Climate change...deer numbers

[Wyo_hntr]

Also, if you’re going to make a claim that the science isn’t settled or established you should probably refer or defer to some science. Just saying so as a guy doesn’t make it so.

You have made up your mind, so it would be a waste of time.

 

[PNW bow hunter]

Whew... all sweaty now.
Temps have increased a whole .89 deg celsius in a SELECT portion of climate history.
The sky is falling.

I thought it was obvious that was humor/sarcasm?

 

[Pony Soldier]

In the 70s we were all warned of a coming ice age. The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

 

[buffybr]

It makes no sense for ODFW to point out how dire mule deer numbers are struggling for one reason, and not point out depredation rates, is all Im saying.
7000 cats in Oregon is what like 1 cat for ever 12 sq miles? Now concentrate those in the habitat (obviously not cities). 1 cougar kills 1 deer a month x 7000 is 84000 deer annually (this would include blacktails which arent struggling..)
There are things ODFW can do but arent. They can increase cougar quotas (its suspiciously low), remove tags and limits even if temporary, and be publicly vocal that something needs to be done about hunting them. Id be thrilled if they said the dog ban was hurting deer population.

Ive never hunted them. Only seen one in the wild many years ago. But recently was getting one on my trailcams, a fawn went missing on one trailcam where I was watching them grow up, same cam that photod the cat. Im hoping to get out there and use the new foxpro before fawns drop this spring.

The figure that I've heard is each adult lion will kill 1 deer a week x 7000 is 364,000 which does seem really high.

 

[MattB]

In the 70s we were all warned of a coming ice age. The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

I remember those days. But on the flip side the Great Lakes used to freeze over every winter and my friends from MI have said that isn't so much a thing anymore. They do not seem to care about how many degrees the earth may have warmed, but they have observed a dramatic difference between when they were kids and now.

 

[Wyo_hntr]

I'm concerned we are removing too much CO2 from the atmosphere. I let my V8 warm up prior to driving just to do my part to offset too much CO2 capture.

 

[manitou1]

I thought it was obvious that was humor/sarcasm?

Oh yeah. I was just adding to it.

 

[Rthur]

Source?

It seems like it is based on a fairly widely shared, but thoroughly debunked, social media post. The 0 line is actually in the 1800's, so no, it would not show the warming into the present day.

Ice core graph used to make misleading global warming claims

Posts viewed millions of times on social media reproduce a graph that they say shows global temperatures are lower than at most times over the past 10,000 years and that this proves humans are not causing climate change. The claim is misleading and has been widely debunked: the graph doesn't...

factcheck.afp.com

So you've only found some obscure source from France that disputed the graph?
Check who funds AFP.
They receive at least 40% of their funding from French tax payers, of who are highly pro
global warming/climate change.
AKA- The Paris agreement on climate change, ring a bell?

(faculty ucr education) source
R

 

[wesfromky]

So you've only found some obscure source from France that disputed the graph?
Check who funds AFP.
They receive at least 40% of their funding from French tax payers, of who are highly pro
global warming/climate change.
AKA- The Paris agreement on climate change, ring a bell?
View attachment 671573
(faculty ucr education) source
R

Link to source on this graph, along with what year is on the far right?

And, there are multiple sources debunking your first graph, just "do your research" and they are not hard to find. Also, you did not provide any data to back up the first graph - like what is year 0 and what year are the basing "present temperature" on? Without those, it is worthless and intentionally misleading. I found it funny that you would use debunked and intentionally misleading graph to try to support your contention that climate change is a hoax. If it was, there should be a ton of solidly backed, peer reviewed, and widely accepted data to show that. But there isn't. There is, however, decades of solid, peer reviewed proving that climate change is real, and it is caused by humans burning fossil fuels.

So, hit me up with your best youtube conspiracy, because you cannot cite any actual science.

 

[PNW bow hunter]

 

[Yoder]

Canada use to be a tropical rain forest. It had more animals than now. Guess when everything dies? Ice age, not from warming.

 

[wesfromky]

Link to source on this graph, along with what year is on the far right?

And, there are multiple sources debunking your first graph, just "do your research" and they are not hard to find. Also, you did not provide any data to back up the first graph - like what is year 0 and what year are the basing "present temperature" on? Without those, it is worthless and intentionally misleading. I found it funny that you would use debunked and intentionally misleading graph to try to support your contention that climate change is a hoax. If it was, there should be a ton of solidly backed, peer reviewed, and widely accepted data to show that. But there isn't. There is, however, decades of solid, peer reviewed proving that climate change is real, and it is caused by humans burning fossil fuels.

So, hit me up with your best youtube conspiracy, because you cannot cite any actual science.

@Rthur this guy is the best you can do? http://www.faculty.ucr.edu/~legneref/

His one climate page, buried under a bunch of other stuff and not linked to his main page, includes some graphs that have no citation other then ""NOTE: Data obtained from Internet sources and checked with various authors for relative accuracy as of 2020""

Earth's Temperature in Past 18,000 years: <climate

 

[Rthur]

Link to source on this graph, along with what year is on the far right?

And, there are multiple sources debunking your first graph, just "do your research" and they are not hard to find. Also, you did not provide any data to back up the first graph - like what is year 0 and what year are the basing "present temperature" on? Without those, it is worthless and intentionally misleading. I found it funny that you would use debunked and intentionally misleading graph to try to support your contention that climate change is a hoax. If it was, there should be a ton of solidly backed, peer reviewed, and widely accepted data to show that. But there isn't. There is, however, decades of solid, peer reviewed proving that climate change is real, and it is caused by humans burning fossil fuels.

So, hit me up with your best youtube conspiracy, because you cannot cite any actual science.

LOL
Why don't you check snopes for me.
You've been subjected to constant lies/propaganda for years.
The last three would wake up most.
Clearly not all.
How long did the ozone hole debacle go?
What was the conclusion after pissing away billions?
Peer reviewed doesn't mean anything when the researchers are funded by
those who expect an outcome.
How about the 95% of scientists that humans are creating global warming?
They neglected to tell you that that was only those surveyed.

You've only listed one source "debunking" the graph.
I listed another with source.

BTW anyone that knows/understands science knows that it is a constant
adjustment of previously believed standards.

JWST just shit on most of the big bang theory.
IE, there is no such thing as settled science.

I've lived long enough to be told of the coming ice age, acid rain will deforest
the planet and kill us all, world wide drought, rising sea levels will drown the costal
populations around the world, global warming(LOL), the earth will end in 12 years,
(now) climate change, predictions by Al Gore and a host of assholes only
interested in making money from the dense.

Why did they( the folks that meet at the Climate meeting at Davos) exempt
super yachts and private jets from the list of sanctioned carbon producers?
This is a clue ^^^.

You've been conditioned to hear the words conspiracy theory and go deaf.

R

 

[wesfromky]

LOL
Why don't you check snopes for me.
You've been subjected to constant lies/propaganda for years.
The last three would wake up most.
Clearly not all.
How long did the ozone hole debacle go?
What was the conclusion after pissing away billions?
Peer reviewed doesn't mean anything when the researchers are funded by
those who expect an outcome.
How about the 95% of scientists that humans are creating global warming?
They neglected to tell you that that was only those surveyed.

You've only listed one source "debunking" the graph.
I listed another with source.

BTW anyone that knows/understands science knows that it is a constant
adjustment of previously believed standards.

JWST just shit on most of the big bang theory.
IE, there is not such thing as settled science.

I've lived long enough to be told of the coming ice age, acid rain will deforest
the planet and kill us all, would wide drought, rising sea levels will drown the costal
populations around the world, global warming(LOL), the earth will end in 12 years,
(now) climate change, predictions by Al Gore and a host of assholes only
interested in making money from the dense.

Why did they( the folks that meet at the Climate meeting at Davos) exempt
super yachts and private jets from the list of sanctioned carbon producers?
This is a clue ^^^.

You've been conditioned to hear the words conspiracy theory and go deaf.

R

All emotion, no data.

I guess we will all find out soon enough, and with that, I will bow out, and let this turn back into a future of mule deer discussion.

 

[Rthur]

All emotion, no data.

I guess we will all find out soon enough, and with that, I will bow out, and let this turn back into a future of mule deer discussion.

No emotion involved.
Must be projecting as you've had your ideology challenged.
You quote sources that have agendas in line with this ideology.
When presented with alternatives you cry foul.

I've the benefit of experiencing the predictions of all the catastrophes for 5 decades and nary a one has been
true.

R

 

[jjohnsonElknewbie]

Recent takedown of John Kerry

 

[Stalker69]

Every time you hear the words climate change or global warming, substitute the words over population.

I believe this to be the truth. With population, you lose habitat. Covering this planet in concrete, asphalt, housing and business has far more impact then they realize. Not only that but with the destruction of fauna and dirt. If we are the cause of climate change ( which I am sure we are a big part of it) I think these things are a HUGE PART OF IT, if not all of it. Water run off is greatly affected by it, all of the garbage and waste ( trash and human waste) we bury has to have a negative affect as well. And countless other things we are doing to destroy this place.

 

[Dos Perros]

it is happening and is affecting wildlife.

You can't possibly, with any level of certainty, attribute impacts to wildlife as being caused by climate change or something else. You just can't. There is so much inherent and random variation in weather, and so many other things that impact wildlife.

 

[KurtR]

I just want to thank global warming for the past two 40 degree days in February

 

[cuerro viejo]

In Colorado we’re experiencing 20 years of drought which has affected some of our herds, especially in overwintering grounds.

and they had large increase in tag(doe and buck)numbers and season dates to mandate the decline