Jump to content

      








Photo

Deer Cull in Greater Victoria


  • Please log in to reply
946 replies to this topic

#941 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan

    Super Moderator

  • Moderator
  • 41,939 posts

Posted 12 December 2016 - 07:14 PM

Is this in the deer thread because they are concerned about deer density?



#942 LJ

LJ
  • Member
  • 6,774 posts

Posted 12 December 2016 - 07:15 PM

I'm trying to figure out why it would take an increase in taxes to cull the deer population. If every household kills just one deer, put it out with the kitchen scraps collection it would all be taken care of.

 

I've done my part.


  • VicHockeyFan likes this
Life's a journey......so roll down the window and enjoy the breeze.

#943 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan

    Super Moderator

  • Moderator
  • 41,939 posts

Posted 12 December 2016 - 07:23 PM

I'm trying to figure out why it would take an increase in taxes to cull the deer population. If every household kills just one deer, put it out with the kitchen scraps collection it would all be taken care of.

 

I've done my part.

 

That's pretty disgusting, LJ.

 

Everybody knows that much deer hair contaminates the recycling stream.  What is required is shaving of the deer hair, saving that for donations to a charity that makes wigs for cancer treatment patients.  Stiff, wiry wigs in this case, but very beautiful.    Then the rest of the carcass can go in the scraps program.



#944 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 11,909 posts

Posted 12 December 2016 - 07:38 PM

I was replying to the earlier post that showed the community survey results. If you want to be a Draconion jerkwad S.O.B. of a moderator then please, feel free to move my post to a more appropriate thread. I humbly yield to your enlightened discretion. Jerkwad.


  • VicHockeyFan likes this

#945 todd

todd

    (gone fishing)

  • Member
  • 3,684 posts

Posted 12 December 2016 - 08:25 PM

I'm going to cite this Oak Bay community satisfaction survey as yet more evidence that Victorians aren't really clear about the terminology that gets tossed around (and possibly yet more evidence that Victorians aren't really clear about the municipal borders). How else to explain the presence of "overdensification" in a list of Oak Bay concerns? How else to comprehend the premise that some Oak Bay residents could possibly be "unhappy with densification"?

 

Population in 2015 (estimate) - 18,366

Population in 2011 - 18,015
Population in 2006 - 17,908
Population in 2001 - 17,798          
Population in 1996 - 17,865     
Population in 1991 - 17,815

 

The population of Oak Bay has grown by a whopping 3% since 1991. Not 3% per year. Just 3%! In other words, the population of Oak Bay is effectively unchanged over a span of almost 25 years.

 

And yet overdensification is on the minds of the people. They're concerned about overdensification in a municipality where overdensification would seem to have no relevance whatsoever.

 

So what's the deal here? Are the good people of Oak Bay actually concerned about overdensification in downtown Victoria? Or in some other area? If so, why?

 

 

If secondary suites were legalized as has been proposed overtime that should raise the population in Oak Bay theoretically somewhat substantially, I think maybe that's what some people are thinking of when they select that option, and some may be thinking of literally physically large homes “monster homes”(in comparison to the property) that have been a touchy subject in the OB. Whether or not that was the intended question.


Edited by todd, 12 December 2016 - 08:26 PM.


#946 Bingo

Bingo
  • Member
  • 12,953 posts

Posted 12 December 2016 - 10:50 PM

 

The population of Oak Bay has grown by a whopping 3% since 1991. Not 3% per year. Just 3%! In other words, the population of Oak Bay is effectively unchanged over a span of almost 25 years.

 

And yet overdensification is on the minds of the people. They're concerned about overdensification in a municipality where overdensification would seem to have no relevance whatsoever.

 

So what's the deal here? Are the good people of Oak Bay actually concerned about overdensification in downtown Victoria? Or in some other area? If so, why?

 

One could assume that in Oak Bay it is an overage of dense people that is the concern, and if a cull should or should not occur at taxpayer expense.


"I know nothing except the fact of my ignorance" - Socrates


#947 todd

todd

    (gone fishing)

  • Member
  • 3,684 posts

Posted 12 December 2016 - 11:10 PM

One could assume that in Oak Bay it is an overage of dense people that is the concern, and if a cull should or should not occur at taxpayer expense.

 

Only about 30%, but it's maybe just holiday weight.



 



1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users