High deer densities may actually be good for some other species?!?!?!
05-05-2009, 01:40 PM
#11
Typical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: manassas va USA
Posts: 614
RE: High deer densities may actually be good for some other species?!?!?!
Buckhunter1:
your summation could not have been written any better and whats more proves that bulls@!t is still bulls@!t. I cant believe that BTB with all his "knowledge" of the insurance industry would even try to make like it has no impact on game laws!!!
your summation could not have been written any better and whats more proves that bulls@!t is still bulls@!t. I cant believe that BTB with all his "knowledge" of the insurance industry would even try to make like it has no impact on game laws!!!
05-05-2009, 02:33 PM
#12
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
RE: High deer densities may actually be good for some other species?!?!?!
ORIGINAL: Buck Hunter 1
An increasing deer population and the growing popularity of trophy hunting induced many changes in Illinois from 1990 to 2000. Former DNR Director Brent Manning dealt with many factions with opposing views on deer management. The Farm Bureau and major insurance companies lobbied for population reduction due to excessive crop damage and deer-vehicle collisions.
February 05, 2008 at 09:53 AM
BY LES DAVENPORT
On the other hand, deer also cause a great deal of monetary loss. Car/deer collisions, loss of agricultural crops, tree damage at nurseries and landscaping losses cost millions of dollars each year as well. Further, those who develop land affect the herd and vice versa. So highway planners, road builders and subdivision developers are being asked to come to the table as well.
October 1998
Deer on the agenda
When the topic is whitetails, hunters, developers, landowners and businesses all have an opinion.
Kevin Wallenfang
to lose control of your vehicle.
“While research has revealed several innovative ways to deter deer from entering the roadways and alerting drivers to the dangers of deer in the area, there will always remain a constant danger of deer-vehicle collisions,” said Melissa Miles, senior research analyst for State Farm . “Undoubtedly, the best way to avoid deer-vehicle collisions is through attentive driving behavior.”
State Farm Press release
The Man With The Plan
With growing complaints from insurance companies forced to pay increasing claims for deer/car collisions and frustration from farmers over of crop damage, the management goal became reducing deer densities To reach that goal Suchy and the IDNR greatly expanded hunting opportunities, especially the hunting of does, and asked hunters to take advantage of new seasons and abundant tags.
The Man With The Plan
Biologist Willie Suchy has been at the center of Iowa deer management for nearly two decades. Here’s his take on how and why things are changing. (August 2006)
By Rich Patterson
Finally, for deer-human conflicts, we rely on Citizen Advisory Committees (CACs). CAC members – citizens within a Wildlife Management Unit (WMU) representing interests of sportsmen, farmers, homeowners, businesses, and others – work together and provide a recommendation to increase, decrease, or stabilize the deer population for a five-year period.
PA Deer Chronicle 2008
My conclusion after reading these and other reports is that the insurance industry is very involved inj game mangement issues in all states. Again the money drives the outcomes! You can play insurance companies anyway you want but i can say this much , more profit is derived from less deer/people collisions than your statement of money in money out. I am odf the opinion that Less monry out means more money in! I think anyone owning a business or paying a tax understands that.
An increasing deer population and the growing popularity of trophy hunting induced many changes in Illinois from 1990 to 2000. Former DNR Director Brent Manning dealt with many factions with opposing views on deer management. The Farm Bureau and major insurance companies lobbied for population reduction due to excessive crop damage and deer-vehicle collisions.
February 05, 2008 at 09:53 AM
BY LES DAVENPORT
On the other hand, deer also cause a great deal of monetary loss. Car/deer collisions, loss of agricultural crops, tree damage at nurseries and landscaping losses cost millions of dollars each year as well. Further, those who develop land affect the herd and vice versa. So highway planners, road builders and subdivision developers are being asked to come to the table as well.
October 1998
Deer on the agenda
When the topic is whitetails, hunters, developers, landowners and businesses all have an opinion.
Kevin Wallenfang
to lose control of your vehicle.
“While research has revealed several innovative ways to deter deer from entering the roadways and alerting drivers to the dangers of deer in the area, there will always remain a constant danger of deer-vehicle collisions,” said Melissa Miles, senior research analyst for State Farm . “Undoubtedly, the best way to avoid deer-vehicle collisions is through attentive driving behavior.”
State Farm Press release
The Man With The Plan
With growing complaints from insurance companies forced to pay increasing claims for deer/car collisions and frustration from farmers over of crop damage, the management goal became reducing deer densities To reach that goal Suchy and the IDNR greatly expanded hunting opportunities, especially the hunting of does, and asked hunters to take advantage of new seasons and abundant tags.
The Man With The Plan
Biologist Willie Suchy has been at the center of Iowa deer management for nearly two decades. Here’s his take on how and why things are changing. (August 2006)
By Rich Patterson
Finally, for deer-human conflicts, we rely on Citizen Advisory Committees (CACs). CAC members – citizens within a Wildlife Management Unit (WMU) representing interests of sportsmen, farmers, homeowners, businesses, and others – work together and provide a recommendation to increase, decrease, or stabilize the deer population for a five-year period.
PA Deer Chronicle 2008
My conclusion after reading these and other reports is that the insurance industry is very involved inj game mangement issues in all states. Again the money drives the outcomes! You can play insurance companies anyway you want but i can say this much , more profit is derived from less deer/people collisions than your statement of money in money out. I am odf the opinion that Less monry out means more money in! I think anyone owning a business or paying a tax understands that.
Second, I wasonly talking about PA in particular since insurance laws varya great dealfrom state to state and I've only had very limited chance to work with a few adjoining states over the years.
That the news media reports that insurance comapnies have an influence is nothing new. I believe Slimey Jim has done that here. The bottom line is that you have no proof that any insurance company has ever lobbied for less deer here in PA EVER!! simply because it hasn't happened here.
The closest thing you'll ever see to an insurance company saying anything at all about deer is that they may use deer to explain why premiums for comprehensive may be higher in a given area.
Try to get this concept. Insurance companies get to charge premiums based on claims. They make a percentage of premium as profit. Consisitent predictable claims are easy to charge for when filing for rates in mosts states. More deer claims= more premiums they can charge. They actually like anything as predictable as deer claims because they ad to the bottom line and are easy to analyze and charge for. The industry may give occasional lip service about reducing claims but the bottom line is that predictable claims make them more money and deer claims are very predictable.
!!!
05-06-2009, 04:10 AM
#15
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ohio,mid
Posts: 1,275
RE: High deer densities may actually be good for some other species?!?!?!
BTB if you want to go further in providing information that insurance companies do not give a darn about the deer/auto collisions why don't you provide incontrivertible proof or statements that they absolutely don't care abut the deer population. and control. That in PA they do not sit in on any boards that cover deer /auto, medical claims, farmers devastation claims, CAC's, hav enever testified or been asked for input, etc.
Your statement about " You meant PA"? Okay it seems a lot of other states insurance industries in this country are concerned w/ the deer population control and it''s impact on pour economy and lives. I guess only PA doesn't care about the issue and the price. If your statement about PA and it's insurance industry is true, again PA leads the way in stcicking it's head in the sand on a game animal subject and how it impacts people, BTB. Your words. They don't care , huh?
Partial quotes: more info proivided by my partial quotes than your statement of 30 years of insurance companies experience. I provided authors and dates where I could find them, what have you to stand up with other than "your personal experience". C'mon let's go to Iraq BTB! You said they have WMD's. If people are interested in seeing the truth beyond your 30 years statement they can search the internet and research as i did, I have provided names and dates as I found them.
I have read your posts and you are literate in most cases, but to call what I have pulled together, demean it and then stand on a statement that YOU are the word and no one else should question it on insurance companies and what they do and how they operate is far fetched BTB, far fetched.
Again show me where an insurance company says "We don't care about the economic impact of the deer populatiuon or controlling it in PA" and I will sing your praises as the Knowledge Man to all and be humbled!
Your statement about " You meant PA"? Okay it seems a lot of other states insurance industries in this country are concerned w/ the deer population control and it''s impact on pour economy and lives. I guess only PA doesn't care about the issue and the price. If your statement about PA and it's insurance industry is true, again PA leads the way in stcicking it's head in the sand on a game animal subject and how it impacts people, BTB. Your words. They don't care , huh?
Partial quotes: more info proivided by my partial quotes than your statement of 30 years of insurance companies experience. I provided authors and dates where I could find them, what have you to stand up with other than "your personal experience". C'mon let's go to Iraq BTB! You said they have WMD's. If people are interested in seeing the truth beyond your 30 years statement they can search the internet and research as i did, I have provided names and dates as I found them.
I have read your posts and you are literate in most cases, but to call what I have pulled together, demean it and then stand on a statement that YOU are the word and no one else should question it on insurance companies and what they do and how they operate is far fetched BTB, far fetched.
Again show me where an insurance company says "We don't care about the economic impact of the deer populatiuon or controlling it in PA" and I will sing your praises as the Knowledge Man to all and be humbled!
05-06-2009, 05:12 AM
#17
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
RE: High deer densities may actually be good for some other species?!?!?!
Again show me where an insurance company says "We don't care about the economic impact of the deer populatiuon or controlling it in PA" and I will sing your praises as the Knowledge Man to all and be humbled!
Maybe to help you understand, I'll use another example that is very similar in structure to the insurance industry. Have you ever played the lottery or gone to the race track? When you win there, you dont take money from the track or the state. That money came from the other bettors. The state or the racetrack is not gambling, the customers are. The lottery or the racetrack is selling a product. Period. The state or the track simply took their cut as a profit and delivered their "product"
As for the insurance industry, it's actually very similar. The industry has bean counters better known as actuaries that analyze and predict claims. The law of large numbers makes their predictions extremely accurate.
(BTW, actuaries are the people that are too boring to become CPA's
)They have gotten very good at what they do. When's the last time you heard of an insurance company going out of business due to claims? The few times that an insurance company has gone broke have been from events like 9-11 or from bad investments like AIG not from regular everyday, predictable claims. Deer claims, theft, fire, accidents, are all everyday predictable claims and the cash register rings every time it happens. To use the industry standard numbers, roughly $1000 in comprehensive premiums is charged for every $650 in expected deer claims across the state. 10,000 deer claims with an average of $650 per deer would mean an influx of $ ten million into the auto insurance industry.
You may see some occasional lip serviceabout preventing claims from the insurance industry but that stuff is pure PR. The bottom line is that claims make them money so long as they are consistent and predictable. Some claims are more predicatble and consistent than others but deer claims are among the most predictable of all.
05-06-2009, 05:47 AM
#18
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
RE: High deer densities may actually be good for some other species?!?!?!
Again show me where an insurance company says "We don't care about the economic impact of the deer populatiuon or controlling it in PA" and I will sing your praises as the Knowledge Man to all and be humbled!
[/quote]
Are you ready to be humbled?OK then,here you go.Here are exerpts from an article in Pa outdoor news dated Jan 15,2009.I'd provide a link but I don't know how.the article is titled.Insurance group noted sharp decline in the state's deer herd.
The company(Erie) recorded 14000 deer claims in Pa in 2007,according to Darrin Birtciel,a rate analyst with erie.
Biirtciel,is aware of the controversy surrouning deer management in Pa.He heard the rumors about car insurance companies somehow colluding with the PGC to decrease numbers.
Those rumors are unfounded,explaining that the insur companies simply calculate the auto insurance claims and the projected payout and them calculate the rates to make a profit.
Obviously we want to reduce the number of accidents involving deer but we have no contacts with the game commission about deer.
We ttry to get information out to warn policyholders.
He is puzzled aboit why sportsmen think the PGC is cooperating with insur companies to lower deer numbers,or even why the PGC wants to eliminate deer.
It's not like the commission calls a board meeting and all the insurance company executives show up to reduce deer numbers.that just doesn't happen and I don't think it ever has.
How's that humble pie taste?
05-06-2009, 05:53 AM
#19
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
RE: High deer densities may actually be good for some other species?!?!?!
What you guys are seeing in the midwest in a group ofindependent insurance agents throwing a fit about too many deer claims.These are agents,not insurance companies.They're free to ask for the seat at the table as a stakeholder just like the USP and the Audubon have done hear.Most likely,they're given just as much empathy.That isn't even close the the conspiracy theory about insurance companies paying off someone in the PGC.there's no proof of that what so ever and to even insinuate that,is ridiculous.