Animal activist refuses to let bow-hunter retrieve deer

A bow-hunter who thought he was doing everything by the book instead went home empty-handed, reports the Connecticut Post.

After mortally wounding a deer, he tracked it -- as responsible hunters should -- until it collapsed and died.

Realizing the animal had ended up on someone's private property, he went to the door to ask permission to retrieve the buck.

"My husband told him to just go away, he couldn't have the deer," homeowner Lynn Gorfinkle said.

Gorfinkle went out into her yard and took photos of the deer. "It was a crime scene, in my opinion, the minute that it was shot," she said.

Turns out, Gorfinkle is the CEO of Animal Rights Alliance in Redding, Conn.

The state's bow-hunting season began mid-September at Bennett's Pond State Park, where hunting is allowed by the Department of Environmental Protection, though the Gorfinkles believe that the whitetail deer came from a closer tract of land.

"I will never go out [in the backyard] so casually again. It impairs the enjoyment of your own property when you feel you have to look over your shoulder or wear fluorescent orange or something," Gorfinkle said.

DEP communications director Dennis Schain said that hunting accidents by bow-hunters are rare. "I've been here four years and have never heard of such a thing," he said.

The controversy between hunting enthusiasts and animal-rights activists is nothing new in the area. Earlier this year, a deer hunt on city property in Stamford was ended early because of complaints, and even death threats, according to a city official. And nearby Fairfield is meeting opposition to their effort to open some town-owned land to deer hunting.

The DEP reports that Fairfield County, where Stamford and Fairfield are located, has the highest deer density in the state, with an estimated average of 62 animals per square mile.

The Fairfield County Municipal Deer Management Alliance still backs the culling as a way to prevent the spread of Lyme disease, over-browsing of native vegetation and deer collisions with automobiles.

Lynn and other animal-rights proponents argue that killing the deer is not the answer and that nature should be allowed to take its course to control deer numbers.

So the carcass remains in the Gorfinkles' yard, where it has been since Oct. 2. Lynn hopes that other animals will eat it because it is too big to bury.

"If someone's going to eat that deer, I want it to be natural predators, not some hunter," she said.

Her actions, meanwhile, may mean the death of another deer. "Since the hunter did not recover the deer, he did not need to tag it and it doesn't count toward his bag limit," Dennis Schain told Outposts.

--Kelly Burgess

Photo: Whitetail deer buck. Credit: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Comments

[Art Burkett]

Has anyone check into the state wildlife codes concerning possession of a legally harvested deer. Seems to me the Gorfinkles should have a deer tag. When they denied the legal hunter of his legal harvest, they took possession. Maybe a wildlife code violation, hmmm!

[jason]

wow, "a clean kill is almost impossible bowhunting" that might be the most ignorant thing i have ever heard. i killed a doe a couple weeks ago and she ran maybe 20 yards and she fell over and she was dead, i consider that pretty clean if you ask me. what is your definition of clean? dead on impact thats impossible for anything killed. if the deer is hit good it won't suffer.

[daniel]

Hey Lynn,
You are a pinhead and have nothing to add to society. Just the other side. Thanks and stop eating meat, ok?

[RowanM]

Adam - you need some basic biology lessons - bears eat what's available, and often there's very little meat around so they eat anything else. And it's funny how on the one hand humans are "top of the food chain" but at the same time, humans are expected to act just like bears or wolves when it comes to their diet. Logic has never been a strong point for the hunter apologists, so it's no surprise.

You know what the animal advocacy debate equivalent of "Godwin's Law" is? Dragging in "abortion" to the discussion - so the hunters lose here. Ciao!

[Barbara]

To Nobody Special: I didn't do the studies, but they do prove the stats about bow hunting. Please read.....

Twenty- two published scientific surveys and studies indicate that the average wounding rate for bow hunting is over 50 percent. More than one out of every two deer shot is never retrieved. Many of these studies were conducted by state wildlife agencies.

For example, "Preliminary Archery Survey Report" Montana Dept. of Fish Wildlife and Parks reports 51% wounding; "Archery Wounding Loss in Texas" Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (51% wounded); "Deer Hunting Retrieval Rates" Michigan Pittman-Robertson Report, Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources (58% wounded); "Effects of Compound Bow Use on Hunter Success and Crippling Rates in Iowa" Wildlife Society Bulletin (49% wounded); "Bow hunting for Deer in Vermont: Some Characteristics of the Hunters, the Hunt, and the Harvest" Vermont Fish and Game Department (63% wounded). The average wounding rate from all 22 reports is 55%.
Hunters might not like the results, but the fact is that they subject countless animals to great misery before death in the name of their so called "sport". As people become aware of the enormous pain and suffering of animals for recreational purposes, they are willing to speak up for those who can't do it for themselves.

And, here's more:

"For humane advocates [and many hunters], bowhunting is set apart from other forms of sport hunting chiefly by its appalling high wounding rate - greater than 50%. In other words, it has been conclusively documented that for every animal hit by a broadhead arrow and retrieved by a hunter, at least one is hit and not retrieved, usually to die after prolonged agony from septic infection, peritonitis, blood loss, or other complications. The broadhead arrow is intended to kill primarily by circulatory hemorrhage. It is extremely difficult to shoot an arrow into a vital organ in a large ungulate such as a deer, and thus, a 'clean kill' is nearly impossible in bowhunting." Houston Post

[Nobody Special]

How many of these animal rights people also support aborting a LIVING HUMAN fetus? Folks, God put us at the top of the food chain for a reason. I do not advocate cruelty to animals, but I, like 90%+ of us, like meat, so when you consider the treatment of grocery store meat (chicken, beef (and veal), pork, turkey, etc.), I would say deer have it pretty good. They roam free and have a fairly good chance of living a full life. No small cages, wing clippings, hormones, steroids, etc. If you eat meat, you shouldn’t have a problem with hunting. If you’re a veggie, I can appreciate where you’re coming from but will contend that the 55% wound rate espoused by Barbara is absolute bogus. And Gorfinkle, you and your husband wasted the life of that animal. Prior to your involvement, it had a purpose and was about to fulfill that purpose. You callously let it rot due to a personal vendetta. Who’s the cruel one?

[Kayla]

Why is it that the majority of pro-hunters resort to name calling, making fun of people, and using tired statements about vegetables having emotions to try and get their point across? This speaks volumes about their class and ability to debate an issue. Plus, on top of it, I've noticed that most never use their real name(Teddy Roosevelt). Rick, from CT, is certainly the exception on all accounts.

[Concerned Local Resident]

What this story does is lay waste to the persistent but false claim made by hunters (and by those who advocate killing animals because they have become inconvenient),who always insist that their methods result in a clean, quick kill. The animal was shot on state land and ultimately collapsed in this woman's yard. It did NOT die a fast or painless death.

[Lynn Gorfinkle]

Yes, I am the real Lynn Gorfinkle. I wanted to fill in a couple of the details of this story. The deer was shot on state land immediately adjoining mine. The bow hunter shot this deer through the lung and it ran some distance before it died on my property. The most important point is that these kinds of shots, especially lung, liver, and paunch hits are very common. Hunting IS animal cruelty, plain and simple. It can take hours, days, weeks, or even months of suffering before arrow-wounded deer die. Readers may be interested in the outcome of this deer's story. Some days after the deer was killed, and the story hit the news, somene trespassed on my land and stole the deer. This required considerable time and trouble on their part and it is probable that the hunter or his pals felt that they needed to remove the evidence to prevent further inquiry. While the hunter still has the tag which he didn't use for this deer, he will not be able to legally kill another on the tract of land near my property. The reason is that the land is controlled by the CT Dept of Transportation, and at my request that agency will post their land NO TRESPASSING.

[Barbara]

Please don’t tell me that you need to do it to eat. Did you know that lead is a toxic material that can cause neurological damage and other health issues and that venison is filled with lead? A physician who is a hunter conducted tests on venison using a CT scanner and found that venison is filled with lead.

He said, "What's very scary about this is you can't feel them -- they're like lead dust.” Many of the fragments are microscopic, but can still cause harm to humans if ingested.” He explained that when a bullet hits the deer, it sends little bits of schrapnel-type lead -- that are almost liquid at that point because of the speed the bullet is going – into the deer. He further explained that the impact is enough to scatter the deadly toxin throughout the entire animal.

And speaking of bowhunting…..Those who indulge in this type of hunting knowingly commit each living creature they hit to lingering agony, and this is true whether the wound is eventually fatal or not. These animals endure prolong suffering before they collapse and die.

And, as for the arrow being less painful, obviously most people do not know that of all types of hunting, bow hunting is the most cruel method because the wounding rate is about 55%, meaning that for every 100 arrow-shot deer, 55 stagger around with arrows imbedded in a non-vital area, for days, weeks, even months before they die. Deer die slowly and painfully, after being shot by a bowhunter.

A buck wounded by the arrow from a hunter and not retrieved by the hunter died outside my house. It was a hideous experience. A few years later, my daughter was nearly hit on her own property by an arrow from a trespassing hunter.

[Adam]

Humans aren't predators!? Humans don't need to eat meat!?Seriously? Humans and their predecessors have been hunting deer and other animals for millions of years so yeah we are kind of predators. Humans might not absolutely have to eat meat, but in that same sense neither do bears or wolves. Should we declaw them and file their canines down and teach them how to harvest soybeans and prepare tofu? Maybe we don't have to eat meat. Plenty of people don't, but we are also well adapted to eating meat and we will continue to eat meat for a long time. You realize meat in the grocery store comes from an animal too, right? It's not like stopping a hunter from killing a deer results in a net save since he will probably just go buy meat from the grocery store. Darn moral busybody people. These people trying to force their moral values on society are probably the same ones that would cry foul if someone tried to make gay marriage illegal on the basis of their moral values (not saying it's right just using to make a point). Collectivists will be happy with nothing short of absolute control and homogeneity.

[Barbara]

Deer did not proliferate before state wildlife agencies began to regulate hunting for the "maximum sustained yield " of this species. Wildlife agencies deliberately propagate wildlife for the recreation of hunters.

According to big-game texts, "Harvesting . . . gets the population into its most productive range . . . this ensures that many animals will be produced."

Even at the turn of the century ~~ two turns ago ~~ killing should not have been considered as "fun." And hunters still think of killing as "recreation?" There are far nicer activities for recreation today.

Hunters can shoot with a camera. A lovely photo is far better than a dead bear or deer. Wildlife does not exist to be exploited and destroyed to provide fleeting moments of “recreation.”

It is intrinsically wrong to deliberately cause suffering for the purposes of amusement, recreation, or in the name of sport or to give the hunter’s life meaning.

[Mike]

Bow hunters wound many more than they kill/retrieve, so if “waste” is an issue, ban bow hunting.
Reasons for having hunts are created by agencies that promote hunting, manage only for larger herds to increase kill opportunities, so the “reasons” are all suspect. They’ve changed the true word, “KILL,” to “harvest, take.” There is no over-grazing, no disease spread, or any of the other rubbish these officials try to brainwash the public with.
Humans as natural predators? Nice try at covering up a barbaric kill sport for what it is—unjustifiable murder, maiming, and mayhem.
A herd population will self-correct (compensatory rebound) and is a far cry from “crash”; but even if the herd DID collapse, others will move in within the year. Let nature take its course—it does a much better job than humans do.

[Barbara]

Anti-cruelty laws attempt to prevent people from harming or starving domestic animals. "Cruelty" includes every act, omission, or neglect, whereby unjustifiable physical pain, suffering or death is caused or permitted.

Therefore, it should not be considered acceptable to hunt and kill wildlife. Anti-cruelty laws should apply to all animals!

[RowanM]

The thing is, humans with bows and arrows or rifles ARE NOT NATURAL PREDATORS of deer! When will the hunting extremists get this through their thick skulls? Humans do not need to slaughter a deer to survive; in fact, they don't even need to eat meat! The deer population will naturally evolve to adjust to the vegetation to support it if hunters weren't allowed to interfere.

Hunters - get a life and stop taking away the lives of deer. Please.

[Dwayne Dickerson]

Violet and Gorfinkle (not 1960 pop singers) are exactly right. Bring back wolves and mountain lions to Redding, Conn. Then nature can balance itself on her front lawn while she watches from the picture window.

So much more natural. Barbaric caveman? What inherent prejudices embedded in that comment?

[Top Predator]

This is the most stupid thing I've ever heard of. The AR groups will loose all their powers on day because of their own stuip ways. Humans have harvested animals since mad kind.We are the top predator on the food chain, not the next animal that comes along. All you AR people need to get a life before you destroy it. You nerds

[Rick]

This is a real sad story to hear but one that I have heard before. Most animal rights activists in my opinion do not realize that you just can not go by the natural selection, you can not rely on other animal taking care of the problem.

After a whitetail deer's first birth they are able to give birth to twins every year after that. That practically doubles the population and even the natural predators can not keep up with that.

Ultimately when that happens the deer starve and can cause the spread of sickness and germs. So, to make a long story short The Gorfinkles in my opinion are doing more harm than good

It is true I am a deer hunter and proudly have been for 19 years now. I am what you might call a meat hunter because everything I am able to tag goes right into my freezer to help feed my family. I don't shoot more than my family can consume in 1 year and if I am able to than I donate it to a local soup kitchen for the homeless.

The more and more I think about it the more I say they are disrespecting that animal by letting it lay there to rot and the more they are letting other predators come to their yard which can only cause more problems for them and their neighbors later on.

Rick Kratzke
Ashford, Connecticut

[Teddy Roosevelt]

OMG ! Violet. You must live on the westside of L.A. and have been indoctrinated by MSNBC. Having lived in New England, deer collisions with auto's are as commonplace as Villarigosa having an extra-marital affair. Moreover, most hunters use the animals to feed it's family & neighbors. As a chef, deer meat is much healthier for you then bovines. Would'nt you want something that is'nt laden with hormones? Oh wait, I forgot who I was talking to...Did you know Tofu screams when you slice it and dice it. Yes Bean Curds have emotions too!! The progressive thinking lefty's, want us to love all living things...so come on everyone, let's all go out and "Hug A Gang Banger or Jihadist Today"

[Bob]

After hunting for 40 years and living for 58, I've come to realize that anti-hunters will never be convinced of the merits of hunting, so Violet's response is no surprise. I've raised 2 children and now have a grandson, and I can say without exception that I would much rather have my children outside, learning about nature and accepting the responsibility of harvesting an animal, than sitting in the house playing video games or watching "crap" like MTV. I applaud the hunter for doing the right thing by asking for permission to retrieve the deer from private land!!

[Violet]

My lord, you people have no compassion for other living creatures. This woman is a hero! Hunters are nothing but barbaric cavemen who get off on watching innocent animals suffer and die. It's disgusting! Murder is murder, no matter what the species. And bow-hunting is probably the cruelest form of hunting because of how painful and slow the death can be for the animal! I hope karma gets all of you sadistic monsters!!!

[todd]

"If someone's going to eat that deer, I want it to be natural predators, not some hunter"

What exactly does she think man is? We are the apex predator of the world.

Its a shame. People with this mentality dont know anything about nature at all. 62 deer per square mile is on the verge of a population crash and some certainly need to be culled due to lack of natural predation. To take food off someone's table is just wrong.

[Humananimal]

How can she continue to labor under the delusion that humans are not "natural predators" of deer, just as other animals are?

[D_Right_One]

I think I would have preferred the hunter to take the deer. Can you imagine the smell? I think that if the hunter told the people that he'd eat the meat, surely they'd let him have it.

[Vince]

What a waste of a perfectly legal kill. Look what happens when wild animals (bears) are fed by humans in Yosemite...an epidemic of wild animal (bear) break-ins into cars. The story concludes correctly, another deer will die in this process that wouldn't have otherwise. Bow hunters are probably the most responsible (and least testosterone-laden of the) hunters out there. The reasons for allowing hunting were spelled out in the article yet an animal-hugger remains defiant. To what end? Over grazing? Spreading disease? Sad day both for hunters, animal activists, and most of all the animals.