Letter: A different view of merely 'culling'

After reading "Bang for the Bucks?" (Jan. 31), I imagined a scene from 15 years ago: Several deer, huddled in a grove outside of Sea Pines, talk over their plight:

"What we gonna do?" asks one. "Humans keep moving in where our ancestors lived forever, and they drive cars that run us over --63 times this year!"

"I got an idea," says another. "Let's build a place they'll come to at night -- say a bar -- and shine bright lights on it. Once they're liquored up and come staggering out to their cars, some of our guys stationed in the dark with high-powered rifles can spot them and shoot them."

"Yeah, that'll work," says a third, "but isn't that against all the sacred moral teachings handed down to us over the centuries?"

"Not so long as we don't call it what it is: cold-blooded murder," says the second deer. "Let's say, instead, that we're merely 'culling' the human population and argue that it's for their own good."

They all agreed and put the plan into effect. By 2015 car-deer collisions were down 85 percent and deer were moving into Sea Pines from all over. There were so many deer, in fact, that little was left of the lush foliage and shaded landscape that made the place appeal to them in the first place.

Don Wright

Beaufort

This story was originally published February 2, 2016 at 9:08 PM with the headline "Letter: A different view of merely 'culling'."