Because they're idiots, that's why

I have in front of me the October 2008 issue of National Geographic, open to page 25 (my Google-fu is weak, but it looks like they don't have this issue online yet).

Anyway, see if you can detect what's wrong with the article, "Deer Crashing," by Thomas Hayden. Seems lots of folks run into deer with their cars; a good time is had by nobody, especially the deer:

Efforts to reduce the number of collisions - which cause thousands of human injuries and some 200 deaths a year - haven't been very successful. ... Some experts believe that the only real solution is wildlife overpasses and underpasses to get animals, from salamanders to grizzly bears, safely across the roads.

Hmmm, let's see. Lots of people hurt, some killed by a wildlife problem. The solution according to "some experts"? Spend a ton of the taxpayer's dough on animal bridges.

Why would "some experts" propose this? Well, you could cheat and look at the title of the post, or you could ask yourself what other solutions might be available:

• Can we get a bunch of people to volunteer their time to solve the problem?
• Could we get these people to bring their own equipment?
• Could we get these people to pay their own money for the privilege of solving society's problem?
• When they were done, would the deer be more likely to keep away from places where there are a bunch of people they might encounter?
• Might these people use tools like this to solve the problem?

Mmm ... Lever gun!

Could it be that "some experts" don't like guns? Or don't they care about the animals?

Me? I love animals.