Mel: I did not say "sprawl is the greatest threat to biodiversity. . .
.." I did say, relative to the perceived deer population "explosion",
it is indicative of the consequences of human/urban development. No
great leap to conclusions here.

For that matter, to take up your well-enumerated points, our industrial
farming is hardly a boon to biodiversity. Given that so many more
acres of land are devoted to this kind of urbanized development (and
modern industial agriculture is not a "rural" enterprise in anything
other than location) I would say your logic only reinforces my
argument.

In that regard, practices on the mechanized, mega-acre food factories
are more responsible for the "urbanization" of the countryside than is
development sprawl. We just see the effects on the edges of our towns
and cities--i.e. deer as pests. (Urban hunters are only asking to also
regard them as a protein source, thus killing the "proverbial" two
birds.) Either way, we are consuming diversity at an increasing rate
(killing, in the process, the "literal" two birds). I know of no
reason to consider this is a good trend.

Dan