SHARE

Hunting Not Solution for Urban Deer

Laura Simon, field director of the Urban Wildlife Program's Connecticut Field Office sent this column in response to a column by John Hannan on the use of bow hunting to reduce deer populations in urban and suburban areas. 

Communities sometimes get frustrated with deer. But, the argument that sport hunting will solve suburban deer problems is flawed.

It fails to objectively examine how deer relate to our communities, not only with respect to damages claimed, but as well in the pleasure and enjoyment that the vast majority of us, as non-hunters, have in everyday contact with these animals.

The “problems” we see with suburban deer are basically four: damage to yards and gardens, claims over Lyme disease, deer-vehicle accidents and loss of forest biodiversity. The backyard battles with deer will take place whether hunting occurs or not. Fences, netting, repellents, deer-resistant plantings and other non-lethal approaches will still be the first, and best, line of defense.

Recent science tells us that hunting will not reduce human cases of Lyme disease unless nearly all the deer are removed from the environment and kept removed for years. The Lyme disease-causing tick is carried by more than 150 species of animals, meaning it is here to stay. Some researchers warn that hunting can actually increase public safety risks because ticks will look for alternative large hosts and be more likely to end up on humans after deer numbers have been reduced.

Deer-vehicle accidents are an important concern, and remain a problem for which new and innovative technological solutions are needed. Systems that warn deer of an approaching vehicle are now available and needed in high-risk areas whether the deer population is ten or a hundred. Driver education is especially critical and defensive driving techniques should be taught in every high school in the country.

The ecological impacts of deer are highly complex, but must start with the understanding that deer were here and were interacting with our forests a long, long time before we were. Is there any sense in perhaps not interfering and letting the plants and the deer work out a new relationship? The idea that we can preserve urban and suburban forests, with all of the impacts that humans heap on them, in some pre-settlement pristine condition is an unrealistic expectation.

The prescription being written by hunt proponents to bring the population down to 20 deer per square mile would not only turn Fairfield County into a virtual battlefield, it just would not work. Not in terms of mitigating damage. It would also deny many people who choose to live in peace with deer the opportunity to do so. It is time to start looking at real solutions for suburban deer conflicts.

to follow Daily Voice Scarsdale and receive free news updates.

SCROLL TO NEXT ARTICLE