Thinning of Deer Herd
the Only Viable Solution

By SANDRA BRIGHT
ONEONTA

I used to consider myself an animal lover, against harming any living creature. I still care about animals, very much, but my concern has grown to envelop all of nature; because of this, I now advocate reducing the deer herd. There’s a delicate balance, and if one species thrives, it is often at the expense of others. As a prey species, deer evolved to have multiple births. In the absence of cougars and wolves, their key predators, the population has grown to outstrip available resources.

As I looked at the increasing impacts of too many deer on our parks, our neighborhoods, our health and the deer themselves, I contemplated these questions:

1) Am I willing to sacrifice other species for the deer? Deer over-browsing has greatly reduced native plants in our forest understory, impacting creatures that rely on them for food, shelter, and raising young. Deer are not strict herbivores, and will eat eggs, birds, and other animals.

2) Am I willing to say goodbye to our forests as they exist today? In Wilber Park, I see many fallen trees, and few saplings to take their place. Invasive species thrive. Biodiversity suffers.

3) Can I accept a greater risk of tick-borne disease? Deer host adult ticks. Japanese barberry, an invasive flowering plant aided in its spread by deer browse, hosts mice and the tick nymphs they host.

4) Have I considered the increasing risks and financial burdens of damage from deer-vehicle collisions, erosion, flooding and increased food costs caused by deer over-browsing?

5) Do I care about the health of the deer themselves? Competing for limited resources weakens the herd; greater population density increases the spread of disease; deer are injured or killed through interactions with the human environment.

Ideally, non-lethal methods could reduce the deer population to sustainable levels. But fertility control only works with an isolated herd and costs from $500.00-$1,500.00 per deer. Translocation relies on having an area to absorb relocated deer and results in a high mortality rate.

After careful consideration, I came to the difficult conclusion that lethal methods are the only viable solution. Death from an arrow is more humane than a slow death from starvation, illness or injury.

Sandra Bright is a member of the Oneonta Deer Management Task Force.