The latest Pat Durkin column:
SHILOH, Tenn. — While approaching a row of cannons on a famous site called the Hornet's Nest at the Shiloh National Military Park last weekend, my thoughts shifted from the Civil War's awful carnage to the annoyance of avoiding deer pellets wherever I stepped.
Minutes later, I studied the shoreline of the Bloody Pond, another tragic site from 146 years ago. I tried to envision the horror of soldiers and horses, Union and Confederate, taking their final drinks. I tried to grasp the futility of trying to sate thirst caused by fear, fatigue and massive hemorrhage.
Then I noticed cloven hoof marks of whitetails pocking the mud everywhere I looked. The spell broken, I moved on.
After a short walk, I saw large wire cages protecting young trees in Sarah Bell's peach orchard as I approached the eastern end of the Hornet's Nest. When I spotted W. George Manse's cabin in the orchard's corner, a harsh browse line in the adjoining woods validated the need for the peach trees' cages. Overpopulated deer are hell on buds and twigs.
Then, I recalled Jeff Shaara mentioned Shiloh's deer and this orchard in his book, "Civil War Battlefields." Shaara wrote: "The peach trees there today are maintained in the original location of the orchard, though keeping the trees healthy is a constant headache since the park's enormous deer population delights in devouring the trees' delicious leaves and blossoms."
My U.S. Park Service leaflet said Miss Bell's orchard was in full bloom on April 6, 1862, as Confederate troops hammered the Union's left flank. Shaara is more specific: "There are no more poetic descriptions of battle than those written by soldiers who fought here, several of whom described how the fully blossoming trees were so cut by the storm of musket fire that the white petals swirled around the men like a snowstorm."
Problems caused by deer aren't unique to this national park. Whether it's deer browsing down the woods of Shiloh in Tennessee, Gettysburg in Pennsylvania or Great Smoky Mountains in eastern Tennessee and North Carolina, or elk strip-mining the herbage of Rocky Mountain National Park in Colorado, Wind Cave National Park in South Dakota or Theodore Roosevelt National Park in North Dakota, we see the pitiful results of overprotection. This is what happens when we set aside treasured areas, then allow almost all forms of human recreation except hunting.
Our nation forever will owe Theodore Roosevelt and other visionaries for setting aside millions of acres for national parks. What Roosevelt couldn't have foreseen was a society 100 years later so disconnected from nature and the food chain that it lacks the common sense and political courage to prevent one species from wreaking havoc on lands that once held diverse species.
Meanwhile, that society somehow produces people who righteously try to remove species they deem alien or exotic if it threatens a native ecosystem. Whether it's lake trout in Yellowstone Lake, or elk and mule deer in Channel Islands National Park off California, the Park Service wants them dead or gone.
Fascinating. If someone took a species from somewhere else in North America and released it where it wasn't living when Europeans arrived 400 years ago, the Park Service crusades with a zealot's conviction, dismissing protests as naïve and uneducated.
But when a species is native to a national park and destroying its home from within, the Park Service merely mopes and hopes the problem goes away. When hunters outside park boundaries don't shoot enough animals to make a difference, the Park Service crafts expensive sharp-shooting plans rather than work with qualified hunters who would solve the problem and be grateful for the opportunity.
The feds should consider Wisconsin's approach. When ecologists show just cause to open a state park to deer hunting, we hold hearings, let everyone bark and open the park to controlled hunts.
A few weeks later, everyone is back to normal, their outrage looking for a new perch. The system works.
Source:
http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080221/GPG07/802210566/1233/GPGsports
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Monday, February 18, 2008
MARYLAND NEWS: 62 Deer Culled at Goucher College
Hunters are finished the business of thinning the deer population at Goucher College in Towson. Concerns over a growing herd forced administrators to call for control measures. As Tim Williams reports, hunters are finished until more studies are done.
As they walk their daily route through the Goucher college campus, the company of deer has become common for the Oettinger family.
April teaches at the school.
"Sometimes we'd see the herd of male deer with the large antlers would be right over here and we would see them hopping back and forth and it would drive our dogs to abstraction," she said.
But now there are 62 less deer in the herd than there were at the end of last year.
"While the college was closed for the winter break, over five days, state licensed deer cooperators came to campus and did a managed bow hunt," said Goucher College spokesperson Kristen Keener.
At about 200 white-tailed deer, the population for the campus was considered out of control. The State Department of Natural Resources estimates there should only be 40.
Hunters first tried to single out animals that were sick or injured because relocation and shooting them with birth control were too expensive and time consuming.
"Of the 62 animals that were removed, seven of them previously had been injured, perhaps as the result of a car collision or poachers who found their way onto campus," Keener said.
The hunt was not unopposed. Some students and alumni were against it from the beginning; others favored the idea.
Students received emails just before the holiday alerting them.
A Goucher spokesperson says with campus expansion, thinning will protect the landscape.
"For me, [I stopped] walking through the woods because of lyme disease and the deer ticks, particularly with the dogs. Now that we have our little boy, we just don't take the trails," Oettinger said.
"The college's administrators are here to protect the well-being of the students, faculty and staff, so any measure that perhaps endangers their well-being is of great concern," Keener said.
No other controlled hunts are scheduled at this time.
Source: http://wjz.com/local/deer.goucher.hunting.2.656312.html
As they walk their daily route through the Goucher college campus, the company of deer has become common for the Oettinger family.
April teaches at the school.
"Sometimes we'd see the herd of male deer with the large antlers would be right over here and we would see them hopping back and forth and it would drive our dogs to abstraction," she said.
But now there are 62 less deer in the herd than there were at the end of last year.
"While the college was closed for the winter break, over five days, state licensed deer cooperators came to campus and did a managed bow hunt," said Goucher College spokesperson Kristen Keener.
At about 200 white-tailed deer, the population for the campus was considered out of control. The State Department of Natural Resources estimates there should only be 40.
Hunters first tried to single out animals that were sick or injured because relocation and shooting them with birth control were too expensive and time consuming.
"Of the 62 animals that were removed, seven of them previously had been injured, perhaps as the result of a car collision or poachers who found their way onto campus," Keener said.
The hunt was not unopposed. Some students and alumni were against it from the beginning; others favored the idea.
Students received emails just before the holiday alerting them.
A Goucher spokesperson says with campus expansion, thinning will protect the landscape.
"For me, [I stopped] walking through the woods because of lyme disease and the deer ticks, particularly with the dogs. Now that we have our little boy, we just don't take the trails," Oettinger said.
"The college's administrators are here to protect the well-being of the students, faculty and staff, so any measure that perhaps endangers their well-being is of great concern," Keener said.
No other controlled hunts are scheduled at this time.
Source: http://wjz.com/local/deer.goucher.hunting.2.656312.html
Friday, February 15, 2008
NEW YORK OPINION: Costs of Feeding Deer Outweigh Benefits
As I sit down to write this article, the wind chill outside is a frigid -20F. It’s predicted to be nearly that cold tonight without the wind and the winter storm watch posted for tomorrow night has just been upgraded to a warning, with the potential for up to a foot of new snow, and maybe more.
I don’t know about you, but this winter has already kicked my behind.
We’ve seen record snowfall, bone-chilling temperatures, relentless wind, blizzard conditions on a number of occasions (the most recent being two nights ago), very little sunshine, and plenty of ice, sleet and freezing rain. Oh, and did I mention the power outages, lingering cold and flu symptoms, and seasonal affective disorder?
The harsh winter weather has been hard on wildlife, too, and even though it probably hasn’t been as difficult as some people believe, if unforgiving conditions prevail into March, some animals won’t survive. Late winter snowstorms, especially when coupled with extreme cold, can be especially hard on deer, particularly does that have burned off most of their fat reserves and are carrying fawns.
That is creating considerable concern. Several individuals that I’ve spoken with recently desperately want to do something to help the deer survive the winter. They feel that feeding them is one way to help. Unfortunately, that is not always the case. Besides, feeding deer is prohibited in New York. It has been illegal to do so since 2003.
That doesn’t discourage some people. They speak as if the deer are their own or feel that they are protecting them. A small number seem at times to have lost sight of the fact that deer are wild animals.
Others become angry.
“I don’t care.”
“They can put me in jail. I won’t admit to it, and no one’s going to tell me I can’t feed deer.”
These are the types of arguments I have heard.
The fact is, the feeding ban is in place as a precautionary action; one of several proactive measures taken to help curtail the spread of and, hopefully, eradicate Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) in the state’s deer herd. CWD is caused by infectious protein particles called prions and spread from animal to animal through saliva. The potential for the spread of the disease is markedly increased when deer continuously feed from the same trough or feeding station, where grain with saliva on it can easily fall from the mouth of one animal only to be eaten by another. The disease is progressive, degenerative and always fatal.
Even if that weren’t the case, there are several other considerations that need to be taken into account. In the wild, deer will select the most nutritious foods in their environment, and their diet varies with the seasons. They are ruminants, or cud chewers. Like cows, deer swallow food without chewing and store it in the rumen, the first and largest chamber of their four-chamber stomachs. Essentially, they eat until the rumen is full. Then, the partially digested food, or cud, is regurgitated, chewed and swallowed.
They are dependant upon a variety of bacteria and microorganisms in the rumen, not digestive juices, to break food down. The types and concentrations of these microorganisms are food specific. If deer have been feeding on native browse, they have built up the micro-organisms that digest only that type [of] vegetation. If a deer suddenly fills its stomach with corn or hay, it may not have enough of the proper micro-organisms in its stomach to digest the food.
Suddenly introducing grain to their diet may also cause deer to suffer scours (diarrhea) and acidosis, a condition where excess acid builds up in the rumen killing natural, digestive-tract bacteria.
Symptoms of acidosis include indigestion, dehydration, staggering and apparent blindness, and death.
Even when deer are able to consume supplemented foods without becoming sick, they receive very little nutrition until their systems adjust to the change of diet. As a result, they can actually starve to death with full bellies.
Keep in mind, too, that many of the deer visiting feed stations are carrying fawns. If they become sick or undernourished, their fawns are put at risk, as well.
There are several other very good reasons not to feed deer. Those that visit feeding stations often become abnormally aggressive. They may injure one another fighting for food. The younger and less assertive deer are often kept away by larger and stronger ones.
Deer that become dependent upon artificial feeding often ignore their natural instincts. They lose their fear of humans and become pests, often returning in the summer to feast on garden plants and landscape and fruit trees. And, since feeding sites encourage deer to crowd together in unnaturally high densities, the risk of death by predators, like coyotes and domestic dogs, is greatly increased.
There are ways for neighboring landowners and hunting clubs to help sustain wild deer populations during winter months without breaking the law and without creating a disease or health risk. If animals go into the winter in good condition, most are able to survive prolonged periods of cold temperatures, persistent deep snow and icy conditions.
By developing and putting into practice a management plan that provides the best possible natural feed and optimal habitat, you can help to better ensure herd survival and health. This will involve timber management practices that use habitat as a guiding objective, along with the development, improvement and fertilization of food plots in areas that already provide quality wintering habitat.
For general tips on management of native vegetation and timber, creating and improving habitat, and establishing food plots on your land, please contact your local DEC regional office or Cornell Cooperative Extension.
Source: http://www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com/Columns/articles.asp?articleID=10438
I don’t know about you, but this winter has already kicked my behind.
We’ve seen record snowfall, bone-chilling temperatures, relentless wind, blizzard conditions on a number of occasions (the most recent being two nights ago), very little sunshine, and plenty of ice, sleet and freezing rain. Oh, and did I mention the power outages, lingering cold and flu symptoms, and seasonal affective disorder?
The harsh winter weather has been hard on wildlife, too, and even though it probably hasn’t been as difficult as some people believe, if unforgiving conditions prevail into March, some animals won’t survive. Late winter snowstorms, especially when coupled with extreme cold, can be especially hard on deer, particularly does that have burned off most of their fat reserves and are carrying fawns.
That is creating considerable concern. Several individuals that I’ve spoken with recently desperately want to do something to help the deer survive the winter. They feel that feeding them is one way to help. Unfortunately, that is not always the case. Besides, feeding deer is prohibited in New York. It has been illegal to do so since 2003.
That doesn’t discourage some people. They speak as if the deer are their own or feel that they are protecting them. A small number seem at times to have lost sight of the fact that deer are wild animals.
Others become angry.
“I don’t care.”
“They can put me in jail. I won’t admit to it, and no one’s going to tell me I can’t feed deer.”
These are the types of arguments I have heard.
The fact is, the feeding ban is in place as a precautionary action; one of several proactive measures taken to help curtail the spread of and, hopefully, eradicate Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) in the state’s deer herd. CWD is caused by infectious protein particles called prions and spread from animal to animal through saliva. The potential for the spread of the disease is markedly increased when deer continuously feed from the same trough or feeding station, where grain with saliva on it can easily fall from the mouth of one animal only to be eaten by another. The disease is progressive, degenerative and always fatal.
Even if that weren’t the case, there are several other considerations that need to be taken into account. In the wild, deer will select the most nutritious foods in their environment, and their diet varies with the seasons. They are ruminants, or cud chewers. Like cows, deer swallow food without chewing and store it in the rumen, the first and largest chamber of their four-chamber stomachs. Essentially, they eat until the rumen is full. Then, the partially digested food, or cud, is regurgitated, chewed and swallowed.
They are dependant upon a variety of bacteria and microorganisms in the rumen, not digestive juices, to break food down. The types and concentrations of these microorganisms are food specific. If deer have been feeding on native browse, they have built up the micro-organisms that digest only that type [of] vegetation. If a deer suddenly fills its stomach with corn or hay, it may not have enough of the proper micro-organisms in its stomach to digest the food.
Suddenly introducing grain to their diet may also cause deer to suffer scours (diarrhea) and acidosis, a condition where excess acid builds up in the rumen killing natural, digestive-tract bacteria.
Symptoms of acidosis include indigestion, dehydration, staggering and apparent blindness, and death.
Even when deer are able to consume supplemented foods without becoming sick, they receive very little nutrition until their systems adjust to the change of diet. As a result, they can actually starve to death with full bellies.
Keep in mind, too, that many of the deer visiting feed stations are carrying fawns. If they become sick or undernourished, their fawns are put at risk, as well.
There are several other very good reasons not to feed deer. Those that visit feeding stations often become abnormally aggressive. They may injure one another fighting for food. The younger and less assertive deer are often kept away by larger and stronger ones.
Deer that become dependent upon artificial feeding often ignore their natural instincts. They lose their fear of humans and become pests, often returning in the summer to feast on garden plants and landscape and fruit trees. And, since feeding sites encourage deer to crowd together in unnaturally high densities, the risk of death by predators, like coyotes and domestic dogs, is greatly increased.
There are ways for neighboring landowners and hunting clubs to help sustain wild deer populations during winter months without breaking the law and without creating a disease or health risk. If animals go into the winter in good condition, most are able to survive prolonged periods of cold temperatures, persistent deep snow and icy conditions.
By developing and putting into practice a management plan that provides the best possible natural feed and optimal habitat, you can help to better ensure herd survival and health. This will involve timber management practices that use habitat as a guiding objective, along with the development, improvement and fertilization of food plots in areas that already provide quality wintering habitat.
For general tips on management of native vegetation and timber, creating and improving habitat, and establishing food plots on your land, please contact your local DEC regional office or Cornell Cooperative Extension.
Source: http://www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com/Columns/articles.asp?articleID=10438
Monday, February 11, 2008
WISCONSIN NEWS: CWD Stakeholder Advisory Group Report Released
The WI Department of Natural Resources appointed 18 citizens with diverse interests in the state’s wild deer herd to offer recommendations regarding future Chronic Wasting Disease management for consideration by the Department and the Wisconsin Natural Resources Board. The group became the CWD Stakeholder Advisory Group (SAG).
The full report is at:
http://dnr.wi.gov/org/land/wildlife/whealth/issues/cwd/doc/SAGreport.pdf
It is worth the read, particularly the minority reports. I hope that in the event of pandemic influenza, a different framework to combat the disease is used.
The full report is at:
http://dnr.wi.gov/org/land/wildlife/whealth/issues/cwd/doc/SAGreport.pdf
It is worth the read, particularly the minority reports. I hope that in the event of pandemic influenza, a different framework to combat the disease is used.
Thursday, February 07, 2008
PENNSYLVANIA NEWS: Plumstead Looking to Control Deer
Plumstead, like many communities in Central Bucks, is worried about a deer problem.
On Wednesday, the township's environmental advisory council heard two approaches to addressing the high number of whitetails, which are blamed for traffic accidents, slow reforestation, Lyme disease and crop damage.
Sen. Chuck McIlhinney, a Bucks Republican, touted a state law he helped pass last year that makes it easier for farmers and other property owners to cull deer from their properties year-round.
A Bedminster animal control group pushed a bow hunting program they successfully instituted in Upper Makefield this fall.
The overall message was one that has been heard in many local communities as deer populations have soared amid declining hunting and increasing land preservation.
“We're dealing with a major problem, an epidemic really,” said Tom Lurz, a member of the environmental board.
Before this year, the state allowed farmers to shoot deer throughout the year in order to keep down crop damage on their properties.
Now, farmers and other property owners in the region will be able to appoint two designees who can also bag deer on the land.
McIlhinney, the chairman of the Senate Games and Fisheries Committee, said the new rules recognize the high degree of property damage that is being delivered by deer in Bucks and Montgomery counties. Allowing a designee frees up property owners who may not have the time to address a widespread problem, he said.
Only property owners that can demonstrate deer damage to the state are allowed to participate.
The designees must have hunting licenses and be without game code violations, but they are allowed to shoot seven days a week, can bait and also use rifles, McIlhinney said.
The law change won praise from committee members, as did the archery program offered by Eccologix, which charged Upper Makefield $48,000 to coordinate bow hunting on properties in that township during the sport season.
Jody Maddock, Eccologix's wildlife management director, said the archers were able to bag at least 450 deer on 70 properties. Police, meanwhile, have tallied a 60 percent drop in the number of road-kill reports, he said.
EAC members said a next step for Plumstead may be to query large landowners to see if there is interest for a similar program in the township.
Source: http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/113-02072008-1484034.html
On Wednesday, the township's environmental advisory council heard two approaches to addressing the high number of whitetails, which are blamed for traffic accidents, slow reforestation, Lyme disease and crop damage.
Sen. Chuck McIlhinney, a Bucks Republican, touted a state law he helped pass last year that makes it easier for farmers and other property owners to cull deer from their properties year-round.
A Bedminster animal control group pushed a bow hunting program they successfully instituted in Upper Makefield this fall.
The overall message was one that has been heard in many local communities as deer populations have soared amid declining hunting and increasing land preservation.
“We're dealing with a major problem, an epidemic really,” said Tom Lurz, a member of the environmental board.
Before this year, the state allowed farmers to shoot deer throughout the year in order to keep down crop damage on their properties.
Now, farmers and other property owners in the region will be able to appoint two designees who can also bag deer on the land.
McIlhinney, the chairman of the Senate Games and Fisheries Committee, said the new rules recognize the high degree of property damage that is being delivered by deer in Bucks and Montgomery counties. Allowing a designee frees up property owners who may not have the time to address a widespread problem, he said.
Only property owners that can demonstrate deer damage to the state are allowed to participate.
The designees must have hunting licenses and be without game code violations, but they are allowed to shoot seven days a week, can bait and also use rifles, McIlhinney said.
The law change won praise from committee members, as did the archery program offered by Eccologix, which charged Upper Makefield $48,000 to coordinate bow hunting on properties in that township during the sport season.
Jody Maddock, Eccologix's wildlife management director, said the archers were able to bag at least 450 deer on 70 properties. Police, meanwhile, have tallied a 60 percent drop in the number of road-kill reports, he said.
EAC members said a next step for Plumstead may be to query large landowners to see if there is interest for a similar program in the township.
Source: http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/113-02072008-1484034.html
Wednesday, February 06, 2008
NEW JERSEY NEWS: South Mountain Cull Already Eliminates 37 Deer Per Square Mile
The Essex County-sponsored deer hunt at South Mountain Reservation today yielded 17 deer, bringing the total number of deer removed to 119, according to Essex County Executive Joseph DiVincenzo.
The take includes six deer -- four males and two females -- from the morning session and 11 more -- four males and seven females -- from the afternoon, DiVincenzo added.
The 119 deer have been culled from the 2,047-acre reservation since the hunt began Jan. 29. (Rooney notes: 119 deer removed from 2047 acres translates to a 37 deer per square mile reduction). Volunteer sharpshooters working from tree blinds have killed a total of 54 males and 65 female deer on the three days the hunt has been allowed.
The reservation stretches across Millburn, Maplewood, West Orange and South Orange, and the hunt is scheduled to take place on most Tuesdays and Thursdays until Feb. 28. DiVincenzo said the hunt would be suspended Tuesday because of Lincoln's birthday, and the park will be open.
Source: http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/02/119_deer_killed_so_far_in_esse.html
The take includes six deer -- four males and two females -- from the morning session and 11 more -- four males and seven females -- from the afternoon, DiVincenzo added.
The 119 deer have been culled from the 2,047-acre reservation since the hunt began Jan. 29. (Rooney notes: 119 deer removed from 2047 acres translates to a 37 deer per square mile reduction). Volunteer sharpshooters working from tree blinds have killed a total of 54 males and 65 female deer on the three days the hunt has been allowed.
The reservation stretches across Millburn, Maplewood, West Orange and South Orange, and the hunt is scheduled to take place on most Tuesdays and Thursdays until Feb. 28. DiVincenzo said the hunt would be suspended Tuesday because of Lincoln's birthday, and the park will be open.
Source: http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/02/119_deer_killed_so_far_in_esse.html
WISCONSIN NEWS: Cull in Portage Underway
The total take in Portage's deer-kill program stands at 59, and there are plenty more of the animals still in the area, City Parks, Recreation and Forestry Director Tim Raimer said Tuesday.
Ten deer were killed Friday night, Raimer said, putting the total at 59 since hunters from Spring Green-based Wildlife Specialists started in late December.
Raimer said when hunters arrived at one of the sites Friday, there were a dozen deer standing near a bait pile. Last Friday was the first time hunters had been out since Jan. 11.
The program aims to control an overabundant deer population within city limits. Raimer said the program is having its intended results.
"The people that are against it are mad because there are less deer around. The people who are for it are happy because there are less deer around. The bottom line is, there are less deer around," he said.
The city is more than halfway to the 100 deer it has budgeted to kill. Wildlife Specialists charges $85 per kill at five baiting sites around the city.
When requested by the city, the company sends sharpshooters armed with high-powered rifles, silencers and night-vision equipment to sites in the city, including bait piles near the Parks and Recreation office at 806 Silver Lake Drive, near the Portage airport, and at Collipp-Worden and Woodridge parks.
Gunderson hill near the Rolling Hills Country Estates on the city's northeast side no longer is being hunted.
Raimer said he will discuss the program at tonight's Municipal Services & Utilities Committee meeting. It is not on the agenda, but Raimer gives a department update during the session. The meeting is at 6:30 p.m. at the municipal building.
Common Council member Rick Dodd, chairman of the committee, said he has received almost entirely positive feedback on the program because people notice a difference, especially in the areas near Woodridge and Collipp-Worden parks and the park and rec office.
He said he supported the program because that's what feedback from residents dictated.
"I don't take any personal stock in it right now because they're not bothering my property and I haven't hit any" in my car, he said.
The program restarted in the city after citizens complained that deer were aggressively moving inward into the city limits on private property, destroying vegetation. They also argued that it was a public safety issue for drivers as well as a public-health issue because deer tend to help propagate Lyme disease.
A similar program ran in the city from 1999 to 2002.
Source: http://www.wiscnews.com/pdr/news/271142
Ten deer were killed Friday night, Raimer said, putting the total at 59 since hunters from Spring Green-based Wildlife Specialists started in late December.
Raimer said when hunters arrived at one of the sites Friday, there were a dozen deer standing near a bait pile. Last Friday was the first time hunters had been out since Jan. 11.
The program aims to control an overabundant deer population within city limits. Raimer said the program is having its intended results.
"The people that are against it are mad because there are less deer around. The people who are for it are happy because there are less deer around. The bottom line is, there are less deer around," he said.
The city is more than halfway to the 100 deer it has budgeted to kill. Wildlife Specialists charges $85 per kill at five baiting sites around the city.
When requested by the city, the company sends sharpshooters armed with high-powered rifles, silencers and night-vision equipment to sites in the city, including bait piles near the Parks and Recreation office at 806 Silver Lake Drive, near the Portage airport, and at Collipp-Worden and Woodridge parks.
Gunderson hill near the Rolling Hills Country Estates on the city's northeast side no longer is being hunted.
Raimer said he will discuss the program at tonight's Municipal Services & Utilities Committee meeting. It is not on the agenda, but Raimer gives a department update during the session. The meeting is at 6:30 p.m. at the municipal building.
Common Council member Rick Dodd, chairman of the committee, said he has received almost entirely positive feedback on the program because people notice a difference, especially in the areas near Woodridge and Collipp-Worden parks and the park and rec office.
He said he supported the program because that's what feedback from residents dictated.
"I don't take any personal stock in it right now because they're not bothering my property and I haven't hit any" in my car, he said.
The program restarted in the city after citizens complained that deer were aggressively moving inward into the city limits on private property, destroying vegetation. They also argued that it was a public safety issue for drivers as well as a public-health issue because deer tend to help propagate Lyme disease.
A similar program ran in the city from 1999 to 2002.
Source: http://www.wiscnews.com/pdr/news/271142
OHIO NEWS: Gahanna Culling Operation Enters 15th Year
Gahanna residents harvested 29 deer in Gahanna parks from Sept. 29, 2007, to Feb. 3 and 26 deer on private property as part of the city's Urban Deer Hunting program.
"This is our 15th year," police Chief Dennis Murphy said. "This is the first year that we used private property."
For the first time, the Gahanna Police Department opened the program to private landowners, hoping to help reduce the deer population. Murphy said six property owners participated in this year's program. Twelve landowners volunteered, he said.
Murphy said the police department meets each hunter interested in participating in the program. Every hunter must attend at least one orientation meeting with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, the city's animal warden and parks and recreation representatives to be allowed to participate in the program, he said.
This year, Murphy arranged a meeting between the hunters and the private property owners to ensure a good match for the program.
"There were no problems this year," he said.
Property owners interested in participating may have been rejected for a variety of reasons, Murphy said, adding that the city couldn't accept property in the middle of a neighborhood. Those property owners helped identify areas of concern, though.
Murphy said the number of deer-auto collisions and property-damage reports were indicative of a deer-population problem.
One area the police department was unable to access was Columbus Academy property. Murphy said deer often flee from nearby city parks and take refuge there. Numerous accidents have occurred on Cherry Bottom, Morse and Hamilton roads because of deer, he said.
Murphy said although Columbus Academy officials have expressed safety concerns, safety need not be a concern. Hunters use arrows that are shot a short distance to thin the herds, he said.
Columbus Academy headmaster John Mackenzie said the school can't allow hunting because no one is permitted to have weapons on campus.
"We have students here every day of the year - even Saturday and Sunday," he said. "Parents would be concerned if they saw hunting going on, on campus."
Mandy Frint, who heads up the city's Urban Deer Hunting program, said numerous safety precautions are taken, especially for private property. She said 200 people had expressed interest in hunting, but only 50 actually participated.
Murphy said hunters are required to follow hunting rules established by ODNR. Hunting may occur from a half hour before sunrise to a half hour after sunset.
Private landowners supported the idea of having hunters on private property, but they wanted more deer harvested, Murphy said.
"We were very successful this year - our first year," Frint said.
Frint said that by opening the property to private land, the number of deer taken has doubled. She said hunters were a lot more eager to participate in the program, too.
Gahanna landowner Mike Murray participated in the program this year. He, a brother and a nephew are all hunters.
Murray said he was tired of watching deer destroy his apple and peach trees and his blackberries, raspberries and strawberries.
"The deer go in and tear things up," he said. "I would like to see more deer taken. For me they are long legged rats."
Murphy said officials realized last year that a change needed to be made in the program when numbers weren't as high as hoped.
Frint said the city in 2007 had 69 auto accidents caused by deer; most were non-injury to the driver or passenger. In 2006, 79 deer-car collisions were reported, and bow hunters killed only 19 deer.
Although city leaders are looking for large parcels of privately owned land for the hunting program, three contiguous neighbors may volunteer for the program.
"We don't want one neighbor adamant against it," Murphy said.
Murphy said the program also serves as a crime deterrent, Murphy said. Sometimes hunters observe a crime in progress and contact the police department.
An informational meeting will be held on the last Wednesday in August. Interested hunters and landowners should check the city's Web site at www.gahanna.gov for more information.
Source: http://www.thisweeknews.com/?sec=home&story=sites/twn/content/pool/exclusives/2008/february/020508-GHN-News-Deer.html&tab=tab1
"This is our 15th year," police Chief Dennis Murphy said. "This is the first year that we used private property."
For the first time, the Gahanna Police Department opened the program to private landowners, hoping to help reduce the deer population. Murphy said six property owners participated in this year's program. Twelve landowners volunteered, he said.
Murphy said the police department meets each hunter interested in participating in the program. Every hunter must attend at least one orientation meeting with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, the city's animal warden and parks and recreation representatives to be allowed to participate in the program, he said.
This year, Murphy arranged a meeting between the hunters and the private property owners to ensure a good match for the program.
"There were no problems this year," he said.
Property owners interested in participating may have been rejected for a variety of reasons, Murphy said, adding that the city couldn't accept property in the middle of a neighborhood. Those property owners helped identify areas of concern, though.
Murphy said the number of deer-auto collisions and property-damage reports were indicative of a deer-population problem.
One area the police department was unable to access was Columbus Academy property. Murphy said deer often flee from nearby city parks and take refuge there. Numerous accidents have occurred on Cherry Bottom, Morse and Hamilton roads because of deer, he said.
Murphy said although Columbus Academy officials have expressed safety concerns, safety need not be a concern. Hunters use arrows that are shot a short distance to thin the herds, he said.
Columbus Academy headmaster John Mackenzie said the school can't allow hunting because no one is permitted to have weapons on campus.
"We have students here every day of the year - even Saturday and Sunday," he said. "Parents would be concerned if they saw hunting going on, on campus."
Mandy Frint, who heads up the city's Urban Deer Hunting program, said numerous safety precautions are taken, especially for private property. She said 200 people had expressed interest in hunting, but only 50 actually participated.
Murphy said hunters are required to follow hunting rules established by ODNR. Hunting may occur from a half hour before sunrise to a half hour after sunset.
Private landowners supported the idea of having hunters on private property, but they wanted more deer harvested, Murphy said.
"We were very successful this year - our first year," Frint said.
Frint said that by opening the property to private land, the number of deer taken has doubled. She said hunters were a lot more eager to participate in the program, too.
Gahanna landowner Mike Murray participated in the program this year. He, a brother and a nephew are all hunters.
Murray said he was tired of watching deer destroy his apple and peach trees and his blackberries, raspberries and strawberries.
"The deer go in and tear things up," he said. "I would like to see more deer taken. For me they are long legged rats."
Murphy said officials realized last year that a change needed to be made in the program when numbers weren't as high as hoped.
Frint said the city in 2007 had 69 auto accidents caused by deer; most were non-injury to the driver or passenger. In 2006, 79 deer-car collisions were reported, and bow hunters killed only 19 deer.
Although city leaders are looking for large parcels of privately owned land for the hunting program, three contiguous neighbors may volunteer for the program.
"We don't want one neighbor adamant against it," Murphy said.
Murphy said the program also serves as a crime deterrent, Murphy said. Sometimes hunters observe a crime in progress and contact the police department.
An informational meeting will be held on the last Wednesday in August. Interested hunters and landowners should check the city's Web site at www.gahanna.gov for more information.
Source: http://www.thisweeknews.com/?sec=home&story=sites/twn/content/pool/exclusives/2008/february/020508-GHN-News-Deer.html&tab=tab1
UTAH NEWS: Severe Weather Leads to State-Sponsored Deer Feeding
Utah wildlife officials are making sure the state's deer get enough to eat.
Throughout northern Utah, animals are starving because of heavy snows this winter. For the first time in several years, the state has activated an emergency feeding program for deer.
Some say the state waited to long to step in and help the deer. Officials waited about a month after the first reports came in to mobilize. Despite the feeding effort, experts predict heavy losses to the population, especially this year's crop of young fawns.
The state is getting help executing the program from concerned groups of hunters. The feeding is expected to go on daily for several weeks.
Source: http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_8164291
Throughout northern Utah, animals are starving because of heavy snows this winter. For the first time in several years, the state has activated an emergency feeding program for deer.
Some say the state waited to long to step in and help the deer. Officials waited about a month after the first reports came in to mobilize. Despite the feeding effort, experts predict heavy losses to the population, especially this year's crop of young fawns.
The state is getting help executing the program from concerned groups of hunters. The feeding is expected to go on daily for several weeks.
Source: http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_8164291
MINNESOTA NEWS: Sharpshooters Hired to Cull Deer in TB Zone
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources will use sharpshooters to reduce the deer population in a part of northwestern Minnesota that's seen high rates of bovine tuberculosis.
DNR helicopter surveys in January showed about 800 deer in the 140-square mile area that is managed for bovine TB. The DNR employed sharpshooters in the same area last year, but say numbers didn't significantly decline.
DNR official Michelle Carstensen says sharpshooters are a necessity, even though the overall prevalence of bovine TB in wild deer remains low and is restricted to a small geographic region.
The DNR has also liberalized hunting regulations in the bovine TB zone.
source: http://www.kxmc.com/News/205961.asp
DNR helicopter surveys in January showed about 800 deer in the 140-square mile area that is managed for bovine TB. The DNR employed sharpshooters in the same area last year, but say numbers didn't significantly decline.
DNR official Michelle Carstensen says sharpshooters are a necessity, even though the overall prevalence of bovine TB in wild deer remains low and is restricted to a small geographic region.
The DNR has also liberalized hunting regulations in the bovine TB zone.
source: http://www.kxmc.com/News/205961.asp
Tuesday, February 05, 2008
WISCONSIN NEWS: DeForest Cull Enters Third Season
For the third straight year, DeForest will hire sharpshooters to kill about 50 deer in an effort to control the encroaching population.
"I think it 's been successful because we 've been able to lessen the density of deer out there, " said Patrick Vander Sanden, the village 's public works director. "It 's been a concern for the village in terms of safety and traveling. "
No date for the deer harvest has been set, but Vander Sanden said he hopes it will happen within the next two weeks.
Last year, sharpshooters using silenced weapons and firing from baited tree stands killed 45 deer. Hunters this year will focus on the same area along River and Windsor roads in the southwest corner of the village.
Vander Sanden said an unscientific count showed more than 100 deer in the area.
"We 've seen deer even coming into the northern part of the village, " he said.
New developments on what used to be cropland are limiting food sources for the deer, forcing them closer to homes where residents have reported deer damage to their yards, Vander Sanden said.
Another problem is the number of car-deer crashes in the village. Last year the village had 16 crashes, down from 19 in 2006 and 19 in 2005. There has been one car-deer crash this year.
"I would expect us to have to keep doing this for a little while longer, " Vander Sanden said of the harvest.
The sharpshooters charge $85 for each deer, and the village expects to spend $3,000 to $4,000 on the program.
Other area communities have relied on paid sharpshooters to clear areas overrun by deer. Sharpshooters in Portage killed 59 deer in December and January. Portage ran a similar program from 1999 to 2002, said Tim Raimer, manager of the city 's parks, recreation and forestry department.
Madison also has committed to a sharpshooting program at Cherokee Marsh this winter, said Jake Fries, wildlife biologist for the state Department of Natural Resources.
A similar program last year killed 75 deer, said Dick Grasmick, interim superintendent of Madison parks.
Tami Ryan, southeast region wildlife supervisor for the DNR, said more communities in the state are looking at some form of lethal deer removal.
"It 's a tool that 's kind of grown to be more and more applicable ... as urban communities are dealing with overabundant deer populations, " she said.
Source: http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/local/270877
"I think it 's been successful because we 've been able to lessen the density of deer out there, " said Patrick Vander Sanden, the village 's public works director. "It 's been a concern for the village in terms of safety and traveling. "
No date for the deer harvest has been set, but Vander Sanden said he hopes it will happen within the next two weeks.
Last year, sharpshooters using silenced weapons and firing from baited tree stands killed 45 deer. Hunters this year will focus on the same area along River and Windsor roads in the southwest corner of the village.
Vander Sanden said an unscientific count showed more than 100 deer in the area.
"We 've seen deer even coming into the northern part of the village, " he said.
New developments on what used to be cropland are limiting food sources for the deer, forcing them closer to homes where residents have reported deer damage to their yards, Vander Sanden said.
Another problem is the number of car-deer crashes in the village. Last year the village had 16 crashes, down from 19 in 2006 and 19 in 2005. There has been one car-deer crash this year.
"I would expect us to have to keep doing this for a little while longer, " Vander Sanden said of the harvest.
The sharpshooters charge $85 for each deer, and the village expects to spend $3,000 to $4,000 on the program.
Other area communities have relied on paid sharpshooters to clear areas overrun by deer. Sharpshooters in Portage killed 59 deer in December and January. Portage ran a similar program from 1999 to 2002, said Tim Raimer, manager of the city 's parks, recreation and forestry department.
Madison also has committed to a sharpshooting program at Cherokee Marsh this winter, said Jake Fries, wildlife biologist for the state Department of Natural Resources.
A similar program last year killed 75 deer, said Dick Grasmick, interim superintendent of Madison parks.
Tami Ryan, southeast region wildlife supervisor for the DNR, said more communities in the state are looking at some form of lethal deer removal.
"It 's a tool that 's kind of grown to be more and more applicable ... as urban communities are dealing with overabundant deer populations, " she said.
Source: http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/local/270877
Monday, February 04, 2008
PENNSYLVANIA NEWS: Upper Makefield Cull Deemed Success
Anne Toohey has seen fewer deer with “ribs showing through.” Adrienne Minassian said fewer deer are munching on her flower and vegetable garden. Police have reported a 65 percent drop in deer/vehicle collisions in 2007 as compared to 2006.
By all accounts, Upper Makefield's season-long controlled deer hunt was a success. About 70 property owners allowed roughly two dozen bow-hunters to thin herds on their land during the harvest, which spanned September to January. The township last year hired Bedminster-based wildlife management company Eccologix to screen and select hunters and to oversee the hunt.
Although officials still are tallying totals, Jody Maddock, Eccologix Wildlife Management director, said, “We're over the 450 mark.” Of the deer killed, Maddock said, roughly 70 percent were female.
“The goal was a triple of last year's harvest. Last year's harvest was 118,” Maddock said. “A triple would be 354.”
At the outset, officials had said about 3,500 deer — or approximately 166 deer per square mile — called the 22-square-mile township home. Seven deer per square mile was identified as a more manageable number in terms of environmental and human safety, Eccologix officials had said.
Getting to that point will take many more years of hunting, officials said.
“I had expected that it was going to be multi-year in order to have some effect,” supervisor Chairman Dan Worden said. “We'll get a report. Based upon that report, we'll decide what we're going to do going forward.”
Maddock said he expects to make a presentation at the March 19 supervisors meeting. He also is readying a survey for participating property owners to complete.
Serge and Adrienne Minassian beat him to the punch. The Eagle Road homeowners of 30 years sent a letter to township officials expressing their approval with the hunt.
Two hunters were assigned to the couple's 6.3-acre property, Adrienne Minassian said, adding that “you don't even know they're there.”
“They're very discreet, very professional,” she said. “We never saw a dead deer.”
What she has seen are fewer herds feasting on her garden and “sauntering across” her lane.
“The deer used to come up to the front steps,” Minassian said. “They would not even be afraid of you.”
Resident Anne Toohey said she wished the hunting season could be extended to continue reducing the population. Maddock said hunters killed about 20 deer on her 5-acre property.
“There's just too many deer. There's a huge problem nationally with the amount of deer,” Toohey said. “We need to be responsible about the deer population.”
To do so, Maddock said, more landowners would have to grant hunters access. With the same properties, he predicts 30 to 40 percent fewer deer would be killed during the upcoming season.
“They've now been to school,” Maddock said of deer. “Where we are there will be less.”
Besides one resident who urged officials to use birth control instead of hunting, the Upper Makefield hunt has received little resistance. A recent sharpshooting in Solebury sparked considerable controversy, and some in Lower Makefield have spoken out against the township's plan for a controlled hunt.
Source: http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/111-02032008-1481758.html
By all accounts, Upper Makefield's season-long controlled deer hunt was a success. About 70 property owners allowed roughly two dozen bow-hunters to thin herds on their land during the harvest, which spanned September to January. The township last year hired Bedminster-based wildlife management company Eccologix to screen and select hunters and to oversee the hunt.
Although officials still are tallying totals, Jody Maddock, Eccologix Wildlife Management director, said, “We're over the 450 mark.” Of the deer killed, Maddock said, roughly 70 percent were female.
“The goal was a triple of last year's harvest. Last year's harvest was 118,” Maddock said. “A triple would be 354.”
At the outset, officials had said about 3,500 deer — or approximately 166 deer per square mile — called the 22-square-mile township home. Seven deer per square mile was identified as a more manageable number in terms of environmental and human safety, Eccologix officials had said.
Getting to that point will take many more years of hunting, officials said.
“I had expected that it was going to be multi-year in order to have some effect,” supervisor Chairman Dan Worden said. “We'll get a report. Based upon that report, we'll decide what we're going to do going forward.”
Maddock said he expects to make a presentation at the March 19 supervisors meeting. He also is readying a survey for participating property owners to complete.
Serge and Adrienne Minassian beat him to the punch. The Eagle Road homeowners of 30 years sent a letter to township officials expressing their approval with the hunt.
Two hunters were assigned to the couple's 6.3-acre property, Adrienne Minassian said, adding that “you don't even know they're there.”
“They're very discreet, very professional,” she said. “We never saw a dead deer.”
What she has seen are fewer herds feasting on her garden and “sauntering across” her lane.
“The deer used to come up to the front steps,” Minassian said. “They would not even be afraid of you.”
Resident Anne Toohey said she wished the hunting season could be extended to continue reducing the population. Maddock said hunters killed about 20 deer on her 5-acre property.
“There's just too many deer. There's a huge problem nationally with the amount of deer,” Toohey said. “We need to be responsible about the deer population.”
To do so, Maddock said, more landowners would have to grant hunters access. With the same properties, he predicts 30 to 40 percent fewer deer would be killed during the upcoming season.
“They've now been to school,” Maddock said of deer. “Where we are there will be less.”
Besides one resident who urged officials to use birth control instead of hunting, the Upper Makefield hunt has received little resistance. A recent sharpshooting in Solebury sparked considerable controversy, and some in Lower Makefield have spoken out against the township's plan for a controlled hunt.
Source: http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/111-02032008-1481758.html
MONTANA NEWS: Helena Cull Delayed
HELENA, Mont. (AP) - City officials have suggested waiting until the fall of this year to kill 50 mule deer inside the Helena city limits.
The city and state wildlife officials are still working out a plan that calls for city police officers to trap and shoot the deer.
Earlier plans called for the program to start this spring.
The city's draft plan calls for police to use clover traps baited with corn, apples, grain and hay to capture the deer; and then shoot adult bucks and does with .22-caliber firearms or bolt guns.
After the animals are cleaned, they would be taken to a meat processor, then picked up by Helena Food Share for distribution to needy families.
The state Fish, Wildlife and Parks Commission will have to approve any new time frame. The city has suggested September 15 through October 15th.
Information from: Independent Record, http://www.helenair.com
Source: http://www.montanasnewsstation.com/Global/story.asp?S=7815703&nav=menu227_2
The city and state wildlife officials are still working out a plan that calls for city police officers to trap and shoot the deer.
Earlier plans called for the program to start this spring.
The city's draft plan calls for police to use clover traps baited with corn, apples, grain and hay to capture the deer; and then shoot adult bucks and does with .22-caliber firearms or bolt guns.
After the animals are cleaned, they would be taken to a meat processor, then picked up by Helena Food Share for distribution to needy families.
The state Fish, Wildlife and Parks Commission will have to approve any new time frame. The city has suggested September 15 through October 15th.
Information from: Independent Record, http://www.helenair.com
Source: http://www.montanasnewsstation.com/Global/story.asp?S=7815703&nav=menu227_2
PENNSYLVANIA NEWS: Possible Changes for Next Season
The Pennsylvania Game Commission may change the look of the firearms deer season, based on the promise of a study that it hasn't started and isn't sure how it's paying for it.
Commissioners gathered in Harrisburg this past week to give preliminary approval to seasons and bag limits for the 2008-09 hunting seasons. Before taking votes, they heard detailed staff reports each lasting as long as 30 minutes on elk, bears, bobcats, fishers, turkeys, and grouse.
When it came to white-tailed deer, though -- the animal that generates by far the most controversy in the state -- commissioners instituted potentially sweeping changes after a 5-10 minute report from a backup biologist.
Commissioners agreed, by a 4-3 vote, to limit hunting to buck only on the first five days of the firearms deer season in wildlife management units 2D, 2G, 3C and 4B. Buck and doe hunting would be then allowed concurrently from the first Saturday of the season until the last Saturday.
Deer season would remain the same as it has been -- two weeks of concurrent buck and doe hunting -- across the rest of the state.
The changes are preliminary. Commissioners have to give them final approval in April to put them into effect.
The commission's deer biologists didn't recommend the changes. They wanted to maintain two weeks of concurrent hunting statewide and shape the size of the deer herd using doe license allocations, said Bret Wallingford, a member of the agency's deer team, who spoke in place of its ill leader, Chris Rosenberry.
But the commission's "senior management team" directed them to prepare an alternative, executive director Carl Roe said.
He did that, according to information he shared previously with others inside the agency, in an attempt to appease state lawmakers who have been holding up the agency's long-sought license fee increase. It may not be enough. Some of those same lawmakers said before the meeting that nothing short of a return to two weeks of buck hunting followed by three days of doe statewide would convince them to give money to the commission.
Yet commissioners made the change anyway.
The change is to be tied to hunter surveys and a study examining the impact of the newly-shaped season on hunter success rates. But that study exists only in theory right now.
The commission needs to collar and track 100 deer each in management units 2D, 2G, 3C and 4B for any study, Wallingford said. The commission already had plans to collar bucks in units 2G and 4B this winter in cooperation with Penn State University.
But there is no staff in place to capture deer in the other units, despite the fact that such work is usually carried out at this time of year, and no partner like Penn State to help the cash-strapped agency pay for it, Roe said. He said only that the agency will have to find the money "somewhere."
Five commissioners added a footnote to their support for the study. They voted in favor of a resolution that no further changes be made to deer seasons over the course of the next four years while the study is being carried out.
That appears to be meaningless, however. Commissioner Tom Boop of Northumberland County -- an opponent of the deer program who will still be on the board when some of its most ardent supporters are gone -- said commissioners can't legally dictate what future boards can or can't do.
That's true, said commissioner Russ Schleiden of Centre County, but the footnote at least gets the board's "intent" on the record.
Game on
Here's a look at the 2008-09 deer hunting seasons given preliminary approval by Game Commissioners this past week. All need final approval in April:
• Deer, archery, antlerless only: WMUs 2B, 5C and 5D, Sept. 20 to Oct. 3, Nov. 17 to 29 and Dec. 15 to 23.
• Deer, archery, statewide: Oct. 4 to Nov. 15 and Dec. 26 to Jan. 10.
• Deer, antlered and antlerless, WMUs 2D, 2G, 3C and 4B: Dec. 1 to 5.
• Deer, antlered and antlerless, 2D, 2G, 3C and 4B: Dec. 6 to 13.
• Deer, antlered and antlerless, the remainder of the state: Dec. 1 to 13.
• Deer, antlerless, juniors and seniors: Oct. 23 to 25.
• Deer, antlerless, muzzleloader statewide: Oct. 18 to 25.
• Deer, antlered or antlerless, flintlock statewide: Dec. 26 to Jan. 10.
• Deer, antlerless, WMUs 2B, 5C, 5D: Dec. 15 to 23 and Dec. 26 to Jan. 24.
Source: http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/s_550409.html
Commissioners gathered in Harrisburg this past week to give preliminary approval to seasons and bag limits for the 2008-09 hunting seasons. Before taking votes, they heard detailed staff reports each lasting as long as 30 minutes on elk, bears, bobcats, fishers, turkeys, and grouse.
When it came to white-tailed deer, though -- the animal that generates by far the most controversy in the state -- commissioners instituted potentially sweeping changes after a 5-10 minute report from a backup biologist.
Commissioners agreed, by a 4-3 vote, to limit hunting to buck only on the first five days of the firearms deer season in wildlife management units 2D, 2G, 3C and 4B. Buck and doe hunting would be then allowed concurrently from the first Saturday of the season until the last Saturday.
Deer season would remain the same as it has been -- two weeks of concurrent buck and doe hunting -- across the rest of the state.
The changes are preliminary. Commissioners have to give them final approval in April to put them into effect.
The commission's deer biologists didn't recommend the changes. They wanted to maintain two weeks of concurrent hunting statewide and shape the size of the deer herd using doe license allocations, said Bret Wallingford, a member of the agency's deer team, who spoke in place of its ill leader, Chris Rosenberry.
But the commission's "senior management team" directed them to prepare an alternative, executive director Carl Roe said.
He did that, according to information he shared previously with others inside the agency, in an attempt to appease state lawmakers who have been holding up the agency's long-sought license fee increase. It may not be enough. Some of those same lawmakers said before the meeting that nothing short of a return to two weeks of buck hunting followed by three days of doe statewide would convince them to give money to the commission.
Yet commissioners made the change anyway.
The change is to be tied to hunter surveys and a study examining the impact of the newly-shaped season on hunter success rates. But that study exists only in theory right now.
The commission needs to collar and track 100 deer each in management units 2D, 2G, 3C and 4B for any study, Wallingford said. The commission already had plans to collar bucks in units 2G and 4B this winter in cooperation with Penn State University.
But there is no staff in place to capture deer in the other units, despite the fact that such work is usually carried out at this time of year, and no partner like Penn State to help the cash-strapped agency pay for it, Roe said. He said only that the agency will have to find the money "somewhere."
Five commissioners added a footnote to their support for the study. They voted in favor of a resolution that no further changes be made to deer seasons over the course of the next four years while the study is being carried out.
That appears to be meaningless, however. Commissioner Tom Boop of Northumberland County -- an opponent of the deer program who will still be on the board when some of its most ardent supporters are gone -- said commissioners can't legally dictate what future boards can or can't do.
That's true, said commissioner Russ Schleiden of Centre County, but the footnote at least gets the board's "intent" on the record.
Game on
Here's a look at the 2008-09 deer hunting seasons given preliminary approval by Game Commissioners this past week. All need final approval in April:
• Deer, archery, antlerless only: WMUs 2B, 5C and 5D, Sept. 20 to Oct. 3, Nov. 17 to 29 and Dec. 15 to 23.
• Deer, archery, statewide: Oct. 4 to Nov. 15 and Dec. 26 to Jan. 10.
• Deer, antlered and antlerless, WMUs 2D, 2G, 3C and 4B: Dec. 1 to 5.
• Deer, antlered and antlerless, 2D, 2G, 3C and 4B: Dec. 6 to 13.
• Deer, antlered and antlerless, the remainder of the state: Dec. 1 to 13.
• Deer, antlerless, juniors and seniors: Oct. 23 to 25.
• Deer, antlerless, muzzleloader statewide: Oct. 18 to 25.
• Deer, antlered or antlerless, flintlock statewide: Dec. 26 to Jan. 10.
• Deer, antlerless, WMUs 2B, 5C, 5D: Dec. 15 to 23 and Dec. 26 to Jan. 24.
Source: http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/s_550409.html
Thursday, January 31, 2008
WISCONSIN OPINION: Deer Management Undermined by CWD Panel's Petty Squabbles
by Pat Durkin
Last July, then-Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources secretary Scott Hassett appointed 17 citizens and an agency biologist to study Wisconsin's six-year battle with chronic wasting disease in white-tailed deer, then decide how to minimize its impact on the herd, woodland habitats, our economy and all who benefit from healthy deer.
Hassett also appointed a technical team to give the advisory group the latest science on CWD, and review and offer guidance as it developed recommendations. The team included a DNR sociologist, conservation warden and wildlife-disease veterinarian; and two CWD experts from the U.S. Geological Survey and University of Wisconsin.
The DNR presented everyone with a handbook that explained the project and encouraged teamwork. The booklet even included an inspiring quotation from famed anthropologist Margaret Mead: "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."
Well, forget that. Six months and eight meetings later, this small group went home Jan. 26 doubting their work would change anything in Wisconsin, let alone the world. The final report offers many insignificant suggestions, but no ultimate goal for managing CWD, and no step-by-step plan with verifiable benchmarks.
Tom Givnish, a University of Wisconsin botany professor who served on the committee, wrote this in his minority report: "The majority report must be judged an abject failure. … The majority (took) so many management tools off the table that it will be impossible to achieve substantial herd reduction or substantially slow the spread of CWD."
The plan merely tweaks hunting regulations that, if approved, would more likely confuse hunters than thwart disease. For instance, the group recommended a statewide ban on recreational deer feeding, but endorsed current deer-baiting laws for hunters, which allow 2 gallons of bait during deer season.
Ed Harvey, chairman of the Wisconsin Conservation Congress, rejected most of the recommendations in a letter on Jan. 23. "Perhaps most importantly, we want to be very clear that (we) do not support the baiting or feeding of deer," he wrote.
When considering the atmosphere surrounding the group, maybe it's noteworthy they crafted anything. For instance, they voted 9-6 at their Jan. 12 meeting to silence the technical team, directing they not speak unless spoken to. This prompted Dr. Julie Langenberg, the DNR's wildlife veterinarian, to walk out.
That wasn't the first sign of trouble. Dr. Daniel Griffiths, a Lomira veterinarian representing the Wisconsin Veterinary Medical Association, attended the group's meetings in July and August, missed the next two for other commitments and never returned.
He said angry e-mails from group members dissuaded him. "E-mails were flying back and forth that if people missed meetings, their voices shouldn't be heard," Griffiths said Sunday. "There was nothing I could tell them that they wanted to hear. Some of them had set agendas. They were hostile to the scientists giving presentations at the first two meetings and treated them with disrespect. We had no common ground to work from at that point."
Givnish had similar thoughts. "There was too much going on behind the scenes," he said after the Jan. 26 meeting. "There were ugly blogs on the Internet associated with this committee. Some people have a creepy idea of what public service involves. We're supposed to resolve our differences through rational argument and common sense, not fisticuffs or worse. It's sad that happens, but I wasn't surprised."
Alan Crossley, the DNR's CWD project leader, represented the agency on the committee. He said he tried to create a collaborative spirit within the group, and felt terrible that animosity often resulted instead.
"If anyone is to blame, it's me," Crossley said. "I never should have allowed that vote (to silence the technical team), but I never thought it would pass. Maybe I'm too accustomed to the emotions surrounding deer. People who don't work in this environment were probably more shocked than I was."
Whew. Big ol' sigh.
As disgracefully as the advisory group sometimes behaved, and as noble as it might be for Crossley to take the hit, the true fault lies with the DNR's hierarchy, our governor and Legislature and all state institutions involved in CWD policy-making.
Wisconsin has yet to specify a long-term goal and comprehensive plan for managing CWD, and no leader has championed one. Expecting 17 citizens and one DNR employee to go beyond the chieftains' audits, indifference and second-guessing proved foolish.
Meanwhile, deer continue paying for our apathy.
Source: http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080131/GPG0204/801310553/1233/GPGsports
Last July, then-Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources secretary Scott Hassett appointed 17 citizens and an agency biologist to study Wisconsin's six-year battle with chronic wasting disease in white-tailed deer, then decide how to minimize its impact on the herd, woodland habitats, our economy and all who benefit from healthy deer.
Hassett also appointed a technical team to give the advisory group the latest science on CWD, and review and offer guidance as it developed recommendations. The team included a DNR sociologist, conservation warden and wildlife-disease veterinarian; and two CWD experts from the U.S. Geological Survey and University of Wisconsin.
The DNR presented everyone with a handbook that explained the project and encouraged teamwork. The booklet even included an inspiring quotation from famed anthropologist Margaret Mead: "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."
Well, forget that. Six months and eight meetings later, this small group went home Jan. 26 doubting their work would change anything in Wisconsin, let alone the world. The final report offers many insignificant suggestions, but no ultimate goal for managing CWD, and no step-by-step plan with verifiable benchmarks.
Tom Givnish, a University of Wisconsin botany professor who served on the committee, wrote this in his minority report: "The majority report must be judged an abject failure. … The majority (took) so many management tools off the table that it will be impossible to achieve substantial herd reduction or substantially slow the spread of CWD."
The plan merely tweaks hunting regulations that, if approved, would more likely confuse hunters than thwart disease. For instance, the group recommended a statewide ban on recreational deer feeding, but endorsed current deer-baiting laws for hunters, which allow 2 gallons of bait during deer season.
Ed Harvey, chairman of the Wisconsin Conservation Congress, rejected most of the recommendations in a letter on Jan. 23. "Perhaps most importantly, we want to be very clear that (we) do not support the baiting or feeding of deer," he wrote.
When considering the atmosphere surrounding the group, maybe it's noteworthy they crafted anything. For instance, they voted 9-6 at their Jan. 12 meeting to silence the technical team, directing they not speak unless spoken to. This prompted Dr. Julie Langenberg, the DNR's wildlife veterinarian, to walk out.
That wasn't the first sign of trouble. Dr. Daniel Griffiths, a Lomira veterinarian representing the Wisconsin Veterinary Medical Association, attended the group's meetings in July and August, missed the next two for other commitments and never returned.
He said angry e-mails from group members dissuaded him. "E-mails were flying back and forth that if people missed meetings, their voices shouldn't be heard," Griffiths said Sunday. "There was nothing I could tell them that they wanted to hear. Some of them had set agendas. They were hostile to the scientists giving presentations at the first two meetings and treated them with disrespect. We had no common ground to work from at that point."
Givnish had similar thoughts. "There was too much going on behind the scenes," he said after the Jan. 26 meeting. "There were ugly blogs on the Internet associated with this committee. Some people have a creepy idea of what public service involves. We're supposed to resolve our differences through rational argument and common sense, not fisticuffs or worse. It's sad that happens, but I wasn't surprised."
Alan Crossley, the DNR's CWD project leader, represented the agency on the committee. He said he tried to create a collaborative spirit within the group, and felt terrible that animosity often resulted instead.
"If anyone is to blame, it's me," Crossley said. "I never should have allowed that vote (to silence the technical team), but I never thought it would pass. Maybe I'm too accustomed to the emotions surrounding deer. People who don't work in this environment were probably more shocked than I was."
Whew. Big ol' sigh.
As disgracefully as the advisory group sometimes behaved, and as noble as it might be for Crossley to take the hit, the true fault lies with the DNR's hierarchy, our governor and Legislature and all state institutions involved in CWD policy-making.
Wisconsin has yet to specify a long-term goal and comprehensive plan for managing CWD, and no leader has championed one. Expecting 17 citizens and one DNR employee to go beyond the chieftains' audits, indifference and second-guessing proved foolish.
Meanwhile, deer continue paying for our apathy.
Source: http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080131/GPG0204/801310553/1233/GPGsports
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
PAKISTAN NEWS: Poachers Killing Endangered Deer
Foreign guests belonging to Gulf States have been found involved in killing protected animals with the connivance of local influentials. While the Sindh Wildlife Department remains silent over the matter, The News has learnt that the illegal hunting of animals including deer [Ed. note - hog deer, Axis porcinus?] — on the list of protected animals according to SWD Act 1972 — is going on unchecked. Most influential people along with their foreign guests have reportedly killed 38 deer in Thar Desert, near Umarkot.
The wide desert area, including Achhro Thar (White Desert), near Pakistan-India border, is a natural habitat of this endangered species. Locals explain that deer cross the border into Pakistan territory in winter and monsoon seasons every year. “The animal usually comes to the other side early morning and poachers kill the animal at its entrance site,” Amar Leghari, a local environmentalist from Sanghar, told The News.
“It is a natural grazing field for the deer in Thar linking Umerkot, Sanghar, Nawabshah and Khairpur districts. Only local people know the habitats, who lead the poachers after taking big amounts from them,” he said.
Reports add that the Sindh Wildlife Department officials deputed there, after possessing skins and other evidence arrested some poachers but later released them after the high-ranking people approached higher authorities.
Only the workers of these influential people were arrested, while those with direct links to the corridors of power were excluded from the report registered by the officials. Later, the SWD local officials were hushed up over the issue of challenging the most powerful people, activists said.
Local people explain that the influential poachers pay attractive sums to traditional foot-trackers to kill these wild animals.
On contracts, local activists explain, “it is routine crime. These people hailing from Gulf States set up camps in these areas for some time in the winter and kill endangered species, including deer and houbara bustard along with the local influential people. According to the activist, this time around the media has taken notice of the situation because political rivals have raised the issue against a candidate, who was the host of these foreign and local guests and arranged the hunting.
The SWD department issues licenses to poachers after receiving prescribed fees for hunting birds from November to March 15 every year. But they are not allowed to kill the endangered species in their habitats.
In case of violation of the rules, the poachers can be fined amounts ranging from Rs100,000 to Rs500,000, depending on the nature of destruction.
When The News approached the Sindh Wildlife Conservator, his subordinates said he was unavailable, while the other officials claim that they are unaware of the crime.
Source: http://www.thenews.com.pk/print1.asp?id=93689
The wide desert area, including Achhro Thar (White Desert), near Pakistan-India border, is a natural habitat of this endangered species. Locals explain that deer cross the border into Pakistan territory in winter and monsoon seasons every year. “The animal usually comes to the other side early morning and poachers kill the animal at its entrance site,” Amar Leghari, a local environmentalist from Sanghar, told The News.
“It is a natural grazing field for the deer in Thar linking Umerkot, Sanghar, Nawabshah and Khairpur districts. Only local people know the habitats, who lead the poachers after taking big amounts from them,” he said.
Reports add that the Sindh Wildlife Department officials deputed there, after possessing skins and other evidence arrested some poachers but later released them after the high-ranking people approached higher authorities.
Only the workers of these influential people were arrested, while those with direct links to the corridors of power were excluded from the report registered by the officials. Later, the SWD local officials were hushed up over the issue of challenging the most powerful people, activists said.
Local people explain that the influential poachers pay attractive sums to traditional foot-trackers to kill these wild animals.
On contracts, local activists explain, “it is routine crime. These people hailing from Gulf States set up camps in these areas for some time in the winter and kill endangered species, including deer and houbara bustard along with the local influential people. According to the activist, this time around the media has taken notice of the situation because political rivals have raised the issue against a candidate, who was the host of these foreign and local guests and arranged the hunting.
The SWD department issues licenses to poachers after receiving prescribed fees for hunting birds from November to March 15 every year. But they are not allowed to kill the endangered species in their habitats.
In case of violation of the rules, the poachers can be fined amounts ranging from Rs100,000 to Rs500,000, depending on the nature of destruction.
When The News approached the Sindh Wildlife Conservator, his subordinates said he was unavailable, while the other officials claim that they are unaware of the crime.
Source: http://www.thenews.com.pk/print1.asp?id=93689
WISCONSIN OPINION: Deer Baiting Ban Misguided
Rooney notes: I am not sure if agree with the entire argument made here, but parts are well-reasonsed and worth considering.
Dear Editor: Tim Eisele's condemnation of the Department of Natural Resources stakeholders advisory group on chronic wasting disease, of which I was a member, needs a response. This is my personal view.
He fails to tell his readers that baiting has been banned in the CWD zone for five years; has it stopped CWD from spreading? He fails to inform readers that research shows the prion involved with CWD binds tightly to soil and fails to inform us that healthy animals put in a pen 16 years after CWD-infected animals were removed caught the disease. This indicates an environmental reservoir (soil?) exists for years.
In areas of Wisconsin where CWD is not present, no amount of saliva exchange can transmit CWD.
The advisory group got it right, i.e., they recognized the difference between baiting and feeding -- one used to kill deer, the other to protect deer -- something the DNR and some state organizations seem unable or unwilling to recognize.
Eisele fails to tell readers that hunting over bait is the safest hunting method; no hunter has been wounded or killed by another hunter hunting over bait. The same can't be said about deer drives, which are the most dangerous hunting method. Yet we don't hear a safety-conscious DNR or any outdoor writer wanting to get rid of deer drives, just baiting.
But maybe we all have it backward. In the CWD zone where we want to reduce the deer population, maybe we should allow baiting, like DNR sharpshooters did, since an environmental prion reservoir exists, and ban baiting in the rest of Wisconsin where it's not found.
One concern I have is that we allow tens of thousands of gallons of doe urine from deer farms to be spread across our landscape as "buck lure" when a synthetic alternative exists.
I believe the most significant recommendation of the CWD advisory group was to enact regulations restricting movement of whole deer carcasses out of the CWD zone. That, I predict, would do more to prevent the spread of CWD than any baiting ban.
Ken Anderson
Eagle River
Source: http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/letters/269838
Dear Editor: Tim Eisele's condemnation of the Department of Natural Resources stakeholders advisory group on chronic wasting disease, of which I was a member, needs a response. This is my personal view.
He fails to tell his readers that baiting has been banned in the CWD zone for five years; has it stopped CWD from spreading? He fails to inform readers that research shows the prion involved with CWD binds tightly to soil and fails to inform us that healthy animals put in a pen 16 years after CWD-infected animals were removed caught the disease. This indicates an environmental reservoir (soil?) exists for years.
In areas of Wisconsin where CWD is not present, no amount of saliva exchange can transmit CWD.
The advisory group got it right, i.e., they recognized the difference between baiting and feeding -- one used to kill deer, the other to protect deer -- something the DNR and some state organizations seem unable or unwilling to recognize.
Eisele fails to tell readers that hunting over bait is the safest hunting method; no hunter has been wounded or killed by another hunter hunting over bait. The same can't be said about deer drives, which are the most dangerous hunting method. Yet we don't hear a safety-conscious DNR or any outdoor writer wanting to get rid of deer drives, just baiting.
But maybe we all have it backward. In the CWD zone where we want to reduce the deer population, maybe we should allow baiting, like DNR sharpshooters did, since an environmental prion reservoir exists, and ban baiting in the rest of Wisconsin where it's not found.
One concern I have is that we allow tens of thousands of gallons of doe urine from deer farms to be spread across our landscape as "buck lure" when a synthetic alternative exists.
I believe the most significant recommendation of the CWD advisory group was to enact regulations restricting movement of whole deer carcasses out of the CWD zone. That, I predict, would do more to prevent the spread of CWD than any baiting ban.
Ken Anderson
Eagle River
Source: http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/letters/269838
TENNESSEE NEWS: 2007 Deer Harvest Down 11% vs. 2006
With the close of last weekends youth deer hunt, the 2007-2008 deer season is in the books. And as expected, the take was below last year’s total of 182,023. As of Wednesday, the unofficial harvest figure for this year is 162,582. There are several excuses bandied about by the wildlife pundits.
In September as the archery deer season was beginning, the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency predicted a harvest that could be as much as 30 percent lower than usual, due to a much heavier than normal die-off of deer caused by Epizootic Hemorrhagic Disease. EHD occurs every year in Tennessee and many other states, caused by a virus spread by a small biting gnat or midge. Tennessee had outbreaks in about 50 counties with a few reporting casualties of 30 percent of the local herd.
The weather was another reason for the decline in deer harvest. The yearlong drought caused a double-digit deficit in rainfall for the year, and a record summer-long heat wave parched what hard and soft mast managed to grow.
Finally, the hot weather in September and October discouraged many bowhunters and muzzleloaders from even going out since the heat could quickly spoil their deer meat.
All things considered, this year’s harvest of 162,582 was only 11 percent below last year, so it could have been a lot worse.
Source: http://www.thedailytimes.com/article/20080120/SPORTS0107/336975729
In September as the archery deer season was beginning, the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency predicted a harvest that could be as much as 30 percent lower than usual, due to a much heavier than normal die-off of deer caused by Epizootic Hemorrhagic Disease. EHD occurs every year in Tennessee and many other states, caused by a virus spread by a small biting gnat or midge. Tennessee had outbreaks in about 50 counties with a few reporting casualties of 30 percent of the local herd.
The weather was another reason for the decline in deer harvest. The yearlong drought caused a double-digit deficit in rainfall for the year, and a record summer-long heat wave parched what hard and soft mast managed to grow.
Finally, the hot weather in September and October discouraged many bowhunters and muzzleloaders from even going out since the heat could quickly spoil their deer meat.
All things considered, this year’s harvest of 162,582 was only 11 percent below last year, so it could have been a lot worse.
Source: http://www.thedailytimes.com/article/20080120/SPORTS0107/336975729
VERMONT NEWS: 14,500 Deer Killed in 2007 Season
The Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife says 2007 was a good fall for the state's deer hunters.
Officials say that during Vermont's archery, rifle and muzzle loader seasons hunters bagged a total of 14,500 deer.
That's up almost 2,000 over 2006. And the deer are bigger than in previous years.
Biologist Shawn Haskell of the state's deer management team says favorable winter conditions and changes in deer hunting regulations contributed to the numbers.
The regulations prevent hunters from shooting spike horn deer. The regulations allow male deer to grow an extra year before they can be taken by hunters.
The largest buck taken in Vermont last fall weighed 225 pounds and was taken in Orleans.
source: http://www.vpr.net/news_detail/79114/
Officials say that during Vermont's archery, rifle and muzzle loader seasons hunters bagged a total of 14,500 deer.
That's up almost 2,000 over 2006. And the deer are bigger than in previous years.
Biologist Shawn Haskell of the state's deer management team says favorable winter conditions and changes in deer hunting regulations contributed to the numbers.
The regulations prevent hunters from shooting spike horn deer. The regulations allow male deer to grow an extra year before they can be taken by hunters.
The largest buck taken in Vermont last fall weighed 225 pounds and was taken in Orleans.
source: http://www.vpr.net/news_detail/79114/
Monday, January 28, 2008
MASSACHUSETTS NEWS: 2007 Is 10% Below 2002 Record Harvest
hile no records were set during the 2007 deer season, both archers and muzzle loaders came close to highs, according to the MassWildlife preliminary deer report
There were 11,132 total whitetails shot by archers, shotgunners and muzzle loaders, falling below the record in 2002, when 12,264 animals were recorded.
The all-time low was in 1967, when only 1,172 whitetails were harvested.
The record year was when a high number of antlerless permits were allotted in an attempt to put doe numbers in a healthy buck-doe relation.
There were 5,745 deer shot by shotgunners in 2007, as compared to the 8,131 taken by gunners in the record year of 1996.
Archers in 2006 took down a record 3,385 deer, as compared to 3,223 in 2007. There were 18 deer shot by bow in the state's first archery season in 1966. Last season's good weather had more bowmen spending more hours in the field than average.
Black powder hunters shot 2,157 deer in 2007. The high was 2,325 shot by primitive weapons in 2005.
There were seven animals shot during the first muzzleloader season in 1972.
The Western District, once the most popular area to hunt as well as the most prolific, was last in nearly every 2007 category,
The Southeast District, followed by the Central, once again led the state in most harvest categories.
Source: http://www.masslive.com/sousa/republican/index.ssf?/base/sports-0/1201446752218690.xml&coll=1
There were 11,132 total whitetails shot by archers, shotgunners and muzzle loaders, falling below the record in 2002, when 12,264 animals were recorded.
The all-time low was in 1967, when only 1,172 whitetails were harvested.
The record year was when a high number of antlerless permits were allotted in an attempt to put doe numbers in a healthy buck-doe relation.
There were 5,745 deer shot by shotgunners in 2007, as compared to the 8,131 taken by gunners in the record year of 1996.
Archers in 2006 took down a record 3,385 deer, as compared to 3,223 in 2007. There were 18 deer shot by bow in the state's first archery season in 1966. Last season's good weather had more bowmen spending more hours in the field than average.
Black powder hunters shot 2,157 deer in 2007. The high was 2,325 shot by primitive weapons in 2005.
There were seven animals shot during the first muzzleloader season in 1972.
The Western District, once the most popular area to hunt as well as the most prolific, was last in nearly every 2007 category,
The Southeast District, followed by the Central, once again led the state in most harvest categories.
Source: http://www.masslive.com/sousa/republican/index.ssf?/base/sports-0/1201446752218690.xml&coll=1
CALIFORNIA NEWS: Cull of Exotic Deer Resumes at Point Reyes
Hunters resumed shooting of nonnative deer in the Point Reyes National Seashore Friday, bringing new criticism from animal rights groups.
The National Park Service approved a plan a year ago to get rid of about 1,100 fallow and axis deer using a combination of contraception and high-powered rifles. A Connecticut company, White Buffalo Inc., killed about 400 of the deer in the summer and fall, prompting an outcry from residents who claimed carcasses were being left out to rot.
The hunters reportedly returned on Friday to a place called Muddy Hollow.
The Humane Society of the United States sent a letter that calls on Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., to end the "futile, destructive and inhumane" program. State Sen. Carole Migden, D-San Francisco; U.S. Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Petaluma; and Assemblyman Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, have called for a moratorium on the killing.
Source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/26/BAGMTUMVIE.DTL
The National Park Service approved a plan a year ago to get rid of about 1,100 fallow and axis deer using a combination of contraception and high-powered rifles. A Connecticut company, White Buffalo Inc., killed about 400 of the deer in the summer and fall, prompting an outcry from residents who claimed carcasses were being left out to rot.
The hunters reportedly returned on Friday to a place called Muddy Hollow.
The Humane Society of the United States sent a letter that calls on Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., to end the "futile, destructive and inhumane" program. State Sen. Carole Migden, D-San Francisco; U.S. Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Petaluma; and Assemblyman Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, have called for a moratorium on the killing.
Source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/26/BAGMTUMVIE.DTL
Friday, January 25, 2008
NEW JERSEY NEWS: Cull Underway in Essex Co. Reserve
Sharpshooters will take to the trees next Tuesday in the South Mountain Reservation in Essex County to deal with a problem that has become the scourge of many suburban communities: too many deer.
The 10-day hunt in the 2,000-acre reservation, a picturesque area of woodlands, streams and trails, is scheduled to start on Jan. 29 and continue every Tuesday and Thursday, 5:30 a.m. and 8 p.m., through Feb. 28.
Proponents of the hunt say it is necessary to thin the number of white-tailed deer because they are destroying the vegetation and becoming a hazard for motorists.
"I don't own a gun. I'm not a hunter. It's not something that I want to do, but it's something I have to do," said Essex County Executive Joseph N. DiVincenzo Jr., who pushed for the hunt.
The state Department of Environmental Protection and leaders of the four municipalities around the reservation have signed off on the hunt. But animal rights activists have criticized it; they prefer a nonlethal alternative such as contraceptives. And some residents worry the shooting will be too close to homes and businesses.
During the hunt, a team of 15 volunteer hunters who've gone through a special training course will be allowed to shoot deer from perches in trees, although only 12 will be allowed in the reservation at one time.
Notices warning residents about the hunt have already been mailed out, and DiVincenzo has been meeting with residents in the communities bordering the reservation -- Maplewood, Millburn, South Orange and West Orange -- to address safety concerns.
The last of those meetings is scheduled for noon Thursday in West Orange.
On hunt days, roads going in to the reservation will be closed off, and people won't be allowed to enter.
Source: http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/01/sharpshooters_aim_to_thin_deer_1.html
The 10-day hunt in the 2,000-acre reservation, a picturesque area of woodlands, streams and trails, is scheduled to start on Jan. 29 and continue every Tuesday and Thursday, 5:30 a.m. and 8 p.m., through Feb. 28.
Proponents of the hunt say it is necessary to thin the number of white-tailed deer because they are destroying the vegetation and becoming a hazard for motorists.
"I don't own a gun. I'm not a hunter. It's not something that I want to do, but it's something I have to do," said Essex County Executive Joseph N. DiVincenzo Jr., who pushed for the hunt.
The state Department of Environmental Protection and leaders of the four municipalities around the reservation have signed off on the hunt. But animal rights activists have criticized it; they prefer a nonlethal alternative such as contraceptives. And some residents worry the shooting will be too close to homes and businesses.
During the hunt, a team of 15 volunteer hunters who've gone through a special training course will be allowed to shoot deer from perches in trees, although only 12 will be allowed in the reservation at one time.
Notices warning residents about the hunt have already been mailed out, and DiVincenzo has been meeting with residents in the communities bordering the reservation -- Maplewood, Millburn, South Orange and West Orange -- to address safety concerns.
The last of those meetings is scheduled for noon Thursday in West Orange.
On hunt days, roads going in to the reservation will be closed off, and people won't be allowed to enter.
Source: http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/01/sharpshooters_aim_to_thin_deer_1.html
MICHIGAN NEWS: Possible Case of Bovine TB in Deer Outside "TB Zone"
A case of bovine tuberculosis may have turned up well outside the part of Michigan where the disease previously has been concentrated.
State officials say a deer recently killed in Shiawassee County is suspected of carrying bovine TB. They are awaiting final test results. A hunter killed the deer more than 100 miles south of the TB Zone in Michigan's northern Lower Peninsula, where authorities have tried to contain the outbreak since the late 1990s.
The Michigan Department of Agriculture plans to schedule cattle herds for testing within a 10-mile radius of where the deer was taken. Meanwhile, the state has declared two sections of Iosco County as "potential high-risk areas" after bovine TB was confirmed in a couple of deer there.
Source: http://blog.mlive.com/grpress/2008/01/state_suspects_new_bovine_tb_c.html
State officials say a deer recently killed in Shiawassee County is suspected of carrying bovine TB. They are awaiting final test results. A hunter killed the deer more than 100 miles south of the TB Zone in Michigan's northern Lower Peninsula, where authorities have tried to contain the outbreak since the late 1990s.
The Michigan Department of Agriculture plans to schedule cattle herds for testing within a 10-mile radius of where the deer was taken. Meanwhile, the state has declared two sections of Iosco County as "potential high-risk areas" after bovine TB was confirmed in a couple of deer there.
Source: http://blog.mlive.com/grpress/2008/01/state_suspects_new_bovine_tb_c.html
Thursday, January 24, 2008
SOUTH DAKOTA OPINION: Bill Would Give Landowners Extra Deer Tags
Two things are quite certain in the rural sections of South Dakota: The deer population is too high, and their constant depredation is tough on farmers, ranchers and landowners.
South Dakota’s landscape is crawling with deer. They’re everywhere — whether it’s along the roadsides at night or in a farmer’s stores of silage at sunup.
Anybody who has a new plan to cut the deer population should speak up. We’re listening.
State Sen. Julie Bartling, D-Burke, has done so.
Earlier this week, she told the Legislature about her plan to allow landowners and lease-holders an additional deer license to be used on their land. The extra tag can be used at the landowner/lessee’s discretion and given to resident or nonresident hunters. The tags would only be valid on the landowner/lessee’s land and can only be issued to those with at least 320 acres of agriculture, grazing or timber land.
Bartling’s plan is backed by the state’s two largest livestock organizations: the South Dakota Stockgrowers Association and the South Dakota Cattleman’s Association.
The state Department of Game, Fish and Parks is trying to cull the herd, and has been for several years now. The agency has increased the number of tags regularly in the past several years, and that has correlated to a much larger harvest. For instance, hunters killed 51,666 deer in South Dakota in 2000; in 2006, the number was 86,806 — an increase of 56 percent.
We need those kinds of harvest increases in South Dakota because the same conditions that have allowed our pheasant population to soar past 10 million have been equally kind to the wild, hooved quadrupeds of our state.
All of those foodplots, trees and switchgrass fields that have been planted to aid pheasants have, in some eyes, backfired when it comes to deer numbers. Several straight years of moderate winters haven’t helped, either.
And as we have said many times before: If you want proof of the state’s growing deer numbers, simply take a drive along a rural highway late at night. They’re everywhere, and they’re a danger to the lives of motorists.
The GF&P does not back Bartling’s second-license plan. The worry is that nonresident hunters would be able to compete more directly in seeking the limited pool of buck licenses during the East River season.
Would this program take a large bite out of the deer herd? Probably not, but we feel that anything to promote more deer hunting in South Dakota is a good idea.
For years, landowners have been dealing with depredation to their valuable crops and stored feed as the deer population grows. We don’t see why they shouldn’t be allowed a chance to harvest more of those troublesome pests.
Source: http://www.mitchellrepublic.com/articles/index.cfm?id=24044§ion=Opinion
South Dakota’s landscape is crawling with deer. They’re everywhere — whether it’s along the roadsides at night or in a farmer’s stores of silage at sunup.
Anybody who has a new plan to cut the deer population should speak up. We’re listening.
State Sen. Julie Bartling, D-Burke, has done so.
Earlier this week, she told the Legislature about her plan to allow landowners and lease-holders an additional deer license to be used on their land. The extra tag can be used at the landowner/lessee’s discretion and given to resident or nonresident hunters. The tags would only be valid on the landowner/lessee’s land and can only be issued to those with at least 320 acres of agriculture, grazing or timber land.
Bartling’s plan is backed by the state’s two largest livestock organizations: the South Dakota Stockgrowers Association and the South Dakota Cattleman’s Association.
The state Department of Game, Fish and Parks is trying to cull the herd, and has been for several years now. The agency has increased the number of tags regularly in the past several years, and that has correlated to a much larger harvest. For instance, hunters killed 51,666 deer in South Dakota in 2000; in 2006, the number was 86,806 — an increase of 56 percent.
We need those kinds of harvest increases in South Dakota because the same conditions that have allowed our pheasant population to soar past 10 million have been equally kind to the wild, hooved quadrupeds of our state.
All of those foodplots, trees and switchgrass fields that have been planted to aid pheasants have, in some eyes, backfired when it comes to deer numbers. Several straight years of moderate winters haven’t helped, either.
And as we have said many times before: If you want proof of the state’s growing deer numbers, simply take a drive along a rural highway late at night. They’re everywhere, and they’re a danger to the lives of motorists.
The GF&P does not back Bartling’s second-license plan. The worry is that nonresident hunters would be able to compete more directly in seeking the limited pool of buck licenses during the East River season.
Would this program take a large bite out of the deer herd? Probably not, but we feel that anything to promote more deer hunting in South Dakota is a good idea.
For years, landowners have been dealing with depredation to their valuable crops and stored feed as the deer population grows. We don’t see why they shouldn’t be allowed a chance to harvest more of those troublesome pests.
Source: http://www.mitchellrepublic.com/articles/index.cfm?id=24044§ion=Opinion
MISSOURI NEWS: 2007 Is Third Largest Deer Harvest On Record
Good hunting by archers contributed to the third-largest deer hunting harvest on record by the time the 2007 hunting season ended, according to the Missouri Department of Conservation.
Hunters took 302,666 whitetails during the hunting season.
Although the harvest was seven percent below the previous year’s hunt, the harvest still ranked third.
Several factors made the hunting season difficult to deal with, according to the department.
Acorn production was down, which caused deer to congregate where food was available. But warm, windy weather during November and an ice storm late in the hunting season affected hunter turnout. Biologists also found more evidence deer were infected with epizootic hemorrhagic disease in some areas.
Source: http://www.news-leader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080124/BREAKING02/80124020
Hunters took 302,666 whitetails during the hunting season.
Although the harvest was seven percent below the previous year’s hunt, the harvest still ranked third.
Several factors made the hunting season difficult to deal with, according to the department.
Acorn production was down, which caused deer to congregate where food was available. But warm, windy weather during November and an ice storm late in the hunting season affected hunter turnout. Biologists also found more evidence deer were infected with epizootic hemorrhagic disease in some areas.
Source: http://www.news-leader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080124/BREAKING02/80124020
Monday, January 21, 2008
KANSAS NEWS: More CWD Found Near Nebraska Border
Three Decatur County white-tailed deer have tested positive for chronic wasting disease, a discovery that comes on the heels of a similar discovery just a couple miles across the border in Nebraska.
The announcement concerning the positive tests was made Friday afternoon.
The Nebraska discovery prompted Kansas wildlife officials to accelerate the testing process for deer killed in northwest Kansas. Testing still remains to be done on about two-thirds of the samples collected during the state deer seasons, most of the samples coming during the firearms season, according to Mike Miller, a spokesman for the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks.
The hunters who shot the animals and provided samples to KDWP have been notified of the test results, he said.
This is the second time chronic wasting disease -- transmissible spongiform encephalopathy, similar to mad cow disease -- has been found in free-ranging deer in northwest Kansas, the first coming in December 2005 when a white-tailed deer from Cheyenne County tested positive for CWD.
Although there is no evidence CWD is a threat to humans, officials suggest any exposure to infected animals be minimized.
The deer that tested positive all were killed by hunters along Sappa Creek in central Decatur County, north of Oberlin. The Nebraska deer that tested positive was killed along Beaver Creek in Red Willow County about 2 miles north of the Kansas border.
Beaver Creek runs through about 10 miles of northwest Decatur County, while the more than 20-mile stretch of Sappa Creek virtually bisects the county. Sappa Creek passes through Oberlin, the county seat.
The positive results were made by the National Veterinary Services Laboratory in Ames, Iowa, after initial screening tests were positive at Kansas State University.
Because of the Decatur County discovery, the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks will be implementing its chronic wasting disease contingency plan, which will prompt a series of events similar to what took place in Cheyenne County in early 2006 after the first free-ranging case of CWD was discovered.
That likely will include a public meeting in Oberlin, Miller said, as well as sampling deer in the county.
In the case of Cheyenne County, KDWP employees converged on the area, going afield after dark to sample the deer herd there.
Ultimately, 51 deer were killed in that case, and samples were taken to determine if other deer were suffering from CWD. No samples tested positive.
KDWP had been planning on sampling the Decatur County deer herd in the wake of the Nebraska discovery but had been expecting to perhaps take a slightly smaller number of deer. KDWP and Nebraska Game and Parks Commission still are planning a joint effort.
That sampling is expected to take place sometime in February and likely will include both the Beaver and Sappa Creek areas. KDWP already had started obtaining permission from landowners along Beaver Creek to shoot deer.
Miller said no timetable has been set for either the public meeting or when agency personnel will go afield to sample deer.
Although Miller said he was unsure when the deer were taken, he's assuming they came from the state firearms season -- primarily because that's when most of the deer in the state are killed. Tissue samples from 2,200 deer have been submitted for testing.
The discovery of CWD-infected deer in Decatur County didn't come as a big surprise to game officials, primarily because it appears where deer concentrate.
"We're pretty sure deer-to-deer contact is a way to spread the disease," Miller said.
Source: http://www.hdnews.net/Story/cwd012008
The announcement concerning the positive tests was made Friday afternoon.
The Nebraska discovery prompted Kansas wildlife officials to accelerate the testing process for deer killed in northwest Kansas. Testing still remains to be done on about two-thirds of the samples collected during the state deer seasons, most of the samples coming during the firearms season, according to Mike Miller, a spokesman for the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks.
The hunters who shot the animals and provided samples to KDWP have been notified of the test results, he said.
This is the second time chronic wasting disease -- transmissible spongiform encephalopathy, similar to mad cow disease -- has been found in free-ranging deer in northwest Kansas, the first coming in December 2005 when a white-tailed deer from Cheyenne County tested positive for CWD.
Although there is no evidence CWD is a threat to humans, officials suggest any exposure to infected animals be minimized.
The deer that tested positive all were killed by hunters along Sappa Creek in central Decatur County, north of Oberlin. The Nebraska deer that tested positive was killed along Beaver Creek in Red Willow County about 2 miles north of the Kansas border.
Beaver Creek runs through about 10 miles of northwest Decatur County, while the more than 20-mile stretch of Sappa Creek virtually bisects the county. Sappa Creek passes through Oberlin, the county seat.
The positive results were made by the National Veterinary Services Laboratory in Ames, Iowa, after initial screening tests were positive at Kansas State University.
Because of the Decatur County discovery, the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks will be implementing its chronic wasting disease contingency plan, which will prompt a series of events similar to what took place in Cheyenne County in early 2006 after the first free-ranging case of CWD was discovered.
That likely will include a public meeting in Oberlin, Miller said, as well as sampling deer in the county.
In the case of Cheyenne County, KDWP employees converged on the area, going afield after dark to sample the deer herd there.
Ultimately, 51 deer were killed in that case, and samples were taken to determine if other deer were suffering from CWD. No samples tested positive.
KDWP had been planning on sampling the Decatur County deer herd in the wake of the Nebraska discovery but had been expecting to perhaps take a slightly smaller number of deer. KDWP and Nebraska Game and Parks Commission still are planning a joint effort.
That sampling is expected to take place sometime in February and likely will include both the Beaver and Sappa Creek areas. KDWP already had started obtaining permission from landowners along Beaver Creek to shoot deer.
Miller said no timetable has been set for either the public meeting or when agency personnel will go afield to sample deer.
Although Miller said he was unsure when the deer were taken, he's assuming they came from the state firearms season -- primarily because that's when most of the deer in the state are killed. Tissue samples from 2,200 deer have been submitted for testing.
The discovery of CWD-infected deer in Decatur County didn't come as a big surprise to game officials, primarily because it appears where deer concentrate.
"We're pretty sure deer-to-deer contact is a way to spread the disease," Miller said.
Source: http://www.hdnews.net/Story/cwd012008
UK NEWS: Muntjc Spreading North
A foreign breed of deer which threatens wild flowers has arrived in the North East, say conservationists.
Durham Wildlife Trust said recent sightings of muntjac, a small Oriental deer, near Darlington and Sedgefield were "very worrying".
The species, introduced into southern England in the early 1900s, is known to devour endangered bluebell woodlands.
The trust has now launched a survey in a bid to establish the strength of the population in the area.
Muntjac sightings have also been reported near the A1's Washington services, at a farm in Houghton-le-Spring and in the Tow Law area of Weardale.
Jim Cokill, Director of Durham Wildlife Trust, said: "The problem with the muntjac is that it is an alien species, which was brought over to this country because people thought it made an attractive addition to the English landscape.
Real fears
"But as often happens with such species, they escape or are released and damage the ecological balance of the countryside.
"It happened with the likes of mink, which have devastated the water vole population, and grey squirrels, which are out-competing the now endangered red squirrel, and there are very real fears that it will happen again with muntjac."
Muntjac are small, stocky, russet brown in summer and grey brown in winter, with short antlers and a ginger forehead.
Any sightings should be reported to the trust.
Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/7199963.stm
Durham Wildlife Trust said recent sightings of muntjac, a small Oriental deer, near Darlington and Sedgefield were "very worrying".
The species, introduced into southern England in the early 1900s, is known to devour endangered bluebell woodlands.
The trust has now launched a survey in a bid to establish the strength of the population in the area.
Muntjac sightings have also been reported near the A1's Washington services, at a farm in Houghton-le-Spring and in the Tow Law area of Weardale.
Jim Cokill, Director of Durham Wildlife Trust, said: "The problem with the muntjac is that it is an alien species, which was brought over to this country because people thought it made an attractive addition to the English landscape.
Real fears
"But as often happens with such species, they escape or are released and damage the ecological balance of the countryside.
"It happened with the likes of mink, which have devastated the water vole population, and grey squirrels, which are out-competing the now endangered red squirrel, and there are very real fears that it will happen again with muntjac."
Muntjac are small, stocky, russet brown in summer and grey brown in winter, with short antlers and a ginger forehead.
Any sightings should be reported to the trust.
Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/7199963.stm
CONNECTICUT NEWS: Group Lobbies for Deer Kill to Control Lyme Disease
GREENWICH, Conn. - A group of Connecticut residents is lobbying state health officials to kill deer to reduce Lyme disease
Georgina Scholl, vice chairwoman of the Connecticut Coalition to Eradicate Lyme Disease, says the abundance of deer is a public health hazard. She says killing deer is the only method that has been found to reduce Lyme disease.
Lyme disease is spread by ticks, which feed off deer and other animals. Scholl's group cites studies that show the deer play a key role in the ticks' reproductive success and is trying to inform the public and lobby health officials.
"It's something whose time has come," said Scholl, a Redding resident. "There's nothing that's been attempted that has successfully reduced Lyme disease."
Animal protection activists vow to fight any efforts to kill deer.
Natalie Jarnstedt, a Greenwich resident, has organized local efforts to oppose the killing of deer and other animals.
"It would be irresponsible to raise people's hopes on reducing the incidence of Lyme disease," she said.
Opponents to deer kills say studies show that certain mice, chipmunks and other small animals carry the Lyme disease bacteria, and ticks carrying Lyme disease will find hosts other than deer.
In addition, reducing the deer herd in Greenwich could be complicated. It's unclear how many deer are in the area.
A survey seven years ago showed that the town has 68 deer per square mile, but more recent studies show Fairfield County has about 30 per square mile. Researchers acknowledge they do not have an accurate method of counting deer, particularly because the animals can roam large areas.
Rick Ostfeld, an animal ecologist at the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies in Millbrook, N.Y., said evidence shows drastic reductions in deer numbers that can lead to a drop in tick population on islands and other isolated communities, but that's not necessarily the case in wide-open areas.
For instance, on the institute's 2,000-acre property, where 50 to 70 deer are killed a year as part of a deer-management plan, the tick abundance is no different than in the surrounding areas where there is no deer management, Ostfeld said.
"Over the long term, there is no relationship between deer numbers and tick numbers," he said.
Source: http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/connecticut/ny-bc-ct--lymedisease-deer0121jan21,0,3659746.story
Georgina Scholl, vice chairwoman of the Connecticut Coalition to Eradicate Lyme Disease, says the abundance of deer is a public health hazard. She says killing deer is the only method that has been found to reduce Lyme disease.
Lyme disease is spread by ticks, which feed off deer and other animals. Scholl's group cites studies that show the deer play a key role in the ticks' reproductive success and is trying to inform the public and lobby health officials.
"It's something whose time has come," said Scholl, a Redding resident. "There's nothing that's been attempted that has successfully reduced Lyme disease."
Animal protection activists vow to fight any efforts to kill deer.
Natalie Jarnstedt, a Greenwich resident, has organized local efforts to oppose the killing of deer and other animals.
"It would be irresponsible to raise people's hopes on reducing the incidence of Lyme disease," she said.
Opponents to deer kills say studies show that certain mice, chipmunks and other small animals carry the Lyme disease bacteria, and ticks carrying Lyme disease will find hosts other than deer.
In addition, reducing the deer herd in Greenwich could be complicated. It's unclear how many deer are in the area.
A survey seven years ago showed that the town has 68 deer per square mile, but more recent studies show Fairfield County has about 30 per square mile. Researchers acknowledge they do not have an accurate method of counting deer, particularly because the animals can roam large areas.
Rick Ostfeld, an animal ecologist at the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies in Millbrook, N.Y., said evidence shows drastic reductions in deer numbers that can lead to a drop in tick population on islands and other isolated communities, but that's not necessarily the case in wide-open areas.
For instance, on the institute's 2,000-acre property, where 50 to 70 deer are killed a year as part of a deer-management plan, the tick abundance is no different than in the surrounding areas where there is no deer management, Ostfeld said.
"Over the long term, there is no relationship between deer numbers and tick numbers," he said.
Source: http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/connecticut/ny-bc-ct--lymedisease-deer0121jan21,0,3659746.story
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
COLORADO OPINION: "Emergency Feeding" of Mule Deer Is Not a Good Idea
GUNNISON — Sometime later this week, the Colorado Division of Wildlife will begin an emergency deer feeding program in the Gunnison Basin.
With night-time temperatures hovering around 20 below zero and snow deeper than a deer’s belly blanketing the surrounding hills, biologists fear mule deer will suffer some unacceptable losses should the snow and intense cold continue.
But it’s winter, and deer are genetically programmed for long, hard winters, biologists say. While feeding the deer might be the socially acceptable thing to do, there are reasons why wildlife agencies across the West are reluctant to begin a feeding program unless it’s absolutely necessary.
Once you start feeding big game, you can’t quit until spring when natural forage returns. Deer can’t readily digest hay and require a specially formulated pellet feed that costs about $300 per ton. Figure each of the estimated 20,000 deer in the Gunnison Basin needs two-three pounds of feed per day and the cost spirals very quickly.
Not all those deer will get fed, since some are in inaccessible places and others might be finding enough food. Still, the DOW plans to feed about half the deer in the area.
“In most cases there’s not much benefit for all the expense,” said Rick Kahn, state terrestrial program leader for the DOW.
“Bluntly, deer are programmed to starve to death in the winter, that’s how they get through a winter.”
Not quite starve to death, but close. Once the snow and cold arrive, deer cannot obtain enough high-quality food to gain weight. Instead, they slowly use their summer reserves all winter long, relying on their reserves and what little feed they find to make it to the spring green-up.
“As long as there is forage, they’ll stay on their natural food but when the sage gets buried and the snow gets crusted, they are in trouble,” said Ron Velarde, Northwest Region manager for the DOW.
It’s part of a deer’s make-up to suffer through winter, Kahn said.
“Ecologically, these things are adapted to pretty tough climates conditions and losing body weight is a normal condition,” Kahn said. “Then, from mid-March to mid-May you get green-up and, boom, the deer get back into good enough condition to fawn.”
Feeding also concentrates animals that normally winter in small herds. Bringing together several hundred deer increases stress and the possibility of disease transmission. Plus, the aggressive nature of deer means the weak and the young might starve anyway.
Some winter mortality occurs every year. Colorado suffers about a 10-15 percent loss of does in an average winter, Kahn said, while fawns may suffer up to 30 percent loss.
“But if you anticipate losing 30 percent of your adult females, that’s a significant, significant loss and it’s time to feed,” Kahn said.
That’s where the Gunnison area deer herds are headed should present conditions continue, biologists said last week.
“We have to look at body and weather conditions and you can’t anticipate what the weather is going to do,” Kahn said.
The last time the DOW fed game in the Gunnison area was 1997. Since then, a growing deer population has increased interest in the deer herds. Plus, Gunnison’s deer winter in areas where watchers can easily see them.
“I think the dynamic has changed in the last 10 years,” Kahn said. “There are so many more animals out on the landscape, there is a lot more competition from elk and a lot more development that keeps pushing deer into smaller and smaller areas.”
Elk find it easier going in winter because they are bigger, stronger and able to digest a wider variety of foods. The DOW said it will “minimize” its elk feeding.
Habitat loss because of development, particularly new subdivisions and energy development in what historically was deer winter range, affects deer winter survival as does the prolonged drought that has reduced sagebrush habitat across the West.
Source: http://www.gjsentinel.com/hp/content/sports/stories/2008/01/16/011608_OUT_why_feed_WWW.html
With night-time temperatures hovering around 20 below zero and snow deeper than a deer’s belly blanketing the surrounding hills, biologists fear mule deer will suffer some unacceptable losses should the snow and intense cold continue.
But it’s winter, and deer are genetically programmed for long, hard winters, biologists say. While feeding the deer might be the socially acceptable thing to do, there are reasons why wildlife agencies across the West are reluctant to begin a feeding program unless it’s absolutely necessary.
Once you start feeding big game, you can’t quit until spring when natural forage returns. Deer can’t readily digest hay and require a specially formulated pellet feed that costs about $300 per ton. Figure each of the estimated 20,000 deer in the Gunnison Basin needs two-three pounds of feed per day and the cost spirals very quickly.
Not all those deer will get fed, since some are in inaccessible places and others might be finding enough food. Still, the DOW plans to feed about half the deer in the area.
“In most cases there’s not much benefit for all the expense,” said Rick Kahn, state terrestrial program leader for the DOW.
“Bluntly, deer are programmed to starve to death in the winter, that’s how they get through a winter.”
Not quite starve to death, but close. Once the snow and cold arrive, deer cannot obtain enough high-quality food to gain weight. Instead, they slowly use their summer reserves all winter long, relying on their reserves and what little feed they find to make it to the spring green-up.
“As long as there is forage, they’ll stay on their natural food but when the sage gets buried and the snow gets crusted, they are in trouble,” said Ron Velarde, Northwest Region manager for the DOW.
It’s part of a deer’s make-up to suffer through winter, Kahn said.
“Ecologically, these things are adapted to pretty tough climates conditions and losing body weight is a normal condition,” Kahn said. “Then, from mid-March to mid-May you get green-up and, boom, the deer get back into good enough condition to fawn.”
Feeding also concentrates animals that normally winter in small herds. Bringing together several hundred deer increases stress and the possibility of disease transmission. Plus, the aggressive nature of deer means the weak and the young might starve anyway.
Some winter mortality occurs every year. Colorado suffers about a 10-15 percent loss of does in an average winter, Kahn said, while fawns may suffer up to 30 percent loss.
“But if you anticipate losing 30 percent of your adult females, that’s a significant, significant loss and it’s time to feed,” Kahn said.
That’s where the Gunnison area deer herds are headed should present conditions continue, biologists said last week.
“We have to look at body and weather conditions and you can’t anticipate what the weather is going to do,” Kahn said.
The last time the DOW fed game in the Gunnison area was 1997. Since then, a growing deer population has increased interest in the deer herds. Plus, Gunnison’s deer winter in areas where watchers can easily see them.
“I think the dynamic has changed in the last 10 years,” Kahn said. “There are so many more animals out on the landscape, there is a lot more competition from elk and a lot more development that keeps pushing deer into smaller and smaller areas.”
Elk find it easier going in winter because they are bigger, stronger and able to digest a wider variety of foods. The DOW said it will “minimize” its elk feeding.
Habitat loss because of development, particularly new subdivisions and energy development in what historically was deer winter range, affects deer winter survival as does the prolonged drought that has reduced sagebrush habitat across the West.
Source: http://www.gjsentinel.com/hp/content/sports/stories/2008/01/16/011608_OUT_why_feed_WWW.html
OHIO OPINION: Deer Damage Justifies Expanded Deer Seasons
If there’s anyone out there who still thinks that deer hunting is unnecessary or cruel, they ought to read the story published in Monday’s T-R on the damage deer have caused to area farms and nurseries.
James Smith, who operates Smith Evergreen Nursery in Carroll County, planted 15 acres of Fraser firs earlier this decade. Smith lost 99 percent of them after they were devoured by deer.
The number of deer in Ohio has exploded in the last few decades. In 1970, the statewide population was estimated at 17,000. The current estimate is 675,000. According to the Ohio Division of Wildlife, deer cause $2 billion in damage nationwide, including $100 million in agricultural crop damage, $750 million in damage to the timber industry and more than $250 million in damage to home landscape and nursery damage.
That’s not counting the cost of vehicle-deer crashes. State Farm estimates that one out of every 164 cars on Ohio’s highways will be involved in a deer-related crash within the next 12 months. The average property damage cost of one of these crashes is $2,900, up 3 percent in the last year.
Those opposed to deer hunting “probably don’t have a relative that was killed when their car hit a deer,” Michael Hogan, the Ohio State University Extension agent assigned to Carroll County, told GateHouse Media. “They probably are not farmers; their crops are not destroyed by deer. The problem is we have protected them as a society.”
With no natural predators to control the deer population, hunting is the only practical option available.
And even with an extra weekend of gun season in December, the number of deer isn’t getting any smaller. We think it’s time the state considers expanding gun season again. Perhaps that would help curb the deer population in Ohio.
Source: http://www.timesreporter.com/index.php?ID=78044
James Smith, who operates Smith Evergreen Nursery in Carroll County, planted 15 acres of Fraser firs earlier this decade. Smith lost 99 percent of them after they were devoured by deer.
The number of deer in Ohio has exploded in the last few decades. In 1970, the statewide population was estimated at 17,000. The current estimate is 675,000. According to the Ohio Division of Wildlife, deer cause $2 billion in damage nationwide, including $100 million in agricultural crop damage, $750 million in damage to the timber industry and more than $250 million in damage to home landscape and nursery damage.
That’s not counting the cost of vehicle-deer crashes. State Farm estimates that one out of every 164 cars on Ohio’s highways will be involved in a deer-related crash within the next 12 months. The average property damage cost of one of these crashes is $2,900, up 3 percent in the last year.
Those opposed to deer hunting “probably don’t have a relative that was killed when their car hit a deer,” Michael Hogan, the Ohio State University Extension agent assigned to Carroll County, told GateHouse Media. “They probably are not farmers; their crops are not destroyed by deer. The problem is we have protected them as a society.”
With no natural predators to control the deer population, hunting is the only practical option available.
And even with an extra weekend of gun season in December, the number of deer isn’t getting any smaller. We think it’s time the state considers expanding gun season again. Perhaps that would help curb the deer population in Ohio.
Source: http://www.timesreporter.com/index.php?ID=78044
Thursday, January 10, 2008
MONTANA OPINION: Is Managing Urban Deer Worth the Cost?
Pardon the cliché, but if you want to know why something is happening, follow the money. So, that’s what I did this week, and at the end of my search, I found what must be the most expensive deer in the world.
You could have some of these high-priced deer in your town, too. What’s happening in Helena, Montana, could be coming to a city near you.
Most cities have urban deer populations. In Helena, we host as many as 700 deer, both whitetails and muleys. These are not country deer coming into the city for a geranium treat now and then. These are third or fourth generation city deer born, raised and reproducing within the city limits, deer that have probably never heard a rifle shot or seen a hunter. They’ve become habituated to humankind for a simple reason. Helena is great deer habitat. Cities unintentionally provide the two primary characteristics of quality wildlife habitat, food and security.
Some people in Helena consider deer an amenity or at worst, a nuisance, but others consider them a pestilence--no better than oversized, hoofed rats. And sure enough, once or twice each fall, an aggressive, love-starved buck threatens somebody, and the incident gets the front page play it doesn’t deserve. Adding to the furor caused by these high profile incidents, our deer neighbors always make landscaping and gardening a challenge, which most of us solve by fencing or netting and planting deer-resistant species.
(All this has, incidentally, has created a substantive “deer economy” in Helena for fence companies and nurseries--and auto body shops, of course.)
To me, urban deer are just part of the we-don’t-live-in-a-perfect-world deal, no different than pigeons and squirrels and dog poop or your lawn amd neighbors who don’t shovel their walks. We city folks created this great deer habitat, so how can we be surprised or upset when deer use it? As any hunter knows, game animals naturally gravitate to habitat closed to hunting--and stay there if they find enough to eat.
But I might be in the minority in Helena. A survey conducted by the University of Montana Business School for the Urban Wildlife Task Force, (UWTF) created by the Helena City Commission to advise them on what to do about the “deer problem” found that 78 percent of city residents surveyed wanted the deer herd “reduced,” but only 54 percent wanted this reduction if we had to use “lethal means.”
This majority appears to be carrying the day in Helena, and the city commission has decided we need to kill deer because they pose a public safety hazard.
So, here’s the plan. Or perhaps I should say, here’s what probably will happen--unless the city commission steps in and stops it. Sometime next winter, Helena police officers will start baiting deer into open space areas and then in the dark of night using night-vision scoped rifles, they’ll shoot 50 deer.
Plan A was to kill 350, but the Fish and Game Commission, the board that sets policy for the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks (FWP), rejected this proposal. At a later meeting, though, the commission agreed to allow the city to kill 50, as long as no hunting license dollars were spent on the project. (That qualifier is sort of comical, as you’ll soon read, because lots of “hunters dollars” have already poured into Helena’s deer management plan, and under any government scenario, more will be spent.)
I’m hardly against killing deer, having done it as much as possible in my life. But the Helena plan brings out my fiscally conservative side. When I followed the money, here’s what I found. (As a disclaimer, agencies can’t accurately track all the publicly financed staff time that goes into administering projects, so the following figures certainly undershoot the true expense of killing deer in Helena.)
To get the ball rolling, the City of Helena created the UWTF and tapped its general fund for $12,000 to finance its work. FWP joined in with a $7,000 grant, which covered most of the cost of the survey.
In addition, according to FWP information officer Tom Palmer, the agency has already devoted $23,000 in staff time to work with the UWTF. The city didn’t keep track of the staff time, but parks and recreation director Randy Lilje told NewWest.Net that “a fairly substantial amount” of staff time has gone into the deer plan. Since I’m fiscally conservative guy who supports equality, I’ll be kind and assume the city only did as much as the state, even though the expenditure of city staff time was likely much higher.
If you’re adding this up, you know we’ve already spent $65,000, all public funds, on targeting these 50 deer or $1,300 per deer. And many more thousands will be spent. The city must hold public hearings and plans to lobby the legislature to pay for its deer reduction plan. I doubt the police department has special urban deer-killing equipment, so we have to buy it. And by the way, I’m a bit stressed about my police force out baiting and killing deer when they should be catching child predators, closing down meth labs, or busting those punks who prowl around Helena slashing tires and shooting out car windows with air pistols.
The venison must be handled properly, so somebody has to field dress the deer and take the meat over to Montana Food Share. And clean up the gut piles, of course, because I suspect people might object to finding them in our city parks.
I’ve probably missed a few expenses, but I feel safe saying the true cost isn’t any less than $2,000 per deer this year. It might be less in future years, and I suppose it’s a little unfair to put the entire amount on those 50 soon-to-be-dead deer instead of amortizing it over hundreds of more deer we plan to kill in the future. Killing deer might cost less than $2,000 per animal going forward, but still cost us deerly.
If somebody wants to challenge my numbers, I’ll make the adjustment and move on because the exact cost is not the point.
The point is: Do we want to spend so much public money to kill urban deer? And then repeat it every year to keep up with Mother Nature? Keeping in mind that close to half of Helenans don’t want deer killed, would this public money be better spent on maintaining parks, buying a fire truck, reducing energy use, making our town more pedestrian or bicycle friendly, promoting recycling, repaving streets, or paying for a hundred other underfunded city services? Ditto for FWP money. Would it be better spent on hunting access programs or wildlife research?
In conclusion, I’d like to see the UWTF do another survey and ask this question: Are you in favor of reducing Helena’s deer population at a cost of $2,000 per deer the first year and an undetermined expenditure of public funds in future years? I suspect that when the results came in, I might be in the majority.
source: http://www.newwest.net/city/article/our_most_expensive_deer/C108/L108/
You could have some of these high-priced deer in your town, too. What’s happening in Helena, Montana, could be coming to a city near you.
Most cities have urban deer populations. In Helena, we host as many as 700 deer, both whitetails and muleys. These are not country deer coming into the city for a geranium treat now and then. These are third or fourth generation city deer born, raised and reproducing within the city limits, deer that have probably never heard a rifle shot or seen a hunter. They’ve become habituated to humankind for a simple reason. Helena is great deer habitat. Cities unintentionally provide the two primary characteristics of quality wildlife habitat, food and security.
Some people in Helena consider deer an amenity or at worst, a nuisance, but others consider them a pestilence--no better than oversized, hoofed rats. And sure enough, once or twice each fall, an aggressive, love-starved buck threatens somebody, and the incident gets the front page play it doesn’t deserve. Adding to the furor caused by these high profile incidents, our deer neighbors always make landscaping and gardening a challenge, which most of us solve by fencing or netting and planting deer-resistant species.
(All this has, incidentally, has created a substantive “deer economy” in Helena for fence companies and nurseries--and auto body shops, of course.)
To me, urban deer are just part of the we-don’t-live-in-a-perfect-world deal, no different than pigeons and squirrels and dog poop or your lawn amd neighbors who don’t shovel their walks. We city folks created this great deer habitat, so how can we be surprised or upset when deer use it? As any hunter knows, game animals naturally gravitate to habitat closed to hunting--and stay there if they find enough to eat.
But I might be in the minority in Helena. A survey conducted by the University of Montana Business School for the Urban Wildlife Task Force, (UWTF) created by the Helena City Commission to advise them on what to do about the “deer problem” found that 78 percent of city residents surveyed wanted the deer herd “reduced,” but only 54 percent wanted this reduction if we had to use “lethal means.”
This majority appears to be carrying the day in Helena, and the city commission has decided we need to kill deer because they pose a public safety hazard.
So, here’s the plan. Or perhaps I should say, here’s what probably will happen--unless the city commission steps in and stops it. Sometime next winter, Helena police officers will start baiting deer into open space areas and then in the dark of night using night-vision scoped rifles, they’ll shoot 50 deer.
Plan A was to kill 350, but the Fish and Game Commission, the board that sets policy for the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks (FWP), rejected this proposal. At a later meeting, though, the commission agreed to allow the city to kill 50, as long as no hunting license dollars were spent on the project. (That qualifier is sort of comical, as you’ll soon read, because lots of “hunters dollars” have already poured into Helena’s deer management plan, and under any government scenario, more will be spent.)
I’m hardly against killing deer, having done it as much as possible in my life. But the Helena plan brings out my fiscally conservative side. When I followed the money, here’s what I found. (As a disclaimer, agencies can’t accurately track all the publicly financed staff time that goes into administering projects, so the following figures certainly undershoot the true expense of killing deer in Helena.)
To get the ball rolling, the City of Helena created the UWTF and tapped its general fund for $12,000 to finance its work. FWP joined in with a $7,000 grant, which covered most of the cost of the survey.
In addition, according to FWP information officer Tom Palmer, the agency has already devoted $23,000 in staff time to work with the UWTF. The city didn’t keep track of the staff time, but parks and recreation director Randy Lilje told NewWest.Net that “a fairly substantial amount” of staff time has gone into the deer plan. Since I’m fiscally conservative guy who supports equality, I’ll be kind and assume the city only did as much as the state, even though the expenditure of city staff time was likely much higher.
If you’re adding this up, you know we’ve already spent $65,000, all public funds, on targeting these 50 deer or $1,300 per deer. And many more thousands will be spent. The city must hold public hearings and plans to lobby the legislature to pay for its deer reduction plan. I doubt the police department has special urban deer-killing equipment, so we have to buy it. And by the way, I’m a bit stressed about my police force out baiting and killing deer when they should be catching child predators, closing down meth labs, or busting those punks who prowl around Helena slashing tires and shooting out car windows with air pistols.
The venison must be handled properly, so somebody has to field dress the deer and take the meat over to Montana Food Share. And clean up the gut piles, of course, because I suspect people might object to finding them in our city parks.
I’ve probably missed a few expenses, but I feel safe saying the true cost isn’t any less than $2,000 per deer this year. It might be less in future years, and I suppose it’s a little unfair to put the entire amount on those 50 soon-to-be-dead deer instead of amortizing it over hundreds of more deer we plan to kill in the future. Killing deer might cost less than $2,000 per animal going forward, but still cost us deerly.
If somebody wants to challenge my numbers, I’ll make the adjustment and move on because the exact cost is not the point.
The point is: Do we want to spend so much public money to kill urban deer? And then repeat it every year to keep up with Mother Nature? Keeping in mind that close to half of Helenans don’t want deer killed, would this public money be better spent on maintaining parks, buying a fire truck, reducing energy use, making our town more pedestrian or bicycle friendly, promoting recycling, repaving streets, or paying for a hundred other underfunded city services? Ditto for FWP money. Would it be better spent on hunting access programs or wildlife research?
In conclusion, I’d like to see the UWTF do another survey and ask this question: Are you in favor of reducing Helena’s deer population at a cost of $2,000 per deer the first year and an undetermined expenditure of public funds in future years? I suspect that when the results came in, I might be in the majority.
source: http://www.newwest.net/city/article/our_most_expensive_deer/C108/L108/
Wednesday, January 09, 2008
OREGON NEWS: Winter Feeding Kills Deer
KLAMATH FALLS, Ore. (AP) — Humans who feel sorry for the deer in the winter can do more harm by feeding them, say some wildlife experts.
Six deer found dead in the Klamath Falls area recently probably died because they were fed an improper diet by humans, officials say.
"Looking at some stomach contents, I'm seeing grain and alfalfa and things they're not supposed to be eating this time of year," said Liz Diver, who operates the nonprofit Badger Run Wildlife Rehabilitation Center. "I've also run into people in the feed store buying grain for the deer, which can be fatal."
She said people believe they're helping deer by feeding them during the winter, she said.
"When you give them apples, carrots, alfalfa and grain, their gut cannot handle it," Diver said. "They get something very similar to colic."
Tom Collom, district wildlife biologist with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, agreed.
He said deer have complex digestive tracts that depend on proper levels of vitamins, minerals and bacteria to digest food.
"If they are subjected to a quick change in diet it takes their system quite a while to change that bacteria makeup to be able to digest that food," Collom said. "It sets the stage where animals can starve to death on a full stomach."
A rapid change in diet actually inhibits the deer's ability to use the food they take in, he said.
Collom said feeding wildlife other than birds is against the law in the city of Klamath Falls under an ordinance approved in the 1990s.
Diver said she's trying to spread the word that feeding deer might end up killing them.
"Sometimes it's accidental," Diver said. "The deer are getting into people's hay barns where they've got it stashed for their horses.
"But you can also walk into feed stores and find people buying sacks of grain and things with the intent of feeding the deer because they feel sorry for them."
source:
http://www.oregonlive.com/newsflash/index.ssf?/base/news-22/1199848810246700.xml&storylist=orlocal
Six deer found dead in the Klamath Falls area recently probably died because they were fed an improper diet by humans, officials say.
"Looking at some stomach contents, I'm seeing grain and alfalfa and things they're not supposed to be eating this time of year," said Liz Diver, who operates the nonprofit Badger Run Wildlife Rehabilitation Center. "I've also run into people in the feed store buying grain for the deer, which can be fatal."
She said people believe they're helping deer by feeding them during the winter, she said.
"When you give them apples, carrots, alfalfa and grain, their gut cannot handle it," Diver said. "They get something very similar to colic."
Tom Collom, district wildlife biologist with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, agreed.
He said deer have complex digestive tracts that depend on proper levels of vitamins, minerals and bacteria to digest food.
"If they are subjected to a quick change in diet it takes their system quite a while to change that bacteria makeup to be able to digest that food," Collom said. "It sets the stage where animals can starve to death on a full stomach."
A rapid change in diet actually inhibits the deer's ability to use the food they take in, he said.
Collom said feeding wildlife other than birds is against the law in the city of Klamath Falls under an ordinance approved in the 1990s.
Diver said she's trying to spread the word that feeding deer might end up killing them.
"Sometimes it's accidental," Diver said. "The deer are getting into people's hay barns where they've got it stashed for their horses.
"But you can also walk into feed stores and find people buying sacks of grain and things with the intent of feeding the deer because they feel sorry for them."
source:
http://www.oregonlive.com/newsflash/index.ssf?/base/news-22/1199848810246700.xml&storylist=orlocal
WEST VIRGINIA NEWS: 2007 Deer Kill Up 6% Over 2006
Deer kills increased 6 percent in West Virginia last year as hunters killed about 7,900 more animals than the previous year.
The Division of Natural Resources says the total kill for the state’s various seasons was 145,577 animals in 2007. Hunters killed 137,621 deer in 2006.
The agency says anterless kills increased 11 percent last year as hunters took advantage of increased bag limits and the opportunity to hunt in more counties. Overall, 43,684 antlerless deer were killed.
DNR Director Frank Jezioro (JEZ’-uh-roh) says the agency will continue to watch the number of antlerless deer in West Virginia to ensure a healthy statewide population.
West Virginia’s various deer seasons started in October and ended Dec. 31.
Source: http://www.herald-dispatch.com/homepage/x607058991
The Division of Natural Resources says the total kill for the state’s various seasons was 145,577 animals in 2007. Hunters killed 137,621 deer in 2006.
The agency says anterless kills increased 11 percent last year as hunters took advantage of increased bag limits and the opportunity to hunt in more counties. Overall, 43,684 antlerless deer were killed.
DNR Director Frank Jezioro (JEZ’-uh-roh) says the agency will continue to watch the number of antlerless deer in West Virginia to ensure a healthy statewide population.
West Virginia’s various deer seasons started in October and ended Dec. 31.
Source: http://www.herald-dispatch.com/homepage/x607058991
Tuesday, January 08, 2008
IOWA NEWS: Deer Population Up, Deer Harvest Down
ORAN --- Sometimes you just can't beat Mother Nature.
Ice storms, cold and snow kept many hunters inside instead of stalking deer in December. Initial state estimates indicated the deer harvest was down about 34,000 after the first two shotgun seasons --- when the vast majority of deer are killed --- compared to last year at the same time.
Last year hunters killed a little more than 150,000 does and bucks. State officials hoped to match or exceed that number this year to keep the state's burgeoning deer herd in check.
Alarmed by the shortfall, the Iowa Department of Natural Resources enticed people back into the woods by extending certain hunting seasons and creating new ones so hunters could fill unused tags. The additional hunting time also was intended to help lockers that rely on processing the animals for income.
As numbers were updated and more kills reported, the harvest is still down but not as drastically as once thought. Willy Suchy, DNR wildlife research supervisor, estimates the harvest will be several thousand less than last year once all the deer hunting seasons end Jan. 27.
"The harvest is not where we wanted, but it's in the margin (of acceptability)," Suchy said.
Suchy said studies show Iowans believe a deer herd of about 300,000 is manageable. It's not that deer wouldn't have enough to eat or be more susceptible to disease if the herd was larger, but people believe that size is tolerable from the standpoint of property damage, he said.
The DNR estimates the deer population was about 370,000 after the last hunting season. Suchy said expanded hunting was needed to keep working toward the herd-size goal.
"Hunters are doing a pretty good job managing the deer population, passing on smaller bucks and taking does," Suchy said.
For some lockers that count on deer processing for a significant portion of their yearly revenue, the reduced harvest isn't good news. While some processors say numbers are as good or better than last year, that's not the case for many others.
Normally the locker in Oran is swamped this time of year with more than 900 deer, bringing in more than $120,000. Employees work overtime, just so customers can get their meat back in a few months.
This year, manager Todd Briddle said the deer count is down about 300 to 350 head. The pace is slower, revenue is lower, and customers are getting meat back in a matter of weeks.
"I'm not the only one hurting. I think a lot of lockers didn't get what they want," Briddle said.
From what Briddle can gather talking with customers and hunting himself, the weather played a significant factor. October hunting wasn't as successful, because rain pushed back harvest a little, and deer were feasting on corn and not in the timber. Then, harsh winter conditions hit.
"We got the weather, and it just killed us," Briddle said. "The state did it (extended hunting seasons) for a reason."
Tony Harford, owner of the locker in Wadena, said last year he processed about 500 deer. As of the last of December, the count was a little more than 400.
With three weeks left before deer hunting is done, Harford is optimistic more will come in, but there are no guarantees.
"I definitely count on deer. If you're down 100 deer, that's $10,000 down," he said.
On the bright side, Harford said labor expenses will go down if deer numbers remain behind last year, though that's not how he would like to save money.
At the opposite side of the spectrum, the locker in Edgewood is as busy as ever. As of the last of December, co-owner Terry Kearn said he had accepted about 200 more deer than last year, when the business processed 3,400.
Kearn said deer accounts for 30 percent of his revenue.
"Absolutely, no doubt, for most lockers deer is a pretty big part of their business," Kearn said. "I do think the kill is down, but I hope we're up (due to) what we do."
Source:
http://www.wcfcourier.com/articles/2008/01/07/news/top_story/1d1fe4d84c4add87862573c9004c7f35.txt
Ice storms, cold and snow kept many hunters inside instead of stalking deer in December. Initial state estimates indicated the deer harvest was down about 34,000 after the first two shotgun seasons --- when the vast majority of deer are killed --- compared to last year at the same time.
Last year hunters killed a little more than 150,000 does and bucks. State officials hoped to match or exceed that number this year to keep the state's burgeoning deer herd in check.
Alarmed by the shortfall, the Iowa Department of Natural Resources enticed people back into the woods by extending certain hunting seasons and creating new ones so hunters could fill unused tags. The additional hunting time also was intended to help lockers that rely on processing the animals for income.
As numbers were updated and more kills reported, the harvest is still down but not as drastically as once thought. Willy Suchy, DNR wildlife research supervisor, estimates the harvest will be several thousand less than last year once all the deer hunting seasons end Jan. 27.
"The harvest is not where we wanted, but it's in the margin (of acceptability)," Suchy said.
Suchy said studies show Iowans believe a deer herd of about 300,000 is manageable. It's not that deer wouldn't have enough to eat or be more susceptible to disease if the herd was larger, but people believe that size is tolerable from the standpoint of property damage, he said.
The DNR estimates the deer population was about 370,000 after the last hunting season. Suchy said expanded hunting was needed to keep working toward the herd-size goal.
"Hunters are doing a pretty good job managing the deer population, passing on smaller bucks and taking does," Suchy said.
For some lockers that count on deer processing for a significant portion of their yearly revenue, the reduced harvest isn't good news. While some processors say numbers are as good or better than last year, that's not the case for many others.
Normally the locker in Oran is swamped this time of year with more than 900 deer, bringing in more than $120,000. Employees work overtime, just so customers can get their meat back in a few months.
This year, manager Todd Briddle said the deer count is down about 300 to 350 head. The pace is slower, revenue is lower, and customers are getting meat back in a matter of weeks.
"I'm not the only one hurting. I think a lot of lockers didn't get what they want," Briddle said.
From what Briddle can gather talking with customers and hunting himself, the weather played a significant factor. October hunting wasn't as successful, because rain pushed back harvest a little, and deer were feasting on corn and not in the timber. Then, harsh winter conditions hit.
"We got the weather, and it just killed us," Briddle said. "The state did it (extended hunting seasons) for a reason."
Tony Harford, owner of the locker in Wadena, said last year he processed about 500 deer. As of the last of December, the count was a little more than 400.
With three weeks left before deer hunting is done, Harford is optimistic more will come in, but there are no guarantees.
"I definitely count on deer. If you're down 100 deer, that's $10,000 down," he said.
On the bright side, Harford said labor expenses will go down if deer numbers remain behind last year, though that's not how he would like to save money.
At the opposite side of the spectrum, the locker in Edgewood is as busy as ever. As of the last of December, co-owner Terry Kearn said he had accepted about 200 more deer than last year, when the business processed 3,400.
Kearn said deer accounts for 30 percent of his revenue.
"Absolutely, no doubt, for most lockers deer is a pretty big part of their business," Kearn said. "I do think the kill is down, but I hope we're up (due to) what we do."
Source:
http://www.wcfcourier.com/articles/2008/01/07/news/top_story/1d1fe4d84c4add87862573c9004c7f35.txt
MINNESOTA NEWS: HUNT TO SLOW BOVINE TB UNDERWAY
Hunters harvested 48 deer during the first weekend of a special hunt in northwestern Minnesota that aims to reduce deer density and stop the potential spread of bovine tuberculosis (TB), according to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR).
The hunt began Dec. 29 and continues through Jan. 13 in Permit Area 101, which is considered the bovine TB zone in far northwestern Minnesota. It is open to hunters who have a valid, unused permit to harvest deer regardless of the zone in which a hunter was licensed.
To date, four deer harvested in the TB zone during the regular firearms season in November have tested presumptive positive for bovine TB. Three tested positive prior to the DNR's Dec. 5 announcement of the late-season hunt. Since then, lab results have indicated that an additional deer taken during the regular firearms season has tested positive.
"Finding one additional deer with the disease is a concern," said Michael DonCarlos, DNR wildlife research and policy manager. "But the prevalence of the disease remains low and is confined to a small geographic region." All four of the infected deer from the fall 2007 hunt have been found within a five-mile radius of Skime.
After the late season hunt concludes, the DNR will conduct an aerial survey of the area to determine deer distribution and abundance. Once that information is collected, the DNR will finalize plans on the need for additional deer removal by sharpshooters. DNR also will continue to work with the agricultural community to expand and improve programs and policies to help prevent contact between cattle and deer.
This fall's testing of deer harvested in Permit Area 101 was part of the DNR's ongoing TB surveillance program, which began in 2005 when the disease was first discovered in cattle. Since then, DonCarlos said, bovine TB has been detected in eight cattle herds and 17 wild deer in Roseau and Beltrami counties. Officials from the DNR, Minnesota Board of Animal Health and U.S. Department of Agriculture have been aggressively working to manage the disease in deer and livestock so Minnesota can regain its bovine TB-free accreditation.
"This may be a narrow window of opportunity to stop this disease in its tracks," DonCarlos said. "As long as bovine TB continues to be found in deer, DNR will continue to work with local hunters, landowners, other wildlife and agriculture organizations and agencies to eliminate bovine TB in Minnesota."
Details of the special late-season hunt being conducted in deer Permit Area 101 only are:
- season dates are Saturday, Dec. 29, to Sunday, Jan. 13, 2008
- deer of either sex may be taken
- hunters can use any 2007 license or permit from any zone
- a hunter must have a license and use the legal weapon for that license; for example, a hunter cannot use a rifle if he or she does not
have a valid 2007 firearms license
- new or replacement licenses can be obtained at any Electronic Licensing System agent, and hunters can buy additional disease
management permits for $2.50
- deer also can be tagged with any remaining unused tags from the 2007 season; for example, deer can be tagged with an unfilled
firearms license, disease management permits, bonus permits or all-season tags.
All harvested deer must be registered at Olson Skime store in Skime; Riverfront Station in Wannaska; Thief Lake Wildlife Management Area headquarters during regular business hours; or Red Lake Wildlife Management Area headquarters during regular business hours.
DNR employees will staff the Skime and Wannaska registration stations during each weekend (Saturday - Monday) of the special season to examine harvested deer for clinical signs of bovine TB. If a deer is taken during the week that exhibits signs of bovine TB, such as lesions on the lungs, hunters should contact the Thief Lake Wildlife Management Area at (218) 222-3747 or the Red Lake Wildlife Management Area at (218) 783-6861.
Temporary deer population reductions may create short-term hardships for deer hunters in this particular area of northwestern Minnesota, Cornicelli said. But reducing the long-term risk of bovine TB becoming established and spreading in the deer population is extremely important.
"In the short term that means deer densities in the bovine TB area will need to be kept low," Cornicelli said. "However, Minnesota's deer populations are resilient, and while we recognize that dramatic reductions in populations won't be popular with everyone, history tells us deer rebound very quickly."
Following two severe winters in the mid-1990s, Minnesota's wild deer population was very low, he said. But fewer than 10 years later, deer populations had expanded to record levels.
Source:
http://www.buckmasters.com/bm/Resources/Articles/tabid/135/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/553/Default.aspx
The hunt began Dec. 29 and continues through Jan. 13 in Permit Area 101, which is considered the bovine TB zone in far northwestern Minnesota. It is open to hunters who have a valid, unused permit to harvest deer regardless of the zone in which a hunter was licensed.
To date, four deer harvested in the TB zone during the regular firearms season in November have tested presumptive positive for bovine TB. Three tested positive prior to the DNR's Dec. 5 announcement of the late-season hunt. Since then, lab results have indicated that an additional deer taken during the regular firearms season has tested positive.
"Finding one additional deer with the disease is a concern," said Michael DonCarlos, DNR wildlife research and policy manager. "But the prevalence of the disease remains low and is confined to a small geographic region." All four of the infected deer from the fall 2007 hunt have been found within a five-mile radius of Skime.
After the late season hunt concludes, the DNR will conduct an aerial survey of the area to determine deer distribution and abundance. Once that information is collected, the DNR will finalize plans on the need for additional deer removal by sharpshooters. DNR also will continue to work with the agricultural community to expand and improve programs and policies to help prevent contact between cattle and deer.
This fall's testing of deer harvested in Permit Area 101 was part of the DNR's ongoing TB surveillance program, which began in 2005 when the disease was first discovered in cattle. Since then, DonCarlos said, bovine TB has been detected in eight cattle herds and 17 wild deer in Roseau and Beltrami counties. Officials from the DNR, Minnesota Board of Animal Health and U.S. Department of Agriculture have been aggressively working to manage the disease in deer and livestock so Minnesota can regain its bovine TB-free accreditation.
"This may be a narrow window of opportunity to stop this disease in its tracks," DonCarlos said. "As long as bovine TB continues to be found in deer, DNR will continue to work with local hunters, landowners, other wildlife and agriculture organizations and agencies to eliminate bovine TB in Minnesota."
Details of the special late-season hunt being conducted in deer Permit Area 101 only are:
- season dates are Saturday, Dec. 29, to Sunday, Jan. 13, 2008
- deer of either sex may be taken
- hunters can use any 2007 license or permit from any zone
- a hunter must have a license and use the legal weapon for that license; for example, a hunter cannot use a rifle if he or she does not
have a valid 2007 firearms license
- new or replacement licenses can be obtained at any Electronic Licensing System agent, and hunters can buy additional disease
management permits for $2.50
- deer also can be tagged with any remaining unused tags from the 2007 season; for example, deer can be tagged with an unfilled
firearms license, disease management permits, bonus permits or all-season tags.
All harvested deer must be registered at Olson Skime store in Skime; Riverfront Station in Wannaska; Thief Lake Wildlife Management Area headquarters during regular business hours; or Red Lake Wildlife Management Area headquarters during regular business hours.
DNR employees will staff the Skime and Wannaska registration stations during each weekend (Saturday - Monday) of the special season to examine harvested deer for clinical signs of bovine TB. If a deer is taken during the week that exhibits signs of bovine TB, such as lesions on the lungs, hunters should contact the Thief Lake Wildlife Management Area at (218) 222-3747 or the Red Lake Wildlife Management Area at (218) 783-6861.
Temporary deer population reductions may create short-term hardships for deer hunters in this particular area of northwestern Minnesota, Cornicelli said. But reducing the long-term risk of bovine TB becoming established and spreading in the deer population is extremely important.
"In the short term that means deer densities in the bovine TB area will need to be kept low," Cornicelli said. "However, Minnesota's deer populations are resilient, and while we recognize that dramatic reductions in populations won't be popular with everyone, history tells us deer rebound very quickly."
Following two severe winters in the mid-1990s, Minnesota's wild deer population was very low, he said. But fewer than 10 years later, deer populations had expanded to record levels.
Source:
http://www.buckmasters.com/bm/Resources/Articles/tabid/135/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/553/Default.aspx
MISSOURI NEWS: Hunters Can't Keep Up With Deer Population
I failed … again, as my wife would say.
I predicted the fall firearms deer season would set a new harvest record. The sun, moon and stars all seemed to line up as I thought about the upcoming deer season and penned my November column.
Lonnie Hansen, Missouri Department of Conservation’s deer expert also thought the season would produce a new record kill.
It wasn’t meant to happen. Missouri deer hunters killed 214,404 during the November firearms season, and for all seasons combined, we killed 260,162 deer, making 2007 the third-largest deer harvest, but not a new record.
Weather played a part, I’m sure. It was unusually warm the first weekend. I quit hunting early to process two antlerless deer I’d killed, and I’m sure many other hunters did, also.
There is another reality dawning on Missouri’s managers. The deer herd continues to grow despite increasing deer harvest, new seasons and increasing liberal harvest regulations. Heck, harvest is almost unlimited. You can kill as many antlerless deer as you have tags and can purchase more tags as the season progresses.
And each year we see different harvest regulations, seasons and expectations as managers continue to fine-tune the harvest and season.
Next year will be no different. MDC will propose new deer harvest regulations and different seasons, to increase, they hope, antlerless deer harvest. The experimental four-point regulation for 29 counties may be modified. It didn’t increase antlerless deer harvest, as managers hoped. Managers are now considering an antlerless season in October, rather than December, and changes in the four-point regulation.
The Missouri Department of Conservation’s Lonnie Hansen estimates Missouri’s current deer herd ranges between 1 million and 1.5 million deer. That’s a lot, and the population is still growing.
You have some control on how to manage that population. Beginning this month, MDC is holding a series of public meetings across the state to listen to your concerns and to discuss proposals for deer regulation changes. Once they hold the public meetings, the managers will propose regulation changes to the Conservation Commission for next year and the following year.
MDC managers are between a rock and a hard place. They must balance hunter expectations, maintain a healthy deer herd and consider social ramifications of an expanding deer herd. Crop depredation and deer automobile contacts continue to increase.
Let me stick my oar in the water on this topic.
In my opinion, Missouri’s deer herd is following the classic sigmoid population curve. The sigmoid curve is "S" shaped with slow growth on the left side, very rapid growth in the middle, followed by population maintenance as the population reaches carrying capacity for the habitat.
Missouri’ deer population is somewhere between full carrying capacity and the rapidly expanding segment, where the herd continues to increase. Current management slows the deer herd’s expansion. However, it isn’t able to stop the expansion.
There is another problem, however, nibbling at the edges of Missouri’s management approach.
What’s first prize: one deer? Second prize: two deer? Third prize: three deer? What do you do with all of the meat?
I suspect the amount of Missouri deer hunters is stagnant or decreasing, while deer numbers continue to increase. The only tool to manage the herd in our manager’s pocket is hunter harvest, and I fear we have reached saturation with regards to the number of deer that hunters are willing to harvest. I have an extended family that uses part of the meat I harvest each year. I process the meat myself. I don’t have to pay a processor $60 to $70 for each deer.
Hansen and MDC’s other managers continue to look for ways to increase deer harvest. Yet, the market is saturated. If you can’t kill a deer or two or four in Missouri, you’re not trying. How do you increase the harvest when fewer hunters participate? This is the conundrum MDC managers face.
Please don’t misunderstand. I believe MDC is doing a great job of managing our deer herd and meeting hunter expectations. Yes, I’d like to see more mature bucks with large racks, but for me, deer hunting is a food gathering exercise, all wrapped in a social event.
The nearest meetings to Columbia will be held Feb 4 at Marshall High School or February 7 at St. George Catholic Church in Linn. Both meetings will run from 7 to 9 p.m. If you can’t attend and would like to comment, write the Missouri Department of Conservation, Box 180, Jefferson City, 65102.
Source: http://www.columbiatribune.com/2008/Jan/20080106Spor001.asp
I predicted the fall firearms deer season would set a new harvest record. The sun, moon and stars all seemed to line up as I thought about the upcoming deer season and penned my November column.
Lonnie Hansen, Missouri Department of Conservation’s deer expert also thought the season would produce a new record kill.
It wasn’t meant to happen. Missouri deer hunters killed 214,404 during the November firearms season, and for all seasons combined, we killed 260,162 deer, making 2007 the third-largest deer harvest, but not a new record.
Weather played a part, I’m sure. It was unusually warm the first weekend. I quit hunting early to process two antlerless deer I’d killed, and I’m sure many other hunters did, also.
There is another reality dawning on Missouri’s managers. The deer herd continues to grow despite increasing deer harvest, new seasons and increasing liberal harvest regulations. Heck, harvest is almost unlimited. You can kill as many antlerless deer as you have tags and can purchase more tags as the season progresses.
And each year we see different harvest regulations, seasons and expectations as managers continue to fine-tune the harvest and season.
Next year will be no different. MDC will propose new deer harvest regulations and different seasons, to increase, they hope, antlerless deer harvest. The experimental four-point regulation for 29 counties may be modified. It didn’t increase antlerless deer harvest, as managers hoped. Managers are now considering an antlerless season in October, rather than December, and changes in the four-point regulation.
The Missouri Department of Conservation’s Lonnie Hansen estimates Missouri’s current deer herd ranges between 1 million and 1.5 million deer. That’s a lot, and the population is still growing.
You have some control on how to manage that population. Beginning this month, MDC is holding a series of public meetings across the state to listen to your concerns and to discuss proposals for deer regulation changes. Once they hold the public meetings, the managers will propose regulation changes to the Conservation Commission for next year and the following year.
MDC managers are between a rock and a hard place. They must balance hunter expectations, maintain a healthy deer herd and consider social ramifications of an expanding deer herd. Crop depredation and deer automobile contacts continue to increase.
Let me stick my oar in the water on this topic.
In my opinion, Missouri’s deer herd is following the classic sigmoid population curve. The sigmoid curve is "S" shaped with slow growth on the left side, very rapid growth in the middle, followed by population maintenance as the population reaches carrying capacity for the habitat.
Missouri’ deer population is somewhere between full carrying capacity and the rapidly expanding segment, where the herd continues to increase. Current management slows the deer herd’s expansion. However, it isn’t able to stop the expansion.
There is another problem, however, nibbling at the edges of Missouri’s management approach.
What’s first prize: one deer? Second prize: two deer? Third prize: three deer? What do you do with all of the meat?
I suspect the amount of Missouri deer hunters is stagnant or decreasing, while deer numbers continue to increase. The only tool to manage the herd in our manager’s pocket is hunter harvest, and I fear we have reached saturation with regards to the number of deer that hunters are willing to harvest. I have an extended family that uses part of the meat I harvest each year. I process the meat myself. I don’t have to pay a processor $60 to $70 for each deer.
Hansen and MDC’s other managers continue to look for ways to increase deer harvest. Yet, the market is saturated. If you can’t kill a deer or two or four in Missouri, you’re not trying. How do you increase the harvest when fewer hunters participate? This is the conundrum MDC managers face.
Please don’t misunderstand. I believe MDC is doing a great job of managing our deer herd and meeting hunter expectations. Yes, I’d like to see more mature bucks with large racks, but for me, deer hunting is a food gathering exercise, all wrapped in a social event.
The nearest meetings to Columbia will be held Feb 4 at Marshall High School or February 7 at St. George Catholic Church in Linn. Both meetings will run from 7 to 9 p.m. If you can’t attend and would like to comment, write the Missouri Department of Conservation, Box 180, Jefferson City, 65102.
Source: http://www.columbiatribune.com/2008/Jan/20080106Spor001.asp
Monday, January 07, 2008
MICHIGAN NEWS: Cull in Jackson's Ella Sharp park Underway
Sharpshooters stationed themselves Sunday in Ella Sharp Park for the first day of a deer harvest that was to kill dozens of the animals that regularly roam the Jackson park's golf course and fields.
Eight men or women with Centerfire rifles shot antlerless deer, beginning after 4:30 p.m. and ending about 11 p.m. Sunday as part of an effort to control a deer population so prevalent many residents have deemed it a nuisance.
Late Sunday, there was no count available on the total number of deer killed. Park Superintendent Eric Terrian said he would not know until early today.
The shooting, depending on the weather conditions, could continue at 4:30 p.m. today and every night until the sharpshooters down 80 deer, Terrian said.
They are shooting in the afternoon to allow children to get safely home from school and avoid times of the day when people are more likely to visit the park and its museum.
Tuesday, sharpshooters also will station themselves in the Cascades Golf Course in Summit Township.
Shooting has been permitted by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources until Feb. 29, but Terrian said he is hopeful the harvest, discussed and planned for years, could wrap up as early as the end of the week.
By about 5:20 p.m. Sunday, as a fog made fuzzy the Jackson landscape, "several" deer already had been killed, said Terrian, who was sitting in a meeting room at the Ella Sharp Golf Course.
He said the shooters, who fire in close range of the animals, indicated the fog was not bothersome.
The roads around the golf course and park were closed, blocked with road signs that read "Deer harvest in progress." Police responded twice to calls about cars or people in the closed area.
Residents who live nearby said they did not hear shots nor see the sharpshooters.
"We were surprised," said Jeff Thomasson, who lives on Horton Road near the park and expected he'd notice when hunters took to the area.
He said he supports the harvest. "We need to thin them out for sure."
The deer overpopulate the park, causing car accidents and property damage. Neighbors have complained and many support efforts to reduce their numbers.
"We can't have flowers or flower beds. They just chew them up and eat them," Thomasson said.
Others say killing the deer is cruel.
"I think they are beautiful," said Nancy Crandell, who lives on Park Road across from the golf course. "I feel sorry for the deer. It's not their fault everyone encroached on them."
She said she has safety concerns about the harvest. "We didn't like the idea of guns and bullets. You don't know where they are going to end up."
Terrian said the process is safe.
Police are monitoring the area. Two DNR officers were at the park Sunday to make sure sharpshooters, who have to follow stringent guidelines, were following the rules, he said.
Once killed, at a price of about $110 a deer, the animals were taken out of the park.
The deer are to be locally processed, and the meat is to be donated to the food pantry at Immanuel Lutheran Church, 1505 W. Michigan Ave.
"We'll be glad to get it and put it to good use and distribute it," said Alice Wiltse, pantry coordinator.
She said demand is high. Last year, the pantry served 10,742 families, up 33 percent from 2006.
"There are many people in Jackson that need the food," she said.
Often, the pantry cannot get meat at a decent price, she said, and pantry clients enjoy venison.
With the donated meat, the pantry can use its money to buy more vegetables and fruit, and meet its goal of giving more food in 2008, she said.
Source: http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2008/01/deer_herd_gets_thinner_in_park.html
Eight men or women with Centerfire rifles shot antlerless deer, beginning after 4:30 p.m. and ending about 11 p.m. Sunday as part of an effort to control a deer population so prevalent many residents have deemed it a nuisance.
Late Sunday, there was no count available on the total number of deer killed. Park Superintendent Eric Terrian said he would not know until early today.
The shooting, depending on the weather conditions, could continue at 4:30 p.m. today and every night until the sharpshooters down 80 deer, Terrian said.
They are shooting in the afternoon to allow children to get safely home from school and avoid times of the day when people are more likely to visit the park and its museum.
Tuesday, sharpshooters also will station themselves in the Cascades Golf Course in Summit Township.
Shooting has been permitted by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources until Feb. 29, but Terrian said he is hopeful the harvest, discussed and planned for years, could wrap up as early as the end of the week.
By about 5:20 p.m. Sunday, as a fog made fuzzy the Jackson landscape, "several" deer already had been killed, said Terrian, who was sitting in a meeting room at the Ella Sharp Golf Course.
He said the shooters, who fire in close range of the animals, indicated the fog was not bothersome.
The roads around the golf course and park were closed, blocked with road signs that read "Deer harvest in progress." Police responded twice to calls about cars or people in the closed area.
Residents who live nearby said they did not hear shots nor see the sharpshooters.
"We were surprised," said Jeff Thomasson, who lives on Horton Road near the park and expected he'd notice when hunters took to the area.
He said he supports the harvest. "We need to thin them out for sure."
The deer overpopulate the park, causing car accidents and property damage. Neighbors have complained and many support efforts to reduce their numbers.
"We can't have flowers or flower beds. They just chew them up and eat them," Thomasson said.
Others say killing the deer is cruel.
"I think they are beautiful," said Nancy Crandell, who lives on Park Road across from the golf course. "I feel sorry for the deer. It's not their fault everyone encroached on them."
She said she has safety concerns about the harvest. "We didn't like the idea of guns and bullets. You don't know where they are going to end up."
Terrian said the process is safe.
Police are monitoring the area. Two DNR officers were at the park Sunday to make sure sharpshooters, who have to follow stringent guidelines, were following the rules, he said.
Once killed, at a price of about $110 a deer, the animals were taken out of the park.
The deer are to be locally processed, and the meat is to be donated to the food pantry at Immanuel Lutheran Church, 1505 W. Michigan Ave.
"We'll be glad to get it and put it to good use and distribute it," said Alice Wiltse, pantry coordinator.
She said demand is high. Last year, the pantry served 10,742 families, up 33 percent from 2006.
"There are many people in Jackson that need the food," she said.
Often, the pantry cannot get meat at a decent price, she said, and pantry clients enjoy venison.
With the donated meat, the pantry can use its money to buy more vegetables and fruit, and meet its goal of giving more food in 2008, she said.
Source: http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2008/01/deer_herd_gets_thinner_in_park.html
Friday, December 28, 2007
WISCONSIN NEWS: You Have a 1 In 99 Chance of Hitting A Deer in 2008
If snow or ice doesn’t mangle your car, a deer might.
State Farm Insurance says Wisconsin drivers have a 1 in 99 chance of hitting a deer in the New Year.
That’s the third highest in the nation, behind only Michigan and West Virginia.
Eric Englund of the Wisconsin Insurance Alliance says about five cents of every dollar spent on auto policies pays for deer damage.
Those claims totaled $100 million statewide last year.
Keith Warnke of the state Department of Natural Resources says you’re 209 times more likely to hit a deer on the road than to get injured in a hunting accident.
Warnke should know. His vehicles have struck five deer in his lifetime.
A year ago, Waupaca County had the most deer crashes in the state, just more than 1,900.
Dane and Eau Claire counties were next on the list.
Most insurers include deer crashes in their comprehensive policies which also cover things like fires and vandalism.
About three-fourths of insured Wisconsin motorists have comprehensive coverage.
Source:
http://www.newrichmond-news.com/articles/index.cfm?id=19445§ion=Wisconsin%20News
State Farm Insurance says Wisconsin drivers have a 1 in 99 chance of hitting a deer in the New Year.
That’s the third highest in the nation, behind only Michigan and West Virginia.
Eric Englund of the Wisconsin Insurance Alliance says about five cents of every dollar spent on auto policies pays for deer damage.
Those claims totaled $100 million statewide last year.
Keith Warnke of the state Department of Natural Resources says you’re 209 times more likely to hit a deer on the road than to get injured in a hunting accident.
Warnke should know. His vehicles have struck five deer in his lifetime.
A year ago, Waupaca County had the most deer crashes in the state, just more than 1,900.
Dane and Eau Claire counties were next on the list.
Most insurers include deer crashes in their comprehensive policies which also cover things like fires and vandalism.
About three-fourths of insured Wisconsin motorists have comprehensive coverage.
Source:
http://www.newrichmond-news.com/articles/index.cfm?id=19445§ion=Wisconsin%20News
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
