Decision Support for Urban Management

 Research
 
 

Deer Management in Suburban Areas:  Why not just move deer from residential  areas? There are several reasons why moving problem deer is not an option. First and foremost, moving deer does not solve the problem. If a residential neighborhood is located near an area with a high deer population other deer will just move into the neighborhood. Trapping deer is very difficult and expensive even under the best of circumstances. It would be virtually impossible to catch enough deer in a residential situation to make any difference. Deer that have been relocated often do not survive long because of the stress involved in the trapping and transportation process and the difficulty in adapting to a new area.

 
 

Dr. Jay Kirkpatrick presents research supporting deer contraception -- double click for full screen



The urbanization of wildlife management: Social science, conflict, and decision making  ME Patterson, JM Montag, DR Williams - Urban Forestry & Urban …, 2003 - Elsevier
Increasing urbanization of rural landscapes has created new challenges for wildlife management. In addition to changes in the physical landscape, urbanization has also produced
changes in the socio-cultural landscape. The greater distancing from direct interaction ...

Recovery of Florida Key Deer


Examples of Deer Management Plans

The city of Grand Haven, Michigan supports a detailed site for their deer management plan and a blog for comments and citings in the city.  

Example of of Deer Management Plan for Ames, Iowa (cached)


The State of Connecticut provides a handbook that can be used to develop deer management plans.  A study by Rand et al in the Journal of Medical Entomology cited to show deer correlation to Lyme Disease is based on removal of deer from an isolated offshore island.


Supporting Documents on the Internet


Urban Deer Management in Wisconsin  

Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat The number of deer that a community wants is a community decision. There is no biologically correct number. The biological carrying capacity of many of our urban areas can be over 100 deer per square mile. What the community needs to determine is the social carrying capacity, —how many deer the citizens are willing to tolerate
Example Cases from the Press

Residents locking horns over urban deer Davis County Clipper 9/17/2010  Utah  by Scott Schulte When people think of deer, the vision is often that of an elegant creature prancing across an open field with beautiful grace. ...

Will County OKs culling deer herds Southtown Star  9/10/2010  BY STEWART WARREN, Sun-Times Media Trained marksmen will begin targeting white-tailed deer this fall in Will County forest preserves. ...

Urban deer are on the rise in Birmingham, says wildlife expert  9/11/2010  Birmingham Mail
BIRMINGHAM commuters will have to get used to sharing the city with wild deer, according to a top wildlife expert. After a lonely muntjac deer was snapped ...

City's Deer-Control Measures Pass Muster  Courthouse News Service  9/10/2010  (CN) - A deer-control ordinance allowing residents to bow hunt within city limits did not violate a Kentucky man's "fundamental right to be free from the ...

Dunlora votes to spare deer from archers 9/15/2010 Charlottesville Daily Progress  Virginia  By Ted Strong By a community vote, the deer in Dunlora have been granted a commutation of sentence. The neighborhood had been exploring a plan that would ...

Hunting has increased deer population, not reduced it  Greenwich Time 9/3/2010  It is very difficult to grasp the logic of the Fairfield County Municipal Deer Management Alliance working closely with the state Department of ...

Major issues face Town Hall this fall, say key RTM members Westport-News  9/2/2010  Controlling the local deer population, a highly controversial issue in other Fairfield County communities, looms as the most explosive item on the RTM's ...

Deer survey available online tomorrow Cranbrook Daily Townsman  8/31/2010   residents of Cranbrook are being invited by the City to fill out an Urban Deer Resident Survey and make their opinions known so they can help shape the ...

Urban deer hunt plan rejected in Parkersburg Charleston Gazette 8/25/2010  (AP) - Parkersburg's City Council has narrowly rejected a plan to conduct an urban deer hunt. President John Rockhold cast the deciding vote against the ...

Bow hunters to help reduce Sioux Falls deer 8/17/2010 KCAU  SIOUX FALLS, SD (AP) - The Sioux Falls City Council has voted unanimously to allow bow hunters to help thin a deer herd causing headaches in the northeast ...
 

 
Hunting has increased deer population, not reduced it  Greenwich Time 9/3/2010  It is very difficult to grasp the logic of the Fairfield County Municipal Deer Management Alliance working closely with the state Department of ...

Welsh deer 'could be given the pill' February 27, 2011 Wales WalesOnline  by Claire Miller, Wales On Sunday WALES' wild deer could be given the pill to keep numbers under control, amid fears the animals pose a serious road accident threat. The nation's booming wild deer population could top 55000 by 2015, from a population of around 16,000 in 2008.  While there is currently no immuno-contraception method available for deer, Defra research into oral contraceptives is ongoing, with work on wild boar and urban badgers due to report this year, with a view to beginning testing on deer.


Walter, W.D., et al. 2002. Evaluation of immunocontraception in a free-ra nging suburban white-tailed deer herd. Wildlife Society Bulletin 30:186-192  Show n difference in health for a variety of different measures for deer receiving immunocontraception versus those not receiving.

Deer-Free Areas May Be Haven For Ticks, Disease

This ScienceDaily article summarizes a Penn State Study:  "This goes somewhat against conventional wisdom. When you remove deer, it does not always reduce the tick population," says Perkins. "If you were to exclude deer from hundreds of acres, tick numbers will fall. But in an area less than 2.5 acres, you are more likely to increase tick density and probably create tick-borne hotspots."

Review of Westport's deer hunting ban proceeds quietly  December 17, 2010  Connecticut  Westport-News  Rutberg talked about the implementation and effects of birth control for deer, while Bull discussed the impact of deer herds on local ecological systems. ...

Committee members heard testimony from Allen Rutberg, a professor at Tufts University's Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine, and Milan Bull, senior director of science and conservation at the Connecticut Audubon Society.

The vaccine produced noticeable results in each trial, Gutberg said. On Fire Island, less than 20 percent of does that were treated produced fawns the following year. This trend was accompanied by a 50 to 60 percent decline in the local deer population during an approximately 10-year span. On Fripp Island, the one-shot vaccine had produced an 80 to 90 percent drop in fawning rates.

Rutberg said the costs of deer birth control were not inconsiderable. While remote darting of the deer cost only about $80 in the Fire Island program, capturing each deer for vaccination and tagging on Fripp Island cost more than $500.

Killing deer cruel, but usual, punishment.  Cost effective humane solution to Valley Forge Deer Management  December 4, 2010  Pennsylvania  The Times Herald  And why are deer always the guilty party and humans are never responsible as though the deer created this situation for themselves? And most galling of all,...

Sharpshooting is typically about $500 per deer

Studies show that immunoncontraception leads to a rapid reduction in deer population of 30-40 percent in 3 years. In 5-6 years, that number reaches goal levels of 80-90 percent reduction. Valley Forge is talking about a 4-year killing program, so while the National Park Service is busy killing, the deer will actually be re-populating each spring—the compensatory rebound effect seen with killing deer to reduce numbers. Efficiency this is not. But with contraception, there isn’t a sharp decline in deer populations, and, instead, the population will level off in a more natural and sustainable manner.

the cost for maintaining a sharpshooter program will remain constant as the deer population rebounds in response to rapid reduction, while the cost for treating a population of deer with contraceptive vaccines declines and stabilizes over time. This includes the often-overlooked cost of additional security needed to sequester the area for sharpshooters and patrol for accidental incursion from the public while shooting is taking place. In contrast, contraception typically costs from $261 to $513 per doe for the first year, but falls to $88 to $103 in subsequent years. These costs reflect the fact that capture/sedation of deer is often conducted initially for research parameters, but is not required in subsequent years.
Comments