December 3, 2012 (Newark, NJ) – District 5 Freeholder Brendan W. Gill of Montclair, Chairman of the Freeholder Board’s Deer Population Control Committee, convened a meeting of his committee on Thursday, November 29, 2012, at the Hall of Records.
Director Salvante gave an overview of pertinent statistics, including the fact that a total of 2,654 deer have been removed from county property since 2008 (818 culled, 545 unborn fetuses, 1,291 killed in vehicle accidents on county roads). He also pointed out that the success of the County’s deer management program (whether due to culling or to the effectiveness of roadside reflectors) was manifested in the reduction in the number of deer killed on county roads: 182 (2012), 233 (2011), 229 (2010), 283 (2009), 363 (2008) and 303 (2007).
Bernier discussed the various elements of the deer management program and emphasized that the hunting aspect “…is not in any way intended to provide recreational sport.” He added, “The hunt is intended strictly for the purpose of deer management, and has three goals: to preserve bio-diversity in the county’s woodland and fields (especially its parks) by allowing for forest re-generation to reverse the damage done by the over-browsing of deer; to provide aesthetic and financial relief to homeowners whose landscaping has been damaged by deer; and to reduce the threat to public safety caused by deer-related motor vehicle accidents.” He also discussed the extensive efforts to notify the public of hunts, the stringent rules in-force to make the hunt as safe as possible, as well as the effort to use skilled and experienced marksmen and to include as many Essex County resident marksmen as possible.
Bernier also responded to questions from Freeholder Gill, other freeholders and members of the public about alternative population control means besides hunting. Regarding “trap-and-transfer”, he pointed out that it was attempted years ago in Essex County and failed; that is very difficult to accomplish, logistically; and that it often results in the death of deer from trauma and injury anyway. He also discussed the current impediments to the use of fertility control/immunocontraceptive drugs such as PZP and GonaCon: legality – the State requires that deer first must be captured, the drug must be administered by veterinarians, and permission must be granted in writing from all property owners within 2,000 feet of the designated darting area if the deer are to tranquilized prior to inoculation; cost - recent analyses indicate the cost to be $1,000 per deer, and likely higher here in Essex County, due mostly to the mandated participation of veterinarians; and application, the most problematic of all - 90% of the female deer must be immunized, they must be captured, tagged and kept track of to know when they must be re-treated, and they must be treated at least every year, if not every year. He went on to add that even if all of these impediments were to be worked out, the use of these drugs will only “…allow you to maintain a population at or close to what it currently is; what it will not do is reduce the population.” “So, if you have too many deer already, fertility control agents are not going to bring that population down for at least ten years.”
Freeholder Gill emphasized the importance of moving forward with forest regeneration efforts and asked, “When are we going to reach the point where the number of deer is low enough that we won’t need to hunt anymore?” Bernier answered by saying that forest ecologists generally say a population of 20 deer per square mile will permit a healthy forest to survive, “…but, your forests are far from healthy and current research suggests you probably need to get the density down to about 5 per square mile in order for forest regeneration to really have the opportunity to succeed.” At the current rate, he indicated that the hunt in South Mountain Reservation would probably have to continue for another 2 or 3 years, that it would take longer at the Hilltop Reservation, and that at Eagle Rock, perhaps a hunt every other year for a while would suffice.
Source: http://www.essex-countynj.org/freeholders/site/index.php?section=120312DeerCmteMtg
Source: http://www.essex-countynj.org/freeholders/site/index.php?section=120312DeerCmteMtg
I feel as though it is good that they are trying to stop deer from over populating.I believe that the most effective way would just be to use fertility control drugs for safety purposes and for it to be effective.If we hunt,for about two to three years while using Fertility controlling drugs on the deer. The population of the deer will significantly decrease and would be back to a stable and more reasonable number for us to be able to stop Hunting and not to constantly have fatal accidents involving deer.
ReplyDeleteI clearly understand the reason as to why they want to stop the deer from overpopulating. Deer have been a detrimental asset to forest by causing damage, and even causing brutal car accidents, not only putting themselves at risk but citizens at risk of injury. However I feel that the most effective way is hunting them because the “trap-and-transfer” method was put into place years ago and failed. In fact, it often resulted in death of deer from trauma and injury anyways. In addition, the drugs could cost up to $1000 per deer, even more in Essex County as stated in the article. Therefore, I strongly believe that in order to save money and to choose an alternative for “trap-and-transfer” because it’s not effective, we have to hunt deer down and kill them. It’ll save a lot more money as well as having deer die as a result of trauma of trap and transfer.
ReplyDeletePersonally I think that they should follow through with getting rid of the deer population or to just lower the population because the deer’s are not benefitting us by destroying our forest. Not only that, they have caused many vehicle accidents, and this is dangerous to the people that drive everyday in these areas that have deer’s. I think that hunting and killing the deer’s would be a better option because drugging the deer’s would cost too much money, and would be a lot of work, because the female deer must be captured, immunized, and will have be kept track of when they must be re-treated, and this might be every year. This process would be too much work for veterinarians to perform and there are many deer’s out there destroying people’s landscapes, forests, and causing accidents every second that is wasted. These programs and organizations that are concerned about this problem need to act fast because we need healthier forests and a healthy environment.
ReplyDeleteUnder normal circumstances, I would have settled with the trap-and-transfer method for deer population control but reading that it only traumatizes the deer, I will then have to agree with hunting them as the best option. My only problem with this method is my fear that it may get out of control. I think that the people might get too carried away and continue to hunt the deer after the hunt has been called off. Comparing the trap-and-transfer method to this however, hunting them looks like the better option for now.
ReplyDeleteThe deer population is increasing year by year in Essex County and the immense number of deer will continue to cause accidents on county roads. The most effective method for controlling the deer population to a stable amount would be the trap and transfer method. The reason is because it’s cheaper than injecting the deer with fertility control drugs. The trap and transfer method will lower the population of deer and it will transfer the deer to a different area. Therefore, it’s better to use the trap and transfer method because it’s not expensive like the immunizations of deer with fertility control drugs.
ReplyDeleteI understand that they have to stop the deer from overpopulating but the best way in my opion is to hunt them the old fasion way. Deers have caused accidents and putting other people's life in danger in Essex County. The reason I chose the trap and transfer method because it less money out of people's pocket and it's easier than injecting the deer with fertility control drugs.
ReplyDeleteI understand the purpose of deer management, which reduces the deer population to maintain balance and diversity in the ecosystem. The large population of deer’s has caused extensive damage to our national parks, vehicle accidents, and endangered public safety. Allowing marksmen to hunt deer to reduce their population will allow the forests to regenerate, and will reduce the number of vehicle accidents on county roads. People have argued for alternative population control methods, for example the trap and transfer, but this has been experimented years ago in Essex County and failed. Fertility control has also been suggested, but this method will require a lot of work from veterinarians, which will have to tranquilize the deer, and will cost up to $1000 per deer. Additionally fertility control will require notifying every resident that lives within 2000 feet from the darting area. This type of control will not reduce the population only maintain it. Therefore, if the deer population is too high fertility control cannot be an option. We cannot think of hunting deer as some meaningless recreational sport, we need to think of it as something that is going to help the environment and have a positively impact to other animals.
ReplyDeleteI believe that they should go along and remove the deer’s out of our environment. The reason why I think this should happen because they cause too many car accidents, destroying forests and peoples landscapes in the Essex County. Hunting should play a huge role in this to help get rid of the deer’s so we can have less problems, also it's better to do this instead of drugging them because it cost too much money and the process would be way too long.
ReplyDeleteI think they should hunt deer the old fashioned way instead of the trap and transfer method.It will be too much for the people who do the fertility injections.I'm also sure that the fertility drugs do not come cheap.If people did it the old fashioned way there be a better reduction of deer in the population.There would be not as many car accidents due to deers.I think overall hunting will do a better job than the trap and transfer method and it would not cost as much.
ReplyDeleteI think that a lot of good ideas were discussed in this article but I believe that it is best to just keep with the usual acts of hunting. This is the least expensive and also the less time consuming. They explained all of the problems with the other methods like the trap and transfer. The trap and transfer method is a good idea but I don't think they should do that anymore because from what I read it doesn't make sense that they spend all of this money to catch the the deer when a lot of the deer don't survive. Also the fertility control drugs would be very costly and time consuming. So in my opinion the best bet for controlling the deer population would be to continue hunting and to monitor it.
ReplyDeleteI believe that hunting deer should be allowed and continue to happen. At first I did not believe hunting was the answer but i now i believe it is the way to go. Hunting cost less money then the "trap and Transfer" method because the cost for drugs can reach 1000 dollars. Many deer cause car accidents and that puts humans at risk whenever they get into the car. The only downside of hunting deer is people may go out of control and many more people could have guns and as we have seen in our countries history some people do not know how to handle themselves when they have guns. Overall I believe hunting is the way to go in controlling the dense deer population
ReplyDeleteMy first true belief about the deer cull was that it was a bad idea because we should not kill innocent animals, but after reading this article it gave me a new impression about deer and their way of life. Since there are so many deer they have to eat and since a deer is a herbivore it will only eat plants and vegetation. The deer relies on the forests for practically all their food. With so many deer alive the forests are beginning to die and the deer will just continuously destroy them. People are trying to establish a good way of lowering the deer population the easiest way and most basic way would be to hunt and kill the deer. There is also the trap and release method but due to history of trying this method in Essex county the success was low to none. So thinking about how times are now within this economy I believe hunting the deer which cost a lot less money and is known to be successful in reducing the population should be put into action.
ReplyDeleteI feel as though the efforts to fight against over population is good, I also believe it may get over-done. The use of chemicals to control fertility is a bit much, the consequence of that chemical could effect later offsprings and damage the deers gene-pool. I believe the most effective way to control the deer population is by hunting. Having hunters go out naturally and kill deer doesn't harm the next generation in anyway. I believe a rule should be set forth that a person can only kill 5 deers a season to aviod eradication of the population and to keep it at a steady number this way it allows the forest to re-grow and the deer to strive off the land.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI personally believe that all communities, no matter how significant or insignificant they may seem, play a major role in the cycle of life. Therefore deers, just like any other species, deserves to play their role in the cycle of life and impact the lives of those other organisms that depend on them. I can honestly say that I do not support the "management" of deers once termination of life is implemented. Though preservation of deer life may not be all that effective when it comes to saving deer life, life itself does not have a price tag.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion I beleive the easiest way to lower the population of deer would be to increase the population of their predator. If we bring in more of the deer's predators to the area or enforce breeding than maybe this would lower the deer population. Plus it is more humane than just slaughtering dozens of deer each year.
ReplyDeleteI think that deer should be away from high populated areas. I think deer should be tranquilized and moved away from people, so that they wouldn't harm people. The deer should be relocated away from people so that they may live freely and still be able to live instead of being harmed by humans. Deer have a right to live life such as humans have a right to life. We shouldn't take away their life because they are part of God's creation.
ReplyDeleteI agree that deer have been over populating and have been a problem for some places. I also agree that slowing down the population rate is a good idea but not by killing them or using chemicals. They should keep watch on deer and how much the mate with each other. This will prevent violence and will also help with the gun laws to prevent people from using guns as much as before.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the reducing of deers in the system becuase there is an outragious amount of deers in the system. There is one thing that I disagree with with reducing the population of deers and that is the use of the drugs in the fertility, I think this is crossing the line becuase it might have the potiental to hurt other animals, so there should be another way to replace the drug fertility. Hunting seasons should be extended and being in more animals which can help fix the problem. At the then of the day i agree with what the peoplw are trying to do becuase it is needed.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteI believe that their is a high level of deers in population and it needs to be reduced. I believe that putting slowing down the reproduction of deer is best because it is not good to hurt innocent deer with chemicals or other things. I think that deer are part of the natural habitats of the world and deserve to be treated the right way .