posted by Joe Polk at 4:08 PM /
Controlled hunts might be needed for the next several years to bring deer roaming Mt. Lebanon to a manageable number, a U.S. Department of Agriculture official said. Sixty-nine deer were killed during hunts at public and private sites in the municipality over seven nights in February and March. The venison was donated to food banks.
But Mt. Lebanon's deer count remains five times higher than it should be, said Craig Swope, a wildlife biologist and local supervisor with the Department of Agriculture.
Link: www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/cityregion/s_520598.html
But Mt. Lebanon's deer count remains five times higher than it should be, said Craig Swope, a wildlife biologist and local supervisor with the Department of Agriculture.
Link: www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/cityregion/s_520598.html
Labels: deer culling, municipality
17 Comments:
I don't like the deer, didn't plant anything this year because it is all eaten. My dog ended up with a couple of tics, and I am afraid of the diseases that deer spread. I do not live in a new development that has taken over the habitat, my home has been here over 70 years. For some reason there are just more deer here than there were 30 years ago.
Yes, Linda, I am going to remain anon but I will sign off as
Sunset Hills resident.
Hard to believe there were a total of 90 deer counted in LeboLand prior to the "culling" (USDA count), 69 removed during Feb./Mar. and we're now being told in early Aug. that we still have 90 roaming around (15/sq.mi.@ 6 sq.mi.). The growing problem in this case must be attributable to a roaming problem -- deer do not respect municipal borders. I guess we will be stuck ad infinitum for $20,000/yr. unless we can convince Bethel Park,Scott and Castle Shannon to follow our and USC's suit. No one told the public this would be an annual requirement , and at a cost of $20,000 or more each and every year! The same thing happened in USC; however, a resident there told me they have both the USDA rifles and the bowhunting white tail deer slayers in play there.Maybe thats next for us? Are rabbits and chipmunks next-they do a lot of damage also? Blackbirds and falcons are troublesome as well.We could pass ordinances prohibiting anything besides humans that breath air and pass gas -- that would take care of things in LeboLand !
Bill, I agree that other animals cause similar damage. However, I can stop in to Rolliers and take steps to personally manage my yard's rabbit, squirrel and chipmunk population. Unfortunately, I can't do the same with the deer.
Also, the food chain naturally manages the population of those smaller animals to a certain extent. I don't think there are too many lions, tigers and gators in Mt. Lebanon helping to maintain the deer population.
I would invite you to my house tomorrow for the daily deer dropping collection. I'm sure this might change your opinion on the need for culling. I could spend hours picking up the stuff, and my kids must navigate the yard like a minefield. Frankly, I'm sick of it. I didn't buy a house adjacent to the state gamelands or even out in Peters Township. I live an increasingly urban community 8 miles from a large metropolitan area. So please grab a shovel and pitch in if your vote is to keep the deer around.
Lastly, I have no special expertise in this regard, but one of the deer that has taken up residence in our yard appears to be seriously injured and under nourished. He hobbles around on 3 legs and is so thin that you can count every rib. No animal should be living like this, and no animal rights supporter should want to see it happening.
Taking the opposite tack, why not reintroduce natural predators into the environment? We could import some mountain lions to make quick work of those deer. Then maybe some wolf packs to keep the lions in check. How about some grizzly bears?
I did not believe that Lebo's deer population was only 90 last year -- maybe the USDA did not count the illegal deer coming in from Bethel and other points south.
While I like deer personally, they are a nuisance. My daughter was heartbroken that the rose bush she selected and helped plant was eaten to the nubs by the next morning. The deer have destroyed more of our landscaping this year than in past years. This is the first year in many that they have taken to grazing the bushes in the front yard. We have a doe and two fawns that camp just beyond our back gate (woods that lead down a hill to a major road). They no longer run away from us when we are in our back yard or in the driveway. They just look our way and go back to sleep.
The thing about yearly culls is that they create space for neighboring deer to inhabit the freed space. So like a previous poster said, unless our neighbors are proactive about their deer population, Mt. Lebo is always going to have 90+ deer, no matter how many are killed and removed yearly by the municipality.
I have to dispute a point the earlier Sunset Hills resident made about the area. Even though we live in an area that has 70-year old houses, the area around Sunset Hills has seen a decent amount of new development here deer may have lived: the end of Country Club by the Lutheran Church; the intersection of Castle Shannon and Mount Lebanon Blvd; the huge houses by the cemetery. All of these wooded areas are close enough that the deer that are now in the neighborhood could have come from there. We don't need Bethel's deer for that. The problem is only going to get worse as Mt. Lebo continues its inexorable growth.
Really? REALLY? I must be missing something here. In a day and age when we can ACTUALLY travel to the moon and create artificial hearts that prolong life, our only recourse to managing a deer population is KILLING them? PLEASE! Where are the voices of reason? Is there not a better way? Are we really only worried about our gardens and yards? Vegetation is meant to be nourishment. Let's teach our children about the wonderful gift we give to the entire planet when we plant. My Lord, I would rather be left with nothing but clover-filled grass and a few ragged shrubs than a beautiful yard brought on by my permission to take the life of a living creature simply in the name of landscape architecture.
Has science failed us here? Is there nothing that can be sprayed upon this precious vegetation to prevent the deer from nibbling. Is there anything else that can be done to make Lebo less conducive to deer life? Have we really researched this fully? Do we KNOW that the deer that are here at any given time actually STAY here, and are they ALL giving birth here? If so, why not birth control? If not, a hunt is temporary. More deer will cross our borders and we will be back where we started.
I've heard people say it's the droppings and the potential for disease passed to humans. Once again, is there nothing science can do to help us coexist? Can we feed the deer or spray the areas with something meant to neutralize the risk to humans?
And finally, it blows my mind to hear the argument that we need to kill something because it is "starving." PEOPLE are starving all over the world. Do you propose the same for them? Life is hard. Natural selection is tough. But it works when we humans don't screw it up. I wouldn't want the blood of ANY living thing on my hands. All creatures great and small ... We have to be much smarter than we act. There has to be a better solution. Killing is never the answer we seek.
I'm not sure that the issue is culling the deer, as to how it is being done. As Mr. Matthews stated, $20,000 a year is pricey. What was the price for the birth control? If it was higher, it would still be more effective, because you would not need to use it more than every other year, or every three years to keep the herd at a manageable number.
We saw an increase in sightings once the developments at the end of Briarwood and Country Club were cleared of trees and brush.
This is a difficult issue; what happened out in North Park with the geese was also disturbing, especially when there are effective means of birth control available.
We spay and neuter our dogs/cats. Why are the 'wild things' not afforded that choice?
Wow, I guess Shelley and I won't be getting together at Morton's to debate this issues over juicy T-bone.
Birth control for the deer? Puleeze! Perhaps Shelly or anonymous would like to take turns putting little deer condoms on, or sprinkling birth control pills over her bushes. Until the deer will politely stand still long enough to be spayed, I think a bullet or an arrow is the best method of birth control.
Anon 9:58 - I'm not sure that the Bill you're quoting is Bill Matthews, but only because he usually posts with his full name.
Shelley - I'd like to point out that what's being advocated isn't genocide, or brutal anti-deer atrocity. In a rural or unpopulated area these deer would be subject to population control through hunting. Here, because of the population density, something else needs to be done. Because of the risk of disease, because of the threat of serious accidents, and because of the increasing contact with humans through development and deforestation, something needs to be done.
I would like to again cite this article, which points out that deer are becoming far overpopulated and are forcing forest birds and other wildlife out of their ecological niches.
I'd also like to again cite these news stories regarding a deer stomping a dog to death in a Mt. Lebanon backyard.
While you may not like the notion of killing these animals, it is a better death than to die suffering from starvation, to die from disease, or to die brutally in a bloody car accident.
At $20,000/yr, this program is costing taxpayers on the order of $2-$4/yr. A birth control program would be costlier.
And pardon me for being a bit snide, but I'm a bit offput by the "no blood on my hands" histrionics. Like it or not, you're subjecting millions of the smallest of God's creatures to death everyday - everytime you pick up that Listerine.
Overherd in Upper St. Clair.
Male Deer: What do you mean your pregnant!!?? I thought you said you took care of it.
Female Deer: Don't yell at me, I thought everything was OK. I was at the park the night they were giving everyone the shots. What am I going to tell my mother? I can't stop crying.
Male Deer: My life is ruined because of you. I'm going out with the other bucks. You don't even know if it mine.
Female Deer: Of course, it's yours. I just want to be hit by an SUV. Don't leave me, it was a mistake. I love you.
Male Deer: I'm moving to Mt. Lebanon. Good riddance.
Shelley:
I admire your passion and your concern, but unfortunately life and the World don't turn out like on TV.
Of course, you are welcome to do as Thoreau did and move to the Wilderness to live more freely, completely, etc. There you will find more animals and fewer people that are complaining about the damage they cause. Just watch out for the mountain lion or grizzly bear that may not care to have you around.
As someone pointed out earlier, if these deer lived in the Wilderness they would still be hunted. That ship has sailed - we have decided long ago to manage the deer population in this Commonwealth and elsewhere by allowing people to get a license and shoot them. Problem is, that doesn't go over too well on Beverly Road or in the Galleria parking lot.
Also, I actually thought my suggestion of putting the injured, hungry deer out of his misery was a more noble gesture than allowing him to hoble around and die a slow death. I'm sure that's what trained vets would do and recommend.
Look, I'm all for animals and I have no support for killing them for killing's sake. But that is not what is happening here. In this instance, we have undertaken controlled hunts in order to advance public safety and protect our residents' property. Certainly, two noble ambitions for local government.
Without being overly dramatic, I would also suggest that you don't want to know or see what happens when a deer meets the windshield of a moving car. It has happened to my grandparents. It was awful, and I know we are smart enough (in between space missions) to not let that happen to anyone else.
I am not here to debate moral beliefs. I believe what I believe, and I have been on the end of many a joke as my friends find me lecturing their children in my home and yard about how we don't kill bugs, mice, etc. I realize my beliefs are a bit extreme, even for my husband who is forever lamenting the "catch and release" policy I hold staunchly to for everything from flies to wasps to bats. But, what I am hearing here (the media, our community, other communities, etc.) is that we are at the end. We have no better ideas, no better ways to solve this dilemma but to KILL. And no matter how you do it, whether it's mass genocide or a select lucky few, it's still KILLING simply because we don't like it, we don't want it, we are afraid to live with it, etc., etc., etc. It sounds more like the hunt is preferred because the hunt is more convenient, and I just think that's sad. We are talking about killing something because we are inconvenienced by it. Regardless of the convenience factor and to some extent regardless of the cost, we should first be looking at ways to deter and decrease the deer population without killing.
That's it in a nutshell for me.
Is using antibacterial handsoap unjustifiable mass murder, or is it a convenient way to control a nuisance and a public health hazard? Would you want your surgeon to skip the Purell step before operating?
Where do you draw the line on killing?
Mr. Wilson, I think that it is appropriate to ask where do you draw the line on killing?
One celled organisms? - It seems as though you will readily kill them for protection against infection.
Killing for food? Nonhuman always - Human only in times of crisis?
Self defense? Defense of porperty by deer? Defense of porperty by human? The pedophile neighbor in a preemptive strike?
Knights that say "Nee"?
Stray dogs? Dogs that poop in your yard? Deer that poop in your yard?
Mosquitos?
I don't think you are being fair to Shelley. There is the legal line for killing and the personal (ethical) line for killing. Shelley errs on living together with other species to her own inconvenience. You?
If Deer Me can invoke Monty Python (though I always understood the reference to be "knights that say 'ni'), then I can point out that Mike Nichols and Elaine May covered this ground thoroughly in a bit called "Out of Africa," in which Nichols plays Albert Schweitzer, famously obsessed with the sanctity of life, and May plays the world's most irritating American tourist, who tests Schweitzer to the breaking point. Find it on the recording titled "Nichols & May Examine Doctors."
Post a Comment
<< Home