Town and Country considering deer survey; shoot ‘em or give birth-control shots
Town and Country officials have been grappling for some time over what to do about their deer.
Tonight (Monday), the town’s Deer Task Force — consisting of Aldermen Bill Kuehling, Fred Meyland-Smith, Lynn Wright and Jon Benigas — will meet at 7 p.m. at City Hall with professor Terry Jones of UMSL.
They’ll discuss a proposed deer-attitude survey of at least 400 Town and Country residents.
As an e-mail from an apparent dissident explains, “The proposal is for a telephone survey, though there is a strong desire amongst residents to survey all citizens to include everyone in the community in the survey, as has always been done in the past. Prior, there was wide input into compiling questions for the survey. Thus far, it will be just the four members of the Deer Task Force who will determine the questions on the survey.”
Questions are apparently being raised about the question-gathering, and the type of automated polling being proposed.
The survey also apparently would be conducted before the “Deer Population Management Forum” on July 17, which is to feature internationally known experts Dr. Jay Kirkpatrick and Dr. Anthony DeNicola on the matter of population control of deer.
Kirkpatrick has worked with the immunocontraceptive vaccine (PZP) and the protocol to administer it, collect and analyze data.
E-mailers also report “another development in the deer controversy, signs backing the killing of the deer…”
Among the signs’ missives:
“Free Venison Eliminate Pests –Let’s Bag a Buck”
No More Surveys –Hunt the Deer Now”
The only way I can really validate my manliness is to insist that the deer be shot in the face without any further surveys. Even hearing the suggestion that some sort of immunocontraceptive (a word I would never pronounce out loud for fear that my man friends would think less of me) vaccine would be administered, along with some kind of protocol to make the processes more efficient makes me want to vomit. I am a manliman. a freedom loving man. Anything short of concerned citizens killing the deer themselves without BIG GOVERNMENT stepping in would make me feel silly and girly and weak. I have an office job and a female boss. Im sorry.
The inefficacy of birth control drugs on wild deer hasn’t changed since the last time Town and Country debated the idea. Trapping and relocation was a colossal disaster. It cost taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars and most of the deer died during the process or immediately after. The only effective and ultimately humane way to manage the deer in a suburban setting is to kill a substantial percentage of breeding does and some of the bucks each year. The alternative is to hit them with cars which either splatters them across the road or subjects them to a slow and painful death off in the bushes. Managed bowhunting is the way to go.
Town and Country has the “doe” to pony up for a sharpshooter to zap as many deer as necessary. The meat could go to area food banks. The good deed of donating food to humans can offset the “grief” associated with having the animals killed.
Birth Control for deer? Bwahahahahah! Sounds like complete idiots are suggesting these options.
West County is too conservative for birth control. They should only talk to the deer about abstinence. If deer don’t know about sex then they will not have sex, right?
I just wonder how many accidents and perhaps a person killed by striking a deer with a vehicle will occur before these folks will just come to a decision?
I’ve wondered myself why they don’t have a special season to kill a certain number of does. The amount of people who have accidents and the number of deer on the side of the road tell an awful story.
Please make a decision!! Stop fooling around and being politically correct! Or perhaps, are you willing to pay the accident costs of any deer strikes in your city limits?
Sherman,
You argument is ludicrous.
A city should be responsible for car accidents involving deer? Perhaps we can also make a city responsible when a tree is struck by lightening and falls and damages your property? Afterall, why haven’t they demanded that all trees be removed from the city and protective anti-lightening device be put over the lot of the city?!!!!
Go-fish,
Managed bowhunting is not the way to go for people who are interested in being humane. If you are going to kill deer (rather than use birth control), the most humane way is to use trained sharpshooters, as amazed suggests, and to target does, as Sherman suggests. Neither of these is really what hunters want.
Do tell Adam, exactly what experience or knowledge of hunting and wildlife management do you have that leads you to such a remarkably ignorant generalization? I’m guessing none. You don’t have a clue what humane means if you think having a deer break its legs and then die slowly of shock in a stock trailer is preferable to near instantaneous death from a well placed arrow.
“A city should be responsible for car accidents involving deer? Perhaps we can also make a city responsible when a tree is struck by lightening and falls and damages your property?”
You make it sound like it’s never happened before. Municipalities in this country and Canada where bears are common take all sorts of steps, including shooting, to keep bears from hurting people or causing property damage. Elk are commonly rounded up and relocated in the western US. So are bison. When relocation for these large animals isn’t feasible, and it almost never is with whitetail deer, they’re culled. Every city in the country keep rights of way and roadways clear for safety reasons. Just a week or so ago St. Charles closed a section of highway 370 just because there were deer all over the road. Sounds like taking responsibility to me.
Forgot to mention that trained sharpshooters (which sounds suspiciously like a contrived term) operating in heavily populated residential neighborhoods isn’t exactly a recipe for safety. Bowhunting is by necessity a quiet and extremely short distance tactic. It’s also the safest and most efficient.
Suzy, Sherman’s argument is far from ludicrous. I bet with 10 phone calls, I can get 5 attorneys to consider action. There is a ton of data showing that T and C has known for years that the deer population is above capacity and incidents of deer vehicle collisions have increased steadily over time. There is some liability there if the City fails to act and people are injured and killed because of their negligence.
Your tree analogy is what is ludicrous.
I personally think the folks of TC will get what they deserve. After they kill a bunch of deer with their Lexus or Beemers, they will be begging from some sort of realistic population control which includes killing deer via bowhunt or sharpshooter.