Straying From Civility In The Deer Management Debate

To the Editor:

David Shugarts’ letter of January 23 [“Misleading Statistics Came From The CDC,” Letter Hive] inserts a certain tone into the deer culling/Lyme disease discussion by raising innuendos about a list of people. One of them is my wife, Janice Paik. Janice is a member of The Animal Center, where she helps “tame” feral kittens and get them adopted. She indeed wrote a letter opposing a deer cull, writing on her own initiative (as do I now, for the record). She impugned no motives and named no names. Most letters opposing the proposed cull were from people unattached to The Animal Center. Painting these letters, and Janice’s, as a single coordinated campaign devalues the writers’ opinions concerning their town. This is inappropriate in a place that values its community spirit.

Mr Shugarts’ letter of January 9 [“Tick-Borne Disease and Deer,” Letter Hive] was more appropriate in tone. I would make two points. First, the letter of the 9th cited statistics about Lyme disease, but then voiced other complaints about the deer population. It did not discuss the connection between deer and Lyme Disease, which does bear investigation. In their November meeting, the Board of Selectmen — all three selectmen, adamantly — insisted that discussion of a deer cull was premature. They repeatedly stated that the panel to be formed in this matter is committed to understanding the Lyme disease problem as its first order of business. Potential solutions would be considered in light of those findings. Mr. Shugarts’ letter of the 9th suggests his predisposition to a deer cull, for reasons beyond Lyme disease.

Second, Mr Shugarts’ letter of the 9th cited CDC statistics on Lyme disease, as he says. Mark Alexander’s letter of the January 16 [“Lyme Disease Battle Should Not Rely On Misleading Claims”] clarified that the rise in Lyme disease in those statistics coincided with a CDC change of methodology. Anyone who does any work involving statistics will understand those implications. Mr Shugarts casts aspersions on Mr Alexander’s motives but does not address the question of methodologies. He sheds no new light on the issue and injects a personal tone into the discussion.

All this, again, concerns an issue that has yet to be studied under our town’s process, as laid out by the selectmen. Mr Shugarts may want to propose a deer cull on its own merits, aside from any findings on Lyme disease. He certainly has that right. Newtown should be able to handle that discussion civilly: my wife and I do not agree 100 percent on the issue, but it doesn’t disrupt our home. Her letter reflected the civil tone I think Newtowners expect. So I am offended to see her name used in someone’s politicized slur. There is no place for that in our community’s civic discourse.

Sincerely,

George F. Paik

15 Overlook Drive, Newtown                                     January 26, 2009