Deer Problem Needs

Environmental Solutions

To the Editor:

I am deeply disturbed by an article in last week’s Bee (Myths And Facts About Deer Management, The Newtown Bee, Friday, November 10, 2006), an article printed without a byline.

We should be looking at long-term environmental solutions to the impact of deer on our lives. Astonishingly, the article states: “There is no [deer] contraceptive available.” But although the FDA has not, as yet, approved deer contraception does not mean that it never will or that we should wring our hands in despair of it’s ever doing so. There are innumerable articles in the literature about ongoing contraceptive studies and field tests. Until contraception is available, the “four-poster” device, education of local citizens and plant nurseries about how to plant without making an enticing buffet for deer, and ongoing education about avoiding tick bites are viable modalities, not yet fully utilized.

Why the determination to convince the citizens of Newtown that there is nothing to be done about deer except to shoot them? As the author of the article tells us, if hunting is used for deer population control: “Following a cull of the population, birth rates would return to normal causing population recovery.” In addition to a birth rate increase, deer from surrounding areas will move in to fill the vacuum. This population rebound would simply lead to unabated hunting. If someone has an agenda of hunting and killing deer, openly acknowledging this would be more a more honest way to approach the citizens of this town rather than playing on their fears. We must bear in mind, however, that if more hunting is carried out and the deer population keeps rebounding (as the author of the article acknowledges it will), then all of the problems of a large deer population — Lyme disease, road accidents and understory deforestation — will remain.

Sincerely,

Marjorie Cramer, MD

38 Huntingtown Road, Newtown                         November 15, 2006