|
WILTON DEER COMMITTEE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Update |
From A Member: Last Monday (5/5) the Board of Selectmen of Wilton took up the issue of what to do about the recommendations of the Wilton Deer Committee. Let me give you a quick summary.
First let me say that the Deer Committee was set up by the selectmen over two years ago under the Conservation Commission of Wilton. The Deer Comm. issued their final report with recommendations back in January (Below). The report was accepted by the conservation commission and passed to the Selectmen.
This past Monday the selectmen decided by a 4 to 1 vote to ask the Conservation Commission to set up an enabling committee to look at the recommendations and come back to the selectmen with a plan for implementation by July 2003. The Conservation Commission is now in the process of picking a new committee to do that work.
The only dissenting vote was cast by Maria Napier who was concerned about the issue of Safety and her concern that the Town would be recommending Hunting to the people of Wilton.
Bruce Beebe the Chairman of the Conservation Commission is now picking the committee.
Wilton
Deer Committee
Final
Report
January
3, 2003
FINAL
REPORT
January 3, 2003
INTRODUCTION
The
Wilton Deer Committee was established in the spring of 2001in response to the
petition of Wilton citizens and an interest of the Wilton Conservation
Commission.
The
task assigned was to investigate the issues associated with the perceived
excessive density of deer. The
Committee accomplished this task by investigating the perceived overabundance
of deer in this area and comparing the density to ecologically sustainable
numbers. Further, the Committee
devoted a substantial amount of time to hearing from experts and others verse
in deer issues and conducting independent research.
A complete collection of gathered information, presenter handouts, and
minutes of the Deer Committee can be found in the office of the Conservation
Commission.
The
committee explored various aspects of the issue including;
1.
Characteristics of the White-tailed deer and population influences
2.
Ecological impacts of varying deer densities
3.
Lyme disease and its relationship to deer
4.
Auto vs. deer accidents
5.
Property damage from deer
6.
Deer herd reduction methods
7.
Efforts of other communities
8.
Public knowledge and attitudes
In
an effort to educate the public on various aspects of the problem, a public
forum was held in May 2002. As
gauged by the questions presented at the forum, the Committee also gained some
insight to the knowledge and concerns of the public.
A fuller understanding of public attitudes, perceptions and experiences
were provided through a town-wide survey conducted by an independent
consultant, Taylor Nelson Sofres Interactive.
Based
on these facts and other information contained in more detail in the body of
this report the committee recommends the following actions be taken.
Based
on gathered information, the committee has determined that “NO ACTION”
is not a viable alternative.
Implementation
The
Board of Selectman should assign the task of implementing the recommendations
of this committee to a department of the Town of Wilton. This assigned
department should be provided a budget and the power to implement the
recommendations.
1.
Encourage individual residents to allow hunting on their property.
2.
Work with the Second Taxing Water District of Norwalk to allow hunting
on their land.
3.
Conduct controlled hunts on town land and work with land preservation
groups to do the same.
4.
Promote and coordinate population reduction with area towns.
5.
Compile an informational package for the residence of Wilton informing
them of the hunting regulations and aiding them in finding responsible
hunters.
6.
In order to have the maximum impact on the deer population, hunters
should be urged to take as many does as possible.
Property
Management
January 3, 2003
In recognition of the issues facing
the town of Wilton relative to the perceived excessive density of deer that
exists within our community, the Wilton Conservation Department committed
itself to addressing the issues in the context of the commission’s charge.
This commitment from the commission came in December of 2000.
Members of the commission along with staff began to craft what they
envisioned as a twelve-month process to investigate and educate the public on
deer related topics. Early
discussions referenced the work of the Town of New Canaan and the desire to
consult with stakeholders in our community.
The interest the Conservation
Commission took in addressing the deer population issues was prompted by
increased interest in the community. This activity led the commission to believe that the
community was ready to deal with this emotional and complex topic. Over the
preceding months, a group called Good Neighbors had been diligently gathering
signatures for a petition supporting safer hunting practices by landowners and
hunters alike. The work of the Good Neighbors, as evidenced by the 651 signed
petitions, was brought to the Board of Selectmen in February 2001 along with
recommended hunting regulations for Wilton.
Simultaneously, an unnamed group of
interested citizens headed by Alice Levin and Lou Reens began collecting
signatures to promote the formation of a deer committee.
Through the fall of 2000 the effort of these citizens yielded 450
signatures. It was the view of
this group that although deer overpopulation was a matter that fit into the
charge of the Conservation Commission, the commission as an entity did not
have adequate time or breadth of knowledge to deal with the matter fully.
Therefore, it was this group’s recommendation that an outside
committee be established to dedicate itself to the many issues resulting from
the deer overpopulation. Their petition was submitted to the Board of
Selectmen in March of 2001.
With the two sets of petitions in
hand, the Board of Selectmen agreed that a separate deer committee was
warranted and requested the Conservation Commission establish such a committee
to work with its oversight. The
Conservation Commission embraced the request and worked off of, and expanded
on, the suggested membership of the “deer committee petition” to create a
committee comprised of varied stakeholders. Stakeholders from: area land trust organizations, the Good
Neighbors, Lyme disease groups, Norwalk’s Water Departments, Woodcock Nature
Center, United Bow Hunters, an animal rights organization, The Wilton Garden
Club, the Audubon Society and staff from the Police, Health and Environmental
Affairs Departments were invited to participate with a Selectman and
Conservation Commissioner. Additionally,
an open invitation was printed in the newspaper asking for interested persons
to submit letters of interest. In the end, seventeen members including town staff formed the
Deer Committee. The first meeting
of the Committee was May 21, 2001.
The monthly meetings were open to
the public, with agendas being posted at the Town Clerk’s office and minutes
filed in the office of the Conservation Commission.
The early meetings sought to define
and list issues associated with deer overpopulation and set a plan to gather
supporting information. First and
foremost, information was sought to assess the density of Wilton’s
white-tailed deer population and how that estimate compared with accepted
ecologically balanced numbers. Much
of the eighteen-month process focused on gathering information through
independent research and more notably, through information gained from invited
speakers with relevant background.
In addition to gathering
information, the committee introduced some of their findings to the community.
Specifically, the committee members authored three articles that were
published in the local newspapers that addressed reducing the potential
residential landscape damage from browsing, hunting regulations, and the
ecological damage our natural landscape has incurred.
The committee also sponsored a public forum on May 13, 2002.
The forum, which was attended by 100+ people, consisted of
presentations from experts on various deer related topics, followed by a
question and answer period.
The issues presented at the forum
represented information that the committee has thus far gathered and
considered factual and applicable to Wilton.
In the next section below is a compilation of facts not only presented
at the forum, but also those the committee gathered through speaker
presentations (as described in section D), from the results of the
town-sponsored survey (described in section E), and those gathered from
literature.
¨
The white-tailed deer population in Wilton is 40 – 60 per
square mile.
¨
The ecologically appropriate density of deer is 10 – 20 per
square mile.
¨
A healthy doe usually produces two fawns per year.
¨
Deer can live up to 18 years.
¨
An unmanaged deer population has the potential to double every 2
–3 years.
¨
In 1900, there were 12 white-tailed deer in Connecticut, in 2000
there were 76,000.
¨
Each deer eats 5-10 pounds of forage each day.
¨
The high density of white-tailed deer has resulted in:
¨
a severe negative impact on the forest environment;
¨
an alarming increase in Lyme disease;
¨
a significant number of deer-vehicle accidents; and
¨
a destruction of residential landscapes.
¨
The impact to the forest is undermining the ability of the
forest to regenerate with native plant species and its ability to support
desired wildlife species.
¨
5-7 wildflower species and 5-7 bird species are believed to no
longer exist in area woodlands due to the impact of deer browsing on the
understory.
¨
Regeneration of oak trees is at serious risk due to excessive
deer browsing of seedlings and acorns.
¨
High rates of Lyme disease are correlated with high deer
populations.
¨
54% of respondents of the town-sponsored survey reported at
least one case of Lyme disease in their household within the last five years.
¨
30% of those town-sponsored survey respondents (reporting an
incidence of Lyme disease in the household) indicated that the symptoms lasted
more than 6 months.
¨
Lyme disease is known to impact one or more of the following;
the heart, liver, muscles, and nervous system
¨
CT Department of Environmental Protection estimates 6,000 –
8,000 deer are killed annually on CT roadways.
¨
66 deer strikes were reported to the Wilton Police Department
from April 1, 2002 to December 13, 2002.
Many more accidents go unreported.
¨
75% of the town-sponsored survey respondents have sustained
residential landscape damage due to deer browsing within the last five years.
¨
Fencing property is the most effective means to reduce or
eliminate deer damage to the enclosed area.
¨
78% of town-sponsored survey respondents agree that deer herd
reduction is warranted (method unspecified).
¨
Coyotes rarely prey on healthy deer.
¨
There is no FDA approved contraception to manage free-range deer
herds.
¨
50% of deer trapped for relocation die.
¨
Hunting is the principal population reduction technique used by
state wildlife agencies throughout the U.S.
¨
From 1995-2001, 22,000 pounds of venison was donated to food
charities in Connecticut.
¨
There is no minimum acreage required for hunting with a shotgun
or bow and arrow.
¨
Sharpshooting is not legal in Connecticut.
It has been effective on a small scale in other states.
¨
The community needs to be educated on a variety of deer related
issues.
C.
Deer Population Influences of the 20th Century
The population density of the white
tailed deer has seen a tremendous surge in suburban communities throughout
Connecticut and surrounding states. Consistent
with the towns of southwest Connecticut, Wilton maintains an average density
of 40 to 60+ deer per square mile, according to estimates from the
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection and aerial surveys
conducted in Greenwich and New Canaan. This exceeds the ecologically balanced
density of 10 to 20 per square mile by at least threefold.
At the turn of the century our
landscape looked quite different, being strongly dominated by agricultural
fields rather than the woodlands we see today. Vast field could not provide
the cover and diverse food resources needed to support thriving populations.
This lack of habitat combined with predation and hunting brought the
white-tailed deer population quite low.
The tide began to turn as fields
were abandoned and hunting practices changed. Abandoned fields reverted to woodlands, where eventually
subdivision homesites were developed. The
clearing that accompanied new houses produced optimal habitat for deer.
The woodlands still remained as a backdrop to open lawns and the
“edge” that is produced at this interface provided excellent habitat for
deer. This new habitat coupled
with ornamental plantings offered extensive food resources to support a
growing herd.
In combination with the changing
landscape, our methodology and attitude towards hunting also changed.
Hunting for sustenance moved towards hunting for sport.
This is not to say that hunters and their families did and do not
consume the meat, simply that they no longer had
to hunt since food was available for purchase.
The target of the sportsman’s hunt was often a buck, resulting in a
disproportionate taking of males. Since
one male can impregnate multiple females, the loss of some bucks from the herd
did not impede the reproduction rate.
Hunting regulations early on were
designed to foster herd growth and have not changed to counter this effect
until recently. Beginning in 1995
in certain high-density areas of the state, limited “replacement antlerless
tags” were issued to promote taking of the females in hopes of impacting
reproduction within the herd. Fairfield
County, known as “Zone 11” by the CT DEP, Bureau of Natural Resources,
Wildlife Division is considered a high-density zone.
This change in their hunting philosophy has led to strong proactive use
of hunting to manage deer overpopulation in our area. Effectively, a hunter can take as many anterless deer as
desired within the season. Although
the DEP sets a limit on how many “tags” they will offer, the number is
high enough that it is effectively limitless.
Unfortunately, this measure will
likely have only limited results in reducing the deer population in Wilton
under current social attitudes. It
is theorized that in suburbs like Wilton, hunting is less prevalent due to the
attitudes of its residents. Some
residents have not been exposed to hunting and see it as dangerous.
Others feel that we are too tightly developed to facilitate safe
hunting.
Lastly, the growth of suburbia has
diminished the presence and thus the impact of predators.
Key predators such as mountain lions and wolves no longer play a role
in containing deer population to ecologically sound numbers.
Mountain lions and wolves are long gone from Connecticut as are the
large, unfragmented tracts of habitat needed to support them. Alternately,
coyotes, which are not native to southwest Connecticut, are now part of our
wildlife community. However,
coyotes will generally only hunt fawns or ailing adults, thus their impact on
reducing the deer density is minimal.
The making of today’s
extraordinary deer population density is a function of an increase of habitat
coupled with a lower rate of mortality due to the absence of predation, either
from humans or other animals.
A focal point of the Deer Committee
was to obtain information regarding the many issues and management techniques
associated with white-tailed deer. In
order to gain this information, a broad diversity of speakers presented their
position and knowledge to the Committee.
Below is a summary of those speakers and their presentations.
A more complete accounting of the presentations can be obtained from
the meeting minutes on file in the office of the Conservation Commission.
Katherine
Morrissey, representing the Wilton Task Force on Lyme Disease, spoke about
issues dealing with the work of the Task Force, the prevalence of the illness,
its consequences and its impact on Wilton and surrounding areas. According to
Ms. Morrissey a recent study done by the Wilton Task Force indicates that Lyme
affects 29% of the households in Wilton while the number in Fairfield County
is 33%. Early diagnosis and treatment as well as defensive measures are
critical. Extensive printed material supporting the information was
distributed to the Committee.
Howard
Kilpatrick, Chief Biologist for the Connecticut Department of Environmental
Protection was invited to speak to the Committee regarding the State’s
knowledge and recommendation regarding the current deer population.
Mr. Kilpatrick began with a brief history of land and wildlife
management practices that influenced the deer herd size.
He stated that deer population in Connecticut was a total of 12 in
1896, and in 2000 the population was at least 76,000.
Studies show that a healthy carrying capacity for deer density is 15
deer per square mile, while the State estimates there are 40-60 deer per
square mile in Fairfield County. The
DEP has divided the state into zones to describe the density and growth
trends. Wilton is in DEP’s Zone
11, which has the highest density of deer per square mile.
Mr. Kilpatrick estimated that Fairfield County has double the deer
population compared to the rest of the state.
A study was conducted in Michigan where 10 deer were isolated in a
fenced in area with minimum risk from predators and starvation.
Five years later the 10 deer had grown to 212 deer, showing the
potential for rapid growth of the deer herd.
Mr. Kilpatrick then described a demonstration site that used an
exclosure (fencing that excludes only deer) to examine the effects of browsing
on vegetation. Slides of the
demonstration showed no vegetation outside exclosure and inside the exclosure
the area was filled with lush vegetation.
In addition the tick count in the area where deer were excluded, was
reduced by 92%.
Mr.
Kilpatrick reviewed the three methods of reducing the deer population in a
given area: trapping and relocating, contraception, and hunting.
Trapping and relocating is extremely stressful on deer and results in a
large percentage of animals dying. Contraception
is not yet a viable option. There
is currently no effective contraception approved by the FDA.
Issues that need to be overcome are producing a contraception that is
safe for consumption by humans and other wildlife, affordability, and efficacy
in administering the drug, perhaps repeatedly.
Mr. Kilpatrick opined that an effective method of contraception is
about 20 years away. Given the problems with the other alternatives, hunting
is then the only reasonable method for density reduction. Mr. Kilpatrick recounted the conditions for a controlled hunt
in Mumford Cove, CT and the high level of community support.
He encouraged the committee to explore hunting on private and public
lands and offered the DEP’s support.
Denise Savageau,
Conservation Director of the Town of Greenwich conveyed her experience with an
ongoing study of residents’ attitudes regarding deer in Greenwich.
She stated the town, in cooperation with Uconn, is in the middle of a
study that is expected to take two years.
The study has a $ 60,000 budget, raised by the Town as well as private
donations. In addition to public
attitudes, the study will also establish baseline data and follow deer
population trends.
Ms.
Savageau stated her expectation that the town will work to educate its
residents on deer related issues and non-hunting management techniques.
She spoke about preventative measures utilized against ticks on
property such as spraying, keeping recreation areas free of leaf litter or
other substrate attractive to ticks. She
stated a contributing factor to the high numbers of deer on the road is the
increased amount of private property being fenced off.
When asked about the ramifications of not hunting the herd and
expansion of the population, she responded that starvation will likely result.
Consequently, the potential for a mass die out
will bring
other problems such as disease and removal of bodies.
Ms. Savageau stressed the major damage the natural environment was
experiencing was due to over browsing. Most
of Greenwich’s forest has lost their lower level of shrubs and young growth.
The deer browse prevents regeneration of the forest canopy.
Hunting is the only option at present, since relocation is impossible
as there is no practical place to relocate the deer.
Most of the large land holdings in Greenwich are in private hands,
limiting management options to owner supported methods.
Ms. Savageau believes the towns in the area must get their respective
legislators involved in resolving the problem.
Laura
Simon, Urban Wildlife Director, Fund for Animals presented information that
stressed the need for landowners to use repellents, special plantings and
fencing to deal with the problem. She
recommended safety measures to prevent deer/vehicular collisions. She asserted that the removal of white tailed deer does not
stop the spread of the tick, as tests have shown that the ticks would switch
to another host or gather in higher density on the remaining deer.
Her position was that hunting deer is not an effective method for
population reduction. After
hunting, which eliminates some deer, the remaining deer have more food, they
are prone to multiple births, and begin breeding at an earlier age.
Moreover, deer would enter from other areas where there is no hunting.
Patrick Comins, Director of
the Connecticut Audubon Society, detailed the evolution of deer herd growth in
the northeast, attributing the growth to the elimination of natural predators
and competitors. Natural
predators such as mountain lions and more robust packs of wolves have
disappeared, removing one element of population control.
With respect to competition, Mr. Comins cited the elimination of the
Passenger pigeons, which once competed with the deer for nuts (a main source
of food for both species). He estimated that the population in Greenwich could
be as high as 90 per square mile, while a generally acceptable population
density is about 20 per square mile.
Mr. Comins
spoke of the impacts to the landscape. He
stated a deer consumes 2000 pounds of vegetation a year, that adds up to 152
million pounds of vegetation consumed in Connecticut.
Almost all of this is eaten from the understory of the forests,
resulting in sparse growth of herbaceous growth, shrubs and saplings.
Instead, ferns and invasive species such as winged euonymous and
Japanese barberry dominate the forest floor and understory.
Wildflower species are experiencing a severe decline.
This in turn undermines rare lepidoptera populations (butterflies and
moths) that are dependent on these wildflowers.
Loss of understory is also
disastrous to many species of birds. Population of certain species of birds
such as black and white warbler, ovenbird and eastern towhee have dropped by
1.1 to 1.9 % annually in the US and as much as 6% in CT.
Many other species of birds have been similarly affected by the
destruction of the understory. To breed successfully, many bird species
require a healthy multi-layered forest, both for nesting and for food source.
Mr. Comins cited an example from Chimon Island to illustrate his point. On Chimon Island a rookery of herons, egrets and other birds
existed. Following the
introduction of deer, the understory was eliminated.
Consequently, the nests were exposed to predation and now all the birds
are gone.
6.
Judith Neville, Chairman of
the New Canaan Deer Committee & New
Canaan Selectwoman
Judith
Neville, Chairman New Canaan Deer Committee spoke of her experiences.
The New Canaan Deer Committee was the first such entity in Connecticut.
It was created as a citizens’ group in 1999, and later became a town
sponsored committee. The
Committee gathered information independently as well as hearing from speakers
over an 18 month period of time. As
a product of its gathered knowledge, the Committee has conducted extensive
educational work, with brochures and public meetings on all aspects of the
deer problem, with an emphasis on Lyme Disease.
In addition to the emphasis on Lyme Disease, Ms. Neville spoke of the
enormous ecological devastation caused by overbrowsing.
Ms. Neville
recounted a few of the Committee’s highlights.
In the winter of 2000, a survey of 435 New Canaan households was
conducted. This telephone survey
conducted by UCONN showed 60% of respondents supported bow hunting and 49%
supported firearm hunting. In
February, 200l, there was an aerial assessment of deer population, which
showed a density of at least 40 deer per square mile in more rural sections to
near zero per square mile in the urban center.
This and other work culminated in final recommendations being reported
to the New Canaan Board of Selectmen in May 2001.
The final recommendations included:
(1) The town should assist homeowners in arranging controlled hunts on
properties of 6 or more acres; (2) Homeowners with less than 6 acres should be
encouraged to share bow hunters, working with neighbors to create larger
tracts. The hunting is to be
implemented using the expertise of the United Bow Hunters and the DEP.
These recommendations were based on the Committee’s finding that
“under current conditions, deer herds will most likely double in less than
three years.” Other
recommendations such as amending P&Z regulations to allow eight foot deer
fencing, and legislative changes to better facilitate deer population
management failed.
Bill
Manetti, speaking on behalf of the Animal Rights Front, described the impacts
of hunting on the reproductive dynamics and population issues of white-tailed
deer. Often hunters remove the
older dominant male in pursuit of the trophy animal, thereby disrupting the
social structure of the herd. The
disruption occurs when the older, less virile male is killed and is no longer
present to fend off the more virile young males.
The young males are then free to impregnate more females.
If dominant females are hunted this changes the feeding and learning
processes. Mr. Manetti went on to
say that hunting makes the deer more skittish, drives them to unoccupied areas
where food is more plentiful. The combination of hunting reducing the deer density and deer
being driven to areas with more food in turn produces conditions that raise
the occurrence of multiple births. Mr. Mannetti recommends the deer population
be allowed to naturally control itself. He
estimates that in about ten years the population will be at a sustainable
level due to the lack of natural food. In
response to a committee member question, Mr. Manetti conceded natural control
includes deer starvation.
Dr. Steve Patton, Director
of Devil’s Den and an ornithologist was asked to speak to the committee
regarding the recent controlled hunt at Devil’s Den.
The deer density in the Den, according to the State DEP, is about 40
per square mile. However, Dr.
Patton reasoned that the population could be as high as 160 deer per square
mile in Devils Den. The impact of this overpopulation has caused the forest to
lose the seedling and sapling growth needed to regenerate.
There are no more oak saplings and many shrub populations are gone.
Further, biodiversity has been lost since much of the ground cover
needed for small animals and birds has been severely compromised.
The Nature Conservancy, as custodian of the land decided to take a
management role. There was a hunt
on one square mile of the Den’s 1500 acres.
Sixteen hunters were spread out over ten stations for a six-day hunt.
Thirty-seven deer were taken, with 27 of those being antlerless. This
represents approximately 25% of the deer in the Den.
Based upon in field evaluations of the killed deer, the deer were
considered to be in poor health.
Friends of
Animals had 60 to 80 protestors at the entrances and police were present to
keep order. After trespassers
disrupted the first few hours of the first day, the hunt went off without
mishap. Annual hunts are planned
until saplings in the Den reach 3 inch diameter, at which time a deer
management plan will be reevaluated. Dr.
Patton indicated the use of bait would be a more efficient way to hunt, but
state law prohibits baiting.
Dr. Kirby
Stafford Chief Scientist, CT Agricultural Station was asked to discuss the
deer tick life cycle, the causes of Lyme disease and the relationship of deer
herd size to the deer tick. Dr.
Stafford stated 100,000 cases of Lyme disease were reported in 1998 mostly
east of the Connecticut River. Currently, 33 % of the reported cases of Lyme
disease in Connecticut are in Fairfield County.
He went on to report that children under the age of 14 and adults over
40 are the two age groups most likely to contract Lyme disease.
According
to Dr. Stafford, deer play a vital role in the two-year life cycle of the deer
tick. During the first year, known as the larval stage, the deer tick feeds
predominantly off the white footed mouse and chipmunks.
It is during this time and from these animals that about 20 percent of
the ticks become infected with the Lyme disease virus. During the second year
of the life cycle the ticks feed off of larger mammal hosts, the preferred and
most plentiful host being the white tail deer.
The large mammal host blood meal is the final feeding needed before
eggs are laid and the cycle begins again.
Lyme is
usually characterized by a large rash, which develops two to thirty days after
the bite. Dr. Stafford recommended tucking one’s pants into one’s socks
and spraying insecticides on one’s property in the spring and fall as ways
to reduce the population of ticks. He also cited a deer exclosure experiment
that examined the effects of excluding deer on the resident tick density.
In eight 15-acre exclousures, the larvae count was reduced by 100% and
the adult count by 83% as the distance in from the fencing increased. Dr.
Kirby also stated that complete elimination of deer would not completely
eliminate ticks due the availability of other hosts, however the reduction in
density would be significant.
Some
presentations were made by members of the Wilton Deer Committee
Eleanor
Sasso presented a synopsis of eight published papers contending that hunting
actually increases the population of the deer herd. This conclusion was based
on the rationale that hunting would alleviate the stress associated with an
elevated deer herd density. In response to the stress reduction, does are more
likely to give birth to twins and triplets.
George
Ciaccio gave a short talk on defensive driving as relates to car-deer
accidents. A film was then shown that pointed out how a driver must keep
focused on the road ahead and pay attention to deer warning signs that
highlight places where there is a higher incidence of deer crossings.
Mr. Ciaccio also warned that sighting one deer in the road usually
means the other deer are also near by since they normally travel in groups.
Additionally, night drivers must drive slower and be more aware of deer
foraging and traveling on the road sides.
Captain
Steve Ralph spoke of the deer strike monitoring the Wilton Police Department
began in April 2002 at the request of the Deer Committee.
The monitoring tracks reported accidents and unreported deer found
along side the roads. Based on
the collected information, Wilton sustained approximately 90 to 100 deer
strikes a year. This number was
likely higher due to the number of unreported strikes where the deer is able
to leave the site of the accident. The locations of known strikes were plotted
on a town map. Several clusters
of strikes were evident. The
clusters, as well as a majority of other strikes, were on State roads.
The higher frequency of strikes on State roads was attributed to higher
volumes of traffic and higher vehicle speeds.
In order to raise public awareness, the Police Department now provides
deer strike information to the local newspapers for inclusion in the published
police logs.
Three
hundred residents in the town of Wilton participated in a survey conducted by
an independent consultant, Taylor Nelson Sofres Interactive.
The survey was conducted by randomly sampling households in town, with
each phone number having been called up to six times before moving on to
another randomly generated phone number.
The main topics addressed in the deer issues survey were; residents'
experiences and views on Lyme disease, vehicle accidents, landscape and garden
damage, ecological impacts and population reduction. The results of the survey
were as follows.
The survey asked
residents to indicate their level of concern associated with local issues that
may have an impact on the community. Lyme
disease topped the list with 56% expressing strong concern.
This exceeds other local issues such as, business development, traffic
in town center, housing development, conservation, and hunting accidents.
When asked directly about their concern with the deer population in
Wilton two-thirds (63%) felt that it was a problem that required action.
Those residents that experienced property damage from deer were
significantly more likely to believe that action was needed (74%).
Also those who had experienced Lyme disease in their household were
more likely to feel that deer were a problem (66%).
Dealing with the topic of Lyme disease in more depth revealed a disturbing result that 54% of the residents surveyed reported at least one case of Lyme disease in their household in the past five years. This compares with a national survey by the same company at the same time period that found nationwide, 3% of the population reported Lyme disease in their household in the past five years. The incidence of Lyme disease was also significantly higher among households with over 2 acres (60%), than those with less than two acres (41%). Three out of 10 who reported diagnosed Lyme cases also said that the symptoms lasted more than six months. Most residents (87%) said that they check for ticks after being in the woods. Further, most respondents indicated they modify their dress and use tick repellents, with more than half having modified their landscape or stayed out of the woods entirely.
Property
Damage
The
survey then questioned the residents on their experiences with property
damage. Three in four residents experienced property damage due to deer within
the past five years. The
incidence of damage increased with those who have lived in the town for more
than six years (80%) verses those residing here for less than six years (61%).
Damage also increases with properties over two acres (80%) verses those
with less than two acres (61%). To assuage deer browsing, seventy-five percent
reported taking some action to exclude deer, over half have used deer
resistant plants or deer repellents and one fifth have installed deer fencing.
Deer-Vehicle Accidents
The survey moved
on to ask residents to relate their experience with deer-vehicle accidents.
Residents reported that 28% have had a deer related accident in the
past five years and that 70% of these accidents have occurred in Wilton. One in ten report an associated injury and the average cost
for damage repair was $1,538. Just
under half of the residents were extremely or very concerned about deer
related accidents happening in the future.
The population with the highest number of accidents (56%) was the 6-10
year residents and they were also the most likely to have had an accident
(42%). Four out of five residents
report taking extra precautions when driving.
Environmental Degradation
Residents were
presented with a statement that related high deer density with environmental
degradation. Most (66%) either
strongly or somewhat agreed that this was a problem in Wilton.
It was interesting that people that lived in town for more than ten
years were less likely to agree. When
asked about their concern with the current or potential impact of the deer
population on flora and fauna the majority said they were either very or
somewhat concerned (66%).
Finally,
after inquiring about the views of residents on their interaction with the
deer, questions addressing population reduction were broached. When asked
about reducing the number of deer in Wilton, 78% were in favor.
Respondents who resided in Wilton for 6 to 10 years were the most
likely to support this (90%). When asked how this reduction should occur, residents were
more reticent. Birth control was
the most favored reduction method (49%), followed by controlled hunting on
town land (32%), trapping and relocating (28%), controlled hunting by sharp
shooters (27%), and bow hunting (28%). Only
10% felt that no action was needed. When
residents were asked to comment on the effectiveness of different methods
regardless of their support, controlled hunting by a sharp shooter had a
significant lead (37%).
State Hunting
Regulations
The survey concluded by asking respondents about hunting regulations. Only one third of the respondents indicated being somewhat (24%) or very (8%) familiar with state hunting regulations. Moreover, only 1 in 10 said they have allowed people to hunt on their property at any point during the last five years. When they were asked about the likelihood of their supporting hunting on their property if it was the method supported by the town of Wilton 21% were very likely to support it and another 17% were somewhat likely to do so.
F.
Recommendations
The purpose of the Deer Committee
was to investigate the current and potential population of the white-tailed
deer in Wilton and research the issues associated with our deer population.
Information submitted by committee members and the multitude of
speakers helped define the nature of the problem and factors of influence.
State, regional and local sources, representing a diversity of organizations,
all concluded that our current deer population is too high.
Secondly, and just as important as defining the problem, the town-wide
survey provided valuable insight to the knowledge base and attitudes of our
residents. From this work the
Committee exacted its charge to formulate recommendations that would benefit
the health, safety and ecological balance of Wilton while respecting the
various social attitudes of our residents.
As has been stated in previous
sections of this report, Wilton sustains a density of deer that exceeds
ecologically and socially sound levels by three to fourfold and it is
inevitable that the population will continue to rise in the absence of
proactive herd management. The CT
DEP estimates that an unmanaged herd has the potential to double every two to
three years. Also, as detailed in
the town-wide survey, 63% of the respondents felt that the current population
is a problem that warrants action. Consequently, the Committee found that a
recommendation to take no action is not an option. But what action is appropriate?
This is best answered with a variety of recommendations.
The recommendations for action have
been divided into four major categories, those being Population Control,
Public Education, Property Management, and Legislative Recommendations. In
order for these recommendations to be effective, the Board of Selectman should
assign the task of implementing the recommendations of this committee to a
department of the Town of Wilton. This assigned department should be provided a budget and the
power to implement the recommendations.
A. Population Control
As the
research of the Deer Committee moved on from speaker to speaker, what had been
suspected by many was confirmed: The white-tailed deer population is too
dense. The factors contributing
to the density are not at all likely to change; thus natural limitation or
reduction of the herd is improbable. However,
should food resources become scare, herd reduction by natural starvation is
not acceptable.
Higher deer
densities are directly correlated with a greater risk of contracting Lyme
disease, increased deer-vehicle accidents, unacceptable levels of property
damage, and the loss of plants and animal diversity of our natural landscape.
The committee also learned of various non-lethal methods to reduce or
control the deer population, but invariably each method was found to be
ineffective at this time. The survey established that the leading preference for
population management was contraception.
Unfortunately, there is no approved contraception that is effective and
safe for human consumption (since a treated doe may be taken for its venison,
any contraception has to be safe for human consumption) and consumption by
other animals in the food chain.
Due to
these negative impacts, the absence of natural controls, lack of alternate
population controls, and with 78% of the survey respondents supporting
population reduction (method unspecified), the Committee recommends hunting of
deer be employed to decrease the deer overpopulation. If must be realized that hunting is not a one-time effort and
results will take time to become evident.
1.
Encourage individual residents to allow hunting on their properties.
Given the extent of residential development in Wilton, bow hunting is
the most compatible method of culling deer.
Further, there is no minimum acreage or setback from buildings required
for bow hunting, which enable the greatest number of property owners to
participate. Larger parcels may
be better suited for a variety of hunting methods. The responsible department
should first seek out property owners with ten or more acres to educate and
encourage them to allow hunting. Property
owners with less acreage can then be contacted as a second tier of candidates.
Aside from
active solicitation of larger landowners, the committee recommends that all
property owners investigate the appropriateness of having a hunter on their
land. Owners are encouraged to
cluster their land with neighboring parcels to form a larger landscape feature
on which to hunt. If an
individual is acting alone, we recommend that neighbors be informed of the
activity so that any concerns can be addressed as is practical.
The responsible department must make this an ongoing effort and draw on
the experiences of existing programs of area towns.
2.
Work with the Second Taxing Water District of Norwalk to allow
hunting on its land. The
Second Taxing District is the single largest landowner in Wilton, owning
almost 1,200 acres. Their land is
technically closed to the public, is naturally vegetated for the most part,
and is distributed in lower and central Wilton.
For these reasons, this land holds the potential to actively manage the
deer herd under a single coordinated effort, which brings a higher probability
of meaningful impacts to the herd size. As
a member of the Deer Committee, the Second Taxing District has had the benefit
of gaining knowledge of the issues first hand.
Further, precedence has been established by the Bridgeport Hydraulic
Co. (Aquarion Co.) where managed hunting has occurred on their lands.
This model and experience could guide the Second Taxing District.
The responsible department should build on this knowledge and that
gained by serving on the Deer Committee to assist in bringing about hunting on
their land.
3.
Conduct controlled hunts on town owned land.
Like the land of the water district, the town controls large blocks of
land suitable for effective controlled hunts.
A controlled hunt would consist of authorized hunters entering closed
town open spaces for a specific and finite period of time.
The responsible department should work with the Department of
Environmental Protection and the Nature Conservancy, who have already
implemented managed hunts, to develop a plan for Wilton for the 2003-2004
hunting season.
4.
Work with Land Trusts and other land preservation groups to
facilitate controlled hunts on their lands.
By the same reasons and methodology as stated above in recommendations
2 and 3, the Wilton and Aspetuck Land Trusts, as well as other land
preservation groups should be actively encouraged to implement controlled
hunts on suitable parcels.
5.
Promote and coordinate population reduction with area towns.
Herd size and territory are factors that do not respect town
boundaries. Because there is free
movement of deer from their more populated areas to less populated areas, we
must approach population reduction from a regional perspective to the extent
reasonable. Wilton actions will
be more effective if they are carried out as part of a multi town endeavor.
6.
Compile an information package for residents wishing to pursue
hunting. According to the
survey, only 8% of the respondents asserted they were “very familiar” with
Connecticut’s hunting regulations. Further,
many residents have expressed a lack of knowledge regarding their obligation
to neighbors, the type of weapon that may be used on a given site, how one
would find a hunter, and what questions should be asked to ensure they are
allowing a responsible, skilled hunter on their property.
An information package addressing general legal questions and
recommended practices associated with hunting needs to be made available to
interested residents.
B. Public Education
The
eighteen-month process revealed a multitude of facts and strategies regarding
deer and the issues associated with overpopulation. Further, the results of the town survey indicate that the
views of our residents may not be based in fact or they simply lack knowledge
on certain topics. To this end,
educational recommendations are a necessary component of the committee’s
work.
1.
Produce one or more brochures to concisely bring forward information
on various deer related topics. The
brochure(s) should target the community as a whole, with perhaps another
publication targeting students. At
a minimum, topics such as Lyme disease prevention, deer behaviors, landscaping
recommendations (including repellents and fencing), and defensive driving
should be covered.
2.
Develop and implement mechanisms for consistent and long-term
distribution of information on deer related topics.
The responsible department needs to develop and act on a plan to
routinely get information to the public.
This distribution of information is not a short-term project, rather it
is envisioned to become institutionalized in our community publications.
Distribution can be in the form of predictably timed articles/column in
the local newspaper, inclusion of topics in the Conservation Commission
newsletter, independent publications and other community communications.
3.
Support activities and groups that focus on Lyme disease prevention.
The town survey reported that an astounding 54% of the respondents’
households experienced Lyme disease in the past five years. Given the potential for severe ramifications of contracting
the disease, strong public education is needed to inform residents of
effective preventative measures. Likewise,
a program specifically geared towards educating children is warranted.
The responsible department needs to consult with local Lyme disease
organizations and health districts in the region, specifically the
Westport-Weston Health District, to ascertain what their programs are and how
to further their message for the benefit of Wilton residents.
4.
Publicize data collected by the Wilton Police Department regarding
deer road kill. Since April
of 2002 the Wilton Police Department has implemented a record keeping
procedure to document the number and location of deer killed or struck on our
roads. Publicizing this
information will heighten awareness of the risk and will hopefully influence
driver behavior. The Conservation
Commission should coordinate the inclusion of this data in the weekly police
log of the local papers.
5.
Investigate the benefit of adding “Deer Crossing” signs at high
frequency crossing points. The
information gathered by the police department on deer strikes and kills on our
roadways needs to be plotted and examined for trends. Should specific areas show themselves as high-risk points,
the Conservation Commission should coordinate the installation of “Deer
Crossing” signs.
6.
Promote the inclusion of defensive driving as it relates to deer/car
collisions in driver’s education courses.
Since being involved in a deer/car collision is not all a matter of
luck and with the potential for severe consequences, defensive driving
techniques need to be communicated to the public.
Specifically, driver’s education programs need to include data
regarding collision frequencies and circumstances, and effective strategies to
minimize such occurrences. The responsible department needs to ascertain what
educational programs exist and work to have this information included in those
curriculums.
7.
Encourage the Department of Public Works to manage roadside
vegetation to reduce accident risks. Deer consistently use roadside shrubbery for cover and food
sources. Unfortunately, this
behavior also increases the risk for a collision since drivers are less likely
to see the deer under the cover of the shrubs.
The Department of Public Works needs to be encouraged to manage
roadside shrubbery to increase deer detection and reduce the threat to human
safety.
8.
Monitor State research programs and encourage the use of Wilton as a
test location when advantageous. The
State of Connecticut, Department of Environmental Protection is actively
addressing the overpopulation of deer, especially in their defined “Zone
11” which encompasses Wilton. The
DEP has referenced possible activities, such as aerial deer count surveys in
our area. The responsible
department needs to maintain a working relationship with the DEP to keep
abreast of developments in the research field and to position Wilton to
benefit from DEP’s work.
9.
Install one or more deer exclosures on public land for the purpose
of monitoring and raising awareness regarding the effects of browsing.
The exclosures should be at least ½ acre in size and allow other
wildlife to pass through it. The
exclosures, overtime, should become an example of the type and density of
vegetation that could again be prevalent in our wooded areas.
The impacts to our natural landscape are vast, although poorly
recognized by the general population. The demonstration exclosure would raise
awareness regarding the ecological impacts of excessive deer browsing
pressure.
10.
Conduct a new town-wide survey in five years.
The efficacy of the work of the responsible department needs to be
reevaluated in five years. The revised survey will give guidance to the responsible
department as to what efforts have been successful and what work still needs
to be done. Further, a current
understanding of the town’s knowledge and attitudes on deer related issues
is critical if activities are to remain appropriate to our community.
C. Legislative Recommendations
Throughout
the process of developing an information base of options to reduce the deer
herd size, the committee frequently had to discard alternatives due to legal
and technological constraints. To
this end, recommendations to advance means of reducing deer density through
legislative changes and advances in technology must be pursued.
1.
Provide support to advance deer contraception technology.
As expressed in the town survey, a large majority of residents (78%)
support reducing the herd size of white tailed deer, with the preferred method
of reduction (49%) being contraception. Unfortunately,
there are not valid options presently to act on this preference.
Therefore, Town of Wilton needs to support or actively promote the
development of deer birth control as a non-lethal means to reduce the herd
size. Support may include but not
be limited to writing elected officials to encourage their support, working
with CT DEP as deemed useful, and endorse financial support from various
sources for research and development.
2.
Pursue changes in the legislation that would allow sharp shooting as
a legal option for the purpose of controlling white tailed deer population
growth. Sharp shooting is a
method of hunting conducted by paid experts for the expressed purpose of
“pest” management. Presently,
hunting deer using a sharp shooter is illegal in Connecticut.
This method of herd size reduction has been used in other states such
as New Jersey to swiftly and effectively cull overpopulated areas.
For many people, sharp shooting represents a tolerable lethal manner to
cull herds because it is often done at night with few or no outside people in
the vicinity, and a swift kill is almost certain.
Further, there is greater opportunity to benefit area food banks since
the effort would be coordinated through a central organizing entity such as
the town, state, or land trust. Therefore,
it is recommended the responsible department work with legislators and
lobbyists to legalize sharp shooting hunts for the purpose of reducing deer
populations in designated management zones of the state.
3.
Pursue changes in the legislation that would allow hunting on Sunday
on private lands. Presently, deer hunting is allowed only Monday though
Saturday during the hunting season. In
area states where Sunday hunting is permitted, there have been notable
increases in the number of deer taken. If
our purpose is to facilitate an increase in hunting opportunities to maximize
the number of deer taken, then Sunday hunting is logical. Therefore, it is
recommended the responsible department work with legislators and lobbyists to
legalize Sunday hunting on private land for the purpose of reducing deer
populations in designated management zones of the state.
4.
Pursue changes in the ledgislation that would allow for an extended
hunting season. Presently,
the deer hunting season extends from September 15 through December 31
(depending on type of hunting). If
deemed warranted by the CT DEP, the legislation defining this time frame
should be altered to facilitate the taking of more antlerless deer.
5.
Initiate a Southwestern Connecticut alliance to share information
and collectively work towards legislative changes.
Many surrounding communities are investigating and implementing
programs related to deer overpopulation.
It is important to for each community to convey lessons learned and
program information to each other to minimize the work any one community has
to undertake. Additionally, a
unified voice working to make legislative change from southwestern Connecticut
to our state representatives will be more powerful than multiple single
voices.
D. Property Management
With three
out of four residents experiencing property damage due to browsing, residents
must make changes in their plant preferences and management techniques to
minimize such damage. Managing
one’s land for the purpose of discouraging or excluding deer from our
property is a necessary tactic if landscaping and gardens are to be part of
our homesite. Measures to reduce
deer activity on-site can also reduce our exposure to deer ticks.
The Committe