hamptons local events, express news group

Story - News

Dec 20, 2013 5:05 PMPublication: The East Hampton Press

Deer-Culling Opponents File Suit Against East Hampton Town, Village Over Planned Cull

Dec 23, 2013 12:22 PM

Two local wildlife organizations and a group of residents have filed a lawsuit seeking to block a regional plan to kill hundreds, perhaps thousands, of whitetail deer using federal riflemen starting in February.

The lawsuit did not, however, stop the East Hampton Village Board on Friday afternoon from signing onto the so-called Deer Project, a proposal by the Long Island Farm Bureau to cull deer herds across the East End.

The petitioners in the lawsuit include 15 residents, as well as the East Hampton Group for Wildlife and the Evelyn Alexander Wildlife Rescue Center of the Hamptons. They filed the suit on December 18 against East Hampton Village and East Hampton Town, as well as the East Hampton Town Trustees, asking for a temporary restraining order against acting on the town’s deer management plan and on any organized killing of the creatures. The town was served on Thursday, December 19, and the village on the following day.

The plan calls for hiring U.S. Department of Agriculture sharpshooters and working with each community to identify hot spots for deer. The sharpshooters would use high-powered rifles, silencers and night-vision equipment to kill female deer over several weeks in February and March in East Hampton, Sagaponack Village and on the North Fork.

East Hampton Village on Friday approved spending up to $15,000 for the project; the towns are set to pay $25,000.

Proponents of the culling say it will reduce tick-borne diseases, cut down on crop damage and limit car accidents that involve deer. They have argued that the methods employed by the federal experts are the most humane way to dispatch the deer.

In addition to the East Hampton lawsuit, residents of Bridgehampton and Sagaponack presented the Southampton Town Board last Thursday, December 19, with a petition signed by 9,800 people in opposition to culling. The same petition was submitted to the Sagaponack Village Board last week as well.

Several people spoke before the East Hampton Village Board on Friday, mostly in opposition to the herd culling plans.

Bill Crain, one of the plaintiffs in the suit and a part-time East Hampton Town resident and psychology professor at City College of the City University of New York, said the cull would create a “nightmare of extraordinary proportions.” He also observed that only humans were present at the meeting, and that there were no seats or delegations for the four-legged or winged creatures of creation.

One man in attendance had “NO CULL” taped to his shirt.

Village Mayor Paul F. Rickenbach Jr. listened to the slate of comments, but reminded the public that a hearing had already been held on the matter earlier this fall.

He said that the whole board is friends with Bambi, but that the cull would be just a first step in an ongoing effort to resolve a problem, which, he said, is that there are too many deer in the village.

John Di Leonardo, the president of Long Island Orchestrating for Nature, or LION, and chairman of the League of Humane Voters-Long Island, submitted a letter for the record urging East Hampton Village to pursue more effective, nonlethal means, such as fencing, plantings, sterilization and education.

East Hampton Town Deputy Supervisor Theresa Quigley this week said she did not know about the suit and that even if she did, she could not comment on litigation, although she did note that people have the right to sue to stop actions.

You've read 1 of 7 free articles this month.

Already a subscriber? Sign in

I suspect that the herds of the anti-cull people will be thinned substantially as each one of them slams a vehicle into one of the too many deer bouncing around our highways; or, God forbid, ends up with a loved one in hospital or a morgue because of the proliferation of these NON-ENDANGERED eating machines.
By Capt. Phil (64), Southampton on Dec 20, 13 5:39 PM
Cull the deer !!! PLEASE

In built-up Hampton Bays whenever we turn our back we have 3-6 deer on our .9 acre!! It is outrageous that our property and safety (I hit one on the Sunrise the other year) and our health (a cousin got lime on our property, she thinks) are put at risk. Town government at the minimum must protect its citizens and their property. AT THE MINIMUM. And it has not so far!!!

Please!!! DO THE CULL!!!
By PeterJenkins (1), New York, New York on Dec 20, 13 5:43 PM
2 members liked this comment
Funny if we didn't keep Building Up our areas maybe there wouldn't be this so called deer problem. If we keep cutting down all our natural woodlands and taking away their natural homes what do we expect. They have to go somewhere
By MACK (50), Southampton on Dec 27, 13 8:30 AM
3 members liked this comment
Cull out imprecise thinking.

Multi-variable complicated situations require complex solutions.

Hasty and flippant remarks do not solve problems.

They are a pestilence on this landscape.
By PBR (4956), Southampton on Dec 27, 13 9:26 AM
"nightmare of extraordinary proportions."...My nightmare is running into one on the road or getting lyme disease. They are constantly in my yard and foraging. I'm ok with that except for the risk of the ticks. Its when I'm on the road and they jump out,stupidly, just in front of me that really gives me nightmares. Compounded by some jerk tailgating me as I have to slam on the brakes or the possibility of veering into a tree or electric pole. Then there is the possibility of being seriously hurt ...more
By V.Tomanoku (790), southampton on Dec 20, 13 6:38 PM
2 members liked this comment
Perhaps the anti-cull herd would prefer that we reintroduce a few predator species to cull the herd naturally. The present deer population on Long Island is out of control. The DEC should remove the limit hunters are allowed to take and pay a bounty as other states do for nuisance species.
By guest425 (1), wading river on Dec 20, 13 7:08 PM
figure out the cost for the cull per animal.
pay half this amount as bounty to the licensed hunter that kills it.
help our hard working middle class
also, lets open the season in september for non antlered deer
By llimretaw (118), watermill on Dec 20, 13 9:06 PM
Another too little too late action on deer. Should have an annual cull by any means possible. Stop the political pandering. If boards of village and town can't face the controversy have a referendum each fall. Let the voters decide. The job of the boards is to carry out the goals of the community, not a vocal minority who caused this problem to get out of control.

Use the USDA, local hunters, etc....but stop the madness. The annual cull is the only means available for people and the ...more
By voter (33), Amagansett on Dec 21, 13 6:54 AM
1 member liked this comment
All of our hunting and fishing are based on keeping the populations in check either with more or less harvesting. I guess being hit by a car or truck is more human than the blink of an eye with abullet that was never seen. This action is the result of failed policy where more harvesting of deer should have been allowed. Again govt at its best. My only concern is the use of a rifle on LI where they are prohibited due to the range at which a bullet is lethal. A .22 the smallest bullet can fly 1.5 ...more
By North Sea Citizen (568), North Sea on Dec 21, 13 7:41 AM
Unless I missed something, I'm not sure the Federally-trained marksmen would have a waiver for use of centerfire rifles which, as you note, are prohibited on Long Island outside of a range.

I think they would be using shotguns with slugs or buckshot.

Bill Crain's remark, facetious or serious, about not having a seat at the table for the " four-legged or winged creatures of creation," disqualifies him from the debate. He's a Bambi-ist.
By Frank Wheeler (1826), Northampton on Dec 21, 13 12:21 PM
Hunters For Deer LLC. has a comprehensive plan utilizing hunters, combining less stringent regulation by the NYSDEC and more hunter access to precluded properties, which would solve this problem for the long term, unlike the short term proposal by the USDA. They have had meetings with Town Supervisors and various organizations garnering support, but are deadlocked because Joe Gergela of the Long Island Farm Bureau would not return calls. It appears that the farmers and some local governments would ...more
By MichaelHunter (76), East Quogue, New York on Dec 21, 13 10:25 AM
A rat is a four legged pest and we eliminate them because they are invasive and carry disease. A deer is no different with exceptions being they are larger and cute. Looks matter.
By double standard (1506), Remsenburg on Dec 21, 13 1:03 PM
1 member liked this comment
The white-tailed deer is native to the United States and does not transmit disease. The white-footed mice are the critical hosts for black-legged ticks, which carry and spread the bacterium that causes Lyme disease.
By MichaelHunter (76), East Quogue, New York on Dec 21, 13 1:23 PM
2 members liked this comment
I stand corrected. Reproduce away handsome pests.
By double standard (1506), Remsenburg on Dec 21, 13 3:15 PM
The deer are the major carrier of the disease spreading tick, ipso facto......
By dnice (2346), Hampton Bays on Dec 21, 13 9:25 PM
While it's true that the mice are the true hosts of Lyme Disease - but mice don't cover the same kind of ground that Deer do. Additionally, deer are much larger animals and can therefore carry many more ticks and pick up ticks from other areas.

You won't be able to eliminate lyme disease or the spread of it by simply "reducing" deer numbers, but it will help.

The biggest problem is the lack of red fox and coyotes on the east end. If the red fox and coyote populations were sufficient, ...more
By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Dec 22, 13 10:26 AM
Hmmm..maybe someone is already quietly re introducing coyotes..there was a sighting in Sagaponack and a questionable sighting due to an attack on a deer in Amagansett 2 wks ago..
By Woods woman (145), East hampton on Dec 27, 13 6:26 PM
I guess the alternative would be introducing predators. Crocodiles are cool and enjoy the occasional swanky Hamptons party.
By double standard (1506), Remsenburg on Dec 21, 13 1:06 PM
A bullet is far more merciful than a wolf, cougar, mountain lion, or even a jaguar. The last one is the only big cat left which crushes the skull of it's prey, instead of the neck. Must be a fine way to meet your maker.

The deer here have no natural predators, except potentially us. Contraception is a nice "down the road" solution, but it does nothing to cull the present herd. Start hunting, and supply the food pantries with meat.
By Mr. Z (11847), North Sea on Dec 21, 13 2:40 PM
That's what they do down here in Delaware, and Pennsylvania.
By pstevens (406), Wilmington on Dec 23, 13 3:02 PM
the food pantries do not accept and cannot deal with raw, undressed deer. on a farm near us hunters shoot deer and they are buried 10 deep in pits.
By V.Uhl (1), Cutchogue on Jan 7, 14 2:54 PM
We know that 8,500 residents find this proposal unconscionable. Before embarking on such an unpopular program, the town should schedule a vote to see how many residents favor it.

If the "Nays" are in the majority, the town must limit itself to non-lethal means.
By highhatsize (4217), East Quogue on Dec 22, 13 11:30 AM
1 member liked this comment
I would be up for a vote on the subject. Majority rule.
By dnice (2346), Hampton Bays on Dec 22, 13 1:20 PM
8,500 residents of Earth. Local residents appear to be largely in favor of urgently reducing the deer population. People's minds are easily changed when a 200 pound animal slams into their car. Flanders Road is like a shooting gallery with the four-legged predators gunning for motorists daily; their biggest successes are marked by white crosses.
By VOS (1241), WHB on Dec 22, 13 2:16 PM
1 member liked this comment
"Non-lethal means?" I sense that you have little knowledge of the matter!

But a referendum would be a good idea -- that way those who vote will actually be residents of the area, and not a claque of animal rights activists scattered from around the area.
By Frank Wheeler (1826), Northampton on Dec 22, 13 3:28 PM
I am confident it would pass.
By dnice (2346), Hampton Bays on Dec 22, 13 3:33 PM
If you check that petition you'll find that a great deal of the people who signed are from outside the area. If you ask the people who actually live here I think you'll find the overwhelming majority support the program. No one really cares what some one from Germany, Canada or even Staten Island thinks about an east End issue.

And it is not just culling, the local municipalities will also be looking at other means to control the population once it is reduced to a sustainable ...more
By Preliator Lives (437), Obamavillie on Dec 23, 13 7:12 AM
1 member liked this comment
I saw the number as 9800, but I would question most of those. Where are they from? To gather that many signatures at this time of year from "locals" seems to be quite the stretch.
And should it be the future of government to vote on every item debated? That's what we elect people for and hold public hearings for.
By But I'm a blank! (1283), Hampton Bays on Dec 30, 13 4:53 PM
I've been living out here since 1998 and have noticed a large increase of deer activity on my property over the last three years. Too many near misses in the car to count. Deer are beautiful animals, but I'm all for culling if it means even a slight increase in safety. They can start in my backyard if they want a warmup.
By double standard (1506), Remsenburg on Dec 22, 13 2:13 PM
The culling of our deer by the USDA sniper teams will cost over $300,000 and have very little impact of reducing car accidents, lyme disease and narrowing of the herd. We should use the money to put in place a real program, utilizing hunters, who would use the meat to feed their families and friends, instead of wasting it. Using NYS Hunters, who buy licenses to take organic game, is the only long term solution. I hope Joe Gergela will come around every Christmas, with his Santa bag filled with ...more
By MichaelHunter (76), East Quogue, New York on Dec 22, 13 7:42 PM
1 member liked this comment
Just about every member of my family has had some tick-borne illness. This is a health-safety issue.
Cull the deer. Lets do it every year!
By SHNative (554), Southampton on Dec 22, 13 8:05 PM
to Frank Wheeler:

Wilton, CT, Rapid City, SD, Lewis Morris Park, NJ, and Stevens Point, WI all tried slaughter as a means of controlling their deer populations over time spans of from ten to seventeen years, without success. Species fertility doomed their attempts.

Contraception is the only effective deterrent. Currently, GonaCon is approved by the EPA for this purpose.

Should East Hampton choose slaughter, the effort will likely fail (as it did in the above locales), ...more
By highhatsize (4217), East Quogue on Dec 23, 13 12:17 AM
1 member liked this comment
"Slaughter" failed? Perhaps those locales should have tried a managed program of culling.

You state, without cites, that contraception "is the only effective deterrent," yet (since 27East doesn't permit off-site links) a quick search of "deer contraception facts" reveals, overwhelmingly, the lack of efficacy of deer birth control.

So on this matter, as I suggested initially, you're talking through your (high) hat.
By Frank Wheeler (1826), Northampton on Dec 23, 13 1:04 AM
to Frank Wheeler:

Always happy to lend a hand whenever your research attempts fail, Frank. Herewith an article attesting to the efficacy of contraception which your "quick search" overlooked:

"Effectiveness of Spayvac® for Reducing White-tailed Deer Fertility

Overabundant white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) populations have been reported in many urban and suburban communities across the United States. Large populations of deer can potentially increase the ...more
By highhatsize (4217), East Quogue on Dec 23, 13 5:51 AM
yeah let's pay the government poison the deer with chemicals that will melt out their nether regions, and hope not too much of it ends up in our water supply. way better than paying snipers to come out. way, WAY better than letting ready and willing locals do the job. i always trust websites who plug an (R) into their findings. Mostly im excited about spraying the earth with birth control.
By milkdilk (49), Southampton on Dec 23, 13 9:10 AM
I don't think there's an argument that utilizing birth control on deers can be effective in reducing successful deer mating. The problem is that it is not an effective solution in the real world.

The article you posted above speaks specifically of two deer populations which are located at confined (fenced or otherwise bordered) government owned properties. It's easy to count the deer and know which ones you've shot up and which one's you haven't.

How do you propose you successfully ...more
By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Dec 23, 13 9:47 AM
1 member liked this comment
Also Frank, don't take stock in anything HHS says, because he has a history of not backing things up. For example, he says deer cull programs have not worked in Rapid City, SD. Interesting,

Found an article (by googling Rapid City, SD Deer Cull) with the following direct quotes:

"When the program first started, he said the city's deer population was abundant. The management plan has helped thin the herd, he said, while helping reduce collisions with vehicles and reduce property ...more
By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Dec 23, 13 2:15 PM
1 member liked this comment
To HHS: the was no "failure" in my research attempts, only a selective one in your own attempt. (Thank you, Nature, for your supportive effort.)

Representatives of the New York State DEC have made presentations before the Boards of at least three (of which I am aware) political subdivisions on the East End over the past four years, all areas plagued with an over-abundance of deer, many of which even with their voracious efforts at defoliation, are wasting away from malnutrition.

Then ...more
Dec 23, 13 4:07 PM appended by Frank Wheeler
Omitted the part about the DEC findings" contraception, while it mollifies the Bambi-ists,is ineffective and a wasteful effort.
By Frank Wheeler (1826), Northampton on Dec 23, 13 4:07 PM
If HHS is worried about deer dying "humanely" he should be interested to learn more about culling. Deer starve to death every year on the East End as Frank points out from malnutrition.

Brookhaven National Lab has discovered numerous dead deer on their property which had full stomachs - but what they had been eating had no nutritional value and as such, they did. Does that sound "humane" or "uncruel"? To let these animals eat and eat and eat and still starve?
By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Dec 23, 13 4:22 PM
to Nature:


"Also Frank, don't take stock in anything HHS says, because he has a history of not backing things up."

Your favorite lie, reiterated in the hope that if you allege it often enough, some will believe it. The truth is that every time you make that allegation, I show your accusation to be patently false, as I shall shortly do with the present one.

"Game, ...more
By highhatsize (4217), East Quogue on Dec 24, 13 1:24 AM
Little Hat - your efforts of self defense are always impressive. I fear not the reprecussions of what I say on here, because I firmly believe it to be true. You are not one to post facts, but rather post long strings of $10 words constructed in a condensending matter in the hopes of verbally pummeling your opponents into submission.

Fact: I didn't "EDIT" anything. I didn't post the whole article and omit specific things, whta I did was highlight the quotes in the article that point to ...more
By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Dec 24, 13 9:36 AM
And in kind I suggest to you, Nature, to not waste electrons on He Who Talks Through His (high) Hat -- when he writes "we contemplate snuffing out the consciousnesses of 3000(!) harmless sentient beings," he has abandoned the rational for the emotional, and in doing so concedes the debate.

Merry Christmas to all and a happy boxing day. Off to the frozen North for holidays with the in-laws.

Out here!
By Frank Wheeler (1826), Northampton on Dec 24, 13 11:20 AM
Thanks Frank - it's just so darn fun sometimes... I too am resigning from 27east for a few days. We should all take a couple days off to reflect on the happy things in life instead of bickering with one another (I'm guilty as the rest of you).
By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Dec 24, 13 11:33 AM
to Frank Wheeler:

Only a distinct subset of humanity thinks that compassion is antithetical to reason. Their behavior often causes folks of normal moral formation to shudder. Some of them have annihilated millions.

to Nature:

One is puzzled how you could misunderstand my statement, "The objection that inoculation is inefficient is noted but it IS effective when successful". Did you forget the example of a successful inoculation program that I supplied above (i.e. The ...more
By highhatsize (4217), East Quogue on Dec 24, 13 12:08 PM
All the people noticing "large increases" in deer population in their yards and roadways, etc. are very likely the same ones who never asked or who are opposed to hunters (who pay NYS each year to hunt) to cull the heard in a natural manner and use the deer to feed families. The article also states the federal sharpshooters will only shoot female deer, are they devoid of the knowledge of knowing males shed their antlers this time of the year as well? This isn't a cull. It's a mass suicide of animals ...more
By fbb1013 (3), Eastport on Dec 24, 13 1:03 PM
2 members liked this comment
This comment has been removed because it is a duplicate, off-topic or contains inappropriate content.
By Dayo (33), Sag Harbor on Dec 26, 13 9:44 AM
The deer are starving. Plants traditionally considered deer-resistant are now being consumed because the animals are desperate. It is neither kind nor rational to wish on the deer an agonizing death by starvation rather than the quick dispatch of a bullet. Added to crop damage, traffic hazard and disease transmission, this makes four reasons why we need the cull.
By Turkey Bridge (1979), Quiogue on Dec 27, 13 11:31 AM

Where do you get your information from... the Enquirer? Shopping in the fiction section at Borders will isolate you from reality. Back up, your statements. Where are the starving deer, the ones I see look pretty healthy. If they were starving then, you suggest, we shoot them to put them out of their misery? What a humanitarian you are. What disease do they transmit...(insert your own word here)? Obviously you sir, have been infected. Nice try with the doom and gloom synopsis, ...more
By MichaelHunter (76), East Quogue, New York on Dec 27, 13 6:40 PM
to Turkey Bridge:

"The poor deer are starving" is the argument to which those advocating slaughter frequently resort for ethical cover. And yet, I have seen no spavined deer, nor is there any objective evidence that there ARE any. Anecdotal reports rely on "common sense" and errant deductions to arrive at this conclusion. Thus it is assumed that, since there are so many deer, they MUST be starving, or, as in the case of the deer carcasses at the National Labs (supra), starvation as a ...more
By highhatsize (4217), East Quogue on Dec 27, 13 12:50 PM
HHS - so you surmise that Timothy Green, PhD, Program Advisor, Department of Environmental Sciences, Brookhaven National Laboratory has NO idea what he is talking about when he says that deer at the Lab are found dead of malnutrition with full stomachs? It is your opinion, that Dr. Green (co-founder of the Long Island Natural History Conference) doesn't know what is a white-tailed Deer's "normal diet"?

You state: "it has been argued that deer act as a "buffer" between Lyme Disease and ...more
By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Dec 27, 13 1:34 PM
P.S. - you may want to check out this anectdotal information from Mike Bottini, author of the 'South Fork Outdoors' column for the Press:

"While surveying Fishers Island for otter sign last winter, I noted that this 4-square-mile section of Southold Town, Suffolk County, that lies within two miles of Rhode Island and Connecticut had lots of otter sign, lots of coyote sign, and no sign of the whitetail deer. According to local naturalists and birders, the island’s coyote population ...more
By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Dec 27, 13 1:38 PM
Anecdotal information is probably the largest source of misinformation we deal with and should never be used as a policy making tool. Bottini, according to you, is a columnist. Columnists share their opinions often disguising them as facts. In this case, the "observations" are not even his, but second hand or further removed from their source - self described naturalists and all those highly trained "birders". I'm sure Bottini and his merry band tromping through the woods mean well but it borders ...more
By VOS (1241), WHB on Dec 27, 13 9:46 PM
He is more than just a columnist - and HHS seemed to be happy to misinterpret what Bottini said to fit his own arguement.

"Mike Bottini is a veteran naturalist, outdoor educator, and environmental consultant. After completing graduate studies in wildlife ecology at the University of British Columbia, Mike worked for fourteen years at the Group for the South Fork, a non-profit environmental advocacy organization. He has taught field ecology, environmental science, and natural history courses ...more
By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Dec 27, 13 10:14 PM
Dr. Tim Green. I know him well. He is a nice guy, but he has done some awful things as far as resource management is concerned. He has had his own agenda since 2008 (perhaps he is qualified as a government sniper). Tim wrote the natural resource evaluation aspect of the EIS for the massive BNL solar project. In it, he basically indicates that the 200 acres of old growth oak that would be sacrificed for the project equate as 'space' that could be replaced with native grasses, and therefore no ...more
By facts maam (4), Manorville on Dec 27, 13 10:24 PM
It's amazing that someone with the REPORTED credentials shows such a callous disregard for the scientific method.
Dec 28, 13 1:03 AM appended by VOS
I would also note that when publishing material from another source it is appropriate to cite that source.
By VOS (1241), WHB on Dec 28, 13 1:03 AM
Introducing cougars wouldnt work as their natural habitat is also rapidly diminishing--Conscience Pt Inn is gone, Hot Dog Beach is gone, and now Neptunes
By CaptainSig (716), Dutch Harbor on Dec 27, 13 3:09 PM
1 member liked this comment
How about Cheetahs?
White-tailed deer jumps into cheetah enclosure at National Zoo, killed by carnivorous big cats
Published December 27, 2013
Associated Press
WASHINGTON – Two cheetahs at the Smithsonian's National Zoo came across unexpected prey and the result was predictable.

Zoo officials say a white-tailed deer was killed by the cheetahs after it apparently jumped into their enclosure on Friday.
By davidf (325), hampton bays on Dec 27, 13 6:06 PM
to Nature:

Mike Bottini observes that small animals on Fishers Island have been reduced by predation (in this case, by coyotes rather than foxes) and that deer ticks have been eliminated. Thanks for the cite.

As is the case of your reference (supra), the observation that deer provide a host for ticks in lieu of humans is anecdotal, specifically, an article in the Chapel Hill News, N.C. (Feb. 9, 2013) by one Karin Yates. It equals in authority your unsupported assertion that one ...more
By highhatsize (4217), East Quogue on Dec 27, 13 8:13 PM
"Mike Bottini observes that small animals on Fishers Island have been reduced by predation"

Where did you read that? He said that there are a lot of coyotes, no deer and the feral cats are gone. Doesn't say anything about mice, raccoons, squirrels, rats, voles, etc. etc. and specifically notes that ground nesting birds (which of course are susceptible to becoming tick hosts) have flourished. Another example of you making a statement that isn't backed up.

As for Dr. Green, his ...more
By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Dec 27, 13 9:13 PM
Has anyone driven on the PA turnpike lately? Do it, and then say we on Long Island have an intolerable problem with deer accidents. PA has bear, wolf and coyote, and probably mountain lions, as well as a long unrestricted hunting season. Go figure why there is a dead deer every quarter mile on the whole stretch. Thousands of them. Its mind boggling. In my long life, I only remember two instances out here where personal acquaintances hit deer. Both cases involved speeding on back woods roads. ...more
By facts maam (4), Manorville on Dec 27, 13 11:39 PM
2 members liked this comment
Nicely said. Thank you for an informed voice of reason -- one which recognizes the complexities of the problem, and the limited benefits (and downsides) of a one-time cull.

Hopefully everyone will read your entire post, facts maam.

Cull out simplistic thinking . . .

PS -- Studies regarding the Compensatory Rebound Effect make for good reading also. A subject which has not been factored in so far.

"Be careful what you wish for," as a few years down the road, ...more
By PBR (4956), Southampton on Dec 28, 13 5:55 AM
Global warming is another factor perhaps in the growing deer tick population? Are we incubating species like this, without as many hard frosts to keep their numbers down? Will they increase, even if we kill every deer on Long Island?

Food for thought . . . regarding unintended consequences.
By PBR (4956), Southampton on Dec 28, 13 5:59 AM
1 member liked this comment
What's that old phrase?

"You can lead a horse to "food for thought" but you can't make her eat?"

By PBR (4956), Southampton on Dec 30, 13 7:58 AM
Ahh, if only things were as simple as facts maam likes to make them sound:

"A deer cull is a waste of taxpayer money. This is a case where people should assess and solve their own problem. If deer get into your garden--fence it."

Fence it with what? Fences greater than 4 feet in height require a permit and are only allowed in side/rear yards. Fences over 6 feet are not allowed in the Town of Southampton and as many people know, a 6' fence will NOT keep deer out (they have been ...more
By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Dec 30, 13 9:57 AM
1 member liked this comment
And if you have only facts - please give a citation for this. Because, hey, according to HHS, deer never starve to death!

"Any culling or sport hunting that targets adult female deer results in the slow and agonizing starvation death of her fawn--collateral damage so to speak."
By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Dec 30, 13 10:02 AM
to Nature:

So Dr. Green did NOT publish any article stating that deer had died at Brookhaven National Lab from starvation while having full stomachs. In fact, your reference is to an alleged oral presentation which none of us can review. Do you know the definition of the word "chutzpah"?

As regards Mike Bottini's article, one presumes that the abundant coyotes reduced mice, squirrels, rats, voles etc. etc. etc. (small rodents being their primary food source) just as they did ...more
By highhatsize (4217), East Quogue on Dec 28, 13 12:36 AM
Little Hat - Never did I claim the report out of BNL regarding starving deer was ever a published study. You're right, no one can review the oral presentation but you all could have attended it as it was open to the public. What are your environmental credentials which make you in any way knowledgeable on the statements you spout off? At least I have nearly a decade of experience in the environmental field within the East End of Long Island and a degree from Stony Brook in Environmental Studies. ...more
By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Dec 28, 13 1:13 PM
I appreciate your passion.
However, as a product of the 60's, I learned to question authority. Having worked for government for 40 years, I can tell you absolutely to not trust them. Always doubt. This is important because we live in one of the few countries that allow this freedom (I think). If this freedom is not exercised. it will be lost.

On any issue. to find the truth, all you need to do is to follow the money. Who's gonna gain, and who's gonna lose. Investigate, ...more
By facts maam (4), Manorville on Dec 28, 13 6:23 PM
1 member liked this comment
Ah, "question authority" . . .

Well said.
By PBR (4956), Southampton on Dec 29, 13 9:01 AM
There are WAY too many deer here because of rampant over development. Time to whack a bunch of them. End of story>
By bigfresh (4666), north sea on Dec 28, 13 7:32 PM
I think PETA is the way to go... People Eating Tasty Animals. Go Hunting.
By unclemilt (57), southampton on Dec 29, 13 12:01 AM
to Nature:

So, having lost the argument, you want us to believe you nonetheless because you "know more" than us (performance herein notwithstanding?)

You should really have a loved one check your responses before you post them because you apparently have no idea what "lame" is.
By highhatsize (4217), East Quogue on Dec 29, 13 10:40 AM
Who said anything about winning and losing? I think the facts stand on their on with respect to the success of the Rapid City culling project, for example.

At least facts maam can have a decent, thought out, educated conversation about the matter. Still waiting to hear what qualifies you to have anything more than a vague opinion on the culling project. You can't pull ANYTHING out of the big hat of yours?
By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Dec 29, 13 7:29 PM
Who said anything about winning and losing, indeed?

Only HHS. He proclaims it, therefore it must be so.

You are correct in respect to facts standing on their own, and HHS's insistence on repeatedly resorting to the emotional instead of the rational, merely means that his own "facts" do not support his position. Those of us who have actually examined the exchanges here are aware that he continues to chatter through that high hat.

Culling, a CONTROLLED program as opposed ...more
By Frank Wheeler (1826), Northampton on Dec 30, 13 8:23 AM
1 member liked this comment
Culling is "the" approach, unless it results in a Compensatory Rebound Effect increase in the herd a few years down the road?

Cull out over-simplification.

This is a complex multi-variable problem requiring a wise and sophisticated approach, with no one tool being "the" right one IMO.
By PBR (4956), Southampton on Dec 30, 13 12:13 PM
Have to agree with Mr. Wheeler here -- more than he would do if the positions were reversed, as he seems to oppose me reflexively these days -- that a controlled, professional cull, while not a perfect solution, is the best option.

Caught friend highhatsize in a rare error of diction. He replies to my post above about starving deer, saying in part that he has "seen no spavined deer, nor is there any objective evidence that there ARE any." Like that word, "spavined," use it myself, but ...more
By Turkey Bridge (1979), Quiogue on Dec 30, 13 12:42 PM
Thank you for the support, TB, but by whatever is sacred to you, stop sniveling!

Now do something useful -- go down and address up-Islander TSimms' characterization of us as "selfish and Arrogant." More irrational name-calling.

O, and I meant "Ingrid Newkirk" above.
By Frank Wheeler (1826), Northampton on Dec 30, 13 2:29 PM
Spoken with what has regrettably become your usual gracelessness, Mr. W. Getting really cranky in your old age or whatever it is that's getting you down, eh?
By Turkey Bridge (1979), Quiogue on Dec 30, 13 2:41 PM
to Frank Wheeler:

I have shown, with references, that deer slaughter is ineffective (and the reason that it IS ineffective) and that the prevalence of Lyme Disease and the density of the deer population are unrelated. I have further noted the absence of evidence that local deer are starving (and that the argument that they need to be killed “mercifully” is therefore specious.) You, and your colleague, Nature, have responded with unsupportable "common sense" objections, unverifiable ...more
Dec 30, 13 1:08 PM appended by highhatsize
to Turkey Bridge: I only noticed your response after posting. Thanks for the correction of "spavined". I had always thought of it as being synonymous with "skeletal" or "with ribs showing". That's wrong. While it can mean, generally, "marked by a decrepit or broken-down condition", it refers more to an effect of being overworked than to nutrition. Moreover, the specific condition on a horse (the animal that it most commonly describes) is marked by "swelling" (of the hock) and not by emaciation. - - - As for your rebuttal, as you admit yourself, your observations are anecdotal. No studies have shown that the local deer are starving, nor have they shown a correlation between Lyme Disease incidence and the density of the local deer population, nor have slaughter programs proved efficacious in practice.
By highhatsize (4217), East Quogue on Dec 30, 13 1:08 PM
This comment has been removed because it is a duplicate, off-topic or contains inappropriate content.
By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Dec 30, 13 2:28 PM
You people pushing for this deer cull are selfish and Arrogant. This is a complete disgrace and to think that its being funded with OUR TAX dollars. I drive the same roads, I run the risk of hitting deer too. Doesn't mean I have the right to kill 1/3 of the deer population. This isn't going to solve Lyme disease. Ticks are all over L.I. its not the deers fault. Ticks will remain here long after this cull is forgotten about. As far as crop damage. if you're going to invest in farming on L.I. you ...more
By TSimms (4), greenlawn on Dec 30, 13 2:01 PM
I have a question for all of you people that are so set on this deer cull. Have you ever killed a deer? I'm not talking about hitting it with your car. I'm talking about actually hunt it down and kill it. Have you?

By TSimms (4), greenlawn on Dec 30, 13 2:08 PM
Only 1 person can actually stand up and say they have killed a deer and that same person didn't like it. Yet, you support the idea of having federal "sharp Shooters" come in to our towns and SLAUGHTER OUR deer. That is just as Cowardly as the sharp shooters shooting deer at night, over bait piles with night vision.. You should all be ashamed. 9000 deer in the next 2 years. Thats alot of blood that you don't have to worry about getting on your hands. Instead you all pawn it off to these so called ...more
By TSimms (4), greenlawn on Dec 31, 13 1:17 AM
TSimms, yes I have. Once, didn't care for it at all, never did it again. But I know that deer was dead in a heartbeat. I've seen far to many deer out here, after being hit by a car, stumble, try to run off, all in a crippled state.
For those idiots who profess "stop the building", grow up. The "building" is not going to stop until almost every buildable lot is built upon.
For those that want the deer "rounded up and moved elsewhere". Are you for real? geez.
TB, hunters in NY state ...more
By But I'm a blank! (1283), Hampton Bays on Dec 30, 13 4:47 PM
to Nature:

As your most recent post indicates, you are incapable of providing relevant citations to support your arguments, for the simple reason that no such sources exist. As regards your IRRELEVANT citations:

We agree that deer die of starvation (and disagree that there is any indication that they are doing so in unusual numbers on the East End.)

We agree that applying insecticide to deer at bait station will reduce the incidence of ticks near those bait stations (but ...more
By highhatsize (4217), East Quogue on Dec 30, 13 4:58 PM
Wow - more drivel from HHS and more avoidance of basic questions asked of him.

Nothing I provided was irrelevant - it all supports the 4 main reasons why deer culling is being proposed as a solution.

Your arguments are all over the place - sometimes implying that deer don't transmit ticks, other times stating they do (but not lyme disease). You think there are too many deer, then you think there aren't too many deer.

You have not provided one iota of factual, scientific ...more
By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Dec 30, 13 5:30 PM
HHS, you are not entirely accurate that "deer act as a buffer as they collect the most deer ticks". Deer are predominately covered with lone star ticks as they are more aggressive and get to the host animal faster. Lone star ticks are so fast that there are some in NYSDEC that think they may be responsible for reductions in deer tick and dog tick populations. We are just beginning to understand the disease potential of the lone star. Deer carry between 5 and 10 thousand ticks so to suggest that ...more
By dnice (2346), Hampton Bays on Dec 30, 13 5:31 PM
Btw - even if this were an accurate description of me "not from a journeyman ecologist of inferior qualifications with a rooting interest." (SUPRAAAAAAA), it would STILL carry more weight than anything you have to say.

By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Dec 30, 13 6:26 PM
to Nature:

Sorry that I haven't been clearer. Let me try to resolve your ongoing misunderstandings.

Deer certainly host deer ticks. What is completely unproven is that deer are responsible for the prevalence of Lyme Disease. The evidence suggests that it is small animals, particularly rodents, who are the culprits.

Whether there are "too many" deer is a value judgment. Judging by the evidence that deer are NOT starving; that they are NOT responsible for the prevalence ...more
By highhatsize (4217), East Quogue on Dec 31, 13 12:01 AM
Hihat where did you get this notion that hunters chase deer onto highway? Please cite article, or study.
Is it possible hunting season coincides with the rut, and that's when deer are more apt to be affected by their hormones and testosterone .
I've hunted for several yrs and have never seen nor heard of my activity to cause a deer to run into the road. Idea is to be stealthy in the woods as to not scare deer. To follow your logic any hiker bird watcher, trail rider is responsible for deer/vehicle ...more
By Danw (2), Patchogue on Dec 31, 13 12:14 AM
AND HHS has yet to provide a link to an actual scientific study supporting anything he says. Surprise surprise. Let's hope the new year brings you some scientific chops
By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Dec 31, 13 9:48 AM
For your reading pleasure

By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Dec 31, 13 10:16 AM
This comment has been removed because it is a duplicate, off-topic or contains inappropriate content.
By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Dec 31, 13 10:16 AM
HHS, what about a correlation that more deer equals more ticks? Lyme disease correlation aside. It is indisputable that higher deer pressure results in more ticks. Ticks spread more than just Lyme last time I checked. There is a mysterious meat allergy that is being spread by lone star ticks. Imagine if that becomes more prevalent. If it were certain that culling would result in fewer ticks, would that make it more palatable or are some just against it because it means killing bambi?
By dnice (2346), Hampton Bays on Dec 31, 13 1:27 PM
Btw I'm against this cull and would prefer the deer be hunted rather than netted over bait pile then shot in the head with a bolt. At least my way is fair chase. Not at night over bait. This should be called a slaughter, not a cull.
By Danw (2), Patchogue on Dec 31, 13 12:18 AM
2 members liked this comment
I couldn't agree with you more.. This is a complete disgrace..
By TSimms (4), greenlawn on Dec 31, 13 1:08 AM
This comment has been removed because it is a duplicate, off-topic or contains inappropriate content.
By MichaelHunter (76), East Quogue, New York on Jan 2, 14 2:19 PM
This comment has been removed because it is a duplicate, off-topic or contains inappropriate content.
By MichaelHunter (76), East Quogue, New York on Jan 2, 14 2:19 PM
Well said, Danw:

"At least my way is fair chase. Not at night over bait. This should be called a slaughter, not a cull."
By PBR (4956), Southampton on Dec 31, 13 4:40 AM
Fair chase? Fair chase? Really? You sound like some sport from Downton Abbey. Since when does the concept of "fair chase" enter into a matter of addressing a public health and economic hazard? The aim here is to alleviate the problem in the most efficient and humane way possible, not to provide some theater of "fair chase" for armed citizens, or some notional chance of escape for the deer.

Anything involving "fair chase" by definition allows for a situation in which a deer, gut-shot ...more
By Turkey Bridge (1979), Quiogue on Dec 31, 13 1:07 PM
" . . . manifestly unfair . . . "

Yup, that about covers it.

One imagines that the "weekend nimrods" [your words] might have something to add . . .
By PBR (4956), Southampton on Dec 31, 13 1:27 PM
to Nature:

Astoundingly, you advocate wholesale slaughter, provide no evidence of its utility, and then demand that others PROVE your notion wrong "scientifically".

To date, you have cited erroneous common sense, unverifiable expert opinion, duplicitously edited articles, and irrelevant statistics as support for your useless and cruel agenda, capped by the contention that we should believe you, despite your shortcomings, because you "know more than us".

How presumptuous ...more
By highhatsize (4217), East Quogue on Dec 31, 13 1:33 PM
Come down from your ivory tower Einstein, whacking 1/3of the deer population will result in LESS DEER ! Verbose, pompous proclamations don't change that fact. Since our beautiful area has been over developed , the deer have less places to live , coupled with no predation , their population has exploded to levels that will result in a weakened population due to lack of both habitat and forage. We must be the predators needed to keep the population in check.
By bigfresh (4666), north sea on Jan 2, 14 6:02 PM