“I confess to having had murderous thoughts… while contemplating a bed of daylilies stripped of their buds, but what really concerns me is how frequently Lyme disease has been diagnosed among my family, friends and neighbors.”

Deer In Suburbia:

Population Control In A Land Populated By People

Mr. Aaron J. Beaudette • Mr. Robert M. Johnson • Mr. Alexander L. Rakow • Ms. Markell J. Ripps

May 2, 2005

Deforestation in New York State:

• Agricultural demands causeddeforestation throughout thestate

• 20% of New York classified asforested in 1900

Reforestation in New York State:

• Urban migration and declineof agriculture has allowed forforest regrowth

• 62% of New York classified asforest in 2003

Reforestation Does Not Tell The Whole Story• Agricultural expansion increased predator/human interaction

• Wolves and Mountain Lions have been extirpated from New York sincebefore the 20th Century

• Current suburban sprawl has increased the amount of suitable forestedhabitat by increasing areas of edge

Cayuga Heights: A Suburban Governance Case Study

Public Safety

Cayuga Heights: A Four Discourse Community

Gardeners Naturalists

Animal Rights

The Gardener’s Discourse• Horticulture is described as possessing both an educational and spritual value

• Extent of deer damage to gardens emphasized

• Cost and unaesthetic nature of protective fences highlighted

• Ecological damage of overpopulation is often employed by linking gardening to nature

Key Metaphors and other Rhetorical Devices

• “Deer Damage”• Spiritual and educational value of horticulture

Assumptions about Natural Relationships

• Gardening as the application of art to nature• White-tailed deer population as a threat to nature

Agents and their Motives• Gardeners, motivated by perceived value of their passion• Overpopulation of white-tailed deer motivated by desperation to find food

Basic Entities Recognized or Constructed

• Horticulture as valuable in human society• Individuals with right to pursue hobby if no harm is caused to society or environment

The Naturalist’s Discourse• A true naturalist emphasizes “scientific observation of life without idealization

or avoidance of the ugly”

• Employ ecological primacy to defend the need to limit deer population, citingthe harm done to overpopulated white-tailed deer to surroundingecosystems

• Defends the sanctity of nature through the aesthetic concerns of charismaticmegafauna: NIMBYism

Key Metaphors and other Rhetorical Devices

• Carrying capacity• Ecological balance• Population control

Assumptions about Natural Relationships

• Health of the ecosystem trumps all individual rights to life• Great capacity for human beings to promote ecological health

Agents and their Motives• Nature, motivated by balance and equilibrium• Humans, motivated by need to undo the damage to the environment caused by their own activities

Basic Entities Recognized or Constructed

• Complex but manageable ecosystem• Nature as beautiful and possessing innate worth

The Public Safety Discourse• Danger to motorists as universal threat and of greater concern than ecology or

aesthetics

• Property damage viewed as a possible threat

• Culling is discouraged due to the public safety threat of firearms and huntingactivity in and around the community

Key Metaphors and other Rhetorical Devices

• Universal nature of motor vehicle travel• Photos and statistics regarding deer-car collisions

Assumptions about Natural Relationships

• Deer population as a threat to human relationship with nature• Life of individual deer as secondary to safety of humans

Agents and their Motives• Motorists, motivated by necessity• Community members, motivated by distaste for firearms

Basic Entities Recognized or Constructed

• Car travel as essential and universal• Deer as increasingly overpopulated and threatening• Guns as inherently dangerous

Key Metaphors and other Rhetorical Devices

• Bambi Syndrome• Helplessness and natural peacefulness of all non-human animals

Assumptions about Natural Relationships

• Equality of all animals• Basic rights far all animals• Ability of humans to survive without hurting or killing other species

Agents and their Motives• Citizens motivated by moral duty to mold institutions toward stewardship of animals rights• Animals motivated by a desire to live in peace; humans are their spokesman

Basic Entities Recognized or Constructed

• Human rationality• Dynamic social, political and economic structures

The Animal Rights Discourse• Extend the Enlightenment value of equal rights and worth of humans to animals:

Green Rationalism

• Animals are described as having capacity to feel pain & joy and therefore, havea morally significant claim to life free of unnecessary suffering

• Some degree of “Bambi Syndrome” present: idealization of nature and deer in particular: Green Romanticism

“Deer are kind, gentle creatures, yet they are not

treated with the respect that they deserve as a native

species in the U.S.A. These gentle creatures exist,

harming no-one, yet by the hundreds of thousands are

killed by Vehicles yearly, plus killed by hunters and

predators.”

(Thepetitionsite.com, 3-29-03)

1998:• Towns people sign petitions requesting aid and advice from the NewYork Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC)

• Second petition is sent to Cayuga Heights Trustees asking for thecreation of a committee to study the deer problem

• Committee convened - August 17, 1998

1999:• Deer Committee suggests establishing bonds to Cornell University &Cornell Cooperative Extension

• Results from first citizen survey reported

1999 - 2000:• Feasibility study begins with photo survey of deer tagged the previouswinter

• Deer population estimated at a maximum 220 with 157 deer presentduring the fawning season

2001:• Second citizen survey is conducted and results reported

-1.9%23.2%25.1%Experienced Deer-Car Accident

.9%84.183.2%Experienced Deer Damage to Garden

1.03.0(on scale of 5)

2.0(on scale of 5)

Acceptability of Culling Deer

03.9(on scale of 5)

3.9(on scale of 5)

Acceptability of Deer Sterilization

-5.8%74.9%80.7%Prefer Decrease in Deer Pop. Size

Change2001 Survey1998 SurveyQuestion

Cayuga Heights: Participation & Social CapitalDr. Jules Pretty & Dr. Hugh Ward’s Model:• Reactive-dependence: Group organizes around a crisis and seeks externalassistance

• Realization-independence: Group becomes increasingly independent and begins fact-finding and information sharing through horizontal links

• Awareness-independence: Group is expected to garner results and possibly employ technological solutions through their ability to leverage political will

Actions Taken In Cayuga Heights:• Signing of petitions & request of aid from DEC, Cornell University and Cooperative Extension

• Commissioned citizen surveys, established deer committee as sole decision-making body for Village and invited experts to speak before deer committee at public meetings

• Never truly occurred. Options were evaluated but consensus was not reached due to factions in the community advocating only their preferred solutions and not a solution agreeable to all

The Cayuga Heights deer case followed the issue-evolution cycle from the concern and involvement stages, to the issue, alternatives and consequences stages. There it stalled.”

(Decker et al., 2004)

“…the community chose to pursue a deer sterilization experiment, which is a research activity, not management action.” (Decker et al., 2004)

Community Governance: Success In Parallel Situations

Homeowner’s Association:

Mumford Cove, CT• CTDEP approached Homeowners Assoc. &formed partnership

• Immunocontraceptive study proposed and funded privately

• Sterilization not producing results

• Homeowners Assoc. votes to allow hunting while discontinuing contraceptive study

Citizen’s Action:

Irondequoit, NY

• Hunting prohibited in township

• Local citizens petition NYDEC for assistance in controlling deer population

• Town split between animal rights and management discourses

• Citizens form consensus around highly regulated bow hunting season with DEC supervision

Citizen-Agency Partnership:

Union County, NJ• Dept. of Parks established diverse community committee

• Committee charged with lowering deer population so as to limit damage to plants and people in cars

• Committee agrees on culling but outside animal rights groups force issue to court

• Agreement reached to only allow state sharpshooters culling rights

Cayuga Heights, NY:Phase 1: Stalled at

Alternatives/Consequences stage when consensus could

not be reached and a sterilization experiment became

privately funded

Ipswich, MA:Phase 1: Voted down by

community

Phase 2: Hunting allowed by community but stalled by animal

rights activists

Phase 3: Hunting allowed afteralternatives investigated in a

more public manner

Cayuga Heights: Proposed Alternatives Continued Sterilization:

Population is expected to begin to decline as more does are sterilized and are not able to breed

Sharpshooter Bow Hunting:

State-licensed, professional bow hunters could be hired to cull the deer population over a number of season. Venison would be donated to soup kitchens

Sterilization/Bow Hunting:

Continue the sterilization research but allow untagged does to be culled as a means of more immediate population reduction

Subsidize Garden Fences/ Homeowner Education:

Begin a program of fencing off property in an effort to limit the available food supply and protect private property