Selected Articles from our
The C.A.S.H. Courier
ARTICLE from the Spring 2010 Issue
Culling Paves The Way For Trophy Bucks In Suburban Areas
The Duping of Municipal Governments
by Game Agencies and
Photo of fetuses removed from does immediately after the
culling of 64 deer at Vassar College.
Published on the HVQDMA website. The hunters are chomping
at the bit to hunt Vassar’s “preserve” annually.
One hunter commented that he was “happy to see what can
be accomplished when groups work together towards better conservation of our
More will be written about this in the next issue of the
C.A.S.H., and other organizations with which we consult,
have noticed a serious increase in the number of “culling” operations that
are being considered by various municipal, county, and park-management
boards, as well as some boards overseeing privately owned large expanses of
“Culling” amounts to “Killing with an excuse.” The usual
rationalization that is put forth to assuage the normal instinct of most
citizens and decision makers to not permit the gratuitous killing of deer
• deer are a vector of the tick that causes Lyme disease
• deer are destroying the under-story of the forest that
song-birds need for nesting
• deer “overpopulation” is the cause of deer-car
• there is no effective and economical non-lethal means
to reduce the deer population
• a quick “cull” followed by bow-hunting (or some other
form of hunting) in perpetuity is an effective way to reduce the deer
The good news is that all of the above rationalizations
are false, and we have the scientific articles to back us up.
The bad news is that science and ethics play, at best, a
supporting role in political decision-making. The lead is played by the
“perceived political will.”
It is up to us to organize and present the decision
makers with evidence that most voters don’t want to kill deer when there is
no rational reason to do so — and there is no rational reason to do so. Here
is a letter that Wildlife Watch routinely sends out:
We are writing on behalf of our xxx members in
[municipality, state] who protest the plan to kill the deer at [place] in
the strongest possible terms. Killing wild animals is a decision that should
and can be avoided with the diligent use of non-lethal means.
Culling is brutal and ignorant of the causes of deer
overpopulation. It amounts to applying a band-aid to the deep-rooted problem
of deer management in [your state ]. The game agency manages deer
populations for hunters, without regard for most of the stakeholders who are
Below are the many reasons that hunting should not
be used to control deer populations:
Bow-hunting will exacerbate an overpopulation problem.
We cannot assume that the majority of local residents do
not tolerate the current deer density based on the claims of the
Deer density is not the sole factor in the diminishing of
the understory of the forest. There are other known causes, such as canopies
of mature trees inhibiting sun from penetrating to the understory. The
diminishing understory is not an aberrant phenomenon; it is a natural
occurrence. It is part of normal ecological succession.
Bow hunting exacerbates deer-car collisions.
The density of the black-legged Lyme-tick depends
primarily on the density of rodents, not deer; further, deer do not carry
the ticks in the stage of life that promotes the disease.
Immunocontraception is relatively inexpensive and has
worked successfully in parks and urban/suburban settings.
Bow hunting is ineffective and cruel; the crippling rate
exceeds 50%. Wounded deer suffer for days before they die.
Rather than taking your vengeance out on the deer, you
should be requiring your State [game agency: DEC, DNR, etc.], [Head of the
game agency for the state], or your state legislators, to stop the
management of deer for hunting – any kind of hunting.
The public and the deer will continue to lose while the
alleged “sportsmen” and the game agents continue to win so they may pump
vast amounts of lead into living beings, the environment and water supply;
and threaten the safety of residents. Additionally, they are threatening the
food banks. The deer meat will not be inspected, and in many cases will be
ground up with lead that is in them from having been shot in non-vital
organs in prior hunting seasons. Further, the deer have fed on lawns treated
with pesticides, herbicides, and fungicides that bio-accumulate in the
muscle-tissue of animals. For example, the only time “culled” deer were
inspected in NY was in Irondequoit, NY, where the deer carcasses were going
to be donated to Attica Prisoners. All 22 carcasses were rejected as “unfit
for human consumption.” Let’s not cynically turn this despicable deed
We hold out hope that at some point, before this brutish
act is committed, that some of the decision-makers involved will break ranks
with those who voted for a cull and deliver the community and the deer from
the fruitless plan. Culling will only have to be continued year after year
due to its inability to succeed. Culling can be likened to trying to keep a
rising river from overflowing its banks during torrential rains with a few
paper towels. The game agencies must be the focus – they must be stopped
from managing deer for the sake of sport hunting. By following their plan,
you are aiding and abetting deer mismanagement that is bringing strife to
To aid in your battle to fight culling, visit:
Website designed by C.A.S.H..
Go on to Next Article
Back to Spring 2010 Issue
Back to C.A.S.H. Courier Article Archive