America’s most ineffective Deer management program

Cut and paste.... more at link

New York City gave 1,719 whitetail bucks on Staten Island the “big snip” the past four autumns as part of an 8-year, deer vasectomy experiment. The program hopes to reduce the herd population, Lyme disease, browse damage, and deer-vehicle collisions. It has cost the city $6.6 million so far.

As of early March—before coronavirus devastated NYC—City Hall remained committed to the vasectomy program, which began in 2016 as a 3-year, $3.3 million project. Wildlife experts opposed it publicly as early as 2015, warning that taxpayer money can’t buy alternative biology and happily-ever-after results.

The experts cited previous contraceptive experiments that targeted female deer, and generally failed to reduce herds and their problems. Vasectomies were previously tried in mostly futile, prohibitively expensive research to control free-ranging coyotes and feral cats, but might help reduce wild horse numbers.

As Cornell University ecologists predicted in 2015, original herd size estimates on Staten Island proved too low. Therefore, the program’s costs climbed to $4.1 million by the third year as contractors tranquilized, sterilized, and ear-tagged more bucks than planned. At $4.1 million, the mass vasectomies have cost $2,385 per buck. Even so, the city’s parks department extended the program in September 2019 for five years by agreeing to an additional $2.5 million for the contractor, White Buffalo, a nonprofit from Connecticut.
 
Decades ago they tried something like this in California on Angel Island in the San Francisco Bay. They tried to capture and air lift deer off the island at a huge cost and many of the deer died in the process.


——
 
A professor that gets it;


Professor Jim Tantillo at Cornell University questions the wisdom of spending millions on an inefficient, unpredictable effort.

“It’s an incredible waste of money, and it disappoints me that any municipality would take this on,” said Tantillo, who teaches students about environmental ethics and history, and the philosophy and morality of hunting. “The ethical question is whether these folks are being honest about their motives. They’re spending $6 million on deer vasectomies, which strikes me as an elaborate form of virtue-signaling that lets them tell everyone how much they care about animals.

——
 
Ann Arbor Michigan was trying something along these lines with the deer in that area too. All that money spent on these deer, just to get run over by a truck. But it's the government, the waste should come as no surprise.
 
What most folks don't seem to comprehend is that they..govt.. will ALWAYS go for whatever program or plan of attack steers FUNDS their way. Has nothing to do with effectiveness or simplicity. It's all about gettin' their hands on 'dat chedda' and while at it, possibly engineering kickbacks for their friends.
 
Jesus. I knew this had been proposed in several places, but wasn't aware it had actually been implemented.

Can't decide if hilarious or sad. I guess since I don't pay taxes in NY I can lean towards the former. But man is that an expensive strategy.
 
On a long enough timeline you'd have to wonder if this would effect the local gene pool.

Since the most elusive bucks will be doing 100% of the breeding, will the deer population get progressively more elusive until pretty soon no one can find a buck to vasectomize?

Sounds like it happened just like that with does they tried it on previously.
 
Jesus. I knew this had been proposed in several places, but wasn't aware it had actually been implemented.

Can't decide if hilarious or sad. I guess since I don't pay taxes in NY I can lean towards the former. But man is that an expensive strategy.
Oh, but you are paying for part of this. SALT (state and local tax) deductions on federal income tax effectively subsidize the nice people that voted for the idiots who are in charge of this fiasco. Unless your SALT deduction is higher than theirs, you are a deer neuterer.

This is an optics and PR effort to keep cash flow for something else. Something they couldn't otherwise fund.

Jeremy
 
Oh, but you are paying for part of this. SALT (state and local tax) deductions on federal income tax effectively subsidize the nice people that voted for the idiots who are in charge of this fiasco. Unless your SALT deduction is higher than theirs, you are a deer neuterer.

This is an optics and PR effort to keep cash flow for something else. Something they couldn't otherwise fund.

Jeremy

This does, admittedly, make it less funny.
 
So lets say they open it to bowhunters with hunter ed and NRA membership that includes a hunter liability policy. Covered there.

2 questions:

How much would it cost to implement a program? ( thinking gov here, its probably more than I would guess.

how much would they charge for tags? Could they get $100 ea?

Seems to me if done right its cash positive... but that might be optimistic, it is gov......and New York after all. They will probably req Teamster oversight or it wont fly....grin

...
 
Staten Island is part of NYC, hunting in any form will never be allowed in nyc. Many hunters do live on the island and would love to knock them down (there have been cases of poaching), but it would quickly get out of hand in my opinion.
 
Is a vasectomy a big name for a rubber band? I really can't understand why this would cost so much.

Castration bands cost about $3/100.
Couple cowboys and lassos, a few beers.

Stitches for the guy wrestling the deer down.......
Figured out the $$.



They could probably sell tickets tho, that might make it cash positive.
 
Soo, is this castration or vasectomy?

castration will get rid of the desire to have sex and reduce population assuming they are able to get the majority of bucks castrated (which is a joke, we all know there are deer no one can find).

vasectomy does not decrease the desire to breed and assuming a near complete job of doing casectomies, wouldnt this option simply extend the rut longer as doe would not be bred and continue to cycle which would lead the bucks to be crazier longer this increasing aggression and potential vehicle strikes.

Of course either option is just plain idiotic, but you can never tell a liberal they are wrong and they wont learn either....
 
Many biologists and cities/towns have been battling rapid population growth of deer in developed areas for decades. Look at what has been done around Rochester and Ithaca NY, including many other areas across the country. It’s a tricky situation, for sure. It seems logical to bring precision marksman to task but there’s so much more into play. The public (i.e., human emotions), the majority voice, have the final say, unfortunately. I really hate to see when they final decide to chemically immobilize deer, rendering the meat inconsumable which happens. I haven’t been part of this realm for awhile but it’s very discouraging on all levels!
 
Back
Top