deer problem in my area(central ny)

S

seansean1444

New member
there is a little town here in central ny called cayuga heights. near cayuga lake. the deer are extremly overpopulated here and the officials in our area are trying to figure out what to do. there are many "hippies" in our area and they want the tax payers to pay 900 dollars for every deer they catch and make fertile!!!! i think this is the stupidest idea ever. why not allow bow hunting and donate all meat to the homeless shelters?? i say bowhunting because it is a suburb area. lets here what you think about this
 
There used to be a group in the east somewhere that had done good gettin' "contracts" or "permission" to eradicate with archery gear. They offered advice on how to get your local group of highly qualified archers recognized as the cost effective and efficient route to deer population control in sub-urban and urban environments.

Might find them with google etc...

Brent
 
Catch and make fertile?

Do you mean infertile? They are already fertile, that's the problem. :D

Give them a case of lead poisonig, they make great Carnitas. We live in an area that's a rural micro canyon area. The deer are so over populated they look like they starve during the dry summer months, they are also the smallest deer I've ever seen. Sometimes I think you'd get more meat off of a Doberman than some of these. This means roses and other flowers that are like deer candy get decimated. My attitude is I feed them so I eat some of them. Two to three a year to be exact, my neighbors have the same policy, but so far there isn't a problem with lowering their numbers appreciably.
 
This problem is certainly not unique to your area. In our state, we have organized hunts in state parks, county land and even on city property. They call them hunts but they are actually a conservation program and there is little that compares to a hunt. There have been many attempts by our state's "Bunny-Hugger" to capture and sterilyze deer population as well as contract hunters. Most or none of these efforts is effective or inexpensive. So what to do? Well .....

Lets set up controlled "hunts", Issue special tags for hunters and while we are at it, charge them for the privledge of resolving our problem. These "hunts" have been successful but there have been problems and the rules change from year to year. One example was a mother walking her child in one of the parks and having to explain what a gut-pile was doing on the bike path.


Be Safe !!!
 
When I was in Louisiana in 1973 there were organized hunts in swamps and forests that were being damaged by overpopulated deer. They would organize drives with hundreds of guys that would target as many does as could be shot up to a determined number, as I recall there were several states using this technique. I guess they figured the bucks would get thinned through normal hunting.

Cost:
Minimal
 
Hey Sean, I hunt right on the borders of Cayuga Heights. It's some mighty fine hunting over there.... if you don't mind a 20 to 1 doe/buck ratio.

You're right, hunting is the obvious answer. However, Ithaca and Cayuga Heights are heavily populated with anti-hunters. Foremost among them, is Mrs. Parks, who is the proprietor of CayugaDeer.org, an anti-hunting organization dedicated to preventing any hunting in and around Cayuga Heights.

Until the local policy makers wise up and stop bending to the pressure from the vocal 10% minority, there will be no hunting in Cayuga Heights. This is not a new problem by any means.

The good news is that there are sensible minds at work in surrounding areas. Cornell University has a large, successful hunting program encompassing several thousand acres of land in very close proximity to Cayuga Heights.

Right now, we have the best we can hope for in the near future.
 
You could spend tax payer money to catch the "Hippies" and make them infertile. J/K.
I am so surprised that auto insurance companies get involved bigtime in deer reduction. It cost them the most money. They should give discounts to deer hunters! I remember reading that after Humans, deer are responsible for the most car accidents.
BILLDAVE
 
NY, I feel for you. In one of the St. Louis suburbs a few years, the 'tree huggers' convinced our Conservation dept to trap and relocate about 150 deer. Now, it was too cruel to kill them but they radio collared the deer and studied the results. Nearly 98% of the deer died of " natural cause" within a few months just like Conservation told the yuppies they would.

Now, the same suburb want to do the crap "infertility drugs" that this NY town is proposing. This time Conservation found their manhood and said absolutely NOT. For one thing deer don't take well to tranquilization and the death loss is significant. For another, it is very expensive..... Conservation agreed to set up management hunts with 'approved' marksmen but that was it. The yuppies finally agreed and the population is under control for now.

Hopefully for you guys in NY, your conservation department will find their manhood and tell the tree hugging lady & company to "take a hike"!!!!!
 
Up here around Rochester, we had a bad deer population problem in a suburb. They set up a "bait and shoot" in order to cut down on the population.
 
Cowboy mo said:
Now, the same suburb want to do the crap "infertility drugs" that this NY town is proposing. This time Conservation found their manhood and said absolutely NOT. For one thing deer don't take well to tranquilization and the death loss is significant. For another, it is very expensive..... Conservation agreed to set up management hunts with 'approved' marksmen but that was it. The yuppies finally agreed and the population is under control for now.

Hopefully for you guys in NY, your conservation department will find their manhood and tell the tree hugging lady & company to "take a hike"!!!!!
Click to expand...


Conservation dept has zero say in the matter. The problem is two fold, one, the town has a no discharge law, two, the state has a no discharge within 500 feet of a residence without permission law. The DEC would love for us to hunt those deer, they can't override either of those regulations.

I'm not sure what's wrong with your deer that they can't handle being tranquilized. Cornell has a long running research program that routinely tranquilizes and sterilizes deer. I have talked to one of the main researchers (because he also runs the hunting program) quite a lot and he has never mentioned a problem with mortality.
 
365 day bow season

We have deer strikes within the city and herds on the golf courses.
We allow bowhunting but no guns. It helps but I would extend the season.
 
Quote: Conservation dept has zero say in the matter.

Maybe in the state of NY conservation doesn't have any say in the matter but under the law in the state of Missouri Conservation has total control over the management of wildlife.

Secondly, the municipality wanted conservation funds to cover the "management" projects they were proposing.

Finally, the point of the OP and my point is that it is ridiculous to spend public funds just to see wildlife live to a ripe old age without reproducing.
 
Cowboy_mo said:
Maybe in the state of NY conservation doesn't have any say in the matter but under the law in the state of Missouri Conservation has total control over the management of wildlife.
Click to expand...

I would be very surprised if state conservation departments can override laws limiting the distances that hunting implements can be fired from occupied dwellings.

Sure, they have "total control" over wildlife management but they can't force you to let someone hunt in your back yard and that's LITERALLY what would be happening in Cayuga Heights.
 
Never said conservation had the ability to change local shooting laws.

But, they do have the ability to stop local do gooders from trapping & relocating, or tranquilizing and neutering deer.

OBVIOUSLY, at least to me.............. both the conservation regulatory agency and the local agency have to work TOGETHER to resolve an urban overpopulation of deer problem. Since both sides rely on PUBLIC funds to operate (that is the hard earned dollars collected from taxpayers) the solution should be reasonable and somewhat lasting.

Neutering deer and allowing them to continue easting someone's landscaping and/or wandering in front of automobiles to do damage to property and potentially a person's body is not a reasonable solution.

Final Answer.
 
I agree that it's not reasonable. What is to be done when the local authorities ARE the anti-hunters? We're talking about a small town here. It is an affluent, upper class, high income community made up of academics. They are liberal and wealthy and almost entirely unopposed within their small town. They ARE the town board. They MAKE local law. We may all agree on what's reasonable but it's NOT going to change in Cayuga Heights.

Their idea of reasonable is to change the decorative fence ordinance to allow for fencing tall enough to dissuade the deer.:rolleyes:
 
I have the solution !!!!!!!!!

Get your Hippies to hire a " Conservation Specialist " to come to North Central Idaho. While here they can capture wolves called " Grey Wolves ", (but they are actually Canadian Wolves ) and relocate them to your area. In a short amount of time the over-population/ regular population of deer will not be a concern. All of the Hippies and liberal wackos can sit around a campfire and tell each other what a great thing they did, and how stupid anti-wolf people are. After a little more time, they will start to **** and moan about how they don't seem to see much wildlife at all anymore and how it must be the hunters fault, George Bush's fault, or some large companies fault. Let a little more time go by and then you'll probably see them on the news describing how their family pet was killed in their front yard in front of their kids by some beast with 4 legs and sharp teeth. The wolf won't actually eat much if any of the pet. It will just tear it open, let flesh and guts hang out while the pet is still alive. The conservation expert will tell everyone not to worry too much about it. I think the experts call it "practice killings". Older members of the pack (Gang) are teaching the younger ones how to kill, or I guess sometime they just kill for fun and keep their skills sharp. Let us know if you are coming an most of the residents here in Idaho will gladly donate to your cause if it means getting wolves out of our state.
 
Pete, I understand what you are saying about the ultra rich, liberal, academics and I suppose if they want to use their own local tax $ so be it. The same really goes for "Town & Country" the St. Louis suburb with the same problem. I just get really excited when towns like this want all the taxpayers of the state pick up the tab for their stupidity.

Idaho.... I really really like your solution...... It would benefit Cayuga NY and the state of Idaho.
 
Frankly, I'm all too happy to let the Cayuga Heights fools wallow in their stupidity. I hunt the very borders of their area and my hunting grounds are positively filled with deer. Works out well for all of us. Actually, it works out well for us hunters and it gives the antis something to urinate about, so I guess that keeps them happily miserable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top