deer cull
 

any comments? Is this the best way going forwrd?

Home : News
Garret Mountain’s big deer herd to be culled by bow hunters
Monday, December 28, 2009
Last updated: Monday December 28, 2009, 11:03 PM
BY RICHARD COWEN
The Record
STAFF WRITER
24 Comments North Jersey’s bow hunters will be welcomed into Passaic County’s Garret Mountain Reservation and Rifle Camp Park this winter to reduce a swollen deer herd that has ravaged the eco-system and become a danger to motorists.
The Passaic County Freeholders last week reached an agreement with the United Bow Hunters of New Jersey to conduct a controlled hunt in both parks on various days in January and February. The county plans to close both Garret Mountain Reservation and Rifle Camp Park on alternate weekdays to allow bow hunters to thin out the whitetail population.
“There’s simply too many deer,” said Freeholder Pat Lepore, who also is the mayor of Woodland Park, where Garret Mountain Reservation and Rifle Camp Park are located. “It’s a dangerous situation and environmentally, it’s a disaster. This is the right thing to do.”
The freeholders last week allocated $20,000 for the culling operation, which will be conducted by the United Bow Hunters of New Jersey. The group has been doing culling operations for 20 years for municipalities, among them Livingston, Milburn, Mountain Lakes, and Denville.
“Not only is this the right thing to do, it’s long overdue,” said Marc Weiss, who is organizing the Passaic County hunt for the United Bow Hunters of New Jersey. “The idea isn’t to eliminate the herd; it’s to reduce the herd.”
The deer herd on Garret Mountain is estimated by Passaic County to number 400 to 600 animals. Weiss estimated that the current deer population was “at least 30 times” higher than the carrying capacity of the land. Many of the deer, he said, are underfed and will likely starve this winter.
The Passaic County Parks Department has yet to set dates for the culling operation. Lepore said that the county was looking to close Garret Mountain Reservation and Rifle Camp Park on alternate days in January and February to allow teams of hunters in.
The plan adopted by the freeholders calls for the Passaic County Sheriff’s Department to provide security. Bow hunters would erect tree stands and lay down bait. The county would operate a deer check station, and all the meat would be donated to the Center for United Methodist Aid in the Community (CUMAC), a Paterson-based anti-poverty agency.
To survive, the deer have browsed their way through the under story of both parks, and into the backyards of homes. Along the way, they’ve eaten just about every plant and shrub in sight — and destroyed the habitat for other species, particularly the migrating songbirds that land on Garret Mountain during the Spring and Fall.
Many of the deer that have survived appear weak and underfed — while others wind up dead in the road, struck by vehicles. Recently, two deer carcasses were discovered in the parking lot of Kohl’s department store on Route 46.
Although the population has been growing steadily, Passaic County has never had a deer management plan for Garret Mountain. Woodland Park residents, tired of having their gardens destroyed by roaming deer, have long been pressuring the freeholders to do something. They’ve been joined by environmental groups such as the New Jersey Audubon Society, which this fall sounded the alarm over the destruction of Garret Mountain’s ecological balance.
Troy Ettel, the director of conservation for the New Jersey Audubon Society, said Garret Mountain is one of the most important resting points in New Jersey for migratory birds. And deer are the number one danger to that ecosystem.
“Forests that are impacted by whitetail deer are like critically ill patients,” Ettel said. “The forest could die. You have to drop the deer population and keep it low in order to give that forest a chance to recover.”
E-mail: [email]cowen@northjersey.com[/email]
North Jersey’s bow hunters will be welcomed into Passaic County’s Garret Mountain Reservation and Rifle Camp Park this winter to reduce a swollen deer herd that has ravaged the eco-system and become a danger to motorists.


RECORD FILE PHOTO
Buy this photoThe deer herd on Garret Mountain is estimated by Passaic County to number 400 to 600 animals. The Passaic County Freeholders last week reached an agreement with the United Bow Hunters of New Jersey to conduct a controlled hunt in both parks on various days in January and February. The county plans to close both Garret Mountain Reservation and Rifle Camp Park on alternate weekdays to allow bow hunters to thin out the whitetail population.

“There’s simply too many deer,” said Freeholder Pat Lepore, who also is the mayor of Woodland Park, where Garret Mountain Reservation and Rifle Camp Park are located. “It’s a dangerous situation and environmentally, it’s a disaster. This is the right thing to do.”

The freeholders last week allocated $20,000 for the culling operation, which will be conducted by the United Bow Hunters of New Jersey. The group has been doing culling operations for 20 years for municipalities, among them Livingston, Milburn, Mountain Lakes, and Denville.

“Not only is this the right thing to do, it’s long overdue,” said Marc Weiss, who is organizing the Passaic County hunt for the United Bow Hunters of New Jersey. “The idea isn’t to eliminate the herd; it’s to reduce the herd.”

The deer herd on Garret Mountain is estimated by Passaic County to number 400 to 600 animals. Weiss estimated that the current deer population was “at least 30 times” higher than the carrying capacity of the land. Many of the deer, he said, are underfed and will likely starve this winter.

The Passaic County Parks Department has yet to set dates for the culling operation. Lepore said that the county was looking to close Garret Mountain Reservation and Rifle Camp Park on alternate days in January and February to allow teams of hunters in.

Fast facts
Parks would be closed on hunting days.

Passaic County would decide how many deer would be hunted.

State law that prohibits hunting within 450 feet of an occupied structure would be waived.
The plan adopted by the freeholders calls for the Passaic County Sheriff’s Department to provide security. Bow hunters would erect tree stands and lay down bait. The county would operate a deer check station, and all the meat would be donated to the Center for United Methodist Aid in the Community (CUMAC), a Paterson-based anti-poverty agency.

To survive, the deer have browsed their way through the under story of both parks, and into the backyards of homes. Along the way, they’ve eaten just about every plant and shrub in sight — and destroyed the habitat for other species, particularly the migrating songbirds that land on Garret Mountain during the Spring and Fall.

Many of the deer that have survived appear weak and underfed — while others wind up dead in the road, struck by vehicles. Recently, two deer carcasses were discovered in the parking lot of Kohl’s department store on Route 46.

Although the population has been growing steadily, Passaic County has never had a deer management plan for Garret Mountain. Woodland Park residents, tired of having their gardens destroyed by roaming deer, have long been pressuring the freeholders to do something. They’ve been joined by environmental groups such as the New Jersey Audubon Society, which this fall sounded the alarm over the destruction of Garret Mountain’s ecological balance.

Troy Ettel, the director of conservation for the New Jersey Audubon Society, said Garret Mountain is one of the most important resting points in New Jersey for migratory birds. And deer are the number one danger to that ecosystem.

“Forests that are impacted by whitetail deer are like critically ill patients,” Ettel said. “The forest could die. You have to drop the deer population and keep it low in order to give that forest a chance to recover

Yes. It really is the way to go.

It is much more then just some damaged bumpers and eaten shrubbery. When the herd gets to big for it's ecosystem - it starves to death.

I used to be very much an anti hunting person. Until I spent a winter in the mountains of Utah and watch an entire herd of elk starve to death. That was the most horrific thing I have ever seen in my life.

According to the article you posted, there is a specific number of deer to be culled and only bow hunters are allowed to participate. This is a far cry from hunting with high powered rifles from helicopters or 4 wheel vehicles.

I think the authorities are acting responsibly. Living out in the country has given me a who new outlook to deer and their survival. Too many will mean that the smaller yearlings and momma's with babies will starve to death as the bigger bucks will keep them away from any food supply. They will also bring the coyotes, which could end up being a bigger problem if the deer are coming close to developed areas.

I love that they are only allowing bow, it makes it a more fair game for the deer.

I agree with this as well but I do not agree with the baiting. :sad:

[QUOTE=rainbow;868347]I agree with this as well but I do not agree with the baiting. :sad:[/QUOTE]

Exactly! I agree they need to be culled. I like the fact that the meat will be donated. I like the bow hunting. I don't like the baiting. :sad:

As they are bowhunting and only allowing so many deer to be taken, even the baiting isn't that bad a thing. The animals that are not taken will get some free feed.

Now, if they were baiting and using high powered rifles with no limit - that would be a problem.

I dunno ...to me it's more like "target practice" than actual "hunting" if they use bait.

I agree, but culling is not hunting. It is a strategic move, and baiting will help them accomplish it quickly, and with greater success. I hope the Bow Hunters will be honorable in the way they shoot, and that the environmental stress on the herd and ecosystem is quickly reduced.

[QUOTE=rainbow;868369]I dunno ...to me it's more like "target practice" than actual "hunting" if they use bait.[/QUOTE]

But the point is to thin the herd, not fill the freezer. NOT baiting would mean that thinning the herd would be completely left to chance - IF the deer was in the area that the hunters were allowed to hunt in - it sounds as if this is very much being carefully controlled.

[QUOTE=Macomom;868433]I agree, but culling is not hunting. It is a strategic move, and baiting will help them accomplish it quickly, and with greater success. I hope the Bow Hunters will be honorable in the way they shoot, and that the environmental stress on the herd and ecosystem is quickly reduced.[/QUOTE]

Yeah that. :thumbs up

[QUOTE=Macomom;868433]I agree, but culling is not hunting. It is a strategic move, and baiting will help them accomplish it quickly, and with greater success. I hope the Bow Hunters will be honorable in the way they shoot, and that the environmental stress on the herd and ecosystem is quickly reduced.[/QUOTE]

No culling isn't hunting, culling would mean to remove the ones that are inferior to the rest of the herd and I doubt that they will be doing that.

[QUOTE=LavenderRott;868455]But the point is to thin the herd, not fill the freezer. NOT baiting would mean that thinning the herd would be completely left to chance - IF the deer was in the area that the hunters were allowed to hunt in - it sounds as if this is very much being carefully controlled.[/QUOTE]

Thinning is a better word but I still don't agree with the baiting. If the problem is as bad as they say it is then there should be no need for it.

Baited or no, deer will be culled. I don't see what difference it makes in the long run :shrug: It needs to be done.

I too agree that it's being done in a responsible way. If they are baiting, chances of a one-shot-kill are much higher than it would otherwise be, thereby reducing the chance of having wounded deer.

Another aspect is that if there are sick deer due to the size of the herd, chances of illness are increased, and chances of passing on illness to other animals are increased too. Not to mention that dead animals or wounded animals are more likely to attract or increase the predator population, so a thoroughly controlled cull with baiting is going to decrease the size of the herd, prevent an increase in predators, and safeguard the general health of flora and fauna.

Why dont we just forget about bows and arrows and guns and use our hands?

That is the only real Fair way to hunt. If its easier to bait them.. Bait them.

As for baiting - it also gives the shooters/bowmen a chance to have a good look at the animals before they select one to kill. If it is done the way it is done in most European countries, there will be people present who are skilled in recognizing weak and sick animals, who will then be selected. Not all deer who present at a bait will be killed - just those who are weak, very old or unhealthy. It's not a free-for-all.

Did a minimal google search and Garrett Mountain is 568 acres. Looked to see how big Rifle park is but it isn't listed.

Trying to hunt for deer on 568 acres is a huge undertaking. Baiting is the best way to get this hunt done as quickly and painlessly as possible without undue stress on the rest of the herd.

[QUOTE=babymomma;868488]Why dont we just forget about bows and arrows and guns and use our hands?
[/QUOTE]

because it would mean an infinitely more painful death.

[QUOTE=Marcha;868491]As for baiting - it also gives the shooters/bowmen a chance to have a good look at the animals before they select one to kill. If it is done the way it is done in most European countries, there will be people present who are skilled in recognizing weak and sick animals, who will then be selected. Not all deer who present at a bait will be killed - just those who are weak, very old or unhealthy. It's not a free-for-all.[/QUOTE]

If the baiting is done the same way as those European countries do it then I would agree with it.

well i cant figure out baiting alot are so tame we can feed them out of hand

[QUOTE=Jim Hall;868559]well i cant figure out baiting alot are so tame we can feed them out of hand[/QUOTE]

Jim, that is exactly what people shouldn't be doing and is obviously why there is a problem there then. :sad:

well its a park you know? and no predators besides its so neat to watrch the kids around them its a good thing but the herd has to be managed

Why does "man" always feel the need to play God ?? To decide who should live and die, when why and how they should die ?

Mother nature looks after itself, and if man would stop freakin messing with the natural balance of things, and killing all their natural predators and destroying habitat there wouldn't be a problem! That's my opinion.

[QUOTE=happycats;868614]Why does "man" always feel the need to play God ?? To decide who should live and die, when why and how they should die ?

Mother nature looks after itself, and if man would stop freakin messing with the natural balance of things, and killing all their natural predators and destroying habitat there wouldn't be a problem! That's my opinion.[/QUOTE]

Interesting idea. But one must wonder just where "man" would live without destroying animal habitat? As for killing natural predators - well, personally I prefer to live in an area where my children and dogs can play in the back yard without having to worry about bears, coyotes, and wolves. But, hey, if I am a minority, I suppose I could learn to deal.

I suppose we could step back and let "nature" deal with this large population of deer that has outgrown it's habitat. But. Have you ever watched a herd of deer starve to death?

FYI - man has been a natural predator since the time of the caveman.

[QUOTE=happycats;868614]Why does "man" always feel the need to play God ?? To decide who should live and die, when why and how they should die ?

Mother nature looks after itself, and if man would stop freakin messing with the natural balance of things, and killing all their natural predators and destroying habitat there wouldn't be a problem! That's my opinion.[/QUOTE]

I agree to a certain point. IF humans left nature alone from the beginning, then nature would be in a better position to keep animal populations in check. However, since we have messed with nature, then this needs to be done. :sad:.

I agree with baiting in a very controlled way. There is a hunter that hunts on the vacant land (very heavily wooded) that is about 30 acres. He is a bow hunter and is there at least twice a week Oct-Dec and some years he doesn't get a deer, and there are a lot around here. Soooo on 600 acres and no bait it would be very difficult to ensure the herd is thinned.

A death by a bow is much more humane than starvation. Like I previous posted, the young and females would be the ones starving.

If "man" did not intervene from time to time, what would happen?
Deer herd explodes which causes coyotes to multiply, then the coyote or wolves get to be too many and what steps in then? Natural destruction such as rabies, so a park full of rabid wolves and coyotes is a better idea?
I really dont see why bow hunting is being glorified here, I hate seeing a bad shot from a bow and the suffering the animal endures, baiting seems like the best way to ensure the bow hunters have swift sucessful kills. If it was rifle hunting then I would disagree with baiting.
Having being raised by hunters, grown up hunting and still living in a hunting household I know the importance of it for our ecosystem. Even just where I live, if there was no hunting season with x amount of bucks,does ect allowed to be killed we would see a population explosion here too, and since i live where there are plentiful numbers of moose, not hunting one or the other would be detrimental to both species due to such things as chronic wasting disease.
Too many of one thing is never good. And as stated earlier I would much rather see them killed swiftly and eaten than starve to death or deteriorate from diseasse such as CWD.

i have two points on this one,, yes i agree with the culling to a major extent..But i would like to point out that we humans are taking over the animals territory thus you could look at an animal attacking a human as their way of culling our numbers. Just wondering at what point we got it in our heads that we were more important than all of gods other creatures. We're the ones wrecking the planet not the animals.

It's a lack of predators in the park that has caused the explosion in the deer population to begin with. I was raised in a northern environment where bears, wolves, etc were plentiful. So was my mother and her mother and father before her. Never was attacked by any of them. Saw wolves rarely, but certainly heard them every night. Saw bears frequently. So thinking that just because predators are around mean danger to people is nonsense.
Dangerous to livestock, certainly, then you need to protect your livestock with dogs and donkeys and not guns.
You are more likely to be killed by a deer you think is tame than you think. The males especially can be quite dangerous, so hand feeding or getting your children to hand feed them is just asking for trouble for both the kids and the deer.
This cull is necessary now or a large number of them are going to starve and most of them may starve anyway now that they've waited for it to get this out of hand.

clm

It's ironic really, most here agree with this deer cull, but what about the cat and dog overpopulation?
Should they all be rounded up and killed ? OMG no way most of you would say. So really what's the difference ?


In many rural areas they round up all the stray dogs and shoot them, but that's horrible, terrible, and most here would be dead against it, and would be fighting to save them all !!

I guess it's just the difference between an animal lover and a pet lover :shrug:

[QUOTE=LavenderRott;868625] well, personally I prefer to live in an area where my children and dogs can play in the back yard without having to worry about bears, coyotes, and wolves. But, hey, if I am a minority, I suppose I could learn to deal. [/QUOTE]

Well we have wolves, coyotes in our back yard and in previous places I've lived ,bears and cougars as well, and have yet to be "attacked" that's the problem, all the hype, and false fears destroying our wildlife. Oh the big bad wolf is gonna eat my kid! OMG please, most times when livestock was attacked in our area, it was a pack of domesticated dogs allowed to run loose by stupid owners, and not wolves and coyotes, but they were blamed as an excuse to blow their brains out.

[QUOTE=LavenderRott;868625]

FYI - man has been a natural predator since the time of the caveman.[/QUOTE]

Yup, and so have lions and tigers and bears and you don't see them all killing everything in sight just for the fun of it. FYI

The problem is some still think like caveman ;)

[QUOTE=happycats;869319]It's ironic really, most here agree with this deer cull, but what about the cat and dog overpopulation?
Should they all be rounded up and killed ? OMG no way most of you would say. So really what's the difference ?


In many rural areas they round up all the stray dogs and shoot them, but that's horrible, terrible, and most here would be dead against it, and would be fighting to save them all !!

I guess it's just the difference between an animal lover and a pet lover :shrug:[/QUOTE]

I understand what you are saying and I really hate the thought of culling any animal.:cry:, but I have also seen what starvation does to an animal :sad: It is a slow, horrid death. If dogs or cats were to starve on the street, then I would agree to culling them too as it is more humane than leaving them do die slowly.

I don't think any animal lover would want to have any animal suffer through a slow death. :sad: