No quick fix for urban deer...
I glance out my window, coffee cup in hand, and see three mule deer in the yard eating the flower-tops off of “deer resistant” plants in my flower bed. Deer are in the newspaper headlines recently as communities struggles with increased populations living in cities and villages. In thirty years, resident hunting licenses in British Columbia have declined by half. Deer populations have expanded in many areas with resident urban deer having little fear of human activity, roads, vehicles, and dogs.
Deer have adapted to the “edge habitat” offered by rural neighbourhoods with lots of trees and greenery, ravines, and wooded areas connecting to natural areas.
Gradually a point is reached where complaints about aggressive deer, deer-vehicle collisions, and damage to crops and landscape plants rise to a level where elected officials take notice and begin to search for deer control options. Letters to newspaper editors presenting different options for dealing with deer show a wide variety of pubic attitudes to deer. Penticton is currently in this position.
Deer management is a complex issue for which very few municipalities have found a satisfactory response. Those cities or districts that have successfully initiated deer population control programs have done so after extensive planning and public consultation, while working with wildlife agencies to understand population data and management options. Often local and provincial bylaws and regulations need to be changed. Data must collected on wildlife damage so that measurable objectives can be set for population control measures.
The BC Ministry of Environment has published a guide for municipalities looking at the problem of high urban deer populations. “British Columbia Urban Ungulate Conflict Analysis Summary Report for Municipalities” is available on the internet, and is an excellent resource for those interested in looking at the pros and cons of different management options. I used information to prepare this article.
The report evaluates the effectiveness of different management options such as fencing, fertility control, landscape design, repellents, euthanasia, and limited hunting. Soft approaches such as landscape design, plant selection and use of repellants can reduce damage but are not very effective once deer populations are established in urban neighbourhoods. Permanent high fences help to solve deer damage to individual properties but do not solve the deer conflict problem being experienced by the community. In the sixteen years I have lived in the Okanagan, more vineyards and orchards are fenced every year but deer continue to increase on roads in built up areas.
Over 10,000 wildlife collisions a year in BC are reported to ICBC resulting in a yearly average of about 380 injuries, five fatalities, and $34 million paid out in damages. This is the most detrimental aspect of the build-up of deer near populated areas, with deer injuries and fatalities equal to the number of collisions.
The Ministry of Environment study looks at the challenges in managing urban ungulates and implementing management plans. Successful deer management strategies involve community consultation, often with a deer management committee being established with wide stakeholder representation.
We each view deer on our property according to our own values. To the fruit grower facing deer mutilated trees and vines, deer represent loss of income. To a gardener, deer browsing can affect years of landscaping effort or months of work growing vegetables. But to many, deer are a welcome sign of living near nature. Elected officials might start by collecting hard data on deer road collisions, damage to agriculture and to homeowners, then gauge public opinion on the perceived need for population control. The Ministry of Environment report has an example of a comprehensive resident survey. It would be a good place to start a community dialogue on the issue.
Photograph courtesy of Laure Neish.