5 ms·

Better to eradicate ticks.

somehnacct3757 5y ago
The deer themselves are a problem in the northeast. They are greatly overpopulated and eat the native understory, preventing the next generation of trees from growing past adolescence. As the existing trees slowly die, there will be none younger to replace them. This also clears out the competition to the benefit of non-native plants, which the deer don't eat. Some of these plants are invasive, such as japanese barberry, and render large areas untraversable. Not to mention the bramble is an excellent home for rodents, another major tick carrier. If you want to reduce ticks, deer are a critical element of their lifecycle.
- jf22 5y ago
  I'm sure deer populations have been higher in the past and the forests survived.
  - zz865 5y ago
    There used to be Wolves and Mountain lions to keep the deer under control.
  - echelon 5y ago
    There's nothing unethical with culling an overpopulated species. We do it to deer, wolves, etc. all the time via hunting permits. As long as wild biology subsists on killing and eating, there's no problem with humans doing the same in order to restore balance. It also helps to reintroduce natural predators when possible. But in absence of that strategy, humans can do the job too.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    There have been times of higher deer population. The population was much higher in PA when my dad was a kid. It currently sits around 30 deer per square mile, which 3 times higher than pre colonial times.
  - somehnacct3757 5y ago
    In my area there are over 120 deer per square mile currently. This number was historically 10, when predators existed. Studies have shown that around 30 deer per square mile is when biodiversity starts to suffer. I live in the forest and manage my lot with guidance from foresters and nearby park rangers. It may take a hundred years for these current trees to die, but there's nothing to replace them. You can walk the understory and see knee-high trees that can't grow further because the deer prune their leaves.
    - bjoli 5y ago
      120 deer per square mile?! In thought the moose problem in Sweden was big. That is just ridiculous. We have a moose population that is waaay higher than ever before because we killed most large predators, and the people responsible for keeping the population down (hunters) want a much larger population than is environmentally defensible.
- giantg2 5y ago
  The mice are the main component to the lyme lifecycle. There is a researcher working to give mice immunity using crispr. Generally, the deer are only overpopulating (at least to the extent you describe) in areas that aren't hunted, which also tend to be highly populated. It seems many people enjoy seeing the deer in their backyards and don't want their almost-pets to be killed, especially if it means it might have to be done on their land. How do you propose dealing with that opposition?
  - gkilmain 5y ago
    Definitely. I bought tick tubes which target the mice. I've had one on me since putting them out in late April. I think they're working but need more time to test.
  - somehnacct3757 5y ago
    Show them a close-up of a deer's face in an ad campaign, lol. They're covered in ticks, it's like a Ren & Stimpy zoom shot. You could also get more ppl into gardening. Gardeners end up hating deer after their gardens get raided once or twice.
  - cmrdporcupine 5y ago
    Eastern red fox populations need to be higher. They're amazing mouse hunters.
  - technothrasher 5y ago
    > Generally, the deer are only overpopulating (at least to the extent you describe) in areas that aren't hunted Central Massachusetts has a very active deer hunting community. I never have any trouble filling my freezer with free venison every fall. But the deer population is still four times the sustainable level as set by the state Wildlife dept and local conservation groups. Hunting isn't necessarily enough to control the population.
    - giantg2 5y ago
      It depends on a number of factors. Access is a huge one where I'm at. Public lands can be basically hunted out while the deer have moved onto private lands where nobody hunts and created huge herds (30+). If your area doesn't have the access issue, then I would guess it could be an issue with the number of hunters - if there aren't enough, then they can't harvest the number required to bring down the population (or the limits make it difficult - seems like that's the case the way they handle doe permits). Many states have a program that allows hunters to donate their deer to a food bank through a participating butcher. This can make a big impact in areas that allow more harvests (MD allows 10 doe per year/season without any special permits).
- gilbetron 5y ago
  Don't forget to give part of the blame for the forest woes on worms: https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/the_dirt_about_earthworms https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/the_dirt_about_earthworms

The deer themselves are a problem in the northeast. They are greatly overpopulated and eat the native understory, preventing the next generation of trees from growing past adolescence. As the existing trees slowly die, there will be none younger to replace them. This also clears out the competition to the benefit of non-native plants, which the deer don't eat. Some of these plants are invasive, such as japanese barberry, and render large areas untraversable. Not to mention the bramble is an excellent home for rodents, another major tick carrier. If you want to reduce ticks, deer are a critical element of their lifecycle.

jf22 5y ago
I'm sure deer populations have been higher in the past and the forests survived.
- zz865 5y ago
  There used to be Wolves and Mountain lions to keep the deer under control.
- echelon 5y ago
  There's nothing unethical with culling an overpopulated species. We do it to deer, wolves, etc. all the time via hunting permits. As long as wild biology subsists on killing and eating, there's no problem with humans doing the same in order to restore balance. It also helps to reintroduce natural predators when possible. But in absence of that strategy, humans can do the job too.
- giantg2 5y ago
  There have been times of higher deer population. The population was much higher in PA when my dad was a kid. It currently sits around 30 deer per square mile, which 3 times higher than pre colonial times.
- somehnacct3757 5y ago
  In my area there are over 120 deer per square mile currently. This number was historically 10, when predators existed. Studies have shown that around 30 deer per square mile is when biodiversity starts to suffer. I live in the forest and manage my lot with guidance from foresters and nearby park rangers. It may take a hundred years for these current trees to die, but there's nothing to replace them. You can walk the understory and see knee-high trees that can't grow further because the deer prune their leaves.
  - bjoli 5y ago
    120 deer per square mile?! In thought the moose problem in Sweden was big. That is just ridiculous. We have a moose population that is waaay higher than ever before because we killed most large predators, and the people responsible for keeping the population down (hunters) want a much larger population than is environmentally defensible.
giantg2 5y ago
The mice are the main component to the lyme lifecycle. There is a researcher working to give mice immunity using crispr. Generally, the deer are only overpopulating (at least to the extent you describe) in areas that aren't hunted, which also tend to be highly populated. It seems many people enjoy seeing the deer in their backyards and don't want their almost-pets to be killed, especially if it means it might have to be done on their land. How do you propose dealing with that opposition?
- gkilmain 5y ago
  Definitely. I bought tick tubes which target the mice. I've had one on me since putting them out in late April. I think they're working but need more time to test.
- somehnacct3757 5y ago
  Show them a close-up of a deer's face in an ad campaign, lol. They're covered in ticks, it's like a Ren & Stimpy zoom shot. You could also get more ppl into gardening. Gardeners end up hating deer after their gardens get raided once or twice.
- cmrdporcupine 5y ago
  Eastern red fox populations need to be higher. They're amazing mouse hunters.
- technothrasher 5y ago
  > Generally, the deer are only overpopulating (at least to the extent you describe) in areas that aren't hunted Central Massachusetts has a very active deer hunting community. I never have any trouble filling my freezer with free venison every fall. But the deer population is still four times the sustainable level as set by the state Wildlife dept and local conservation groups. Hunting isn't necessarily enough to control the population.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    It depends on a number of factors. Access is a huge one where I'm at. Public lands can be basically hunted out while the deer have moved onto private lands where nobody hunts and created huge herds (30+). If your area doesn't have the access issue, then I would guess it could be an issue with the number of hunters - if there aren't enough, then they can't harvest the number required to bring down the population (or the limits make it difficult - seems like that's the case the way they handle doe permits). Many states have a program that allows hunters to donate their deer to a food bank through a participating butcher. This can make a big impact in areas that allow more harvests (MD allows 10 doe per year/season without any special permits).
gilbetron 5y ago
Don't forget to give part of the blame for the forest woes on worms: https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/the_dirt_about_earthworms https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/the_dirt_about_earthworms