City Council to hear deer removal options both violent and non-

The city of Charlottesville is setting its sights on the local deer population.

City Hall is looking at sharpshooting and urban archery as possible solutions to an overabundance of deer and the problems that go along with it, such as vehicle collisions and damage to gardens and wildlife habitats.

It’s unclear whether there’s any appetite on the City Council for using lethal methods to deal with deer, but councilors are scheduled to discuss the options at tonight’s meeting.

A memo prepared for councilors summarizes research on deer management programs in other cities such as Lynchburg and Staunton, but acknowledges that the issue is sure to be contentious.

“A recommendation for how to proceed with a deer management program is difficult in Charlottesville for several reasons,” the memo reads. “The primary concern is that the city is a tight, dense urban environment, making the likelihood of negative interaction with citizens or property more likely. The experience of other communities is that sharpshooting is, without a doubt, the most effective means to reduce the deer population. However, it is the most dangerous and the mostly likely to create problems for the city. Council will also need to decide if it is an efficient use of the resources. Likewise, urban archery is not without its danger and potential liability issues. Given these concerns it is believed that Council should proceed with community discussion of deer management with sharpshooting and urban archery as the two possible methods, but with both needing further discussion.”

City officials were told that two large auto body shops perform between 200 and 250 repairs each year due to collisions with deer, though those figures represent accidents in the larger region. The Charlottesville/Albemarle Health Department also reported 8 cases of Lyme disease in city limits in 2011. Lyme disease can be transmitted to humans via deer ticks, and high deer densities bring more ticks.

Mayor Satyendra Huja said Monday that he is opposed to killing animals, even though he sees anywhere from three to five deer near his home every day.

“Animals were here before we were, so I think we need to not kill deer at all,” Huja said.

Councilor Dave Norris echoed Huja’s remarks, saying the problems with deer are caused by humans “invading their turf.”

“There are plenty of things we can do short of bringing in sharpshooters and bow hunters to address this issue. I certainly don’t think it’s gotten to the point where we need to be killing off the deer,” Norris said. “… I would like to see us take that off the table [tonight]... and focus on non-lethal methods of addressing the issue and give that a try first.”

Most cities with sharpshooters use SWAT officers carrying silenced sniper rifles, while others contract with professional hunters, according to the City Hall memo. Most sharpshooting is usually done after midnight to minimize dangers to humans and reduce the likelihood that children might witness the deer dying. Possible locations for sharpshooting activities include McIntire, Pen and Azalea parks, and parkland along creeks, according to the memo.

City Hall also suggests that the deer meat could be donated to local food banks to help feed the needy.

The city estimates a sharpshooting program could cost $25,580 per year, which would cover the costs for manpower and processing the meat. The memo notes that Staunton has created a list of residents willing to pick up deer after a kill, which would eliminate processing costs.

Urban archery programs involving bows and crossbows are typically left up to citizens, but they require permits from the state Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, according to the memo. Archery hunts can take place on public land or private property during daylight hours.

The city estimates an archery program would cost a little more than $5,000 per year for administrative costs.

City Hall recommends that any deer management program be accompanied by a public relations campaign to educate residents on other methods to reduce conflict, including not feeding the animals, fencing, use of unpalatable plants, repellants and harassment techniques.

Norris suggested some of the non-lethal options may be a better approach.

“For the people that do have deer in the neighborhoods, we have to work with the residents there to figure out ways of getting into better balance with their natural surroundings,” Norris said.

City Hall’s recommendation includes scheduling a special work session on deer and holding a public hearing in order to come up with a plan that could be implemented this fall.