Here is a copy of the deer survey which Tom Kelley touched upon on Monday night. Chief Coleman McDonough discussed the increase in deer incidents, but also pointed out that residents may be more apt to call the police now to report a deer SIGHTING. We all know how quickly Kristen and her following like calling the police for perceived incidents. Filing a police report and comparing me to the Gabby Giffords attack when an anonymous comment discussed the execution of a document, or when a resident cautioned her not to speak of her family during a public school board meeting, or when terroristic threats were allegedly made to her when she had Real Lebo, or how about when she had the police show up on private property because of an alleged sign stealing incident are just a few that come to mind.
Ms. Linfante's concern for public safety seemed to dissapate when I brought up the dangerous situation in front of her house. It occurs when there are cars parked on both sides of her narrow street at the crest of the hill. An accident at that blind spot "is only a matter of time." What the Kluck?
Update June 26, 2013 5:50 PM From a 5:26 PM Lebo ALERT :
This is an important notice from LeboALERT.If you have difficulty finding them on their website, I have them here. They are easier to read than what I originally scanned since these are in color.
2013 deer management study is posted at www.mtlebanon.org. If you have comments, contact your commissioner.
Vision Air Deer Survey 2013
2013 Deer Locator Map
Update June 27, 2013 6:40 AM Following my last blog comment at 4:34 AM, I sent an additional email to the Commission concerning the survey. The email exchange follows. Where's Dave Brumfield when I need him?
At 5:32 AM, I wrote:
OK, I officially was up all night. Kristen rounded up the count to 60
deer per square mile. That makes it 2520 deer in Mt. Lebanon. What was the
count, Kristen?
I have a class at 9 AM. That is in 3.5 hours. Thanks, guys.
Elaine Gillen
At 5:41 AM, I heard from Kristen:
Well, Ms Gillen, I am awake as well. Surely, your lack of sleep has gotten the best of you. We are 6 sq. miles and there were 342 deer counted. Period. That equals about 57 per sq mile, or 60 as I stated since I rounded up - which seemed appropriate after the May births.
If you look at the GIS you will see that only a few deer were counted on the boundary edges - appropriately so, I might add, per Mr Kelley's explanation about their habits.
Kristen Linfante
Commissioner, Ward 3
6:01 AM, I responded with:
Kristen, who did the math? You or Tom? There were 342 deer counted in 42
square miles. Listen to what Steve and Tom said. Period.
Elaine
6:06 AM, Kristen's comeback:
Ms Gillen,
This will be my final response to your absurd emails.
I think the recommended animal to count to help with sleep is sheep, not deer. Perhaps the switch might help.
With your lack of sleep, please drive carefully to your class- there are a lot of deer out there.
Kristen Linfante
Commissioner, Ward 3
Update June 27, 2013 4:15 PM Dave Brumfield sent me an email today, after I sent this to the Commission this morning at 7:34 AM:
Commissioners, I am sending a link to a Google Doc which a Lebo Citizens reader created for my Lebo Citizens blog. It may help Kristen better understand what Tom Kelley and Steve Feller said at Monday's Discussion meeting. https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B9r_1biKte_bQnRrb2p0Y2E3NGM/edit?usp=sharing
Elaine Gillen
I got this response from Dave Brumfield, sent at 9:22 AM:
I would have sent this sooner, but as I indicated in my earlier emails, I have been in class all day.Ms. Gillen,I wanted to clarify a few apparent misconceptions you have about the results of the deer survey. First the aerial survey did not add a 2 mile buffer to all of Mt. Lebanon. For efficiency's sake, due to our irregular borders the area was squared off. This certainly made the survey area greater than Mt. Lebanon's actual footprint, but it was nowhere near a 42 square mile area. Mr Kelly did point out that some of the deer included in the count were over 2000 feet from the border, but even that distance is not consistent all the way around the map. When discussing the deer outside our borders that were included in the count Mr. Kelly did mention that deer have a 2 mile radius that defines their "living area". But to be clear the survey results do apply to Mt. Lebanon's 6 square miles. The count reflects the number of different deer that are likely to be seen within our borders. Taking a snapshot count of an active deer population we have to account for their movement patterns. The density numbers cited by the commission and staff are accurate based on the survey results and Mt. Lebanon's actual area. They might be misleading if a neighboring community did a similiar survey, as deer would be double counted, but as an assessment of how many deer are contributing to our reported incidents it is accurate as stated.Additionally, I would ask that in the future if you intend your information to be of assistance to just one Commissioner please send the email just to them. If you intend it for all of us than address your comments and questions to all of us.Thank you.Dave Brumfield
Update July 2, 1013 12:08 PM The map below shows the bullet range of a stray bullet. The map is of town in NY which is 1.5 miles in its widest point. It is conceivable that a shot could be fired on one border of Mt. Lebanon and travel all the way to the other side of Mt. Lebanon.
Linfante lives her hyperbole! She's quoted in the Almanac: "“We’re not only putting our residents at risk, we’re putting our public safety officers at risk, too,” commissioner Kristen Linfante said. “They’re driving down the roads at high speeds. It’s only a matter of time before a major disaster occurs.”"
ReplyDeleteHigh speed driving on our municipal streets, none of which is posted above 35mph. I'd be more concerned for the thousands of kids, joggers and walkers than the few hundred deer we 'may' have. A matter oftime before a "major disaster occurs"! Really? What are we going to see... a hundred car pile up, thousands injured at Roycroft and Castle Shannon?
To protect our high speed drivers we may want to start culling those joggers that run in the streets and ignore crossing signs.
Plus, you make a good point Elaine. While the Chief is no doubt accurate in his incidentcount, the devil is in the details.
How many deer related accidents actually occurred?
How many of the calls were from the same resident?
I'm betting we'll see a completely different picture.
How many people have been injured in a deer-related incident... vehicle related or not over the past year... 5 years... ten years?
ReplyDeleteCompared to how many people have been injured in DUIs, pedestrian-vehicle and excessive speed, blown stop sign, illegal turns.
Oh the carnage Ms. Linfante, kill Bambi now before humanity ceases to exist in your little duchy!
I hope the commissioners consider a statement that Kristen made at the Discussion Session. She said something like, "Contact Upper St. Clair. They have been doing this for years."
ReplyDeleteFor years? So culling isn't the answer. Sounds like Kelly's sterilization program has merit.
And before anyone criticizes me for only approving comments that support my side, you do have commissioners and a public works official supporting your side. The back room deal is that you support me on artificial turf, and I'll support you on deer culling. One commissioner has stated on the record that he will only support culling when deer are allowed to carry guns to level the playing field. Unless that field is artificially turfed.
Elaine
Perhaps our PIO can actually provide some useful public information detailing the Chief's deer incidents reports.
ReplyDeleteBefore we spend $60,000 culling deer it would be good to knowi if the reports are due to deer/car crashes or some resided calling repeatedly because some deer is nibbling on her begonias!
The chief says each incident costs $75, maybe it'd be cheaper to buy that resident some netting or deer repellant!
10:34 is asking our PIO to actually do some work!
ReplyDeleteA-HA! A-HA-HA-HA! A-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!
Yeah, I forgot that's a helluva a lot to ask of some making slave wages. I'd rather here more of her vacation stories. By the way her expenses reimbursed or tax deductible if she writes aboutin in Lebomag?
ReplyDeleteOK here's a plan that kills two birds (or rather deer!) with one stone.
ReplyDeleteTo keep all these ESB, tree-hugging, save the planet goodniks honest that have no problems forcing their agendas on everyone else should live with their actions.
Here's the plan.
Trigger happy Linfante and pals get their deer cull! But, to pay for it the municipality starts an annual venison festival in the park featuring venison chili, stew, etc.
We can make it a Lebo event, other towns have their pumpkin, tomato, maple, popcorn, BBQ festivals... Why not a venison festival?
Linfante can be the Mistress of Ceremonies and partake of the first bowl of venison chili or stew. Her choice.
We can have booths with deerskin vest, gloves, skirts. Powdered deer horn potions for ED, trinkets and jewelry.
It be the event of the year. Winchester, Henry, Remington will show up with their traveling displays. The new hotel will be booked months in advance.
Then all that new tourist money can be used to turf and light Mr. Franklin's fields.
It's a win-win. C'mon Commissioner Linfante you get everything you want, get on the team. New revenue, fewer deer. Just one bowl of venison stew and a $10 admission ticket is all it'll cost you. Think of the lives you'll save.
I'm no rocket scientist and certainly not as pretty or smart as our female officials but here's my Terc investigation attempt.
ReplyDeleteIf Lebo is 6 sq miles then it some dimension like 2 x 3 miles. 2 x 3 = 6.
Add the 2 mile deer range to each side of the square and we get 6 miles x 7 miles or 42 sq miles.
342 deer dispersed over 42 sq miles = 8.14 deer per square mile.
Let's combine all the fund-raisers in town. We can have the First Friday Ultra-Cull BrewFest in the Park.
ReplyDeleteSeriously, let me use the local nitwits' words agsint them (including various members of the school board): if you want turf for six-year olds, if you want a place that pisses away money on phantom deer, and if you want a community flush with cash, then move. Leave. Kristin, Dave, pretty much whole school board...leave. Oh, you don't like that? That's been your response to anyone who has dared mention the financial disaster our town has become. Really, though, just leave. The town will be better off without you.
And there's more...
ReplyDeleteThe school district could showcase it's renovated Fine Arts Theatre with a dramatization of Cooper's "The Deerskayer".
Andy Griffith got his start performing in The Lost Colony down at the Outer Banks, giving our PIO new stuff to write about.
While this is entirely anecdotal, our street has the same group of seven deer for the last few seasons which have caused a great deal of damage to landscaping. One could make an argument that this is just a side effect of living in a suburban setting, that we need to adjust what we plant and that it's not the municipality's responsibility to manage the population in the name of our gardens. While this is not my opinion, I understand it.
ReplyDeleteI will point out however, that a side effect of the herd growth is that the shortcuts that children have been using to get to school for generations are slowly being sealed off. People are tired of watching their gardens being destroyed and figure the easiest solution is to just fence off their yards. This means that fewer young kids are walking to school because they're forced onto the main roads at rush hour.
I've spoken to a couple apologetic neighbors who welcomed kids using their yards as a shortcut, but felt like they had to put up fences to protect their landscaping investments. Again, it's just anecdotal, but I think this disunites us a community.
Lets see, 6 square miles, sorta like 3 X 2 = 6. If you extend 2 miles in each direction, it would then be like 5 X 4 = 20 square miles. If there were 342 deer counted in that 20 square mile area, that would be an average of 342/20 = 17 deer/square mile, not 57 or 60 for crying out loud !
ReplyDeleteAnd no one at the Commission meeting - Commissioners, solicitor, manager or staff - caught or spoke up to correct the misinformation ? No wonder we're in deep trouble.
Do I win a free bowl of venison chili for my math prize ?
12:46 your math Is flawed. Two miles in EACH direction would add two miles on each and every side of a box.
ReplyDeleteIf your box is 2 x 3 sq. miles, two miles on the east, west, north and south sides expands that box to 6 x 7 sq miles, not 5 x 4.
To 12:33, it appears the biggest threat to our kids is not deer, but excessive vehicle speeds in a community where kids are expected to walk to school.
And where does our SD focus efforts to get kids safely across a dangerous (snicker) boulevard- why Horsman Drive.
12:19 I agree with your sentiment, but not the delivery.
1:08 PM, are you a graduate of MTLSD ?
ReplyDelete1:08 PM, very good. You solved the problem. 342 divided by 42 equals a little more than 8 deer per square mile. The old saying goes: Figures don't lie, but liars figure.
ReplyDeleteElaine
Did anyone read the actual report? The report says that within the squared off area as shown in appendix A, there were 342 deer found. Mt Lebanon is 6.05 square miles and by my estimate the squared off area is 7.6 square miles (I used Scott Twp municipal park, the intersection of Greentree Road and McMonagle Road, Riehl Park, and Village Green Park as the four corners of the squared off area; this tool will find area: http://www.daftlogic.com/projects-google-maps-area-calculator-tool.htm).
ReplyDeleteSo let's do the actual math:
342 deer / 7.5 square mile = x deer / 6.05 square mile
Solving for x, we get 275 deer. Divide that by 6.05 and we get 45 deer per square mile in Mt Lebanon.
While the range of a deer might well be 2 miles, this ignores the fact that the report says that 342 deer were found in the project area in Appendix A on February 25. The range of the deer is utterly irrelevant to the density of the deer calculation. Whether the speaker at the meeting misspoke or the listener misheard as to the relevance of a deer's range, I could not say. Unless there was some organized effort by the deer to all simultaneously travel to the Mt Lebanon edges of their respective ranges, your whole “math question” is pointless.
Plus!, the study says that there was a possibility of 15% underdetetection in deciduous forest and 50% underdetetection in conifer forests. So 45.06 deer per square mile is the lowball.
Plus!, plus!, you all ignore the dramatic apples-to-apples comparison outlined in the Almanac article. In 2006, there were 90 deer found in Mt Lebanon. Assuming that the 2006 study followed the actual borders of the municipality and not the squared off area, that's a threefold increase!
2:23 the range is relevant to the density of the deer calculation.
ReplyDeleteYou're are assuming that on February 25th every deer found in Lebo is a Lebo deer.
How do you know that on that given day 10, 20, 30 deer were grazing here from Scott and 15 or so were grazing here from USC.
Maybe it was a deer recreation meeting on that day, I don't know.
So yes, on Feb 25th you are absolutely correct, we had 342 in our borders and the range is irrelevant.
But unless you counted... we might easily had 75 deer, or 250 or 736 deer on February 26th.
Who knows? But range is indeed relevant, unless you're going to pass some ordinance that only those 342 deer be in MTL on the days we send out the hunters.
2:23 how many actual deer/vehicle collisions occurred in MTL this year, last year and each year back to 2005?
ReplyDeleteIf the deer population is exploding as you suggest we should have had Ms. Linfante's major disaster by now, wouldn't you think?
As to your comment that range is irrelevant, I have some friends that are advid deer hunters. They'll scope out areas and find the one just flush with deer. Then the week they take off for buck season they'll see not a one and come home empty handed.
Guess those pesky deer had meetings in Lebo that week, right.
4:35, holy moly.
ReplyDeleteSo you're saying that it's more likely that there were more deer immigrants to Mt Lebanon from surrounding communities the evening of February 25 than emigrants from Mt Lebanon to surrounding communities? Was there something going on that night in the deer world? Are you suggesting that Ms. Linfante baited the perimeter of Mt Lebanon to boost the numbers? Tell me more about this deer conspiracy theory of yours. I'm all ears.
Oh, 2:23 PM, yes I actually read the report. In fact, I attended the presentation. So let's talk numbers. In Appendix A, the rectangle drawn includes the deer groupings. They went two miles out from the borders of Mt. Lebanon. Like it or not, that comes to 42 square miles. You write, "Plus!, the study says that there was a possibility of 15% underdetetection in deciduous forest and 50% underdetetection in conifer forests." That is true of any study. This a CYA statement that is included in their study.
ReplyDeleteFor an apples to apples comparison, this is the first time we did an aerial survey. To have a true apples to apples comparison, the municipality needs to do another aerial survey next February, an idea that some of the commissioners are considering. The survey cost was low enough that the funding is there to do an additional aerial survey next February. Are you in? I am.
Elaine
Here is a map illustrating the square miles considered, 2:23 PM. Thanks to the reader who created this document.Deer map
ReplyDeleteElaine
4:54 I'm not suggesting a conspiracy or clandestine deer meetings or a Linfante round up.
ReplyDeleteI'm just commenting that a survey taken on February 25 just doesn't seem to be a very accurate count.
You on the other hand believe that on the evening of Feb. 25 is the definitive count of deer in our midst.
How do I know why we had 342 deer. Maybe they exhausted all the convenient food just over the survey area border and happened to come here. Maybe 100 or so went to Dairy Queen in Dormont for a cone that night and we really have 442 deer.
The whole point is that with one survey taken on one specific night you are only getting a snapshot of that moment in time.
342 fits your agenda, so be it.
That map available at 5:14 Elaine, says the deer could range 2 miles from any edge of Mt. Lebanon. Deer from those surrounding 35 light blue boxes could just as easily wander INTO Mt. Lebanon.
ReplyDeleteThe gods are getting angry. Here is the latest LeboALERT.
ReplyDeleteFrom: LeboALERT
To: EGillen476
Subject: LeboALERT: 2013 deer management...
Date: Wed, Jun 26, 2013 5:26 pm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is an important notice from LeboALERT.
2013 deer management study is posted at www.mtlebanon.org. If you have comments, contact your commissioner.
Elaine
I thought they didn't read your blog!
ReplyDeleteI waited until today to post the survey, hoping the PIO would be proactive. They got the information before I did!
ReplyDeleteElaine
You should REALLY look at this map: http://i.imgur.com/J6toYWM.png?1
ReplyDeleteYou said, "So let's talk numbers. In Appendix A, the rectangle drawn includes the deer groupings. They went two miles out from the borders of Mt. Lebanon."
You also said, "Figures don't lie, but liars figure."
OK, 5:57 PM, go on.
ReplyDeleteElaine
I'll go on. The map I provided clearly showed that there is no two mile halo around Mt Lebanon when counting the deer. Do you realize that I-79 is less than 1-1/4 miles from the Mt Lebanon border? Do you think they surveyed the interstate?Instead, the methodology used by the aerial survey is very clearly spelled out in the document. And perhaps you should have taken the time to read and understand the survey before calling Ms. Linfante a liar. You should be ashamed of yourself.
ReplyDelete7:49 what in heavens name are you talking about.
ReplyDeleteAre you suggesting no deer are in the area where someone penned Galleria?
Are you suggesting deer don't cross interstates?
Loicing at your map there's no Chik-Fil-A or Trader Joe's either.
Oh, 7:49 PM, you crack me up. If you would have listened to the podcast
ReplyDeletehttp://www.lebocitizens.com/Lebo_Citizens/Podcasts/Entries/2013/6/24_Commission_Discussion_Session_Part_2.html you would have heard Steve Feller ask Tom Kelley about the deer outside of the boundries. Tom explained that the range that deer use for feeding is a 2 mile radius, so they consider that as part of the count. Tom said that some are 2700 feet outside of the boundries. So if you want to quibble about feet, go right ahead. Tom Kelley said there were 57 deer per square mile. Kristen rounded it up to 60. I read the document and I posted the document. I posted the podcast too. I pretty much know what was said and presented.
I really don't care what you think.
Elaine
7:49 take a few of your maps deer sightings and draw circles with 2 mile radius around each. Use deer near the perimeters of Mt. Lebanon.
ReplyDeleteThen pick some landmarks outside of Lebo and draw those same 2 mile radius circles. Say the Pesto post office, Cool Springs Golf, Aldi's on McNeilly, Bethel Bakery, Caste Village, South Hills Village, South Park.
Do the circles overlay one another?
So 7:49, its feasible that deer living in the woods on say Weyman Road behind Caste or behind Lowe's on Baptist could be counted in our survey, could they not?
So you could cull forever and since you can't shoot into Whitehall or Bethel never eliminate these deer from your count.
60 deer per square mile seems awfully high. At those kind of numbers you think one would spot at least one deer every day. Or find evidence of deer... tracks, droppings, fur on bark or fences.
ReplyDeleteFour years ago, I wouldn't be surprised at that count. I'd see 2 or 3 almost every other day. Sometimes they'd be so brazen as to walk down the middle of the street In broad daylight like they owned it.
Last year and this, I've gone a month without seeing one.
The many drivers who SPEED around this town on 25 mph streets every day are much more a threat than the deer. If you are driving the speed limit, you will see any deer in plenty of time to stop.
ReplyDeleteAlso, common sense should tell drivers to be on the lookout for deer around the park areas and nearby streets.
Some of us could benefit by rereading Genesis.
I just sent this to the Commission, Steve Feller, and Tom Kelley:
ReplyDeleteGood morning,
I am pretty sure that most of you are still sleeping, but my sleepless nights over deer have started again, thanks to you folks.
The deer survey that shows 342 deer was counted in a 42 square mile area, not a 6 square mile area. According to the recording of the June 24, 2013 Discussion Session, Steve Feller asked Tom Kelley about the
deer outside of the boundaries. Tom explained that the range that deer use for feeding is a 2 mile radius, so they considered that as part of the count. Tom said that some are 2700 feet outside of the boundaries. The figure that he used of 57 deer per square mile is grossly incorrect. There are 8.1 deer per square mile.
Elaine Gillen
I also noticed that I spelled boundaries incorrectly in my 9:13 PM comment.
Elaine
I sent another email to the commission putting it another way.
ReplyDelete"The area surveyed was 42 square miles, if you go 2 miles past the boundaries of Mt. Lebanon on all sides. If Tom Kelley is correct in saying that there are 57 deer per square mile, then there should have been 2394 deer counted. What was the count, folks?
Elaine Gillen"
I just love knowing that I have a 9:00 AM class this morning.
Elaine
I updated this thread again. Dave Brumfield, where are you now?Elaine
ReplyDeleteCounted 61 "dots" within the border. Many are blue and yellow, meaning less than 4. If you assume they average "brown" that would be 4 per group. At 4 per group that would be 241 deer, or about 40 per sq mile.
ReplyDeleteNow this was quickly looking on a computer screen. The thing to do is count the actual dots by color and total the deer and divide by the area. It should not be that hard and will likely be no where near 60 per sq mile. It is a finite number. There is no reason to count the deer that went outside the border. Some of the deer that came to mt lebanon are just visiting as well.
This has been a real opportunity for Mrs. Linfante to show what kind of commissioner she is and how she respects her constituents.
BTW how do they tell the difference between deer and unicorn?
Can none of you read? Survey says:
ReplyDelete"The municipality has an irregular boundary. To reduce flight time and thus flight costs the project area was squared off to facilitate transition from one transect to the adjacent transect."
So when you see the little dots outside of the municipal boundaries on the locator map, those are part of the "squared off" project area. In fact, that's exactly what the comment at 2:23 yesterday said.
And 42 square miles is an invention. You realize that if the plane was to survey 42 square miles with 800 foot wide transects, the plane would have had to travel more than 250 miles the evening of February 25? You people are being willfully ignorant.
And Elaine, despite being given proof that you're wrong on a silver platter, you keep doubling down, hurling childish insults and making yourself look like more and more of a fool.
Perhaps you can contact the company that did the survey and get confirmation:
Susan Bernatas
904 East Washington Street
Boise, Idaho 83712
208.841.9566
info@visionairresearch.com
www.visionairresearch.com
I'm sure she's used to dealing with local nuts.
I love these kind of problems.
ReplyDeleteThe obvious question for me is why the high concentration of deer in the MTL 6 sq miles?
Subtract that area and thel deer within and what is the concentration of deer in the two mile "halo" around our borders? Looking at Ariel map it looks like very few.
So are the deer coming into Lebo for our great schools or just because it's a great walking community?
Inquiring minds want to know!
This Blogger concludes that given the size of Mount Lebanon and the roaming habits of deer, all of the deer accounted for in the survey could be coming from outside of the township. It is, in fact, a snapshot in time.
ReplyDeleteThank you, 8:23 AM. Your comment is right up there (or should I say down there?) with my commissioner's.
ReplyDeleteElaine
Calling Ccommissioner "let's play nice" Brumfield!
ReplyDeleteAre we supposed to call the police when we see a deer? Are we supposed to call the police when we see more than 2 dozen Hispanic men squatting in Bird Park? Everyone's more worried about the deer and the cost and damage associated with them when we should be worried about the undocumented people in our parks that wait for someone to hire them to rake their leaves or what ever else they need done. The police can't arrest these people because the INS will not come get them. If these undocumented workers are in our jail we have to pay to feed them and we have to provide medical attention when needed. That costs more than a deer incident. There are deer and undocumented people in the bubble. The police department knows about both issues. By the way our police department is top notch and everyone from the Chief down should be proud of what they do everyday to protect us. I am very proud of them and support them. And that's no lie, we are lucky indeed to be safe. Mrs. Linfante let them focus on crime PLEASE. Case in point...At Petco recently a woman was telling the cashier about how her house was robbed and her cats were mistreated by the perpetrator and now the cats are suffering from some mental problems now. The women said the she lives behind Mineo's and many homes are being broken into. She was very distraught over being violated because of this crime. Please let our great police department do what their job is and that is to investigate crimes and solve them. Deer don't break into homes very often but people do. We should assume a crime is being done by people and not deer. There are laws against people committing crimes. Are there any laws on the books against deer doing what they do? I don't think so.
ReplyDeleteHere's a different perspective:
ReplyDelete1. First, my biases: I see deer almost every day (not sure if they're the same handful of deer or not), I like seeing deer, I've also had a couple of close calls with them on the roads (inside and outside MTL). My strong bias is against hunting in MTL for both humanitarian and safety reasons, and I don't despise MTL local government nearly as much as some on this blog.
2. From my read of the materials, they did NOT count every deer within two miles of the MTL border (BTW, minus the deer, the problem with the two mile border appeared almost exactly in the review materials for the Algebra Keystone this spring--and gave a 10th grader I know fits; btw, he was pre-TERC, so don't go there).
3. At the same time, it's clear that they did count some deer that were outside the borders (and could probably determine about how many).
4. Thus, the deer per square mile is probably less than 57 and greater than 8. I'd guess from my quick read that it's closer to 57 than it is to 8.
5. So what? I have no clue whether 57 (or 8) is a lot, a little, too many (whatever that means), etc. Further, any guide in that regard is going to be inaccurate because it fails to take into account traffic patterns, where the deer are, how much wooded area there is, etc. At the extremes, if the deer stayed on the golf course and in the park all the time, there would be little problem. If they all spent their days going back and forth from DiNardo's to Mineo's, there would be a big problem.
6. There's no reason to assume that there are any more or fewer deer in the snapshot who are "Mt. Lebanon deer" visiting outside MTL than there are "non-Mount Lebanon deer" visiting inside MTL. Minus a report of a big USC-MTL deer basketball game in either place, the best assumption is the two cancel each other out. In that respect, the number counted is the best estimate.
7. But that number counted has several problems. First, it's only a snapshot, so it doesn't tell us about trends over time (and I would think that's what we want to know). Second, it isn't totally accurate. It probably undercounts deer (misses some), but it could also overcount (mistake a big rock for a deer).
8. The way to address both of those problems (needing to know about change over time, and methodological issues) is to do a second count next year at the exact same time (taking into account deer basketball schedules, or course), using the exact same methodology. That would allow for comparison with the previous year, and it would also ameliorate the effects of the systematic biases with the counting method (since you'd be using the same method both years).--Neil Berch
8:23, I just drove a loop Bower Hill to Cochran to Washington to Castle Shannon to Scott to Washington and Back to Bower Hill.
ReplyDeleteWith a concentration of 60 deer per sq mile I would have expected to catch at least a fleeting glimpse of one deer.
Didn't see one!
Furthermore, I make this loop fairly regularly and it's been ages since spotting a deer.
I haven't seen a deer in weeks and I live not far from the park on Beadling Road.
ReplyDeleteWhat would really shine an accurate light on the deer issue and establish the potential for a "major disaster" would be if they overlaid the survey Ariel map with a plot of every police incident.
ReplyDeleteSay---
Red dots for every deer/car accident
Green dots for every annoyance call (bet there will be a huge number from 1 or 2 addresses)
Blue dots for deer attacks on kids or pets
Then you'd get an accurate picture of the deer problem and could devise a plan. Maybe one street has a problem, PennDOT pinpoints deer crossing areas easily, maybe that's all we need... a couple of warning signs.
Maybe those 1, 2, 5 or 10 people with deer issues just need educated to change their choice of plants. Which would be cheaper than thousands of dollars for hunters.
A plane crisscrossing the community at 70 or 80 mph (slowest stall speed I know of for fixed wing aircraft) only gives a brief count at one specific time.
Incident reports over period of months or year paints a more accurate picture.
Combining the survey and the police incident reports would shine a bright light on 'the problem.' plus it would save buying another $5,000 (?) survey.
Neil,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comment. If I may address your points one by one.
1. I think that since we’re not willing to tolerate deer predators in a our community, it is our responsibility to control the size of the deer population. Controlling the population is the humanitarian thing to do.
2. This is correct. The report by Vision Air is very clear when they define the “project area.”
3. Also correct. They “squared off” the project area because Lebo has “an irregular boundary. In the map in the Appendix, you can also see that a few deer were counted when the aircraft made the 180 degree turn from one transect to the next.
4. The 2:23 comment from yesterday addresses this:
“Mt Lebanon is 6.05 square miles and by my estimate the squared off area is 7.6 square miles (I used Scott Twp municipal park, the intersection of Greentree Road and McMonagle Road, Riehl Park, and Village Green Park as the four corners of the squared off area; this tool will find area: http://www.daftlogic.com/projects-google-maps-area-calculator-tool.htm).
So let's do the actual math:
342 deer / 7.5 square mile = x deer / 6.05 square mile
Solving for x, we get 275 deer. Divide that by 6.05 and we get 45 deer per square mile in Mt Lebanon.”
5. I utterly agree.
6. Also agree entirely.
7. I think the 2006 survey is an interesting comparison. If you compare it to that, it shows a threefold increase. Also, in regards underdetection, the 2:23 comment from yesterday addresses this:
“Plus!, the study says that there was a possibility of 15% underdetetection in deciduous forest and 50% underdetetection in conifer forests. So 45.06 deer per square mile is the lowball.”
As to overdetection and “mistak[ing] a big rock for a deer,” the survey used thermo detection. So unless the rock was lava, that seem unlikely. I think a legit possibility for overdetection would be the undocumented workers the paranoid 9:54 comment referenced or the neighbor’s great dane.
8. Very much agree.
Mr. Berch, just saw your post and agree with everything except spending more money for another survey.
ReplyDeleteWe have a very good survey at hand, the police incident reports that are more than a snapshot in time.
It would take a municipal employee or intern less than a couple of hours to plot the type of incident and where it occurred.
Like you said, if the deer are hangin' on the golf course who cares. On the other hand if they have a taste for Mineos pizza we need to change their habits.
10:38 I think it's pretty easy to see where you're coming from.
ReplyDeleteYour first point: "1. I think that since we’re not willing to tolerate deer predators in a our community,"
How'd you arrive at that conclusion? You didn't ask me. Because you don't tolerate deer, everybody must be intolerant too?
I'm willing to tolerate the deer, even sort of enjoy the occasional sighting. Yeah, they occasionally invade our garden, but that's no more of a nuisance than the McDonalds litter deposited on our lawn regularly (and I don't think that warrants gunning down McD's patrons).
10:38 a community wide intolerance for deer - is that your opinion or fact?
ReplyDeleteIf the community is so universally intolerant why did the commissioners just institute an ordinance prohibiting feeding the deer?
Elaine, your readership doesn't pride itself on reading comprehension, does it?
ReplyDelete10:38 and 11:20, I wrote, "since we’re not willing to tolerate deer predators in a our community [sic]."
Deer PREDATORS. PREDATORS.
From Wikipedia:
"There are several natural predators of white-tailed deer. Wolves, cougars, American alligators, and (in the tropics) jaguars are the more effective natural predators of white-tailed deer. These predators frequently pick out easily caught young or infirm deer (which is believed to incidentally improve the genetic stock of a population) but can and do take healthy adults of any size. Bobcats, lynxes, bears, wolverines, and packs of coyotes usually will prey mainly on deer fawns. Bears may sometimes attack adult deer while lynxes, coyotes, wolverines and bobcats are most likely to take adult deer when the ungulates are weakened by harsh winter weather."
So again, unless I'm way out of touch and the community is willing to release mountain lions in Main Park, I think my assessment of the community's tolerance was on the money.
Sheesh. You people.
I don't think alligators, mountain lions, coyotes (although coyotes have been spotted here) or anything along those lines would be a good idea. :)
ReplyDeleteElaine
OK you got me, I misread your opening point based on the overall tone of your comments. I thought you were calling the deer-- predators.
ReplyDeleteBut anyway I'm still not completely off base regarding predators. We tolerate you! You want to prey on and destroy deer-- making you a predator. So we do indeed tolerate predators. "Gazinga!"
The definition of a predator is: "
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/predator
Definition of PREDATOR. 1: one that preys, destroys, or devours . 2: an animal that lives by predation. See predator defined for English-language learners »
But let's look at the conclusion of that first point. You write: "it is our responsibility to control the size of the deer population. Controlling the population is the humanitarian thing to do."
Our responsibilty is to control the deer population? I thought the progressive agenda was to live in harmony with Mother Nature, not control it..."Save the whales," "stop global warming," "worship nature", and all that jazz.
A question. In Mt. Lebanon if you have a problem with feral cats, groundhogs, raccoons, squirrels-- does animal control remove them from your property for free? Or are there fees for traps and removal of the problem? Just curious.
Never thought of that! A fee to remove scoundrels!
ReplyDeleteThe proceeds could fund teachers and turf !
Wait.
Won't work.
If all of the scoundrels are removed then we won't have any teachers or YSA members left!
Who would want or use the turf?
"But anyway I'm still not completely off base regarding predators."
ReplyDeleteIf you say so.
"Our responsibilty [sic] is to control the deer population?"
Yes. We've disrupted "Mother Nature" by tolerating one species (deer) and not tolerating other species (the deer's predators). Since this disruption was caused by a desire to protect ourselves and our pets, we need to compensate for the predators we do not permit in our community. Humans have been doing so since the beginning. We domesticated dogs and cats for the exact purpose of acting as predators in our stead. This is widely studied: http://news.ucsc.edu/2011/07/apex-consumers.html
Funny, I've always understood the "progressive agenda" to be to educate oneself about an issue before making a judgment. And, as an aside, is there a better manifestation of the poor state of science education in this country than the content of this blog?
Anywho, as to fees for animal control, I don't know the answer to that. We have a social contract with our government: in exchange for taxes, we receive a menu of services. I think it's a very legitimate conversation to have about whether controlling the deer population should be on that menu of not. I seem to think it should be. Since citizens are not permitted to control the deer population themselves within the confines of our fair municipality, I would say that it’s within the government's purview to do so. Contrastingly, since I am permitted to control the pest population within my house, I would say that that task is not in the government's purview.
1:10 you make me laugh... thanks.
ReplyDeleteYou write: "Yes. We've disrupted "Mother Nature" by tolerating one species (deer) and not tolerating other species (the deer's predators)."
I fondly remember those alligator, cougar and jaguar hunts. They were great fun!
Yep, we sure do have a social contract with our government. "In exchange for our taxes, we receive a menu of services"... you are indeed correct. One point you're missing is that you don't get to create the menu!
You and I, and I think a lot of the participants in this 'conversation' agree with you.
Indeed their should be a conversation on whether venison should be on the menu or not. Thought that is what we were doing here.
My perception is that Commission Linfante has already placed her order.
"I fondly remember those alligator, cougar and jaguar hunts. They were great fun!"
ReplyDeleteI bet the settlers of this region remember them (well at least the cougar part). Consider the historic ranges of some animals that used to be here.
Cougars (same as Mountain Lions and Pumas): http://www.cougarfund.org/images/artmax/artmax_86.jpg
Gray Wolf: http://www.fws.gov/midwest/wolf/images/maps/historicalrangeHall1981.jpg
Red Wolf: http://www.chattanooganaturecenter.org/images/photos/wolf%20range.jpg
Hilariously, coyotes have expanded their ranges due to the historically limited ranges of the above species: http://www.urbancoyoteresearch.com/Image5.jpg
Nature finds a way. Look what happened to these species once their predators went away: http://www.ncpa.org/images/1666.gif
We broke it so we should fix it.
1:10... you said it not me! "...as an aside, is there a better manifestation of the poor state of science education in this country than the content of this blog?"
ReplyDeleteBetter be careful the teacher's union might put you the predator's we can't tolerate list.
I think it's time for the PIO to include the deer in the "Seen" section of the Mt. Lebanon Magazine! Just what are those pesky deer doing while we are all asleep? Dressing up in fancy clothes and dangling hostas from their mouths - all part of a larger plan to take over the community no doubt!
ReplyDeleteWe must stop them now!
Less than 5 months ago on this here blog about the aerial survey:
ReplyDelete"Through many meetings, Kelly Fraasch was able to come up with an excellent plan for deer management, as well as a cost effective, yet quite accurate method to count deer in Mt. Lebanon."
And now we question the methodology?
1:57 I can picture it now, if we don't decimate the deer population Cougars, Mountain Lions and Pumas will be running rampant in the streets.
ReplyDeleteIt won't be safe to send 'lil Davey off to school without the trusty Kentucky longrifle (oh, oh can't have guns in school), Bowie knife and powder horn.
We'll be forced to incorporated tracking, trapping, skinning and sharp shooting into the district curriculum. Hey Rs. Cappucci, you may want to revisit the rifle range. If the municipalitity doesn't uphold their side of the social contract we a gonna be needin it har these parts, I a-reckon.
I updated this post again with an email from Dave Brumfield explaining the survey results. Elaine
ReplyDeleteNo 3:46 we don't question the methodology. We question it's accuracy and whether one survey is a definitive answer.
ReplyDeleteI'm guessing the survey people accurately "spotted" the deer they said. I'm didn't have any major problems with 60 deer/sq mile on any day in February so maybe it's not really a problem or potential catastrophe at that deer population level. Get back to me when we start toreach 100 deer per.
@4:23...
ReplyDelete"...yet quite ACCURATE [emphasis mine] method to count deer in Mt. Lebanon."
Brumfeld has clarified the methodology and count, and Fraasch (and this blog) considered said methodology accurate, but because the count doesn't meet your randomly selected threshold for being a problem for YOU, it's not accurate?
Got it. Nice to see that you get to define the problem for the community based on, well, what suits you.
And THAT is the dilemma. It is an arbitrary number. There are experts who analyze data such as - I may not be using the right terminology,an environmental assessment. Study the damage done to trees for instance. Not how many hostas are eaten, but serious damage to our forests. They analyze incidents which are reported to the police or animal control. They don't consider deer sightings as incidents which drive up the numbers for Kristen and company. But the community has to come up with a tolerance level. Who determines that? Obviously Kristen thinks she does. Or the Garden Tour hosts from last year. Or the people who want every deer killed, oh wait, the word now is "discharged." Now you are getting into personal or religious beliefs, people's rights to quiet enjoyment, and safety.
ReplyDeleteElaine
Yeah it's not a problem for me at 60 deer. Do I have to say it is to please you?
ReplyDeleteI very rarely see, am mpacted by or attacked by deer. So I can't justify spending thousands of dollars to eradicate a non-problem for me. For somebody else the 60 count could indeed be a problem.
So that's why I've suggested scrutiny of the police incident reports. If we're packing St. Clair Hospital's ER with deer attack victims we've got a problem and it'd be foolish to wait for another survey.
On the other hand if some gardener is clogging 911 with calls about their begonias being nibbled...
Amen to your 5:03 comment, Elaine.
ReplyDeleteSeems to be he way things are working around here. Somebody wants to walk their dog, we sped hours study it on land we paid big bucks for.
Somebody wants a vomitorium for the football team we build a $113 million high school.
Somebody's garden gets nibbled we have to exterminate some wildife.
Somebody wants plastic grass and high owered ights, we have to turf a field or two for a couple of million.
Want a climbing wall... You got it!
Wonder after we exterminate the deer-- what's next?
ReplyDeleteOld people? I heard there is a high concentration of these pesky critters in the bubble. Something like 200 or 300 per sq mile.
They drive really, really slow, sometimes drive inebriated in school zones, hog all the free samples at Costco and cause endless delays at the pharmacy. And everyone knows you might be confronted by one of them to help shovel their drive. Then there are the wailing sirens of the ER wagon responding to their emergencies at 3 in the morning.
It's best we exterminate 'em all before it's too late.
Then after we get rid of the deer, the old people we can go after 'them.'
You know who we'retlking about... Them!!!!!
Oh gof, hide the women and children, lock your doors. They're reproducing at prodigious rates.
There are more and more older people in the bubble and we think it is time for a public partnership where the younger set pays for their new toys instead of sending the bill to others. Signs anyone? Another new useless field, perhaps? Have a want spend a buck or move; we elders like it here, 5:53.
ReplyDeleteYes 6:54, but unfortunately you're proliferating Ike... Ike... deer.
ReplyDeleteYour herd is going to need to be thinned!
7:48, you sound like a member of the teachers union that will be thinned to pay for pension costs and extra building expenses.
ReplyDeleteJust catching Mr. Brumfield's 9:22 response it is obvious that he misunderstands the 42 sq mile area.
ReplyDeleteNo one suggested that the survey or MTL's area comprises 42 sq mile. The map and the area is only a representation of the area that would be included in deer ranging any where within their 2 mile radius.
If a deer standing on the very outmost perimeter of MTL and can range 2 miles in any direction from that point you add significant area. And if the Lebo deer can radiate out 2 miles, its conversely true that deer outside the borders of MTL but inside the 2 mile "halo" cand range 2 miles into MTL as well.
So simplistically represented we could have deer visiting our neighborhoods from any in a 42 sq mile area. On that February day we have no way of knowing if we had a heavy congregation of deer or an unusually sparse population, so the survey only tells which deer were in or relatively close to Lebo on one single day. You need several more surveys to establish an accurate average.
Anyone remember geometry?
ReplyDeletePi R squared! (I don't have the symbols available on my smartphone) to find the area of a circle.
If a deer can range 2 miles in any direction that is your R number or 2. 2 squared = 4. 4 x 3.14 (pi) = 12.56
So each deer generally lives in an area of 12.56 sq miles. During rut they range even further and I doubt if the deer give a hoot where Lebo ends and USC, Scott, Bethel, Dormont start. So in my mind its pretty foolish to say we have 342 deer in 6 sq miles because of one survey.
I reread what Dave Brumfield wrote to me. First, thanks for your response. It was civil, and nothing like Kristen's retort. I am concerned with one sentence in your email. "The count reflects the number of different deer that are likely to be seen within our borders. " Are likely to be seen within our borders?
ReplyDeleteNow that I have some time, I would like to address the last paragraph in your email. I did send the chart to the entire commission for several reasons. 1) it could be informative to all of you, 2) I don't trust Kristen to send anything to her alone, 3) she doesn't communicate, collaborate, or cooperate, and 4) Kristen had demonstrated (perhaps a poor word choice) she had already "snipped" me in her previous as she has been known to do. Ultimately, it is never productive dealing just with Kristen.
Elaine
Yes, Comish Brumfiel's response was polite and respectful as it should.
ReplyDeleteFunny though. First the deer survey at least as presented here and defended by people like Linfante and 4:40 is definitive. 57 (or rounded up 60) deer in Mt. Lebanon.
Now Dave concedes that 57 deer are likely to be here at any given time. So it's likely there could be only 8 deer or 114 deer here as well.
So that means in your cull, unless you conduct it over a very long time in the end you could likely end up with days were 57 deer are still roaming in our midst.
Seriously, it was so rude of Ms. Linfante to have "snipped" you in that email after you called her a liar in a public forum. I mean, sure she was correct all along, but how dare she! The gall of some people!
ReplyDeleteI still don't see what the "problem" is with deer. Has anyone produced numbers for deer-related injuries, traffic accidents, property damage or anything else? Wait, I forgot, we don't deal with facts here in Utopia. We deal with "gimme gimme".
ReplyDeleteHere's an equation for you.
Irrelevant issue + uneducated commissioner - public input x public money spent frivolously = crappy community.
Linfante, you're a disgrace. A child. You have no business making decisions for any other person in the world. Stick to doing whatever it is you do because being a commissioner isn't your cup of herbal tea.
8:02 AM, persistance pays off, doesn't it? That was my gift to you.
ReplyDelete8:02 AM, I didn't jump on her ridiculous statement at the budget retreat how she wants to cut interest earnings. That peach of a comment starts at the 59:59 mark on the municipal video found here. http://mtlebanon.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=44 Brumfield mocked her when he said, "Stop giving us money."
But 8:02 AM, keep it up. You are doing a great job.
Elaine
Here is a better link for you. Cut interest earnings
ReplyDeleteElaine
She wants to cut street sweeping since we have so little of it anyway ? Does she take stupid pills ?
ReplyDeleteI tried to be fair, even after writing this in the second comment, "And before anyone criticizes me for only approving comments that support my side, you do have commissioners and a public works official supporting your side." I allowed some comments that support Kristen's side. I will not be accepting any more anecdotal evidence supporting her side. Yes, there may have been a deer spotted at such and such place and something COULD HAVE happened, but I am not approving such comments. If you feel this is unfair, too bad. I am busting my ass, as it is, and will not do any additional work that supports Kristen's cause.
ReplyDeleteElaine
8:02 you wrote: "I mean, sure she was correct all along, but how dare she!"
ReplyDeleteShe was correct about what?????
8:48 it would be so easy to silence us wouldn't it if they just plotted out the numerous police incident reports.
I mean geez, we're under attack from herds of rampaging deer, women and children are being assaulted, homes are being ravaged, fuana trampled in the stampedes. Of course all this death and destruction is documented in the police reports.
ReplyDeleteOh so smug and intelligent 1:10 am 6/27, made one of their typical smartass remarks: "And, as an aside, is there a better manifestation of the poor state of science education in this country than the content of this blog?
Guess they have a problem with Penn State as well.
From Lesson #3 The deer population cycle
http://ecosystems.psu.edu/youth/sftrc/deer/wtd-lesson3
White-tailed deer populations naturally rise and fall at different times of the year. Deer populations increase through births or when new animals move into the area (immigration). Deer populations decrease through deaths or when animals leave the area or disperse (emigration). Population change = (birth + immigration) – (death + emigration).
Deer, and most other wildlifepopulations, show a regular pattern of increase after the breeding season and decline following hunting season and winter mortality. The numbers of deer in a population varies over the course of a year.
Late spring/early summer, with fawns being born represents the time of highest deer population. Summer, predation on fawns reduces the deer population slightly. Fall, hunters harvest surplus animals and reduce population level. Mid-late winter represents the lowestpopulation level due to some deer dying of starvation, predation, and disease.
Many factors influence the ability ofdeer populations to successfully reproduce and maintain a constantpopulation over time. Some of these include: disease, predator/prey relationships, habitat destruction and degradation, food availability, hunting pressure, and weather conditions. Deer populations are not static; they continuously change in response to many factors.
Limiting factors prevent deer populations from reproducing in greater numbers than their habitat can support. When limiting factors are in excess it may lead to a reduction in population levels.
For deer to survive they need food, water, shelter/cover, and space to move about and find their daily requirements. These are the essential components of habitat. Without them, deer will not be successful at surviving and reproducing.
Deer are herbivores, their food is composed of plants. Deer receive most of the water they need from the plants they eat. Shelter and cover are necessary for a deer to survive for a number of reasons; hiding young fawns from predators, protection from severe weather, and escape from hunters. Each deer must be able to find all the food, water, and shelter/cover it needs within the area it travels. This area is referred to as its home range."
So tell me 1:10, or should we address you as A. Einstein? After you and Linfante get your way and exterminate every deer in Lebo, what happens?
Could it be that the plants those now gone deer ate thrive, thereby creating a very attractive habitat that lures new deer from outside our borders that we couldn't hunt down. Creating the same situation all over again.
Wouldn't it be better to let nature find it's own equilibrium for free and do our part by limiting the deer's favorite food?
FYI, 3:47 PM, you did get a response at 4:44 PM, but as that person said, I am the gatekeeper. You can thank Kristen for my "12:25 proclamation," 4:44 PM.
ReplyDeleteI don't appreciate how she treated me at the podium on October 9, 2012, and I certainly won't put up with her nastiness in personal emails.
Elaine
Elaine, how gauche of you, authoring a blog and controlling the distribution of information on it and who is allowed to post comments. Thank god, you're not an elected official... oh wait!
ReplyDeleteWhen are you up for re-election, Elaine? Is it next year? You HAVE to run again. I know, there's probably been a lot of pressure to go the Dan Miller route, go for state or even national office, and I'm sure you would love to return to your lucrative, um... business, but your constituents need you, now more than ever. Promise right now that you won't be just a one-termer!
ReplyDeleteVery mean.
ReplyDeleteElaine
Oh you mean you want Elaine to create or raise some more fees on rainwater, apartment inspections,, pass some more lucrative sign ordinances, support another overpriced, behind schedule school construction project, and stand ready to buy a couple of million dollars worth of plastic grass and environment polluting lights.
ReplyDeleteExcellent record to campaign on, go for it.
Oh and what Kluck, by all means continue a career of picketing public forums and fussing people that might not subscribe to your personal agenda.
ReplyDeleteI am quite content knowing that I would never have to serve with Kristen. About the dig about my "lucrative, um...business," I worked with many families who were devastated when they were told that their child could never eat the foods that other kids could eat. I showed them that it wasn't the end of the world. If you are talking about being a sewing instructor, it is quite satisfying to teach sewing. My grandfather was a tailor and my grandmother was a seamstress, who came to America with all their worldly possessions inside the trunk that I proudly display in my home. My grandfather lived to be 100 and never missed voting. He would call my father and make sure that he voted. My father will tell you that Greece is the birthplace of democracy. I know that my family is quite proud of me.
ReplyDeleteAs far as running, I don't have any desire to run for office again. I found my niche.
Elaine
Getting back to the deer survey, please keep in mind that Kelly Fraasch came up with a comprehensive, nonlethal deer management plan.
ReplyDeleteElaine
Yes, deer and the survey. Whatis the big issue with sharing our 6 or 7 square miles with 342 deer on a day in Februar?
ReplyDeleteGee there is 30,000+ of us, you mean we can't find it in our hearts to let 342 deer live in the bubble?
Pretty damn selfish attitude some people have.
In December, Ms. Kingsley posted: "Last year alone we had over 150 deer-related incidents reported to the MLPD. I have received many calls from people who have been in deer/vehicular accidents, who have had attacked by deer, who have been chased by deer, who have had deer crash through windows in their homes, etc. "
ReplyDeleteIs it too much to share the location and nature of those "deer-related incidents?"
Were they car accidents with injuries, actual attacks or just deer feigning aggressive behavior to protect a fawn? Or are they somebody calling police to chase the deer off their lawn?
It should be easy enough to do. She knows there were 150 "incidents", not around 149, or about 151, there were 150.
Why do we need to know the nature of the incidents? If 100+ involve people getting killed or injured, I won't relish the idea, but maybe it's time for her culling.
If it's somebody crying about their lawn 100 times, yawn.
7:03 AM, there is such a list. I scanned it and posted it at the beginning of the second paragraph of this thread. It is the link that is highlighted "Here is a copy of the deer survey." It is rather difficult to read, but looking at the 2013 "incidents" many of them are reports of "injured deer in yard." along with the street. It appears that we're counting the same deer in some cases, followed by a "dead deer in yard" the next day. There are multiple reports for one deer. Chief McDonough indicated that in his report.
ReplyDeleteIf the gods wanted you to see this report, it would have been posted on their website.
Elaine
See pages 8-13 in the Google document that I posted. The first incident tracked is listed as 05/16/11. The comments for 2011 seem to be primarily reports of dead deer. Reading the comments for 2013, there is a significant increase in reports of injured deer.I am puzzled about the "deer struck in woods - deer and veh GOA" listed on 404/08/13. When one drives a vehicle through the woods, there is always a risk of hitting deer.
ReplyDeleteElaine
Applying the Terc Investigations method & Singapore math approach,the injuries reported since the inception of the deer incidents tracking report cited a total of three (3). It begs the question
ReplyDeleteIn the same time frame, how many DUI-related injuries were reported ?
Who is the true menace on the road - man or deer ?
Yep, 10:09 AM. Two in 2011 and one in 2012. Period. ;)
ReplyDeleteElaine
First, if the risk of injury or death from rampaging is deer is so prevalent in Mt. Lebanon, why do I see so many solitary woman joggers and dog walkers out at 4, 5, 6 am, unarmed and unprotected? Are they fools? Don't they know that we have deer behind every bush just waiting to gore them and stomp their brains out.
ReplyDeleteSecond, this whole issue is laughable. Having hiked and backpacked in the Rockies for weeks unarmed, and in areas where there actually are predators willing and able to chew your face off, fearing our deer is a joke.
Try sleeping with nothing between you and a 400lb bear other than a piece of canvas and a sleeping bag. To them, you and your provisions are the neighborhood Giant Eagle.
So this isn't really about attacks or injuries, there cull proponents want the municipality to protect their precious landscaping. Same as they detest having to wash the grass stains out of little Johnny's soccer shorts. (turf.
There's same quivering, beauty queens and rocket scientist will spend how they are the great environmentalist protecting our planet.
Gimme a break!
Perhaps rather than trying to reason with these namby pambys, we should just start sneaking up behind them and shouting boo!
Once they've soiled themselves enough maybe they'll leave.
But Kristen says it is an accident waiting to happen. The same could be said for increasing the number of artificially turfed fields. More turf, more head and knee injuries. Yet we seem to have a higher tolerance for sports related injuries, than hosta, hydrangea or rose bush attacks.
ReplyDeleteElaine
Correction--
ReplyDeleteSo this deer issue isn't really about attacks or injuries to people, the cull proponents real agenda is they want the municipality to protect their precious landscaping. Same as they detest having to wash the grass stains out of little Johnny's soccer shorts so they lobby for turf.
Yet these same quivering, beauty queens and rocket scientist will spend hours telling us how THEY ARE the great environmentalist, nature's guardians protecting our planet from ourselves.
Right on, Elaine! Is there anyone in this town who observes the posted speed limits?
ReplyDeleteThe deer have as much right to be here as we do.
Kristen was quoted in the Almanac as saying: "It’s only a matter of time before a major disaster occurs.”
ReplyDeleteMore worrisome than those DUI incidents reported on the police blotter one must assume... Right?
Yes, you are right. That is what Kristen said. I stand corrected.
ReplyDeleteIt has always been about the gardens. Look at old Commission meeting minutes and read who spoke in favor of killing deer. Then do a little research to see who had their gardens included for the annual Mt. Lebanon Garden Tours. You will see many of the same names who are pro kill.
Elaine
Wasn't correcting you Elaine, supporting your 2:35 comment.
ReplyDeleteHow can we as a community debate issues seriously when our elected officials confuse the issues with hyperbole?
No, I understand, but I don't want to be accused of misquoting Kristen. Thank you. You saved me from more hateful comments.
ReplyDeleteElaine
Oh you won't avoid their malicious attacks.
ReplyDeleteBecause they can't debate the facts they resort to going after your occupation, education or something. You'll be castigated for being the wrong religion, having the wrong hair color, wearing glasses, being left handed or something.
You won't be beautiful, won't live on the right street.
Is deer culling safe? According to this website from Central NY, NO! http://www.cayugadeer.org/safe.htm
ReplyDeleteThis is why I was fearful during the last two killings. Sleeping in a vinyl siding addition, knowing that there was a stray bullet on the street behind me on Rockwood, stray bullets that hit a house near Williamsburg Park, and of course, the boy riding his bike through Rockwood Park when there were hunters standing in the back of a pick up truck. Or when I would let out my dog before going to bed only to see a man ready to take aim and shouting to him, "Don't shoot!" The Lindendale deer...How many deer related injuries have been tracked since 2011? THREE. Introduce weapons, Kristen, and read what an Amherst official said: "Amherst council member declared the bait-and-shoot program "an accident waiting to happen."
I am not backing down. You are playing with fire, Kristen.
Elaine
By the way, I can document all my statements, Kristen. You want to talk about public safety?
ReplyDeleteElaine
This deer issue shouldn't be about is Kirsten right, is Elaine right.
ReplyDeleteWe just spent what... $5,000 on a survey to count deer... why?
Is it because there is carnage and death on our local streets? Apparently not, according to police reports.
So what is it, our shrubs and vegetable gardens are being decimated by herds of hungry deer? Not in my neighborhood that I've heard. Maybe they are in others, but why should I have to pay more taxes to protect someones hibiscus? Plant something the deer don't like.
Now then if there was a sudden upsurge in deer related traffic accidents and MTL was being defoliated by deer I'd have to side with Kristen and gladly pony up my share of a $40 or $60,000 cull.
I personally believe we're not there yet. I also believe that if we do cull in 2-3 years we'll be back right where we started as deer from other areas discover the unpopulated leafy buffet left by the cull.
If we don't create bigger deer salad bars, the population will eventually level out on it's own.
Elaine-
ReplyDeleteLets examine the three deer related injuries in 2011-12.
*Scooter struck curb avoiding deer 11:05 pm
Avoiding a squirrel or a pedestrian would generate the same reaction.
*Deer struck in roadway 2:02 pm
*Driver swerved avoiding deer - flipped vehicle & struck pole 7:45 pm
Was driver observing the speed limit. Motorists are to use caution when driving at dawn and dusk. These are peak migrating times for deer.
The three incidents in 2011 and 2012 are not enough to justify culling or sterilizing deer, who have as much right to occupy this planet as we do.
ReplyDeleteSurely there are ways besides extermination to keep deer away from vegetable and flower gardens. Has anybody tried sticking mothballs in the dirt? Have we given up on scarecrows? How about some old-fashioned fences?
And here's another thought: what message does killing deer send to the children of this community?
I sincerely hope the commissioners will think long and hard before doing anything radical like culling innocent animals who are only trying to survive.
8:40 PM, speaking of children in our community, turn to page 47 of the new mtl Magazine. A sixth-grader from Jefferson Middle School earned western Pa's top prize in PA American Water's 11th Annual "Protect Our Watersheds" art contest. His drawing is beautiful. It is a picture of a deer drinking from a stream.
ReplyDeletePeople keep forgetting that there is a recommendation on the table for a sterilization program. It is a safe, nonlethal deer management plan put together by Kelly Fraasch and a group of residents. The commissioners were optimistic about this safe alternative to killing deer. Then something happened and the commissioners who were opposed to guns suddenly did a 180.
Elaine
How amazing that a student's drawing of a deer drinking from a stream is a contest winner!
ReplyDeleteSeems to me there's a clear message here.
ReplyDelete"I sincerely hope the commissioners will take care of the assets they have before culling innocent SENIORS who are only trying to survive their careless new school and municipal spending orgy.
Just think, next year the kid could add Limfante rising Rambo-like out of the stream, guns blazin' and the deer dropping dead into the stream.
ReplyDeleteIn the bubble over over her head it'll read: "Not in my neighborhood you filthy animal!!!"
Bound to be a repeat winner.
Elaine:
ReplyDeleteYou are such an asset to the community that you should run for office.
There you go... Told you they'd be back.
ReplyDeleteNow you have to be an "asset", like coal, fresh water, natural gas, farm land to be worthy of living here.
If you're not a commodity or a bank that they can tap for money to feed their whims you're not worthy of living in the bubble.
Thanks, but no thanks. Been there, done that. If Kristen gets her wish, I am outta here. I cannot go through another deer cull next to my house.
ReplyDeleteElaine
The other 9:22 AM, I took that as a compliment.
ReplyDeleteElaine
These lyrics or at least the Lebo version of them keeping repeating in the commissioner's chambers...
ReplyDelete" Welcome to the camp
I guess you all know, why we're here
My name is Tommy
And I became aware this year
If you want to follow me
You've got to play pinball
And put in your earplugs
Put on your eye shades
You know where to put the cork"
Maybe we can get permission from The Who to adapt their lyrics to a new municipal hymn.
ReplyDeleteIf you want to live inside the bubble
You've got to pay for turf and deer cullIng
And [especially] put in your earplugs
Put on your eye shades
And definitely insert that cork!
I love my house. As I had said at a school board meeting one time, it is my home, my nest. I don't want to move. That is why I am so angry with Kristen. She is not looking at the facts. Culling in six square miles with a population of 33,000 is dangerous. Culling doesn't work here. Sure, there were almost 200 applications from residents for deer culling on their property, but they were denied due to space limitations. Just as she wants to cut interest earnings, Kristen is clueless about the reality of deer culling in Mt. Lebanon.
ReplyDeleteI will never forget, sitting next to her at the Candidates Forum, watching her smile as she told the community that we must kill deer.
Kristen is bullying the commission. She and her buddies are bullying the community.
Elaine
Kristen and pals didn't want anyone discussing community issues without them. "What the Kluck" were they afraid of from a town hall of 50 people or so, with no legislative authority?
ReplyDeleteKristen and pals couldn't keep their snide comments and disrespectful snickering to themselves at the school board meeting as you presented a 4,000 signature petition.
And people wonder why the community is so divided.
I resent Kristen wanting to make cuts to the golf course, which generates revenue, and wants to cut seasonal programs, but Steve Feller stopped her because they also generate revenue. This is in addition to cutting interest earnings.
ReplyDeleteThis woman doesn't have a clue.
Elaine
Maybe we can charge the people a fee that want deer culled. Say $1,000 a bullet.
ReplyDeleteYou want three deer removed from your yard $3,000.
Hey, we pay for our rounds of golf, we pay for our sets of tennis. our kids pay to park at school, SOME US PAY to park at municipal parking meters, we pay to swim... to skate, they want us to pay to throw out garbage... so what's wrong making people pay to have deer removed that bother them?
You write 200 people applied to shoot deer on their property. Let 'em pay a fee to use approved municipal hunters! Sounds like a plan, though sorry Elaine, it won't stop the bullets for sure. Bet though your neighbors probably will rethink how much they hate deer if they're charged a fee.
2:01 PM, that addresses my argument about using municipal funds to protect people's hosta, but it still doesn't solve the safety issue of people running through the town shooting guns. There is always a risk when a bullet is fired, no matter who is behind it. Do you think Kristen would want people shooting guns on her property? She freaked out when someone brought in a bullet and when people were talking about executing documents.
ReplyDeleteElaine
Where then does she want this culling to occur.
ReplyDeleteOh, she's a NIMBY. (Not In My Back Yard)
I went back to Kelly Fraasch's plan about deer on her website. It would be worth reposting here because it makes a lot of sense.
ReplyDeleteExcellent suggestion!
ReplyDeleteKelly Fraasch's deer management plan
Elaine
I should have also included a link to Kelly's blog post.
ReplyDeleteDeer in Mt. Lebanon
Elaine