Poor Tony. They lost some good customers because they moved away and the new owners don't think there is a deer problem.
It has been hard to convince the new landowners to participate given, from their perspective, they do not have a deer problem with reduce deer numbers in their neighborhoods.
They will try to get them to change their minds for next year. Yes. Next. Year.
Given the favorable results for three consecutive years of the archery program, we recommend that the municipality continue to include this program as part of the overall deer management strategy.
We paid Tony $9000 to manage the volunteer archers this past year. Archery season ran from the middle of September to the end of January, with a short break between Thanksgiving and Christmas and all they killed were twenty five deer. That comes to $360 per deer. Twenty five hunters. Twenty five deer killed.
Here is the breakdown:
Here is the breakdown:
Total Deer Harvest: 25
White Buffalo Hunters – 25
Hunter Cooperative – No data
Antlered – 1
Antlerless – 24 (1 male, 23 female) Total
Female Harvest – 23
Total Male Harvest – 2 %
Female Harvest – 92%
Public Property Harvest – 18
Private Property Harvest – 7
White Buffalo Public Property Harvest Summary
Conservation District – 0
McNeilly Park – 4
Municipal Golf Course – 10
Public Works/Robb Hollow – 4
Twin Hills – 0
Eight deer were donated to Hunters Sharing the Harvest. That doesn't sound like much sharing to me.
Eight deer were donated to Hunters Sharing the Harvest. That doesn't sound like much sharing to me.
Our commission majority voted to pay DeNicola $77,110.11 without knowing the results of the archery hunt.
7 comments:
"Harvest" is such a manipulative word. You harvest crops -- wheat, corn. You KILL deer. Just call it what it is. We don't need a "1984" version of "deer management." (Yep: "management").
From the report.... Multiple private properties also were considered and/or used. We
continued to use the same seven proven participants from the 2015-2017 seasons...
We also have lost some private property access through landowner turnover....
HUH?
I know, 4:40 PM. Which one is it? Also, did you see the date of the report? February 5, 2018. Why did it take 22 days to publish? Why wasn't it discussed at the commission meetings?
Elaine
25 "hunters". 5 months of "hunting". (This isn't hunting, this is killing semi-tame deer that walk right up to be killed.) Plus, I'm sure they are baiting the deer too. And all they could find is 25 deer to kill!
DeNicola writes, "Given the favorable results ... we recommend the the municipality continue to include this program as part of the overall deer mgt strategy".
Of course, he's being paid $9,000 to do just about nothing, why would he recommend ending the program? This is a blatant conflict of interest that we experienced back when the USDA Wildlife Services recommended the deer killing program, and then was paid to carry out the program.
Of course, nothing seems to matter with this commission. They continue to write a blank check to DeNicola.
Also, an important fact to consider for those concerned with moral issues and cruelty to animals, is that based on past reports that at least half of the deer killed were babies (fawns). What's the character and honor of the men that can kill a semi-tame doe and her fawns? And of course, the soulless award winning Lebo ladies that lied and manipulated the commission to get their back yard tulip eating deer family slaughtered, instead of planting deer resistant flowers, using repellents, or agreeing to non-lethal and humane deer mgt program. In addition, many of the other deer slaughtered were yearlings and pregnant doe. Mt. Lebo used to advertise, "A Community with Character" on its website. I didn't notice it up there the last time I looked. I think it's appropriate that it has been removed.
7:54 PM, according to the website, we are still "A Community with Character." It should really be "A Community with Characters."
Elaine
10:56 AM, every year of deer killing is considered "successful." I would love to know what constitutes an unsuccessful program. It is successful in Tony DeNicola's eyes because he was able to fleece taxpayers out of thousands of dollars.
Elaine
Post a Comment