Town Hall held on urban deer problem

Havre City Council held its most well-attended town hall meeting yet, with more than 40 residents coming to the meeting where local Fish, Wildlife and Parks personnel discussed possibilities for putting together an urban deer management plan.

Havre Mayor Doug Kaercher said the meeting was both to hear from FWP about possible elements for the plan that could reduce the number of deer in the city, but also to gauge how many resources the public is willing to put into this problem.

"Havre has limited resources. So how much of those resources do we expend on this issue, and what's the tolerance of the community?" he said. " ... That's what I'm looking for."

The issue of deer inside city limits has been one of increasing concern in Havre and calls for the city to do more have grown over the past few years.

FWP Region 6 Biologist Scott Hemmer led the presentation, talking about other cities and towns around Montana and the plans they've put in place to deal with their own deer issues, plans that he said most people seem satisfied with.

Hemmer stressed that these plans will almost certainly not eliminate the problem completely, and the effects of the plans usually aren't seen until they've been implement for a few years, but they can be effective at reducing deer populations and the complaints and damage that comes with them.

He also stressed that every city is different, and what works in one area may not work in another.

"There's no one-size-fits-all silver bullet," he said.

Hemmer said the deer population has definitely gone up in the area since he's been here and between the property damage, human-wildlife conflict, collisions and deer fatalities, it is clearly causing problems.

He said based on his observations a lot of these deer are ones actually born in Havre, and this is not the result of some kind of migration from outside city limits.

Through all the plans he presented there were a few common elements, one being an effort to educate people about why feeding deer is not good for them, the city or the deer.

Hemmer and other local experts have stressed over the years that feeding deer only makes them more likely to stay in the city if they aren't already and consequently less able to function in the wild.

"You're not helping those deer," Hemmer said at the meeting.

They've also said the food humans often provide isn't the kind of food they're used to and can often make them extremely ill and often kill them.

Another common tool is designating areas in city limits where archery hunting is allowed if people have a permit.

This is generally not used in the heart of the cities or densely populated residential areas for safety reasons, but there are wide open areas where it may work if the city permits it, Hemmer said.

He said city's typically pair these permits with an "Earn a Buck," program which requires archers to kill a doe before killing a buck, otherwise bucks are all most people want to go after.

In order to designate areas and grant permits, the urban deer management plan does need to be submitted to the Montana Fish and Wildlife Commission for approval, he said.

Kaercher said if they want to get this plan moving as early as possible, it will need to be submitted by July 5, and should they decide to do it, he hopes to have money allocated for at least the first year before implementing it.

He said putting together this plan would involve more meetings with the opportunity for public comment.

One audience member said the situation in town is really bad, and he wants serious resources devoted to it, a sentiment that many in the audience shared.

"We used to have a dog problem in town, and we put city resources into creating leash laws, et cetera. These deer are far worse than the dog problem," he said. " ... I want to encourage you and the city council to find resources or create resources or to do whatever is necessary."

Another audience member later in the meeting said he wouldn't be opposed to setting up a special taxing district for the deer, saying the money he pays for the Weed and Mosquito District is the best tax money he ever spent.

Kaercher said that would need to be approved via a vote from the public, but did not discount the possibility.

He did say he wants people to understand that processing deer after they're killed can be expensive so it will be a significant expense.

Some audience members proposed looking to private citizens who might be willing to do it for free to save the city money.

Another possible expense would be trapping, which a few members of the audience said they think is the only way to really solve the issue, especially in the inner parts of the city where bow hunting isn't safe.

Hemmer said trapping usually ends with euthanizing the animals because FWP generally doesn't like moving the animals for fear of spreading chronic wasting disease.

He said testing for CWD is not required when processing a deer, but generally FWP likes to test out of an abundance of caution.

He stressed that there has never been a case of CWD in humans, but they still like to play it safe.

Hemmer and Kaercher said there's nothing preventing them from doing both, but the former said trapping, while it can be effective, is also expensive as well.

Hemmer talked about other possible tools like contracting with a sharpshooting agency and fencing where it is practical.

Some members of the audience touted electric fencing but were concerned about city regulations regarding where and if it can be used.

Another suggestion was leaving out something poisonous to deer but nothing else and collecting their carcasses after they die, but Hemmer said poisons are generally not deer-specific so he doubts the commission would support anything like that.

Some audience members also mentioned deer repellents, but others, as well as Hemmers, said they generally lose their effectiveness in fairly short order.

After about an hour and 20 minutes the meeting wrapped up and Kaercher said this is the best town hall they've had so far and thanked everyone for their time and their willingness to speak their minds about the issue.