White Tailed Deer Management Plan for Fairfax County, Virginia - Term Paper Example

White-Tailed Deer Management Plan for Fairfax County, Virginia (Term Paper) Number Faculty Introduction Virginia, a part of Fairfax County is located near a big tract in forested parkland. Approximately twenty-five years ago, finding deer in the place was quite rare. However, in some years later deer sightings were found to be occasional and they could easily be found browsing anywhere near households in the region. Overpopulation of the animals, as mentioned above in the suburban surrounding, has been a major concern both in the eastern and central parts of the Fairfax County (Saari, 2012). Overpopulation particularly of the Fairfax County of deer has caused damage to the ecology, resulted in significant loss of property by damage of landscapes and frequent collisions with the cars as well as supporting tick capacity that carry diseases along with them. Fairfax County has employed a few methods of in management of the deer population, which includes, sharpshooting, bow hunting and managed hunts. Residents of the area experiencing very high densities of the deer show opinions and the attitudes are quite divided concerning the effects and presence of the deer. However, the majority of the residents express their opinions positively of the presence of the deer and express concern about the damage of the landscape disease and collision. White-Tailed Deer Management Plan for Fairfax County, Virginia On exploring American continent, first Europeans reported a significant population of the white-tailed deer in Virginia within the newly discovered land. Deer in the environment were considered a mainstay for survival for big population of the Native Americans for they were a primary source of hides and food. For this reason, since there was no regulated hunting and that land had to be cleared for human settlement and agricultural purposes, the deer population was found decreasing drastically (Saari, 2012). In the turn of the twentieth century, the overall population of the white-tailed deer was discovered to have been less than a hundred thousand in the nation. In some regions of the county, the sightings deer were very rare and could only be reported in the newspapers. Early in 1900s, the government had to step in to respond to the drastic decline in the population of the white-tailed deer by imposing very strict limits on the hunting of the less populated deer. In the middle of 1900s, their primary natural predators like the lions and the wolves were eradicated. Deer started evolving and reproducing at a very high rate since the traditionally experienced natural predation had been dealt with and that the wildlife personnel had stepped in control. On their movement into the suburban environments, people enjoyed their existence although at the same time people tend were worried about the problems associated with their being. Indeed, the problems were directly associated with the increase in the controllable population. The major areas of great concern that were affected included; adverse impact on the ecology, frequent collision with the vehicles, loss of property and diseases. The ecological effect from the overabundance of the deer included an impact on animal as well as plant life. They had a feeding sort of pattern, which was described as browsing whereby the deer walked very slowly through eating small amounts of vegetation in a particular piece of vegetation. A grown up deer would take up to ten pounds of vegetation in a single day. The outcome of over-browsing in some forested parts of the Fairfax County was felt to threaten or to endanger the plants (Saari, 2012). Indeed, the small types of trees that replenished the forest had been removed that threatened a long-term viability of the forest. As well, small animals and birds that were requiring adequate forest for their protection were also affected. In accordance with Cote’s argument, deer exerted a cascading impact on both animals and plants in competition for resources and indirect modification of the composition with the physical arrangement of the habitats (Saari, 2012). Supply of food was exhausted in the habitats and accordingly, the deer increasingly were scattered in the nearby yards and gardens for forage that on careful investigation was found to cause a widespread damage to the plants that comprised the residential landscapes. Property loss experienced was as a result of extensive damage to the landscape in some particular parts of the Fairfax County. As the population of the white-tailed deer grew huge, the collisions between them and vehicles went increasing as well (Saari, 2012). Nationally, the estimation of the collisions was 1.5million deer-vehicle collisions within every year. Although the collision usually caused neither injury nor death of human beings, it commonly resulted in damage to the vehicles involved at the expense of the owners (Saari, 2012). Tick associated diseases like Lyme diseases came as an outbreak since the deer were considered as Lyme vectors a problem that affected even the surrounding such as Country Club Manor neighborhood that experienced a very high incidence of Lyme and related diseases. Currently, the management in place for controlling adequately the increased adverse impacts of the overgrown population of the white-tailed deer in Fairfax County has somehow failed. Unfortunately, the primary means agreed on to control the population of deer in Fairfax County has been through collision. The local governments waiting to give a way forward in managing the deer often are stymied mainly by the polarized and the emotional responses by the citizens when the matter is considered. Opinions in the place have been of vast range where at one end of the spectrum, a part of the citizens feels there should be need to protect the deer at whatever expense while on the other hand others hold on a feeling that deer are pests that bring destruction and so need immediate killing. In this regard, the Fairfax County Board has approved majorly three methods of management in response to the increased population of the deer. They include; sharpshooting, bow hunting and managed hunts. It has as well employed Biologist in wildlife with a responsibility for addressing all wildlife related matters within the county inclusive of the management efforts concerning deer population. In the year 2009, some money was allocated by the county for the wildlife management. Managed hunts in Fairfax County have been approved in selected parks where the local hunters have had to apply for participation that when accepted one had to first, take a hunter safety study which was mandatory and secondly, one had be certified in the county for qualifications (Saari, 2012). The county had a good safety record for its managed hunts. However, the hunts usually have been cost effective since the permit fees for the recent hunts have been exceeding the cost of the program. The members of the Police Department tactical teams have been utilized in the county for sharpshooting. The skillfully trained men had to engage training regularly or the purpose of maintaining expert proficiency. Deer hunts allowed them to shoot live target practically instead of practicing on a shooting range. All the harvested deer were donated to organizations that provided food for the hungry. Except in some specific situations inclusive of managed hunts that were conducted by the county, it was illegal for average citizens to be found hunting wildlife in the Fairfax County. This kind of hunting was considered useful in the suburban areas since it was deemed safer in comparison to the use of firearms and it was the only management method that the citizens could easily employ. There are nonlethal methods that could be used for easy control of the deer. The method of immunocontraception for birth control could successfully be used in control of the same. The method could effectively be used, but it is quite expensive (Saari, 2012). In order to give an effective outcome close to eighty percent of the female need to be injected after duration of every two to three years. There is a need as well to educate the public on issues concerning deer, more particularly with the available nonlethal measures put across to help reduce damage from deer and personal property. There should as well be continued education to the public on the deer impacts and their remedies through the internet, DVDs or TVs for sufficient knowledge necessary for the public in making right decisions concerning the impacts brought forth by deer in their lives. Recreational hunting unquestionably will eventually serve the best means of managing the population of the deer within most of the landscapes. With regulations put forward for the realities in the modern environments, hunters can play a good role significant in the reduction of the population. There have been several incidences that deer hunting has failed in resolving mainly on human/deer conflict and indeed, there have been very little evidence in support of the claim that such mentioned programs have been effective in the help to reduce the disturbing population in Fairfax County. In conclusion, there are significantly many problems that are associated with increased population of the deer in the county, which includes; property loss in the landscape damage, damage to the ecology and the increased possibility of tick-borne diseases (Saari, 2012). As much as the Fairfax County has implemented a few mechanisms in an attempt to reduce the population the recommendation that would help for the same reason will eventually embrace nonlethal methods such as use of contraceptive on the females in the range of every two to three years that will cause an apparent effect on the normal reproduction process. The method recommended will ensure no harm is caused to not only the animal but also the human beings and their surroundings. References Saari, A. (2012). Deer hunting guide. [Wisconsin: Andrew Saari]. Read More