My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2017-6-6_PR Comm Packet
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Parks & Recreation
>
Parks & Recreation Commission
>
Packets
>
2017
>
2017-6-6_PR Comm Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/5/2017 9:57:35 AM
Creation date
6/5/2017 9:57:31 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
66
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
More arresting, however, was what examinations of the deer turned up. They were skinny, and <br />females expected to be carrying fawns weren’t. Deer had been limping on broken bones, likely <br />from crashes with cars. One had been shot before. <br />The hunters, with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) wildlife arm, left Roseville <br />believing that “an overabundant deer population in questionable health still remains in the city” <br />despite all the gunfire. <br />Their report suggested that local reluctance to bring down Bambi may be preventing wildlife <br />scientists from doing what they believe is needed to protect the animals’ welfare. <br />One possibility being considered by the DNR is a statewide ban on feeding deer. <br />Such bans, condemned by wildlife managers for a variety of reasons, are imposed now only in <br />piecemeal fashion across the metro area by individual jurisdictions. Blaine went that route just <br />this spring, and Roseville in 2015. But it’s far from a universal practice and attracts anger when <br />done. <br />Still, one of the most striking findings from a round of public hearings throughout the state in <br />recent months, said Adam Murkowski, the state’s top deer analyst, was the degree of support for <br />thatproposition. <br />“In the 12 meetings we had,” he said, “it surprised a lot of folks inside DNR how people are <br />putting together the puzzle that when they see the wildlife gathering at a feeding site it creates <br />issues: unnatural concentrations, collisions with cars. It stops deer from going where they <br />traditionally winter and can compromise their ability to survive. <br />“Public input shows people want us to explore \[how to handle\] feeding of deer and all that litany <br />of things that aren’t good for deer.” <br />‘No magic number’ <br />In the case of the Roseville findings, park professionals and wildlife experts differ over how <br />much they should be concerned about the observations and whether deer densities should be <br />throttled back, <br />Shawn Riley, who teaches human dimensions of wildlife management at Michigan State <br />University, said he’s comfortable letting local politicians hold sway. <br />“There is no magic number that I can tell you or anyone else can tell you is right for a <br />community,” he said. “Citizens living right next door will disagree on whether there are too <br />many or too few.” <br />For instance, a lack of deer fetuses may be nature’s way of adapting to circumstances, he said. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.