Ellen,

Thanks for posting this. Overbrowsing by deer is one of the greatest threats to forest-interior songbirds in Maryland and I would encourage birders to submit comments and support the preferred alternative of a deer cull. This support will be needed to counter the outcry from many people who don't understand the need for deer control or who just don't like the idea of implementing it.

Do you know when the deadline for comments is?

Dave

David Curson, PhD
Director of Bird Conservation,
Audubon Maryland-DC
Tel: (410) 558 2473



-----Original Message-----
From: Maryland Birds & Birding [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Tim Boucher
Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 8:04 AM
To: 
Subject: [MDOSPREY] Deer management plan - Rock Creek Park

I hope this topic is suitable for MdOsprey and if not, apologies to Norm. I'll understand if it is removed.

Rock Creek Park has published a notice of the availability of a draft Environmental Statement for its deer management plan. Details below.

I post this for two reasons:

1. The preferred alternative will have some impact on birding, in that the use of sharp shooters mandates the temporary closure of some parts of the park. Typically, sharp-shooters are deployed at night and into the early morning.

2. Every time a county or park tries to do something to reduce deer herds, there is a huge public outcry. If you support the park's plan - and I am not telling anyone that they should or shouldn't - but IF you do, please take the time to comment.

To be honest, though, I will say that it is my opinion that the preferred alternative should be supported, for lots of reasons, but for the reason relative to birds - the need to protect understory habitat, which is really gone throughout most of the park.

Immunocontraceptives are typically ineffective in open populations, and it is very hard to imagine that the NPS generally or the Rock Creek Park has enough funding for expensive exclosures - very high fences that also serve to keep birders out. We already have lethal control - unintentional though it may be - in the form of vehicles.

Ellen Paul
Chevy Chase MD


he DEIS evaluates four alternatives for
managing white-tailed deer in the park. The document describes and
analyzes the environmental impacts of the No-Action Alternative and
three Action Alternatives. When approved, the plan will guide deer
management actions in Rock Creek Park over the next 15 years.
    Alternative A (No Action) would continue the existing deer
management actions and policies of monitoring vegetation, deer density
and relative numbers, using limited protection fencing and deer
repellents to protect rare plants in natural areas and small areas in
landscaped and cultural areas, data management, continuing current
educational and interpretive measures, as well as inter-jurisdictional
communication; no new deer management actions would be implemented.
    Alternative B would include all actions described under Alternative
A, but would incorporate several non-lethal actions to protect forest
seedlings, promote forest regeneration, and gradually reduce the deer
numbers in the park. Additional actions under Alternative B would
include large-scale exclosures (fencing) and reproductive control of
does via sterilization and immunocontraceptives when feasible.
    Alternative C would include all actions described under Alternative
A, but would also incorporate two lethal deer management actions to
reduce the herd size. Additional actions under Alternative C would
include reduction of the deer herd by either sharpshooting or capture
and euthanasia of individual deer. Capture and euthanasia of individual
deer would be an approach used in limited circumstances where
sharpshooting may not be appropriate.
    Alternative D (the NPS Preferred Alternative) would include all
actions described under Alternative A, but would also include a
combination of certain additional lethal and non-lethal actions from
Alternatives B and C to reduce deer herd numbers. The lethal actions
would include both sharpshooting and capture/euthanasia and would be
taken initially to quickly reduce the deer herd numbers. Population
maintenance would be conducted via reproductive control methods if
these are available and feasible. Sharpshooting would be used as a
default option for maintenance if reproductive control methods would
prove to be unavailable and infeasible. Alternative D would fully meet
the plan objectives and has more certainty of success than the other
alternatives analyzed. The relatively rapid reduction in both deer
density and browsing pressure on native plant communities and species
of special concern would provide beneficial impacts to the natural and
cultural resources of the park.

ADDRESSES: The DEIS and White-tailed Deer Management Plan will be
available for public review on the NPS Planning, Environment and Public
Comment (PEPC) Web site at http://parkplanning.nps.gov/rocr by
selecting the link ``Deer Management Plan for Rock Creek Park.'' Bound
copies of the DEIS and White-tailed Deer Management Plan will also be
available at the Rock Creek Park Nature Center, 5200 Glover Road, NW.,
Washington, DC; at Rock Creek Park Headquarters, 3545 Williamsburg
Lane, NW., Washington, DC; and at public libraries adjacent to Rock
Creek Park.


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adrienne A. Coleman, Superintendent,
Rock Creek Park, 3545 Williamsburg Lane, NW., Washington, DC 20008,
(202) 895-6000.
    Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying
information--may be made publicly available at any time. Although you
can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be
able to do so. We will make all submissions from organizations,
businesses, or individuals identifying themselves as representatives or
officials of organizations or businesses, available for public
inspection in their entirety.