Nearly three years ago, County Staff began receiving an increasing number of complaints about deer damage/conflict from citizens. In response to these complaints, the County Administrator convened a committee comprised of County residents living near large populations of deer, organizations responsible for the forested areas in and adjacent to York County in which the deer reside, the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, supporters of animal rights, and County staff. The committee was charged with determining if there was a deer problem in York County and developing a course of action to deal with the problem if it was determined that one existed. The committee members worked methodically for two and a half years to fulfill their charge. The committee learned about deer biology, deer management models, gathered data on deer damage in the County, looked at ongoing deer management programs, evaluated all of the known management options, attempted to ascertain public attitudes and sentiments, and then reported their findings and recommendations to the County Administrator (Report of the Deer Management Committee, June 28, 1999).

The Committee determined there was not a County-wide deer problem; however, the Committee did determine that the subdivisions of Queens Lake, Edgehill, Marlbank Cove, Marlbank Farms, Yorktown Village, Route 17 between Cook Road and the Coleman Bridge, Cook Road between Route 17 and Route 238, and Fort Eustis Boulevard between Rt 17 and Richneck Road were areas in which deer had destroyed ornamental and garden foliage on residential property, had collisions with motor vehicles, and physical confrontations with humans. The Committee determined that these localized deer problems were due to the proximity of deer habitat to residential areas, the ability of deer to adapt and thrive in urban environments, and their preference for ornamental and garden foliage as a food source.

The Committee made six recommendations: 1) manage the deer populations in York County on the basis of each community's tolerance for the problems associated with cohabiting with the deer and/or public safety concerns; 2) continue to maintain County deer damage statistics; 3) place deer crossing signs on the roads where deer collisions had been frequent, and reduce the speed limit on Cook Road to 45 miles per hour for its entire length; 4) work with representatives from each of the identified problem areas in the County to inform them about the deer management options available to minimize deer conflict/damage; 5) amend the discharge of firearms ordinance to allow the use of firearms for the purpose of deer management; and, 6) Continental research should present a report on the results of the Deer Management Opinion Survey to the York County Board of Supervisors and the general public at a regular board meeting (County of York, Deer Management Opinion Study, Final Report).

With the assistance of staff, The County Administrator assessed the Committee's report and made recommendations to the Board of Supervisors (County Administrator's memorandum, July 14, 1999) which became part of the agenda package of the August 4, 1999, meeting. Specifically, the County Administrator noted that with the resources available through the Public Information Office, the Department of Fire and Life Safety, and Computer Support Services Division, County staff were prepared to continue to gather data on deer damage and provide periodic reports to the Board and citizens. The County Administrator agreed with placing deer crossing signs on various roads and the speed limit reduction on Cook Road. A resolution was prepared requesting VDOT to effect those changes (Resolution R99-167) which the Board passed on September 1. The County Administrator reported to the Board that County staff would facilitate discussion of deer management options with representatives of areas that experienced deer problems as recommended by the committee.

Return to top of page

The July 14 memorandum also reviewed the various non-lethal deer management options currently available. The non-lethal deer management options were: 1) drive defensively and be alert for deer near the road and where deer are commonly seen, especially during the evening, nighttime or early morning hours; 2) modify landscapes to include plants which are less likely to be damaged by deer; 3) use a variety of repellents or a dog kept outdoors and/or fencing to discourage deer from damaging landscape plants; 4) minimize exposure to ticks when outside during the warm weather months; 5) allow nature to take its course — status quo (not recommended); 6) trap and transfer deer (not recommended); 7) fertility control (not recommended); 8) supplemental feeding (not recommended); and, 9) re-introduce predators (not recommended).

The County Administrator stated his opposition only to the Committee's recommendation to amend the discharge of firearms ordinance to allow the use of firearms for the purpose of deer management. He stated that he did not believe the County should accept the risks associated with the use of firearms in areas prohibited under County ordinance because of the potential safety hazard to citizens. He noted that most, if not all, of the areas where major problems had been reported were adjacent to the large forested properties in which regulated hunting and other lethal means of deer management was not permitted. He, therefore, felt that the effectiveness of using firearms on private property would be minimal, and not worth the risk to human life. In light of his position on the effectiveness of firearms usage, the County Administrator recommended that the Board consider the adoption of resolutions to the County's congressional delegation, the Department of the Interior, National Park Service, and the City of Newport News requesting those entities to consider the use of stronger management measures to control their deer populations. These resolutions (R99-164(R), R99-165(R), and R99-166(R)) were prepared and presented to the Board for its consideration at the September 1 regular meeting and the September 8 work session.

The Deer Management Committee made a formal presentation of its findings and recommendations to the York County Board of Supervisors on August 4, 1999, and Continental Research, Inc., reported the results of the Deer Management Opinion Survey to the Board of Supervisors and the general public at the board meeting on September 1.

Following the August 4 Board meeting, staff was made aware of certain significant facts (Memorandum - New Information on Deer Management, August 17, 1999). Through discussions with the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF), it was learned that the Virginia General Assembly had enacted a change in the Code of Virginia, effective July 1, 1999, which eliminated VDGIF's ability to issue out of season kill permits to stop damage to ornamental foliage except in areas classified as "reduce." In addition, it was learned that a group of residents from the village of Yorktown had met with the VDGIF and had developed a plan to harvest deer on residents' property during bow hunting season beginning in October. VDGIF advised staff that residents were informed that they would be provided with a warden and technical assistance to coordinate hunting and monitor safety concerns. VDGIF stated that this type of program had been used in several residential areas in neighboring jurisdictions. This information was provided to the Board at its August 18, 1999, meeting. It was also learned that the VDGIF representative had erred in reporting to the Deer Management Committee that York County's status in the Virginia Deer Management Plan had been changed, as requested by the Committee, from the "stabilize" category to the "reduce" category. Had the change occurred as requested, the VDGIF would have been able to issue out of season kill permits to stop damage to ornamental foliage even after the July 1, 1999, change in the Code of Virginia.

The Board met with the VDGIF (work session, September 8, 1999) to discuss the County's status within the Virginia Deer Management Plan and the use of bow hunting and other means of lethal deer management in residential subdivisions.

The Board has taken the following actions to further address deer management in York County.

2. The Board directed staff action:

The Board is waiting to see how the initiatives already begun, in combination with the efforts of individual property owners working with VDGIF, impact the deer damage issue before taking further actions.

GLENN ASKINS, WILDLIFE BIOLOGIST                      253-7072

PHIL WEST, WILDLIFE BIOLOGIST                               253-4180

RONNIE WARREN, GAME WARDEN                            253-7072