Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Deer Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge Town and Country to suspend sharpshooter deer program, propose bow-hunting alternative
Summary
Multiple residents used public comment at the Jan. 12 Town and Country meeting to call for suspension of the sharpshooter deer-removal program, alleging safety and ethics problems, and to propose a volunteer daytime bow-hunting program as an alternative.
Get email alerts on the Deer Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At the Jan. 12 Town and Country Board of Aldermen meeting, several residents urged the board to reconsider the city’s use of contracted sharpshooter operations to manage the deer population, arguing the program is unsafe and unsustainably culls bucks.
A resident identifying an address at 319 Quinnmore Drive (transcript name rendered as "Salimoney") told the board the sharpshooter program has produced dangerous conditions near parks and private property, accused contractors of operating for profit and said, "This man is dangerous and it needs to be stopped." The speaker requested prompt notification of future operations, distribution of a community questionnaire and an informal residents' meeting to present facts.
Another resident, James Shimire, urged the board to permit a volunteer, daytime bow-hunting program similar to those used in neighboring communities, arguing it is safer and can be sustained over several months. Shimire said volunteers could be organized to cover target areas and claimed the approach reduces rebound effects that can occur after short-term culling by contractors.
No formal action on deer-management policy was taken at the meeting; both comments were part of the public-comment period. Board members did not record a response or direct staff assignment on the record during this meeting. The matter may be raised again in future sessions or through the planning and public-works process.
The speakers framed their proposals around public safety and long-term population management; neither offered a specific draft ordinance at the meeting.
