Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wildlife Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Franklin deer-management report urges regional coordination; lethal options cited as only legal population-reduction route under current Michigan practice
Summary
A citizen-led committee presented a fact-based report listing nonlethal conflict-reduction tactics, costly nonlethal fertility control, and lethal culling options; the committee and residents urged regional cooperation (Southeast Michigan Urban Deer Coalition) and the council said it will seek more detail before deciding on coalition participation.
Blaine Dennis, chair of the Franklin Village Deer Management Options Committee, presented a committee report that catalogued options to reduce human–deer conflict in Franklin, including resident education and landscape protections, nonlethal reproductive controls, and lethal removal (culling) where permissible. The report stressed data limitations for a village the size of Franklin and recommended transparent public engagement and use of regional resources.
Dennis said the committee categorized approaches as (1) conflict-reduction measures that avoid changing herd size, (2) nonlethal population-control strategies that require substantial investment and long time horizons, and (3) lethal options that can quickly reduce herd numbers but have logistical and regulatory constraints. He noted Michigan Department of Natural Resources rules that affect culls—such as a guideline requiring a 5-acre parcel for culling operations—and that smaller municipalities often lack appropriate contiguous land or resources.
Several residents and committee members urged regional cooperation; Margaret Bancroft and others noted that Southfield, Farmington Hills and Farmington have cooperated on coordinated USDA-led calls and removals and that 70 deer were removed in a recent regional effort. Dennis said the Southeast Michigan Urban Deer Coalition and USDA sharpshooters can provide capacity but that participation would likely require Franklin to contribute financially or provide suitable locations. He cited an example figure discussed by the coalition of roughly $150,000–$180,000 a year to fund a USDA biologist assigned to a group of communities.
Council members asked about logistics, fencing ordinance changes, and community engagement; trustees suggested town halls and surveys to collect baseline complaint and collision data because the village lacks Franklin-specific scientific population studies. The council agreed to gather more information and to await the presenter’s follow-up after an upcoming coalition meeting.
No policy decision was made; the report was accepted as submitted and will inform further discussion and possible public engagement steps.
