No Evidence For A

Deer/Disease Correlation

To the Editor:

It is my understanding the Tick-Borne Disease Action Committee was created to investigate and determine the best method to reduce the incidence of tick-borne disease in our town. 

Since the formation of this committee, I have not heard or read any evidence, scientific or otherwise, that indicates that a reduction in the deer herd in Newtown will reduce the incidence of tick-borne disease in our town. Even experts for deer-culling advocates have been unable to categorically state that a deer cull reduces the incidence of tick-borne disease. In fact, it appears that in those towns in Connecticut that have been “reducing” the herd, some for seven to ten years, not one town has seen a reduction in tick-borne diseases. And, let’s not confuse our town’s issue with a few studies that have been done in isolated areas (islands!) that bear no resemblance to geography of our town with its open boundaries. 

I own and operate a large pet-sitting business in town with a staff of eight. For the last 15 years or so, we walk our client’s dogs through the woods, streets, and private properties of Newtown, seven days- a-week, from morning until night. You would assume that my staff would be the prime targets for ticks and resulting Lyme disease. Not one of my staff has had Lyme disease or any other tick-borne disease. This lack of disease is the result of educating my staff on the approved method of inspecting their clothes and bodies each day.

Until such time as there is any research, evidence, studies, etc, that proves that reducing the deer herd will ultimately reduce the incidence of tick-borne disease, educating Newtown’s families with a town-based initiative on ways to prevent the disease is certainly a less expensive and more humane way to deal with the tick problem.

Without any scientific evidence, the harsh reality of a cull is just a lot of dead deer.

Adria Henderson

Arlyn Ridge Road, Newtown                                      February 3, 2010