Community Example: Weston, Massachusetts

Key facts

Community Size: Small city or village (less than 10,000 people)

Region: Northeast

Plan established in 2012

Link(s): Deer Management Program Webpage, Deer Management Summary presentation, Deer in Weston: Conservation Commission Report

When residents of Weston, Massachusetts (population 11,500), an affluent community in the Boston metropolitan area, noticed a dramatic increase in the local deer population, the town’s Conservation Commission began a thoughtful process that led to the creation of a deer management program –managed bowhunting on five public properties. From the moment the Conservation Commission kicked off their process in 2011 to the maturing deer management program currently in place, Weston has sought guidance from experts and resident opinion—and placed an emphasis on educating residents about forest stewardship.

Location

Phase 1. Problem Definition

Although most residents enjoy the presence of deer in Weston, by 2011 the community had reached a tipping point. Weston’s Conservation Commission received an increasing number of complaints about deer-related impacts on quality of life in the community, which elevated the issue as one in need of action.

Weston was challenged initially by a lack of concrete deer population estimates. To address this information gap, the Conservation Commission consulted with experts from the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, who helped them determine that the deer density in Weston was approximately triple the level recommended by state wildlife biologists.

To characterize the problem, the Conservation Commission created an online survey designed to gage resident attitudes. Among the top concerns were: damage to forest understories, public safety issues (deer-car collisions), and increased incidence of Lyme disease. The Conservation Commission held educational forums to share information about elevated deer densities and resulting impacts. Regional biologists presented the best available information in these sessions. They launched a web page where residents could report deer sightings during this phase, and also organized a number of well-publicized walks to observe deer damage to forest conservation lands.

Phase 2. Decision-making

Weston's Conservation Commission conducted a thorough review of literature on the ecological and social impacts of overabundant deer. In addition, the Commission consulted examples from other communities and deer management experts. Over the course of several months, they held three public hearings with presentations by a range of experts, discussions led by an outside facilitator and a chance for participants to register their comments about management alternatives. In all, the Problem Definition and Decision-Making phases took place over a total of 9-months of public engagement.

Weston established one primary goal for local deer management: “Reduce the deer herd to a more ecologically sustainable level.” Among the options considered to achieve that goal were: capturing and moving deer, contraception, sharpshooting (deer culling over bait) and managed hunting by community volunteers. Of these, managed bow hunting was recommended as the only practical alternative to reduce Weston’s deer population.

The process was convened by the Conservation Commission, and action alternatives were selected via majority rule by the commission. This was followed a by majority rule vote by the town's board of selectmen, which ultimately authorized the Conservation Commission to establish a bowhunting program on town conservation lands.

Phase 3. Implementation

Since the fall of 2012, the Weston Conservation Commission has opened five town properties to allow bowhunting of deer. The program is managed by volunteers and the town’s Conservation Administrator. Weston does not have a budget allocation.

After the first year of implementing the program, a citizens' petition challenging the program's validity was filed. The Conservation Commission responded with additional public outreach, educating residents on the importance of deer management. At a town meeting, a vote reaffirmed the Conservation Commission-approved hunting program.

Phase 4. Evaluation and Adaptation Phase

Weston considers its program a success and follows an assessment plan to gage effectiveness. Following best practices, Weston’s evaluation plan focuses on monitoring damage to forest regeneration in which a local university, Harvard Forest, and citizen scientists monitor deer damage to natural areas. For example, abundance of lady slippers, a wildflower especially vulnerable to deer browsing, is assessed annually with help from the Weston garden clubs. Weston has installed 10 deer exclosures. With the help of Harvard Forest and a local university, vegetation growth within the exclosures (i.e. where no deer are present) is being compared with vegetation growth outside the exclosures (i.e. where deer are present). In addition to assessing deer damage to natural areas, Weston collects police reports on the number of deer-related vehicle accidents and reviews reports from the county health department to track the number of tick-borne illnesses.

The Conservation Commission is responsible for carrying out the assessment plan and monitoring the success of the deer management program. Since its initial implementation, Weston has expanded the number of conservation land parcels that are open to bowhunting each year. They made this change to increase the overall effectiveness of the deer management program. The community notes that measuring deer impacts is imprecise and change is only detectable over the long term. Weston identifies the problem of too many deer as a regional one, and they are working on getting other abutting towns involved.

Community Survey

Phase 1: Problem Definition

Initial discussion about deer as a community issue

Which parties initiated the original discussion about the possibility of a local deer management program?

Formal (elected or appointed) community leaders (e.g., town supervisor, town council)

Issue Drivers

What deer-related concerns were the main drivers of the original discussion about need for local deer management?

Deer damage to gardens and plantings around homes; Deer damage to farm crops; Deer-related vehicle accidents; Concern about Lyme or other tick-borne disease; Deer damage to forests or other native plants

Any particular impact/event that was a tipping point for your community’s decision to develop a deer management program?

A combination of increased resident letters of concern and conservation commissioner awareness of the problem

Gathering Information

What process was used to define the deer management problem(s) in the community?

A local deer committee charged with defining the problem held discussions, but the committee did not have an outside facilitator

Special challenges

Describe any challenges the community faced in defining the deer and deer management problem.

Challenge:

Lack of concrete deer population estimates for the town

Community Response:

Contacted the state fish and wildlife service to give us the best population estimate available and made peace with the fact that it was only an estimate

Given how your community identified your deer management problem, what would you or your community have done differently?

We thought carefully about the process from the beginning and made a conscious effort to include input from experts and residents early on and throughout the process. We put a huge emphasis on educating residents about forest stewardship.

Phase 2: Decision-Making

Structure of the decision-making process

In what year did the first decision-making phase begin?

2011

What parties initiated or convened the process?

Formal (elected or appointed) community leaders (e.g., town supervisor, town council)

What was the mechanism by which action alternative were selected in the community?

majority rule by the Conservation Commission; Followed by majority rule by the Board of Selectmen authorizing the Commission to establish a bow hunting program on town conservation land

Briefly summarize the decision-making process.

see presentation attached (above)

In what ways did community members have opportunity(s) to provide input during the decision-making process?

Leaders created a formal public comment period before making decisions, Leaders or deer committee held public comment meetings, Leaders or deer committee surveyed residents about decision alternatives, after the first year of the program, a citizen's petition challenging the program was filed and a town meeting vote re-affirmed the Commission's hunting program

Did your community use a facilitator to help make decisions about deer management goals and actions?

Discussions about deer management goals and alternatives were led by an outside person brought in to serve the local deer committee as a process facilitator.

Information Gathering

What information sources were consulted by the community group that made decisions about deer management action alternatives?

Content experts from wildlife agency, Content experts from other organizations, Content experts from university, Community opinion presented by stakeholder groups, Research reports or papers, Deer management plans from other communities

How were different types of information used?

Content experts from wildlife agency:

To determine cost, To determine feasibility, To determine acceptability of action alternatives

Content experts from other organizations:

To determine feasibility

Community opinion presented by stakeholder groups:

To determine cost, To determine feasibility, To determine acceptability of action alternatives

Research reports or papers:

To determine cost, To determine feasibility, To determine acceptability of action alternatives

Deer management plans from other communities:

To determine feasibility, To determine acceptability of action alternatives

How did the group find/identify the content experts they consulted?

Through the research community, abutting communities, and state wildlife agency

Program Goals

What specific long-term goals were identified for this community’s deer management program?

1) To identify whether Weston has too many deer. 2) If so, to reduce the deer herd to a more ecologically sustainable level

When were goals for the community-based deer management identified?

During the process of selecting action alternatives

Selecting Management Actions

Special Challenges

Describe the two or three most important challenges the community faced during the decision-making phase.

Challenge:

Dealing with the moral objection of community members who believed it was wrong to kill deer

Community response to challenge:

Redefine the problem as ecosystem wide. There is no solution that does not involve mortality for some creatures. Emphasized the importance of forest health for the whole ecosystem

Challenge:

Resident concerns about personal safety on conservation land while hunting is occurring

Community response to challenge:

We limited hunting to archery only. We explained safety record of bow hunting and the logistics of hunting from stands in trees (i.e. aim down). We required proficiency tests of all hunters accepted in the program.

Thinking back on your community’s decision-making process, what would you or your community have done differently, if anything?

we would have changed nothing

Phase 3: Implementation

Key characteristics of the management program

Have any actions already been taken with respect to your deer management program?

We have had a successful bow hunting program on town conservation land for the last 4 years.

What is/was the annual budget for your community's deer management program?

0.00

Did your community create any new positions to assist in implementing the deer management program?

Volunteer, None, deer management duties were assigned to an existing position

What partners, if any, has the community engaged in to help implement the effort?

State wildlife management agency

Was venison donation a component of the implementation process?

Special challenges

Describe the most important challenges your community faced in implementing your deer management program

Challenge:

During the first hunting season, we had residents form anti-hunting group, picketed at the town green, and submitted a citizens petition to ban hunting on town land

Community response to challenge:

additional public outreach was conducted, educating the residents on the importance of deer management. residents supported the Commission's deer management program at town meeting.

Challenge:

Safety concerns from dog walkers and people re: using lands during hunting season

Community response to challenge:

provided FAQ on the safety record of bow hunting and other information to alleviate resident fears.

Considering your community’s deer management program implementation, what would you or your community have done differently?

nothing

Phase 4: Evaluation and Adaptation

The community's approach to outcome assessment

Did the community develop an assessment plan for measuring progress towards deer management goals?

Yes

What kinds of baseline information did your community collect before implementing the deer management program?

Damage to forest regeneration

Parks department or citizen science efforts to monitor deer damage to natural areas in community parks, Partner with universities to conduct plant damage studies

Deer-vehicle collisions

Collecting police reports on number of deer-related vehicle accidents in community

Rate of tick-borne disease cases in the community

Review annual reports from county health department with number of reported cases of tick-borne illnesses

If an assessment plan was created, what indicators are used for measuring outcomes of management actions?

Damage to forest regeneration

Parks department or citizen science efforts to monitor deer damage to natural areas in community parks, Partner with universities to conduct plant damage studies

Deer-vehicle collisions

Collecting police reports on number of deer-related vehicle accidents in community

Who is responsible for carrying out the assessment plan and monitoring the success of the deer management program?

Deer Committee, The Conservation Commission functions at the "Deer Committee" in Weston

How program implementation has been adapted over time

What, if any, changes have been made to the deer management program since its initial implementation?

Change:

we have expanded the number of conservation land parcels open to bow hunting

Why was the change made?:

to increase the effectiveness of our hunting program

Special challenges at this phase

Describe any challenges your community faced in evaluating your deer management program.

Challenge:

measure deer impacts is imprecise and long-term

Community response to the challenge:

It's a decades long process that we are monitoring with deer exclosures

Assessment of program success overall

What would you or your community have done differently for the evaluation of its deer management program?

nothing

Does the community consider its CBDM program to be successful in achieving its objectives? Why or why not?

Yes. it's a start. we had to start somewhere. we don't have evidence that we are changing the impacts on the forest health but it's a long process. It's a regional problem, not a town problem. we are working to get other abutting towns involved.