Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOstfield, R DEIS.pdf Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies Box AB,2801 Sharon Turnpike Millbrook,New York 12545-0129 Telephone 845-677-5343 FAX 845-677-5976 Telephone(direct dial)845-677-7600,ext. 136 E-mail: ROstfeld(dtcarvinstitme.ore Senior Scientist Richard S.Ostfeld,Ph.D. 6 December 2010 To:Village of Cayuga Heights Board of Trustees Subject:Draft Environmental Impact Statement,Cayuga Heights Deer Management Plan I am a research scientist who has devoted much of the past twenty years to understanding the ecology of Lyme disease and other tick-borne infections(see http://www.ecostudies.org/people sci ostfeld.html). I have carefully read all sections of your DEIS pertaining to the potential impacts of management options on ticks and tick-borne disease. The DEIS contains many inaccurate and unsupported statements about relationships between deer,blackleg ticks (incorrectly called "deer ticks"), �e >Ra�_ or example.page 2-10 incorrectly states that linear correlations exist between deer and ticks. A comprehensive review of the scientific literature on the relationship between numbers of deer and numbers of ticks reveals that the majority of studies find no statistical correlation at all(see:Ostfeld,R.S.2011. Lyme disease: the ecology of a complex system. Oxford University Press, New York.). The lack of a correlation derives from the following facts: (1)deer do not infect ticks with Lyme bacteria,and actually reduce the infection prevalence in tick populations; (2)adult blacklegged ticks feed on at least 27 different species of mammals and are not specialists on white-tailed deer;(3)when deer populations are culled, ticks crowd onto the remaining deer,resulting in similar total numbers of tick meals;and (4)even when deer affect the number of eggs laid by adult ticks and resulting abundance of larvae, numbers of larvae do not predict numbers of nymphs(nymphs are responsible for transmitting Lyme disease to people). On page 3-,5 the document cites the Monhegan Island (Maine)study to project what might happen in Cayuga Heights. This is misleading. On Monhegan Island,the deer herd was hunted from 100 to zero individuals. No other host animals for the adult stage of the tick were present on the island. Therefore,with no other host on which to complete their life cycle, the blacklegged ticks declined dramatically. But when deer have been culled on mainland sites,management never achieves extirpation of deer, and the remaining deer plus many other hosts support adult ticks. Therefore, control of ticks is weak to nonexistent. Moreover,although mention is made of deer thresholds in the non-peer-reviewed literature,no scientific data support the existence of a deer density threshold below which ticks decline to low numbers. Scientific literature on which my statements are based can be found in the book cited above. I refrain from commenting on other arguments concerning the benefits of culling deer. However, to the extent that the justification is based on the notion that reduced Lyme disease incidence will result,the document is deeply flawed. I would be happy to address questions should any arise. Sincerely, Richard S. Ostfeld,PhD Senior Scientist