HomeMy WebLinkAboutFindings Statement Deer Mgmt Amdmt 11-20-12.pdf
State Environmental Quality Review
Findings Statement - Amendment
Deer Management Plan
Village of Cayuga Heights
Tompkins County, New York
Adopted: November 20, 2012
This document is an Amendment of the Findings Statement prepared and adopted by
the Village Board of Trustees on April 4, 2011 (the “Findings Statement”) pursuant to
and as required by 6 NYCRR Part 617.11 implementing the New York State
Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). This Findings Statement Amendment
draws upon the information in the Village of Cayuga Heights (the “Village”) record in
connection with the Village's program for deer management (the “Deer Management
Plan,” of “DMP”) as set forth on the Village's website ; the Draft Environmental Impact
Statement (DEIS) dated November 1, 2010, and comments received on the DEIS at a
duly noticed public hearing held on December 6, 2010, along with written comments
received on the DEIS; the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) dated March
14, 2011, and comments received on the FEIS between March 14, 2011 and ten days
thereafter; the Findings Statement itself; the Decision, Order and Judgment dated
September 14, 2011 of the State of New York Supreme Court, Honorable Phillip R.
Rumsey, Justice Presiding (the “Supreme Court Decision”), in the action brought
against the Village by opponents of the DMP seeking annulment of the DMP and
challenging the Village’s SEQRA review of the DMP, along with all documents filed in
connection with such action; the Memorandum and Order dated June 14, 2012 of the
State of New York Supreme Court Appellate Division, Justice Lahtinen presiding (the
“Appellate Court decision”), in the appeal of said action, along with all documents filed in
connection with such appeal; and such information and materials provided to or
obtained by the Village since undertaking the DMP .
In preparing this Amendment of the Findings Statement the Village of Cayuga Heights
Board of Trustees has given due consideration to the DEIS, FEIS, the Findings
Statement itself, community and agency input and other documents reviewed and
considered in conjunction with the SEQRA process. Further, this Amendment of the
Findings Statement incorporates by reference the facts and conclusions in the DEIS
and FEIS relied upon by the Board of Trustees to support its decisions, and considers
and balances the relevant environmental impacts with “social, economic and other
considerations” which form the basis for its decision (6 NYCRR 617.11(d)).
Pursuant to Article 8 (SEQRA) of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR
Part 617, the Village of Cayuga Heights Board of Trustees as Lead Agency ma de and
adopted the findings set forth in the Findings Statement and makes a nd adopts the
Village of Cayuga Heights, Deer Management Plan
SEQRA Findings Statement Amendment November 20, 2012
Page 2
additional findings set forth in this Amendment. The Findings Statement and all of
the findings set forth therein are hereby incorporated in their entirety into this
Amendment by reference. All capitalized terms used in this Amendment but not
defined herein will have the respective meanings given to such terms in the Findings
Statement.
A. Additional Information Obtained Since the Findings Statement and
Additional Findings.
1. Confirmation of the Village’s Compliance with SEQRA
The Supreme Court decision provided confirmation that the Village’s SEQRA review of
the DMP was wholly consistent with the requirements of the SEQRA process. The
Court concluded that “there is sufficient evidence in the record to show that [the Village]
complied with SEQRA,” that the DMP “adopted by [the Village] is generally consistent
with the DEC’s recommendation for managing deer populations in urban and suburban
areas” and that the petitioners’ “contentions have been considered and have been
rejected.” Following the Village’s receipt of the Supreme Court’s confirmation that
Village had in all respects satisfied the requirements of SEQRA and that the DMP could
proceed, the Village began the necessary steps for implementation of the DMP.
2. Further Confirmation of the Village’s Compliance with SEQRA
The opponents of the DMP then appealed the Supreme Court decision. The Village
again prevailed, with the Appellate Division in toto affirming the Supreme Court
decision. The Appellate Court decision concluded as follows.
We are unpersuaded by petitioners’ contention that respondent failed to provide sufficient
data for informed public comment and failed to take a hard look at important adverse impacts of
the plan. The DEIS was detailed in describing the problem, the proposed solution, the potential
impacts, and the alternative approaches. Moreover, the DEIS was similar in its
recommendations to the DRAC report, which had been issued and made public over a year
before the DEIS was issued. There was ample information and sufficient time to comment, as
reflected by over 60 comments received. The comments were sufficiently addressed in the FEIS.
The issues of human treatment of the deer problem as well as asserted potential impact on human
health were adequately considered. The remaining issues have been considered and are
unavailing.”
3. Proceeding with Implementation of the Deer Management Plan
Subsequent to receiving the Appellate Court decision, the Village proceeded with
implementation of the DMP. In order to undertake both the sterilization component of
the DMP as well as the culling component of the DMP, the Village sought the written
Village of Cayuga Heights, Deer Management Plan
SEQRA Findings Statement Amendment November 20, 2012
Page 3
consent of property owners to use their properties for each component of the DMP. The
Village sent consent forms to all property owners in the Village. A copy of the
“Landowner Consent Agreement” form is attached for reference. Once the Village had
collected the written consents of property owners, the Village consulted further with Dr.
Paul Curtis (“Dr. Curtis”) of Cornell University, who had been providing consulting
services to the Village regularly throughout the development and implementation of the
DMP, and with Dr. Anthony DiNicola (“Dr. DiNicola”) of White Buffalo, Inc. (“WB”), the
wildlife management firm that the Village has intended to contract with for
implementation of the DMP.
The owners of approximately _________ percent of the parcels in the Village [or:
approximately _____________ percent of the property owners in the Village] returned
the consent forms to the Village. The owners of approximately ten percent of the
parcels in the Village [or: Approximately _____________ percent of the property
owners in the Village] responded that they did not consent to use of their property for
the culling of deer. In accordance with NYS Environmental Conservation Law Section
11-0931(4), the discharge of a firearm within five hundred feet from a dwelling house is
illegal without the consent of the owner of such house (except in specified
circumstances, such as the authorized use by a police department). The Village
identified the locations of the dwellings of the owners who did not provide consent to
culling and measured a five hundred foot radius around each such dwelling. Although
these property owners made up only approximately ten percent of all property owners in
the Village, the dispersal of these properties throughout the Village resulted in the five
hundred foot radius circles around such dwellings covering a majority of the area of the
Village. As a consequence, only limited locations in the Village currently would be
available as sites for the culling of deer. As a result of the Village’s analysis of the
property owner responses and consultation with the Village’s experts, the Village
determined that the Village currently would not have an adequate number of feasible
sites to cull deer in order for the culling component of the DMP to succeed.
4. Further Consideration of Alternatives for Implementation of the DMP.
In recognition that the Village currently would not have an adequate number of feasible
sites to cull deer for the culling component of the DMP to succeed, the Village
undertook further consideration of other options for management of the excessive
population of deer in the Village in accordance with the DMP. In the process of
developing the DMP, the Village had considered and reviewed, including in the DEIS,
the FEIS and the Findings Statement, the alternative of sterilization only as a deer
population management alternative. “Under this alternative,” the Findings Statement
stated, “… greater numbers of deer would need to be sterilized in order to stabilize the
herd at the numbers recommended by the DRAC. This option is slower and more
expensive than culling alone or the combined approach of sterilization and culling. It
would take three to five years to stabilize the herd, and herd reduction would not be
evident for five to six years …” In connection with undertaking the sterilization
component of the DMP, the Village had received from the NYS DEC a License to
Village of Cayuga Heights, Deer Management Plan
SEQRA Findings Statement Amendment November 20, 2012
Page 4
Collect or Possess up to 60 female deer for the purpose of surgical sterilization (the
“LCP”). A copy of the LCP is attached for reference.
The Village consulted with various officials at NYS DEC who have been aware of and
involved with the Village’s DMP, as well as with Dr. Curtis and with Dr. DiNicola. Dr.
Curtis explained certain relevant aspects the deer management program that he has
been conducting for many years on the Cornell University campus, immediately
adjacent to the south of the Village. In particular, Dr. Curtis explained that the Cornell
program had achieved a sterilization rate of 90-95% of the female deer, and that after
approximately 3-4 years of maintenance of that level, the population of the deer herd on
the Cornell property had stabilized and was indicating a decline. In addition to relaying
these results to various Village officials, Dr. Curtis presented this information to the full
Village Board at its regular meeting on November 13, 2012.
For in excess of a year, the Village has been discussing with Dr. DiNicola the terms of a
proposed contract for WB to undertake both the sterilization and the culling components
of the DMP. These discussions have been undertaken primarily between Dr. DiNicola
and the Village attorney, with regular consultation with the Village’s Mayor, Deputy
Mayor and Deputy Treasurer. Evaluation of the proposed contract terms, and, in
particular of the various cost components of the work, made it abundantly clear that
mobilization costs for the work were a substantial expense. Consequently, significant
costs advantages would accrue to the Village if more of the work could be completed
immediately following one mobilization effort than if WB had to conduct only a portion of
the work on one occasion, and then return to the Village, re -mobilize and continue with
the work on subsequent occasions.
The Findings Statement had noted that the sterilization component of the DMP would
take place over a two year period, and that it would not b e expected that the physical
activities to achieve sterilization would be significantly disruptive as they would be of a
short duration. This “short duration” was indicated in the Findings Statement to be “over
several months annually.” As the terms of the WB contract evolved, it became clear
that the sterilization work could be completed in an even shorter time frame, particularly
if a greater number of female deer were permitted to be sterilized initially, without having
to undertake re-mobilization for additional work on subsequent occasions. Also of
relevance was the point made in the Findings Statement that “Depending on decisions
made by the Trustees the sterilization effort could take place over one or more
seasons.”
Given the Village’s collection of the foregoing information, and taking into account the
information previously collected by the Village, as set forth in the Findings Statement
and elsewhere in the SEQRA documentation for the DMP, the Village determined to
further consider the use at this time of sterilization only as a deer management tool. In
order to proceed with this possibility, the Village contacted NYS DEC to request
modification of the LCP to authorize the Village to capture a larger number of female
deer for sterilization. In response to the Village’s request, on November 16, 2012, the
NYS DEC issued to the Village a modification of the LCP that authorizes the Village to
capture up to 145 female deer for sterilization. A copy of this permit is attached for
reference.
Village of Cayuga Heights, Deer Management Plan
SEQRA Findings Statement Amendment November 20, 2012
Page 5
5. Impacts of Proceeding with Implementation of the Deer Management Plan.
The Village has considered of all of the information contained in the Findings Statement
and elsewhere in the SEQRA documentation for the DMP, as well as all of the
additional information obtained by the Village since the adoption of the Findings
Statement. For the reasons outlined in this Amendment of the Findings Statement, the
Village currently will not have the opportunity to undertake the culling component of the
DMP and would consider currently proceeding with management of the deer population
in the Village by increasing the number of female deer sterilized.
The most significant impacts considered and evaluated in the Findings Statement and
the other SEQRA documentation for the DMP were (1) the actual impact on the deer
that would be euthanized in the culling component of the DMP and (2) the degree of
public controversy related to the DMP. As noted in the DEIS, “Controversy has been
caused by opposition to culling the deer herd and, to a much lesser degree, by
opposition to sterilization. Opposition comes from a relatively small minority of resident
and primarily from individuals living outside of the Village.” Uncontrovertibly, the
inability of the Village currently to undertake the culling component of the DMP and
sterilization of a larger number of deer instead will result in significantly less actual
impact on the deer. Likewise, the Village’s current inability to proceed with the culling
component of the DMP substantially diminishes the public controversy concerning the
DMP. Also as noted in the DEIS, in the event that no culling were to take place,
“community objections to this aspect of the proposed program would be placated.” In
summary, currently proceeding with sterilization of a greater number of deer and without
culling does not result in any impacts that were not already considered and evaluated in
the SEQRA process and largely eliminates the most significant impacts that had been
identified in the SEQRA process.
B. The SEQRA Process.
1. Amendment of Findings Statement.
In accordance with SEQRA (6 NYCRR Part 617) the Village had prepared, reviewed
and adopted the Findings Statement. Further in accordance with SEQRA, if a
modification or change of circumstances related to the project requires a lead agency to
substantively modify its decision, findings may be amended and filed in accordance with
subdivision 617.12(b) of SEQRA. This Amendment of the Findings Statement
constitutes such an amendment of the Village’s findings.
2. Required Permits & Approvals.
As the Lead Agency, the Village of Cayuga Heights has primary responsibility for review
of this proposal. The only other agency that has permitting authority is the New York
Village of Cayuga Heights, Deer Management Plan
SEQRA Findings Statement Amendment November 20, 2012
Page 6
State Department of Environmental Conservation, who has authority to grant the
requisite wildlife management permits.
C. Conclusions
The Village of Cayuga Heights Board of Trustees finds and certifies that:
The Village Board has given due consideration to the Draft and Final EIS, the
Findings Statement and information derived from other documents and public
hearings and Trustee meetings during the course of this SEQRA review process;
This Findings Statement Amendment has been prepared pursuant to and as
required by 6 NYCRR Part 617;
Consistent with social, economic and other essential considerations of the
proposed action, the No Action condition and other reasonable alternatives, the
proposed action assessed in the Draft EIS, the Final EIS, the Findings Statement
and this Amendment of the Findings Statement is an action that avoids or
minimizes adverse environmental impacts to the maximum extent practicable;
and,
Consistent with social, economic and other essential considerations, to the
maximum extent practicable, potential adverse environmental effects revealed in
the environmental impact statement process will be avoided or minimized by
various plans and policies and procedures that will be incorporated into the Deer
Management Plan as identified as likely and practicable in the Draft EIS, Final
EIS, the Findings Statement and this Amendment of the Findings Statement.
The Trustees as the Lead Agency have considered reasonably related long-term,
short-term, direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts, including other simultaneous
or subsequent actions and determined that there are no significant long-term
cumulative impacts.
Village of Cayuga Heights Board of Trustees
Kate Supron .
Signature of Responsible Official Name
Mayor November 20, 2012______
Title Date