sharpshooters culling deer - how??
 

Vasser College in Poughkeepsie,N.Y. had sharpshooters come in last week and shot 64 deer in 2 days.
My question is how do they do it, what method? Do they use .22s and spot lights? Don't the deer run off? How many shooter would they use?
Here is some of the local article;


Vassar College's effort to reduce the deer population near its Town of Poughkeepsie campus is expected to resume this week.
A group opposed to the deer culling scheduled a protest for 4 p.m. Monday, according to a news release, at Raymond and Hooker avenues.
Vassar College has a permit issued by the state Department of Environmental Conservation to use hired sharpshooters to kill up to 50 deer on its 500-acre Vassar Farm and Ecological Preserve off Hooker Avenue.
Jeff Kosmacher, Vassar's spokesman, said Friday that 44 deer were killed Thursday night. After 50 have been culled, the college can apply for another permit to take more deer. He declined Friday to say precisely when this week the cull will resume.
Out of an estimated 100 deer living on the property, college officials said 85 need to be removed to protect the preserve.
Venison from the cull will be donated to local food banks. Connecticut-based White Buffalo Inc. is performing the cull for an estimated $10,000.
Reach Michael Woyton at mwoyton @poughkeepsiejournal.com or 845-451-4518.

22s and spotlights ARE ILLEGAL for deer huntin.

13pointjomc, this is different though. I know on nuciance permits you can use any means just about.

I know when they did the culling around here, all the venison was scrapped due to some official calling it "not fit for comsumtion". it was a shame and the pricetag was a lot more than $10,000. I think they billed the county $15,000 in ammo alone.

oh ok,i didnt read the whole thing!lol

For farmers/landowners that insist deer be killed off of their land for the ability to hunt their ground while at the same time charge you a lease, the current rate of deer removal has been established at $200 per head. They should either reduce the lease rate or pay the hunter that harvests the deer.

This only applies to landowners/farmers that insist deer be taken. As long as a owner is okay with a hunter going O-fer the season and the relationship is good, then the agreement is still hunting related. However, when the owner puts stipulations that this is what he/she wants done, the agreement is now about culling and herd control which is basically a business arrangement. Can't have cake and eat it to (untill some hard up for land access guy says yes master, anything you want.)

They use silenced high power rifles with night vision scopes. While I commend the donation of the meat to the shelters, I find the practice to be completely unethical. Some town's here in the PRNJ did the same thing. These people are too stupid to realize that they can generate revenue by selling a special permit archery hunt, instead they want to spend money to use a contractor.

That is how they do it (Night vision scope on AR-15's). I also agree 100 percent with the rest of your statement. What a waste.

Years ago a 6400acre gov't property around here had deer galore, every few years I think they bring in the sharpshooters. In the middle of the suburbs this place. A friend once went to a meeting about allowing bowhunters to do the job....none of the 5 person panel hunted, or even fished I don't think. Of course they vetoed that idea...and brought in the sharp shooters. Such a shame, these gov't/state owned properties could manage the deer herd, even make money off it, but they're worried about other BS.

I don't disagree with you about using hunters to get rid of deer, other then the fact that you suggest that the state charge them to do it. I swear I gotta be the only one on this board that feels the state already steals enough money from me. Why promote them stealing more?

Anyhow the only problem with the bowhunter route is that these "sharpshooters" (in the story) are getting 50 deer out in just a few days. That aint happening with bowhunting. The school does not want the PR of dealing with people seeing hunters around constantly in order to meet the reduction goals. Not saying that it is right or wrong, just reality. A few days to cull deer will go unnoticed for the most part. Months of hunting won't.

I agree that hunters could just as effectively solve the problem, and think the college should allow hunting, at least with archery equipment in the future, now that they have a good start with their cull. Students and locals could take an hour safety briefing at the college to understand any special rules they may have and safely harvest those deer.
I do see however the need to get rid of those deer practically overnight by whatever means the law will allow to get a hunting program started. They needed them gone, quickly and safely, for the benefit of the deer and the college and its students. Hiring experts to do that is totally fine with me. I just wish they'd have called me first. I'm an expert shooter, or at least I always qualified as such in the Army. And I could have killed all those deer the same way for the cost of the ammo and a case of beer after the job was done.