Deer Control in Brookfield
Summary
The deer population in Brookfield has risen dramatically in the last few years. At the request of numerous residents, the city council created a citizen task force to study the issue, made recommendations, and is now controlling the herd. Alderman Berg supports the deer control effort.
As grim as it may seem, the whole point of this program is to remove deer from Brookfield. A deer population census is taken by flying a helicopter over the entire Brookfield township (6 by 6 miles or 36 square miles) including the City of Brookfield, the Village of Elm Grove and the Town of Brookfield in early December. The reduction s usually January through March.
There are only three zones where the deer are removed and they are all owned by the city.
- Wirth Park
- Black Forest Corridor
- Poplar Creek
For safety, public access is restricted during the hunting period. Adjacent land owners often give special permission to use their property for easier access. The following table and chart summarizes the program.
| Year | Population Before Removal | Removed | |
| 2002 | City Elm Grove Town Total |
425 25 50+ 500 |
143 |
| 2003 | City Elm Grove Town Total |
324 26 20 370 |
96 |
| 2004 | City Elm Grove Town Total |
469 26 52 547 |
92 |
| 2005 | City Elm Grove Town Total |
262 28 13 303 |
64 |
| 2006 | City Elm Grove Town Total |
317 17 34 368 |
81 |
| 2007 | City Elm Grove Town Total |
329 30 57 416 |
88 |
| 2008 | City Elm Grove Town Total |
261 38 87 386 |
90 |
The long range population goal is between 130 and 190 deer in the city. There will have to be an annual program to achieve and maintain that population.
Another objective of the program was to reduce car/deer accidents. As the following table shows, the rate has declined.
| Year | Reportable | Non-reportable | Total |
| 2000 | 60 | 21 | 81 |
| 2001 | 67 | 13 | 80 |
| 2002 | 43 | 21 | 64 |
| 2003 | 70 | 1 | 71 |
| 2004 | 32 | 16 | 48 |
| 2005 | 39 | 18 | 57 |
| 2006 | 40 | 8 | 48 |
| 2007 | 38 | 14 | 52 |
A "reportable" accident is an occurrence that originates or terminates on a traffic way, which involves at least one motor vehicle in transport, and results in any of the following:
- Injury or fatality of a person
- Total damage to one person's property to an apparent extent of $1,000 or more
- Damage to government-owned property to an apparent extent of $200 or more, except government owned vehicles, where the threshold is $1,000 or more
A "non-reportable" accident is an occurrence that does not meet the above criteria. Of course there are accidents that don't get reported at all and thus can't be classified as reportable or non-reportable.
Two years ago my car was rear ended while I was waiting for another car that was waiting for a school bus that was waiting for two deer to cross the road. In my opinion, the deer "caused" the accident since none of the vehicles would have been stopped if they hadn't been in the road. No one was cited and I'm sure it was not recorded as deer related since it was a collision between two cars, not a car and a deer.
In January, 2008 the program cost $25,763. That worked out to about $233/deer for sharpshooting (rifle) and about $400/deer for live trapping.
In the past, when a deer was trapped it would be transported to a game farm. In an attempt to contain chronic wasting disease, DNR regulations have been changed to prohibit transport, so the trapped deer are now euthanized shortly after capture. Also, past practice was for the venison (deer meat) to be processed and given to food pantries, etc. Food pantries are now stating strong concerns over transmitting disease to people and have difficulty giving the meat away, so they end up throwing it in the garbage. While communities are still allowed to give the venison away, it is becoming more common to bury the carcasses.
The city is under tremendous pressure to reduce spending and taxes. This is an excellent example of a new program (started in 2002) with a continuing cost (new deer are born every year, so the deer population reduction continues every year) that is not absolutely essential (in the way a fireman is deemed to be) but is politically popular. Should it be continued? You tell me!
The following MJS article has an incorrect statement. The comment about Bambi bleeding in the front yard was actually made by Alderman Karl Schultz. When I was interviewed the next day by a reporter who was not at the meeting, I repeated the comment with credit, but the reporter missed that attribution. In any event, I did support the preference given to rifles over bows.
MJS - August 24, 2000 - Some Residents are in a Hurry to do Away With Deer
MJS - October 11, 2000 - Survey Shows High Deer Resentment
MJS - March 31, 2002 - Communities Trim Deer Herds, Despite Mild Winter Weather