Valley Forge Deer: Update from Pity, Not Cruelty (PNC) Inc.

1)As far as I know, everyone who has worked to try to get Valley Forge National Historical Park (VFNHP) to accept PNC, Inc's offer of fencing or contraception (or both) hopes the FOA's lawsuit is successful.

2) If animals have rights, then contracepting deer is a violation of their rights in an ideal world or if such rights are absolute, but even human rights are not absolute (there are limitations on what we can say and who we can marry, etc.) and hardly anyone would try to argue that we live in an ideal world.

3) The offer to fund fencing of wooded areas ( (4 ten acre "forest" plots) and contraception (1,000 deer) was made to show that the park's plan to cull deer to "protect, preserve and restore native vegetation" is not necessary and is, in fact, a waste of tax dollars. The offer was made in response to what the park saw as a problem. At no time and in no way was the offer intended to show that the park's perceived problem reflected the true state of affairs in the park. We reject the idea that promoting birth control "actually concedes the point that the deer are overpopulated." It only acknowledges that the park claims the deer are overpopulated and that at least some people believe that. It is an attempt to offer an alternative to save deer lives, nothing more, nothing less. We could also claim that FOA's insistence on doing nothing is almost a guarantee that a slaughter will take place. We fervently hope we are mistaken, and that this adherence to a noble principle is not at the expense of deer lives.

4) It is true that Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) has not been detected in Pa and is not proven to be transmissible to humans (the jury is out on this question), but it certainly is transmissible to deer. Killing 80 or 90 % of the VFNHP deer herd will create a vacuum, inviting deer from outside the park to move in. CWD experts assert that the most dangerous thing to do is to move deer if one is concerned about the transmission of CWD. The fact that the park is willing to spend almost $1,000,000 to guard against or detect CWD reveals some degree of concern, but a reckless way of responding..

5) PNC, Inc. did not offer to fund any or all kinds of contraceptives. The offer specifically involved vaccinating the deer under the direction of Jay Kirkpatrick, Ph.D. using PZP made by the Science and Conservation Center in Montana.

6) PZP does NOT alter the social structure of the deer herd. Peer reviewed articles in scholarly journals attest to this fact.

7) PZP does NOT produce dangerous abscesses or inflammation. Peer reviewed articles in scholarly journals attest to this fact.

8) For the vast majority, grazing deer that are darted with PZP continue to graze after they have been darted, so while deer obviously feel the dart, they do not react as if it were any more painful than an injection.

9) PZP does NOT reduce fat content in bone marrow (a sign of poor nutrition). Deer that are darted with PZP are heavier (a sign of good health) than deer that have given birth and nursed a fawn. Weights are equal by the following autumn. Peer reviewed articles in scholarly journals attest to this fact.

10) Male deer are NOT darted with PZP, thus there is no abnormal antler development. PZP blocks the entry points on a female's egg (ovum) so that the male sperm cannot penetrate and fertilize the egg. It would have no effect on a male deer.

11) It is misleading, to say the least, to oppose the offer of PZP immunocontraception to VFNHP by listing results that pertain to other contraceptives, but NOT PZP. For instance, GonaCon apparently affects antler development. PNC, Inc's offer did not include GonaCon.

Priscilla Cohn, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus

Help Valley Forge Deer - Let them be - From Friends of Animals, Pennsylvania

Valley Forge National Park officials are developing a deer management strategy that they claim supports long-term protection, preservation, and restoration of native vegetation and other natural and cultural resources. The plan cites unacceptable damage to the understory of the woods, the threat of Chronic Wasting Disease, damage to ornamental plants on local human residents' property, and other perceived problems. The Park initially set out four alternatives: (A) no action against the deer, the status quo; (B) fencing and reproductive control; (C) sharpshooting plus capture and euthanasia and (D) killing 80% of the deer with sharpshooters and imposing birth control on the remaining 20%. Park officials favor “Alternative D,” a massacre.

In February, Friends of Animals, CARE, and certain individual citizens joined together to submit extensive comments favoring “Alternative A.” These comments are publicly available in their entirety at: http://www.friendsofanimals.org/programs/free-living/Deer_Management.htm. Among others, the following facts indicate that Park officials' claims are disingenuous:
– The deer population has decreased and stabilized since 2005.
– Accidents are better prevented by enforcing speed limits and putting up fences and reflective lights, rather than shooting or trapping (for birth control) deer (which will cause deer to run into traffic).
– Chronic Wasting Disease has not been detected in PA and is not proven to be transmissible.
– Coyotes are present in the area, and could keep the deer numbers in check if permitted to thrive.
Why not promote birth control? Imposing birth control on free-living animals is a violation of their rights. Controlling deer fertility is not only a physical violation, but also alters the social structure of a group. Contraceptives have been tested on deer, with disturbing reactions in the deer test subjects: abscesses, inflammation, pain, reduced fat content in bone marrow, and abnormal antler development in male deer. Porcine Zona Pellucida, a birth control made from pig eggs, is clearly not vegan. Though we understand that activists proposing use of contraceptives view this as a compromise to prevent killing, promoting the imposition of birth control actually concedes the point that the deer are overpopulated when, in fact, they are not. In that respect, the Park officials can assert that there is general agreement that the deer are overpopulated.

Friends of Animals and CARE are suing the Park to protect the deer with the assistance of the Denver University Environmental Law Clinic.
What can you do to help?
1 - Write to your Senator and Representative to tell them that you object to the Park spending a budgeted $3,000,000 of taxpayer money on this massacre. Ask your family and friends to do the same.
2 - If you live in the area, e-mail philly@friendsofanimals.org to be added to the mailing list for alerts about protests and other actions demanding that the Park “LET THE DEER BE.”