Catalina Island Humane Society opposes deer eradication
The Catalina Island Humane Society (CIHS), as the voice of compassion for animals on Catalina Island, strongly opposes the recent decision by the Catalina Island Conservancy to eradicate the entire population of mule deer on Catalina Island. This move, driven by the Conservancy’s stated goal to return the island to its “natural state,” has raised concerns among residents, animal advocates, and ethical conservationists alike.
CIHS believes that the proposed plan to manage the deer population lacks consideration for both the science and ethics of the situation.
We share the concerns of many residents who cherish the presence of these gentle creatures that have been part of our island’s ecosystem for nearly a century.
We question the ethical and practical implications of this decision:
- Humane and Ethical Alternatives: CIHS advocates for the most humane and ethical methods to manage the deer population. We believe that compassion should guide conservation efforts while respecting the cultural significance of the deer, which have been a vital resource for generations of island residents.
- Public Input and Evidence: The Conservancy’s decision lacks transparency and adequate public input. We formally request that the Conservancy provide evidence to support their claim that complete eradication of the deer population is needed rather than considering a reduced population controlled by responsible hunting practices.
- Economic Impact: The potential negative impact on tourism, the lifeblood of the island, is a concern. Tourists come to Catalina Island not only for its natural beauty but also for the opportunity to experience its unique wildlife, including the mule deer.
- Wildlife Welfare: The proposed eradication methods, such as shooting from helicopters, raise concerns about the welfare of these innocent animals and the potential for suffering. We urge the Conservancy to consider more humane options that align with scientific and ethical standards. None of us should want to repeat the trauma of the pig and goat eradication project.
- Ecological Impact: The ecological impact of eliminating the entire deer population on the island is uncertain. CIHS questions whether this decision aligns with the Conservancy’s mission to balance conservation, education, and recreation while respecting the island’s cultural heritage.
We call upon the Catalina Island Conservancy to reconsider its approach and engage in a comprehensive public dialogue that includes the cultural significance of the deer, ethical wildlife management practices, and the welfare of all animals on the island.
CIHS encourages residents, visitors, and animal lovers to join our efforts in opposing the eradication plan and advocating for a more compassionate, evidence-based, and culturally sensitive approach to wildlife management on Catalina Island.
CIHS Board of Directors info@catalinahumane.org
In response to short term rental letters
“There’s lies, damn lies and statistics.” Mark Twain
I write in response to Mr. Greg Haskin of Atascadero, California, and Ms. Claire Bourke, no location referenced, letters to the Catalina Islander Editor, regarding short-term vacation rentals.
Mr. Haskins states the only way to identify the impact of short-term rentals is through data.
Certainly data should be collected, has been collected and will be collected.
The facts are, we are an Island with a tourist economy, and we have limited resources: Water, landfill for trash, parking, a workforce, and decent, affordable housing for residents. We do have an increase in the number of short-term vacation rentals, which does affect full-time housing options.
You questioned whether our City Attorney is aware of proposed suggestions and regulations? The proposed suggestions have been successfully implemented in other communities throughout the country. I am sure our City Attorney will evaluate each proposal for review.
Ms. Burke insinuates the noise complaints are coming from “locals” because six adults and children live in the property behind where she rents short-term.
These “locals ” often work 2-3 jobs to afford rent, sacrifice time away from their children to provide services we need to run our economy. We want our “locals” to have a quality of life and decent, affordable housing. You expressed concern that vacation rental companies do not have a “say” in the short-term rental discussion.
Avalon’s Planning Commission has nearly one half its seats filled with realtors and property managers, (who pitch homes as vacation rental income investments). All but two own property versus rent. Historically, these commissioners have voted “yes” to transient rentals.
The goal of discussing vacation rentals, the good and the bad, is to take the time to acknowledge the limitations of our Island and to explore how to create a fiscally strong, sustainable, enjoyable community for BOTH residents and visitors. We are joining the movement of thousands of towns across America grappling with short-term rental impacts, positive and negative, on their communities.
Please be patient with our process.
Janice Hall
Removed from Planning Commission for voting “no”
