# Deer management back on Ann Arbor’s agenda, Humane Society speaks out

**By:** ryanstanton  
**Published:** 2026-09-21T15:35:49.024Z  
**Source:** [mlive](https://mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/2026/09/deer-management-back-on-ann-arbors-agenda-humane-society-speaks-out.html)

---

A deer in Ann Arbor's Nichols Arboretum in 2015.Ryan Stanton | The Ann Arbor News

ANN ARBOR, MI — Deer management is back on the Ann Arbor City Council’s agenda for the first time in several years and the Humane Society of Huron Valley is speaking out.
“As the community’s wildlife rescue service, we’ve seen no evidence of biological deer overpopulation in Ann Arbor and believe many conflicts stem from human population growth, habitat loss and fragmentation, and human behavior,” Tanya Hilgendorf, the group’s president and CEO, wrote in a letter to council.
“I know everyone involved means well, and I deeply appreciate your public service. But because of the framing throughout, we oppose the resolution as written.”
Council Members Jenn Cornell, Jon Mallek, Dharma Akmon, Lisa Disch and Chris Watson are sponsoring the resolution on council’s agenda Tuesday night, Sept. 22.
They propose directing City Administrator Milton Dohoney to develop recommendations regarding a regional deer management program, saying the city recognizes the importance of maintaining healthy, sustainable deer populations and protecting public safety, natural resources, vegetation and ecological balance.
“Deer populations that exceed the capacity of available habitat may contribute to ecological degradation, damage to public and private property, increased vehicle-deer collisions, negative impact on the health of deer and humans including through increased tick exposure, and other community impacts,” the resolution states.
Ann Arbor residents have requested the city’s assistance with deer management, something city residents have limited ability to address on their own, according to the resolution sponsors.
After more than a year of serious discussions about starting a deer management program, City Council voted nearly unanimously in 2015 in favor of taking a lethal approach, bringing professional sharpshooters into city parks and nature areas. Mayor Christopher Taylor cast the lone dissenting vote against it.
The city spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on the controversial program that prompted many protests and legal action against the city while it was carried out over several years. It created division in the community and intense debate, with residents speaking strongly for and against it at many city meetings, similar to how they’ve been debating the city’s new housing density plan more recently.
Protestors hold signs and chant during the Friends of Ann Arbor Wildlife in Nature deer cull protest in front of City Hall in downtown Ann Arbor on Monday, Jan. 6, 2020.Mary Lewandowski| MLive.com

Some residents accused city leaders of creating a culture of hate and violence when the culls were being carried out, while others thanked the city for killing animals they viewed as pests causing damage and posing health and safety risks.
Nearly 500 deer were killed in the annual culls from January 2016 to January 2020, noticeably reducing the population, before the program ended. Dozens of deer also were surgically sterilized via a nonlethal management program the city implemented.
Even in the face of intense criticism, council held firm on supporting the deer culls year after year. An attempt to end the program in 2019 fell short in an 8-2 council vote, with only Council Member Jeff Hayner, D-1st Ward, and Taylor in favor of cutting it from the budget and redirecting a $250,000 allocation.
It wasn’t until the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 that council voted 9-2 to cut the $140,000 for the next cull. 
A sharpshooter with White Buffalo, Inc. speaks on the phone as he waits at Narrow Gauge Way Park in Ann Arbor on Jan. 2, 2018.Jacob Hamilton

During budget deliberations in 2021, council voted 6-5 to defund the deer cull program for another year, freeing up $120,000 to reallocate to other initiatives. 
Council also voted 6-5 in 2022 against even considering resuming deer management.
The resolution now on council’s agenda, if approved, would direct Dohoney to develop recommendations for how the city could participate in pursuing a regional deer management program. It proposes looking at deer population levels, ecological impacts, crash data, property damage, tick reports, cost estimates, applicable regulations and standards for humane implementation, with evaluation of nonlethal management alternatives.
City staff would be tasked with presenting a report with proposed next steps to the city’s Sustainability Commission within 180 days before any final recommendation goes to council.
Hilgendorf argued the resolution seems to start with the conclusion before establishing any facts.
“We subscribe to modern compassionate conservation: first, do no harm; individual animals matter; and wildlife are not ours to manage. We manage the conflict instead,” she wrote to council. 
“The resolution also raises ecological damage, property damage, collisions, and human health without first establishing that these are significant problems in Ann Arbor, that deer are the primary cause, or that reducing their numbers would solve them.”
Without deer cull in Ann Arbor, city residents seeing uptick in yards
She said she understands council members have heard from frustrated homeowners, but she suggests damage to neighborhood landscaping can be addressed using repellents, fencing, deer-resistant plantings and ongoing education. 
Killing is never “one and done” — it means ongoing expense, park closures, sharpshooters and community division, Hilgendorf told council members.
“We should also be cautious about assumptions that feel like settled science,” she wrote. “Ecologists, including Yale’s Dr. Oswald Schmitz, have challenged conventional thinking about deer and biodiversity, and evidence connecting deer culls to reduced Lyme disease is far from conclusive.”
She cited a suburban New Jersey study that found, even with deer numbers reduced by 47%, there was no reduction in ticks or Lyme disease incidence.
“To avoid repeating other past mistakes, we need to protect objectivity and public trust by not relying on those already advocating for a cull — or who could financially gain from one — to collect or evaluate data,” she wrote, calling for trying problem-specific nonlethal strategies before considering killing.
She’s asking council members to change the question from “How should we manage the deer?” to “What problems are we trying to solve, and what is the least harmful way to solve them?”
Council members said in the proposed resolution results and data from the city’s previous deer management program can inform current and future deer management efforts, and effective deer management may require coordination among neighboring municipalities, regional agencies, landowners, conservation organizations and state wildlife authorities.
The resolution encourages “an evidence-based, regionally coordinated, transparent and humane approach to deer population management that considers ecological sustainability, the health of deer and humans, and community impacts.”