Ironically Councilman Russo said he "would not tolerate inaccurate statements" by the public, yet here he is doing what he won't tolerate. Here's the news story in black, and comments in blue.
In researching the issue of deer management and consulting with experts on the topic,
Contacting only one sided experts doesn't qualify as "research". Well qualified non-lethal experts, expressed interest in Solon and were ignored by the Councilman, xx.
Solon Councilman William I. Russo said last week he's trying to look at the entire issue objectively.
Odd coming from a person who demonstrates a very strong bias toward lethal options.
Mr. Russo, who chairs City Council's safety and public properties committee, said, "I've done a lot of research," including reading information from the Cleveland Metroparks and that of trained experts in the field.
This "research" specifically excluded all non-lethal alternatives but one, which he shot down.
The conclusion is that "you have to have a combination of options, and, unfortunately, they have to be lethal and nonlethal, which will include culling," he said. A complete nonlethal program simply won't work, he said.
How could he possibly know that since he ignored all non-lethal alternatives but one, which he shot down?
Mr. Russo's committee is to be presented with a comprehensive deer-management program from the city administration at its next meeting, May 11.
An administration that enjoys hunting and earlier this year tried to hurry through a bow hunting pilot for all the hunting enthusiasts on the city payroll.
The committee's recommendation based on that will be forwarded to City Council for consideration.
"In order to control our deer population and do it cost effectively, we need a combination of lethal and nonlethal methods," he said.
"Counts rise when hunting ceases, and to think the deer population will level off, I just can't see that," Mr. Russo said.
Mr Russo doesn't understand basic biology and forces of nature which ensure that all life (except human life) doesn't exceed the biological carrying capacity of the environment.
"From what the department of wildlife mentioned, how the deer population has exploded over last 30, 40 years because hunting has been restricted and natural predators have disappeared, if we are only using nonlethal, that population will only continue to grow."
Until it reaches the biological carrying capacity and it will level off as its done for millenia before Russo's junk science hit the scene.
In regards to Solon residents gathering signatures to put a referendum on the November ballot prohibiting lethal forms of deer management, Mr. Russo said, "In my mind, I think that would effectively tie the city's hands in trying to address any future issues as the deer population continues to grow and thrive.
It would ensure the safety of the citizens of Solon, the task that his committee is responsible for, discharging deadly weapons in the city does not enhance our safety.
"God forbid we have an outbreak of Lyme disease," he said. "We would have no method of controlling that.
Total hysteria and very inaccurate. Lyme disease is not a problem in Ohio, nor is it likely to be. Again a basic understanding of Lyme disease would have you know that its origin is from small animals or rodents and if deer are not available, it will still spread.
"There's a mix of people from Solon and outside of Solon who are pushing the nonlethal issue, which is fine, but when residents of Solon take a look at this, they're tired of people who don't live in the city telling us what we should be doing."
Actually we're tired of uninformed politicians telling us what to do. Apparently Mr. Russo wants to make your decisions for you.
Mr. Russo said it is his opinion that, if the city would allow crossbow hunting on city properties in remote areas where deer are present, "I want to stress that this is not people running around Solon with bows and arrows, but using a crossbows off a platform."
Actually its is. The last group of "sharpshooters" were found to be handling firearms in an unsafe manner, it will be no different with hunters.
He said that method would reduce the overall cost of a deer-management program, recognizing that the cost of culling alone is very expensive. Hunting with a crossbow would essentially be free for the city in that hunters will pay for permit, he said.
He likely isn't factoring in the huge overhead of police overtime, administrative processing, and lawsuits, which all occurred last time.
Mr. Russo said he also is looking for the use of Strieter-Lites as part of the program. "You can't put them throughout the city but can target them in areas where we find deer congregating," he said.
Interesting, will they be doing it effectively this time, or is this just so they can say there is a non-lethal alternative.
A comprehensive program also has to involve some education on what types of plants and shrubs to plant, Mr. Russo said. "Those are going to have to be incorporated in anything we put together."
Yet, Mr. Russo ignored a national expert in this area, once again more lip service, and no actual interest if it doesn't involve killing them.
Public Works Director James S. Stanek, who is to present the options to the safety committee, said each one will need discussed.
So as to appear to be a "comprehensive plan". They will discuss it on camera, while off camera they ignore non-lethal experts.
"If you want to mix lethal with nonlethal, we have to make sure what we would be using could be done that way," he said.
"On the face value of what we know about deer parks, they can't be used in lethal situations, at least where you will follow up and request a nuisance permit from the division of wildlife."
And if it doesn't allow lethal alternatives it won't be considered. The main goal is clear, killing deer, a lucrative business, the only non-lethal methods to be considered must still allow killing even if the goal of reduced DVA and landscape damage is met by the non-lethal methods.
Hunting with a crossbow will be an option in selected areas, Mr. Stanek said. "There will be limits to some of these options where it makes sense it can be used.
Nice that they made this decision before all the options were discussed in public.
"We will lay out the options and then look at some of the areas and decide on what works where and what won't work where," Mr. Stanek said. "That collectively becomes your program." Once a plan is drawn up, it does not have to "be your plan forever," he said.
What this means, and we've seen it before, we'll do some non-lethal options to satisfy the public, but after they forget about it we'll move to all lethal. They installed Strieter Lites, but left gaps to insure that DVAs would still occur. Then they left them without basic maintenance, while spending nearly $200K per year to maintain the killing.
The debate on the issues has to stop, Mr. Stanek said. It has resulted in a lot of "negative energy and wasted resources," he said.
The debate is about wasting resources year after year on killing. There are effective, cheaper, non-lethal methods that they won't try by themselves, because once they proved effective, it would be hard to justify the continued killing.
"If we are going to commit to have a program, we have to do what needs to be done," Mr. Stanek said. "Hopefully, it gets beyond the back and forth."
What this administrator wants is an end of debate, no spotlight on deer killing safety issues, lack of effectiveness, high costs, they want to do the killing and say they are doing some, this is following age old hunting interests. Solon should expect and demand more, that we take the lead and explore non-lethal alternatives.