How about loosening restrictions on deer hunting as part of the policy change to reduce deer populations and, consequently, tick populations, that Governor Healey grandstanded^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H spoke passionately about earlier this year

▲

3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

zzzeek 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

and the rabbits and chipmunks and mice and squirrels, as well as that you have to kill basically all deer to the point of about 8 deer per square mile, since one deer can carry 2000-3000 new ticks. which is basically impossible on mainland because new deer just wander over.

	▲	any_throw777 an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I'm thinking reverse gene drive? Keep the animals and destroy the pests. Also let's do that for screw worms.
	▲	Fomite an hour ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		In many places, you need to add lizards to that list.
	▲	viccis 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I wasn't making a scientific statement about whether depopulating the deer will help; the governor of Massachusetts already did. I'm saying that it's pathetic to blame it all on deer and then not eliminate the pointlessly onerous burden on culling their population. But since you're being needlessly snarky about it (it's not productive to suggest killing "the rabbits and chipmunks and mice and squirrels"), here: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25118409/ >After hunts were initiated, number and frequency of deer observations in the community were greatly reduced as were resident-reported cases of Lyme disease. Number of resident-reported cases of Lyme disease per 100 households was strongly correlated to deer density in the community. Reducing deer density to 5.1 deer per square kilometer resulted in a 76% reduction in tick abundance, 70% reduction in the entomological risk index, and 80% reduction in resident-reported cases of Lyme disease in the community from before to after a hunt was initiated.