HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 28-26RECORD OF RESOLUTIONS
BARRETT BROTHERS - DAYTON, OHIO Form 6301
Resolution No._28-26 Passed ,
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT WITH THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE — WILDLIFE
SERVICES (USDA APHIS-WS) TO CONDUCT A DEER MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM
WHEREAS, deer population management in Dublin has been the subject of
ongoing discussion, monitoring and research since 2022, including review by the
Community Services Advisory Committee (CSAC); and
WHEREAS, CSAC presented a comprehensive report to City Council at its
March 9, 2026 meeting outlining deer management considerations, research and
potential next steps; and
WHEREAS, City Council heard from subject matter experts from The Ohio
State University School of Environment and Natural Resources (SENR), the Ohio
Department of Natural Resources (ODNR), and Columbus & Franklin County Metro
Parks at its April 20, 2026 Work Session regarding deer management options and
impacts; and
WHEREAS, City Council reviewed potential next steps to establish a Deer
Management Program at its May 11, 2026 meeting and unanimously directed the
City Manager to enter into contract negotiations with the United States Department
of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service — Wildlife Services
(USDA APHIS-WS) to conduct targeted deer management operations; and
WHEREAS, the City and USDA APHIS-WS engaged in discussions to define
the terms and responsibilities associated with conducting a targeted deer |
management program within the City of Dublin; and |
WHEREAS, the proposed deer management program is intended to support
public safety, reduce aggressive deer encounters and deer-vehicle collisions, limit
property and landscape damage, and manage the deer population in a manner
informed by annual population monitoring and community feedback; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Dublin, __/»
of its elected members concurring, that:
Section 1. The City Manager is hereby authorized to enter into a contract
with the United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service — Wildlife Services (USDA APHIS-WS) for the purpose of
conducting a deer management program within the City of Dublin.
Section 2. Council further hereby authorizes and directs the City Manager, the
Director of Law, the Director of Finance, the Clerk of Council, or other appropriate
officers of the City to take any other actions as may be appropriate to implement this
Resolution without further legislation being required.
Section 3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately in accordance with 4.04(a)
of the Dublin Revised Charter.
Passed this x= day of shes , 2026. aaa
Mayor - Presiding Officer
CofC) bu Clerk Of Count
To: Members of Dublin City Council
From: Megan D. O’Callaghan, P.E., City Manager
Date: June 2, 2026
Initiated By: Michael E. Barker, Deputy City Manager
Emily Goliver, Operations Administrator/Sustainability
Re: Resolution 28-26: Authorizing the City Manager to Enter Into Contract with
USDA APHIS-WS to Conduct a Deer Management Program
Background
Deer population management in Dublin has been the subject of ongoing discussion, monitoring,
and research over the past several years, informing the analysis and recommendations outlined
below. The Community Services Advisory Committee (CSAC) has been studying deer management
in Dublin since February 2022, including the review and recommendation of the Outdoor Feed
Ordinance in 2023 and ongoing collaboration with experts, Staff and regional partners. CSAC
presented a comprehensive report to City Council at its March 9, 2026, meeting. The report
included an outline of all that the Committee has learned about deer management and potential
next steps for consideration.
A population assessment conducted by students at the Ohio State University School of
Environment and Natural Resources in 2023 indicated an estimated 50-85 deer per square mile in
Dublin. CSAC also reviewed deer management approaches in the region, including Worthington,
Columbus, Marysville, New Albany and Columbus & Franklin County Metro Parks. Based on the
multi-year comprehensive review of options, CSAC found that non-lethal methods have limited
impacts. Feeding bans, which are already in place, do not reduce the existing population, while
relocation and fertility control are generally considered ineffective at reducing a population and are
either illegal or impractical as a solution for Dublin. Lethal management options, particularly
targeted removal, are identified as the most effective means of reducing deer populations.
City Council heard from local subject matter experts at its April 20 Work Session. Representatives
from The Ohio State University School of Environment and Natural Resources (SENR), Ohio
Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) and Columbus & Franklin County Metro Parks (Metro
Parks) served as an additional resource to support discussions regarding potential deer
management options for Dublin.
Following the information shared at the April 20 Work Session, City Council reviewed the next
steps to establish a Deer Management Program at its May 11, 2026, meeting.
At that time, Council emphasized the need for transparency, education and a strong ethical
foundation for the program. Several Council Members noted that the importance of a program
extends beyond public safety concerns and includes broader ecological impacts, such as damage
to native plant species, effects on wildlife habitat and the spread of ticks. Council stressed the
importance of developing a clear public education and communications strategy before any winter
operations begin. Council supported establishing a deer management program consisting of
Office of the City Manager
5555 Perimeter Drive • Dublin, OH 43017
Phone: 614.410.4400 Memo
Memo re. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Enter Into Contract with USDA APHIS-WS to Conduct a
Deer Management Program
June 2, 2026
Page 2 of 7
targeted removal conducted by trained wildlife management professionals. The goals of the
program were identified to be:
Public Safety
- Reduce aggressive deer encounters
- Reduce deer/vehicle collisions or almost collisions
- Reduce the annual number of dead deer pick-ups
Environment
- Limit property and landscape damage
Ethics
- Reduce the number of resident complaints
- Reduce the deer population, as informed by an annual population index
To advance this, Council unanimously moved to direct staff to proceed with contract negotiations
related to a deer management program.
Summary
Social Carrying Capacity
Based on research conducted in partnership with The Ohio State University in May 2023, Dublin’s
deer density was estimated at approximately 50–85 deer per square mile. A standard urban deer
population is typically cited as 20–25 deer per square mile. This biological benchmark, or what is
commonly accepted as a healthy range of white-tailed deer, is not a biological carrying capacity.
As defined by the experts at ODNR and SENR, biological carrying capacity includes all elements,
including food, water, cover and space required for a healthy wildlife population. When too many
deer are present to occupy a landscape and cannot obtain adequate resources, the population will
experience a rapid reduction until it levels out. A community will reach sociological carrying
capacity far before it reaches biological carrying capacity. Sociological carrying capacity occurs
when residents and the community have reached their capacity to tolerate living with wildlife
without conflict.
ODNR has advised that Dublin is not currently at biological carrying capacity, given the absence of
widespread disease, starvation, or a sustained rise in severe deer-vehicle accidents. However,
ODNR has characterized Dublin as being near or at sociological carrying capacity, meaning that
resident tolerance for deer presence may be strained even if other indicators do not yet suggest
the population is at biological carrying capacity.
Aggressive Deer Incidents
In 2025, the City received approximately 20 reports of dogs attacked by deer and 35 reports of
deer stalking or chasing behavior. This is a significant increase from the three reports received in
2023 and four in 2024. This data is limited to reported cases. Incidents can happen without being
reported to the City. In responses submitted as part of the open-ended survey questions, at least
120 residents reported that a deer attacked, stomped, kicked, gored, head-butted, charged, or
otherwise injured a pet. There were four references to a pet being killed by an interaction with a
deer and 45 distinct references to deer chasing and/or stalking people. According to local experts
Memo re. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Enter Into Contract with USDA APHIS-WS to Conduct a
Deer Management Program
June 2, 2026
Page 3 of 7
that have also been involved in the Worthington Deer Task Force, these numbers far exceed what
has been reported in Worthington.
Survey Results
Survey results from 2023 to 2026 show growing public concern and support for management, with
59% of respondents favoring intervention and 60% supporting the use of public funds to manage
the deer population. Resident experiences are mixed, but the majority perceive an increasing deer
population, with key concerns including public safety, aggressive behavior, deer-vehicle collisions
and property damage. Support for lethal management methods is split with 49% in favor, 33%
opposed and 18% neutral. Since the 2026 survey closed on Feb. 25, the City has heard from an
additional eleven residents, of which nine were supportive of managing the population.
Citywide Deer Population Index Survey
Dark Horizon flew two drones in the evening from Friday, April 24 to Monday, April 27. The high-
resolution thermal imaging drones flew citywide in a systematic grid pattern while the operators
counted all visible deer. The summary report is attached. A total of 528 deer were spotted during
the four-day survey. The City was separated into zones based on city council wards to enable
comparison of survey responses with deer counts. In Ward 1, 204 deer were counted. In Ward 2,
95 were spotted, while there were 123 observed in Ward 3. Finally, 106 deer were counted in
Ward 4. This data should be considered a snapshot in time. When combined with the other data
points the City has collected, it is another way to monitor a deer management program. This is a
similar approach to the one taken by Metro Parks to establish a baseline population estimate and
evaluate program success.
The citywide drone population survey helped to identify areas in the city where deer are most
populated. The areas identified by the citywide deer population index survey aligned with the
locations where the Dublin Police Department (DPD) drone flew to count the population in specific
zones. The zones were selected based on where Staff receive the most calls from residents, where
dead deer are picked up and where the City has received reports of aggressive deer encounters.
The citywide population survey confirmed that these areas have a high concentration of deer.
Management Options
The City passed an outdoor feeding prohibition in 2023, which is the primary non-lethal
management strategy. Other tactics, such as relocation and birth control methods, were evaluated.
Based on discussions with ODNR, these approaches may help slow future population growth but
do not significantly reduce the current herd. Additionally, relocation is illegal in Ohio under Ohio
Revised Code Chapter 1531 because it is associated with a high mortality rate and disease risk.
Sterilization and contraceptives have shown limited effectiveness in open herds and involve
logistical challenges. The subject matter experts also presented potential ethical concerns
associated with sterilization and contraceptives.
Lethal management options reviewed included targeted removal by trained professionals and
regulated archery programs, both of which are used by peer communities and supported by ODNR
when data indicates a need. Targeted removal, conducted by trained firearms professionals with
safety as the top priority, is the quickest and most effective way to reduce deer numbers, with
opportunities to donate venison to local food pantries. Archery programs have lower direct costs
Memo re. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Enter Into Contract with USDA APHIS-WS to Conduct a
Deer Management Program
June 2, 2026
Page 4 of 7
because they rely on volunteer hunters, but they require more staff oversight and are less effective
for rapid population reduction. Archery programs can serve as a long-term complementary tool.
Potential benefits of lethal management include a direct, measurable reduction in the deer
population, fewer deer-related safety issues such as aggressive encounters, the ability to target
specific areas and support for food pantries through donated venison. In the first year of
Worthington’s program, the processed deer accounted for over 4,200 pounds of venison donated
to the Worthington Resource Pantry, supporting local families in need. The Dublin Food Pantry
(DFP) is aware of Dublin’s ongoing deer discussions. Any venison donated beyond DFP’s storage
capacity will be donated to the Mid-Ohio Food Collective to support the region at-large.
Agreement Summary
The City and USDA defined the terms and responsibilities for each party in the attached contract. A
summary of the pertinent articles of the agreement is provided below.
Mutual Responsibilities
USDA agrees to perform the services set forth in the work plan, which include:
• Coordination with the City of Dublin to inspect, propose and certify baiting and shooting
zones to be used
• Acquire any necessary equipment
• Conduct removal of white-tailed deer from the City of Dublin using rifles equipped with
noise-suppression devices
• Collect and transport intact deer carcasses to a predetermined facility to be processed by
USDA staff
• Collect data; live weight, sex, age and/or fetus counts as requested
• Deliver deer to the processor/butcher the morning following removal efforts
• Conduct removal activities between November 1, 2026 – March 31, 2027. Every effort will
be made to conduct removal activities during this time, but activities are contingent upon
weather conditions and site availability. Up to 100 deer may be removed as part of the
agreement. If 100 deer are reached before funds are expended, and USDA is available, an
additional 25 deer may be removed. Any deer removal and the number of deer to be
removed must be permitted by the Division of Wildlife prior to any action.
At any point during the term of the agreement, both parties may mutually agree in writing to
amend, modify, add or delete services from the work plan.
Additional mutual responsibilities include an agreement that no equipment with a procurement
price of $5,000 or more per unit will be procured directly with funds reimbursed by Dublin, and
that both parties will coordinate before responding to media requests regarding work associated
with the project.
Cooperator Responsibilities
Dublin agrees to authorize USDA to conduct direct control activities as defined by the work plan.
USDA will be considered an invitee on City property. Dublin will exercise reasonable care to warn
USDA of dangerous conditions or activities in the project area. Dublin will reimburse USDA for
costs, not to exceed the approved amount of $110,608.38. If costs are projected to exceed this
Memo re. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Enter Into Contract with USDA APHIS-WS to Conduct a
Deer Management Program
June 2, 2026
Page 5 of 7
amount, the agreement will be amended to include an amended work plan and financial plan, and
both parties will formally revise and sign the agreement before services resulting in additional
costs are performed. All payments will be made within 30 days of receiving an invoice from USDA.
Additionally, Dublin agrees to provide a project coordinator who is reachable during all phases of
the project. DPD will help to verify that operational areas are closed and empty of visitors a half
hour before removal operations begin, and shall be available and in direct communications with
USDA during the operations.
Dublin will identify a processor for venison packaging and arrange for the donation of the meat.
The processor and donation information shall be provided to USDA. Dublin agrees to maintain
records and report results to the Division of Wildlife and USDA upon completion of the program.
Dublin’s responsibility, as outlined in the work plan, includes:
• Obtain deer damage control permits issued by the Division of Wildlife and any other
necessary authorization, naming USDA as the sub-permittee
• Provide a project coordinator during all phases of the project that shall be present and
reachable during removal activities
• Make available law enforcement during removal operations and in direct communications
with USDA
• Obtain a processor for the processing and packaging of meat and provide USDA with its
contact information
• Obtain a refuse company to collect and dispose of entrails resulting from USDA field
dressing operations.
• Arrange for the donation of the meat and provide USDA with that information
• Maintain records as required by the Division of Wildlife, reporting results to the Division of
Wildlife and USDA upon completion of the program.
USDA APHIS-WS Responsibilities
USDA agrees to conduct activities at designated sites by providing qualified personnel and other
resources necessary to implement the work plan. Actions are contingent upon a determination by
USDA that such actions comply with the National Environmental Policy Act, Endangered Species
Act, and other applicable federal statutes.
Liability
USDA assumes no liability for any actions or activities conducted under the agreement except to
the extent that recourse or remedies are provided by Congress under the Federal Tort Claims Act
(28 U.S.C. 1346(b), 2401(b), and 2671-2680). Similarly, Dublin assumes no liability for any actions
or activities conducted under the agreement except to the extent that recourse or remedies are
provided under the Political Subdivision Tort Liability provisions of Chapter 2744 of the Ohio
Revised Code.
Duration, Revisions, Extensions, and Terminations
The agreement shall become effective on November 1, 2026, and shall continue through June 30,
2027. This allows ample time for final invoicing to occur before the contract terminates. Any
changes to the agreement must be made by mutual agreement of both parties in writing. The
Memo re. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Enter Into Contract with USDA APHIS-WS to Conduct a
Deer Management Program
June 2, 2026
Page 6 of 7
agreement may be terminated at any time by mutual agreement of both parties in writing, or by
one party, provided that party notifies the other in writing at least 30 days prior to effecting such
action.
Next Steps
The Communications & Marketing team is collaborating with MurphyEpson on a comprehensive
public relations and information campaign. Included in Council’s packet is the public relations
strategy and frequently asked questions document, including an ethics statement, which was
created with input from Dr. Greg Hitzhusen, whose work focuses on environmental values and
ethics in ecology. He also serves as a volunteer hunting ethics instructor for the Hunting for
Conservation program of Conservation Leaders for Tomorrow. His expertise helped inform the
development of the management program. The ethics statement is intended to serve as a
foundational framework for the program and guide community dialogue and understanding.
Staff has engaged with USDA to identify measurable goals and potential locations for management
operations, relying heavily on USDA’s expertise at each step. Staff requested that USDA provide a
quote for services based on the maximum number of deer they can take in a year. Based on their
experience in other cities, the current staffing levels would limit them to 100 deer in the first year,
with the option to remove up to 25 additional deer if funding is still available. This anticipates 12
operational nights to remove the 100 deer.
Once a lethal management program begins, residents may notice deer behave differently, as the
presence of a predator can reintroduce a greater sense of caution and natural wariness within the
deer population.
USDA reviewed several locations around Dublin for potential management activities. According to §
91.08(B) of the City’s Code of Ordinances, “no person shall hunt, kill or attempt to kill any animal
or fowl by the use of firearms, air rifle or any other means within the corporate limits of the
municipality.” However, a codified exception to this prohibition is established via § 96.17(B)(1),
which states that “no person in a park shall hunt…. Without a permit from the City Manager or
designee other than by fishing.” This language gives the City Manager the ability to authorize
targeted removal activities in parks. Targeted removal activities would therefore not be permissible
on private property. Given the City of Dublin’s extensive park system, it is anticipated that there
are sufficient public locations available to meet the program's needs.
USDA will review locations based on a number of criteria, with the ability to safely conduct removal
operations as the primary decision-maker. Safety considerations include the ability to shoot from
an elevated platform angled towards the ground or a “backstop” of terrain (i.e. hills), vegetation or
other similar characteristics. The total drone population survey map and the drone population
index conducted by the DPD will inform where management operations could be effective. USDA
will review this data, along with all other data the City has compiled, including crash data and dead
deer pickups, as part of the contracted work. Specifically, the contract states that they will
coordinate with the City of Dublin project coordinator to inspect, propose and certify baiting and
shooting zones to be used. In addition to using parks, Staff will engage in conversations with
Washington Township to determine if any property within the unincorporated Township is viable.
Memo re. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Enter Into Contract with USDA APHIS-WS to Conduct a
Deer Management Program
June 2, 2026
Page 7 of 7
USDA will coordinate with Dublin to set up baiting station locations prior to the start of removal
operations. Removal operations occur after dark, when parks are already closed. DPD will assist
with monitoring any park serving as a removal location to ensure resident and pedestrian safety.
USDA will communicate directly with DPD regarding any movement between parks. Operations will
be carried out using night vision and/or thermal optics to improve efficiency and safety. Teams of
three trained wildlife management professionals make up a removal group, with one serving as the
spotter to validate the safety of each shot. Every shot is logged and accounted for by USDA,
further ensuring that a shot is only taken when it is guaranteed to be safe. In most cases, sites are
accessible by trucks and removal operations can be conducted on top of the vehicle, which serves
as the elevated platform.
Depending on deer movement, operations may occur across multiple parks on a single evening. To
avoid the potential for the public to gather at a removal site and create a safety concern, the exact
dates, times and locations of removal operations will not be made public. Signs will be posted
several days in advance to indicate that removal operations may be occurring in the area and to
remind parkgoers that the park closes at dusk. Additionally, residents living near the removal sites
will be notified by direct mail ahead of operations.
City Staff have spoken with Thurn’s Specialty Meats, located in the South Franklinton
neighborhood of Columbus, which serves as the processing facility for Metro Parks. Thurn’s has
quoted the processing fee at $130 per deer. The contract for processing is estimated to be
between $13,000 and $16,250. The City of Worthington contracted with the Ohio Penal Industries
Meat Processing Career Center at the Pickaway Correctional Institution for processing at the same
price per deer. Worthington picked up the processed meat for delivery to the Worthington
Resource Pantry twice. The closer proximity of the Thurn’s facility to Dublin is desirable, as it
increases the efficiency of transporting processed venison from the facility to the Dublin Food
Pantry.
The total cost for the program is estimated to be approximately $168,263, including entrail
composting, processing, DPD staffing and the contract with USDA.
Recommendation
Staff recommends adoption of Resolution 28-26 Authorizing the City Manager to Enter Into
Contract with USDA APHIS-WS to Conduct a Deer Management Program. Funding for the program
will be included in the Q3 Supplemental Request.
WS Agreement Number: 27-7239-5843-RA
Account Number: 27XXWSER3939REIMBRX3972022
WBS: AP.RA.RX39.72.0022
June 1, 2026 Page 1 of 10
COOPERATIVE SERVICE AGREEMENT
Between
CITY OF DUBLIN (DUBLIN)
And
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICES (APHIS)
WILDLIFE SERVICES (WS)
ARTICLE 1 – PURPOSE
The purpose of this Cooperative Service Agreement is to allow for reimbursement of funds
expended by the APHIS-WS program while assisting the Cooperator with the implementation of
their white-tailed deer management plan as detailed in the attached work plan and financial plan.
APHIS-WS activities are described in the attached Work and Financial Plan and will be effective
from November 1, 2026 through June 30, 2027.
ARTICLE 2 – AUTHORITY
APHIS-WS has statutory authority under the Acts of March 2, 1931, 46 Stat. 1468-69, 7 U.S.C.
§§ 8351-8352, as amended, and December 22, 1987, Public Law No. 100-202, § 101(k), 101 Stat.
1329-331, 7 U.S.C. § 8353, to cooperate with States, local jurisdictions, individuals, public and
private agencies, organizations, and institutions while conducting a program of wildlife services
involving mammal and bird species that are reservoirs for zoonotic diseases, or animal species
that are injurious and/or a nuisance to, among other things, agriculture, horticulture, forestry,
animal husbandry, wildlife, and human health and safety.
ARTICLE 3 – MUTUAL RESPONSIBILITIES
The cooperating parties mutually understand and agree to/that:
1. APHIS-WS shall perform services set forth in the Work Plan, which is attached hereto and
made a part hereof. The parties may mutually agree in writing, at any time during the term
of this agreement, to amend, modify, add or delete services from the Work Plan.
2. The Cooperator certifies that APHIS-WS has advised the Cooperator there may be private
sector service providers available to provide wildlife damage management (WDM)
services that the Cooperator is seeking from APHIS-WS.
3. There will be no equipment with a procurement price of $5,000 or more per unit
purchased directly with funds from the cooperator for use on this project. All other
equipment purchased for the program is and will remain the property of APHIS-WS.
June 1, 2026 Page 2 of 10
4. The cooperating parties agree to coordinate with each other before responding to media
requests on work associated with this project.
ARTICLE 4 – COOPERATOR RESPONSIBILITIES
Cooperator agrees:
1. To designate the following as the authorized representative who shall be responsible for
collaboratively administering the activities conducted in this agreement.
City of Dublin
Megan D. O’Callaghan, City Manager
5555 Perimeter Dr.
Dublin, OH 43017
614-410-4420
mocallaghan@dublin.oh.us
2. To authorize APHIS-WS to conduct direct control activities as defined in the Work Plan.
APHIS-WS will be considered an invitee on the lands controlled by the Cooperator.
Cooperator will be required to exercise reasonable care to warn APHIS-WS as to
dangerous conditions or activities in the project areas.
3. To reimburse APHIS-WS for costs, not to exceed the annually approved amount specified
in the Financial Plan. If costs are projected to exceed the amount reflected in the Financial
Plan, the agreement with amended Work Plan and Financial Plan shall be formally revised
and signed by both parties before services resulting in additional costs are performed. The
Cooperator agrees to pay all costs of services submitted via an invoice from APHIS-WS
within 30 days of the date of the submitted invoice(s). Late payments are subject to
interest, penalties, and administrative charges and costs as set forth under the Debt
Collection Improvement Act of 1996.
4. To provide a Tax Identification Number or Social Security Number in compliance with the
Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996.
5. As a condition of this agreement, the Cooperator ensures and certifies that it is not
currently debarred or suspended and is free of delinquent Federal debt.
6. To notify APHIS-WS verbally or in writing as far in advance as practical of the date and
time of any proposed meeting related to the program.
7. The Cooperator acknowledges that APHIS-WS shall be responsible for administration of
APHIS-WS activities and supervision of APHIS-WS personnel.
8. The Cooperator will not be connected to the USDA APHIS computer network(s).
9. Obtain deer damage control permits issued by DOW and any other necessary
authorizations naming APHIS- WS as subpermittee.
June 1, 2026 Page 3 of 10
10. Provide a Project Coordinator during all phases of the project. The Project Coordinator
shall be present and reachable via cellular phone during removal activities.
11. Provide a centralized site for data collection during nightly operations with the following
recommended specifications.
12. Law enforcement shall verify that shooting areas are closed and empty of visitors ½ hour
prior to removal operations for any City of Dublin owned properties.
13. Law enforcement shall be available during removal operations and in direct
communications with APHIS-WS.
14. Obtain a processor/butcher for the processing and packaging of meat and provide APHIS-
WS with the processor/butcher’s contact information.
15. Obtain a refuse company to collect and dispose of entrails resulting from APHIS-WS field
dressing operations.
16. Arrange for the donation of the meat and provide APHIS-WS with that information.
17. Shall maintain records as required by DOW and report results to DOW and APHIS-WS
upon completion of the program.
ARTICLE 5 – APHIS-WS RESPONSIBILITIES
APHIS-WS Agrees:
1. To designate the following as the APHIS-WS authorized representative who shall be
responsible for collaboratively administering the activities conducted in this agreement.
USDA/APHIS/WS:
John Paul Seman, State Director
USDA, APHIS, WS
4469 Professional Parkway
Groveport, Ohio 43125
(614) 993-3444
john.p.seman@usda.gov
2. To conduct activities at sites designated by Cooperator as described in the Work and
Financial Plans. APHIS-WS will provide qualified personnel and other resources
necessary to implement the approved WDM activities delineated in the Work Plan and
Financial Plan of this agreement.
3. That the performance of wildlife damage management actions by APHIS-WS under this
agreement is contingent upon a determination by APHIS-WS that such actions are in
compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, Endangered Species Act, and any
other applicable federal statutes. APHIS-WS will not make a final decision to conduct
requested wildlife damage management actions until it has made the determination of such
compliance.
June 1, 2026 Page 4 of 10
4. To invoice Cooperator Monthly for actual costs incurred by APHIS-WS during the
performance of services agreed upon and specified in the Work Plan. Authorized auditing
representatives of the Cooperator shall be accorded reasonable opportunity to inspect the
accounts and records of APHIS-WS pertaining to such claims for reimbursement to the
extent permitted by Federal law and regulations.
ARTICLE 6 – CONTINGENCY STATEMENT
This agreement is contingent upon the passage by Congress of an appropriation from which
expenditures may be legally met and shall not obligate APHIS-WS upon failure of Congress
to so appropriate. This agreement may also be reduced or terminated if Congress only
provides APHIS-WS funds for a finite period under a Continuing Resolution.
ARTICLE 7 – NON-EXCLUSIVE SERVICE CLAUSE
Nothing in this agreement shall prevent APHIS-WS from entering into separate agreements
with any other organization or individual for the purpose of providing wildlife damage
management services exclusive of those provided for under this agreement.
ARTICLE 8 – CONGRESSIONAL RESTRICTIONS
Pursuant to Section 22, Title 41, United States Code, no member of or delegate to Congress
shall be admitted to any share or part of this agreement or to any benefit to arise therefrom.
ARTICLE 9 – LAWS AND REGULATIONS
This agreement is not a procurement contract (31 U.S.C. 6303), nor is it considered a grant
(31 U.S.C. 6304). In this agreement, APHIS-WS provides goods or services on a cost
recovery basis to nonfederal recipients, in accordance with all applicable laws, regulations and
policies.
ARTICLE 10 – LIABILITY
APHIS-WS assumes no liability for any actions or activities conducted under this agreement
except to the extent that recourse or remedies are provided by Congress under the Federal Tort
Claims Act (28 U.S.C. 1346(b), 2401(b), and 2671-2680). Cooperator assumes no liability for
any actions or activities conducted under this agreement except to the extent that recourse or
remedies are provided under the Political Subdivision Tort Liability provisions of Chapter
2744 of the Ohio Revised Code.
June 1, 2026 Page 5 of 10
ARTICLE 11 – NON-DISCRIMINATION CLAUSE
The United States Department of Agriculture prohibits discrimination in all its programs and
activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex,
marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information,
political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any
public assistance program. Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.
ARTICLE 12 – DURATION, REVISIONS, EXTENSIONS, AND TERMINATIONS
This agreement shall become effective on November 1, 2026 and shall continue through June
30, 2027, not to exceed five years. This Cooperative Service Agreement may be amended by
mutual agreement of the parties in writing. The Cooperator must submit a written request to
extend the end date at least 10 days prior to expiration of the agreement. Also, this agreement
may be terminated at any time by mutual agreement of the parties in writing, or by one party
provided that party notifies the other in writing at least 30 days prior to effecting such action.
Further, in the event the Cooperator does not provide necessary funds, APHIS-WS is relieved
of the obligation to provide services under this agreement.
June 1, 2026 Page 6 of 10
In accordance with the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, the Department of Treasury
requires a Taxpayer Identification Number for individuals or businesses conducting business
with the agency.
Cooperator’s Tax ID No.: 31-6400452
APHIS-WS’s Tax ID: 41-0696271
THE CITY OF DUBLIN, OHIO,
an Ohio municipal corporation
BY: ______________________________ ________________________
Michael E. Barker, Deputy City Manager Date
BY: ______________________________ ________________________
Megan D. O’Callaghan, City Manager Date
Approved as to Form:
______________________________ ________________________
Philip K. Hartmann, Law Director Date
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE ANIMAL PLANT AND HEALTH
INSPECTION SERVICE WILDLIFE SERVICES
BY: _______________________________ ___________________________
John Paul Seman, State Director Date
USDA, APHIS, WS
4469 Professional Parkway
Groveport, Ohio 43125
(614) 993-3444
BY: _______________________________ ___________________________
Keith Wehner Date
Director, Eastern Region
USDA, APHIS, WS
920 Main Campus Drive; Suite 200
Raleigh, NC 27606
June 1, 2026 Page 7 of 10
CERTIFICATION OF FUNDS
I hereby certify that the funds required to meet the City's obligation, payment, or expenditure
under this Agreement have been lawfully appropriated or authorized for such purpose and are free
from any obligation now outstanding
Matthew Rubino, CFO/Director of Finance Date
June 1, 2026 Page 8 of 10
Work Plan
for
CITY OF DUBLIN
COOPERATOR
City of Dublin
LOCATION
City of Dublin
Franklin, Union, Delaware County
Ohio
Program Objective
To assist the CITY OF DUBLIN with meeting the objectives of their white-tailed deer
management plan, to help reduce damage and public safety threats caused by white-tailed deer.
Plan of Action
This work plan is contingent upon an approved deer management plan between the CITY OF
DUBLIN and the Ohio Division of Wildlife (DOW), and the resulting permit issued by the DOW
and the issuance of any other municipal permits if applicable.
Through the implementation of management measures described below, APHIS-WS will assist
the CITY OF DUBLIN with the sharpshooting and baiting portion of their white-tailed deer
management Plan.
1. APHIS-WS will coordinate with the CITY OF DUBLIN project coordinator to inspect,
propose and certify baiting and shooting zones to be used.
2. APHIS-WS personnel will acquire any necessary deer damage management equipment.
3. APHIS-WS will conduct removal of white-tailed deer from the CITY OF DUBLIN using
rifles equipped with noise-suppression devices.
4. APHIS-WS will collect and transport intact deer carcasses to a predetermined facility to
be processed (e.g. eviscerate/gut) by APHIS-WS.
5. APHIS-WS will collect data; live weight, sex, age, and/or fetus counts as requested.
6. APHIS-WS will deliver deer to the processor/butcher the following morning following
removal efforts.
7. APHIS-WS will conduct removal activities between 11/1/2026 – 3/31/2027. Every effort
will be made to conduct removal activities during this time, but activities are contingent
upon weather conditions and site availability. Up to 100 deer may be removed as part of
June 1, 2026 Page 9 of 10
this agreement. If 100 deer are reached before funds are expended and WS is available, an
additional 25 deer may be removed. Any deer removal and the number of deer to be
removed must be permitted by the DOW prior to any action.
CITY OF DUBLIN will be responsible for the following:
1. Obtain deer damage control permits issued by DOW and any other necessary
authorizations naming APHIS- WS as subpermittee.
2. Provide a Project Coordinator during all phases of the project. The Project Coordinator
shall be present and reachable via cellular phone during removal activities.
3. Law enforcement shall be available during removal operations and in direct
communications with APHIS-WS.
4. Obtain a processor/butcher for the processing and packaging of meat and provide APHIS-
WS with the processor/butcher’s contact information.
5. Obtain a refuse company to collect and dispose of entrails resulting from APHIS-WS field
dressing operations.
6. Arrange for the donation of the meat and provide APHIS-WS with that information.
7. Shall maintain records as required by DOW and report results to DOW and APHIS-WS
upon completion of the program.
MONITORING OR ACCOMPLISHMENTS
APHIS-WS will provide a final annual report to the CITY OF DUBLIN no later than April 30,
2027.
EFFECTIVE DATE
This Agreement shall commence on November 1, 2026 and shall expire on June 30, 2027.
June 1, 2026 Page 10 of 10
FINANCIAL PLAN
The distribution of the budget from this Financial Plan may vary as necessary to accomplish the
purpose of this agreement but may not exceed $110,608.38.
APHIS-WS staff may be compensated at regular time, night-time-differential, and/or overtime
pay rates in accordance with programmatic Directives to accomplish the purpose of this
agreement. The final monthly invoice is expected to arrive by the end date of this agreement, but
due to adjustments and potential delays in final charges clearing the financial process, the final
bill may be delayed.
Financial Points of Contact:
Matthew Rubino, Chief Financial
Officer/Director of Finance
City of Dublin
5555 Perimeter Dr.
Dublin, Ohio 43017
614-410-4441
mrubino@dublin.oh.us
Patti De Graff, Budget Analyst
APHIS-WS
4469 Professional Parkway
Groveport, Ohio 43125
614-993-3444
Patricia.a.degraff@usda.gov
Cost Element
Personnel Compensation
Travel
Vehicles
Other Services
Supplies and Materials
Equipment
Subtotal (Direct Charges)
Pooled Job Costs 11.00%9,568.95$
Indirect Costs 16.15%14,048.96$
Aviation Flat Rate Collection -$
Agreement Total
Full Cost
76,832.03$
-$
2,021.44$
-$
4,020.00$
4,117.00$
86,990.47$
110,608.38$
Deer Management Program PR Strategy
MurphyEpson – City of Dublin
DRAFT: May 26, 2026
Executive Summary
Due to complaints of aggressive deer, residents reporting deer harming pets and
property, and environmental impact, the City of Dublin is pursuing targeted removal.
MurphyEpson is recommending three public engagement sessions to inform residents
of when and how these removals will take place and why lethal methods are necessary
in our specific community. A proactive media approach is also recommended.
PR/Marketing Goals
• Educate Dublin residents about white-tailed deer density issues and the need for
and benefits of managing the deer population
• Inform Dublin residents and community members of misconceptions about non-
lethal deer removal options
• Remind the community about Dublin’s more than four years of research,
engagement and study of solutions
• Reiterate Dublin’s values for ecosystem balance, ethics, safety and animal
welfare
• Maintain transparency and communication throughout deer management plan
implementation
Audiences
1. Residents of the City of Dublin (meetings, website, social media, other channels)
a. Homeowners, pet owners
b. Environmentalists, animal rights advocates
2. Residents and city officials from surrounding communities
3. Media
For Messaging
• Begin with the problem: reports of aggressive deer, property damaged, resident
inquiries/complaints, pets stalked or attacked by deer
• Reiterate conversation and research within city since early 2022 – “it’s time”
• Avoid “sharpshooters” and “markspeople”; use “trained wildlife management
professionals”
• Utilize “targeted removal” not “killing” or “hunting”
• Acknowledge strong opinions; emphasize “transparency”, “clarity” and “facts”
Strategies
1. Continue to use the website as a central source of information
a. “Deer in Dublin” webpage
b. https://telldublin.dublinohiousa.gov/deer-in-dublin
2. Amplify education through existing communication and marketing channels
a. Utilize platforms such as eNews, Dublin Life magazine, City Manager
Report, LinkAhead podcast and social media channels
b. Update Nextdoor frequently to inform residents as plans move along
3. Proactively approach media – Engage trusted reporters from WBNS-10TV,
WCMH NBC4, ABC6/FOX28, Columbus Dispatch and/or WOSU for one-on-one
interviews
a. From our review of media coverage of other cities, we know the media will
cover deer management programs. The question is – do we want Dublin
to have the first word with the media or an angry resident? Offer to the
media a scientist or wildlife professional
4. Establish one-pager (FAQs) — include timeline of what Dublin has done since
looking into this in Feb. 2022
5. Produce informative/impactful videos and PowerPoint for public meetings
6. Recognize topic can illicit strong opinions and point to ethics/ethical statement
that grounds this work
7. Convene three public education sessions to inform residents and prepare them
for what the deer management program entails
a. Session 1: Introduction and Q&A (Hold within 30 days of June 8)
i. Introduction
1. Brief introduction of city officials, wildlife experts and
speakers
2. Outline the purpose of the session: to inform Dublin
residents of the problem and the upcoming deer
management plan
ii. The importance of deer management
1. How deer density issues happen and why it is harmful for
communities
iii. The City of Dublin’s deer management plan and schedule
iv. Facilitated Panel / Audience
1. Wildlife experts to address common misconceptions
2. The OSU Professor/Worthington Resident
3. Wildlife Expert/USDA
4. Barbara Ray, Nature Education Coordinator, Dept. of Dublin
Sustainability
5. Emily Goliver, Administrator for Sustainability
v. Facilitated Q&A (Columbus Metropolitan Club luncheon model)
vi. Closing remarks
1. Overview of next steps and where residents can find
more/updated information
2. PowerPoint to be posted online
b. Session 2: Revisiting Deer Management Plan and Q&A (About a month
and a half after the first session. Target: mid-August or September)
i. Introduction
1. Brief introduction of city officials, wildlife experts and
speakers
2. Outline the purpose of the session: to inform Dublin
residents of the upcoming implementation of deer
management plan
ii. The importance of deer management
1. How deer density issues happen and why it is harmful
iii. The City of Dublin’s deer management plan and implementation
schedule
iv. Panel
1. Wildlife experts to address common misconceptions
v. Facilitated Q&A (Columbus Metropolitan Club luncheon model)
vi. Closing Remarks
c. Session 3: Targeted Removal Information Session (date to be finalized
once targeted removals are scheduled. Target: October, early November
– ideally, two or three weeks before the hunting begins)
i. Introduction
ii. The importance of deer management
1. Reiterate previous talking points from public education
sessions
iii. Targeted removals
1. Where, when and how frequently
2. Outline the notification process for residents who may live
near removal areas
iv. Facilitated Q&A
v. Closing Remarks
Ethical Statement:
The City of Dublin is committed to responsible and ethical wildlife management that
protects public safety, preserves ecological balance and reflects community values.
Deer are an important part of the natural environment, and their management requires a
careful, science-based approach to ensure the deer population’s long-term health and
our community’s long-term safety.
In suburban areas, deer populations often grow as landscaped spaces provide
abundant food and limited natural constraints. This can lead to habitat damage, reduced
biodiversity, vehicle collisions and aggressive deer encounters. Excessive deer grazing
can also prevent young trees and native plants from growing naturally, reducing habitat
for birds, pollinators and other wildlife, weakening the overall health of the local
ecosystem.
Guidance from the Ohio Division of Wildlife, United States Department of Agriculture
Wildlife Services and other agencies recognizes that active deer population
management may be necessary to maintain ecological balance and protect public
safety. Dublin’s approach is guided by data and ongoing monitoring. When needed,
targeted removal is used as part of a comprehensive strategy to maintain sustainable
population levels. This work is conducted by trained and licensed professionals,
following strict safety protocols and humane standards, with respect for the animals and
the community.
While non-lethal methods such as relocation, sterilization and fertility control are often
discussed, these options are either prohibited by law or not feasible at Dublin’s scale.
Deer relocation is illegal in Ohio due to animal welfare and disease concerns, while
sterilization and fertility control are permitted only for research purposes and would be
ineffective in a community as populated and open as Dublin.
The City of Dublin remains committed to transparency and community engagement. Our
goal is to support a balanced ecosystem while maintaining the quality of life and safety
that defines our Exceptional Community.
DRAFT – ONE PAGER & FAQS – CITY OF DUBLIN
DEER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
DRAFT: MAY 22, 2026
The City of Dublin’s Deer Management Program
Shaping a Balanced Ecosystem
Program Overview
The City of Dublin is committed to ethical and effective ways to manage the white-tailed
deer population in the community. After careful consideration of Dublin’s ecosystem, a
review of survey data and conversations with wildlife experts, the City is engaging
trained professionals from the USDA Wildlife Services to conduct targeted removals.
The City understands this topic is important to residents and may generate strong
opinions. The following FAQs are intended to offer clarity, provide facts and answer
common questions.
Why Do Deer Need to be Removed?
The local deer population in Dublin is increasingly impacting the community and
environment. Residents are reporting deer-vehicle collisions, damage to landscaping
and native vegetation, the spread of disease and more frequent encounters with
aggressive deer.
Overpopulation also harms the ecosystem itself. Excessive browsing by deer damages
forests and green spaces, limits the growth of native plants and reduces habitat for
other wildlife species. In some cases, deer can suffer from poor health and starvation
when populations exceed what the environment can naturally support.
Managed deer removal is intended to help restore ecological balance, improve public
safety and maintain a healthier deer population over time.
What is “Targeted Removal”?
Trained and licensed wildlife management professionals from the USDA Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Services Wildlife Services (APHIS-WS) will remove deer by
lethal means to reach and maintain sustainable population levels.
APHIS-WS strategically selects removal sites, in partnership with the police department,
based on safety considerations and higher deer densities. This will happen overnight,
following strict safety protocols and human standards. Residents will be notified if
removal is scheduled near their home.
How Did Dublin Decide?
The Community Services Advisory Committee (CSAC) has been discussing deer
management since February 2022 and has continued to review the topic at City Council
meetings. CSAC conducted research in partnership with The Ohio State University in
May 2023 on Dublin’s deer density, estimated at 50-85 deer per square mile. Wildlife
experts generally say more than 20–25 deer per square mile increases the likelihood of
ecological damage, vehicle collisions and human-deer conflicts.
We are hearing this from our residents, as well, who are reporting aggressive deer,
landscape damage and crashes involving the animals.
● In 2025, the City received 20 reports of dogs attacked by deer and 35 reports of
deer stalking or chasing behavior.
● Based on initial survey results, 120 residents reported that a deer attacked,
stomped, kicked, gored, head-butted, charged or otherwise injured a pet.
● Between 2019 and May 2026, 67 deer-related reports were submitted through
the GoDublin app.
Why Not Use Non-Lethal Methods?
While non-lethal methods such as relocation, sterilization and fertility control are often
discussed, these options are either not permitted by law or not feasible at our
community’s scale. The trapping and relocation of deer is illegal in Ohio, under the Ohio
Revised Code, due to its unethical and inhumane impact on animals. Sterilization and
fertility control are permitted only for research purposes and would be ineffective in a
community as populated and open as Dublin.
What Can I Do?
● Adhere to the “no feed ordinance” to prevent close encounters with deer
● Drive cautiously at dawn and dusk, as deer are more active at these times
● Visit telldublin.dublinohiousa.gov/deer-in-dublin to stay up to date
What’s Next?
Dublin is one of many communities in the region joining wildlife experts at the Metro
Parks in maintaining regular deer management projects to ensure the ecosystem
remains in balance. The City of Dublin deeply values the well-being of its residents and
recognizes the importance of keeping the community informed throughout the process.
As the City determines where and when targeted removals will take place, residents will
continue to receive updates.
Ethical Statement:
The City of Dublin is committed to responsible and ethical wildlife management that
protects public safety, preserves ecological balance and reflects community values.
Deer are an important part of the natural environment, and their management requires
a careful, science-based approach to ensure the deer population’s long-term health and
our community’s long-term safety.
In suburban areas, deer populations often grow as landscaped spaces provide abundant
food and limited natural constraints. This can lead to habitat damage, reduced
biodiversity, vehicle collisions and aggressive deer encounters. Excessive deer grazing
can also prevent young trees and native plants from growing naturally, reducing habitat
for birds, pollinators and other wildlife, weakening the overall health of the local
ecosystem.
Guidance from the Ohio Division of Wildlife, United States Department of Agriculture
Wildlife Services and other agencies recognizes that active deer population
management may be necessary to maintain ecological balance and protect public
safety. Dublin’s approach is guided by data and ongoing monitoring. When needed,
targeted removal is used as part of a comprehensive strategy to maintain sustainable
population levels. This work is conducted by trained and licensed professionals,
following strict safety protocols and humane standards, with respect for the animals
and the community.
While non-lethal methods such as relocation, sterilization and fertility control are often
discussed, these options are either prohibited by law or not feasible at Dublin’s scale.
Deer relocation is illegal in Ohio due to animal welfare and disease concerns, while
sterilization and fertility control are permitted only for research purposes and would be
ineffective in a community as populated and open as Dublin.
The City of Dublin remains committed to transparency and community engagement.
Our goal is to support a balanced ecosystem while maintaining the quality of life and
safety that defines our Exceptional Community.
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
1
APRIL 30, 2026
DEER POPULATION REPORT
CITY OF DUBLIN
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
Dark Horizon Drones
PILOTS - COLE CHAPMAN & DALE MANNASMITH DEER POPULATION REPORT
Dark Horizon Drones conducted a deer population index survey from April 24-27, 2026 across all of the
city limits of Dublin, OH. Two pilots operated enterprise-grade commercial thermal drones, allowing the
team to divide and systematically survey the entire city limits. This coordinated approach ensured that
survey boundaries were clearly defined and that no overlap in deer counts occurred, maintaining the
integrity, safety, and accuracy of the data collected.
Both Cole Chapman and Dale Mannasmith were present on site as FAA Part 107 certified remote pilots,
operating with all required licenses and authorizations. Several areas were located within restricted
airspace, and in those instances the appropriate FAA flight authorizations were obtained prior to
conducting operations.
In total, Dark Horizon Drones covered just over 16,000 total acres of designated city property. None of
the data collected was outside city limits.
Based on the methods used and the conditions during the flights, Dark Horizon Drones has high
confidence in the accuracy of the deer counts recorded during these surveys. The data represents a
reliable snapshot of deer presence at the specific time and locations surveyed. Survey operations
prioritized efficiency, systematic coverage, and counting accuracy. Flights were conducted in cool, wet,
overcast, and night time conditions which are ideal for maximizing thermal imaging performance and
improving wildlife detection.
1
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
2
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
(Flight Path Example - April 27, 2026)
Deer locations were recorded with GIS pins. (Blue Diamonds) Airspace Geo Zones (Shaded Orange.)
( Pilot View Below)
Thermal Imaging of Deer (Bright White) Blue Diamonds (GIS Pin)
3
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
SURVEY AREA SEGMENTATION
To organize the survey effectively, the City of Dublin was divided into four regions based on the City
Council ward structure. Each ward will be explored in greater detail in subsequent sections of this
report. The map below provides a visual representation of these four shaded regions. Following a
comprehensive audit of the data, all GIS pin locations were verified and accounted for, confirming the
integrity of the dataset with no instances of duplicate counting.
4
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
Ward 1 Cluster Map
5
Deer Clusters Ward 1
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
Ward 1 Deer Survey Data
Total Deer : 204
Avg per cluster : 4.25
6
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
Ward 2 Cluster Map
7
Deer Clusters Ward 2
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
Ward 2 Survey Data
Total Deer : 95
Avg Per Cluster : 3.95
8
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
Ward 3 Cluster Map
9
Deer Clusters Ward 3
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
Ward 3 Survey Data
Total Deer : 123
Avg Per Cluster : 4.55
10
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
Ward 4 Cluster Map
11
Deer Clusters Ward 4
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
Ward 4 Survey Data
Total Deer : 106
Avg Per Cluster : 4.60
12
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
City of Dublin Deer Population Survey
Summary
Survey Overview
A comprehensive aerial survey was conducted across approximately 16,220 acres within the
City of Dublin to assess deer presence and distribution. The survey utilized systematic coverage
of the study area to ensure consistent observation conditions and accurate data collection.
Findings
A total of 528 deer were identified during the survey. Observations were concentrated across
Four distinct locations, indicating a clustered distribution pattern rather than uniform
dispersion throughout the city.
Spatial Distribution
Deer activity was not heavily concentrated within any single ward or specific area. While Ward
1 recorded the highest total with 204 deer observed, the remaining three wards showed
relatively similar distribution levels. Overall, deer presence was consistently dispersed
throughout the city, with the highest concentrations occurring within wooded habitats and
natural cover areas. These areas provide a combination of open space, vegetation, and reduced
disturbance, making them ideal environments for deer habitat.
Interpretation
Survey results indicate a high deer density relative to typical suburban thresholds, suggesting
the population may exceed the area’s ecological carrying capacity. Elevated densities can lead
to vegetation damage, increased human-deer interactions, and higher risk of vehicle collisions.
These findings support consideration of population management strategies to maintain
ecological balance and reduce community impact.
Conclusion
This survey provides a clear snapshot of deer presence within the City of Dublin, highlighting
both total population observed and areas of higher concentration. These findings can support
future wildlife management decisions, targeted monitoring efforts, and resource allocation
within the city.
13
Minutes of
RECORD OF FROGEEDINGS Dublin City Council Meeting
GOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 844-224-3338 FORM NO. 10148
Held May 11, 2026
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Amorose Groomes called the Monday, May 11, 2026 Regular Meeting of Dublin City
Council to order at 6:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Members present were Ms. Alutto, Mayor Amorose Groomes, Vice Mayor De Rosa, Ms.
Johnson, Mr. Keeler, Ms. Kramb and Dr. Lam.
Staff members present were Ms. O'Callaghan, Chief Paez, Mr. Hartmann, Mr. Shamp, Mr.
Rubino, Ms. Weisenauer, Mr. Earman, Ms. Miglietti, Ms. Falcone, Mr. Gracia, Mr. Severyn,
Mr. Barker, Mr. Taylor, Mr. Jiang, Ms. Blake, Ms. Rauch, Mr. Hammersmith and Mr. Ament.
Also present: Retired LTC Jeff Noble, VFW Post 800
ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION
Ms. Amorose Groomes moved to adjourn to executive session to consider:
e Personnel Matters: Considering the Employment of a Public Employee
Ms. Alutto seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Mr. Keeler, yes; Vice Mayor De Rosa, yes; Ms. Johnson, yes; Dr. Lam,
yes; Mayor Amorose Groomes, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes.
The meeting was reconvened at 7:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Amorose Groomes invited Retired LTC Jeff Noble of VFW Post 800 to lead the
Pledge of Allegiance.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS/ RECOGNITION
e Memorial Day Ceremony Invitation
Retired Lieutenant Colonel Jeff Noble, a member of the Veterans Advisory
Committee, presented the plans for the upcoming Memorial Day ceremony on May
25, 2026. He introduced Colonel Andrew Powers, Commander of the 121st Aerial
Refueling Wing and Dublin resident, as the keynote speaker. LTC Noble noted the
particular significance of Colonel Powers serving in this role given that his unit
recently lost six members.
The ceremony will begin at 11:00 AM at South Dale Drive in front of the Wendy's
location, proceed with a wreath-throwing ceremony on the bridge, and conclude
with a formal ceremony in the cemetery. Following the ceremony, the Dublin
Jerome Band will lead attendees across the road to a community picnic. LTC Noble
noted that this year's program will not include a Gold Star family speaker. Mayor
Amorose Groomes welcomed the plans, noting that Colonel Powers is a Dublin High
School graduate and lifelong resident.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
Sen Gao, President of the Global Asian Culture Heritage Foundation and Dublin resident
and small business owner of eleven years, addressed Council. He thanked the City of
Dublin for supporting diversity, culture and community unity. Recently, the Ohio Asian
Culture Heritage Festival was held, which brought together families from many different
backgrounds through music, martial arts, dance, food and the culture exchange. As an
Asian American community leader, he expressed appreciation for the support shown by
the City of Dublin, the Mayor, the Vice Mayor, City Council members, City staff, and the
volunteers. Dublin is becoming a model city for inclusion, respect and multicultural
understanding. He expressed pride in calling Dublin home. On behalf of our organization
and the Asian American community, thank you for supporting culture heritage and
Minutes of
RECORD OF FRQOGEEDINGS ounc ; Meeting
GOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 644-224-3808 FORM NO, 10146
Held
May tt, 2026 Page 2 of
20
community engagement. Mr. Gao also invited all present to the 32nd Asian Festival at
Franklin Park, Memorial Day weekend, May 23 through 24. He presented the Mayor with a
special gift from Thailand and a certificate of appreciation.
Daniel Hammill, 5725 Trafalgar Lane, addressed Council regarding the Planning and
Zoning Commission meeting of the prior week and code changes in the ID-6 Research
Transition District. He addressed resident safety concerns and asked that the R and D
manufacturing in ID-6 be removed or listed as a conditional use. He would like to see
strong guidelines for the byproducts of manufacturing and waste streams as a result of
advanced manufacturing, a clear definition that distinguishes clean manufacturing from
advanced manufacturing. Also a definition of guidelines for fleet vehicles and clearly
defined parameters of hours of operation including shipping and receiving. He stated that
the current code language as it states today is too vague. He was pleased to hear several
commissioners voice similar concerns regarding the code language. Ms. Harter stated that
everyone in the room, not just developers, should be able to read and understand what's
in the code, and conditional use is very important to her. Commissioner Alexander voiced
concern regarding toxic output. Commissioner Newell had similar concerns that residents
had regarding the distinction between clean manufacturing and advanced manufacturing
and also called for conditional uses. Chairman Way continues to tell residents that
commissioners' hands are tied, and that they are guided by all the planning and work that
has developed up until now. He asked City Council to untie planning and zoning's hands
and direct them to focus on protecting residents. Ideally, the land should be residential,
which was in the plan from 2007 until recently and supported by residents, property
owners, and now Zillow. But at a very minimum, advanced manufacturing should be a
conditional use and we should look to develop clean manufacturing standards instead. Last
Thursday, Ms. Rausch stated that adding certain types of manufacturing as conditional
adds another layer of uncertainty, and that would make it difficult to attract development
to the city. He disagreed with that statement and added that our high standards and
discernment are what attracts the type of business we want in our community. To lower
those standards, does a disservice to all. He stated his opinion that we are nowhere closer
to acceptable code language than we were 9 months ago when this was tabled. Let's act
now and continue the Envision Dublin plan and not make this “invasion Dublin."
CONSENT AGENDA
° Minutes of the April 27, 2026 Regular Council Meeting
° Minutes of the May 4, 2026 Special Council Meeting
° Excuse the Absence of Dr. Lam from the May 4, 2026 Special Meeting.
Hearing no request to remove an item from the Consent Agenda, Mayor Amorose Groomes
moved to approve the Consent Agenda.
Ms. Alutto seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: Ms. Kramb, yes; Mayor Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Keeler, yes; Dr.
Lam, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Ms. Johnson, yes; Vice Mayor De Rosa, yes.
INTRODUCTION/FIRST READING — ORDINANCES
Ordinance 27-26
Authorizing the Submission of a Petition for the Regular Annexation of 201.7
Acres, More or Less, of Property from Darby Township, Madison County to the
City of Dublin, Ohio
Ms. Alutto introduced the Ordinance.
Mr. Shamp presented the report for the ordinance, which authorizes the Law Department
to submit a petition for regular annexation of 201.7 acres located in Darby Township,
Madison County. This parcel is part of the larger 348.6-acre strategic land acquisition in
the West Innovation District and serves as the companion piece to the 146.9-acre
municipal annexation authorized at the previous meeting under Ordinance 25-26.
RECORD OF FROGEEDINGS ‘ 5 ounc . Minutes of Meeting
GOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 644-224-3308 FORM NO. 10148 an 4k = = Vay TT, 2026 Page 3 org
Held 20
Mr. Shamp explained that the regular annexation process, governed by Ohio Revised Code
709.02, requires a majority of real estate owners within the area to submit and file the
petition and mandates a hearing before the Madison County Board of Commissioners. This
process was chosen specifically because it allows the City to later conform township
boundaries, consistent with the City's long-standing policy of bringing newly annexed land
into Washington Township. Municipal annexation does not permit such township boundary
adjustments.
Anticipated next steps include the submission of the municipal annexation petition to
Franklin County following the effective date of Ordinance 25-26 on May 28, with a Franklin
County hearing expected in June. Should the current ordinance be adopted at the May 26
meeting, the regular annexation petition would be submitted to Madison County with a
hearing anticipated in July or August.
There were no public comments.
Second reading/public hearing is scheduled for Tuesday, May 26, 2026.
Ordinance 28-26
Authorizing the Provision of Certain Incentives to Ruscilli Construction Co. LLC
to Induce it to Purchase an Office Building for the Relocation of the Company’s
Existing Office and the Expansion of that Office and its Associated Operations
and Workforce within the City; and Authorizing the Execution of an Economic
Development Agreement
Ms. Alutto introduced the Ordinance.
Ms. Falcone presented this ordinance on behalf of Economic Development staff. Ruscilli
Construction Company, currently headquartered in Dublin, is considering expanding its
operations to a new location within the City. The company provides construction
management and design-build services across markets including commercial offices and
affordable housing.
The proposed Economic Development Agreement includes a ten-percent income tax
withholding performance incentive over five years valued at $185,000, as well as a
location grant payment of $50,000 to assist with the purchase of a building and related
renovation expenses within Dublin. The project is projected to result in the retention of
120 employees and the creation of 26 new positions by December 31, 2032, bringing
approximately $2,140,000 in additional income tax withholding revenue over the term of
the agreement.
There were no public comments.
Second reading/public hearing is scheduled for Tuesday, May 26, 2026.
INTRODUCTION/PUBLIC HEARING/VOTE — RESOLUTIONS
Resolution 24-26
Accepting the Lowest and Best Bid for the Street Light & Traffic Control Utility
Painting Project (26-015-CIP)
Ms. Alutto introduced the Resolution.
Mr. Taylor presented Resolution 24-26. The scope of work covers the painting of 222
poles, 84 streetlight cabinets, and 30 signal control cabinets at various locations
throughout the City. The engineer's estimate for the project was $175,000. Three bids
were received, with the lowest submitted by Public Works Painting in the amount of
$109,044.04, representing a savings of 37.7 percent below the engineer's estimate and
$65,955.96 under the budgeted funds. Although Public Works Painting has not previously
performed work within Dublin, staff conducted reference checks and received positive
feedback. Work is expected to commence in May 2026 and be completed by October
2026.
There were no public comments.
RECORD OF FROGEEDINGS ouncl Minutes of Meeting
OVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 844-225-3538 FORM NO, 1014
Held 20
Ms. Kramb inquired whether the scope represented all poles identified as needing painting
at this time, or whether additional poles had been deferred to stay within budget. Mr.
Taylor confirmed that the scope reflects all poles identified through the City's asset
management inspection data as requiring painting, and that none had been set aside for
budgetary reasons. ;
Vote on the Resolution: Mayor Amorose Groomes, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes; Ms. Johnson, yes;
Vice Mayor De Rosa, yes; Mr. Keeler, yes; Dr. Lam, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes.
OTHER BUSINESS
e Request for Approval of a Reclassification of a Position in the Division of
Legislative Services
Ms. Miglietti presented the request. Following a recent vacancy in the position of
Assistant Clerk within the Division of Legislative Services, staff conducted an
evaluation consistent with the City's vacancy review process. The recommendation
is to reclassify the position from Assistant Clerk to Deputy Clerk in order to ensure
a more balanced distribution of responsibilities and support the division's ongoing
organizational goals. The annual budgetary impact of the reclassification is
approximately $7,800, with the change to be reflected in the 2027 operating
budget if approved.
There were no public comments.
Mayor Amorose Groomes moved to approve the reclassification of the Assistant
Clerk position to the Deputy Clerk position.
Ms. Alutto seconded.
Vote on the motion: Vice Mayor De Rosa, yes; Mayor Amorose Groomes, yes; Ms.
Johnson, yes; Dr. Lam, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mr. Keeler, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes.
e Deer Management Program
Ms. Goliver presented a comprehensive update on the City's multi-year deer
management review process and sought Council direction to proceed with contract
negotiations with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA).
Background and Process
Staff noted that this topic has been under active review for more than four years
through the Community Services Advisory Commission (CSAC). Key milestones
included the adoption of an outdoor feeding prohibition ordinance in November
2023, presentations from the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) to
CSAC in 2024, a community survey conducted in early 2026 that received 3,656
responses, and an April 20, 2026 work session at which Council heard directly from
subject matter experts from ODNR, the Ohio State University, and Metro Parks.
Data and Survey Findings
Staff reported 20 direct reports of dogs attacked by deer and 35 reports of deer
stalking or chasing incidents in 2025 alone, a significant increase from three and
four such reports in 2023 and 2024, respectively. The community survey's open-
ended responses documented 120 accounts of pets being attacked by deer, four
references to pets being killed, and 45 distinct references to deer chasing or
stalking people. Among survey respondents, 59 percent believe the population
should be managed, 49 percent expressed support for lethal methods, 18 percent
neither supported nor opposed lethal methods, and 33 percent opposed lethal
methods.
Population Survey
Dark Horizon Drones conducted a citywide thermal imaging drone survey from April
24 through April 27, 2026, using a systematic grid pattern consistent with surveys
conducted for Upper Arlington and the Metro Parks. A total of 528 deer were
Oounc RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Meeting
GOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 644-224-3508 FORM NO. 10146 Aas 14 902K Dano fb Ato
Wray TTY, 2U2U Tr aye VU?
Held 20
counted, establishing a baseline population estimate. Notably, the hotspots
identified during the drone survey aligned closely with prior thermal imaging work
conducted by the Dublin Police Department in February, lending confidence to the
data. The survey also revealed a higher-than-expected deer concentration in the
Ward 2 area, where resident complaints have historically been lower.
Management Options
Ms. Goliver reviewed management options. Relocation is prohibited under ORC
Chapter 1531 due to the lethal stress it causes and the risk of disease spread. Birth
control methods, including surgical sterilization and contraceptives, are generally
only approved for research purposes, have limited effectiveness in an open herd,
and would not reduce the existing population. Staff recommended proceeding with
targeted removal conducted by USDA Wildlife Services, involving professionally
trained sharpshooters using rifles with noise suppression devices, operating
overnight from baiting stations. Processed venison from removed deer would be
donated to local food pantries. Archery programs were noted as a longer-term,
cost-effective complement to a targeted removal program, though less effective at
quickly reducing the population.
There were no public comments.
Council Discussion
Ms. Kramb clarified that the evening's vote would authorize staff to begin contract
negotiations with USDA and would not constitute final approval of an operational
plan, a point confirmed by Ms. Goliver. The contract, anticipated to come before
Council on June 8 pending negotiation progress, would include location details, the
number of deer targeted for removal, associated costs, and related scope of work.
Mr. Keeler expressed that while he had initially focused on the public safety
dimension of aggressive deer encounters, the presentations from ODNR, Ohio
State, and Metro Parks had significantly expanded his understanding of the
ecological impacts. He noted that deer carry ticks and spread Lyme disease,
preferentially consume native plant species over invasives such as honeysuckle,
and that a clear ethics statement would be valuable in helping residents
understand the humane and ecologically responsible rationale for management.
Ms. Alutto echoed those sentiments, emphasizing that the ecological impact of an
oversized deer population on brush-dwelling species and rare native plants
deserved prominent treatment in any communications plan, not just the public
safety arguments.
Ms. Johnson noted that the drone survey's findings were broadly consistent with
expectations and confirmed that the City is approaching ecological carrying
capacity.
Dr. Lam raised several substantive points: the importance of beginning the public
education process as early as possible given the lead time required before winter
operations, the significance of obtaining the ODNR deer damage control permit in
advance, the mathematical reality that reducing the population meaningfully would
likely require removing far more than the roughly 100 deer removed by
Worthington given Dublin's significantly larger geographic area, and the value of a
long-term advisory committee structure. Ms. Goliver responded that USDA would
likely submit the ODNR permit on the City's behalf, and that CSAC would serve as
the ongoing resident advisory body given its deep institutional knowledge of the
issue, similar to the role Worthington's Deer Advisory Committee plays.
Vice Mayor De Rosa commended the methodical, multi-year process and stressed
that the ethics statement should guide not only communications but the entire
management program. She also emphasized the importance of broad public
education and acknowledged that not all residents support lethal management.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Minutes of Meeting
GOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 644-204-0808 FORM NO. 10146 AA 44_9N9k. D. Cato.
Wray TT, 2UZzU ae aye UU?
Held 20
Mayor Amorose Groomes highlighted public safety concerns related to deer
concentrations along Riverside Drive and Dublin Road, noted the visible
deterioration of native species on Dublin's forest floors, and indicated support for
hosting public education events featuring the same subject matter experts that had
informed Council's deliberations.
Mayor Amorose Groomes moved to direct staff to proceed with contract
negotiations related to a deer management program.
Ms. Alutto seconded.
Vote on the motion: Dr. Lam, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes; Ms. Johnson,
yes; Vice Mayor De Rosa, yes; Mayor Amorose Groomes, yes; Mr. Keeler, yes.
Food Truck Regulations
Ms. Blake presented recommendations from the Public Services Committee
regarding the establishment of a formal food truck regulatory framework,
stemming from recommendations in two recently adopted strategic plans: the
Community Events Road Map and the Downtown Dublin Curbside Management
Plan.
Proposed Regulatory Framework
Staff recommended removing two existing code sections within the Historic District
zoning chapter and consolidating regulations into a standalone chapter for clarity
and usability. A pilot program approach was proposed, featuring an annual City
license for food truck operators with a delayed effective date of March 1, 2027, to
allow time for a comprehensive cost study, feedback collection, and alignment with
state renewal timelines. During the initial pilot period, the license fee would be
waived. In the interim, operators wishing to reserve a designated food truck
parking zone would be required to submit a copy of their valid state food service
operations license.
Operational regulations would take effect on the normal timeline and include
permitted hours of 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM with no overnight parking, a requirement
to display a valid City-issued license while operating, containment of all operational
equipment within or immediately adjacent to the truck (with auxiliary items such as
condiment tables permitted within ten feet), a prohibition on amplified sound (with
an exception for permitted ice cream trucks), a prohibition on connecting to utilities
without property owner consent, a restriction from operating within 1,000 feet of a
City-approved or permitted event, and a prohibition on improper disposal of grease
or liquid waste. Violations would be treated as a third-degree misdemeanor.
Appeals would be heard by the Board of Zoning Appeals. Operators would also be
required to register with the Division of Taxation for income tax reporting, and
Washington Township Fire Department committed to inspect each food truck prior
to license issuance.
Designated Locations
Staff proposed twelve designated food truck zones using a corridor approach that
balances public safety, distance from existing restaurants, and proximity to
gathering areas. Rather than striping specific parking spaces, staff recommended
defined zones within which operators would be responsible for finding a safe
parking location, avoiding conflicts with regular parking users. Proposed locations
include: Avery Park (south), Ballantrae Community Park and Splash Pad, Belle
Griffin Park, Coffman Park (three zones: rec center overflow, the existing Food
Truck Wednesday lot, and the Commerce Parkway lot), Darree Fields (three zones:
north soccer fields, baseball diamonds, and softball/dog park area), Arlington Park,
Emerald Fields (two zones), Ferris Wright Park, Franklin Street, Riverside Crossing
Park (on-street and plaza food carts), Kaltenbach Community Park, and Scioto
Park.
RECORD OF FROGEFEDINGS
Minutes of Meeting
jOVERNMENT FORMS & SUPPLIES 644-224-3308 FORM NO. 10148 AA 44. 9Noe Dp. 7 EO}
Wray TT, 2020 T age TU’?
Held 20
Additional Considerations
Staff noted feedback from the Visit Dublin board and local hospitality industry,
which expressed general support for food trucks as a community vibrancy asset
while requesting limitations in high-traffic areas such as High Street and Riverside
Drive. Staff also acknowledged that two existing youth organizations operating
concession stands at City sports complexes had previously raised concerns about
unannounced food trucks competing with their sales; the proposed designated
zones were intentionally placed away from those concession stands while still
permitting food truck access to the parks. Staff further identified the Central Ohio
Food Truck Association as a potential outreach partner, and noted that a
comprehensive website with location, availability, and application information
would be developed. Regarding private property, the proposed code permits
commercial property owners to invite licensed food trucks onto their premises for
up to fourteen days, and carves out explicit provisions for neighborhood
gatherings, HOA and civic-approved events, and City-permitted block parties.
Scott Turner came forward to express concern about the DCRC overflow parking lot
location given its close proximity to residences.
Council Discussion
Mr. Keeler confirmed with staff that the regulations apply to City-owned property
and designated public spaces, with private property addressed separately in the
code. He raised a concern that restricting food trucks from operating near
concession stands at youth athletic facilities could reduce revenue for those same
organizations that seek bed tax grant funding from the City, representing a tension
between two City interests. He also requested clarification on the logistical process
for the fire inspection and license issuance prior to a food truck's first operation.
Vice Mayor De Rosa, drawing on Public Services Committee discussions,
emphasized the importance of the pilot program structure and the ability of city
manager staff to update designated locations administratively without returning to
Council. She also raised concerns about the Riverside Crossing Park on-street
locations along Riverside Drive, citing pedestrian safety, blocked sightlines, and the
visual impact of food trucks as de facto billboards along the corridor. She
suggested exploring whether trucks could be relocated to the pathway area closer
to the river. She also raised the concept of revenue sharing with youth
organizations at athletic parks as a potential mechanism to offset any impact on
their concession sales.
Dr. Lam asked whether the educational component would extend to residents
beyond just food truck operators, and staff confirmed plans to present the program
at a future HOA Leadership Night. He also asked about enforcement, specifically
whether there was a graduated warning system for lower-level infractions. Mr.
Severyn responded that no formal grace period is included in the current draft but
that prosecutorial and enforcement discretion would apply, and that Council could
direct staff to add a warning or remediation period if desired. Dr. Lam noted that
an enforcement ladder beyond a single misdemeanor charge would be worth
considering, particularly for technical, non-safety violations. He also emphasized
the need for direct communication with the youth organizations at Darree Fields
and Avery Park prior to implementation.
Ms. Kramb expressed support for the draft code and suggested several location
modifications to be incorporated: adding a second food truck zone on the north
side of Avery Park given the park's size, adding a zone near the baseball fields at
Emerald Fields, and adding a zone at the lower level of Scioto Park to serve the
shelter area and improve access for visitors with mobility challenges.
Ms. Alutto expressed support for the pilot approach and echoed Council Member
Kramb's suggestions, particularly regarding Scioto Park accessibility.
Minute ublin s of Meeting
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
OVERNMENT FORM: UPPUES 842-225-3335 FORM NO, 101m WRT EN tT
Held
Mayor Amorose Groomes expressed reservations about the Riverside Crossing Park
on-street locations along Riverside Drive, citing pedestrian and safety hazards,
visual impacts on the corridor's aesthetic, and the tendency of trucks and their
associated equipment to obstruct sidewalks. She suggested that relocating trucks
into the park along the river path would better serve visitors and enhance the
experience. She also supported exploring a revenue-sharing model with youth
organizations.
Ms. Blake confirmed they had received sufficient direction and would incorporate
the following location modifications in the forthcoming draft code: relocating the
DCRC zone closer to the main building, adding Avery Park North, adding an
Emerald Fields baseball-area zone, adding a Scioto Park lower-level zone, and
further evaluating the Riverside Crossing Park on-street placement in consultation
with public services staff. Council reached general consensus that if trucks cannot
be moved into the park at Riverside Crossing, the on-street locations should be
shifted further north, away from the plaza area, and reduced in number if
necessary.
Mayor Amorose Groomes moved to approve the recommendations of the Public
Services Committee regarding food truck regulations and advance the proposed
related code amendments.
Ms. Alutto seconded.
Vote on the motion: Ms. Johnson, yes; Ms. Kramb, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mr.
Keeler, yes; Dr. Lam, yes; Vice Mayor De Rosa, yes; Mayor Amorose Groomes, yes.
STAFF COMMENTS
Ms. O'Callaghan had no staff comments.
COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE
Ms. Kramb thanked staff and extended congratulations to all new citizens who took the
oath at the recent naturalization ceremony held the prior Wednesday.
Ms. Alutto wished residents a happy belated Mother's Day and reminded the community
that, with approximately three weeks remaining in the school year, traffic patterns would
be changing and drivers should exercise heightened caution around children both in school
zones and throughout the community, particularly given the prevalence of motorized
bicycles and electric devices.
Mr. Keeler thanked the Chamber of Commerce and its volunteers for their participation in
the community service day on May 2, noting his own contribution to improving curb appeal
at the justice center.
Vice Mayor De Rosa thanked the Chamber for the opportunity to speak at the Leadership
Academy graduation, recognizing the strong organizational support for community
volunteerism. She also expressed appreciation for the honor of attending the naturalization
ceremony and singled out frequent volunteer Emmet Apolinario, who delivered remarks
about his own journey from the Philippines to U.S. citizenship. Vice Mayor De Rosa also
requested a staff update on the rollout of the updated motorized vehicle and path
regulations, noting increased activity on paths with the arrival of spring and asking that
any update include details on signage deployment and school communications outreach.
Mayor Amorose Groomes reported on the following:
e a trip to Miami on April 28 to meet with BrightLine leadership, including the CEO
and business development staff, in connection with the Federal-State Partnership
grant application currently before the federal government.
e She also expressed gratitude for the invitation to JASCO's celebration gala on April
30, at which the City of Dublin was recognized for its work as an inclusive
community.
RECORD OF GROGEEDINGS
Minutes of Meeting
GOVERNMENT FOAMS & SUPPLIES 644-204-4808 FORM NO, 10146 AA 44 5ADe: D. DAL o
Wray’ TT, 2UZO0 raye Jug
Held 20
e She reported on a community meeting held on May 1 with journalists from The
Dispatch, Business First, and Axios to discuss coverage of suburban communities
and mutual expectations.
e She noted that a resolution was passed at that meeting opposing the proposed
Ohio constitutional amendment to eliminate property taxes.
e She thanked the Memorial Tournament and Nationwide Children's Hospital for the
Legends luncheon on May 5, noting that the tournament raised more than one
and a half million dollars for Nationwide Children's Hospital.
e She also remarked on the naturalization ceremony held on May 6 as a meaningful
civic celebration.
e Finally, the Mayor recognized Council Member Johnson on the occasion of her
upcoming birthday on Wednesday, May 13, and extended congratulations on
behalf of Council.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:36 p.m.
Mh. -Z>
Mayor — Presiding Officer
Clerk of Coufcil
To: Members of Dublin City Council
From: Megan D. O’Callaghan, P.E., City Manager
Date: May 5, 2026
Initiated By: Michael E. Barker, Deputy City Manager
Emily Goliver, Operations Administrator/Sustainability
Re: Deer Management Program
Background
Deer population management in Dublin has been the subject of ongoing discussion, monitoring,
and research over the past several years, informing the analysis and recommendations outlined
below. The Community Services Advisory Committee (CSAC) has been studying deer management
in Dublin since February 2022, including the review and recommendation of the Outdoor Feed
Ordinance in 2023 and ongoing collaboration with experts, Staff and regional partners. CSAC
presented a comprehensive report to City Council at its March 9, 2026, meeting. The report
included an outline of all that the Committee has learned about deer management and potential
next steps for consideration.
A population assessment conducted by students at the Ohio State University School of
Environment and Natural Resources in 2023 indicated an estimated 50-85 deer per square mile in
Dublin. CSAC also reviewed deer management approaches in the region, including Worthington,
Columbus, Marysville, New Albany and Columbus & Franklin County Metro Parks. Based on the
multi-year comprehensive review of options, CSAC found that non-lethal methods have limited
impacts. Feeding bans, which are already in place, do not reduce the existing population, while
relocation and fertility control are generally considered ineffective at reducing a population and are
either illegal or impractical as a solution for Dublin. Lethal management options, particularly
targeted removal, are identified as the most effective means of reducing deer populations.
City Council heard from local subject matter experts at its April 20 Work Session. Representatives
from The Ohio State University School of Environment and Natural Resources (SENR), Ohio
Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) and Columbus & Franklin County Metro Parks (Metro
Parks) served as an additional resource to support discussions regarding potential deer
management options for Dublin.
April Work Session Feedback
Council provided feedback at its April 20, 2026, Work Session on the following questions:
1. Does Council wish to proceed with a lethal management program and direct Staff to begin
contract negotiations with the USDA at the May 11 Council meeting?
2. Is Council supportive of the goals identified in the CSAC report?
3. Does Council support initiating a program this upcoming winter?
4. Is Council supportive of staff contracting with Dark Horizon Drones to conduct a citywide
deer population index survey? This would serve as a baseline population estimate.
5. Is there any additional information Council requires to inform a decision?
0BOffice of the City Manager
1B5555 Perimeter Drive • Dublin, OH 43017
2BPhone: 614.410.4400 Memo
Memo re. Deer Management Program
May 5, 2026
Page 2 of 5
Does Council wish to proceed with a lethal management program and direct Staff to begin contract
negotiations with the USDA at the May 11 Council meeting?
The majority of Council expressed support for proceeding with a lethal management program. The
ecosystem impacts and aggressive deer encounters were cited as a reason to launch a program.
Council’s support stemmed from the public safety concerns presented by the current deer
population, including 20 reports of dogs attacked by deer and 35 reports of deer stalking or
chasing in 2025. The support is also informed by the community survey results, which indicate that
59% of respondents think the deer population in Dublin should be managed. Further, 49% of
respondents indicated support for lethal methods, 18% responded that they neither support nor
oppose lethal methods and 33% indicated they oppose lethal methods.
Is Council supportive of the goals identified in the CSAC report?
Council was supportive of the goals identified by CSAC. It was suggested to establish broader
categories for the goals including safety, environmental and ethical goals with specific
subcategories. This will help the communication strategy by clearly defining the overarching
purpose of a deer management program.
Does Council support initiating a program this upcoming winter?
Council was generally supportive of initiating a program this upcoming winter if feasible. General
sentiment indicated that timing should be dictated by the feasibility of launching a program this
winter, as determined by partner organizations. There was also widespread support for public
education, and experts emphasized the importance of clear and consistent communication.
Is Council supportive of staff contracting with Dark Horizon Drones to conduct a citywide deer
population index survey? This would serve as a baseline population estimate.
Council provided unanimous support for conducting a baseline population estimate via a citywide
deer population index survey. The information was requested to serve as an additional data point
to inform a population management program and to track program progress.
Is there any additional information Council requires to inform a decision?
Council was interested in understanding where management operations could feasibly take place
in Dublin. Council also expressed support for developing an ethics statement to help inform all
communications regarding deer management.
Summary
Social Carrying Capacity
Based on research conducted in partnership with The Ohio State University in May 2023, Dublin’s
deer density was estimated at approximately 50–85 deer per square mile. A standard urban deer
population is typically cited as 20–25 deer per square mile. This biological benchmark, or what is
commonly accepted as a healthy range of white-tailed deer, is not a biological carrying capacity.
As defined by the experts at ODNR and SENR, biological carrying capacity includes all elements,
including food, water, cover and space required for a healthy wildlife population. When too many
deer are present to occupy a landscape and cannot obtain adequate resources, the population will
experience a rapid reduction until it levels out. A community will reach sociological carrying
capacity far before it reaches biological carrying capacity. Sociological carrying capacity occurs
when residents and the community have reached their capacity to tolerate living with wildlife
without conflict.
Memo re. Deer Management Program
May 5, 2026
Page 3 of 5
ODNR has advised that Dublin is not currently at biological carrying capacity, given the absence of
widespread disease, starvation, or a sustained rise in severe deer-vehicle accidents. However,
ODNR has characterized Dublin as being near or at sociological carrying capacity, meaning that
resident tolerance for deer presence may be strained even if other indicators do not yet suggest
the population is at biological carrying capacity.
Aggressive Deer Incidents
In 2025, the City received approximately 20 reports of dogs attacked by deer and 35 reports of
deer stalking or chasing behavior. This is a significant increase from the three reports received in
2023 and four in 2024. This data is limited to reported cases. Incidents can happen without being
reported to the City. In responses submitted as part of the open-ended survey questions, at least
120 residents reported that a deer attacked, stomped, kicked, gored, head-butted, charged, or
otherwise injured a pet. There were four references to a pet being killed by an interaction with a
deer and 45 distinct references to deer chasing and/or stalking people. According to local experts
that have also been involved in the Worthington Deer Task Force, these numbers far exceed what
has been reported in Worthington.
Survey Results
Survey results from 2023 to 2026 show growing public concern and support for management, with
59% of respondents favoring intervention and 60% supporting the use of public funds to manage
the deer population. Resident experiences are mixed, but the majority perceive an increasing deer
population, with key concerns including public safety, aggressive behavior, deer-vehicle collisions
and property damage. Support for lethal management methods is split with 49% in favor, 33%
opposed and 18% neutral. Since the 2026 survey closed on Feb. 25, the City has heard from an
additional eleven residents, of which nine were supportive of managing the population.
Citywide Deer Population Index Survey
Dark Horizon flew two drones in the evening from Friday, April 24 to Monday, April 27. The high-
resolution thermal imaging drones flew citywide in a systematic grid pattern while the operators
counted all visible deer. The summary report is attached. A total of 528 deer were spotted during
the four-day survey. The City was separated into zones based on city council wards to enable
comparison of survey responses with deer counts. In Ward 1, 204 deer were counted. In Ward 2,
95 were spotted, while there were 123 observed in Ward 3. Finally, 106 deer were counted in
Ward 4. This data should be considered a snapshot in time. When combined with the other data
points the City has collected, it is another way to monitor a deer management program. This is a
similar approach to the one taken by Metro Parks to establish a baseline population estimate and
evaluate program success.
The citywide drone population survey helped to identify areas in the city where deer are most
populated. The areas identified by the citywide deer population index survey aligned with the
locations where the Dublin Police drone flew to count the population in specific zones. The zones
were selected based on where Staff receive the most calls from residents, where dead deer are
picked up and where the City has received reports of aggressive deer encounters. The citywide
population survey confirmed that these areas have a high concentration of deer, helping to inform
management locations.
Memo re. Deer Management Program
May 5, 2026
Page 4 of 5
Management Options
The City passed an outdoor feeding prohibition in 2023, which is the primary non-lethal
management strategy. Other tactics, such as relocation and birth control methods, were evaluated.
Based on discussions with ODNR, these approaches may help slow future population growth but
do not significantly reduce the current herd. Additionally, relocation is illegal in Ohio under Ohio
Revised Code Chapter 1531 because it is associated with a high mortality rate and disease risk.
Sterilization and contraceptives have shown limited effectiveness in open herds and involve
logistical challenges. The subject matter experts also presented potential ethical concerns
associated with sterilization and contraceptives.
Lethal management options reviewed included targeted removal by trained professionals and
regulated archery programs, both of which are used by peer communities and supported by ODNR
when data indicates a need. Targeted removal, conducted by trained firearms professionals with
safety as the top priority, is the quickest and most effective method to reduce deer numbers, with
opportunities for venison donation to local food pantries. Archery programs have lower direct costs
because they rely on volunteer hunters, but they require more staff oversight and are less effective
for rapid population reduction. Archery programs can serve as a long-term complementary tool.
Potential benefits of lethal management include a direct and measurable reduction in the deer
population, fewer deer-related safety issues such as aggressive deer encounters, the ability to
target specific areas and support for food pantries through processed venison.
Next Steps
Staff have engaged with USDA to begin identifying measurable goals and potential locations for
management operations, relying on USDA’s expertise at each step. Upon direction from Council,
Staff will work with USDA to negotiate a contract that includes the following scope of work:
• USDA coordination with Dublin on baiting station locations and times/locations for removal
operations
• USDA removal of deer by professionally trained sharpshooters using rifles with noise-
suppression devices
• USDA transporting the intact deer carcasses to a facility to be processed
• USDA collecting data on the deer, including weight, sex and age
• USDA delivering deer to the processor the following morning after management operations
• USDA and Dublin will determine the goal number of deer to be removed, based on staffing
availability and other components related to establishing a feasible removal number
Staff will also work to develop a public education and comprehensive communications plan that
will align with the contract to ensure that all information shared can be specific to the program, as
determined by USDA and Dublin.
Recommendation
Staff recommend establishing a deer management program consisting of targeted removal
conducted by professional markspeople with the goals of the program to be:
Public Safety
- Reduce aggressive deer encounters
Memo re. Deer Management Program
May 5, 2026
Page 5 of 5
- Reduce deer/vehicle collisions or almost collisions
- Reduce the annual number of dead deer pick-ups
Environment
- Limit property and landscape damage
Ethics
- Reduce the number of resident complaints
- Reduce the deer population, as informed by an annual population index
To advance this, Staff recommend City Council direct the City Manager to enter into contract
negotiations with USDA to conduct targeted management operations, with timing and other details
to be determined as part of the negotiations process.
Further, Staff recommend funding a deer management program through a Q3 Supplemental
request. Requested funds will be used to cover the contract with USDA, processing fees and any
associated expenses. Funding the program in Q3 will allow Staff and vendors time to develop
contracts and ensure that any funding request aligns with the program’s needs.
To: Members of Dublin City Council
From: Members of the Community Services Advisory Committee
Date: March 3, 2026
Re: CSAC Report – Deer Management
Background
The Community Services Advisory Committee (CSAC) has been discussing deer management since
February 2022, beginning with a general overview of the City’s wildlife management program.
Since then, the Committee has reviewed the topic at its February 14, 2023, June 13, 2023,
September 12, 2023, and October 10, 2023 meetings. At the October 10, 2023, meeting, the
Committee recommended that City Council amend the City’s Code of Ordinances to include a
prohibition on outdoor feeding of wild animals or animals running at large. Ordinance 47-23 was
adopted at the November 27, 2023, City Council meeting and amended via Ordinance 05-24 at the
April 22, 2024, meeting to remove a reference to feral cats.
City Council referred this topic back to CSAC for continued evaluation as regional conditions
evolved at its October 21, 2024, meeting. CSAC received a presentation on statewide deer
management strategies at its November 25, 2024, meeting, presented by representatives of the
Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR). Following that presentation, City staff members
presented updated data and new information on regional programs, including the City of
Worthington’s program, at its February 11, 2025, meeting. The Committee recommended that the
City of Dublin continue to monitor the regional landscape of deer management programs and
provide CSAC with updates when new information becomes available. This recommendation was
supported by City Council at its May 5, 2025, meeting.
In furtherance of this commitment, City Staff provided an update to CSAC at its January 14, 2026,
meeting. City Staff updated the Committee on benchmarking, data, aggressive deer, outdoor feed
ordinance enforcement and collected feedback from CSAC members. City Staff presented
responses to additional questions that the Committee had at its Jan. 14 meeting, along with survey
results and some additional information to provide context at CSAC’s February 10, 2026, meeting.
CSAC also discussed the topic with local experts from the Ohio State University School of
Environment and Natural Resources (SENR) and Columbus & Franklin County Metro Parks (Metro
Parks).
Throughout CSAC’s engagement with deer management, the Committee reviewed:
• Presentations from experts, including ODNR, SENR and Metro Parks
• Dublin-specific data on deer populations, resident inquiries, deer-vehicle collisions and
aggressive deer encounters
• Resident survey results from 2023 and 2026
0BOffice of the City Manager
1B5555 Perimeter Drive • Dublin, OH 43017
2BPhone: 614.410.4400 Memo
Memo re. CSAC Report – Deer Management
March 3, 2026
Page 2 of 14
• Benchmarking information from statewide and regional communities, including the City of
Worthington, Metro Parks, Marysville, Gahanna and New Albany
Dublin-Specific Data and Trends
Based on research conducted in partnership with The Ohio State University in May 2023, Dublin’s
deer density was estimated at approximately 50–85 deer per square mile. A standard urban deer
population is typically cited as 20–25 deer per square mile. While this suggests that Dublin’s
population exceeds biological benchmarks, ODNR has advised that Dublin is not currently at
biological carrying capacity, given the absence of widespread disease, starvation, or a sustained
rise in severe deer-vehicle accidents.
However, ODNR has characterized Dublin as being near or at sociological carrying capacity,
meaning that resident tolerance for deer presence may be strained even if other indicators do not
yet suggest the population is at biological carrying capacity.
Resident Inquiries and Complaints
Deer-related inquiries are highly seasonal, increasing in late spring and early summer during
fawning season. Common concerns include landscape damage, defensive does, canine-deer
interactions and questions about fawns bedding in yards. The City received 37 documented deer-
related inquiries in 2023, 24 in 2024 and 22 in 2025. Since the GoDublin app launched in 2019, 67
inquiries have been submitted through the app.
Aggressive Deer Incidents
In 2025, the City received approximately 20 reports of dogs attacked by deer and 35 reports of
deer stalking or chasing behavior. This is a significant increase from the three reports received in
2023 and four in 2024. This data is limited to reported cases. Incidents can happen without being
reported to the City. Based on the survey results, at least 120 residents reported that a deer
attacked, stomped, kicked, gored, head-butted, charged, or otherwise injured a pet. There were
four references to a pet being killed by an interaction with a deer and 45 distinct references to
deer chasing and/or stalking people.
The incidents reported to the City were concentrated in several neighborhoods and were largely
associated with the fawning season. Current response protocols involve police monitoring and
coordination with ODNR when available, with City staff also exploring removal services for specific
aggressive deer.
Deer-Vehicle Collisions and Deer Mortality Data
Deer-vehicle collision data shows year-to-year variability but no sustained upward trend. Recent
years have generally reflected low numbers of collisions and low injury severity. Similarly, the
number of deer dispatched due to catastrophic injuries has remained relatively consistent. The
Dublin Police Department dispatched 21 deer in 2025, as opposed to 19 dispatched in 2024.
Year Number of
Collisions
# Resulting in
Minor Damage
# Resulting in
Significant
Damage
# of Collisions
Resulting in Injury
2015 11 10 1 2
2016 13 10 3 0
Memo re. CSAC Report – Deer Management
March 3, 2026
Page 3 of 14
2017 13 11 2 2
2018 10 10 0 0
2019 10 8 2 2
2020 21 19 2 5
2021 12 8 4 1
2022 11 8 3 1
2023 7 6 1 1
2024 11 11 0 0
2025 6 4 2 0
Another data point CSAC reviewed is the number of dead deer the Department of Public Service
has picked up. City Staff created a map to identify hot spots and track the total number of dead
deer reported year-over-year. Prior to late 2022, the GoDublin app did not specify whether a dead
animal pick-up request was for a deer. Data from 2021 and 2022 were compiled by filtering service
request comments for those that mention “deer.” This specification was added to better track
trends. Since 2023, the number of dead deer picked up has increased by about 10 per year.
The City is working to establish a population index, consistent with work conducted in
Worthington. The Dublin Police Department conducted a drone survey using thermal imaging to
count deer in specific zones. These zones were selected based on where Staff receive the most
calls from residents, where dead deer are picked up and where the City has received reports of
aggressive deer encounters. Replicating this population index annually can serve as a data point to
determine if the population is declining. For example, when Metro Parks was having difficulty
finding deer for its targeted removal program in 2025, an aerial survey confirmed that there were
significantly fewer deer in Glacier Ridge than had previously been counted, indicating that the
program was successfully reducing the population.
Enforcement of the Outdoor Feed Ordinance
Since City Council’s adoption of Ordinance 47-23, which prohibits the outdoor feeding of wild
animals or animals running at large, members of the City’s Nature Education staff have proactively
informed and engaged residents regarding the purpose and objectives of this legislation. The
Nature Education staff distributed informational materials concerning Responsible Bird Feeding to
44 residents and issued educational letters to 14 residents, six of whom received an additional
follow-up educational letter. Furthermore, the Nature Education staff provided consultation to 36
residents seeking to better understand the code changes enacted by the ordinance.
In 2025, there were three cases initiated by Code Enforcement Officers following violations of
Code Section 91.12 that remained unresolved by residents despite the proactive provision of
educational information by Nature Education staff. All three cases were dismissed, and no
residents were fined after achieving voluntary compliance.
The first instance involved a resident with multiple hanging bird feeders, various trough-style
feeders, a bin-style gravity corn feeder for deer mounted on a tree, and kiddie pools with ramps
designed for ducks. Following the issuance of a citation and the scheduling of an arraignment, the
resident agreed to remove all feeders and the improvised ponds for 30 days to modify deer and
waterfowl feeding behavior, with a plan to gradually reintroduce limited hanging feeders. This
Memo re. CSAC Report – Deer Management
March 3, 2026
Page 4 of 14
measure was deemed acceptable, and consequently, Code Enforcement Officers recommended
dismissing the charges. The second case involved a resident who possessed multiple hanging bird
feeders between their home and an adjacent home, creating a pathway for deer to potentially
travel out of the open space and further into a neighborhood. The case was resolved and closed
following the relocation of feeders to a landscaped area near an adjacent ravine and installing a
drop catcher on the single remaining bird feeder near the resident's home. The third case that
required Code Enforcement Officer attention involved a resident with numerous hanging feeders, a
trough-style feeder, and a kiddie pool, but the primary concern was other code violations unrelated
to outdoor feeding. The resident addressed the outdoor feeding violations immediately following
contact by Code Enforcement Officers, and the property is being monitored through the Spring to
ensure feeding patterns are altered.
Regional Benchmarking and Peer Community Approaches
Worthington, Ohio
The City of Worthington has served as a key benchmarking point for CSAC’s review. Worthington
City Council voted unanimously at its January 21, 2025, meeting to direct Worthington staff to
implement a deer management program consistent with the recommendation of the Deer Task
Force, including targeted removal and an archery hunting program.
Worthington will likely conduct a targeted removal program for the next several years before
considering an archery program. The targeted removal operations will primarily take place on City-
owned properties. Private properties are also eligible to host a removal operation. Private property
owners can submit their property for evaluation by the USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Services Wildlife Services (APHIS-WS), which will determine whether it is appropriate for use. The
City recently sent letters to all property owners within 200 feet of each approved site to notify
them of upcoming operations.
The City of Worthington worked with ODNR to obtain permits, listing APHIS-WS as a sub-
permittee. APHIS-WS set up bait stations at the removal sites. Removal activities will be conducted
from Jan. 1 – March 31, 2026, with a goal of removing up to 100 deer. If 100 deer have been
removed before funds have been expended, and based on APHIS-WS availability, an additional 25
deer may be removed.
The City of Worthington Police Department will have officers on overtime to monitor the
surrounding areas of the removal operations and assist with clearing them. Worthington’s Service
and Engineering Department crews working overtime will be responsible for field dressing the
harvested deer, including entrail removal.
APHIS-WS will collect data (weight, age, sex, etc.) on the deer and then deliver them to the City of
Worthington’s maintenance building for field dressing. APHIS-WS will provide a refrigerated truck
to store the deer meat. They will return the next day to transfer the meat to the Pickaway
Correctional Institution. All meat processed there will be donated to local food pantries, with
priority given to the Worthington Resource Pantry.
It could take several overnight operations to reach Worthington’s goal removal number. The total
contract with APHIS-WS is $56,831.32. Worthington staff does not anticipate accounting for the
Memo re. CSAC Report – Deer Management
March 3, 2026
Page 5 of 14
overtime costs associated with police and maintenance staffing as part of the total program cost.
The City will pay the Ohio Penal Industries $130 per deer for meat to be processed into two-pound
ground venison packages. Worthington will coordinate the distribution of the packaged venison to
food banks.
As part of the Worthington Deer Task Force’s work, Worthington received 5,118 responses from
Worthington residents across its two surveys, both conducted in 2024. The survey results showed
that 71% of residents would like to see a decreasing deer population and 74.9% were supportive
of using public funds to address the issue. When asked about specific lethal management
strategies, 73% of respondents supported or strongly supported a targeted removal program using
professional sharpshooters.
The Worthington Police Department conducted a drone thermal-imaging count and spotlight
survey to determine how many deer were in specific areas around the city. This method can be
duplicated in Dublin. By establishing an initial deer count at a specific location, the City can track
program success by conducting drone surveys annually to determine whether the deer population
in that location is decreasing.
Columbus & Franklin County Metro Parks
Metro Parks has employed targeted removal and controlled hunting since the 1990s as part of its
broader ecological management strategy. The program is framed around biodiversity protection
and habitat health rather than nuisance control. At nearby Glacier Ridge Metro Park, deer
management is considered essential to prevent over-browsing, habitat degradation and long-term
ecological instability. Targeted removal typically takes place overnight from late October to late
January. Data on annual targeted removals and aerial population counts from Metro Parks’ 2025-
2035 Deer Management Plan are available below. The plan states that the acceptable population
range at Glacier Ridge Metro Park, following targeted removal operations, is 40-60 deer.
City of Columbus
The City of Columbus conducted a deer survey from June through August 2025, collecting 3,151
valid responses. The survey, which is not statistically valid, was analyzed by capstone students
from Ohio State. A substantial number of respondents were Clintonville residents, who will likely be
most impacted by deer migration caused by Worthington’s program. The survey responses indicate
that 71.7% of respondents reported that deer numbers in their neighborhood have increased over
the past three years, and 70.2% indicated that they would like to see the population decrease.
There was 57% support for professional targeted removal and 61% support for an archery
program. The City of Columbus hosted a community conversation to explore different deer
management approaches with subject matter experts on February 19, 2026.
2021 2022 2023 2024
53 54 43 66
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Average
110 69 81 65 33 72
Targeted Removal Totals - Glacier Ridge
Annual Aerial Count - Glacier Ridge
Average
54
Memo re. CSAC Report – Deer Management
March 3, 2026
Page 6 of 14
Other Central Ohio Communities
New Albany, Marysville and Gahanna have used or explored urban hunting or targeted lethal
management with varying structures and levels of formality. Some programs emphasize police
oversight and designated discharge zones, while others rely on volunteer or permit-based hunting
models. Reported outcomes generally indicate reductions in deer-vehicle collisions and landscape
damage, with minimal public safety incidents when programs are tightly controlled.
Management Options Reviewed by CSAC
Non-Lethal Management Options
CSAC reviewed several non-lethal strategies, including those listed below. Based on CSAC’s review
and discussions with ODNR, non-lethal strategies may be effective in reducing population increase,
but don’t impact current populations. Additionally, some non-lethal strategies are not permissible
unless accompanied by a lethal program.
• Outdoor feeding prohibition, which has already been implemented in Dublin
• Relocation, which is illegal in Ohio under Ohio Revised Code Chapter 1531 and associated
with a high mortality rate and disease risk
• Birth Control
o Surgical Sterilization: Limited effectiveness on an open herd and not proven to be
effective in reducing the existing population
o Contraceptives: Limited effectiveness on an open herd, significant complexities
caused by the need for boosters and not proven to be effective in reducing the
existing population
Lethal Management Options
Lethal management strategies reviewed include targeted removal by professionals and regulated
archery programs. These options are used by peer communities and supported by ODNR when
data indicates a need.
• Targeted Removal: The City contracts with trained professionals at APHIS-WS. APHIS-WS
strategically selects removal sites, in partnership with the police department, based on
safety considerations and areas with higher deer concentrations. Operations are conducted
overnight with safety as the top priority. This is the quickest way to effectively reduce the
deer population.
o Dublin can establish a call-out list for locals to pick up the whole deer, eliminating
the need for field dressing, or potentially hire APHIS-WS to field dress the deer,
depending on their staffing availability
o Deer meat can be donated to local food pantries after being processed
• Archery Hunting Program: Less effective at quickly reducing the population. The direct cost
of an archery program is lower, as it relies on volunteer hunters, but it requires more staff
Memo re. CSAC Report – Deer Management
March 3, 2026
Page 7 of 14
time to establish and oversee. The Dublin Police Department would provide oversight to an
archery program, including conducting an archery proficiency and safety test and
establishing standards for where/when activities can be conducted. An archery program
can be implemented as a long-term, cost-effective management tool to complement a
targeted removal program.
Potential pros of a lethal management program:
• Direct and measurable reduction in deer population
o Potentially reduces all types of human-deer conflicts, including deer/vehicle
collisions and landscape damage
• Proven effectiveness in peer communities
• Ability to target specific areas of the city
• Processed venison can support local food pantries
Potential cons of a lethal management program:
• Potential negative public reaction and ethical concerns from residents
• Financial costs associated with contractors, oversight and any staffing needs (ex. Dublin
Police Department costs associated with supporting the safety on any operations)
• Long-term commitment. Once a program is started, it must be maintained.
Analysis of Survey Results
May 2023
The first time City of Dublin residents were surveyed on this topic was May 2023. Staff partnered
with the Ohio State University’s (OSU) School of Environment and Natural Resources to conduct
research during the weeks of May 9 through May 26, 2023. The purpose of this work was to
establish a population estimate of the deer herd within the City of Dublin. The survey team
conducted a field study during the week of May 15, which included road sightings and camera-trap
surveys, assessed vegetation for signs of deer, and created a citizen survey to gather data on the
community’s attitudes towards deer. The week-long community-wide survey received 297
responses. Public sentiment was split on whether the white-tailed deer population in Dublin is
increasing and needs to be managed. The 2023 survey results are below.
Memo re. CSAC Report – Deer Management
March 3, 2026
Page 8 of 14
January 2026
To better understand Dublin residents’ attitudes toward and the impact of the local white-tailed
deer population, and to track changes in sentiment since May 2023, a second survey was launched
on Jan. 6 and remained open through at least Jan. 30. This survey was developed to closely align
with Worthington’s surveys. A total of 3,656 responses were collected. With approximately 33,838
adult residents in Dublin, this represents a statistically valid response rate. The Committee
reviewed responses to each survey question as of Feb. 3 at its February 10, 2026, meeting. A
summary of the responses, including the sentiment change from the questions asked in 2023, is
included below. The data is visually displayed in Exhibit A.
Overall Experience and Perceived Population Trends
Resident experiences with deer were mixed. About 40% of respondents described their experience
as positive, 38% as negative and 22% as neutral. However, 55% of respondents believe there are
too many deer in Dublin, while 41% feel the current number is acceptable. A small fraction (4%)
believes there are too few deer.
Sixty percent of respondents reported that the number of deer in their neighborhood has increased
over the past three years, compared to 34% who believe the population has remained stable and
fewer than 6% who observed a decrease. This indicates a perception of population growth, even
in the absence of clear biological indicators of overpopulation.
Impacts and Experiences with Deer
The most common negative experience reported was plant and property damage, cited by 49% of
survey takers. Deer-vehicle collisions or near misses were reported by 14% of respondents. Most
respondents (93%) indicated that no one in their household had experienced a deer-related injury
to people or pets.
Level of Concern
Memo re. CSAC Report – Deer Management
March 3, 2026
Page 9 of 14
The issue of public safety was cited as most concerning to 38% of survey takers, while 33% were
slightly concerned and 29% were not concerned. The cost of administering a program was most
concerning to 19% of respondents, while 81% were slightly concerned (44%) or not concerned
(37%). Finally, the individual welfare of deer was selected as the most concerning by 34% of
survey takers, while 36% were not concerned and 30% were slightly concerned.
Support for Management
When asked directly whether the deer population should be managed, 59% of respondents said
the population is increasing and should be managed, while 41% said there is no need for
intervention. Regarding public funds used to address the deer presence in Dublin, 60% supported
it, while 40% did not. Support for using lethal methods to regulate the local deer population was
49% in favor, 33% opposed, and 18% neutral.
2023 to 2026
A comparison of the 2023 and 2026 surveys is presented visually below and in Exhibit A. Notably,
the sentiment regarding population management has increased from 50% in 2023 to 59% in 2026.
Narrative Response Summary
The survey offered residents the opportunity to share open-ended comments. Across the narrative
responses, residents describe their interactions with deer. The primary themes are public safety
concerns, pet injuries and deaths, aggressive deer behavior, vehicle collisions, and property
damage. Most narrative responses express negative sentiment towards the current herd
population, with about 25-30 expressing opposition to lethal management due to ethical concerns.
Approximately 135 of the narrative responses refer to aggressive deer. This includes charging,
stomping, kicking and acting territorially around humans and pets. About 45 references to humans
being chased, knocked down, charged at or injured (either by a deer or as a result of fleeing from
a deer) by a deer. Nearly 105 responses mention concerns with road safety, including repeated
Memo re. CSAC Report – Deer Management
March 3, 2026
Page 10 of 14
near-misses and confirmed deer-vehicle collisions. Just over 150 responses mention concerns with
deer destroying landscaping and the financial implications for replacing damaged gardens. About
80 respondents expressed concern about overpopulation, often calling on the City to act. Other
concerns mentioned included Lyme disease and general health.
Public Education and Information
Dublin Nature Education Programming
The City of Dublin has leveraged comprehensive nature education programming to help residents
coexist with wildlife for decades, including having a dedicated employee to lead the program.
Dublin has prohibited the feeding of waterfowl citywide since 2003 and the feeding of wildlife in
City parks since 2013, with education serving as a foundational component of enforcement. Deer-
related outreach has expanded in recent years, particularly following the adoption of the 2023
Outdoor Feed Ordinance. Educational efforts have included targeted neighborhood mailings in
areas with feeding violations, articles in Dublin Life Magazine, a video series and podcast featuring
the Nature Education Coordinator, informational materials distributed at programs and events,
presentations at Neighborhood Leadership Meetings, social media outreach, and inclusion in the
Dublin News Now newsletter. Seasonal messaging also helps residents understand deer behavior,
including the fawning season and increased movement at dusk during the fall.
Worthington Deer Task Force
The Worthington Deer Task Force, in partnership with Ohio State University students, conducted a
community survey in the spring of 2024 to assess resident attitudes toward deer, perceived
impacts, preferred management approaches, and areas of concern. The survey also revealed
several prevalent misconceptions. To address these and better inform the public, the Task Force
hosted two educational sessions focused on deer ecology and management strategies. The first
session, held in July 2024 and titled “Deer 101: How We Got Here, Understanding the Basics to
Inform Management Decisions,” featured Jonathon Cepek, Wildlife Ecologist with Cleveland
Metroparks. The second session, held in September 2024, “Deer Management Options & Choosing
the Right Path,” was led by Geoff Westerfield, Assistant Wildlife Management Supervisor with
ODNR. Mr. Westerfield provided the same presentation to CSAC at its November 25, 2024,
meeting.
Both sessions were recorded and made available on the City’s website. The Task Force launched
its second survey in the fall of 2024. According to Greg Hitzhusen, a member of the Worthington
Deer Task Force and a professor at Ohio State, the second survey results indicated that the
education sessions helped dispel some misinformation evident at the first meeting.
Program Goals for Consideration
Given that Dublin is not at its biological carrying capacity, there is no exact science to determining
how many deer should be removed each year. Rather, it depends on the social tolerance and is
evaluated annually based on the results. The decision on how many to remove each year is made
based on what is feasible and realistic in an urban area. Measuring the success of a lethal
management program depends on the community’s tolerance for deer and which factors are
deemed important metrics. In other words, the number taken each year is driven by the program's
goals and what is feasible, as determined in partnership with APHIS-WS.
Memo re. CSAC Report – Deer Management
March 3, 2026
Page 11 of 14
Once a lethal program begins, residents will experience deer differently, as their behavior will
change. According to APHIS-WS, deer will begin to ignore bait traps in a park after a few removal
operations. Additionally, it becomes more difficult to remove deer after a few years of a reduction
program because they learn to avoid areas and become less brazen. The number of years required
for a lethal program to reach maintenance levels depends on the number of deer taken during the
initial reduction efforts. These numbers are determined annually based on what helps the program
achieve its goals.
It is important to acknowledge that white-tailed deer will remain a permanent presence in Dublin,
regardless of the effectiveness of a management program. The goal is not to eliminate deer
entirely, which is not possible in an open space like Dublin. Rather, the goal is to meet the
community’s tolerance for their presence. It will be impossible to eliminate landscape/property
damage. A reasonable population is one that minimizes negative impact.
Should City Council determine that a lethal deer management program is appropriate to address
community concerns, establishing clear and measurable goals would be critical to designing the
program, evaluating its effectiveness and communicating with residents. The following potential
goals are provided for consideration.
1. Reduce aggressive deer encounters
Public safety is the City’s number one priority. One potential goal would be to reduce incidents of
aggressive deer behavior, particularly those involving people and pets. Survey responses and
service request data indicate increased reports of deer charging, stalking, and attacking pets in
recent years. In addition to removal services for specific aggressive deer, a lethal management
program can aim to reduce negative and unsafe encounters between residents and deer. This can
be tracked by continuing to document aggressive deer reports and encouraging residents to report
any aggressive deer encounters to ensure data is accurate. Additionally, conducting a community
survey every few years can track changes in the number of aggressive deer encounters reported
via the survey.
2. Reduce deer/vehicle collisions or almost collisions
Another goal related to public safety is reducing collisions or near-misses. The City can track all
calls for service related to car collisions involving deer, not just those that produce a crash report.
Since not all collisions are reported to the Dublin Police Department, the City can also monitor the
number of dead deer picked up, particularly along roadways. A function can be added to Cityworks
for the GoDublin crew to record any dead deer pick-ups along the side of the road. A community
survey conducted every few years can also be used to track any changes in the percentage of
deer-related vehicle safety concerns.
3. Limit property and landscape damage
The most reported experience residents have with deer is property and landscape damage. By
conducting a community survey every few years, the City can track this data point. A successful
program would result in a lower percentage of residents reporting deer-related damage to their
gardens than in the January 2026 survey.
Memo re. CSAC Report – Deer Management
March 3, 2026
Page 12 of 14
4. Reduce the number of resident complaints
The City will continue to track inquiries related to landscape damage, reports of negative deer
interactions and questions regarding fawn bedding in residents’ yards. A successful program will
see a reduction in the total number of these complaints received annually.
City Staff can continue educating residents on deer-resistant plants, repellents, hazing and other
tools to promote a successful coexistence of humans and deer.
5. Reduce the annual number of dead deer pick-ups
Using existing data and continuing to track the number of dead deer picked up by Public Service
crews can be used as a measure of success for a lethal program. If the overall population in Dublin
declines, the number of dead deer pick-ups will decrease. This saves the City time and money,
enabling the GoDublin crew to focus on other important priorities.
6. Reduce the deer population, as informed by an annual population index
Given that estimating deer population is challenging, the City can conduct an annual population
index using thermal-imaging drones. This would include using drone technology from the Dublin
Police Department to estimate the number of deer in specific areas of the city. Drone imaging can
be used to count deer in these areas before implementing a lethal program. The same methods
can be repeated annually to track any population changes after implementation. This is not a
foolproof method for tracking population changes, as numerous factors can influence deer
congregation in a given area, but it can be used as an additional metric when determining success.
Implementation Considerations
Should City Council wish to advance a lethal management program, City Staff would begin working
with APHIS-WS to identify areas within the city suitable for a removal operation. Safety
considerations analyzed include an adequate backstop (berm, wooded backdrop, downward
shooting angle, etc.), the ability to control access to the property and an appropriate distance from
homes. Additionally, based on the program goals and available APHIS-WS staffing, Staff would
determine the total targeted number of deer for the first year. If APHIS-WS can provide staffing to
support field dressing of the deer, the City could hire them to conduct this work. Alternatively,
Staff can work to establish a call-out list for residents to either take the deer whole or assist with
field dressing needs. All of this information would be determined as part of the contract
development process with APHIS-WS, which would be approved by City Council.
CSAC was particularly interested in hearing about the public education component that was
deployed by Worthington. This included public education sessions and informational graphics to
correct public misconceptions about deer management. If lethal management is determined to be
the most appropriate option, a comprehensive public education campaign could be deployed to
help keep residents informed. The Ohio Community Wildlife Cooperative, of which the City of
Dublin is a part, is planning to host a workshop on white-tailed deer management in Dublin this
April. This educational session, “Urban Deer 101: Biology, Impacts, and Management Strategies,”
will be hosted by third-party subject matter experts and held at the Dublin Community Recreation
Center from 6 to 8 p.m. on Tuesday, April 8.
Memo re. CSAC Report – Deer Management
March 3, 2026
Page 13 of 14
Exhibit A – Survey Results
Experiences
Level of Concern
Management
Memo re. CSAC Report – Deer Management
March 3, 2026
Page 14 of 14
DEER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
May 11, 2026
•Ongoing discussion and monitoring since Feb. 2022•Ordinance 47-23 was adopted by City Council at the Nov. 27, 2023,
meeting •ODNR presented to CSAC at the Nov. 25, 2024, CSAC meeting•CSAC discussion at the February 11, 2025, meeting•Data and benchmarking update at the Jan. 14, 2026, CSAC meeting•February 10, 2026, review of the survey results and discussion with
experts from Ohio State and Metro Parks•March 9, 2026, comprehensive report from CSAC to City Council•Council heard from local subject matter experts from Ohio State, Metro
Parks and ODNR at its April 20 Work Session
Background
1)Does Council wish to proceed with a lethal management program and direct Staff to begin contract negotiations with the USDA at the May 11 Council meeting? •Majority support for proceeding with a lethal management program•Public safety concerns stemming from aggressive deer encounters, community survey results indicating 59% of respondents think the population should be managed and ecological impacts•Further, 49% of respondents indicated support for lethal methods, 18% responded that they neither support nor oppose lethal methods, and 33% indicated they oppose lethal methods2)Is Council supportive of the goals identified in the CSAC report?•Council supported the goals and suggested establishing higher-level “buckets” for the goals•There was also widespread support for public education, and experts emphasized the importance of clear and consistent communication.
April 20 Work Session Feedback
3.Does Council support initiating a program this upcoming winter?
•General support for initiating a program this upcoming winter if feasible
4.Is Council supportive of staff contracting with Dark Horizon Drones to
conduct a citywide deer population index survey? This would serve as a
baseline population estimate.
•Council provided unanimous support for conducting a baseline population
estimate
5.Is there any additional information Council requires to inform a decision?
•Council was interested in understanding where management operations
could feasibly take place in Dublin
•Council supported establishing an ethics statement to help inform a
communications plan
April 20 Work Session Feedback
•Biological Carrying Capacity•Includes all elements, including food, water, cover and space required for a healthy wildlife population•When the number of deer exceeds what the landscape can support, the population will experience rapid reduction until it levels out•Sociological Carrying Capacity•Occurs when residents and the community have reached their capacity for tolerating living with wildlife conflict •Biological Benchmark•“A healthy population of deer is around 20-25 per square mile” (Capstone Report, 2023)•Dublin –ODNR has advised that Dublin is not currently at biological carrying capacity•Absence of widespread disease, starvation, or a sustained rise in severe deer-vehicle collisions
Defining Carrying Capacity
•Reported to the City•20 reports of dog attacks and 35
reports of stalking/chasing in 2025•3 reports in 2023; 4 in 2024•Survey Results•120 reports that a deer attacked,
stomped, kicked, gored, head-
butted, charged or otherwise injured
a pet•4 references to a pet being killed•45 distinct references to deer
chasing and/or stalking people
Aggressive Deer Incidents
•Dublin survey launched on Jan. 6; open for approx. 7 weeks
•3,656 responses
•Eleven contacts since the survey; nine support management
Survey Results 10) As the City of Dublin explores potential deer
management options, what is your opinion about
the use of lethal methods to regulate the local
deer population, assuming regulations are
established for safety?
4) Do you think the deer population in Dublin
should be managed?
•Flew two drones in the evening from Friday, April 24 to Monday, April 27•High-resolution thermal imaging drones flown in a systematic grid pattern•Total of 528 deer counted, establishing a baseline population estimate•Another data point to inform a decision and track progress•Hotspots aligned with zones where DPD flew in February•Helps to inform removal location discussions
Citywide Deer Population Index Survey
•Outdoor feeding prohibition (adopted by Dublin in 2023)
•Relocation program
•ORC Chapter 1531: it is currently illegal to trap and relocate deer in
Ohio
•Causes potentially lethal levels of stress and can lead to disease spread
•Birth Control: surgical sterilization and contraceptives
•Generally, only approved for research purposes
•Limited effectiveness in an open herd
•Do not reduce the existing population
•Extends the lifespan of does
Management Options – Non-Lethal
•Targeted removal•The City contracts with trained professionals•Professionals, in partnership with DPD, select removal sites•Operations conducted overnight•Quickest way to reduce the population•Deer can be picked up whole or field dressed and sent for processing •Processed venison can be donated to local food pantries•Archery•Lower direct cost; high staff involvement•Oversight and permitting by DPD•Less effective at quickly reducing a population•Long-term, cost-effective management tool to complement a targeted removal program
Management Options –Lethal
Upon direction from Council, Staff will work with USDA to
negotiate a contract that includes the following scope of work:
•USDA coordination with Dublin on baiting station locations
and times/locations for removal operations
•USDA removal of deer by professionally trained
sharpshooters using rifles with noise-suppression devices
•USDA transporting the intact deer carcasses to a facility to
be processed
•USDA collecting data on the deer, including weight, sex and
age
•USDA delivering deer to the processor the following morning
after management operations
•USDA and Dublin will determine the goal number of deer to
be removed, based on staffing availability and other
components related to establishing a feasible removal
number
Next Steps
•Anticipate bringing forward a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to Enter into an Agreement with the United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Wildlife Services on June 8, 2026 (pending contract negotiation status)•Develop a comprehensive public education and communications plan aligned with the USDA and Metro Parks messaging•Focus on ecosystem, ethics, safety and animal welfare•Hold multiple public education meetings•Utilize all Communications & Marketing channels, including:
o Webpage, including FAQs and one-pagers
o Videos and podcast episodes featuring Dublin and regional/national nature and wildlife experts
o eNews
o HOA outreach
o Social media
o Direct mailings
o Dublin Life magazine
Next Steps (continued)
Staff recommend establishing a deer management program consisting of targeted removal conducted by professional markspeople with the goals of the program to be:
Public Safety•Reduce aggressive deer encounters•Reduce deer/vehicle collisions or almost collisions•Reduce the annual number of dead deer pick-ups
Environment•Limit property and landscape damage
Ethics•Reduce the number of resident complaints•Reduce the deer population, as informed by an annual population index
To advance this, Staff recommend City Council direct the City Manager to enter into contract negotiations with USDA to conduct targeted management operations, with timing and other details to be determined as part of the negotiations process.
Recommendation
City Council Agenda
Monday, April 20, 2026 at 7:00 pm
Special Presentation(s)
Public Comments
Approval of Meeting Minutes
Public Hearings on Legislation
Call to Order1.
Roll Call2.
Pledge of Allegiance3.
2026 Deer Management Program Report
Executive Summary:Staff will provide a report on the Deer Management Program and 2026
targeted deer removal operations.
4.
Visitor Comments
Public comments for topics not on the published agenda.
5.
Approval of Meeting Minutes
Approval of Meeting Minutes from the March 9, 2026 Special Meeting
Executive Summary:Meeting Minutes from the March 9, 2026 Special Meeting.
Recommendation:Approve as presented.
6.
Ordinance No. 09-2026 - Appropriation - Arterial Roadway Improvements - Linworth
Road & Snouffer Road
Amending Ordinance No. 26-2025 (As Amended) to Adjust the Annual Budget by Providing for an
Appropriation from the Capital Improvements Fund Unappropriated Balance to Pay the Costs of the Arterial
Improvements – Linworth, Snouffer & Godown Project and all Related Expenses and Determining to Proceed
with said Project. (Project No. 765-24)
Executive Summary:This ordinance funds the Arterial Roadway Improvements, Linworth and
Snouffer Road, Project Number 765-24.
Recommendation:Motion to Amend to insert the appropriation amount and contractor name.
7.
Page 1
New Legislation - Resolution(s)
Approve as Amended.
Ordinance No. 10-2026 - Appropriation - Worthington Service Building #2 Floor
Replacement
Amending Ordinance No. 26-2025 (As Amended) to Adjust the Annual Budget by Providing for anAppropriation from the Capital Improvements Fund Unappropriated Balance to Pay the Costs of the Service
and Engineering Building Concrete Replacement and all Related Expenses and Determining to Proceed withsaid Project. (Project No. 792-26)
Executive Summary:This ordinance funds the Worthington Service & Engineering Department
Building #2 concrete floor and drains replacement.
Recommendation:Approve as presented.
8.
Resolution No. 29-2026 - Transfer of Appropriations
Adjusting the Annual Budget by Providing for a Transfer of Previously Appropriated Funds
Executive Summary:This Resolution authorizes the transfer of previously appropriated funds to
cover expenses as anticipated for the remainder of the year in appropriate accounts. Approval of
this Resolution will not result in an increase of total appropriations.
Recommendation:Introduce and Approve as Presented.
9.
Resolution No. 30-2026 - Adopting Job Descriptions and Amending Staffing Chart -
Court Liaison/Security Officer
Amending the Position Description for Part-time Court Liaison/Security Officer, Adopting the Position
Description for Part-time Security Officer, and Amending the Staffing Chart to add .25 FTE Part-time SecurityOfficer Position
Executive Summary:This Resolution amends a job description for the position of PT Court Liaison/
Security Officer, adopts a job description for PT Security Officer, and amends the Staffing Chart to
add a .25 PT Security Officer position.
Recommendation:Introduce and Approve as Presented.
10.
Resolution No. 31-2026 - Board & Commission Appointments
Appointing Members to Various City Board and Commission.
Executive Summary:This Resolution appoints members to various Boards and Commissions.
Recommendation:Introduce and Approve as presented.
11.
Resolution No. 32-2026 - Board of Tax Review Appointments
Appointing Debra Pistone and Rebecca Princehorn to the Worthington Board of Tax Review.
Executive Summary:This Resolution re-appoints Rebecca Princehorn to the Worthington Board of
Tax Review and makes the new appointment of Debra Pistone to the Worthington Board of Tax
Review.
12.
Page 2
Reports of City Officials
Reports of Council Members
Other Business
Executive Session
Adjournment
Contact: Daniel Ruggiero, Clerk of Council (Daniel.Ruggiero@worthington.org (614) 436-3100) | Agenda published
on 04/16/2026 at 1:19 PM
Recommendation:Introduce and Approve as Presented
Policy Item(s)
Permission to Waive Fees - Mrs. Goodman's Subdivision
1012 High Street Subdivision – Waiver of Fees
Executive Summary:This would waive fees associated with the dedication of right-of-way
associated with the redevelopment of 1012 High Street and permit the City to pay
associated fees to record the documents with Franklin County.
Recommendation:Motion to waive fees and pay associated fees to record the document.
a.
TREX - The Slice Worthington LLC
Economic Development Related Transfer of Liquor Permits (TREX)
Executive Summary:This item acknowledges The Slice Worthington LLC’s (dba The Slice)
requested transfer of D-1, D-2, and D-3 permits into the City of Worthington as an
economic development project (TREX).
Recommendation:Motion to acknowledge The Slice as an economic development project
by authorizing the City Manager to sign the TREX application and to not request a public
hearing for their D-1, D-2, and D-3 permits.
b.
March Financial Report
Executive Summary:The Financial Report for the month of March is attached.
Recommendation:Motion to accept the Report as presented.
c.
13.
Motion to Adjourn14.
Page 3
STAFF MEMORANDUM
City Council Meeting – April 20, 2026 Date: April 16, 2026 To: Robyn Stewart, City Manager From: Riley Hoover, Management Assistant Subject: 2026 Deer Management Program Report
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Staff will provide a report on the Deer Management Program and 2026 targeted deer removal operations.
BACKGROUND/DESCRIPTION The 2026 Deer Management Report provides an overview of the City of Worthington’s Deer Management Program, including the first year of targeted removal operations implemented in response to increasing deer-related conflicts and recommendations from the City’s Deer Task Force. The program, guided by the City’s Deer Management Plan, aims to reduce property damage, minimize deer–vehicle collisions, and decrease human–deer conflicts. Worthington’s Deer Management Plan is available on the City’s Deer Management webpage.
ATTACHMENTS 2026 Worthington Deer Management Report 2026 USDA Wildlife Services Deer Management Report
Page 4
6550 N. High Street | Worthington, Ohio 43085 | 614.436.3100 | worthington.org
2026
DEER MANAGEMENT REPORT
City of Worthington, Ohio April 2026
Page 5
2026 Worthington Deer Management Report
2
Contents Executive Summary.............................................................................................................................................. 3 Background and Deer Task Force Recommendations ............................................................................ 4 Program Implementation .................................................................................................................................. 5 Targeted Removal ................................................................................................................................................. 5 Conclusion................................................................................................................................................................ 8 References ............................................................................................................................................................ 10 Appendix A Worthington Deer Population Index ................................................................................. 11 Appendix B 2026 Targeted Removal Operations Data ........................................................................ 12 Appendix C Maps of the City of Worthington .......................................................................................... 13 Appendix D 2026 Targeted Removal Program Cost ............................................................................. 16
Page 6
2026 Worthington Deer Management Report
3
Executive Summary The 2026 Deer Management Report provides an overview of the City of Worthington’s Deer Management Program, including the first year of targeted removal operations implemented in response to increasing deer-related conflicts and recommendations from the City’s Deer Task Force. The program, guided by the City’s Deer Management Plan, aims to reduce property damage, minimize deer–vehicle collisions, and decrease human–deer conflicts. In January and February 2026, the City conducted its first season of targeted deer removal operations, contracting with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service – Wildlife Services. Over eight operational nights, 100 deer were removed, meeting the City’s 2026 goal. Operations were conducted safely on designated public and private properties, with no incidents involving people, pets, or property. Meat from harvested deer was processed and donated to the Worthington Resource Pantry, providing over 4,200 pounds of venison to the community. The 2026 operations represent the first year of implementing the City’s 2025 Deer Management Plan, a long-term strategy to reduce the deer population to a level where most property damage complaints, deer-vehicle collisions, and human-deer conflicts are eliminated. The City anticipates that it will take several years to reach a maintenance population level, followed by ongoing annual management efforts.
Page 7
2026 Worthington Deer Management Report
4
Background and Deer Task Force Recommendations Over the past two decades, Worthington’s deer population has grown significantly, leading to more resident complaints about property damage, traffic collisions, deer aggression, and other conflicts. The first step Worthington took to manage the deer population was the adoption of a No Feeding Ordinance, which took effect on July 1, 2022. The ordinance prohibits the intentional feeding of deer to reduce congregation, vehicle collisions, and damage to vegetation, while discouraging reliance on non-native food sources. Residents can report suspected violations through an online complaint form. Since the ordinance went into effect, the City has received 28 reports, including 6 filed between January 1 and April 1, 2026. While this ordinance was an important first step, it needed to be paired with additional management methods to achieve the City’s desired outcomes. In November 2023, the City created a Deer Task Force to study the issue and provide recommendations to City Council. The Task Force heard from wildlife experts, reviewed management programs in other communities, shared educational content, and conducted community surveys to understand resident experiences and levels of support for various management strategies. The Deer Task Force partnered with capstone student groups at The Ohio State University within the College of Food, Agricultural and Environmental Sciences to conduct two community surveys. A spring 2024 survey found that 91.7% of residents reported seeing deer daily or weekly, and 71% said they would like to see the population decrease. Residents identified deer–vehicle collisions and property damage as their top concerns, with 63% reporting damage or expenses from deer in the past three years. Survey respondents reported nearly $1.5 million in property-related costs and more than $200,000 in injury and veterinary expenses. A fall 2024 follow-up survey asked residents about their support for specific management strategies. A majority supported each lethal strategy: targeted removal (73%), archery hunting (61%), and a combination of the two (67%). When asked to choose one preferred approach, 47% favored a combination, 26% favored targeted removal alone, 18% favored no action, and 9% favored archery alone. In December 2024, the Deer Task Force released a report outlining the current situation, community input, and recommendations for managing deer in Worthington. The recommendations were as follows: • Establish an Ongoing City Deer Management Program Overseen by a Designated Advisory Committee • Establish and Operate a Recurring Community Education Program • Implement Annual Deer Population Reduction and Management • Establish Ongoing Metrics and Measurements for the Deer Management Program
Page 8
2026 Worthington Deer Management Report
5
Program Implementation In January 2025, City Council unanimously directed staff to implement a deer management program consistent with the Deer Task Force’s recommendations. A Deer Advisory Committee was subsequently established in May 2025 to oversee the program. The committee includes four former members of the Deer Task Force, including Gary Comer, an advisor with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources Division of Wildlife (Ohio Division of Wildlife). A fifth member was appointed in fall 2025.
In early 2025, staff enhanced communication on the City’s Deer Management webpage by incorporating work completed by Ohio State University capstone students. “What to Do If” guidance was added to help residents respond to common situations, such as finding a fawn in their yard, encountering an aggressive deer, or reporting a deer-vehicle collision. Additional information, including fawning season tips, was shared through the City’s social media channels. Staff also updated existing website content on deer-resistant landscaping techniques and deterrent plants to provide residents with current information to help reduce damage to private property. City staff continues to collect and track baseline metrics related to deer activity. These include resident correspondence, police calls for service containing the keyword “deer,” reported vehicle collisions involving deer, and deer carcass pickups by the Service & Engineering Department. In addition, the Worthington Division of Police conducts biannual population surveys using drone technology and spotlight counts. Initial counts were conducted in May and June 2024 and November 2024. These efforts have continued consistently at the same locations, with additional surveys completed in April 2025, November 2025, and April 2026 (Appendix A, Table 1). Throughout 2025, Worthington staff undertook the necessary planning and coordination to implement the first year of deer population reduction efforts, culminating in targeted removal operations in January and February 2026. This planning included the creation of Worthington’s D Plan, which is required to be submitted to the Ohio Division of Wildlife every ten years.
Targeted Removal The City of Worthington conducted its first season of targeted deer removal operations in January and February 2026. The City contracted with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service – Wildlife Services (Wildlife Services) to carry out operations. Professional markspeople conducted removal activities using firearms on designated properties. Over the course of eight operational nights, 100 deer were removed, meeting the City’s goal of removing between 100 and 125 deer. This goal was established in coordination with Wildlife Services and the Ohio Division of Wildlife, with a similar approach anticipated for future operations. Operations were conducted on multiple weekdays after dusk, weather permitting. Wildlife Services utilized a mobile unit, tree stands, and a recovery team. Wildlife Services personnel were accompanied by the Worthington Police Division, which interacted with
Page 9
2026 Worthington Deer Management Report
6
residents and provided drone support. No incidents of damage to people, pets, and property occurred as a result of targeted removal operations. Many operational nights occurred in temperatures far below freezing, and a significant snowstorm in January left nearly a foot of snow on the ground for multiple weeks. These conditions may have affected deer movement, particularly limiting their presence in parklands, and created operational challenges. Appendix B, Table 1, provides a breakdown of the number of deer removed during each night of operations.
Site Selection and Property Use Operations took place on a combination of volunteered private properties and selected publicly owned sites. Approved public locations included six City parks, Walnut Grove Cemetery, and two Worthington Schools properties (Appendix C, Figure 1). All Worthington parks close at dark, as stated in Worthington City Code Section 941.07(a)(5). Signs were placed at common public property entrances stating “Park Closed at Dark – Deer Management Area” to remind users of park closure requirements and ongoing deer management operations. These signs were posted beginning in early January and remained in place through the conclusion of operations. A total of 22 residential properties were included in the program, with 10 ultimately used. All properties were evaluated by Wildlife Services prior to use to ensure suitability and safety. To enroll private properties, including those owned by residents and businesses, the City released an interest form in June 2025. The form was shared on the City’s website, emailed on June 13, 2025 to residents subscribed to Deer Management Program updates, and included in a Village Talks newsletter mailed to all households in fall 2025. The opportunity to express interest in enrolling property in the 2026 program closed on October 31, 2025. In total, 136 Worthington residents volunteered their properties for targeted deer removal. Of those, 30 properties were deemed suitable for targeted removal operations and approved by Wildlife Services, and 22 property owners ultimately entered into agreements with Wildlife Services to participate in the program. Wildlife Services varied operation locations to distribute activity throughout the City, reflecting the widespread nature of deer-related concerns. A heat map of deer-related service calls from 2022 to 2025 demonstrates that these issues are not concentrated in a single area but occur throughout the community in both residential neighborhoods and along busy roadways. Site selection was based on factors such as deer presence, site conditions, and the size of the available shooting area. Geographically, 42% of harvested deer were taken east of SR-315 and north of SR 161 (Area A), 46% south of SR 161 and east of SR-315 (Area B), and 10% west of SR-315(Area C) (Appendix C, Figures 2 and 3). As can be noted in the heat map, residential properties proved crucial, as few deer were observed in parklands on some nights of operations due to snow cover. Wildlife Services reported observing no deer in the Olentangy Parklands for multiple consecutive weeks while several inches of snow remained on the ground.
Field Operations and Processing Page 10
2026 Worthington Deer Management Report
7
Once Wildlife Services staff removed and recovered deer, they were transported to the field dressing location . There, City staff from the Department of Service & Engineering field dressed the deer, while Wildlife Services collected biological data, including sex and age. Field dressing the deer in-house ensured the meat did not spoil. All harvested deer were tagged with their corresponding ODNR permit number. Biological data included the breakdown of age and sex of deer removed. Since the goal of the operations was to reduce the overall deer population, antlerless deer were prioritized. However, antlered deer were also removed, as they contribute to landscape damage, deer-vehicle collisions, and other conflicts. A detailed breakdown of deer demographics is provided in Appendix B, Tables 2 and 3. The morning after each removal operation, deer were transported to the Pickaway Correctional Institution for processing at the Meat Processing Career Center, a local USDA-inspected facility. The ground venison was packaged in 2-pound bags and labeled for donation in accordance with state requirements. Worthington staff coordinated pickup of the processed meat, which was then delivered to the Worthington Resource Pantry.
Meat Donation A total of 4,249.30 pounds of ground venison was donated to the Worthington Resource Pantry. Pantry staff began distributing the meat to community members following each delivery. Feedback has been generally positive, with recipients reporting a favorable experience and Pantry staff expressing appreciation for the donation, particularly noting the value of having an additional protein option when beef supplies were limited.
Financial Implications The total cost of the program was $119,113.86 (Appendix D, Table 1). The largest portion of this cost was the City’s contract with Wildlife Services. This included activities across all eight operational nights, as well as daily baiting, transportation, and related logistical support. Deer were processed at a cost of $130 per deer at the Meat Processing Career Center. This expenditure ensured that all venison could be donated to the Worthington Resource Pantry. Although this figure includes the cost of overtime for Worthington Police Officers who accompanied Wildlife Service and Service & Engineering staff who performed field dressing during operations, the total cost does not include work performed by City staff during regular business hours. Staff from nearly every department contributed to the implementation of the Deer Management Program. Wildlife Services and the Deer Advisory Committee expressed support for continuing to have Worthington Police accompany Wildlife Services staff. Police presence provided an additional layer of safety, interacting with residents and providing drone footage to ensure there were no nearby trail users during removal operations.
Page 11
2026 Worthington Deer Management Report
8
Community Feedback and Resident Response Resident feedback reflected a range of perspectives on the deer management program. While some residents expressed opposition to lethal methods, others voiced support for population reduction efforts. Between November 24, 2025, and March 31, 2026, Worthington staff received 127 messages regarding the program, including calls, emails, letters, and responses submitted through the Worthington Wildlife Concerns and Questions form. Multiple residents also shared feedback and concerns at Worthington City Council meetings. During this same period, 16 residents contacted the City to volunteer their properties for future operations. While these properties could not be incorporated into the 2026 program, Wildlife Services may evaluate them for potential use in 2027. Resident feedback was highest leading up to the start of targeted removal operations, with 72% of all feedback received prior to the first night of operations on January 21, 2026. The most common concerns related to safety and proximity to residential areas, particularly regarding the use of firearms. Notification letters were mailed in November and December to households within 200 feet of designated removal sites. Some recipients indicated that receiving the letter raised concerns about the safety of themselves and their families. To maintain operational security and protect the privacy of participating property owners, specific private property addresses were not included in these notifications. This same period, after notification letters were mailed and prior to the first night of operations, also saw the highest level of media coverage, with multiple regional news outlets requesting information and featuring the program. Once operations began, feedback declined substantially. Over the course of eight operational nights, during which 100 deer were removed, the Worthington Division of Police received only four calls reporting hearing shots fired. Following the conclusion of operations, the City received messages from some residents expressing disappointment that removal efforts had ended for 2026, noting continued deer activity in their neighborhoods.
Conclusion This represents the first year of a long-term effort to reduce property damage, deer–vehicle collisions, and other human–deer conflicts. The City anticipates that it will take several years to reach a maintenance population level, followed by ongoing annual management efforts. Operations were conducted safely and the City met 2026 removal goals. A second round of targeted removal operations is expected to occur in January and February 2027. The Deer Advisory Committee will continue to evaluate Year 1 outcomes, identify potential program improvements, and work to enroll additional properties later this fall to support future operations.
Page 12
2026 Worthington Deer Management Report
9
The City will continue to track key metrics, including deer activity, resident feedback, deer–vehicle collisions, and service calls, and will compare these data to desired outcomes. Ongoing evaluation will also include biological data from removal operations and analysis of program costs, safety considerations, and overall effectiveness. In addition, the City will continue to share educational information with the community and enforce Worthington’s No Feeding Ordinance. Worthington will also continue working with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources to evaluate and refine deer management strategies. The Deer Advisory Committee will provide ongoing oversight of the program, working collaboratively with staff to monitor progress, recommend adjustments, and develop annual proposals and budgets for City Council consideration. All recommendations will prioritize community safety and align with the goals outlined in the City’s Deer Management Plan of reducing property damage, minimizing deer–vehicle collisions, and decreasing human–deer conflicts.
Page 13
2026 Worthington Deer Management Report
10
References City of Worthington. (2025). Worthington Deer Management Plan. City of Worthington. https://www.worthington.org/DocumentCenter/View/12722 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services. (2026). Summary Report of Activities for the City of Worthington White-
tailed Deer Damage Management Program, Worthington, Ohio. Cooperative Service Agreement No. 2672395800RA. 15 pp.
Page 14
2026 Worthington Deer Management Report
11
Appendix A
Worthington Deer Population Index Table A1. Worthington Deer Spotlight and Drone Counts
BETA NOVEMBER 2024 APRIL 2025 DECEMBER 2025 APRIL 2026
# Date/Time # Date/Time # Date/Time # Date/Time # Date/Time
SPOTLIGHT 31 43 50 67 61
Riverglen/Southington Loop 14 5/27/2024 16 11/27/2024 0 4/2/2025 12 12/9/2025 15 4/9/2026
Whitney/Lambourne Loop 5 5/28/2024 14 11/4/2024 0 4/2/2025 8 12/9/2025 1 4/9/2026
E South/ Southington Loop 7 5/28/2024 6 11/4/2024 6 4/2/2025 11 12/9/2025 14 4/9/2026
McCord Community Garden 5 5/27/2024 7 11/18/2024 3 4/2/2025 6 12/9/2025 3 4/9/2026
Snouffer Park 6 4/3/2025 4 12/9/2025 8 4/9/2026
Perry Park 6 4/3/2025 3 12/9/2025 0 4/9/2026
Castlecrest 2 4/3/2025 2 12/9/2025 3 4/9/2026
Plesenton 12 4/3/2025 2 12/9/2025 9 4/9/2026
Whieldon 3 4/3/2025 2 12/9/2025 3 4/9/2026
Seabury/Sinsbury 8 4/3/2025 10 12/9/2025 3 4/9/2026
Farrington 4 4/3/2025 7 12/9/2025 2 4/9/2026
DRONE 49 92 148 113 80
Northigh Dr / Eastview Dr 5 6/3/2024 4 12/1/2024 6 4/2/2025 0 12/9/2025 3 4/9/2026
Northland Rd 0 6/3/2024 3 12/1/2024 3 4/2/2025 0 12/9/2025 4 4/9/2026
E North St 0 6/3/2024 2 12/1/2024 11 4/2/2025 3 12/9/2025 4 4/9/2026
Morning St 0 6/10/2024 4 12/1/2024 0 4/2/2025 3 12/9/2025 0 4/9/2026
E South St 2 6/10/2024 11 12/1/2024 7 4/2/2025 5 12/9/2025 7 4/9/2026
Indianola Ave 4 6/10/2024 6 12/1/2024 12 4/2/2025 3 12/9/2025 8 4/9/2026
W New England 2 6/16/2024 3 11/25/2024 15 4/2/2025 2 12/9/2025 3 4/9/2026
Olentangy Blvd 5 6/16/2024 6 11/25/2024 14 4/2/2025 7 12/9/2025 3 4/9/2026
W Selby 2 6/16/2024 4 11/25/2024 4 4/2/2025 3 12/9/2025 0 4/9/2026
Evening St 12 6/3/2024 5 11/18/2024 0 4/2/2025 10 12/9/2025 14 4/9/2026
Lambourne Ave 5 6/3/2024 5 11/25/2024 9 4/2/2025 3 12/9/2025 2 4/9/2026
Whitney Ave 0 6/16/2024 12 12/1/2024 5 4/2/2025 18 12/9/2025 6 4/9/2026
Whitney Playground 7 6/16/2024 0 11/18/2024 34 4/2/2025 0 12/9/2025 4 4/9/2026
Highgate Playground 5 6/3/2024 24 12/1/2024 16 4/1/2025 18 12/9/2025 13 4/9/2026
Olentangy Parklands 0 6/3/2024 3 12/1/2024 0 4/1/2025 5 12/9/2025 0 4/9/2026
Walnut Grove Cemetery 12 4/2/2025 33 12/9/2025 9 4/9/2026
Page 15
2026 Worthington Deer Management Report
12
Appendix B
2026 Targeted Removal Operations Data Table B1. Daily WS Deer Harvest in Worthington, Ohio, January 21, 2026 – February 24, 2026
Date Deer Removed 01/21/2026 14 01/29/2026 7 02/03/2026 16 02/05/2026 16 02/10/2026 10 02/12/2026 8 02/19/2026 14 02/24/2026 15 Note. Data sourced from U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services (2026). Table B2. Antlered and Antlerless Deer Harvested in Worthington, Ohio, January 21, 2026 – February 24, 2026
Type Number Antlerless 90 Antlered 10 Note. Data sourced from U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services (2026). Table B3. Age and Sex Distribution of Deer Harvested in Worthington, Ohio, January 21, 2026 – February 24, 2026
Age Class Males Percent of
Total
Harvest
Female Percent of
Total
Harvest
Total for
age class
Percent of
Total
Harvest 0.5 20 20% 17 17% 37 37% 1.5 9 9% 13 13% 22 22% 2.5+ 7 7% 34 34% 41 41%
Total 36 36% 64 64% 100 100% Note. Data sourced from U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services (2026).
Page 16
2026 Worthington Deer Management Report
13
Appendix C
Maps of the City of Worthington Figure C1. 2026 Worthington Targeted Deer Removal Public Properties
Page 17
2026 Worthington Deer Management Report
14
Figure C2. 2022-2025 Deer Related Service Call Distribution Analysis
Page 18
2026 Worthington Deer Management Report
15
Figure C3. 2026 Heat Map of Worthington Deer Harvest Locations
Note. Figure sourced from U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services (2026).
Page 19
2026 Worthington Deer Management Report
16
Appendix D
2026 Targeted Removal Program Cost Table D1. 2026 Targeted Deer Removal Program Cost
Item Cost Targeted Removal $51,614.99 Deer Processing $13,000 Field Dressing Waste Composting $2,484* Field Dressing Equipment $1,791.54 Overtime - Police $33,759.04 Overtime – Service & Engineering $16,464.29
Total $119,113.86*
*Estimation. Only charged $414 for composting as of 4/15/26
Page 20
United States Department of Agriculture
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Wildlife Services
2026 Summary Report of Activities
The City of Worthington White-Tailed Deer Damage Management
Program
Submitted by:
USDA APHIS Wildlife Services
4469 Professional Parkway
Groveport, OH 43125
This document should be cited as:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services. 2026
Summary Report of Activities for the City of Worthington White-tailed Deer Damage Management
Program, Worthington, Ohio. Cooperative Service Agreement No. 2672395800RA. 15 pp.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Worthington entered into a Cooperative Service Agreement with the United States
Department of Agriculture, Wildlife Services (WS) to implement portions of the City’s Deer Management
Program during the winter 2026 management season. Under this agreement WS performed all targeted
removal activities, site preparation, baiting, biological data collection and transportation of deer to
Pickaway County Correctional Institute for processing.
Deer damage management was conducted in accordance with the Ohio Division of Wildlife Deer Damage
Control Permit #33072. A total of eight nights were needed to remove 100 deer from twelve shooting
sites. Of the 100 deer removed, female deer accounted for 64% of the total take. A total of 4,249lbs. of
processed meat from deer harvested on this project was donated to the Worthington Resource Pantry.
The 2026 Deer Management Program was performed in a safe and efficient manner by all participants.
There were no significant issues that developed as a result of any of the activities in the program. This
was in no small part attributable to the Police Department's involvement with the program.
The program successfully met its first-year goal of safely and efficiently removing deer from the City of
Worthington. Moving forward, the City of Worthington remains intent on monitoring and evaluating the
effectiveness of the Deer Management Program. Continued lethal management will remain necessary to
reduce property damage, deer-vehicle collisions (DVC), related police service calls, and incidents
involving aggressive deer. Future efforts should especially concentrate on addressing specific
geographical areas within the City that support higher numbers of white-tailed deer or deer that may pose
an elevated risk to public safety.
2
Table of Contents
OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................... 3
Site Description ........................................................................................................................... 3
Scope and Need for Action ......................................................................................................... 3
METHODS ..................................................................................................................................... 4
Baiting ......................................................................................................................................... 4
Targeted Removal ....................................................................................................................... 4
Data Collection and Processing .................................................................................................. 4
RESULTS ....................................................................................................................................... 5
Effort ........................................................................................................................................... 5
Age and Sex Distribution ............................................................................................................ 5
Harvest Locations ....................................................................................................................... 6
FUTURE MANAGEMENT ........................................................................................................... 9
LITERATURE CITED ................................................................................................................. 10
APPENDIX 1. 2026 Worthington Deer Damage Management Biological Data ......................... 11
APPENDIX 2. 2026 Deer Damage Control Permit ...................................................................... 14
3
OVERVIEW
Site Description
Worthington is a suburb of Columbus, located in Franklin County. The city has a population of
approximately 14,500 and covers 5.47 square miles (US Census Bureau). Worthington’s businesses,
vibrant downtown, and central location make it a frequent destination. Since only 6% of Worthington
residents work within the city, the workforce primarily consists of commuters (City of Worthington
2025). The City of Worthington manages more than 221 acres of public land across 16 developed and
natural parks (City of Worthington 2026).
Scope and Need for Action
The biological carrying capacity of a wildlife population is defined as the maximum number of animals
that an area’s native and cultivated resources can support without degradation to the animal’s health and
the environment over an extended period of time. The cultural carrying capacity is defined as the
maximum density of a given species that can coexist compatibly with the local human population (Decker
and Purdy 1988). This term is useful when managing urban deer because it defines when conflicts with
deer have exceeded an acceptable level and provides managers with a target for establishing management
objectives. For any given damage situation, there will be varying acceptance thresholds by those directly,
as well as indirectly, affected by the damage. Factors which may influence the cultural carrying capacity
include landscape or vegetation impacts, crop damage, threats to public safety, the potential for illegal
killing of deer, and personal attitudes and values. The threshold of wildlife damage acceptance is a
primary limiting factor in determining the cultural carrying capacity. The City of Worthington uses
deer‑vehicle accidents, resident complaints about deer‑related damage, and other harmful human–deer
interactions, such as attacks on people or pets, to assess its cultural carrying capacity. (City of
Worthington 2025).
Deer-vehicle accidents are a serious concern nationwide because of losses to property and the potential
for human injury and death (Conover 1997, Conover et al. 1995, Romin and Bissonette 1996). The
economic costs associated with DVAs include vehicle repairs, human injuries and fatalities, and removal
of deer (Drake et. al 2003). Annually, it is estimated that more than one million DVAs occur nationwide
contributing to more than 200 human deaths (Williams et al. 2012).
Deer can also cause significant damage to landscaping and ornamental trees, shrubs, and flowers. As
rural areas are developed, deer habitat may actually be enhanced because fertilized lawns, gardens and
landscape plants serve as high-quality sources of food (Swihart et al. 1995). Furthermore, deer are
prolific and adaptable and have characteristics that allow them to exploit and prosper in most suitable
habitat near urban areas, including residential areas (Jones and Witham 1990). The appealing nature of
many ornamental landscape plants, coupled with high nutrient contents from fertilizers, offers an
attractive food source for deer. In addition to browsing pressure, male white-tailed deer damage
ornamental trees and shrubs by antler-rubbing which can result in broken limbs and bark removal. While
large trees may survive antler-rubbing damage, smaller saplings often die or become scared to the point
that they are no longer aesthetically acceptable for landscaping.
The City of Worthington implemented its first year of a Deer Management Program (DMP) in the winter
of 2026. The program was deemed necessary due to an elevated white-tailed deer population, which has
resulted in increased DVAs, an increasing number of resident complaints due to property damage caused
by deer and an increase in deer/human encounters resulting in the injury of humans, pets, and personal
property destruction. For the winter 2026 deer management season, the City enacted operations at twelve
different sites.
4
In support of white-tailed deer management to alleviate conflicts with human safety and damage to
property, the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR), ODW issued the Deer Damage Control
Permit # 33072 that authorized the City of Worthington to remove up to 125 deer. ODW is the regulatory
authority of wildlife in Ohio. The ODW urban/suburban deer management goal is to provide a deer
population that will allow maximum recreational, aesthetic, and economic benefits while minimizing
conflicts with property damage, motor travel, loss of ecological biodiversity, and ensuring the overall
health of the deer herd. It was under this permit that the City of Worthington requested the assistance of
Wildlife Services in meeting objectives outlined in their Deer Management Plan.
METHODS
Baiting
Baiting with food attractants was used to draw deer into safe locations designated for targeted removal
activities. On 5 January 2026, WS personnel initiated the baiting at 10 sites prior to targeted removal
operations. Wildlife Services guidelines specified that approximately 15 lbs. of whole kernel corn be
delivered to each site daily for the period prior to targeted removal efforts. The amount of bait distributed
was to be reduced from 15 pounds to 5-10 pounds to ensure reliable daily visitations by deer that were
competing for available resources. Bait was placed in 1-3 small piles, 5-10 yards apart to encourage safe
shooting distance between groups of feeding deer. Sites were monitored with trail cameras to assess
resident deer populations, bait acceptance, and feeding times to ensure program efficiency.
Targeted Removal
Targeted removal activities were conducted on twelve sites, two city/public-owned (Walnut Grove
Cemetery and Olentangy Parklands) and ten privately owned properties. Each shooting site was
inspected by representatives from WS with input from Worthington PD to identify safe shooting zones
before targeted removal operations were conducted. Safety zones for shooting were established and
defined at each site by taking into consideration natural backstops created from either elevation or natural
topography, direction of nearby structures and avoiding areas of potential human traffic. Targeted
removal activities were conducted between 18:30 and 24:00. Local law enforcement was available for
each WS designated staff during the duration of all targeted removal efforts.
Wildlife Services used rifles equipped with noise suppression devices, also known as suppressors.
Suppressors quiet the muzzle blast of a rifle shot by slowing and redirecting the gases produced when the
ammunition is discharged. A suppressor does not silence the sonic signature (sonic crack) of the projectile
(bullet) in flight. In accordance with the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) guidelines
for euthanasia, shots were placed with the goal of penetration and destruction of brain tissue, causing an
instant loss of consciousness.
Wildlife Services used forward looking infrared (FLIR) technology aided by night vision devices and/or
firearm mounted spotlights when conducting targeted removal activities. Wildlife Services utilized a
handheld FLIR unit to locate and observe deer in complete darkness. These capabilities also further
enhanced Wildlife Services ability to ensure the safety of humans and pets during operations.
Data Collection and Processing
All harvested deer were tagged using temporary tags created by Wildlife Services per ODW permit
instructions. Each tag contained a unique identification number(ex. FY26WOR001). Harvested deer
were transported to a central processing station and field dressed by City of Worthington maintenance
5
employees. Biological data (gender, age, antlered) was collected from deer harvested during the project.
Deer were aged by assessing the tooth replacement and wear of the lower jaw (Severinghaus 1949). Deer
were classified into the following age (years old) categories; 0.5, 1.5, 2.5+ per ODW deer damage control
permit conditions.
Deer were processed for human consumption by Pickaway County Correctional Institute. A total of
4,249 pounds of processed meat from deer harvested on this project was donated by the City to the
Worthington Resource Pantry.
RESULTS
Effort
Wildlife Services targeted removal activities occurred on eight days (Table 1). A total of 62- WS staff
hours(does not include other aspects such as baiting, transport, and other logistics.) were spent conducting
targeted removal efforts to remove 100 deer, yielding a ratio of 0.62-WS staff hours per deer harvested
(total number of person hours spent shooting/total number of deer removed) (Table 2).
Table 1. Daily WS deer harvest in Worthington, Ohio, 21 January 2026 – 24 February 2026.
Date Deer Removed
01/21/2026 14
01/29/2026 7
02/03/2026 16
02/05/2026 16
02/10/2026 10
02/12/2026 8
02/19/2026 14
02/24/2026 15
Table 2. Effort required to harvest 100 deer in Worthington, Ohio, 21 January 2026 – 24 February 2026.
Number
of Days
Number of WS
Staff Hours
Number of
Deer Removed
Average Number of Deer
Removed per Day
Number of WS Staff Hours
per Deer Removed
8 62 100 12.5 0.62
Age and Sex Distribution
Female deer accounted for 64% (n=64) of total harvest, with 47% (n=47) of deer removed being adult
females (1.5 years of age and older). (Table 3).
Table 3. Age and sex distribution of deer harvested in Worthington, Ohio, 21 January 2026 – 24 February 2026.
Age Class Males
Percent of
Total
Harvest
Female
Percent of
Total
Harvest
Total for age
class
Percent of
Total
Harvest
0.5 20 20% 17 17% 37 37%
1.5 9 9% 13 13% 22 22%
2.5+ 7 7% 34 34% 41 41%
Total 36 36% 64 64% 100 100%
6
Harvest Locations
A total of twelve sites were successful at targeted removal locations. Olentangy River Parklands north of
Dublin Granville Road were considered separate from Olentangy River Parklands-John Galipault Field.
The City was divided into three units(A,B,C). Unit A consisted of the corporation boundary to the north
and east and the areas north of Dublin-Granville Rd. and east of State Route 315(blue border). Unit B
consisted of the corporation boundary to the east and south, and the areas south of Dublin Granville Rd.
and east of State Route 315. Unit C consisted of corporation boundaries to the north, west, and south and
area west of State Route 315. Forty-two percent of harvested deer were taken in unit A, 46% in unit B,
and 10% in unit C respectfully(Figure 1). Several harvest locations coincide with deer related service calls
the City has received from 2022-2025(Figure 2).
7
Figure 1. A heat map depicting the relative density of deer harvest locations during the 2026 deer management
program. Worthington, Ohio. 2026
8
Figure 2. Deer related service calls. City of Worthington 2022-2025.
9
FUTURE MANAGEMENT
The City of Worthington was successful in implementing the first year of their Deer Management
Program in 2026. The initial goal of the safe and efficient removal of 100 deer from the population
within the City was achieved. It will be imperative that the City evaluate the effectiveness of their Deer
Management Program in working towards reaching the goals and objectives outlined in the City’s Deer
Management Plan. Baseline data is illustrated in Figure 3. Consistency in data collection and reporting
will be critical to monitoring any progress made towards those goals.
Figure 3. Reported deer vehicle accidents and the number of aggressive deer in the City of
Worthington. 2022-2024.
Continued lethal management will be necessary to reduce levels of DVC’s, aggressive deer and property
damage issues within the City. Where feasible, lethal management should be concentrated within areas of
the city that support higher numbers of white-tailed deer or deer that may pose an elevated risk to public
safety. Those areas can only be identified through sound and effective monitoring which should include
analyzing the locations and trends of DVC’s and deer related police service calls within the City (Figure
3), analyzing the locations of reported property damage complaints within the City, and accurately and
consistently evaluating the deer population on an annual basis. As areas of abundant deer populations are
identified, WS recommends that the City increase the access to privately-owned lands for targeted
removal to more effectively assist in reaching the goals established in their Deer Management Plan. To
better aid in management success and efficiency of lethal management, the City of Worthington’s no
feeding ordinance should continue to be enforced
Lethal management should be supported with non-lethal measures for an Integrated Wildlife Damage
Management (IWDM) approach. The most effective approach to resolving wildlife damage is to
integrate the use of several methods simultaneously. Both lethal and non-lethal management alternatives
were reviewed and discussed by the City in the 2025 Deer Management Plan. Management alternatives
should be reviewed and updated annually. Goals should be evaluated and updated to reflect changes in
deer populations, DVC’s, the number of police service calls for dead or injured deer, the number of
aggressive deer and property damage complaints received from residents. As the deer management
program continues there may be a need to refine or change techniques to have continued success.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Deer Vehicle Accident Aggressive Deer
Police Calls for Service-Deer
2022 2023 2024
10
LITERATURE CITED
City of Worthington. 2025. City of Worthington, Ohio Deer Management Plan. December 2025.
City of Worthington. 2026, Mar 10. City of Worthington Home Page
https://oh-worthington2.civicplus.com/252/Parks
Conover. M. R. 1997. Monetary and intangible valuation of deer in the United States. Wildlife Soc. Bull.
25:298-305.
W. C. Pitt, K. K. Kessler, T. J. DuBow, and W. A. Sanborn. 1995. Review of human injuries, illnesses,
and economic losses caused by wildlife in the United States. Wildlife Society Bulletin 23:407-
414.
Decker, D.J., and K.G. Purdy. 1988. Toward a concept of wildlife acceptance capacity in wildlife
management. J. Wildl. Manage. 58(4): 711-718.
Drake, D., J.B. Paulin, P.D. Curtis, D.J. Decker, G.J. San Julian. 2003. Assessment of Economic Impacts
from Deer in the Northeastern United States. Rutgers Cooperative Extension.
Jones, J. M. and J. H. Witham. 1990. Post-translocation survival and movements of
metropolitan white-tailed deer. Wildlife Society Bulletin 18:434-441.
Romin, L. A., and J. A. Bissonette. 1996. Deer-vehicle collisions: status of state monitoring activities
and mitigation efforts. Wildlife Society Bulletin. 24:276-283.
Severinghaus, C.W. 1949. Tooth development and wear as criteria of age in white-tailed deer. Journal of
Wildlife Management. 13:195-216.
Swihart, R. K., P. M. Picone, A. J. DeNicola, and L. Cornicelli. 1995. Ecology of urban and suburban
white-tailed deer. Pages 35-44 in J. B. McAninch, editor, Urban deer—a manageable resource?
Proceedings of the 1993 Symposium of the Central Section, The Wildlife Society.
Williams, S., A. DeNicola, T. Almendinger, and J. Maddock. 2012. Evaluation of Organized Hunting as a
Management Technique for Overabundant White-tailed Deer in Suburban Landscapes. Wildlife
Society Bulletin, DOI: 10.1002/wsb.236.
11
APPENDIX 1. 2026 Worthington Deer Damage Management Biological
Data
Date ID Number Prefix ID Number Age Sex Antlered
1/21/2026 FY26WOR 001 2.5 Male YES
1/21/2026 FY26WOR 002 2.5 Male YES
1/21/2026 FY26WOR 003 0.5 Male NO
1/21/2026 FY26WOR 004 2.5 Female NO
1/21/2026 FY26WOR 005 1.5 Female NO
1/21/2026 FY26WOR 006 0.5 Female NO
1/21/2026 FY26WOR 007 1.5 Male NO
1/21/2026 FY26WOR 008 0.5 Female NO
1/21/2026 FY26WOR 009 2.5 Female NO
1/21/2026 FY26WOR 010 0.5 Male NO
1/21/2026 FY26WOR 011 1.5 Female NO
1/21/2026 FY26WOR 012 2.5 Female NO
1/21/2026 FY26WOR 013 2.5 Female NO
1/21/2026 FY26WOR 014 2.5 Female NO
1/29/2026 FY26WOR 036 1.5 Female NO
1/29/2026 FY26WOR 015 2.5 Female NO
1/29/2026 FY26WOR 016 1.5 Female NO
1/29/2026 FY26WOR 017 1.5 Female NO
1/29/2026 FY26WOR 018 0.5 Female NO
1/29/2026 FY26WOR 037 0.5 Male NO
1/29/2026 FY26WOR 038 2.5 Female NO
2/3/2026 FY26WOR 019 0.5 Female NO
2/3/2026 FY26WOR 020 2.5 Male NO
2/3/2026 FY26WOR 041 2.5 Female NO
2/3/2026 FY26WOR 021 2.5 Female NO
2/3/2026 FY26WOR 022 0.5 Female NO
2/3/2026 FY26WOR 023 0.5 Male NO
2/3/2026 FY26WOR 024 0.5 Male NO
2/3/2026 FY26WOR 025 2.5 Female NO
2/3/2026 FY26WOR 026 2.5 Female NO
2/3/2026 FY26WOR 027 0.5 Male NO
2/3/2026 FY26WOR 028 0.5 Male NO
2/3/2026 FY26WOR 029 0.5 Male NO
2/3/2026 FY26WOR 030 0.5 Male NO
2/3/2026 FY26WOR 031 2.5 Female NO
2/3/2026 FY26WOR 040 1.5 Female NO
2/3/2026 FY26WOR 039 0.5 Female NO
2/5/2026 FY26WOR 044 1.5 Male YES
12
2/5/2026 FY26WOR 042 0.5 Male NO
2/5/2026 FY26WOR 043 1.5 Female NO
2/5/2026 FY26WOR 032 1.5 Male NO
2/5/2026 FY26WOR 033 2.5 Male NO
2/5/2026 FY26WOR 034 2.5 Female NO
2/5/2026 FY26WOR 035 0.5 Male NO
2/5/2026 FY26WOR 046 0.5 Female NO
2/5/2026 FY26WOR 045 0.5 Male NO
2/5/2026 FY26WOR 047 2.5 Male NO
2/5/2026 FY26WOR 051 0.5 Male NO
2/5/2026 FY26WOR 052 0.5 Female NO
2/5/2026 FY26WOR 053 2.5 Female NO
2/5/2026 FY26WOR 055 0.5 Female NO
2/5/2026 FY26WOR 054 2.5 Female NO
2/5/2026 FY26WOR 056 0.5 Female NO
2/10/2026 FY26WOR 066 1.5 Male YES
2/10/2026 FY26WOR 050 2.5 Female NO
2/10/2026 FY26WOR 049 2.5 Female NO
2/10/2026 FY26WOR 060 0.5 Male NO
2/10/2026 FY26WOR 057 1.5 Female NO
2/10/2026 FY26WOR 059 2.5 Female NO
2/10/2026 FY26WOR 067 2.5 Female NO
2/10/2026 FY26WOR 048 1.5 Male YES
2/10/2026 FY26WOR 068 2.5 Female NO
2/10/2026 FY26WOR 058 2.5 Female NO
2/12/2026 FY26WOR 061 2.5 Female NO
2/12/2026 FY26WOR 062 2.5 Female NO
2/12/2026 FY26WOR 069 0.5 Female NO
2/12/2026 FY26WOR 065 1.5 Female NO
2/12/2026 FY26WOR 070 2.5 Female NO
2/12/2026 FY26WOR 063 1.5 Male YES
2/12/2026 FY26WOR 071 0.5 Male NO
2/12/2026 FY26WOR 064 2.5 Male YES
2/19/2026 FY26WOR 073 1.5 Female NO
2/19/2026 FY26WOR 077 1.5 Male YES
2/19/2026 FY26WOR 076 2.5 Male YES
2/19/2026 FY26WOR 074 0.5 Female NO
2/19/2026 FY26WOR 078 2.5 Female NO
2/19/2026 FY26WOR 075 2.5 Female NO
2/19/2026 FY26WOR 072 0.5 Female NO
2/19/2026 FY26WOR 086 2.5 Female NO
13
2/19/2026 FY26WOR 087 1.5 Male YES
2/19/2026 FY26WOR 088 1.5 Male YES
2/19/2026 FY26WOR 089 0.5 Male NO
2/19/2026 FY26WOR 090 2.5 Female NO
2/19/2026 FY26WOR 091 0.5 Female NO
2/19/2026 FY26WOR 092 1.5 Female NO
2/24/2026 FY26WOR 083 0.5 Male NO
2/24/2026 FY26WOR 095 1.5 Female NO
2/24/2026 FY26WOR 096 2.5 Female NO
2/24/2026 FY26WOR 097 0.5 Female NO
2/24/2026 FY26WOR 100 2.5 Female NO
2/24/2026 FY26WOR 079 2.5 Female NO
2/24/2026 FY26WOR 081 1.5 Female NO
2/24/2026 FY26WOR 082 0.5 Male NO
2/24/2026 FY26WOR 084 2.5 Female NO
2/24/2026 FY26WOR 080 0.5 Female NO
2/24/2026 FY26WOR 085 2.5 Female NO
2/24/2026 FY26WOR 093 2.5 Female NO
2/24/2026 FY26WOR 094 0.5 Female NO
2/24/2026 FY26WOR 098 0.5 Male NO
2/24/2026 FY26WOR 099 0.5 Male NO
**DOW Deer Damage Control Permit age structure recording conditions only required deer age of 2 or
older to be recorded as 2+. WS app tracks age at 0.5-year increments.
14
APPENDIX 2. 2026 Deer Damage Control Permit
15
DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL
WORK SESSION
APRIL 20, 2026
Minutes
Vice Mayor De Rosa called the Monday, April 20, 2026 work session to order at 6:03 p.m.
Council members present: Ms. Alutto, Vice Mayor De Rosa, Ms. Johnson, Mr. Keeler, Ms. Kramb and
Dr. Lam. Mayor Amorose Groomes was absent.
Staff present: Ms. O'Callaghan, Mr. Barker, Deputy Chief Tabernik, Mr. Ament, Mr. Rubino and Mr.
Batchelor.
Others present: Kevin Kasnyik, Columbus and Franklin County Metro Parks; Gary Comer, Ohio
Department of Natural Resources; and Greg Hitzhusen and Gabe Karns, The Ohio State University.
Ms. Johnson led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Deer Management
Ms. Goliver began by providing comprehensive background on the deer management issue,
explaining that discussions had been ongoing since February 2022. She outlined the chronological
progression of actions taken, beginning with the adoption of Ordinance 47-23, the outdoor feed
ordinance prohibiting feeding of wild animals on private property, which was adopted at the
November 27, 2023 City Council meeting.
Ms. Goliver detailed subsequent steps, including the Ohio Department of Natural Resources
(ODNR) presenting to the Community Services Advisory Committee (CSAC) at the November 25,
2024 meeting, followed by CSAC discussion at the February 11, 2025 meeting where they
recommended that City staff continue monitoring the regional landscape surrounding deer
management programs, particularly Worthington's newly adopted program at that time. Staff
committed to providing CSAC with updates when new information became available, and City
Council received this recommendation at its May 5, 2025 meeting.
She continued explaining that staff provided a data and benchmarking update at the January 14,
2026 CSAC meeting, followed by a February 10 review of survey results and discussion with
experts. CSAC then provided a comprehensive report to City Council at the March 9, 2026 meeting,
bringing the discussion to the current evening.
Ms. Goliver introduced the panel of experts present, noting they had been extremely involved
through phone calls and emails to inform all conversations with CSAC and had graciously joined for
the evening session.
Kevin Kasnyik is the resource manager for Columbus and Franklin County Metro Parks, explaining
he had been with Metro Parks for over 27 years and had been involved with their deer
management program every year. He noted that he had served as a sharpshooter for about 12
years and had been in charge of their overall deer management program for the last 8 years,
covering all aspects of deer management.
Gary Comer is the Central Ohio or Wildlife District 1 Wildlife Management Supervisor. He explained
that he had been with the Division of Wildlife since 2008 and previously worked with Ohio State
Council Work Session
April 20, 2026
Page 2 of 12
University on various natural resource programming and educational programs. He detailed his
responsibilities for all permitting, research, and public land management activities in 13 central
Ohio counties. Mr. Comer noted he serves on a task force in Worthington as well as a group called
the Ohio Community Wildlife Cooperative, where he works with Barbara Ray to help municipal
decision makers who are non-wildlife professionals make decisions around conflict and other
wildlife-related issues in their communities.
Greg Hitzhusen is an associate professor in the School of Environment and Natural Resources at
The Ohio State University, specializing in religion, ecology, and sustainability, which he explained
essentially equates to environmental ethics. He noted his membership on the Worthington Deer
Task Force throughout their entire deer management decision-making process and his role as
capstone instructor for the sustainability senior capstone course that conducted two surveys in
Worthington. He introduced his colleague Gabe Karns, describing him as a landscape and wildlife
ecologist who knows a great deal about deer habitat and deer behavior.
Ms. Goliver began the substantive discussion by asking Mr. Comer to define biological and
sociological carrying capacity. Mr. Comer explained that biological carrying capacity includes all
physical elements including food, water, cover, and space required for healthy wildlife populations.
When too many species occupy a landscape and cannot obtain adequate resources, the population
experiences rapid reduction until it levels out. When biological capacity is exceeded, it overflows.
Mr. Comer explained that social carrying capacity occurs when animals may not be approaching
their biological carrying capacity, but residents and the community have reached their capacity for
living together without conflict. He noted that in Central Ohio, they had been rapidly approaching
social carrying capacity for a long time, with deer not being diseased, sick, or starving, but human
residents having reached their tolerance limit.
Mr. Karns addressed the challenge of establishing benchmark numbers for deer populations,
explaining that the State oh Ohio does not manage white-tailed deer at very granular levels. He
noted that while neighboring properties of 200 and 600 acres would not receive different
management plans, the State sets bag limits at the county level, which represents their most
detailed approach to deer management.
Mr. Karns explained that when queried, states in their region typically reference 20 to 30 deer per
square mile as healthy population levels, but emphasized that the reality depends on specific
circumstances. He noted that suburban deer live in premium environments, being edge species by
nature that are adaptable, generalists, and live exceptionally well around humans.
Regarding healthy population levels, Mr. Karns explained that while Mr. Comer referenced deer
nearing social carrying capacity, there was not tremendous evidence of deer nearing biological
carrying capacity. If there were, observers would see females reducing fawn production and deer
physically appearing to be starving during winter months as the rule rather than the exception.
Since these indicators were not observed, the situation would likely worsen before improving.
Mr. Karns described the concerning scenario where populations overshoot carrying capacity,
explaining that the steep downward decline represents an undesirable situation. He noted that
populations typically get worse before they get better, and the State manages counties by
adjusting hunter regulations to remove sufficient deer to maintain balance.
He emphasized that at the granular level of townships or municipalities, local governments operate
below the level where the State applies its coarse filter to larger landscapes, creating a roundabout
way of understanding benchmark establishment.
Council Work Session
April 20, 2026
Page 3 of 12
Ms. Goliver presented key information that Council had previously received, detailing Worthington's
contract with USDA to remove 100 deer at a cost of $56,831.32, plus their contract with Ohio
Penal Institute for Industries at $130 per deer. She reported that Dublin launched a survey on
January 6 that remained open for approximately seven weeks, receiving 3,656 responses. Since
the survey closed, they had received 10 additional contacts, with 9 supporting management.
Ms. Goliver displayed a graph showing survey response distribution that Council had previously
reviewed as part of the CSAC report. She outlined non-lethal options, beginning with the outdoor
feeding prohibition adopted in 2023. She explained that relocation programs are currently illegal in
Ohio, cause potentially lethal stress levels, can lead to disease spread, and would not receive state
permits.
Regarding birth control options including surgical sterilization and contraceptives, Ms. Goliver noted
these are generally approved for research purposes, have limited effectiveness on open herds like
Dublin's, do not reduce existing populations but only manage future population growth, and may
extend doe lifespans.
She detailed lethal options, starting with targeted removal involving City contracts with trained
professionals who would work with Dublin Police Department to select removal sites. Operations
would be conducted after dusk overnight, representing the quickest method to reduce populations.
Deer could be picked up whole or field dressed and sent for processing, with processed venison
donated to local food pantries, similar to Worthington's approach.
Ms. Goliver explained that archery represents a lower direct cost option but requires high staff
involvement through oversight and permitting by Dublin Police Department. While less effective at
quickly reducing populations, it serves as a complementary tool to targeted removal programs.
She presented pros and cons of lethal programs. Pros include direct and measurable population
reduction, proven effectiveness in peer communities, ability to target specific city areas, and
processed venison supporting local food pantries. Cons encompass potential negative public
reaction, ethical concerns from residents, financial costs for contractors and oversight staffing
support, and representing a long-term commitment requiring ongoing management for years, as
learned from Worthington's experience.
Ms. Goliver described the Police Department's use of thermal imaging drones for conducting a
drone population index on February 24th. Zones were selected based on areas where staff
received the most resident calls, where dead deer are most commonly collected, and where the
City received reports of aggressive deer encounters. She emphasized this represented a snapshot
in time showing deer present in those zones on that specific day, but provided a valuable tool for
tracking program success.
She introduced another potential tool, the Dark Horizon drone service, which recently conducted
surveys in peer cities and worked with metro parks. Their aerial thermal drone operations could
cover Dublin's 16,000-plus acres in an estimated four days at a cost of $24,508, providing a total
population snapshot for that specific date and time.
Ms. Goliver presented CSAC's goals for consideration: reducing aggressive deer encounters,
reducing deer vehicle collisions or near collisions, limiting property and landscape damage,
reducing resident complaints, reducing annual dead deer pickups, and reducing deer population as
informed by an annual population index.
Implementation considerations included beginning work with USDA through contract negotiations,
defining measurable goals, and identifying locations. The process would require a City Council
resolution authorizing an agreement and launching a comprehensive public information campaign.
Council Work Session
April 20, 2026
Page 4 of 12
Vice Mayor De Rosa opened the floor for general questions before addressing the specific
questions presented to Council.
Ms. Alutto asked about drone thermal imaging capabilities for heavily wooded areas, which Ms.
Goliver confirmed the drones utilized thermal imaging technology.
Mr. Keeler referenced Mr. Karns' explanation about biological limits and asked whether deer
populations would self-correct if deer were starving to death, eliminating the need for action.
Mr. Karns provided a detailed response explaining that while populations would self-correct, deer
do not exist in a vacuum. He described deer as one of six to eight species in the eastern United
States that function as ecosystem engineers. Using a road crew analogy, he explained that two
people take time to complete a job, twenty people work faster, but two hundred people might
finish overnight. Similarly, two deer on a landscape barely impact plants, twenty deer could be
healthy, but two hundred deer would cause significant ecosystem damage before starving.
Mr. Karns explained that deer functioning as ecosystem engineers means they take sensitive plants
with them before dying, raise the cover profile in woods by consuming everything green within
reach, creating visibility through previously dense foliage. Because of these impacts, wildlife
managers typically prefer not to let white-tailed deer self-correct. He noted that while other
species without ill effects on surrounding ecology might be allowed to self-correct, deer create
problems requiring intervention.
He described the cyclical nature of deer population management, explaining that after self-
correction, reduced competition leads females back into reproductive overdrive, quickly returning
to the same problematic cycle. Mr. Comer added that before reaching biological carrying capacity
levels, human conflict escalates exponentially from current levels, including vehicle strikes and
aggressive issues. He emphasized that the best time to start deer management was ten years ago.
Ms. Alutto asked about deer as plant engineers and their impact on other wildlife. Mr. Karns
confirmed negative impacts exist and explained that while much ecology remains hidden until
proper studies reveal connections, he could highlight several examples. He noted that locally rare
and sensitive plants represent the first casualties of overly high deer populations, as deer are
selective browsers seeking the choicest morsels on landscapes. He referenced plants that
previously existed at Sharon Woods Metro Park that were no longer present, though some
recovery was possible given sufficient time after deer control implementation due to seed bank
availability.
Mr. Karns extended the discussion to human health implications, describing known trophic linkages
connecting impacts on native vegetation to deer perpetuating invasive plant species problems. He
specifically mentioned Japanese barberry and bush honeysuckle, noting these plants harbor
heavier tick loads that carry Lyme disease and other human vector diseases, illustrating
unexpected ecological connections.
Ms. Alutto expressed concern about tick population impacts. Mr. Karns explained that any prey
item dependent on cover would be affected, describing browse lines that appear as if professional
landscape crews removed everything green within six feet of the ground. Ground-dependent
species requiring green foliage for predator shelter would face significant problems. He referenced
local Columbus landscapes showing extreme conditions where observers could see completely
through woodlots that should naturally provide dense cover.
Mr. Karns noted that songbirds represent another affected group, emphasizing that few species
can trigger such cascading effects, with white-tailed deer in the east being a primary example.
Council Work Session
April 20, 2026
Page 5 of 12
Dr. Lam thanked all participants for their work and stated his position from the previous council
meeting. He noted that Ward 3 had the highest survey responses favoring culling and described a
recent HOA meeting in River Forest, which had the highest deer concentrations. He observed a
deer crossing after the meeting and learned from a homeowner who reported seeing about 20
deer daily in her backyard.
Dr. Lam noted that the 2026 survey materially changed compared to the initial 2023 survey,
particularly regarding increased aggressive encounters including pets being affected and deer
following people. He asked about estimating unreported incidents, noting that medicine has
methods for such estimates, and wondered whether deer-related unreported incidents had
increased over the previous three years.
Mr. Karns identified two relevant factors: complaint fatigue, where residents stop filing complaints
after perceiving no action, and nonresponse bias in surveys. He explained how peer-reviewed
publications often require follow-up surveys to check for nonresponse bias through direct contact
with non-respondents to verify that their responses align with survey respondents, preventing bias.
Mr. Karns noted that with Dublin's high sample size of over 3,000 respondents, statistical power
was impressive. He explained that typically 400 to 500 respondents provide sufficient data, with
additional responses not significantly increasing information value. He suggested that unless a
totally unreported area of Dublin could be identified through mail distribution patterns, the survey
likely provided a good population snapshot.
Mr. Hitzhusen added insights from Worthington's experience regarding deer vehicle strikes. They
compared police reports of deer strike calls to survey responses and found higher proportions of
survey respondents reporting deer vehicle accidents than police counts reflected. This indicated
police counts were underrepresented because insurance companies do not require police reports
for deer strikes, meaning many incidents go unreported to police while appearing in survey
responses.
Mr. Karns emphasized focusing on trends rather than absolute numbers, noting that complaint
numbers, deer vehicle collisions, and deer population counts are important but trends matter
more. He stressed that seeing trends move in desired directions represents good evidence and
data, while holding up single numbers as truth creates unrealistic expectations.
Dr. Lam asked Mr. Hitzhusen about ethical arguments for proceeding when not at biological
carrying capacity but at sociological carrying capacity, requesting a strong ethical framework for
resident communication given that one-third of survey respondents opposed culling with a sizable
neutral block.
Mr. Hitzhusen provided extensive ethical analysis, first challenging the premise that biological
carrying capacity should be the management standard. He explained that statewide deer
management does not target biological carrying capacity but rather social carrying capacity, which
was a new fact for him when involved with Worthington. He noted that management decisions are
based on complaint numbers rather than some perfect deer population number, focusing on
reducing conflict trends rather than honoring ecological balance.
Mr. Hitzhusen described reading through approximately 2,000 survey comments from
Worthington's first survey and discovering significant confusion among residents. Many opposition
comments reflected misunderstandings about alternatives, with people suggesting illegal or
ineffective options like relocation or sterilization. This led to conducting public education before
their second survey.
Council Work Session
April 20, 2026
Page 6 of 12
He emphasized the importance of public education phases in addressing the percentage of people
concerned about deer removal, noting that significant portions of opposition stem from
misunderstanding available options. He cited common misconceptions like believing deer were
present first and humans had no right to remove them, when natural forest deer density is
approximately 4 deer per square kilometer compared to suburban density in the forties. Suburban
areas provide smorgasbords for deer with luscious gardens and landscaping, creating optimal
multiplication conditions rather than disadvantaging deer.
Mr. Hitzhusen explained that humans have removed deer predators and continuously replace food
sources, making suburban environments bonanzas for deer populations. He noted that
Worthington's second survey showed significantly decreased opposition and increased support
after education efforts, suggesting Dublin's survey results resembled Worthington's first survey
with similar misconception levels.
He addressed the ethical challenge perspective, noting that approximately 20 percent of any
community will oppose deer removal regardless of circumstances, representing a baseline
expectation. He emphasized that opposition voices raise important cautions about ensuring deer
are respected and removed as humanely as possible, representing crucial ethical considerations
that must remain part of any equation.
Mr. Hitzhusen expressed disappointment that citizens never presented strong moral cases during
Worthington Deer Task Force meetings, with most complaints focusing on deer attacks, garden
damage, community garden destruction, and tree damage rather than nuanced ethical discussions
he had anticipated.
Ms. Johnson asked about targeted removal ethics, referencing Worthington's report showing 64 to
67 percent of removed deer were female, mostly 2.5 years old and older, and whether fawns are
taken simultaneously during targeted removal.
Mr. Comer explained that at targeted removal timing, most people envision nursing spotted fawns
when considering young deer, but six-month-old deer are biologically still fawns while appearing
like smaller adults. He noted that targeting female population members is strategic because they
are baby makers, with one male serving many does. Reducing only male populations would result
in tired bucks but continued reproduction.
Mr. Comer described statewide agency struggles with declining hunter populations and declining
venison use. Most hunters are trophy hunters wanting mature males, and statistics show that 85
percent of hunters taking bucks as their first harvest will not take another deer that season.
National trends show average male deer harvest age increasing from 1.5 years in 2000 to 3.5
years currently, creating challenges for agencies trying to increase female harvest.
He explained that urban deer populations count heavily in herd estimates, but these estimates are
based on harvest data. Since urban populations are not hunted, agencies lack harvest data for
management decisions. They manage based on public opinion surveys of landowners and hunters,
aiming for balanced satisfaction where half of each group considers deer numbers appropriate.
Mr. Karns addressed the 67 percent female removal rate, explaining that at fawn drop, deer are
roughly 50-50 male to female, but males are reckless. Natural adult sex ratios typically become 2
to 2.5 females per male, meaning the 67 percent female rate indicated sharpshooters had zero
selectivity, taking the first animal presenting an ethical, clean, safe, quick kill opportunity. This
percentage aligned exactly with expectations from unharvested populations.
Mr. Comer added that his training originally taught that removing 60 percent of female populations
maintains steady numbers, but this may now require 85 to 90 percent removal for population
Council Work Session
April 20, 2026
Page 7 of 12
reduction. He provided an example where removing 60 deer from 100 would typically result in 100
deer again the following year.
Ms. Johnson clarified she had no problem with the ratios but wanted to understand community
education messaging. Mr. Hitzhusen explained that hunting seasons are set in fall when fawns are
older and capable of independent survival if mothers are harvested, with targeted removal
occurring even later when fawns are more independent.
Ms. Alutto asked Mr. Kasnyik about metro park deer management experiences and lessons
learned. Mr. Kasnyik explained their program started in the late 1980s with experience attempting
relocation and birth control before realizing targeted removal was the best option for quickly
reducing numbers while maintaining ethical and safe standards for deer and staff.
Their management program includes other options like archery hunting and controlled deer
hunting in certain parks across their 23 parks in 7 counties. Mr. Kasnyik emphasized that they do
not conduct deer management in all parks but monitor situations closely.
He highlighted biological diversity impacts, referencing Sharon Woods in Westerville where they
first recognized huge problems in the early 1990s. They lost over 350 plant species when their
metaphorical bucket was ready to tip over. Metro Parks conducts extensive biotic surveys with
substantial data on vegetation, insects, and birds, all directly impacted in short periods without
targeted removal.
Mr. Kasnyik noted their difference from municipalities in having commissioned officers, including
himself, though he no longer shoots after 12 years as a sharpshooter. They use their own staff for
every program element, benefiting from their 30-year program history.
Ms. Alutto asked about factors making some deer more aggressive than others. Mr. Comer
identified timing as crucial, explaining that evolutionary protection instincts cause does with fawns
to perceive small dogs as potential timber wolves. Pet owners protecting their animals create
confrontational situations where humans often lose. He noted the difficulty of rationally advising
people to drop leashes and run because they do not want to watch their dogs get harmed.
Mr. Comer described other aggression timing factors including habituated behavior misinterpreted
as aggression from hand-feeding, where deer perceive humans as snack providers. During
breeding season, hormone levels and testosterone in competing males can cause humans to
become collateral damage when caught between fighting bucks. Young, frisky yearling and 2.5-
year-old males who have not mastered breeding behavior pose additional risks, similar to young
bulls in cattle or adolescent male turkeys displaying territorial behavior.
Ms. Goliver added that aggressive behavior can be learned, with fawns born to aggressive mothers
learning to attack dogs and humans. This creates patterns in specific areas where aggressive does
have taught herd animals to be aggressive, resulting in year-after-year aggressive issues at
identifiable addresses.
Mr. Comer confirmed this observation, noting that when responding to aggressive incidents as an
agency, neighbors emerge reporting unreported incidents involving the same problem deer. He
described situations where nearly every neighbor in cul-de-sacs had experienced problems with the
same aggressive deer.
He explained maternal territories where grandmothers, mothers, aunts, and nieces form maternal
groups that split for fawn dropping but return to work together, meaning entire maternal groups
learn aggressive behaviors.
Council Work Session
April 20, 2026
Page 8 of 12
Ms. Alutto expressed fascination with docile deer in her area, describing an incident where her dog
charged a deer that simply stood and moved outside the electric fence boundary, demonstrating
the deer's knowledge of fence limitations. Mr. Hitzhusen confirmed similar observations of deer
understanding traffic patterns and using crosswalks in Worthington.
Ms. Alutto asked about processing deer parts beyond meat donation. Mr. Comer explained
standard byproduct handling similar to livestock. Ground meat is used for donation due to its
versatility as a substitute for beef, turkey, or ground chicken.
Mr. Comer noted that processing represents the largest or close to largest expense in deer removal
programs, though hunter involvement can offset costs since deer become hunter property and
responsibility. He emphasized that food facilities consistently accept venison donations, as red
meat cannot be sourced quickly enough nationally.
Ms. Goliver confirmed that Worthington composted entrails, aligning with sustainability goals. Mr.
Hitzhusen added that Worthington's resource pantry initially accepted limited venison amounts but
requested all available venison after discovering community enthusiasm.
Regarding antlers, Mr. Comer explained his office distributes them to Columbus Zoo and nature
centers for animal enrichment. Permit standards require antler disposal rather than trophy
keeping. Most targeted removal programs surrender antlers to agencies immediately on-site to
prevent accusations of removing trophy deer for personal use or wall mounting.
Ms. Kramb asked about Glacier Ridge Metro Park analysis and sharpshooting activities. Mr. Kasnyik
confirmed active annual operations starting in 2022 after hearing complaint reports from Mr.
Comer, observing deer vehicle collisions with Route 33, noting growing development, and
experiencing increased deer conflicts within the park as public facilities developed.
Mr. Kasnyik provided removal statistics: 54 deer removed in 2022, 43 in 2023 when trends
appeared positive, then 66 in 2024 after tremendous development increases between 2023 and
2024. Large woodlots were completely cleared adjacent to Glacier Ridge, causing displaced deer to
move into the park and increasing problems. They established exclosure fencing in multiple places
with Mr. Karns conducting Ohio State University research, clearly demonstrating differences in
areas where deer were excluded from grazing.
In 2025, they removed only 19 deer, which-Mr. Kasnyik attributed to previous year development
impacts and different winter weather patterns. He predicted 20 to 40 removals for the following
year, noting the difficulty of predicting changes at that location.
Ms. Johnson asked whether Glacier Ridge removal was based on baseline population data and
whether Dublin needed full 25-square-mile drone surveys. Mr. Kasnyik explained that data
snapshots change quickly and dramatically due to weather and development, with numbers over
long periods providing better understanding. He described how clearing 50 acres of prime whitetail
habitat adjacent to the park made previous efforts seem ineffective overnight.
Mr. Kasnyik noted environmental impacts on deer survival, including drought affecting fawn
survival and hard winter conditions with snow affecting population distribution. He explained that
warm-season grasses and prairie grasses at Glacier Ridge lose nutritional value in winter, causing
deer to move into neighborhoods where targeted removal operations could not access them.
Mr. Comer expressed the importance of baseline surveys from a permitting standpoint, explaining
that management plans requiring baseline establishment are absolutely required for targeted
removal permits. Baselines serve as defense mechanisms, even when absolute numbers cannot be
Council Work Session
April 20, 2026
Page 9 of 12
determined, by establishing deer presence. He cited Worthington examples where some residents
claimed seeing only one or two deer, making data essential for factual responses.
Mr. Comer noted that management plan proposals can be based on various factors without secret
formulas. Metro Parks staff have developed art-and-science approaches to recognizing when parks
approach maintenance levels where negative impacts become noticeable. He distinguished
between ecosystem management at metro parks versus urban area management, where over-
harvesting would have greater conflict reduction impact and longer-lasting effects before
populations fill back in.
He described cost variability and annual reporting requirements where agencies must submit
proposals explaining removal numbers and justifications. Metro Parks operates on autopilot due to
experience, while Worthington began conservatively to prove safe and successful program
implementation to their community.
Mr. Comer acknowledged that budget constraints significantly influenced Worthington's initial
numbers, with costs including USDA Wildlife Services contracting and Ohio Penal Institute
processing. While successful from implementation standpoints, biological impacts were minimal,
with community complaints continuing at similar rates and residents questioning program
effectiveness.
He noted placebo effects where legitimate management attempts generate resident appreciation
for effort, similar to rotating street maintenance creating community perception of comprehensive
attention rather than complaints about neglected areas.
Dr. Lam asked follow-up questions about Worthington's 10-year management approach and target
determination methods. Mr. Hitzhusen clarified that the program represents ongoing management
rather than 10-year limitation, continuing until deer numbers are controlled for whatever reason.
He explained that Worthington police coincidentally purchased infrared drones prior to task force
initiation, enabling regular deer surveys using police equipment.
Mr. Comer noted pros and cons of Worthington's survey design based on plow routes,
acknowledging repeatability benefits but questioning biological ideal. He explained that fixed-
altitude street-center flights miss deer hiding behind houses, bushes, and ravines, though
consistent methodologies allow stability assessment over time.
He recommended comprehensive community surveys to identify targeted management areas,
noting that riparian corridors might concentrate entire populations in single square miles affecting
specific neighborhoods, enabling focused management versus citywide approaches.
Vice Mayor De Rosa noted unanimous agreement on drone surveys while mentioning leaf timeline
constraints, asking about expediting data collection processes.
Ms. O'Callaghan suggested using contingencies for time efficiency and expressed comfort
proceeding based on Council feedback, noting the professional services contract approach would
not require specific resolutions while gauging interest in unbudgeted items.
Council members provided individual responses to the four questions presented.
Mr. Keeler supported moving forward based on 59 percent survey support for deer population
management, indicating social issues requiring action. He emphasized that waiting for deer
starvation would be irresponsible, noting that deer represent the most lethal animals to human
populations despite two documented US coyote fatalities. He highlighted protecting native species
as an environmental benefit and supporting food pantries through venison donation while
maintaining healthy deer populations.
Council Work Session
April 20, 2026
Page 10 of 12
Mr. Keeler answered yes to proceeding with lethal management programs while noting that
specific details like ethics statements, communications plans, and deer numbers would emerge
from program development. He calculated that Worthington's size being five times Dublin's
geographic area suggested Dublin could theoretically remove 500 deer, though he recommended
starting with 100-200 and noted Mr. Comer's urban area recommendation for higher rather than lower removal numbers.
He supported beginning this winter if feasible and likely supporting ongoing population monitoring
subject to budget considerations. Ms. O'Callaghan clarified that Worthington's costs excluding
overtime totaled approximately $100,000 rather than the $56,000 figure initially presented.
Dr. Lam supported lethal management programs and CSAC goals, noting aggressive attack
increases from 4 in previous years to 20 in the most recent year. He supported Dark Horizon
baseline surveys while deferring timing feasibility to experts and emphasized hotspot targeting
importance for informed decision-making. He indicated readiness to proceed without additional
questions regarding the basic decision, though noting specific implementation questions about
public-private areas and setback requirements for future discussion.
Ms. Goliver clarified timing considerations for Dark Horizon surveys, explaining the need to
complete surveys before full leaf coverage with approximately one to two weeks available for
baseline data collection before the upcoming winter implementation window.
Ms. Kramb indicated she was not ready to proceed, preferring to address additional questions
before rushing forward. Her primary concern focused on whether drone surveys covered the entire
city or only selected concentration areas. Ms. Goliver explained that the limited drone survey
represented spot checks of locations selected based on dead deer pickups and resident complaints
rather than comprehensive coverage.
Ms. Kramb questioned whether deer concentrations in areas suitable for sharpshooting made the
program relevant, noting that if deer were only accessible on periphery areas like Glacier Ridge,
the program might be ineffective for addressing central city problems. She emphasized that if
sharpshooting could only reach edge deer rather than problematic central areas, the program
would not solve the identified issues.
She supported public education meetings about deer behavior as immediate actionable items and
noted observing coyote predation on deer in her area, wondering about behavioral impacts on
deer skittishness and aggression. Ms. Kramb suggested improved signage for deer crossings and
high deer concentration areas, referencing educational signs in Emerald Fields about coyote
encounters.
Ms, Kramb expressed concern about slippery slope implications of managing deer potentially
leading to expectations for managing other damaging animals like skunks. She emphasized the
need to answer questions about lethal program effectiveness and costs before proceeding,
estimating $700 per deer based on Worthington's experience and projecting significant expenses
for Dublin's potentially higher needs.
Ms. Johnson shifted question order to start with supporting drone surveys within the specified
timeframe to answer targeting questions and provide hotspot data. She expressed initial
skepticism about necessity but found the evening educational and eye-opening regarding
ecosystem impacts and deer welfare. Ms. Johnson supported CSAC goals, winter initiation if
feasible pending outstanding question resolution, and had no additional questions at that time.
Ms. Kramb added emphasis on surveying woodlot vegetation conditions to assess deer impacts on
plant communities. She noted observing browse lines during daily walks but seeing recovering
Council Work Session
April 20, 2026
Page 11 of 12
vegetation and suggested ecological surveys would help determine program support based on
woodlot condition assessments.
Ms. Karns cautioned against woodlot condition assessments without proper controls, explaining
that problems become invisible when missing species are eliminated systemically everywhere. He
noted that expert assessments would likely appear fine without exclosure controls and sufficient
recovery time for native seed bank germination, given humans' limited memory and perspective on
long-term changes. He acknowledged that negative impacts likely increased over the previous 5 to
10 years while noting his survey tabulation of 94 deer over 10 spot counts, reinforcing the
importance of comprehensive drone surveys for future decision-making.
Ms. Alutto expressed appreciation for the educational session and complete support for drone
surveys as appropriate first steps for confident decision-making. She supported CSAC goals as
good community representation and moved from initial skepticism to supporting lethal
management programs based on resident protection needs, ecosystem impacts on plant and
animal species, and ethical considerations framework.
Ms. Alutto noted eye-opening statistics about historical deer populations and appreciated the
ethical discussion approach. While uncertain about winter timing pending drone study data and
additional conversations, she supported general program direction for better protection. She
acknowledged concerns about managing additional animal species but noted that deer differ from
animals like skunks where private exterminators provide individual property solutions.
Vice Mayor De Rosa expressed unanimous drone survey support with leaf timeline urgency,
supporting the program despite personal emotional connections to backyard deer. She noted that
missing the 10-year-ago optimal timing made current action responsible and necessary.
Regarding CSAC goals, Vice Mayor De Rosa suggested elevating them to broader categories
including safety, environmental, and ethical goals with specific items as subcategories to improve
communication effectiveness. She supported winter implementation if properly executed and
requested additional information from experts and communication guidance based on
Worthington's lessons learned.
Mr. Hitzhusen provided additional clarification about Dublin's higher aggressive deer complaint
numbers compared to Worthington, noting Dublin's 30-40-50 aggressive deer complaints
represented significantly more than Worthington experienced. He suggested this issue particularly
needed management in Dublin due to learned aggressive behavior being taught to offspring,
creating multiple generations of problematic deer.
Ms. Johnson corrected previous information about Worthington private landowner participation,
clarifying that approximately 100 homeowners volunteered participation with about 50 percent
ultimately utilized during operations, demonstrating substantial community support for the effort.
The session concluded with expressions of appreciation from Council members after thanking all
participants for their time and expertise in addressing the complex deer management issue facing
Dublin.
There being no further business for discussion, the meeting was adjourned at 8:01 p.m.
Council Work Session April 20, 2026
I \ | WU
Presiding Officer — Vice Mayor
Clerk of Coypcil
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
1
APRIL 30, 2026
DEER POPULATION REPORT
CITY OF DUBLIN
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
Dark Horizon Drones
PILOTS - COLE CHAPMAN & DALE MANNASMITH DEER POPULATION REPORT
Dark Horizon Drones conducted a deer population index survey from April 24-27, 2026 across all of the
city limits of Dublin, OH. Two pilots operated enterprise-grade commercial thermal drones, allowing the
team to divide and systematically survey the entire city limits. This coordinated approach ensured that
survey boundaries were clearly defined and that no overlap in deer counts occurred, maintaining the
integrity, safety, and accuracy of the data collected.
Both Cole Chapman and Dale Mannasmith were present on site as FAA Part 107 certified remote pilots,
operating with all required licenses and authorizations. Several areas were located within restricted
airspace, and in those instances the appropriate FAA flight authorizations were obtained prior to
conducting operations.
In total, Dark Horizon Drones covered just over 16,000 total acres of designated city property. None of
the data collected was outside city limits.
Based on the methods used and the conditions during the flights, Dark Horizon Drones has high
confidence in the accuracy of the deer counts recorded during these surveys. The data represents a
reliable snapshot of deer presence at the specific time and locations surveyed. Survey operations
prioritized efficiency, systematic coverage, and counting accuracy. Flights were conducted in cool, wet,
overcast, and night time conditions which are ideal for maximizing thermal imaging performance and
improving wildlife detection.
1
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
2
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
(Flight Path Example - April 27, 2026)
Deer locations were recorded with GIS pins. (Blue Diamonds) Airspace Geo Zones (Shaded Orange.)
( Pilot View Below)
Thermal Imaging of Deer (Bright White) Blue Diamonds (GIS Pin)
3
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
SURVEY AREA SEGMENTATION
To organize the survey effectively, the City of Dublin was divided into four regions based on the City
Council ward structure. Each ward will be explored in greater detail in subsequent sections of this
report. The map below provides a visual representation of these four shaded regions. Following a
comprehensive audit of the data, all GIS pin locations were verified and accounted for, confirming the
integrity of the dataset with no instances of duplicate counting.
4
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
Ward 1 Cluster Map
5
Deer Clusters Ward 1
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
Ward 1 Deer Survey Data
Total Deer : 204
Avg per cluster : 4.25
6
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
Ward 2 Cluster Map
7
Deer Clusters Ward 2
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
Ward 2 Survey Data
Total Deer : 95
Avg Per Cluster : 3.95
8
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
Ward 3 Cluster Map
9
Deer Clusters Ward 3
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
Ward 3 Survey Data
Total Deer : 123
Avg Per Cluster : 4.55
10
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
Ward 4 Cluster Map
11
Deer Clusters Ward 4
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
Ward 4 Survey Data
Total Deer : 106
Avg Per Cluster : 4.60
12
2026 SPRING DEER REPORT
City of Dublin Deer Population Survey
Summary
Survey Overview
A comprehensive aerial survey was conducted across approximately 16,220 acres within the
City of Dublin to assess deer presence and distribution. The survey utilized systematic coverage
of the study area to ensure consistent observation conditions and accurate data collection.
Findings
A total of 528 deer were identified during the survey. Observations were concentrated across
Four distinct locations, indicating a clustered distribution pattern rather than uniform
dispersion throughout the city.
Spatial Distribution
Deer activity was not heavily concentrated within any single ward or specific area. While Ward
1 recorded the highest total with 204 deer observed, the remaining three wards showed
relatively similar distribution levels. Overall, deer presence was consistently dispersed
throughout the city, with the highest concentrations occurring within wooded habitats and
natural cover areas. These areas provide a combination of open space, vegetation, and reduced
disturbance, making them ideal environments for deer habitat.
Interpretation
Survey results indicate a high deer density relative to typical suburban thresholds, suggesting
the population may exceed the area’s ecological carrying capacity. Elevated densities can lead
to vegetation damage, increased human-deer interactions, and higher risk of vehicle collisions.
These findings support consideration of population management strategies to maintain
ecological balance and reduce community impact.
Conclusion
This survey provides a clear snapshot of deer presence within the City of Dublin, highlighting
both total population observed and areas of higher concentration. These findings can support
future wildlife management decisions, targeted monitoring efforts, and resource allocation
within the city.
13