Would New Yorkers Support Reducing Deer to Reduce Lyme Disease?

More than 70% supported deer reduction under certain conditions
Reducing Lyme disease was one reason
But reducing deer may not always reduce Lyme risk

Would New Yorkers support reducing deer populations if doing so could reduce Lyme disease? A 2025 survey suggests that many would.

Blossey and colleagues surveyed 1,206 adults across New York State about deer management. More than 70% accepted reducing deer populations using lethal methods if doing so would reduce Lyme disease, improve forest regeneration, protect native plants and animals, or improve road safety.¹

But the study answers a question about public opinion, not whether reducing deer actually prevents Lyme disease.

That distinction matters because the relationship between deer, blacklegged ticks, and Lyme disease is more complicated than the name “deer tick” suggests.

What Did the New York Deer Survey Find?

The researchers used an online questionnaire to examine attitudes toward deer management among a stratified sample of New York State residents.¹

Participants were asked whether shooting more deer would be acceptable if deer reduction produced specific benefits.

Researchers found widespread acceptance when deer reduction was linked to outcomes such as:

• reducing Lyme disease
• improving human health
• increasing forest regeneration
• protecting native plants and animals
• improving road safety

Overall, more than 70% of respondents accepted lethal deer reduction when it was associated with these types of human-health and environmental benefits.¹

Urban and Rural New Yorkers Were Surprisingly Similar

One of the more interesting findings was what researchers did not find.

Preferences for deer management did not differ significantly between urban and rural respondents.¹

This challenges the assumption that people living in cities and people living in rural areas necessarily hold very different views about managing deer populations.

Acceptance was stronger among older respondents, hunters, conservationists, people who owned more land, and those who considered health and safety particularly relevant when answering the survey. Respondents who identified as animal protectionists were less accepting of lethal deer reduction.¹

How the Question Was Asked Matters

The results also illustrate how attitudes toward wildlife management can depend on how the issue is framed.

The researchers did not simply ask participants whether there should be fewer deer. Instead, they asked whether reducing deer would be acceptable if it produced particular ecological, health, safety, or economic outcomes.¹

This is important when interpreting the finding that more than 70% accepted deer reduction under certain conditions.

The survey demonstrates broad willingness to consider deer reduction if meaningful benefits would result. It does not necessarily mean that more than 70% of New Yorkers favor reducing deer populations under all circumstances.

Why Are Deer Connected to Lyme Disease?

White-tailed deer are important hosts for adult blacklegged ticks, Ixodes scapularis. Adult female ticks commonly feed on deer before reproducing.

However, deer are not considered important reservoir hosts for Borrelia burgdorferi, the bacterium that causes Lyme disease. Small mammals, including white-footed mice, are much more important sources from which immature ticks acquire the Lyme disease bacterium.^2,3

This creates an important distinction:

Deer can help support populations of blacklegged ticks without being the primary animals infecting those ticks with Lyme disease bacteria.

This is why the relationship between deer abundance and human Lyme disease risk is not straightforward.

Does Reducing Deer Reduce Lyme Disease?

Sometimes—but the evidence is mixed.

Studies in certain geographically isolated locations have found substantial reductions in tick abundance after deer populations were reduced to very low levels. A Connecticut community study also reported large declines in tick abundance and resident-reported Lyme disease as deer density fell substantially.²

However, those findings have not been consistently reproduced across different ecological settings.

A review by Kugeler and colleagues concluded that eliminating or nearly eliminating deer in islands and other isolated settings can substantially affect blacklegged-tick reproduction, while less-extreme deer reductions have produced mixed results.³

The authors concluded that evidence was insufficient to recommend deer population reduction as a general Lyme disease prevention strategy except under specific ecological circumstances.³

Ticks Can Shift to Other Animals

Another study illustrates why simply reducing deer may not be enough.

Williams and colleagues evaluated several tick-control approaches in four residential neighborhoods in Connecticut. Deer reduction alone produced only a small reduction in juvenile ticks feeding on white-footed mice.⁴

The researchers suggested that when fewer deer were available, ticks could obtain blood meals from other available hosts. Interventions that also targeted ticks associated with rodents produced substantially greater reductions in their measured tick outcome.⁴

This supports a broader principle in Lyme disease prevention: the transmission cycle involves multiple wildlife hosts, the tick itself, the environment, and human exposure.

Deer Reduction Is Not the Same as Lyme Prevention

The 2025 New York survey should therefore not be interpreted as evidence that shooting more deer will necessarily prevent Lyme disease.

The researchers measured whether people would accept deer reduction if it produced outcomes such as reducing Lyme disease. They did not reduce deer populations, measure ticks afterward, or track human Lyme disease cases.¹

Those are separate scientific questions.

Communities considering deer management may have several goals at the same time, including reducing vehicle collisions, limiting damage to forests and gardens, protecting native vegetation, and potentially affecting tick populations.

Whether a particular deer-management program will reduce human Lyme disease risk depends on the local ecology, the degree of deer reduction, movement of wildlife, alternative tick hosts, and other factors.

What Does This Mean for Lyme Disease Prevention?

The study provides an interesting window into the public-health side of Lyme disease prevention.

Community interventions often require public participation and acceptance. Even an intervention that appears biologically promising may be difficult to implement if residents strongly oppose it.

The New York survey suggests that people may be more willing to consider deer management when they understand the potential human-health, ecological, and safety outcomes involved.¹

At the same time, expectations should remain realistic. Deer management should not replace personal Lyme disease prevention measures such as repellents, protective clothing, tick checks, prompt tick removal, yard management, and awareness of early Lyme disease symptoms.

Clinical Takeaway

A 2025 survey found that more than 70% of New York State respondents accepted reducing deer populations by lethal means if doing so would reduce Lyme disease or provide several other health, environmental, and safety benefits.¹

The study measured public acceptance—not whether deer reduction actually prevents Lyme disease.

Deer are important hosts for adult blacklegged ticks, but they are not the principal reservoir for Borrelia burgdorferi. Research on deer reduction has produced different results depending on the setting and the extent of population reduction.

Reducing Lyme disease risk therefore requires a broader view of tick ecology rather than assuming that fewer deer will automatically mean fewer cases of Lyme disease.

Frequently Asked Questions

Do New Yorkers support reducing deer to reduce Lyme disease?

A 2025 survey found greater than 70% acceptance for reducing deer populations using lethal means if doing so would reduce Lyme disease or provide several other environmental and safety benefits.

Does reducing the deer population prevent Lyme disease?

Not necessarily. Very large deer reductions have lowered tick abundance in some isolated settings, but results have been mixed in other communities. The effectiveness depends on local ecology and the magnitude of deer reduction.

Do deer give ticks Lyme disease?

Deer are not considered important reservoirs for Borrelia burgdorferi. Small mammals such as white-footed mice are much more important sources of infection for immature blacklegged ticks.

Why are deer important if they do not spread the Lyme bacteria efficiently?

Adult blacklegged ticks commonly feed on white-tailed deer. Deer therefore provide important blood meals that help support tick reproduction even though they are not major reservoirs for the Lyme disease bacterium.

Can Lyme disease be prevented by controlling wildlife alone?

No single wildlife intervention eliminates Lyme disease risk. Prevention may include personal protection, tick checks, landscape management, community tick-control approaches, and prompt recognition of tick bites and early symptoms.

Related Articles

• Can Deer Get Lyme Disease? The Truth About Deer, Ticks, and Lyme Disease
• Ticks Do Not Respect Property Lines: Is Community Prevention the Missing Piece?
• How to Tick-Proof Your Yard and Prevent Lyme Disease
• Lyme Disease Prevention: What Works and What Doesn’t

References

1. Blossey B, Brice E, Dalaba J, Hare D. Perspectives of New York State residents on deer management, hunting, and predator reintroduction. Scientific Reports. 2025;15:6123. doi:10.1038/s41598-025-90600-4. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39971768/
2. Kilpatrick HJ, LaBonte AM, Stafford KC III. The relationship between deer density, tick abundance, and human cases of Lyme disease in a residential community. Journal of Medical Entomology. 2014;51(4):777-784. doi:10.1603/ME13232. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25118409/
3. Kugeler KJ, Jordan RA, Schulze TL, Griffith KS, Mead PS. Will culling white-tailed deer prevent Lyme disease? Zoonoses and Public Health. 2016;63(5):337-345. doi:10.1111/zph.12245. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26684932/
4. Williams SC, Little EAH, Stafford KC III, Molaei G, Linske MA. Integrated control of juvenile Ixodes scapularis parasitizing Peromyscus leucopus in residential settings in Connecticut, United States. Ticks and Tick-borne Diseases. 2018;9(5):1310-1316. doi:10.1016/j.ttbdis.2018.05.014. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29859885/

This article is for educational purposes and is not a substitute for individual medical advice.

Dr. Daniel Cameron, MD, MPH
Lyme disease clinician with over 30 years of experience and past president of ILADS.

Symptoms • Testing • Coinfections • Recovery • Pediatric • Prevention