In response to Ruth Ann Dailey's column on deer ("Why not let property owners decide what to do about deer?" Nov. 6): Killing deer has only a temporary effect on deer populations.

The stress of a population crash causes more multiple births -- triplets and twins. The crash also stimulates breeding, causing more does to come into estrous, sometimes to the point that fawns breed in their first year.

In addition, Mother Nature plays the survival mechanism ace up her sleeve, which causes more female offspring to be conceived when a species is threatened with heavy losses.

State wildlife agencies take advantage of this phenomenon and manage deer herds for "maximum sustained yield" to encourage more people to hunt and to buy hunting licences.

And that's why we have a deer population large enough to interfere with the interests of farmers, motorists and some householders.

BINA ROBINSON

Swain, N.Y.

Editor's note: The writer is the owner and operator of the 500-acre Civitas Wildlife Sanctuary in western New York.

Ruth Ann Dailey's column on deer ("Why not let property owners decide what to do about deer?" Nov. 6) was not humorous, and her lack of compassion is striking. More importantly, she does not know what she is talking about.

If she had consulted objective sources, she would have learned that killing deer by culling or by hunting does not decrease deer numbers because of "compensatory rebound" -- the deer herd is initially reduced, leaving more food for the remaining deer, which, in turn, leads to increased reproduction.

Studies show annual killing does not keep the remaining deer out of gardens, does not reduce Lyme disease and does not decrease deer/vehicle collisions. The inevitable conclusion: Killing does not solve any problem.

Furthermore, most deer shot with guns are wounded and die later. Read any hunting book for this information. Deer hunted with bows and arrows suffer even greater wounding rates. The inevitable conclusion: Hunting is not humane.

Contraception for deer is effective, relatively cheap and presents no danger to people, even if they eat a treated deer.

By the way, the flesh of deer killed with lead bullets may be dangerous, particularly to pregnant women and young children, due to lead contamination. The flesh of deer killed by arrows is also contaminated because the arrow clips hairs and contaminates the flesh.

PRISCILLA COHN

Villanova, Pa.

Editor's note: The writer is a professor emeritus of philosophy and ethics at Penn State's Abington College and president and director of PNC Inc., a nonprofit animal rights group.

I'm responding to Ruth Ann Dailey's column ("Why not let property owners decide what to do about deer?" Nov. 6). I agree with one thing that Ms. Dailey said: "Some things never change." Every year, Ms. Dailey writes a deer-demonizing article encouraging hunting and the use of lethal weapons in our suburban neighborhoods, which threatens the safety of our families, children and companion animals. I wanted to respond to some uninformed points that Ms. Dailey makes:

• If the deer killing programs in Upper St. Clair or Mt. Lebanon were successful, they wouldn't have to be implemented on an annual basis. Hunting actually increases reproductive growth.

• The U.S. Department of Agriculture Wildlife Services is trying to increase revenues and has an inherent conflict of interest when doing surveys and giving recommendations.

• I don't believe deer meat is safe to give to food banks. It's not inspected, and recent studies have found lead contamination from bullets.

• Ms. Dailey thinks it's a good thing that Mt. Lebanon residents aren't notified when shooting will take place in their parks and their neighbor's back yards. This is an accident waiting to happen.

• The Pennsylvania Game Commission spends millions each year to increase the deer population for its hunter constituents. That's why more deer are migrating into the suburbs and why more deer/auto collisions are occurring.

The most effective way for homeowners to protect their gardens is to make them less attractive to deer. Killing some deer doesn't stop the remaining deer from eating the same flowers. Killing deer is not a solution.

Property owners should not have the right to override established safety buffer zones and use lethal weapons on their property because it threatens the safety and welfare of their neighbors and community.

GEORGE NAGLE

Green Tree