Saving Catalina’s Deer: Why the Conservancy’s New Eradication Plan Must Be Stopped

In the sun-drenched hills of Santa Catalina Island, a controversial shadow looms once again over the island’s iconic mule deer population. Just months after scrapping a widely condemned helicopter-based culling plan, the Catalina Island Conservancy has unveiled a revised proposal: ground-based sharpshooting to eradicate up to 1,500 non-native mule deer. Proponents argue it’s essential for ecosystem restoration, but this “kinder” approach is anything but. It’s a drastic, inhumane overreach that ignores scientific nuance, local expertise, and the will of the community. As Los Angeles County officials rally against it, it’s time to demand better solutions for Catalina’s wildlife.

Gone are the helicopters that sparked outrage for their cruelty and inefficiency, but the end goal remains the same: total elimination of a species that’s roamed Catalina for over a century. Deer, introduced in the early 1900s, have indeed altered native vegetation through browsing and trampling. Yet, painting them as ecological villains overlooks the island’s complex history of human impacts—from invasive plants to overgrazing by other species long before the deer arrived.

The Conservancy’s plan, submitted to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for approval, calls for professional hunters to roam the island’s rugged terrain, picking off deer one by one over several years. The very term Professional Hunters is an anathema to what a true hunter as a conservationist is. Hunters go through training to be able to humanely remove a animal from the landscape through a program ran by the California Department of Fish & Wildlife. Hunters who do not use the meat from the animal are guilty of Wanton Waste in the California Fish & Game Code (4304). The conservancy plans to just dispose of hundreds of deer through the use of a Scientific Collection Permit (SCP) that is designed for scientific research, education or propagation activities not for eradication. The SCP is to ensure that the activities are conducted in a manner that does not threaten the survival of the species or harm the environment. The Mule Deer on Catalina can be considered as a candidate for a subspecies and thus their eradication would be in violation under this permit.

This isn’t just about ecology; it’s about ethics and evidence. Los Angeles County Supervisor Janice Hahn, whose district encompasses Catalina, has been a fierce voice against the slaughter from the start. In a pointed letter to state wildlife officials dated October 6, Hahn decried the plan as “drastic and inhumane,” urging its outright rejection. “The Catalina Island Conservancy’s proposal to eliminate the island’s mule deer population is not only cruel but also unnecessary,” she wrote, emphasizing that alternative management strategies— “Options like expanded hunting seasons, relocation, or sterilization have not been fully pursued, and I believe those deserve real investment and consideration.”

Hahn’s stance echoes a unanimous April 2024 vote by the L.A. County Board of Supervisors opposing the original plan, a decision that forced the Conservancy to pause and pivot. Her leadership has galvanized residents, hunters, and animal welfare advocates who see the deer as integral to the island’s charm and tourism economy.

Compounding the opposition is a damning critique from an unlikely source: L.A. County Fire Chief Anthony Marrone. With a fire station on Catalina, Marrone knows the island’s blaze-prone landscape intimately. In a statement to Hahn’s office, he directly challenged one of the Conservancy’s key justifications—that deer exacerbate wildfire risks by promoting dry grass growth. “I believe mule deer do not pose a fire hazard,” Marrone asserted, calling out the claim as a falsehood unsupported by data from his department’s operations. His words cut through the Conservancy’s narrative, highlighting how fearmongering about fires—especially amid California’s escalating climate crisis—distracts from real threats like drought, invasive grasses, and inadequate fuel management.

Marrone’s intervention is particularly poignant given Catalina’s fire history. The island has endured devastating blazes, including the 2007 fire that scorched thousands of acres. Yet, years of firefighting records show no correlation between deer presence and increased ignition or spread risks. Instead, experts point to factors like eucalyptus trees and cheatgrass—both human-introduced—as far greater culprits. By debunking this myth, Marrone underscores a broader truth: Eradication won’t “save” the island from fires; collaborative, science-based restoration will.

The Conservancy insists the plan is humane, with trained marksmen aiming for quick kills. But ground shooting introduces its own horrors: wounded animals fleeing into the brush, orphaned fawns, and the psychological toll on shooters and witnesses. Non-target species, from endangered island foxes to birds, face collateral risks in the crossfire. And for what? Studies from similar efforts on other islands, like New Zealand’s rat eradications, show mixed results at best, often requiring ongoing interventions that cost millions.

Public backlash has been swift. A Diverse coalition of Hunters’ groups, including the California chapter of Safari Club International, California Deer Association, California Bowman Hunters and the California Rifle & Pistol Association have submitted comments to state regulators opposing the cull, arguing it squanders opportunities for sustainable hunting. Animal rights organizations like In Defense of Animals hail Hahn’s efforts as a model for compassionate conservation. Even locals, who coexist with the deer daily, decry the plan as tone-deaf to the island’s identity—where spotting a buck at dusk is as much a rite of passage as the ferry ride from Long Beach.

As the Department of Fish and Wildlife reviews the proposal, the clock is ticking. Hahn has called for a hold on any action until alternatives are fully vetted, a plea Marrone’s expertise bolsters. It’s a moment for reason over radicalism: Invest in controlled hunting that brings in funding in the hundreds of thousands of dollars per year according to the leadership of Wildlife West the former hunting concession on the island, immune-contraceptives, habitat restoration, and community-led monitoring. Catalina’s deer aren’t invaders; they’re part of the island’s story. Exterminating them won’t rewrite a healthier future—it’ll just leave blood on the chaparral.

The Conservancy has a chance to pivot toward partnership, not annihilation. Will they listen to Hahn, Marrone, and the voices of reason? Or will Catalina become a cautionary tale of conservation gone wrong? The deer—and the island’s soul—hang in the balance.