The Blue Hills Deer Hunt and Bowhunting

Blue Hills Deer Hunt 2024

Archery: The Blue Hills Deer Management Permitted Archery Hunt will take place Monday through Thursdays only from November 3 through November 26, 2025. There will be no hunting on Thursday, November 27, 2025 in observance of the Thanksgiving holiday. The application process, as well as the orientation for hunters will be virtual. Please review all information carefully whereas there may be differences form previous year hunts.

Shotgun: As since 2020, there is no shotgun season.

History

In September 2015, the state announced public hearings on a proposed deer hunt in the Blue Hills, an area that, prior to 2015, had not permitted hunting for 100 years. Despite the majority of the public’s comments either opposing the hunt or expressing serious concerns, the state announced on October 14 that the hunt would take place. Shortly after, the hunt began in November. Over a period of 4 days of shotgun hunting, 64 deer were killed. In 2016, 58 deer were killed—6 fewer than in 2015—despite the fact that more hunters participated, an additional 700 acres was opened for hunting, and bow hunting was also allowed (in addition to shotgun hunting). Across 2015 and 2016, nearly $300,000 in state and local money was spent on the hunt, translating to a cost of at least $2,200 per deer.

In 2017, the hunt was expanded by adding 11 days of bow hunting, bringing the total number of hunting days up from 4 to 15. An additional 450 acres of land were also opened to hunting. Despite the increased hunt duration and increased land available, just 67 deer were killed—3 more than the previous record. State and local agencies once again spent thousands of dollars on the hunt, with no significant decrease in the purported deer population to show for it.

In 2018, an additional 180 acres of land were opened up and 25 hunters added to the hunt; the hunt remained 15 days long. 72 deer were killed—just 5 more than the previous year.

In 2018, Governor Baker proposed an Environmental Bond Bill (H. 4318) aimed at increasing climate change resilience, environmental protection, and community investments. At a hearing on the bill, however, legislators questioned the head of the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, Secretary Beaton, about unused funds from the original 2014 Environmental Bond Bill, asking why funding that was nominally intended for climate-hazard remediation projects went unspent, while projects promoting hunting interests, including the Blue Hills hunt, were prioritized and executed.

In 2019 and 2020, there were 13 and 11 hunt days, respectively. The amount of acreage was dropped, as was the number of hunters; the number of deer killed decreased as well (25 and 19 respectively). In 2021, 2022 and 2023, the amount of land open to hunting remained the same (2,622 acres), as did the number of hunt days (11 days). In 2021, 193 permits were issued and in 2022 the number was 221. We do not yet know how many were issued in 2023.

In the 2019-2020 legislative session, Representative Bill Driscoll introduced H. 757, An Act to study the health of the Blue Hills Forest and ecology to inform long-term reservation management. This bill passed the legislature in a modified form as part of the 2019 budget and was signed into law by the Governor; see Chapter 84, An Act Relative to the Environmental Health of the Blue Hills Reservation. In its original form, the bill required both a study of the Blue Hills’ forest health as well as a moratorium on hunting while the study was being conducted; however, the moratorium was removed by the Governor. Thus, the law as is requires the University of Massachusetts to select an independent scientific organization to conduct a study and survey of the environmental health of the Blue Hills Reservation and does not require a moratorium on hunting while the study is conducted.

Blue Hills Hunt Statistics:

Managing deer populations

Wildlife culls are not a solution to address deer population concerns.

Culling is not a viable solution for reducing deer numbers. The deer reproductive strategy is prolific and quickly compensates for population declines. If there is less competition for existing food sources, does will bear more offspring that same year. Thus, culling merely recreates and even exacerbates the very problem it purports to solve: hunting results in more deer being born, which then necessitates increased hunting, which in turn leads to still more deer.

Bow hunting does not offer a humane solution.

Dozens of studies show that bow hunting causes an unacceptably high “crippling rate”—close to 50%^[1]—among deer. When deer are struck by an arrow and are wounded but not killed, they tend to flee, often leaving the area where they were hunted. Part of the “sport” of bow and arrow hunting involves following a blood trail to track the wounded animal. Wounded deer may flee onto private property abutting the Blue Hills, so hunters may be forced to trespass to put the animal out of its misery. Alternatively, some hunters may abandon their tracking efforts at a property line and leave the animal to die slowly from its wounds. These abandoned deer endure prolonged suffering, and passersby, hikers, and others are subject to viewing the remains of the animal when it finally succumbs to its injuries.

Hunting does not reduce Lyme disease.

The pervasive but incorrect common name “deer tick” suggests a correlation between deer and tick-borne Lyme disease, and has led communities to increase deer hunting in a futile attempt to reduce the threat of Lyme disease. In fact, the science is conclusive that there is no correlation between deer population and tick prevalence.^[2] Ticks do not require a specific host and can thrive by feeding on mice and other small animals. When deer numbers are reduced, ticks simply find other hosts, some of which can actually more efficiently transmit bacterial infection, increase the risk to human of contracting Lyme disease. To effectively reduce the number of Lyme disease cases, the number of disease-carrying ticks must be reduced, not the number of deer. (Learn more about Lyme disease and deer and, for a deeper dive, check out the book Lyme Disease – The Ecology of a Complex System.)

What can I do?

1. Contact your state legislators to express opposition to the hunt, the questionable data on the deer population, and the lack of serious attention to alternatives.
2. If you live in the areas surrounding the Blue Hills — Milton, Canton, Quincy, Braintree, Randolph, and Dedham residents — contact both your local lawmakers (click on your town’s hyperlink to learn who your town officials are) and your state legislators.

Additional Information:

• “The Argument: Should the state permanently end the annual deer hunt at the Blue Hills Reservation?” State Representative Bill Driscoll, Jr. The Boston Globe. August 5, 2021. [PDF]
• “Now in its 3rd year, Blue Hills deer hunt still faces opposition.” Fred Hanson. Aug. 23, 2017. The Patriot Ledger. 
• “Stop the Blue Hills deer hunts.” Philip W. Johnston and Laura Hagen. November 30, 2016. The Boston Globe. [PDF]
• “Deer and taxpayers back in the crosshairs with Blue Hills hunt.” Laura Hagen. July 8, 2016. The Patriot Ledger. 
• Comments on the 2015 and 2016 hunt from the MSPCA, Animal Rescue League of Boston, and HSUS
• Learn more about DCR’s Blue Hills Deer Management Program.