Letters to the Editor

I’m writing in response to the guest column by Ralph Disibio that appeared in the AUg. 29 edition of the Aiken Standard. Rarely have I seen such an overabundance of hubris as was on display in Mr. Disibio’s column.

Mr. Disibio suggests that Woodside’s request to cull the herd is because the residents consider the deer a nuisance – according to him “sometimes seen” in the area and “at times” feeding on plantings with “few reported incidents of vehicular collisions or other significant disruptions.” This is a gross misrepresentation of the extent of the problem. He also conveniently omitted the fact that Woodside engaged Folk Land Management, an organization with significant expertise and experience in doing deer counts, to conduct a count to determine if we even had an overpopulation problem. Based on that count, the SCDNR recommended we cull the herd, not only for the health of the herd itself, but also for the health of other wildlife in the community.

As for the community vote on culling the herd, Mr. Disibio claims that the Property Owner's Association conducted the most recent vote because an earlier vote failed to garner a majority. What he neglected to mention was that the earlier vote was conducted over three years ago when the problem was far less severe. He suggests further impropriety on the part of the Woodside POA, stating that they “declared” that an overwhelming majority voted for the cull. The fact is that 64% of the residents voted for the deer cull. Unless there’s been some recent secret change to how one does math, 64% is an overwhelming majority. Just ask any politician who wins an election by that margin.

One might expect that a person of Mr. Disibio’s credentials would spend a bit more time learning the facts of the case and a bit less time twisting those facts to suit his agenda.

Ava Eakin Powell

Aiken