While ticks are certainly on the rise in our region (“Oh deer, ‘Ticks are winning,’” Recorder, May 27), Gov. Maura Healey’s proposals to weaken Massachusetts hunting laws by allowing Sunday hunting, expanding crossbow hunting, and reducing the distance from homes and roads at which weapons can be fired will not solve the tick problem. To see this, all we have to do is look at the very same Northeastern states that proponents of these changes cite as role models in making these changes.

Almost every other state in the region has a worse deer problem than Massachusetts, which, in 2025, had a statewide average of 12.2 deer per square mile. In Vermont, it was 14.4; in Rhode Island, it was 17.4; in Connecticut, it was 20.9; in New York, it was 25.4; and in Pennsylvania, it was 33.5. Only New Hampshire (11.2) and Maine (9.6) had lower deer density rates than Massachusetts — and Maine is the other Northeastern state that also prohibits hunting on Sundays.

If these measures really did suppress deer populations, we would see lower deer density rates in the states that have adopted these measures. We don’t. Instead, almost all these states have deer problems worse than ours. Sunday hunting, crossbow hunting, and reduced weapon-firing setbacks do not reduce deer populations.

Similarly, as the article noted, proponents of these changes to our hunting laws assert that they would reduce the distribution of ticks and thus Lyme and other diseases spread by ticks. Again, if these changes would reduce the spread of ticks as claimed, we would see that reflected in a comparison with the other Northeast states that have implemented such changes. And again, we do not.

In 2025, the rate of Lyme cases per capita in Massachusetts was 0.0013. This puts us in the middle of the pack for our region: Maine (0.0021), Vermont (0.0022), Rhode Island (0.0026), and Pennsylvania (0.0127) are doing worse than us, with New Hampshire (0.0011), New York (0.0011), and Connecticut (0.0009) faring only slightly better. Sunday hunting, crossbow hunting, and reduced weapon-firing setbacks do not reduce the spread of ticks and tick-borne disease.

Deer overpopulation is inarguably an ecological and agricultural crisis, particularly in the eastern part of Massachusetts, but for over 40 years repeated peer-reviewed, scientific studies have shown that recreational hunting does not sustainably reduce deer populations. Indeed, many studies have shown it has the opposite effect, leading to long-term growth in deer populations due to lack of resource competition.

Likewise, the spread of ticks and Lyme, as well as other tick-borne diseases, is undeniably a major public health crisis. But weakening our hunting laws, making our forests, fields, and yards less safe, adopting measures that will encourage increased trespassing and expand the number of weapons in our rural communities, and sacrificing our position as far-and-away the state with the strongest hunting safety record will not solve our tick problem.

The governor and our legislators should be making these kinds of important policy decisions based on evidence, not selective and skewed data that puts the privileges enjoyed by the few above the safety and well-being of the many.

Matteo Pangallo lives in Shutesbury.