I think it is hard to know before the appearance of people who might count, but the loss of the forest means that the deer are browsing suburban areas more and

I think it is hard to know before the appearance of people who might count, but the loss of the forest means that the deer are browsing suburban areas more and the ticks are becoming more prevalent. Clearly there are no longer any wolves or cougars in the Northeast and that affects predation. I'm not sure the counterfactual is really relevant. I'm just saying Lyme is the poster child for this kind of problem. My preference would be for more risk from wolves and more diverse ecology, with less suburbia and more forest. If your preference is for whatever causes the least number of deaths then you're going to have to also integrate driving, pollution, carcinogens, etc., into your model.