On April 2, 2013, Lyons Press will release DEERLAND: America’s Hunt for Ecological Balance and the Essence of Wildness.
The U.S. is now home to 30 million hungry deer—100 times more than were here a century ago. When we see all those deer out in the woods, most of us believe it’s a measure of the forest’s health. It is, but in exactly the opposite way we think. All across America, overabundant deer routinely devastate ecosystems and alter entire landscapes. DEERLAND traces the story of how we got here and asks tough questions about what it will take to restore the balance we’ve disrupted.
The author also asked tough questions about the rapidly changing gear, tactics, and values of today’s hunters—and about what role those hunters will continue to play in 21st Century America. And when it comes to deer, are hunters part of the solution, part of the problem, or both? Rest assured, however, that DEERLAND isn’t just about hunting. It’s a much larger environmental and cultural story. (To learn more, you can visit the author's website at www.alcambronne.com)
Whether you’re a hunter, a gardener, or a birder, and whether you care about the environment, the deer in your back yard, or the shrubbery they just ate, DEERLAND is an eye-opening read that will change forever the way you think about deer and the landscape we share with them.
Pre-order a copy at Amazon
Showing posts with label research. Show all posts
Showing posts with label research. Show all posts
Monday, March 04, 2013
Thursday, August 23, 2012
RESEARCH NEWS: Another Recent Study Questions Deer-Lyme Link
A recent study has been published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, questioning the link between deer and Lyme disease. It is not the first study to do so, and in fact my view on the connections between deer and Lyme (such as they are) are a minority viewpoint within the field. Moreover, I do not conduct disease research, so my opinion should not be regarded as "expert opinion" on the topic.
Deer, predators, and the emergence of Lyme disease
Lyme disease is the most prevalent vector-borne disease in North America, and both the annual incidence and geographic range are increasing. The emergence of Lyme disease has been attributed to a century-long recovery of deer, an important reproductive host for adult ticks. However, a growing body of evidence suggests that Lyme disease risk may now be more dynamically linked to fluctuations in the abundance of small-mammal hosts that are thought to infect the majority of ticks. The continuing and rapid increase in Lyme disease over the past two decades, long after the recolonization of deer, suggests that other factors, including changes in the ecology of small-mammal hosts may be responsible for the continuing emergence of Lyme disease. We present a theoretical model that illustrates how reductions in small-mammal predators can sharply increase Lyme disease risk. We then show that increases in Lyme disease in the northeastern and midwestern United States over the past three decades are frequently uncorrelated with deer abundance and instead coincide with a range-wide decline of a key small-mammal predator, the red fox, likely due to expansion of coyote populations. Further, across four states we find poor spatial correlation between deer abundance and Lyme disease incidence, but coyote abundance and fox rarity effectively predict the spatial distribution of Lyme disease in New York. These results suggest that changes in predator communities may have cascading impacts that facilitate the emergence of zoonotic diseases, the vast majority of which rely on hosts that occupy low trophic levels.Link to study here
Monday, May 21, 2012
RESEARCH NEWS: Artificial Insemination With Trophy Buck Sperm
Researchers at LSU are trying to breed a trophy buck.
For the first time, Louisiana researchers say they have impregnated six female deer with sperm harvested from an already-dead champion buck – this one shot some 600 miles away in Illinois. Louisiana State University AgCenter scientists say that the new process could be the key to preserving the eons-old genetic material of a variety of animals actively hunted in the wild – animals that would otherwise be lost.Trophy bucks--male deer with large multi-spiked antlers--reflect four factors: genetics, environment (including diet), a genetic by environment interaction, and age. It is not clear to what extent genetics alone were responsible for the condition of the trophy buck shot on a private hunting preserve. Source: Fox News
Thursday, February 03, 2011
MICHIGAN NEWS: Who Are the Predators of Deer?
Wolf, bear, coyote or bobcat.
If you had to name the carnivore that kills the most white-tailed deer in the Upper Midwest, which would you pick?
If you are thinking smaller rather than larger, you're on the right track.
The answer is coyote, at least according to preliminary data from a study in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan.
The sample sizes were rather small, and I am somewhat skeptical of how robust or generalizable these findings are. As for the data:
In all, 57 adult deer and 44 fawns have been captured and fitted with tracking devices.
The data are from Jan. 1, 2009 through Aug. 31, 2010. Though preliminary, they are showing some very interesting results.
Coyotes in the study area were responsible for 13 fawn mortalities, followed by bobcat (9), unknown predator (5), abandonment (4), unknown agent (3), black bear (2), vehicle collision (2), wolf (2) and bald eagle (1).
Among adult and yearling female deer, coyote killed 6, followed by wolf (3), black bear (2), drowning (2), birthing complications (1), vehicle collision (1) and unknown predator (1).
Source: MJOnline
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
BRITISH COLUMBIA NEWS: Deer Populations Altering Gulf Islands
Booming deer populations on some Gulf Islands are driving away songbirds and leaving the area susceptible to invasion by foreign species, says a recent study.
Following hunting bans on many small islands in the 1970s, deer populations grew. People began feeding deer, which compounded the problem. Now residents of at least one island are looking at sterilization as a control measure, but are getting little support from the provincial government.
I'll post my own synopsis of this study--it is quite good.
Source: Nanaimo Daily News
I've included a picture from the study that shows vegetation on low, medium, and high deer density islands.
Tuesday, January 04, 2011
RESEARCH NEWS: New Virus Found in Deer Hunters
A smallpox-like disease (but less virulent) has been identified in hunters that field-dressed deer with open wounds on their hands.
Source: CIDRAP
Two similar skin infections in hunters who field dressed white-tailed deer led to the identification of a new parapoxvirus, which can mimic other infections and lead to diagnostic delays, according to researchers from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
In both cases, the hunters, one from Virginia and one from Connecticut, cut their fingers in November 2008 while field dressing deer that appeared healthy at the time of death, according to the researchers, who reported their findings in the Dec 30 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine (abstract here).
Patients with parapoxvirus infections typically have a single lesion, developing over 4 to 8 weeks, that progresses through four stages—papule, vesicle, shallow annular ulcer, and scab—that heals with little or no scarring.
Infections can recur, and smallpox vaccination doesn't block parapoxvirus infection. The group noted that human infections are likely underreported, because many patients may not seek medical care because of the usually self-limited nature of the disease.
The clinical course was similar for both patients. About 7 weeks after the field dressing injury the hunters sought medical care for a nodule at the wound site that didn't heal. In the case of the Virginia patient, doctors removed and biopsied the lesion, but it recurred about a month later. The Connecticut hunter was treated with antibiotics, and his doctors biopsied the lesion. In both instances, specimens were sent to the CDC for evaluation.
Source: CIDRAP
Thursday, October 07, 2010
RESEARCH NEWS: A CWD Vaccine On the Horizon?
Chronic wasting disease has cast a pall over the Wisconsin deer herd and the state's deer hunting tradition since it was discovered in 2001.
One could argue the only good CWD-related news in the last decade is the nightmare scenario has not played out - the disease has not jumped the species barrier to affect humans or livestock.
Wisconsin wildlife managers have taken aggressive measures to initially try to eradicate the disease and more recently to reduce its spread. The disease is now found in a 9,000-square-mile area of south-central Wisconsin.
The primary tools have been deer reduction efforts (hunting or sharpshooting) and transport prohibitions on deer and elk.
Canadian researchers are testing a CWD vaccine they hope will add another tool to the tool box.
A Canadian team has made some promising advances, and a vaccine might be commercially available in 2 years, assuming they can raise the funding needed for development. The logistics of administering the vaccine to wild deer might prove insurmountable. However, it holds a lot of promise for captive and farmed deer.
Source: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
RESEARCH NEWS: Coyotes Not Decimating Pennsylvania Deer
It’s a question that has captured the imagination of Keystone State deer hunters and wildlife lovers: Has increased predation on helpless deer fawns by an growing population of Eastern coyotes resulted in dwindling whitetail numbers across Pennsylvania’s rugged northern reaches? The answer is no, according to a deer researcher in Penn State’s College of Agricultural Sciences.
“It’s a cruel world out there for wildlife,” said Duane Diefenbach, adjunct professor of wildlife ecology and leader of the Pennsylvania Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit housed in the college’s School of Forest Resources, “but it’s no crueler in Pennsylvania than other states.”
There is no question the coyote population has grown dramatically in the Northeast in recent decades, he said, and everyone agrees that coyotes do prey on fawns, “but our data tell us that coyote predation is not an issue in Pennsylvania.”
Diefenbach should know. Nationally recognized for his deer research, he has been involved in all the Pennsylvania Game Commission’s deer studies since 2000, overseeing a groundbreaking fawn-mortality study completed in 2002. For the last decade he and his students have been monitoring hundreds of deer they captured and fitted with radio collars, about 3,000 in total, carefully documenting the animals’ movements, behavior and fates.
“Significantly, very, very few adult deer in our studies have succumbed to predation from coyotes, bears or anything else,” he said. “We now know that in this state, once a deer reaches about 12 months of age, the only significant mortal dangers it faces are getting hit by a car or being harvested by a hunter. By far, most of the time when a coyote eats venison, it is from a road-killed animal, or from a deer that was wounded by a hunter but not retrieved.”
We know fawns often are killed and eaten by coyotes and bears, Diefenbach said, but that has always been the case.
“When we monitored more than 200 radio-collared fawns from 2000 to 2002, the survival rates of fawns in Pennsylvania were similar to what was previously found in Maine, Illinois, Minnesota, Iowa and New Brunswick, Canada,” he said. “Our research has shown that overall mortality here is not extraordinary.”
About 50 percent of fawns make it to six months of age, Diefenbach said.
“The general pattern in Pennsylvania and in other states and provinces is that we have seen slightly higher fawn survival rates in agricultural areas because there is less predation, and in forested habitats we see slightly lower survival rates.”
According to Diefenbach, the literature shows that fawn survival for the first year of life in forested landscapes is about 25 percent.
“Our work showed that Pennsylvania came in at about 28 percent,” he said. “Our research also showed that fawns in Pennsylvania agricultural landscapes have a 52 percent survival rate.”
Some people have encouraged the Game Commission to implement a study of fawn predation by coyotes, but Diefenbach contends that it is not needed.
“I know this may be an unpopular view, but it is not readily apparent to me how another study on fawn mortality will help us better manage deer,” he said. “Our 2000-to-2002 fawn study showed that fawn-predation rates were normal here, and I don’t have any evidence that anything has changed since then — no available data, such as changes in hunter-success rates in harvesting deer, suggest that coyote predation is increasing. If it is, then hunters should be harvesting fewer young deer, and we are not seeing that.”
Diefenbach points to information contained in recent years’ deer-hunter harvests that show fawn predation is not growing at an alarming rate.
“The fawn component of the hunter harvest — typically about 40 percent of antlerless deer killed by hunters — has remained largely unchanged for many years. If fewer fawns were surviving because of increased coyote predation, they would not be available to hunters.”
Still, Diefenbach understands the emotional reaction of hunters and wildlife lovers to fawns being killed and eaten by predators such as coyotes, and he said that continuing deer research conducted by his unit at Penn State is examining fawn numbers and survival.
“Peoples’ natural reaction to hearing and seeing coyotes, and knowing that they are everywhere in Pennsylvania, is to wonder how many fawns they kill,” he said, “but I don’t know what we would learn if we conducted another fawn-survival study, especially because of what we already know about deer-coyote ecology. I am advising a graduate student right now who is evaluating the assumptions and methods that we use to track and monitor deer-population trends in this state. His research is focused on the validity of the model we use to manage deer. All of his work done so far — both in the field and with computer simulations — doesn’t show any evidence of a decline in deer numbers because we are not recruiting fawns into the population.”
Source: GantDaily
“It’s a cruel world out there for wildlife,” said Duane Diefenbach, adjunct professor of wildlife ecology and leader of the Pennsylvania Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit housed in the college’s School of Forest Resources, “but it’s no crueler in Pennsylvania than other states.”
There is no question the coyote population has grown dramatically in the Northeast in recent decades, he said, and everyone agrees that coyotes do prey on fawns, “but our data tell us that coyote predation is not an issue in Pennsylvania.”
Diefenbach should know. Nationally recognized for his deer research, he has been involved in all the Pennsylvania Game Commission’s deer studies since 2000, overseeing a groundbreaking fawn-mortality study completed in 2002. For the last decade he and his students have been monitoring hundreds of deer they captured and fitted with radio collars, about 3,000 in total, carefully documenting the animals’ movements, behavior and fates.
“Significantly, very, very few adult deer in our studies have succumbed to predation from coyotes, bears or anything else,” he said. “We now know that in this state, once a deer reaches about 12 months of age, the only significant mortal dangers it faces are getting hit by a car or being harvested by a hunter. By far, most of the time when a coyote eats venison, it is from a road-killed animal, or from a deer that was wounded by a hunter but not retrieved.”
We know fawns often are killed and eaten by coyotes and bears, Diefenbach said, but that has always been the case.
“When we monitored more than 200 radio-collared fawns from 2000 to 2002, the survival rates of fawns in Pennsylvania were similar to what was previously found in Maine, Illinois, Minnesota, Iowa and New Brunswick, Canada,” he said. “Our research has shown that overall mortality here is not extraordinary.”
About 50 percent of fawns make it to six months of age, Diefenbach said.
“The general pattern in Pennsylvania and in other states and provinces is that we have seen slightly higher fawn survival rates in agricultural areas because there is less predation, and in forested habitats we see slightly lower survival rates.”
According to Diefenbach, the literature shows that fawn survival for the first year of life in forested landscapes is about 25 percent.
“Our work showed that Pennsylvania came in at about 28 percent,” he said. “Our research also showed that fawns in Pennsylvania agricultural landscapes have a 52 percent survival rate.”
Some people have encouraged the Game Commission to implement a study of fawn predation by coyotes, but Diefenbach contends that it is not needed.
“I know this may be an unpopular view, but it is not readily apparent to me how another study on fawn mortality will help us better manage deer,” he said. “Our 2000-to-2002 fawn study showed that fawn-predation rates were normal here, and I don’t have any evidence that anything has changed since then — no available data, such as changes in hunter-success rates in harvesting deer, suggest that coyote predation is increasing. If it is, then hunters should be harvesting fewer young deer, and we are not seeing that.”
Diefenbach points to information contained in recent years’ deer-hunter harvests that show fawn predation is not growing at an alarming rate.
“The fawn component of the hunter harvest — typically about 40 percent of antlerless deer killed by hunters — has remained largely unchanged for many years. If fewer fawns were surviving because of increased coyote predation, they would not be available to hunters.”
Still, Diefenbach understands the emotional reaction of hunters and wildlife lovers to fawns being killed and eaten by predators such as coyotes, and he said that continuing deer research conducted by his unit at Penn State is examining fawn numbers and survival.
“Peoples’ natural reaction to hearing and seeing coyotes, and knowing that they are everywhere in Pennsylvania, is to wonder how many fawns they kill,” he said, “but I don’t know what we would learn if we conducted another fawn-survival study, especially because of what we already know about deer-coyote ecology. I am advising a graduate student right now who is evaluating the assumptions and methods that we use to track and monitor deer-population trends in this state. His research is focused on the validity of the model we use to manage deer. All of his work done so far — both in the field and with computer simulations — doesn’t show any evidence of a decline in deer numbers because we are not recruiting fawns into the population.”
Source: GantDaily
Tuesday, September 01, 2009
RESEARCH NEWS: Four-Posters Reduce Numbers of Lyme-Carrying Ticks 71%
A device called the "4-poster" Deer Treatment Bait Station, developed and patented by scientists with the Agricultural Research Service (ARS), was highly effective at reducing the number of ticks infected with the Lyme disease bacterium in a six-year U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) study in five Northeastern states—Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut and Rhode Island—where the disease is endemic.
In the $2.1 million USDA Northeast Areawide Tick Control Project, investigators noted a 71 percent overall reduction in the number of ticks infected with the Lyme disease bacterium during summer months when most people get the disease. If the 4-poster is used in areas where the disease is endemic, this should translate to a corresponding 71 percent decrease in Lyme disease cases, according to Durland Fish, a professor of epidemiology at Yale School of Public Health and principal investigator for the project. The effectiveness of the 4-poster ranged from 60 to 82 percent among the seven individual 2-square-mile study sites.
The device is a bin that contains corn, with insecticide-laden paint rollers mounted at the bin's corners. When a deer-the primary carrier of the blacklegged tick, Ixodes scapularis, which carries the Lyme disease bacterium—inserts its muzzle into the bin to feed, it must rub its head, neck and ears against the insecticide-treated rollers. When the deer subsequently grooms itself, the insecticide is spread enough to protect the animal's entire body.
Developed by ARS scientists at the agency's Knipling-Bushland U.S. Livestock Insects Research Laboratory in Kerrville, Texas, the 4-poster's efficacy could be boosted to more than 90 percent by using newer, more effective insecticides that were not available at the start of the USDA study, according to J. Mathews Pound, an entomologist at the Kerrville laboratory and a co-investigator on the study.
The results of the study have been published in a series of 11 papers in the August 2009 issue of the medical journal Vector-borne and Zoonotic Diseases. The articles are available free online.
Source: USDA-ARS
In the $2.1 million USDA Northeast Areawide Tick Control Project, investigators noted a 71 percent overall reduction in the number of ticks infected with the Lyme disease bacterium during summer months when most people get the disease. If the 4-poster is used in areas where the disease is endemic, this should translate to a corresponding 71 percent decrease in Lyme disease cases, according to Durland Fish, a professor of epidemiology at Yale School of Public Health and principal investigator for the project. The effectiveness of the 4-poster ranged from 60 to 82 percent among the seven individual 2-square-mile study sites.
The device is a bin that contains corn, with insecticide-laden paint rollers mounted at the bin's corners. When a deer-the primary carrier of the blacklegged tick, Ixodes scapularis, which carries the Lyme disease bacterium—inserts its muzzle into the bin to feed, it must rub its head, neck and ears against the insecticide-treated rollers. When the deer subsequently grooms itself, the insecticide is spread enough to protect the animal's entire body.
Developed by ARS scientists at the agency's Knipling-Bushland U.S. Livestock Insects Research Laboratory in Kerrville, Texas, the 4-poster's efficacy could be boosted to more than 90 percent by using newer, more effective insecticides that were not available at the start of the USDA study, according to J. Mathews Pound, an entomologist at the Kerrville laboratory and a co-investigator on the study.
The results of the study have been published in a series of 11 papers in the August 2009 issue of the medical journal Vector-borne and Zoonotic Diseases. The articles are available free online.
Source: USDA-ARS
Monday, July 13, 2009
NEW YORK NEWS: Cornell Issues Progress Report on Campus/Community Deer Management
A 13-page progress report on Cornell University's Integrated Deer Research and Management Study was recently issued, with updated data on sterilization surgeries, culling and research protocols that include infrared-triggered cameras.
Under "expected outcomes," Drs. Paul Curtis and Jay Boulanger in CU's Department of Natural Resources write: "We will evaluate whether it is possible to integrate deer fertility management with a controlled hunting program to meet localized deer management objectives. The goal is to reduce overall deer abundance and associated impacts (primarily plant damage), and deer-vehicle accidents on and near the Cornell University campus. If this integrated management program is successful, it may have additional applications in other communities in New York state and the Northeast." Additional public presentations on this work will be held later this year, (dates TBD), and results will be published in peer-reviewed literature. To view the full report, access www.govrelations.cornell.edu/community.
Source: The Ithaca Journal
Under "expected outcomes," Drs. Paul Curtis and Jay Boulanger in CU's Department of Natural Resources write: "We will evaluate whether it is possible to integrate deer fertility management with a controlled hunting program to meet localized deer management objectives. The goal is to reduce overall deer abundance and associated impacts (primarily plant damage), and deer-vehicle accidents on and near the Cornell University campus. If this integrated management program is successful, it may have additional applications in other communities in New York state and the Northeast." Additional public presentations on this work will be held later this year, (dates TBD), and results will be published in peer-reviewed literature. To view the full report, access www.govrelations.cornell.edu/community.
Source: The Ithaca Journal
Monday, July 06, 2009
GEORGIA NEWS: Berry College Studies Ways to Reduce Deer-Vehicle Collisions
Deer-vehicle collisions are a nationwide problem, killing an estimated 150 people each year and causing a billion dollars worth of damage, researchers say.
And, with as many as 2,500 deer roaming its property on any given day, Berry College is the perfect setting to study ways to avoid the collisions.
George Gallagher, professor of animal science, and his team of Berry students are collaborating with Bob Warren and Karl Miller of the University of Georgia to develop methods and devices to minimize deer-vehicle collisions. Their efforts are part of a seven-year study funded by the Georgia Department of Transportation.
“We do all our preliminary lab work at UGA’s captive deer facility and all the field work at Berry,” said Gallagher. “Berry represents a very wonderful urban deer population.”
Their past experiments have been designed to measure how a deer perceives and reacts to sights and sounds — in order to better understand the anatomy and physiology of the animal.
A common misconception is that deer have excellent hearing, Gallagher said.
“The truth is, their hearing is much closer to our hearing,” he said.
The current, yearlong, study is focusing on the effectiveness of a new fence designed to keep deer off roadways and lessen the possibility of an accident.
As part of this study, a two-mile stretch of temporary fencing has been constructed along Lavender Mountain Drive, which connects Berry’s main and mountain campuses.
One mile consists of the standard eight-foot fence often seen along highways.
“A deer can typically jump an eight-foot to ninefoot fence,” Gallagher said. This type of fence will work 80 to 90 percent of the time, but it’s relatively expensive and unattractive, he said.
The second mile consists of a new cost-effective design previously tested on the captive deer herd at UGA.
The new design is a fence with Bayco wire lined along the top and angled away from the road.
“Because of the angle, deer are a lot less likely to want to jump the fence,” Gallagher explained.
At the same time, if a deer is on the side of the road and comes upon the fence, it is more likely to jump over the fence to the safer side.
“The goal is to provide a fence that balances the need to minimize deer-vehicle collisions with a more cost-effective design, better suited for implementation and maintenance by Georgia and other DOT operations,” he said.
Before building the fence, teams of researchers canvassed the area around Lavender Mountain Drive in an effort to fit deer with GPS radio collars. Once deer have been collared, researchers are able to track their movements and learn more about their habits.
“The GPS collars provide an unprecedented glimpse into deer behavior by giving us a location update every 30 minutes, 24 hours a day, for an entire year,” Gallagher explained.
“This type of information allows us to develop a better understanding of their behavior, which, in turn, puts us in a better position to try to determine how to alter their actions.”
In an effort to be as humane as possible, researchers used both tranquilizer darts and rocket-propelled nets to capture the deer without causing undue injury.
With the fences up, and the GPS collars on approximately 20 deer around Lavender Mountain Drive, Gallagher and his team are now collecting data.
Gallagher said he is hoping to provide more insight about the new fence by January.
“I’m not a fan of the high fences. I’m hoping we’ll have a fence design that is cost-effective and effective for the deer,” he said. “Now, we’re just waiting and letting the deer be deer.”
Source: Rome News Tribune
And, with as many as 2,500 deer roaming its property on any given day, Berry College is the perfect setting to study ways to avoid the collisions.
George Gallagher, professor of animal science, and his team of Berry students are collaborating with Bob Warren and Karl Miller of the University of Georgia to develop methods and devices to minimize deer-vehicle collisions. Their efforts are part of a seven-year study funded by the Georgia Department of Transportation.
“We do all our preliminary lab work at UGA’s captive deer facility and all the field work at Berry,” said Gallagher. “Berry represents a very wonderful urban deer population.”
Their past experiments have been designed to measure how a deer perceives and reacts to sights and sounds — in order to better understand the anatomy and physiology of the animal.
A common misconception is that deer have excellent hearing, Gallagher said.
“The truth is, their hearing is much closer to our hearing,” he said.
The current, yearlong, study is focusing on the effectiveness of a new fence designed to keep deer off roadways and lessen the possibility of an accident.
As part of this study, a two-mile stretch of temporary fencing has been constructed along Lavender Mountain Drive, which connects Berry’s main and mountain campuses.
One mile consists of the standard eight-foot fence often seen along highways.
“A deer can typically jump an eight-foot to ninefoot fence,” Gallagher said. This type of fence will work 80 to 90 percent of the time, but it’s relatively expensive and unattractive, he said.
The second mile consists of a new cost-effective design previously tested on the captive deer herd at UGA.
The new design is a fence with Bayco wire lined along the top and angled away from the road.
“Because of the angle, deer are a lot less likely to want to jump the fence,” Gallagher explained.
At the same time, if a deer is on the side of the road and comes upon the fence, it is more likely to jump over the fence to the safer side.
“The goal is to provide a fence that balances the need to minimize deer-vehicle collisions with a more cost-effective design, better suited for implementation and maintenance by Georgia and other DOT operations,” he said.
Before building the fence, teams of researchers canvassed the area around Lavender Mountain Drive in an effort to fit deer with GPS radio collars. Once deer have been collared, researchers are able to track their movements and learn more about their habits.
“The GPS collars provide an unprecedented glimpse into deer behavior by giving us a location update every 30 minutes, 24 hours a day, for an entire year,” Gallagher explained.
“This type of information allows us to develop a better understanding of their behavior, which, in turn, puts us in a better position to try to determine how to alter their actions.”
In an effort to be as humane as possible, researchers used both tranquilizer darts and rocket-propelled nets to capture the deer without causing undue injury.
With the fences up, and the GPS collars on approximately 20 deer around Lavender Mountain Drive, Gallagher and his team are now collecting data.
Gallagher said he is hoping to provide more insight about the new fence by January.
“I’m not a fan of the high fences. I’m hoping we’ll have a fence design that is cost-effective and effective for the deer,” he said. “Now, we’re just waiting and letting the deer be deer.”
Source: Rome News Tribune
Thursday, June 25, 2009
SPECIAL REPORT: All You Need to Know About Deer Exclosure Construction
The website deerfacts.org has just posted an excellent report entitled "Deer Exclosures: A Comprehensive Practical Guide." The report has excellent photos and drawings, and provides five levels of cost and quality for different types of fencing. I highly recommend the report.
Friday, June 19, 2009
MINNESOTA NEWS: New Deer Warning System Tested
ST. PAUL, Minn. - The state is testing a warning system in southwest Minnesota aimed at reducing the number of deer traffic collisions.
The state has stopped putting up the yellow "deer crossing" signs because a University of Minnesota study found drivers were desensitized to them. And, with a deer herd estimated at 1 million, the animals are everywhere.
The system set up along Highway 23 near Camden State Park stretches nearly a mile and includes a wall of light beams that trigger flashing roadside lights to warn drivers when deer approach.
MnDOT says the deer warning system cost $150,000 and reduced collisions by 57 percent over 18 months of study.
Minnesota has averaged nearly 4,500 deer-vehicle crashes annually over that past 10 years.
Source: MLive
The state has stopped putting up the yellow "deer crossing" signs because a University of Minnesota study found drivers were desensitized to them. And, with a deer herd estimated at 1 million, the animals are everywhere.
The system set up along Highway 23 near Camden State Park stretches nearly a mile and includes a wall of light beams that trigger flashing roadside lights to warn drivers when deer approach.
MnDOT says the deer warning system cost $150,000 and reduced collisions by 57 percent over 18 months of study.
Minnesota has averaged nearly 4,500 deer-vehicle crashes annually over that past 10 years.
Source: MLive
Sunday, June 07, 2009
PENNSYLVANIA NEWS: A View on Deer Management Policy from Latham's Acre
EMPORIUM, Pa.—Thousands of bright green buds reached through the forest floor or peaked from the tips of branches in the shady patch of forest. On the other side of the fence: a conspicuous absence of new growth.
By late April, spring sprouts were everywhere at Latham's Acre, one of a series of cyclone-fence islands erected nearly 60 years ago on a McKean County mountaintop at North America's east-west continental divide, about 50 miles northwest of State College.
The fenced "deer exclosures" were built in 1950 by Roger Latham, a biologist and head researcher for the Pennsylvania Game Commission before he became the outdoors editor of the former Pittsburgh Press.
Latham died in a mountain accident in the Alps in 1979, but each spring the sprouts return to Latham's Acre, demonstrating the level of forest regeneration possible in the absence of over-browsing deer.
The sprouts, and the lack of them outside the exclosure, provided a timely lesson for a dozen members of the Village Garden Club of Sewickley, based about 10 miles northwest of Pittsburgh. Members traveled over 150 miles northeast to Emporium to compare the impacts of deer over-browsing in McKean County with the white-tail problems they face at home in Allegheny County.
The spring growth at Latham's Acre coincided with new skirmishes in an ideological battle that pits the Game Commission against many deer hunters, who question the science behind a controversial plan to balance regional white-tail populations with habitat by manipulating hunting seasons, bag limits and antler restrictions.
A national study of white-tail management conducted by the Pinchot Institute for Conservation in Washington, D.C., found that Pennsylvania is ahead of many states in attaining parity in deer population and habitat, but problems exist with the program's methodology.
The Pinchot study examined agencies throughout the United States that use science-based methods to manage deer populations and maintain healthy forest ecosystems. It cited 2002-2003 stakeholder surveys conducted by the Game Commission in which Pennsylvanians told the commonwealth they ranked "healthy, sustainable forest ecosystems" as their top goal for deer management.
Pinchot researchers noted the state is one of only a few with a written deer plan, calling it "one of the most progressive deer management programs in the country." But they found the program's goals "fall short of what the public has said it wants." The study recommended the Game Commission take critical new steps, including:
—Developing better science-based indicators of deer impacts on forests.
—Employing more staff to focus on ecosystem science.
—Improving methods for determining public expectations on what deer management should achieve.
This April in Harrisburg, the state House Legislative Budget and Finance Committee hired another Washington, D.C.-based conservation organization to conduct an independent audit of the deer management plan. The audit stems from a House bill authored by state Rep. David Levdansky, D-Elizabeth, and unanimously approved by the House in 2008.
Levdansky, treasurer of the Budget and Finance Committee and member of the House Game and Fisheries Committee, said the goal is to "remove the guesswork" from the deer management program.
"This independent audit...will help us determine if we are harvesting the right number of deer, of the right age and sex ratio, in the right places," he said. "It has been a challenge to locate a qualified and objective company from outside Pennsylvania to perform the audit, which is important for obtaining an independent review."
A Game Commission representative said the agency welcomes the audit.
Up at Latham's Acre, in State Game Land 30, the ground is awash with new wildflowers, and fresh buds shoot from shoulder-high branches. Outside the fence, the forest is barren of new growth from the carpet of dead leaves to the browse line about 5 feet off the ground. Soil acidity, rainfall and other factors are identical on both sides of the fence. Game Commission Wildlife Conservation Officer John Dzemyan, who's worked on the mountain since the 1970s, hikes past muddy patches surrounding the exclosure pocked with telltale deer tracks.
State Game Land 30, like most of Pennsylvania, was clear cut for timber in the late 1800s and early 1900s, nearly decimating the deer population, said Dzemyan. As vegetation re-grew, the state became a white-tail smorgasbord and populations soared. But by the late 1930s, as forests matured and the canopy grew out of reach, deer found it increasingly difficult to find food. With natural predators removed and hunting managed to put unnatural numbers of deer in front of hunters, he said, a problem grew with the state's deer herd—too many to be sustained by habitat in some places, not enough in others.
The state game land is located in the heart of the Pennsylvania Wilds, in Wildlife Management Unit 2G, where the deer population has been intentionally reduced as part of the deer management plan.
"By going to some of these fenced areas you can see the difference," said Dzemyan. "You can get an idea of what kind of wildflower understory there should be over perhaps hundreds of thousands of acres up here."
A prolific understory, he said, is essential to the health of the deer herd and vital to other animals. Latham and the Game Commission were preaching deer control decades ago.
"But when it came to actually getting it done," said Dzemyan, "there was so much political and social pressure against that, due to misunderstanding, that we couldn't get it through. (Some in the Game Commission) wanted to keep that deer herd high, not understanding that keeping it that high was going to cause long-term problems."
After intentionally reducing the deer herd in 2G, the 2009-2010 doe tag allocation of 26,000 licenses reflects an effort by commission biologists to continue stabilizing the population. Dzemyan said he's seen deer numbers rising incrementally, but it's still "less than hunters are used to."
To Ann Coburn, president of the Village Garden Club, the absence of browse just outside Latham's Acre offered a stark contrast to the flower show inside.
"I was very impressed to learn that the reduction in the deer herd from the issuing of doe licenses has made a reduction in the number of deer and a noticeable gain in the quality and variety of plant life," she said. "The major lesson that we learned going north was how pervasive the problem of deer overgrazing is and how almost scary it was to see huge tracks of woods that are cleared bare, (much like) the limited tracts we have here in Allegheny County. In short, something needs to be done."
Source: York Daily Record
By late April, spring sprouts were everywhere at Latham's Acre, one of a series of cyclone-fence islands erected nearly 60 years ago on a McKean County mountaintop at North America's east-west continental divide, about 50 miles northwest of State College.
The fenced "deer exclosures" were built in 1950 by Roger Latham, a biologist and head researcher for the Pennsylvania Game Commission before he became the outdoors editor of the former Pittsburgh Press.
Latham died in a mountain accident in the Alps in 1979, but each spring the sprouts return to Latham's Acre, demonstrating the level of forest regeneration possible in the absence of over-browsing deer.
The sprouts, and the lack of them outside the exclosure, provided a timely lesson for a dozen members of the Village Garden Club of Sewickley, based about 10 miles northwest of Pittsburgh. Members traveled over 150 miles northeast to Emporium to compare the impacts of deer over-browsing in McKean County with the white-tail problems they face at home in Allegheny County.
The spring growth at Latham's Acre coincided with new skirmishes in an ideological battle that pits the Game Commission against many deer hunters, who question the science behind a controversial plan to balance regional white-tail populations with habitat by manipulating hunting seasons, bag limits and antler restrictions.
A national study of white-tail management conducted by the Pinchot Institute for Conservation in Washington, D.C., found that Pennsylvania is ahead of many states in attaining parity in deer population and habitat, but problems exist with the program's methodology.
The Pinchot study examined agencies throughout the United States that use science-based methods to manage deer populations and maintain healthy forest ecosystems. It cited 2002-2003 stakeholder surveys conducted by the Game Commission in which Pennsylvanians told the commonwealth they ranked "healthy, sustainable forest ecosystems" as their top goal for deer management.
Pinchot researchers noted the state is one of only a few with a written deer plan, calling it "one of the most progressive deer management programs in the country." But they found the program's goals "fall short of what the public has said it wants." The study recommended the Game Commission take critical new steps, including:
—Developing better science-based indicators of deer impacts on forests.
—Employing more staff to focus on ecosystem science.
—Improving methods for determining public expectations on what deer management should achieve.
This April in Harrisburg, the state House Legislative Budget and Finance Committee hired another Washington, D.C.-based conservation organization to conduct an independent audit of the deer management plan. The audit stems from a House bill authored by state Rep. David Levdansky, D-Elizabeth, and unanimously approved by the House in 2008.
Levdansky, treasurer of the Budget and Finance Committee and member of the House Game and Fisheries Committee, said the goal is to "remove the guesswork" from the deer management program.
"This independent audit...will help us determine if we are harvesting the right number of deer, of the right age and sex ratio, in the right places," he said. "It has been a challenge to locate a qualified and objective company from outside Pennsylvania to perform the audit, which is important for obtaining an independent review."
A Game Commission representative said the agency welcomes the audit.
Up at Latham's Acre, in State Game Land 30, the ground is awash with new wildflowers, and fresh buds shoot from shoulder-high branches. Outside the fence, the forest is barren of new growth from the carpet of dead leaves to the browse line about 5 feet off the ground. Soil acidity, rainfall and other factors are identical on both sides of the fence. Game Commission Wildlife Conservation Officer John Dzemyan, who's worked on the mountain since the 1970s, hikes past muddy patches surrounding the exclosure pocked with telltale deer tracks.
State Game Land 30, like most of Pennsylvania, was clear cut for timber in the late 1800s and early 1900s, nearly decimating the deer population, said Dzemyan. As vegetation re-grew, the state became a white-tail smorgasbord and populations soared. But by the late 1930s, as forests matured and the canopy grew out of reach, deer found it increasingly difficult to find food. With natural predators removed and hunting managed to put unnatural numbers of deer in front of hunters, he said, a problem grew with the state's deer herd—too many to be sustained by habitat in some places, not enough in others.
The state game land is located in the heart of the Pennsylvania Wilds, in Wildlife Management Unit 2G, where the deer population has been intentionally reduced as part of the deer management plan.
"By going to some of these fenced areas you can see the difference," said Dzemyan. "You can get an idea of what kind of wildflower understory there should be over perhaps hundreds of thousands of acres up here."
A prolific understory, he said, is essential to the health of the deer herd and vital to other animals. Latham and the Game Commission were preaching deer control decades ago.
"But when it came to actually getting it done," said Dzemyan, "there was so much political and social pressure against that, due to misunderstanding, that we couldn't get it through. (Some in the Game Commission) wanted to keep that deer herd high, not understanding that keeping it that high was going to cause long-term problems."
After intentionally reducing the deer herd in 2G, the 2009-2010 doe tag allocation of 26,000 licenses reflects an effort by commission biologists to continue stabilizing the population. Dzemyan said he's seen deer numbers rising incrementally, but it's still "less than hunters are used to."
To Ann Coburn, president of the Village Garden Club, the absence of browse just outside Latham's Acre offered a stark contrast to the flower show inside.
"I was very impressed to learn that the reduction in the deer herd from the issuing of doe licenses has made a reduction in the number of deer and a noticeable gain in the quality and variety of plant life," she said. "The major lesson that we learned going north was how pervasive the problem of deer overgrazing is and how almost scary it was to see huge tracks of woods that are cleared bare, (much like) the limited tracts we have here in Allegheny County. In short, something needs to be done."
Source: York Daily Record
Friday, June 05, 2009
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION: Deer Browsing on Mayapple
Last weekend a student of mine was out in south central Ohio, where she observed a significant amount of deer browsing on mayapple (Podophyllum peltatum). There is no question it was deer (and not a mower or slugs or groundhogs).
This is something I have not observed directly. Mayapple contains podophyllotoxin, which is lethal to people in relatively small doses. LD50s for mice and rabbits are 100 mg/kg and 200 mg/kg, respectively.
Any observations (both observations of browsing and observations of never having seen the plant browsed) would be appreciated. Please include your location (western North Carolina, southeastern Maine, etc.).
This is something I have not observed directly. Mayapple contains podophyllotoxin, which is lethal to people in relatively small doses. LD50s for mice and rabbits are 100 mg/kg and 200 mg/kg, respectively.
Any observations (both observations of browsing and observations of never having seen the plant browsed) would be appreciated. Please include your location (western North Carolina, southeastern Maine, etc.).
Monday, May 18, 2009
CONNECTICUT NEWS: Deer Kill Up, Deer Collisions Down
Road kills of deer in town have declined dramatically over the last decade, as the number of deer taken by hunters has risen.
“If you kill deer by hunting them, you get fewer car accidents,” Conservation Commission Chairman Ben Oko said. “That seems very clear.”
But a vast lowering of deer numbers — the culling of five out of every six deer now roaming Ridgefield’s forests — would be needed to bring the population down to levels that research has found can make a difference in keeping down ticks and Lyme disease.
The state counted 122 deer road kills in 1998, and just 35 in 2008. Deer taken by archery hunting rose from 55 in 1998 to 222 in 2008.
The pattern holds — with some ups and downs — across the 12 years from 1996 to 2008, according to statistics assembled by Howard Kilpatrick, a wildlife biologist with the state environmental department.
And Ridgefield no longer leads the state in the number of deer killed on its roads.
“Ridgefield was consistently ranked number one for many years — it was for three, four, five years anyway,” Mr. Kilpatrick said. “In 2007, they were ranked number seven.”
Ridgefield Police count more road deaths of deer than does the state, but the trend is similar. Road kills fell from 205 seven years ago to 90 last year, according to Police Chief John Roche.
Annual road-kill totals from 2001 to 2008 were: 205, 129, 172, 198, 146, 115, 127, 90.
No method of counting deer — hunted, killed on the roads, or running in the woods — can be taken as 100% accurate, Mr. Kilpatrick said. His numbers are based on Deer Kill Incident Report forms that police all across the state fill out when they go to the scene of an accident.
The higher numbers from the Ridgefield Police include those incidents, but also count carcasses found along roads when no accident is reported.
Mr. Kilpatrick’s numbers on deer harvested are based on tags turned in by hunters, and are likely low since not all hunters turn them in. Still, he said his numbers were meaningful because the methodology was consistent over the 12 years.
“We know the reported harvest is low. We know the reported deer road kills are low,” he said. “But our method for collecting that data is the same, so any trends should reflect what’s really happening out there.”
“What Howard is saying is that there is still a correlation, whether it’s reported as what he had, or what we had,” Chief Roche said. “There is still a drop in the number of deer found dead on the side of the road.”
Full story at: Acorn Online
Monday, May 11, 2009
RESEARCH NEWS: Economic Damage to Non-timber Forest Products
The nontimber forest products industry has been growing rapidly since the mid-1980s, contributing billions of dollars to the U.S. economy annually. Examples of nontimber forest products (NTFP) include edibles such as fruits and nuts, medicinal and herbal products, and specialty floral and decorative products. Standouts in the NTFP industry include U.S.-grown herbs used to satisfy increasing consumer demand for herbal medications.
American ginseng, for example, accounted for $32 million in U.S. export revenue to Asia during 1996. The emerging economic industry has its share of challenges, including the impact of wildlife that naturally inhabit forests where NTFPs grow. Of particular concern are white-tailed deer, which can reduce the quality, quantity, and profitability of NTFPs by "browsing" twigs and rubbing the stems of shrubs, trees, and plants.
When deer browse, or nibble on buds, twig-ends, and leaves of woody plants, shrubs and trees can be deformed, stunted, or, in the case of young plants, eaten completely. Deer browse year-round, but are most destructive during the winter when alternative foods are less available. Male white-tailed deer also rub the stems of trees and shrubs during autumn to remove velvet from their antlers and to communicate with other deer. Deer rubbing reduces the plants' health and can kill vulnerable trees and shrubs.
The financial impacts of deer browsing and rubbing on NTFPs, particularly woody ornamental plants, can be considerable. Heavily browsed tips or rubbed stems are not marketable, and thus are a direct loss to the grower. Losses of trees and shrubs due to deer damage can amount to over $2030/acre per year depending on the species.
To reduce damage and lessen economic losses, producers often turn to lethal and nonlethal techniques to control deer. Hunting is not always supported by the public, and may only be applicable in rural areas. Nonlethal techniques can be difficult to apply, expensive to implement, and are often temporary solutions; fences, repellents, and frightening devices provide varying degrees of success in reducing crop damage.
Researchers attempting to provide alternative solutions to deer damage to NTFPs are working to identify species of trees and shrubs that are not as attractive or even avoided by deer. Scott E. Hygnstrom from the University of Nebraska and research colleagues from New Mexico State University and the USDA National Wildlife Research Center published a study in the American Society for Horticultural Science journal HortTechnology that evaluated deer damage to 26 species of trees and shrubs.
"Our objectives were to determine the varying levels of deer damage sustained by 26 species of trees and shrubs; to relate morphological features of trees and shrubs to damage levels; and to evaluate the economic impacts of deer damage on the production of nontimber forest products", explained Hygnstrom.
The study was conducted at the University of Nebraska Agricultural Research and Development Center. The area included eight species of trees and 18 species of shrubs that produced commercially valuable nontimber forest products. The 40-acre complex was occupied by about 48 white-tailed deer per square mile during the study.
The team measured the frequency and intensity of browsing and rubbing by deer on various species of trees and shrubs after 1 year of growth. To assess the financial impacts of deer damage, the scientists recorded numbers of stems rendered unmarketable by deer browsing or rubbing while harvesting and processing selected woody florals in February and December 2001. The results showed that pussy willow suffered the least economic impact of deer browsing and rubbing; less than 1% of the total number of stems produced were rejected for market. High levels of damage were documented for 'Blood-twig' dogwood (more than 21% of the stems were rejected). Losses per year due to combined damage by browsing and rubbing amounted to about $26/acre for pussy willow, $2031/acre for 'Blood-twig' dogwood, and $1595/acre for curly willow.
The research also revealed that leaving some NTFPs (especially dogwood) in the field until late winter considerably increases the percentage of stems rendered unmarketable due to deer browsing. Harvesting these products in late fall and early winter can substantially reduce the percentage of stems damaged by deer.
Source: Science Daily
American ginseng, for example, accounted for $32 million in U.S. export revenue to Asia during 1996. The emerging economic industry has its share of challenges, including the impact of wildlife that naturally inhabit forests where NTFPs grow. Of particular concern are white-tailed deer, which can reduce the quality, quantity, and profitability of NTFPs by "browsing" twigs and rubbing the stems of shrubs, trees, and plants.
When deer browse, or nibble on buds, twig-ends, and leaves of woody plants, shrubs and trees can be deformed, stunted, or, in the case of young plants, eaten completely. Deer browse year-round, but are most destructive during the winter when alternative foods are less available. Male white-tailed deer also rub the stems of trees and shrubs during autumn to remove velvet from their antlers and to communicate with other deer. Deer rubbing reduces the plants' health and can kill vulnerable trees and shrubs.
The financial impacts of deer browsing and rubbing on NTFPs, particularly woody ornamental plants, can be considerable. Heavily browsed tips or rubbed stems are not marketable, and thus are a direct loss to the grower. Losses of trees and shrubs due to deer damage can amount to over $2030/acre per year depending on the species.
To reduce damage and lessen economic losses, producers often turn to lethal and nonlethal techniques to control deer. Hunting is not always supported by the public, and may only be applicable in rural areas. Nonlethal techniques can be difficult to apply, expensive to implement, and are often temporary solutions; fences, repellents, and frightening devices provide varying degrees of success in reducing crop damage.
Researchers attempting to provide alternative solutions to deer damage to NTFPs are working to identify species of trees and shrubs that are not as attractive or even avoided by deer. Scott E. Hygnstrom from the University of Nebraska and research colleagues from New Mexico State University and the USDA National Wildlife Research Center published a study in the American Society for Horticultural Science journal HortTechnology that evaluated deer damage to 26 species of trees and shrubs.
"Our objectives were to determine the varying levels of deer damage sustained by 26 species of trees and shrubs; to relate morphological features of trees and shrubs to damage levels; and to evaluate the economic impacts of deer damage on the production of nontimber forest products", explained Hygnstrom.
The study was conducted at the University of Nebraska Agricultural Research and Development Center. The area included eight species of trees and 18 species of shrubs that produced commercially valuable nontimber forest products. The 40-acre complex was occupied by about 48 white-tailed deer per square mile during the study.
The team measured the frequency and intensity of browsing and rubbing by deer on various species of trees and shrubs after 1 year of growth. To assess the financial impacts of deer damage, the scientists recorded numbers of stems rendered unmarketable by deer browsing or rubbing while harvesting and processing selected woody florals in February and December 2001. The results showed that pussy willow suffered the least economic impact of deer browsing and rubbing; less than 1% of the total number of stems produced were rejected for market. High levels of damage were documented for 'Blood-twig' dogwood (more than 21% of the stems were rejected). Losses per year due to combined damage by browsing and rubbing amounted to about $26/acre for pussy willow, $2031/acre for 'Blood-twig' dogwood, and $1595/acre for curly willow.
The research also revealed that leaving some NTFPs (especially dogwood) in the field until late winter considerably increases the percentage of stems rendered unmarketable due to deer browsing. Harvesting these products in late fall and early winter can substantially reduce the percentage of stems damaged by deer.
Source: Science Daily
Thursday, May 07, 2009
CONFENCE SUMMARY - Suburban Deer Hunts Most Effective Management Tool
When it comes to controlling the damage caused by deer in suburban areas, controlled hunts have proven to be one of the most effective ways of restoring the ecological balance to the region's forests, according to wildlife officials.
Last week, federal, state and county officials, along with a host of university researchers, gathered for the annual Northeast Fish & Wildlife Conference in Lancaster, Pa.
While the two-day conference dealt with a multitude of problems , from the mystery fungus killing bats throughout the northeast to grassland restoration to aid the Regal Fritillary butterfly, there were several presentations dealing with the region's deer problems.
It was 15 years ago that Union County became the first county in the state to apply for a special permit to allow for the culling of the deer herd in the Watchung Reservation. With no natural predators, the growing number of deer were devouring the understory, the smaller shrubs and plants that provide shelter and food for smaller species.
Since that first Watchung hunt, similar approaches have been adopted by communities and counties across the state, with the South Mountain Reservation in neighboring Essex County one of the latest to bring in marksmen to reduce the deer herd. In recent years, Summit and Scotch Plains have also had cullings.
In 1994, the first year of the hunt in the Watchung Reservation, counts indicated a population of at least 96 deer per square mile, more than triple the amount the 2,065-acre preserve could sustain, said Daniel Bernier, who heads the county's Division of Park Planning and Environmental Services. Bernier, together with Susan Predl, a biologist with the N.J. Bureau of Wildlife Management, outlined the progress of the hunt at the Lancaster conference.
Bernier said that by the 1980s, it was clear that the growing deer herd was taking its toll on the reservation. Residents from the five communities surrounding the reservation were becoming increasingly frustrated by the mounting destruction to their residential landscaping, along with concerns for Lyme disease.
Since the culling began, 1,289 deer have been removed, which has enabled the forest floor to begin to rejuvenate, Bernier said.
"We're seeing plants return that we haven't seen in quite awhile--but it's slow," he said.
The hunt provides anywhere from 2,000 to 3,000 pounds of venison annually for the needy, with the hunters allowed to keep 20 pounds for themselves. The cost of the hunt has also been dramatically reduced, from $55,000 in the first year, to a cost now of $3,000. The number of marksmen has also been trimmed from over 90 to now about 11 in the woods at any one time.
Bernier told wildlife officials that the hunt is conducted under strict rules that hold all participants to a high degree of accountability. "We account for every shot, every hit, every miss," he said.
Predl said that every deer that is taken is examined, with data recorded for continual review.
While the argument has been made that hunts cause deer populations to increase because the surviving deer have less competition, Predl said an analysis of the Watchung data shows that is not the case.
Without a deer hunt, even conservative projections indicate the reservation would now be home to nearly 1,400 deer, Predl said. The most recent count determined that there are now about 77 deer in the reservation.
Also discussing the region's deer problems was Dr. Gino D'Angelo, from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's wildlife services branch. D'Angelo oversaw a deer hunt in a section of Bucks County, Pa., just across the Delaware River northwest of Lambertville.
When deer grow overabundant, the entire ecosystem suffers, including the deer, he said, stressing there was no quick fix.
"It's no longer once and (we're) done," D'Angelo said. When the herds are left unchecked, "they're like a time bomb," he said.
The Bucks County hunts have led to a 15 percent reduction in deer-motor vehicle collisions and an increase in production at area farms by 18 percent, he said. Complaints from residents have dropped and the area's forests are showing signs of regeneration.
The recent protests by neighboring Essex County residents over the deer culling in the South Mountain Reservation was reminiscent of what Union County experienced when the Watchung hunts began, said County Manager George Devanney. But given the damage the deer were causing, residents came to accept the necessity of the hunt, he said.
"The county understands the emotional aspects of the deer culling," Devanney said. "But we have thrown the reservation's ecosystem out of balance and unless we reintroduce the deer's natural predators, like wolves, there is no other way to keep the deer population in check--and I don't think anyone is suggesting we do that."
New Jersey's deer population hit an all-time high in the mid-to-late '90s, said Carol Kandoth, who heads the state Department of Environmental Protection's Deer Project.
"Hunting is the most cost-effective and efficient method of control for any species," Kandoth said. "We had trap and transfer, but there is no place within the state to move them and most other states don't want them. And when you do move them, a third die anyway."
The original predators of deer were mountain lions and wolves and both species were eradicated several hundred years ago. In California, where they have allowed the cougar to remain, people have been killed and mauled, she said.
"When you inhabit the space that an animal normally inhabits, then you are responsible for managing the space that animal inhabits," Kandoth said.
Source: NJ.com
Last week, federal, state and county officials, along with a host of university researchers, gathered for the annual Northeast Fish & Wildlife Conference in Lancaster, Pa.
While the two-day conference dealt with a multitude of problems , from the mystery fungus killing bats throughout the northeast to grassland restoration to aid the Regal Fritillary butterfly, there were several presentations dealing with the region's deer problems.
It was 15 years ago that Union County became the first county in the state to apply for a special permit to allow for the culling of the deer herd in the Watchung Reservation. With no natural predators, the growing number of deer were devouring the understory, the smaller shrubs and plants that provide shelter and food for smaller species.
Since that first Watchung hunt, similar approaches have been adopted by communities and counties across the state, with the South Mountain Reservation in neighboring Essex County one of the latest to bring in marksmen to reduce the deer herd. In recent years, Summit and Scotch Plains have also had cullings.
In 1994, the first year of the hunt in the Watchung Reservation, counts indicated a population of at least 96 deer per square mile, more than triple the amount the 2,065-acre preserve could sustain, said Daniel Bernier, who heads the county's Division of Park Planning and Environmental Services. Bernier, together with Susan Predl, a biologist with the N.J. Bureau of Wildlife Management, outlined the progress of the hunt at the Lancaster conference.
Bernier said that by the 1980s, it was clear that the growing deer herd was taking its toll on the reservation. Residents from the five communities surrounding the reservation were becoming increasingly frustrated by the mounting destruction to their residential landscaping, along with concerns for Lyme disease.
Since the culling began, 1,289 deer have been removed, which has enabled the forest floor to begin to rejuvenate, Bernier said.
"We're seeing plants return that we haven't seen in quite awhile--but it's slow," he said.
The hunt provides anywhere from 2,000 to 3,000 pounds of venison annually for the needy, with the hunters allowed to keep 20 pounds for themselves. The cost of the hunt has also been dramatically reduced, from $55,000 in the first year, to a cost now of $3,000. The number of marksmen has also been trimmed from over 90 to now about 11 in the woods at any one time.
Bernier told wildlife officials that the hunt is conducted under strict rules that hold all participants to a high degree of accountability. "We account for every shot, every hit, every miss," he said.
Predl said that every deer that is taken is examined, with data recorded for continual review.
While the argument has been made that hunts cause deer populations to increase because the surviving deer have less competition, Predl said an analysis of the Watchung data shows that is not the case.
Without a deer hunt, even conservative projections indicate the reservation would now be home to nearly 1,400 deer, Predl said. The most recent count determined that there are now about 77 deer in the reservation.
Also discussing the region's deer problems was Dr. Gino D'Angelo, from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's wildlife services branch. D'Angelo oversaw a deer hunt in a section of Bucks County, Pa., just across the Delaware River northwest of Lambertville.
When deer grow overabundant, the entire ecosystem suffers, including the deer, he said, stressing there was no quick fix.
"It's no longer once and (we're) done," D'Angelo said. When the herds are left unchecked, "they're like a time bomb," he said.
The Bucks County hunts have led to a 15 percent reduction in deer-motor vehicle collisions and an increase in production at area farms by 18 percent, he said. Complaints from residents have dropped and the area's forests are showing signs of regeneration.
The recent protests by neighboring Essex County residents over the deer culling in the South Mountain Reservation was reminiscent of what Union County experienced when the Watchung hunts began, said County Manager George Devanney. But given the damage the deer were causing, residents came to accept the necessity of the hunt, he said.
"The county understands the emotional aspects of the deer culling," Devanney said. "But we have thrown the reservation's ecosystem out of balance and unless we reintroduce the deer's natural predators, like wolves, there is no other way to keep the deer population in check--and I don't think anyone is suggesting we do that."
New Jersey's deer population hit an all-time high in the mid-to-late '90s, said Carol Kandoth, who heads the state Department of Environmental Protection's Deer Project.
"Hunting is the most cost-effective and efficient method of control for any species," Kandoth said. "We had trap and transfer, but there is no place within the state to move them and most other states don't want them. And when you do move them, a third die anyway."
The original predators of deer were mountain lions and wolves and both species were eradicated several hundred years ago. In California, where they have allowed the cougar to remain, people have been killed and mauled, she said.
"When you inhabit the space that an animal normally inhabits, then you are responsible for managing the space that animal inhabits," Kandoth said.
Source: NJ.com
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
VIRGINIA NEWS: So Where Did All Of Those Deer Come From?
Virginia’s suburbanites and farmers often complain about the number of deer in the road and in the crops, but nobody knows where all those deer came from. Radford University biology professor Bob Sheehy aims to find out.
Naturally, he’s asking his students to help him with the task.
Sheehy is using his genetics class and the 35 students in it to examine the DNA of Virginia’s deer population in hopes of tracing its varied roots. He has also put hunters to work gathering slivers of deer DNA for the students to scrutinize.
What makes the result of the research likely to be intriguing is that much of Virginia’s deer population can be traced to other states: deer all but disappeared from western Virginia at the beginning of the 20th century, prompting the state to bring in deer from elsewhere.
Thirteen deer from West Virginia, for instance, were released in Rockingham County in 1926. Ten deer from North Carolina were let go in Washington County in 1930 and 1931. And, as the program expanded, hundreds more were released in counties west of the Blue Ridge from Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin in the following decades.
Altogether, one academic count showed, nearly 2,800 deer were brought to Virginia from other states by 1970, successfully restoring deer to the state.
Now, Sheehy and his students hope to learn how the populations have mingled — if they have — and if they have migrated. Beyond the basic scientific understanding, Sheehy said, is the hands-on knowledge of DNA that students will get from analyzing fingernail-size pieces of deer.
“I’m always trying to find ways to introduce students to genetic variability at the molecular level,“ Sheehy said. “They often find it obtuse. I thought using deer would be great because there’s a ready supply of deer.“
One student who said he is getting a lot out of the project is Jon Hirst, a 22-year-old junior and a graduate of Thomas Dale High School in Chester. “I’ve actually learned a lot more in the lab than in the lectures. It’s showing you rather than telling you about it. And Professor Sheehy is very excited about genetics.“
Sheehy said he hopes to receive samples of DNA from the states that sent deer to Virginia so his students can determine the basic genetic markers — the stuff that makes them unique — of each population. Then, year after year, new classes of students will participate in the project, building a database of deer DNA from throughout Virginia.
“This is real research for the students,“ Sheehy said, “and somebody will use the data further down the line.“
Source: Lynchburg News Advance
Naturally, he’s asking his students to help him with the task.
Sheehy is using his genetics class and the 35 students in it to examine the DNA of Virginia’s deer population in hopes of tracing its varied roots. He has also put hunters to work gathering slivers of deer DNA for the students to scrutinize.
What makes the result of the research likely to be intriguing is that much of Virginia’s deer population can be traced to other states: deer all but disappeared from western Virginia at the beginning of the 20th century, prompting the state to bring in deer from elsewhere.
Thirteen deer from West Virginia, for instance, were released in Rockingham County in 1926. Ten deer from North Carolina were let go in Washington County in 1930 and 1931. And, as the program expanded, hundreds more were released in counties west of the Blue Ridge from Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin in the following decades.
Altogether, one academic count showed, nearly 2,800 deer were brought to Virginia from other states by 1970, successfully restoring deer to the state.
Now, Sheehy and his students hope to learn how the populations have mingled — if they have — and if they have migrated. Beyond the basic scientific understanding, Sheehy said, is the hands-on knowledge of DNA that students will get from analyzing fingernail-size pieces of deer.
“I’m always trying to find ways to introduce students to genetic variability at the molecular level,“ Sheehy said. “They often find it obtuse. I thought using deer would be great because there’s a ready supply of deer.“
One student who said he is getting a lot out of the project is Jon Hirst, a 22-year-old junior and a graduate of Thomas Dale High School in Chester. “I’ve actually learned a lot more in the lab than in the lectures. It’s showing you rather than telling you about it. And Professor Sheehy is very excited about genetics.“
Sheehy said he hopes to receive samples of DNA from the states that sent deer to Virginia so his students can determine the basic genetic markers — the stuff that makes them unique — of each population. Then, year after year, new classes of students will participate in the project, building a database of deer DNA from throughout Virginia.
“This is real research for the students,“ Sheehy said, “and somebody will use the data further down the line.“
Source: Lynchburg News Advance
Thursday, November 06, 2008
HEALTH NEWS: Blood Lead Levels Linked to Wild Game
The article makes recommendations for children under 6. I would extend that to children under 9, recognizing that kids between the ages of 2-6 are most vulnerable. This is a good argument for lead bullet substitutes.
People who eat wild game killed with lead bullets tend to have higher levels of lead in their blood than people who don't, according to a first-of-its-kind study of 738 North Dakotans.
"People who ate a lot of wild game tended to have higher lead levels than those who ate little or none," Dr. Stephen Pickard, epidemiologist for the North Dakota Department of Health, said Wednesday.
The study also showed that the more recent the consumption of wild game killed with lead bullets, the higher the level of lead in the blood.
The blood lead levels of those tested were considered low, but even low levels can have adverse health effects, especially for children and pregnant women.
Officials recommended that pregnant women and children under 6 not eat any venison from deer killed with lead bullets -- the same recommendation made last month by the Minnesota Health Department.
"Children under 6 are particularly vulnerable because their brains are still developing," Pickard said. "It causes permanent brain damage even in very small quantities. There is no safe exposure level for small children. We see children with permanent lower intelligence and changes in behavior."
Lead can increase the risk that a pregnant woman could lose her baby or deliver it prematurely, Pickard said. In adults, lead can cause high blood pressure, hearing loss and infertility, though usually with higher lead levels.
The study, done by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the North Dakota Department of Health, appears to add to the evidence that using lead bullets can pose potential health problems for hunters and their families. A Minnesota study last summer showed lead bullets fired from high-powered rifles scatter lead fragments -- many too small to see or feel -- up to 18 inches from the wound.
Source: Minneapolis Star-Tribune
People who eat wild game killed with lead bullets tend to have higher levels of lead in their blood than people who don't, according to a first-of-its-kind study of 738 North Dakotans.
"People who ate a lot of wild game tended to have higher lead levels than those who ate little or none," Dr. Stephen Pickard, epidemiologist for the North Dakota Department of Health, said Wednesday.
The study also showed that the more recent the consumption of wild game killed with lead bullets, the higher the level of lead in the blood.
The blood lead levels of those tested were considered low, but even low levels can have adverse health effects, especially for children and pregnant women.
Officials recommended that pregnant women and children under 6 not eat any venison from deer killed with lead bullets -- the same recommendation made last month by the Minnesota Health Department.
"Children under 6 are particularly vulnerable because their brains are still developing," Pickard said. "It causes permanent brain damage even in very small quantities. There is no safe exposure level for small children. We see children with permanent lower intelligence and changes in behavior."
Lead can increase the risk that a pregnant woman could lose her baby or deliver it prematurely, Pickard said. In adults, lead can cause high blood pressure, hearing loss and infertility, though usually with higher lead levels.
The study, done by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the North Dakota Department of Health, appears to add to the evidence that using lead bullets can pose potential health problems for hunters and their families. A Minnesota study last summer showed lead bullets fired from high-powered rifles scatter lead fragments -- many too small to see or feel -- up to 18 inches from the wound.
Source: Minneapolis Star-Tribune
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
