USDA DEER STUDY STATISTICS ON DEER DENSITY AND FOREST HABITAT HEALTH
Deer begin to impact forest resources when their density exceeds 10 deer per square mile. At this point abundance of songbird species that nest in habitats affected by deer (the shrub layer) declines, and wildflowers and shrubs preferred by deer begin to disappear. When deer density exceeds 20 per square mile, abundance of seedlings preferred by deer (such as red maple, hemlock, sugar maple, and white ash) decline in abundance or disappear and plants not preferred by deer such as ferns and grasses begin to take over the understory, choking out seedlings and shrubs.
At densities exceeding 40 deer per square mile there is a distinct browse line, only tree species resistant to deer browsing (beech, striped maple) are left, and shrubs and wildflowers are basically gone. When density exceeds 60 deer per square mile even resistant seedlings are heavily impacted and the forest understory is basically bare. At this density deer starve to death.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
forests maturing is something wildlife management will have to take into account By: Mike DiCicco | Quantico Sentry
Deer begin to impact forest resources when their density exceeds 10 deer per square mile. At this point abundance of songbird species that nest in habitats affected by deer (the shrub layer) declines, and wildflowers and shrubs preferred by deer begin to disappear. When deer density exceeds 20 per square mile, abundance of seedlings preferred by deer (such as red maple, hemlock, sugar maple, and white ash) decline in abundance or disappear and plants not preferred by deer such as ferns and grasses begin to take over the understory, choking out seedlings and shrubs.
At densities exceeding 40 deer per square mile there is a distinct browse line, only tree species resistant to deer browsing (beech, striped maple) are left, and shrubs and wildflowers are basically gone. When density exceeds 60 deer per square mile even resistant seedlings are heavily impacted and the forest understory is basically bare. At this density deer starve to death.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
forests maturing is something wildlife management will have to take into account By: Mike DiCicco | Quantico Sentry
QUANTICO, Va. --
As Tim Stamps stopped to scan the forest, peering through a thermal imaging device, a small, bright-white spot appeared in the grayscale viewfinder. "I think we may have one," he said.At about 10 a.m., Stamps, the head of Fish, Wildlife and Agronomy at Quantico, had been walking the forests on the main side of the base with another wildlife biologist since sunup, searching for fawns. Already, they had spotted three and managed to catch two. The ones that were caught were each fitted with a collar carrying a tracking device. A numbered tag was also attached to their ears, and they were released.
The effort is part of a program initiated about four years ago to determine the fates of deer young on the base. It is largely a response to concerns that the coyotes that have made inroads into Virginia over the last decade or so are bringing down the population of local hunters' favorite prey. Spotting fawns can be difficult, even with the thermal imager. Other animals and even decaying stumps give off heat, and on a clear day, the sun shining through the canopy creates warm spots on the forest floor. The trick is to look for a bright, often kidney bean-shaped image, such as the one Stamps had just spied.
The fawn, curled up and still in some sparse undergrowth about 15 yards away, was virtually invisible to the naked eye."Their nature is just to stay frozen," Stamps said, noting that a doe will often "park" her fawns for hours or even all day while she goes off to feed. "They just hunker down and stay motionless."The instinct to stay still until the last moment makes it easy to get close to them, Stamps said. "Often, you can just walk up and grab them, which worked on the two this morning." However, they still become difficult to catch by the time they're about a week old and steady on their feet, which is why Stamps was out searching on May 25, at the very start of fawn season.
Slowly, he and biologist Damon Lowery approached the fawn from either side. Stamps carried a large salmon net. Only when they got within a few feet of the little animal did it leap up and flee. They gave chase, but the fawn got a fast start and outran them, giving a loud bleat as it raced off into the woods.Stamps estimated that the young deer was "pretty well over a week old. Once they get past seven days, they're a lot more capable of surviving on their own."
Another way the naturalists locate infant deer is with a different type of tracking device implanted in early spring in does' birth canals, after they are tranquilized with a dart projector. When the deer gives birth, the device is ejected with the fawn, and upon cooling, it sends a signal. The biologists immediately descend on the location to collar the newborn. However, Stamps said five of the six transmitters implanted this year had already been expelled, and none had resulted in a catch, which is unusual for this technique."I'm guessing they were moved to heavier cover," he said, although he added that they could have been eaten.In that event, a coyote would be the most likely culprit, although the base is also home to some black bears and bobcats.
.So Stamps and his crew have set about collaring the infant deer to find out how many are eaten. When the tracking devices stay in one place for four hours or more, the pulse of their signal quickens. If that goes on for some hours, the naturalists go see what's become of the fawn.As of last year, 54 fawns had been tracked. The collars are designed to eventually fall off, and seven of them had come off early, leaving those fawns' fates unknown. Of those remaining, 64 percent had survived the summer. Nine died after being abandoned, most likely because their mothers couldn't feed them, Stamps said. Five died of unknown causes, and only three were definitely eaten.Two of the 14 more collared by late March of this year had been determined to be victims of predators.
"So far, anyway, we're not showing predation that some studies, like in North Carolina and South Carolina, are showing," Stamps said. John Rohm, wildlife biologist with the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, said findings of dramatic impacts on deer populations resulting from coyotes are, in fact, rare. The studies are almost always undertaken because hunters believe the new coyote presence is bringing down deer numbers, but predation usually — although not always — turns out not to be the main cause, he said.
In the case of Quantico, Rohm said, "I would think if it was such a problem, with the sampling they've done over there, they would find more of an impact."A more likely explanation is that as forests mature, they have less capacity for supporting deer populations, Rohm said. Deer are better equipped to deal with predators than with food shortages. "Deer just outbreed predation because that's what they're designed to do," he said. "They've evolved with everything trying to eat them."
Whatever the cause of the population decline, Stamps said he is trying to keep deer numbers up by managing their harvest, mainly by reducing the number of days that does can be hunted by about 40 percent.
Whatever the cause of the population decline, Stamps said he is trying to keep deer numbers up by managing their harvest, mainly by reducing the number of days that does can be hunted by about 40 percent.
He said earlier population levels were probably too high anyway, resulting in increased traffic accidents. "We're probably at a decent number of deer right now, but we don't want it to drop below our current levels."Rohm said there is no population count of coyotes in the area, but they do appear to be on the rise. However, to the extent that they may affect deer populations, he said there is little that can be done to stop them.Areas in the west of the country have put bounties on coyotes and spent, in some cases, millions of dollars trying to eradicate these opportunistic omnivores, with little effect, he said. They are often smart enough to avoid trapping and simply outbreed efforts to reduce their numbers.
"You can't get rid of coyotes. That's just not an option," he said. "So we'll have to learn to live with
them."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deer Management in Virginia
W Matt Knox and Nelson Lafon - Deer Project Coordinators Izaak Walton League
White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) garner more interest than any other wildlife species in Virginia. Many Virginians relish the chance to hunt, watch, or photograph this graceful mammal. Deer hunting is a deeply-rooted social tradition in Virginia. The economic impact of deer hunting in Virginia is over $250 million annually. However, as the largest wild herbivore (plant-eater) in the Commonwealth, deer have a profound impact on forest ecosystems. Deer also inflict millions of dollars in damage to crops, trees, and gardens and are a safety risk on our highways.
White-tailed deer in Virginia have a remarkable and interesting history. Historical changes in deer distribution patterns, population trends, and management practices in Virginia are representative of those in many southeastern states. Deer herds at the time of European settlement around 1600 were plentiful and widespread. Over-exploitation during the next 300 years resulted in near extirpation of deer by 1900. When the first European settlers arrived in North America in 1607 at Jamestown Island, Virginia, they described an animal found in abundance, which would become commonly known as the Virginia white-tailed deer. The exact number of deer that inhabited the Commonwealth of Virginia at the time of European settlement is unknown.
Following colonization, Virginia's deer population began to decline. Factors cited as reasonable causes for this decline are habitat loss due to deforestation and agriculture, over-harvest, and lack of effective law enforcement. Extensive over-harvest may have been the most damaging factor.
To rectify the decline in deer numbers, Virginia was one of the first colonies to establish in 1699 a closed season on hunting deer (from February 1 through July 31). By 1738, separate seasons had been established for bucks and for does and fawns.
The over-harvest of Virginia's deer resource was characterized by several distinct stages. During early European settlement, venison and deer hides were essential staples of everyday colonial life. Despite the potential harm likely to be inflicted on deer populations, nearly every law that was enacted by colonists to protect deer in Virginia exempted settlers living on the contemporary western frontier. As further evidence of the pioneers' dependence on deer as a source of food and clothing, it was not until 1849 that the deer season was closed completely in counties west of the Blue Ridge Mountains.
Commercial trade in deer hides, which peaked around 1700, added to subsistence hunting. Between 1698 and 1715, approximately 14,000 hides were exported from Virginia to Europe annually. The boom in market hunting followed the rise and fall of commercial trade in deer hides. One market hunter in northwestern Virginia was reported to have killed over 2,700 deer prior to 1860 at an average price of 10 cents per pound. Market hunting effectively ceased with the passage of the federal Lacey Act in 1900, which outlawed the buying and selling of wildlife taken illegally and enhanced federal government control over the interstate transport of wildlife.
Like most southeastern states, Virginia's deer herd reached its lowest point during the early 1900s. By 1900, the deer herd in nearly all of Virginia's Mountain and Piedmont regions had been extirpated. In an article that appeared in the Game and Fish Conservationist, the precursor to today’s Virginia Wildlife, the 1931 statewide deer population was estimated to be approximately 25,000 animals.
After its formation in 1916, the Virginia Game Commission devoted considerable time and effort to deer management. Initial efforts to protect remaining deer herds included establishing shorter hunting seasons and imposing a season bag limit. Annual deer harvests during the 1920s averaged about 620 deer for all 33 counties that had open deer seasons. In 1924, the General Assembly restricted hunting to a 45-day buck-only deer season between November 15th and December 31st with a 1-deer per day, 2-deer per season bag limit. In 1926, the Game Commission initiated a deer restoration program. In its early stages (1926-1950), 1,305 deer from out-of-state sources were imported to and released in Virginia.
Historical records indicate that Virginia received deer from more states (11) than any other state in the Southeast. The last deer imported to and released in Virginia was in 1950. Following a slow start, the number of deer released per year peaked at 375 deer in 1940. Most restocking in Virginia occurred west of the Blue Ridge Mountains. In all, more than 4,200 deer were released.
In 1952, the Virginia Game Commission initiated a statewide program to collect data on deer populations to help set appropriate seasons and bag limits. In 1953, the first full-time deer biologist was employed to direct this program.
Since the 1940’s, Virginia’s deer herd has demonstrated exponential growth as a result of protective laws, deer restoration efforts, and habitat changes. From a low of 25,000 during the Depression, by the early 1950s, Virginia's statewide deer population was estimated to have expanded to 150,000 animals. By 1970, Virginia's statewide deer population was estimated to be approximately 215,000 animals. The 1980 statewide deer population was estimated at 422,000 animals. The 1987 statewide deer population was estimated to be approximately 575,000 animals. Current population reconstruction computer models estimate a population of approximately 900,000 deer in Virginia.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011-2012 Deer Kill Summary-Virginia Dept of Fame and Fish
The Department's deer management efforts over the past five years to increase the female deer kill over much of the state, especially on private lands, has been very successful. Female deer kill numbers have been at record levels for the past five consecutive deer seasons. These high and sustained female deer kill levels were intended to eventually lead to a decrease in the statewide deer herd and a decline in total deer kill numbers.
It should be noted however, that the Department is currently actively managing to increase deer populations in the Cumberland Plateau counties of Buchanan, Dickenson, and Wise, in the Alleghany Highland counties of Alleghany, Bath, and Highland and on National Forest lands west of the Blue Ridge Mountains.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUNTER KILLED DEER IN VIRIGINIA OVER THE PAST 10 YEARS
Total for Virginia 2001 215872
Total for Virginia 2002 214847
Total for Virginia 2003 237035
Total for Virginia 2004 221492
Total for Virginia 2005 215082
Total for Virginia 2006 223775
Total for Virginia 2007 242792
Total for Virginia 2008 256382
Total for Virginia 2009 259147
Total for Virginia 2010 222074
Total for Virginia 2011 233104
source for abouve statistics: 2012 Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment