Skip to main content
Other
Test of Localized Management for Reducing Deer Browsing in Forest Regeneration Areas
USDA National Wildlife Research Center - Staff Publications
  • Brad F. Miller, Arkansas Game and Fish Commission, 2 Natural Resources Drive, Little Rock, AR 72205, USA
  • Tyler Campbell, United States Department of Agriculture/Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service/Wildlife Services/National Wildlife Research Center-Texas Field Station, Texas A&M University-Kingsville, Kingsville, TX 78363, USA
  • Ben Laseter, Fish and Wildlife Associates, Incorporated, P.O. Box 241, Whittier, NC 28789, USA
  • W. Mark Ford, United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station, Parsons, WV 26287, USA
  • Karl Miller, University of Georgia, Athens
Date of this Version
1-1-2010
Comments
Published in Journal of Wildlife Management 74(3):370–378; 2010; DOI: 10.2193/2009-221.
Abstract
White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) browsing in forest regeneration sites can affect current and future stand structure and species composition. Removal of deer social units (localized management) has been proposed as a strategy to alleviate deer overbrowsing in forest systems. We conducted an experimental localized removal in a high-density deer population in the central Appalachians of West Virginia, USA, during winter 2002. We removed 51 deer within a 1.1-km2 area that encompassed 2 forest regeneration sites (14 ha). During the summer following removal, we detected decreases in distance from the removal area in 8 of 30 (26.7%) adult females having pretreatment mean telemetry locations <2.5 km from the center of the removal area. We measured browsing rates during the summers of 2001–2004 from forest regeneration sites to examine efficacy of localized management. Browsing rates declined annually in both removal and control areas, due in part to increased timber harvesting on the larger study site, suggesting that increasing forage availability may be more effective at reducing impacts on forest regeneration than localized reductions in deer populations. Three years after the initial removal, we removed an additional 31 deer from the original 1.1-km2 removal area. Home range shifts of adjacent deer coupled with the large number of animals collected in the second removal suggests that localized management only produces temporary voids within high-density deer herds. Localized management may not effectively reduce negative impacts of deer in areas of high deer density.
Citation Information
Brad F. Miller, Tyler Campbell, Ben Laseter, W. Mark Ford, et al.. "Test of Localized Management for Reducing Deer Browsing in Forest Regeneration Areas" (2010)
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/tyler_campbell/17/