From: kdw@icd.ab.com (Kenneth D. Whitehead)
Subject: Re: HUNT: Omaha's Fontenelle Forest
Organization: Allen-Bradley Company, Inc.
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 15:01:06 GMT

Hi, Ed;

 ed@cwis.unomaha.edu (Ed Stastny) writes:
`
>(First paragraph deleted)


>I called the director at Fontenelle and asked about alternatives to
>hunting.  He said that they could move the deer to another forest, but
>it would cost a couple thousand dollars (that they don't have to spare)
>and the mortality rate is high for such moves.  

Just to clarify this;  actually, the cost is a couple of thousand dollars
PER DEER, not just a couple of thousand total, and from what I have heard
the mortality rate for such transfer attempts approaches 50%. Couple that
with the fact that they're having deer overpopulation problems almost
everywhere, and you have the question of where are ya gonna put them?
I'm sure the farmers in the Omaha vicinity don't want them turned loose
on their crops! 

I have heard a few things about birth control for deer, and this could work
(in some measuer, anyway) in a relatively small area such as a park, possibly, 
but trapping them is just too expensive and hard on the animals.


>He said that the herd
>had a disproportionate amount of does.  Does this mean that there are
>too many does?  


Yes, it does, although this is a situation that is generally caused by
hunting practices that encourage the harvest of bucks only.  It sounds like
you are talking about an area that doesn't normally get hunted, and such
places typically are in better male/female balance;  in such an instance,
if there are too many does, there are also a hell of a lot of bucks!


>I assumed that's what he meant, but when I talked to my
>sister later...she said that too many does is not a problem (but then
>again, she acts like an expert in things she really doesn't know much
>about).  

Your sister is right if she wants to increase the deer population, but wrong
if she favors holding it down.  Here's why:

Typically, the dominant buck in any given area will breed all (or most all)
of the does.  And depending upon the availability of food and other habitat,
each doe will produce two (sometimes 3, if things are REAL good) offspring 
every year, usually about the first week of June.

Let's say you have a woodlot that is surrounded by development, and this
woodlot has ten deer living on it;  5 bucks, and 5 does.  In November, the
dominant buck breeds the does, all 5 of them.  (The other bucks could get
killed off and this would still happen, because it only takes one buck to
perpetuate the herd.)  But let's say that none of them get killed, they all
make it through the winter.  And in the spring, the five does give birth to 
2 fawns each, increasing the herd size by 10, to a total of 20 deer, for a 100%
increase in herd size.

Same scenario, except that there is an imbalance in the herd;  that is,
the herd still consists of 10 deer, but only 1 is a buck and 9 are does.
Once again, in November the buck breeds the does.  And in the spring,
each doe drops 2 fawns.  But this time, the herd doesn't increase from 10
deer to 20, it increases from 10 deer to 28, a 180% annual population boom!

The more does, the greater the percentage of population increase.  The fewer
the does, the smaller the increase.  As long as the population increase doesn't
exceed ambient mortality factors such as hunting, car accidents, wild
dogs, etc., the population will remain stable, and will not exceed the winter 
carrying capacity of the land.  However, if the increase in population is
significantly greater than the annual mortality rate, the herd size will
increase rapidly, and after a while the wintering capabilities of the herd 
will be reduced and overbrowsing will destroy browse habitat up to a level 
of about 6 feet, or as high on the vegetation as the deer can reach standing 
on their hind legs.

When this happens, the land becomes barren and useless to all species living 
on the ground.  And considering that even a balanced herd doubles in size 
every spring, this can happen very quickly, especially in areas where hunting 
is restricted; once the average person notices there is a problem, it's already 
a pretty serious problem, and then special hunts are often needed in order to 
bring the deer population back into line with the carrying capacity of the land.



Ken








 


Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals