Deer overabundance in the USA: recent advances in population control
R. J. WarrenWarnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA. Email: warren@warnell.uga.edu
Animal Production Science 51(4) 259-266 https://doi.org/10.1071/AN10214
Submitted: 9 October 2010 Accepted: 12 January 2011 Published: 8 April 2011
Abstract
During the 20th century, deer (Odocoileus spp.) populations in many parts of the USA changed from locally extirpated to locally overabundant. In 1997, two comprehensive books were published on deer overabundance to help wildlife professionals understand the complex biological, ecological, sociopolitical, public, and legal issues associated with managing overabundant deer. Since then, there have been several advances in dealing with deer overabundance, which have been briefly summarised in this review article. Most notably, since 1997 ecologists have more definitively characterised the ecological consequences of chronically overabundant deer populations, not merely in terms of direct impacts on plant communities but also in terms of cascading effects on animal communities. While still acknowledging the complexity of the interactions that affect ecosystem services and states (e.g. top-down pathways, bottom-up forces, disturbance regimes), ecologists now believe that the presence of an apex predator can affect the density, as well as behaviour and physiology of ungulates, and thereby help maintain the natural structure and functioning of plant communities. In some situations, wildlife researchers in the USA have restored native predators or documented adaptive responses by colonising predators, both of which have helped reduce locally overabundant deer populations and helped restore plant community diversity. On the wildlife policy front, some state wildlife agencies have enacted new programs to manage overabundant deer in protected areas and in urban and suburban settings. Examples include special permits for lethal removal of urban deer, as well as public hunts using special weapons (e.g. crossbows) or sharpshooting programs to control deer in state parks. A better understanding of the human dimensions associated with deer overabundance has helped many agencies define appropriate public education programs. However, despite these efforts to educate stakeholders about deer overabundance, there have been legal challenges associated with programs designed to control deer populations in some suburban communities. Some nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) have implemented award-winning, classroom-based educational modules to help children learn how to live with deer. Some NGOs also have stressed the importance of hunting as an ecological service. Still other NGOs have worked to facilitate linkages and cover liability concerns to enable bowhunters to help control deer in suburban communities. There also have been major advances in the potential for managing overabundant deer with fertility control, including the recent approval of an immunocontraceptive vaccine for use in deer (GonaCon™). In summary, wildlife biologists now understand the complex issues associated with deer overabundance better and there are more ‘tools in the chest’, both in terms of agency policies and management procedures than in 1997. Yet, human dimensions, public education, and stakeholder concerns continue to be the most challenging aspects of managing deer overabundance. Therefore, this issue likely will continue to confront wildlife professionals for many decades to come, whether in the USA or other parts of the world.
Additional keywords: deer–vehicle collisions, GonaCon™, human dimensions, immunocontraception, predator restoration, sharpshooting, wildlife policy.
References
[1] McShea WJ, Underwood HB, Rappole JH, eds. The science of overabundance: deer ecology and management. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press; 1997.[2] Warren RJ, ed. Special issue – deer overabundance. Wildl Soc Bull 1997; 25 213–600.
[3] McCabe RE, McCabe TR. Of slings and arrows: an historical retrospection. In: Halls LK, editor. White-tailed deer: ecology and management. Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole Books; 1984. pp. 19–72.
[4] Woolfe A, Roseberry JL. Deer management: our profession’s symbol of success or failure? Wildl Soc Bull 1998; 26 515–21.
[5] Leopold A, Sowls LK, Spencer DL. A survey of over-populated deer ranges in the U.S. J Wildl Manage 1947; 11 162–77.
| A survey of over-populated deer ranges in the U.S.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[6] DeNicola AJ, VertCauteren KC, Curtis PD, Hygnstrom SE. Managing white-tailed deer in suburban environments: a technical guide. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Cooperative Extension Information Bulletin, Cornell University; 2000.
[7] Russell FL, Zippin DB, Fowler NL. Effects of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) on plants, plant populations and communities: a review. Am Midl Nat 2001; 146 1–26.
| Effects of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) on plants, plant populations and communities: a review.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[8] Rooney TP, Waller DM. Direct and indirect effects of white-tailed deer in forest ecosystems. For Ecol Manage 2003; 181 165–76.
| Direct and indirect effects of white-tailed deer in forest ecosystems.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[9] Cote SD, Rooney TP, Tremblay J, Dussault C, Waller DM. Ecological impacts of deer overabundance. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 2004; 35 113–47.
| Ecological impacts of deer overabundance.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[10] Cote SD. Extirpation of a large black bear population by introduced white-tailed deer. Conserv Biol 2005; 19 1668–71.
| Extirpation of a large black bear population by introduced white-tailed deer.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[11] Laundré JW, Hernandez L, Altendorf KB. Wolves, elk, and bison: reestablishing the ‘landscape of fear’ in Yellowstone National Park, USA. Can J Zool 2001; 79 1401–9.
| Wolves, elk, and bison: reestablishing the ‘landscape of fear’ in Yellowstone National Park, USA.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[12] Creel S, Christianson D, Liley S, Winnie JA. Predation risk affects reproductive physiology and demography of elk. Science 2007; 315 960
| Predation risk affects reproductive physiology and demography of elk.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2sXhs1Clu7Y%3D&md5=4d6aa2500ba015f5f6d6978dd08ae419CAS | 17303746PubMed |
[13] Creel S, Winnie JA, Christianson D. Glucocorticoid stress hormones and the effect of predation risk on elk reproduction. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2009; 106 12 388–93.
| Glucocorticoid stress hormones and the effect of predation risk on elk reproduction.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1MXpslGjsbg%3D&md5=ce60e7237eb002f1c31474ed32b589ddCAS |
[14] Beschta RL, Ripple WJ. Large predators and trophic cascades in terrestrial ecosystems of the western United States. Biol Conserv 2009; 142 2401–14.
| Large predators and trophic cascades in terrestrial ecosystems of the western United States.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[15] Latham RE, Beyea J, Benner M, Dunn CA, Fajvan MA, Freed RR. et al. Managing white-tailed deer in forest habitat from an ecosystem perspective: Pennsylvania case study. Report of the Deer Management Forum. Harrisburg, PA: Audubon Pennsylvania and Pennsylvania Habitat Alliance; 2005.
[16] Stromayer KAK, Warren RJ. Are overabundant deer herds in the eastern United States creating alternate stable states in forest plant communities? Wildl Soc Bull 1997; 25 227–34.
[17] Warren RJ. Ecological justification for controlling deer populations in eastern national parks. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 1991; 56: 56–66.
[18] Underwood HB, Porter WE. Values and science: white-tailed deer management in eastern national parks. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 1991; 56: 67–85.
[19] Ruggiero LF. Scientific independence and credibility in sociopolitical processes. J Wildl Manage 2010; 74 1179–82.
| Scientific independence and credibility in sociopolitical processes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[20] Kilgo JC, Ray HS, Ruth C, Miller KV. Can coyotes affect deer populations in southeastern North America? J Wildl Manage 2010; 74 929–33.
| Can coyotes affect deer populations in southeastern North America?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[21] Warren RJ, Conroy MJ, James WE, Baker LA, Diefenbach DR. Reintroduction of bobcats on Cumberland Island, Georgia: a biopolitical lesson. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 1990; 55: 580–89.
[22] Diefenbach DR, Hansen LA, Conroy MJ, Warren RJ, Nelms MG. Restoration of bobcats to Cumberland Island, Georgia, USA: lessons learned and evidence for the role of bobcats as keystone predators. Iberian Lynx Ex-situ Conservation Seminar Series. Sevilla, Spain: Fundación Biodiversidad; 2009. Available online at: http://www.lynxexsitu.es/comunicacion/simposios.htm [verified 2 October 2010]
[23] Roberts SB, Jordan JD, Bettinger P, Warren RJ. Using bobcat habitat suitability to prioritize habitat preservation on a developing barrier island. J Wildl Manage 2010; 74 386–94.
| Using bobcat habitat suitability to prioritize habitat preservation on a developing barrier island.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[24] Roberts SB, Jordan JD, Bettinger P, Warren RJ. Wildlife icon helps preserve habitat: integrating bobcat research, education, and habitat preservation on a suburbanizing barrier island. The Wildlife Professional 2010; 4 42–4.
[25] Berger J. Hunting by carnivores and humans: does functional redundancy occur and does it matter? In: Ray JC, Redford KH, Steneck RS, Berger J, editors. Large carnivores and the conservation of biodiversity. Washington, DC: Island Press; 2005. pp. 315–41.
[26] Kilpatrick HJ, LaBonte AM, Barclay JS, Warner G. Assessing strategies to improve bowhunting as an urban deer management tool. Wildl Soc Bull 2004; 32 1177–84.
| Assessing strategies to improve bowhunting as an urban deer management tool.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[27] Kilpatrick HJ, Guynn D, Hall S, Ballard D, Mayer K. Panel discussion: regional perspectives on major bowhunting issues. In: Warren RJ, editor. Proceedings of the 1st national bowhunting conference. Comfrey, MN: Archery Manufacturers and Merchants Organization; 2002. pp. 134–41.
[28] Williams T. Wanted: more hunters. Available online at: http://www.audubonmagazine.org/incite/incite0203.html [verified 2 October 2010]
[29] Winand CJ. Bowhunting suburban deer: a case history. In: Warren RJ, editor. Proceedings of the 1st national bowhunting conference. Comfrey, MN: Archery Manufacturers and Merchants Organization; 2002. pp. 73–5.
[30] Graham JM, McAninch JB, Durkin PE. Control of urban deer herds by a bowhunters’coalition in Minneapolis, Minnesota. In: Warren RJ, editor. Proceedings of the 1st national bowhunting conference. Comfrey, MN: Archery Manufacturers and Merchants Organization; 2002. pp. 69–72.
[31] Tonkovich MJ, Cartwright ME. Evaluation of the use of crossbows for deer hunting in Ohio and Arkansas. In: Warren RJ, editor. Proceedings of the 1st national bowhunting conference. Comfrey, MN: Archery Manufacturers and Merchants Organization; 2002. pp. 31–9.
[32] Mayer KE, Lund RC, Hansen LP, Warren RJ, Gladfelter HL. Review of archery equipment regulations for big game hunting in the United States. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 2000; 65: 109–18.
[33] Kaji K, Saitoh T, Uno H, Matsuda H, Yamamura K. Adaptive management of sika deer populations in Hokkaido, Japan: theory and practice. Popul Ecol 2010; 52 373–87.
| Adaptive management of sika deer populations in Hokkaido, Japan: theory and practice.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[34] Schwartz JA, Warren RJ, Henderson DW, Osborn DA, Kesler DJ. Captive and field tests of a method for immobilization and euthanasia of urban deer. Wildl Soc Bull 1997; 25 532–41.
[35] Killmaster CH, Osborn DA, Warren RJ, Miller KV. Deer and understory plant responses to a large-scale herd reduction on a Georgia state park. Nat Areas J 2007; 27 161–8.
| Deer and understory plant responses to a large-scale herd reduction on a Georgia state park.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[36] Cromwell JS, Warren RJ, Henderson DW. Live-capture and small-scale relocation of urban deer on Hilton Head Island, South Carolina. Wildl Soc Bull 1999; 27 1025–31.
[37] Henderson DW, Warren RJ, Cromwell JA, Hamilton RJ. Responses of urban deer to a 50% reduction in local herd density. Wildl Soc Bull 2000; 28 902–10.
[38] Henderson DW, Warren RJ, Newman DH, Bowker JM, Cromwell JA, Jackson JJ. Human perceptions before and after a 50% reduction in an urban deer herd’s density. Wildl Soc Bull 2000; 28 911–8.
[39] Bowker JM, Newman DH, Warren RJ, Henderson DW. Estimating the economic value of lethal versus non-lethal deer control in suburban communities. Soc Nat Resour 2003; 16 143–58.
| Estimating the economic value of lethal versus non-lethal deer control in suburban communities.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[40] DeNicola AJ, Williams SC. Sharpshooting suburban white-tailed deer reduces deer-vehicle collisions. Human–Wildlife Interactions 2008; 2 28–33.
[41] Fagerstone KA, Coffey MA, Curtis PD, Dolbeer RA, Killian GJ, Miller LA. et al. Wildlife fertility control, Technical Review 02–2. Bethesda, MD: The Wildlife Society; 2002.
[42] Gionfriddo JP, Eisemann JD, Sullivan KJ, Healey RS, Miller LA, Fagerstone KA, et al Field test of a single-injection gonadotrophin-releasing hormone immunocontraceptive vaccine in female white-tailed deer. Wildl Res 2009; 36 177–84.
| Field test of a single-injection gonadotrophin-releasing hormone immunocontraceptive vaccine in female white-tailed deer.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1MXksVOnsLk%3D&md5=db1c83929d7f735770de4cfe08aa9722CAS |
[43] Rutberg AT, Naugle RE. Population-level effects of immunocontraception in white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus). Wildl Res 2008; 35 494–501.
| Population-level effects of immunocontraception in white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus).Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1cXht1KrtLnM&md5=7dbc51c15838935e94010068755ac6b5CAS |
[44] Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. Deer immunocontraceptive working group, meeting summary and products, March 2007. Available online at: http://www.fishwildlife.org/Science_research/Deer_Immuno_Report_MARCH07.pdf [Verified 2 October 2010].
[45] Fraker MA, Brown RG, Grant GE, Kerr JA, Pohajdak B. Long-lasting, single-dose immunocontraception of feral fallow deer in British Columbia. J Wildl Manage 2002; 66 1141–7.
| Long-lasting, single-dose immunocontraception of feral fallow deer in British Columbia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[46] Miller LA, Fagerstone KA, Wagner DA, Killian GJ. Factors contributing to the success of a single-shot, multiyear PZP immunocontraceptive vaccine for white-tailed deer. Human–Wildlife Interactions 2009; 3 103–15.
[47] Locke SL, Cook MW, Harveson LA, Davis DS, Lopez RR, Silvy NJ, et al Effectiveness of SpayVac for reducing white-tailed deer fertility. J Wildl Dis 2007; 43 726–30.
| 17984269PubMed |
[48] Miller LA, Gionfriddo JP, Fagerstone KA, Rhyan JC, Killian GJ. The single-shot GnRH immunocontraceptive vaccine (GonaCon) in white-tailed deer: comparison of several GnRH preparations. Am J Reprod Immunol 2008; 60 214–23.
| The single-shot GnRH immunocontraceptive vaccine (GonaCon) in white-tailed deer: comparison of several GnRH preparations.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1cXhtFKrsbzP&md5=6ebf92eaa7e3bd361bd5f2b037e2747fCAS | 18782282PubMed |
[49] Decker DJ, Brown TL, Siemer WF. Human dimensions of wildlife management in North America. Bethesda, MD: The Wildlife Society; 2001.
[50] Nolan WP, Bertalan D. Marketing urban white-tailed deer management: a classroom activity. In: Warren RJ, editor. Proceedings of the 1st national bowhunting conference. Comfrey, MN: Archery Manufacturers and Merchants Organization; 2002. pp. 59–61.
[51] Cooper CB, Dickinson J, Phillips T, Bonney R. Citizen science as a tool for conservation in residential ecosystems. Ecology and Society 2007; 12: 11. Available online at: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol12/iss2/art11/ [verified 2 October 2010]
[52] Devictor V, Whittaker RJ, Beltrame C. Beyond scarcity: citizen science programmes as useful tools for conservation biogeography. Divers Distrib 2010; 16 354–62.
| Beyond scarcity: citizen science programmes as useful tools for conservation biogeography.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[53] Morellet N, Gaillard JM, Hewison AJM, Ballon P, Boscardin Y, Duncan P, et al Indicators of ecological change: new tools for managing populations of large herbivores. J Appl Ecol 2007; 44 634–43.
| Indicators of ecological change: new tools for managing populations of large herbivores.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
