Social organization in deer: Implications for localized management

Populations of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) inhabiting many state and national parks and suburban areas have grown to the point that they conflict with human activities. Conflicts range from destruction of vegetation through browsing to public perception that diseases carried by deer pose threats to human health. Traditional modes of hunting to control populations are inappropriate in many of these areas because of intense human development and activity. This article explores an alternative approach for population reduction based on deer social organization. Female white-tailed deer are highly philopatric and female offspring remain near their dams for life. This suggests that a population expands slowly as a series of overlapping home ranges in a form analogous to the petals on a rose. Incorporating the rose petal concept into a model of population growth shows that removal of deer by family unit can potentially alleviate conflicts in localized areas for as many as 10–15 yr.     

Model-Based Assessment of Aspen Responses to Elk Herbivory in Rocky Mountain National Park,USA

In Rocky Mountain National Park (RMNP), aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) has been observed to be declining on elk (Cervus elaphus nelsoni) winter range for many decades. To support elk management decisions, the SAVANNA ecosystem model was adapted to explore interactions between elk herbivory and aspen dynamics. The simulated probability of successful vegetative regeneration for senescent aspen stands declines sharply when elk densities reach levels of 3–5 elk/km², depending on model assumptions for the seasonal duration of elk foraging activities. For aspen stands with a substantial component of younger trees, the simulated regeneration probability declines more continuously with increasing elk density, dropping below 50% from densities at 8–14 elk/km².At the landscape scale, simulated aspen regeneration probability under a scenario of extensive seasonal use was little affected by elk population level, when this level was above 300–600 elk (25%–50% current population) over the ca. 107 km² winter range. This was because elk distribution was highly aggregated, so that a high density of elk occupied certain areas, even at low population levels overall. At approximately current elk population levels (1000–1200 elk), only 35%–45% of senescent aspen stands are simulated as having at least a 90% probability of regeneration, nearly all of them located on the periphery of the winter range. Successful management for aspen persistence on core winter range will likely require some combination of elk population reduction, management of elk distribution, and fencing to protect aspen suckers from elk browsing.