Suburban
QDM March 2007
Kip
Adams, QDMA Director of Education and Outreach, Northern
Region
Many states struggle to reduce
and/or maintain deer populations at appropriate levels in
rural areas even with the willing aid of hunters. Some deer
populations are difficult to control even with property
access, proficient hunters and favorable hunting seasons
and bag limits. Add restricted property access, landowner
unfamiliarity with hunting, safety zones and weapons
discharge ordinances and you have made a difficult task
even tougher.
Goals for managing deer in urban and suburban environments
are similar to rural environments; balance the deer herd
with the available habitat, balance the adult sex ratio,
and have a complete age structure for bucks and does.
However, there is generally a much higher emphasis on
balancing the herd with the habitat to reduce deer-vehicle
accidents and other deer human conflicts. Unfortunately,
controlling herd growth in these areas is often more
difficult than in rural landscapes. Expanding deer herds in
rural areas often increase until they degrade the habitat
to the point where it can no longer provide enough food or
cover to support the deer population. The quality of the
habitat then declines and generally brings the size of the
deer herd down with it. Many of these areas ultimately end
up with poor quality habitat and low density deer herds.
This is a no-win situation for the habitat, deer herd and
other wildlife species. There are many examples of this
scenario in the traditional “big” deer states
like Michigan, New York and Pennsylvania. In urban and
suburban areas, as deer herds climb and degrade the
habitat, you end up with poor quality habitat but you
rarely get the corresponding drop in deer numbers. For
example, look at Valley Forge National Historic Park in
southeastern Pennsylvania. Despite severe habitat
degradation, the deer herd has increased from approximately
155 to 240 deer per square mile over the past decade. In
such instances the deer population continues increasing
despite the loss of habitat because of two factors: 1) low
mortality rates and 2) alternative food sources. Across
their range, hunter harvest is the number one mortality
source for deer. Other important sources include predation,
deer-vehicle accidents and disease. In many
urban/suburban deer herds, hunter harvest is low or
nonexistent, as is mortality from predators. From a food
perspective, urban/suburban environments offer abundant
gardens, shrubbery and other landscaping, as well as
supplemental feed from some homeowners. The point is that
urban/suburban deer populations can remain high even in
poor habitats, and the number one mortality source –
and management tool - is not as easily applied as in rural
areas.
To be able to use hunting as a management tool in
urban/suburban areas we need to understand the barriers
currently preventing or limiting its use. One major barrier
is a property owner’s unwillingness to allow anyone -
hunter or otherwise - access to his/her property. Recent
court cases like Pennsylvania’s Burns vs. Haas where
a landowner was held liable for a shooting accident that
occurred on his property do little to increase property
access for hunting. Fortunately, current legislation (PA
HB13) is attempting to protect landowners from future
liability suits. Additionally, as managers and hunters we
need to demonstrate the utility of hunting to these
property owners. “Bubba hunters” need not
apply. We need to make these property owners feel safe and
comfortable about having hunters in their woods. Look sharp
and be polite when asking for permission.
Another barrier is urban/suburban residents’ views
toward wildlife management. Many residents in
urban/suburban municipalities receive inaccurate
information on potential strategies for managing the
“town’s” deer population. Some may want
fewer deer but fear for their family’s safety if
weapons are discharged in their neighborhoods. Others may
feel the situation can easily be addressed by trapping deer
and releasing them elsewhere. Still others have heard about
contraceptive techniques that work well in horses on
Maryland and Virginia’s Assateague Island. Not
everyone will support hunting and hunting is not
appropriate for every situation, but hunting can be used in
far more areas and to a much greater degree than it is
currently being used. The key to making this happen is
education.
The best way to educate urban/suburban residents on deer
management is to provide them with unbiased, scientific
information on deer management strategies and let them
decide which option(s) they prefer, or at least can live
with. The two best published documents with this
information are An Evaluation of Deer Management Options by
Ellingwood and Caturano and Managing White-Tailed Deer in
Suburban Environments: A Technical Guide by DeNicola,
VerCauteren, Curtis and Hygnstrom.
An Evaluation of Deer Management Options is an excellent
publication and is intended for distribution to the general
public. Managing White-Tailed Deer in Suburban Environments
is also an excellent publication and is intended for
professional biologists and managers, community leaders,
and others involved with suburban deer management. A new
publication, the community version of QDMA’s Living
with White-tailed Deer (LWWTD) educational program uses
information from these documents to provide the most
up-to-date scientific information available. The community
version of LWWTD is written in laymen’s terms and
specifically targets urban/suburban residents and community
leaders. The community version includes a one-page
information sheet on each of the seven most commonly used
strategies, including advantages, disadvantages and
associated costs for each. The document covers
contraception, predation, allowing nature to take its
course, fencing and repellents, trapping, hunting and
sharpshooting. The document does not tell the reader which
option
is the best, rather it provides the facts and lets the
reader make his/her own decision – based on factual
information – about which management strategy(s) is
appropriate for them. LWWTD removes the emotion and
misinformation from the decision- making process and will
help remove barriers to managing deer in urban/suburban
environments.
Urban and suburban deer management have been emerging
challenges for state wildlife agencies and local
municipalities. Given our country’s rate of
development and increasing human population, these deer
management arenas will necessitate additional time and
resources in the near future. The sooner we begin educating
urban/suburban municipalities and other nontraditional
hunting groups on the benefits of hunting, the sooner
we’ll begin adequately managing urban/suburban deer
populations.
DeNicola, A.J., K.C. VerCauteren, P.D. Curtis, and S.E.
Hygnstrom. 2000. Managing white-tailed deer in suburban
environments: a technical guide. A publication of the
Cornell Cooperative Extension, the Wildlife
Society-Wildlife Damage Management Working Group, and the
Northeast Wildlife Damage Research and Outreach
Cooperative. 52pp.
Ellingwood, M.R. and S.L. Caturano. 1988. An evaluation of
deer management options. Publication Number DR-11,
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection,
Wildlife Division, Hartford, Conn. Revised and reformatted,
NH Fish and Game Department, 1996.
Kip’s Korner is written
by Kip Adams, a Certified Wildlife Biologist and Northern
Director of Education and Outreach for the Quality Deer
Management Association (QDMA). The QDMA is an
international nonprofit wildlife conservation organization
dedicated to ethical hunting, sound deer management and
preservation of the deer-hunting heritage. The QDMA
can be reached at 1-800-209-DEER or www.QDMA.com.