The facts and history of the deer in both forestland and highly mixed farmland or residential areas all clearly do show that high deer populations can’t be sustained long term without a healthy forest. Yes the farmland, neighborhood habitats can sustain deer in a healthy conditions but history has proven that unless there is also a good mix of healthy forest in that habitat equation the high deer numbers will be sustained long term.

There are several reasons the high deer numbers wouldn’t be sustained without a good mix of healthy forest though. Here are some of those reasons.

During the summer months whether forest habitat is high or low quality many deer can be sustained by eating grass from lawns and hay from farm fields with little complaint from the farmer or lawn owner. But, high deer numbers will also eat a lot of farm crops and neighborhood gardens during the summer and that starts the deer/human conflict problems that lead to the over whelming none hunter/public demands for fewer deer. Thus both more crop damage kills, red tags and increased antler less allocations and hunter harvests in the future.

During the summer, if there are healthy forest habitats, more deer feed in the forested habitats and thus less in the areas where they wear out their welcome to the neighborhood gardens and farm crops.

During the winter months if there is enough healthy forest, with a balanced deer herd for the area, most of those deer would be able to find sufficient food in the forested habitats to be healthy and produce fawns with a high recruitment rate. If that forest habitat isn’t healthy enough to sustain all of the deer for the area then several things are likely to happen including the excess deer casing damage to the forest food supply. As that forest food supply starts to decline more deer move out into the neighborhood shrubs and ornamental landscaping causing damage them.

That decline in habitat then does two things that result in fewer deer for the future. First of all as the over winter habitat becomes degraded the fawn survival rates decline as the deer actually attempt to reduce their own numbers. The second thing the reduced forest health does is result in an even higher public demand for fewer deer impacting their properties, which once again leads to those human/deer conflicts that set up the chain of events which ultimately result in increased deer harvests for the future.

The plan and simple fact of the matter is that a healthy forest habitat can and will mean higher long term sustainable deer numbers then what can be sustained without good forest health. Once the forest habitat declines even the deer are smart enough to reduce their own numbers so there isn’t much man can do to reverse that other then help those deer keep their own numbers in balance with that habitat.

Even with that having been explained I will also tell everyone right now that those areas with a good mix of farmland, forestland (good quality or not) and small landowner plantings that come with high quality soils areas will probably always result in higher deer numbers then the poor soil big woods areas. But, even though rich soil, mixed habitat areas will have higher long term sustainable deer numbers with a healthy forest habitat then that they will have with poor forest health.

R.S. Bodenhorn