High deer densities may actually be good for some other species?!?!?!
05-04-2009, 04:48 PM
#1
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
High deer densities may actually be good for some other species?!?!?!
Some surprising results from a study by Ohio State University........
It seems high deer numbers can actually benefit SOME other wildlife........
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/deer.htm
It seems high deer numbers can actually benefit SOME other wildlife........
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/deer.htm
SNAKES, SALAMANDERS AND OTHER CREATURES THRIVE IN AREAS WITH HIGHER DEER POPULATIONS
COLUMBUS, Ohio – Reducing the number of deer in forests and parks may unexpectedly reduce the number of reptiles, amphibians and insects in that area, new research suggests.
A recent study by researchers at Ohio State University and National Park Service found that higher deer activity is modifying forest ecosystems in unexpected ways. Out of several species of snakes, salamanders, and invertebrates studied, a greater diversity of animals were found in areas with deer populations than were in areas with no deer activity.
The study, which comes at a time when many states have begun to selectively control deer populations, challenges previous research that has suggested deer populations can negatively impact forest ecosystems through eating plants that many smaller animals may depend on.
Email this to a friend
addthis_pub
= 'OhioStateWebmaster';
[hr][align=center]
The areas with higher deer populations may appear to lack the high variety of low-lying plants found in exclosures, but the deer may be creating a richer soil mixture through their droppings. This rich soil may be benefiting some plants in the area, which in turn is attracting a larger diversity of insects and invertebrates.[/align]
[hr]
Instead, researchers found that high numbers of deer may in fact be attracting a greater number of species. This may be because their waste creates a more nutrient-rich soil and as a result, areas with deer draw higher numbers of insects and other invertebrates. These insects then attract larger predators which thrive on insect lava such as salamanders, and the salamanders in turn attract even larger predators such as snakes.
The results, which were published recently in The Journal of Wildlife Management, highlight how recent attempts to control deer populations in and around forests may indirectly affect other animals in the forest.
“By just reducing the number of deer in the forest, we’re actually indirectly impacting forest ecosystems without even knowing the possible effects,” said Katherine Greenwald, co-author of the study and doctoral student in evolution, ecology, and organismal biology at Ohio State.
“Smaller creatures like salamanders and insects are all part of the base of a larger food web that can be affected by small changes.”
Research was conducted in Cuyahoga Valley National Park, a 51-square-mile park in northeastern Ohio with an estimated deer population of 2,300 to 4,600. The park’s large population of deer and varying landscape made it an ideal place to test for the effects of these animals, she said.
Researchers studied the forest by pairing 12 unfenced sites with 12 fenced sites, called exclosures, based on similar habitat type, forest cover, soil type, and slope. The exclosures, which are used frequently to test for differences in plant growth between grazed and untouched areas, prevent deer from grazing in certain areas. Both unfenced and fenced areas measured 10 meters by 10 meters (approximately 33 feet by 33 feet).
Five square wood boards measuring almost one square foot (30 centimeters square) were placed in random spots in each fenced and unfenced site. These boards are placed on top of the soil and act as rocks or other ground cover for salamanders, slugs and other animals to hide under for protection.
The researchers then counted the number of invertebrates and vertebrates under each board every three to four weeks from May through December in 2004 and monthly from May through September the following year.
They identified a variety of species during the study including snakes, salamanders, earthworms, slugs, spiders, ants, beetles, and many more invertebrates. Species diversity was determined by comparing the variety of insect groups and invertebrates found in each area.
The results, Greenwald said, were completely unexpected.
“We thought the salamanders especially would be very sensitive to areas with deer because in those areas the whole undergrowth is basically gone. So we thought these creatures were going to be much more abundant in the fenced exclosures because it is just bursting with plants and other studies have shown that amphibians prefer damp, covered areas,” she said.
Instead, they found that many of the species studied favored the unfenced areas where deer grazed frequently. Pill bugs, centipedes, millipedes, and beetles were found equally in grazed and fenced areas, but many other creatures were found in greater numbers in grazed areas.
Researchers found nearly three times as many red-backed salamanders and five-and-a-half times more snakes in sites with deer than those without deer. Among invertebrates, snails were 11 percent more abundant in grazed areas than in exclosures and the diversity of arthropods was also 14 percent greater in these areas.
Greenwald speculates that the areas with higher deer populations may appear to lack the high variety of low-lying plants found in exclosures, but the deer may be creating a richer soil mixture through their droppings. This rich soil may be benefiting some plants in the area, which in turn is attracting a larger diversity of insects and invertebrates.
Salamanders and snakes may then be following these creatures, creating a more diverse animal population overall in areas with deer.
“Another possibility is that we are observing a ‘refuge effect,’ where animals in the grazed areas are more likely to use the cover objects than animals in the ungrazed areas. If the ground in the exclosures really is more favorable, as we originally thought, maybe the animals there just have no need for our artificial cover boards,” Greenwald said.
But no matter what the reason, she cautions that the take-home message of the study is that officials need to understand the forest ecosystem before making decisions about wildlife management.
“We need to be aware of what’s happening in these forest ecosystems. Culling deer may cascade into affecting plants, salamanders, and other creatures in ways we can’t even imagine. So before we start removing deer we should study what’s really happening in these areas because there are a whole host of other issues that go along with culling,” she said.
Greenwald conducted the study with Thomas Waite, former associate professor of evolution, ecology and organismal biology at Ohio State, and Lisa Petit of the Cuyahoga Valley National Park.
Written by Jenna McGuire, (614) 247-8362; [email protected]
COLUMBUS, Ohio – Reducing the number of deer in forests and parks may unexpectedly reduce the number of reptiles, amphibians and insects in that area, new research suggests.
A recent study by researchers at Ohio State University and National Park Service found that higher deer activity is modifying forest ecosystems in unexpected ways. Out of several species of snakes, salamanders, and invertebrates studied, a greater diversity of animals were found in areas with deer populations than were in areas with no deer activity.
The study, which comes at a time when many states have begun to selectively control deer populations, challenges previous research that has suggested deer populations can negatively impact forest ecosystems through eating plants that many smaller animals may depend on.
Email this to a friend
addthis_pub
= 'OhioStateWebmaster';
[hr][align=center]
The areas with higher deer populations may appear to lack the high variety of low-lying plants found in exclosures, but the deer may be creating a richer soil mixture through their droppings. This rich soil may be benefiting some plants in the area, which in turn is attracting a larger diversity of insects and invertebrates.[/align]
[hr]
Instead, researchers found that high numbers of deer may in fact be attracting a greater number of species. This may be because their waste creates a more nutrient-rich soil and as a result, areas with deer draw higher numbers of insects and other invertebrates. These insects then attract larger predators which thrive on insect lava such as salamanders, and the salamanders in turn attract even larger predators such as snakes.
The results, which were published recently in The Journal of Wildlife Management, highlight how recent attempts to control deer populations in and around forests may indirectly affect other animals in the forest.
“By just reducing the number of deer in the forest, we’re actually indirectly impacting forest ecosystems without even knowing the possible effects,” said Katherine Greenwald, co-author of the study and doctoral student in evolution, ecology, and organismal biology at Ohio State.
“Smaller creatures like salamanders and insects are all part of the base of a larger food web that can be affected by small changes.”
Research was conducted in Cuyahoga Valley National Park, a 51-square-mile park in northeastern Ohio with an estimated deer population of 2,300 to 4,600. The park’s large population of deer and varying landscape made it an ideal place to test for the effects of these animals, she said.
Researchers studied the forest by pairing 12 unfenced sites with 12 fenced sites, called exclosures, based on similar habitat type, forest cover, soil type, and slope. The exclosures, which are used frequently to test for differences in plant growth between grazed and untouched areas, prevent deer from grazing in certain areas. Both unfenced and fenced areas measured 10 meters by 10 meters (approximately 33 feet by 33 feet).
Five square wood boards measuring almost one square foot (30 centimeters square) were placed in random spots in each fenced and unfenced site. These boards are placed on top of the soil and act as rocks or other ground cover for salamanders, slugs and other animals to hide under for protection.
The researchers then counted the number of invertebrates and vertebrates under each board every three to four weeks from May through December in 2004 and monthly from May through September the following year.
They identified a variety of species during the study including snakes, salamanders, earthworms, slugs, spiders, ants, beetles, and many more invertebrates. Species diversity was determined by comparing the variety of insect groups and invertebrates found in each area.
The results, Greenwald said, were completely unexpected.
“We thought the salamanders especially would be very sensitive to areas with deer because in those areas the whole undergrowth is basically gone. So we thought these creatures were going to be much more abundant in the fenced exclosures because it is just bursting with plants and other studies have shown that amphibians prefer damp, covered areas,” she said.
Instead, they found that many of the species studied favored the unfenced areas where deer grazed frequently. Pill bugs, centipedes, millipedes, and beetles were found equally in grazed and fenced areas, but many other creatures were found in greater numbers in grazed areas.
Researchers found nearly three times as many red-backed salamanders and five-and-a-half times more snakes in sites with deer than those without deer. Among invertebrates, snails were 11 percent more abundant in grazed areas than in exclosures and the diversity of arthropods was also 14 percent greater in these areas.
Greenwald speculates that the areas with higher deer populations may appear to lack the high variety of low-lying plants found in exclosures, but the deer may be creating a richer soil mixture through their droppings. This rich soil may be benefiting some plants in the area, which in turn is attracting a larger diversity of insects and invertebrates.
Salamanders and snakes may then be following these creatures, creating a more diverse animal population overall in areas with deer.
“Another possibility is that we are observing a ‘refuge effect,’ where animals in the grazed areas are more likely to use the cover objects than animals in the ungrazed areas. If the ground in the exclosures really is more favorable, as we originally thought, maybe the animals there just have no need for our artificial cover boards,” Greenwald said.
But no matter what the reason, she cautions that the take-home message of the study is that officials need to understand the forest ecosystem before making decisions about wildlife management.
“We need to be aware of what’s happening in these forest ecosystems. Culling deer may cascade into affecting plants, salamanders, and other creatures in ways we can’t even imagine. So before we start removing deer we should study what’s really happening in these areas because there are a whole host of other issues that go along with culling,” she said.
Greenwald conducted the study with Thomas Waite, former associate professor of evolution, ecology and organismal biology at Ohio State, and Lisa Petit of the Cuyahoga Valley National Park.
#
Contact: Katherine Greenwald, (614) 578-3207; [email protected]Written by Jenna McGuire, (614) 247-8362; [email protected]
05-04-2009, 06:40 PM
#3
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Westmoreland County PA.
Posts: 735
RE: High deer densities may actually be good for some other species?!?!?!
Interesting post BTB.A little surprised at the estimated number of deer. My cousin lives 6 miles from that park. Two years ago,they hired snipers to reduce the herd. They supposedly removed a little over a thousand animals. I guess this story will get things in motion again. As in, what is the correct amount of deer?[/align]
05-04-2009, 06:59 PM
#4
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
RE: High deer densities may actually be good for some other species?!?!?!
All this time we thought the HR program was about forest regeneration and now it's obvious that it's really all about too many spiders and snakes!
Kinda reminds me of that old song by Jim Stafford
Kinda reminds me of that old song by Jim Stafford
05-05-2009, 04:55 AM
#5
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ohio,mid
Posts: 1,275
RE: High deer densities may actually be good for some other species?!?!?!
Wow, they should immediately rescind Xbow hunting in Ohio! [:@] Couldn't resist ! Save the deer, kill the deer. They will end up killing more deer as Nationwide Insurance in Ohio will nmake sure that happens no matter what!
05-05-2009, 05:10 AM
#6
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
RE: High deer densities may actually be good for some other species?!?!?!
ORIGINAL: Buck Hunter 1
Wow, they should immediately rescind Xbow hunting in Ohio! [:@] Couldn't resist ! Save the deer, kill the deer. They will end up killing more deer as Nationwide Insurance in Ohio will nmake sure that happens no matter what!
Wow, they should immediately rescind Xbow hunting in Ohio! [:@] Couldn't resist ! Save the deer, kill the deer. They will end up killing more deer as Nationwide Insurance in Ohio will nmake sure that happens no matter what!
05-05-2009, 07:02 AM
#7
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
RE: High deer densities may actually be good for some other species?!?!?!
That too, is your OPINION. Though, one I happen to agree with.
I dont believe they are a major player, theoverwhelming evidence pointstoAudubon and timber to be the biggest clowns in the keystone state tent anyway.
I dont believe they are a major player, theoverwhelming evidence pointstoAudubon and timber to be the biggest clowns in the keystone state tent anyway.
05-05-2009, 11:02 AM
#8
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ohio,mid
Posts: 1,275
RE: High deer densities may actually be good for some other species?!?!?!
btb, go do some looking and in many states the insurance companies have involvement w/ the planning teams of deer manage,ment programs. With well over 1.5 billion in deer accident claims you can bet your bippy that insurance is involved to an extent. By the way PA leads in statistics of these accidents. But i'm sure Erie INsurance doesn't care about the seer claims, they happily pay out...............
05-05-2009, 11:40 AM
#9
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
RE: High deer densities may actually be good for some other species?!?!?!
That too, is your OPINION. Though, one I happen to agree with.
The insurance business is a game of money in, money out and they take their share as it passes through their machine. Their profit is derived from a percentage of premiums charged. More claims, so long as they are predictable as deer claims are, means more premiums can be charged. Period. Predictable claims are the cash cow of that industry. The only claims they have issues with are the unforeseeable oneslike 9-11 ornatural disasters where the scope of damage is hard to predict, like hurricanes.
Deer claims, even in PA, are not even on the insurance companies radar. I challenge anyone here to produce any proof that any insurance company has ever lobbied for less deer in PA
btb, go do some looking and in many states the insurance companies have involvement w/ the planning teams of deer manage,ment programs. With well over 1.5 billion in deer accident claims you can bet your bippy that insurance is involved to an extent. By the way PA leads in statistics of these accidents. But i'm sure Erie INsurance doesn't care about the seer claims, they happily pay out...............
05-05-2009, 12:44 PM
#10
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ohio,mid
Posts: 1,275
RE: High deer densities may actually be good for some other species?!?!?!
An increasing deer population and the growing popularity of trophy hunting induced many changes in Illinois from 1990 to 2000. Former DNR Director Brent Manning dealt with many factions with opposing views on deer management. The Farm Bureau and major insurance companies lobbied for population reduction due to excessive crop damage and deer-vehicle collisions.
February 05, 2008 at 09:53 AM
BY LES DAVENPORT
On the other hand, deer also cause a great deal of monetary loss. Car/deer collisions, loss of agricultural crops, tree damage at nurseries and landscaping losses cost millions of dollars each year as well. Further, those who develop land affect the herd and vice versa. So highway planners, road builders and subdivision developers are being asked to come to the table as well.
October 1998
Deer on the agenda
When the topic is whitetails, hunters, developers, landowners and businesses all have an opinion.
Kevin Wallenfang
to lose control of your vehicle.
“While research has revealed several innovative ways to deter deer from entering the roadways and alerting drivers to the dangers of deer in the area, there will always remain a constant danger of deer-vehicle collisions,” said Melissa Miles, senior research analyst for State Farm . “Undoubtedly, the best way to avoid deer-vehicle collisions is through attentive driving behavior.”
State Farm Press release
The Man With The Plan
With growing complaints from insurance companies forced to pay increasing claims for deer/car collisions and frustration from farmers over of crop damage, the management goal became reducing deer densities To reach that goal Suchy and the IDNR greatly expanded hunting opportunities, especially the hunting of does, and asked hunters to take advantage of new seasons and abundant tags.
The Man With The Plan
Biologist Willie Suchy has been at the center of Iowa deer management for nearly two decades. Here’s his take on how and why things are changing. (August 2006)
By Rich Patterson
Finally, for deer-human conflicts, we rely on Citizen Advisory Committees (CACs). CAC members – citizens within a Wildlife Management Unit (WMU) representing interests of sportsmen, farmers, homeowners, businesses, and others – work together and provide a recommendation to increase, decrease, or stabilize the deer population for a five-year period.
PA Deer Chronicle 2008
My conclusion after reading these and other reports is that the insurance industry is very involved inj game mangement issues in all states. Again the money drives the outcomes! You can play insurance companies anyway you want but i can say this much , more profit is derived from less deer/people collisions than your statement of money in money out. I am odf the opinion that Less monry out means more money in! I think anyone owning a business or paying a tax understands that.
February 05, 2008 at 09:53 AM
BY LES DAVENPORT
On the other hand, deer also cause a great deal of monetary loss. Car/deer collisions, loss of agricultural crops, tree damage at nurseries and landscaping losses cost millions of dollars each year as well. Further, those who develop land affect the herd and vice versa. So highway planners, road builders and subdivision developers are being asked to come to the table as well.
October 1998
Deer on the agenda
When the topic is whitetails, hunters, developers, landowners and businesses all have an opinion.
Kevin Wallenfang
to lose control of your vehicle.
“While research has revealed several innovative ways to deter deer from entering the roadways and alerting drivers to the dangers of deer in the area, there will always remain a constant danger of deer-vehicle collisions,” said Melissa Miles, senior research analyst for State Farm . “Undoubtedly, the best way to avoid deer-vehicle collisions is through attentive driving behavior.”
State Farm Press release
The Man With The Plan
With growing complaints from insurance companies forced to pay increasing claims for deer/car collisions and frustration from farmers over of crop damage, the management goal became reducing deer densities To reach that goal Suchy and the IDNR greatly expanded hunting opportunities, especially the hunting of does, and asked hunters to take advantage of new seasons and abundant tags.
The Man With The Plan
Biologist Willie Suchy has been at the center of Iowa deer management for nearly two decades. Here’s his take on how and why things are changing. (August 2006)
By Rich Patterson
Finally, for deer-human conflicts, we rely on Citizen Advisory Committees (CACs). CAC members – citizens within a Wildlife Management Unit (WMU) representing interests of sportsmen, farmers, homeowners, businesses, and others – work together and provide a recommendation to increase, decrease, or stabilize the deer population for a five-year period.
PA Deer Chronicle 2008
My conclusion after reading these and other reports is that the insurance industry is very involved inj game mangement issues in all states. Again the money drives the outcomes! You can play insurance companies anyway you want but i can say this much , more profit is derived from less deer/people collisions than your statement of money in money out. I am odf the opinion that Less monry out means more money in! I think anyone owning a business or paying a tax understands that.