1 Predation on White-tailed Deer Fawns by Bobcats, Foxes, and Alligators: Predator Assessment Marc B. Epstein, Appalachian Environmental Laboratory, University of Maryland, Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies, Frostburg State College Campus, Frostburg, MD George A. Feldhamer, Appalachian Environmental Laboratory, University of Maryland, Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies, Frostburg State College Campus, Frostburg, MD Robert L. Joyner, Tom Yawkey Wildlife Center, Georgetown, SC Abstract: Forty-eight white-tailed deer fawns (Odocoileus virginianus) were marked during the spring and early summer of 1981 and Forty-one (85.4%) of these fawns died, 26 (63%) due to predation. In 18 of the 26 predator-caused deaths, the species of predator could be determined. Bobcats (Felis rufus) accounted for 12 deaths, while red foxes (Vulpes vulpes), gray foxes (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) and alligators (A lligator mississipptensis) were responsible for a total of at least 6 fawn deaths. Criteria for determining predator damage are discussed. Foxes and alligators have not previously been documented as predators on white-tailed deer fawns. Proc. Annu. Cont. Southeast. Assoc. Fish and Wildl. Agencies 37: The feeding habits of bobcats, red foxes, and gray foxes are well-documented. The feeding habits of alligators are less well-known. Few studies have suggested that foxes or alligators actively prey on white-tailed deer fawns. Deer in the diets of foxes mainly have been attributed to scavenging (Hatfield 1939, Scott 1943, Trapp 1978, Pils and Martin 1978, Fritzell and Haroldson 1982). Most researchers do not consider foxes "serious" predators of deer (Mitchell et al. 1973, Ozoga et al. 1982a). This paper reports the findings of a telemetry study of white-tailed deer mortality involving 3 predator species on 2 coastal islands in South Carolina.
2 162 Epstein et al. Funding for this study was provided by the Yawkey Foundation, in cooperation with the South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Department. We thank Dr. V. Nettles and Dr. C. E. Couvillion, Southeast Cooperative Wildlife Disease Study group, for necropsy analysis. Dr. W. D. Klimstra and Dr. G. W. Wood provided helpful comments on an earlier draft of the manuscript. P. Wilkinson and M. Hudson, South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Division, provided information on alligator observations. We thank Dr. C. B. Loadholt, MUSC, for providing statistical advice. This is Contribution No AEL, Appalachian Environmental Laboratory, Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies, University of Maryland. Study Area This study was conducted on the South and Cat Island portions of the Tom Yawkey Wildlife Center, Georgetown County, South Carolina. Elevation ranges from sea level to 12.8 m. South Island, about 2,700 ha in size, includes upland maritime forest, numerous impoundments of emergent plant species and widgeon grass (Ruppia maritima), tidal marshes, and cultivated areas of annual winter ryegrass (Lolium spp.). Deer density has remained stable for the last 30 years with levels up to 2.8 deer/ha or greater (R. Joyner, unpub!. data), and is among the highest in the coastal sea island region. There is no hunting on South Island and daily supplemental feeding (shelled corn) has been provided throughout the year for 30 years. Cat Island, about 2,720 ha in size, is more typical of the mainland with an overstory dominated by long-leaf pine (Pinus palustris), and understory that is controlled by burning half the upland area each year on a rotational basis. There also are marsh impoundments, freshwater ponds and cultivated wildlife openings. The mean density of deer is about 0.2/ha. Supplemental feeding occurs 3 days a week, and the herd has been selectively harvested since 1978 to produce trophy-antlered bucks (see Brothers and Ray 1975). Access is controlled and generally only wildlife center personnel are present. Methods Fawns were captured and fitted with radio collars using 3 techniques: (l) walking a grid pattern in areas where does were believed to be fawning; (2) observing solitary does and isolated fawns from an automobile during the day, and (3) spotlighting at night (Downing and McGinnes 1969, White et al. 1972, Carrol and Brown 1977, Steigers and Flinders 1980). A dog was used in the daytime during the 1981 field season to help locate fawns, but proved unsuitable because of the abundance of alligators on the study area.
3 Predation on White-tailed Deer Fawns 163 A long-handled hoop net aided hand captures of fawns. Once fawns were captured, a 5-cm wide elastic bandage was used to cover the eyes and snout. This considerably reduced a fawn's vocal and physical struggle. The capture procedure took from 10 to 25 minutes; older fawns required more time. Handling procedures included attachment of collar, determination of sex and age, tagging, and recording the general physical condition of fawns. Age was estimated mainly by characteristics outlined by Haugen and Speake (1958). General appearance and size of fawns were also important (Cook et al. 1971). Some fawns were marked with tuff-flex ear tags for individual recognition in the field, while others were left untagged. Very young fawns (1 to 4 days) were not tagged, or were recaptured and tagged after their first week of life. The tuff-flex tags were placed in the ear above the small ridge of cartilage as described by Downing and McGinnes (1969). Metal tags were attached at the base of the ear as described by Lund (1975). These were small and inconspicuous, and these fawns were considered to be "untagged". Transmitters were mounted on fully expandable, drop-off collars. During 1982, 10 collars were cryptically colored and 15 were red. Collars were recycled from dead fawns after being sterilized. All collars were stored in a bag of detritus before use to help remove unnatural odors (Steigers and Flinders 1980). Locational fixes were taken from 1 to 3 times daily on each fawn. If dead fawns were recovered, necropsies of carcass remains were performed following the procedures outlined by Nettles (1981) and Wobeser and Spraker (1980). Criteria used to determine predator-involved mortalities were generally adapted from Garner et al. (1976), Bowns (1976), White (l973b), and Hawthorn (1980). The main criteria used to verify predatorinvolved mortalities were evident signs of trauma: bite or claw marks, puncture wounds and subcutaneous or external hemorrhaging. Knowledge of the general physical condition of fawns prior to death was also important (Cook et al. 1971). Criteria used to discriminate between kills of different predator species were based on carcass disposition and injuries. During the second field season, selected fawns were necropsied by the Southeastern Cooperative Wildlife Disease Study Group at Athens, Georgia. Also, training on identification of fawn diseases and predator-induced trauma was provided in the field (V. Nettles and C. E. Couvillion, pers. commun.). Fawn carcasses were returned to the site of mortality whenever possible to reduce the possibility of increasing the predation rate. Seven fawns that had died of disease, accident, or starvation were returned to selected sites with transmitters attached to assess the extent of scavenging. Predator scats were collected on a random basis as a temporal indicator of fawn mortality (Salwasser 1974). Refer to Epstein (1983) for details of the study area and marking procedures.
4 164 Epstein et al. Results Of 48 fawns captured, 47 were fitted with radio collars. Mortality rate of fawns during the study period was 85.4% (41 of 48). Of the 41 fawn mortalities, 26 (63.4%) were attributed to predation (Epstein 1983). The predator was determined for 18 of the 26 mortalities. Bobcats accounted for 12 (66.7%) deaths, red and gray foxes for 4 (22.2%), and alligators for at least 2 (11.1 %). Thus, foxes and alligators accounted for 33.3% of the fawn mortality in which the predator could be determined. In all predator-involved mortalities, hemorrhages indicated fawns were alive when attacked. No fawn carcasses were scavenged by a predator during this study. No data were collected on carcasses which were returned to the kill site. However, between 20 June and 3 August 1982, 7 fawn carcasses with attached transmitters were placed in locations of known fox predation or activity. Turkey vultures (Cathartes aura) scavenged 1 carcass; the remaining carcasses were not disturbed and they decomposed within 5 days. We have no explanation as to why foxes did not locate or utilize these carcasses. Mortality of fawns relative to type of tag and color of the collar is given in Table 1. Different collars and tag combinations used to mark fawns are presented in Table 2. There were no differences in survival of fawns based on collar color and tagging (P >.05; Fisher's exact test, Finney et al. 1963). However, the test was significant for tagged fawns, which suggests that tagging may have increased survival of fawns. We have no explanation of why survival was biased toward tagged fawns. Bobcat Predation.-At least 6 individual bobcats were observed on the study area during the study period. Two females were observed with litters of 3 kittens (Cat Island, 1981) and 4 kittens (South Island, 1982). Predators Table 1. Affect of tagging and collar color on mortality of white-tailed fawns on the Yawkey Center, Georgetown County, South Carolina, during the field seasons of 1981 and Type of tag N killed N not killed Total Type of tag Large visible Small and cryptic, or untagged Totals Collar colora Red Cryptic Totals Calculations do not include 1 tagged but uncollared fawn.
5 Predation on White-tailed Deer Fawns 165 Table 2. Collar and tag combinations of marked fawns on the Tom Yawkey Wildlife Center, Georgetown County, South Carolina, TotalN of Collar color Tagged N killed N not killed fawns marked Red Tuff-flex Red Untagged Cryptic Untagged Cryptic Tuff-flex None Tuff-flex Totals are unexploited on the Yawkey Center and populations are believed to be quite high. Predator damage criteria observed for bobcats in this study were very similar to White's (l973b) description of fawns killed by coyotes. However, the 2 main differences were: (l) bobcats usually cached carcass remains under a small scrape similar to Hawthorn's (1980) description, and (2) fawn remains were never scattered in various fragments. Most scrapes were a small mound of ground litter which was readily recognized when located. However, some were located along marsh edges and constructed of marsh detritus, and were very inconspicuous; the only evidence was the radio signal coming from the telemetry collar. Like coyotes (White 1973b), bobcats usually ate the viscera first. This may have been due to the presence of milk curd in the abomasum (Young 1958). Much of White's (l973b) description of coyote-killed fawns was very similar to bobcat-killed fawns that is, feeding upon the ribs, shoulders, and hams and the prevalence of light feeding on the remainder of the carcass. Only on 2 occasions did bobcats devour the heads of fawns; the remains (body) were then cached on site. Both cases occurred in the same general area and the same bobcat may have been involved. Small mandible, teeth, and cranial fragments were under the carcass at the cache site. Thus, the bobcat had fed on the head and covered the remains at the same site. Fox predation.-foxes were believed responsible for 3 known fawns' mortalities in 1981 and 1 in Five red foxes were observed on Cat Island during the study period, and at least 1 pair raised a litter of pups annually. Three gray faxes were observed during the same period, 2 on Cat Island and 1 on South Island. Fawns preyed upon were active and appeared healthy prior to death. In 1 case, a 4-day-old radio collared fawn was visually observed in good condition on 12 May Telemetry readings indicated this fawn was active and in the same general area on 13 May. On the morning of 14 May, the fawn could not be located. That afternoon, a red fox was observed in the area carrying portions of a fawn. This fawn's radio collar was then found at an
6 166 Epstein et al. active red fox den which was located in an open pasture on Cat Island. The linear distance from the den to the last locational fix of the fawn was 2.1 km, within the home range area of a red fox (Samuel and Nelson 1982). In another case, a 20-day-old fawn was visually observed in good condition 24 hours prior to our finding its radio collar near the last observed location. The remains and ear tags of this fawn were found at the same fox den the next day. We believe this red fox was responsible for both fawn deaths. The capture of the latter fawn by a red fox, and a 27-day-old fawn captured by a black bear (Ursus americanus) (Ozoga and Verme 1982) is curious because older fawns usually have the speed and agility to evade capture. Gray foxes captured fawns 6 and 10 days of age. On 1 occasion, a fiveday-old fawn was captured and fitted with a cryptic radio collar and metal tags on 8 June This fawn was visually observed in good condition on 10 June Two consecutive radio locations on 13 June and 14 June 1982 indicated the fawn had not moved. The radio collar, head, and right front leg were then located under an abandoned woodpile which was believed to be a gray fox den. The den was located along a Maritime forest-marsh edge on South Island. Gray foxes commonly use woodpiles as den sites (Samuel and Nelson 1982). Also, no red foxes were observed on South Island during this study. Necropsy was performed by a SCWDS field team on South Island. There was hemorrhaging in the subcutis of the occipital region associated with a small (4 mm diameter) compression fracture in the right occipital bone. Blood clots also were noted in the epidural region. In 1981, a gray fox was observed the evening prior to finding the carcass of the 6-day-old fawn approximately 30 m from the above den site. We believe the same gray fox was responsible for both fawn deaths. Fox predator damage criteria were similar in all cases. Fawn remains were chewed around the snout and ears, the long bones were chewed and the carcass strewn about. Alligator predation.-we believe alligators were responsible for at least 2 fawn deaths, 1 in 1981 and another in There are about 850 alligators on the study area (P. Wilkinson, unpubl. data). The home ranges of the 2 radio collared fawns killed by alligators encompassed brackish marsh and freshwater areas inhabited by at least 6 alligators, ranging from 0.46 to 2.74 m in length. However, several large alligators were in the general area (P. Wilkinson and M. Hudson, pers. commun.). Although drowning is a reported cause of fawn mortality (Klimstra et al. 1978, Steigers and Flinders 1980, Ozoga et al. 1982b), necropsies of 2 fawns which were retrieved from a nontidal freshwater pond indicated cause of death was due to trauma from predator attack. In the first case (1981), the head, left shoulder and spinal area of a 95-day-old fawn had multiple, large puncture wounds, and there were several fractures of the cranial bones. The left front leg was severed at the shoulder. In the second case (1982), a 26-day-old fawn found in the same pond had similar puncture wounds and
7 Predation on White-tailed Deer Fawns 167 cranial fractures. Also, the anterior half of an uncollared 21-day-old fawn was found in this pond in We suspect alligators were responsible for the disappearance of several fawns listed as unknown predator mortalities. Fawn home ranges encompassed dikes and impounded marsh areas inhabited by approximately 25 to 30 large alligators (up to about 3.8 m). These fawns commonly bedded on marsh-water interfaces and suddenly vanished, although their twins and/or dams were highly visible. Earthen dikes, marsh impoundments and adjacent channels are used extensively by alligators (Sandifer et al. 1980). Discussion Capture, collaring, and tagging fawns did not increase the overall mortality rate (Epstein 1983). Random collections of bobcat scats indicated that bobcats were taking uncollared fawns 2 weeks prior to our observing bobcatinvolved mortalities of collared fawns. Moreover, late summer fawn-to-doe ratios on South Island were consistent with the high fawn mortality rate. Four night counts at the end of each field season on South Island indicated fawnto-doe ratios of 1 : 42 and 1 : 39 in 1981 and 1982, respectively. This suggests that uncollared fawns were dying as well as collared fawns. Bobcats were the most important predator during this study. Beale and Smith (1973), Garner et al. (1976) and Trainer et al. (1981) concluded that bobcats can be effective predators on antelope (Antilocapra americana), white-tailed deer fawns, and mule deer (0. hemionus) fawns, respectively. This contrasts to the findings of Cook et al. (1971) and Carrol and Brown (1977) with white-tailed fawns in South Texas. In the south and southwestern regions of the United States, bobcats are a less significant predator on newborn or young ungulates than are coyotes (Canis latrans). This may be due to disproportionately high coyote densities in these regions. Barick (1969) ranked bobcats the third most important predator on deer in the southeastern United States after man and dogs (Canis familiaris). There were no coyotes or feral dogs on the study area. Beasom and Moore (1977) found that bobcats will eat deer more frequently during periods of low alternative prey abundance. Cottontail rabbits (Sylvilagus floridanus) occur uncommonly on the study area. Marsh rabbits (S. palustris) usually are very common, although population densities have declined for an unknown reason(s): so few marsh rabbits were observed in 1980 that a reintroduction was considered. Marsh rabbits are a principal food item for bobcats inhabiting the sea island region (Sandifer et al. 1980). There is little question regarding the capability of bobcats capturing and consuming young fawns. However, we are unaware of previous reports of fox predation of fawns. Numerous researchers have acknowledged the possibility (Hamilton 1943:404, Dahlberg and Guettinger 1956: 112, Errington 1967:30,
8 168 Epstein et al. Richardson and Peterson 1974:32, Lloyd 1975:208, Doutt et al. 1977:191, Halls 1978:54, Hamilton and Whitaker 1979:320). Bartlett (in Hasley 1956:220) stated that "Foxes may rarely kill fawns, but this loss is insignificant." Schueler (1951 :463) noted that for foxes "deer flesh, mostly carrion, was important in the winter and early spring." Barick (1969) reported foxes were suspected predators on deer, however, no "known" kills were observed. This study shows that foxes are capable of predation on young whitetailed deer fawns. This may be especially true on coastal islands or areas with high levels of insect annoyance and/or deer density. Predation of fawns by foxes may not be a wide-spread phenomenon and may be limited to individual foxes (Alexander et al. 1967, Korschgen 1959) which specialize on particular prey (Errington 1963, 1967, Fox 1971, Lloyd 1980, Sequeira 1980). We feel that fawn predation by foxes was a function of the opportunistic feeding habits (Korschgen 1959, Lloyd 1975), the food energy gained from assimilation of fawns vs. their relative ease of capture, and decreased availability of alternative prey species (Gibbons and Coker 1978, Dueser and Brown 1980). We observed some aggressive behavior of dams toward foxes, again suggesting foxes are potential predators (Garner and Morrison 1980). However, given the high deer density on the study area and the probability of associated density-dependent disrupted maternal behavior (Ozoga et al. 1982b) the number of unprotected fawns may have been quite high. Also, Rosenzweig (1966) found that 30% to 40% of the prey of red and gray foxes were within the weight range of white-tailed deer fawns. Moreover, red foxes prey upon several other cervids including red deer (Cervus elaphus) calves in Scotland (Darling 1937) and caribou calves (Rangifer tarandus) in Canada (Miller 1982). Arctic foxes (Alopex lagopus) are believed to cause some neonatal mortality of cervids (Calef 1981). Also, foxes prey upon domestic animals within the size range of fawns, especially young pigs and lambs (Korschgen 1959, Rowley 1970, O'Gara et al. 1983). There is little question concerning the capability of alligators to capture and consume fawns. However, we are unaware of documented occurrences of alligators preying upon white-tailed deer fawns. Large alligators are capable of preying upon adult feral hogs (Sus scrofa) and mature cattle (McIlhenny 1935, Neill 1971, Wood and Brenneman 1977), species which are larger and more mobile than young fawns. Nonetheless, McNease and Joanen (1977) found deer hair in only 1 of 314 alligator stomachs and did not speculate as to whether or not it was carrion. Valentine et al. (1972) found no evidence of deer remains in 413 alligator stomachs, nor have other researchers studying alligator food habits (Kellogg 1929, Giles and Childs 1949, Chabreck 1972). We encountered 2 main obstacles in attempting to monitor alligator pre. dation: (1) many of the channels and marsh areas are tidal which means that tidal flushing could remove fawn carcasses from the study area, and (2) transmitters would not operate when submerged in salt or brackish water.
9 Predation on White-tailed Deer Fawns 169 The 2 radio collared fawns killed by alligators during this study were retrieved from a nontidal freshwater pond. Also, 1 uncollared fawn killed by an alligator was found in this pond. Three other fawns we believe were alligator-kills were in the same nontidal pond during Previously, 2 adult does were found in the pond, again due to suspected alligator predation. Following the doe mortalities, all occurring during a I-week period, a 3.7 m-long alligator was captured and removed from the pond. No additional adult deer mortalities occurred in that pond, but similar mortalities were noted in brackish impoundments on the study area (P. Wilkinson, pers. commun.). Although there is no direct evidence, we feel alligators were responsible for at least 2 other radio collared fawn mortalities during the study period. Foxes and alligators were less significant predators on white-tailed deer fawns than were bobcats. However, during spring and summer, when young fawns are most vulnerable, foxes and alligators may be responsible for a greater amount of predation than has been previously acknowledged. Literature Cited Alexander, G., T. Mann, C. J. Mulbean, I. C. R. Romley, D. Williams, and D. Winn Activities of foxes and crows in a flock of lambing ewes. Australian J. Exp. Agr. and Animal Husb. 7: Barick, F. B Deer predation in North Carolina and other southeastern states. Pages in L. K, Halls, ed. White-tailed deer in the southern forest habitat. Symp. Proc. South, Forest Exp. Station, Nacogdoches, Texas. Beale, D. M. and A. D. Smith Mortality of pronghorn antelope fawns in western Utah. J. Wildl. Manage. 37: Beasom, S. L. and R. A. Moore Bobcat food habit response to a change in prey abundance. Southwest Nat. 21: Bowns, J. E Field criteria for predator damage assessment. Utah Sci. 37: Brothers, A. and M. E. Ray Jr Producing quality white-tails. Wildl. Servo Publ., Laredo, Texas. 245pp. Calef, G. W Caribou and the barren-lands. Firefly Books Ltd., Toronto, Can. 176pp. Carrol, B. K. and D. L. Brown Factors affecting neonatal fawn survival in southern-central Texas. J. Wildl. Manage. 41 : Chabreck, R. H The food and feeding habits of alligators from fresh and saline environments in Louisiana. Proc. Annu. Conf. Southeast. Assoc. Game and Fish Comm. 25: Cook, R. S., M. White, D. O. Trainer, and W. C. Glazner Mortality of young white-tailed deer fawns in South Texas. J. Wildl. Manage. 35: Dahlberg, B. L. and R. C. Guettinger The white-tailed deer in Wisconsin. Wise. Conserv. Dep. Tech. Wildl. Bul pp. Darling, F. F A herd of red deer. Oxford Univ. Press, London, Engl. 215pp. Doutt, K. J., C. A. Heppenstall, and J. E. Guilday Mammals of Pennsylvania. Pa. Game Comm., Harrisburg. 288pp Proc. Annn. Conf. SEAFWA
10 170 Epstein et al. Downing, R. L. and B. S. McGinness Capturing and marking white-tailed deer fawns. J. Wildl. Manage. 33: Dueser, R. D. and W. C. Brown Ecological correlates of insular rodent diversity. Ecology 61: Epstein, M Mortality and movements of white-tailed deer fawns on two coastal islands in South Carolina. M.S. Thesis, Frostburg State College, Frostburg, Md. 89pp. Errington, P. L The phenomenon of predation. Am. Sci. 51: Errington, P. L Of predation and life. Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames. 277pp. Finney, D. J., R. Latcha, B. M. Bennett, and P. Hsu Tables for testing significance in a 2 X 2 contingency table. Cambridge Univ. Press., New York. 103pp. Fox,M. W Behavior of wolves, dogs, and related canids. Jonathan Cape, London, Engl. Fritzell, E. K. and K. J. Haroldson Urocyon cinereoargenteus. Mammal. Species, pp. Garner, G. W., J. A. Morrison, and J. C. Lewis Mortality of white-tailed deer fawns in the Wichita Mountains, Oklahoma. Proc. Annu. Con. Southeast. Assoc. Fish and Wildl. Agencies. 30: Garner, G. W. and J. A. Morrison Observations of interspecific behavior between predators and white-tailed deer in Southwestern Oklahoma. J. Mammal. 61: Gibbins, J. W. and J. W. Coker Herptofaunal colonization patterns of Atlantic coast barrier islands. Am. MidI. Nat. 99: Giles, L. W. and V. L. Childs Alligator management of the Sabine National Wildlife Refuge. J. Wildl. Manage. 13: Halls, L. K White-tailed deer. Pages in J. L. Schmidt and D. L. Gilbert, eds. Big Game of North America. Stackpole Books, Harrisburg, Pa. 494pp. Hamilton, W. J. Jr The mammals of the eastern United States. Comstock Publ. Co. Inc. 432pp. Hamilton, W. J. Jr. and J. O. Whitaker Jr Mammals of the Eastern United States. 2nd ed., Cornell Univ. Press. 346pp. Hasely, N. W Management of the white-tailed deer in its environment. Pages in W. P. Taylor, ed. The Deer of North America. The Stackpole Co., Harrisburg, Pa. Hatfield, D. M Winter food habits of foxes in Minnesota. J. Mammal. 20: Haugen, A. O. and D. W. Speake Determining age of young fawn whitetailed deer. J. Wildl. Manage. 22: Hawthorne, D. W Wildlife damage and control techniques. Pages in S. D. Schemnitz, ed. Wildlife Management Techniques Manual, 4th Ed. Kellogg, A. R The habits and economic importance of alligators. U.S. Dep. Agric. Tech. Bul pp. Klimstra, W. D., J. D. Hardin, and N. J. Silvy Population ecology of key deer. Natl. Geogr. Soc. Res. Pub!., 1969 projects. Pp Proc. Annu. Coni. SEAFWA
11 Predation on White-tailed Deer Fawns 171 Korschgen, L. J Food habits of the red fox in Missouri. J. Wildl. Manage. 23: Lloyd H. G The red fox in Britain. Pages in M. W. Fox, ed. The wild canids: their systematics, behavioral ecology and evolution. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York, N.Y. Lloyd, H. G The red fox. B. T. Batsford Ltd., London, Engl. 320pp. Lund, R. C The capture and marking of wild, newborn white-tailed deer fawns. Pages in De Carli, ed. Trans. Northeast Sec. Wildl. Soc. McIlhenny, E. A The alligator's life history. Christopher Publ. House, Boston, Mass. 117pp. McNease, L. and T. Joanen Alligator diets in relation to marsh salinity. Proc. Annu. Conf. Southeast. Assoc. Fish and Wildl. Agencies. 31: Miller, F. L Caribou, Rangifer tarandus. Pages in J. A. Chapman and G. A. Feldhamer, eds. Wild Mammals of North America: Biology, Management and Economics. Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, Md. Mitchell, B., D. McCowan, and T. Parish Some characteristics of natural mortality among wild Scottish red deer (Cervus elaphus L.). Proc. Internat. Congo Game BioI. 10: Neill, W. T The last of the ruling reptiles: Alligators, crocodiles and their kin. Columbia Univ. Press, New York, N.Y. 486pp. Nettles, V. F Necropsy procedures. Pages 6-16 in W. K. Davidson, F. A. Hays, V. F. Nettles, and F. E. Kellogg, eds. Diseases and parasites of whitetailed deer. Misc. Publ. 7. Tall Timbers Res. Sta., Tallahassee, Fla. O'Gara, B. W., K. C. Brawley, J. M. Munoz, and D. R. Henne Predation on domestic sheep on a western Montana ranch. Wildl. Soc. Bul. 11 (3) : Ozoga, J. J. and L. J. Verne Predation by black bears on newborn whitetailed deer. J. Mammal. 63: Ozoga, J. J., C. S. Bienz, and L. J. Verne. 1982a. Red fox feeding habits in relation to fawn mortality. J. Wildl. Manage. 46: Ozoga, J. J., L. J. Verne, and C. S. Bienz. 1982b. Parturition behavior and territoriality in white-tailed deer: impact on neonatal mortality. J. Wildl. Manage. 46:1-11. Pils, C. M. and M. A. Martin Population dynamics, predator-prey relationships and management of the red fox in Wisconsin. Wise. Dep. Nat. Resour., Tech. Bul Madison. 56pp. Richardson, A. H. and L. E. Peterson History and management of South Dakota deer. S.D. Dep. Game, Fish and Parks, Bul pp. Rosenzweig, M. L Community structure in sympatric carnivora. J. Mammal. 47: Rowley, I Lamb predation in Australia: incidence, predisposing conditions, and the identification of wounds. CSIRO Wildl. Res. 15: Salwasser, H Coyote scats as an indicator of time of fawn mortality in the North Kings deer herd. Calif. Fish and Game 60: Samuel, D. E. and B. B. Nelson Foxes, Vulpes vulpes and allies. Pages in J. A. Chapman and G. A. Feldhamer, eds. Wild Mammals of
12 172 Epstein et al. North America: Biology, Management and Economics. Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, Md. Sandifer, P. A, J. V. Miglarese, D. R. Calder, et al Ecological characterization of the Sea Island coastal region of South Carolina and Georgia. Vol. III: Biological features of the characterization area. U.S. Dep. Int., Fish and Wildl. Serv., FWS/OBS-79/ pp. Schueler, R. L Red fox food habits in a wilderness area. J. Mammal. 32: Scott, T. G Some food coactions of the northern plains red fox. Ecol. Monogr. 13: Sequiera, D Comparison of the diet of the red fox (Vulpes vulpes L.) in Gelderland, Holland, Denmark, and Finnish Lapland. Pages in E. Zimen, ed. The red fox. Junk Publ. Boston, Mass. Steigers, W. D. and J. T. Flinders Mortality and movements of mule deer fawns in Washington. J. Wildl. Manage. 44: Trainer, C. E., J. C. Lemos, T. P. Kistner, W. C. Lightfoot, and D. C. Towell Mortality of mule deer fawns in Southeastern Oregon. Ore. Dep. Fish and Wildl., Wildl. Res. Rep pp. Trapp, G. R Comparative behavioral ecology of the ringtail and gray fox in southwestern Utah. Carnivore 1(2) :3-32. Valentine, J. M. Jr., J. R. Walther, K. M. McCartney, and L. M. Ivt Alligator diets on the Sabine National Wildlife Refuge, Louisiana. J. Wildl. Manage. 36: White, M., F. F. Knowlton, and W. C. Glazener Effect of dam-newborn fawn behavior on capture and mortality. J. Wildl. Manage. 36: White, M Description of remains of deer fawns killed by coyotes. J. Mammal. 54: Wobeser, G. A and T. R. Spraker Postmortem examination. Pages in J. D. Schemnitz, ed. Wildlife management techniques manual, 4th ed. U.S. Govt. Printing Off., Wildl. Soc. Wood, G. W. and R. E. Brenneman Research and management of feral hogs on Hobcaw Barony. Pages in G. W. Wood, ed. Research and management of wild hog populations: proceedings of a symposium. Belle W. Baruch For. Sci. Inst., Clemson Univ., S.C. Young, S. P The bobcat of North America. Stackpole Co., Harrisburg, Pa. 193pp.
Two species use the same limited resource or harm one another while seeking a resource Resource Organisms use common resources that are in short supply Resource Interference Interference Organisms seeking
Annual Report 2005 Ecology and management of feral hogs on Fort Benning, Georgia. PROJECT INVESTIGATORS: Stephen S. Ditchkoff, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Forestry and Wildlife Sciences Bldg.,
PREDATOR CONTROL AND DEER MANAGEMENT: AN EAST TEXAS PERSPECTIVE BEN H. KOERTH, Institute for White-tailed Deer Management and Research, Box 6109, Arthur Temple College of Forestry, Stephen F. Austin State
11 FOOD HABITS OF COYOTES IN AN AREA OF HIGH FAWN MORTALITY Deborah Holle Oklahoma Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma Coyote scats were collected from the
Long-tailed Weasel Mustela frenata Other common names None Introduction Like its cousin the short-tailed weasel, the long-tailed weasel develops a white coat in winter to aid with camouflage. This habit
Mule and Black-tailed Deer Mule and Black-tailed Deer: Because mule deer are closely tied to the history, development, and future of the West, this species has become one of the true barometers of environmental
DEER DISTRIBUTION IN RELATION TO WOLF PACK TERRITORY EDGES Densities of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) are higher in areas of overlap between territories of wolf (Canis lupus) packs than in
Coyotes: Wild and free on the urban interface Dana Sanchez Extension Wildlife Specialist Dana.Sanchez@oregonstate.edu 541-737-6003 Coyotes in legend and culture Canis latrans = barking dog 20-45 lbs Males
Wildlife Introduction The wildlife section of this chapter is divided into sections for various habitats and groups of species. Old growth, snags and downed wood, and riparian areas are unique habitats
1 COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report for Grizzly Bear Western population (Ursus arctos) in Canada SUMMARY The COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report for grizzly bears assess the status of Western and Ungava
University of Wyoming National Park Service Research Center Annual Report Volume 13 13th Annual Report, 1989 Article 32 1-1-1989 Effects of 1988 Fires on Ecology of Coyotes in Yellowstone National Park:
Population Ecology Yellowstone Elk by C. John Graves Group Names: Hour Date: Date Assignment is due: end of class Score: + - Day of Week Date Rocky Mountain elk (Cervus elaphus) living in Yellowstone National
Transactions of the Illinois State Academy of Science received 9/14/99 (2000), Volume 93, #2, pp. 165-173 accepted 1/16/00 Status and Distribution of the Bobcat (Lynx rufus) in Illinois Alan Woolf 1, Clayton
Evolving niche of the coy-wolf in northeastern forests and implications for biodiversity Principal Investigators Dr. Jacqueline Frair Roosevelt Wild Life Station, SUNY ESF 1 Forestry Drive, Syracuse, NY
Northern Yellowstone Cooperative Wildlife Working Group 2012 Annual Report (October 1, 2012-September 30, 2012) Member Agencies Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks National Park Service, Yellowstone National
Coyote Canis latrans COLOR Dark gray to pale gray to reddish-brown Physical Description LENGTH Average 37 long, 18 high WEIGHT From 20 to 50 pounds -Coyotes in the NE US tend to be larger due to interbreeding
MOUNTAIN CARIBOU INTERACTIONS WITH WOLVES AND MOOSE IN CENTRAL BRITISH COLUMBIA Dale R. Seip British Columbia Ministry of Forests and Range, 1011 Fourth Ave., Prince George, B.C. V2L 3H9, Canada, e-mail:
Hunter Success and Selectivity of Archers Using Crossbows Stephen S. Ditchkoff, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Auburn University, AL 36849 William R. Starry, McAlester Army Ammunition Plant,
Population Parameters and Their Estimation Data should be collected with a clear purpose in mind. Not only a clear purpose, but a clear idea as to the precise way in which they will be analysed so as to
History of Bighorn Sheep in the Sun River Area, Montana BRENT N. LONNER, Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks, Fish & Wildlife Division, PO Box 488, Fairfield, MT 59436, USA Abstract: The Sun River bighorn sheep
Modern status of Sea otter population on the Commander Islands Alexander Burdin, Kamchatka branch of Pacific Institute of Geography, RAS, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, ASLC, Sergey Zagrebelny, Commander
Tweedsmuir Caribou Modelling Project: Caribou Population Ecology Meeting Notes held March 5, 2008 Participants: Mark Williams, Debbie Cichowski, Don Morgan, Doug Steventon, Dave Daust Purpose: The purpose
Michigan Predator-Prey Project Phase 1 Preliminary Results and Management Recommendations Study Background White-tailed deer are important ecologically, socially, and economically throughout their geographic
Governors' Camp Game Report, Masai Mara, May 2012 Weather and Grasslands Generally it was wet and with frequent rainfall for the first half of May. The Latter half has brought clearer skies and cool mornings.
Journal of Wildlife Management 74(5):929 933; 2010; DOI: 10.2193/2009-263 Commentary Can Coyotes Affect Deer Populations in Southeastern North America? JOHN C. KIGO, 1 United States Department of Agriculture
Best Management Practices for Trapping Canada Lynx in the United States This BMP document applies to the contiguous U.S. only. Best Management Practices (BMPs) are carefully researched educational guides
Status Of Oregon Rocky Mountain Goats VICTOR L. COGGINS, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, 65495 Alder Slope Road, Enterprise, OR 97828, USA PATRICK E. MATTHEWS, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife,
COYOTES May 2006 in Insular Newfoundland Current Knowledge and Management of the Islands Newest Mammalian Predator. The first confirmed coyote on insular Newfoundland was in 1987, a pup hit by a car near
15 THE KIDNEY FAT INDEX AS AN INDICATOR OF CONDITION IN VARIOUS AGE AND SEX CLASSES OF MOOSE J. R. McGillis Canadian Wildlife Service Abstract: Kidney fat indices were obtained from 623 moose (A1ces a1ces
PATTERNS OF GRIZZLY BEAR PREDATION ON CARIBOU IN NORTHERN ALASKA HARRY V. REYNOLDS, ill, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, 1300 College Road, Fairbanks, AK 99701 GERALD W. GARNER, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Wolves in Yellowstone Park A Story about Ecosystem Balance Yellowstone: A National Park In 1872, Yellowstone (in the state of Wyoming) was declared the first national park in the United States. Geologic
COYOTE AND BOBCAT FOOD HABITS AND THE EFFECTS OF AN INTENSIVE PREDATOR REMOVAL ON WHITE-TAILED DEER RECRUITMENT IN NORTHEASTERN ALABAMA by CORY L. VANGILDER (Under the Direction of Karl V. Miller) ABSTRACT
Great Basin Naturalist Volume 42 Number 1 Article 2 3-31-1982 Seasonal foods of coyotes in southeastern Idaho: a multivariate analysis James G. MacCracken Colorado State University, Fort Collins Richard
Proceedings of The National Conference On Undergraduate Research (NCUR) 2012 Weber State University, Ogden Utah March 29-31, 2012 Comparative Diet Analysis of Canis rufus and Canis latrans Olivia Souther
349 AN INCIDENTAL TAKE PLAN FOR CANADA LYNX AND MINNESOTA S TRAPPING PROGRAM Glenn D. DelGiudice, Michael DonCarlos, and John Erb SUMMARY A Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) has been developed in association
Purpose The purpose of this document is to improve the understanding and transparency of the Commission s stock assessment process and results. It is the first of several that will be developed throughout
Veronica Yovovich, Ph.D. Wildlife Conflict Specialist and Science Program Director Mountain Lion Foundation This is the second workshop we ve had addressing livestock and carnivores. The first was in April
EXHIBIT C Chronic Wasting Disease What is CWD? Fatal neurological disease similar to mad cow disease, but only found in cervids (deer, elk, moose and caribou). Not spread by a virus, bacteria or fungus,
Delisting the Yellowstone Grizzly Bear A Lesson in Cooperation, Conservation, and Monitoring Christopher Servheen and Rebecca Shoemaker Grizzly bear monitoring by National Park Service staff on Pelican
The Pine Marten What is a pine marten? The pine marten Martes martes is a member of the weasel family and related to the stoat, weasel, mink, polecat, otter and badger. It is a native British mammal and
Quality Deer Management and Coyotes QDMA Articles By: Lindsay Thomas Jr. He is the trickster in Native American folktales cunning, mischievous, and, much to the aggravation of those he torments, immortal.
The Basics of Population Dynamics Greg Yarrow, Professor of Wildlife Ecology, Extension Wildlife Specialist Fact Sheet 29 Forestry and Natural Resources Revised May 2009 All forms of wildlife, regardless
Great Basin Naturalist Volume 41 Number 4 Article 11 12-31-1981 Summer food habits of coyotes in central Wyoming Joseph Tucker Springer Wyoming Game and Fish Research Laboratory, University of Wyoming,
Mississippi River Life National Mississippi River Museum and Aquarium Conservation Education Curriculum Target Grades: Pre K 4 th grade Key Words: Habitat, diversity Subject Areas: science, biology Duration:
Minnetonka Coyote Management Hazing Works If We Do It Together Coyote Hazing: How to identify coyotes Brief overview of coyote behavior Hazing tools and techniques Why Minnetonka does not have a removal
Science Lesson Plan Form Teacher: 4 th Grade Lesson: Predator/Prey SPI: 2.1 Science Goal: Recognize the impact of predation and competition on an ecosystem. What is the big idea of this standard? All life
INTRODUCTION Vultures play a vital ecological role in the environment. They are the clean-up crew of the animal kingdom. They clean the landscape of dead animals that would otherwise spread disease. They
Cub Scout Den Meeting Outline Month: August Week: 4 Point of the Scout Law: Friendly Before the Meeting Gathering Opening Games Activity Business items/take home Closing After the meeting Tiger Wolf Bear
TURKEY, QUAIL, AND PREDATORS IN THE ROLLING PLAINS, TEXAS MARK C. WALLACE, Department of Range, Wildlife and Fisheries Management, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409-2125; email: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Squirrels and Rabbits (Dave Pehling) Slide 1 Title Slide Slide 2 Squirrels can be a serious problem in the garden; in particular, the Eastern Gray Squirrel, and that is the species we will be concentrating
DEER CAMERA SURVEYS: HELPING MANAGERS AVOID THE PITFALLS SETH BASINGER M.S. CANDIDATE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE - FWF MAY 7, 2013 12:30 PM ROOM 160 PBB OUTLINE Deer population estimators Why camera surveys???
J FLY LOOSE RANCH 984 + ACRES LAVACA COUNTY, SPEAKS, TX JEFF BOSWELL Partner/Broker 713-3048186 email@example.com REPUBLICRANCHES.COM J FLY LOOSE RANCH Likely one of the best hunting ranches located
Lead and Wildlife Julie A. Blanchong Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management Iowa State University Lead Negative impacts of lead on human health have become well-known through: Food contamination
Otters & Their Waters: frequently asked questions Unless otherwise specified, river otter means North American river otter (Lontra canadesis) throughout this document. How deep do river otters dive? They
1 FARM ANIMAL A-20.2 REG 10 The Domestic Game Farm Animal Regulations being Chapter A-20.2 Reg 10 (effective May 19, 1999) as amended by Saskatchewan Regulations 106/2001; 75/2004; 67/2010 and 126/2017.
2017 LATE WINTER CLASSIFICATION OF NORTHERN YELLOWSTONE ELK A collaborative survey by the Northern Yellowstone Cooperative Wildlife Working Group Report Prepared by: Karen Loveless, Montana Fish Wildlife
Period Date LAB. NATURAL CONTROLS OF POPULATIONS The size of populations in a community are regulated in many ways. Some of the controls acting on populations are: the amount of food and water available
ALTERNATIVE DEER MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR GAME MANAGEMENT UNITS 12A, 12B, 13A, 13B, 16A, 45A, 45B, 45C, and White-tailed Deer Units Arizona Game and Fish Department April 4, 2006 Alternative Deer Management
ESSAI Volume 14 Article 12 Spring 2016 The Effects of Body Mass and Water Submersion on Decomposition Rates in Mice and Rats Elizabeth Carroll College of DuPage Follow this and additional works at: http://dc.cod.edu/essai
BIG GAME S Prairie WMUs (100 Series & 732) Sunday hunting for big game is prohibited in Prairie WMUs (102 160). Archery Only Seasons are those where only a bow and arrow may be used to hunt. General Seasons
Deer Management in Maryland Brian Eyler Deer Project Leader Maryland DNR 301-842-0332 firstname.lastname@example.org General Behavior Social groups Social hierarchy Home range Nocturnal Bedding Food Habits Ruminants
N10/4/ENVSO/SP2/ENG/TZ0/XX/T 88106303 ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS AND SOCIETIES Standard level PAPER 2 Wednesday 3 November 2010 (morning) 2 hours RESOURCE BOOKLET INSTRUCTIONS TO CANDIDATES Do not open this
Ecology and control of invasive Northern Pike in the Columbia River, Canada Brian Heise, Daniel Doutaz, Matthias Herborg, Matt Neufeld, David Derosa, Jeremy Baxter 19 th International Conference on Aquatic
//CEMEX USA BLACK GAP WMA/ECLCC MULE DEER RESTORATION PROJECT UPDATE February 2, 2016 Mule deer numbers at Black Gap Wildlife Management Area (BGWMA) and El Carmen Land & Conservation Company-CEMEX USA
Deer Management Unit 252 Geographic Location: Deer Management Unit (DMU) 252 is 297 miles 2 in size and is primarily in southeastern Marquette, southwestern Alger and northwestern Delta County. This DMU
KLINE S TAXIDERMY QUALITY YOU CAN SEE AT PRICES YOU CAN AFFORD PAYMENT POLICY 50% DEPOSIT REQUIRED WITHIN 90 DAYS BALANCE DUE UPON COMPLETION PERSONAL CHECKS ACCEPTED FOR DEPOSITS CASH OR CREDIT CARD ONLY
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Alligator Bites 1 on People in Florida Last Updated: April 2016 NOTE: These statistics are the latest figures available and may not include recent incidents
University of Wyoming National Park Service Research Center Annual Report Volume 15 15th Annual Report, 1991 Article 42 1-1-1991 Effects of 1988 Fires on Ecology of Coyotes in Yellowstone National Park:
Sheepshead Fishery Overview South Atlantic State/Federal Management Board May 2014 Introduction The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) does not currently manage sheepshead (Archosargus
Best Management Practices for Trapping Weasels in the United States Best Management Practices (BMPs) are carefully researched educational guides designed to address animal welfare and increase trappers
Best Management Practices for Trapping Opossums in the United States Best Management Practices (BMPs) are carefully researched recommendations designed to address animal welfare and increase trappers efficiency
Colorado Parks & Wildlife (CPW) advises hands off with wildlife CPW is the agency tasked with managing wildlife for the state of Colorado and for future generations. The agency often hears from citizens
1 In literature, art, and folklore, lions have long been the symbol of kings and royalty. Their very appearance suggests strength and power. They are the largest of all felines and are one of the top predators
RANCHING Wildlife Texas White-Tailed Deer 2017 Hunting Forecast During most summers, I take a short break and head to Colorado, Wyoming, or somewhere out west to enjoy a respite from the hot South Texas
North American Journal of Fisheries Management 22:950 954, 2002 Copyright by the American Fisheries Society 2002 Initial Mortality of Black Bass in B.A.S.S. Fishing Tournaments GENE R. WILDE,* CALUB E.
DMU 006 Arenac County Deer Management Unit Area Description The Arenac County Deer Management Unit (DMU) 006 is in the Northern Lower Peninsula (NLP) Region. It has roughly 248,320 acres and consists of
HOW TO AVOID INCIDENT NCIDENTAL TAKE OF LYNX While Trapping or Hunting Bobcats and other Furbearers The purpose of this publication is to help achieve the goal of reducing injury and mortality to the Threatened
"Oh! Deer! & Limiting Factors" adapted from Project Wild Mr. Mark Musselman Audubon at the Francis Beidler Forest Overview: Student act out the parts of a deer herd looking for food, water, and shelter.
ACTIVITY FIVE SPECIES AT RISK Subjects: Science, math, art, history LEARNING OBJECTIVES: Differentiate between species that are threatened, endangered, or extinct. Identify biological and human-influenced