Lethal & Non-Lethal Deer Management Options May 26, 2011 Jonathan Kays, Extension Specialist-Natural Resources University of Maryland Extension George Timko, Deer Biologist - MD Dept of Natural Resources Wildlife & Heritage
Suggested Resources Managing Deer Damage in Maryland (EB354C) - free online http://extension.umd.edu/local/index.cfm Website: www.naturalresources.umd.edu Publications library, Wildlife and Insect Damage tab Other deer damage management publications
What We Will Cover Problems with overabundant deer populations IPM Options for Deer Damage Management Implementing community deer management Questions
Problems With Overabundant Deer Damage to Personal Property Gardens, Landscaping, Agriculture & Woodlands Damage to Forest Health Deer - Vehicle Collisions Disease Transmission to Humans (Lyme) Herd Health
Deer browsing can ruin landscapes. Photo by Rob Gibbs
Agricultural Lands removed from production (not economical) Horticultural plants impacted
Comparing Grain Crop Losses from Deer 1997 and 2005 1997 2005 University MD Study Kevin McNew (USDA, National Ag Statistics Office, MD Office) Estimated Economic Loss Region (million $) Western 195.3 Estimated Economic Loss (million $) Central 6.5 3.6 Southern 15.8 1.4 Upper ES 6.3 2.4 Lower ES 9.2 1.2 Total $37,941 $8.9
Damage to Forest Ecosystems & Biodiversity
From: DeCalesta, 1994
Impact on human suffering and property from deer-vehicle collisions
MD Deer Vehicle Collisions (reported by insurance companies) Year # of collisions $ estimate @ $2,000 each 2002-03 26,169 $52.3 million 2003-04 21,968 $43.9 million 2004-05 22,820 $45.6 million 2005-06 27,925 $55.6 million 1 in every 141 MD motorists will have a collision with a deer in the next 12 months. 18% increase in deer-vehicle collisions in last 5 years.
Deer whistles on vehicles do not work and provide a false sense of security.
Disease Transmission to Humans Lyme Disease Life Cycle (Deer are an essential component) From: Lyme Disease, by M. Brittingham, Penn State Ext. Cir. 366
Deer Population Dynamics Need to harvest 40-50% of does to maintain population till next year
Decision Considerations for Applying Wildlife Damage Management for Deer Non-lethal Options Fencing Repellents Vegetation Management Lethal Options Population Management Traditional hunting Managed hunts or sharpshooters Deer contraception not practical if used alone
Wildlife Damage Management (WDM) Approach for Deer
Favorite Deer Foods (Trees) Japanese maple pear Leyland cypress white pine apple crabapple balsam fir Norway maple cherry plum hemlock Resistance of Ornamentals to Deer Damage (UME fact sheet 655)
Rarely Damaged Trees Allegheny serviceberry heritage birch Japanese falsecypress Japanese cedar Scotch pine Douglas fir San Jose / American holly Colorado blue spruce flowering / Korean dogwood honeylocust Resistance of Ornamental to Deer Damage (UME fact sheet 655)
Forest Stewardship Program Combine native habitat with deer harvesting to maintain balance. If over 10 acres, contact your state forester
Wildlife Damage Management (WDM) Approach for Deer
Things to Know About Using Repellents... They will fail 7 to 13 weeks. Work by odor, taste or combo Apply before damage occurs Different areas different results. Change repellents annually. Availability of other foods a factor. Short-term solution
Repellents NOT for Use on Edible Plants New growth requires application more often. Mode of Action Active Ingredient Longevity Name brands Odor Taste Putrescent egg-based 7 weeks or more Deer-away Deer guard Liquid Fence Taste Fungicide Thiram-based 7 weeks or more Bonide Chew-Not Deerbuster deer repellent & turf fungicide Odor Taste Edible animal Protein, fish 7 weeks or more Plantskydd Repellex Bobbex Taste Benzldiethyl Ammonium benzoate BITREX 7 weeks or more Tree Guard Ropel, Repel Odor Taste Combination preparations Egg, garlic, pepper, BITREX 7 weeks or more Deerbuster Deer 1
Repellent study in Montgomery Count 2000-2002
Difference in Browse of Treated and Untreated Plants (Montgomery County 2000-2002)
Dog in a box activated by motion detector barks louder as animal approaches Ultrasonic generator hooked up to motion detector Beware of Snake Oil! Research does not support use of these devices!
Pairs of dogs can protect 20-30 acres Dogs contained by buried electric fence
Wildlife Damage Management (WDM) Approach for Deer
Solidlock Fixed-Knot Fencing Fence of choice by most
Plastic Fencing Light Low cost Easy to install Blends in with wooded backdrop
Black plastic fencing blends in with a wooded backdrop. Flagging tied to fence to alert deer.
Deer will go through fence making holes that are easily fixed by attaching spare pieces.
Electric chargers Battery/solarpowered A/C- powered High voltage, low impedance Small computers with 45-65 pulses/min Short Duration - 0.003 per second AC, DC, battery, solar powered units available Always use AC power if possible.
Polytape & Polywire A plastic filament material with strands of wire interwoven that carry an electric charge. Very flexible and easy to use.
Applications: Gardens & Crops
snow.
Wildlife Damage Management (WDM) Approach for Deer
The most economical and practical method of deer population regulation is... hunting.
Deer Fertility Control Contraception Gonacon Only Drug Approved by EPA MDA Pesticide Applicators Requirements MD DNR Deer Cooperator Requirements Animal Marking/Tagging Required (EPA) Two Research Projects In MD* 80% Effective - 1 st Year, 50% - 2 nd Year $15 Dose / $1,000 Per Deer Capture, Handling * Not Practical Unless Used With A Population Reduction Program Cost Bourne by Community
Deer Fertility Control Surgical Sterilization Ovariectomy One Research Project In MD, 2011* 33 Deer Treated Veterinarian Expertise Required $1,200 Per Deer / Capture, Handling, Surgery* Cost Bourne by Community Not Practical Unless Used With A Population Reduction Program
Deer Fertility Control MD DNR Will Review The Merits Of Any Proposal On A Case By Case Basis
Use Regulated Hunting to Control Deer Numbers Hunting Seasons September 15 January 31 Archery: entire period Muzzleloader: 2 weeks Firearms: 2 weeks Crossbow Season expanded Region B (Urban Area) increased to unlimited antlerless bag limit for archery
Controlled or Managed Hunting A safe, practical method to remove deer from refuges in/near suburban areas. Pros: Can Be Inconspicuous, Effective & Safe Deer Learn fear of humans DNR Approval Required Meat can be donated Inexpensive Cons: Written permission within 150 yards of dwelling Coordinate with local authorities Community Consensus Years to reduce population, Not a one-time deal
Sharpshooting Rapid population reduction in local areas Safe, controlled hunting environment Used when there are serious safety concerns Very expensive
Deer Cooperators: An effective alternative to remove deer from suburban areas. Pros: Safe Deer learn fear of humans Permitted Cooperators Meat must be donated to needy Fast population reduction Cons: 150 yards from occupied dwelling w/out permission Community consensus Expensive: up to $400 per deer Coordinate w / local police Not a one-time deal
Deer Management Permits (DMP s) (Formerly Crop Damage Permits) MD DNR Wildlife Service can issue permits to commercial growers of agricultural and tree crops. Used any time of year. Permission can be given to others to use permits. If you have a written forest stewardship plan you are eligible for crop damage permits.
MD Reported Deer Mortality, 2010 (estimates) Deer Coop. Permits (Sharpshooting) 1400 Deer Management Permits Crop Damage Permits 8,000 Deer-Vehicle Collisions 25,000 Hunting 99,000
Waiving Safety Zone from Nearby Dwelling To hunt must be 150 yards from nearest dwelling Can be waived if written permission provided by owner of nearby property Enables hunting in subdivisions or similar areas.
Move to Community-based Deer Management Provides greater flexibility in the management of deer populations where traditional management methods are not an option.
Stages in Evolution of CBDM Concern Evaluation Involvement Implementation Issue Choice Alternatives Consequences
Six Models of Community Base Deer Management Community vote Environmental impact statement (EIS)/public consultation Agency partnership Homeowners association Citizen action Citizen agency partnership
Community Deer Management Requires a community come together to develop consensus on problem and options. Best approach is a small group that represents different stakeholders. Public meetings do not lend themselves to good outcomes. Need to consider non-lethal and lethal options
Move to Community Based Deer Management Research-based information, not decisions based on emotion. Good educational programs for homeowners, producers, professionals, etc. Resolve and commitment of local political officials. On the ground implementation essential for the long term.
Examples of Community-Based Mgt Gibson Island Loch Raven Reservoir City of Rockville Moyone Reserve Homeowner associations Local Government organizations Municipalities County-based citizen task forces
Task Force Progress to Working Group Representative stakeholders Resolution from local government Deer Survey of county residents Understanding deer biology, interactions, conflicts, and impacts Deer management options & effectiveness, cost, etc Summary & recommendations Best success if county or municipality proves personnel to implement a long term deer management plan through working group.
Citizen Task Force Reports in MD Available online at naturalresources.umd.edu
www.naturalresources.umd.edu
Interested in More information? Jonathan Kays 301-432-2767 x323 jkays@umd.edu www.naturalresources.umd.edu George Timko 301-432-4307 gtimko@dnr.state.md.us www.dnr.state.md.us/wildlife