Upload
saul-beaufort
View
240
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Providence Water & White Tailed Deer
• The Study• Deer Management
Goals & Options• Tunk Hill Deer
Management Coop Area
• Monitoring
The Study
• 2008 Contracted with Natural Resource Consultants (NRC) to– Evaluate Deer Impacts
on 1,000 acres– Determine if Deer are
Overabundant Given our Goals
– If found to be Overabundant Develop Recommendations
The Study
Overabundant Wildlife is Defined as When One Species Limits the Abundance or Occurrence of Another Valued Resource or Interferes
with some Valued Ecological Process or Human Activity.
The Study
• NRC Chose to Concentrate on Deer Impacts to the Forest Rather than Deer Density
• Used SILVAH Developed by the US Forest Service– Quantitative– Analytical– Evaluates Forest Regeneration
and Deer Impacts– Compares to Established
Standards
The Study
When Evaluating Deer Browse Look At
Deer impact levels
Amount of food available
The Study
SILVAH Defines 5 Levels of Deer Impacts
1. None – found only inside fenced areas
2. Low3. Medium4. High5. Very High – Preferred
browse plants are absent, and abundance of non-preferred vegetation is reduced by browsing. Browse resilient plants show signs of heavy repeated browsing
The Study
• Eight Stands Within Study Area Selected
• Transects Established• Plots Sampled
– 6’ radius plots– Hardwood seedlings w/ 2 or
more leaves– Conifer seedlings– Current deer impacts on
vegetation– Amount of preferred browse
present– Amount & condition of non-
preferred browse
The Study
All Stands Evaluated by NRC Ranked as Having a HIGH IMPACT LEVEL. Preferred browse plant species were rare while non-preferred and browse
resilient vegetation was limited in height growth by deer browsing.
The Study
Amount of Food Available Based on– Current browse impacts– Amount of preferred woody
browse– Land use (other sources of
food) within one mile
Food Availability Ranked as LOW
The Study
Need More Seedlings the Higher the Deer Impact Level and the Lower the Food Availability. A Forest Needs at Least 70% of Sampled Plots
to Meet the Standards to be Considered Able to Restock Itself
The Study
With a High Deer Impact Level & Low Food Availability Need:
+15 conifer seedlings per plot or
+50 other desirables or
+100 new oaks or
+50 established oaks
The Study
Stand # Plots # Plots w/ 0 seedlings# Stocked plots needed
# Plots adequately stocked
713 30 2 21 0
715 40 8 28 0
New 40 26 28 0
722 23 5 16 0
726 25 11 17 1
550 41 28 28 0
550a 36 7 25 0
590 48 4 33 0
Stand # Plots # Plots w/ 0 seedlings# Stocked plots needed
# Plots adequately stocked
Conclusion
Given Our Primary Mission and Our Dependence on the Successful
Management of the Forest to Meet that Mission and the Current Conflict
Between Deer Impacts and Forest Management, it is Clear that by
Definition that Deer are OVERABUNDANT in the Study
Area
NRC Deer Management Goals for PWSB• Maintain deer as a valued component of the forest while
implementing a restoration plan that restores, maintains, and protects the structure, diversity, and function of the forest
• Reduce the potential for exotic invasive plants
Deer Management Goals
• Reduce deer-auto strikes
• Manage deer in a safe, humane, and responsible manner
• Establish a monitoring program to assess impacts and guide deer impact reduction efforts
Options
• No Action – Not Recommended• Mitigation Techniques (Fencing,
Repellents) – Not Recommended• Restore Predators – Not Recommended• Trap & Transfer – Not Recommended• Contraception – Not Recommended
Options
• Human Directed Mortality1. Trap and euthanasia – Not recommended2. Sharpshooters – Not recommended3. Agricultural damage permits
– Not recommended4. Recreational Hunters – Recommended
1. Public hunting2. Controlled hunt3. Hunting leases
PWSB Watershed Staff Recommends Controlled Hunt Over Other Options
On March 17, 2010 The Providence Water Supply Board
Authorized the Implementation of a Deer Impact Control Program Throughout the Watershed Property
Tunk Hill Deer Management Coop Area
• Encompasses Approximately 1,000 Acres • Deer Hunting by Permit Only• Number of Permits Will be Limited to 50
for the 2010 – 2011 Season• DEM Will Receive Applications and
Conduct Lottery if Necessary• Follows DEM Seasons for Deer Hunting
Tunk Hill Deer Management Coop Area
For Those with Permits Allows1. Archery – September 15 to
January 31
2. Muzzleloader – November 6 to November 28 and December 26 to January 2
3. Shotgun – December 4 to December 12 and December 26 to January 2
Tunk Hill Deer Management Coop Area
• An Antlerless Deer Must be Harvested Prior to Taking a Buck
• Will be an Ongoing Effort Not Just One Year
• Other Areas Being Impacted by Overabundant Deer Will be Added as Other Coop Areas in Future Years if Appropriate
Goal is Ecosystem Balance, not Recreation
Monitoring - What Do We Measure?
• Vegetation Monitoring Plots within Area– Six transects with 6 permanent
plots on each have been established
– Each transect will have an additional adjacent plot that will be fenced to exclude deer
– Each plot is 11meter radius where all vegetation greater than 4.5’ tall is measured
– A 1.78 meter radius sub plot with the same center established where all seedlings and herbaceous plants are counted
What Do We Measure?
• Deer Exclosures Ensure the Changes in Vegetation are the Result of Changing Deer Numbers
• Provides a Measure of the Potential Seedling and Herbaceous Diversity, Density, and Height
• Guides Deer Removal Either up or down
What Do We Measure?
RI DEM
Baseline Herd Density Estimates• Spotlight survey• Aerial counts in winter• Onsite remote sensing
equipment (motion cameras)
Success When
• Deer Impacts are Reduced so Similar Species Richness, Structure, and Flowering are Found in Fenced and Unfenced Plots
• Deer Impacts are Reduced so Tree Regeneration Meets Quantitative Standards
• Deer-Auto Strikes are Reduced Around the Forest
Questions?