[Peewit]

I watched Countryfile this morning and it had an article about Deer, and the effect that they are having on the countryside. There appears to be a Deer explosion now and the numbers are increasing all of the time to the point there are too many of them.

This in turn is having an effect on other species like the Nightjar and the Song Thrush, and their habitat is being destroyed at a cost to the species.
More and more deer fences are being put up so that trees, and undergrowth can grow to provide basic animal needs.

Anyway the link will be available soon so that the program can be watched on BBC I-Player.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00gvg6g

Taken of link

'Five years ago, a Deer Action Plan was created to deal with the increasing population......

[MarkHows]

This is due to the lack of deer predators

Mark

[Isurus]

Originally Posted by MarkHows

This is due to the lack of deer predators

Mark

Quoted for truth.

Absence a lynx/bear/wolf reintroduction, a mass influx of venison sausages in the nation's supermarkets wouldn't be a bad thing environmentally either.

[Farnboro John]

Originally Posted by Isurus

Quoted for truth.

Absence a lynx/bear/wolf reintroduction, a mass influx of venison sausages in the nation's supermarkets wouldn't be a bad thing environmentally either.

Red Deer is the most tasty. Fallow is not dissimilar to roast beef: nice, but not different enough to be exciting.

John

[Capercaillie71]

Originally Posted by MarkHows

This is due to the lack of deer predators

There's potential for an interesting discussion regarding the extent to which predators control their prey populations or whether the opposite is true. I suspect that both can occur depending on circumstances.

In any case, I'm not sure that the increase in the deer population over the past 50 years can be blamed on the extinction of predators that took place 300+ years ago.

Small woodlands and other patches of suitable habitat provide great cover for deer, and when they are surrounded by tasty crops and grassland that receive significant inputs of fertiliser each year, it is easy to see how the deer population across much of Britain has risen to a level far above that which 'natural' habitats can sustain. As those 'natural' habitats have been reduced to a few small fragments in the countryside, it is inevitable that they will suffer from the impacts of high deer numbers.

In the Scottish Highlands, the numbers of red deer on many estates are also kept high by the provision of winter feeding (e.g. hay) at a time when the lack of food would naturally constrain the population.

[bombycilla]

Originally Posted by MarkHows

This is due to the lack of deer predators

Mark

It is mainly due to lack of population control by humans, which admittedly are predators !

Most sporting estates IME like to keep fairly inflated herds of animals, primarily as an asset, especially now given the dire Grouse shooting situation with most beats now seemingly only permitting walking up shooting.

That said some do their bit to control numbers sensibly, however, sometimes overshooting just creates a vacuum that animals from adjacent land simply fill.

Readers may be interested to know that a stalker is employed by RSPB at Abernethy. I think this is very sensible land management on their part as Red Deer are the single biggest factor in the rate of natural re-generation of our native pine woods - that and some gamekeepers cutting down samplings that 'compromise' the edges of grouse moors !

[DaveN]

Well I've done my bit for the Nightjar and Song Thrush, I had a Venison curry the other night.

[OK_Scissortail]

In Oklahoma, US we have a deer population problem it seems or the wildlife dept thinks so. They released some cougars to help with the deer population. The release I feel was done at the wrong time with reports from hunters that the deer hunting season didn't turn out that well. The deer were way too alert and didn't travel same routes so the hunters came home with fewer then last season if any at all. The cougars had everything spooked up too much. The cougars are probably doing their job but they can go for quite awhile after killing one to the next meal so go figure on them controlling the population. The cougars have also killed livestock, young calves etc from reports. I really think they are messing things up here as far as with the cougars. They should had released the cougars earlier in the year and not before hunting season.

Now with all that being said, I agree with hunting to keep the population down and disease controlled so it doesn't spread to other animals or even humans, but I don't hunt, neither does my family. Our farm is a safe haven for friendly animals, if they get off the property then that is their choice during hunting season. This last year 2 does had a set of twins each so they can multiply fast.

[Farnboro John]

Originally Posted by OK_Scissortail

In Oklahoma, US we have a deer population problem it seems or the wildlife dept thinks so. They released some cougars to help with the deer population. The release I feel was done at the wrong time with reports from hunters that the deer hunting season didn't turn out that well. The deer were way too alert and didn't travel same routes so the hunters came home with fewer then last season if any at all. The cougars had everything spooked up too much. The cougars are probably doing their job but they can go for quite awhile after killing one to the next meal so go figure on them controlling the population. The cougars have also killed livestock, young calves etc from reports. I really think they are messing things up here as far as with the cougars. They should had released the cougars earlier in the year and not before hunting season.

The cougars will be there all the time so their effect on the alertness of the deer population will be permanent. Unless you thought the wildlife service would catch them again at intervals to let the deer turn back into dumb targets? I think your hunters have been spoiled and need to sharpen up their skills instead of moaning about how the deer got away from them this year. True sportsmen would be enthusing about how real skill will now be rewarded.

Incidentally human prey selection criteria differ from those of natural predators. A human hunter is after healthy meat - i.e. fit animals - and if he is after trophies then he is selecting further for the animals best fitted for breeding. Neither criterion assists with disease control or improves the stock of the population.

An animal predator wants something edible that can be caught with as little effort and danger as possible. This removes the young, the old and the sick and maintains or improves the stock of the population.

John

[Isurus]

Originally Posted by Farnboro John

The cougars will be there all the time so their effect on the alertness of the deer population will be permanent. Unless you thought the wildlife service would catch them again at intervals to let the deer turn back into dumb targets? I think your hunters have been spoiled and need to sharpen up their skills instead of moaning about how the deer got away from them this year. True sportsmen would be enthusing about how real skill will now be rewarded.

Incidentally human prey selection criteria differ from those of natural predators. A human hunter is after healthy meat - i.e. fit animals - and if he is after trophies then he is selecting further for the animals best fitted for breeding. Neither criterion assists with disease control or improves the stock of the population.

An animal predator wants something edible that can be caught with as little effort and danger as possible. This removes the young, the old and the sick and maintains or improves the stock of the population.

John

John makes an excellent point about the differing criteria. In fact a paper was released quite recently about the effect of this and, frankly, its a little scary how much human hunting can alter almost any species and how quickly. The always excellent Ed Yong of Not Exactly Rocket Science summarises here:
http://scienceblogs.com/notrocketsci...urce=nytwidget

[Mysticete]

Um, so where have you heard that Oklahoma Fish and Game is reintroducing Cougars? Because I am not familiar with any planned Cougar reintroduction in any parts of the US besides Florida, and I keep hearing this urban legend about local Fish and Games reintroducing cougars. Given the amount of work it takes to reintroduce wolves (numerous public hearings, close monitoring, etc), I am very skeptical that they just released a few cougars under the radar.

[razorsharp]

Originally Posted by Isurus

John makes an excellent point about the differing criteria. In fact a paper was released quite recently about the effect of this and, frankly, its a little scary how much human hunting can alter almost any species and how quickly. The always excellent Ed Yong of Not Exactly Rocket Science summarises here:
http://scienceblogs.com/notrocketsci...urce=nytwidget

Very interesting article, will hunters listen though I wonder??

[bkrownd]

I have a hard time believing that any token predator reintroduction is going to have nearly the culling effect that hunting season does. Several million are taken yearly in the US during very short and fairly casual amateur hunting seasons.

[BJ64]

Originally Posted by Mysticete

Um, so where have you heard that Oklahoma Fish and Game is reintroducing Cougars? Because I am not familiar with any planned Cougar reintroduction in any parts of the US besides Florida, and I keep hearing this urban legend about local Fish and Games reintroducing cougars. Given the amount of work it takes to reintroduce wolves (numerous public hearings, close monitoring, etc), I am very skeptical that they just released a few cougars under the radar.

There are two problems with your logic.

First is assuming that the Oklahoma Fish and Game is required to report any activity of reintroducing any species. It is not.

The Oklahoma State Constitution is the largest constitution of any government in the world. Within this document are layers of protection of the various chartered public agencies.

For the most part these powers have been kept in check. To date the largest abuse of this has been the City of Tulsa taking water from Spavinaw Creek in 1912.

As for the Oklahoma Wildlife Department, you can note that there are species of fish found in our rivers that are not found in the same rivers in the adjoining states. How did they get established? There was no public hearing because it was not required. Several variants of catfish and clams found in the Grand River are what I am referring to. The release of some type of Rattlesnake in the Spavinaw Wildlife Management area is another one.

In contrast, the wolf release program was a change in the public policy of wolf eradication during the early 1900's. This program was challenged as a breach of contract between the US Government and the ranchers that leased public land for grazing from the BLM (Bauru of Land Management). The definition of ownership of land in the Oklahoma Constitution would make this case void if tried here. The taking and usage of land by the City of Tulsa to gain water from Spavinaw Creek is an example of this (eminent domain).

The second flaw in your logic is assuming that the release of Cougars has to be government sponsored. I would like to point out that there are a growing number of privately owned exotic animal facilities in Oklahoma and Texas. Perhaps this is common elsewhere and I do not know of it. It has been reported that one of these privately owned farms 3 miles north of Adair, Oklahoma has had an alligator escape as well as some sort of 50 pound rat.

The release of a large cat may not be something these people would want to report.

A case could be made that they are migrating here on their own. The attraction of higher densities of food in the eastern part of the state would make this logical. If this was the case, then why they are not also reported in eastern Kansas as noted in eastern Nebraska and the Dakotas?
http://www.cougarnet.org/prairiestates.html

However, I would like to point out that there have not been any creditable reports of cougars in this area for so many years that the official public stance is that they are not here.

The usage of "tree hugger" cameras by several hunters and game officials in the area has proven otherwise. The big cats are here.

Also for your consideration.

"Western cougar populations have been increasing since the 1960's, largely due to increased legal protection (i.e., game animal status) and expanded prey populations (primarily deer and elk). There is substantial evidence that indicates the species is beginning to re-colonize the adjacent Prairie States. South Dakota has documented a growing population of cougars, while the states of Nebraska, North Dakota and Oklahoma believe that they may now have small resident populations. "

http://www.cougarnet.org/prairiestates.html

"Despite game warden Daniel's claim that their department hasn't been able to substantiate cougar presence in Oklahoma from numerous sightings, the presence of cougars in Oklahoma has been verified, with two cougar kills in recent years in Cimarron County. One cougar was hit by a vehicle three years ago, and another was shot by a landowner in his yard last spring. Sources: (Rural Newkirk Woman Victim Of Cougar Attack; The Newkirk Herald Journal; Wayne White; 09/26/2002) (K-State Research and Extension News; K-State to Record Kansas Puma Sightings; Kathleen Ward, Communications Specialist; 10/15/2002) "

http://users.frii.com/mytymyk/lions/attacks3.htm

[Farnboro John]

I entirely take the point about escapes/releases from non-governmental sources and I should not be surprised if the various fish exotics originate from idiot anglers who want to catch something in particular without travelling for it (big problem over here too). However, the odd escape does not usually generate a population, especially in large predatory animals - the odds against them meeting or breeding are just too high.

Range expansion is another matter completely.

Finally, press reporting is insufficiently self-critical to be regarded as evidence. Ditto eye-witness accounts even with photographs (you should see how many "Beast of Bodmin" so-called big cat sightings in UK are actually, visibly attributable to Tibbles photographed badly) and then there is the urban/rural myth factor.

Note I am not in this case saying they are not there: just that so far no evidence that stands up to scrutiny has been produced.

John

[lashinala]

John brings up a good question cougar question....did they migrate or are they transplants? I know of several confirmed cougar sightings in Louisiana over the past few years. 2 sightings were 100 miles apart and about 3 weeks between. Either same cat that gets around or now they have at least 2.
But back to the orig. poster....yes we have a deer problem here too. I live close to a state park that doesn't allow hunting, which means we have had lots of fat, wandering clueless deer. I know some people still bow hunt there, but that doesn't really run them much. Coyotes arrived a few years ago, replacing the foxes for the most part, which didn't run deer. Now the area has lots of alert deer, and lots of missing cats and small dogs...probably a lot easier to catch than alert deer. Odd thing is, (from what I've read) the coyotes seem to move in waves of 15 to 20 years through here, then die out for a while, then the foxes come back. Then they run the foxes off again.
Cyclical.

[Isurus]

On the topic of fat clueless deer I approached a mule deer buck to within 6 feet in Sequoia National Park last year which is an area that still has black bear and cougar in good numbers. Do we think in a no human hunting situation they don't register humans as dangerous or was this one just dopey.

[lashinala]

Isurus,
Are you a vegetarian, or fish only? If so, maybe he didn't smell the threat?

[Mysticete]

I have no doubt that cougars are expanding there range, including into Oklahoma. I just don't believe that there is some sort of secret agenda by state F&G in this country to covertly introduce cougars. I have heard this "speculation" from many midwestern and eastern states, and it makes no sense to me.

As far as introducing non-native game fish and saying it would be comparable to introducing cougars, I don't think so. a non-native Bass might be a threat to the environment for native species, but people in general don't care about that. People DO care if large predatory mammals, with a history of killing people/pets/livestock ARE introduced.

[lashinala]

Or if one tries to water ski in a lake with non-native fish that jump out of the water and hit you. Ouch!

[fugl]

Originally Posted by Mysticete

II just don't believe that there is some sort of secret agenda by state F&G in this country to covertly introduce cougars. I have heard this "speculation" from many midwestern and eastern states, and it makes no sense to me.

Absolutely--pure urban myth. The idea that state F&W agencies have slush funds for covert cougar re-introductions is ludicrous.

[Isurus]

Originally Posted by lashinala

Isurus,
Are you a vegetarian, or fish only? If so, maybe he didn't smell the threat?

Nah - I'll eat pretty much anything that can be sustainably raised/harvested.

[Himalaya]

Looking at the case for Scotland, i think:-


1. If Wolves are not going to be reintroduced then at least lynx should be. I am not sure how Lynx will affect the numbers of Deer - are they capable of taking adult Roe Deer? How many Lynx and Wolves will be needed to lower the populations naturally?

2. Sika Deer in the UK should be neutered and the population allowed to die off. Then Red Deer from Scotland be introduced back into some of its former range. Do Red Deer exist in paces such as Yorkshire Dales NP, Forest of Bowland, Peak District NP, Sherwood Forest, Cannock Chase, Wales and other countryside areas? Relocation is better than culling unnecesarily.

3. Cheap Trophy Hunting which would discourage poachers at home and abroad, if visiting.

[borealowl47]

Classic example is Yellowstone np.No predators,to many ungulates,
destroying to much habitat for other species.Introduce predators
Wolf ,ecological balance is restored ,more birds,more wolfs,
less ungulates!
National Geographic had a great film on reintroducing Wolfs to
Yellowstone.What I found fascinating was the regrowth of the
riparian zone around the rivers.Which meant more habitat for
birds!etc etc.

Darrell

[Farnboro John]

Originally Posted by Himalaya

Looking at the case for Scotland, i think:-


1. If Wolves are not going to be reintroduced then at least lynx should be. I am not sure how Lynx will affect the numbers of Deer - are they capable of taking adult Roe Deer? How many Lynx and Wolves will be needed to lower the populations naturally?

2. Sika Deer in the UK should be neutered and the population allowed to die off. Then Red Deer from Scotland be introduced back into some of its former range. Do Red Deer exist in paces such as Yorkshire Dales NP, Forest of Bowland, Peak District NP, Sherwood Forest, Cannock Chase, Wales and other countryside areas? Relocation is better than culling unnecesarily.

3. Cheap Trophy Hunting which would discourage poachers at home and abroad, if visiting.

1. I agree Lynx should be reintroduced. It doesn't matter whether Lynx can take adult Roe Deer, they will take young and exert pressure on the population at that point instead.

2. Easy to say, the Sikas may not by so easy to catch! If you really want them gone shooting is the answer, humans have an excellent record of exterminating species with guns. Re catching, ditto Red Deer of course. In any case, East Anglian lowland Red Deer would probably do better in some of the areas you mention. There are already Red Deer in Wales. Don't know about Bowland but they are at Leighton Moss so I suspect they may well be in the area at low density.

3. Trophy hunting targets prime breeding males and does not therefore constitute an appropriate culling mechanism. In addition how are you going to force cheapness on sporting estates (i.e. where all the deer presently are)? Additionally, if you make it cheap are you going to get competent hunters or a rash of poorly shot suffering wounded beasts?

Back to the drawing board I think.

John