Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Lynn Christenson – Vassar College

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Lynn Christenson – Vassar College"— Presentation transcript:

1 Lynn Christenson – Vassar College
The Environmental Monitoring and Management Alliance (EMMA) and White-tailed Deer Monitoring for Management Lynn Christenson – Vassar College VMC Meeting December 2016

2 Who we are EMMA is a network of scientists, land managers and educators centered in the Hudson Valley of New York State. This group is dedicated to the use of research-based monitoring to inform management and conservation efforts.

3 Deer like low mixed woodlands, forest edges, agriculture fields and second growth areas. Residential areas are now very desirable to deer.

4 Symptoms of high deer density:
Decreased understory species diversity Lack of forest regeneration Increased abundance of invasive species Frequent sightings of deer Keri started managing the preserve in 2005

5 Ungulate Herbivores and Nutrient Cycling
Herbivores can have both direct and indirect effects on nutrient cycling: Direct Effect Changes in foliar N content Indirect Effect Change in plant community composition Selective browsing on preferred species Browsing/grazing pressure Urine and feces Urine and feces 1.8% N 1.5% N 1% N 0.6% N

6 Trophic structure of a decomposer community
Trophic level Food Resources 3° Predators 2° Predators 2° Predators 1° Predators 1° & 2° decomposers 1° Predators 2° Decomposers Shredded litter & microorganisms 1° Decomposers Litter Chart adapted from Scheu (2002)

7 Management Goals Reducing Deer Density
Primary Goals: Ecosystem Allow forest regeneration. Promote biodiversity. Maintain ecosystem function. Secondary Goals: People Reduce deer/car collisions Reduce damage to ornamental landscape Reduce tick borne diseases Provide food to local food pantries. Results made management a top priority at our site Committee set management goals (<15 deer/ square mile). 15 deer on preserve. Evaluate progress by vegetation monitoring

8 Deer Exclosures Experimental Design
< 5 m buffer > 10 m 10 m 10 m Permanent Quadrats (> 0.5 m) % cover Tree seedlings Canopy Photos Shrub (0.5m- 2m) Species Stem Abundance Height of tallest bud Tree (>2m) Condition DBH Fenced Unfenced 3 sets of paired plots in forested areas 5 one meter square permanent quadrats Treatments randomly assigned Fenced treatment enclosed in an 8 foot tall deer fence

9 Vegetation Sampling Seedlings and Herbs Seedling Height: 0 – 0.5 m
Sample: species, height Permanent Quadrat Saplings Height: m Sample: species, browse, height Trees Height: > 2 m Sample: species, height, dbh, canopy die back

10 Deer Exclosures 2012 Regeneration rates are low at our site.
Deer are having a negative impact on tree regeneration and species richness. p<0.005 Fix SE on Sapling Abundance p<0.1 p<0.05 Values are means ± SE.

11 Long Term Deer Exclosure Results
Hunting Bucks only No Hunting

12 Leaf litter invertebrates evaluated summer 2012

13 Developing Management Recommendations
Fertility Control/ Sterilization Fence Controlled Access Archery Sharp shooting over bait Committee Debated: Fertility Control/ Sterilization- Not approved, expensive, difficult, unproven. Concerns over behavior, fate in the environment…$ /deer Fence- Recommended as a non lethal option after initial reduction. Restrict movement of all large animals. Interrupt ecosystem function? Maintenance. Expensive - $145,000 Controlled Access Archery- -Cannot have hunt during traditional season-Students -Limited by the amount of huntable area -Less Efficient -Safety, Liability -PR Injured Deer - *Season does not correspond to our winter break* Our goal is not to provide a recreational experience. $68-200/deer Sharp shooting over bait- - Humane - safe -efficient; least impact -liability -Needs to occur less frequently. $203/deer. ($13,000 total).

14 Implementation Mixed Public Response Permitting
-Discharge a firearm from a vehicle -City firearms ordinance Sharp shooting -64 deer in two nights. Venison Donation -10,000 meals provided. Baiting- Duration (DEC/White Buffalo), Able to do with Vassar & Local Hunter Volunteers Permitting- City Waiver, Permit said no discharge from vehicle (triggered DEC debate) Press- Debate took place in local paper, Protestors- Rallied to try and convince the college to stop. Misinformation, no solutions to offer

15 Public Response

16 EMMA managers compare and contrast deer management efforts at their locations
Cary IES Calder CGC Huyck Mianus Mohonk NYBG Teatown Vassar WPR What form of deer management are you using? Small archery, shotgun and muzzle loader N/A Archery Archery; have used cull in the past Sharpshooting over bait What years have you conducted your deer management program? 1976 – present 2004 – present 2014 – present 2010 – present 2010 – present (for County Parks 2009 – present) Do you receive DMAPS? Yes. Issued DMAP permit #1 Yes, 30 Yes, unsure of how many No Not anymore. Issue 3S tags for the state Do you use hunters, and how do you manage them? Yes Yes. Set group of hunters. Each hunter gets 2 or 3 zones they can hunt Yes. Call-in, call-out system, we limit the number of hunters on land; “lead” hunters tell other hunters where to go on specific days; hunters are required to take out the deer on their own with occasional help from staff No, not for harvesting. Hunters are only used as volunteers to collect data on deer health and to process the meat. The cull is conducted by United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) Wildlife Services Yes. Regulate number of hunters, deer killed, staff interaction and oversight, and compliance of regulations and guidelines What type of information do you provide to the hunters? Rules and regulations, procedures, review results from previous years, summaries of N/Aeach hunter’s effort and success since beginning, other ecological programming Annual meeting, report on harvest, hours etc. They can look at camera trap photos each fall Deer density; time they need to stop hunting etc Maps, rules/ regulations/ guidelines, orientations, individual statistics, yearly statistics, site statistics, hunting areas etc.

17 EMMA experience across the Hudson Valley can inform management decisions at other locations in this area. How many deer were harvested in 2015? 21 N/A 9 23 40 57 How many hunters participated in your program in 2015? 31 11 6 73 What was the number of returning hunters in 2015? 6 out of 8 44 What was the average hunting effort in 2015? 1275 hours total for 30 hunters (shotgun only) 538 hours 85 hunter days total (average of 28 hunter days per month) Only record active hunting time What was the average volunteer time/effort (outside of hunters) in 2015? 357 hours (not counting actual hunting hours) for camera work, posting property borders, clearing woods and roads, data entry Unsure. Hunters volunteer to collect data and process meat What was the average staff time/effort in 2015? 120 hours (30 days, 4 hrs/day) 0.5-1 day a week 225 hours total (average of 85 hours per 3 staff members) 2 nights 2 staff on average of 35 hours per week What types of staff are involved in your program? 1 full time staff member and 1 temporary assistant for weekends (total 6 days) Just Chris Nagy Stewardship and science staff Field Station Manager and staff from APHIS Wildlife Service 1 full time staff and 1 hourly assistant

18 EMMA can provide support for management decisions through information access
Have you done any outreach concerning your program? Presentations at meetings and journal articles N/A Deer meetings, conferences, public talks No Used to hold more outreach events. Now send letters to neighbors, send a college campus e- mail, and update the preserve’s website Deer symposium What was the cost of your program in 2015? Donations were received from some hunters, plus salary and stipend for temporary assistant Staff time $10,000 Absorbed by county, so cost unknown How has your deer management program developed over the years? Reduced number of participants because of reduced deer population Simplified protocols (registration, check in, data collected by hunters, hunters bring reproductive tract form) Automatic check in/out with touch screen and laptop Eliminated fee Evolved methods for deer relative abundance to set harvest goals Harvest rate has severely declined. Will probably institute some cull type system on top of normal hunting. This will be a big investment of staff time, as primarily staff will do the hunting at night. Final plan for 2016 is still being worked out Started with a cull, but transitioned to archery after Teatown sued. May go to archery over bait in future. Willing to try various methods as archery is not believed to get Teatown to the necessary population levels Have been using a cull as it is the best method for the area Vassar is located in. Still keeping track of potential immunocontracepti on if research suggests the method is successful It has developed a lot.

19 EMMA provides workshop and meeting opportunities

20 VMC and data management for EMMA
Partnering with VMC – More than just data storage…

21 Questions?


Download ppt "Lynn Christenson – Vassar College"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google