|
Practical Deer Damage Management Alternatives Submitted for publication by the VA/WV Horticultural Society. Presented at the Annual Meeting in Roanoke, Virginia on January 12, 1999 by: Jonathan S. Kays, Regional Extension Specialist-Natural Resources, University of Maryland Cooperative Extension When deer significantly damage crops, forests, or vehicles, they are considered to be a nuisance. The best approach to control deer damage is an integrated pest management (IPM) plan, which includes careful monitoring of any one, or combination of, the following strategies: population management, fencing, repellents, or vegetation management. Although nonlethal techniques can help minimize damage caused by deer in any one area, the lack of any population control will likely result in an increasing population and the problems associated with this increase. Controlling deer damage requires a comprehensive program. The combination of control options one should use in an IPM program will depend on an accurate assessment of the problem and the desired outcome. Answering the following questions will help in determining which factors apply to a specific situation, which will help in planning an IPM program and potentially save time, expense, and frustration. How much money am I losing as a result of deer damage? Surprisingly few people carefully calculate their annual losses resulting from deer damage. Regardless of whether the damage is to landscapes or crops, this question must be answered to analyze the costs and benefits of the various control measures. What are the types of deer damage? There are primarily three types of deer damage: (1) browsing of plant parts, (2) antler rubbing of sapling bark, and (3) trampling of plants. It is important to determine the type of damage because certain controls are only effective against certain types of damage. For example, repellents may be effective against browsing damage, but they have little effect on antler rubbing or trampling. What is the annual pattern of deer damage? This will vary from year to year depending on weather, habitat, deer density, and other factors. Many fruit growers have planted young trees, successfully used repellents for 2 to 3 years, and then lost their entire investment as a result of deer grazing after a single severe summer or winter. It is best to plan a deer damage control program that is based on the most severe instance of damage in the past 5 years. What is the seasonal pattern of deer damage? Like annual damage patterns, seasonal damage patterns must be evaluated over a period of years. In general, summer damage is less extensive than winter damage, because other sources of food often are available in the summer. Fruit growers, foresters, nursery operators, and Christmas tree growers commonly lose dormant buds and annual growth to deer during the winter when other food is not available. In these cases, fencing, which can be costly, may be the only realistic option. However, farmers who suffer damage to field and row crops during the summer probably can use repellents or lower-cost fencing to minimize damage. What are the characteristics of the local deer population? Growers should investigate deer hunting and population-density data for their region, as well as travel routes and high-use areas, such as stream corridors, woodlots, or areas with low hunting pressure. Much of this information is available from the district wildlife biologist. What about the site? The size and characteristics of an area, as well as the farm management plan, are critical to selecting appropriate deer control measures. If planting sites are to be replaced or expanded, control measures should take this into account. Controlling damage on a short-term site-by-site basis is costly and inefficient. The size of the site is important. Large areas usually have lower per-acre, per-year control costs, but higher deer pressure because alternative food sources are far away. If fencing is used, it is important to provide travel corridors for deer. As the size of fenced areas increases over 20-25 acres, the effectiveness may decrease as deer penetrate the fenced area. Farmers should remember that forests, fields, and brush around a site encourage grazing because deer do not have to stray far from cover. There is less deer damage potential in sites surrounded by open or developed land. What about controlling other wildlife? Some deer control programs can be altered to control other pests. With slight modifications, electric fences can impede raccoons, woodchucks, and rabbits.
DEER PRESSURE AND CONTROL OPTIONS Deer damage control programs are most effective when planned well before crops are planted. Very low deer pressure may not warrant action when the cost of the damage is less than the cost of controlling it. Behavioral deterrents, such as repellents, usually are effective against low to moderate deer pressure. Deer repellents disrupt, rather than eliminate, deer feeding, and some damage will still occur. When deer damage reaches high levels in spite of repellents, damage may become economically intolerable. Under these conditions, fences are the best possible control measure. In general, it is best to consider fencing as a cost of doing business in areas with heavy deer pressure. This is especially true with new orchards, fields, and other production areas.
COSTS AND BENEFITS OF CONTROL METHODS It is useful to estimate the cost-benefit ratio for a given control method, taking into consideration the annual cost of a control measure versus the annual cost of the deer damage. At this time the following question must be answered: "How much money and time am I willing to spend to reduce the deer damage?" The financial and human resources available to deal with the problem often will dictate the control options available. Fencing may be very cost effective, but the grower must have the money to build the fence. Hunting and vegetation management options are not costly, but they will not usually solve the problem unless they are done properly. A thorough cost-benefit analysis by growers will usually show that more costly options are worthwhile investments. For example, New York fruit-tree studies have shown that the cost of implementing an effective repellent program for more than a few years costs more than installing a standard high-tensile fence that can last for decades. Also, repellents become less economical, and properly installed fencing more cost-effective, as the size of a site increases; the larger the lot, the more dramatic the drop in fencing costs per acre. At one Maryland nursery, deer caused approximately $2,000 damage each year within a 5-acre tract. The cost of a commercially installed high-tensile fence for 5 acres would be approximately $4,000, and would last for approximately 20 years. It is easy to see that the fence would more than pay for itself within a few years. The key to an effective IPM program is monitoring on a regular basis to see if the program is working. It is difficult to change seasonal deer feeding habits after they have begun. Therefore, it is important to try to monitor whatever controls are being used to anticipate problems.
ALTERING DEER HABITATVEGETATION MANAGEMENT Habitat for any wildlife species consists of food, cover, water, and space found within the home range of the species. The home range of a deer is about 1 square mile for does and up to 4 square miles for bucks. Most landscapes in Maryland provide each of the habitat components within the home range of deer. Deer prefer to stay near the edge of woodlands and brush areas, which provide good cover. Farm crops and landscape trees and shrubs provide high-protein nutrition sources, as do native sources of browse, such as tree sprouts and seedlings. Thus, growers and homeowners usually experience the greatest amount of damage to crops and forests near these edges. Consider the following solutions: Leave as much open area as possible between field edges and planted material. Clear underbrush from field edges to a width of approximately 60 feet to reduce cover for deer. Bushhog this area a few times a year. However, growers must consider that destroying deer habitat means destroying the habitat of other wildlife as well. Implement a forest management plan for your woodland that includes harvesting to promote an abundant source of young browse. In many cases, this strategy can provide additional income. Placate deer by planting a "nurse crop," a crop deer favor and may eat instead of your main crop. This technique can be expensive and it can backfire by attracting more deer to the area. Plant landscape trees and shrubs that are not highly preferred by deer. For more information, refer to Fact Sheet 655, "Resistance of Woody Ornamentals to Deer Damage," published by the Maryland Cooperative Extension Service When the creation of native habitat through good forestry is combined with an effective hunting program, deer damage can be greatly reduced at little cost. State forestry agencies usually provide forest management planning services to private landowners under the Forest Stewardship program. The number of your local state forester can be found the phone book. Educational seminars are also available through your local Extension office.
SCARE DEVICES Loud noises, scarecrows, and dogs may deter deer over a short period (a few days to weeks), but these strategies generally lose their effectiveness as time passes. Deer have a great ability for adapting to their environment. However, scare devices may be quite effective if damage is minimal, the crop will be harvested shortly, or when used in combination with other control techniques.
DOGS CONTAINED BY INVISIBLE FENCING Free-ranging dogs contained by buried electric fencing ("invisible fencing") around a protected area can be an effective deterrent. House pets are usually not effective because deer feed in the evening when house pets are less likely to be roaming. A commercial company has taken the invisible fence technology used in home systems and developed a commercial system for large acreages. Initial research in commercial orchards and nurseries has found that areas of 20-40 acres can be protected from deer damage. The actual acreage depends on topography, visibility, snow cover, and other factors. The dogs are sourced from shelters, trained, and fitted with an electronic collar that will sound off and finally give a slight shock if the animal comes too close to the buried fence wire. Each dog must be carefully selected to get a suitable breed that is independent but good with people. Automatic feeding and water stations are positioned in the protected area, and owners agree to follow a rigorous dog maintenance protocol. Dogs chase deer away from inside the fenced area. There are successful applications of this technology to deter geese and groundhogs as well. In one demonstration study in a commercial nursery, the initial cost of the control box, fence wire for a 6,000 foot perimeter (35 acres) installed by producer, automatic feeders, dog food, veterinary care, batteries for collar, and dog shelters was approximately $4,000, or $0.65 per linear foot. Dog care costs of about $300 per year ($600 per pair) require an annual long-term cost. As with any system, growers need to compare the long-term cost with that of high-tensile fencing. The control box is capable of protecting three zones, so additional areas could be protected at lower cost, but dog costs would be similar. Results of a two-year Cornell University study in three apple orchards in New York protected by Off Limits Crop Protection System found significant reductions in bud loss, more bloom density, and higher yields. Over the two years, protected orchards averaged 124 bushels per acre, with an additional return of $809 per acre. While the economic data appears favorable, it is important to realize the system functions more as a repellent or scare device than a physical barrier. While the technology is relatively new and more research is needed, it does appear to provide a cost-effective option for commercial fruit growers, nurseries and others with high-value crops to investigate. However, long-term dog expense must be considered when comparing this system with high-tensile fencing. There may be applications for other crops as well.
ULTRASONIC DEER DEVICES The development of ultrasonic devices to repel deer has increased, and many products for small landscapes are available commercially. These devices produce high-frequency, short-wave ultrasonic sounds that are inaudible to people, although some animals, such as deer, dogs, and cats can hear well in the ultrasonic range. Devices are sold that are triggered by an infrared detector that turns on the ultrasonic device and a floodlight to further startle the deer. In many cases the deer will become used to the noise. Research has not found these products to be effective.
REPELLENTS Repellents disrupt and reduce instances of deer feeding on plants. Repellents are most effective when used in orchards, nurseries, gardens, and on ornamental plants. Their value for row crops, forages, and other large acreage crops is limited because of their expense, application restrictions, and variable results. Repellents are most effective when used as part of an integrated management program that includes other repellents, scare devices, fencing, vegetation management, and population control. Repellents fall into two categories: contact and area. Contact repellents are applied directly to plants and repel deer because of their foul taste. They are most effective on dormant trees and shrubs. New growth that occurs after treatment is unprotected. Contact repellents may reduce the palatability of forage crops and should not be used on plant parts that are intended for human consumption. Area repellents repel deer by odor. Apply area repellents near plants you want to protect. Border applications of area repellents may protect large areas at a relatively low cost. Crops grown for human consumption can be protected because area repellents are not applied directly to plants. Growers who use repellents should understand some basic principles: Repellents do not eliminate browsing, only reduce it; therefore, repellent success is measured by the reduction, not elimination, of damage. If even minimal damage is intolerable, 8-foot fencing is the best option. Rainfall will wash off many repellents, so they will need to be reapplied. Some repellents weather better than others. Repellents only reduce antler rubbing to the extent that they keep deer out of the area. Repellents work by altering deer behavior. Therefore, they work best if used before feeding habits become established in a certain area. Deer establish their feeding habits in the late fall and spring. The availability of other, more palatable deer food dictates the effectiveness of repellents. When food is scarce, deer may ignore both taste and odor repellents. If you use repellents, do not overlook new preparations, products, or creative ways to use old ones. New products are constantly appearing on the market. Growers who are facing a long-term problem should compare the costs of repellents and fencing over time. A repellent that works in one area may not work elsewhere, even if the crop and conditions are similar to the first site. cost Before selecting a repellent, consider both its effectiveness, longevity, and cost. Studies of nursery plant species highly preferred by deer suggest that there are large differences in cost and longevity. Repellents can be quite effective for short-term forestry applications on seedlings. However, repellents are not usually cost-effective in controlling deer damage over a long period of time. Studies of orchards in New York have shown that the cost of a repellent spray program for reducing deer damage exceeds the cost of high-tensile deer fencing after only a few years. Money spent on repellent applications could be wasted if unusual weather conditions force deer to eat crops as a result of the loss of alternative foods.
FENCING In situations in which deer pressure is moderate to high, or if the growing stock is very valuable, using fencing to physically exclude or deter deer from growing areas is a necessity. An 8-foot fence is needed to physically exclude deer. Many designs of electric and nonelectric fence are available. They range in cost from pennies per foot to as much as $6.00 per linear foot. Consider fencing as a long-term investment. A well-maintained fence should last between 5 to 20 years, depending on the type. Most fences pay for themselves within a few years by reducing losses caused by deer damage. For example, it is not uncommon for a high-tensile type fence around an orchard, nursery, or other high-value crop to pay for itself within 2 to 3 years. electrified fencing Electric deer fences are the most common and effective type of fencing used. They are effective because deer, unless chased, prefer to go through or under a fence rather than attempt to jump over it. Electric fences are powered by high-voltage, low impedance chargers, which provide timed pulses (45 to 65 per minute) of short duration (0.0003 per second). How well a charger will perform depends on its power output measured in joules under load. Deer hair is hollow and well-insulated, and their hooves are small and pointed, which lessens the impact of an electric shock. Therefore, conventional fence chargers that will deter cattle may lack sufficient output to deter deer. The charger also must be matched to the fence design. Suppliers can provide more information. A good rule of thumb when selecting a charger is that 1 joule of output from a charger will adequately power 3,000 feet of fence wire. By determining the perimeter of your fenced area and the number of wires that will be charged, you can get a rough idea of your charger needs. All electric fences should be marked with signs. Chargers can be either AC-, battery-, or solar-powered and maintain a charge greater than 5,000 volts on several miles of fence. It is best to use AC-powered chargers because they have a lower cost per joule of output and are most reliable. A power wire can be run to the fence location, or aluminum fence wire can be run considerable distances on posts from an AC-powered charger to the remote fence location. The cost of running a well-maintained electric fence with a 4-joule energizer for one year is equivalent to the cost of running a 40-watt light bulb for one year. Battery chargers are adequate but must be maintained properly. Solar chargers have a solar panel that keeps a battery charged, but they are very expensive and high-joule units must be custom-made. One of the recent developments in deer fencing has been the discovery that baiting fences with peanut butter or other attractants can greatly increase the effectiveness of an electric fence. The smell of the peanut butter attracts the curious deer so that they touch the fence with their nose. The shock the deer gets in its head area has a much greater impact than a shock to a leg or other body part. This better conditions the deer to stay away from the fence. fence maintenance and effectiveness Many landowners experience problems with deer penetrating fences after the first year due to lack of maintenance. Fences must be maintained to remain effective. Vegetation must be kept off of the lower fence wires using herbicides or mechanical means to reduce grounding and voltage loss. The voltage must be checked regularly and broken strands quickly repaired. Deer constantly test the fence, and if they find they can penetrate it because the power is off or for some other reason, the fence will lose its effectiveness. Another common mistake is not electrifying the fence strands before leaving the area during construction or afterward. Some people have made the mistake of leaving a fence in place for weeks or months, but they turn off the power during the offseason. This renders the fence ineffective even after it is re-electrified, because the deer have learned that they can penetrate it. It is important to understand that most fences are not true physical barriers but behavioral barriers. The electric shock conditions the deer to stay away. Once deer know they can penetrate this fence, its effectiveness is seriously reduced. Another problem experienced with fences is not providing a minimum 10- to 15-foot cleared buffer on the outside of the fence to allow deer to see the fence. Otherwise, they will run into the fence and break it or go through it. On steep slopes this buffer must be wider. The following discussion presents some general information on various types of fencing that differ in cost and have differing applications. permanent nonelectric deer fences Wire mesh fencing. This fence is best suited to protecting high-value crops under severe deer pressure. This nonelectric fence is expensive and difficult to construct, but easy to maintain and very effective. Although a fence may last for 20 years or more, its initial cost of 2 to 4 dollars per linear foot, excluding labor, has resulted in reduced use over the years. It is assembled from two tiers of 4-foot woven wire strung together to form an 8-foot barrier. The fence should be close to the ground so deer do not crawl under. The tiers of wire are tied together at the seam to prevent penetration. Other designs include 6-foot woven wire with strands of high-tensile wire above that to a height of 8 to 10 feet. Little maintenance is required. Plastic mesh fencing. The use of nonelectric plastic mesh fencing has some residential and landscape applications. The fencing is lightweight, high-strength, and virtually invisible, so it does not detract from the appearance of the property. The product available is a 7.5-foot black plastic mesh fence with an expected life of 10 years. This type of fence can be attached to existing trees or hung on pressure-treated posts. The light weight of the material minimizes the need for many posts. White streamers 12 inches long are attached 4 feet off of the ground every 12 feet to warn the deer of the barrier. Galvanized 12-inch stakes can be purchased to secure the fencing to ground every 12 feet. The cost of the fencing material, excluding posts, is approximately $0.65 per linear foot. permanent and semipermanent electric fencing Slanted seven-wire fence. This fence differs from the vertical fence in its post alignment and wire barrier, which are constructed at a 30-degree angle to the ground. Its three-dimensional design, which measures 5 feet high and 8 feet wide, and electric shock present a formidable barrier. The fence is constructed using 12-gauge wire. The wires are attached to slanted fence battens at 50-foot intervals to attain the three-dimensional effect. One drawback to this fence is that it requires 8 feet of space along its entire length, which increases maintenance cost and removes a larger area from production. Cost, excluding labor, is $1.50 to $2 per linear foot. Vertical electric deer fencing. This is a permanent fence originally developed by Pennsylvania State University and has since been modified and improved and is now widely used. It has proven highly effective on up to 20 to 25 acres. There is a wide variety of fence materials and specific designs, including the number of wires (5, 7, 9, or more) and fence height (5 to 10 feet), that you can use. Posts are usually driven into the ground with a mechanical device and high-tensile wires (12-gauge) applied and maintained under very high tension, hence the need for good support. The fence is powered by a high-voltage, low-impedance, New Zealand style charger. Properly maintained, this fence has a life expectancy of at least 20 years. Cost, excluding labor, ranges from $0.75 to $1.50 per linear foot. Electric Spider fence. This is a relatively new fencing concept that combines multiwire electric fencing technology with medium cost and good exclusion capability. This 5-wire fence is 48 inches tall and uses a lighter 17-gauge wire that is not under high tension. The only driven posts are the corners, and intermediate fiberglass posts are used periodically to maintain wire spacing and height. The minimal wire tension is increased or decreased by wrappings on the Spider G-Spring at the gate opening system. Because there are few driven posts and low tension, the fence is only semipermanent and much cheaper to construct than conventional high-tension systems. Baiting with peanut butter flags, described later, is essential to make this fence effective. The finer gauge wire can break more easily than conventional 12-gauge wire if hit by deer or falling branches. However, this has not proven to be a large problem because the fence will lean under force and then straighten. Also, an adequately cleared buffer around the outside of the fence can minimize these problems. Properly maintained, this fence has a life expectancy of about 10 to 12 years. Cost, excluding labor, ranges from $0.35 to $0.40 per linear foot. temporary electric deer fences There are types of temporary electric fences that provide inexpensive protection for many crops on small and large acreage. They are easy to construct and materials are readily available. The fences are designed to attract the animals attention and encourage them to touch the fence with their nose, whereupon they receive a strong but harmless electrical shock (high voltage, low amperage). Similar to the strategy behind many farm livestock fences, deer are conditioned to avoid the fence and the food source that lies behind it. Another advantage of these fences is their ability to be easily removed and installed. The major cost of the this fence is the fence charger. Polywire is composed of three, six, or nine strands of metal filament braided with strands of brightly colored polyethylene. Polywire has a life expectancy of 5 to 7 years A wider polytape is also available and has the advantage of being stronger and more visible, but is also more expensive. Both polywire and polytape come in a wide variety of colors; however, many users claim that white provides the greatest contrast to most backgrounds and is easier for the deer to see, especially at night. Loss of voltage over long distances of polywire/polytape can be a problem. Purchase materials with the least electrical resistance (ohms/1000 ft) for these applications. There have been many applications of polywire and polytape in deer fencing. In its simplest application, an electrified single strand of polywire is suspended approximately 30 inches above the ground by 4-foot fiberglass rods at 20- to 50-foot intervals. The fence is baited with luminum foil "flags" (foil squares 4 inches by 4 inches folded over the wire) or screening, and attached to the wire at 20- to 50-foot intervals using tape or paper clips to hold them in place. Closer spacing may be necessary near existing deer trails and during the first few months the fence is used when deer behavior is being modified. The underside of the flags are baited with a 1:1 mixture of peanut butter and vegetable oil. The smell encourages deer to touch or sniff the flags, leaving a vivid reminder of why they should avoid the fence. The flags should be rebaited every 4 to 8 weeks, depending on weather This basic design can be adapted. A second wire can be added to increase effectiveness: one wire placed 18 inches from the ground and the top wire at 36 inches above the ground. This prevents fawns from walking under the fence and also increases the chances that one wire will remain electrified if deer should knock the fence over. Usually only the top wire is baited. In smaller areas, such as home gardens, more wires can be added on taller poles if desired, and closely spaced bottom wires can keep out rabbits and groundhogs. It is important that vegetation be mowed or removed under the fence so it does not short out. The use of fiberglass posts for corner posts results in high tension and usually requires the use of stakes and ropes to hold them up. An improvement is the use of 4-foot metal fence stakes covered with PVC or a buried wooden post. Proper maintenance of the fences is essential for long-term effectiveness. It is likely the deer will knock the fence over until they are trained to stay clear. This is common near well-used travel paths. It is important that the fence be located at least 15 feet from any forest edge or brush so the deer have a chance to see it. The user must check the fence every day for the first month to make sure it is charged and upright, in case it was knocked down. The easiest and safest way to check fence voltage is with a digital or color meter. Most materials required for these fences can be purchased from fence suppliers and local farm stores. The metal fence stakes and PVC can be found in local farm stores. Some fence suppliers now offer ready-made kits that include all of the materials needed to fence 1 acre or more. effectiveness of temporary electric fences Temporary deer fences have been used in Maryland and other states to protect corn, soybeans, fruit trees, forest plantations, Christmas trees, vegetable crops, home gardens, nurseries, and other crops. Based on past experience with temporary fences, the following generalizations can be made: If protection is only needed during the growing season when other food sources are available to deer, large acreages may be effectively protected. Protection of areas 1 acre and smaller may not be possible during the dormant season since other food sources are usually lacking. Presence of snow cover is an important factor that will greatly reduce effective dormant season protection. Snow cover insulates the ground and makes most temporary fences ineffective. The maintenance associated with temporary fences during the dormant and growing season on larger acreages is so demanding that it is may not be practical for many growers. If fenced areas cut across existing deer trails, it will be very difficult to change these behavioral patterns. Fences will likely be compromised. If deer pressure is severe, possibly no temporary fence will be effective. If a temporary fence has become ineffective, remove the wire for a season and retrain the deer later. If protection is needed for multiple years and the effectiveness of temporary fencing is questionable, consider multi-strand steel fencing designs.
POPULATION MANAGEMENT Deer populations in Maryland are capable of doubling within a few years if they are not controlled. With diminished populations of natural predators, the most efficient type of population control is hunting. Although other types of population control, such as infertility treatments, are being researched, it is unlikely they can or will be economical or biologically effective in free-roaming deer populations. A typical deer herd in Maryland may contain three does for every buck. In many herds the ratio of does to bucks is higher. One buck is capable of mating with many does, so eliminating bucks has little effect on the growth of the herd. The population of a deer herd can double in one year (without hunting or other mortality) and the effect of hunting on the rate of population increase: Other mortality factors, such as vehicle collisions and death by starvation in the winter, could also reduce the rate of increase in the herd size. Deer herds in Maryland are hunted to maintain populations that are compatible with human land use. This is called the cultural carrying capacity. This contrasts with biological carrying capacity, which is the deer population that the available habitat can support. Most growers suffering damage want to reduce deer populations, but the goal must be more specific. For example, do you want to eliminate all of the deer, or only to reduce the population so that damage is at an acceptable level? Do you want to reduce damage but also produce trophy quality bucks? Each of these options requires population regulation. The most practical way to regulate the population is hunting. hunting Many landowners hunt deer on their property but fail to reduce populations to a level that significantly decreases crop damage. In many cases, attempts to reduce populations through hunting are frustrated by neighbors who do not hunt deer, thereby providing a deer refuge during the hunting season. Still other landowners have concerns about their liability in case of a hunting accident. Although there are many reasons for failure, population dynamics show that the sex of the deer killed is more critical to effective management than the number. In most areas of Maryland, approximately 35 to 40 percent of the does must be killed to stabilize the population, and a greater percentage must be killed to reduce it. developing a hunting program Many landowners realize that to effectively reduce doe populations, they must recruit an adequate number of successful hunters on their property. Maryland law provides considerable liability protection for landowners who do not charge a fee. Most states have similar statues. Many growers have sufficient land to develop a fee hunting enterprise with a group of responsible hunters. Affordable liability insurance is available. More information on free and fee hunting can be found in Fact Sheet 617, "Recreational Access and Landowner Liability," available from the Maryland Cooperative Extension. Following the suggested guidelines below will help landowners to ensure that hunters will be responsible on their property while being effective in their efforts.
recruiting effective hunters Invite hunters who are safe, dependable, and capable. Hunters can be family, friends, or reliable acquaintances. Remember that their efforts will determine the success or failure of the hunting program. Require hunters to apply for a doe permit if necessary. Remind hunters of the application dates to secure doe permits for firearms season. Either sex usually can be taken during archery and muzzleloader seasons. Specify that hunters must harvest a doe before killing a buck. Consider leasing your land to a local hunt club and develop a contract with clearly defined responsibilities and actions. Although many landowners use leases (contracts) only when hunters pay for leasing rights, leases are appropriate if no fee is charged. The Maryland Cooperative Extension Service provides copies of sample lease agreements. hunting strategies Minimize scouting the week before opening day. Scouting immediately before the season may reduce hunter success. Deer are alerted by the unfamiliar odors, sounds, and sight of people and move to less disturbed areas. Scouting is essential but should be done several weeks before the hunt. Concentrate hunting efforts during the opening weekend. Deer are most vulnerable on opening day, before they become aware of hunter activity and alter their behavior. Hunt from stands. This increases success and lessens chances for detection by deer. Safety is very important. Make sure stands are sturdy and located far enough apart to avoid the chance of an accident. Encourage hunters to use the most productive stands. Encourage hunters to remain on their stands throughout the day. Many deer are killed after noon when other hunters on the move disturb the deer and cause them to flee. Maintain the pressure after opening weekend and during other seasons. Deer become more difficult to bag as the season progresses. Driving deer from thickets toward prepositioned hunters can be very effective. Remember that archery season precedes the firearms seasons and archers can be very effective in bagging deer from stands. Work with your neighbors to encourage them to allow deer hunting. crop damage permits In many cases, the severity of deer damage requires immediate action, even if it is not hunting season. Most state wildlife agencies can issue crop damage permits to commercial growers to allow off-season hunting. These permits are useful for eliminating nuisance deer, and keeping pressure on the deer herd year round, but they are not a long-term solution. Once called, a wildlife agency biologist will usually visit your property and assess the damage. The biologist must see the damage to issue a permit, so do not clean up the mess prematurely. He or she will then determine how many crop damage permits should be issued to address your problem. It is recommended you fill the permits as quickly as possible through your efforts or other hunters you enlist. You can then usually get more permits depending on the situation.
SUBURBAN DEER CONTROL Deer damage is no longer just a rural problem. Population increases in rural areas, lack of hunting pressure, firearms-discharge restrictions in developing areas, and deer adaptability to suburban habitats, among other factors, have resulted in rapid increases of suburban deer populations. The result has been increased damage to suburban landscapes and to forest, and an increase in the number of deer-car collisions. Many growers run into conflicts with suburban neighbors when trying to implement population management programs on their property. Efforts to reduce deer populations by use of special hunts, sharpshooters, and special permits may result in serious conflicts between various groups due to a lack of consensus. Many states and localities have found an effective method to address this problem. Rather than use public meetings, which often end in arguments rather than solutions, a citizen task force or advisory board composed of representatives of various groups has worked effectively in building consensus.
WHAT CAN YOU DO ABOUT DEER? On Your Property?
In Your Community?
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION AND ADDITIONAL READING LIST OF FENCING SUPPLIERS (Check local listing as well) Benners Garden, Inc. Bala Cynwyd, PA (800)753-4660 Fencing Deerbusters, Inc. Frederick, MD 1-888-422-DEER (3337) Many products Kencove Fence, Inc Blairsville, PA (800) 245-6903 Fencing Kiwi Fence Systems, Inc. Waynesburg, PA (800) 627-8158 Fencing Off Limits Crop Protection Systems Chantilly, VA (800) 538-3647 Dog-invisible fence Premier Fence Co. Washington, IA (800) 282-6631 Fencing West Virginia Fence Corp. Lindside, WV (800) 356-5458
PUBLICATIONS A full listing of deer and other natural resource publications is available on this web site by clicking PUBLICATIONS. Some are listing below but go to the other website for ordering information.
|