Hunting Fact Sheet #2

White-Tailed Deer: Creatures or Crops?

Q: AREN'T DEER HERDS INCREASING?

A: In the last century, the U.S. deer population has grown from fewer than 500,000 to more than 20 million. This is primarily because state wildlife agencies view themselves as providers or producers of deer for sport hunting.[1] Because of a growing human population and increased development infringing on wildlife habitat, deer densities appear to be higher than ever in suburban areas. People are coming into more contact with deer due to factors that include ornamental shrubs, private and commercial gardens and orchards that are attractive to deer, the "edge" habitat created by roadsides, suburban lawns, and deserted farmlands that generate large amounts of grazing and browsing for deer, roadways and highways that tend to concentrate deer in certain areas, and the eradication of predators such as wolves and mountain lions.[2]

Q: HOW MANY DEER ARE HUNTED?

A: Hunters in the U.S. kill approximately 4 million deer each year, representing 2% of the 200 million animals killed annually by sport hunters.[3] It is interesting to note that while hunters try to justify their entire sport based on deer overpopulation, deer represent only a minuscule fraction of overall hunting activities. The millions of mourning doves, rabbits, squirrels, waterfowl, and other animals hunters kill are never considered overpopulated.

Q: ISN'T HUNTING DONE TO KEEP DEER FROM OVERPOPULATING?

A: Hunters and wildlife agencies are not concerned with reducing deer herds, but rather with increasing or maintaining the number of targets for hunters and the number of potential hunting license dollars. Thus, they use deer overpopulation as a smokescreen to justify their sport. The New Jersey Division of Fish, Game and Wildlife states that "the deer resource has been managed primarily for the purpose of sport hunting,"[4] and hunters readily admit, "deer hunters want more deer and more bucks, period."[5]

Q: BUT WE NEED SOME MANAGEMENT, DON'T WE?

A: The current system of wildlife mismanagement has been directly responsible for the rise in conflicts between deer and people. While some forms of nonlethal management may be appropriate, managing deer herds for the sole interest of providing enough targets for sport hunters has wreaked havoc on deer and on the animals who share their ecosystems. For example, Michigan has a "Deer Range Improvement Program" (DRIP) that earmarks $1.50 from each deer hunting license sold into a fund specifically designed to increase deer reproductivity and to maximize sport hunting opportunities. According to a 1975 newspaper report, three years after the DRIP program began, "The DNR's Wildlife Division wants to keep clear-cutting until 1.2 million acres of forest land -- more than a third of all of the state-owned forest -- have been stripped . . . the wildlife division says it is necessary because a forest managed by nature, instead of by a wildlife division, can support only a fraction of the deer herd needed to provide for half a million hunters."[6] Since that prophetic 1975 report, the number of hunters in Michigan has doubled and the state's deer herd has tripled.

Q: DOESN'T HUNTING KEEP DEER NUMBERS DOWN?

A: While it is indisputable that hunting removes some animals from the population, it does not keep deer populations at a continually reduced level. While the average fall hunting season may remove 20% to 30% of the deer from a population, surviving deer will have less competition for food and increased nutritional health. Several scientific studies indicate that better-nourished deer have higher productivity,[7] lower neonatal mortality, increased conception rates,[8] and increased pregnancy in yearlings.[9] In hunted populations, does are more likely to have twins rather than single fawns, and are more likely to reproduce at a younger age, thus helping the population grow even faster. One study even indicated that "twinning was 38% on hunted and 14% on nonhunted" deer populations.[10] Because hunting pressure is focused on bucks, hunting skews the sex ratio of deer herds and leaves more females to reproduce (there have been reports of "does outnumbering bucks by as much as 30-1").[11] In these skewed sex ratios, a single buck can impregnate every doe in the population. Since hunting may cause the reproduction rates of a deer population to double or triple, hunting is not a solution to a problem, but a commitment to a permanent problem.

Q: DON'T WE NEED HUNTING TO STOP DEER FROM INVADING SUBURBAN AREAS?

A: State wildlife officials have duped urban and suburban communities into believing that hunting will solve conflicts between deer and human residents, and these communities tend to lean toward bowhunting or muzzleloading weapons because they fear the use of high-powered rifles or shotguns in residential areas. Yet, these two cruel and primitive methods of hunting do not reduce deer populations because of their extremely high crippling rates. Dozens of scientific studies indicate that bowhunting yields more than a 50% crippling rate.[12] For every animal dragged from the woods, at least one animal is left wounded to suffer -- either to bleed to death, to become infested with parasites and diseases, or to live as a cripple. One study even indicated that "100-200 archers per square mile per day would be necessary to achieve a satisfactory deer harvest."[13] Muzzleloading equipment, because of the lengthy amount of time it takes to reload, also yields a high incidence of crippling. Hunter education manuals indicate that while a deer shot with a rifle may take 5-10 minutes to die, an animal shot with a muzzleloader may take 60-70 minutes. Bowhunting and muzzleloading deer hunts may be psychologically soothing to landowners, but wounding animals at random does little or nothing to stop conflicts between deer and people.

Q: DOESN'T HUNTING STOP DEER FROM EATING ORNAMENTAL FLOWERS AND ENDANGERED PLANTS?

A: Killing some deer because we want to protect certain vegetation does not stop the surviving deer from eating those same plants. What we need are site-specific mitigation measures that have proven to be both humane and effective. With high-tensile wire fencing, electric fencing, and the planting of vegetation that is unpalatable to deer, nearly every deer problem can be resolved or reduced. The California Department of Fish and Game distributes a free brochure detailing a "complete list of deer-resistant' plants, deer repellents and fencing techniques designed to minimize garden and landscape damage by deer,"[14] and the New Jersey Division of Fish, Game and Wildlife donates materials to farmers and homeowners who report deer damage -- including barbed wire and high-tensile electric fencing, and repellents such as "Hinder" (liquid) and "Deer Away" (granulated powder).

Q: DOESN'T HUNTING REDUCE AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENTS?

A: While public officials tend to blame an increase in deer-vehicle collisions on an increase in the deer population, such collisions are more often the result of more roadways being built, more people driving, and roadways bisecting deer habitat. Killing some deer does absolutely nothing to prevent the surviving deer from crossing the exact same roadways at the exact same "deer hot spots." Michigan hunters, for example, killed 330,980 deer in 1993, and Michigan drivers collided with 47,813 deer that same year. In 1994, Michigan hunters killed 362,490 deer and drivers hit 56,666 deer.[15] Clearly, an increase in deer killing does not solve the problem of deer-vehicle collisions. In fact, there is also evidence that suggests a direct correlation between higher deer-car accident statistics and the onset of hunting season.[16] It has been suggested that hunting season has a disruptive effect by startling deer and putting them more "on the run." With nonlethal and effective mitigation measures such as driver education, reduced speed limits, improved fencing techniques, lining the roads with vegetation that is unpalatable to deer, and the use of roadside reflectors to deter deer from crossing roads, some communities are actually reducing the number of deer-vehicle collisions rather than relying on the pro-hunting "shoot first, ask questions later" propaganda. Several scientific studies applaud the use of Strieter-Lite Reflectors (formerly called Swareflex Reflectors) that, when installed and maintained properly on the sides of roadways, can reflect light from a vehicle's headlights and stop deer from crossing. The Washington State Department of Transportation recorded an 88% reduction in deer-vehicle collisions after installation,[17] and Minnesota officials recorded a 91% decrease.[18]

Q: DOESN'T HUNTING STOP THE SPREAD OF LYME DISEASE?

A: Although deer are a primary carrier of the adult Ixodes scapularis tick -- the "Lyme disease tick" or "black-legged tick," formerly known as Ixodes dammini -- many wildlife species carry the larval and nymph stages of the tick which are actually the most infectious to humans. The tick can be found on 49 bird species[19] and commonly carried by a variety of mammals, including white-footed mice, chipmunks, grey squirrels, voles, foxes, rabbits, and opossums.[20] When deer numbers are reduced, ticks tend to congregate at higher densities on the remaining deer[21] or switch to alternate hosts.[22] Even during a study in which all the deer were eradicated from an island, the number of adult ticks actually increased.[23] Lyme disease is easily treatable if it is caught in time, and nearly every state wildlife agency and physician's office offers free brochures on how to protect yourself from Lyme disease ticks when recreating in the woods.

Q: DEER CONTRACEPTION ISN'T REALLY AN OPTION, IS IT?

A: With the vast surge in immunocontraceptive technology over the past few years, the deer contraceptive dart known as "porzine zona pellucida" (PZP) is a viable option for communities. The contraceptive, when injected into female deer, stops them from reproducing for one to two years. The National Park Service tested PZP on Fire Island National Seashore off the coast of Long Island and reported a 95% success rate. The National Institute of Standards and Technology is now using PZP at its 575-acre campus in suburban Washington, D.C.[24] If wildlife agencies did not spend billions of dollars on hunter education, enforcement of hunting regulations, and other hunting-related activities, that money could be better spent on more immunocontraceptive research.

Q: WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE WHO NEED DEER MEAT TO SURVIVE?

A: While there may be a few native cultures that still hunt for food, the overwhelming majority of American hunters practice the activity only for sport. Several studies indicate that the average price of venison from deer killed in the woods -- after calculating the costs of firearms, ammunition, license fees, travel expenses, etc. -- is about $20.00 per pound.[25] Clearly, there are more economical ways to eat than by spending $20.00 per pound for food. Organizations such as "Hunters for the Hungry" are nothing more than public relations outfits that try to convince the public that hunting is beneficial to people. If hunters really cared about homeless or low-income families, they could purchase a lot more food for $20.00 than a pound of deer meat.

Q: BUT HUNTERS DON'T KILL FAWNS OR YOUNG DEER, DO THEY?

A: Despite rhetoric from hunters that they do not kill fawns, reports indicate that "of the bucks taken" during Michigan's 1994 deer hunting season, "74.6% were yearlings."[26] Biologists point out that "hunters continue to take about 70 percent of the yearling bucks."[27] These are young deer within the first year of their lives. When hunters talk about killing "antlerless" deer, they are more often killing young bucks rather than adult females.

Q: WON'T DEER STARVE TO DEATH IF THEY ARE NOT HUNTED?

A: Hunters do not search for starving animals. They either shoot animals at random, or they seek out the strongest and healthiest animals in order to bring home the biggest trophies or largest antlers. While Michigan hunters, for example, killed more than 400,000 deer during the 1995 hunting season, state officials estimated that "200,000 deer" starved to death the following winter.[28] Clearly, hunting is not stopping starvation, but may in fact be adding to the problem by triggering productivity. Even hunting columnists have condemned "the risk taken to build up the state deer herds to unrealistic levels in order to satisfy hunters and to sell more hunting licenses each year."[29]

Q: WHETHER IT'S NATURAL FACTORS OR HUNTERS KILLING DEER, WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE?

A: When animals die of natural causes such as starvation or predation, the old and the sick animals die, leaving the strong and healthy animals to reproduce and to keep the herd strong. When animals die of starvation, their carcasses become critically important food reservoirs for bears, coyotes, opossums, hawks, owls, and eagles who rely on some winter mortality to make it through long winters. There's no such thing as waste in an ecological system where deer carcasses replenish life-supporting nutrient cycles such as nitrogen. Hunters, however, disrupt this natural system, removing the strongest and healthiest animals from the population and leaving animals who would normally not have reproductive success to pass on their genes. In light of the consequences, it is no wonder some ecologists have referred to hunting as "evolution in reverse."

For more information, or to order our 12-page brochure "Living With Deer," please contact The Fund for Animals' campaign office at:

The Fund for Animals
850 Sligo Avenue, Suite 300
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Phone: (301) 585-2591
Fax: (301) 585-2595
E-Mail: MikeM@fund.org

FOOTNOTES

1. J.S. Larson, "Managing Woodland and Wildlife Habitat in and Near Cities," Trees and Forests in an Urbanizing Environment, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, 1971.

2. J.H. Fitch, "White-Tailed Deer Population Ecology: Implications for Management in an Urbanizing Environment," Deer Management in an Urbanizing Region: Problems and Alternatives to Traditional Management, The Humane Society of the United States, East Windsor, New Jersey, 1993.

3. Compiled by The Fund for Animals with information from state wildlife agencies.

4. New Jersey Division of Fish, Game, and Wildlife, An Assessment of Deer Hunting in New Jersey, 1990.

5. K. Darwin, "Has the DNR Mismanaged Our Deer Herd?" Michigan Hunting & Fishing, June 1993.

6. J. Schutze, "Trees Fall in Favor of Bigger Deer Crop," Detroit Free Press, January 27, 1975.

7. L. Verme, "Reproductive Patterns Related to the Nutritional Plane of White-Tailed Deer," Journal of Wildlife Management, 33:420-27, 1969. L. Verme, "Physical and Reproductive Characteristics of a Supplementally-Fed White-Tailed Deer Herd," Journal of Wildlife Management, 46(2):281-301, 1982.

8. C.W. Severinghaus and E.L. Cheatum, "Life and Times of the White-Tailed Deer," The Deer of North America, Stackpole Co., Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, 1956.

9. W.D. Mansell, "Productivity of White-Tailed Deer on the Bruce Peninsula, Ontario," Journal of Wildlife Management, 38:808-814, 1974.

10. A.R. Richter and R.F. Labisky, "Reproductive Dynamics Among Disjunct White-Tailed Deer Herds in Florida," Journal of Wildlife Management, 49(4):964-971, 1985.

11. E. Sharp, "Horn O' Plenty Deer," Detroit Free Press, June 14, 1991.

12. A. Benke, The Bowhunting Alternative, B. Todd Press, San Antonio, 1989. For a complete list of scientific studies on bowhunting, please contact The Fund for Animals.

13. C.W. Severinghaus, "Effectiveness of Archery in Controlling Deer Abundance on the Howland Island Game Management Area," New York Fish and Game Journal, Vol. 10(2).

14. B. Coey and K. Mayer, "A Gardener's Guide to Preventing Deer Damage," California Department of Fish and Game.

15. K. Cole, "Danger, Costs Soar as Herd Hits High," Detroit News, October 24, 1995.

16. Based on records of the National Highway Traffic Safety Commission and state wildlife agencies.

17. J.A. Schafer, S. Penland, and W.P. Carr, "Effectiveness of Wildlife Warning Reflectors in Reducing Deer-Vehicle Accidents in Washington State," Washington State Department of Transportation, WA-RD 64.1, August 1984.

18. D.K. Ingebrigsten and J.R. Ludwig, "Effectiveness of Swareflex Wildlife Warning Reflectors in Reducing Deer-Vehicle Collisions in Minnesota," Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Wildlife Report 3, 1986.

19. J.F. Anderson, "Mammalian and Avian Reservoirs for Borrelia Burgdorferi," Lyme Disease and Related Disorders, 1988.

20. A.B. Carey, W.L. Krinsky, and A.J. Main, "Ixodes Dammini (Acari: Ixodidae) and Associated Ixodid Ticks in Southcentral Connecticut," Journal of Medicinal Entomology, 17:89-99, 1980. A.J. Main, A.B. Carey, M.G. Carey, and R.H. Goodwin, "Immature Ixodes Dammini (Acari: Ixodidae) on Small Mammals in Connecticut," Journal of Medicinal Entomology, 19(6):655-664, 1982. J.F. Anderson and L.A. Magnarelli, "Avian and Mammalian Hosts for Spirochete-Infected Ticks and Insects on a Lyme Disease Focus in Connecticut," Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, 57:627-641, 1984. E.M. Bosler, B.G. Ormiston, J.P. Coleman, J.P. Hanrahan, and J.L. Benach, "Prevalence of the Lyme Disease Spirochete in Populations of White-Tailed Deer and White-Footed Mice," Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, 57:651-659, 1984.

21. R.D. Deblinger, M.L. Wilson, D.W. Rimmer, and A. Spielman, "Reduced Abundance of Immature Ixodes Dammini (Acari: Ixodidae) Following Incremental Removal of Deer," Entomological Society of America, 30(1):144-150, 1993.

22. D.C. Duffy, S.R. Campbell, D. Clark, C. DiMotta, and S. Gurney, "Ixodes Scapularis (Acari: Ixodidae) Deer Tick Mesoscale Populations in Natural Areas: Effects of Deer, Area, and Location," Entomological Society of America, 31(1):152-158, 1994.

23. M.L. Wilson, S.A. Telford III, J. Piesman, and A. Spielman, "Reduced Abundance of Immature Ixodes Dammini (Acari: Ixodidae) Following Elimination of Deer," Journal of Medicinal Entomology, 25:224-228, 1988.

24. K. Gambrell, "No Mommies, Deerest, at NIST," Montgomery Gazette, August 2, 1996.

25. J.G. Mitchell, The Hunt, Knopf, New York, 1980. J.G. Mitchell, "Our Wily White-Tailed Deer: Elegant but Perplexing Neighbors," Smithsonian, November 1982. E. Bauer, Deer in their World, Outdoor Life, New York, 1983. M. Cartmill, A View to a Death in the Morning: Hunting and Nature through History, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1993.

26. Outdoor News, "'94 Deer Harvest," Michigan Hunting and Fishing, February 1995.

27. "1993 Hunt Season May Mark Watershed in Deer Management," The North Woods Call, November 24, 1993.

28. R. Imrie, "Brutal Winter Kills Thousands of Deer," Associated Press, June 10, 1996.

29. G. Charles, "Tragedy is Looming for Wintering White-Tails," Traverse City Record-Eagle, February 11, 1996.