. Ecology of sympatric populations of mule deer and white-tailed deer in a prairie environment. White-tailed deer; Mule deer. Contrary to past assumptions, winter habitat and weather conditions generally had less effect on deer numbers and dynamics then summer range conditions. (Photo by: Alan K. Wood) unpubl. data). Dispersal of young deer may help to limit additional increases in prairie deer populations when high densities are achieved and if weather patterns continue to favor fawn survival. This possibility was suggested by the correlation between density and rates of decline for adult fem
. Ecology of sympatric populations of mule deer and white-tailed deer in a prairie environment. White-tailed deer; Mule deer. Contrary to past assumptions, winter habitat and weather conditions generally had less effect on deer numbers and dynamics then summer range conditions. (Photo by: Alan K. Wood) unpubl. data). Dispersal of young deer may help to limit additional increases in prairie deer populations when high densities are achieved and if weather patterns continue to favor fawn survival. This possibility was suggested by the correlation between density and rates of decline for adult female mule deer during summer, and the observation that maximum population declines for whitetails during summer coincided with peak population densities. High rates of dispersal in other areas also might have influenced population dynamics. Severson and Carter (1978) reported a 50% dispersal rate of yearling females from an unhunted mule deer population that occupied prairie habitat in South Dakota. Robinette (1966) reported a 35% female dispersal rate in a hunted mule deer population with most movement from lightly to heavily hunted areas. Gladfelter (1978) reported a 24% rate of emigration among female whitetails in central Iowa. Klein and Strandgaard (1972) described a mechanism of population regulation for roe deer {Capreolus capreolus) whereby aggression of females trying to defend an area around their young fawns stimulated dispersal and helped to maintain relatively stable populations. They felt that cover was more important in regulating density than food supply. They speculated that this mechanism would not work for Odocoileus species in North America because "segments of deer habitat are often more extensive" and "there are no low density areas to absorb the surplus" (Klein and Strandgaard 1972:78). 82. Please note that these images are extracted from scanned page images that may have been digitally enhanced for readability - coloration and appearan
Size: 2248px × 1112px
Photo credit: © The Book Worm / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookcentury1900, bookcollectionamericana, bookd, bookleafnumber96
