Search

Simple Summary: Hunting can have direct effects (i.e., mortality) and indirect effects (i.e., behavior changes, such as shifting away from foraging areas to circumvent risk from hunters) on white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus). Deer populations within the Chattahoochee National Forest of northern Georgia, USA, have declined significantly since the 1980s. Since deer population sustainability is a concern, understanding the potential negative effects of hunting on female deer is important. During the 2018–2019 and 2019–2020 hunting seasons, we evaluated the indirect effects of 7 firearms hunts for male deer on 20 non-target female deer. We used GPS locations recorded every 30 min during pre-hunt, hunt, and post-hunt periods to calculate and compare movement rates during the day and night, as well as the size and landscape characteristics of the space the deer utilized. Our results suggest that the low level of hunting pressure in our study area led to no biologically significant changes in female deer movements. To the extent of the findings presented in this paper, adjustments to the management of hunting in our study area do not appear to be necessary to minimize hunting-related disturbances for female deer. However, managers should continue to consider female deer behavior when evaluating future changes to hunting regulations. Perceived risk associated with hunters can cause white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) to shift their activity away from key foraging areas or alter normal movements, which are important considerations in managing hunting and its effects on a population. We studied the effects of seven firearms hunts on the movements of 20 female deer in two Wildlife Management Areas within the Chattahoochee National Forest of northern Georgia, USA, during the 2018–2019 and 2019–2020 hunting seasons. Deer populations and the number of hunters in our study area have declined significantly since the 1980s. In response, hunting regulations for the 2019–2020 hunting season eliminated opportunities for harvesting female deer. To evaluate the indirect effects of antlered deer hunting on non-target female deer, we calculated 90% utilization distributions (UDs), 50% UDs, and step lengths for pre-hunt, hunt, and post-hunt periods using the dynamic Brownian bridge movement model. Data included 30 min GPS locations for 44 deer-hunt combinations. Pre-hunt 50% UDs ( x −   = 7.0 ha, SE = 0.4 ha) were slightly greater than both hunt ( x −   = 6.0 ha, SE = 0.3 ha) and post-hunt ( x − = 6.0 ha, SE = 0.2 ha) 50% UDs (F = 3.84, p = 0.03). We did not detect differences in step length, nor did we detect differences in size or composition of 90% UDs, among the periods. Overall, our results suggest that the low level of hunting pressure in our study area and lack of exposure to hunters led to no biologically significant changes in female deer movements. To the extent of the findings presented in this paper, adjustments to the management of hunting in our study area do not appear to be necessary to minimize hunting-related disturbances for female deer. However, managers should continue to consider female deer behavior when evaluating future changes to hunting regulations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Conservation Biology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Baited camera surveys are often used to study white‐tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus populations and inform harvest decisions. Surveys are commonly conducted in late summer or early fall when deer populations are expected to be segregated sexually, whereas hunting seasons typically occur during the breeding season when sexes are likely to be mixed. However, the effects of socio‐sexual shifts in space use on pre‐season camera surveys has not been evaluated. We conducted a baited survey before the hunting season followed by passive camera surveys during the hunting season on three properties in southwestern Georgia, USA. We collected 51 106 images of deer before and during the hunting season from baited and passive cameras. Based on interpolated maps of camera detections, the populations were highly segregated during the September baited surveys. In contrast, subsequent passive camera surveys indicated high overlap of males and females during the breeding months, with males shifting their distribution towards females. Because most management units on private lands are substantially smaller than our camera arrays (typically < 1000 ha), our results suggest that pre‐season surveys may not accurately reflect the population available for harvest during the hunting season. Establishment of cooperative management programs among adjacent landholdings may improve management effectiveness. In addition, managers should anticipate shifts in male distributions during the breeding months and real‐time analytical approaches could be developed with the use of cellular‐based cameras to rapidly alter harvest objectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Perceived risk associated with hunters can cause white-tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ) to shift their activity away from key foraging areas or alter normal movements, which are important considerations in managing hunting and its effects on a population. We studied the effects of seven firearms hunts on the movements of 20 female deer in two Wildlife Management Areas within the Chattahoochee National Forest of northern Georgia, USA, during the 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 hunting seasons. Deer populations and the number of hunters in our study area have declined significantly since the 1980s. In response, hunting regulations for the 2019-2020 hunting season eliminated opportunities for harvesting female deer. To evaluate the indirect effects of antlered deer hunting on non-target female deer, we calculated 90% utilization distributions (UDs), 50% UDs, and step lengths for pre-hunt, hunt, and post-hunt periods using the dynamic Brownian bridge movement model. Data included 30 min GPS locations for 44 deer-hunt combinations. Pre-hunt 50% UDs (x- = 7.0 ha, SE = 0.4 ha) were slightly greater than both hunt (x- = 6.0 ha, SE = 0.3 ha) and post-hunt (x- = 6.0 ha, SE = 0.2 ha) 50% UDs ( F = 3.84, p = 0.03). We did not detect differences in step length, nor did we detect differences in size or composition of 90% UDs, among the periods. Overall, our results suggest that the low level of hunting pressure in our study area and lack of exposure to hunters led to no biologically significant changes in female deer movements. To the extent of the findings presented in this paper, adjustments to the management of hunting in our study area do not appear to be necessary to minimize hunting-related disturbances for female deer. However, managers should continue to consider female deer behavior when evaluating future changes to hunting regulations.