The Maritimes' disappearing deer

Maine and NB are teaming up and doing a study.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nb-deer-population-1.3778852

deer-herd.png


Deer population's changes studied by N.B., Maine researchers
Project will attach satellite collars to deer to determine habitat choices, survival rates

Satellite tracking collars will be places on at least 100 yearlings in New Brunswick and another 30 to 40 collars on yearlings in neighbouring Maine in the fall to help determine habitat behaviour and survival rates.

Satellite tracking collars will be places on at least 100 yearlings in New Brunswick and another 30 to 40 collars on yearlings in neighbouring Maine in the fall to help determine habitat behaviour and survival rates. (CBC)
20 shares


New Brunswick deer herd down 70% in 30 years, DNR numbers show
Deer population is 'catastrophically low,' biologist says

With white-tailed deer populations declining in the province, researchers and industry partners are beginning a three-year project to try and find out why.

"There is a lot of management around deer and [the] need for data to do that," said Graham Forbes, a wildlife ecologist at the University of New Brunswick, said Monday on Information Morning Fredericton.

"So, the focus is on trying to find out what causes the ups and downs, the population changes, in whitetail deer in the region,"
Forbes

Graham Forbes is one of the researchers involved in a research project trying to determine the causes of declining white-tailed deer populations. (CBC)

Forbes is one of the researchers involved with the Northeast Deer Research Network.

The network included the university, the province, the State of Maine and private sector companies, such as J.D. Irving Ltd.

​Forbes said the plan is to attach satellite tracking collars on at least 100 yearlings in New Brunswick and another 30 to 40 collars on yearlings in neighbouring Maine.

The project will use GPS data over three winters to monitor the habitats the yearlings choose [as well as avoid] to live and and feed but also track survival rates in the harsh weather conditions.

hi-deer-shortage.png


Deer population is 'catastrophically low,' biologist says
New Brunswick deer herd down 70% in 30 years, DNR numbers show

"It's not as easy as it sounds. There is a lot of factors — some of them interact," said Forbes.

Besides winter conditions, other factors that impact deer populations are the increased number of coyotes, herbicide spraying and hunting and forestry practices.

"We need to get a handle on how these interact and how they influence numbers," he said.

Forbes explained the satellite collars cost $3,000 to $4,000 each and are more than the standard radio collars.
hi-deer-shortage

Researchers will be looking at the impact coyotes and harsh winters have on the province's deer population. (CBC)

But the satellite collars don't require researchers to fly over a collared deer to track and monitor behaviour and movement.

As well, satellite collars will alert researchers if a deer hasn't moved in six hours.

This will allow researchers to locate a deer and, if dead, help determine the cause.

The National Sciences and Engineering Research Council is providing funding for the project, said Forbes.

According to numbers recently released by the Department of Natural Resources, the deer population has declined by 70 per cent in the past 30 years — from 270,000 in 1985 to 70,000 in 2014.
Click to expand...
 
Similar topic; They just fairly recently finished a study here in Alberta regarding the declining woodland caribou herds.
A very important factor was the loss of just birthed calves to predation and the ability of wolf packs to cover vast distances traveling man-made clear cuts in the northern boreal forest.
Perhaps the bigger/heavier eastern coyotes are having the same impact down there on the eastern white tailed deer population?

In 1985 coyotes were just the occasional rumor and legend down there. Bet you the maritime snowshoehares are in decline as well for the same reason.
 
Brutus said:
Similar topic; They just fairly recently finished a study here in Alberta regarding the declining woodland caribou herds.
A very important factor was the loss of just birthed calves to predation and the ability of wolf packs to cover vast distances traveling man-made clear cuts in the northern boreal forest.
Perhaps the bigger/heavier eastern coyotes are having the same impact down there on the eastern white tailed deer population?

In 1985 coyotes were just the occasional rumor and legend down there. Bet you the maritime snowshoehares are in decline as well for the same reason.
Click to expand...

it's very noticable. As a kid you could drive down any dirt road at dusk and see rabbits scattering by the dozens, now you need to do some actual searching to find one, and they're back in the deep stuff more often than not.
 
dand883 said:
it's very noticable. As a kid you could drive down any dirt road at dusk and see rabbits scattering by the dozens, now you need to do some actual searching to find one, and they're back in the deep stuff more often than not.
Click to expand...

+1

Coyotes are thick where I am hunting this year. Scat everywhere and more yote tracks than deer tracks, and you can clearly see where the yotes are following the deer tracks.
 
Alright, so I'll take a stab at explaining the contributing factors to the deer populations decline. TSX seems to think that preventing the growth of deer forage, especially winter forage, does not affect the herds in any way. Nor does the government allowing a larger portion of old growth deer wintering yards to be harvested have any effect on populations and that Irving is perfect and the NBDNR aren't in denial that what they are doing is affecting deer numbers. It is ridiculous to dismiss either of these as having no effect and willfully ignorant to assume that Irving or the NB Government have anything besides revenue generation as their main objective in forest management (a necessary evil I know) I also have an education in forestry and have worked in the forestry industry. So here it goes.

1. Cutting hardwood dominant forests and using herbicide to prevent the natural regeneration of these stands into hardwood, replanting them as mono-culture softwood stands effectively removing hardwood off the landscape has no effect on deer populations. The fact that someone believes that this would not contribute to deer numbers in any way is just plain ignorant, saying it is the same as a wildfire is ridiculous as a fire for the most part will not burn in hardwood stands. How can you think that removing large tracts of land that were an important food source for this animal would not affect their numbers in some way? Ever heard of the K factor? A habitat can only support so many animals, guess what one of the factors which determines the K factor is? AVAILABLE FOOD!!!! The population of deer has been in a steady decline ever since the 1980's, it has gone from 250,000 deer to 60,000-70,000 deer! Guess when they started using herbicide as a forest management tool? That's right! the 1980's!!! Harsh winters and coyote populations can definitely explain why the populations fluctuate in the short term but these are not effective indicators of long term declines in population. The reduction in suitable habitat CAN explain long term declines though. What I would recommend as a better forestry practice would be that if it was a hardwood stand when you cut it down, then it's a hardwood stand when you plant it. Better yet, use selection cut silviculture systems to manage hardwood stands rather than just clearcutting them. The reason they don't do much in the way of planting hardwoods is because it's too hard for them to manage. Softwood is easy because they will grow and just shade everything else out while also making the soil too acidic for hardwood species to get a foothold in the stand.

2. STOP REMOVING ALL THEIR WINTERING YARDS TO MAKE A SHORT TERM DOLLAR! If harsh winters have a clear impact on deer populations then why the hell are we taking away all of the habitat that protects them from these winters?

I don't know if anyone is even still following this thread so I'll stop there.

I would also like to add as a final point that it is not any one factor which is contributing to the decline in deer numbers. Rather it is a combination of forestry practices focused on the growth of softwoods, a government which caves to the whining of forestry company lobbyists (look up the provincial management plan and how they did a complete 180 within a year around 2013-2014 I think?), herbicide, heavy pressure by hunters on a smaller herd, winters, the removal of habitat and so on and so on. I just want people to stop pretending that herbicide is harmless to the herds habitat and that removing their habitat has no effect on them.
 
SEP7EMBER10 said:
That one guys sounds like he's on Irvings payroll hahaha.
I know quite a few places here in NB that are wiped off the earth, Clear cutted and left for dead.
Click to expand...

Sounds like that guy knows what he is talking about with his comments .
Easy to point a finger without facts.

Earth first, then we Log the other planets next!
Rob
 
Last edited:
BigBuck1991 said:
Alright, so I'll take a stab at explaining the contributing factors to the deer populations decline. TSX seems to think that preventing the growth of deer forage, especially winter forage, does not affect the herds in any way. Nor does the government allowing a larger portion of old growth deer wintering yards to be harvested have any effect on populations and that Irving is perfect and the NBDNR aren't in denial that what they are doing is affecting deer numbers. It is ridiculous to dismiss either of these as having no effect and willfully ignorant to assume that Irving or the NB Government have anything besides revenue generation as their main objective in forest management (a necessary evil I know) I also have an education in forestry and have worked in the forestry industry. So here it goes.

1. Cutting hardwood dominant forests and using herbicide to prevent the natural regeneration of these stands into hardwood, replanting them as mono-culture softwood stands effectively removing hardwood off the landscape has no effect on deer populations. The fact that someone believes that this would not contribute to deer numbers in any way is just plain ignorant, saying it is the same as a wildfire is ridiculous as a fire for the most part will not burn in hardwood stands. How can you think that removing large tracts of land that were an important food source for this animal would not affect their numbers in some way? Ever heard of the K factor? A habitat can only support so many animals, guess what one of the factors which determines the K factor is? AVAILABLE FOOD!!!! The population of deer has been in a steady decline ever since the 1980's, it has gone from 250,000 deer to 60,000-70,000 deer! Guess when they started using herbicide as a forest management tool? That's right! the 1980's!!! Harsh winters and coyote populations can definitely explain why the populations fluctuate in the short term but these are not effective indicators of long term declines in population. The reduction in suitable habitat CAN explain long term declines though. What I would recommend as a better forestry practice would be that if it was a hardwood stand when you cut it down, then it's a hardwood stand when you plant it. Better yet, use selection cut silviculture systems to manage hardwood stands rather than just clearcutting them. The reason they don't do much in the way of planting hardwoods is because it's too hard for them to manage. Softwood is easy because they will grow and just shade everything else out while also making the soil too acidic for hardwood species to get a foothold in the stand.

2. STOP REMOVING ALL THEIR WINTERING YARDS TO MAKE A SHORT TERM DOLLAR! If harsh winters have a clear impact on deer populations then why the hell are we taking away all of the habitat that protects them from these winters?

I don't know if anyone is even still following this thread so I'll stop there.

I would also like to add as a final point that it is not any one factor which is contributing to the decline in deer numbers. Rather it is a combination of forestry practices focused on the growth of softwoods, a government which caves to the whining of forestry company lobbyists (look up the provincial management plan and how they did a complete 180 within a year around 2013-2014 I think?), herbicide, heavy pressure by hunters on a smaller herd, winters, the removal of habitat and so on and so on. I just want people to stop pretending that herbicide is harmless to the herds habitat and that removing their habitat has no effect on them.
Click to expand...

+100000
 
Bigbuck1991 has it right. Predation can aggravate declines and push fawn mortality, but habitat loss is the key to longer term declines.
 
BigBuck1991 said:
Alright, so I'll take a stab at explaining the contributing factors to the deer populations decline. TSX seems to think that preventing the growth of deer forage, especially winter forage, does not affect the herds in any way. Nor does the government allowing a larger portion of old growth deer wintering yards to be harvested have any effect on populations and that Irving is perfect and the NBDNR aren't in denial that what they are doing is affecting deer numbers. It is ridiculous to dismiss either of these as having no effect and willfully ignorant to assume that Irving or the NB Government have anything besides revenue generation as their main objective in forest management (a necessary evil I know) I also have an education in forestry and have worked in the forestry industry. So here it goes.

1. Cutting hardwood dominant forests and using herbicide to prevent the natural regeneration of these stands into hardwood, replanting them as mono-culture softwood stands effectively removing hardwood off the landscape has no effect on deer populations. The fact that someone believes that this would not contribute to deer numbers in any way is just plain ignorant, saying it is the same as a wildfire is ridiculous as a fire for the most part will not burn in hardwood stands. How can you think that removing large tracts of land that were an important food source for this animal would not affect their numbers in some way? Ever heard of the K factor? A habitat can only support so many animals, guess what one of the factors which determines the K factor is? AVAILABLE FOOD!!!! The population of deer has been in a steady decline ever since the 1980's, it has gone from 250,000 deer to 60,000-70,000 deer! Guess when they started using herbicide as a forest management tool? That's right! the 1980's!!! Harsh winters and coyote populations can definitely explain why the populations fluctuate in the short term but these are not effective indicators of long term declines in population. The reduction in suitable habitat CAN explain long term declines though. What I would recommend as a better forestry practice would be that if it was a hardwood stand when you cut it down, then it's a hardwood stand when you plant it. Better yet, use selection cut silviculture systems to manage hardwood stands rather than just clearcutting them. The reason they don't do much in the way of planting hardwoods is because it's too hard for them to manage. Softwood is easy because they will grow and just shade everything else out while also making the soil too acidic for hardwood species to get a foothold in the stand.

2. STOP REMOVING ALL THEIR WINTERING YARDS TO MAKE A SHORT TERM DOLLAR! If harsh winters have a clear impact on deer populations then why the hell are we taking away all of the habitat that protects them from these winters?

I don't know if anyone is even still following this thread so I'll stop there.

I would also like to add as a final point that it is not any one factor which is contributing to the decline in deer numbers. Rather it is a combination of forestry practices focused on the growth of softwoods, a government which caves to the whining of forestry company lobbyists (look up the provincial management plan and how they did a complete 180 within a year around 2013-2014 I think?), herbicide, heavy pressure by hunters on a smaller herd, winters, the removal of habitat and so on and so on. I just want people to stop pretending that herbicide is harmless to the herds habitat and that removing their habitat has no effect on them.
Click to expand...

I agree exactly with what you say. A couple seasons ago we where deer hunting around Wlliams lake area and decided to take a walk through a fresh clearcut. I noticed it was strangely quiet. Not a bird, bug or sign of deer in the area. Then I noticed a chemical smell and saw some notices warning humans to stay out of the area due to recent spraying! Of course we left right away. That place was 'dead".
 
longbranch* said:
I agree exactly with what you say. A couple seasons ago we where deer hunting around Wlliams lake area and decided to take a walk through a fresh clearcut. I noticed it was strangely quiet. Not a bird, bug or sign of deer in the area. Then I noticed a chemical smell and saw some notices warning humans to stay out of the area due to recent spraying! Of course we left right away. That place was 'dead".
Click to expand...

I've come across similar signs around PG.
 
longbranch* said:
I agree exactly with what you say. A couple seasons ago we where deer hunting around Wlliams lake area and decided to take a walk through a fresh clearcut. I noticed it was strangely quiet. Not a bird, bug or sign of deer in the area. Then I noticed a chemical smell and saw some notices warning humans to stay out of the area due to recent spraying! Of course we left right away. That place was 'dead".
Click to expand...

One of the worst parts about it, at least for me, is that because the populations are so low the hunt becomes much harder. As a younger person who only started hunting deer three years ago (I'm 26, still haven't found a buck) it gets to be really frustrating when you want to get into hunting and always come up empty handed at the end of the season. I've been bird hunting since I was 16 and I really enjoyed that so I've been giving deer a shot. I know the experience is more important than the kill, which is why I still go out every year even though I probably won't see anything, but I think a lot of young people just give up before they really get into it because they don't see the point when they won't find anything anyway. That might be a good thing for the deer populations but it's not such a good thing for keeping our hunting heritage alive in New Brunswick. I know a lot of people who used to hunt every year, now most of them don't even bother. I've also heard plenty of stories from my grandfather of basically just going for a walk in the woods and getting a deer. It's hard to learn from the animals and gain experience when there aren't any around to learn from. Depending who you ask, this seems to be one of the best ways to learn how to hunt is from the animals. I'm to the point now where I'd rather see them close the season for five years or restrict it to bow hunting until the population rebounds. I don't know what the solution is but I do know that there's a serious problem and that something needs to be done. It's kind of sad because from what I've heard New Brunswick used to be a great place to hunt and now it's not and I just want to have the same opportunity my father and grandfather had to hunt, for myself and for the next generation of hunters.
 
The hunting seems to get harder every year, deer never seem to bounce back anymore and there are less and less people hunting. IMO, DNR and government could not care less about deer and other game animals. They exist only to make money off in their minds and if there was 1 deer left they would have a raffle to see who gets to shoot it.

I hunted for 30 years now and it would be very discouraging for a new hunter to get into it and never see a thing. I am out every weekend in deer season and average seeing 5-7 animals a season. might have a shot at half of that if I was sharp.

Depressing.
 
All you have to do is go on Google earth and get yourself a satelite view of New Brunswick and zoom in on any piece of property thats not a city, or a National Park, and I mean anywhere, take a random zoom. The logging roads are everywhere and cut blocks are larger than the standing timber, if you think NB is a model of forestry management I would ask you if what you see on that Satelite image is what you would view as a model to be emulated. As for the person who indicated that the spraying is well managed and selective...they spray just about everything, seriously everything, those warning signs are everywhere.
So yeah there are a lot of factors at work regarding the deer pop. but NB has had hard winters for centuries and the deer did okay, because they could manage well enough in the big timber, there is no big timber anymore so no place to go in winter, then the coyotes showed up, coyotes can travel on top of the crusty snow, deer can't and because they are malnourished to start with they haven't got a chance. So take away the shelter, take away the food, throw in some coyotes and some big snow and they haven't got a chance....but again, go ahead take a look at a satelite view of the province, particulary the south east around what used to be Canaan Game Reserve...its criminal whats happening there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom