Acceptance of Deer Management Strategies by Suburban Homeowners and Bowhunters

Abstract

More communities are experiencing problems associated with overabundant white‐tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) populations. Public acceptance of approaches for managing deer may differ within communities. Although hunting with firearms is a common practice used to manage deer populations, many suburban communities only allow bowhunting. Our objectives were to assess suburban homeowners and bowhunters acceptance of lethal and nonlethal deer management strategies. Additionally, we wanted to determine homeowner willingness to pay for deer management and how long they would be willing to wait for relief to address conflicts caused by deer overabundance. Most homeowners supported using lethal strategies to reduce and manage deer populations. Most homeowners were unaware of the cost (94%) or effectiveness (92%) of birth control agents to manage free‐ranging deer populations. Of lethal strategies, bowhunting was preferred. Establishment of a special crossbow season outside the existing archery season received the greatest support by bowhunters and was also acceptable to homeowners. As landscapes progressed from rural to more urban, hunting access, human‐wildlife conflicts, and homeowner willingness to pay for deer management decreased. Regardless of management strategy, most homeowners were willing to wait 3‐5 years to achieve a desired reduction in the deer population at no cost to them. As costs increased, homeowner willingness to wait decreased. Because exposure, tolerance of deer, and willingness to pay for management varies by landscapes, towns with diverse landscapes should consider developing regional rather than town‐wide plans to manage overabundant deer populations.

Preferences for wildlife management methods among the peri-urban public in Scotland

“…Fulton et al 2004) but lower than others which achieved rates of greater than 60% (e.g. Kilpatrick et al 2007;Stout et al 1997). This was disappointing given the process of questionnaire distribution (via established social networks) which was chosen specifically with the aim of achieving a high response rate in a short time.…”

“…Attitudes towards fencing have not been considered by the existing, largely North American, literature. For example, it is absent from the lists of management options for respondents in studies by Stout et al 1997 andKilpatrick et al 2007. This is perhaps due to the dominance of hunting as an issue, research focus and pastime, but also perhaps because of cultural and legal issues, and the scale and size of woodlands and individual properties in North America.…”

“…Studies from North America, for example, commonly report support for lethal control or hunting at much higher levels -for example, 74% (Kilpatrick et al 2007), 71% (Fulton et al 2004), 58.6% (Green et al 1997), and 55% (Kilpatrick and Walter 1997). This may reflect a number of factors, but social and cultural influences are likely to be amongst the most important.…”

Acceptability and Conflict Regarding Suburban Deer Management Methods

“…Most human dimension studies of suburban deer are conducted at small scales and include only one or two natural areas where the need to cull deer is imminent (Kilpatrick & LaBonte, 2003;Kilpatrick & Walter, 1997;Kilpatrick, LaBonte, & Barclay, 2007;Lauber & Knuth, 2004). Natural resource agencies pursue stakeholder participation in deer management via surveys (Connelly, Decker, & Wear, 1987;Green, Askins, & West, 1997;Kilpatrick et al, 2007;Lauber, Anthony, & Knuth, 2001;West & Parkhurst, 2002), face-to-face interviews (Lauber et al, 2001), town-hall meetings (Kilpatrick & Walter, 1997), and citizen task forces (Stout, Decker, Knuth, Proud, & Nelson, 1996;Stout et al, 1997). All of these methods have proven effective in understanding stakeholder perceptions and opinions regarding local deer populations.…”

“…Alternatively, managers can access a more geographically dispersed suite of public participants by administering surveys via telephone or mail (Siemer, Connelly, Brown, & Decker, 2001). Few studies, however, have employed these techniques to examine attitudes toward deer or deer management across urban or deer density gradients (Stout et al, 1996(Stout et al, , 1997Kilpatrick et al, 2007;Urbanek, 2012;Urbanek, Nielsen, Davenport, & Woodson, 2013).…”