Effects of Bait on Male White-Tailed Deer Resource Selection

Johnson, James T.; Chandler, Richard B.; Conner, L. Mike; Cherry, Michael J.; Killmaster, Charlie H.; Johannsen, Kristina L.; Miller, Karl V.

doi:10.3390/ani11082334

Cited by 5 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although these methods have been shown to be highly effective, they are labor intensive because they can involve manual interpretation and cross-referencing of thousands of images. Moreover, adult female deer lack unique markings, prohibiting the use of standard SMR models (Johnson et al, 2021). Partially marking the adult female population within our study area permitted a cost-effective sampling method that balanced the tradeoffs between density estimation and logistic constraints.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…White‐tailed deer play important cultural, economic, and ecological roles throughout their range, and reliable techniques are needed to monitor deer population dynamics and to guide management decisions. Remote cameras have become increasingly popular monitoring methods for white‐tailed deer due to their low‐cost and non‐invasive nature (Chitwood et al, 2017; Curtis et al, 2009; Jacobson et al, 1997; Johnson et al, 2021; Keever et al, 2017; Roberts et al, 2006).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Monitoring partially marked populations using camera and telemetry data

Margenau

Cherry

Miller

et al. 2022

Ecological Applications

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Long‐term monitoring is an important component of effective wildlife conservation. However, many methods for estimating density are too costly or difficult to implement over large spatial and temporal extents. Recently developed spatial mark–resight (SMR) models are increasingly being applied as a cost‐effective method to estimate density when data include detections of both marked and unmarked individuals. We developed a generalized SMR model that can accommodate long‐term camera data and auxiliary telemetry data for improved spatiotemporal inference in monitoring efforts. The model can be applied in two stages, with detection parameters estimated in the first stage using telemetry data and camera detections of instrumented individuals. Density is estimated in the second stage using camera data, with all individuals treated as unmarked. Serial correlation in detection and density parameters is accounted for using time‐series models. The two‐stage approach reduces computational demands and facilitates the application to large data sets from long‐term monitoring initiatives. We applied the model to 3 years (2015–2017) of white‐tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) data collected in three study areas of the Big Cypress Basin, Florida, USA. In total, 59 females marked with ear tags and fitted with GPS‐telemetry collars were detected along with unmarked females on 180 remote cameras. Most of the temporal variation in density was driven by seasonal fluctuations, but one study area exhibited a slight population decline during the monitoring period. Modern technologies such as camera traps provide novel possibilities for long‐term monitoring, but the resulting massive data sets, which are subject to unique sources of observation error, have posed analytical challenges. The two‐stage spatial mark–resight framework provides a solution with lower computational demands than joint SMR models, allowing for easier implementation in practice. In addition, after detection parameters have been estimated, the model may be used to estimate density even if no synchronous auxiliary information on marked individuals is available, which is often the case in long‐term monitoring.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Monitoring partially marked populations using camera and telemetry data

Margenau

Cherry

Miller

et al. 2022

Ecological Applications

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An alternative explanation of our results is that the change in observed spatial distributions was the result of using different survey methods (baited versus passive). However, previous studies have demonstrated that sexual segregation is not an artifact of sampling methodology (McCullough et al 1989, Main and Coblentz 1990, Bowyer 2004, and deer distributions are not altered by bait (Johnson et al 2021). Furthermore, baited sites were equally distributed across the landscape allowing all deer to have access to at least one baited site within their home range.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Property 1 focused on white‐tailed deer habitat management, while properties 2 and 3 had a long history of intensive habitat management to promote high densities of northern bobwhite Colinus virginianus . Typical management on the properties included frequent prescribed fire, food plots/supplemental feed, timber management, roller chopping, mowing and seasonal disking (Johnson et al 2021).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the implications of sexual segregation when surveying white‐tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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 preseason 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.

show abstract

“…Priesmeyer et al (2012) reviewed past deer baiting papers and concluded that supplemental feeding can disrupt movement patterns, but impacts were highly variable. While baiting has been shown to concentrate animals in specific areas [32,34], it is not fully understood if baiting protocols used for '4-Poster' operations increase site-specific deer densities on the landscape, especially in overpopulated suburban areas. Nor is it well understood how often or during which times deer visit '4-Poster' feeders, which is potentially consequential for their overall utility.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

White-Tailed Deer Spatial Distribution in Relation to ‘4-Poster’ Tick Control Devices in Suburbia

Roden-Reynolds

Kent

Li³

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deer are keystone hosts for adult ticks and have enabled the spread of tick distributions. The ‘4-Poster’ deer bait station was developed by the United States Department of Agriculture to control ticks feeding on free-ranging deer. Although effective in certain scenarios, ‘4-Poster’ deer treatment stations require the use of bait to attract deer to one location, which may cause increased deer disease transmission rates and habitat damage. To better understand and manage the impact of baited ‘4-Poster’ stations on deer movements, we captured and GPS-monitored 35 deer as part of an integrated pest management project. Fifteen ‘4-Poster’ stations were deployed among three suburban county parks to control ticks. To quantify the effects of ‘4-Poster’ stations, we calculated deer movement metrics before and after feeders were filled with whole kernel corn, and we gathered information on visitation rates to feeders. Overall, 83.3% of collared deer visited a feeder and revisited approximately every 5 days. After feeders were refilled, collared deer were ~5% closer to feeders and conspecifics than before filling. Males used a higher percentage of available feeders and visited them more throughout the deployment periods. Although these nuanced alterations in behavior may not be strong enough to increase local deer abundance, in light of infectious diseases affecting deer populations and effective ‘4-Poster’ densities, the core range shifts and clustering after refilling bait may be a cause for concern. As such, trade-offs between conflicting management goals should be carefully considered when deploying ‘4-Poster’ stations.

show abstract

Effects of Bait on Male White-Tailed Deer Resource Selection

Cited by 5 publications

References 23 publications

Monitoring partially marked populations using camera and telemetry data

Monitoring partially marked populations using camera and telemetry data

Assessing the implications of sexual segregation when surveying white‐tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus

White-Tailed Deer Spatial Distribution in Relation to ‘4-Poster’ Tick Control Devices in Suburbia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About