James: Habitat structure and climate are much stronger controls on deer populations than predation. Basically, the more fragmented the landscape is (i.e. the more field/woodland edges there are), the higher the population. Its only in landscapes unfragmented by people that the ratio of predators such as wolves or coyotes to deer is high enough that they can control the deer population. The same applies in areas cold enough to limit the deer population, such as northern Minnesota and Michigan, possibly northern Maine, and some high elevation areas in the Appalachians and Adirondacks. In northern MN, for example, as one moves from north-central MN to far northern MN, the climate reduces deer populations from 20-30 per square mile to only 2-3 per square mile, but the wolf density is about the same, and the wolf:deer ratio obviously 10 times as high in the far north, such that wolves become a major factor in regulating the deer population in the far north.
Coyotes are not very efficient deer predators. We have had a high coyote density in parts of MN without wolves for decades, and those areas have deer populations ranging from 8-40 deer per square mile. However, I don't think the coyotes are responsible for the variation in deer density. Habitat factors are more important. In the far western part of the state there is less forest/field edge, because its in the prairie region, and thats where the deer populations are around 8 per square mile. In the central and southeast parts of the state, there is a mixture of forest and field, and thats where they reach 30+ per square mile. Lee JamesRobertSmith wrote: > I was talking to a ranger in the GSMNP a couple of years ago. We were > discussing the failed attempt to reintroduce the red wolf. One of the > main reasons it failed was that coyotes had already entered the park > and filled that particular niche. > > As coyotes do prey on deer, I was wondering if there is any chance > that growing coyote populations in the east and south are going to > have a major influence on deer populations. This would be a good thing > for eastern forests, as humans are not taking out enough deer to keep > the populations down and preventing the deer from creating a dam > against normal forest regeneration. > > Any thoughts from our resident experts? > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org You are subscribed to the Google Groups "ENTSTrees" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
