Deer Damage Assessment

Wildlife Damage Management February 04, 2008|Print

Deer | Deer Overview | Deer Damage Assessment | Deer Damage Management | Deer Acknowledgments | Deer Resources | ICWDM | Wildlife Species Information

Damage and Damage Identification

White-tailed deer, Odocoileus virginianus
White-tailed deer, Odocoileus virginianus

Deer damage a wide variety of row crops, forage crops, vegetables, fruit trees, nursery stock, and ornamentals, as well as stacked hay. In addition to the immediate loss of the crop being damaged, there is often residual damage in the form of future yield reduction of fruit trees or forage crops such as alfalfa. Ornamental trees or nursery stock may be permanently disfigured by deer browsing. Under high densities deer may severely impact native plant communities and impair regeneration of some forest tree species. Besides vegetative damage, deer/vehicle collisions pose a serious risk to motorists, and deer have been implicated in the distribution and transmission of Lyme disease.

Figure 5. Deer tracks.
Figure 5. Deer tracks.

Damage identification is not difficult. Because both mule deer and white-tailed deer lack upper incisors, deer often leave a jagged or torn surface on twigs or stems that they browse. Rabbits and rodents, however, leave a clean-cut surface. In addition, deer tracks are very distinctive (Fig. 5). The height of damage from the ground (up to 6 feet [1.8 m]) often rules out any mammal other than deer. Deer often are observed “in the act” of causing damage.

Legal Status

Deer are protected year-round in all states and provinces, with the exception of legal harvest during appropriate big-game hunting seasons. In cases of severe or persistent damage, some states may issue farmers special permits to shoot deer at times other than the legal hunting seasons. Regulations vary on the necessary permits and on disposal of dead animals. The popularity of deer as game animals and the need to curb poaching have led to the development of severe penalties for illegal possession. No lethal deer control can be initiated before consulting your state wildlife agency. By law, some states provide technical assistance or direct compensation for deer damage. This is discussed under the section on the economics of damage and control.

Economics of Damage and Control

A national survey conducted by USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service in 1992 identified deer damage as the most widespread form of wildlife damage. Forty percent of the farmers reporting had experienced deer damage. No estimate exists of nationwide annual crop losses to deer, but damage estimates have been made for some states. In Wisconsin, a 1984 survey of farmers suggested minimum statewide deer damage of $36.7 million annually. A similar study in Pennsylvania estimated the annual crop loss at $16 to $30 million. The situation is similar in most agricultural states with moderate to high deer densities. Estimates by Hesselton and Hesselton (1982) suggest that the cost of deer-vehicle collisions may exceed $100 million each year in the United States and Canada. In fact, the cost of deer/ vehicle collisions was estimated at $100 million in Wisconsin alone in 1990.

Deer also damage nurseries, landscape plantings, and timber regeneration. However, as established earlier, deer are a valuable public resource. Cost estimates for control techniques are presented with the appropriate techniques. A cost/benefit analysis is always advisable before initiating a control program.

Two additional economic aspects are worth consideration. One involves farmer tolerance for deer damage. Two summaries of social science research related to deer damage (Pomerantz et al. 1986, and Siemer and Decker 1991) demonstrated that a majority of farmers were willing to tolerate several hundred dollars in deer damage in exchange for the various benefits of having deer on their land. Thus “total damage” figures are misleading because only a small percentage of the farmers statewide or nationwide are suffering sufficient damage to warrant control or compensation.

The second economic consideration involves state-funded programs of subsidies for damage control materials or direct compensation for crop losses. Such programs can be very costly but are probably necessary where large deer herds are maintained in agricultural landscapes. As an example, the Wisconsin Wildlife Damage Program expended $2.25 million in 1992 for abatement materials, claims, and administration. The program is a collaborative effort of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services, and Wisconsin counties and is very effective. Individual states vary greatly, however, in their degree of financial or technical assistance. Consult your state wildlife agency for information on compensation or cost-sharing programs. Also, many states have local publications on deer and deer damage--Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, and New York, for example. Consult your local Extension office or state wildlife agency.

Deer | Deer Overview | Deer Damage Assessment | Deer Damage Management | Deer Acknowledgments | Deer Resources | ICWDM | Wildlife Species Information


Donate to Wildlife Damage Management

Your donation keeps eXtension growing.

Give Now