ÿWPC« 2‹¼ÉƒcJso^ž¶ŽÈ;³ìÚóyJܾ[~ DäÖŪ۞§ F´+ r½¯œoCI-®r t¡Êª¢ ¸=ùÑ-µÎ ᥓ t& Ã!Çü²m@ÿ†B¤Ì<°5+Fj—l%º'¦«rÓ.À®3\·£ zœ©Ã9S;ätÀ­#Y×àF³p|C€Üu×(‚a­ò…*c²¬È¶u]°s7*U£»)©W$Õ 2-*3X…[¥«ñò€+.›ÙÞšÓ-’nÑuÜë?.Aý‘ é†)ÛžîS&‰µíõÑš]‹UÚˆz |š~¡\ÓØå*ZdÕçän*ÏTΈÄ-dutr~äEÖðKSä˜)£•×:º¶«)?\-±'qbôtÛÀ>.ãÔDSÁ€ åÌÝĪy˪ˆg—4]–M¶Ø£3†äÇ“¼£þ¡Ý£@„Ú€Ö8{ Jï'Á&h'>¼›ëüÎdžÏE°!1ø˜¾b)5–øA"KXL¿u·£ÝwJ)$——™Ð”¼yXõ(#Ç4Ì›hÉ¡E3“’RéÓ?Úžz?ÜVdïÀ­ºS=ï_t‰uçeWñÓ­%î¹RFévýg0ÕL_iáS5«øU:Ò n­#!ÉUNê %8 0(>Nf hwn4r† mˆ^ ŸHþ6X9`("Courier NewTT3|x«Hþ6X9`("Courier NewTTôÛxþ6X@ÉüCô@˜lexmark Optra0(  Z‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡H]^f+„2†}!ˆ ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀë)X2áÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÓ?+ÿÿ °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ °œX?ÓÓ  ÓÔ€ôçÇõXXÔÔ€ôIõõôçÇÔÔ% € ÔÌÌÌÌà@nnìàDEER€MANAGEMENT„Ô_ÔNORBECKÔ_ÔˆÌÌÌà  àThe€Ô_ÔNorbeckÔ_Ô€Wildlife€Preserve€contains€both€summer€and€winter€range€forÏmule€and€white„tailed€deer€(Art€Carter,€pers.€com.).€The€R2€Ô_ÔHABCAPÔ_Ô€model€used€inÏthe€wildlife€analysis€implies€that€even„aged€timber€harvest€will€improve€thisÏhabitat€and€thus€increase€mule€and€white„tailed€deer€populations.€We€challengeÏthis€assumption€with€the€following€points:ÌÌà  à1.€Although€there€is€research€documentation€of€localized€increases€in€deerÏuse€in€harvested€areas€of€coniferous€forest,€this€has€not€been€shown€to€resultÏin€increased€deer€numbers.ÌÌà  à2.€Not€all€Ô_ÔreasearchÔ_Ô€indicates€timber€harvest€increases€localized€deer€use.ÌÌà  à3.€Even€if€localized€forage€increases€do€occur,€there€may€not€be€a€netÏoverall€increase€over€the€period€of€the€timber€rotation.ÌÌà  à4.€€Forage€is€not€currently€believed€to€be€a€limiting€factor€to€deerÏpopulations.Ìà  àÌà  à5.€The€compatibility€of€even„aged€management€with€deer€management€in€manyÏconiferous€forest€environments€is€currently€being€questioned.ÌÌà  à6.€Habitat€management€is€a€complex€issue,€and€requires€at€least€a€modicumÏof€local€field€analysis€before€reasonable€assumptions€regarding€habitatÏalterations€can€be€made.ÌÌà  àThe€following€is€a€brief€discussion€of€each€of€the€above€points.ÌÌÌÌÌÌ1.€€à  àALTHOUGH€DEER€USE€WITHIN€Ô_ÔCLEARCUTSÔ_Ô€MAY€INCREASE€AS€A€RESULT€OF€INCREASEDÐ zÊ& ÐFORAGE€AVAILABILITY,€POPULATION€INCREASES€SHOULD€NOT€BE€ASSUMED€WITHOUT€ADEQUATEÏDOCUMENTATION.Ìà  àÌà  àA€number€of€studies€have€reported€that€deer€use€was€higher€within€harvestÏunits€than€in€the€adjacent€coniferous€forest.€For€example,€in€Wyoming,€Ô_ÔSticklandÔ_ÔÏ(1975)€reported€that€mule€deer€in€the€Snowy€Mountain€range€were€attracted€to€theÏforage€within€Ô_ÔclearcutsÔ_Ô;€he€suggested€that€deer€summer€range€could€thus€beÏenhanced€through€the€creation€of€Ô_ÔclearcutsÔ_Ô,€which€would€in€turn€increase€deerÏfeeding€habitat.̀Р $P0 ÐÌà  àIn€Colorado,€Ô_ÔWallmoÔ_Ô€(1969)€reported€that€10€years€after€lodgepole€pine€andÏspruce„fir€timber€was€logged€in€€alternating€Ô_ÔclearcutÔ_Ô€and€uncut€strips,€the€useÏby€mule€deer€was€significantly€higher€than€within€adjacent€timber;€he€suggestedÏthat€alternate„€strip€Ô_ÔclearcuttingÔ_Ô€with€strips€1€to€6€chains€wide€improved€deerÏhabitat.€At€a€later€date,€Ô_ÔWallmoÔ_Ô€et€al.€(1972)€compared€forage€values€betweenÏlogged€and€Ô_ÔunloggedÔ_Ô€deer€habitat€in€Colorado,€and€found€that€the€forage€carryingÏcapacity€within€logged€areas€were€47%€greater€than€Ô_ÔunloggedÔ_Ô€habitat;€thus,€theyÏsuggested€that€a€sustained„Ô_ÔyeildÔ_Ô€cutting€cycle,€with€small€blocks€clear„cutÏperiodically,€would€provide€a€Ô_ÔmeasureableÔ_Ô€improvement€in€deer€forage€supplies.€ÏÔ_ÔRegelinÔ_Ô€and€Ô_ÔWallmoÔ_Ô€(1978)€suggested€that€increased€forage€production€withinÏÔ_ÔclearcutsÔ_Ô€may€persist€well€beyond€20€years.ÌÌà  àIn€Arizona,€Patton€(1974)€suggested€that€deer€habitat€in€Castle€CreekÏÔ_ÔbenefitedÔ_Ô€from€logging€via€increased€forage€(up€to€a€100%€increase)€as€well€asÏdiversity€due€to€creation€of€edge;€he€observed€that€deer€use€of€Ô_ÔclearcutsÔ_ÔÏincreased€for€a€short€period€during€the€fall;€as€a€result,€he€suggested€that€aÏwell„stocked€ponderosa€pine€watershed€can€be€cut€in€opening€sizes€that€vary€fromÏa€few€to€32€acres€to€benefit€deer.ÌÌà  àNone€of€the€above€studies€documented€either€increases€in€deer€populationsÏor€fawn€survival€as€a€result€of€Ô_ÔclearcuttingÔ_Ô.€Eventual€increases€in€deer€numbersÏhas€only€been€assumed€(Patton€1974).€Pac€et€al€(1982)€has€stressed€that€suchÏassumptions€may€be€erroneous€since€they€imply€that€forage€supplies€are€limiting.ÏThis€point€was€acknowledged€by€Ô_ÔWallmoÔ_Ô€(1969)€regarding€increased€deer€use€ofÏÔ_ÔclearcutsÔ_Ô€in€Colorado;€he€stated€that€local€increases€in€deer€use€did€notÏnecessarily€indicate€a€net€increase€in€carrying€capacity.ÌÌà  àThe€only€study€that€we€are€aware€of€where€deer€population€responses€toÏhabitat€manipulation€were€monitored€was€a€recent€study€€done€by€Ô_ÔKlingerÔ_Ô€et€al.Ï(1989)€in€California,€where€changes€in€density,€habitat€use€and€fawn€survival€ofÏblack„tailed€deer€were€evaluated€following€prescribed€burning€of€chaparral;Ïalthough€deer€use€of€burned€areas€increased€during€certain€seasons,€this€was€aÏresult€of€a€shift€in€local€use€patterns€of€deer€rather€than€an€overall€increaseÏin€deer€numbers;€also,€no€significant€changes€in€fawn€survival€were€detected;€theÏresults€Ô_ÔdemonatratedÔ_Ô€that€the€application€of€fire€to€chaparral€may€not€translateÏinto€increased€deer€numbers.Ìà  àÌà  àThe€lack€of€long„term€monitoring€of€deer„habitat€relationships€has€recentlyÏbeen€discussed€by€Ô_ÔHamlinÔ_Ô€and€Ô_ÔMackieÔ_Ô€(1989);€they€stated€that€although€millionsÏof€dollars€have€been€spent€on€habitat€manipulation€for€deer,€they€are€not€awareÏof€published€data€documenting€benefits€to€big€game€populations€in€terms€ofÏincreased€numbers€or€fawn€survival;€they€suggested€that€the€lack€of€suchÏdocumentation€may€indicate€little€or€no€monitoring€of€animal€populations,€orÏperhaps€that€beneficial€Ð  d!´, Ðresults€were€not€observed;€overall,€they€suggested€that€both€the€stable€andÏvariable€properties€of€the€Ô_ÔenvirnmentÔ_Ô€are€difficult€to€change,€especially€toÏbenefit€species€such€as€mule€deer.ÌÌà  àWe€conclude€that€there€is€presently€no€research€data€in€western€coniferousÏforests€that€documents€increased€deer€populations€from€logging.€As€such,€weÏquestion€the€validity€of€the€R2€Ô_ÔHABCAPÔ_Ô€model,€which€suggests€that€the€proposedÏlogging€of€Ô_ÔNorbeckÔ_Ô€will€result€in€increases€in€both€white„tailed€and€mule€deer.ÌÌÌÌÌÌ2.€NOT€ALL€DEER€RESEARCH€INDICATES€THAT€DEER€ARE€ATTRACTED€TO€TIMBER€HARVESTÏAREAS.ÌÌà  àA.€Summer€RangeÌÌÌà  àNot€all€studies€have€shown€that€deer€use€of€timber€harvest€areas€increases.ÏFor€example,€Reynolds€(1962)€reported€that€residual€old„growth€stands€in€ArizonaÏproduced€more€Ô_ÔunderstoryÔ_Ô€vegetation€than€either€openings€or€pole„size€stands,Ïirrespective€of€thinning€intensity€of€the€latter.€Pearson€(1968)€reported€thatÏsummer€deer€use€of€logged€areas€in€Arizona€decreased.à È àÔ_ÔWallmoÔ_Ô€and€Ô_ÔSchoenÔ_Ô€(1980)Ð ± Ðfound€that€summer€deer€use€of€Ô_ÔclearcutsÔ_Ô€in€Alaska€did€not€receive€as€much€use€asÏadjacent€Ô_ÔovermatureÔ_Ô€forest.ÌÌà  àPac€et€al.€(1982)€noted€in€the€Ô_ÔBridgerÔ_Ô€Mountains€of€Montana€that€althoughÏÔ_ÔclearcutsÔ_Ô€occurred€in€high€deer€density€areas,€few€of€the€deer€activity€centersÏfell€within€them;€they€also€noted€that€herd€ranges€with€a€Ô_ÔsignficantÔ_Ô€amount€ofÏforested€summer€range€were€also€capable€of€sustaining€higher€deer€densities.ÌÌà  àLyon€and€Jensen€(1980)€concluded€in€an€analysis€of€deer€use€of€Ô_ÔclearcutsÔ_ÔÏin€eastern€Montana€that€such€were€of€no€particular€relevance€to€deer;€theyÏsuggested€that€other€unmeasured€characteristics€of€the€environment€must€have€beenÏmore€important€in€influencing€deer€habitat€use€in€that€area.à x àÐ …Õ# ÐÌà  àIn€northwestern€Montana,€Ô_ÔMundingerÔ_Ô€(1982)€reported€that€white„tailed€deerÏused€logged€areas€significantly€less€than€expected€during€summer;€even€thoughÏtimber€harvest€had€extensively€altered€white„tailed€deer€habitat,€they€continuedÏto€be€associated€with€the€mature€forest.€Because€of€this,€Ô_ÔMundingerÔ_Ô€(1982)Ïsuggested€that€those€deer€have€not€yet€adapted€to€effectively€use€the€alteredÏhabitats.ÌÌà  àSince€there€is€considerable€variability€in€response€of€big€game€toÏÔ_ÔclearcutsÔ_Ô,€Lyon€and€Jensen€(1980)€suggested€that€predictions€of€probable€use€byÏdeer€depends€on€adequate€information€about€forage€development€patterns€in€theÏopenings€and€Ð  Y#©/ ÐÔ_Ôon€habitat€conditions€that€assure€the€forage€produced€is€actually€available€toÏbig€game€animals.€This€point€was€also€emphasized€by€Mackie€et€al.(1980);€theyÏsuggested€that€each€habitat€will€be€somewhat€unique,€that€deer€numbers,Ïreproductive€and€survival€patterns€and€rates€and€other€population€phenomena€willÏdiffer€consistently€between€populations€and€habitats;€as€a€result,€managementÏneeds€and€opportunities€or€constraints€will€also€differ;€judgements€orÏgeneralizations€about€the€relative€"quality"€of€individual€habitats,€theirÏpotential€to€support€deer€or€to€sustain€hunting,€the€importance€of€variousÏlimiting€factors,€and€management€needs€and€benefits,€could€be€extremelyÏmisleading€without€some€specific€knowledge€of€basic€deer„habitat€interactions€andÏthe€"strategies"€deer€follow€in€those€habitats.€à È àÐ š ê  Ðà  àThis€also€would€apply€to€claimed€benefits€to€deer€from€edges€created€byÏclearcuts.€Kirchhoff€et€al.€1983.€stated€that€although€the€literature€containsÏnumerous€reference€to€edge€effect€and€its€purported€benefits€to€deer,€few€studiesÏprovide€actual€measurement€data€that€demonstrate€these€benefits;€their€ownÏresearch€on€deer€habitat€use€in€Alaska€showed€no€increased€use€of€deer€along€oldÏgrowth„clearcut€edges,€possibly€because€of€the€natural€high€diversity€alreadyÏexisting€within€old€growth€stands.€Kirchhoff€et€al.€(1983)€concluded€that€theÏvalue€of€man„made€edge€to€deer€cannot€be€assumed€without€careful,€localÏevaluation.ÌÌà  àIn€summary,€since€the€reported€impacts€of€logging€on€deer€summer€range€haveÏfrquently€been€suggested€to€be€negative,€we€question€how€the€R2€HABCAP€determinedÏthat€in€the€Black€Hills,€only€beneficial€impacts€will€occur.€This€interpretationÏwould€only€be€valid€if€localized€monitoring€of€deer„habitat€relationshipsÏindicated€such,€and€at€this€time,€no€such€information€is€available.ÌÌÌà  àB.€Winter€RangeÌà  àÌà  àAffects€of€logging€on€winter€habitat€use€of€deer€have€frequently€been€shownÏto€be€negative.€An€immediate€impact€could€be€removal€of€a€forage€resource.€DuseckÏ(1987)€found€that€white„€tailed€deer€in€the€Long€Pines€of€southeastern€MontanaÏrelied€heavily€on€ponderosa€pine€needles€as€a€food€source€during€severe€winters.ÏDusek€(1987)€also€noted€that€the€ponderosa€pine€forest€is€very€critical€forÏwinter€thermal€cover,€since€deer€employ€energy€conservation€as€a€means€toÏcompensate€for€limited€winter€forage;€as€such,€physical€disturbances,€such€asÏlogging,€which€affect€cover€and€forage€values€of€the€habitat€could€adverselyÏimpact€survival€of€deer€in€that€environment.ÌÌà  àA€major€impact€of€logging€on€deer€winter€range€is€a€decreased€availabilityÏof€forage€due€to€increased€snow€accumulation.€à p àJones€and€Bunnell€(1982)€reportedÐ  !Y) Ðthat€in€the€mountainous€interior€of€Vancouver€Island,€Briish€Columbia,€snow€wasÏthe€greatest€single€factor€influencing€habitat€selection€by€black„taioed€deer€inÏwinter;€the€tree€canopy€of€old„growth€Ð  #l, Ðforests€intercepted€falling€snow,€and€consequently€snow€was€much€shallower€thanÏin€adjacent€logged€habitats;€the€deep,€soft€snow€in€cut„over€areas€prevented€deerÏmovement€and€restricted€deer€to€old„growth€winter€ranges€during€a€severe€winter.€¼à  àIn€Alaska,€à ¸ àÐ Ã ÐSchoen€and€Wallmo€(1979)€reported€that€2„3€times€more€snow€accumulated€inÏopenings€than€under€old„growth€forests,€and€depths€were€much€more€vaiable€in€theÏtimber€than€in€clearcuts;€thus€the€usefulness€to€deer€of€productive€earlyÏsuccessional€clearcuts€appeared€to€be€nil,€or€of€limited€value,€during€theÏcritical€winter€periods€of€high€snow€accumulation.à È àà  àÐ 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àIn€general,€the€literature€indicates€that€logging€on€deer€winter€ranges€canÏhave€significant€negative€impacts.€However,€this€sensitivity€of€deer€winterÏranges€to€logging€is€not€indicated€by€the€R2€HABCAP€model,€since€only€beneficialÏimpacts€of€logging€are€projected.ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌ3.€EVEN€IF€LOCALIZED€FORAGE€INCREASES€OCCUR€FOLLOWING€TIMBER€HARVEST,€THIS€DOESÏNOT€ENSURE€A€NET€GAIN€IF€THE€ENTIRE€ROTATION€CYCLE€IS€CONSIDERED.ÌÌÌà  àIf€the€intent€is€to€understand€the€influence€of€silvicultal€systems€onÏwildlife€habitat,€the€entire€rotation€period€should€be€considered.€Wallmo€andÏSchoen€(1980)€formulated€a€tentative€model€of€deer€habitat€changes€during€120„¼year€rotation€clearcut€logging€of€a€subalpine€forest€in€the€central€RockyÏMountains;€in€that€model,€carying€capacity€of€each€cutting€unit€increases€afterÏlogging€then€declines€to€the€prelogging€level€in€about€40€years,€resulting€in€aÏnegligible€net€increase€in€carrying€capacity€over€the€rotation€period;€they€notedÏthat€it's€possible,€if€carrying€capacity€of€the€young„growth€stand€falls€belowÏthat€of€overmature€forest,€that€a€net€long„term€loss€in€carrying€capacity€mayÏoccur,€even€though€there€is€a€brief€postlogging€gain;€such€losses€would€be€mostÏsignificant€where€winter€range€is€involved€if€early€seral€stages€are€unusable€inÏthe€winter.ÌÌà  àIn€an€analysis€of€deer€habitat€use€in€the€western€hemlock„€Sitka€spruceÏforest€in€southeast€Alaska,€Wallmo€and€Schoen€(1980)€indicated€that€none€of€theÏsuccessional€stages€that€followed€logging€were€of€any€significant€value€to€deer;Ïhabitat€values€would€not€be€reestablished€for€several€hundred€years,€at€whichÏtime€old€growth€forest€conditions€redeveloped.ÌÌÌÌÌÌ̀Р à%0!0 ÐÌ4.€FORAGE€IS€NOT€CURRENTLY€BELEIVED€TO€BE€A€LIMITING€FACTOR€TO€DEER€POPULATIONS.Ìà  àÌÌÌà  àMackie€et€al.€(1989)€studied€population€ecology€and€dynamics€of€three€muleÏdeer€and€2€white„tailed€deer€populations€in€four€broadly€different€environmentÏof€Montana€for€periods€of€7„28€years€between€1960€and€1987.€The€study€includedÏmonitoring€of€population„environment€relationships.€Mackie€et€al.€(1989)Ïconcluded€that€low€production€and€survival€were€seldom€the€effect€ofÏundernutrition€resulting€from€density„dependent€intraspcific€competition€forÏfood;€very€conservative€estimates€of€annual€forage€production€during€the€priodÏ1976„1986€indicated€that€annual€forage€quantities€were€adequate€to€support€2„10Ïtimes€the€numbers€of€deer€that€occurred€on€the€area€during€summer€and€autumn;Ïthey€reported€that€where€data€are€available€for€deer€populations€in€northernÏenvironments,€summer€forage€has€generally€been€shown€to€be€available€in€more€thanÏadequate€quantities.ÌÌà  à€Wallmo€et€al.€(1972)€reported€that€the€calculated€carrying€capacity€of€aÏColorado€deer€summer€range€resulted€in€theoretical€densities€that€far€exceed€theÏdeer€densities€estimated€to€exist€on€summer€ranges€in€that€vicinity.à Ð àLater,Ð „Ô  ÐWallmo€et€al.(1977)€reported€that€forage€quantity€for€a€migratory€mule€deerÏpopulation€in€north€central€Colorado€on€summer€through€early€winter€range€wasÏenough€to€support€more€than€30€times€the€number€of€deer€that€actually€occurred.ÌÌà  àSimilar€conclusions€have€been€developed€regarding€winter€forage€supply.¼à  àWallmo€et€al.€(1977)€reported€forage€quantities€on€a€mule€deer€winter€rangeÏin€Colorado€were€greater€than€what€deer€needed;€the€limiting€factor€was€notÏforage€quantity€but€quality;€the€nutritional€quality€of€winter€forage€would€notÏsustain€deer€at€any€population€level;€the€duration€and€severity€of€winter€was€theÏfactor€determining€the€length€of€time€that€deer€could€survive€on€these€ranges.ÌÌà  àMackie€et€al.€(1980)€reported€similar€results€for€mule€deer€in€Montana;Ïthey€stated€that€winter€forage,€particularly€browse,€is€only€one€of€the€manyÏenvironmental€factors€influencing€the€occurrence€and€dynamics€of€deer;€inÏnorthern€environments,€characterized€by€long€severe€winters€with€deep€snow,€deerÏcannot€and€do€not€select€and€use€winter€range€on€the€basis€of€forage€alone;€dataÏcollected€in€the€Bridger€Mountains€and€elsewhere€indicate€that€the€quantity€andÏquality€of€key€browse€on€northern€mountain„foothill€winter€ranges€areÏinsufficient€to€meet€the€minimum€dietary€requiremnets€of€deer;€it€has€been€shownÏthat€deer€compensate€for€these€nutritional€deficiencies€in€winter€by€voluantarilyÏreducing€food€intake,€reducing€their€basic€metabolic€rate,€utlizing€previouslyÏaccumulated€fat€reserves,€and€by€selecting€habitats€and€employing€behavior€thatÏreduced€the€energy€deficit;€comparisons€of€winter€distribution€and€range€useÏamong€Ð  #l, Ðtheir€study€areas€indicate€that€deer€select€specific€habitats€and€microenvirmentsÏthat€(1)€enable€deer€to€physically€use€an€area€in€spite€of€prevailling€climaticÏextremes€and€(2)€favor€energy€conservation.ÌÌà  àSince€forage€is€generally€not€considered€to€be€limiting€to€deer€populationsÏduring€either€summer€or€winter€in€western€coniferous€forests,€an€increase€inÏforage€quantity€via€timber€harvest€should€not€in€itself€promote€an€increase€inÏdeer€numbers.à ¸ àÐ ‡ × ÐÌÌÌÌÌ5.€THE€COMPATIBILITY€OF€EVEN„AGED€MANAGEMENT€WITH€DEER€MANAGEMENT€IS€CURRENTLYÏBEING€QUESTIONED.ÌÌÌÌà  àA.€Even„aged€management€will€greatly€reduce€or€eliminate€the€area's€abilityÏto€provide€deer€winter€range.ÌÌà  àEven„aged€management€can€eliminate€highly€valuable€winter€range€for€deer.ÏBloom€€(1978)€found€that€winter€habitat€use€of€Sitka€black„tailed€deer€inÏsoutheast€Alaska€was€highest€in€heavily€stocked€old„growth€timber€stands;€theseÏsites€had€the€least€snow€accumulation€during€the€critical€late€winter€period.ÌSimilarly,€Barrett€(1970)€reported€that€the€old„growth,€uneven„€aged€stands€ofÏhemlock€and€spruce€in€another€area€of€Alaska€supported€a€surprisingly€highÏdensity€of€Sitka€deer€through€the€winter€months.€Keay€and€Peek€(1980)€reportedÏthat€during€the€winter€months€in€Idaho,€white„tailed€deer€and€mule€deer€selectÏmature€Douglas„fir€stands€and€southerly€exposures€with€an€intact€overstoryÏcanopy,€where€thermal€values€were€greatest€and€snow€depths€were€lowests.ÌÌà  àOnce€old€growth€stands€which€provide€deer€winter€range€are€converted€toÏeven„aged€management,€their€winter€range€value€may€never€reach€former€values.ÏArno€et€al.€(1987)€reported€that€long„€term€management€with€clearcutting€orÏoverstory€removal€might€provide€winter€habitat€less€than€half€the€time€on€a€givenÏpiece€of€ground,€given€that€even„aged€stands€that€result€after€clearcutting€willÏbe€ready€for€another€harvest€only€a€few€decades€after€they€again€become€usefulÏas€winter€habitat.€In€some€cases,€stands€may€never€attain€their€original€winterÏrange€value€prior€to€the€next€harvest.€Wallmo€and€Schoen€(1980)€reported€thatÏeven€after€140€years,€middle„aged€young„growth€stands€in€Alaska€tend€to€haveÏshallower,€but€more€uniform€snow€depths,€exposing€little€of€the€sparse€understoryÏvegetation.ÌÌà  àÌÌ̀Р /% / ÐÌà  àB.€Even„aged€management€results€in€a€permanent€reduction€in€deer€coverÏvalues,€which€can€have€detrimental€impacts€on€deer€habitat€use.Ìà  àÌÌà  àCover€provides€numerous€values€to€deer.€For€example,€deer€densities€areÏstrongly€influenced€by€habitat€features€that€control€the€number€of€parturitionÏterritories€(fawn„rearing€areas)€that€an€area€will€support€(Hamlin€and€MackieÏ1989).€A€key€feature€of€parturition€territories€is€visual€isolation.€VisualÏisolation€serves€to€reduce€antagonistic€social€interactions€between€does€withÏfawns.€As€these€antagonistic€social€interactions€increase,€summer€fawn€mortalityÏmay€also€increase€(Dusek€and€Mackie€1980).€Heavy€cover€can€serve€to€reduce€theseÏdetremental€interactions,€and€may€explain€why€fawn„rearing€areas€are€frequentlyÏcharacterized€by€readily€available€dense€cover€(Huegel€1986;€Dusek€and€MackieÏ1989).ÌÌà  àCover€can€extend€the€period€of€time€that€summer€ranges€retain€high€qualityÏforage,€since€timber€provides€cool,€shaded€microclimates.€Klinger€et€al.(1989)Ïreported€in€California€that€deer€use€of€oak€woodlands€in€late€summer€and€fall€wasÏpartly€related€to€the€persistence€of€herbaceous€species€under€the€shaded€canopy;Ïforage€in€the€chaparral€areas€became€dessicated€at€that€time.€Lenth€ofÏavailability€of€green€forage€can€have€significant€population€affects€on€deer.ÏHamlin€and€Mackie€(1989)€found€that€in€the€Missouri€River€breaks,€annualÏvariations€in€the€length€of€time€plants€remain€green€and€succulent,€providingÏhigh€quality€forage,€appeared€to€be€a€major€factor€influencing€mule€deerÏpoulation€dynamics€in€their€study€area.ÌÌà  àCover€is€important€for€general€habitat€security€for€deer.ÌSuring€and€Vohs€(1979)€reported€that€disperson€of€columbian€white„tailed€deer€inÏOregon€was€related€to€availability€of€cover.€Dusek€(1980)€noted€that€althoughÏcottonwood€forest€along€the€Yellowstone€River€in€Montana€occupied€only€about€30%Ïof€total€area,€white„tailed€deer€were€located€there€over€70%€of€the€time;€he€alsoÏobserved€that€habitat€use€was€most€extensive€in€the€areas€of€good€cover,€and€thatÏdense€overhead€cover€was€selected€yearlong€by€all€deer.à  àÐ Ñ! ÐÌà  àThe€cover€value€of€timber€stands€may€also€be€related€to€dead€and€downÏmaterial.€In€eastern€Montana,€higher€deer€populations€were€found€in€conjunctionÏwith€greater€dead„and„down€timber€depths;€the€smaller€stems€and€shorter€crownsÏof€eastern€Montana€timber€apparently€produce€less€of€a€barrier€to€movement€inÏovermature€forest€stands;€there€also€may€be€some€security€associated€with€downedÏtmber€where€forest€stands€lack€a€shrub€understory€(Lyon€and€Jensen€1980).ÌÌÌÌ̀Р Í#- Ðà  àC.€Even„aged€Management€will€eliminate€the€highly€diverse€habitat€providedÏby€old€growth€timber€stands.ÌÌÌà  àBarrett€(1970)€noted€that€the€continuing€cycle€of€regeneration€and€deathÏof€individual€trees€in€old€growth€stands€provides€a€fine„grain€mosaic€ofÏavailable€food€and€cover€which€may€be€optimum€for€the€maintenance€of€Sitka€deerÏpopulations€near€the€northern€limit€of€their€range.€Similarly,€Kirchhoff€et€al.Ï(1983)€noted€that€in€southeastern€Alaska,€old€growth€provides€a€mosaic€of€coverÏand€foraging€areas€resulting€from€the€natural€mixture€of€centuries„old€dominantÏtrees,€openings€created€by€dead€and€fallen€trees€and€poorly€drained€sites,€oldÏsubdominant€trees,€and€scattered€small€stands€of€saplings€and€pole„sized€trees;Ïthis€ever„changing€array€of€irregular€patches€of€vegetation€of€different€ages€isÏcharacteristic€of€old€growth€and€has€been€labeled€the€Shifting€Mosaic€SteadyÏState;€the€advantages€of€interspersion€of€cover€and€openings€for€deer€may€beÏmaximized€in€this€old„growth€forest€mosaic.ÌÌÌà  àThe€same€highly€diverse€structure€of€old€growth€forest€was€also€noted€byÏMundinger€(1982)€in€northwestern€Montana;€he€described€habitat€structure€of€homeÏranges€for€white„tailed€deer€in€the€Swan€Valley€as€a€fine„grained€mosaic;€thisÏstructure€would€be€changed€to€a€coarse„grained€interspersion€of€even„aged€standsÏfollowing€timber€management.ÌÌà  àPac€et€al.€(1982)€reported€that€high€summer€mule€deer€densities€in€theÏBridger€Mountains€of€Montana€appeared€to€be€associated€with€milti„aged€(150„300Ïyears)€stands€of€Douglas€fir€and/or€subalpine€fir€on€moist€north€and€eastÏaspects;€moderate€densities€seem€to€be€associated€with€very€open€stands€ofÏDouglas€fir,€100„200€year€old€on€drier€south€and€west€aspects;€low€densitiesÏseemed€typical€of€extensive€even„aged€stands€of€lodgepole€pine,€60„100€years€ofÏage€at€intermdeiate€elevations,€and€whitebark€pine,€100„150€years€old€at€higherÏelevations.ÌÌÌà  àEven„aged€management€may€differ€significantly€from€the€historic€ecologicalÏdisturbance€processes€that€occurred€in€an€area.€Deer€research€biologist€JohnÏMundiger€(pers.€com.)€suggests€that€white„tailed€deer€in€northwestern€MontanaÏevolved€in€forest€characterized€by€a€regime€of€frequent,€low„itensityÏperturbations;€as€such,€they€may€not€readily€adapt€to€the€infrequent,€high„¼intensity€perturbations€imposed€by€timber€management.ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌ̀Р /% / ÐÌà  àD.€Even„aged€management€applies€a€single€management€strategy€to€a€wideÏrange€of€natural€habitat,€greatly€reducing€overall€habitat€diversity.ÌÌÌà  àHamlin€and€Mackie€(1989)€have€suggested€that€a€variety€of€habitats€areÏcritical€to€survival€of€deer€over€time;€no€single€habitat€can€generally€beÏsepareted€out€as€more€critical€or€key€than€another;€each€type€may€have€a€criticalÏrole€to€play€at€some,€and€thus€affect€long„term€survival€of€existing€deerÏpopulations.ÌThe€greater€the€interspersion€of€a€variety€of€habitats,€the€more€likely€thisÏhabitat€can€be€optimally€used€by€deer€(Dusek€and€Mackie€1989).€This€fine„grainedÏinterspersion€of€various€habitats€is€not€achieved€by€applying€a€single€managementÏapproach,€even„€aged€management,€over€a€broad€area.€This€results€inÏhomogenization,€rather€than€diversification,€of€the€habitat.à x à€Ð ^®  Ðà  àMundinger€(1982)€suggests€that€even„aged€managementis€not€compatible€withÏthe€habitat€requirements€of€white„tailed€deer€in€northwestern€Montana.€Similarly,¼à  àPac€et€al.€(1982)€suggested€that€concepts€viewing€diversity€as€a€mosaic€ofÏlarge€blocks€of€even„aged€timber€interspersed€with€extensive€stands€of€forage€inÏrecent€clearcuts€would€not€appear€to€be€compatible€with€the€observedÏdistribution,€movements€and€habitat€relatins€of€mule€deer€occupying€forestedÏcommunities€in€the€Bridger€Mountains;€here,€mule€deer€appeared€to€maintain€highÏsummer€densities€by€exploiting€the€significantly€more€diverse€pattern€offered€byÏexisting€late€mature€and€old€growth€forest€habitats.ÌÌÌà  àBoth€Mundinger€(1982)€and€Pac€et€al.€(1982)€have€suggested€that€historicalÏwhite„tailed€and€mule€deer€densities€within€their€research€areas€can€not€beÏmaintained€with€even„aged€management.€Pac€et€al.€(1982)€feel€that€silviculturalÏpractices€which€rapidly€convert€overmature€and€old„growth€stands€into€even„agedÏmonotypes€will€remove€and€suppress€the€habitat€diversity€that€seems€to€maintainÏhigh€deer€densities€in€the€Bridgers;€application€of€these€practices€to€manyÏpresent€"mature"€stands€will€effectively€prevent€their€ultimate€succession€to€oldÏgrowth,€and€thus€replacement€of€optimal€deer€habitat€conditions€for€the€future;Ïthey€recommended€that€future€expansion€of€logging€activity€thus€should€beÏconfined€to€presently€unmanaged,€even„aged€stands€on€sites€that€offer€the€lowestÏlong„term€potential€as€summer€deer€habitat.€Ellig€(1986)€expressed€a€concern€ofÏthe€Montana€Department€of€Fish,€Wildlife€and€Parks€€that€even„aged€timberÏmanagement€may€prevent€their€department€from€meeting€deer€management€goals.ÌÌÌÌà  àÌÌ̀Р Í#- ÐÌ6.€FAILURE€TO€ASSURE€REALISTIC€PREDTIONS€DUE€TO€LACK€OF€FIELD€MONTIORING.ÌÌà  àSince€the€claimed€benefits€to€deer€from€the€proposed€timber€harvestÏactivites€are€not€substantiated€by€general€deer€management,€we€suggest€that€someÏextensive€field€monitoring€of€local€logging€impacts€on€deer€will€be€required€toÏadequately€project€impacts€of€habitat€alteration.€The€importance€of€accurateÏfield€analysis€is€not€a€new€concept.€John€Mundinger€(pers.€com.),€a€deer€researchÏbiologist€in€Montana,€has€stated€that€successful€management€of€white„tailed€deerÏhabitat€in€coniferous€froests€requires€an€understanding€of€historical€disturbanceÏpattersn€and€associated€successional€response;€once€this€is€known,€silviculturalÏsystems€can€be€designed€to€mimic€historial€disturbances€and€nutirent€cycling.€ForÏwhite„tailed€deer€management,€John€believes€this€will€entail€the€use€of€all„ageÏmanagement€concepts€and€fire€for€site€preparation.ÌÌà  àÌà  àSimilarly,€Harris€and€Farr€(1979)€suggested€that€only€when€quantitativeÏarea„by„area€information€on€the€habitat€requirements€of€deer,€and€the€ability€ofÏvarious€forest€stands€to€supply€those€requirements€under€natural€conditions€andÏunder€management€is€know€will€land€managers€be€able€to€statisfactorily€weigh€theÏeffects€that€timber€management€or€other€resource€developments€will€have€on€deerÏpopulations.ÌÌà  àÌÌÌÌLITERATURE€CITED:ÌÌArno,€S.F.,€G.€E.€Gruell,€J.€G.€Mundinger,€and€W.€C.€Schmidt.€1987.€DevelopingÏsilvicultural€prescriptions€to€provide€both€deer€winter€habitat€and€timber.ÏWestern€Wildlands€12:19„24.ÌÌBarrett,€R.€H.€1979.€Admiralty€Island€deer€study€and€the€Juneau€unit€timber€sale.ÏPages€114„132€in€Sitka€black„tailed€deer:€proceedings€of€a€conference€in€Juneau,ÏAlaska.€USDA,€Forest€Service.€Series€No.€R10„48.ÌÌBloom,€A.€M.€1978.€Sitka€black„tailed€deer€winter€range€in€the€Kadashan€Bay€area,Ïsoutheast€Alaska.€J.€Wildl.€Manage.€42:€108„€112.ÌÌBunnell,€F.€L.€and€D.€R.€Klien.€1982.€RElationships€between€deer€and€old„growthÏforess€on€Vancouver€Isaland:€a€case€study.€Pages€385„390€in€Fish€and€WildlifeÏRelationships€in€Old„Growth€Forests.€Proceedings€of€a€symposium.€Eds.€W.€R.ÏMeehan,€T.€R.€Merrell,€and€T.€A.€Hanley.€Published€by€the€american€Institute€ofÏFishery€Research€biologists.Ì̀Р ~$Î. ÐDusek,€G.€L.€1987.€Ecology€of€white„tailed€deer€in€upland€Ponderosa€pine€habitatÏin€southeastern€Montana.€Prairie€Nat.€19:€1„17.ÌÌDusek,€G.€L,€and€R.€Mackie.€1989.€Population€ecology€of€white„€tailed€deer€alongÏthe€lower€Yellowstone€River.€Wildlife€Monographs€104.ÌÌEllig,€L.€Montana€Department€of€Fish,€Wildlife€and€Parks€letter€to€Richar€Inman,ÏGallatin€Forest€February€14,€1986.ÌÌHamlin,€K.€L.,€and€R.€J.€Mackie.€1989.€Mule€deer€in€the€Missouri€River€Breaks,ÏMontana:€a€study€of€population€dynamics€in€a€fluctuating€environment.€PublishedÏby€the€Montana€Department€of€fish,€Wildlife€and€Parks.€Project€No.:€W„120„R„7„18.ÌÌHarris,€A.€S.€and€W.€A.€Farr.€1979.€Timber€management€and€deer€forage€inÏsoutheast€Alaska.€Pages€15„24€in€Sitka€black„tailed€deer:€proceedings€of€aÏconference€in€Juneau,€Alaska.€USDA,€Forest€Service.€Series€no.€R10„48.ÌÌHuegel,€C.€N.,€R.€B.€Dahlgren,€and€H.€L€gladfelter.€1985.€Mortality€of€white„¼tailed€der€fawns€in€southcentral€Iowa.€J.€Wildl.€Manage€49:€377„390.ÌÌKeay,€J.€A.€and€J.€M.€Peek.€1980.€Relationships€between€fires€and€winter€habitatÏof€deer€in€Idaho.€J.€Wild.€Manage.€44:€372„380.ÌÌKirchhoff,€M.€D.€1983.€Black„tailed€deer€use€in€relation€to€forest€clear„cutÏedges€in€southeastern€Alaska.€J.€Wild.€Manage.€47:€497„501.ÌÌKlinger,€R.€C.,€M.€J.€Kutilek,€and€H.€S.€Shellihammer.€1989.€Population€responsesÏof€black„tailed€deer€to€prescribed€burning.€J.€Wildl.€Manage.€53:€863„871.ÌÌLyon,€L.€J.,€and€C.€E.€Jensen.€1980.€Management€implications€of€elk€and€deer€useÏof€clear„cuts€in€Montana.€J.€Wildl.€Manage.€44:€352„326.ÌÌMackie,€R.€J.,€K.€L.€Hamlin,€D.€F.€Pac,€G.€L.€Dusek€and€A.€K.€Wood.€1990.ÏCompensation€in€free„ranging€deer€populations.€Presented€at€the€Special€SessionÏon€Compensatory€Mortality€in€Wildlife€Populations,€formulated€and€sponsored€byÏthe€Wildlife€Society,€55th€North€American€Wildlfie€and€Natural€ResourcesÏConference,€Denver,€CO.ÌÌMackie,€R.€J.,€K.€L.€Hamlin,€H.€E.€Jorgensen,€J.€G.€Jundinger,€and€D.€F.€Pac.Ï1980.€Montana€deer€studies.€Job€progress€report,€research€project€segment.ÏProject€W„120„R„11.€Pages€192„200,€Management€Implications€and€Recommendations.ÌÌMundinger,€J.€G.€1982.€Biology€of€the€white„tailed€deer€in€the€coniferous€forestsÏof€northwestern€Montana.€Pages€275„284€in€Fish€Ð  k"»+ Ðand€Wildlife€Relationships€in€Old„Growth€Forests,€Proceedings€of€a€Symposium.ÏEds.€W.€R.€Meehan,€T.€R.€Merrell,€and€T.€A.€Hanley.€Published€by€the€AmericanÏInstitue€of€Fishery€Research€Biolgists.ÌÌPac,€D.€F.,€R.€J.€Macie,€and€H.€E.€Jorgensen.€1982.€Relationships€between€muleÏdeer€and€forest€in€southwestern€Montana„some€precautionary€observations.€PagesÏ321„329€in€Fish€and€Wildlife€relationships€in€old„growth€forests.€Proceedings€ofÏa€symposium.€Juneay,€Alaska.eds.€Meehan,€W.R.,€T.€R.€Merrell,€T.€A.€Hanley.ÏPublished€by€the€American€Institute€of€Fishery€Research€biologists.ÌÌPatton,€D.€R.€1974.€Patch€cuting€increases€deer€and€elk€use€of€a€pine€forest€inÏArizona.€Journal€of€Forestry€1974:€764„766.ÌÌPearson,€H.€A.€1968.€Thinning,€clearcutting,€and€reseeding€affect€deer€and€elkÏuse€of€ponderosa€pine€forests€in€Arizona.€USDA,€Forest€Service.€Research€Note€RM„¼119.ÌÌSchoen,€J.€W.€and€O.€C.€Wallmo.€1979.€Timber€management€and€deer€in€southeastÏAlaska:€current€problems€and€research€direction.€Pages€69„85€in€Sitka€black„¼tailed€deer:€proceedings€of€a€conference€in€Juneau,€Alaska.€USDA,€Forest€Service.ÏSeries€No.€R10„48.ÌÌStrickland,€D.€1975.€Mule€deer€in€the€Medicine€Bow€Mountains.€Report€FW„3„r„21.ÏWyoming€Game€and€Fish€Department.ÌÌSuring,€L.€H.€and€P.€A.€Vohs.€1979.€Habitat€use€by€Columbian€white„tailed€deer.ÏJ.€Wildl.€Manage€43:€610„619.ÌÌWallmo,€O.€C.€1969.€Response€of€deer€to€alternate„strip€clearcutting€of€lodgepoleÏpine€and€spruce„fir€timber€in€Colorado.€USDA€Forest€Service€Research€Note€RM„141.ÌÌWallmo,€O.€C.,€L.€H.€Carpenter,€Wl.€L.€Regelin,€R.€B.€Gill€and€D.€L€Baker.€1977.ÏEvaluation€of€deer€habitat€on€a€nutritional€basis.€J.€Range€Manage.€30:€122„127.ÌÌWallmo,€O.€C.,€W.€L€Regelin,€and€D.€W.€Reichert.€1972.€€Forage€use€by€mule€deerÏrelative€to€logging€in€Colorado.€J.€Wildl.€Manage€36:€1025„1033.ÌÌWallmo,€O.€C.€and€J.€W.€Schoen.€1980.€Response€of€deer€to€secondary€forestÏsuccession€in€southeast€Alaska.€Forest€Sci.€26:€448„462.ÌÌÌÌÌÓ  Ó