LAUSR.org creates dashboard-style pages of related content for over 1.5 million academic articles. Sign Up to like articles & get recommendations!

Deer harvest variation in small and large management units in Pennsylvania

Photo from wikipedia

Large game management units often lead to criticisms from hunters because they assume smaller units possess less variation in wildlife populations and more closely represent their local area. In 2003,… Click to show full abstract

Large game management units often lead to criticisms from hunters because they assume smaller units possess less variation in wildlife populations and more closely represent their local area. In 2003, Pennsylvania, USA, replaced smaller, socio-political county-based management units with larger wildlife management units (WMUs). We tested the hypothesis that smaller county units possessed less variation in antlered and antlerless white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) harvest densities among municipalities than did larger WMUs. Spatial variation, as measured by standard deviation and coefficient of variation of deer harvested per km was similar for antlered deer (county units 0.44 SD, CV1⁄4 0.35; WMUs 0.43 SD, CV1⁄4 0.38) and antlerless deer (county units 0.71 SD, CV1⁄4 0.44; WMUs 0.84 SD, CV1⁄4 0.45). We found no support for the assumption that larger management units resulted in greater spatial variation in deer harvest density. 2019 The Wildlife Society.

Keywords: county; management; variation; deer harvest; management units

Journal Title: Wildlife Society Bulletin
Year Published: 2019

Link to full text (if available)


Share on Social Media:                               Sign Up to like & get
recommendations!

Related content

More Information              News              Social Media              Video              Recommended



                Click one of the above tabs to view related content.