ABSTRACT
Deer can be managed for varying densities that are related to carrying capacities for different classes of forest resources and different groups of stakeholders. The highest carrying capacity, termed maximum sustained yield (MSY), occurs when production of deer forage is maximized and deer reproduction and recruitment are maximized to produce the highest deer densities, which is highly desired by a segment of deer hunters who prefer high deer density to high deer quality (body weight and antler characteristics). At such high deer densities, abundance and species richness of understory vegetation, including tree seedlings, shrubs, herbaceous vegetation, and wildlife habitat and dependent wildlife species are reduced, some species are missing, and understory vegetation is characterized by ferns, grasses, and woody species less palatable to deer and of low commercial value. At deer densities below MSY, species richness and abundance of other forest resources, such 100as shrubs, herbs, and tree seedlings, wildlife habitat and dependent wildlife species, increase as deer density decreases. Deer densities associated with the ability to regenerate commercially desirable tree species may be classified as regeneration carrying capacity and include increases in abundance and species richness of other forest resources. Deer density sufficiently low to favor high abundance and species richness of these other forest resources may be classified as diversity carrying capacity, which may approximate the species richness and abundance characteristic of forest ecosystems prior to the vast expansion of deer densities resulting from human impacts on forest resources. Increasing amounts of available deer forage sustainably, by harvesting/thinning overstory trees, may allow a rise in deer densities associated with carrying capacities for producing timber and the desires of hunters for higher deer densities, but likely not for abundance and species richness of other forest resources. Different silvicultural practices affect the amount of deer forage created and may affect carrying capacities. Even-aged management produces more landscape forage than uneven-aged management, resulting in higher deer densities associated with the various classes of carrying capacity than under uneven-aged management. It does not appear to be possible to increase deer density associated with diversity carrying capacity by increasing quantity and quality of deer forage regardless of silvicultural practice. Attempts to increase deer density while reducing deer impacts by increasing amounts of forage may succeed for regenerating seedlings of commercial timber species with even-aged management, but will likely not benefit herbaceous vegetation or wildlife habitat nor be viable with uneven-aged management.
