Brief Summary of Minutes of Annual Meeting

The annual meeting was called to order by Chair R. Campa in Allen Park, Michigan. We met from 8:30 am to 5:30 pm on 20 February and 8:30 am to noon on 21 February, 2004. Kevin Kephart (South Dakota State University) participated as the Administrative Advisor.

Participants were welcomed and those unable to attend (J. Millspaugh, Missouri, H. Weeks, Indiana, S. Winterstein, Michigan, and T. VanDeelen, Wisconsin) were mentioned. The outcome of the proposal to amend the title and objectives that was submitted to NCRA and to multi-state MRC was discussed, and Administrative Advisor Kephart indicated that amendments were approved at the NCRA level but that the Washington office stated that they would not allow amending. The issue was whether the proposal as written was sufficient to pursue disease related questions and Kephart suggested current objectives would allow participants to pursue disease ecology in relation to population and landscape ecology of deer. There was brief discussion of NC-505, a new project with a predominately vet-science focus on rapid diagnostic tests for response to Transmissible Spongiform Encephalitis, and also about ESCOP research priority areas. Campa led discussion centered on the use of a project website to relate implications of NC-1005 results to disease issues and Riley suggested that Wisconsin could have benefited from the regional project if such information had been in place prior to the chronic wasting disease (CWD) outbreak. State reports included summaries about cooperative funding, field research in relation to NC-1005 objectives and about current results applicable to managing diseases associated with white-tailed deer, particularly CWD. Michigan, Minnesota/South Dakota and Wisconsin have implemented field studies of deer ecology in relation to landscape features that substantially contribute to the NC-1005 objectives and methods. Nebraska is about to implement a similar project design. At the institutional level most Experiment Station funding has been limited to administrative support. Investigators have been successful at attracting financial support from state Departments of Natural Resources, USDI Geological Survey cooperative units and laboratories, and USDA APHIS. Much of the external funding is associated with disease ecology objectives. Investigators reported results from field studies that are already ongoing. Research in human dimensions of stakeholder attitudes toward deer management alternatives naturally proceeds at a much faster pace than field study and there was presentation of some specific results on quality deer management. Nominations were solicited a new Executive Board for 2004-2005 was elected: W. Clark-Chair, N. Mathews-Vice Chair, S.Gehrt-Secretary. Participants agreed to hold the 2005 meeting in January-February in Nebraska.

A primary goal of this project was to study deer movements and survival across a gradient of landscapes that vary in woodland and agricultural components. We now have field research ongoing across these landscape types in Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, South Dakota, and Nebraska. Within study areas, woodland habitat varies from 3% in eastern South Dakota to 38% in southeastern Minnesota and agricultural habitat varies from 60% in eastern South Dakota to about 40% in southeastern Minnesota. In Michigan researchers have initiated studies in southern lower Michigan (Jackson and Washtenaw Counties), an area of mixed farmland compared to their previous studies in more forested habitats of northern lower Michigan. We currently have nearly 200 deer radio-marked in 5 states, and access to data on hundreds of deer from these landscapes comprising tens of thousands of radio locations in relation to landscape features. In the course of the preparation for the field studies researchers spent many hours contacting private landowners and farmers who are essential cooperators in this research.

The goal of considering deer ecology across regional landscape gradients is a primary motivation for common approaches to management of GIS data, methods of quantifying habitat selection by deer, and human dimensions research. We are debating whether national land cover classification data are sufficient to accomplish individual research goals but we have agreed to be sure that the approach each state uses can be translated into this common data form. Quantifying habitat selection and movements is an interest of a number of the researchers in the group and we have exchanged methodology so that we can begin developing new methods. Not only will this facilitate regional comparison of deer/landscape relationships, but also new methods for analyzing habitat selection data will have very wide application in wildlife research. Likewise the development of stakeholder acceptance capacity methods, lead primarily by Michigan, is being used by other participants as the approach for human dimensions assessment.

Investigators have been successful at attracting financial support from state Departments of Natural Resources, USDI Geological Survey cooperative units and laboratories, and USDA APHIS. Researchers in Michigan have a well-funded program that combines support and personnel from the DNR as well as the MSU Experiment Station. In the cases of Wisconsin and Iowa, the external funding is associated with CWD. Wisconsin has funding from the DNR and USGS. Iowa has funding from USGS Wildlife Health Lab. Researchers in Nebraska have secured funding from the USDA-National Wildlife Research Center, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, USGS-Biological Resources Division, Nebraska Game and Parks Commission, and Berryman Institute for Wildlife Damage Management-East for continuation of deer research in Nebraska. At the meeting the committee explored sources of funding for research associated with concerns about vehicle collisions including AAA, National Transportation Safety Board, and the Bradley Fund for the Environment. Enck agreed to describe the project to Sand County Foundation-Bradley.

We have attempted to quickly beginning work on information and technology transfer about products of this project. Michigan has created a web site for their efforts that we plan to use as a blueprint for information exchange on other project accomplishments (http://www.fw.msu.edu/deer/). We are making publications available on line where possible (see Riley et al.). At the recent annual meeting we spent substantial time discussing efficient exchange of information among participants. N. Mathews proposed a method for videoconferencing to relay student presentations in a seminar forum. S. Hyngstrom suggested INTERNET II, POLYCOM as platforms to use, based on his experiences in extension. Participants are checking on the availability of systems, and we will attempt a half-day meeting sometime in September. R. Campa is inquiring about presenting our efforts at a possible poster session for the annual conference of The Wildlife Society (national meeting) and the Midwest Fish and Wildlife Conference (regional meeting).

All of the participants have a close working relationship with their respective Departments of Natural Resources and a number of DNR biologists are participating in the regional committee. As a result university wildlife ecologists are actively consulted during planning of deer management in their respective states. Researchers at Michigan State have formalized these working relationships into a process termed adaptive impact management (AIM) that provides a framework for integrating ecological and social insights to wildlife management. AIM requires engagement of stakeholders in all aspects of for wildlife management, including objective setting, appropriate actions to achieve objectives, and evaluation of management performance.

Our plans for the next year include first working on technology outreach using videoconferencing. This should insure improved communication among all participants, especially graduate students. We will focus on two technical objectives: preparing a review of methods to quantify habitat selection and methods for reaching common classification of landscapes that can be used to assess deer habitat across the region.

Bigalke, B. J., J. A. Jenks, and C. S. DePerno. 2003. An efficient lower jaw removal technique for large mammals. South Dakota Academy of Science 82:67-72.

Brinkman, T. J. 2003. Movement and mortality of white-tailed deer in southwest Minnesota. M.S. Thesis, South Dakota State University, Brookings. 135pp.

Brinkman, T. J., J. A. Jenks, C. S. DePerno, and B. S. Haroldson. 2004. Survival of white-tailed deer in an intensively farmed region of Minnesota. Wildlife Society Bulletin 32: In Press.

Brinkman, T. J., J. A. Jenks, C. S. DePerno, and B. S. Haroldson. 2004. Clostridium perfringens Type A induced disease in a free ranging white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) fawn in Minnesota? The Prairie Naturalist 35:In Press.

Brinkman, T. J., K. L. Monteith, J. A. Jenks, and C. S. DePerno. 2004. Predicting neonatal age of white-tailed deer in the Northern Great Plains. The Prairie Naturalist 35:In Press.

Gilsdorf, J.M., S.E. Hygnstrom, and K.C. VerCauteren. 2003. The use of frightening devices in wildlife damage management. IPM Reviews 7:29-45.

Gilsdorf, J.M., S.E. Hygnstrom, K.C. VerCauteren, E. Blankenship, and R.M. Engeman. 2004. Evaluation of propane cannons and electronic guards to reduce deer damage in cornfields. Wildlife Society Bulletin. (in press)

Gilsdorf, J.M., S.E. Hygnstrom, K.C. VerCauteren, E. Blankenship, and R.M. Engeman. 2004. Evaluation of a deer-activated bioacoustic frightening device to reduce deer damage in cornfields. Wildlife Society Bulletin. (in press)

Riley, S.J., D.J. Decker, J.W. Enck, and P.D. Curtis. 2003. Deer populations up, hunter populations down: implications of interdependence of deer and hunter population dynamics on management. Ecoscience 10(4): 356-362. http://www.fw.msu.edu/people/riley/publications_files/RileyetalEcoscience.pdf

VerCauteren, K.C. and S.E. Hygnstrom. White-tailed deer. in D. Wishart, ed., Great Plains Encyclopedia. Center for Great Plains Studies. UN, Lincoln, NE. (in press)

VerCauteren, K.C., S.E. Hygnstrom, M.J. Pipas, P.B. Fioranelli, S.J. Werner, and B.F. Blackwell. 2003. Red lasers are ineffective for dispersing deer at night. Wildlife Society Bulletin 31:247-252.

Zimmerman, T. J., J. A. Jenks, L. D. Holler, C. N. Jacques, and W. W. Morlock. 2004. Congenital Hypotrichosis in a white-tailed deer fawn from South Dakota. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 40 (in press).