Browsing by Subject "Deer -- Texas"
Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Characterization of adjacent desert mule and white-tailed deer habitats in West Texas(Texas Tech University, 1983-05) Wiggers, Ernie PFourteen vegetative parameters and a Land Surface Ruggedness Index (LSRI) were quantified on 306,000 ha of rangeland that differentially supported high and low densities of mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus crooki) and white-tailed deer (0. Virginianus texanus) in west Texas to evaluate species-specific habitat parameters. The only significantly different (P<0.05) vegetative component between the habitats of the 2 species was percent woody cover. On the high density white-tailed deer habitats, woody cover averaged 63/E, and on the high density mule deer habitats i t averaged 43%. Increases in white-tailed deer densities were positively correlated with increases in percent woody cover. The relationship between woody cover and responses in desert mule deer numbers was not significant (P>0.05), but desert mule deer numbers tended to decrease as percent woody cover increased. Mule deer recently disappeared from 2 areas where woody cover exceeded 75?. The measurement of percent woody cover correctly classified 83 and 65% of the study areas into high and low density classes, respectively, for white-tailed deer and desert mule deer. The threshold value for discriminating between habitats of high or low deer density was approximately 53 and 50% woody cover for white-tailed deer and mule deer, respectively. Average LSRI values where white-tailed deer were sighted during aerial surveys were less than where desert mule deer were sighted. The LSRI for mule deer ranged from 2 to 232 and for white-tailed deer from 0 to 136. In areas exhibiting a wide variance in topographic ruggedness white-tailed deer appeared to be restricted to locations of lesser ruggedness, but mule deer were not. Coexistence of desert mule deer and white-tailed deer in west Texas is possible because of their divergent habitat selection for percent woody cover and topography. However, because woody cover can change temporally, the possibility exists for competitive exclusion to occur as deer densities shift in response to changes in woody cover. Competitive exclusion apparently has occurred in west Texas as white-tailed deer have successfully supplanted mule deer in localized areas. Monitoring of changes in woody cover should be used as an a priori method for identifying areas where the potential for competitive exclusion exists. The use of habitat manipulative practices that can rebalance the ratio of preferred habitats for each deer species seems essential to ensure the continued presence of both species in this portion of their range.Item Deer Use of Different Dize Mechanically Cleared Openings in South Texas Brush(Texas Tech University, 1979-05) Naderman, Justin FNot Available.Item Genetics of white-tailed deer of South Texas(Texas Tech University, 1979-12) Erickson, Laurie MarieNot availableItem Habitat use, herd ecology, and seasonal movements of mule deer in the Texas Panhandle(Texas Tech University, 1981-05) Koerth, Benjamin HenryIn Texas, mule deer occur in the Trans-Pecos and parts of the Panhandle. However, published information concerning habitat use and productivity of Texas mule deer herds has been limited to the Trans-Pecos area. This study was conducted: Cl) to determine macro-habitat preferences of mule deer; C2) to determine the extent of micro-habitat selection within the larger macro-habitat and which factors might account for this selection; C3). to estimate productivity population structure, and density of selected deer herds; and, (4) to estimate seasonal and annual home ranges for Panhandle mule deer. Study areas were selected along the Canadian River in Oldham County, representing deer habitat from the western portion of the Panhandle, and near Clarendon in Donley County, representing deer habitat from the eastern portion of the Texas Panhandle. Further, the Clarendon area had habitat supplement for deer in the form of winter wheat on cultivated fields and the Canadian River area did not. Juniper Breaks was the only vegetation type preferred by deer on the Canadian River area. Important vegetation types varied by season at Clarendon. Vegetation types containing the most screening cover received more deer use, with the exception of cultivated fields. These fields were important to deer during fall and winter when native forage was limited. Deer generally favored north and east aspects with close cover screens, steep slopes, and minimal human and livestock activity. Distance to water was also an important factor in habitat selection by deer. Deer did not appear to select for the most diverse plant communities. Average herd size for mule deer on the Canadian River was 2.9 animals compared to 3.9 animals for the Clarendon area. Larger herd sizes for the Clarendon area were primarily due to deer congregating on cultivated fields during fall and winter. Buck:doe and doe:fawn ratios were low compared to other mule deer herds in the West and Southwest indicating low recruitment into the population. Home range size of adult does on the Clarendon area was larger than for does on the Canadian River area, probably because of seasonal movements to and from cultivated fields. Bucks occupied a larger home range than does for either area. Also bucks engaged in rutting season travels for nearly 3 months, some of which involved movements of several miles.