Impact of deer management cooperative implementation on white‐tailed deer harvest behaviors. (29th December 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Pruitt, Hunter P.; Boley, B. Bynum; D'Angelo, Gino J.; McConnell, Mark D.
• Is Part Of: Wildlife Society bulletin. Volume 47:Number 1(2023)
• Page Start: n/a
• Page End: n/a
• Publication Date: 2022-12-29
• Subjects: deer management cooperatives -- harvest behavior -- hunt quality -- private landowners -- Quality Deer Management; Wildlife management -- Periodicals; Wildlife conservation -- Periodicals; 333.9540973
• DOI: 10.1002/wsb.1409
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0091-7648

Abstract

Abstract: Since the early 1980s, Quality Deer Management (QDM) has been used widely to manage populations of white‐tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ) in the United States. Since 2000, QDM has been a catalyst behind a suite of deer management cooperatives (DMCs) forming across the United States. Although QDM has grown in popularity among North American deer hunters, large‐scale implementation of multi‐landowner DMCs relies on voluntary changes to implement structured hunter harvest behavior to achieve management goals. Therefore, a national review of how DMCs influence harvest behavior of hunters and if the DMC model works to accomplish deer management goals is warranted. We assessed if DMCs change the harvest behavior of their members, and if factors such as state, motivations, and length of membership influence change in hunter behavior. Results from our survey of 459 DMC members across 5 U.S. states found that DMC members' harvest behavior changed after joining their DMC. Deer management cooperative members reported they were more likely to harvest does, less likely to harvest yearling males, and more likely to pass on the harvest of a 3.5 year old (or younger) males after joining the DMC. When analyzed at the state level, Texas and Georgia saw the largest gains in perceived hunt quality ( ≥ $\ge $ 2.5 point gain on 1–7 scale) and QDM implementation. Motivations for joining the DMC had little impact, but length of membership influenced hunt behavior with more tenured members (>5 years of membership) being more likely to follow QDM practices. Our results suggest that DMCs serve stakeholders by increasing perceived hunt quality, assisting agency personnel with non‐regulatory avenues to address management goals, and developing a community engaged with local wildlife management. Deer management cooperatives occupy the critical nexus of agency needs and private landowner deer management objectives, often at scales larger than a single private landowner, that are necessary for effectively managing wild deer populations. Although DMCs may not be widely implemented, they may address a myriad of management objectives that public and private stakeholders desire.