During the latter half of the twentieth century, we experienced the restoration to abundance of white-tailed deer across the eastern United States, with many areas even suffering damage from overabundant deer. However, a growing body of research now indicates that the establishment and increase of coyote populations in the region have begun to affect deer populations in some areas. I will review this information, focusing first on evidence indicating declines in deer recruitment and then on evidence that predation by coyotes is the cause for declines. Recruitment at one site in South Carolina declined from near 1 fawn per doe prior to the arrival of coyotes to <0.4 fawns per doe currently. Radio-telemetry research on fawns at that site, as well as in Alabama, determined that low recruitment was attributable to exceedingly high levels of predation by coyotes on neonates. Studies in Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina all reported increased recruitment following intensive experimental coyote removals, further indicating that predation by coyotes depressed recruitment at those sites. I will discuss these and other recent data in the context of existing deer-coyote research from the historic range of the coyote. I conclude predation levels by coyotes can be very high and in some situations, particularly where doe harvest is aggressive, can have dramatic effects on southeastern deer populations. I predict that this pressure will require significant changes in how deer populations are managed in the Southeast in the future, because coyotes are here to stay.
Coyote populations have increased dramatically during the last decade in many areas of the southeastern United States. Because a growing body of evidence has indicated that coyotes are responsible for declines in recruitment in many areas, deer management prescriptions must be responsive to changing herd demographics. Although intensive coyote removal before and during fawn drop can increase fawn survival, trapping efforts likely are not a practical solution on most areas, and may not be warranted in others. Alternative strategies, such as providing abundant alternate prey, or increasing fawning cover, have been proposed to increase fawn survival, but the success of these strategies has not been demonstrated. Further, growing evidence of the behavioral plasticity of this predator, along with temporal and geographic variations in coyote density and impacts, clearly demonstrates the need for further research on coyote impacts as well as the importance of obtaining site-specific data on fawn recruitment rates. In some areas, antlerless harvest prescriptions may need to be adjusted in response to observed recruitment rates and deer management objectives. Because low recruitment rates may reduce potential population growth rates, antlerless harvest prescriptions may become more conservative to prevent overharvest. Site-specific data from camera surveys, hunter observations, and lactation rates will become increasingly important to monitor changing recruitment rates and population trends as a basis for developing sound deer management prescriptions.
Have been seeing a "explosion" in them within the last 3 years. Seen 3 from my stand already this season.
