Arboriculture & Urban Forestry 35(1): January 2009 Arboriculture & Urban Forestry 2009. 35(1):47– 49. 47 Deer Use of a Right-of-Way in Central Pennsylvania, U.S. Richard H. Yahner Abstract. The purpose of the State Game Lands (SGL) 33 Research and Demonstration Area, since its inception in 1953, has been to compare the effectiveness of commonly used mechanical and herbicidal maintenance treatments on vegetation and wildlife on a right-of-way (ROW). White-tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginiana ) use of the SGL 33 Research and Demonstration Area, Center County, Pennsylvania, U.S. was reported over 20 years ago. As part of a 2-year study before and just after maintenance of the SGL 33 ROW, I examined deer use of the ROW in 2006 to 2007. Deer can have a positive impact on a ROW by browsing on undesirable trees (those capable of growing tall) in wire and border zones of a ROW and providing aesthetic value to a ROW; however, deer can have a negative impact on adjacent forest health by feeding on herbaceous and woody vegetation. In this study, I determined relative use by deer of the ROW, which is maintained by the wire-border zone method and using integrated vegetative management. Deer use of the ROW in 2006 to 2007 was minimal, which I attribute primarily to the lack of grass cover type as a food resource. Key Words. herbicidal; maintenance; mechanical; right-of-way; vegetation. There have been two objectives at the State Game Lands (SGL) 33 Research and Demonstration Project in central Pennsylvania, U.S. since 1953: 1) to compare commonly used mechanical and herbicidal maintenance treatments on controlling target trees (trees capable of growing tall in wire zones and possibly causing a blackout, hereafter termed undesirable) and development of tree-resistant plant cover types; and 2) to determine the effectiveness of mechanical and herbicidal maintenance on vegetation and wildlife species of high public interest (Yahner and Hutnik 2004). In 1982, the wire-border zone method of vegetation management was implemented on the right-of-way (ROW) of the SGL 33 Research and Demonstration Project (Bramble et al. 1985; Yahner and Hutnik 2004). This method usually results in a tree-resistant forb–shrub–grass cover type in wire zones but a tall shrub cover type in border zones, thereby producing wildlife habitat diversity on the ROW. White-tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ) may be an impor- tant wildlife species on an electric transmission ROW by brows- ing on undesirable tree species (Bramble et al. 1985). Deer also can impact regeneration and growth of herbaceous veg- etation in the adjacent forest (Yahner 2000; Pennsylvania Game Commission 2003). Because deer have tremendous rec- reational value, prefer early successional habitat (e.g., that cre- ated by vegetation management of a ROW), and can have profound effects on forest health, studies of deer on a ROW are important. STUDY AREA AND METHODS In 2000, vegetation on the SGL 33 Research and Demon- stration Area was treated (details of the treatments are given in Yahner and Hutnik 2004, 2005). The area comprised two units each of handcut (HC), mowing (M), mowing plus herbi- cide (MH), stem–foliage spray (SF), foliage spray (F), and low- volume basal spray (BLV). In June 2007, the entire ROW again was treated (details are given in Yahner 2007), but treatment was after the major portion of the growing season. Hence, I believe plant succession had minimal effect on deer populations in the later part of 2007. Units selected for this study were accessible by vehicle and contained dominant life forms (tree, shrub, forb, and grass), including two units of M, MH, SF, and BLV and one unit of HC and F. The area surveyed for deer use comprised approximately 67% of the total ROW. Forest cover was located adjacent to the entire length of the ROW, and dominant trees were red maple ( Acer rubrum ), chestnut oak ( Quercus montanus ), northern red oak ( Q. rubra ), white oak ( Q. alba ), and black oak ( Q. velutina ) (Bramble et al. 1992). Tree sprouts were produced in the HC unit with common tree species being black cherry ( Prunus serotina ) and chestnut, northern red, white, black, and scrub ( Q. ilicifolia ) oaks. Tall shrub cover type predominated in border zones of sev- eral treatment units, e.g., mowing plus herbicide, with a domi- nant tall shrub of witchhazel ( Hamamelis virginiana ) (Bramble et al. 1992). Short shrub cover type commonly occurred in wire zones of some units, e.g., basal low-volume spray, and the prin- cipal plant species were blueberry ( Vaccinium vacillans and V. angustifolium ), huckleberry ( Gaylussacia baccata ), and sweet- fern ( Comptonia peregrina ). Cane thicket cover type was present in pure stands of some wire zones, e.g., basal low-volume spray, and the major species was common blackberry ( Rubus allegh- eniensis ). Forb–shrub cover type was common in wire zones of mowed plus herbicide units; major species included goldenrod ( Solidago rugosa and Euthamia graminifolia ), hayscented fern ( Dennstaedtia punctilobula ), and sweet-fern. Deer were surveyed 6 days per month from March 2006 through October 2007 (3 days at dusk and 3 days at sunrise) using spotlighting or visual observations with field glasses in the ten units accessible from a vehicle (after Storm et al. 1992). Spotlighting was discontinued after March 2006 mainly because it was difficult to determine sex and age of deer. Number (and percent) of undesirable trees/ac 30 to 91 cm tall (1 to 3 ft) in wire zones and border zones of two replicates of five different units that showed evidence of browsing by deer were noted in June 2006, just after leaf-out. Data were combined from seven ©2009 International Society of Arboriculture
January 2009
| Title Name |
Pages |
Delete |
Url |
| Empty |
Search Text Block
Page #page_num
#doc_title
Hi $receivername|$receiveremail,
$sendername|$senderemail wrote these comments for you:
$message
$sendername|$senderemail would like for you to view the following digital edition.
Please click on the page below to be directed to the digital edition:
$thumbnail$pagenum
$link$pagenum
Your form submission was a success. You will be contacted by Washington Gas with follow-up information regarding your request.
This process might take longer please wait
