In 2008, the Quality Deer Management Association (QDMA) developed a map of white-tailed deer density with information obtained from state wildlife agencies. The map contains information from 2001 to 2005, with noticeable changes since the development of the first deer density map made by QDMA in 2001. The University of Minnesota, Forest Ecosystem Health Lab and the US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service-Northern Research Station have digitized the deer density map to provide information on the status and trends of forest health across the eastern United States. The QDMA spatial map depicting deer density (deer per square mile) was digitized across the eastern United States. Estimates of deer density were: White = rare, absent, or urban area with unknown population, Green = less than 15 deer per square mile, Yellow = 15 to 30 deer per square mile, Orange = 30 to 40 deer per square mile, or Red = greater than 45 deer per square mile. These categories represent coarse deer density levels as identified in the QDMA report in 2009 and should not be used to represent current or future deer densities across the study region. Sponsorship: Quality Deer Management Association; US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service-Northern Research Station; Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Link to DRUM catalog record. File Name: Web Page, url: https://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/178246

The Selkirk White-tailed Deer Management Zone (WDMZ) is home to the largest population of white-tailed deer in the state and consists of seven Game Management Units (GMU; GMUs 105, 108, 111, 113, 117, 121, and 124) located in northeast Washington. Aside from the southern portion of GMU 124, dominated by the metropolitan area of Spokane, Washington, most of these GMUs have similar rural characteristics. Private landowners manage most of the Selkirk WDMZ (77 percent), primarily for commercial timber harvest. The U.S. Forest Service manages 16 percent of the land, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of Natural Resources, and Bureau of Land Management manage the remaining 7 percent. White-tailed deer used in this analysis were captured on their winter range in GMUs 117 and 121, where the habitat consists of conifer forest (65 percent of the total land cover within the area) and shrub land. Grassland, pasture, and cultivated crops make up the next highest land cover types (altogether comprising nearly 21 percent of the Selkirk WDMZ). Agriculture in the valley supports high densities of deer adjacent to U.S. Highway 395, which bisects the Selkirk WDMZ from north to south. This white-tailed deer population experiences some of the highest rates of deer-vehicle collisions in the state (Myers and others 2008; G. Kalisz, Washington Department of Transportation, written commun.). Currently, there are no crossing mitigations in place along U.S. Highway 395 and State Route 20 to curtail collisions with wildlife. Other wildlife-human management challenges for this herd include mitigating crop damage complaints, maximizing hunting opportunity, and encroaching human development on the deer’s winter range. These mapping layers show the _location of the migration routes for White-Tailed Deer (odocoileus virginianus) in the Selkirk population in Washington. They were developed from 121 migration sequences collected from a sample size of 43 animals comprising GPS locations collected every 4 hours.

From 1962-2008, White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) were studied at the SUNY ESF Huntington Wildlife Forest (HWF) and adjacent private and public lands in Essex and Hamilton Counties, New York, USA. Social group membership, migration and dispersal, reproductive biology, and many other objectives were studied over the course of the study period. Deer were captured, individually marked with ear tags or streamers, fitted with radio collars (later, GPS collars), and released to be tracked for a variety of research objectives. Deer were located by visual observation, recapture, and/or their location was estimated with ground, air or tower-based radio telemetry. Physical condition of deer was recorded at capture and at subsequent recapture or visual observation select variables were documented (e.g., deer group size; presence of fawns with does). Physiological, demographic, social organization, home range and behavior data were collected. HWF is a no-hunting area but deer could be harvested if they moved to huntable parts of the study area; there was a managed hunt on HWF in 1966-1970 and in 1984 to meet deer density and forest management objectives at that time. Unmarked deer were incorporated into the dataset if they were roadkilled, harvested or otherwise encountered during field activity; these deer did not receive individual identifications but may have been incorporated into select projects.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Brown Deer population by age cohorts (Children: Under 18 years; Working population: 18-64 years; Senior population: 65 years or more). It lists the population in each age cohort group along with its percentage relative to the total population of Brown Deer. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population distribution across children, working population and senior population for dependency ratio, housing requirements, ageing, migration patterns etc.

Key observations

The largest age group was 18 to 64 years with a poulation of 7,730 (61.28% of the total population). Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates.

Age cohorts:

• Under 18 years
• 18 to 64 years
• 65 years and over

Variables / Data Columns

• Age Group: This column displays the age cohort for the Brown Deer population analysis. Total expected values are 3 groups ( Children, Working Population and Senior Population).
• Population: The population for the age cohort in Brown Deer is shown in the following column.
• Percent of Total Population: The population as a percent of total population of the Brown Deer is shown in the following column.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Brown Deer Population by Age. You can refer the same here

Deer hunting areas and season start and end dates for Alaska Game Management Unit 2, Prince of Whales island. This data feeds the Deer Hunt Areas web map. About the Data:Background:The Federal Subsistence Board (Board) adopted Proposal WP03-05 (in 2003) with modification to close Federal public lands in Unit 2 to deer hunting by NFQUs from Aug. 1 – Aug. 21 for the continuation of subsistence uses. A number of interrelated reasons were discussed as justification for the closure, including: a long-term trend of declining deer habitat (only 6% of clearcuts remain “huntable”); declining deer populations; increasing hunter participation; and increasing competition between user groups, resulting in a decline in subsistence opportunity. Many of these issues were cited as being particularly prevalent in the most road-accessible portions of POW.In 2021 Tongass GIS staff was asked to make a polygon feature class showing Federal lands open to timber harvest in Alaska Fish and Game Unit 2 comprising Prince of Wales and adjacent islands. These lands were previously defined only as a verbal description and maps were needed to better communicate the boundaries to the public.Process:Used r10_tnf.r10_tnf.Land/r10_tnf.r10_tnf.BasicOwnership to define federal ownership and USGS Watershed Boundaries (r10_tnf.r10_tnf.HydrologicUnits/r10_tnf.r10_tnf.WBDHU10) to define drainage boundaries.Verbal description from Federal Subsistence Board follows: Federal public lands on Prince of Wales Island, excluding the southeast portion (land south of the West Arm of Cholmondeley Sound draining into Cholmondeley Sound or draining eastward into Clarence Strait), are closed to hunting of deer from August 1-August 15, except by Federally qualified subsistence users hunting under these regulations. Unless otherwise restricted, non-Federally qualified users may only harvest up to 2 male deer.Metadata 20241008 Tom Heutte

The Siskiyou mule deer herd migrates from winter ranges primarily north and east of Mount Shasta (i.e., Day Bench, Lake Shastina, Montague, Mount Dome, Mount Hebron, Sheep-Mahogany Mountain, Tionesta, and Wild Horse Mountain) to sprawling summer ranges scattered between the Mount Shasta Wilderness in the west and the Burnt Lava Flow Geological Area in the east. A small percentage of the herd are residents, residing largely within winter ranges across the central and northeast areas of the herd’s annual distribution. The total population size of the Siskiyou herd is unknown, but adult deer densities averaged 6.01 deer per km2 on summer ranges in 2017 and 5.16 deer per km2 on winter ranges in 2019 (Wittmer and others, 2021). Some deer cross major highways during their seasonal migrations (U.S. Highways 97 and 89), and road mortalities of telemetered deer have been recorded. The summer range poses few concerns to the health of the herd, although limited water availability and recent forest fires may affect deer to some extent. Possible risks to deer population health on the winter range are relatively unknown. While recreational (hunting) opportunities have declined, the herd’s status is considered stable. These mapping layers show the location of the migration stopovers for mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) in the Siskiyou population in California. They were developed from 167 migration sequences collected from a sample size of 67 animals comprising GPS locations collected every 1-13 hours.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the White Deer population by age cohorts (Children: Under 18 years; Working population: 18-64 years; Senior population: 65 years or more). It lists the population in each age cohort group along with its percentage relative to the total population of White Deer. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population distribution across children, working population and senior population for dependency ratio, housing requirements, ageing, migration patterns etc.

Key observations

The largest age group was 18 to 64 years with a poulation of 608 (51.57% of the total population). Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates.

Age cohorts:

• Under 18 years
• 18 to 64 years
• 65 years and over

Variables / Data Columns

• Age Group: This column displays the age cohort for the White Deer population analysis. Total expected values are 3 groups ( Children, Working Population and Senior Population).
• Population: The population for the age cohort in White Deer is shown in the following column.
• Percent of Total Population: The population as a percent of total population of the White Deer is shown in the following column.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for White Deer Population by Age. You can refer the same here

High white-tailed deer abundance in the United States represents an ecological and human health threat. Reducing deer populations by lethal means and facilitating return of large predators are two potential, but controversial, management options. We used an online questionnaire to measure perspectives on deer management and predator return among a stratified sample of New York State residents. We found widespread acceptance (>70%) for reducing deer populations using lethal means if doing so would reduce Lyme disease, increase forest regeneration, protect native plants and animals, and improve road safety. Acceptance for shooting more deer was unaffected by ethnicity but strongest among respondents who were older, identified as hunters or conservationists, owned more land, and considered health and safety while answering our questionnaire. Respondents who identified as animal protectionists were least accepting. Restoring regionally extirpated wolves and cougars had limited acceptance..., This dataset contains data from an online questionnaire we used to assess perspectives of New York State residents on deer management and potential return of large predators. Qualtrics LLC (www.qualtrics.com) recruited 1,206 adults (aged 18 or older) living in New York State who answered our questionnaire from 6 - 28 June 2022. To reduce sampling error and increase external validity, we stratified our sample to approximate the population of New York State in terms of age, ethnicity, and gender identity according to the most recent American Community Survey statistics (U.S. Census Bureau, 2020). We oversampled from rural areas to permit more powerful rural-urban comparisons. Respondents reported beliefs about who should participate in deer management; how acceptable it would be for people who shoot deer to use meat and other parts in various ways; how acceptable it would be for land managers to allow shooting more deer if doing so would help achieve various ecological and socioeconomic o..., , # Data from: When dogma meets reality: perspectives of New York State residents to deer management, hunting, and predator reintroductions

https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.2280gb60s

The spreadsheet contains data from 1,206 respondents (recruited by Qualtrics LLC) to our survey regarding public perceptions of deer management and deer welfare in New York State. We stratified our sample to approximate the population of New York State in terms of age, ethnicity, and gender identity according to the most recent American Community Survey statistics (U.S. Census Bureau, 2020). We oversampled from rural areas to permit more powerful rural-urban comparisons. All respondents provided informed consent and completed a block of demographic questions to ensure they met sample quotas before answering survey questions. Each row of the spreadsheet contains responses from an individual respondent, with columns referring to their demographic information and answers...,

Graph and download economic data for Population Estimate, Total, Hispanic or Latino (5-year estimate) in Deer Lodge County, MT (B03002012E030023) from 2009 to 2023 about Deer Lodge County, MT; MT; latino; hispanic; estimate; persons; 5-year; population; and USA.

About the Data:

Background:

The Federal Subsistence Board (Board) adopted Proposal WP03-05 (in 2003) with modification to close Federal public lands in Unit 2 to deer hunting by NFQUs from Aug. 1 – Aug. 21 for the continuation of subsistence uses. A number of interrelated reasons were discussed as justification for the closure, including: a long-term trend of declining deer habitat (only 6% of clearcuts remain “huntable”); declining deer populations; increasing hunter participation; and increasing competition between user groups, resulting in a decline in subsistence opportunity. Many of these issues were cited as being particularly prevalent in the most road-accessible portions of POW.

In 2021 Tongass GIS staff was asked to make a polygon feature class showing Federal lands open to timber harvest in Alaska Fish and Game Unit 2 comprising Prince of Wales and adjacent islands. These lands were previously defined only as a verbal description and maps were needed to better communicate the boundaries to the public.

Process:

Used r10_tnf.r10_tnf.Land/r10_tnf.r10_tnf.BasicOwnership to define federal ownership and USGS Watershed Boundaries (r10_tnf.r10_tnf.HydrologicUnits/r10_tnf.r10_tnf.WBDHU10) to define drainage boundaries.

Verbal description from Federal Subsistence Board follows: Federal public lands on Prince of Wales Island, excluding the southeast portion (land south of the West Arm of Cholmondeley Sound draining into Cholmondeley Sound or draining eastward into Clarence Strait), are closed to hunting of deer from August 1-August 15, except by Federally qualified subsistence users hunting under these regulations. Unless otherwise restricted, non-Federally qualified users may only harvest up to 2 male deer.

Metadata 20241008 Tom Heutte

Population Estimate, Total, Not Hispanic or Latino, Black or African American Alone (5-year estimate) in Deer Lodge County, MT was 30.00000 Persons in January of 2023, according to the United States Federal Reserve. Historically, Population Estimate, Total, Not Hispanic or Latino, Black or African American Alone (5-year estimate) in Deer Lodge County, MT reached a record high of 138.00000 in January of 2013 and a record low of 30.00000 in January of 2023. Trading Economics provides the current actual value, an historical data chart and related indicators for Population Estimate, Total, Not Hispanic or Latino, Black or African American Alone (5-year estimate) in Deer Lodge County, MT - last updated from the United States Federal Reserve on July of 2025.

Distance sampling results for annual, off-trail, transect-based surveys to estimate population density of black-tailed deer on Blakely Island, Washington, USA.

The Crow Mesa Mule Deer Study was initiated in 2019 to identify the seasonal movement and distribution patterns of mule deer in the eastern half of Game Management Unit (GMU) 2C. This GPS study builds on nearby studies of mule deer and elk conducted by the Bureau of Land Management, the Southern Ute Tribe, the Jicarilla Apache Nation, and the New Mexico Department of Fish and Game. Migration corridors extended 20 to 75 miles from the winter ranges in GMU 2C to various summer ranges northeast to the Carson National Forest near Chama, and southeast to the San Pedro Parks Wilderness in the Santa Fe National Forest. The Crow Mesa herd relies largely on winter ranges administered by the Bureau of Land Management, where approximately 70% of the population remains year-round (Sawyer 2021). The other 30% migrate through, and summer on an assortment of private, tribal, and U.S. Forest Service lands. Notably, all mule deer migration corridors crossed Jicarilla Apache Nation immediately east of this herd’s winter range. Key management challenges with this deer herd include fence barriers, highway crossings, and habitat loss and human disturbance associated with energy development. These mapping layers show the location of the winter ranges for mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) in the Crow Mesa/2C population in New Mexico. They were developed from 40 migration sequences collected from a sample size of 12 animals comprising GPS locations collected every 2-8 hours.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the population of White Deer by race. It includes the population of White Deer across racial categories (excluding ethnicity) as identified by the Census Bureau. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population distribution of White Deer across relevant racial categories.

Key observations

The percent distribution of White Deer population by race (across all racial categories recognized by the U.S. Census Bureau): 99.24% are white and 0.76% are multiracial.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates.

Racial categories include:

• White
• Black or African American
• American Indian and Alaska Native
• Asian
• Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander
• Some other race
• Two or more races (multiracial)

Variables / Data Columns

• Race: This column displays the racial categories (excluding ethnicity) for the White Deer
• Population: The population of the racial category (excluding ethnicity) in the White Deer is shown in this column.
• % of Total Population: This column displays the percentage distribution of each race as a proportion of White Deer total population. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for White Deer Population by Race & Ethnicity. You can refer the same here

The Wenatchee Mountains mule deer herd inhabits a matrix of private and public lands along the eastern slope of the Cascade Range in Chelan and Kittitas Counties in Washington (fig. 24). Historically, the Wenatchee Mountains mule deer herd was separated into two subherds, Chelan and Kittitas; however, recent GPS collar data indicated the mule deer south of U.S. Highway 2 and north of Interstate 90 represent one population. Their high-use winter range extends along the foothills west and south of Wenatchee, Washington and throughout the foothills of the Kittitas Valley near Ellensburg. Their low-use winter range occurs along the foothills west of the Columbia River north of Interstate 90. In the spring, migratory individuals travel west into the Wenatchee Mountains to their summer range, which includes regional wilderness areas. Between 2020 and 2021, collaring efforts focused on the foothills near Wenatchee and in the surrounding foothills near Ellensburg. Collar data analysis indicated the Wenatchee Mountains mule deer population is partially migratory. A high proportion of migratory individuals inhabit the northern winter range of the Wenatchee Mountains, and resident individuals more commonly inhabit the foothills of the Kittitas Valley. In 2022, collaring efforts of mule deer (n=25) in the northern winter range foothills near Wenatchee targeted the higher proportion of the migratory population, to more clearly identify the movement corridors intersecting U.S. Highway 97 near Blewett Pass. The herd has several challenges, including the increasing frequency of large-scale wildfires and residential developments, which continue to degrade and reduce available winter habitat. Disturbance from human recreation on the winter range continues to be a concern. Additionally, U.S. Highway 97 and State Route 970 receive high volumes of traffic in the region and present semipermeable barriers to spring and fall migration. These mapping layers show the location of the winter ranges for mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) in the Wenatchee population in Washington. They were developed from 151 migration sequences collected from a sample size of 97 animals comprising GPS locations collected every 4 hours.

The Mendocino mule deer herd complex is comprised of three overlapping black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus) administrative herds, including Mendocino, Clear Lake, and Alder Springs. Mendocino black-tailed deer exhibit variable movement patterns and strategies, including traditional seasonal migrants, full-time residents, and multi-range migrants. Migrants move between seasonal ranges from a multitude of lower elevation areas within the North Coast Range in winter to higher elevation summer ranges (fig. XXX). Local biologists predict high-use winter ranges throughout both foothill slopes and valley bottoms. Female deer of the Mendocino herd complex exhibit both short-term (seasonal/annual) and long-term (multi-generational) fidelity to their summer ranges (Bose and others, 2017). Population density estimates in 2011 and 2012 based on fecal DNA pellets indicated exceptionally high deer densities on productive summer ranges (50.75 deer/km2; Lounsberry and others, 2015). However, the population was declining strongly at the time of study due to low adult survival, including of prime-aged females (Marescot and others, 2015). Survival rates were lower than typically observed for mule deer populations across their range (Forrester and Wittmer, 2013). Predation from black bears (Ursus americanus) and coyotes (Canis latrans) was the primary cause for low annual survival of fawns (Forrester and Wittmer, 2019) while predation from pumas (Puma concolor) was the foremost cause of adult female mortality (Marescot and others, 2015), often in areas deemed less familiar to the individual mule deer (Forrester and others, 2015). Puma kill rates of mule deer in the study area were the highest reported across their range (Cristescu and others, 2022), likely due to high rates of kleptoparasitism from black bears (Elbroch and others, 2015; Allen and others, 2021). More recent research from CDFW was directed at the collection of DNA from fecal pellets to update population density estimates (CDFW, 2015) and to determine population response to catastrophic wildfire (CDFW, 2019; CAL FIRE, 2021). Habitat use of mule deer (Bose and others, 2018) and their predators (Cristescu and others, 2019) in the area is well understood and most of the habitats occupied by the Mendocino herd complex are protected and not at risk of development or fragmentation. However, the risk of catastrophic wildfire and climate changed induced landscape scale changes exist with the consequences unknown. These mapping layers show the location of the Migration corridors for mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) in the Mendocino population in California. They were developed from 125 migration sequences collected from a sample size of 50 animals comprising GPS locations collected every 1-13 hours.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the data for the White Deer, TX population pyramid, which represents the White Deer population distribution across age and gender, using estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates. It lists the male and female population for each age group, along with the total population for those age groups. Higher numbers at the bottom of the table suggest population growth, whereas higher numbers at the top indicate declining birth rates. Furthermore, the dataset can be utilized to understand the youth dependency ratio, old-age dependency ratio, total dependency ratio, and potential support ratio.

Key observations

• Youth dependency ratio, which is the number of children aged 0-14 per 100 persons aged 15-64, for White Deer, TX, is 48.3.
• Old-age dependency ratio, which is the number of persons aged 65 or over per 100 persons aged 15-64, for White Deer, TX, is 29.2.
• Total dependency ratio for White Deer, TX is 77.6.
• Potential support ratio, which is the number of youth (working age population) per elderly, for White Deer, TX is 3.4.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates.

Age groups:

• Under 5 years
• 5 to 9 years
• 10 to 14 years
• 15 to 19 years
• 20 to 24 years
• 25 to 29 years
• 30 to 34 years
• 35 to 39 years
• 40 to 44 years
• 45 to 49 years
• 50 to 54 years
• 55 to 59 years
• 60 to 64 years
• 65 to 69 years
• 70 to 74 years
• 75 to 79 years
• 80 to 84 years
• 85 years and over

Variables / Data Columns

• Age Group: This column displays the age group for the White Deer population analysis. Total expected values are 18 and are define above in the age groups section.
• Population (Male): The male population in the White Deer for the selected age group is shown in the following column.
• Population (Female): The female population in the White Deer for the selected age group is shown in the following column.
• Total Population: The total population of the White Deer for the selected age group is shown in the following column.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for White Deer Population by Age. You can refer the same here

The Area 7 mule deer population is one of the state’s largest deer herds with an estimated population of about 11,000 in 2019. This deer herd is highly important to Nevada from an economic and ecological perspective. It’s one of the longest distance deer migrations in the state of Nevada with some animals known to migrate over 120 miles during a single migration. A subset of this population, known as the “Pequop” herd, crosses a major highway (US highway 93) and an interstate (Interstate-80) twice annually during their seasonal migration. Several million dollars in wildlife crossing structures have been constructed to help these deer during their migration, yet they still face challenges to connectivity between winter and summer ranges including miles of livestock fencing and a large-scale gold mine operation in close proximity a large stop-over site near Long Canyon. Winter range for this deer herd occurs primarily along the east side of the Pequop Mountains from Sixmile Creek to Ninemile Canyon. The largest stopovers occur along the west side of Snake Mountains near Tabor Creek, Antelope Peak and Bishop Creek areas, north and south of Interstate 80 near Pequop Summit, and the Sixmile Creek to Long Canyon area in the Pequop Mountains. Summer range for this herd primarily occurs between the Owyhee and Bruneau Rivers east of Wildhorse Reservoir. These data provide the location of migration corridors for mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) in the Pequop Mountains, Nevada. They were developed from Brownian bridge movement models (Sawyer et al. 2009) using 218 migration sequences collected from a sample size of 79 animals comprising GPS locations collected every 1-25 hours.

The Area 10 mule deer population is one of the largest deer herds in the state, accounting for roughly 20 percent of the statewide mule deer population. The Area 10 herd is comprised of several sub populations that occupy the majority of the Ruby Mountains, are highly migratory,and exhibit long distance migrations from summer to winter ranges. Several key stopovers occur within the migration corridor for the Area 10 deer migration. The largest stopovers are located along the Harrison Pass Road on both sides of Toyn Creek,the west side of Pearl Peak and Sherman Mountain, Little and Big Bald Mountains near the Bald Mountain Mine complex, and Bourne to Orchard Canyons west of Warm Spring Ranch. The winter range encompasses a very large area and is distributed along the lower elevations of the Ruby Mountains from Interstate 80 to US Highway 50, a span of approximately 120 miles. Some extended migrations have occurred even farther to the south near Highway 6 in extreme winter years. Several migratory pathways in Area 10 face challenges to permeability including livestock fences, impediments to the migration path from mineral extraction, competition from wild horses, and increasing highway traffic in some portions of the range. These data provide the location of migration stopovers for mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) in the Ruby Mountains, Elko County, Nevada. They were developed from Brownian bridge movement models (Sawyer et al. 2009) using 290 migration sequences collected from a sample size of 155 animals comprising GPS locations collected every 1-25 hours.

Mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) along the Owl Creek Mountains display both a longitudinal and altitudinal migration as they depart the northern section of the Wind River Indian Reservation (fig. 28). Deer in this trans-boundary migration corridor move from areas under the jurisdiction and sovereignty of the Eastern Shoshone and Northern Arapaho, to lands where the Wyoming Game and Fish Department manages wildlife. West of the Reservation, deer migrate to summer ranges in the Absaroka Range, the Mount Leidy Highlands, and the Gros Ventre River watershed, all within the Bridger-Teton and Shoshone National Forests. The herd numbers around 3,000. Arid winter ranges are a mix of shrubs, herbaceous grasslands and riparian ecosystems, within Tribal land as well as private land along the Wind River. Animals migrate an average one-way distance of 63 mi (101 km), ranging from as little as 14 mi (23 km) to as far as 141 mi (227 km). Summer ranges are predominantly lodgepole pine forests with smaller areas of open herbaceous grasslands. The population size of the herd has remained relatively steady over the last decade. There is minimal concern for these animals on winter range because Tribal Trust Land is under low risk of development, and the Shoshone and Arapaho manage deer hunting for sustainable harvest under a game code established in 1984. However, some of their winter range along Wind River is in close proximity to US Highway 26/287, putting deer at heightened risk of vehicle collisions. Critically, the migration routes extend through residential areas such as Dubois and the Hoback Basin with heightened risk of negative human-wildlife interactions (i.e. vehicle collisions, fences and barriers). Summer ranges within National Forests are of less concern. These data provide the location of migration routes for mule deer in the Owl Creek Mountains population in the Wind River Reservation. They were developed from 73 migration sequences collected from a sample size of 20 animals comprising GPS locations collected every 2 hours.