Hobby hunters do not help with forest conversion

Professor Josef H. Reichholf explains why shooting more deer will save neither the forest nor the climate. Recreational hunting keeps populations highly productive.

Editorial Team Wild beim Wild — October 18, 2020

The debate about the transformation of the forest and the demand for even stronger hunting of deer or stags flares up again and again.

But is shooting even more of these highly reproductive wild animals the solution? The renowned zoologist and ecologist Prof. Josef H. Reichholf says no: This will not save either the forest or the climate.

Forest conversion is necessary because forests need to become climate-resilient. However, deer are browsing on young trees, hindering the transformation. Therefore, even more deer must be culled than before, until new forests grow naturally. The Bavarian Nature Conservation Association, the Ecological Hunting Association, and forest owners recently called for this in a press release.

The idea sounds plausible. However, upon closer inspection, it isn't. The roe deer population has been intensively hunted for decades, with the trend increasing according to hunting statistics. This apparently hasn't helped natural regeneration in the forests. Why? A brief look at the roe deer itself and its way of life provides some insight.

" A persistently high hunting pressure of around one million deer shot per year in Germany has not regulated the population to the desired level, but has kept it highly productive at a high level ."
Prof. Josef H. Reichholf

This means that the more deer or stags are shot, the more they reproduce.

The roe deer is not a forest animal by nature. As is well known, it doesn't give birth to its fawns in the protective thickets of the forest, but rather out in the fields, preferably in meadows. Unfortunately, because there they are all too easily maimed by mowing machines. Before that, in spring, we see roe deer in the fields. Quite openly. Where they are not hunted, or only lightly, they would also roam freely in the fields for the rest of the year. From autumn onwards, they travel in groups, which hunters call "leaps".

Deer are by nature inhabitants of meadows and forest edges. It is only hunting by recreational hunters that drives the animals into the forest, where they then find no grasses and herbs – vital for their survival – and have no choice but to nibble on buds. Hunting unnecessarily disturbs the wild animals, which often further increases their need for food and thus the damage they cause by grazing.

Apart from spring, deer are practically invisible. They wait until nightfall before venturing out into the fields. Heavy hunting has made them very wary. Only the most cautious deer survive. Young deer learn from their behavior. As a result, deer have been virtually forced into the forests. They must obtain a large portion of their daily food there, browsing the buds of young trees. In fact, they prefer them, as these contain the nutrients deer need in a favorable concentration. Deer are picky eaters. With their slender build and small stomachs, they have to be.

If they eat young, protein-rich shoots of grasses out in the field, it causes no harm. That's because grasses grow " from the bottom up ," not from the top, from the tips, like trees. Trees' growth originates from the buds. Farmers know this. They've always practiced it this way: grass can be mowed, often even. Young tree shoots cannot.

Therefore, open fields are a far more suitable habitat for deer than forests. However, increased hunting forces them even further into the forest – thus increasing browsing damage.

The roe deer population in Germany is large and productive. Despite considerable efforts, culling barely accounts for the annual increase, because their wariness makes them increasingly difficult to hunt.

The deer are actually thriving in the cultivated landscape. The generally heavy fertilization has made the plants they feed on more nutritious. This is reflected in the high frequency of twin births. Intensive hunting keeps the deer population at a high level. This has led to a dead end, from which there is no escape if the pressure intensifies. On the contrary, browsing damage will continue to increase until the deer are almost eradicated. This is because the imposed wariness prevents them from living largely in the wild, as is their nature. If they were allowed to do so, it would not only benefit natural regeneration in the forest, but the frequency of wildlife collisions would also decrease. Deer that don't have to cross roads at night and in fog also don't get run over. They can learn to adapt to road traffic. Which certainly wouldn't be a bad thing. Because the collisions, which are fatal for the vast majority of deer but cause " only" minor damage to cars, are associated with very high costs. Without personal injury to the vehicles, these collisions cost several thousand euros each. And this is with around 200,000 deer collisions per year. That means annual damages in the tens of millions.

Another advantage would be that the deer would become visible again. If they weren't so shy, it would be much easier to determine the actual size and distribution of the deer population. Browsing damage is not a reliable indicator of this. It relates solely to forestry practices. Some tree species wouldn't thrive in the forests in question because they don't occur naturally there. Examples include Douglas firs planted in state forests or spruce trees in the riparian forest along the Alz River, a nature reserve with more or less regular flooding.

It should also be noted that the intensive management of the state forest over the years has promoted the mass spread of Himalayan balsam, which prevents the natural regeneration of the desired forest trees. The deer are certainly not to blame for this. Nor is it the fact that spruce trees were planted extensively in the past where beech trees or mixed deciduous forests would naturally occur.

The mistakes of forestry management are not the fault of the deer. Nor is it the fault of society, which is once again expected to pay for them. Many people would like to see deer in our region that don't bolt in a wild panic or cause dangerous sudden stops at night. Further increasing the culling of deer will not save either the forest or the climate.

Further reading