Bases of Support Differ for Deer Reduction Versus Behavior Change Options to Manage Deer Impacts

Abstract

Research on urban deer management has used bivariate analysis of public support for options. Multiple regression analyses tested predictors of support for deer reduction options (hunting; contraception; removal; no action or “letting nature take its course”) and willingness to change one's own behavior (self-protection; yard re-planting; planting native plants). Deer reduction support correlated with wanting fewer deer and opinions about hunting's and no-action's effects; behavior-change support correlated with distrust of government, general environmental attitudes, and beliefs about deer impacts. Variations occurred for specific options (e.g., belief in no action increased with beliefs that nature lacked negative effects and reduced deer numbers; seeing global extinction as a problem and political liberalism favored native-species planting). Controlling for other variables, women supported hunting more and no action less than men, reversing prior bivariate findings. Multivariate analysis thus showed hitherto unobserved differences in the basis of support for deer reduction versus behavior change.

Keywords:

• white-tailed deer
• management alternatives
• hunting

Acknowledgments

I gratefully acknowledge the support of the late Prof. Joan Ehrenfeld, and the suggestions of her multi-disciplinary research team on “Risk factors for West Nile Virus: the role of biodiversity in the ecology of hosts, vectors and humans” on questions for the survey instrument.

Funding

Although the research described in this article has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency through grant/cooperative agreement RD-83377701-0 to Professor Ehrenfeld, it has not been subjected to the Agency's required peer and policy review and therefore does not necessarily reflect the views of the Agency and no official endorsement should be inferred.