|
Research on Deer Damage to Wild Flowers Inconclusive
This forest hydrology professor's goal was to answer, once and for all, whether deer are
behind wildflower decline in Pennsylvania. But it didn't work out that
way.
By Jeff Mulhollem
Penn State Agricultural News & Information
UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. -- Although Bill Sharpe is a hunter and an
outdoorsman, he admits he never paid much attention to wild flowers
until he kept hearing that they were disappearing because an
overpopulation of white-tailed deer was eating them into oblivion.
So the professor of forest hydrology in Penn State's College of
Agricultural Sciences worked with ecology graduate student Jacob
Thompson to design a research project to learn if it was true that too
many deer were eradicating wildflowers, or if the culprit in their
demise was really acidifying soils from decades of acid rain, as Sharpe
suspected.
Sharpe, who has been researching the effects of acid rain for
more than three decades, was frustrated by the dearth of historical
information about wildflowers in Pennsylvania, the lack of known
specifics about the plants' biological preferences and needs, and what
he views as an absence of science behind claims that deer are
responsible for a disappearance of wildflowers.
"I've worked with forest soils, trees and acidic precipitation
long enough to know that soil plays a critical role in the welfare of
plants," he says. "You can't just assume that when a plant starts
disappearing, it is caused by deer browsing. Deer have always eaten
wildflowers."
Sharpe's goal was to answer, once and for all, whether deer are
behind wildflower decline in Pennsylvania. But it didn't work out that
way.
"Turns out it is not so simple," he says. "We found evidence
that acidifying soils and deer browsing both have an impact, but in all
honesty, since there doesn't seem to be any baseline data about past
wildflower prevalence in Pennsylvania, I can't even be sure they are
becoming scarce. All the information we could find was anecdotal."
For his research, Sharpe selected three of the 35 species of
trillium growing in eastern United States forests. Members of the lily
family, purple (Trillium erectum), white (Trillium grandiflorum) and
painted (Trillium undulatum) trilliums all are fairly common in
Pennsylvania. Thirty-seven patches of trillium in Centre, Clearfield,
Somerset and Westmoreland counties, and in West Virginia, were used as
research plots.
What Sharpe and colleagues discovered was that each kind of
trillium was affected differently by soil acidity and deer browsing.
Sharpe speculates that is true of all wildflower species. "You can't
generalize about the trilliums at least," he explains. "They have
different soil preferences and it appears that deer may prefer some over
others."
Deer populations in the study areas were gauged by counting
pellets (fecal matter) in a specified distance around the trillium
patches. The method may seem primitive, but it is an accepted method of
estimating deer numbers in a given area, Sharpe says. "With plants that
were obviously eaten, we assumed deer ate them," Sharpe explained. "But
there was really no way to be sure, except for a few deer tracks."
"We did learn a lot," says Sharpe. "We now know, for example,
that painted trillium actually prefers more acidic soils. We found a
strong correlation, however, between purple and white trillium and
better soils with lots of calcium. White trillium only grew on sites
with relatively high calcium and pH as well. They are truly calcium
dependent. I believe the gradual acidification of soils may have a
negative impact on purple and possibly white trilliums, but not as much
on painted trillium."
Deer snacking on trillium also was not as straightforward as you
might expect. Purple trillium didn't seem to be much affected by deer
browsing, but white trillium definitely was, and painted trillium also
was, but to a lesser degree. And where painted trillium was eaten, the
browsing seemed to have the greatest impact only on the height of plants with flowers, not the density of plants in the patch. Which brings up the obvious question: Do deer like the taste or appearance of white flowers more?
"I can't answer that," Sharpe says. "I am going to take the
researcher's cop-out and say, 'More research needs to be done.'"
So what conclusions can be drawn from Sharpe's small-sample-size
study of trillium? Maybe none, he admits, but more is known about these
wildflowers than before. "The mixed results tell me that we must be
cautious when we make claims about an animal making a plant disappear,"
he says. "The wildflower manuals we saw didn't even have any basic soil
or leaf chemistry information about trillium. Now at least we know two
of three we studied would be negatively impacted by growing acidity in
soils. And we do know deer are having some effect.
"All trilliums take five to 10 years to flower," he adds, "so
some of these patches are quite old. And because trillium sends out
shallow shoots or stems under the soil called rhizomes, all the flowers
in a patch might be the same plant."
They are a beautiful, interesting species that have many
admirers, Sharpe points out. "The patches of wildflowers we studied in
the research were located with information provided by wildflower
enthusiasts," he says. "Some people were reluctant to tell us where the
patches were because they didn't want the flowers picked or the patches
damaged. I can see how people become attached to them."
|