Hunting As a Population Management Plan for Black-Tailed Deer on Saltspring Island

SCHOOL OF ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES ES 341/ER311

Restoring a predator-prey relationship: hunting as a population management plan for Black-tailed deer on Saltspring Island

Photo from: http://www.huntwashingtonstate.com/

Created By:

Table of Contents List of Figures ...... iv List of Tables ...... iv Acknowledgements ...... v 1. Introduction ...... 1 2 . Site Survey and Analysis ...... 2 2.1 Cultural Implications of Black-tailed Deer Population ...... 2 2.2 Vegetation Survey...... 5 2.2.1 Survey Area – Ruckle Park & Saltspring Island ...... 5 2.2.2 Survey Method ...... 7 2.2.3 Data ...... 7 2.2.4 Analysis ...... 11 2.3 Literature Review of Browsing down our natural heritage: Deer impacts on vegetation structure and songbird populations across an island archipelago by Tara G. Martin, Paul Arcese and Nancy Scheerder (in press) ...... 12 2.3.1 Summary ...... 12 2.3.2 Data ...... 12 2.3.3 Analysis and Comparison of Data ...... 13 2.4 Conclusion ...... 15 3. Policy, Goals & Objectives ...... 16 Policy ...... 16 Goals ...... 16 Objectives ...... 16 4. Design ...... 17 5. Implementation and Management ...... 19 5.1 Management Options ...... 19 5.1.1 Administrative Options ...... 19 5.1.2 Conflict Reduction Techniques ...... 19 5.1.3 Population Reduction Methods ...... 21 5.2 Management Methods to be Implemented ...... 25 5.2.1 Population Estimation ...... 26 5.2.2 Hunting Protocols ...... 27 5.2.3 Food Security ...... 28

ii 5.2.4 Social Network Specifications ...... 29 5.2.5 Fencing ...... 32 5.2.6 Costs ...... 32 6. Monitoring & Evaluation ...... 36 6.1 Procedures ...... 36 6.2 Costs ...... 37 References ...... 39 Appendices Appendix A – Ruckle Provincial Park Map ...... 45 Appendix B – Map of Saltspring Island ...... 46 Appendix C – Saltspring Island Land Ownership Maps ...... 47 Appendix D – Ruckle Provincial Park Proposed Fence Plots and Related Maps ...... 49 Appendix E – “Facebuck” ...... 53

iii List of Figures

Figure 1. Sample of photo points taken at each site. Site 1 – North, East, South, West 10 Figure 2. Oceanspray sample from Site 1 11 Figure 3. Percent vegetation cover for total trees, shrubs and herb/grasses 12 as well as two common native shrubs salal and oceanspray across low (L), moderate (M) and highly (H) deer density islands. Bars represent 95% credible intervals. Figure 4. Deer browsing impact on forest vegetation cover; A. No deer 13 (Patos island), B. Moderate deer density (Wallace Island,) and C. High deer density (Sidney island). Figure 5. Impact of increasing browsing pressure on architecture of 14 native shrub oceanspray; A. No deer present (North Ballenas), B. Moderate deer density (Little D’Arcy), C. High deer density (Sidney Island).

List of Tables

Table 1. Raw Data from Vegetation Survey 10 Table 2. Average cover of vegetation layers in Ruckle Park 10 Table 3. Average cover of oceanspray and salal in Ruckle Park 10 Table 4. Summary of costs of various management methods 25 Table 5. Fees incurred by hunters to obtain licenses 32 Table 6. Cost estimates of various fencing types 34 Table 7. Estimated total annual cost of restoration 35

iv Acknowledgements

This paper is the result of the combined effort of Carley Coccola, Kate Graham, Sasha Kvakic, Greg Medhurst , Rachel Saint and Chanda Turner. Each member contributed specific sections of the report. Carley worked mainly on retrieving and editing the maps, the history of Ruckle Park, the biogeoclimatic zone information for Ruckle Park and Saltspring Island and the fencing plot choices and reasons. Kate designed the website, “Facebuck”, and wrote the description of the website and its’ value to the project and also collected and compiled all of the field data into one final table. Sasha detailed the hunting aspect of the management plan, as well as the monitoring and evaluation and introduction sections. Greg completed most of the site analysis, synthesizing and analyzing the data from the vegetation survey and literature review. In addition, he researched and detailed the various population count methods and contributed to the monitoring and evaluation section. Rachel did all of the costs analysis of different methods, as well as integrating information from two group members into the management methods section. She also wrote about food security. Chanda completed the cultural analysis, contributed to the management methods section and combined, formatted and edited each group members’ work to create the final product. References were cited by each individual, with Chanda compiling them all into the same format. All group members assisted in the field survey. We would also like to thank the following people for their contribution and assistance: Dr. Brian Starzomski, Dr. Tara Martin, Don Doyle, Joe Benning and Nathan Nankivell.

v 1. Introduction

Problems related to deer overpopulation on Saltspring Island, and by extension throughout urban and suburban areas in BC stem from a lack of large predators (Hesse, 2010). Deer have evolved in response to the pressures associated with being a part of a predator-prey system and reproduce at a rate that ensures that a large surplus population accommodates losses due to predation, disease, accidents and the like. In the absence of large predators, deer populations tend to grow to the point that they outstrip the available natural food supply. In situations such as these, winter kill becomes the population control mechanism. Based on the available ecological research, Saltspring Island's deer population does not appear to be at a level where mass starvation will happen in the near term, though that's not to say that there aren't significant negative ecological consequences associated with the current population level. (Martin et al., in press) Beyond the ecological impacts, deer are increasingly becoming a topic of discussion in the local media due to their cultural impact through their propensity to eat ornamental plants and become involved in automobile accidents (Gulf Islands Driftwood, 2008-2010). This paper will examine the ecological effects that a growing Black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus) population has on selected plant communities. Various management options will be outlined and compared in light of their effectiveness at reducing this population's overall numbers and impacts, and maintaining it at a level consistent with ecological integrity. Finally, this paper will focus on selective fencing and a managed hunt coordinated using social media as the tools most suitable for achieving this end.

1 2. Site Survey and Analysis

Three components of the site survey and analysis will be discussed in the case of the Saltspring Island deer population. As the restoration will be of a predatory process on an entire island, a singular site has not been identified. Instead, a vegetation survey in Ruckle Provincial Park and an analysis of the cultural implications of the Black-tailed deer population on Saltspring Island were carried out in addition to a literature review of Browsing down our natural heritage: Deer impacts on vegetation structure and songbird populations across an island archipelago by Tara G. Martin, Paul Arcese and Nancy Scheerder (in press). The cultural analysis was comprised of newspaper articles as well as blog and forum posts from residents of Saltspring Island and surrounding areas. The vegetation survey was conducted on October 11th, 2010 by 6 students in the University of Victoria’s School of Environmental Studies course entitled ES341: Ecological Restoration. With permission from the area supervisor of Saanich and the Southern Gulf Islands, Joe Benning (personal communication, October 7, 2010), 6 discrete plots were surveyed using methods outlined in the Field manual for describing terrestrial ecosystems (B.C. Ministry of Forests and B.C. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, 1998). The literature review of Martin et al. (in press) involved the discussion of photos and figures as well as a summary and comparison of the results and analysis presented by the authors.

2.1 Cultural Implications of the Black-tailed Deer Population The human dimension of any management plan is critical for success (Starzomski, 2010); however, the importance of the cultural aspect is magnified on Saltspring Island, as most land on which management initiatives will take place is privately owned (see Appendix C). Additionally, residents of Saltspring Island appear to have a greater degree of concern and involvement with the ecology and viability of their land than do typical city-dwellers who may surround other proposed restoration sites, which can be seen in farming and development practices as well as the 307 acres of private land protected by conservation covenants (Salt Spring Island Conservancy, n.d.). There are several elements to consider on the human side of things. People may respond to a management plan with varying degrees of enthusiasm, which are affected by many personal and cultural factors. Some of the more important examples are: personal experience with target species, health and safety, effectiveness of options, cost of options, political support and humaneness and violence (Hesse, 2010). It is important to note that not all of these factors coincide with the ecology behind some management strategies; killing may be viewed as inhumane, when in reality population reduction in

2 certain situations will reduce winter starvation, which is a very slow and surely less humane way for deer to die (Nelson, 1997). However, the attitudes of some residents are unlikely to change regardless of how factually correct they are, and thus remain an important factor in the process of designing a management plan. In British Columbia, in general, there is currently an overwhelming support for deer population control, especially in urban areas. As discussed by Gayle Hesse (2010) in a BC Ministry of Environment publication, conflicts between humans and deer include damage to gardens, vehicle collisions with or caused by deer, potential disease transmission and some incidence of aggressive deer behaviour towards humans. A recent Union of B.C. Municipalities convention that took place in Whistler saw a motion for the province to take action on urban deer herds pass by a wide margin as Chris Moslin, from Grand Forks, spoke about municipalities being forced to implement controversial policies such as sharpshooting and limited entry hunts because of the inaction of the provincial government (Nagel, 2010). It was also noted by delegates that budget cuts to the Ministry of Environment have resulted in a need for more conservation officers (Nagel, 2010). The overpopulation of deer where there are no predators to control their growth is not restricted to urban regions; predators have also been extirpated from the Gulf Islands as humans have settled on them and deer populations have correspondingly increased. Opinions of the residents of Saltspring Island regarding the deer they must share their land with are not hard to find. One simply needs to read the Gulf Islands Driftwood, a local newspaper, to find several references to the deer and the effects they are having on the environment and the lives of citizens. The majority of people are calling for action to reduce the population, although there are those who oppose any management of the deer. One such opinion has been provided by Sepp Kandler (2010) in a recent letter to the editor disputing a previous article entitled “Deer leave heavy footprint on islands’ landscape”. Sepp speaks of culling deer as a violation of residents’ “commitment to preserve the natural appeal of the island” (Kandler, 2010) and expresses the view that hunting is frightening, referring to a man who was killed on Galiano Island by a hunter in the 1970s. Kandler finds some support in another letter to the editor from Mary Toynbee (2010), who declares several interesting opinions. First, Toynbee (2010) indicates that being stalked and killed by a rifle bullet must be easier for a deer than being stalked and mauled by a cougar and that being stalked and anaesthetized or even killed is probably the easiest. She explains that if a cull must be done, she would hope for a professional cull, and that it would not be done by “trigger- happy game hunters out for a good time and a trophy” (Toynbee, 2010). While many people do not express these kinds of opinions, it is extremely important that concerns like those of Sepp Kandler and Mary Toynbee, both Saltspring residents, are addressed in the management plan for the island. It highlights the need for public awareness and education on the negative

3 impacts deer can create by overbrowsing; fragile ecosystems can be degraded and wildlife habitat destroyed if population levels are allowed to grow unchecked (Martin et al., in press). Safety concerns of residents, especially if the proposed hunting is going to occur on private land, cannot emphasized enough; the screening and networking processes, as well as hunting protocols, suggested for management of the deer population effectively address these concerns and will be readily accessible by residents upon the implementation of the management plan. Several occurrences of opinions contrary to the ones previously discussed are present, as found in the Gulf Islands Driftwood (2010). Although many article titles regarding the deer population on Saltspring Island exist, only a few are accessible, including an editorial and a news article. The news article discusses two separate vehicle accidents caused by deer in a single morning (Anonymous, 2010a). One of the accidents resulted in severe vehicle damage when a deer was clipped as a man swerved to try and avoid it, while another driver was lucky to miss a deer and ended up in the ditch with no significant vehicle damage (Anonymous, 2010a). In July of 2010, Barbara Johnstone Grimmer discussed a scooter rider who was knocked off his scooter the year before on Saltspring. Vehicle incidents with deer are not uncommon and are clearly recognized by residents as an effect the deer population has. An editorial entitled “Time to consider deer cull”, was published shortly after Tara Martin’s talk on Saltspring Island (Anonymous, 2010b). The author first mentions a well-publicized incident in Cranbrook where a protective deer attacked a dog, explaining that a mail carrier in the same area was head-butted by a doe in July of the same year and an aggressive deer also chased a woman and her dog in August (Anonymous, 2010b). They go on to describe how aggressive behaviours have not yet been experienced by residents of Saltspring Island, but how the implications for forest ecology indicate that they need to make the choice offered by Tara Martin: an abundance of deer or an abundance of plant and bird biodiversity (Anonymous, 2010b). Options and their viability as presented by the author (2010b) include the introduction of predators, which is likely to meet resistance from farmers, sterilization or relocation, which will be expensive and finally, a cull, which will definitely raise controversy among residents. The stark concluding sentence refers back to Tara Martin’s lecture: “[p]erhaps it’s time to make that choice before the deer make it for us” (Anonymous, 2010b). Along those same lines, Bob Weedon (2010) recognizes both the need to act and to find a community based approach to the deer. Weedon (2010), in an article entitled “Where Have all the Flowers Gone?” discusses how he identified with Tara Martin’s descriptions of songbird choruses in healthy understories where deer are not present, contrasted with singular calls in areas where they are, and how he believes that the deer population will grow to numbers where spring ephemerals are further depressed and winter die-off will become commonplace if some kind of management plan is not implemented. Weedon (2010) points out that the Salt Spring Island Conservancy (SSIC) was formed in

4 order to protect ecological communities through feasible and effective methods and asserts that deer will undeniably become a severe threat to these communities. Of particular interest is the statement following his appeal for a decision from the whole community; “[t]he Conservancy isn’t the fount of all wisdom any more than it is where all responsibility rests or all action starts” (Weedon, 2010). Further integration of Bob Weedon’s suggestions are essential for the successful management of the deer population; members of Saltspring Island’s community must come together and be actively involved in the management technique, which must be widely accepted. There are many who would support management of the deer population, although no quantitative data exists to measure the support for various methods. Qualitative indicators of individual support for hunting as a population control technique can be seen on HuntingBC.ca. A thread was started by the username Mountaintop about a lecture by Tara Martin hosted by the Salt Spring Island Conservancy; Mountaintop goes on to describe how Dr. Martin indicated hunting was the most viable solution to deer overpopulation, even after questions regarding sterilization were asked by residents (Mountaintop, 2010). Mountaintop (2010) goes on to say that from their understanding there was little opposition to the deer hunting suggestion, at least in this context. Further down the thread, username steel_ram indicated that, based on his experience, long-term residents on Saltspring were fine with hunting (steel_ram, 2010). Username quadrakid affirmed that on Quadra Island, residents were not “antihunting hippies” (quadrakid, 2010), but actually asked him to hunt on their properties. These accounts indicate two things: some hunters are receptive to the idea of hunting on private property on Saltspring Island if the opportunity arises and some hunters perceive there is the possibility of partnerships with landowners amenable to the idea of hunting. It must be noted that while these individual accounts exist, all hunters and Saltspring Island landowners cannot be expected to share these opinions. While a full consensus may never be reached, it appears that the citizens of Saltspring Island appreciate that deer are becoming more of a problem and management may be necessary. There is recognition that this management may need to involve a cull of the deer, whether by sharpshooting or a managed hunt. The community will be an essential part of any action that is taken, leading to greater long-term success. Ways to integrate residents are numerous and will be further elaborated on in the discussion of the proposed management plan.

2.2 Vegetation Survey 2.2.1 Survey Area – Ruckle Park & Saltspring Island Ruckle Provincial Park occupies the southeast corner of Saltspring Island at 48°46'54"N, 123°23'23"W (BC Geographical Names Office, n.d.). See Appendix A for a map of the park. Saltspring Island, see Appendix B, is part of the Gulf Islands archipelago between Vancouver Island and mainland

5 British Columbia on the west coast of North America. The island was originally inhabited by the Saanich, Cowichan, and Chemainus First Nations groups, many of which were believed to have left due to epidemic and war in the 1780’s (Salt Spring Island Archives, n.d.). Historically, the First Nation’s people frequented Ruckle Park as an area for food gathering, plant harvesting, and settlement. Today, Saltspring Island remains part of the Hul’qumi’num First Nations land claim. In the 1850’s the Hudson Bay Company (HBC) named the island “Saltspring” due to the cold salt water shores surrounding the island (Vancouverisland.com, 2010). Later in the same decade, James Douglas open up the island to settlement by immigrants, making Saltspring one of the first lands in BC occupied by non-aboriginals without a land sale agreement (Salt Spring Island Archives, n.d.). Henry Ruckle was one of such immigrants who chose to settle on Saltspring, moving to the island from Ireland in 1872. He originally purchased a couple hundred hectares of land for a farm, which grew to encompass 1196 hectares during the peak of its production. The farm had orchards, as well as crops and animals for sale, and was passed down through consecutive generations in the Ruckle family. In 1974, the Ruckle family donated most of their land to the province for park land. They maintained a small parcel of land, which the family farm still resides on today, making it the oldest operating farm in BC (B. C. Ministry of Environment (MoE) & Lane, M., 2010). Ruckle Park has a colourful history; it was also a popular spot for rum runners in the 1920’s hiding their contraband as they attempted to smuggle it across the border. Today, Ruckle Park spans an area of 5.29km2 with 7km of shoreline (MoE, 2010). The park is classified as Coastal Douglas fir moist maritime (CDFmm) biogeoclimatic zone (MoE, 2010). Biogeoclimatic (BCG) zones are classified by their climate, soil and geographic composition, as well as their biotic components. The prevalence of an ecosystem, along with its species variety and abundance, are also considerations in their classification. Additionally, threats to a BCG zone are examined (Nature Trust of BC, 2005). There are currently 14 different BCG zones across British Columbia. Saltspring Island represents a significant portion (16.6%) of BC Parks’ protected area of CDFmm BCG zone, with Ruckle Park alone containing 5.3% (MoE, 2010). The variation within this zone leads to a range of ecosystems, including wetlands, Garry oak meadows, shoreline habitats and several types of forest which are CDF red-listed ecological communities (MoE, 2010). Vegetation surveys conducted by BC Parks in 2006, found 144 plant species present in 48 plots, with 82 of them native and 62 exotic. Common native species in the area include sword fern (Polystichum munitum), salal (Gaultheria shallon), Dull Oregon grape (Berberis aquifolium), Western redcedars (Thuja plicata), and Douglas-firs (Pseudotsuga menziesii). Several species of birds and mammals also live in the CDFmm BGC zone, including Pileated Woodpeckers (Dryocopus pileatus), Chestnut-back chickadees (Poecile rufescens), Steller’s jays

6 (Cyanocitta stelleri) , Black-tailed deer, cougars (Puma concolor), squirrels and bats (Nuszdorfer, Klinka and Demarchi, 1991). The park is also popular with outdoor recreational users who camp, canoe, or hike along the 15km of trails through the area (MoE, 2009 & 2010). These areas of both high and low human impact in Ruckle Park make it somewhat representative of the rest of Saltspring Island, allowing conclusions about the density and effects of the deer population drawn from the survey to be generally applied to other parts of the island. At the time of writing, no estimates of the deer population on Saltspring Island had been done, perhaps due to the fact that the traditional deer population count method of spring spotlight counting in cut blocks does not translate well to the Gulf Islands (Doyle, D., personal communication, November 15, 2010) Therefore vegetation surveys, such as the one conducted, become even more important as a tool for estimating deer populations in terms of density. Vegetation dynamics are heavily influenced by deer browsing; changes in these dynamics are indicative of specific densities of deer (Martin et al., in press). Saltspring Island is found mainly in the Coastal Douglas Fir BCG zone, with small pockets of dry maritime Western Hemlock zones. Coastal Douglas fir BCG zones are among the rarest in B.C, valued for their long growing season and temperate climate (Salt Spring Island Conservancy, 2010). This BCG zone is also known for having the highest incidence of rare and endangered species present in the province. Saltspring Island alone has over 45 provincial and federally recognized species at risk (Salt Spring Island Conservancy, 2010). This Coastal Douglas fir BCG zone is present at lower elevations and ranges as far north as Powell River (Southern Gulf Islands Atlas, 2005).

2.2.2 Survey Method Six non-random 20m square quadrats were surveyed in high and low human impact zones within different ecological communities in the park. The survey followed the vegetation survey methods outlined in the Field Manual for Describing Terrestrial Ecosystems (B.C. Ministry of Forests & B.C. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, 1998).

2.2.3 Data

Site Layers % Cover % Present By Layer Species Present By Layer Cover by Species 10/10/11 – TREES 70 Big leaf Maple (Acer macrophyllum) 45 Ruckle 01 Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) 12 48.77352N Western redcedar (Thuja plicata) 10

7 Site Layers % Cover % Present By Layer Species Present By Layer Cover by Species 123.37252W Grand fir (Abies grandis) 7 SHRUBS 5 Oceanspray (Holodiscus discolor) 2 Salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis) 2 Red huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifolium) 1 HERB 70 Sword fern (Polystichum munitum) 65 Grass (possibly Andropogon glomeratus) 1 Trailing blackberry (Rubus ursinus) 0.5 Bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum) 0.5 Cleavers (Galium aparine) 0.5 Northern starflower (Trientalis arctica) <1 Pathfinder (Adenocaulon bicolor) <1 MOSS 2 Magnificent moss (Plagiomnium venustum) 2 10/10/11 – TREES 55 Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) 30 Ruckle 02 Garry oak (Quercus garryana) 30 48.77338N SHRUBS 10 Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) 3 123.36808W Garry Oak (Quercus garryana) 2 Rose bush (Domestic -Invasive) 0.5 Willow (miscellaneous Salix) 0.5 Grasses - Tufted hairgrass (Deschampsia cespitosa), Early hairgrass (Aira praecox), HERB 90 Columbia brome (Bromus vulgaris) 85 Sword fern (Polystichum munitum) 3 Trailing blackberry (Rubus ursinus) 2 Dovefoot geranium (Geranium molle) 1

Red huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifolium) <1 Western trumpet honeysuckle (Lonicera ciliosa) <1

Pathfinder (Adenocaulon Bicolor) <1

Common snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus) <1 MOSS 15 Magnificent moss (Plagiomnium ellipticum) 15 10/10/11 – TREES 50 Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) 50 Ruckle 03 Grand fir (Abies grandis) 5 123.40041W SHRUBS 95 Salal (Gaultheria shallon) 90 48.77118N Oceanspray (Holodiscus discolor) 10

8 48.77118N Oceanspray (Holodiscus discolor) 10

Site Layers % Cover % Present By Layer Species Present By Layer Cover by Species Dull Oregon-grape (Mahonia nervosa) 7 HERB 2 Trailing blackberry (Rubus ursinus) 1 Grasses - Possibly Columbia brome (Bromus vulgaris) 2 MOSS 60 Oregon beaked moss (Kindbergia oregana) 59 Additional miscellaneous mosses 1 10/10/11 – TREES 40 Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) 30 Ruckle 04 Arbutus - Pacific madrone (Arbutus 48.77186N menziesii) 25 123.39919W SHRUBS 2 Salal (Gaultheria shallon) 2

Dull Oregon-grape (Mahonia aquifolium) <1

Baldhip rose (Rosa gymnocarpa) <1 HERB 4 Grasses - multiple varieties 4 MOSS 85 False-polytrichum (Timmia austriaca) 50 Menzies’ neckera (Metaneckera menziesii) 20 Additional Mosses – Stair step moss (Hylocomium splendens), Oregon beaked moss (Kinderbergia oregana) 15 10/10/11 – TREES 40 Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) 40 Ruckle 05 SHRUBS 85 Salal (Gaultheria shallon) 80 48.77508N Oceanspray (Holodiscus discolor) 30 123.39711W Dull Oregon-grape (Mahonia aquifolium) <1

HERB <1 Trailing blackberry (Rubus ursinus) <1

Sword fern (Polystichum munitum) <1 MOSS 50 Menzies’ neckera (Metaneckera menziesii) 40 Stair step moss (Hylocomium splendens) 10 10/10/11 – TREES 40 Red Alder (Alnus rubra) 40 Ruckle 06 SHRUBS 30 Salal (Gaultheria shallon) 12 48.77507N Oceanspray (Holodiscus discolor) 5 123.39473W Baldhip rose (Rosa gymnocarpa) <1

Site Layers Cover % Present By Layer Species Present By Layer Cover by Species HERB 55 Various Grasses 35 Sedge 25 Other assorted herbs 1 MOSS 25 Large hair moss 20 Oregon beaked moss (Kindbergia oregana) 2

Plume moss (Ptilium crista-castrensis) 1 Common water moss (Fontinalis antipyetica) 1 Table 1. Raw Data from Vegetation Survey

Vegetation Layer Average Cover (%) Tree 49.2 Shrub 37.8 Herb 44.2 Moss 39.5 Table 2. Average cover of vegetation layers in Ruckle Park

Species Average Cover (%) Oceanspray 46.0 Salal 11.8 Table 3. Average cover of oceanspray and salal in Ruckle Park

Figure 1. Sample of photo points taken at each site. Site 1 – North, East, South, West

Figure 2. Oceanspray sample from Site 1

2.2.4 Analysis The varied locations of the sample plots identify some of the various ecological communities within the CDFmm BGC zone of Ruckle Park. The differences between sites with high levels of human activity and those without are clear. While these differences could be contributed to human interactions with the vegetation closer to the campground (where site 1 is located), there could also be a difference in deer population closer to the campground compared to further into the park itself. The B.C. Ministry of Environment (2009) state that signs of deer are commonly found near the campground area. The decrease in shrub layer at Site 1 suggests more deer are present than in the later sites (sites 3-6). In the later sites (3, 4 and 5), the herb layer is all but non-existent. As well, sites 3 and 5 appear to be frequent deer browsing sites due to the increase in oceanspray cover, suggested by Martin et al. (in press) to be a popular source of food for deer, as well as physical evidence at site 5 of deer being present in the form of fecal pellets. Site 2 and 4, a meadow area and a rocky hilltop respectively, show little evidence of deer. Due to the singular nature of the plots, it is difficult to formulate any significant conclusions from these sites. The composition of site 6 poses some issues with analysis, having around a quarter of the sample area being covered by a bog and walking path, but the overall trend of high salal densities to low oceanspray densities present in the other CDF sample areas is present nonetheless. Due to the relatively small sample size, time of year and the variety of areas sampled, it is difficult to define solid trends in the data. However, Martin et al. (in press) also conducted a vegetation survey on the Gulf and San Juan Islands in an attempt to determine the effects of deer on vegetation

11 population dynamics. By comparing select portions of the collected data, including the photo points and vegetation cover by layer, some conclusions may be drawn regarding the deer density in Ruckle Park.

2.3 Literature Review of Browsing down our natural heritage: Deer impacts on vegetation structure and songbird populations across an island archipelago by Tara G. Martin, Paul Arcese and Nancy Scheerder (in press)

2.3.1 Summary Martin, Arcese and Scheerder (in press) examined the relationship between deer densities and bird assemblages on 18 islands in the San Juan and Southern Gulf Islands archipelagos. Deer densities were determined by a singular deer count on a Piers Island fecal counts on the other islands. More than 10 point counts were taken to determine the vegetation cover by percent by layer. This data was compared for low, medium and high deer densities. Ocean spray and salal structure measurements were also compared to deer densities. Finally, bird densities were compared to deer densities. Martin et al. (in press) conclude that high deer densities have an adverse relationship on the reproduction and structure of ocean spray, bird densities and forest composition in terms of cover by layer. A threshold of <0.1 deer/ha is recommended for the recovery of native vegetation and bird populations (Martin at al., in press).

2.3.2 Data

Figure 3. Percent vegetation cover for total trees, shrubs and herb/grasses as well as two common native shrubs salal and oceanspray across low (L), moderate (M) and highly (H) deer density islands. Bars represent 95% credible intervals. Reprinted from “Browsing down our natural heritage: Deer impacts on

12 vegetation structure and songbird populations across an island archipelago,” by T. G. Martin, P. Arcese and N. Scheerder, in press, Biological Conservation. Copyright 2010 by Elsevier Ltd. Reprinted with permission.

A B

Figure 4. Deer browsing impact on forest vegetation cover; A. No deer (Patos island), B. Moderate deer density (Wallace Island,) and C. High deer density (Sidney island). Reprinted from “Browsing down our natural heritage: Deer impacts on vegetation structure and songbird populations across an island archipelago,” by T. G. Martin, P. Arcese and N. Scheerder, in press, Biological Conservation. Copyright 2010 by Elsevier Ltd. Reprinted with permission.

13 A B

Figure 5. Impact of increasing browsing pressure on architecture of native shrub oceanspray; A. No deer present (North Ballenas), B. Moderate deer density (Little D’Arcy), C. High deer density (Sidney Island). Reprinted from “Browsing down our natural heritage: Deer impacts on vegetation structure and songbird populations across an island archipelago,” by T. G. Martin, P. Arcese and N. Scheerder, in press, Biological Conservation. Copyright 2010 by Elsevier Ltd. Reprinted with permission.

2.3.3 Analysis and Comparison of Data Martin et al. separated deer populations into three categories: low (<0.1 deer/ha), moderate (0.1-1 deer/ha) and high (>1 deer/ha) densities. In order to determine Ruckle Park’s deer density, which will roughly indicate the density on the rest of Saltspring Island, a comparison of the collected data and those of Martin et al. (in press) is necessary. The average vegetation cover, by layer, of Ruckle Park suggests a moderate to high deer density. However, the salal and oceanspray densities (Table 3) of the Ruckle Park data are either widely inconsistent with the Martin et al. data presented in Figure 3 or suggest low deer

14 densities. Photographic evidence does seem to offer some concurrent comparison value. Photos of oceanspray taken during the site survey (see Figure 2) seem to be similar to the Martin et. al photographs (Figure 5) of oceanspray shrub structure under either moderate or high deer density. Aside from offering estimates about the deer density of the area, the sample vegetation study also revealed some interesting aspects of the population dynamics. Every time salal and oceanspray were present in the same plot, the salal would be the vastly dominant species, leaving little room for the oceanspray. As well, the salal would be quite high, nearly 4 or 5 feet, indicating it was not likely used by deer as a primary food source. While deer are known to browse on salal (Crouch, 1966), when data from both vegetation surveys are considered, it appears that they favour ocean spray over salal. The shape of the oceanspray encountered supports this conclusion; most had leaves higher than 6 feet with little to no leaves lower than 6 feet. Martin et al. (in press) also commented on this and attributed this change in shrub structure to deer browsing effects. While no measurements were taken to quantify this observation in the Ruckle Park survey, it appears as though the photographic evidence suggests that there is enough deer browsing on the oceanspray to affect the development of the shrub (Figures 2 and 5). Limitations of this data must be considered; much of the vegetation had already begun to lose its’ leaves in early October and the sample size of applicable photographs is only one.

2.4 Conclusion Martin et al. (in press) described how deer populations have a detrimental effect on the native vegetation structure if the density exceeds low density, at <0.1 deer/ha. Based on vegetation surveys and the state of ecology on Saltspring Island, with no predators present to check deer numbers, it would appear that the deer density exceeds this threshold. The three components of site analysis conducted all indicate that the deer population on Saltspring Island should be monitored and managed at a level below this level. Therefore, it is recommended that a course of action to decrease the deer population on Saltspring Island, which involves members of the community, be initiated.

15 3. Policy, Goals & Objectives

3.1 Policy To maintain and improve the ecological integrity of Saltspring Island by preserving the biodiversity of native ecological communities and protecting conservation areas.

3.2 Goals To achieve and maintain healthy deer density by limiting deer populations to long term sustainable levels that will not decrease biodiversity or endanger species by overbrowsing. To involve the community as an integral resource and component of management and monitoring procedures through the use of a functional online community in addition to community events. To reduce the negative cultural impacts of the deer population, including deer-vehicle incidents and resident complaints. To promote the maintenance of native plant biodiversity in red-listed (extirpated, endangered or threatened) ecological communities including Douglas-fir, shore pine, arbutus and Alaska oniongrass. To increase local food security by re-implementing traditional hunting practices.

3.3 Objectives To achieve a low deer density of <0.1deer/ha on Saltspring Island by the spring of 2013 maintain the deer population at this level indefinitely. To achieve 100% exclusion of deer from specific conservation areas by the end of September 2011. To launch and engage community members in social networking site (Facebuck) by June 2011.

16 4. Design

The main design of the proposed plan consists of the management techniques used to lower deer density to <0.1 deer/ha while simultaneously protecting vital plant species in Ruckle Park. The lowering of deer density shall be accomplished through intensive management techniques including a managed hunting program to maintain a healthy population density of <0.1 deer/ha. A public social networking system shall be implemented (tentatively called “Facebuck” – see Appendix E) to connect potential hunters to land owners, creating not only a location where the possible deer hunting locations can be discussed amongst those interested, but also a stronger sense of community across the island. By lowering the deer density, the browsing pressure on the vegetation across the island will lessen and allow a healthy native vegetation dynamic to be restored. To help the vegetation return to a native Coastal Douglas Fir marine maritime (CDFmm) ecosystem, a series of fences shall be implemented to protect the most threatened areas of Ruckle Park, with extensions possible as more areas of high conservation value are identified. Three fencing plots have been chosen to protect the areas of highest conservation concern to protect them from Black-tailed deer. The fencing will help protect communities of Douglas fir, shore pine, arbutus, onion grass and rare bird communities. Together with a strong hunting regime, the fences shall protect the ecological integrity of Saltspring Island.

Two 225m by 225m plots and one 225m by 112.5m plot were drawn on the Ruckle Park aerial map (see Appendix D) as proposed fenced areas. Plots were chosen based on their conservation rank and ecosystems residing in the area. Plot 1 was chosen as it overlaps multiple sensitive ecosystems, including areas of rare plant and bird habitat. This plot is located in an area of high traffic due to its close proximity to the campground, which is known for high incidence of Black-tailed deer. Species in this plot include Douglas fir, shore pine, and arbutus trees. BC Parks has classified the area around this plot as a high conservation rank, so fencing of this plot is important to prevent further degradation (Ministry of Environment, 2009 & Capital Regional District, 2010). Plot 2 is also located in an area classified as a high conservation rank in an older second growth forest ecosystem, making it an important area to preserve. Currently, a hiking trail goes through this selection. Given the conservation value of the ecological community, it is proposed that the hiking trail is moved to go around the fenced plot. Plant species in this area include Douglas fir, shore pine, arbutus, and onion grass. This plot is at a higher elevation, meaning it likely has shallower soils, which species such as onion grass prefer. These shallow soils are often more sensitive to disturbance, making it an important area to preserve. Unlike plots 1 and 3, plot 2 is also found furthest from the shore, which helps to provide

17 more diversity in the protected fenced areas (Ministry of Environment, 2009 & Capital Regional District, 2010). Plot 3 is found in an area classified as very high conservation rank, making it of considerable concern to protect. This plot is also in an older second growth forest ecosystem, located near rare bird habitats, and contains plant species such as Douglas fir, shore pine, and arbutus (Ministry of Environment, 2009 & Capital Regional District, 2010).

18 5. Implementation and Management

5.1 Management Options In the creation of a management plan for the Black-tailed deer population on Saltspring Island, several options were considered. These options fall into some broad categories; administrative options, conflict reduction techniques and population reduction methods, including fertility control (Hesse, 2010). Methods and their costs that were considered but not recommended for implementation at this time will be discussed in addition to the reasons they were rejected. Following this analysis, two options will be introduced as the management plan for Saltspring Island’s deer population: a managed hunt, facilitated by a social networking website, and fencing of specified areas.

5.1.1 Administrative Options 5.1.1a Maintaining the status quo As implied, this method would involve no management on the part of any organization. However, the combination of the social impact of the Saltspring Island deer population as well as the review of studies on their impact on local ecosystems (Martin et al., in press) led to the conclusion that maintaining the status quo and allowing natural processes to manage the population would not adequately address the situation. Knowledge of the mechanics of food chains indicates that in the absence of predators and with the abundance of food, Saltspring Island’s deer population could continue to grow until the vegetation could no longer support the animals, leading to massive winter die-off. This phenomenon has been observed in the past on Fire and Angel Islands on the East and West coasts of the US, respectively (Nelson, 1997). Costs of maintaining the status quo appear to be negligible; however, costs may be incurred by residents and businesses as deer cause damage to gardens, vehicles and even homes (Hesse, 2010). The cultural importance of non-action must be considered as well. Bob Weedon’s (2010) comments in The Acorn, the Salt Spring Island Conservancy’s newsletter, point out that the community must come together to find and work towards solutions that are beneficial and practical for all. This suggests that a continuation of the status quo would not generally be accepted, as do numerous personal opinions from the Gulf Islands Driftwood (Anonymous, 2010).

5.1.2 Conflict Reduction Techniques These techniques focus on keeping deer away from areas where they may inflict damage. Generally, this type of management is applied to urban environments where damage to residents’ property is the biggest concern.

19 5.1.2a Hazing and Frightening Techniques Hazing refers to ensuring deer do not become to human activities, while frightening techniques employ a variety of different methods to keep deer away from specified areas. The cost for this method is difficult to estimate and ranges significantly based on the type of frightening devices used. Visual frightening devices include scare-crows, strobe lights, and balloons activated at random intervals. Auditory devices include bangers, gunfire, fireworks, sirens, propane cannons, and gas exploders (Hesse, 2010). Some of these devices are labour intensive to set up and maintain in non-predictable intervals so that the deer do not become habituated. Costs are estimates to be low to moderate in comparison to the additional management options discussed (Hesse, 2010).

5.1.2b Repellents Two types of repellents exist: area repellents and contact repellents (Hesse, 2010). Both types are meant to cause behaviour change in the animals through odours, reducing palatability of plants or inducing pain or fear. Repellents require multiple applications (every 2 to 5 weeks) throughout the year depending on environmental factors, such as weather conditions, and especially to protect the new shoots during growing season. This repeated application can become costly. − Liquid Fences Liquid Fence Deer & Rabbit Repellent 2.5 Gallon Concentrate - Makes 40 gallons and covers 80,000 square feet. The cost of this product ranges from $176 - $260 at four stores (http://www.shoppingedge.com/) − Deerbusters Deer I Repellent 2.5 Gal Concentrate - Makes 20 gallons and treats 3000-4000 4 ft. high shrubs or flowers. This cost of this product is $289 (http://www.deerrepellents.com). − RTU Pre-mixed Plantskydd 1.32 gal. Jug - Protects approximately 500-600 plants 1 ft. high. The cost of this product is $54.95 US (http://www.treeworld.com).

5.1.2c Landscaping Alternatives A variety of plants exist which ungulates find less palatable; using these plants in landscaping may reduce browsing by deer (Hesse, 2010). Plant and landscaping costs depend largely on the property owner, thus replacement costs for damaged plants and landscape can vary dramatically but can become highly expensive. In 2002, Conover estimated that deer caused over $250 million USD per year in residential damage to urban landscaping in the United States (as cited by Hesse, 2010).

5.1.2d Ungulate Vehicle Collision Mitigation Incidents between vehicles and deer are some of the most frequently recognized conflicts that arise from interactions between humans and these animals. Implementation for vehicle collision prevention

20 ranged sufficiently in cost depending on the method used. Some methods include deer whistlers, in- vehicle technology, roadway lights, wildlife crossing, etc. Deer whistles are estimated at $5.95 each but methods such as installing wildlife crossing signs can range up to $1 million (Hesse, 2010).

While several conflict reduction techniques may be useful for residents experiencing problems with deer in their yards or fields, none of these actions could be applied on a scale large enough to protect the vegetation dynamics in natural regions of Saltspring Island. Thus, these techniques are not an effective management tool to achieve the restoration project goals. However, specific objectives involving smaller plots of land will employ a conflict reduction technique discussed in the management plan: fencing.

5.1.3 Population Reduction Methods

5.1.3a Capture and Euthanize Capture and euthanization is an effective method to reduce deer populations. Capture methods include the use of drop nets, rocket nets, net guns, Clover traps and potentially remote immobilization by way of darts containing immobilizing drugs (Hesse, 2010). Trapping is less effective over time, as populations decrease and trap wariness of remaining animals increases (Hesse, 2010). Some methods require baiting, which can cause a series of problems in the ecosystem if animals other than the intended deer discover and make use of the bait (Hesse, 2010). Following capture, deer are killed by a shot to the head with a bolt gun or other firearm (Hesse, 2010). If animals are to be killed, sharpshooting is a more humane option because of the distress an animal suffers from their capture (Hesse, 2010). This method has been reported to be expensive as a result of the high cost for animal capture. This method varies with technique and over 60% of the cost goes toward personnel costs and the remaining toward the staff time required for baiting, locating and relocating traps as well as equipment including guns, traps, and bait. Previously reported costs estimate $250 USD/deer using clover traps (Hesse 2010). Estimated costs from Creacy (2006) range from $150-$500 USD/deer (as cited by Hesse, 2010).

5.1.3b Capture and Relocate Capture and relocation implies that deer will be moved into habitat that they have previously, or presently, occupy (Hesse, 2010). Capture procedures are usually the same as outlined in capture and euthanization. In general, this method is effective at reducing the population and is useful for the public

21 relations value it holds, although it may not, in actual fact, reduce deer mortality (Hesse, 2010). Deer mortality has been managed throughout the procedures of trapping, transporting and releasing of the animals, however the mortality that may occur as a result of relocated deer being pushed out by deer native to an area or being unable to adjust to their environment cannot be mitigated by any strategy (Hesse, 2010; Nelson, 1997). The mortality rates of relocated deer compared to resident deer range from the same as to nearly four times as high in the same period of time (Hesse, 2010). The potential for diseases carried by either the newly relocated or the resident deer to spread the other population adds another dimension to the argument of those who oppose relocation (Hesse, 2010). Another complication with this method is the question of where the animals would go; the few communities that have low deer populations that are well below the ecological carrying capacity would generally like to keep it that way. This is compounded by the fact that there is no guarantee that the relocated deer will not cause problems in the area to which they are moved (Hesse, 2010). Costs are relatively high due to the volume of personnel hours that are required, especially in the capture phase of this type of project. The cost of capture and relocation varies with technique. Most of the cost goes toward personnel expenses and staff time required for baiting, locating and relocating traps, as well as capturing and darting (Hesse, 2010). Equipment costs include tranquilizers, guns, traps, bait, pens, trailers, and transportation (Hesse, 2010). Hesse (2010) cites the median cost/deer from multiple sources; it ranges from ~$350 USD/deer- $800 USD/deer. For both the Capture and Relocate and Capture and Euthanize methods, capture costs will be the lowest when the deer densities are high as well as when the deer have not been trapped previously (Hesse, 2010).

5.1.3c Fertility Control This option is considered in the British Columbia Urban Ungulate Conflict Analysis (Hesse, 2010) and is also discussed in Richard Nelson’s book, Heart and Blood: Living with Deer in America (1997). Fertility control reduces population numbers by reducing the birth rate so that it is equal to the death rate (to maintain a population) or lower than the death rate (to reduce a population). This form of population management can be effective over long periods of time, as is asserted by Rutberg and Naugle (2008) in the discussion of Fire Island National Seashore, New York (as cited in Hesse, 2010). There are several methods of implementing fertility control, including surgical sterilization (requiring capture), synthetic steroid hormones (requiring oral ingestion every few days to one week), immunocontraception (requiring the administration of a vaccine) and contragestion (which can cause abortion of already implanted fetuses and the possibility of fetal cannibalism). Each of these sterilization procedures has a monetary and time cost associated with it.

22 Fertility control treatment is fairly inexpensive, at $24-$50 USD/deer, but is barred by the fact that there are currently no approved drugs for fertility control in ungulates in Canada (Hesse, 2010). The main cost of the fertility control method is associated with the cost of animal capture and possible annual treatments of vaccine administrations. This dramatically increases the expense for this method. Additional costs for labour for capturing and handling deer, supplies, equipment, and travel increase the cost to an estimated cost ranging from $350-$1128 USD/deer, depending on methods used (Hesse, 2010). These costs are far greater than that of hunting or sharpshooting (culling).

5.1.3d Introduction of Natural Predators The introduction of natural predators is the most natural way to control deer populations, however, several intuitive problems make this method unlikely to be implemented. Natural deer predators on Saltspring Island would have included wolves (Canis lupus) and cougars (Puma concolor), both of which have been extirpated from the island by human inhabitants. As the island is still inhabited by humans, the public would most likely not accept the reintroduction of cougars and wolves, especially with the risk to livestock involved. Barring this, the option remains to introduce a midsized predator that lives in conjunction with humans in many environments – coyotes (Canis latrans). Coyote introduction was proposed by Dale R. McCullough in the 1980s to control the deer population on Angel Island, across from San Francisco Bay (Nelson, 1997). He proposed 6 radio-collared, sterilized coyotes be released on the island to determine their effectiveness at reducing and controlling the overabundant deer population (Nelson, 1997). However, public outcry at the introduction of these smaller predators, in small numbers and unable to reproduce, was nearly as acute as the response would likely be to the proposal of reintroducing wolves back to Saltspring. Another issue is that coyotes would be introduced to the island, not merely reintroduced, as they are a non-native species on the Gulf Islands. It is not only public opinion that renders predator introduction an unlikely scenario; the effectiveness of coyotes as a control measure has to be questioned, as the biological and cultural carrying capacities are often exceeded in regions where these predators are present (Hesse, 2010). Due to a combination of the reasons mentioned and perhaps others, natural predator introduction has never been used as a means of deer population control. Thus, no cost or effectiveness estimates exist (Hesse, 2010).

5.1.3e Sharpshooting In the event that hunting is not an effective form of controlling the deer population, sharpshooting will be implemented. Sharpshooting involves trained and authorized personnel who will remove deer from previously approved and baited sites (Hesse, 2010). An advantage of sharpshooting over hunting is the accuracy with which shots must be placed; shots are only permitted under specific

23 conditions and when there is certainty that the animal will be killed by one shot to the head or neck (brain or spine). The meat of the killed animals may be donated to food banks if local government restrictions permit. This method becomes more expensive if conservation officers or police are contracted out for the duration of the project. Reported costs estimate a range from $150-$400 USD/deer (Hesse, 2010).

A lethal population control method would be the most efficient way to reduce deer density and population on Saltspring Island. However, capture and euthanization is quite expensive, as is fertility control. The introduction of natural predators presents a multitude of barriers, the least not being the lack of a suitable midsized native predator. Controlled public hunting will be discussed as a preferred method of lethal population control in the management plan that follows.

Management Method Estimated Cost

Conflict Reduction Techniques

Hazing and Frightening The cost for this method is difficult to estimate and significantly Techniques ranges based on the type of frightening devices used. Costs are estimates to be low to moderate in comparison to the additional management options discussed.

Repellents Costs vary depending on type of repellent used and frequency of applications.

Landscaping Alternative Replacement costs for plants and landscaping depend largely on the property owner, but can become very expensive.

Ungulate Vehicle Collision Implementation for vehicle collision prevention ranged sufficiently in Mitigation cost depending on the method used. Cost range from $5.95/deer whistle to $1 million in installing deer crossing signs.

Population Reduction Methods

Capture and Relocate $352-$800/deer

Capture and Euthanize $150-$500 USD/deer

24 Management Method Estimated Cost

Sharpshooting $150-$400 USD/deer

Fertility Control $802- $1,100/deer

Management Methods to be implemented

Fencing Costs/type of fence vary depending on the level of protection required, the level and animal pressure expected, area size, topography, and aesthetics, etc.

Controlled Public Hunting Costs are offset by hunting licenses purchased by hunters. Cost range from $20 CND/deer-$200 USD/deer.

Table 4. Summary of costs of various management methods

5.2 Management Methods to be Implemented A well-managed program of recreational hunting has the potential to be a cost effective population control tool for deer on Saltspring Island. The central idea is that human predators can play the role that other large carnivores played in the past, restoring the predator-prey ecological process and ensuring a deer population that does not threaten biodiversity through overbrowsing (Brown et al. 2000). There are several issues that need to be managed in order to ensure that a hunting based population control program is effective, safe and politically acceptable over the long term. Saltspring Island's land use context is dominated by private residential acreages and parkland, therefore safety and the protection of property need to be addressed. More intensive management of hunting also requires adequate information in order to set harvest levels and gauge effectiveness of the program, which can be collected through population surveys. There is also an ethical and legal responsibility to engage First Nations in co- managing this resource. What is being proposed is a hunting based deer management program based on centralized licensing and skill testing, a land owner and hunter registry in the form of a social networking website, and coordination of hunting on private and park lands. This management plan would build upon the experience of managed urban hunting programs successfully employed in the United States (Kilpatrick et al., 1999). While this is focused on Saltspring Island now, if the initial project proves successful, this model could be exported to other suburban areas in BC facing similar deer overpopulation problems.

25 5.2.1 Population Estimation The first course of action to manage and monitor the deer population on Saltspring Island is to determine the actual population and density of deer on the island. There has yet to be a government sanctioned deer count on Saltspring Island, because the traditional counting method used on Vancouver Island of spring spot counting in cut blocks does not translate well to the Gulf Islands (Doyle, D., personal communication, November 15, 2010). This makes the initial count absolutely vital. Because the traditional counting method does not translate well to the Gulf Islands, a new counting method for both Saltspring and various other Gulf Islands must be established. The counting method could either be primary or secondary depending on the amount of time available to dedicate to this important task. Some primary counting techniques could be: 1) a systematic count of the deer across the island, likely by splitting the island up into sectors and using a vast amount of staff to count the deer present in each sector at the same time to lower the chance of a double count; 2) a capture and release program; 3) a photographic survey program, which would have the additional benefit of creating a catalogue of every deer on the island which could later be cross-checked against killed deer to monitor how the population is changing (Berglund, 2010); 4) an aerial survey of the island, which would have to contend with the high levels of conifers obstructing sight of the ground level, even in the winter (Fitzpatrick, 1998); or 5) thermal imaging counts (Gill, Thomas and Stocker, 1997). Some secondary techniques could be: 1) a vegetation survey done across the entire island (which would also have the added benefit of creating a baseline for the vegetation dynamics on the island that can then be cross referenced against future vegetation surveys to monitor the effects the change in deer population have on the island’s vegetation populations); 2) counting deer fecal pellets in several reference sites and extrapolating to estimate deer population across the island (Campbell, Swanson and Sales, 2004; Forsyth, Barker, Morriss and Scroggie, 2007; Mayle, Doney, Lazarus, Peace and Smith, 1996); 3) counting the deer population in a certain area of the island and using this to estimate deer across the island; or 4) using deer tracks in a certain part of the island to estimate deer across the island (Mayle, Putman and Wyllie, 2000). After reviewing the different forms of deer population counts, the recommended methods are vegetation surveys and fecal pellet counts. Vegetation surveys will also offer an indication of the progress made in preserving ecological integrity. Both count methods have the disadvantage of being time consuming; however, are necessary for accurate abundance measurements in order to set bag limits for hunting. Future monitoring of the deer population remains an important task as limits may fluctuate between hunting seasons. This count must be done sooner rather than later so that the actual management plan can be implemented. Therefore, it is suggested that this count be done in the four months between

26 January 2011 and April 2011. This would then allow for the first hunting season to be the fall (September-December) of 2011. This original population survey and all future population surveys, should be done by a wildlife biologist and 4 co-op students from various universities. The data collected can be used by the Ministry of Fish and Wildlife to set bag limits.

5.2.2 Hunting Protocols The current regulations for hunting on the Gulf Islands require the use of shotguns or bows, which have a much shorter effective range than the centrefire rifles commonly used to hunt deer. There is also a requirement to purchase a special area license which is only issued to hunters with proof of $100,000 general liability insurance coverage to cover costs related to negligent property damage. At present the hunting regulations provide for a relatively long three month general open season (MoE, 2010a). The main obstacle to hunting's effectiveness as a population control tool relates back to the land use pattern on Saltspring. In BC, hunters primarily use open-access crown forest lands to pursue game, lands which are in short supply on the Gulf Islands. In order to access private lands hunters need to gain permission from the owners, which presents some logistical difficulties for the hunters. If a hunter “cold calls” a landowner asking for permission to hunt the owner has difficulties in trying to asses the hunter's skill and safety. And there is a persistent notion among many hunters that Saltspring Islanders are hostile to hunters and hunting (Huntingbc.ca, 2001-2010). While all new hunters in BC have to pass a Conservation and Outdoor Recreation Education exam, which covers safety, there would need to be a supplementary test of marksmanship in order to ensure safety and a clean kill. Such supplementary skill testing would hopefully give landowners peace of mind in opening up their properties to hunters. A generally accepted tradition suggests that hunters limit the range at which they take shots at large game to a distance at which they can hit a ten inch (twenty five centimetre) diameter target nine times in ten shots. Taking this as an appropriate benchmark, bow hunters would have to demonstrate this level of competence at thirty metres and shotgun “slug” (single projectile) hunters at sixty meters. The Saltspring private land hunt would be “limited entry” with a supplement to the standard limited entry hunt (LEH) draw fee to defray the costs of managing the hunt. While limited entry hunting is normally used to manage hunts for smaller or more sensitive populations where conservation concerns preclude a general open season (MoE, 2010b), the Saltspring private and park lands hunt would use this mechanism to limit the number of hunters to a level consistent with landowner participation and program capacity. The initial pilot year of the program would be limited to a small number of hunters (50) in order

27 to ensure that unforeseen negative outcomes are limited and lessons learned through the experience are incorporated into procedures before a full implementation of the program begins. In order to facilitate hunters gaining permission to hunt private lands, this plan would include establishment of a landowner registry where skill tested hunters would be matched with properties. During the summer, the coordinating conservation officer would organize a series of public information meetings for Saltspring residents where the program would be explained and promoted. Efforts would also be made to connect residents interested in learning to hunt with the hunters in the program. Landowners and vetted hunters would be encouraged to register on a hunting social networking site where they could connect and arrange hunting opportunities. (See Appendix E - “Facebuck”). Successful hunters would be required to submit samples for compulsory inspection following the same guidelines currently in place for other LEH species. Experience in other jurisdictions has shown that hunters have a preference for harvesting male deer, which is not an effective population reduction mechanism because a single male can mate with many females. (Brown et al., 2000) A modification of bag limits would be imposed to require harvest of at least one antlerless deer before pursuing a buck. The numbers for these bag limits would be specified each year, in accordance with population surveys completed in the spring. Significant opportunities exist to allow hunting on park land. At present hunting is restricted to select class “B” provincial parks (MoE, 2010). The existing parks plans for Ruckle, Bourgoyne Bay, and Mount Maxwell Provincial Parks should be amended to allow hunting within the context of the proposed plan. Hunting with these parks would be managed the same way as on private lands, through the hunter networking website with the same competency requirements. Conservation officers would schedule and monitor hunts on predetermined dates and work with Parks staff and contractors to ensure safety. This would include closures of the Parks to the public for varying amounts of time. The Constitution Act (1982) recognizes aboriginal rights and title, and several Supreme Court decisions have clarified the Province's obligations to Status Indians (First Nations) with regards to harvesting wildlife. At present, Status Indians have an unfettered right to harvest wildlife on crown land within their traditional territories. Special efforts would be made to involve First Nations hunters in the private landowner registry and Provincial Park hunts. First Nations hunters who pass the plan's safety vetting process would be given priority in harvest opportunities.

5.2.3 Food Security Food security is fulfilled when all people at all times have access to enough food that is affordable, safe, healthy, meets dietary needs, is culturally accepted and is produced in ways that are environmentally sound and socially acceptable. It essentially allows all people to live active and healthy

28 lifestyles. Food security is not just an issue of poverty; it is a much larger and complex problem that even developed countries such as Canada must address. The 2005 version of the Canadian Community Health Survey, released in the fall of 2006, showed 183,026 British Columbians age 12 and older, which is 5.4 percent of the population 12 and older, experienced food insecurity during the previous 12 months (Kerstetter & Goldberg, 2006). A managed deer hunt can contribute to the increase in food security by providing the hunters themselves and their families with a dependable source of meat. In addition, charitable meat donations to food banks allow hunters to provide food for others in the community, particularly the ones who are suffering from food insecurity. Donating is a simple process by which hunters take the meat to an approved processing plant and tell them how much meat they would like to donate. The processing plant does all the packing, storing and transportation, if needed. Many families and individuals in need benefit from these kinds of donations, as they are provided with a reliable source of protein which is an essential part of the daily diet.

5.2.4 Social Network Specifications Objective To develop a social networking site designed to encourage the creation of cooperative relationships between hunters and land owners so as to more effectively monitor and implement the goals and objectives outlined within the Saltspring Island restoration project. Description The social networking element of the Saltspring Island restoration project's design will play a pivotal role in the establishment of community support and hunter participation essential to ensuring successful implementation and long-term management of restoration objectives. Creation of an interactive website that aims to facilitate the establishment of mutually functional relationships between private land owners, organizations concerned with land and ecosystem conservation and responsible hunters could encourage the establishment of the infrastructure necessary to achieve successful management of Saltspring Island’s invasive deer population through controlled public hunting. The website would be designed to provide a centralized location through which information between potential hunters and concerned landowners could be exchanged in a responsible, productive and pre-organized manner. The establishment of a cyber-community that unifies the intentions of hunters with the objectives of ecological restoration projects would prove extremely valuable, as it could provide a space for responsible discussion of ecological objectives while simultaneously allowing for free flowing education of community members in an easy to use online program. In addition, the creation of this internet based tool could potentially harness the explosive popularity of social networking media formats

29 and thus provide a platform from which restoration information and specific project intentions could be more readily transmitted to the public. Enabling community based utilization of an internet based mediums such as this could prove invaluable, as it could aid in achieving greater community support for the policy's goals and objectives and foster greater involvement in the program. Website Design The proposed website will display a main page entitled "Facebuck", from which the public can access information regarding the specific objectives of the Saltspring Island restoration project as well as general background information on the intended purpose of the website. Specifically, the homepage will present the ecological value of the endangered ecosystems present on Saltspring Island and provide educational information on the need to maintain and monitor the invasive deer populations in order to prevent further landscape degradation. Following this introduction, participants viewing the site will be directed to subscribe to either a 'hunter' or 'landowner' profile. The creation of profiles will be managed by single use access codes. Hunters will receive an access code upon their completion of the supplemental skill testing and verification that they hold all the required licenses to hunt on Saltspring Island. Landowners must also obtain an access code available upon proof of identity and land ownership from the Land Title and Survey Authority of BC. Profile Types 'Hunter' profiles would include: - Uploaded profile photo - List of personal information regarding background and personal intentions for involvement with the program - Certifications and previous hunting history - Personalized request for specific dates or additional regional hunting information 'Community/Landowner' profiles would include: - Information on the land available to hunt on on Saltspring Island - Could potentially be developed to have updates or personal blogs that contain: - maps - hunting stats/sightings - weather conditions - helpful tips - A section for personalized emails and requests for use of land owner property

Participants in the network would then be able to browse through uploaded personal hunter profiles as well as available privately owned landscape profiles, creating a means for effective and easy

30 facilitation of public partnerships between Saltspring land owners and interested hunters. The site could provide additional cultural networking possibilities as well through the inclusion of additional discussion forums. These could include a multitude of topics that network community members see fit to include, such as: Explanation of traditional indigenous hunting practices − This section could be developed to include discussion of the value of and need for preservation of First Nations cultural traditions. − This could therefore facilitate the creation of special organizations/events to allow traditional aboriginal deer hunts on Saltspring Island − Provide space for First Nations people to continue the education of younger generations about traditional food preparation and hunting techniques − Encourage education of public and help increase cross-cultural tolerance, acceptance and co- operation Section to encourage beginner or inexperienced marksmen to become involved in the hunting process: − Discussion of the creation of a new breed of eco-conscious hunters Information on other important issues deemed appropriate for discussion − Slow foods movement information/ increasing awareness about food security − Address animal cruelty concerns/ create awareness of the negative impacts of overpopulation/ effects of invasive species on endangered ecosystem environments − Provide space for community to voice concerns about the hunting program

It is apparent that both the Saltspring residential community and degraded environmental ecology demonstrate a distinct need for this type of integral solution. Creation of this tool would be beneficial as it would answer the question of how to maintain site restoration on a limited budget in a format that would ensure its continuation for years to come. Once community members are onboard with the idea, the site could potentially become largely self maintained by small contributions and continued updates of the multitude of members a well designed site could attract. The involvement of the Saltspring Island Conservancy as the managing body of the website must also be considered, as they are a valuable local resource that should not be ignored. The social networking tool would also provide many additional cultural benefits, as separate forums developed on the site could provide both a voice and opportunity for First Nations community leaders and youth alike to maintain or develop their connection with traditional foods and hunting practices. Likewise, an internet community could be developed to encourage both education and active discussion of other prominent environmental topics such as the slow foods movement or about the

31 creation of a new breed of eco-conscious hunters. Establishment of this resource will function to clarify the ecologically restorative function of planned hunting targets for Saltspring Island`s deer population. Through development of this easy to use interactive website, hunters, residents and environmental ecologists alike could utilize a new dynamic tool that could potentially bridge the disconnect that currently exists between the Saltspring Island residential community and responsible eco-conscious hunters.

5.2.5 Fencing Slanted 7-strand high-tensile wire was chosen for the fencing control method because of it’s three dimensional effect, as well as its relatively low cost. The 3-D effects of the slanting levels of wire confuse the depth perception of deer, which are spooked from jumping the fence. The fence is designed to withstand the impact of deer, as well as falling trees, thermal expansion and contraction, and snow/ice loading with minimal maintenance or repair (O’Dell, 1997). Fence plots can be seen in Appendix D, as well as reasons for their choices in section 3. Design.

5.2.6 Costs 5.2.6a Managed Hunting Hunting is relatively inexpensive and is considered a cost effective method of population reduction due to the fact that the hunters provide majority of the labour for animal removal. As well, a small proceeds comes in through the required license purchases of hunters. Reported costs are estimated to range from $20 CND/deer to $200 USD/deer. This range varies due to additional costs that may or may not be incurred in the final cost, including control staff wages, administration, and equipment. Hunters are required by the Government of British Columbia to purchase a hunting license to legally be able to hunt in British Columbia. This will in turn offset some of the cost for the project.

License to License to hunt Limited Gulf Islands special Total Cost hunt wildlife Black-tailed deer Entry Hunt hunting area permit B.C. Resident* $32.00 $15.00 $7.50 $2.00 $54.50 Non-Resident** $75.00 $125.00 $7.50 $2.00 $207.50 Table 5. Fees incurred by hunters to obtain licenses * B.C. Resident means1: (a) a person who

1 From http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/hunting/resident/#Licences

32 is a Canadian citizen or a permanent resident of Canada, whose only or primary residence is in British Columbia, AND has been physically present in British Columbia for the greater portion of each of 6 calendar months out of the 12 calendar months immediately preceding the date of making an application under this Act or doing another thing relevant to the operation of this Act, OR (b) a person who is not a Canadian citizen or a permanent resident of Canada, but whose only or primary residence is in British Columbia, AND has been physically present in British Columbia for the greater portion of each of the 12 calendar months immediately preceding the date of making an application under this Act or doing another thing relevant to the operation of this Act. **Non-resident means1: a person who is not a resident but who is either a Canadian citizen or landed immigrant, or their primary residence is elsewhere in Canada and has resided in Canada for the preceding 12 months.

5.2.6b Fencing Fences provide a physical, impenetrable barrier to animals. Fences must be well-built, high and strong enough to take into account the physical capabilities of deer. According to Hesse (2010), fences must be at least 2.4m high and must not have openings 19cm or wider, as deer have been known to make their way through gaps of this size. The adaptability of deer requires that a fence must also completely touch the ground or extend underground to fully exclude deer. Scale is an important factor; fencing the whole of Saltspring Island is neither practical nor recommended. In areas that are particularly sensitive to deer, fencing ensures that regardless of the total deer population, these areas will remain protected and will not be depressed by deer grazing. Three sites within Ruckle Park have been chosen as a basis for protection on Saltspring Island. The cost of fencing will vary depending on the level of protection required, the level and animal pressure expected, area size, topography, and aesthetics. The costs of a more expensive fence must be weighed against the cost of the maintenance a less costly fence will incur over time (Hesse, 2010).

Fence Type Cost/m* Height (m) Maintenance

Woven wire $10-$15 2.4 Low

33 Fence Type Cost/m* Height (m) Maintenance

Welden wire $10-$15 2.4 Low

Chain link >$20 2.4 Low

Polypropylene mesh $15-$20 2.4 Medium

Polypropylene rope 9 $5-$10 1.82 High

Modified woven-wire $5-$10 2.4 Medium 3-strand HT*

Polypropylene snow $5-$10 2.12 Medium fence

Offset high-tensile wire $2-$5 1.05 High

Slanted 7-strand high- $2-$5 1.5 High tensile wire

Penn St. 5-strand high $2-$5 1.12 High tensile wire

2-strand poly-tape <$2 0.9 High

Baited electric <$2 1.12 High

*2006 USD Table 6. Cost estimates of various fencing types (Hesse, 2010)

Conservation Officers Overall average annual salary is roughly $51,200 -$ 58,500. Benefits include medial and extended medical benefits, vacation time and pension contributions, etc., that equate to roughly 25% of an employee’s annual gross earnings (Nankivell, N., personal communication, November 15, 2010).

5.2.6c Web Site Design

34 The cost of a web site can vary greatly depending on the developer. The following estimates from Galliford (2009) give a rough idea of how much with would cost to set up and maintain a blog/forum website to bring residents and hunters together in an online community. Template or “From Scratch” Design - Template can be found for less than $100. A designer is able to customize a template for a site between $100-$400. If a “from scratch” design is used, the cost will be between $1,000-$5,000. Maintenance Fees - These include additional costs after creating the web site template. Hosting - around $10-$100/month Domain name - $5-$25/year Payment Gateway - $20-$40/month plus transaction fees. Upgrades and Enhancements - 10-25% of the cost of the original website budget should be budgeted for annual software upgrades, new futures and consulting,

5.2.6d Estimated Total Cost

Hunters (approx. 50 hunters) ($20 CND/deer-$200 $1 000 CND - $10 000 *assuming each hunter shoots 1 deer USD/deer) x 50 USD

Cost of hunting license (BC -$54.50 x 50 -$2 725 Residents) *deducted from total cost

Fencing highly specialized areas $4-$10/m x 2475m $9 900 - $24 750 (using 1.5m x 2 height slanted 7- strand high-tensile wire)

Conservation officers wage $64 000 -$73 125 $64 000 - $73 125

Web sign design and maintenance $100 + ($120-$1,200) + ($5- $465-$1805 (not including enhancements) $25) + ($240-$480)

Staff implementing project [$20/hr x 40hrs/week x 16 $51 200 monitoring wages (approx 16 months weeks] x 4 full-time wages for co-op students)

Total Estimated Annual Cost $123 840 - $158 155

Table 7. Estimated total annual cost of restoration

35 6. Monitoring & Evaluation

6.1 Procedures Several sources of data will be used in order to determine the plan's overall effectiveness and ensure that an appropriate harvest level is set each year. Harvest data from compulsory inspection will yield accurate age, sex and health information, and in combination with hunter surveys will allow the calculation of catch per unit effort, a potentially accurate proxy population metric (Lancia et al, 1996). Vegetation and fecal pellet count surveys would provide population data independent of the hunting program. These two data streams would be supplemented by annual ecological inventories of threatened vegetation communities and an organized citizen monitoring program to gauge the ultimate effectiveness of the program at meeting its stated goal (Moller et al, 2004). To be more specific, a comprehensive population count should be done in the spring of 2012 (after the first managed hunt in the fall of 2011). By doing the population count again in the spring, there would be consistency with the baseline count conducted in 2011. As well, a spring count would accurately reflect the winter survival rate of the past year's fawns. This count will be a combination of fecal pellet counts and vegetation surveys done by wildlife biologists and co-op students from various universities. The second count will need to be just as extensive as the baseline count to determine if the hunt has been successful in lowering the deer density on the island. Given that the first year is a precautionary trial (with a conservative harvest target) to allow the refinement of procedures and practices in anticipation of full roll-out in 2012, there will likely not be a significant impact on deer density of the island observed in the 2012 survey. For the first fully operational managed hunt in the fall of 2012, bag limits and hunter intake will be directly set to the number of deer required to be removed to bring the density down to the <0.1 deer/ha target level. Another population count will be conducted in the spring of 2013. This population count will follow the same procedure as the previous two years. This final annual population count will be used to measure the effectiveness of the managed hunt at reducing deer populations, as well as to determine if the change in deer density has affected the vegetation dynamics on the island. After this measurement is taken, it can be used as a guideline to determine bag limits in the future. Following the final annual population count in 2013, the monitoring could be lifted slightly. A total population count would only have to occur every 5 years after 2013, although relative deer population estimates will continue to be conducted each year based on compulsory inspection data. Limited vegetation surveys would continue on an annual basis. Following three years of comparative data, the vegetation survey will be able to accurately determine the continued impact deer have on the island's threatened plant communities. As well, continuous input by the community via a citizen

36 monitoring program can be cross checked against catch per unit effort data. This monitoring program could persist indefinitely to form a continuous population estimate of the number of deer on Saltspring Island, which can then be used to determine if the deer are being over hunted or under hunted. In the fenced-off areas identified as particularly sensitive to over-browsing regular, inspections would be conducted to ensure the fences are in good repair and plants are recovering. The composition of the ecological communities present will be monitored through vegetation surveys to determine if species which were at previously depressed levels are becoming more prevalent and the if ecosystem unit is functioning as it should. Reference ecological communities will be identified through survey of other islands or known sites existing in literature. If additional areas of special concern are identified, more fenced areas may be added. If the population drops too low, the hunting season can be closed for a year to give the deer time to recover. Conversely, if the population rises too high again, additional management techniques may be implemented in order to bring the deer population back under control, such as sharpshooting. This plan is explicitly designed to be adaptive to dynamic ecological conditions. Continual monitoring of the deer population and the ability to be flexible with the number of animals removed in the hunting season is vital to preserve the ecological integrity of Saltspring Island. Because this deer management plan will not only be implemented within an ecological context but also a social and political context, efforts must be made to continuously solicit input from community members. This is especially important for those not directly involved in the landowner hunting registry. It is recommended that a public information telephone and email “hotline” be set up so citizens can pass on their questions and comments about the program. Advertisements should be published to direct people to the “Facebuck” website so they can learn more about deer management. Finally, prior to the commencement of each year's hunting season, a public information meeting should be held with a well facilitated opportunity for public input. It is hoped that by providing opportunities for meaningful input, public concerns can be addressed before they become problems. Additionally, these public input mechanisms provide a venue for the recruitment of landowner program participants and citizen scientists to help with ecological monitoring.

6.2 Costs Administrative and operational costs will be incurred to implement ongoing project monitoring that involves collecting and analyzing data. Naturalist’s wages depend on various factors including specific job, employer, experience and education (Government of Alberta, Employment and Immigration, 2009). Biologists working in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services have been reported that biologists with higher level advances have an average annual salary of $44 136 to $52 899, whereas conservation officers make

37 an average of $52 330 a year. However, this total salary will not be incurred by the project itself, but likely by the B.C. government. Co-op students’ wages ($51 200/4 students and 4 months) will need to be taken into consideration as well. The maintenance of the website must also be considered; an average of $465-1805/year must be allocated, in addition to any improvements or enhancements. Additionally, website promotion will add to this figure. A single conservation officer will be required, especially during the hunting season (September – December) to monitor adherence to hunting procedures, entry specifications and bag limits.

38 References

Anonymous. (2007). Save-A-Deer Whistle. Retrieved November 2, 2010 from http://www.deer whistle.com/?gclid=CPnCm5jTlKUCFQw7gwodcDVdhQ

Anonymous. (2010a, August 11). Deer blamed for two vehicle mishaps. Gulf Islands Driftwood. Retrieved from http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_south/saltspringisland driftwood

Anonymous. (2010b, August 18). Driftwood editorial – Time to consider deer cull. Gulf Islands Driftwood. Retrieved from http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_south/salt springislanddriftwood

B. C. Government. (2010). Hunting Licenses. Retrieved October 16, 2010 from http://www.env. gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/hunting/resident/#hunting

B. C. Ministry of Environment. (2009). Management Plan for Ruckle Provincial Park. Retrieved from http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/bcparks/planning/mgmtplns/ruckle/RucklePP_mp_draft. pdf

B. C. Ministry of Environment. (2010). Ruckle Provincial Park. Retrieved November 4, 2010, from http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/bcparks/explore/parkpgs/ruckle/

B. C. Ministry of Forests & B.C. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks. (1998). Field manual for describing terrestrial ecosystems. Victoria, BC: Province of British Columbia.

B. C. Ministry of Natural Resource Operations. (n.d.[a]) Hunting and Trapping Regulations Synopsis. Retrieved on November 12, 2010, from http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/hunting/ regulations/

B. C. Ministry of Natural Resource Operations. (n.d.[b]) Harvest Allocation policy. Retrieved November 12, 2010, from http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/harvest_alloc/

BC Geographical Names Office (n.d.) Retrieved November 13, 2010, from http://archive.ilmb.gov. bc.ca/bcgn-bin/bcg10?name=22756

Brown, T., Decker, D., Riley, S., Enck, J., Lauber, T., Curtis, P. & Mattfeld, G. (2000). The Future of Hunting as a Mechanism to Control White-Tailed Deer Populations. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 28(4), 797-807

Capital Regional District. (2010). Natural Areas Atlas. Retrieved November 19, 2010, from http://www. crd.bc.ca/maps/natural/atlas.htm

Berglund, M. (March 30, 2010). New deer population-counting is more high tech, less costly. Missourian. Retrieved from http://www.columbiamissourian.com/

Campbell, D. Swanson, G.M. & Sales, J. (2004). Comparing the precision and cost-effectiveness of fecal pellet group count methods. Journal of Applied Ecology, 41, 1185-1196

Carnivore Safe Passage. (2007). Designing Effective Wildlife Crossings. Retrieved November 2, 2010 from http://www.carnivoresafepassage.org/design-crossing.htm

Crouch, G. L. (1966). Preferences of Black-Tailed Deer for Native Forage and Douglas-Fir Seedlings. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 30(3): 471-475.

DeerBusters. (2010). Deer Repellents, protecting your garden from deer damage. Retrieved November 2, 2010 from http://www.deerrepellents.com/dee-1073.html

Fitzpatrick, T. (1998). Detecting deer: new method for counting population in urban areas. Message posted to http://www.scienceblog.com/community/older/1998/

Food Security Network of Newfoundland and Labrador. (2007). What is Food Security? Retrieved November 24, 2010, from http://www.foodsecuritynews.com/What-is-food-security.htm

Forsyth, D., Barker, R. J., Morriss, G. & Scroggie, M. P. (2007). Modeling the relationship between fecal pellet indices and deer density. Journal of Wildlife Management, 71(3), 964-970. doi: 10.2193/ 2005-69

40 Galliford, M. (2009). The cost of building a website from scratch. Retrieved from http://www.subhub. com/articles/cost-of-building-a-website-from-scratch

Gill R.M.A., Thomas, M.L. & Stocker, D. (1997). The use of portable thermal imaging for estimating deer population density in forest habitats. Journal of Applied Ecology, 34, 1273-1286.

Government of Alberta, Employment and Immigration. (2009, September). Alberta Occupational Profiles. Retrieved November 6, 2010, from http://alis.alberta.ca/occinfo/

Grimmer, B. J. (2010, July 19). Deer in the Gulf Islands. Message posted to http://thefarmersstand. blogspot.com/

Gulf Islands Driftwood Newspaper. (2008-2010). Various letters to the editor. Ganges, BC: Driftwood Publications.

Hemami, M.R., Watkinson, A. Gill, R.M.A. & Dolman, P. (2007). Estimating abundance of introduced Chinese muntjac Muntiacus reevesi and native roe deer Capreolus capreolus using portable thermal imaging. Mammal Review, 37, 246-254.

Hesse, G. (2010). Urban Unguate Conflict Analysis Available from http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/ cos/info/wildlife_human_interaction/UrbanUngulatesConflictAnalysisFINALJuly5- 2010.pdf

Kandler, S. (2010, September 1). Letter – Nature Appeal. Gulf Islands Driftwood. Retrieved from http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_south/saltspringislanddriftwood

Kaplan, G., Abrahami, A., & Abrahami, N. (2006-2010). Wix [Free website builder]. Retrieved November 5th, 2010. Available from http://www.wix.com/

Kerstetter, S. & Goldberg, M. (2006). Food insecurity and public policy in British Columbia. Retrieved from http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/socialplanning/initiatives/foodpolicy/tools/ pdf/FoodInsecurity.pdf

41 Killpatrick, H., & Walter, W. (1999). A controlled archery deer hunt in a residential community: cost, effectiveness and deer recovery rates. Wildlife Society Bulletin 27(1), 115-123

Lancia, R., J. Bishir, M. Conner, & C. Rosenberry. (1996). Use of catch-effort to estimate population size. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 24(4), 731-737

Lane, M. (2010) Ruckle Farm: British Columbia’s oldest working farm. Retrieved November 4, 2010 from http://www.ruckleheritagefarm.com/

Martin, T. G., Arcese, P. & Scheerder, N. (in press). Browsing down our natural heritage: Deer impacts on vegetation structure and songbird populations across an island archipelago. Biological Conservation. Retrieved November 3, 2010, from http://www.sciencedirect.com/

Mayle, B., Doney, J., Lazarus, G., Peace, A. & Smith, D. (1996). Fallow deer (Dama dama L.) defecation rate and its use in determining population size. Suppl. Ric. Biol. Selvaggina XXV, 63-78.

Mayle, B.A., Putman, R., & Wyllie, I. (2000). The use of trackway counts to establish an index of deer presence. Mammal Review, 30, 233-237.

Ministry of Environment. (2010c) British Columbia Limited Entry Hunting Regulations Synopsis. Retrieved November 12, 2010, from http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/hunting/resident/ docs/leh_10_11.pdf

Missouri Department of Conservation. (n.d.) Share the Harvest. Retrieved November 25, 2010, from http://mdc.mo.gov/sites/default/files/resources/2010/09/9804_6779.pdf

Moller, H., F. Berkes, P. O. Lyver, & M. Kislalioglu. (2004). Combining science and traditional ecological knowledge: monitoring populations for co-management. Ecology and Society 9(3): 2. Available at http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss3/art2/

Mountaintop. (2010, August 19). Salt Spring Deer [Msg #1]. Message posted to http://www.huntingbc.ca/ forum/showthread.php?t=54179

42 Nagel, J. (2010, October 1). Cities urge province to cull urban deer. BC Local News. Retrieved from http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_central/albernivalleynews/

Nuszdorfer, F.C., Klinka, K. & Demarchi, D.A. (1991) Coastal Douglas-fir zone. In D. Meidinger & J. Pojar (Eds.), Ecosystems of British Columbia (pp 81-94). Victoria, BC: Province of British Columbia.

O'Dell, Charlie. (1997) Low-Cost Slant Fence Excludes Deer from Plantings. Retrieved from http://www.cnr.vt.edu/extension/fiw/wildlife/damage/deer_fencing.pdf

Plantskydd Repellent Products. (n.d.) Retrieved November 2, 2010 from http://www.treeworld.com/ buy.html quadrakid. (2010, August 19). Salt Spring Deer [Msg #9]. Message posted to http://www.huntingbc.ca/ forum/showthread.php?t=54179

Salt Spring Island Archives. (n.d.). A brief history of Salt Spring Island. Retrieved November 4, 2010, from http://www.saltspringarchives.com/history.htm

Salt Spring Island Conservancy (2010a). Current Stewardship Projects. Retrieved November 26, 2010 from http://www.saltspringconservancy.ca/stewardship.html

Salt Spring Island Conservancy (2010b). Species at Risk. Retrieved November 26, 2010 from http://www.saltspringconservancy.ca/species_at_risk.html

Southern Gulf Island Atlas, (2005). Southern Gulf Islands. Retrieved November 26, 2010 from http://www.shim.bc.ca/gulfislands/islands.cfm

Starzomski, B. (2010). What is restoration? [PDF document]. Retrieved from UVic Moodle: http://moodle.uvic.ca/ steel_ram. (2010, August 19). Salt Spring Deer [Msg #6]. Message posted to http://www.huntingbc.ca/ forum/showthread.php?t=54179

43 The Nature Trust of British Columbia (2005). Land Acquisitions. Retrieved November 26, 2010 from http://www.naturetrust.bc.ca/key_land_accq.php

Toynbee, M. (2010, August 25). Letter – On death and culling. Gulf Islands Driftwood. Retrieved from http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_south/saltspringislanddriftwood

Vancouverisland.com. (2010). Saltspring Island. Retrieved November 4, 2010, from http://www. vancouverisland.com/regions/towns/?townid=257

Warren, J. R. (2000.) Overview of fertility control in urban deer management. Proceedings of the 2000 Annual Conference of the Society for Theriogenology, 237-246. Available from http://coryi.org/ Florida_panther/deerfertilitycontrol.pdf

Win Buyer. (2009). Liquid fence deer & rabbit repellent 2.5 gallon concentrate. Retrieved November 2, 2010 from http://www.shoppingedge.com/Liquid%20Fence%20Deer%20%20and%20%20 Rabbit%20Repellent%202.5%20Gallon%20Concentrate/pid-34290658/offers.html

44 Appendices Appendix A – Ruckle Provincial Park Map Ruckle PROVINCIAL PARK

From Management Plan for Ruckle Provincial Park (MoE, 2009)

45 Appendix B – Map of Saltspring Island

Capital Regional District Map

Legend

This map is a visitor generated static output from the Capital Regional District's Internet mapping site and is for general reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or Scale: 1:170,488 0 2 4 6 8 km. may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION. For more information please visit http://www.crd.bc.ca/maps. Created: November 27, 2010 From Capitol Region District (CRD) Natural Areas Atlas (http://www.crd.bc.ca/maps/natural/atlas.htm)

46 Appendix C – Saltspring Island Land Ownership Maps

Land Ownership on Saltspring Island

Legend

This map is a visitor generated static output from the Capital Regional District's Internet mapping site and is for general reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or Scale: 1:24,900 0 275 550 825 1100 m. may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION. For more information please visit http://www.crd.bc.ca/maps. Created: November 27, 2010 Area near Ruckle Provincial Park [From CRD Natural Areas Atlas (http://www.crd.bc.ca/maps/ natural/atlas.htm)]

47 Land Ownership on Salt Spring Island

Legend

This map is a visitor generated static output from the Capital Regional District's Internet mapping site and is for general reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or Scale: 1:24,900 0 275 550 825 1100 m. may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION. For more information please visit http://www.crd.bc.ca/maps. Created: November 27, 2010 Ganges [From CRD Natural Areas Atlas (http://www.crd.bc.ca/maps/ natural/atlas.htm)]

48 Appendix D – Ruckle Provincial Park Proposed Fence Plots and Related Maps

Map of Ruckle Park with Fence Plots [From CRD Natural Areas Atlas (http://www.crd.bc.ca/maps/ natural/atlas.htm)]

49 Ruckle Provincial Park Draft Management Plan Oct. 09

FigureRuckle 4: Provincial Ruckle Provincial Park Ecological Park Ecological Communities Communities and Conservation and Conservation Ranking Ran Mapking (Madrone Map (Madrone 2007, 2007)from Management Plan for Ruckle Provincial Park [MoE, 2009]) 10

50 Sensitive Ecosystems in Ruckle Park, Saltspring Island

Legend

This map is a visitor generated static output from the Capital Regional District's Internet mapping site and is for general reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or Scale: 1:20,000 0 225 450 675 900 m. may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION. For more information please visit http://www.crd.bc.ca/maps. Created: November 27, 2010 Ruckle Provincial Park Sensitive Ecosystems [From CRD Natural Areas Atlas (http://www.crd.bc.ca/ maps/natural/atlas.htm)]

51 Contour Map of Ruckle Park, Salt Spring Island

Legend

This map is a visitor generated static output from the Capital Regional District's Internet mapping site and is for general reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or Scale: 1:20,000 0 225 450 675 900 m. may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION. For more information please visit http://www.crd.bc.ca/maps. Created: November 27, 2010 Ruckle Provincial Park Contour Map [From CRD Natural Areas Atlas (http://www.crd.bc.ca/maps/ natural/atlas.htm)]

52 Appendix E – “Facebuck”

Website can be accessed at: http://www.wix.com/kathrynegraham/facebuck---first-draft

Home page

53 Sample landowner/property profile

Sample hunter profile