Country, Cover or Protection: What Shapes the Distribution of Red Deer and Roe Deer in the Bohemian Forest Ecosystem?

March Country, Cover or Protection: What Shapes the Distribution of Red Deer and Roe Deer in the Bohemian Forest Ecosystem? Marco Heurich 0 1 Tom T. G. Brand 0 1 Manon Y. Kaandorp 0 1 Pavel ustr 0 1 Jrg Mller 0 1 Bjrn Reineking 0 1 0 1 Department of Conservation and Research, Bavarian Forest National Park , Grafenau, Germany, 2 Chair of Wildlife Ecology and Management , University of Freiburg, Faculty of Environment and Natural Resources , Freiburg, Germany, 3 Van Hall Larenstein , University of Applied Sciences , Leeuwarden , The Netherlands , 4 Department of Biodiversity Research, Global Change Research Centre, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic , Brno , Czech Republic, 5 Sumava National Park, Vimperk , Czech Republic, 6 Chair for Terrestrial Ecology , Department of Ecology and Ecosystem Management, Technische Universitat Munchen , Freising, Germany, 7 Biogeographical Modelling , Bayreuth Center for Ecology and Environmental Research BayCEER, University of Bayreuth , Bayreuth, Germany, 8 UR EMGR Ecosystemes Montagnards, St.-Martin- d'Heres , France 1 Academic Editor: Aaron W. Reed, University of Missouri Kansas City, UNITED STATES The Bohemian Forest Ecosystem encompasses various wildlife management systems. Two large, contiguous national parks (one in Germany and one in the Czech Republic) form the centre of the area, are surrounded by private hunting grounds, and hunting regulations in each country differ. Here we aimed at unravelling the influence of management-related and environmental factors on the distribution of red deer (Cervus elaphus) and roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) in this ecosystem. We used the standing crop method based on counts of pellet groups, with point counts every 100 m along 218 randomly distributed transects. Our analysis, which accounted for overdispersion as well as zero inflation and spatial autocorrelation, corroborated the view that both human management and the physical and biological environment drive ungulate distribution in mountainous areas in Central Europe. In contrast to our expectations, protection by national parks was the least important variable for red deer and the third important out of four variables for roe deer; protection negatively influenced roe deer distribution in both parks and positively influenced red deer distribution in Germany. Country was the most influential variable for both red and roe deer, with higher counts of pellet groups in the Czech Republic than in Germany. Elevation, which indicates increasing environmental harshness, was the second most important variable for both species. Forest cover was the least important variable for roe deer and the third important variable for red deer; the relationship for roe deer was positive and linear, and optimal forest cover for red deer was about 70% within a 500 m radius. Our results have direct implications for the future conservation management of deer in protected areas in Central Europe and show in particular that large non-intervention zones may not cause agglomerations of deer that could lead to conflicts along the border of protected, mountainous areas. - Funding: This work was supported by the project "Modelluntersuchungen zum Wildtiermanagement in Schutzgebieten am Beispiel des Nationalparks Bayerischer Wald" of the German Federal Environmental Foundation (Deutsche Bundesstiftung Umwelt). This study was part of a project on the predator-prey relationship of the Eurasian lynx, roe deer and red deer carried out by the Bavarian Forest National Park Administration, Department of Research. Financial support was provided by the EU programme INTERREG IV (EFRE Ziel 3), and the Bavarian Forest National Park Administration. Pavel ustr's contribution was funded by the grants No. 1436098G of the GA CR and No. CZ.1.05/1.1.00/ 02.0073 of the MSMT. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. The increasing human population combined with an increasing standard of living in many parts of the world have resulted in an increased exploitation of nature [1]. The natural areas that are left, such as protected national parks, can be seen as habitat islands in cultural landscapes, but are usually too small to accommodate all relevant ecological processes within park boundaries [25]. Most national parks are not large enough to sustain viable populations of large mammals, particularly those that engage in seasonal migration behaviour [68]. As a result, such animals also utilize landscapes surrounding protected areas. This could lead to conflicts as management objectives inside and outside protected areas can differ considerably. Inside national parks, the guiding principle is often the protection of ecological processes (natural process management), whereas outside the parks, management typically aims at optimizing recreational opportunities for hunters while minimizing complaints from farmers and foresters [10]. One likely cause of conflict outside protected areas could be high mammal densities inside protected areas [1114]. Population measures, such as density or reproduction, are influenced by both the physical and biological environment as well as by human activities. Deer habitat selection is strongly determined by the presence of food and cover, both of which are correlated with forest distribution [1517]; so too are ungulate density and forest structure [18]. Therefore, Gill, Johnson [19] suggest that forested areas may be one of the main factors that determine ungulate distribution. Variation in altitude has a major influence on local climate in mountainous environments, which is characterized by high precipitation, generally lower temperatures and long periods of snow coverage. High snow packs especially limit access to food and increase the energy needed for movement [17, 20, 21]. An important adaptation strategy of the animals is to migrate away from these climatic conditions towards lower elevations with less snow cover [7, 22]. Human conflicts with wildlife throughout Europe and North America often involve deer species owing to the dramatic increase in their populations over the last century [2325]. This development was initially regarded positively, but opinion changed when overabundance led to a high economic impact because of bark peeling and increased browsing on forest vegetation and arable crops. As a consequence, ungulates attained an ambivalent status in societywatching or hunting the animals provides recreational pleasure, yet the animals are regarded as pests that cause considerable damage to agricultural fields and forests [26]. Hunting can be a key management factor for regulating deer populations and their spatial distribution in the landscape [2729]. But whether hunting is effective strongly depends on local hunting regulations, philosophy, or hunter effort [30]. Even if the (...truncated)