rates than deer in "core" areas. Recruitment and mortality 

 were properties of individual animals in individual home 

 ranges . 



Occasionally, mortality was high when density was high. 

 This was not really the result of density per se, but the 

 result of density-independent changes in energy gain and loss 

 related to variable weather patterns. Seasonally and 

 annually, variable weather modified habitat quality, 

 structure, and its ability to support deer. When weather 

 conditions were conducive to deer living in "marginal 

 habitats", survival remained high despite high deer density. 

 Also, few deer lived in marginal areas unless density was 

 high. Thus, when density was high, more deer were vulnerable 

 to density-independent changes in weather. "Carrying 

 capacity" fluctuated widely and annually, usually as a result 

 of density-independent factors (especially weather). 



Our model of population dynamics may be unsatisfactory to 

 some, especially those who would prefer to "force" ecological 

 events into mathematical formulae. Although we did not 

 observe "classic" density-dependent population responses , they 

 may be relatively more operational in stable environments and 

 those lacking predators or dispersal sinks. However, there 

 are many other types of populations and situations that must 

 be dealt with by managers. Often, knowledge of what proximate 

 factors are affecting populations is more important than what 

 the ultimate regulating factor is under precisely specified 

 and fixed conditions. We most hope to convince the reader 

 that dogmatic, deterministic, or fixed views are often not 

 helpful or widely applicable. A framework of general 

 principles may apply overall, but interpretation and 

 application of those principles must be made within the 

 context that each population is a unique product of its total 

 environment . 



22 



