1976-1983. Alternative estimates of fawn numbers and ratios 

 were generated by assuming that all females older than 

 yearlings recruited fawns at the same average rate. 



Numbers 



Given the estimated female age structure each year from 

 1968 through 1986, there was little difference in the average 

 number of fawns recruited whether recruitment varied by age 

 for females (Column Al, Table 5.5) or whether recruitment rate 

 was the same for all 2+ females (Column Bl, Table 5.5). Fawn 

 production did not vary significantly more than numbers of 

 females producing those fawns in either case. Number of 

 females producing fawns was more important to total fawn 

 production than age-specific differences in fawn recruitment 

 among females. The greatest difference in fawn recruitment 

 for any individual year was during 1969, when variation in 

 recruitment by age class produced about 15% fewer fawns than 

 would have been produced by egual recruitment by all age 

 classes (Table 5.5). 



Potential differences in fawn recruitment between the 2 

 models are shown in Figure 5.4. When the population was 

 expanding and had relatively more females in younger age 

 classes, fawn recruitment would have been somewhat depressed 

 by the age-specific variation in recruitment observed during 

 1976-83. The reverse was true in declining populations with 

 relatively more older animals. In neither case, however, 

 would general population trend be greatly affected. The 

 observed number of fawns recruited (Column CI, Table 5.5) 

 varied considerably more than any variation owing to age- 

 specific differences in recruitment. Age-specific differences 

 in fawn recruitment, operating as an intrinsic mechanism of 

 population control, probably contributed a relatively minor 

 amount of the observed variation in fawn recruitment. 



Ratios 



We observed little variation in average fawn: female 

 ratios between the model assuming age-specific differences in 

 recruitment (Column A2, Table 5.5) and the model assuming 

 equal recruitment across all age classes (Column B2, Table 

 5.5). The same was true for fawn:2+ female ratios (Columns A3 

 and B3, Table 5.5). Observed fawn:female and fawn:2+ female 

 ratios (Columns C2 and C3, Table 5.5) varied considerably more 

 than ratios assuming constant recruitment. 



Given the female age structures estimated for each year 

 1968-1986, and assuming that annual fawn recruitment was 

 stable for the population but varied among age classes as 

 observed for 1976-1983, fawn: female ratios could have varied 

 from 52 to 83:100 with a mean of 67:100 and a coefficient of 



125 



