age. We believe that age and reproductive status were too 

 autocorrelated (the chance that a female will have a fawn 

 increases from age 1 to 5 , see Chapter 5) to enable us to 

 determine any effects due entirely to age. 



Factors Affecting Summer Home Range Size of Fawns 



Home range size of fawns on this area from 1976-1980, as 

 determined by the modified minimum area method (Harvey and 

 Barbour 1965), was reported by Riley and Dood (1984). They 

 found that fawn summer home range size decreased with 

 increased population size during 1976-1980. 



We found that mean home range size for fawns increased in 

 ascending order as follows: single females, twin females, 

 single males, mixed sex twins, twin males (Table 8.3). Those 

 differences were not statistically significant, however 

 (Kruskal-Wallis; PHR, X 2 =1.39, P=0.85, df=4; AAR, X 2 =1.43, 

 P=0.84, df=4). Combined, twins had larger home ranges than 

 singles, but the significance level was marginal 

 (Mann-Whitney; PHR, Rank Sum=1361.0, P=0.06; AAR, Rank 

 Sum-1352.0, P=0.08). Mean home range size was larger for all 

 males than for all females, but the difference was not 

 statistically significant (Mann-Whitney; PHR, Rank Sum=874.5, 

 P=0.43; AAR, Rank Sum=875.0, P=0.43). Although the general 

 tendency for differences in movements by sex and litter size 

 appeared to be as expected, the extreme variation in values 

 (Table 8.3) precluded statistical significance. 



Home range size of fawns was compared among the same 4 

 density classes delineated for adult females, and a 

 significant difference in home range size among density 

 classes was observed (Kruskal-Wallis; PHR, X 2 =13.77, P<0.01; 

 AAR, X 2 =9.27, P=0.03). Summer home range size generally 

 declined as deer density increased. There may have been 

 effects related to variation in sex and litter size among 

 years, but sample sizes were too small to conduct tests which 

 would eliminate those effects. 



The comparison of summer home range size for fawns 

 eliminated the effect of reproductive status on home range 

 size that we observed for adult females. Although total 

 summer home range size of adult females did not decline with 

 increasing density, it appeared that the size of the fawn- 

 rearing areas or "parturition territory" did. 



There was no evidence that good forage production reduced 

 the movements or summer home range size of fawns. Home range 

 sizes were actually largest during 1978 and 1979 when forage 

 production was best. Sample size was not sufficient to 

 partition the effect of density and forage abundance. 



216 



