Vol. 22, No. 9 
Page 4 
Ecology and Management of White-tailed Deer 
C. M. Nixon, 
L. P. Hansen, 
J. E. Chelsvig 
While woody cover (forests, shrub habitats, pastures with woody shrubsl 
appears necessary for maintenance of a viable deer herd, there is more to the 
relationship between deer numbers and the matrix of vegetation covering Illinois 
than forests perse. The linear correlation between average deer harvest eve s 
for the years 1969-73 in each county (V) and the forest cover remaining in each 
county in 1962 (X) was significant (P<0.00l) but relatively low (r = +0.50 
using acres of forest in each county; r = +0.45 using percent of each county 
counrJef’ Tw U !’ leSS . u than 2 ® of the variation in deer harvest levels amoL 
counties could be attributed to the amount of forest cover. 
As pointed out by Roseberry et al. (1975) , 
between deer numbers and forest cover resembles^a 
too much forest cover reduces deer numbers. At p 
are less than 20 % forested, which is probably far 
the graphic relationship 
hyperbola, as too little or 
resent most Illinois counties 
less than optimum for deer. 
Roseberry, J.W. K1imstra, and E. Waldhaus. 1975. 
habitat in southern Illinois 1940 vs. I 970 . Unpublished 
Wi1dlife Research Lab. Southern 111inois Univ. 82 pp. 
Evaluation of wildlife 
data. Cooperative 
