Study

Impact of deer on temperate forest vegetation and woody debris as protection of forest regeneration against browsing

  • Published source details Pellerin M., Saïd S., Richard E., Hamann J., Dubois-Coli C. & Hum P. (2010) Impact of deer on temperate forest vegetation and woody debris as protection of forest regeneration against browsing. Forest Ecology and Management, 260, 429-437.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Use wire fencing to exclude large native herbivores

Action Link
Forest Conservation

Remove woody debris after timber harvest

Action Link
Forest Conservation
  1. Use wire fencing to exclude large native herbivores

    A replicated, controlled study in 2005-2008 in temperate forest in France (Pellerin et al. 2010) found no effect of excluding deer browsing on species richness and diversity of trees and herbaceous species. The number of woody plant species (deer exclusion: 8-10; unfenced: 7-10/m2) and their species diversity (Shannon's index deer exclusion: 2.1-2.5; un-fenced: 1.9-2.1) and the number of herbaceous species (exclusion: 17-20; un-fenced: 13-17/m2) and their species diversity (Shannon's index deer exclusion: 3.4-3.5; unfenced: 2.9-3.1) were similar between treatments. Data were collected in May 2008. At one site there were 60 sampling plots (1 m2) inside a 1 ha fenced area (deer exclusion) and 60 similar plots inside a 1 ha open area (unfenced). At a second site there were 42 sampling plots (1 m2) inside a 1.5 ha fenced area (deer exclusion) and 42 similar plots inside a 1.5 ha open area (unfenced). Both sites were regularly grazed by roe deer Capreolus capreolus and red deer Cervus elaphus. Exclosures were set up in March 2005.

     

  2. Remove woody debris after timber harvest

    A replicated, controlled study in 2005-2008 in temperate forest in France (Pellerin et al. 2010) found no effect of clearing of woody debris on species richness and diversity of trees and herbs. Numbers of woody plant species (control: 7-8; cleared: 10 m2) and diversity (Shannon's index control: 2.1-2.5; cleared: 1.9-2.1), and number of herbaceous species (control: 17-20; cleared: 13-17 m2) and diversity (Shannon's index control: 2.9-3.5; cleared: 3.1-3.4) were similar between treatments. Data were collected in May 2008 in 60 pairs of control (woody debris left) and 60 cleared (woody debris cleared of) plots (1 m2) in one site, and 42 similar pairs at a second site. Plots were set up in May 2005.

     

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 18

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust