Long-term deer exclusion in yew-wood and oakwood habitats in southwest Ireland: natural regeneration and stand dynamics

  • Published source details Perrin P.M., Kelly D.L. & Mitchell F.J. (2006) Long-term deer exclusion in yew-wood and oakwood habitats in southwest Ireland: natural regeneration and stand dynamics. Forest Ecology and Management, 236, 356-367


This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Use wire fencing to exclude large native herbivores

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

    A replicated, paired sites study in 1969-2001 in temperate broadleaf forest in Ireland (Perrin, Kelly & Mitchell 2006) found that excluding deer decreased the number of seedlings but increased the number of saplings and the height of common holly Ilex aquifolium and rowan Sorbus aucuparia. In yew Taxus baccata wood sites, the density of holly seedlings was lower in fenced plots (fenced: 0.4; unfenced: 2.1/m2) , whereas the density of rowan seedlings was similar between treatments (fenced: 0.2; unfenced: 0.2) Sapling density of both holly (fenced 0.7, unfenced <0.1) and rowan (fenced 0.4, unfenced 0.0, respectively) and juvenile height () ( holly: fenced 45, unfenced 8cm; rowan: fenced 70, unfenced 10 cm) was higher in fenced plots. In oak-wood sites, seedling density for both holly (fenced: 0.5; unfenced: 21.9) and rowan (fenced: <0.1; unfenced: 0.8) was lower in fenced plots. Sapling density for holly was higher in fenced plots (fenced: 3.0; unfenced: 0.5) and for rowan it was similar between treatments (fenced: 0.3; unfenced: <0.1). Sapling juvenile height was higher in fenced plots for both holly (fenced: 130; unfenced: 10) and rowan (fenced: 240; unfenced: 10). Data were collected in 2001 in three fenced plots in yew wood-type sites (764-1,036 m2 deer-proof exclosures established in 1969-1970), four fenced plots in oak wood-type sites (225-1,090 m2, established in 1974-1975) and seven adjacent unfenced plots (225-600 m2).


Output references

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, terrestrial 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