Conservation Evidence strives to be as useful to conservationists as possible. Please take our survey to help the team improve our resource.

Providing evidence to improve practice

Individual study: Relative effectiveness of repellents for reducing mule deer damage

Published source details

Andelt W.F., Burnham K.P. & Manning J.A. (1991) Relative effectiveness of repellents for reducing mule deer damage. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 55, 341-347


This study is summarised as evidence for the intervention(s) shown on the right. The icon shows which synopsis it is relevant to.

Use repellents that taste bad (‘contact repellents’) to deter crop or property damage by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict Terrestrial Mammal Conservation

A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 1989 on captive animals in Colorado, USA (Andelt et al. 1991) found that chicken eggs, MGK® Big Game Repellent and coyote urine, used as repellents on foodstuffs, reduced consumption of that food by mule deer Odocoileus hemionus more than did treatment with thiram, Hinder®, soap and Ro·pel®. Deer consumed less food treated with chicken eggs (89 g/day), MGK® Big Game Repellent (94 g/day) and coyote urine (98 g/day) than food treated with thiram (212 g/day), Hinder® (223 g/day), soap (308 g/day) and Ro·pel® (399 g/day). It was not possible to assess which of these feeding rates differed significantly from consumption of food treated just with water (500 g/day). Three female and eight castrated male mule deer were held in individual pens. Repellents and a control (water) were sprayed daily on commercial deer pellets at a rate of 10 ml/500 g. Pellets were dried for 24 hours. The soap treatment involved hanging a bar of soap above the feed container. Food from each treatment was offered in different containers (500 g in each), which were randomized daily, for four days, in May and June 1989.

(Summarised by Nick Littlewood)