Comparison of fencing designs for excluding deer from roadways
-
Published source details
Stull D.W., Gulsby W.D., Martin J.A., D'Angelo G.J., Gallagher G.R., Osborn D.A., Warren R.J. & Miller K.V. (2011) Comparison of fencing designs for excluding deer from roadways. Human Wildlife Interactions, 5, 47-57.
Published source details Stull D.W., Gulsby W.D., Martin J.A., D'Angelo G.J., Gallagher G.R., Osborn D.A., Warren R.J. & Miller K.V. (2011) Comparison of fencing designs for excluding deer from roadways. Human Wildlife Interactions, 5, 47-57.
Actions
This study is summarised as evidence for the following.
| Action | Category | |
|---|---|---|
|
Install barrier fencing along roads Action Link |
 |
-
Install barrier fencing along roads
A replicated, controlled study in 2008 in fields in Georgia, USA (Stull et al. 2011) found that white-tailed deer Odocoelus virginianus did not jump 2.4-m-high barrier fencing, at 1.8 m fewer jumped if fencing was opaque and 1.2-m-high fences with outriggers angled towards deer were jumped less than those angled away. Among deer that jumped the 1.2-m control fence, fewer jumped each subsequently taller fence (1.5 m: 92%; 1.8 m: 75%; 2.1 m: 42%; 2.4 m: 0%). In opaque fence trails, 90% jumped 1.2 and 1.5-m fences and 50% jumped the 1.8-m fence. With an outrigger, fewer jumped when this was angled towards deer (60%) than away (90%). Three treatment areas (0.1–0.2 ha) were bisected with a test fence. Designs were woven-wire fencing either alone (1.5, 1.8, 2.1 and 2.4 m high), covered with opaque fabric (fence 1.2, 1.5 and 1.8 m high), 1.2 m high with a 0.6-m 50% opaque plastic outrigger angled at 45°, or a 1.2-m-high control fence. Ten adult female deer were each tested with each design in each treatment area. After 48 hours habituation and limited food, deer were enclosed the opposite side of test fences from food. Deer were videoed throughout each 25-hour trial.
(Summarised by: Rebecca K. Smith)
)_2023.JPG)
