ShareThis Page

Study shows deer grazing costs Fox Chapel native plant life

| Wednesday, March 19, 2014, 9:00 p.m.
A lone deer crosses Field Club Road in front of the Fox Chapel High School.
Jan Pakler | for The Herald
A lone deer crosses Field Club Road in front of the Fox Chapel High School.

Nancy Fales remembers when trillium flourished in Fox Chapel's forests.

The plants made it difficult for her and her friends to hike in the woods almost seven decades ago.

“People used to come from all around to see the trillium, and then all of a sudden, there were almost no trillium,” said Fales, 74, of Fox Chapel, citing overabundant deer as the reason for the change.

A study led by Susan Kalisz, a professor at the University of Pittsburgh, supports Fales' view that deer have overgrazed native plants they find appetizing, which results in nonnative plants that deer won't eat taking their place.

The study examined the relationship between deer, native edible plants such as trillium and a nonnative plant called garlic mustard in Fox Chapel's forests since 2003. Volunteers plan to pull up garlic mustard plants on four days this spring, which follows up on April 2013 events in which 125 bags of plants were removed.

In the Pitt study, researchers established seven pairs of 196-square-meter plots, half of which excluded deer with fencing. One pair of plots was knocked out by the remnants of Hurricane Ivan in 2004, which left six pairs in the study.

Results from 2003 to 2008 showed that the six fenced-in plots reversed the impact of deer.

While garlic mustard decreased by 12 percent annually, 26 percent of native plants in the those protected plots reproduced. The study projected that garlic mustard eventually would go extinct without the presence of deer.

In plots that weren't protected against deer, garlic mustard increased by 30 percent annually, and only 5 percent of native palatable, or pleasant tasting, plants reproduced.

Fox Chapel has used archers and a two-man sharpshooting team on its police force to try to control the borough's deer population since 1993.

Police Chief Dan Laux said the Pennsylvania Game Commission's standard for deer in a community is equivalent to 20 to 30 deer per square mile of forest. With 3.5 square miles of forest in Fox Chapel, Laux said, the target is 65 to 90 deer, though the estimated deer population probably is somewhere between 200 and 300.

“Our goal will never be to eradicate the deer population in the borough,” Laux said.

Fox Chapel Sgt. Mike Stevens said it's difficult to gauge the borough's deer population, but the department views a drop in vehicle collisions with deer as an indicator of the program's effectiveness. There were 81 vehicle collisions with deer in Fox Chapel in 1993, and there have not been more than 22 in a year since 2005.

While archers may keep the deer meat, Stevens said, the department donates deer it shoots to a processor, and the meat is sent to local food banks.

Marilyn Bruschi, co-chairwoman of the Garden Club of Allegheny County's Native Plant Initiative, said she encourages gardeners to plant native species.

While the study is in its final year, Kalisz and other researchers are drawing up a proposal for more funding from the National Science Foundation to continue their research.

Fox Chapel Park Commission chairman James Pashek said garlic mustard pulling will take place April 26 and 27, as well as on May 3 and 4 in Fox Chapel. Sessions run from 9 a.m. to noon and 1 to 4 p.m. each day. For details, call the Fox Chapel borough office at 412-963-1100.

Shawn Annarelli is a freelance writer for Trib Total Media.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.