Datasheet
Cervus elaphus (red deer)
Don't need the entire report?
Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.
Generate report
Pictures
Top of page| Picture | Title | Caption | Copyright |  | Title | Stag |
|---|
| Caption | Cervus elaphus (Red deer); stag in parkland, UK. December, 2013. |
|---|
| Copyright | ©CABI-2013 |
|---|
 |
| Stag | Cervus elaphus (Red deer); stag in parkland, UK. December, 2013. | ©CABI-2013 |
 | Title | Hinds and calves |
|---|
| Caption | Cervus elaphus (Red deer); hinds and calves in parkland. UK. August, 2013. |
|---|
| Copyright | ©CABI-2013 |
|---|
 |
| Hinds and calves | Cervus elaphus (Red deer); hinds and calves in parkland. UK. August, 2013. | ©CABI-2013 |
Identity
Top of pagePreferred Scientific Name
- Cervus elaphus Linnaeus, 1758
Preferred Common Name
International Common Names
- English: European red deer; maral deer
- Spanish: Ciervo colorado; ciervo común; venado
- French: cerf commun; cerf elaphe
Local Common Names
- Denmark: kronhjort
- Germany: Edelhirsch; Hirsch, Edel-; Hirsch, Rot-; Rothirsch; Rotwild
- Iran: gawasn
- Italy: cervo
EPPO code
Summary of Invasiveness
Top of pageRed deer (Cervus elaphus) were introduced to several countries, including North and South America, New Zealand and Australia. In Argentina they have invaded several National parks, influencing native flora and fauna and possibly disrupting ecological processes. Of particular concern is possible competition with an endangered deer endemic to the southern parts of Chile and Argentina. They also compete with livestock.
Taxonomic Tree
Top of page
- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Metazoa
- Phylum: Chordata
- Subphylum: Vertebrata
- Class: Mammalia
- Order: Artiodactyla
- Suborder: Ruminantia
- Family: Cervidae
- Genus: Cervus
- Species: Cervus elaphus
Description
Top of page
Adult red deer (Cervus elaphus) are medium-sized and round-antlered, with a uniform, plain brown body, lighter below. Mature males have antlers with 10 or more tines, the uppermost pointing upwards in a cluster. The muzzle is blackish and hairless, and the hooves are grey to black. Both sexes are similar in colour. Adults typically have no spots, newborn fawns are brown or reddish-brown with a dark dorsal stripe and a creamy to light brown rump patch. White spots are scattered on the back and flanks (Nugent and Fraser 2005). Female live weights are generally 100-150kg, male live weights 200-300kg.
There is great variation between the different races of C. elaphus in the wild; in the larger European forms adult males (stags) may weigh over 300 kg whereas relic populations in Corsica or the Po valley (Italy) may only reach 100 kg (Geist, 1999).
Both species have coarse coats with hollow hairs which are red in summer pelage in the case of C. elaphus and grey in C. canadensis. In both the winter coats are longer and more grey. The mane, rump patch and tail size are variable and are used to differentiate different races; thus tails of the European deer are larger in the western races and small in the wapiti. The rump patch is normally white but often delineated by a yellow margin sometimes itself surrounded by black hairs and extending a variable distance up the croup. Manes are common in some races and especially so in the wapiti where the mane extends past the ramus of the mandible and, unlike the red deer, the mane is present in both sexes.
Antlers
Only the males of this deer species grow antlers. The first antlers usually appear at about 9-10 months of age and grow to form single spikes, although these may in red deer carry many points in the well nourished yearling. These antlers clean at about 16 months of age.
C. elaphus has a five-point antler compared with the six-point antler of C. canadensis; however, when adequately nourished, the antlers of C. elaphus are normally much more complex, carrying substantial crowns and many points which have been known to reach 25 on each antler and which commonly achieve ten. Wapiti antlers are finer and longer than those of the red deer but carry fewer points and, in proportion to body weight, less mass. Those of the red deer are generally rougher. Deer farmers have attempted to use the different bloodlines of the two species to achieve heavier antlers for both velvet production and trophies. Hard antler weights of C. elaphus in New Zealand can reach 20 kg which is proportionately much greater than C. canadensis.
Distribution
Top of pageNative range: Eurasia.
Known introduced range: North and South America, New Zealand and Australia. It has proven to be very successful in establishing viable populations and in South America has invaded very distinct environments.
Distribution Table
Top of pageThe distribution in this summary table is based on all the information available. When several references are cited, they may give conflicting information on the status. Further details may be available for individual references in the Distribution Table Details section which can be selected by going to Generate Report.
Habitat
Top of pageThe habitat types occupied by red deer (Cervus elaphus) in southern Chile and Argentina include native forest types and grasslands and modified vegetation types. Currently red deer are established in most forested habitat types encountered between about 34E and 55E S. Inhabited native vegetation types include: alerce forests, Fitzroya cupressoides; Araucaria forest, Araucaria araucaria; Cordilleran Cypres forest, Austrocedrus chilensis; Roble-Rauli-Coihue forest, Nothofagus obliqua, N. nervosa, N. dombeyi; Rauli-Tepa-Coihue forest, Nothofagus nervosa, N. dombeyi, Laureliopsis philipiana; Valdivian Rainforest complex; Lenga forest, Nothofagus pumilio; Nire forest, Nothofagus antarctic; Magallan Coihue forest, Nothofagus betuloides; alto-Andean vegetation; Patagonian steppe; wet meadows and riparian wetlands; brush and grassland of anthropogenic origin - e.g. forests cleared for livestock; agricultural areas and forest plantations. The present distribution of red deer has the following environmental characteristics: it covers the latitudes between 37E 42' S and 54E 55' S (non-contiguous); the longitudes between 73E 36' W and 69E 50' W (non-contiguous); and altitudes between 300m and 2,450m.
Habitat List
Top of page| Category | Habitat | Presence | Status | | Terrestrial-managed |
| Managed forests, plantations and orchards | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
| Terrestrial-natural/semi-natural |
| Cold lands / tundra | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
| Natural forests | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
| Natural grasslands | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
| Scrub / shrublands | Present, no further details | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
Biology and Ecology
Top of pageNutrition
The dietary breadth of red deer (Cervus elaphus) is evidenced by the habitat types invaded so far, which range from temperate rain forests to cold-dry steppe habitat. Females feed on the more lush habitats whilst the males prefer the poorer feeding areas.
Reproduction
Normally one offspring per female. In some parts of Argentina, 10-30% of yearling females breed.
Lifecycle stages
In Patagonia, sexual maturity of red deer (Cervus elaphus) females is at 1 or 2 years of age; gestation lasts approximatly 240 days; males reach their maximum development at 12-14 years of age; life span in the wild in both sexes is 18-20 years.
Pathway Causes
Top of page| Cause | Notes | Long Distance | Local | References | | Acclimatization societies | | Yes | | |
| Animal production | | Yes | | |
| Escape from confinement/ garden escape | | | Yes | |
| Self-propelled | | | Yes | |
Impact Summary
Top of page| Category | Impact | | Biodiversity (generally) | Negative |
Impact
Top of page
General Impacts
Compiled by IUCN SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG)
In South America there is now evidence of extensive dietary overlap of red deer (
Cervus elaphus) with an endangered native huemul (see
Hippocamelus bisulcus in IUCN Red List of Threatened Species) and likely with guanaco (
Lama guanicoe), another native ungulate. Red deer have reached high densities locally with measurable effects on the flora (Flueck, W., pers. comm., 2003).
Deer prevent regeneration of favoured plant species, which causes significant changes to the structure and composition of native ecosystems. At critical sites, non-replacement of canopy species can lead to canopy collapse. There is no evidence in New Zealand, Chile or Argentina, that equilibrium has been reached between deer and the native ecosystems they inhabit. Deer continue to inhibit forest regeneration even at low density (Department of Conservation Policy Statement on Deer Control, 2002).
Risk and Impact Factors
Top of pageImpact mechanisms
- Competition - monopolizing resources
- Herbivory/grazing/browsing
Impact outcomes
- Ecosystem change/ habitat alteration
- Modification of successional patterns
- Negatively impacts forestry
- Threat to/ loss of endangered species
- Threat to/ loss of native species
Invasiveness
- Proved invasive outside its native range
Uses
Top of pageRed deer (Cervus elaphus) have been used to stock game parks for recreational and trophy hunting. Red deer have been farmed for venison, velvet and skins/hides, as well as for Asian medicines using antlers, velvet, tails and testicles, and teeth for jewellery (Auckland Regional Council- PestFacts).
Uses List
Top of pageAnimal feed, fodder, forage
General
- Game animal
- Sport (hunting, shooting, fishing, racing)
Human food and beverage
Materials
- Horn
- Miscellaneous materials
- Skins/leather/fur
Medicinal, pharmaceutical
Prevention and Control
Top of page
Preventative measures: Risk Assessment models for assessing the risk that exotic vertebrates could establish in Australia have been further explored by the Western Australia Department of Agriculture & Food (DAFWA) to confirm that they reasonably predict public safety, establishment and pest risks across a full range of exotic species and risk levels.
Mammals and birds were assessed for the pest risk they pose if introduced to Australia, by calculating Vertebrate Pests Committee (VPC) Threat Categories. These categories incorporate risk of establishing populations in the wild, risk of causing public harm, and risk of becoming a pest (eg causing agricultural damage, competing with native fauna, etc). The 7-factor Australian Bird and Mammal Model was used for these assessments.
Physical: In Argentina, wild red deer (Cervus elaphus) are generally treated as a resource, mainly for trophy hunting, and currnently there is no comprehensive strategy to monitor and control populations. Although considered an unwanted invasive species in National parks, current manipulations are restricted to trophy hunting. Only where densities have reached high levels on some private lands, red deer are specifically culled to decrease the density. Several provinces and National parks with wild red deer have established their hunting regulations, though not being based on population characteristics or conservation goals (Werner, F., pers. comm., 2004).
Integrated management: The Department of Conservation in New Zealand has released a policy statement on deer control, (Department of Conservation Policy Statement on Deer Control, 2001), which adopts an integrated approach to control of deer, working with all interest groups.
Management Information
Compiled by IUCN SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG)
Case Study: New Zealand
NB: The information in this case study has been extracted from Fraser Parkes and Thomson (2003) unless otherwise stated.
1. 0 Management Strategies
1.1 Eradication of Newly Escaped Deer Populations
In New Zealand various species of deer, mainly red deer (C. elaphus scoticus) have established themselves in the wild, including areas of Northland and Taranaki. One study (Fraser Parkes and Thomson 2003) has found that in 85% of cases of farm escape of deer either farmers or the Department of Conservation successfully recaptured deer. Eradication of wild deer populations (following farm escapes) has been carried out in Northland and Taranaki between 1997 and 2000 and it is suggested such management should be extended to deer-free areas north of Auckland, the Coromandel Peninsula and Banks Peninsula. To know more eradication campaigns in Northland and Taranaki (including costing details) please see Fraser Parkes and Thomson (2003) Management of New Deer Populations in Northland and Taranaki.
1.2 Preventing Farm Escapes through Legislation
Farm escapes of deer in New Zealand are usually the result of inadequate fencing or damage to adequate fencing. Relevant legislation on the keeping of deer and deer fencing regulations is in place. Deer farming is prohibited in certain parts of New Zealand and, where it is permitted, farming and fencing standards are regulated under the Wild Animal Control Act 1977, particularly section 12, which requires farmers to obtain a permit to farm and to maintain adequate fences. DOC is developing more comprehensive standards and inspection procedures that will be a prerequisite for farmers to obtain approval to farm deer, and act as a guide to DOC officers, especially when inspecting areas where escaped deer pose additional risks.
Illegal liberations of deer also pose a problem and there may need to be enforcement of the relevant legislation to discourage people from liberating deer (although this has reported to be a problem with sika deer not red deer per say).
1.3 Pest Management Strategies
Finally, public and stakeholder awareness of the problem is reinforced in proactive planning documents such as the local Conservation Management Strategies and Regional Pest Management Strategies. Reactive management, aimed at dealing with new deer populations as they are discovered, has focused on surveillance, early detection, and on eradicating any populations discovered.
1.4 Freecall Number
In Northland, DOC has a toll-free number (0800 FIND DEER), which farmers use to report deer escapes to the department. Typically, DOC Northland receives about four calls each month and checks the reports within 24 hours. This system has already resulted in the successful recapture of several mass deer escapes. It encourages farmers to report early and not just rely on their own devices, and is visible evidence that management agencies are taking the problem seriously.
2.0 Management Tools
2.1 Monitoring Deer
The usual method in New Zealand is to use randomly located faecal pellet transects (Baddeley 1985, in Fraser Parkes and Thomson 2003), but in the case of low-density and/or patchy new deer populations a stratified design is recommended, i.e. more transects would be located in areas known or suspected to have most deer.
2.2 Detecting Deer
This can be done via information from the public (reportings of sightings), searching for visual signs in the field (feacal remains, browsing signs and tracks), spotlighting, aerial surveys and use of dogs and trained experts or thermal infrared cameras. Surveying methods are further discussed in Fraser Parkes and Thomson (2003).
3.0 Control Techniques
3.1 Hunting Deer
Many ungulate populations have been eradicated from New Zealand (Parkes 1990, unpubl. data, in Fraser Parkes and Thomson 2003) and in nearly all cases this was achieved finally through various forms of ground hunting. Aerial hunting is another well-developed control method for ungulates in New Zealand, and is commonly used to harvest deer for game meat (Challies 1990; Parkes et al. 1996). Although this method is most successful in non-forested habitats, it is often possible to shoot animals in forests either through the canopy or when the animals are crossing slips, river terraces, or other open habitats.
Team hunting is one way to decrease the proportion of animals that escape their first encounter with the hunters. It was trialed against deer and chamois in the South Island in the 1950s (Batcheler and Logan 1963, in Fraser Parkes and Thomson 2003), but has improved considerably in recent years in campaigns against feral goats with the use of dogs (trained for the purpose) and the availability of radio communication devices to keep the hunters in contact one with another (Parkes et al. in press, in Fraser Parkes and Thomson 2003).
3.2 Poisoning Deer
Deer can be poisoned by aerial baiting (Daniel 1965, in Fraser Parkes and Thomson 2003). Between 30% and 93% of deer are usually killed during aerial 1080-baiting campaigns aimed at possums (Fraser and Sweetapple 2000, Nugent et al. 2001a, in Fraser Parkes and Thomson 2003). Widespread application of 1080 baits is expensive, but the may be of use in eliminating localised populations of deer that are not easily killed by other means. The use of 1080 gels smeared on leaves of palatable plant species as baits has successfully reduced a moderate-density red deer population in the central North Island by 78% (Sweetapple 1997, in Fraser Parkes and Thomson 2003). It is likely to be less successful in low density populations with abundant food sources, as evidenced by the failed attempt to eradicate red deer on Secretary Island (New Zealand) (Tustin 1977, in Fraser Parkes and Thomson 2003).
3.3 Exclusion Fencing
Duncan and colleagues (2006) found that fencing (in comparison to either form of hunting; aerial or ground) is the most effective deer control method of encouraging mountain beech seedling growth and mountain beech forest recovery rate. The same may apply to other forest ecosystems. The use of fencing may prove to be useful in preventing the re-invasion of deer into ecologically sensitive areas following deer eradication or control.
4.0 Integrated Management
The proposed eradication of red deer from Secretary Island (New Zealand) is designed to protect the ecological values of the island, and to test and develop methods for intensive control of deer (Crouchley et al. 2007). The eradication campaign will involve a combination of control methods including aerial hunting, ground hunting, use of barrier fences and capture pens, use of self-attaching radio transmitter collars and ground baiting (1080 gel).As there has never been a deer eradication campaign on an island of similar size or habitat this project is somewhat experimental and will be a valuable lesson in vertebrate management and island eradications. For the details of this integrated management proposal please see Crouchley et al. 2007. Secretary Island Secretary Island Operational Plan: Deer Eradication.
5.0 Research
5.1 Forest Recovery Dynamics
Duncan and colleagues (2006) performed an analysis of the mountain beech (Northofagus solandri var. cliffortioides) data from Kaweka Forest Park to guide managers on future deer control. They assessed the recruitment rate of mountain beech forest under three forms of deer control (deer-fenced plots, aerial hunting areas and recreational hunting areas). Mountain beech seedling growth, recruitment and survival were monitored to under the three conditions and then modelled to determine recovery rates. The models indicated that mountain beech forest would take the longest time to recover under recreational hunting and the fastest time to recover under fencing (an up to 80 year shorter time period compared with recreational hunting).
There is currently great interest in restoring ecosystems affected by invasive organisms. While government agencies in New Zealand have attempted to reduce deer numbers and restore forests to something approaching their pre-invasion composition and structure, they have met with only limited success. Coomes and colleagues (2003) have investigated and discussed the various fascinating dynamics that are involved in forest regeneration following deer control. Based on a literature review, the authors identified the following factors (some inter-related) which could impact forest regeneration and make deer impacts irreversible: (1) palatable species remain highly browsed even at low deer densities as a result of diet switching; (2) vacated niches become occupied by plant species not eaten by deer; (3) seed sources become locally extinct; (4) successional pathways become fundamentally altered; (5) ecosystem processes shift; (6) other exotic animals and/or plants become naturalised and weaken the effectiveness of single-species (deer) control. On a positive note scientific research can contribute to effective forest restoration by the creation of empirically based forest-dynamics models (eg: computer simulations) that place regeneration in the context of other processes such as disturbance, soil fertility, and multiple invasive organisms (Coomes et al. 2003).
5.2 Other Research
The Department of Conservation (New Zealand) is currently involved in trialing various control technologies which could potentially be incorporated into deer control stategies. These include: (i) remote monitoring of capture pens, (ii) self-attaching transmittor collars, (iii) use of baits and/or lures, monitoring cameras, (iv) night vision equipment and (v) DNA analysis of hair samples (Crouchley et al. 2007).
References
Bibliography
Top of pageAuckland Regional Council (ARC) Pest Facts. http://www.arc.govt.nz/albany/fms/main/Documents/Environment/Plants%20and%20animals/animal%20pests.pdf
Bomford, M., 2003. Risk Assessment for the Import and Keeping of Exotic Vertebrates in Australia. Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra. http://www.feral.org.au/feral_documents/PC12803.pdf
Coomes, D.A., Allen, R.B., Forsyth, D.M. and Lee, W.G. 2003. Factors Preventing the Recovery of New Zealand Forests Following Control of Invasive Deer, Conservation Biology 17 (2): 450–459.
Crouchley, D., Brown, D., Edge, K. and McMurtrie, P. 2007. Secretary Island Secretary Island Operational Plan: Deer Eradication. Department of Conservation: Te Anau. http://www.doc.govt.nz/templates/MultiPageDocumentTOC.aspx?id=43013
Department of Conservation (DOC), 2001. Policy Statement on Deer Control, 2001. http://www.doc.govt.nz/templates/MultiPageDocumentTOC.aspx?id=39968
Department Of Conservation (DOC)., undated. Southern Islands Biodiversity Action Plan - Deer management http://www.doc.govt.nz/templates/MultipageDocumentPage.aspx?id=39666
Díaz, N. I. and J. Smith-Flueck. 2000. The Patagonian huemul. A mysterious deer on the brink of extinction. Literature of Latin America, Buenos Aires. 149 pp. (English and Spanish version available).
Duncan, R., Ruscoe, W., Richardson, S. and Allen, R. 2006. Consequences of Deer Control for Kaweka Mountain Beech Forest Dynamics (Landcare Research Contract Report: LC0607/021). http://www.doc.govt.nz/upload/documents/conservation/threats-and-impacts/animal-pests/kaweka-deer-control.pdf
Flueck, W. T., Jo Anne M. Smith-Flueck And C. M. Naumann, 2003. The current distribution of red deer (Cervus elaphus) in southern Latin America. European Journal of Wildlife Research 49(2): 112-119.
Flueck, W.T, J.M. Smith-Flueck, and K.A. Rüegg, 1995. Management of introduced red deer in Patagonia. (J.A. Bissonette and P.R. Krausman, eds.). Integrating people and wildlife for a sustainable future. Proceedings of the first International Wildlife Management Congress. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, Md. 525-528 proceedings.
Flueck, W.T, M. Franken, and J.M. Smith-Flueck 1999 Red deer, cattle and horses at high elevations in the Andean precordillera: habitat use and deer density Journal of Neotropical Mammalogy (SAREM), Vol. 6, No. 2 5-12
Flueck, W.T. 1996 Interactions between free-ranging guanaco (Lama guanicoe) and introduced red deer (Cervus elaphus) in Argentina. Zeitschrift Jagdwissenschaft, Vol. 42, No. 1 (12-17).
Flueck, W.T. 2001 Pregnancy rates of introduced red deer in Patagonia, Argentina after a period of drought. Ecología Austral, Vol. 11 17-24
Flueck, W.T. J.M. Smith-Flueck, 1993.Über das in Argentinien angesiedelte Rotwild (Cervus elaphus L., 1758): Verbreitung und Tendenzen. Zeitschrift Jagdwissenschaft, Vol. 39, No. 3 (153-160).
Flueck, Werner T.; and Arlene Jones., 2005. Potential existence of a sylvatic cycle of Taenia ovis krabbei in Patagonia, Argentina. Veterinary Parasitology Volume 135, Issues 3-4, 18 February 2006, Pages 381-383
Fraser, K.W., Parkes, J.P. and Thomson, C. 2003. Management of New Deer Populations in Northland and Taranaki, Science for Conservation 212. http://www.doc.govt.nz/upload/documents/science-and-technical/SFC212.pdf
Hatzofe O, 2006. Invasive Species in Israel. Israel Nature & Parks Authority internal report.
IUCN/SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG)., 2010. A Compilation of Information Sources for Conservation Managers Involved in the Prevention, Eradication, Management and Control of the Spread of Invasive Alien Species that are a Threat to Native biodiversity and Natural Ecosystems.
Nugent, G. and Fraser, W. 2005. Red Deer. In C.M. King (Ed.): The Hanndbook of New Zealand Mammals, Second Edition, pp 401-420. Oxford University Press, Melbourne.
Smith-Flueck, J.M. 2003. La ecología del huemul (Hippocamelus bisulcus) en la Patagonia Andina de Argentina y consideraciones sobre su conservación. Doctoral thesis, Univ. Nac. Comahue, Argentina. 361 pp.
References
Top of pageArcher JA, 2004. Selection and breeding technologies for genetic improvement in New Zealand deer. Proceedings 21 of Deer Branch NZVA, World Deer Vet Congress held at Queenstown, New Zealand, February 2004, 92–96.
Berg DK, Asher GW, 2004. New Reproductive Technologies for Red Deer and Wapiti. Proceedings 21 of Deer Branch NZVA, World Deer Vet Congress held at Queenstown, New Zealand, February 2004, 71–75.
Blaxter KBSir, Kay RNB, Sharman GAM, Cunningham JMM, Eadie J, Hamilton WJ, 1988. Farming the red deer. The final report of an investigation by the Rowett Research Institute and the Hill Farming Research Organisation. Farming the red deer. The final report of an investigation by the Rowett Research Institute and the Hill Farming Research Organisation., 169 pp.
Bringans M, 2004. Collection of semen from cervids. Proceedings 21 of Deer Branch NZVA, World Deer Vet Congress held at Queenstown, New Zealand, February 2004, 80–83.
Fleckinger A, 2003. Otzi, the Iceman. Vienna/Bolzano: Folio.
Geist V, 1999. Deer of the World: their evolution, behaviour and ecology. Shrewsbury, UK: Swan-Hill Press.
Haigh JC, Hudson RJ, 1993. Farming Wapiti and Red Deer. Toronto, Canada: Mosby.
ISSG, 2011. Global Invasive Species Database (GISD). Invasive Species Specialist Group of the IUCN Species Survival Commission. http://www.issg.org/database
Jarman MR, 1972. European Deer Economies and the Advent of the Neolithic. In: Higgs ES, ed. Papers in Economic PreHistory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Polziehn RO, Strobeck C, 2002. A phylogenetic comparison of red deer and wapiti using mitochondrial DNA. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 22(3):342-356.
Putman R, 1988. The Natural History of Deer. Bromley, UK: Christopher Helm.
Rackham O, 1986. The History of the Countryside. London, UK: JM Dent.
Schafer EH, 1968. Hunting parks and animal enclosures in ancient China. Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, 11:318-343.
Simmons IG, Dimbleby GW, 1974. The possible role of ivy (Hedera helix L.) in the mesolithic economy of Western Europe. Journal of Archaeological Science, 1:291-296.
Suttie JM, Haines SR, Li C, 2004. Proceedings of Second Antler Science and Product Technology Symposium, Queenstown, New Zealand. New Zealand: AgResearch.
Thorleifson I, Pearse T, Friedel B, 1997. Elk Farming Handbook. Canada: Alberta Venison Council.
Whitehead GK, 1972. Deer of the World. London, UK: Constable.
Wilson PR, 1984. Editor, Annual Proceedings of Deer Branch New Zealand Veterinary Association.
Wilson PR, 2004. Editor, Proceedings 21 of Deer Branch NZVA, World Deer Vet Congress held at Queenstown, New Zealand, February 2004.
Woodbury MR, 2004. The Basics of Chronic Wasting Disease. In Proceedings 21 of Deer Branch NZVA, World Deer Vet Congress held at Queenstown, New Zealand, February 2004, 50–53.
Yerex D, 2001. Deer, the New Zealand Story. Christchurch, New Zealand: Canterbury University Press.
Contributors
Top of pageReviewed by: Dr. Werner T. Flueck, Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Tecnologica and Centro de Ecologia Aplicada del Neuquen, Argentina.
Principal sources: Dr. Werner T. Flueck, Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Tecnologica and Centro de Ecologia Aplicada del Neuquen, Argentina
Compiled by: IUCN/SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG) |
Last Modified: Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Distribution Maps
Top of page
- = Present, no further details
- = Evidence of pathogen
- = Widespread
- = Last reported
- = Localised
- = Presence unconfirmed
- = Confined and subject to quarantine
- = See regional map for distribution within the country
- = Occasional or few reports