Unfortunately, the Key Deer have been used by some local groups to further their own causes. Keeping the Key Deer on the endangered species list furthers this ability for exploitation.
The Key Deer have not been properly protected: One of the Major components of the Key Deer Study and the Resulting Doctorial Thesis call for a Captive Breeding Program to protect the herd from the danger of extinction from Natural Catastrophes such as Hurricanes, or disease from over-population. Until such time as this Vital Component is met, the Key Deer cannot be down-graded, nor will their DNA be protected.
TRUTH ABOUT THE KEY DEER NO ONE WANTS YOU TO KNOW: THE FOLLOWING ARE STATEMENTS OF FACT MADE BY R. LOPEZ IN HIS 2001 STUDY: Population Ecology of the Florida Key Deer
Abstract iii: “Current density estimates (450 -515) suggest that population increases [240%] over the last 30 years on Big Pine and No Name keys have placed the deer population at or near carrying capacity.Further increases in deer numbers might result in damage to vegetation and an increased likelihood of disease.” (*NOTE: Today, the (USFWS) “Official” population total is currently estimated to be 800+. Unofficially, we hear that the population total exceeds 1,000 Key Deer.) “Deer dispersal between islands in low, and that might require biologists to manage other island populations using translocations.” “Severe hurricanes continue to threaten the Key deer population. The only insurance against the risk of population extinction is to increase the number of deer on other islands and to initiate a captive propagation program.”“additional development can occur on Big Pine and No Name keys without jeopardizing the overall viability of Key deer.”
Pg 50: Despite increases in highway mortality and urban development, the Key Deer population has increased nearly 240% in the last 30 years.
Pg 52 “Nettles et al. (2001) reported increases in the incidence of disease are a result of high deer populations at or above carrying capacity.”
Pg 52-53 Data Biases: “the contribution of road mortality to overall deer mortality is likely overestimated” “Previous studies reported highway mortality accounted for 60-75% of total deer mortality…road mortality to overall deer mortality is likely overestimated”
Pg 53 Life Expectancy: “Key deer life expectancy was high despite high road kill mortality”.
Pg 53 Management Implications: “deer populations on Big Pine and No Name keys are approaching or near carrying capacity based on observed abomasal parasite counts.” “…highway mortality might benefit the Key deer population by reducing the overall population size. In other words, highway mortality serves as an alternative form of predation or hunting for the Key deer.Despite the biological benefits in herd reduction, however, minimizing highway mortality is encouraged because of human safety concerns and because road mortality in an inhumane method of reducing deer numbers.”
Pg 189 Chapter VIIIConclusion and Implications: Research Highlights: Urban Development: “Population increases in white-tailed deer herds due to urbanization has been well documented…urban development is partly responsible for the [240%] increase in the (Key) deer herd in the last 30 years.”
Pg 190 Deer Numbers: Herd health indices, however, suggest that population increases over the last 30 years have placed the deer population at or near carrying capacity on Big Pine and No Name keys (Nettles et al. 2001, Chapter IV).Maintaining high deer densities is not recommended because of potential damage to habitat and the increased likelihood of disease” “…a reduction in deer numbers when deer densities are high would benefit the Key deer herd”
Pg 190 Stochastic Events: “…hurricanes or disease will continue to threaten the viability of the deer herd”“The only safeguard against the risk of population extinction is increasing the numbers of deer on other islands via translocations and” “initiating a captive propagation program on the mainland.”
Pg 190 Habitat Conservation Planning: “Model simulations suggest a certain degree of development can occur on Big Pine and No Name keys without jeopardizing the overall viability of the deer population.”
Pg 191 Management Implications: Land Acquisitions 2) “Identify areas that are not important to the viability of the deer herd and allow these areas to be developed.”
Pg 192 Population Management: 1)“Establish reclassification criteria that can be realistically achieved.Currently some recovery criteria are unobtainable.For example, the Key Deer Recovery Plan states that the Key deer will be down-listed “when stable populations of the Key deer are distributed throughout its historic range; and two, additional, stable populations have been established along the periphery of the historic range”.For the latter, this requires the establishment of Key deer populations in Key West and Marathon” “…Such criteria are unreasonable and do not allow for a step-down process necessary in a Recovery Plan.” 2)“reduce deer densities, if necessary, to maintain a healthy deer population.” “…maintaining high densities of Key deer is not desirable because of potential habitat degradation and increased risk of disease transmission (McShea et al 1997, Davidson and Doster 1997, Nettles et at 2001).” 3)“Conduct Key deer translocations” “Deer translocations are recommended to reduce risks to the population such as disease outbreaks or hurricanes.” 4)“Highway mortality currently benefits the deer population by reducing the overpopulation size” “Despite the biological benefits in herd reduction, reducing highway mortality is recommended because of human safety concerns and because it is an inhumane method of reducing deer numbers.” “..contraception should be developed to allow greater flexibility in managing the deer herd” *NOTE: This is a 2001 Statement, the heard has increased dramatically since this recommendation. 5)“Initiate a captive propagation program (S2.8, USFWS 1999)”“Key deer susceptibility to sever storms, however, warrants the implementation of a captive breeding program” “…to ensure the survival of the Key deer population an alternative “refuge” protected from natural disturbances such as hurricanes is needed.”“…successful recovery of the Key deer requires the use of multiple strategies rather than a single approach (land acquisition)”. *NOTE: To date there is no captive breeding program, there are only 5 Key Deer located in Zoos. Pg 193 Public Outreach: 2) Remove Recovery Plan criteria that are not directly related to the recovery of the Key deer.”
*NOTE: THE ABOVE STATEMENTS ARE DIRECT QUOTES FROM THE LOPEZ STUDY. Excerpts from: POPULATION ECOLOGY OF FLORIDA KEY DEER R. Lopez, PhD 2001, submitted to Texas A&M Universityhttp://apc.tamu.edu/keys/rlopez.pdf
Webmasters Note: NoNameKey.org does not support any local or private Key Deer or Refuge "groups". The Key Deer have unfortunately been misused for local, political, and personal agendas. NoNameKey.org feels that only the appropriate organization, US Fish and Wildlife Services by the direction and authority provided to them through the Endangered Species Act, should weigh-in or direct when it comes the Key Deer herd, the National Wildlife Refuges, and best management practices.
The site is presented by a voluntary association of individuals working to develop a common resource of information on the Florida Keys.Most information is taken from published articles and media reports already in the public domain but gathered here for your convenience. This information is being provided freely, and no kind of agreement or contract is created between you and the owners or users of this site. We cannot guarantee the validity of the information found here.None of the contributors, administrators, or anyone else connected with this site in any way whatsoever can be responsible for the appearance of any inaccurate or libelous information or for your use of the information contained in or linked from these web pages.