Wild Red Deer (Cervus elaphus) Do Not Play a Role as Vectors or Reservoirs of SARS-CoV-2 in North-Eastern Poland.

Several studies reported a high prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 among white-tailed deer in North America. Monitoring cervids in all regions to better understand SARS-CoV-2 infection and circulation in other deer populations has been urged. To evaluate deer exposure and/or infection to/by SARS-CoV-2 in Poland, we sampled 90 red deer shot by hunters in five hunting districts in north-eastern Poland. Serum and nasopharyngeal swabs were collected, and then an immunofluorescent assay (IFA) to detect anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was performed as well as real-time PCR with reverse transcription for direct virus detection. No positive samples were detected. There is no evidence of spillover of SARS-CoV-2 from the human to deer population in Poland.

There is only one winner: The negative impact of red deer density on roe deer numbers and distribution in the Slowinski National Park and its vicinity.

Red and roe deer are the most numerous cervids in Europe, and they occur in sympatry in most regions. Roe deer were considered to be an inferior competitor in studies in which they co-occurred with fallow deer or muntjac. Despite the remarkable overlap of their ranges, there are few studies on the competition between the red and roe deer. Since interspecific interactions among ungulates are often related to their mutual densities, the current study focused on the effects of high red deer density on the roe deer numbers and spatial distribution in the unhunted Slowinski National Park (SNP) in northern Poland and forest districts open to hunting bordering the park. Using fecal pellet group counts, it was found that in the forest districts (where red deer densities were 2-3 times lower than in the SNP), roe deer densities were significantly higher than in the park. The red-to-roe deer density ratio was 10.8 and 2.7, in the SNP and the surrounding forest districts, respectively. Moreover, in the SNP, the roe deer distribution was negatively affected by the red deer habitat use, while in the hunting areas, such an effect was not recorded. The negative influence of the red deer on the roe deer population in the park was most probably due to the red deer impact on food availability. The biomass of the plant groups forming the staple food of the roe deer (Rubus spp., forbs, dwarf shrubs) was significantly higher in the fenced plots than in the unfenced ones. Lack of hunting in the protected areas may benefit only some species in ungulate assemblages which, in turn, may contradict one of their objectives-to maintain viable and ecologically functional populations.

Drive counts as a method of estimating ungulate density in forests: mission impossible?

Although drive counts are frequently used to estimate the size of deer populations in forests, little is known about how counting methods or the density and social organization of the deer species concerned influence the accuracy of the estimates obtained, and hence their suitability for informing management decisions. As these issues cannot readily be examined for real populations, we conducted a series of 'virtual experiments' in a computer simulation model to evaluate the effects of block size, proportion of forest counted, deer density, social aggregation and spatial auto-correlation on the accuracy of drive counts. Simulated populations of red and roe deer were generated on the basis of drive count data obtained from Polish commercial forests. For both deer species, count accuracy increased with increasing density, and decreased as the degree of aggregation, either demographic or spatial, within the population increased. However, the effect of density on accuracy was substantially greater than the effect of aggregation. Although improvements in accuracy could be made by reducing the size of counting blocks for low-density, aggregated populations, these were limited. Increasing the proportion of the forest counted led to greater improvements in accuracy, but the gains were limited compared with the increase in effort required. If it is necessary to estimate the deer population with a high degree of accuracy (e.g. within 10% of the true value), drive counts are likely to be inadequate whatever the deer density. However, if a lower level of accuracy (within 20% or more) is acceptable, our study suggests that at higher deer densities (more than ca. five to seven deer/100 ha) drive counts can provide reliable information on population size.