Where forest & forestry resources come together for all users!

Sponsored by the Michigan Forest Association and Michigan State University Extension

The carrying capacity idea gets tossed around in a variety of ways, most of which are difficult to define and defend, if not outright incorrect. Carrying capacity related to white-tailed deer is likely the most common context in which the idea is used, and misused.

In some ways, defining carrying capacity might be theoretical. In other ways it has practical implications. In any case, most people who use the term often find it hard to explain exactly what they mean. Notions of carrying capacity are largely value defined, rather than science defined.

Science-based evaluations of carrying capacity are difficult to find in the literature. Value-based evaluations are prolific. Both scientific and social definitions have legitimacy. The area of greatest conflict occurs when social values are mistaken for science.

Carrying capacity is the maximum number of individuals of a species that the landscape can support over time. That's not too hard to understand. However, imbedded in this definition are a number of difficult questions. Do all species behave the same? Which landscape? Which season? How are other species impacted? How long in time? Does the maximum fluctuate? How frequently? For what reasons?

Research has shown that populations of different species can behave in very different ways. A species relates to its own kind and with other species. Non-living habitat elements, such as weather, can have huge impacts. Growth curves showing change from low numbers to high numbers have more than one shape.

Not all species populations show the classic rate of increase to a sustainable plateau. For most species, the curves don't go flat or stabilize. Some species, such as whitetails, can irrupt and crash. Theoretically, these populations will stabilize in balance with their environment. However, most ungulate research has demonstrated a continuing cycle of irruptions and crashes.

When a population is maintained at their carrying capacity; what impacts does that have on other parts of an ecosystem? White-tails at carrying capacity can have negative impacts on the regeneration of timber species and understory plants, which serve critical habitat for many other wildlife species. Simply because a landscape might be able to carry a certain number of animals . . . should it?

An ecosystem's ability to support a population varies widely. For most species in the north, winter is the season when food is scarcest and environmental conditions most rigorous. The mix of habitats and constant habitat change are key variables. It is unrealistic to expect things to stay the same in our actively dynamic natural environment.

Calculating a carrying capacity for a species requires knowledge of the species and its environment, a definition of the range size, and a sense of time measured in years or decades. Once determined, can all species be managed at that level? Are population irruptions and crashes natural? Or are these patterns caused by human influence?

Much more commonly, populations are managed using a set of social values. However, values are seldom universal and are not static. Deer populations probably provide the best examples and generate the most controversy. How much tree regeneration can be sacrificed before it is too much? How many car collisions are acceptable? How much risk to endangered species shall be tolerated? How much vegetation loss in parks and natural areas will be allowed? At what point is hunter satisfaction or dissatisfaction significant? Is a population crash a waste or merely nature taking its course? Is damage to vegetation permanent or does it recover after a period of time when deer populations are down? Can deer populations managed at artificially high populations prevent vegetation recovery? What is artificial? The list of questions continues.

Most wildlife and forest management systems are based on sets of societal values, using science-based data to achieve these values. The science that is used to support a value system should not be mistaken for science defining nature in a pristine sense or as a replacement for value judgments.

The body of science that enables foresters to grow tree plantations, maintain aspen stands, or accelerate old growth conditions reflects a need to satisfy demands of society. The body of science used to manage white-tail populations reflects current values of society held towards deer. Values change.

Science employed to support one side of an inflammatory issue is usually a misuse of science. The conflict is over values and should be debated as such. Science, when properly funded, can tell us, for example, about the level of biodiversity across a defined landscape. Societal values will tell us whether that level is appropriate or not.

Trailer
Bill Cook is an MSU Extension forester providing educational programming for the entire Upper Peninsula. His office is located at the MSU Upper Peninsula Tree Improvement Center near Escanaba. The Center is the headquarters for three MSU Forestry properties in the U.P., with a combined area of about 8,000 acres. He can be reached at cookwi@msu.edu or 906-786-1575.

Prepared by Bill Cook, Forester/Biologist, Michigan State University Extension, 6005 J Road, Escanaba, MI 49829
906-786-1575 (voice), 906-786-9370 (fax), e-mail: cookwi@msu.edu

Use / reprinting of these articles is encouraged. Please notify Bill Cook.
By-line should read "Bill Cook, MSU Extension" Please use the article trailer whenever possible.

Michigan State University is an affirmative action equal opportunity institution. The U.S. Department of Agriculture prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital status or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.)

This website is maintained by Bill Cook, Michigan State University Extension Forest in the Upper Peninsula. Comments, questions, and suggestions are gratefully accepted.
Last update of this page was 5 November, 2018