Experiments on Starvation and Recovery of Mule Deer Does

We attempted to test the hypothesis that mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) subjected to a short period of starvation would exhibit better survival after feeding than deer starved presumably nearly to death. But, no starved deer died after feeding resumed. We were unable to synchronize condition of starving deer to produce a group close to death at resumption of feeding. Free-ranging deer starving in winter probably also lack synchrony of declining physical condition. We therefore postulate that supplemental feeding can save a portion of the herd not already close to death. Comparison of blood parameters for nonstarved deer, starved deer, and deer dying of starvation for two trials indicated that: (1) deer catabolize stored fat and muscle protein during starvation, and (2) increased catabolism of muscle protein as fat stores are depleted results in impaired gluconeogenesis and deer in this hypoglycemic state succumb to starvation. J. WILDL. MANAGE. 41(1):81-86 Studies involving feeding of starved penned mule deer (deCalesta et al. 1974, 1975) did not confirm three hypotheses concerning failure of winter feeding to prevent losses. These were: (1) rumen microorganisms of starving deer are lost, die, or lose the ability to digest feeds; (2) chemical composition of feed fed to starving deer influences survival; and (3) deer become irreversibly moribund when starved longer than a certain period and cannot be saved by feeding. Our data suggested that starved deer dying after new food was offered were already dying when feeding commenced and had not died as a result of feeding. Success of feeding starving deer probably depends on the degree to which metabolic changes progressed prior to feeding. The purpose of this research was to test the hypothesis that deer subjected to a short period of starvation would exhibit better survival after feeding than deer subjected to starvation of sufficient duration to render them close to death. We thank R. W. Phillips, Department of Physiology and Biophysics, Colorado State University, for his advice and the use of his laboratory, and V. Athanasiou, T. Bahti, G. Collins, A. Jones, M. Loftsgard, D. Reeder, D. Roy, G. Schoonveld, W. Vassar, and L. Young for assistance with laboratory analysis and animal handling. Financial aid and pen space were provided by the Colorado Division of Wildlife Resources (P-R Proje t W-38-R-24) in cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.