Touching the Wild

by Joe Hutto

  Like does, males are largely faithful to a given winter range, and the same individuals will return year after year. Bucks retain long-term social bonds with the maternal herd, and these affiliations are distinctly more complex and interesting than simply the urge to mate. Some older and thus more dominant males may spend their rut in other territories, where there is perhaps less competition, but after the general chaos of the mating season has ended, they predictably return to their original winter herd of does, fawns, and bucks. They are immediately greeted by the other familiar males with only a minimum of ritualized posturing and the obligatory verification and reestablishment of status. Within twenty-four hours they are once again secure members of the herd. Within the winter herd, bucks prefer the company of other bucks. Occasionally, a solitary, mature buck will attempt to become attached to a herd with which he has no prior affiliation, and although he may be allowed to remain after weeks or even months of resentment by the other bucks, he is only allowed a “satellite” status. Most or all overt aggression may subside, but many of these bucks never become fully integrated into the brotherhood of resident bucks. However, with persistence, younger one-and two-year-old unattached antlered bucks may eventually achieve true affiliation with the greater herd.

  When predators are active in the area, a winter herd will gather together and “herd” in the truest sense, apparently applying the “safety in numbers” strategy. Once pursued by lions, large packs of coyotes, or wolves, and, particularly if a herd member has been killed, the deer may actually disperse from the home range and take refuge miles away, only returning gradually in a day or two, once the coast is clear. Predator winter ranges tend to be large, so most are itinerate and seem to pass through the area only on a wide circuit. But with a variety and abundance of major predators in our area, it is a probability that some danger is never too far away.

  By June, yearling bucks are no longer tolerated by their mothers, and an expectant doe may be seen in aggressive pursuit of her previous year’s buck fawn. In fact, all young bucks in their first velvet are eventually persecuted by all the expectant, mature does, whereas the older, mature bucks are ignored or indulged, and even on occasion are casually allowed to inspect the newborn fawns. For a time I suspected that jealous yearling bucks must represent a threat to the mother’s newborn. But, after many years of observation, I have never seen a buck of any age ever make an aggressive gesture toward a newborn fawn. It is interesting to observe the gentle and kind interest shown by the otherwise powerful mature bucks in velvet as they cautiously inspect a fragile, wobbly newborn. The little fawns may be seen fearlessly sniffing and examining the bucks with great interest. These early introductions may serve to help the new little strangers become integrated into the herd. But while the new mothers may seem to ignore the older bucks, they continue treating the one-year-old males with great hostility. The doe’s pursuits may involve long distances and repeated blows to the young deer’s backside as she may be seen chasing the confused juvenile for a mile or more. I have wondered if perhaps this behavior may serve to disperse males into new territory. This is the only possible inbreeding barrier that I have observed among mule deer. It all seems a pitiful development for the confounded young buck who is still entirely attached to his mother and repeatedly tries to return to the comfort of her side. However, if no replacement is born because of infertility or miscarriage, the young buck may immediately reestablish the bond with his mother, and they can retain a close doe-fawn attachment for yet another year. Even though the yearling buck is not always at his mother’s side, he will maintain a consistent proximity, coming together with her throughout the day to rest or indulge in the occasional mutual grooming session. Young mule deer bucks are tentative and insecure and apparently derive great solace from their mother’s attention.

  But, typically, by late June, young males have gotten the message and keep company with other juvenile bucks. Although some of these young bucks will certainly return to their old home range during summer or fall, many seem to disappear into new areas and are never seen again.

  Most deer are seasonal migrants, and it could be said that by summer there is a somewhat even distribution of deer spread over hundreds of square miles of high country. Here they may raise fawns and avail themselves of ideal browsing conditions throughout the complex mountain ecology, including the rich and botanically diverse groves of aspen that surround the many lush mountain basins and their drainages. Predators no longer have the advantage of large, clearly visible herds of animals concentrated on the open windswept slopes and foothills, as they too are well dispersed and actively about the business of rearing young. And in spite of the migratory predisposition of many deer, there are certainly those groups of related individuals that remain sedentary at lower elevation the entire year and merely represent the predictable distribution of deer as determined by the carrying capacity of that particular habitat. Without the advantage of radio tracking collars, it is impossible to know how far some of the deer in this study group disperse. I believe that once a deer has been born in a particular location, it is biologically obligated and likely to return to the place of its birth to have its fawns, and no amount of encouragement or enticement can alter the urge. The migratory urge can be forestalled, but sooner or later, the deer is compelled to return. Those deer could be considered migratory obligates. But, again, one defining feature of mule deer behavior is that mule deer are definitively unpredictable, and not all mule deer are migratory—and not all migratory deer will be inclined to remain so. Just when you think you have the edge in understanding and predicting this animal’s behavior, it will all fly in your face as the deer consistently do the unexpected. However, even a consistent lack of predictability is a pattern of sorts, so I have no doubt that their seemingly capricious behavior is one of their many finely tuned survival strategies. Life for a mule deer is a complex chessboard with no lines, few set rules, and one thousand pieces.

  Mule deer are sensual, affectionate creatures, and grooming is an important component of mule deer society and certainly serves to reinforce family bonds and create new affiliations among the group. It is endearing to see two large, fully mature bucks with antlers engaging in this gentle social activity that would seem to satisfy any possible definition of true affection. Indeed, grooming is one of the tools I use to ingratiate myself to these affectionate creatures, and when they respond in kind and attempt to groom me in return, that is the moment when I realize they have come to accept me in some way as a member of their herd or family.

  Mothers lavish attention on their fawns, spending much time licking and grooming them in an obvious effort to keep them clean and free of any external parasites. Interestingly, in a matter of weeks the behavior becomes reciprocal, and the fawn may be occasionally seen actually returning the favor to the doe. The grooming process obviously brings great pleasure to the recipient, as doe, buck, and fawn alike may be seen with sagging eyelids, in languid, peaceful bliss, being rhythmically groomed and nuzzled.

  It is all too common for fawns to become orphaned throughout the summer, and I have found that even at four months of age, I can quickly habituate a fawn to my touch. Some orphaned fawns, by virtue of their mother’s prior status, have clearly been born into privilege and are allowed to accompany other resident deer. But other orphaned mule deer fawns, even orphans from different years and different generations, tend to recognize their precarious situations and band together. Often forming their own family group, they may remain identified with one another for years. In many cases the presence of an unaffiliated orphan is not tolerated by the other does, and even on occasion the helpless fawn is brutally persecuted—possibly serving to keep a sick, unhealthy young animal with little chance of survival from potentially infecting other fawns. In addition, does are often resentful of any other fawn that comes sniffing around their udders looking to be nursed, and sadly a starving fawn will often run to the side of another lactating doe, only to be rebuffed. If an older fawn beco
mes orphaned, he can survive for periods of time, depending on how much natural browse he has begun to eat and whether he’s been lucky enough to avoid a large predator. Mule deer mother’s milk can average 20 percent protein, and the richest possible browse might contain 10 percent; however, in most cases, it will include much less. But all orphans become increasingly emaciated, riddled with parasites, and their survival chances decrease daily. Finally, in desperation, these older orphans display an irrational willingness to accept help from any source—including a caring human. Even when under constant persecution and attacks by other deer, these pathetic little individuals will languish on the periphery of any herd of deer in late fall and winter and are thus easily spotted. In rescuing a number of orphans at various ages and in various states of starvation, I have found that not only are they suffering from some lesser or greater degree of malnutrition and a high internal and external parasite load—they have also clearly become desperately touch-deprived. The attentive mother provides nourishment in many forms, and physical contact appears to be vital to the fawn’s sense of well-being, both physically and emotionally. In just a day or two, an orphan fawn or twins (orphan twins tend to remain together) may quickly surrender to the touch of a nurturing human, with only the offering of perhaps some much-needed food and a few gentle words of encouragement. Often, within mere minutes of being touched, a fawn will relax in your arms, entering a state of almost unconscious bliss, when at long last it is being scratched and coddled; it is only then that it becomes clear that the little creature is only a walking skeleton, wearing a dry, brittle coat and riddled with ticks. In contrast, when handling fawns who are still associated with their mothers, it is clear that she has managed to keep her fawns immaculate, well filled out, and completely free of parasites. Ticks can be a source of great stress to all deer, and it is with obvious delight and even appreciation that they are removed. Thereafter the orphaned fawns—and even these “rescued” fawns that have grown into adulthood—continue to desire regular grooming sessions. It clearly serves to strengthen and reinforce our bonds over time. Older adult deer who are only rarely or never groomed by other individuals must feel some level of deprivation of this kind of tactile interaction and will now and then “ask” for an attention from me that always seems to elicit great pleasure and relief. If I stop the grooming session before the deer is satisfied, I may be pursued, nudged, or even pawed, and reminded that the deer has not had its fill. On more than one occasion I have seen a mature three- or even four-year-old heavily antlered buck in a semiconscious torpor as his aging mother from several years past once again grooms her very large fawn in the comfort of the warming morning sun. Mule deer affiliations can be strong and everlasting.

  The Mule Deer Doe and Fawn

  Within all species, certain specific characteristics are inherent, so generalizations can be made about common behaviors and the physiology that are peculiar to that group. Mule deer can certainly be categorized in this way, and, indeed, there are many defining attributes that distinguish Odocoileus hemionus from other deer.

  And, as with the preponderance of living things, it is often females and the fundamental maternal affiliations that provide the nucleus around which the lives of the members of a species revolve. And, as social creatures, mule deer are most clearly understood in terms of the bedrock that females provide in establishing the family, the extended family, and ultimately the herd that is the foundation on which mule deer life is supported. In most well-organized societies, a structure must be provided, which is often based on a system of social stratification, defined in this case in terms of superior tendencies toward physical well-being and resilience in confronting the environmental stresses of disease, predation, geography, human interference, and weather. This success is most clearly demonstrated by the mere historical persistence of a female and her offspring through time and the consistent ability to produce successive adaptive and prosperous generations of young.

  The mule deer doe hierarchy is more complex than the mere physical prowess and aggression that tend to define the social existence and status of the mule deer buck. Although does can be emphatic in expressing dominance toward other females or fawns within the group, it seems that they are not entirely reliant on mere physicality. Dominance can be achieved through more subtle phenomena and perhaps has much to do with the advantages of birthright. Clearly, the fawns born from dominant does are regarded with more respect and deference by the herd at large. In essence, some fawns, it appears, are simply born into privilege. Dominance may even be a poor choice of words to describe the society of mule deer does, as rank based on maternal affiliations may best describe mule deer authority. Even the highest-ranking doe, occupying a position of greatest respect, may not be particularly authoritative in her demeanor or personality.

  I’ve been confounded by the high-ranking status of some females who lack any conspicuous tendency toward hostility and aggression. Furthermore, these individuals tend to go entirely unchallenged. Not uncommonly, when any perceived dispute arises, it is only the most subtle gesture of a raised chin that serves to immediately resolve the issue. Tempers seem to rarely flare toward a dominant female. In fact, with never a need to exercise her rank, it appears that a dominant doe may even become less aggressive over time. However, these same deer seem to be a focal point around which the greater herd revolves. These dominant deer may make decisions about movements and the times for involvements in various mule deer activities—resting periods, feeding activities, or traversing from one area to the next. A high-ranking doe quietly takes the initiative, and others follow. These experienced veterans—females who have throughout their lives encountered violence and terror—will on occasion confront a potential predator, bravely leading the less experienced and more cautious herd on a headlong charge directly into the face of certain danger—into the face of a predator clearly known by all deer to have killed their fawns or companions on other occasions with impunity. I have seen foxes, bobcats, badgers, and the more formidable coyote turn tail and run, as if fleeing for their lives, while twenty angry deer turn on the afterburners. Cases of coyotes being killed by mule deer have been documented. Mule deer are also known to viciously attack domestic dogs and cats. Recent research has helped shed light on these behaviors and even more extraordinary aspects of female mule deer life.

  Canadian biologist Susan Lingle conducted an important mule deer study in Alberta. While capturing and tagging a large number of mule deer fawns ranging in age from newborn to two weeks, she recorded the predictable loud, bleating distress calls that were emitted by many fawns at the moment of capture. The high-quality recordings were played back under various circumstances to determine whether mule deer does could discriminate between their own fawns’ vocalizations and any other mule deer fawns’. Whitetail fawns were also recorded to test the reactions of both whitetail does and mule deer does to these differing voices. The recordings were played back through hidden speakers, with observers concealed nearby. Mule deer does immediately responded to any fawn in distress and displayed aggressive behaviors toward the hidden speaker. It was also noted that whitetail does responded to whitetail fawn voices but not to mule deer fawns’, and that the response lacked the intense aggression displayed by the mule deer. Furthermore, some whitetail does failed to respond altogether after their fawns were a few weeks old. Then, the question arose: were mule deer unable to recognize their own fawns’ distress call from any others’, or were they clearly going to the aid of any fawn, regardless of whose it was? In subsequent tests, Lingle made a discovery that would prove to be a stunning revelation. Mule deer does standing with their own fawn at their side would abandon that fawn and run to the aid of another fawn who was vocalizing distress in the distance. It appears not only that mule deer cooperate in aggressively attacking predators but, more significant, that the mule deer doe with fawns, or even a barren doe without a fawn, will immediately come to the aid of another female’s helpless fawn. She will in fact put herself at g
reat risk in the face of an attacking predator and, by implication, risk the life of her own fawn, should she succumb to the immediate threat she has chosen to confront. Mothers of many species will bravely attempt to defend their own young from danger, but to come to the aid of another parent’s offspring is, by any measure, phenomenal, and rarely observed in nature, with the possible exception of elephants and some species of whales and dolphins. This represents true reciprocal altruism and has often been applied as one of the unique qualities used to define highly evolved societies. Human reciprocal altruism may merely take the form of one neighbor gladly helping another neighbor raise his barn, or, in more extreme cases, leaving your home and family and sacrificing your own life by charging headlong at a perceived enemy. To risk death by displacing one’s own survival needs and instincts in favor of the welfare of another individual or the group—even at the expense of your own biological family—is an exceedingly rare occurrence.

  I have observed bighorn sheep in cooperative pursuit, chasing a large predator down a high mountain pass for a mile or more. From the kitchen window of our ranch house, Leslye and I once watched a pregnant herd of Angus cattle that was spread over a broad hillside in deep snow suddenly band together at a gallop and chase a lone wolf up and across the far ridge and out of sight. And clear cases of other species cooperatively attacking a known predator are a relatively common occurrence. But reciprocal altruism within a herding species such as deer, where one female—even a female with a fawn at her side—is actually willing to abandon that fawn and perhaps sacrifice herself for another mother’s offspring is seemingly outside the bounds of ordinary expectation. In our own human society, these extraordinary behaviors, occurring only on the rarest of occasions and demonstrating clear unselfish altruistic behavior, are honored and celebrated above all others.