106
The Essex Naturalist
and small stands of woodland for cover and lying up. This is another point for
the behavioural hypothesis.
The roadkill statistics show that many more deer have been killed on the
B.1393 than have been killed on any other similar length of road in the entirety
of Epping Forest. Clearly a high level of deer crossing is occurring here, which is
further evidence to support the observation that deer cross from the Lower
Forest to fields and back again. The other two roads bordering the Lower forest
have a total of two roadkills. A study of the map shows that the arable land on
these borders is neither as large nor as unpopulated as that on the north-western
side. It must also be remembered that these two roads are much less busy than
the B.1393, another reason why there may be less deaths. In the main forest the
A. 104 is certainly as busy, but has fewer road deaths than the B.1393 at the
Lower Forest. However many kills in the main forest occur during the rut, or in
September and April, when herds are either assembling or splitting up; the road
crossings for feeding purposes are made daily.
Hardly any deer are killed south of the Robin Hood roundabout, confirming
the idea that few, if any deer are still to be found there. Most of the remaining
roadkills occur along the main north/south road through the forest, or close to
areas where deer are known to be found, such as Honey Lane Quarters, and the
edge of Deershelter Plain. All of this evidence seems to be a point in favour of
the behavioural hypothesis.
The roads are not a disturbance to the deer in themselves since deer in the
forest can often be found lying up unconcerned next to busy roads, but they
cause fragmentation of the forest by being a barrier which may only be safely
crossed at night.
During the study period of May to August, there is no evidence that deer
crossed the M.25 anywhere except on Woodredon bridge. Woodredon bridge
was used frequently, but not by more than 2-3 deer in 24 hours. The M.25
therefore represents an extremely significant barrier to fallow deer movement,
and comes close to separating the deer into two populations with little or no
contact with one another. Equally importantly, the motorway prevents fallow
south of the motorway from utilising the fields to the north.
The fact that the M.25 was such a serious barrier to the fallow deer is a point
in favour of the behavioural hypothesis, as this hypothesis states how important
barriers are to deer location. Furthermore, if the historical hypothesis were
correct and deer were being pushed north out of the forest due to visitor pressure
and grazing availability, then it might be expected that most slots would go from
south to north and not return, and this is clearly not the case. The roads as
barriers is a point in favour of the behavioural hypothesis.
The predictions of deer presence were successful. This is a strong point in
favour of the behavioural hypothesis. This would not always work, however. The
Wake Arms area of the forest has deer, and this is an area where deer presence