Cervus Elaphus, Red Deer

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™
ISSN 2307-8235 (online)

IUCN 2008: T55997072A22155320
Cervus elaphus, Red Deer

Assessment by: Lovari, S., Lorenzini, R., Masseti, M., Pereladova, O., Carden, R.F.
& Brook, S.M.
View on www.iucnredlist.org
Citation: Lovari, S., Lorenzini, R., Masseti, M., Pereladova, O., Carden, R.F. & Brook, S.M. 2016.
Cervus elaphus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T55997072A22155320.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016-2.RLTS.T55997072A22155320.en
Copyright: © 2016 International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written
permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged.
Reproduction of this publication for resale, reposting or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written
permission from the copyright holder. For further details see Terms of Use.
The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ is produced and managed by the IUCN Global Species Programme, the IUCN
Species Survival Commission (SSC) and The IUCN Red List Partnership. The IUCN Red List Partners are: BirdLife
International; Botanic Gardens Conservation International; Conservation International; Microsoft; NatureServe; Royal
Botanic Gardens, Kew; Sapienza University of Rome; Texas A&M University; Wildscreen; and Zoological Society of London.
If you see any errors or have any questions or suggestions on what is shown in this document, please provide us with
feedback so that we can correct or extend the information provided.
THE IUCN RED LIST OF THREATENED SPECIES™

Taxonomy
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family
Animalia Chordata Mammalia Cetartiodactyla Cervidae
Taxon Name: Cervus elaphus Linnaeus, 1758
Common Name(s):
• English: Red Deer, Western Red Deer
• French: Cerf Élaphe
• Spanish: Ciervo
Taxonomic Source(s):
Randi, E., Mucci, N., Claro-Hergueta, F., Bonnet, A. and Douzery, E.J.P. 2001. A mitochondrial DNA
control region phylogeny of Cervinae: speciation in Cervus and implications for conservation. Animal
Conservation 4: 1-12.
Taxonomic Notes:
Although Grubb (in Wilson and Reeder 2005) included canadensis in C. elaphus sharing this conclusion
with most taxonomists of 20th century, all original scientific papers published since 1995 have
concluded that C. elaphus and C. canadensis are two valid species regardless of whether this conclusion
was based on comparison of molecular (Kuwuyama and Ozawa 1999, Randi et al. 2001, Ludt et al. 2004,
Pitra et al. 2004, Zhang and Zhang 2012, Liu et al. 2013, Lorenzini and Garofolo 2015), or ethological
data (Cap et al. 2008, Frey and Riede 2013). Based on morphological data this was suggested earlier by
several authors, e.g. Lydekker (1898), Flerov (1952) and Geist (1998) and both recent reviews on cervid
taxonomy are in line with this opinion (Groves and Grubb 2011, Mattioli 2011).
A recent analysis of the Cervus group (Lorenzini and Garofolo 2015) has provided the first indications of
another, third, species (aside from Cervus nippon). Mitochondrial complete cytochrome b and control
region sequences were analysed under a Bayesian coalescent framework to derive phylogeny, with
particular attention on populations from Central Asia. The resultant phylogenetic reconstruction
confirmed that red deer is differentiated into two robust monophyletic clades corresponding to the
western and eastern part of the range. At the species level, molecular data suggested a fourth species
should be recognised, the Tarim Red Deer from Central Asia, including the populations from the
Yarkand-Tarim and Bukhara regions and Indian Kashmir, which were formerly considered as subspecies
of C. elaphus (C. e. yarkandensis, C.e. bactrianus and C. e. hanglu, respectively). The authors suggest this
taxon should be recognised as the Tarim Red Deer (Cervus hanglu, Wagner 1844), as the name with
priority over C. yarkandensis or C. bactrianus. Further investigations need to be conducted from
additional molecular sources and nuclear coding genes as well as verification of morphology from
museum specimens, before the elevation of this taxon to species level can be confirmed (Lorenzini and
Garofalo 2015). We provisionally follow this taxonomy here for the purpose of the IUCN Red List
assessment in 2016. However, it should be noted that future clarification on genetic relatedness,
especially studies with nuclear markers and a more formal morphological description, may lead to
further revisions to the taxonomy of the provisional species, C. hanglu, as more information becomes
available.
© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Cervus elaphus – published in 2016. 1
Several subspecies of Western Red Deer have been recognized with their ranges as follows:
C. e. elaphus: Ireland, Great Britain, continental Europe
C. e. barbarus: Atlas Mountains (Algeria, Tunisia)
C. e. corsicanus: Corsica (extinct, reintroduced in 1985), Sardinia
C. e. maral: Anatolia,
C. e. italicus: Italy (Ferrara)
C. e. brauneri Crimea (Russia)
C. e. montanus (syn. Carpathicus) Carpathian mountains
C. e. italicus (Mesola Red Deer) has been recently described as a new subspecies, based on
morphological and genetic characteristics, from the Bosco Della Mesola Nature Reserve, which is
thought to be the only autochthonous population of Red Deer in the Italian Peninsula (Zachos et al.
2014). This conclusion is supported by Lorenzini and Garofalo (2015). However, recent analyses call into
question the veracity of the morphology-based subspecific taxonomy of C. elaphus more generally.
Rather, three genetic lineages were clearly differentiated corresponding approximately with
geographical factors. One lineage was distributed in central-western Europe (and also Ukraine), one
from eastern Europe to the Middle East, and a third which corresponded to C. e. barbarus and C. e.
corsicanus from North Africa and Sardinia, the latter two nomials are considered synonyms and were
recommended considered as a subspecies (Lorenzini and Garofalo 2015). This work suggests that
revision of the subspecific taxonomy of C. elaphus could be beneficial.
Assessment Information
Red List Category & Criteria: Least Concern ver 3.1
Year Published: 2016
Date Assessed: October 12, 2015
Justification:
This species is listed as Least Concern due to a wide distribution and presumed large populations. There
have been range contractions and presumably population declines in some parts of the species' range
but it is not believed to approach the threshold for the population decline criterion of the IUCN Red List
(i.e. declining more than 30% in three generations). Genetic mixing as a result of introductions of deer
from different areas is a problem that should be addressed.
Geographic Range
Range Description:
The Red Deer has a distribution extending from Europe into North Africa and the Middle East (Corbet
1978, Koubek and Zima 1999, Wilson and Ruff 1999, Wilson and Mittermeier 2011). It is widely but
somewhat patchily distributed throughout most of continental Europe, although it is absent from
northern Fennoscandia and largely from European Russia. It is present on a number of islands, including
the British Isles and Sardinia. Whether the Red Deer is native to Ireland or introduced is still under
debate (Carden et al. 2011). In Ireland Red Deer became locally extinct at the end of the Pleistocene but
were reintroduced by humans from Scotland during the Neolithic period. The only population
descended from this early introduction is within Killarney, County Kerry. All other populations were
introduced during the 19th century from outside of Ireland. (Carden et al. 2012). It became extinct on
Corsica but was reintroduced in 1985 from Sardinia. All the continental populations of Italy became
extinct in historic times and were replaced by new stocks of foreign origin (Toschi 1965, Mattioli 1990,
Mattioli et al. 2001, Breber and Masseti 2007); in Sardinia the species did not belong to the fossiliferous
horizons of the Upper Pleistocene and did not appear before the end of the 7th millennium BC (Masseti
and Vianello 1991, Vigne 1992). On the small island of Lampedusa (Italy), in the Sicilian Channel, a
population of deer possibly referable to C. elaphus corsicanus survived between the last part of the 18th
and the first half of the following century (Masseti and Zava 2002). It is extinct in Albania. In Greece, the
small isolated subpopulations are the result of reintroductions into areas where it previously occurred.
The last native population of Greek Red Deer is supposed to have survived in the Sithonia peninsula
(Chalkidiki, north-eastern Greece) where it became extinct in the 1980s (Masseti 2012 and references
therein). Likewise in Portugal all populations result from reintroduction or natural expansion from
transborder Spanish populations which in turn were reintroduced. It occurs from sea level to above the
tree line (c. 2,500 m) in the Alps. The distribution is much more patchy and fragmented than the
apparent continuity suggested by the distribution map.
In Africa it is found in the Atlas Mountains of NE Algeria and Tunisia. It is in the near and Middle East in
Turkey, N Iran, and Iraq, but extinct in Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria.
Country Occurrence:
Native: Algeria; Armenia (Armenia); Austria; Belarus; Belgium; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Bulgaria;
Croatia; Czech Republic; Denmark; Estonia; France (France (mainland)); Georgia; Germany; Hungary;
Iran, Islamic Republic of; Ireland; Italy; Latvia; Lithuania; Luxembourg; Macedonia, the former Yugoslav
Republic of; Moldova; Montenegro; Netherlands; Norway; Poland; Romania; Serbia (Serbia); Slovakia;
Slovenia; Sweden; Switzerland; Tunisia; Turkey; Ukraine
Regionally extinct: Albania; Israel; Jordan; Lebanon; Syrian Arab Republic
Reintroduced: Greece; Morocco
Introduced: Argentina; Australia; Chile; New Zealand
Distribution Map
Cervus elaphus
Population
It is a widespread and abundant species across much of its current range, although there is increasing
fragmentation of populations in northern Africa and central Europe, and the species has been lost from
some areas. In all Europe excluding Russia, the species numbered 1.25 million individuals in 1985 and
2.4 million in 2005. Densities are typically 1-5 individuals per km², sometimes up to 15 individuals per
km² (Wilson and Mittermeier 2011). The annual harvest grew in the same period from 270,000 to
500,000 individuals. In Germany there are reports of 60,000 animals hunted per year. The most recent
records indicate a population size of 150,000-180,000 in Germany (M. Stubbe pers. comm. 2006). The
species has been extirpated in historical times from Lebanon, Syria, Israel and Jordan.
In Russia, approximately 500 purebred C. elaphus (C. e. hippelaphus) are estimated to occur in
Voronezskii Zapovednik. Animals from here were translocated to European Russia, simultaneously with
C. e. sibiricus, hybrid animals from Askania-Nova and Sika Cervus nippon, so the rest of the animals in
European Russia (an estimated 20,000 individuals) cannot be considered pure C. elaphus (O. Pereladova
pers. comm). Outside of European Russia, native populations number approximately 3,000 individuals
(O. Pereladova pers. comm.). C. e. maral seriously declined in the Russian part of the Caucasus in
the1990s but has recovered slightly since 2,000 although it is still seriously threatened. In Georgia and
other parts of the Caucasus it is very rare. There are no data on C. e. brauneri from the Crimean
Peninsula but it is thought to be very rare (O. Pereladova pers. comm.).
C.e.corsicanus, and C.e.barbarus remain rare. C. e. corsicanus underwent a dramatic decline

disappearing from Corsica in 1969 and decreasing to circa 100 individuals in Sardinia in 1970. The
subspecies recovered slowly in Sardinia, numbering 8,000 animals in 2014 and in 1985 a reintroduction
programme was started in Corsica (Wilson and Mittermeier 2011).
Populations in Northern Africa have been increasingly declining. In Algeria, C. e. barbarus persists in the
Annaba, Bouchegouf, and El-Kala regions, where it is restricted to the Beni-Salah, Ben Abed, and El-Kala
forests (DSG 1988). The total number of animals in the mid-1970s was reported to be 400–600 (Halisse
1975), and by the late 1980s reached around 2,000 animals (Dolan 1988, de Smet 1989). However, the
population has been in a sharp decline since (K. de Smet pers. comm. 2007). In Tunisia, the population
was reported to have expanded considerably during the 1970s, with populations known in El Feidja, Ain
Draham, and Tabarka regions (DSG 1988). The total population of ten animals in 1961 had increased to
around 2,000 by the late 1980s. Much of this increase is attributed to the success of the 1966
reintroduction protection program at El Feidja, which has resulted in colonization of an approx. 100 km
length of coastal Tunisia (Dolan 1988). A survey in 2006 showed that population levels were significantly
lower than estimated before. In Morocco it went extinct in the early 20th century (by 1932). During the
first half of the 20th century, Spanish deer were introduced to northern Morocco from the royal estate
of El Pardo (Madrid) (Lehmann 1969).There have more recently been reintroductions into two
enclosures but wild populations have not yet become established (F. Cuzin pers. comm. 2007).
A regional assessment has been completed for this species as part of the European Mammal
Assessment (http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/conservation/species/ema/), which offers more
details on European occupances, populations and threats.
Current Population Trend: Increasing
Habitat and Ecology (see Appendix for additional information)
It inhabits open deciduous woodland, mixed deciduous-coniferous and coniferous woodland, upland
moors and open mountainous areas (sometimes above the treeline), Mediterranean maquis scrub,
natural grasslands, pastures and meadows (Koubek and Zima 1999). It prefers broadleaved woodland
interspersed by large meadows. In woodland, its diet consists mainly of shrub and tree shoots, but in
other habitats it also consumes grasses, sedges and shrubs. Fruit and seeds are important in autumn.
Generally found in mountainous regions, where it spends summers in alpine meadows and winters in
valleys. On more level terrain, seeks wooded hillsides in summer, open grasslands in winter. In west
central Asia it occurs in woody and shrubby thickets along riverbanks in desert areas (Wilson and
Mittermeier 2011).
Found up to 2,800 asl on the Alps. Animals come lower into valleys in winter. They live in small herds of
females and young, gathering into larger herds in winter. Stags live singly or form all male herds in
summer, but gather harems in rut season in late summer, without obvious territories. Natural lifespan is
about 15 years, but a captive animal lived up to almost 27 years. Calving peaks in May-June following a
gestation of 235 days. Females drop single calves in late spring. Females are sexually and socially mature
at 1.5-2.5 years. Males attain sexual maturity as yearlings but they continue growing until at least 6
years of age and cannot compete for females with other males until then, by which time they reach
social maturity.
Systems: Terrestrial
Threats (see Appendix for additional information)

The main threat is the intermixing of the various subspecies, Asia to Europe and vice versa, including
with C. canadensis from North America (Wapiti) and, as well as hybridisation with Sika Cervus nippon
(Koubek and Zima 1999). The introduction of animals from North America to Europe has also resulted in
the spread of parasites and diseases to previously unaffected subpopulations (e.g. liver worms). In many
areas hunting is strictly regulated on this species and harvests are used to control population growth as
large predators have been removed or "controlled" over much of the range. Overhunting and habitat
loss and fragmentation as a result of agricultural intensification and urbanisation are other pressures in
some areas and for some subspecies, but they are not thought to pose a major threat to the species at
present.
In the former USSR, the species is heavily poached for food, and settlement, stock grazing (Petocz 1973).
In Algeria and Tunisia, the species has declined due to overhunting, particularly during the Algerian War,
and habitat degradation destruction and direct mortality from anthropogenic forest fires (DSG 1988). In
Corsica and Sardinia, C. e. corsicanus declined as a result of hunting (Dolan 1988), similar to C. e. maral
and C. e. brauneri in the Caucasus and Crimea.
The Mesola Red Deer C. e. italicus is highly threatened and prone to inbreeding depression. Habitat
improvement and reduction of competition with Fallow Deer has helped this subspecies, the
establishment of additional populations is recommended with exchanges of animals between them to
maintain genetic diversity and minimise the effects of inbreeding (Zachos et al. 2014). A National
Conservation Plan for the conservation of Mesola Red Deer has been developed (Lovari and Nobili
2010).
Conservation Actions (see Appendix for additional information)

It is protected under Appendix III of the Bern Convention. Subspecies C. e. corsicanus is strictly protected
under Appendix II of the Bern Convention and Annexes II* and IV of the EU Habitats and Species
Directive. It occurs in numerous protected areas across its range and also in protected areas outside its
range where it has been introduced. To preserve the genetic integrity of local populations, it is
important that the introduction of red deer from other areas is stopped, unless there is evidence that
they belong to the same taxon (subspecies).
Red Deer in Europe have been affected to a large extent by translocations not only between far distant
populations and different subspecies within the continent, but also by translocations of deer within the
same regions with admixture of different 'park deer' of various mixed stock with wild ranging deer of
'pure' stock, and also by imported conspecifics from Central Asia and of C. canadensis from North
America, and introduced Sika (Niedzialkowska et al. 2011, Smith et al. 2014, McDevitt et al. 2009,
McDevitt and Zachos 2014, Zachos and Hartl 2011). As a result, most of the present deer populations of
Europe are either known hybrids on a subspecific or even specific level or their breeding background is
insufficiently known for excluding such a possibility. Systematic investigation into the history and the
genetics of all European Red Deer populations is therefore needed as a base for establishing a European
Red Deer Management Plan. Part of this plan should be the identification of unpolluted autochthonous
populations of this species and protection of their genetic integrity, thus preserving as much as possible
of what is left of its natural variation. The development of stable meta-population networks by
developing corridors and habitat connectivity will be important to ensure the viability of populations of
Red Deer in the future (Zachos and Hartl 2011).
Populations from Algeria and Tunisia are listed on CITES Appendix III.
Credits
Assessor(s): Lovari, S., Lorenzini, R., Masseti, M., Pereladova, O., Carden, R.F. & Brook, S.M.
Reviewer(s): Duckworth, J.W. & McShea, W.J.
Contributor(s): Conroy, J., Herrero, J., Maran, T., Giannatos, G., Stubbe, M., Aulagnier, S., Jdeidi, T.,
Nader, I., De Smet, K. & Cuzin, F.
Bibliography
Ahlén, J. 1965. Studies, Cervus elaphus L. Scandinavia Viltrery 3.
Allen, G.M. 1938. The mammals of China and Mongolia Part I. Natural History of Central China, pp. 1-
620. American Museum of Natural History, New York, USA.
Allen, G.M. 1940. The mammals of China and Mongolia Part II. In: W. Granger (ed.), Natural History of
Central Asia, pp. 621-1350. American Museum of Natural History, New York, USA.
Bannikov, A. 1978. The present status of the Bactrian deer (Cervus elaphus bactrianus) in the USSR.
Threatened deer: proceedings of a working meeting of the Deer Specialist Group of the IUCN Survival
Service Commission, pp. 159–172. IUCN, Morges, Switzerland.
Banwell, D. B. 1993. A Historical Review of the Influence of Chinese Cervids on European and New
Zealand Red and Sika Deer‘. Deer of China, Biology and Management, Amsterdam.
Breber, P. and Masseti, M. 2007. The last of the red deer Cervus elaphus of “Bosco Isola”, Lesina (Foggia,
southern Italy). Hystrix. The Italian Journal of Mammalogy 18(2): 229-232.
Cap, H., Deleporte, P., Joachim, J. and Reby, D. 2008. Male vocal behaviour and phylogeny in deer.
Cladistics 24: 917-931.
Carden, R.F., Carlin, C.M., Marnell, F., McElholm, D., Hetherington, J. and Gammell, M.P. 2011.
Distribution and range expansion of deer in Ireland. Mammal Review 41: 313-325.
Carden, R.F., McDevitt, A.D., Zachos, F.E., Woodman, P.C., O'Toole, P., Rose, H., Monaghan, N.T.,
Campana, M.G., Bradley, D.G. and Edwards, C.J. 2012. Phylogeographic, ancient DNA, fossil and
morphometric analyses reveal ancient and modern introductions of a large mammal: the complex case
of red deer (Cervus elaphus) in Ireland. Quaternary Science Reviews 42: 74-84.
Carne, P. 2000. Deer of Britain and Ireland, Shrewsbury. Swan-Hill Press, Shrewsbury, UK.
Carranza, J. 2003. The preservation of Iberian red deer (Cervus elaphus hispanicus) from genetic
introgression by other European subspecies. Deer Specialist Group News, Newsletter.
Chassovnikarova, T. G., Markov, G. G. and Müller, P. 2003. DNA fingerprinting analysis of red deer (Cervus
elaphus L., 1758) populations from Bulgaria. Mammalian Biology 68.
Chen, H., Ma, J., Li, F., Sun, Z., Wang, H. and Luo, L. 1998. Seasonal Composition and Quality of Red Deer
Cervus elaphus Diets in Northeastern China. Acta Theriologica 43(1): 77-94.
Clutton-Brock, T. and Gill, R. 1989. Conservation news.
Corbet, G.B. 1978. The Mammals of the Palaearctic Region: a Taxonomic Review. British Museum
(Natural History) and Cornell University Press, London, UK and Ithaca, NY, USA.
Deer Specialist Group. 1983. IUCN/SSC Deer Specialist Group Newsletter.
Deer Specialist Group. 1988. IUCN/SSC Deer Specialist Group Newsletter.
De Smet, K. 1989. The distribution and habitat choice of larger mammals in Algeria, with special
reference to nature protection. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Ghent.
Dolan, J. M. 1988. A deer of many lands – a guide to the subspecies of the red deer Cervus elaphus.
Zoonooz 62(10): 20.
Dubray, D. 1990. Réintroduction du cerf de Corse (Cervus elaphus corsicanus) en Corse: problématuique
et état actuél de l’operation. Rev. Ecol. (Terre Vie) Suppl. 5: 135-144.
Flerov, K.K. 1952. Musk deer and deer. In: Pavlovsky, E.N. (ed.), Fauna SSSR, pp. 1-255. Mlekopitayuschie,
Izdatelstvo Akademii Nauk SSSR, Moskva.
Flint, V., Pereladova, O. B. and Mirutenko, M. V. 1989. Program for Bukara deer restoration in the USSR.
All Union Research Institute for Nature Protection and Reserve Services, State Committee on Nature,
USSR.
Frey, R. and Riede, T. 2013. The anatomy of vocal divergence in North American elk and European red
deer. Journal of Morphology 274: 307-319.
Gärdenfors, U. 2005. Rödlistade arter i Sverie 2005 [The 2005 Red List of Swedish species] — Uppsala:
ArtDatabanken.
Geist, V. 1998. Deer of the World: Their Evolution, Behaviour, and Ecology. Stackpole Books,
Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, USA.
Groves, C.P. and Grubb, P. 1987. Relationships of Living Deer. In: C.M. Wemmer (ed.), Biology and
Management of the Cervidae, pp. 21-59. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC, USA.
Gu Jinghe. 1991. IUCN/SSC Deer Specialist Group Newsletter.
Halisse, A. 1975. Amenagement cynegetique de la reserve El Oubeira El Kala. Mimeo.
Hartl, B., Lang, G., Klein, F. and Willing, R. 1991. Relationships between allozymes, heterozygosity and
morphological characters in red deer (Cervus elaphus), and the influence of selective hunting on allele
frequency distributions. Heredity 66: 343-350.
Hmwe S. S., Zachos, F. E., Eckert, I., Lorenzini, R., Fico, R. and Hartl, B. 2006. Conservation genetics of the
endangered red deer from Sardinia and Mesola with further remarks on the phylogeography of Cervus
elaphus corsicanus. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 88(4): 691–701.
IUCN. 1993. Nature Reserves of the Himalaya and the mountains of Central Asia. Oxford University
Press, Oxford, UK.
IUCN. 2016. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2016-2. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org.
(Accessed: 04 September 2016).
Koubek, P. and Zima, J. 1999. Cervus elaphus. In: A. J. Mitchell-Jones, G. Amori, W. Bogdanowicz, B.
Kryštufek, P. J. H. Reijnders, F. Spitzenberger, M. Stubbe, J. B. M. Thissen, V. Vohralík and J. Zima (eds),
The Atlas of European Mammals, pp. 388–389. Academic Press, London, UK.
Kurt, F. 1978. IUCN/WWF Project 1103: Hangul, India– ecological study to identify conservation needs.
Final Report.
Kuwuyama, R. and Ozawa, T. 1999. Phylogenetic relationships among European red deer, wapiti and sika
deer inferred from mitochondrial DNA sequences. Molecular Phylogenetic Evolution 15: 115-123.
Lehmann, E. von. 1969. Über das Vorkommen des spanischen Rothirsches, Cervus elaphus bolivari
Cabrera, 1911, in Nordmarokko. Säugetierkundliche Mitteilungen 17: 137-141.
Liu, Y.H., Zhang, M.H. and Ma, J.Z. 2013. Phylogeography of red deer (Cervus elaphus) in China based on
mtDNA cytochrome B gene. Research Journal of Biotechnology 8: 34-41.
Lorenzini, R. and Garofalo, L. 2015. Insights into the evolutionary history of iCervus (Cervidae, tribe
Cerini) based on Bayesian analysis of mitochondrial marker sequences, with first indications for a new
species. Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research 53: 340-349.
Lovari, S. and Nobili, G. (eds). 2010. Programma nazionale di conservazione del cervo della Mesola. (The
National Action Plan for the Mesola red deer). Quaderni di Conservazione della Natura, Ministero
dell’Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare, Ministero delle Politiche Agricole Alimentari e
Forestali – Corpo Forestale dello Stato.
Ludt, C. J., Schroeder, W., Rottmann, O. and Kuehn, R. 2004. Mitochondrial DNA phylogeography of red
deer (Cervus elaphus). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 31: 1064–1083.
Lydekker, R. 1898. The deer of all lands. Rowland Ward, London.
Mahmut, H. Ganzorig, S., Onuma, M., Masuda, R., Suzuki, M. and Ohtaishi, N. 2001. A preliminary study
of the genetic diversity of Xinjiang Tarim Red Deer (Cervus elaphus yarkandensis) using the microsatellite
DNA method. Japanese Journal of Veterinary Research 49: 231-237.
Masseti, M. 1998. Holocene endemic and anthropochorous wild mammals of the Mediterranean
islands. Anthropozoologica 28: 3-20.
Masseti, M. 2012. Atlas of terrestrial mammals of the Ionian and Aegean islands. De Gruyter, Berlin.
Masseti, M. 2015. Data on the historical distribution of the red deer, Cervus elaphus L., 1758, of Mesola,
in the Po delta (north-eastern Italy). In: J. De Grossi Mazzorin and U. Thun Hohensten (eds), Atti del 7°
Convegno Nazionale di Archeozoologia. Università di Ferrara.
Masseti M. and Vianello F. 1991. Importazioni preistoriche di mammiferi alloctoni nelle isole del Mar
Tirreno centro-settentrionale. Rivista di Scienze Preistoriche XLIII(1-2): 275-292.
Masseti, M. and Zava, B. 2002. The red deer of Lampedusa (Pelagian islands, Italy): literary references
and osteological evidence. Archives of Natural History 29: 51-66.
Mattioli, S. 1990. Red deer in the Italian peninsula with particular reference to the Po delta population.
Deer 8(2): 95-98.
Mattioli, S., Meneguz, P.G., Brugnoli, A. and Nicoloso, S. 2001. Red deer in Italy: recent changes in range
and numbers. Hystrix. Italian Jourbal of Mammalogy 12(2): 27-35.
McDevitt, A.D. and Zachos, F.E. 2014. Genetic analyses of natural and anthropogenic movements in
deer. In: K. Baker, R. Carden and R- Madgwick (eds), Deer and People. Chapter 1, Windgather Press.
McDevitt, A.D., Edwards, C.J., O'Toole, P., O'Sullivan, P. O'Reilly, C. and Carden, R.F. 2009. Genetic
structure of and hybridisation between, red (Cervus elaphus) and sika (Cervus nippon) in Ireland.
Mammalian Biology 74: 263-273.
Ministry of Nature and Environment. 2005. Manual for Foreign Hunters and Fishers. Ministry of Nature
and Environment. State Inspection Agency and German Technical Cooperation, Ulaanbaatar.
Niedziałkowska, N., Jędrzejewska B., Honnen, A-C., Otto, T., Sidorovich, V.E., Perzanowski, K., Skog, A.,
Hartl, G.B., Borowik, T., Bunevich, A.N., Lang, J. and Zachos, F.E. 2011. Molecular biogeography of red
deer Cervus elaphus from eastern Europe: insights from mitochondrial DNA sequences. Acta Theriol. 56:
1-12.
Nowak, R.M. 1991. Walker's Mammals of the World. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, USA
and London, UK.
Ohtaishi, N. and Gao, Y.T. 1990. A review of the distribution of all species of deer (Tragulidae, Moschidae
and Cervidae) in China. Mammal Review 20(2-3): 125-144.
Petocz, R. G. 1973. The Bactrian deer (Cervus elaphus bactrianus). A report on the March 1973 field
survey in northern Afghanistan. Mimeo.
Pitra, C., Fickel, J., Meijaard, E. and Groves, C.P. 2004. Evolution and phylogeny of old world deer.
Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 33: 880-895.
Randi, E., Mucci, N., Claro-Hergueta, F., Bonnet, A. and Douzery, E.J.P. 2001. A mitochondrial DNA
control region phylogeny of Cervinae: speciation in Cervus and implications for conservation. Animal
Conservation 4: 1-12.
Schaller, G. B., Liu, W. and Wang, X. 1996. Status of Tibet red deer. Oryx 30: 269-274.
Sheng, H.I. and Ohtaishi, N. 1993. The status of deer in China. In: N. Ohtaishi and H.I. Sheng (eds), Deer
of China: Biology and Management, pp. 8. Elsevier, Oxford, UK.
Smith, S.L., Carden, R.F., Coad, B., Birkitt, T. and Pemberton, J.M. 2014. A survey of the hybridisation
status of Cervus deer species on the island of Ireland. Conservation Genetics 15: 823-835.
Sokolov, V. E., Danilkin, A. A. and Dulamtseren, S. 1982. Contemporary Distribution and Populations of
the Forest Ungulates in Mongolia. Zoological Studies in the People's Republic of Mongolia 8: 37-56.
Toschi, A. (ed.). 1965. Fauna d’Italia. Mammalia. Lagomorpha, Rodentia, Carnivora, Ungulata, Cetacea.
pp. 647. Edizioni Calderini, Bologna.
Vigne, J. D. 1992. Zooarchaeology and the biogeographical history of the mammals of Corsica and
Sardinia since the last Ice Age. Mammal Review 22: 87-96.
Wemmer, C. 1998. Deer Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and
Cambridge, UK.
Whitehead, K.G. 1993. The Whitehead Encyclopedia of Deer. Voyageur Press, Inc, Stillwater, MN, USA.
Wilson, D.E. and Mittermeier, R.A. 2011. Handbook of the mammals of the world. Vol. 2. Hoofed
mammals. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, Spain.
Wilson, D.E. and Ruff, S. 1999. The Smithsonian Book of North American Mammals. Smithsonian
Institution Press, Washington, DC, USA.
Zachos, F.E. and Hartl, G.B. 2011. Phylogeography, population genetics and conservation of the
European red deer Cervus elaphus. Mammal Review 41: 138-150.
Zachos, F.E., Mattioli, S., Ferretti, F. and Lorenzini, R. 2014. The unique Mesola red deer of Italy:
taxonomic recognition (Cervus elaphus italicus nova spp., Cervidea) would endorse conservation. Italian
Journal of Zoology 81: 136-143.
Zahler, P., Lkhagvasuren, B., Reading, R.P., Wingard, G.J., Amgalanbaatar, S., Gombobaatar, S., Barton, N.
and Onon, Yo. 2004. Illegal and Unsustainable Wildlife Hunting and Trade in Mongolia. Mongolian
Journal of Biological Sciences 2(1): 23-31.
Zhang, W.-Q. and Zhang, M.-H. 2012. Phylogeny and evlution of Cervidae based on complete
mitochondrial genomes. Genetics and Molecular Research 11: 628-635.
Citation
Lovari, S., Lorenzini, R., Masseti, M., Pereladova, O., Carden, R.F. & Brook, S.M. 2016. Cervus elaphus.
The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T55997072A22155320.
Disclaimer
To make use of this information, please check the Terms of Use.
External Resources
For Images and External Links to Additional Information, please see the Red List website.
Appendix
Habitats
(http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical-documents/classification-schemes)
Major
Habitat Season Suitability
Importance?
1. Forest -> 1.1. Forest - Boreal - Suitable Yes
1. Forest -> 1.4. Forest - Temperate - Suitable Yes
3. Shrubland -> 3.4. Shrubland - Temperate - Suitable Yes
4. Grassland -> 4.4. Grassland - Temperate - Suitable Yes
0. Root -> 6. Rocky areas (eg. inland cliffs, mountain peaks) - Suitable Yes
14. Artificial/Terrestrial -> 14.2. Artificial/Terrestrial - Pastureland - Marginal -
Threats
Threat Timing Scope Severity Impact Score
1. Residential & commercial development -> 1.1. Ongoing - - -

Housing & urban areas
Stresses: 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation
2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.1. Annual & Ongoing - - -

perennial non-timber crops -> 2.1.3. Agro-industry
farming
2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.3. Livestock farming Ongoing - - -

& ranching -> 2.3.3. Agro-industry grazing, ranching
or farming
3. Energy production & mining -> 3.2. Mining & Ongoing - - -

quarrying
4. Transportation & service corridors -> 4.1. Roads & Ongoing - - -

railroads
5. Biological resource use -> 5.1. Hunting & trapping Past, - - -

terrestrial animals -> 5.1.1. Intentional use (species is unlikely to
return
the target)
Stresses: 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality
5. Biological resource use -> 5.3. Logging & wood Ongoing - - -
harvesting -> 5.3.5. Motivation
Unknown/Unrecorded
Stresses: 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation
6. Human intrusions & disturbance -> 6.3. Work & Ongoing - - -

other activities
Stresses: 2. Species Stresses -> 2.2. Species disturbance
8. Invasive and other problematic species, genes & Ongoing - - -

diseases -> 8.1. Invasive non-native/alien
species/diseases -> 8.1.1. Unspecified species
Stresses: 2. Species Stresses -> 2.3. Indirect species effects ->
2.3.1. Hybridisation
Conservation Actions in Place

Conservation Actions in Place

In-Place Land/Water Protection and Management
Conservation sites identified: Yes, over entire range
In-Place Species Management
Successfully reintroduced or introduced beningly: Yes
In-Place Education
Included in international legislation: Yes
Subject to any international management/trade controls: Yes
Conservation Actions Needed

Conservation Actions Needed

2. Land/water management -> 2.1. Site/area management
3. Species management -> 3.1. Species management -> 3.1.1. Harvest management
3. Species management -> 3.1. Species management -> 3.1.2. Trade management
5. Law & policy -> 5.1. Legislation -> 5.1.2. National level
5. Law & policy -> 5.4. Compliance and enforcement -> 5.4.2. National level
Research Needed
Research Needed
1. Research -> 1.1. Taxonomy
1. Research -> 1.2. Population size, distribution & trends
1. Research -> 1.3. Life history & ecology
1. Research -> 1.5. Threats
1. Research -> 1.6. Actions
2. Conservation Planning -> 2.1. Species Action/Recovery Plan
3. Monitoring -> 3.1. Population trends
Additional Data Fields

Distribution
Estimated extent of occurrence (EOO) (km²): >20,000
Lower elevation limit (m): 0
Upper elevation limit (m): 5000
Population
Population severely fragmented: No
Habitats and Ecology

Movement patterns: Full Migrant
The IUCN Red List Partnership
The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ is produced and managed by the IUCN Global Species
Programme, the IUCN Species Survival Commission (SSC) and The IUCN Red List Partnership.
The IUCN Red List Partners are: BirdLife International; Botanic Gardens Conservation International;
Conservation International; Microsoft; NatureServe; Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew; Sapienza University of
Rome; Texas A&M University; Wildscreen; and Zoological Society of London.
THE IUCN RED LIST OF THREATENED SPECIES™

Cervus Elaphus, Red Deer

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cervus Elaphus, Red Deer

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™

ISSN 2307-8235 (online)

Cervus elaphus, Red Deer

THE IUCN RED LIST OF THREATENED SPECIES™

Animalia Chordata Mammalia Cetartiodactyla Cervidae

Taxon Name: Cervus elaphus Linnaeus, 1758

Year Published: 2016

Date Assessed: October 12, 2015

Regionally extinct: Albania; Israel; Jordan; Lebanon; Syrian Arab Republic

Reintroduced: Greece; Morocco

Introduced: Argentina; Australia; Chile; New Zealand

C.e.corsicanus, and C.e.barbarus remain rare. C. e. corsicanus underwent a dramatic decline

Threats (see Appendix for additional information)

Conservation Actions (see Appendix for additional information)

Reviewer(s): Duckworth, J.W. & McShea, W.J.

Clutton-Brock, T. and Gill, R. 1989. Conservation news.

Deer Specialist Group. 1983. IUCN/SSC Deer Specialist Group Newsletter.

Deer Specialist Group. 1988. IUCN/SSC Deer Specialist Group Newsletter.

Gu Jinghe. 1991. IUCN/SSC Deer Specialist Group Newsletter.

Halisse, A. 1975. Amenagement cynegetique de la reserve El Oubeira El Kala. Mimeo.

Lydekker, R. 1898. The deer of all lands. Rowland Ward, London.

1. Forest -> 1.1. Forest - Boreal - Suitable Yes

1. Forest -> 1.4. Forest - Temperate - Suitable Yes

3. Shrubland -> 3.4. Shrubland - Temperate - Suitable Yes

4. Grassland -> 4.4. Grassland - Temperate - Suitable Yes

14. Artificial/Terrestrial -> 14.2. Artificial/Terrestrial - Pastureland - Marginal -

Threat Timing Scope Severity Impact Score

1. Residential & commercial development -> 1.1. Ongoing - - -

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.1. Annual & Ongoing - - -

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.3. Livestock farming Ongoing - - -

3. Energy production & mining -> 3.2. Mining & Ongoing - - -

4. Transportation & service corridors -> 4.1. Roads & Ongoing - - -

5. Biological resource use -> 5.1. Hunting & trapping Past, - - -

6. Human intrusions & disturbance -> 6.3. Work & Ongoing - - -

8. Invasive and other problematic species, genes & Ongoing - - -

Conservation Actions in Place

Conservation Actions in Place

Conservation sites identified: Yes, over entire range

In-Place Species Management

Successfully reintroduced or introduced beningly: Yes

Included in international legislation: Yes

Subject to any international management/trade controls: Yes

Conservation Actions Needed

Conservation Actions Needed

1. Research -> 1.2. Population size, distribution & trends

1. Research -> 1.3. Life history & ecology

1. Research -> 1.5. Threats

1. Research -> 1.6. Actions

2. Conservation Planning -> 2.1. Species Action/Recovery Plan

3. Monitoring -> 3.1. Population trends

Additional Data Fields

Lower elevation limit (m): 0

Upper elevation limit (m): 5000

Habitats and Ecology

THE IUCN RED LIST OF THREATENED SPECIES™

You might also like