Today (6 October) I spotted a female roe deer with two fawns (spring twins).
They had been foraging on a harvested and oil radish-sown field downhill while I was walking on a trail uphill.
As they noticed me, they ran toward the nearby riparian forest.
The oil-radish cover is rather high now (perhaps 10 – 15 cm).
There had been a couple of corvids (probably jackdaws but I am not certain) feeding on the field.
As the roe deer were running off, one of the corvids was spooked and it took wing, in its turn, alarming one of the fawns who had been running close to it (on the left side of the fleeing group).
The fawn started and briefly stopped (there was not much concern because I was very far and it would have taken me several minutes to even climb downhill, cross the ditch and get to where the roe deer had been foraging (wished I so) and I believe the roe deer knew that).
Then, rather than following its mother and sibling, the fawn lunged at the corvid (which had landed just about 20 cm further in the field).
After that, the fawn rejoined the very slowly fleeing family group.
There was a pause between the alarm and the lunging as if the fawn was processing what had happened.
Therefore, I do not think that the fawn’s reaction was instinctive (and generally, I find it difficult to believe that a roe deer fawn’s first instinctive reaction would be taking offense).
It seemed to me that the roe deer fawn realized that it had been given fright for no good reason and it got irritated and spiteful, and it attacked the corvid to punish the corvid for the emotional upset and humiliation.
The fawn was not foraging and therefore this was not a competitive situation (chasing a competitor away from food resources).
The relatively stressful situation also made it unlikely for the fawn to have calculated that the presence of the corvid meant food competition and, amidst the flight, action had to be taken to ensure that the competitor left the area.
However, it is possible that roe deer are generally irritated by corvids and that their response is, indeed, to chase them off (a response that might have been triggered not by any actual competitive setting but rather by the slight anxiety which would yield to the most typical reaction toward a corvid).
(I have not observed many interactions between corvids and roe deer and this is the first time I have seen a deer chasing a corvid at all.)
Personally, I believe this observation has several important implications.
First, the roe deer (even at a relatively early stage of development) are aware of their emotional state.
The fawn experienced a fright and then it stopped to process and when it had processed the experience, it was irritated (the lunge was not truly aggressive which is why I do not assume that the fawn was angry or enraged).
To me, it seemed that the factor of it having been ‘a mere corvid’ also played a part suggesting that the fawn felt humiliated.
The experience of upset and humiliation was powerful enough for the fawn to take brief action despite the danger that it was supposedly fleeing (me).
A sense of humiliation implies a sense of self-value and awareness of one’s status.
If the fawn felt irritated after having processed its emotional experience and if it felt humiliated after having assessed the agents involved, this would mean that roe deer are not a species that ‘accepts’ the role of ‘the underdog’ (the one who has to give way, move off etc.).
It would mean that roe deer are, in fact, rather spirited and that they value their self-worth as well as their emotional state.
It is important because, on such occasion, their inner world (their perception of their own experiences) differs from the strategy they apply to avoid predators and danger (being unnoticeable, quietly moving out of way).
In relations with those who do not threaten them, roe deer apparently entertain a sense of self-worth and recognize their emotional rights (are aware of justice and injustice).
We should remember that while interacting with this ‘yielding’ species the needs of which are often dismissed.
For example, roe deer males are territorial and if roe deer, in general, experience a sense of humiliation upon having their status lowered (even temporarily and even in their own eyes or in the eyes of those who know them, e.g., in this case, the fawn’s family), changes in their habitats might not be experiences as lightly by the roe deer.
Novel objects that cause an unfounded start, removal of their favourite foraging grounds etc. might be experiences that roe deer do not appreciate.
***
For example, sometimes it is thought that roe deer are shy, timid, easily scared and these assumptions are based on how we perceive their ‘freeze’ behaviour.
However, if we consider our own responses, is it not much more difficult to stand very still in the face or nearing threat and to sort of ‘pokerface it out’ until the treat is gone?
Does it not take great nerve not to flee but rather to stay put even if it means that a predator (or supposed predators) passes by us very closely?
In fact, I believe that this ‘freeze’ and ‘wait it out’ behaviour is also adaptive because roe deer observe everything and at least in my area, they are very familiar with the nature of the threats and with human routines and habits.
Species that choose to flee or that choose to keep away from more perilous places might not be as informed on the danger they are avoiding.
I think that roe deer are very courageous and that their strategy grants them opportunity to investigate the threats that they are facing and to learn which threats and under what circumstances are real.
They might be one of the best-educated species when it comes to risk factors.
Notes by Ieva 