AbstractIn this paper we argue that although investigators often address themselves generally to human interaction with deer and the results of such interaction, they often fail to consider a number of related nonhuman factors that bear directly upon deer populations. Thus, such populations are seen and described as static, unchanging, and a given rather than as entities capable of considerable fluctuation and change that affect the human adaptive system. In addition, the related issue of the use and abuse of deer density figures is examined. We conclude that in most instances published density figures used by archaeologists are unrealistically high and in need of reassessment.