Game Commission Using New Deer Measurements

At the end of the day, deer "management" comes down to ensuring the most dominant genes are passed down to fawns.

Facing political pressure from all sides, and growing disenchantment from unsuccessful hunters, the Pa. Game Commission is seeking "middle ground" in its management of the state's deer herd.

In recent years, deer populations have declined upwards of 40 percent in the agency's Wildlife Management Area 2G, a largely forested area which includes all of Cameron County, about half of Potter, and significant portions of McKean, Tioga, Clinton, Elk, Lycoming, Clearfield and Centre.

The PGC this year has unveiled new methods it will use to measure the number of deer in its management areas and adjust license allotments - - the commission's primary deer management tool -- accordingly. The agency will inject better science and biological data into its multifaceted equation to determine how many deer can be sustained by the state's habitat.

Better science

Biologists and other PGC professionals will analyze deer health information using reproductive data, including embryos per doe and fawn pregnancy rates.

They'll also use new techniques to assess habitat conditions and determine how many deer can survive on available food sources in a given area.

"There has to be a solid scientific foundation for deer management," said Dr. Christopher Rosenberry, who supervises deer management for the agency. "These new measures will provide a clearer picture to manage for healthy deer, healthy forest habitat and reduced deer-human conflicts."

Rosenberry chose his words carefully, due to the divergent viewpoints on the preferred size of the deer herd.

"Deer-human conflicts" could be anything from overbrowsing on private farmland and forest tracts to excessive property damage due to car/vehicle collisions.

Too many? Too few?

Cal DuBrock, PGC wildlife management director, acknowledged the agency's delicate balancing act:

"Managing whitetails has always been controversial because the views of those trying to influence deer management are so different. For example, there's public outcry about reduced deer populations, while the House Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee hears complaints that deer are causing upwards of $150 million in damages annually to farming, forestry and nursery industries."

He added that establishing socially acceptable deer population goals puts the Game Commission in the crosshairs of every interest group.

"There is always one group of stakeholders that wants what another doesn't, creating extremes that cannot, or refuse to, find middle ground . . . With the new measures of deer and forested habitat health, we are positioned to further refine our approach."

"Reproduction is the best measure of deer health because there are differences in the reproductive rates of females in good physical condition and those in poor physical condition," Dr. Rosenberry explained. "As a deer population's size increases, its reproductive rates decline. In fact, female fawns often stop breeding when deer populations are high."

Going forward, the PGC will consider deer health to be "good" when 30 percent or more of fawns are bred; when two-year-old females have 1.5 fawns or more; and when females three years or older have 1.7 fawns or more.

Trees tell tales

The second phase of the new approach is to more closely monitor habitat conditions on Pennsylvania's forested acreage.

"A healthy forest can sustain deer, as well as a variety of plant and animal life, and replace its losses," said Rosenberry. "So, we decided one way to gauge a forest's well-being would be to measure its ability to replace itself. In other words, are there enough young trees in a forest to replace older trees when they die, are harvested for timber, or are damaged by natural causes, such as windstorms?"

Forest habitat health will be gauged as "good" when at least 70 percent of sampled plots have adequate regeneration to replace the current forest canopy.

The PGC said the new management formula has the endorsement of biologists, professional foresters and other experts from a wide variety of state and national agencies and educational institutions.

"It's what scientific wildlife management is all about, and what Pennsylvanians should expect from the Game Commission," Rosenberry said.

The PGC has been saying for decades that Pennsylvania has too many deer for the habitat to support. Critics charge that the campaign to reduce the deer herd is a sellout to interest groups, such as the timber industry, farmers and car insurers.

PGC asks for patience

The agency this year contracted for aerial surveys of many remote sections of the region, where infrared technology provided a better picture of how many deer are in the woods, and where. The PGC has also captured and examined more than 2,500 deer over the past five years to gather more biological data and measure the impact of its management practices.

With fewer deer in the woods, forest regeneration should improve, according to DuBrock. He added that a healthy, regenerating forest means a healthy deer herd.

"By decreasing the deer herd, we believe that overbrowsed habitat will recover so that these areas can one day sustain higher numbers of deer and other species," he said.

In the meantime, DuBrock has asked hunters and touristbased businesses to be patient and recognize that the sacrifices they're making today will lead to a healthier and more plentiful deer herd in future years.