Click here to subscribe today or Login.
It’s a complex problem that, on the surface, is simple to fix.
As it has for the last several years, the Pennsylvania Game Commission desperately needs a license fee increase, many hunters want the deer herd to increase and the legislators have rejected any chance at a license hike until the agency changes its course with deer management.
So how do you fix it? Compromise.
You don’t remove the board president and you don’t stay the course with deer management and chalk it up to “we’re following science, and science is always right.”
To do so is borderline dictatorship, and it only increases the disdain some hunters have for the board.
Fortunately, a compromise to the deer issue might be forthcoming.
Last Tuesday, the Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs asked the House Game and Fisheries Committee to have an independent audit conducted on the agency’s deer management program.
That is exactly what committee Chair Rep. Ed Staback (D-Lackawanna/Wayne) and Minority Chair Rep. Sam Rohrer (R-Berks) called for in April.
And, in a more direct approach, the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania called for an audit of deer numbers several months ago.
According to a PFSC press release, Dr. Timothy Schaeffer, executive director of Pennsylvania Audubon, expressed his support for the audit and further suggested the PGC personnel and legislators head out to state game lands and other properties to examine habitat conditions.
I have no problem with it, as long as they take the suggestion a step further.
In addition to examining habitat, let’s have the legislators, PGC commissioners and Schaeffer accompany hunters to the state game lands on the first day of deer season to get a firsthand look at the concerns that hunters have been expressing for some time.
Hunters’ concerns over a lack of deer are just as critical as the foresters’ concerns regarding degraded habitat, so it should be given the same consideration.
Sure, it’s great that the PFSC is now supporting an independent evaluation of the methods and data used by the PGC in its deer program.
But let’s not stop there.
Let’s move forward with the USP’s request for an audit of deer numbers, as well as a recent call by Rohrer to audit PGC expenditures.
The commissioners would be wise to support all three audits for several reasons:
It will provide a better direction for deer management
It could end the fighting between the “lack of deer” and “too many deer” groups.
Most importantly, moving ahead with the audits would show the PGC is willing to work with all sides on the issue, and maybe compromise when warranted.
Unless that happens, the legislators will remain unwilling to grant a license fee increase.
And while the audits mainly center on deer management, the board should remember that the agency is charged with managing 467 species of mammals and birds.
While they stay the course with deer management, the legislators won’t grant a license fee increase and more programs and practices will be cut.
It means those other 467 species will pay the price, along with law enforcement, land acquisition, pheasant stockings and other valuable programs.
And to think it could all be avoided with a few simple concessions in deer management.