RE: Pa Game Comm. Overhaul
All the Game Commission really needs in order to greatly improve wildlife management is the adequate funding needed to have a full staff of people and to implement the best possible research and management objectives. As for habitat management that is more difficult because the Game Commission owns very little of the state’s land on which it has management control.
Bluebird’s last comments about Penna. “managing their deer herd based on the regeneration of the existing forest canopy” either shows how little he knows about Penna’s deer management program or was posted to mislead people that don’t know better.
The fact is deer are managed based on a number of different criteria many of which are actually proved by the real deer that live in each management unit.
The first and most important thing taken into consideration is if the area has the food to feed more deer or not. That is where the forest floor (not the canopy as Bluebird said) is surveyed by using established survey plots to find out what the deer food species are doing. If there are desired deer food and indicator species found in a majority of the survey plots then the unit gets a good habitat rating which ultimately indicates it could support more deer provided the deer health is also good. Only fair food supplies being found in the survey plots indicate the habitat will not allow more deer for long term periods. Thus it would be foolish to manage for even a short term population increase. Poor food supplies in the survey plots indicates that the deer numbers are still too high for the existing habitat and further reduction is desired before nature steps in and makes the population reduction without the aid of hunters.
Next what the deer tell the Biologists is used to determine what they deer have to say about the habitat they are living in. That is done by checking the reproductive rates on the adult does being killed on the highways. Adults three years and older with a reproductive rate of less then 1.50 indicate poor herd health, 1.50 - 1.70 indicates satisfactory herd health and over 1.70 indicates good herd health. Bred does two year old does are based on less then 1.10 reproductive rates being poor, 1.10 - 1.50 as satisfactory and over 1.50 as good.
Next the breeding rates for the yearling does is considered. If less then 10% of the yearly does were bred that indicates both poor herd and poor habitat health. Breeding of 10-30% is satisfactory while over 30% is a good herd and habitat health indicator.
Finally a human conflict factor gets applied. This is used primarilty in the areas where there are high numbers of people like around our cities. Since deer really aren’t wanted on, or around, our city streets those human conflict factors can be a justified reason toward attempting to reduce deer numbers to levels that are lower then the carrying capacity of the habitat. That is where the Citizens Advisory Council comes into the deer management picture. When they recommend fewer deer then the habitat could support it is likely their recommendation will be acted upon. But, if they recommend having more deer then the deer and the food supply say is wise, or even possible, for the land and food supplies then we have to listen to the deer and what they have to say over what people wish could happen.
That trying to do what people wish were possible over what the deer and habitat tell us is stupid, because it can’t work. It can’t work because nature will never allow more of any living organism then the food supply will support for more then short term periods of ideal environmental conditions. That is what everyone needs to be smart enough to recognize if we really want the best possible resource management.
The Game Commission is well on their way to having the best management of our lifetime. The way to make it better is to have adequate funding to implement both better management options and better education programs. The management is needed to do the right thing for the wildlife, the habitat and the future. The education is need to help people understand what good management really is. It is very obvious that many simply don’t have a clue about good wildlife or habitat management.
R.S.Bodenhorn