What has been happening to the deer population is big news in Pennsylvania. During the 1990s, the deer herd numbers were very high — in fact, far too high to be sustained by the habitat, according to deer managers of the Pennsylvania Game Commission. So far in the 21st Century efforts have been made through the allocation of antlerless deer licenses to reduce the deer population.

Now things are changing. After more meetings of Citizen Advisory Committees, it has become clear that in several wildlife management units the committees want slight increases in the deer populations. This year we will see numerous reductions in antlerless license allocations. Do not, however, expect the deer situation to change much, at least not soon.

Dr. Chris Rosenberry, head of the Deer Section of the Pennsylvania Game Commission, says he has received no instructions to change the way deer are managed. But it appears that the goals have mostly been achieved. In most of the commonwealth the current plan is to either increase the deer population, or keep it where it is.

Here’s a look at what should be in store for hunters in various management units across the state.

WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNITS 2B, 5C AND 5D
“The only three places where we’re looking to reduce deer numbers are units 2B, 5C and 5D,” Rosenberry said. “Those are the units around Pittsburgh and Philadelphia. The objective to reduce deer populations in those units is also supported by completion of Citizen Advisory Committees, (which) recommended reduced deer populations in those three units as well.”

At WMU 2B, the antlerless deer license allocation will remain the same as last year, 68,000, but no DMAPs will be available this year. The deer harvest last year was 4,300 antlered deer and 20,000 antlerless deer. While that antlered deer harvest was nearly the same as the 4,000 figure for the previous year, the antlerless harvest was a big increase from the 15,300 taken the year before.

By the numbers it might appear as though this small WMU should be a good destination, and it is for hunters who have a place to hunt within it. It is, however, mostly the urban/suburban Pittsburgh area and contains just one state game land and very little other public land. Hunting access to private land can be difficult for non-local hunters to secure.

The situation is not so different in WMU 5C and WMU 5D. These wmu’s are mostly comprised of the Philadelphia urban/suburban area, an area larger than that of Pittsburgh. It just is not a good destination for traveling hunters unless they’ve done considerable work before the season to line up a place to hunt.

WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNITS 2A, 1A, 1B AND 2D
For hunters who are looking for the best place to fill their tags, Rosenberry has some advice.

“I would just look at the kill data, the harvest data that we have, the tags that are out there,” he said.

And for filling a doe tag, he suggested, “Again we’re looking at some of those western units as some of the higher success rates in the state. Those units really are the ones that have the best success rates.”

These units are one in the same as the units where the antler restriction is at least four points on a side. It does not take much thought to understand that the area that has the best nutrition for antler growth also has the best nutrition to support more deer, and to replace deer that have been harvested.

“In the units in the four-point area,” Rosenberry said, “in general around 10 deer per square mile are being harvested each year in 1B, 1A, 2A, and 2D. And then you get in to Pittsburgh, 2B, there’s more than 10 deer per square mile being harvested.

“There are some less developed units in that four-point area. They’re doing pretty well, like 10 per square mile, which is above the state average.”

One of the characteristics of these units is that there is not a lot of public land.

“One thing I would make a comment on concerning the public land and where the hunters hunt,” Rosenberry pointed out, is that “the minority of our hunters hunt exclusively public land. The majority of our hunters do hunt on private land at some point.”

Some of the state game lands in these units are reclaimed strip mines or industrial lands. The Southwest Region in particular has had more land added to state game lands than any other region. These reclaimed strip mines tend to be excellent habitat because land managers can virtually design the habitat as they wish.

WMU 2D is actually quite different from the other units in this four-point group. It is similar in land use and in the checkerboard habitat; however, the blocks of the checkerboard lack the swamps and other wetlands for the most part. Wood lots might tend to be somewhat larger, but the agriculture and overgrown fields are there. In fact, overgrown fields in various stages of regrowth provide deer with excellent escape cover.

WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT UNITS 2D, 2G, 3C AND 4B
This seemingly odd grouping of wildlife management units have one important thing in common: They were the first four units managed under an experimental season in which antlerless deer were fair game only during the second week of the regular firearms deer season. The first week is antlered deer only.

This arrangement of the seasons was a response to hunter suggestions and complaints. Of course the underlying intent of many of the hunters who favor this is that it will reduce the antlerless deer harvest.

How has this affected the deer management program?

“With that having been done in four other units, that right off the top would reduce the harvest,” Rosenberry said. “Then in many of those (units’) allocations were also reduced, so that will further reduce the harvest.

“In terms of our deer program, in terms of the way it affects the biologists, in general I would say the goals as far as I have been told have not changed, and that’s
what drives our program. That’s what drives the biologist’s recommendations, what goals have we been given to achieve. It’s not going to affect our measures.”