Click here to subscribe today or Login.
I consider myself among those hunters who feel deer numbers are low in certain areas and need to be increased a bit.
But lately, that’s where the similarities end.
It seems that many of those who issue the call for more deer also support measures that would result in fewer deer.
Sunday hunting and legislation to allow the use of semi-automatic rifles for hunting are two examples.
And now there’s a third.
At the behest of hunters, the PGC board voted in April to reduce the antlerless license allocation this year. It’s something that a vocal majority of hunters demand each year because of low deer numbers in the areas they hunt.
For a while, the commissioners increased antlerless license allocations each year despite objections from hunters. That led to accusations that the PGC board wasn’t listening to the concerns of its constituents. Legislators even got involved in the matter and essentially warned the board to start listening, or else.
In recent years, the board began listening to hunters and cut the antlerless license allocation – significantly in some Wildlife Management Units.
Still, complaints persisted. The cuts weren’t significant enough to allow deer numbers to rebound, some hunters said, and demanded the board do more.
This year, however, another complaint surfaced.
During the PGC board meeting last month, commissioners said they were hit with complaints from hunters who weren’t necessarily demanding the doe license allocations be reduced again, but something quite the opposite. It appears that some hunters are now upset because they didn’t receive the same number of antlerless licenses that they’re used to getting every year.
So here we have a longstanding demand to cut antlerless license allocations, and now that demand has transformed into a complaint because there simply weren’t enough licenses available for hunters to get the customary two or three they had gotten year after year.
What did they think was going to happen as fewer antlerless licenses were made available?
If we want deer numbers to increase, it’s going to mean that we as hunters have to give something up – i.e. a second or third doe license.
Perhaps the only group that has a legitimate gripe in the matter are nonresident hunters who grew up in Pennsylvania and look forward to returning back to their home state for deer season. Nonresidents have really been squeezed out by the reduced number of antlerless licenses because they have to wait for two weeks to apply for a tag while residents buy them all up.
The commissioners suggested taking a look at the application schedule to make the process more fair for nonresidents, and perhaps a solution can be reached.
But for those resident hunters who received one or two doe licenses this year instead of the two or three they were used to getting, there is a choice to make.
Either you want deer numbers to increase or you want to be able to shoot as many deer as regulations allow.
Personally, if receiving one doe license instead of three will help deer numbers increase, that’s a sacrifice I’m willing to make.
If you’re among those hunters who want to see higher deer numbers yet still be able to obtain three doe licenses every year, be careful.
During the commissioners’ discussion on the issue, one commissioner indicated that deer numbers have increased in areas thanks to reductions in antlerless license allocations. As a result, the commissioners may be able to increase doe license allocations in some areas next year.
Such a move would surely result in an increased harvest as well, followed by complaints that deer numbers are low again.
More deer or more antlerless licenses – we can’t have it both ways.
Pick one.