The Pennsylvania Game Commission reported on Monday that hunters harvested an estimated 308,920 deer in the state’s 2009-10 hunting seasons, which is an 8 percent decline from the 335,850 deer harvested in 2008-09.

The kill was Pennsylvania’s lowest in 23 years, dating back to 1986-87’s estimated harvest of 300,014.

Hunters took 108,330 antlered deer in 2009-10, down 11 percent from the previous license year’s harvest of 122,410, but similar to the 2007-08 harvest of 109,200. Last season’s buck kill represents a 47 percent decline from the record-high buck kill of 203,247 posted in 2001-02, the last season before the state’s controversial antler restrictions went into effect.

Also, hunters harvested 200,590 antlerless deer in 2009-10, a 6 percent decline from the 213,440 antlerless deer taken in 2008-09. The 2007-08 antlerless deer harvest was 213,870.

For comparison, here are Pennsylvania’s estimated deer harvests for the past 10 seasons:

2009-10: 308,920

2008-09: 335,850

2007-08: 323,070

2006-07: 361,560

2005-06: 354,390

2004-05: 409,320

2003-04: 464,890

2002-03: 517,529

2001-02: 486,014

2000-01: 504,600

Bureau of Wildlife Management personnel currently are working to develop 2010 antlerless deer license allocation recommendations for the commission’s April board meeting. Calvin W. DuBrock, Game Commission Bureau of Wildlife Management director, said that in addition to harvest data, the staff will be looking at population trends, deer reproduction, forest regeneration, and deer-human conflict for each Wildlife Management Unit (WMU).

Harvest estimates for 2009-10 seasons are based on 105,192 usable harvest report cards (41,251 antlered; 63,941 antlerless) returned by hunters to the commission, which included 64,945 reported by mail and 40,247 reported by the new online harvest reporting system. Reporting rates are determined by cross-referencing these report cards with the data collected from the 24,839 deer (7,942 antlered; 16,897 antlerless) examined by Game Commission personnel in the field and at processors.

Yearling bucks comprised 49 percent of the 2009-10 antlered harvest. Since 2003, the percent of yearling bucks in the annual harvest has varied between 49 and 56 percent. Button bucks represented 22 percent of the antlerless harvest, which is the same percentage from the 2008-09 harvest.

The 2009-10 hunting seasons marked the first time crossbows were legal in statewide archery deer seasons for all hunters. In those 19 WMUs outside of the three urban areas, the archery harvest increased 13 percent. The proportion of the archery harvest taken by crossbows in the 19 WMUs increased from 15 percent to 30 percent. Crossbows have been legal in WMUs 2B, 5C and 5D since 2004.

“Although we do not use season-specific harvest data for management purposes, we recognize the public is interested in these harvest estimates,” said DuBrock. “For that reason only, we provide estimated deer harvest breakdowns for firearms, archery and muzzleloader seasons, but we only use total deer harvest estimates when making recommendations for each WMU.”

Check out the final harvest statistics below to see how hunters in various parts of the state fared last year, with 2008-09 figures in parentheses:

WMU 1A: 5,500 (5,400) antlered, 10,700 (12,600) antlerless;

WMU 1B: 5,100 (7,500) antlered, 9,500 (13,400) antlerless;

WMU 2A: 6,800 (6,700) antlered, 13,900 (15,300) antlerless;

WMU 2B: 4,300 (4,000) antlered, 20,000 (15,300) antlerless;

WMU 2C: 6,500 (7,500) antlered, 10,900 (12,800) antlerless;

WMU 2D: 10,000 (9,500) antlered, 16,000 (15,600) antlerless;

WMU 2E: 3,700 (5,000) antlered 5,300 (6,200) antlerless;

WMU 2F: 5,200 (7,000) antlered, 6,600 (9,100) antlerless;

WMU 2G: 5,200 (6,800) antlered, 4,200 (6,500) antlerless;

WMU 3A: 3,300 (4,100) antlered, 6,000 (7,500) antlerless;

WMU 3B: 4,900 (5,500) antlered, 9,100 (9,900) antlerless;

WMU 3C: 6,200 (6,300) antlered, 7,100 (7,300) antlerless;

WMU 3D: 3,100 (3,900) antlered, 6,300 (6,700) antlerless;

WMU 4A: 3,700 (4,200) antlered, 7,400 (6,900) antlerless;

WMU 4B: 4,000 (3,900) antlered, 4,100 (3,800) antlerless;

WMU 4C: 4,700 (5,000) antlered, 7,200 (8,000) antlerless;

WMU 4D: 5,000 (6,600) antlered, 7,200 (9,300) antlerless;

WMU 4E: 4,100 (4,300) antlered, 6,300 (7,200) antlerless;

WMU 5A: 2,200 (2,100) antlered, 4,200 (3,800) antlerless;

WMU 5B: 6,000 (6,800) antlered, 11,300 (11,200) antlerless;

WMU 5C: 7,600 (8,700) antlered, 23,200 (20,200) antlerless;

WMU 5D: 1,100 (1,300) antlered, 3,900 (4,500) antlerless; and

Unknown WMU: 130 (310) antlered, 190 (140) antlerless.

Smaller harvests are exactly what the Game Commission envisioned when it increased antlerless tag allocations and lengthened the doe season early last decade, but they don't win any favor among hunters. While part of the commission's task is to manage deer for all Pennsylvanians, it must remember that hunters are the ones picking up the tab. And there are a lot of hunters who are pretty discouraged right now with the state of the deer herd, especially considering that hunters routinely killed half a million deer not long ago.

The commission has plenty of scientific reasons behind its current deer management policies, such as forest regeneration, better buck to doe ratios, a higher age class of bucks, and so on. But all of that science ignores the one number that matters most: the number of hunters in the woods. The number of hunters has dropped 14 percent in the last 10 years, and unless the commission really listens to how dissatisfied hunters are with its deer plan, more and more hunters will ultimately stop hunting.

The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation held Elk Camp in Reno, Nev., March 4-7, a yearly celebration of elk, elk country, and elk hunting.

The convention is a place for hunters to book trips, swap stories, purchase gear, and attend seminars from legendary elk hunters like Wayne Carlton of Carlton Calls and Al Morris from Hunter’s Specialties. Even if you’ve never hunted elk before, Elk Camp will get you fired up to buy an elk call and head for the timber.

Considering that elk are one of North America’s most expensive—and difficult—animals to hunt, the approximately 20,000 hunters in attendance were some of the most die-hard outdoorsmen and conservationists you’ll find anywhere.

That’s why I found two pieces of information that I gleaned from the show particularly interesting.

The first involves a new land access/conservation program known as the Dale Earnhardt Land/Wildlife Legacy. The new venture is a partnership between the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and the Dale Earnhardt Foundation.

This new partnership is a big deal because, as more than one hunter expressed to me at the show, gaining access to land and preserving existing wildlife habitat from development are two of the greatest challenges that we face.

“There are lots of NASCAR fans in the RMEF membership, and lots of conservationists among race fans,” said David Allen, president of the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. “Teaming up allows us to redouble our efforts on projects that honor Dale’s memory—things like wildlife habitat improvement, land conservation, hunting access improvements and more.

“When Dale wasn’t thinking about racing, he was thinking about hunting and sharing his passion for the outdoors with others.”

Allen was a personal friend of Earnhardt. In fact, he directed marketing and sponsorships for the Dale Earnhardt/Richard Childress race teams and other NASCAR teams until Earnhardt’s fatal crash in the 2001 Daytona 500. Allen still remains close to the Earnhardt family.

Earnhardt’s son, Kerry, was in Reno for the announcement and to represent the Earnhardt family and others involved in the Dale Earnhardt Foundation. The nonprofit group based in North Carolina funds charitable programs and causes that sustain Dale Earnhardt’s lifelong commitment to children, education, and wildlife conservation.

Teresa Earnhardt, Dale’s wife, said, “As a lifelong outdoorsman, Dale was committed to wildlife and land conservation, a passion which he shared with his friends and family. Now that legacy lives on through his foundation and we are honored to have a partner in RMEF. Our shared mission to conserve and restore native game and their habitat will ensure the same opportunities for future generations.”

Childress, an NRA Board Member and Earnhardt’s long-time friend and team owner, said, “Dale was ‘The Intimidator’ for his fearlessness and competitiveness on the track, but the peacefulness of the outdoors also was a big part of who he was. I believe his quiet-time hunting and fishing helped recharge him for racing, and I know he’s smiling down now at being able to help other people enjoy the outdoors like he did.”

In addition to restoring and preserving elk herds and elk habitat, a challenge of perhaps equal concern is a hunter’s ability to actually land an elk tag. Ever-changing regulations, a state-by-state patchwork of confusing tag drawings, and the high-cost of guided hunts are all significant barriers to entry for the average person who wants to get involved in elk hunting.

To make sense of it all, a cottage industry has popped up to help hunters land big-game tags in the West. The Huntin’ Fool is a magazine and consulting service devoted to providing hunters with information on new regulations, application deadlines and fees, and advice on how to go about applying for tag drawings and which units in each state provide the best opportunities for trophy-class hunts. They will also recommend guide services, fill out your application for you, and answer any question you have about applying for a tag over the phone.

“You’ve got to get in and play the game,” said Garth Carter, founder of The Huntin’ Fool magazine, during a seminar he hosted at Elk Camp. “Very few states do over-the-counter tags anymore. We specialize in drawings, landowner tags, and the overall process of helping people find places to kill trophy-class animals.”

In essence, The Huntin’ Fool teaches hunters the ins and outs of the application process, a service that has become almost imperative in light of how often states change their regulations—and how burdensome the process of getting a tag has become.

To learn more about The Huntin’ Fool, visit www.huntinfool.com.

While certainly a valuable tool, one has to wonder if states need to re-evaluate how they issue tags if people need to hire consultants just to make sense of the process.

Next year’s 27th annual Elk Camp will return to the Reno-Sparks Convention Center March 3-6, marking the 13th time Reno has hosted the event.

For years, animal “rights” groups have fought to keep wolves in the Rocky Mountains protected under the Endangered Species Act. Despite overwhelming scientific evidence that wolf populations in the area far exceed the numbers needed to remove that protection and manage them like any other big game animal, the animal rightists continue to protest controlled, regulated wolf hunting.

One of the arguments that animal “rights” groups have used often in recent years is that there is no evidence that wolf predation causes significant declines in elk populations. In fact, groups like Defenders of Wildlife and the Western Wildlife Conservancy—using data from the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation—have recently been asserting that restored wolf populations have somehow translated to growing elk herds in the northern Rockies. These assertions led to a public statement from RMEF that the anti-hunting groups are misrepresenting their data.

"The theory that wolves haven’t had a significant adverse impact on some elk populations is not accurate. We’ve become all too familiar with these groups’ tactic of cherry-picking select pieces of information to support their own agenda, even when it is misleading,” said David Allen, RMEF president and CEO. “We will not allow that claim to go unchallenged.”

RMEF population data, which come from state wildlife agencies, show that elk populations are expanding the most in areas of the northern Rockies where wolves are not present. However, where elk share habitat with wolves, such as the greater Yellowstone area, some elk populations are declining fast. In fact, since the mid-1990s introduction of gray wolves, the northern Yellowstone elk herd has dropped from about 17,000 to 7,100 animals—a 58 percent decline.

A recently completed survey in Idaho showed an even more accelerated decline-- the elk population in the state’s Lolo Zone has declined from 5,110 to 2,178, a 57-percent reduction—just since 2006! The Lolo Elk Management Zone is 1.5 million acres of the Clearwater Region, north and south of the Lochsa River, up to the Montana border.

Additionally, some research shows that Idaho elk remaining in areas of concentrated wolf populations are suffering nutrition loss, lower body weights and decreasing birth rates. “This survey, combined with ongoing research showing wolves are the primary cause of elk mortality today, is further scientific evidence of the impact wolves are having,” Idaho Fish and Game Director Cal Groen said. “The rate of this decline in just four short years should help people understand there is an urgency to manage for a balance in this area.”

Wolf predation is the major source of mortality on this elk herd and is affecting population size because too few calves are surviving to replace the adults that die each year. Predation is preventing recovery from a decline that began in the late 1980s and a steep decline following the severe winter of 1996-97.

 When it comes to wolves or any other game management question, NRA maintains its longstanding position that decisions be made on sound science. We have the science—in addition to a wealth of anecdotal evidence from hunters of the Rocky Mountains—that wolves are taking a drastic toll on elk. For anti-hunting groups to misuse data from RMEF or anyone else is hardly surprising, but it shows their true colors—and it shows their ignorance of what the wolves themselves need. Wolves reproduce at a rate of about 20 percent a year, and the quotas set by Montana and Idaho in their 2009-2010 wolf seasons were designed to harvest about 20 percent from the existing numbers. So while wolf numbers are at least staying stable, their prey base of elk is declining. Perhaps the animal rights’ groups could tell us what happens to a predator when it eventually runs out of prey.