Doyle Ritchie has been telling anyone who will listen that the number of deer on the George Washington and Jefferson National Forests in Virginia, where he hunts, has experienced a drastic decline.
“This year the hunting season was just terrible on the national forest,” said Ritchie, a veteran deer hunter of 40 years. He lives in Fulks Run on the edge of the national forest in Rockingham County.
“I scouted week after week all summer and fall. I hunted day in and day out during the archery, early muzzleloader and firearm’s seasons. I’ve been out during the late archery and muzzleloading season, but with the same results. There are few, if any, deer in the national forest in the many regions I hunted.”
You might think Ritchie’s message would be a tough sell, considering Department of Game and Inland Fisheries’ officials are saying the 2008-09 deer season could go down as a record when the final count is made in a few weeks. Last season kill was a record.
Add to that, there are so many deer in some sections of the state that they end up in the grills of vehicles and they account for millions of dollars in crop damage.
But what Richie says about the national forest gets solid backing from many sportsmen who hunt public property, particularly the northern end of the forest.
“Hunter after hunter I spoke with reported the same,” he said.
Even DGIF wildlife biologists share the concern.
“I agree with him that we have low deer populations on United States Forest Service lands,” said Jay Jeffreys. He is the DGIF regional wildlife manager assigned to the northern Shenandoah Valley, including national forest property.
Where the differences occur, wildlife officials blame the national forest situation on declining deer habitat, mast failures and lower numbers of hunters. Richie puts the problem squarely on liberal hunting regulations that he says have resulted in a purging of too many does and young bucks.
“You won’t see mature deer if you shoot out the young ones,” Richie said. “You won’t have deer around here if you take the does.”
Richie, who calls himself “blunt,” is a newcomer to this debate, which has been going on for about four years and mostly has involved hunters in Rockingham, Augusta and Highland counties. He is more aggressive than most, leveling stinging criticism at Matt Knox, the DGIF deer project coordinator.
“Knox and his team seem to want to kill off the deer, no matter what,” said Richie. “If it is brown, it needs to go down. You never hear Knox or members of his team say good things about deer. The mentality is pest control.”
During a recent meeting with Knox, Jeffreys and Bob Ellis, chief of the DGIF wildlife division, Richie recommended a moratorium on shooting does in the national forest and a limit of two bucks that meet a minimum of six points.
Some restrictions are expected to be set this year, but Richie isn’t likely to get all he wants by a long shot. But officials are sympathetic.
Here’s the challenge, said Jeffreys: Deer don’t recognize boundaries. They range on both national forest and private land. When they come out of the national forest to forage for food they are confronted by more liberal seasons and bag limits. When they return to the forest there isn’t that much food available.
“Private land regulations may well have driven down deer numbers on adjoining public land,” he said.
One resolution would be to enhance deer habitat on the national forest, but state biologists are limited in what they can do.
“We as an agency can enact regulations but we have real limitations in managing deer habitat on U.S. Forest Service land,” said Jeffreys.
Just this week, Congress advanced legislation that would set aside 43,000 acres of additional wilderness in Virginia, and environmentalists are betting on the new president to move even further down that road. Wilderness and roadless areas prohibit the kind of forest management that provides the new growth necessary to advance the wellbeing of deer, especially during times of mast failure.
One factor the two sides agree on, deer are being impacted by the growing number of predators, namely coyotes and black bear.
“The talk out here where I live is not how many deer that hunters saw, but how many bears they saw,” said Ritchie. “The bear hunters brag about how they have brought the bears back, and they certainly have been successful. But the problem is the number of fawns the bears and coyotes are taking. Last summer, I found so much bear crap in the national forest containing fawn hair that it was hard not to step in it.”
PART II next week: No easy answer for improving deer herd on the national forest
Friday, January 23, 2009
Aging of national forest is bad news for deer hunters -- Part 2
Van Humphreys, who lives in Craig County, can remember hunting in the national forest when you couldn’t see much beyond 50 yards because of the thick understory. It was ideal habitat for deer, not to mention grouse and other wildlife species.
Now often you can see twice that far because of the scarcity of cover. That’s particularly bad for deer and for deer hunters. The same can be said of grouse and woodcock hunters.
“No protection, no browse equal no game,” Humphreys said in response to last week’s column on the decline of deer in the national forest.
The national forest is aging. Browse is giving way to mature trees and a park-like atmosphere.
“There is a slow but steady decline in quality of deer habitat,” said Jay Jeffreys, a regional wildlife manger for the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries.
While mature trees can produce mast, namely acorns which deer relish, mast crops are unreliable. When they fail, as they did in 2002 and 2003, a mature forest becomes a wasteland. The result: deer productivity and recruitment are impacted, said Jeffreys.
Whether they realize it or not, hunters are locked in a battle with environmentalists over how the national forest will be managed. Environmentalists want more wilderness and roadless areas, which they are likely to get under the Obama Administration. This means less logging and other minumpliation of the forest, the kind of activities that create quality habitat for deer through new growth.
There is room for both wilderness and enhanced deer habit on the more than 1 million acres of national forest in Virginia, but that hasn’t kept some environmentalists from trying to hog it all. Either they don’t care or understand what their actions are doing to wildlife.
Hunters have exerted little effort in fighting back, although they have science on their side. Many simply have switched their attention to private property, where deer are abundant. This lack of hunting pressure adds to the decline in the number of deer being killed on the national forest.
“Many of our staff believes the reduced number of hunters results in a significant reduction of deer movement, thus fewer deer coming before the hunter’s gun,” said Jeffreys.
What you have on the national forest is an interaction of a number of factors -- poorer deer habitat, increased predators, fewer hunters, mast failures and more liberal hunting regulations that are designed to address the overabundance of deer on nearby private land but also impact national forest herds.
Jeffreys correctly places habitat decline at the apex of the equation, but he gets an argument from Doyle Ritchie of Rockingham County who has become a major critic of the DGIF’s deer management practices. Ritchie believes the national forest deer herd has been harmed by DGIF regulations that crop off an excess of does and young bucks.
While it is true that DGIF has attempted to address the decline in the national forest deer herd by setting more restrictive bag limits on forest property, Ritchie says these efforts have been offset by the addition of an extra week of muzzleloading season and increased youth hunting opportunities.
“I’m just really angry about the way the national forest is going downhill, yet deer flourish in places right next to the forest,” said Ritchie. “I don’t think it’s a lack of food or mast crop failure. I think the problem is really poor management practices.”
A case could be made that there are plenty of deer on private land. So why manipulate the national forest for deer? The answers: There are sportsmen who depend on the national forest for their hunting. Other wildlife species, even song birds, benefit from a young forest habitat and the day may come when more hunters will depend on the national forest as private land is developed.
HERE’S WHAT HUNTERS CAN DO:
1. Take an active role in the management of the national forest. Right now the George Washington National Forest is revising its Land and Resource Management Plan. The plan is tilting toward removing 42 percent of the forest from active management practices, the kind that provide deer habitat. Several input meetings have been lightly attended by hunters. There are a couple remaining: Jan. 29, 6:30- 9 p.m., Rockbridge County High School, Lexington and Feb. 5, 6:30-9 p.m., Peter Muhlengerg Middle School, Woodstock. Also check the forest’s Web site for information on the plan revision. Let your congressman and senators know that you want deer/grouse habitat to get a fair shake in the management of the national forests.
2. Participate in the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries’ current regulatory process with an eye toward establishing hunting laws that address the needs of the national forest. Check HuntFishVa.com for opportunities to express views at public meetings and online. Beyond that, tell DGIF and forest officials that you would like for them to rekindle the spirit of the 70-year old Cooperative Wildlife Management Agreement that mandates state wildlife officials working hand-in-hand with federal forest officials.
Now often you can see twice that far because of the scarcity of cover. That’s particularly bad for deer and for deer hunters. The same can be said of grouse and woodcock hunters.
“No protection, no browse equal no game,” Humphreys said in response to last week’s column on the decline of deer in the national forest.
The national forest is aging. Browse is giving way to mature trees and a park-like atmosphere.
“There is a slow but steady decline in quality of deer habitat,” said Jay Jeffreys, a regional wildlife manger for the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries.
While mature trees can produce mast, namely acorns which deer relish, mast crops are unreliable. When they fail, as they did in 2002 and 2003, a mature forest becomes a wasteland. The result: deer productivity and recruitment are impacted, said Jeffreys.
Whether they realize it or not, hunters are locked in a battle with environmentalists over how the national forest will be managed. Environmentalists want more wilderness and roadless areas, which they are likely to get under the Obama Administration. This means less logging and other minumpliation of the forest, the kind of activities that create quality habitat for deer through new growth.
There is room for both wilderness and enhanced deer habit on the more than 1 million acres of national forest in Virginia, but that hasn’t kept some environmentalists from trying to hog it all. Either they don’t care or understand what their actions are doing to wildlife.
Hunters have exerted little effort in fighting back, although they have science on their side. Many simply have switched their attention to private property, where deer are abundant. This lack of hunting pressure adds to the decline in the number of deer being killed on the national forest.
“Many of our staff believes the reduced number of hunters results in a significant reduction of deer movement, thus fewer deer coming before the hunter’s gun,” said Jeffreys.
What you have on the national forest is an interaction of a number of factors -- poorer deer habitat, increased predators, fewer hunters, mast failures and more liberal hunting regulations that are designed to address the overabundance of deer on nearby private land but also impact national forest herds.
Jeffreys correctly places habitat decline at the apex of the equation, but he gets an argument from Doyle Ritchie of Rockingham County who has become a major critic of the DGIF’s deer management practices. Ritchie believes the national forest deer herd has been harmed by DGIF regulations that crop off an excess of does and young bucks.
While it is true that DGIF has attempted to address the decline in the national forest deer herd by setting more restrictive bag limits on forest property, Ritchie says these efforts have been offset by the addition of an extra week of muzzleloading season and increased youth hunting opportunities.
“I’m just really angry about the way the national forest is going downhill, yet deer flourish in places right next to the forest,” said Ritchie. “I don’t think it’s a lack of food or mast crop failure. I think the problem is really poor management practices.”
A case could be made that there are plenty of deer on private land. So why manipulate the national forest for deer? The answers: There are sportsmen who depend on the national forest for their hunting. Other wildlife species, even song birds, benefit from a young forest habitat and the day may come when more hunters will depend on the national forest as private land is developed.
HERE’S WHAT HUNTERS CAN DO:
1. Take an active role in the management of the national forest. Right now the George Washington National Forest is revising its Land and Resource Management Plan. The plan is tilting toward removing 42 percent of the forest from active management practices, the kind that provide deer habitat. Several input meetings have been lightly attended by hunters. There are a couple remaining: Jan. 29, 6:30- 9 p.m., Rockbridge County High School, Lexington and Feb. 5, 6:30-9 p.m., Peter Muhlengerg Middle School, Woodstock. Also check the forest’s Web site for information on the plan revision. Let your congressman and senators know that you want deer/grouse habitat to get a fair shake in the management of the national forests.
2. Participate in the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries’ current regulatory process with an eye toward establishing hunting laws that address the needs of the national forest. Check HuntFishVa.com for opportunities to express views at public meetings and online. Beyond that, tell DGIF and forest officials that you would like for them to rekindle the spirit of the 70-year old Cooperative Wildlife Management Agreement that mandates state wildlife officials working hand-in-hand with federal forest officials.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)