Elk Problems
Elk are beautiful and majestic animals, but their presence in Pennsylvania and, in particular, the elk hunting season, has created a lot of controversy and headaches for the Pennsylvania Game Commission. The agency is in the process of changing regulations and the number of permits in an attempt to better manage the elk herd and address some of the problems.
Applications for elk licenses are now available for the 2003 season. This will be the commission’s third attempt at a modern-day elk hunt. One hundred licenses (80 antlerless, 20 antlered) will be available this year, as compared to 70 last year and 30 for the first hunt in 2001.
When the topic turns to elk, people line up in one or more of many opinion camps. The anti-hunters are opposed to an elk season of any kind, others fear that reducing the herd will hurt tourism, and still another group criticizes the hunt for biological reasons. The herd and its gene pool is just too small for hunting without hurting the health of the population, they claim. This camp particularly fears the targeting of the best breeding bulls by hunters.
On the other side of the fence there are hunters who are thrilled at the opportunity to hunt elk in Pennsylvania. They love watching elk, but also view the herd as a resource that can support hunting. These hunters are willing to do their part to help the commission manage the growing herd and limit property damage.
Yet another group views the presence of elk as an unwanted intrusion on their property rights. Some of these individuals, to the dismay of most hunters, have shot multiple elk for “crop damage.” A few in this camp would be happy if all of the non-native elk were exterminated.
It should be said that most property and camp owners love watching the elk and put up with intrusions by tourists and hunters, as well as the damage caused by the elk themselves.
On top of all of this, the behavior and alleged behavior of a small number hunters and their guides during the 2002 season brought an avalanche of criticism down on hunters and the commission and really fed the rumor mills. Among those things alleged were hunters shooting elk within safety zones; hunters or guides driving elk from safety zones; elk being shot along highways, in people’s yards and in streams; and, of course, that allegation that the game commission did nothing about it.
During the past six months, I’ve attempted to track down some of these allegations and I’ve questioned commission personnel about their role in the entire affair. Here’s what I learned.
Upon PGC investigation, an elk was confiscated and three individuals were charged with illegally driving a large bull elk from a park. A guide was found guilty by the local magistrate. Much to the dismay of the commission and the officers involved in the prosecution, the second guide and the hunter who shot the elk were found not guilty and the elk was returned to the hunter. Don’t ask me to explain that decision.
It was documented that at least one other elk was driven from a safety zone and shot. This was done legally, however, with the permission of the owner of the safety zone.
All of my other hot leads turned into dead ends. For example, the “I know a guy who saw a hunter shoot an elk in First Fork,” actually turned into “Well, the elk was wet when it was brought into the check station.” This went on and on.
How did the commission handle this? According to PGC Northcentral Director of Law Enforcement Quigg Stump, “We investigated every reported violation and I gave instructions to our officers to follow up on all specific rumors.”
Several commission officers confided that they were unhappy with some activities of hunters and guides, but these actions fell into the realm of ethics rather than the law.
With the entire elk hunt under a public microscope, poor ethical decisions made by a few make all hunters look bad. Hunters, guides and the commission should keep this in mind, and the commission should move to quantify ethics as law where necessary.
The first step in this direction occurred at the commission’s April meeting when they voted to make the herding (pushing or driving) of elk illegal. This regulation will be voted on again for final rule-making at their June 23-24 meeting.
According to the commission, as it stands now, their elk management goals are designed to stabilize the elk population on the entire range and allow hunting in all management areas. They continue to target human-elk conflicts by issuing more permits in those areas, while not allowing hunting near the better elk viewing areas. By making the vast majority of the 2003 permits for antlerless elk, they address some of the biological concerns and better target the limiting of the elk population’s growth.
The commission continues to pledge money from the first 10,000 applications ($100,000) toward habitat improvement within the elk range. The Sinnemahoning Sportsmen, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and other groups are aiding with habitat acquisition and improvement. It is hoped that this effort will also help to keep elk away from problem areas and provide a more natural hunting experience.
This year’s elk season will be held November 10-15, one week earlier than last year, but in the same time slot as the 2001 hunt. The non-refundable application fee is again $10. Applications can be made on-line through the commission’s website www.pgc.state.pa.us or mailed in with the form found in the 2003-2004 regulations booklet.
Mark Nale can be reached at MarkAngler@aol.com
