The Velvet Is Shed As Pennsylvania Elk Rut Approaches

August is a month of change for the Pennsylvania elk herd.  The antlers complete their development in July and the velvet dries out and cracks in early to mid-August with many bulls starting the shedding process during the second week of August.  I was in Pennsylvania Elk Country from August 15th through the 19th, looking to document this process and  found what would prove to be the largest bull of the trip lying in a meadow beside Winslow Hill Road on Monday evening.

9x8 Bull Elk Starting To Shed Velvet

It is difficult to see with the size of the photo on the blog, but count forward three points from the back of the left beam and then look just below the two points that are clustered together and you can see the first bloody, partially bare patch on his antlers.  Eventually he got up, dislodged some apples from a nearby tree with his antlers, and rubbed the velvet against the limbs.  At this point one could also see some blood and partially bare areas on the other antler as well.

I found him in the same spot at dawn on Tuesday morning and the shedding was much more advanced, but he still had a long way to go.

Bare Spots Are Larger Next Morning With Strips Of Velvet Hanging Loose

I was at this meadow at dawn on Thursday morning , but he was not there so I went on the Hick's Run viewing area where I saw a lot of whitetail deer, but sometime after I left  well known elk watcher and photographer Lamie Wheler saw him crossing the meadow and took a series of photos of  him as he violently rubbed an autumn olive bush less than twenty yards from the road.  This was exactly what I wanted to film with the video camera, but alas I was in the wrong place.  Later in the morning I encountered him at the edge of some woodlands and only a few strips of velvet remained.

Shedding Almost Complete On Thursday Morning

I checked the meadow again that evening as dusk was falling and he was moving across it in such a manner that  it was obvious that he was not going to linger long enough to take still photographs so I mounted the Canon XL-H1 camcorder and got a a few video clips before he vanished from sight.  As best as I could tell the antlers were completely bare by this point.  All of the above photos were taken with the Canon 500mmF4 IS.  The first two are with the Canon 7D and the third with the T3i.

I hope to post more photographs from the trip over the next few days, but the trip was not only about photography, but  elk management issues as well. With the annual  drawing for elk licenses being held in September and elk season being held from October 31--November 5th and the extended season from November 7th through the 12th--there is is quite a bit of talk about the events of the past season and the decision to issue 10 of the 18 bull tags for Zone 2, 8, and 10 this year.  These are the zones that most directly impact the areas where most visitors look for elk.  If one includes the special conservation tag, this means a total of 11 of the bulls that frequent the center of elk related tourism could be killed.  With hunter success rate running between approximately 90-100% on bulls this effectively means that there is a high possibility that at least 10 of the bulls that you see on Winslow Hill this September will be dead by mid-November.

As disturbing as this is, it was eclipsed by an eyewitness account of the killing of a bull during the past season.  I hope to share at least portions of this story in the next post.

Originally posted at Pennsylvania Wildlife Photographer by Willard Hill.

Controlling Pennsylvania's Elk Population-Is Shooting Necessary?

Elk In Hunt Zone 2-Day Before Elk Season: photo by W.Hill

In the most recent post, Pennsylvania Elk-As Wild As Any?, a reader raised an excellent question:

"I also own a family camp on Houston Hill, and we are privileged enough to have Elk come right into our backyard. Elk on our mountain seem to be a little bit more skittish than the ones around Winslow Hill, but not by much. I know that's a subjective comment, but it's the only way I know to describe it. I agree that hunting these Tame Elk is like shooting fish in a barrel, but how would you propose we control the Elk Population if we do not hunt them? I would love to hear your ideas/proposals."
Thanks,
Curt

I begin by stating that I believe that the Pennsylvania elk herd is of more value to society as an easily viewable natural resource than as the object of a limited hunt in which only a small number of people will ever participate.  With that being said though, there is room for both world class tourism and a hunt to co-exist in Pennsylvania, but for this to be, the herd needs to be managed in different ways in different areas.  Hunting for the sake of hunting itself should be conducted  in areas well away from  Winslow Hill,  but  it is uncertain as to  how wild elk in these areas are also. For example I have heard from reliable sources that they find the elk on Moore Hill to be as wild as whitetails in many cases, yet certain stories of hunts in  the remote areas raise a flag in my mind. One of these describes a situation in the Quehanna Wild Area in which a hunter fired a "challenge shot" at a bull at short range (sounds like another word for missed...in all of my years of hunting I have not heard of firing a shot to challenge an animal, but such is the way the story goes ). The party then followed the animal's tracks to a nearby food plot where the bull was feeding in spite of being recently shot at, and the hunter then killed the animal.

But I digress, let's assume that elk in areas such as Quehanna, Moore Hill,etc. are sufficiently wild to justify calling shooting them hunting, this does not excuse trying to portray the elk on Gray Hill or Winslow Hill as being "as wild as any" and portraying shooting them as being a challenging hunt, yet, by looking at PGC harvest maps it is obvious that most of the elk killed since season resumed in 2001 have been taken in the Winslow Hill /Gray Hill areas, and the 555 corridor.  With that being said,  there are possibly times that elk in this area would need to be shot to control the population, but that should be limited to antlerless elk only, and it should be plainly stated up front that this would not always be a  fair chase hunt, but rather the necessary removal of surplus animals. The animals would be just as dead, but at least we would be honest about the situation.

2001-2009 Elk Harvest Map: Source-The Pennsylvania Game Commission

In the documentary film, "The Truth About Pennsylvania's Elk Herd", I advanced several ideas designed to give further protection to the large bulls that frequent the elk viewing areas. These ideas should  result in less killing of acclimated elk as well.

One possibility is to retain the current No Hunt Zone as an area where no elk of either sex would be killed, with problem animals being relocated by trap and transfer. The No Hunt Zone should possibly be expanded to protect the areas in the Medix Run, Benezette, Rt 555 Corridor.

Alternate No Hunt-Population Control Only Hunt Zones From "The Truth About Pennsylvania's Elk Herd"-map is approximation only not accurate in fine detail.

Second would be a substantial zone around this area which would be a population control only hunt. There would be no bull tags issued for this area and only enough antlerless tags to contain the population at an acceptable level. It would not be portrayed as a challenging hunt, but rather as a population control tool, held only when strictly needed and not utilized as an excuse to conduct a yearly hunt.

At this point it is not clear that we are at the place where we need to control the size of the Winslow Hill sub-herd by shooting.  According to The Management Plan For Elk In Pennsylvania 2006-20016,( In the following quote, BCC means biological carrying capacity or the amount of elk the habitat will support and SCC means social carrying capacity or what society will tolerate) " The BCC for elk in Pennsylvania is unknown, but there is no indication that the population is reaching it. None of the studied indications mentioned above have been observed. In fact, elk appear to be reproducing and reaching weights above what is expected and survival rates are normal to high. The SCC is also unknown at this time. However, indications are that number hasn't been reached either. Most interested parties haven't complained of too many elk and would actually like to see more. As we gather more information, we will balance the numbers so that we do not go over the BCC but still maintain an elk population that provides enjoyment for the people of the Commonwealth.(written by elk biologist Jon Marc DiBerti)

Originally posted at Pennsylvania Wildlife Photographer by Willard Hill

News From Pennsylvania Elk Country: A Report From Paul Staniszewski

Today, I received a very informative e-mail from Paul Staniszewski that covers some important developments in Pennsylvania elk country and will be the basis for most of today's post.

There was much speculation that the bull known as "Attitude" among our circle of photographers was among the bulls that were shot this past hunting season, but Paul reports that he and Ron "Buckwheat" Saffer did see this bull and seven cows across from Benezett store. They also saw four other large bulls, which included the famous Benezette town bull "Fred", aka "Dog Rope", aka "Bull No. 36". This is welcome news when two of the most famous character bulls "Odie" aka "Kisser" and "Crazy Legs Jr." were killed during the past elk season, along with the large 7x7 that thrilled thousands of visitors to the Elk Country Visitor Center.



Two Of The Major Attractions At Elk Country Visitor Center, Killed In Elk Season: Photo by W.Hill

 In addition, Paul reports:
"In traveling down Dewey Road we were surprised to see that the barn and garage at the Gilbert Farm were gone.... I was glad to see that theywere not simply burned down, but dismantled with the barn siding and foundation stones salvaged.

Kenny Gilbert Barn: Photo by W.Hill

Shed At Gilbert: Photo by W.Hill

Further down across the road from the "Stink Ponds" we observed at least 75 cows feeding in the field.



Elk At Ponds Near Gilbert Buildings: Photo by W.Hill

  In our discussions with local residents, all of the talk was about the all the Marcellus Gas Well leases being signed and a lot of money changing hands.I am very concerned about how all the drilling being planned in the area will impact the elk herd and how the hundreds of thousands of visitors and gas well activity (including traffic) will coexist.

Marcellus Sale Related Work-Porcupine Run-Winslow Hill Viewing Area: Photo by W.Hill

 Editor's Note:
According to other information that I have received, it seems that the gas and oil rights on at least a portion of the public lands on Winslow Hill are still owned by previous owners or their families. This includes the land where the Elk Country Visitor Center is located. A local resident told me on the day that the above photo was taken that a gas well is to be located there.

Now more from Paul Staniszewski:
"We stopped in the Elk Country Visitors Center and the staff reported that the previous day (Sunday) was just as busy as it was during the rut in October. The traffic to the center has far exceeded everyone's expectations. I look at this as being very positive because more and more people are being educated as to the value of the elk herd as a asset to be viewed and appreciated by many tourists rather than a handful of hunters.

On the way home, we stopped in Hollywood and spoke to Larry Alexander,an environmental engineer from DEP, and he gave us a tour of the abandoned mine drainage reclamation project that is currently underway. This project is very important because these are the headwaters of the Bennetts Branch that runs through Benezette. Larry previously worked out of the trailer that was parked on the Gilbert Farm for 8 years while he supervised the building of the 2 silos, the construction of the "Stink Ponds", and all the other activity related to cleaning up Dents Run. He told us that presently the lower reaches of Dents Run are now able to sustain aquatic insect life and will be stocked with trout. I never thought that I would see that happened in my
lifetime."

A special thanks to Paul for another informative report.

Originally posted at Pennsylvania Wildlife Photographer by Willard Hill

E-Mail From Paul Staniszweski: Change In Visitor Center Operation Schedule

The following is a letter to the editor so as to speak, which was sent in the form of an e-mail.  This is from Paul Staniszweski, a retired educator who is currently a Pennsylvania Wild Juried Artist and a volunteer at the Elk Country Visitor Center.

Willard, I would like to comment on your blog: First of all, I would like to go back to October and the dedication of the Elk Country Visitors Center.... At that time, I mentioned that there was a noticeable absence of any representation from the PA Game Commission... Everyone that I talked to said that the reason was that there is an ongoing conflict between the Game Commission and the management of the Keystone Country Elk Alliance.... In my opinion, I think that more is involved. I feel that the vast majority of attendees to the "grand opening" were against the elk hunt and the Game Commission didn't want to have to answer questions about the hunt being unethical and giving new meaning to the word "sportsmanship". In truth, I believe the the PGC is embarrassed about the hunt and they know that it is a joke.... And the PGC knows that this hunt amounts to "shooting fish in a barrel".

Acclimated Bulls Sparring On Winslow Hill: Photo by Paul Staniszewski

The following are concerns I have about the hunt:

• The elk hunt should NOT be promoted as a trophy event.
• The "no hunt zone" needs to be extended to include Winslow Hill (I Understand that bugling was going on there throughout the hunt).
• The elk hunt does not need to be an annual event, but conducted on a "need to have" basis.

Willard, again, these are only my thoughts and now I will get off my soapbox... Sorry for the long post...

Paul

Paul also informs us that the days and hours of operation of the Visitor Center have changed.

"The management of the visitors center has announced a change in their hours and days of operation for the upcoming months as follows: For November and December, it will be closed on Tuesdays and Wednesdays and for the open days, the hours will be 9:00 AM til 5:00 PM.... And for January, February, March,
and April it will be open on Saturdays and Sundays only from 9:00 AM til 5:00 PM."

Originally posted at Pennsylvania Wildlife Photographer by Willard Hill

An Unpleasant Encounter In Pennsylvania Elk Country

Dawn on September 29th, 2010 found me slowly moving toward my favorite elk photography spot as the thunderous bugles of bull elk rent the autumn air.  On this morning I was accompanied by three other persons,  my brother Coy of Country Captures, and our good friend Richard and one of his relatives.

Approaching The Favorite Spot: Photo by W.Hill

Over the years this spot has rewarded me with some of the most exciting experiences I have had in the great outdoors.   These experiences included numerous encounters with large numbers of exceptional bull elk.  In 2003 I saw and recorded the mating of a bull and cow, and the best experience of all was when I recorded a fight between what is now known as Bull 36 (Fred) and an impressive monster known as the Test Hill Bull.  This fight is part of the theater presentation at the new Elk Country Visitor Center today.

Little did I realize that  my  memories of the area would soon be tainted forever by a very unpleasant encounter.  Suddenly I spotted a young bull elk horning a sapling above me on the hill side and began to position the camera to film him, when suddenly I spotted something out of place in the tall grass that grew alongside the pathway in front of me.  I swung the camera toward the spot and was amazed to see that two persons were crouched in the grass.  What had drawn my attention was the reflection from the hunting license attached to the back of one of the persons.

A Surprise: Photo by W.Hill

It seemed likely that this was the hunter who had the Governor's Conservation elk tag for this year.  This is a special bull permit that is awarded to the highest bidder in an auction conducted by some prominent conservation organization chosen by the PGC.  The first drawing was in 2009 when the tag was auctioned by the National Wild Turkey Federation and brought in $28,000.  According to state law up to 20% of the proceeds may be retained by the organization that conducts the auction while the rest is returned to the PGC to fund elk management programs. In this the second year, the tag was given to the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and was auctioned off for $35,000.  The successful bidder is permitted to harvest one bull elk anywhere in the Pennsylvania elk range except for the No Hunt Zone and according to the 2010-11 Pennsylvania Hunting and Trapping Digest, may hunt from September 1st through November 6th.

At this point I decided to maintain my position and photograph the young bull, which in fact the other members of the party were already doing. Note: most photos in this post are frame captures from a Canon XL-H1 Video Camera.

Young Bull Rubbing Sapling: Photo by W.Hill

As I was filming the bull I noticed movement to the left and the hunter and guide emerged from cover and walked away from the area, vanishing into a ravine some distance away.

Hunter and Guide Leave Area: Photo by W.Hill

After they vanished from sight, I moved on to my favorite spot on a retention pond bank while the rest of the party continued to photograph the small bull.  From this vantage point I could see the top of the rack of a mature bull and signaled the rest of the party that a large bull was on top of the hill.  At the time the animal was lying down, but soon stood up.  This animal had been injured earlier in the rut and walked with a distinct limp.  He spent much of the week of September 20th lying in a camp lawn along Winslow Hill Road, but now he had moved some distance away to this meadow where a newly reclaimed area was planted in fall grain.

Coy Hill Photographs Bull Lying Down: Photo by W.Hill

In time the bull stood up and I was able to photograph the entire animal.  This particular animal has no fear whatsoever of humans and will not run from them.

Crippled Bull: Photo by W.Hill

While the rest of the party were photographing the bull, I noticed the hunter and guide walking up a ravine to my left.  They stopped at the cluster of trees to the right of the large mound of earth and stayed there for an extended period of time.

View From Pond Bank To Ravine: Photo by W.Hill

When the other members of my party finished photographing the bull, they came down the hill to the pond bank where I was standing.  We discussed the morning's encounter with the bulls and waited in the hopes that more elk would appear.

Facing Area Where Bull Had Been, Shows Hillside That Hunter And Guide Approached Us By: Photo by C.Hill

After a time the hunter and guide came along the hillside in front of where I am standing in the above photo and then came striding down the hillside to us.  The hunter asked us if we were aware that they were conducting a hunt in the area.  He explained that these were game lands purchased by hunting license dollars to be used for hunting purposes. They were working a bull in the area and we had interfered with them.  (It is a violation of the Pennsylvania Game and Wildlife Code to interfere with a lawful hunt), At this time I invited the hunter to file charges against me so we could settle this in a court of law.  (In actuality he would need to report the incident to a PGC officer who would investigate and decide if a violation had in fact occurred, and  file charges if warranted).  I also asked the hunter if he was accusing me of harassing him and he said," no", at which point I informed him that he was coming dangerously close to harassing me.  I then turned to the guide and recapped the events of the morning, noting that I was coming to an area that I utilize quite frequently and in fact was my favorite spot for elk viewing an photography. I had done exactly the same thing on several morning's and evenings in the last two weeks and the only thing that was different today was that they (the hunting party) were in the area this morning.  I stopped immediately upon sighting them, did not create a disturbance and did not move until until after they left the area.   I asked the guide if he had a problem with this and he said that he did not.  They then wished us "a good day" and "good luck" and left the area while we remained for some time in the hopes of further elk sightings.

The crux of the matter is that we were engaged in a  legal activity in an area where we had every legal right to be.  As far as I know, the guide and hunter were also engaged in a legal activity in an area where they had the legal right to be.  It would have been inappropriate for us to approach them while they were hunting and discuss the ethics of the situation in which they were involved, to purposefully frighten the animal they were hunting, or otherwise prevent them from hunting it, but simply being in the same area is not interfering with the hunt.

Some will think he had a point about the land being bought with hunting license dollars for hunting purposes, but this is not nearly as valid as it appears at first glance.  For one thing one would need to research the matter to see just how that portion of State Game Lands 311 was purchased, as  funds from a variety of sources other than hunting license dollars are often utilized in such land transactions.  Also it is likely that most if not all in our party either buy a hunting license each year or have done so in the past.  I bought my first license at somewhere between fourteen and sixteen years of age and continued to do so until 1998 when I quit hunting.  My brother Coy bought his first license at a young age and continues to do so today, so it is not a simple case of hunters vs anti-hunters or hunters vs non-consumptive users.

Since I am about eight years older than the hunter, but stopped buying a license twelve years ago, it is possible that he has only had been a license holder for four more years than I have been-although he could have started buying his license at twelve years of age, which would bias the scale a bit more in his favor, but that being said, I have contributed almost as much to the game fund by buying a license as he has, yet it seems persons such as I should not be on the game lands or at least not while hunters are present.

But he spent $35,000 for a special tag so that puts him far ahead of me in contributing to wildlife conservation, or does it?  I was a Deputy Wildlife Conservation Officer (DWCO) from 1982 until 2006 and served in a district which had a  large number of deputies.Coy began a few years later and retired in the same time period that I did.  During my early years with the PGC it was common to be allocated twelve paid days per year, which were paid during the fall hunting seasons.  At the sum of $30.00 per day this resulted in a total income of $360.00 per year before taxes, yet we were young and motivated and it was common to work 40 to 100 hours per month during the months of September, October, November, and December.  In addition I have donated numerous photographs and video footage to the PGC for their use, and Coy has donated numerous photos as well.  In addition I retired from the full-time position of Game Lands Maintenance Supervisor for Fulton County and portions of Bedford and Franklin Counties. Considering this I think our contribution to wildlife conservation has been significant.

With that being said though, these factors shouldn't enter the equation.  The area where they were hunting should still be part of the No Hunt Zone as it was from the first Hunt in 2001 until 2005 as most elk in this area are completely acclimated to humans and are easily approachable. . With over 865,000 square miles of elk range, why must there be elk hunting in this particular area, and how could a hunter expect privacy during the peak elk viewing season-or did they expect that everyone should stay away from the area in the off chance that they might be hunting there? The area in question is quite near the Gilbert Viewing Area and is open to the public. The hunters should have expected to encounter other persons and in fact the area was inundated with people during the previous weekend.

One should be required to have either a valid hunting license, or a  Game Lands use permit to be present on State Game Lands.  This would ensure that everyone contributed financially to wildlife conservation and  would remove the argument that non-hunters do not contribute to wildlife conservation and should not be there during hunting seasons.

For more reading about this subject please visit Country Captures and read Elk Hunt Zone 2 & The Viewing Areas.

Originally posted at Pennsylvania Wildlife Photographer by Willard Hill

SPE and Elk County Outfitters Engage In Debate

Recently several members of SupportPaElk engaged Jack Manack, Jr. of Elk County Outfitters in an extended discussion of the issues surrounding our elk herd, and elk management.

Read More:

Thoughts On Pennsylvania Elk Hunting: An Interesting Comment

A Potential "Great" Pennsylvania Bull

On July 7th, I received a comment from Jim B , which is as follows:

"I enjoy looking at your photos and my wife and I enjoy visiting Benezette and photographing the elk. I have been a hunter for over 45 years (and I am deeply involved in the firearms industry), but what PA calls an Elk Hunting Season is anything but a hunting season. The elk in PA regardless of where you see them are acclimated to humans and have not developed a healthy fear of humans as the deer have.

I think your film did some good and we need to do more to convince the Game Commission that other means of population control is needed versus leading the public to believe that the elk season provides "elk hunting". I at least wish that the TV stations would avoid filming the "hunts" that certainly would cause those that do not hunt to just have more examples to share on why they do not believe in hunting."

I appreciate Jim's comment and wish to elaborate a bit.

I find that most of the people I personally know, that do object to the elk hunt as it is currently implemented, seem to agree with much or all of what Jim has to say. Many also come from a hunting background and most still hunt.

A prime example is a retired biologist and college professor who hunted Elk in Colorado, but opposes the Pennsylvania Hunt. He told me it was far different to hunt elk in a state with a large herd (247,090 after the 2005 season according to "Rocky Mountain Game and Fish"), than in one with a herd numbering considerably less than 1,000 animals. (an estimated 700-750 animals in October of 2007, according to a report on the PA. Game Commission Website). He felt the hunt was likely to damage the genetic makeup of the herd as there was extreme danger of removing too many of the biggest and best animals from such a small herd.

He related this to me as we stood on an Elk County hillside, with several bulls ranging about pursuing a cow in heat. This was after a few years of elk hunting. He pointed out that at a casual glance this seemed like a great situation, but if one looked closely, second tier bulls and not the prime animals of a few years before, were doing much of the breeding activity, as too many of the mature animals had been removed by the hunting season.

Jim B. touches on an interesting point concerning the videotaping of hunts. Those who do so should should look closely at the resulting footage, not just from the standpoint of a hunter, but they should ask, "does this portray a negative image to those not involved in the sport"? It is quite common for the participants to look only at the successful aspect of the hunt and miss seeing things that the more critical observer will take exception to. More importantly they should review the situation with a critical eye and make every effort to insure that any negative aspect does not occur again on future hunts.

One episode comes to mind in which a hunter fires several shots at a bull from what appears to be moderate range. Some shots miss and some hit. The bull runs some distance and collapses. After quite a bit of talking, and congratulatory backslapping, the hunter reloads his rifle and they approach the fallen elk. As they approach the dead bull, the camera cuts to a smaller bull standing in the area where the first animal fell and the hunter thinks that the bull he shot got back up. Luckily the guide knows it is a different animal and the hunter does not shoot. The animal stands there for quite some time while the hunting party approaches before running away.

I have heard comments from numerous persons who have seen this episode. We must bear in mind that it is possible that events were re-arranged somewhat in editing, or re-staged for the camera after the situation was resolved, but if the story is taken as presented, some come away with a less than positive view of the situation.

The most common reactions include the following points.

1. Would the hunter have shot the second elk by accident if an experienced guide had not been present?

2. Why was so much time spent before the party approached the fallen animal?

3. The behavior of the second elk is not exactly that of a wary animal and does not support the view that "Pennsylvania elk are as wild as any"!


I welcome comments from all points of view about our elk herd and elk hunting, as long as the discussion is respectful!

What Is Best For The Resource

Hunters, tourists, and photographers want to see plenty of trophy animals, but are these goals compatible?

Doing What Is Best For The Resource-A Management Principle

We discussed Ralph Harrison and his contributions to Pennsylvania Elk management in some detail in a recent post.During late September of 2006, I had the good fortunate to speak with Mr. Harrison for an hour or so. During that conversation he brought up an important point. “We must do what is best for the resource, not what the tourist industry wants, not what the hunting industry wants, but what is best for the animals themselves”.

No truer words were ever spoken. I for one believe that Mr. Harrison, if in a decision making position, would pursue a management policy based on that statement and that it would be an excellent management policy.

Unfortunately the problem is that most people view what is best for the resource through the prism of their own self-interest. A good example is the current deer management controversy in Pennsylvania. (One could devote a blog to this subject alone) There are all shades of opinions on the matter but it mostly boils down to many who have problems with deer damaging property and crops want far fewer animals, while those who like to hunt and watch them want more.

A favorite statement of politicians is that the deer wars must end. The truth of the matter is that for the wars to end, one side must but give up their concept of what is the right number of animals and neither is willing to do so, even if the inability to compromise on the issue ultimately results in the destruction of the PGC!

This principle of course applies to elk management. Both tourists and hunters want plenty of elk and lots of bulls with large antlers. The problem is that while the goal of each may be somewhat the same on the surface, in actuality there is quite a divergence of opinion when one examines the subject in depth.

Mature Pennsylvania Bull Elk-Winslow Hill

Mature Whitetail Buck: Shenandoah National Park

I think the above points are well worth considering as we continue to explore wildlife management issues in future posts!

Pennsylvania Elk Management:: Ralph Harrison Above And Beyond The Call Of Duty!

Gilbert Viewing Area-Sept. 2004 Canon 10D: 100-400mm lens

So far in our discussion of the making of the documentary, Pennsylvania Elk: Reclaiming the Alleghenies., we have primarily dealt with Billie Cromwell and Hal Korber, who shot the footage, but there were other important figures as well.

Scott Weidensaul wrote the script, and Rawland Cogan narrated it. There were also interviews with various DCNR and PGC officials.I have no idea what Mr. Weidensaul personal views were on the Elk hunt that was soon to follow. It is certain that Mr. Cogan was supportive of a hunt, if in fact he was not leading the charge.

Some of those involved in the effort were not supporters of an Elk hunt.

Billie Cromwell and Ronald Saffer turned out to be bitter opponents of the hunt. While I was not involved in the making of this video in any capacity; I did get to meet many of the people involved.

When I first went to the elk range in 1995 I was an avid deer, turkey, and squirrel hunter, but surprisingly I did not view the elk as objects of a possible hunt. Billie Cromwell and Ron Saffer, both were also dedicated deer hunters, although Billie did quit about the same time that I did, which was in 1997-98.

Billie and I both held the following position:

A. The Pennsylvania Elk Herd was a small herd. It had a large number of extremely impressive mature bulls that had not been hunted in nearly 70 years.

B. It is the nature of trophy hunting to take the largest and best animals. If a hunt was held it should be primarily for population control and should be held only as needed to keep herd numbers in line with the available food and habitat.

C. The herd was of great value to the citizens of Pennsylvania as a unique viewing experience.

In time I came to realize that three people had been involved with the elk for a long time. Two of them represented the old guard, which had a much more low key, approach to the elk. These persons were Ralph Harrison and Wildlife Conservation Officer Harold Harshbarger. The third was Rawland Cogan, the elk biologist at the time. He represented the new hard driving elk management policy, which seemed intent on establishing an elk hunt in the near future, although for a time he devoted much effort to expand the elk range by a trap and transfer program.

Ralph Harrison:

The video included a substantial interview with retired Bureau of Forestry Maintenance Supervisor, Ralph Harrison, Elk County native and resident of Dent’s Run. Mr. Harrison was born in Dent’s run in 1928 and has lived there most of his life except for a stint in the military. Ralph went to work for what was then know as the Department of Forest and Waters in 1951 and worked for them for the next forty years, although the agency changed names over this period. It would take a book to cover his life and in fact Ralph has written two. The first was “The Pennsylvania Elk Herd: published by The Pennsylvania Forestry Association in cooperation with the USDA Forest Service and DER Bureau of Forestry. The Second was a smaller update of the first called, “The Pennsylvania Elk Herd of Today” Published by The Pennsylvania Forestry “Association in cooperation with the DCNR Bureau of Forestry. I do not know if these books are still in print, but as recent as last autumn some copies were still available for purchase at Benezette Store..

Mr. Harrison never had an official job in elk management. There was no big title, just a simple love and respect for the animals, which led him to go above and beyond the call of duty and dedicate his life to them. He has seen elk population grow from less than twenty to the 500-700 of today. Although he would never claim responsibility, he was an important factor in this increase. Like most true experts, he professes to know little about elk.

This is an extremely condensed history of the elk in Pennsylvania. The last Pennsylvania Elk was killed sometime in the late 1860s or early 1870s as a result of unregulated market hunting. In 1913 The Pennsylvania Game Commission released fifty animals in the north central part of the state. These animals were obtained from Yellowstone National Park. There were additional releases and in time the herd grew to the point that The PGC established a hunting season in 1923. Anyone with a general hunting license could kill an elk (bulls of 4 or more points were legal). In 1931 only one bull was killed and the season was closed in 1931 and remained so until 2001.

During this time the PGC lost interest in the herd and at times few even knew they existed, as what few remained stayed well away from human habitation in most cases. The population began to increase slowly in the 1950s.


Ralph recalls how he realized the elk herd was rebounding in the mid-1970s after a late August evening encounter with cows and calves in a meadow in which he heard bulls bugling in the woodlands. This so inspired him that he approached his boss the next day and outlined a proposal to help the elk herd survive and expand. Things progressed from there. A management plan was developed which included more public land acquisition and development of suitable elk habitat, but there were problems with a shortage of funds.

In a nutshell the PGC did re-introduce the elk in 1913, but when the population declined too much to support a hunt, they lost interest in the species. It was The Bureau of Forestry, inspired by Ralph Harrison that picked up the torch and brought the elk herd to the position it was in a few years ago. The PGC only entered the fray after Forestry had done the hard legwork to bring the herd back from the brink. It should be noted that this was the agency as a whole, not some of the dedicated Game Commission employees who were assigned to the area.

These included District Game Protectors Norm Erickson who served from late 1940s-1965 or 66, and Harold Harsbarger who ably filled the slot from 1966-97. PGC Wildlife Biologist Bill Drake was also numbered among these dedicated individuals. All were very interested in the welfare of the elk, even at times that The PGC as a whole was not.

If you can find Mr. Harrison’s books, they are well worth reading!

To be continued

PGC To Discontinue Controversial September Elk Hunt!

The first September elk season was held in 2006. It was preceded by an intensive public relations offensive, to sell the concept to the public. It was portrayed as a win-win situation for hunters and landowners alike. What is unclear is exactly who requested the season in the first place!

It doesn’t seem that most farmers did, or if they did they didn’t take the hunt seriously. An elk guide told me “off the record” that most of those farmers didn’t need or want any help with the "elk problem". They took care of it quite handily at night with tractors, rifles, and spotlights.

He guided hunters on this hunt and on at least one occasion removed his clients from the area, as there were a lot of hunters, with magnum rifle slugs flying everywhere. Two elk were killed during that season, but according to the guide, The PGC termed it “an outstanding success”. In the two years that the September season has been held, 20 hunters killed a total of four elk.

Some critics of the September hunt considered it to be a trial balloon floated by the PGC to determine the public’s reaction to a September hunt, and had the hunt, been successful it would have been extended to other areas of the elk range.

Such a hunt would disregard the thousands who flock to the north woods to view the elk during the rut.

The November hunt continues with a proposal to issue 45 tags being considered. As of yet there has been no decision as to the sex breakdown or the number of animals in each elk hunt zone.

The final September hunt will be held in 2008 as the licenses were issued in last year's drawing, and this years hunt was already approved.

For the official story read PGC News Release: 007-08

Dr. Perk-A Controversial Figure

I first went to Winslow Hill to videotape the elk in 1995

At that time The Gilbert Viewing Area did not exist. The land was still owned by Kenny Gilbert, the farmer for which the viewing area was named. The fields were much as they are today except that no crops were planted to attract the wildlife. At times portions of the meadows were mowed. This area was the hotspot for observing large numbers of elk, several of which were monster bulls.
There was no elk hunt, and there was little talk of one.

A white frame house was located on a small parcel of land in a hollow. This was to the left of what is now known as Dewey Road-the public road, which passes through The Gilbert Viewing Area.

Dr. Perk's House: The cabin to the right was not there in 1995

This was home to Claude M. Nye. Mr. Nye was deeply interested in the elk herd and loved to videotape the animal. He initially used a VHS camcorder. Each year he made a tape of what he saw and offered it to the public for a modest price.

He portrayed himself as an elk expert and called himself "Dr. Perk". This aroused the ire of Rawland ‘Rawley’ Cogan who was the PGC elk biologist at the time and the two became enemies. Perk’s expertise was not biological in nature, nor did he portray it to be. He attracted elk to his property by feeding them and soon had a herd of “habituated” elk that visited each day. By his daily observations he was eventually able to differentiate between individual animals and named most of them. He would tell someone what day, hour, and minute an animal was born.

At the time I thought that this could not be. It was possible to distinguish bulls because of the different antler configurations, but there was no way he could distinguish individual cows.

In time I found that I was wrong. A day came that I could distinguish individual antlerless deer under certain circumstances and I had to eat my words! Now you are saying that I am nuts, but stop and think! Can a farmer differentiate between individual animals in his herd? Can you tell your pet cat or dog from every other dog of the same type out there? One only has to spend a large amount of time around the same group of animals and observe them closely. Soon one notices the differences rather than just the similarities. I do think that he was guessing about the hour and minute of birth in many cases.

1995; Dr. Perk explaining how antlers are shed

Dr. Perk: Second from left in blue jacket

During mating season or “The Rut” as it is normally called, the herd of “habituated” cows that frequented his lawn, brought monster bulls to the area in large numbers.

Dr. Perk was on a collision course with The Pennsylvania Game Commission!

Note: Above photos except Mr. Nye’s residence are frame captures from an S/VHS camcorder as this is from a period when I did not take still photos.

Elk Management in PA. Where We Should Go From Here!

What Do We Want?

Elk Along Winslow Hill Road

Elk Watchers

"The Gilbert" on a saturday morning during the rut

"The Gilbert" without elk or visitors

Edward G. Rendell, the governor of Pennsylvania has targeted the north central portion of the state for increased nature tourism with elk viewing being the primary attraction to get people there and then get them interested in other outdoor related activities as well.

The Pennsylvania Game Commission hereinafter referred to as the PGC has announced support for this plan. They have publicly stated that they want to divert hunting attention away from the public lands and from large branch antlered bulls, and focus hunting pressure in areas where conflicts occur with humans.

In fact they have targeted the large bulls and they have heavily targeted the public lands near the viewing areas where there is no conflict with agricultural interests or a significant number of homeowners.

If they address what they perceive as “the habituated elk” problem then they must eliminate the herds that visit the viewing areas on Winslow Hill, and then elk tourism, as we know it is gone. All this while The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation is planning an elk-viewing portal at their property on Winslow Hill.

That is the problem as I see it. Some facts and possible solutions are as follows. This is grossly oversimplified, but it is a starting point.

As matters stand:

The PGC does not profit from elk tourism.

A hunt is currently held, and it is likely that one must be held to prevent the animals from spreading into more heavily settled areas of the state.

The PGC needs to receive income from the tourist industry. It would take little to surpass what they currently derive from hunting ($ 178.615.00 in 2007). One idea is that one would need a basic hunting license to be present on PGC lands or in lieu thereof a use stamp or permit. This should not cost more than a basic hunting license and persons under a certain age should be exempt. It would be beneficial to study the National Park Service Fee structures and entrance policies for further ideas. (Shenandoah National Park charges $30.00 for a one-year pass, which is good for anyone in the vehicle with the pass holder.) This would not work well in the Pennsylvania, but it is a point to start from.

The PGC currently receives funds or land from sources other than license sales and it is likely to receive funding from other sources in the near future or else be absorbed into another agency such as DCNR. Other sources at present are:
1.Growing Greener
2.Lands donated whole or partially by other organizations.

Where we need to go from here!

A herd managed primarily for tourism with emphasis on maintaining a satisfactory number of mature bulls.

Present viewing areas maintained much as they are with the public not permitted to walk into the meadows and spook the elk.

The back country maintained much like it is now, with access not being denied at any period, but vehicles not permitted so that those that want to hike to a remote area could observe and photograph elk in a wild situation. This should keep disturbance suitably low.

Forget the nonsense that the habituated elk must be killed. It all depends on what “habituated” means. The elk need not be so wild that someone who hikes into the backcountry gets only a glimpse of an elk running away. The situation as it exists is about right for viewing at present, but it is too tolerant for ethical hunting. Hazing or harassing the elk to make them wilder is not the remedy. There is no reason that elk in a tourist zone should be frightened of humans.

A greatly increased NO HUNT ZONE-the boundaries to be determined by careful study but it should include at least 80% of Elk Hunt Zone 2, and a portion of ELK HUNT ZONE 8. This should be the minimum and more would be preferred!

There will always be a certain amount of conflict at the borders of a no hunt zone and a hunt zone, with animals being too acclimated, but it would be lessened if the borders were well away from the population centers and the primary tourist areas.
A limited population control hunt held well away from Winslow Hill would likely control elk numbers to the extent that little if any population management would be needed in The No Hunt Zone.

If a trophy hunt must be held, then areas such as The Quehanna Wild Area are where it should be held, not in the backyard of the viewing areas.

If population control is needed in the No Hunt Zone:
PGC employees could perform it in a carefully prescribed manner. This would be the most effective method, as animals could be selectively culled to remove certain problem animals, but this approach would likely not be acceptable to many and it would be the most expensive to implement.

If this was the case, “hunters” could be used, but this should not be called a fair chase hunt. In neither case should large bulls should be taken. It should not be portrayed as challenging and it should not be held annually,but ONLY AS NEEDED! and Needed should not be construed as an opportunity to slip in a back door regular hunting season. Use of hunters would make it much more difficult to cull animals with problems and would be more likely to result in any elk being killed regardless of physical condition.

It 's A Disease

I noticed recently that I am getting several hits from people searching google images. I must admit that I was not aware of the Google Image search feature before . I typed in Pennsylvania Elk" and came across a link to King's Outdoor World, the particular page features two still pictures and a video clip titled "What Does This Elk Score?" The following is a quote from that page:

"This bull is a herd bull that is a result of transplanted elk to the east to help build up the herd years ago and therefore has a radio collar on its neck as wildlife authorities keep a close eye on the herd. Don’t let that make you think that it is a high fenced bull. This is a fair chase bull that a lucky hunter could very well get this year through their lottery draw."

Of course it is not a high fenced bull, but it is completely tame and trusting to humans. This is bull number 36 or "Fred" as most call him. He has survived to date by remaining in the No Hunting Zone. This animal's tolerance range of humans can be measured in mere feet. "Fair Chase", I think not!

It totally gripes me, why people cannot enjoy seeing an impressive animal such as this without thinking about killing him. The video clip starts with a shot of another bull and then there is Fred chasing a cow. You can hear someone say," I think I could even hit him from here" Some one else says ,"Oh I could probably get one in him"

Bull Number 36-"Fred"

Above is a photograph of "Fred" in 2005 when he had a more perfect and perhaps larger rack. It would simply be murder to shoot this bull. I featured him in a previous post where he was shown with the rack that he had this fall and with his collar showing. In the picture above it was removed in photoshop.

It would seem to me that even dedicated hunters would want to preserve at least a few of these monsters so that they could drive to the viewing areas and see what a true large bull looks like, but evidently some are not that far sighted. All they can think about is pulling the trigger or releasing the arrow.

I have been assured by a person who is on good terms with many of the elk guides that many of them have no interest in guiding a hunter to "Fred". In her words, "The person who kills Fred will be totally ostracized." I hope that is the case.

Since 1997 I have had him in numerous circumstances where I could have "put one in him", but I never had the slightest desire or thought of it. Instead I enjoyed observing this magnificent animal and obtaining photographs of him.

My experience is not unique. Most serious visitors to Winslow Hill have gotten close enough to him to"put one in him" on numerous occasions! Many specifically look for him when they travel to the elk range and are concerned about his welfare.

I think many would enjoy the outdoors and wildlife more if they could drop this total absorption with killing. They carry the obsession to the stage that it becomes a disease!

I must repeat that I have no quarrel with the person who hunts legally and ethically!