In the late 1800s and early 1900s, deer numbers were very low
and the hillsides were bare of trees.

This is the result of overharvesting of deer and the trees by
those living in the area at the time.

Soon after, wildfires spread across the growing forest and oak
trees were able to sprout up again as a result of their hearty root
systems, despite the fires.

Now oak tree numbers are threatened by deer who prefer to eat
oak seedlings over most other species of trees and faster-growing
trees that shade out oak seedlings before they have a chance to
grow.

As a result, many researchers and foresters are looking for ways
to promote oak regeneration and at least one of those practices is
angering hunters as deer numbers are reduced.

At least one man looks at the past practices of Pennsylvania
residents and reminds that it just might be our own fault.

“Hunters don’t move around like they used to,” said Ron Ramsey,
Pennsylvania Director of Forest Conservation from the Nature
Conservancy in Harrisburg.

“I’d say Pennsylvania hunters have lost the sport or think of it
now as a right and there may be some truth to that,” added
Ramsey.

“A healthy deer forest and healthy forest habitats come hand in
hand – if there are no deer in the forest, there is a management
problem. If deer did not cause the problem – we did. We are all
guilty and are also part of the solution. The hunters, industry,
everybody is implicated.”

“You have to understand the history of deer and understand the
history of the forest,” said Ramsey. “We decimated the deer because
of timbering.”

Ramsey explained that 90 to 95 percent of the forest had been
harvested at one time. He said 36 percent of the state forests were
radically altered and then market hunting, or the harvesting of
deer to satisfy the desire for venison of those living further
east, was allowed and what resulted was an overharvest of deer and
forest.

This was in the late 1800s and early 1900s.

He added that the folks that cut the forest eventually moved on
and it started to recover. Then the Depression hit and the farm
land was abandoned. The deer as well as the forest rebounded, and
market hunting was abolished.

“At that time you had a young forest and a big deer herd. Then
it burned and you had oak regeneration,” said Ramsey adding that
oak does better than other species with fire (prescribed) or
not.

He said the deer population increased with the forest coming
back and they started hunting the deer (again) when the forest was
about 40 or 50 years old. He added that there were a lot of
different tree species.

“They both grew up together – hunters that are older today
remember all those deer – the capacity of the tree species provided
the food – mainly oaks,” said Ramsey.

“Then a series of things happened … it started to become a
forest that was economically mature (by 1960) and we started
harvesting oak and other things that were desirable ecologically
and economically,” he continued.

Ramsey said harvesting was done on a wide scale when oak was
impacted by the gypsy moth and the oak leaf roller.

Ramsey also talks about fire and its good and bad qualities. He
said there is a lot of material considered usable when it’s left on
the ground to rot. He explained there are good fires and bad fires
and there was a time when the wildfires “ran amuck” across the
landscape.

But he adds that there had been a reaction and over-reaction to
wildfire by forestry agencies in the east in trying to suppress all
fires.

“It produced a decline in oak as well as proliferation of
species that don’t tolerate fire,” Ramsey said.

“Fast forward to today, look at the state of the forest in the
forest inventory and analysis report – oaks are blinking out –
maple and birch are the most predominant now,” said Ramsey.

“But if we are going to fix the problem, we have to agree first
– oak or too many deer? You have to develop a solution for the
hunters against the forest industry, it’s tough, but there should
be a common ground,” added Ramsey. “Nobody has said they want to
get rid of the deer completely. I want to see them, but I also
understand what they depend on.”

Ramsey also cited poor harvesting practices by many foresting
agencies.

“Not all of the forest industries are homogenous,” said Ramsey
meaning that they do not all have the same practices.

“Some find the biggest and best trees and leave the garbage –
they change the economic potential and ecological equality all
around and it has been happening around the state. It has impacted
a lot of things including the ability to have healthy deer. It is
inexcusable when we try to have a high-grade forest.”

Jim Zoschg, Cameron County Conservation District watershed
specialist and outdoor columnist for The Era, said while he is out
in the forest, he takes note of everything around him.

“It seems like some of these timbering people can’t wait for the
right conditions (to harvest oak trees) and in the meantime,
species like black birch have a head start before the oaks drop
their acorns,” he said agreeing with regeneration timing as one
aspect of promoting oak regeneration.

“I think that is a valid point to do a cut in areas where the
seedlings are already present in the site and then open up the
canopy,” he added. “It sounds like an ideal situation if you
already have acorns – in a lot of what I read.”

But Zoschg said since he does pay attention while he is out in
the woods, he realizes there are also lots of other factors
preventing oak regeneration including acid rain, hay scented fern
numbers blocking seedlings from sun, and deer browsing – even if
deer numbers are down.