A group of disgruntled Pennsylvania deer hunters, who claim the state's deer herd was mismanaged in recent years, apparently will have their day in court.

A panel of three Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania judges on Monday upheld the 30,000-member Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania's right to proceed with a lawsuit the group has filed against Pennsylvania Game Commission over the agency's deer-management program.

In rejecting the Game Commission's requests to dismiss Unified's suit, the judges ruled a court challenge is Unified's only recourse in trying to convince the Game Commission to change its deer-management program.

The judges wrote in a 27-page opinion that "the Game Commission does not identify a specific remedy (Unified) Sportsmen may pursue to challenge the Game Commission's deer-management policies and practices."

East Hempfield Township resident Charles Bolgiano, an officer with Unified, called the ruling a "victory" for the organization and for disgruntled deer hunters.

Unified's president, Stephen L. Mohr of Bainbridge, agreed.

"It says the hunters do have a right to complain and that they do have an interest in deer management," he said.

In a news release issued Monday, Carl Roe, executive director of the Game Commission, said the agency is ready to defend its deer-management program in court.

"We recognize that the commonwealth's deer-management program is viewed differently by many people, and there are those who do not support some of the current outcomes," Roe said.

"However, as the Game Commission manages all wild birds and mammals and their habitats for current and future generations, we must do what is right for all based on the best science available."

Unified's lawsuit against the Game Commission is its third in recent years regarding deer management. The first two were thrown out of Commonwealth Court before they reached trial.

In its current suit, the organization argues the Game Commission has "acted intentionally to destroy and diminish the deer herd … below the natural and sustainable population level."

The agency used faulty data, Unified claims, to justify expansions in deer hunting seasons and in allocations for doe licenses over the past six years, under the agency's deer-management program.

That program resulted in a decline in deer numbers across the state, Unified claims.

In its suit, Unified asks Commonwealth Court to order the Game Commission to "put an immediate halt to the taking" of does on publicly owned state game and state forest lands, pending a "scientific determination" of the size and dispersion of the state's deer herd.

Mohr said he hopes an injunction on doe hunting on public lands will be imposed in time for the coming 2008-09 season.

Game Commission officials in the past have said the data used to justify the state's hunting seasons and doe-license allocations are "scientifically sound."

Various aspects of their deer-management program have been reviewed and approved by wildlife biologists from across the country, agency officials have said.

In its request to have Unified's suit thrown out of court, the Game Commission argued the organization is simply recycling its two prior suits.

The agency also contended that managing deer is the Game Commission's responsibility, while Unified Sportsmen "do not own the deer" and "have no authority to manage them."

Unified should have no legal standing to file a lawsuit over deer management, the agency argued.

The Commonwealth Court judges denied the Game Commission's requests for dismissal, and the agency now has 30 days to formally respond to the decision.

According to Mohr, the next phase will be for both sides to present their cases in Commonwealth Court to determine if there is sufficient evidence to take the case to trial.

He did not know when those proceedings might occur, but he hopes it's some time this summer.

Roe stated in the news release that the Game Commission is looking "forward to a speedy trial … and the opportunity to have our many expert witnesses expound on the scientific basis and soundness of our management plan.

"Likewise, as part of the process, those who filed this lawsuit will have to validate their claims by presenting their scientific evidence and expert witnesses."

E-mail: preilly@lnpnews.com