Is the P.G.C. in suicide mode?
03-03-2009, 07:47 AM
#11
Fork Horn
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location:
Posts: 282
RE: Is the P.G.C. in suicide mode?
Years ago I helped to form one of the more prominant chapters of Trout Unlimited in PA, and I remained very active in the chapter for quite some time. The PA Fish Commission was great to work with, and they valued and applied our input.
IMHO the Game Commission doesn't have the same relationship with hunters.
IMHO the Game Commission doesn't have the same relationship with hunters.
03-03-2009, 08:56 AM
#12
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: PA
Posts: 8,167
RE: Is the P.G.C. in suicide mode?
ORIGINAL: the outsider
The PA Fish Commission was great to work with, and they valued and applied our input.
IMHO the Game Commission doesn't have the same relationship with hunters.
The PA Fish Commission was great to work with, and they valued and applied our input.
IMHO the Game Commission doesn't have the same relationship with hunters.
The Ruffed grouse society was gut shot on the long running study being done on one game lands,their and the commissions biologist both tried to keep the study going yet both were ignored.
Will Pheasants forever be yet another victim of the P.G.C.?
Does any one really believe that those members of the turkey federation that made this possible don't understand the repercussions that will be long felt when the Elk federation has an opportunity to capitalize on future expenditures.It seems that working together for the good of all is an unreasonable goal.
03-03-2009, 09:34 AM
#13
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
RE: Is the P.G.C. in suicide mode?
Good post Jim.
Setting aside the deer issue as that has been done to death here, the other two recent developments can only be described as either huge blunders or "in your face" arrogance.
WTF were they thinking???
Setting aside the deer issue as that has been done to death here, the other two recent developments can only be described as either huge blunders or "in your face" arrogance.
WTF were they thinking???
03-03-2009, 09:51 AM
#14
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: PA
Posts: 8,167
RE: Is the P.G.C. in suicide mode?
With a license increase on the table it would seem the alienation of like minded organizations would be political suicide.
But with each passing month a new enemy is created. The fractioning of the states hunters is to me the beginning of the end. We already have the archers against the rifle hunters.Throw in the Xbows and you have a further divide. Now we add the fragmentation of some of the largest hunting organizations at a time when the economy is terrible and money comes at a premium ,it makes no sense unless there are motives that we know not about.
If any of you can justify this divisional course were on I'd love to hear it.
The infighting within large organizations is expected and as money gets tight more of itwill result yet to throw gas on the fire is just plain irresponsible & certainly not self serving.
But with each passing month a new enemy is created. The fractioning of the states hunters is to me the beginning of the end. We already have the archers against the rifle hunters.Throw in the Xbows and you have a further divide. Now we add the fragmentation of some of the largest hunting organizations at a time when the economy is terrible and money comes at a premium ,it makes no sense unless there are motives that we know not about.
If any of you can justify this divisional course were on I'd love to hear it.
The infighting within large organizations is expected and as money gets tight more of itwill result yet to throw gas on the fire is just plain irresponsible & certainly not self serving.
03-03-2009, 10:12 AM
#15
Typical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: PA
Posts: 522
RE: Is the P.G.C. in suicide mode?
You can't even count that as a factual statement because of the following facts:
#1. Agency biologists recommended 45 elk permits to allow the herd to grow. BOCs went against biologists advice and allocated 59.
#2. Biologists recommended not opening up a grouse study area on SGL 176, and dang if it wasn't opened up to hunters anyhow.
#3. Biologists recommended not adding an extra week of fall turkey hunting in one WMU, and dang if the extra week wasn't added anyhow.
*************************************
Most of the things Manyspurs mentioned, actually benefitted hunters.
That grouse study had been ongoing for many years, yet many of the "findings" weren't transferable to other areas of the state, when it came to managinghabitats for grouse. When the guy in charge of the study,grouse biologist Palmer, was asked by a BOC memberifhe'd regularlypassed on study findings to other PGC biologists, Palmer looked like he'd beenmomentarily struck blind, deaf and dumb.
Now, that huge area will be opened to grouse hunters.
BOC probably has more to consider when setting elk permits, than just the recommendations of the elk biologists. If the herd is growing and causing more problems with farmers and others in a particular area, than perhaps it was the right thing to do for the time being, to allow a few more to be taken?
Now, a few more hunters can get a crack at an elk.
Don't recall which area was involved in the extra week of turkey, but IIRC,our biologists are still opposed to all day spring gobblerhunting due to nesting hen disturbance, yet most other states have already decided that's not a problem and allow all day gobbler hunting.
PF is working closely with the PGC on wild pheasant introduction programs, primarily in areas with large amounts of CREP land that makes for better nesting/brooding conditions. No early hay cutting, probably a more viable program for having sustainable populations of wild birds?
It's myunderstanding that since RMEF decided to put it's eggs in the DCNR basket (elk watching areas, etc) instead of staying closely aligned with PGC, that probably played some part in NWTF getting the first Pa elk auction tag? Might also be some lingeringacrimony over elk biologistCogan leaving PGC for RMEF too?
I doubt RMEF has spent anywhere near the amount of money in PA for wildlife work, that NWTF has spent here over the past 25 years? And the work NWTF has funded, benefits almost all wildlife, not just turkeys.
#1. Agency biologists recommended 45 elk permits to allow the herd to grow. BOCs went against biologists advice and allocated 59.
#2. Biologists recommended not opening up a grouse study area on SGL 176, and dang if it wasn't opened up to hunters anyhow.
#3. Biologists recommended not adding an extra week of fall turkey hunting in one WMU, and dang if the extra week wasn't added anyhow.
*************************************
Most of the things Manyspurs mentioned, actually benefitted hunters.
That grouse study had been ongoing for many years, yet many of the "findings" weren't transferable to other areas of the state, when it came to managinghabitats for grouse. When the guy in charge of the study,grouse biologist Palmer, was asked by a BOC memberifhe'd regularlypassed on study findings to other PGC biologists, Palmer looked like he'd beenmomentarily struck blind, deaf and dumb.
Now, that huge area will be opened to grouse hunters.
BOC probably has more to consider when setting elk permits, than just the recommendations of the elk biologists. If the herd is growing and causing more problems with farmers and others in a particular area, than perhaps it was the right thing to do for the time being, to allow a few more to be taken?
Now, a few more hunters can get a crack at an elk.
Don't recall which area was involved in the extra week of turkey, but IIRC,our biologists are still opposed to all day spring gobblerhunting due to nesting hen disturbance, yet most other states have already decided that's not a problem and allow all day gobbler hunting.
PF is working closely with the PGC on wild pheasant introduction programs, primarily in areas with large amounts of CREP land that makes for better nesting/brooding conditions. No early hay cutting, probably a more viable program for having sustainable populations of wild birds?
It's myunderstanding that since RMEF decided to put it's eggs in the DCNR basket (elk watching areas, etc) instead of staying closely aligned with PGC, that probably played some part in NWTF getting the first Pa elk auction tag? Might also be some lingeringacrimony over elk biologistCogan leaving PGC for RMEF too?
I doubt RMEF has spent anywhere near the amount of money in PA for wildlife work, that NWTF has spent here over the past 25 years? And the work NWTF has funded, benefits almost all wildlife, not just turkeys.
03-03-2009, 10:30 AM
#16
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
RE: Is the P.G.C. in suicide mode?
I agree with everything you stated Denny,except the part about the RMEF.No one has done more to improve the elk habitat than the RMEF.IMO,the PGC spit right in the face of that organization by handing that tag over to the NWTF.It also bugs me that the BOC votedfor the full inclusion of crossbows.The only reason I'm no infuriated is because it was just a matter of time before the legislature mandated it their way.
I've been OK with most of the biologists recommendations since Alt left.Never did care for his delivery.
I've been OK with most of the biologists recommendations since Alt left.Never did care for his delivery.
03-03-2009, 10:32 AM
#17
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
RE: Is the P.G.C. in suicide mode?
Jim, you have hit the nail on the head SQUARELY. Pgc has other ideas and that to many is no secret. ITs all about the ecoextremist fruitcakes. All ya gotta do is look around. You have pgc embracing them more than ever and hunters less than ever. Its continually pointed out that hunting is dying and birdwatching etc. are the future. We are constantly told we are the great minority. The treehuggers have wisened up and finally using different venues to their full advantage.... They are EVERYWHERE! (LOL) They are in our pgc, our"sportsmans" organizations, they are on the governors fishing hunting and conservationist committee, they can be seen on hunting message boards... (just look for the posts on hpa etc. about water quality, saving the trillium...thetiger salamander or currently the "allegheny mussels".
Fact is, these people are liars and frauds, always attempting to use US as the "tool' to sculpt their perfect forest "nirvanna", and our hunting lands as their own personal life sized "terrariums". The nuts have been been looking for ways to gain even more power over our situation and are succeeding. They already have great say in our game lands usage, and they also want other funding sources to be implemented, and what better way than to make it the ONLY option? Those clowns have been clamoring for further removing hunters from the decision making process of wildlife managementsince the days of Latham getting tossed on his Arse, and the sentiment only magnified since, with idiots like Alt stating the same, that alternate funding was needed to remove hunters from having any say in matters, and he is currently pa audubons greatest hero judging by their website.
Having socalled hunters like Denny etc. who think these idiots are "friends' to we hunters is doing us all a great disservice as well. These are NOT our friends.
Fact is, these people are liars and frauds, always attempting to use US as the "tool' to sculpt their perfect forest "nirvanna", and our hunting lands as their own personal life sized "terrariums". The nuts have been been looking for ways to gain even more power over our situation and are succeeding. They already have great say in our game lands usage, and they also want other funding sources to be implemented, and what better way than to make it the ONLY option? Those clowns have been clamoring for further removing hunters from the decision making process of wildlife managementsince the days of Latham getting tossed on his Arse, and the sentiment only magnified since, with idiots like Alt stating the same, that alternate funding was needed to remove hunters from having any say in matters, and he is currently pa audubons greatest hero judging by their website.
Having socalled hunters like Denny etc. who think these idiots are "friends' to we hunters is doing us all a great disservice as well. These are NOT our friends.
03-03-2009, 10:45 AM
#18
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
RE: Is the P.G.C. in suicide mode?
"I agree with everything you stated Denny,except the part about the RMEF.No one has done more to improve the elk habitat than the RMEF.IMO,the PGC spit right in the face of that organization by handing that tag over to the NWTF.It also bugs me that the BOC votedfor the full inclusion of crossbows.The only reason I'm no infuriated is because it was just a matter of time before the legislature mandated it their way. "
I disagree STRONGLY Doug. Word had it (even according to Bluetick over on the hpa brownnose site)that there were many legislators ALSO OPPOSED to xguns. There was no way of telling how any vote might have gone. Thats simply a PGC pass the buck excuse. Nothing is EVER their fault. Its always either the legislators, or the usp, or the hunters....Anyones but their own. Pgc never blinked on "staying the course' with the deer program, and it had FAR less acceptance from the beginning than crossguns. LEgislators were outraged and had, and still do threaten legislative action.... To no avail. Pgc didnt care, and the legislators have done basically nothing to change it successfully. So I dont buy that poor lil' pgc in this instance was afraid of the big bad legislators but werent previously when Gary Alt had to wear bullet proof vests!!!
"I've been OK with most of the biologists recommendations since Alt left.Never did care for his delivery. "
Ive seen no difference in general. The deer densities are the same or lower basically everywhere in the state than they were when alt left. Also Alt never was the problem. It is those who pulled him from his job as bear biologist and made him the deer campaign spokesman. Some of which are thank god on their way OUT of their commissioner seats!
I disagree STRONGLY Doug. Word had it (even according to Bluetick over on the hpa brownnose site)that there were many legislators ALSO OPPOSED to xguns. There was no way of telling how any vote might have gone. Thats simply a PGC pass the buck excuse. Nothing is EVER their fault. Its always either the legislators, or the usp, or the hunters....Anyones but their own. Pgc never blinked on "staying the course' with the deer program, and it had FAR less acceptance from the beginning than crossguns. LEgislators were outraged and had, and still do threaten legislative action.... To no avail. Pgc didnt care, and the legislators have done basically nothing to change it successfully. So I dont buy that poor lil' pgc in this instance was afraid of the big bad legislators but werent previously when Gary Alt had to wear bullet proof vests!!!
"I've been OK with most of the biologists recommendations since Alt left.Never did care for his delivery. "
Ive seen no difference in general. The deer densities are the same or lower basically everywhere in the state than they were when alt left. Also Alt never was the problem. It is those who pulled him from his job as bear biologist and made him the deer campaign spokesman. Some of which are thank god on their way OUT of their commissioner seats!
03-03-2009, 10:51 AM
#19
Typical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: PA
Posts: 522
RE: Is the P.G.C. in suicide mode?
I will always consider Alt to have been "the bear guy". Figure they only gave him the job with deer, to give the new deer managementdirections some extra "clout"? Only ever talked to him briefly a few times, seemed like a nice enough guy, feel both he and the deer management program were misused by his presense.
Either way, HR needed to happen in most areas of the state and it finally did happen. Some are unhappy, some don't care, some still enjoy their deer seasons, regardless of the current numbers of deer where they hunt.
As for RMEF being spat-upon, I can only go with what I've heard from both sides of the issue. Still think the biggest reason they got "left out" this time around, is because they changed horses midstream, by casting their lot with DCNR.
There is still far more behind the scenes acrimony between DCNR/Gov's office and the PGC, than either side will probablyadmit to? At present, many suspect DCNR/Gov's officeis exerting far too much influence in the selection of the next few BOC members, in order to stack the deck in their favor.
It isn't a "deer thing"...it's a power thing.
Either way, HR needed to happen in most areas of the state and it finally did happen. Some are unhappy, some don't care, some still enjoy their deer seasons, regardless of the current numbers of deer where they hunt.
As for RMEF being spat-upon, I can only go with what I've heard from both sides of the issue. Still think the biggest reason they got "left out" this time around, is because they changed horses midstream, by casting their lot with DCNR.
There is still far more behind the scenes acrimony between DCNR/Gov's office and the PGC, than either side will probablyadmit to? At present, many suspect DCNR/Gov's officeis exerting far too much influence in the selection of the next few BOC members, in order to stack the deck in their favor.
It isn't a "deer thing"...it's a power thing.
03-03-2009, 10:54 AM
#20
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
RE: Is the P.G.C. in suicide mode?
Some would give pgc their blessing if they walked into their house climbed onto the dinner table and crapped right in the middle of it while they were eating.
Its clear some have very strong "eco-agendas" that have little or nothing to do with hunting.
I agree Denny. SOme are happy, some arent. But when those who arent are the HUUUUUUUGE majority, something is badly amiss.
Having said that, the problems we now are facing extend beyond simply deer management. The treehugger influence within our game/wildlife managementis not "good" for any game animal management or hunting itself. When people are calling the shots and it effects others and other activities they couldnt care less about, its not a good situation.
Its clear some have very strong "eco-agendas" that have little or nothing to do with hunting.
I agree Denny. SOme are happy, some arent. But when those who arent are the HUUUUUUUGE majority, something is badly amiss.
Having said that, the problems we now are facing extend beyond simply deer management. The treehugger influence within our game/wildlife managementis not "good" for any game animal management or hunting itself. When people are calling the shots and it effects others and other activities they couldnt care less about, its not a good situation.