Will The Audit Include
05-25-2009, 05:51 AM
#31
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
RE: Will The Audit Include
Here is what WMI has to say about PA hunters.
[blockquote]quote:
Deer management in Pennsylvania lies within the interface of the three pillars
mentioned above and the PGC must address each independently and
comprehensively. Deer are a public resource and the public has the right to
understand and influence deer management goals. PA deer hunters are motivated
by their hunting experiences to influence deer management goals and feel SPECIAL
DISPENSATION because of their financial support to have their desires translated to
agency policy. And finally, the PGC must interact with the public, deer hunters and
the wild deer resource itself, only within a scientifically defendable program of
work.
[/blockquote]
[blockquote]quote:
Deer management in Pennsylvania lies within the interface of the three pillars
mentioned above and the PGC must address each independently and
comprehensively. Deer are a public resource and the public has the right to
understand and influence deer management goals. PA deer hunters are motivated
by their hunting experiences to influence deer management goals and feel SPECIAL
DISPENSATION because of their financial support to have their desires translated to
agency policy. And finally, the PGC must interact with the public, deer hunters and
the wild deer resource itself, only within a scientifically defendable program of
work.
[/blockquote]
I'll go out on a limb here and guess that this is the part you object to....
PA deer hunters are motivated
by their hunting experiences to influence deer management goals and feel SPECIAL
DISPENSATION because of their financial support to have their desires translated to
agency policy.
by their hunting experiences to influence deer management goals and feel SPECIAL
DISPENSATION because of their financial support to have their desires translated to
agency policy.
You've also proven by your previous posts that you don't care about the effect of deer on other species or on the habitat, timber and food sources so long as we manage deer at MSY. I see that WMI statement as reasonable and practical if hunting is to survive well into the future.
05-25-2009, 06:39 AM
#32
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Carbon County Pa.
Posts: 601
RE: Will The Audit Include
ORIGINAL: BTBowhunter
[/quote]
I see nothing incorrect about that statement and see it as WMI recognizing that hunters should have input but not an absolute say. Hunters like you and Cornboy are examples of why a statement like that would even come from a game management organization. You have a one track mind when it comes to deer management and that track is more deer no matter what. You seem to keep forgetting that hunters alone own only a small percentage of the land that supports the herd. You seem to think that those who provide feed and habitat for the majority of our deer all year shouldn't be on equall footing with deer hunters when it comes to managing the herd.
You've also proven by your previous posts that you don't care about the effect of deer on other species or on the habitat, timber and food sources so long as we manage deer at MSY. I see that WMI statement as reasonable and practical if hunting is to survive well into the future.
[/quote]
I know way to many hunters who think the sole purpose of the game commission is to keep an adquate supply of game so they can fill their freezers every year for the cost of the 20 dollar tag. In reality we hunters are nothing more than a wildlife management tool. we should be grateful we have the privilege to hunt instead ofcrying you don't have enough deer to kill.
[/quote]
I see nothing incorrect about that statement and see it as WMI recognizing that hunters should have input but not an absolute say. Hunters like you and Cornboy are examples of why a statement like that would even come from a game management organization. You have a one track mind when it comes to deer management and that track is more deer no matter what. You seem to keep forgetting that hunters alone own only a small percentage of the land that supports the herd. You seem to think that those who provide feed and habitat for the majority of our deer all year shouldn't be on equall footing with deer hunters when it comes to managing the herd.
You've also proven by your previous posts that you don't care about the effect of deer on other species or on the habitat, timber and food sources so long as we manage deer at MSY. I see that WMI statement as reasonable and practical if hunting is to survive well into the future.
[/quote]
I know way to many hunters who think the sole purpose of the game commission is to keep an adquate supply of game so they can fill their freezers every year for the cost of the 20 dollar tag. In reality we hunters are nothing more than a wildlife management tool. we should be grateful we have the privilege to hunt instead ofcrying you don't have enough deer to kill.
05-25-2009, 06:42 AM
#33
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
RE: Will The Audit Include
I see nothing incorrect about that statement and see it as WMI recognizing that hunters should have input but not an absolute say. Hunters like you and Cornboy are examples of why a statement like that would even come from a game management organization. You have a one track mind when it comes to deer management and that track is more deer no matter what. You seem to keep forgetting that hunters alone own only a small percentage of the land that supports the herd. You seem to think that those who provide feed and habitat for the majority of our deer all year shouldn't be on equall footing with deer hunters when it comes to managing the herd.
You've also proven by your previous posts that you don't care about the effect of deer on other species or on the habitat, timber and food sources so long as we manage deer at MSY. I see that WMI statement as reasonable and practical if hunting is to survive well into the future.
You've also proven by your previous posts that you don't care about the effect of deer on other species or on the habitat, timber and food sources so long as we manage deer at MSY. I see that WMI statement as reasonable and practical if hunting is to survive well into the future.
The average citizen will derive no benefit from managing the herd at the biodiversity carrying capacity and in fact may be disappoint by not seeing deer in their area. Hunters spend millions of dollars for the privledge of hunting and doing the work of the herd while the average bird watcher contributes nickels and dimes in comparison. If the herd was managed between the CC for max. regeneration and the MSY CC all parties would be treated equally and all would benefit from proper deer management.
05-25-2009, 07:20 AM
#34
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
RE: Will The Audit Include
"I see nothing incorrect about that statement and see it as WMI recognizing that hunters should have input but not an absolute say. "
Then you should also be able to see that hunters currently have NO say. Helluva long way between where we are currently and "total say". LMFAO!!! BIGTIME.
"Hunters like you and Cornboy are examples of why a statement like that would even come from a game management organization. "
And fools like yourself are why pgc is enabled to do the asnine things to us and our sport that they are currently.
"You have a one track mind when it comes to deer management and that track is more deer no matter what."
No moreseo than the KILL THE DEER KILL THE DEER KILL THE DEER to save the birds and trees mindset of pgc and the ecofools.
" You seem to keep forgetting that hunters alone own only a small percentage of the land that supports the herd. "
LMFAO!!! SO if we dont own the land there shouldnt be reasonable numbers of deer on the property?? Any land not having written documentation requesting more deer and being posted to allow it will be assumed to want MANY less deer. Brilliant you brainiac. That sounds like the words of a complete moron. The majority of landowners did not clammor for deer slaughter. A few extremists did. People who want less deer have tools to make it happen. No excuse for statewide slaughter.
None. That justification is nothing more than more solid PGC ar$e kissing on your part.
Then you should also be able to see that hunters currently have NO say. Helluva long way between where we are currently and "total say". LMFAO!!! BIGTIME.
"Hunters like you and Cornboy are examples of why a statement like that would even come from a game management organization. "
And fools like yourself are why pgc is enabled to do the asnine things to us and our sport that they are currently.
"You have a one track mind when it comes to deer management and that track is more deer no matter what."
No moreseo than the KILL THE DEER KILL THE DEER KILL THE DEER to save the birds and trees mindset of pgc and the ecofools.
" You seem to keep forgetting that hunters alone own only a small percentage of the land that supports the herd. "
LMFAO!!! SO if we dont own the land there shouldnt be reasonable numbers of deer on the property?? Any land not having written documentation requesting more deer and being posted to allow it will be assumed to want MANY less deer. Brilliant you brainiac. That sounds like the words of a complete moron. The majority of landowners did not clammor for deer slaughter. A few extremists did. People who want less deer have tools to make it happen. No excuse for statewide slaughter.
None. That justification is nothing more than more solid PGC ar$e kissing on your part.
05-25-2009, 07:32 AM
#35
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
RE: Will The Audit Include
"I know way to many hunters who think the sole purpose of the game commission is to keep an adquate supply of game so they can fill their freezers every year for the cost of the 20 dollar tag. In reality we hunters are nothing more than a wildlife management tool. we should be grateful we have the privilege to hunt instead of crying you don't have enough deer to kill. "
Ha ha ha. Get a life Patsy. People want reasonable responsible management that doesnt cause our states management agency to become the joke of the nation, getting sued, audited, prevented fee increases...cause themselves to be financially run into the ground, reasonable numbers of deer as there SHOULD Be, and stop alienating hunters. If you are nuts enough to equate that to "wanting to fill the freezer for $20". Odds are you have some asnine connection to this moreso than simply as a concerned hunter.
BTW, it is no "PGC GRANTED PRIVILEGE"... hunting is my god given right. Until some arseholes are stupid enough to try and stop me, you'll just have to take my word for that.
Hunting has been in existence since the dawn of mankind. Sorry if the "audubon types" want to trivialize that. But doesnt matter, cause I say they can go straight to hell, and im sure most "hunters" would agree with that sentiment 100%.
It would also be basically a right by legal definition if it werent for some of the econuts, like those on HPA like Galthatfishes and others who have fought AGAINST legislation, bills to basically MAKE HUNTING A RIGHT in the state of Pennsylvania in the past few years. Used pathetic excuses like complaining of the bills exact wording etc... when there was no legit reasons to be against. Kinda funny seeing those nonhunter friendly clowns trying to all of a sudden act like "super hunter activists" LMAO, when trying to do damage control (and have to be "hunter oriented" to be taken seriously by hunters) or when they are trying to gain seats on b.o.c board.
Ha ha ha. Get a life Patsy. People want reasonable responsible management that doesnt cause our states management agency to become the joke of the nation, getting sued, audited, prevented fee increases...cause themselves to be financially run into the ground, reasonable numbers of deer as there SHOULD Be, and stop alienating hunters. If you are nuts enough to equate that to "wanting to fill the freezer for $20". Odds are you have some asnine connection to this moreso than simply as a concerned hunter.
BTW, it is no "PGC GRANTED PRIVILEGE"... hunting is my god given right. Until some arseholes are stupid enough to try and stop me, you'll just have to take my word for that.
Hunting has been in existence since the dawn of mankind. Sorry if the "audubon types" want to trivialize that. But doesnt matter, cause I say they can go straight to hell, and im sure most "hunters" would agree with that sentiment 100%. It would also be basically a right by legal definition if it werent for some of the econuts, like those on HPA like Galthatfishes and others who have fought AGAINST legislation, bills to basically MAKE HUNTING A RIGHT in the state of Pennsylvania in the past few years. Used pathetic excuses like complaining of the bills exact wording etc... when there was no legit reasons to be against. Kinda funny seeing those nonhunter friendly clowns trying to all of a sudden act like "super hunter activists" LMAO, when trying to do damage control (and have to be "hunter oriented" to be taken seriously by hunters) or when they are trying to gain seats on b.o.c board.
05-25-2009, 08:37 AM
#36
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Carbon County Pa.
Posts: 601
RE: Will The Audit Include
ORIGINAL: Cornelius08
Ha ha ha. Get a life Patsy. People want reasonable responsible management that doesnt cause our states management agency to become the joke of the nation, getting sued, audited, prevented fee increases...cause themselves to be financially run into the ground, reasonable numbers of deer as there SHOULD Be, and stop alienating hunters. If you are nuts enough to equate that to "wanting to fill the freezer for $20". Odds are you have some asnine connection to this moreso than simply as a concerned hunter.
Ha ha ha. Get a life Patsy. People want reasonable responsible management that doesnt cause our states management agency to become the joke of the nation, getting sued, audited, prevented fee increases...cause themselves to be financially run into the ground, reasonable numbers of deer as there SHOULD Be, and stop alienating hunters. If you are nuts enough to equate that to "wanting to fill the freezer for $20". Odds are you have some asnine connection to this moreso than simply as a concerned hunter.
I haveno asinine connection to anything. I just don't gocrazy if I don't kill a deer every year. As for excessive HR, with a little effort, I always manage to find deer. I can't complain.
05-25-2009, 09:05 AM
#37
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
RE: Will The Audit Include
And I have no problem with your position you are now stating.
Though Im sure youre aware that people with legit concerns, would take offense to comments like this in your previous post: "I know way to many hunters who think the sole purpose of the game commission is to keep an adquate supply of game so they can fill their freezers every year for the cost of the 20 dollar tag. In reality we hunters are nothing more than a wildlife management tool. we should be grateful we have the privilege to hunt instead of crying you don't have enough deer to kill."
I dont go crazy either, and wouldnt matter if I did when I didnt kill a deer because I do kill a deer every year...Always a buck and with bow. I also find deer. But there is still much to complain about. Our deer plans success or failure doesnt hinge upon what I or you kill. There is a very "big picture" to look at and its far more complicated than wether I have filled a tag or not. By that logic, if there were 3 deer in the entire management unit, and I filled my tag on one of them, all would be well and we should all be happy as clams?? I dont think so.
Though Im sure youre aware that people with legit concerns, would take offense to comments like this in your previous post: "I know way to many hunters who think the sole purpose of the game commission is to keep an adquate supply of game so they can fill their freezers every year for the cost of the 20 dollar tag. In reality we hunters are nothing more than a wildlife management tool. we should be grateful we have the privilege to hunt instead of crying you don't have enough deer to kill."
I dont go crazy either, and wouldnt matter if I did when I didnt kill a deer because I do kill a deer every year...Always a buck and with bow. I also find deer. But there is still much to complain about. Our deer plans success or failure doesnt hinge upon what I or you kill. There is a very "big picture" to look at and its far more complicated than wether I have filled a tag or not. By that logic, if there were 3 deer in the entire management unit, and I filled my tag on one of them, all would be well and we should all be happy as clams?? I dont think so.
05-25-2009, 12:29 PM
#40
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
RE: Will The Audit Include
In reality we hunters are nothing more than a wildlife management tool. we should be grateful we have the privilege to hunt instead of crying you don't have enough deer to kill.