Something for ALL Pa hunters to think about...
01-17-2005, 09:23 AM
#1
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
Something for ALL Pa hunters to think about...
Whether you cheered or cried when Gary Alt retired, here's an interesting perspective on what may lie ahead for Pa hunters....
edit: here's the link to the article
[link]http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/sports/outdoors/s_293682.html[/link]
Hunters need answers before making a move
Tools Print this article
E-mail this article
Subscribe to this paper
Larger / Smaller Text
By Bob Frye
TRIBUNE-REVIEW OUTDOORS EDITOR
Sunday, January 16, 2005
If Pennsylvania's deer hunters aren't careful, they're going to get exactly what they're asking for.
And it will kill them.
Some hunters have been shouting for the Pennsylvania Game Commission to abandon its current deer management policy and return to the days of three-day doe seasons and lower doe license allocations.
The Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania have gone so far as to circulate a letter saying they intend to sue the commission if it doesn't reverse course.
All of the complaints suggest the commission's deer management plan has worked too well.
But has it? The truth is no one knows.
Remember, the idea was never simply to drive deer numbers down. It was to drive them down and keep them there long enough for our forests to grow new oaks and beeches and other trees.
We don't know yet if that regeneration is occurring.
Pennsylvania's 2004-05 deer harvest will almost assuredly be down. A couple of wet springs, harsh winters and, yes, liberal doe hunting have all decreased deer populations in many places.
But harvest figures don't tell the whole story. Say the harvest drops 20 percent, from 464,890 in 2003-04 to 375,000 in 2004-05. Those numbers alone won't say if landowners -- including the commission -- can grow new forests without fencing them in first.
The commission's deer management plan can't offer many answers. It's supposed to cover the years 2003 to 2007, but 13 months after it was to go into effect, it's still in the review stage.
The Game Commission is kicking off a study next month to see just what percentage of does in a population are killed by hunters. The Department of Conservation and Natural Resources plans to start a regeneration study this year to see how our forests are responding to increased deer harvests.
But we're a year away from getting even the most preliminary results from either project.
Take all of that together and, if the commission changes course now, before it has any evidence that deer numbers are low enough to allow for regeneration, it will get sued and it will lose.
The groups that will be doing the suing -- ironically, the foresters and environmentalists most often at odds with one another -- have science on their side. Look at the Deer Forum report that came out last week. Forget for a minute what it says about the commission and look at the portion focusing on deer impacts. Almost all of the research out there indicates that deer have severely altered forests in Pennsylvania and the rest of the northeastern U.S.
There's no getting around that.
These groups also have the money and expertise to win a war in the courts. They are the same people who routinely stop timbering over issues like the spotted owl and Indiana bat. They will wear the commission and hunters down.
And now, to top things off, they've got the perfect expert witness to present their case.
Some have been crowing about Gary Alt's resignation, as if they tarred and feathered him and ran him out of town. In fact, all they've done is given him a spa treatment, dressed him in new clothes and chauffeured him to the opposition.
Alt is the most highly acclaimed biologist of our age, has a fame that can give him access to every newspaper, magazine and TV station around, and has the communication skills to get his message across.
You don't think he could star in a courtroom as well?
Things don't have to go that way. The commission and hunters can show a little patience, get some answers and strike a balance between those who want too few deer and those who want too many.
That will mean a few years of tougher hunting than we're used to. But if you want to carry a rifle and climb mountains in December without your lungs feeling as if they're about to burst, you've got to start exercising in August.
We've got to make similar sacrifices now if we want better hunting later.
We're close to getting answers. If we stop looking for them while questions remain, we'll only hurt ourselves.
Bob Frye can be reached at [email protected] or (724) 838-5148.
Back to headlines
Tools Print this article
E-mail this article
Subscribe to this paper
Larger / Smaller Text
By Bob Frye
TRIBUNE-REVIEW OUTDOORS EDITOR
Sunday, January 16, 2005
If Pennsylvania's deer hunters aren't careful, they're going to get exactly what they're asking for.
And it will kill them.
Some hunters have been shouting for the Pennsylvania Game Commission to abandon its current deer management policy and return to the days of three-day doe seasons and lower doe license allocations.
The Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania have gone so far as to circulate a letter saying they intend to sue the commission if it doesn't reverse course.
All of the complaints suggest the commission's deer management plan has worked too well.
But has it? The truth is no one knows.
Remember, the idea was never simply to drive deer numbers down. It was to drive them down and keep them there long enough for our forests to grow new oaks and beeches and other trees.
We don't know yet if that regeneration is occurring.
Pennsylvania's 2004-05 deer harvest will almost assuredly be down. A couple of wet springs, harsh winters and, yes, liberal doe hunting have all decreased deer populations in many places.
But harvest figures don't tell the whole story. Say the harvest drops 20 percent, from 464,890 in 2003-04 to 375,000 in 2004-05. Those numbers alone won't say if landowners -- including the commission -- can grow new forests without fencing them in first.
The commission's deer management plan can't offer many answers. It's supposed to cover the years 2003 to 2007, but 13 months after it was to go into effect, it's still in the review stage.
The Game Commission is kicking off a study next month to see just what percentage of does in a population are killed by hunters. The Department of Conservation and Natural Resources plans to start a regeneration study this year to see how our forests are responding to increased deer harvests.
But we're a year away from getting even the most preliminary results from either project.
Take all of that together and, if the commission changes course now, before it has any evidence that deer numbers are low enough to allow for regeneration, it will get sued and it will lose.
The groups that will be doing the suing -- ironically, the foresters and environmentalists most often at odds with one another -- have science on their side. Look at the Deer Forum report that came out last week. Forget for a minute what it says about the commission and look at the portion focusing on deer impacts. Almost all of the research out there indicates that deer have severely altered forests in Pennsylvania and the rest of the northeastern U.S.
There's no getting around that.
These groups also have the money and expertise to win a war in the courts. They are the same people who routinely stop timbering over issues like the spotted owl and Indiana bat. They will wear the commission and hunters down.
And now, to top things off, they've got the perfect expert witness to present their case.
Some have been crowing about Gary Alt's resignation, as if they tarred and feathered him and ran him out of town. In fact, all they've done is given him a spa treatment, dressed him in new clothes and chauffeured him to the opposition.
Alt is the most highly acclaimed biologist of our age, has a fame that can give him access to every newspaper, magazine and TV station around, and has the communication skills to get his message across.
You don't think he could star in a courtroom as well?
Things don't have to go that way. The commission and hunters can show a little patience, get some answers and strike a balance between those who want too few deer and those who want too many.
That will mean a few years of tougher hunting than we're used to. But if you want to carry a rifle and climb mountains in December without your lungs feeling as if they're about to burst, you've got to start exercising in August.
We've got to make similar sacrifices now if we want better hunting later.
We're close to getting answers. If we stop looking for them while questions remain, we'll only hurt ourselves.
Bob Frye can be reached at [email protected] or (724) 838-5148.
Back to headlines
[link]http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/sports/outdoors/s_293682.html[/link]
01-17-2005, 09:31 AM
#2
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 1,149
RE: Something for ALL Pa hunters to think about...
Well they're heading in a better direction.
Wonder if it ever occured to them to take hunters who are interested,educate them,and let them give the results on deer populations and regen then report to them?
One problem I have with their statement about maintaining is that they aren't doing that.If the numbers are already below the goals in certain areas why are they still asking for more reductions?
Wonder if it ever occured to them to take hunters who are interested,educate them,and let them give the results on deer populations and regen then report to them?
One problem I have with their statement about maintaining is that they aren't doing that.If the numbers are already below the goals in certain areas why are they still asking for more reductions?
01-17-2005, 09:36 AM
#4
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location:
Posts: 205
RE: Something for ALL Pa hunters to think about...
does not take a genious to see Bob Frye is a horn hunter...editorials hold little importance to me.I can find several that say the PGC has overharvested the herd in some places and bring in legislators that agree with that,two of the Advisory Board memebers themselves agree with that.
01-17-2005, 10:24 AM
#5
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
RE: Something for ALL Pa hunters to think about...
No Matter who any of us agrees or disagrees with, It looks like our hunting license dollars are more likely to be spent on legal fees than wildlife in the near future. Maybe from two sides. From the unified crowd on one side and the timber companies, environmentalists, other sportsmens groups, etc on the other.
Unfortunately to hope the Unified crowd will suddenly realize what a rats nest they may be opening is simply unrealistic.
Unfortunately to hope the Unified crowd will suddenly realize what a rats nest they may be opening is simply unrealistic.
01-17-2005, 11:38 AM
#7
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 232
RE: Something for ALL Pa hunters to think about...
Some have been crowing about Gary Alt's resignation, as if they tarred and feathered him and ran him out of town. In fact, all they've done is given him a spa treatment, dressed him in new clothes and chauffeured him to the opposition.
Alt is the most highly acclaimed biologist of our age, has a fame that can give him access to every newspaper, magazine and TV station around, and has the communication skills to get his message across.
You don't think he could star in a courtroom as well?
Alt is the most highly acclaimed biologist of our age, has a fame that can give him access to every newspaper, magazine and TV station around, and has the communication skills to get his message across.
You don't think he could star in a courtroom as well?
Alt would be a sitting duck for even a rookie lawyer that did a little research and simply read the deer a mangement articles in the PGN and read the annual reports and press releases since Alt was appointed. Alt has many claims that are inconsistent and none of his projections have come true. Even the claims that the forests have been ravaged by the deer are easily debunked by PGC stats. We now have 26,529 SM od forested land compared to 26,264 SM in 1984. That is hardly an indication that the deer have been ravaging the forests for 80 years .
01-17-2005, 11:46 AM
#8
Join Date: May 2004
Location:
Posts: 255
RE: Something for ALL Pa hunters to think about...
not to mention Bob Frye does not have a very good track record of writing anything that would even be considered slightly unbiased.
He is a pro-PGC writer (do your own research and read some of his work), and has never shown any balance towards hunters.
He a pro-alt sportswriter who covers the Harrisburg beat, and I have talked to him at the PGC meetings.
If I were looking for a fair and balanced approach to anything, I would not go to Bob.
He is a pro-PGC writer (do your own research and read some of his work), and has never shown any balance towards hunters.
He a pro-alt sportswriter who covers the Harrisburg beat, and I have talked to him at the PGC meetings.
If I were looking for a fair and balanced approach to anything, I would not go to Bob.
01-17-2005, 12:35 PM
#9
Fork Horn
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 377
RE: Something for ALL Pa hunters to think about...
I'd actually like to see where our hunting tag fees are being spent..that is I'd like a fair an unbiased report. Seems like every WCO, Land Manager, Biologist , etc. has a new 4x4 truck, and the PGC employees seem to have a pretty good benifit plan not to mention pension plan at least better than I can afford.
Oh an let's not forget that headquarters building on Elmerton Ave, what's that running us honest hunters. $$ that could be spent on food plots,timber harvests,reintroduction of pheasants (rather than those lousy farm birds they call "wild"), etc.
IT IS the hunters that support the PGC and the PGC would do well to remember that! Thet need $$ raise back tag fees to $50 I have no problem with that,still a bargain or timber more of that sacred cow forest they are barely touching ( when did deer floursih the best? right after ww2 and the timbering of Pa).
Oh an let's not forget that headquarters building on Elmerton Ave, what's that running us honest hunters. $$ that could be spent on food plots,timber harvests,reintroduction of pheasants (rather than those lousy farm birds they call "wild"), etc.
IT IS the hunters that support the PGC and the PGC would do well to remember that! Thet need $$ raise back tag fees to $50 I have no problem with that,still a bargain or timber more of that sacred cow forest they are barely touching ( when did deer floursih the best? right after ww2 and the timbering of Pa).