LETS ROLL USP !!!!!
07-28-2006, 03:04 PM
#1
Typical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Pa.
Posts: 554
LETS ROLL USP !!!!!
From The Morning Call
July 26, 2006
Court lets Unified Sportsmen take their best shot
The statewide group has legal standing to sue Game Commission.
By Christian Berg
Of The Morning Call
Commonwealth Court has upheld a statewide hunting group's right to sue the Pennsylvania Game Commission over deer management — a decision being hailed by some as a major victory for sportsmen.
The lawsuit that sparked the ruling was filed last year by the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania, which claims the commission is intentionally decimating the state's whitetail herd with no scientific basis for its policies.
Although the merits of that argument have yet to be considered, Unified officials are celebrating the court's recognition that sportsmen have ''standing,'' which is the legal right to challenge the commission on hunting-related matters.
''This in itself is a major victory for sportsmen,'' Unified Chairman Gregory Levengood said in a news release.
Levengood also called Judge Robert Simpson's July 20 ruling a ''major step in the USP's efforts to bring accountability to the Game Commission's deer management plan.''
Game Commission officials, however, viewed the court's ruling much differently and expressed confidence that Unified's case will eventually be defeated.
''In my opinion, it's only prolonging the inevitable that this is going to get tossed out,'' said Commissioner Gregory Isabella of Philadelphia.
Commission President Thomas Boop, a lawyer from Northumberland County, said just because the court recognized Unified's right to pursue its case, that doesn't mean the group's claims are true.
''It's going to proceed on the merits [of their case], and I think ultimately it will be determined that the commission does use scientific methods to make these decisions,'' Boop said. ''At the end of the day, the commission will prevail.''
Unified filed its lawsuit against the commission last August. In addition the commission and individual commissioners, the state Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, DCNR Secretary Michael DiBerardinis and Gov. Ed Rendell were named as defendants.
Unified claims the commission and DCNR have conspired to drastically reduce deer numbers for the benefit of the state's $5 billion timber industry. By so doing, Unified claims, the commission has violated statutory and constitutional requirements to manage wildlife for the benefit of all citizens and provide adequate hunting opportunities to sportsmen.
Unified, which claims 40,000 members, also contends the commission has never conducted a reliable census of Pennsylvania's deer population and therefore lacks the data needed to make management decisions.
Unified said deer-management policies implemented by the commission in recent years — such as a concurrent firearms season for bucks and does, special seasons for antlerless deer and a dramatic increase in the number of antlerless deer-hunting licenses — have already slashed the deer population from an estimated 1.5 million six years ago to less than half that today.
Unified's suit asks the court to force commission and DCNR officials to release all information used to formulate deer management policies and make state employees available for depositions where they can be questioned about the rationale for their decisions.
The state, which is being represented by the attorney general's office, argued that Unified's suit should be thrown out because the commission has sole authority and ownership of Pennsylvania's deer herd. Therefore, the state argued, hunters have no standing from which to bring a legal challenge.
However, Simpson noted in his 21-page opinion that the state Game Code specifically requires the commission to serve the interest of sportsmen by providing adequate hunting and trapping opportunities. Simpson also cited a U.S. Supreme Court case that recognized the desire to use or observe an animal species as a basis for legal standing.
Unified's lawyer, Don Bailey of Harrisburg, said the court's decision to grant Unified standing sets a legal precedent that can be utilized by sportsmen's groups throughout Pennsylvania.
''If the court said there was no standing,…groups like Unified would never be able to participate in the way they need to be able to participate,'' Bailey said. ''We would have a door closed to us probably forever.''
Although Simpson sided with Unified on the issue of standing, he granted the state's request to dismiss DCNR, DiBerardinis and Rendell as defendants because they have no mandatory legal duties regarding deer management.
Simpson also expressed numerous concerns about the nature of relief sought by Unified and gave the group 30 days to amend its pleading. Simpson said the relief requested by Unified — access to commission records and staff — do not appear directly related to the agency's alleged failure to protect and preserve game, serve the interests of sportsmen and provide adequate hunting opportunities.
''Based on the ambiguous nature of Sportsmen's pleading, it is not possible to discern a legal theory to support the relief requested,'' Simpson wrote.
Despite that, Simpson said there are potential legal grounds for Unified to seek relief. So, the court decided to grant a 30-day extension for amendments rather than dismiss the lawsuit.
Bailey said he plans to meet with Unified officials and have a revised complaint filed with the court prior to the Aug. 19 deadline.
[email protected]
July 26, 2006
Court lets Unified Sportsmen take their best shot
The statewide group has legal standing to sue Game Commission.
By Christian Berg
Of The Morning Call
Commonwealth Court has upheld a statewide hunting group's right to sue the Pennsylvania Game Commission over deer management — a decision being hailed by some as a major victory for sportsmen.
The lawsuit that sparked the ruling was filed last year by the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania, which claims the commission is intentionally decimating the state's whitetail herd with no scientific basis for its policies.
Although the merits of that argument have yet to be considered, Unified officials are celebrating the court's recognition that sportsmen have ''standing,'' which is the legal right to challenge the commission on hunting-related matters.
''This in itself is a major victory for sportsmen,'' Unified Chairman Gregory Levengood said in a news release.
Levengood also called Judge Robert Simpson's July 20 ruling a ''major step in the USP's efforts to bring accountability to the Game Commission's deer management plan.''
Game Commission officials, however, viewed the court's ruling much differently and expressed confidence that Unified's case will eventually be defeated.
''In my opinion, it's only prolonging the inevitable that this is going to get tossed out,'' said Commissioner Gregory Isabella of Philadelphia.
Commission President Thomas Boop, a lawyer from Northumberland County, said just because the court recognized Unified's right to pursue its case, that doesn't mean the group's claims are true.
''It's going to proceed on the merits [of their case], and I think ultimately it will be determined that the commission does use scientific methods to make these decisions,'' Boop said. ''At the end of the day, the commission will prevail.''
Unified filed its lawsuit against the commission last August. In addition the commission and individual commissioners, the state Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, DCNR Secretary Michael DiBerardinis and Gov. Ed Rendell were named as defendants.
Unified claims the commission and DCNR have conspired to drastically reduce deer numbers for the benefit of the state's $5 billion timber industry. By so doing, Unified claims, the commission has violated statutory and constitutional requirements to manage wildlife for the benefit of all citizens and provide adequate hunting opportunities to sportsmen.
Unified, which claims 40,000 members, also contends the commission has never conducted a reliable census of Pennsylvania's deer population and therefore lacks the data needed to make management decisions.
Unified said deer-management policies implemented by the commission in recent years — such as a concurrent firearms season for bucks and does, special seasons for antlerless deer and a dramatic increase in the number of antlerless deer-hunting licenses — have already slashed the deer population from an estimated 1.5 million six years ago to less than half that today.
Unified's suit asks the court to force commission and DCNR officials to release all information used to formulate deer management policies and make state employees available for depositions where they can be questioned about the rationale for their decisions.
The state, which is being represented by the attorney general's office, argued that Unified's suit should be thrown out because the commission has sole authority and ownership of Pennsylvania's deer herd. Therefore, the state argued, hunters have no standing from which to bring a legal challenge.
However, Simpson noted in his 21-page opinion that the state Game Code specifically requires the commission to serve the interest of sportsmen by providing adequate hunting and trapping opportunities. Simpson also cited a U.S. Supreme Court case that recognized the desire to use or observe an animal species as a basis for legal standing.
Unified's lawyer, Don Bailey of Harrisburg, said the court's decision to grant Unified standing sets a legal precedent that can be utilized by sportsmen's groups throughout Pennsylvania.
''If the court said there was no standing,…groups like Unified would never be able to participate in the way they need to be able to participate,'' Bailey said. ''We would have a door closed to us probably forever.''
Although Simpson sided with Unified on the issue of standing, he granted the state's request to dismiss DCNR, DiBerardinis and Rendell as defendants because they have no mandatory legal duties regarding deer management.
Simpson also expressed numerous concerns about the nature of relief sought by Unified and gave the group 30 days to amend its pleading. Simpson said the relief requested by Unified — access to commission records and staff — do not appear directly related to the agency's alleged failure to protect and preserve game, serve the interests of sportsmen and provide adequate hunting opportunities.
''Based on the ambiguous nature of Sportsmen's pleading, it is not possible to discern a legal theory to support the relief requested,'' Simpson wrote.
Despite that, Simpson said there are potential legal grounds for Unified to seek relief. So, the court decided to grant a 30-day extension for amendments rather than dismiss the lawsuit.
Bailey said he plans to meet with Unified officials and have a revised complaint filed with the court prior to the Aug. 19 deadline.
[email protected]
07-28-2006, 05:37 PM
#2
Typical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: PA
Posts: 522
RE: LETS ROLL USP !!!!!
Chris starts out by declaring that Judge Simpson "gave sportsmen standing", although Atty. Bailey correctly points out later in the article that the judge granted Unified (Sportsmen) standing. Everywhere in the judge'sissued opinion, Simpson refers to the word sportsmen with a capital S, so itmay beunclear if he meant Unified Sportsmen or sportsmen in general.
Although Simpson did clarify that sportsmen do have an interest, as far as the PGC being required to provide adequate hunting and trapping opportunities. Best wishes to Judge Simpson if he can define "adequate" to the satisfaction of all ofPennsylvania's hunters.
After months of false starts, requests for continuances and other stumbles, the judge has finally ruled on some of the issues (after having refused afurther USP motion for venue changes)and allowed USP to have one more chance to file a coherent lawsuit.
Let's roll indeed. Reminds me of a chant one might hear at an Auburn home game when 'Bama is the visting team: Round the rim and down the hole, roll Tide roll.
[8D]
[quote]Simpson also expressed numerous concerns about the nature of relief sought by Unified and gave the group 30 days to amend its pleading. Simpson said the relief requested by Unified — access to commission records and staff — do not appear directly related to the agency's alleged failure to protect and preserve game, serve the interests of sportsmen and provide adequate hunting opportunities.
''Based on the ambiguous nature of Sportsmen's pleading, it is not possible to discern a legal theory to support the relief requested,'' Simpson wrote.
Despite that, Simpson said there are potential legal grounds for Unified to seek relief. So, the court decided to grant a 30-day extension for amendments rather than dismiss the lawsuit.
Bailey said he plans to meet with Unified officials and have a revised complaint filed with the court prior to the Aug. 19 deadline.
Although Simpson did clarify that sportsmen do have an interest, as far as the PGC being required to provide adequate hunting and trapping opportunities. Best wishes to Judge Simpson if he can define "adequate" to the satisfaction of all ofPennsylvania's hunters.
After months of false starts, requests for continuances and other stumbles, the judge has finally ruled on some of the issues (after having refused afurther USP motion for venue changes)and allowed USP to have one more chance to file a coherent lawsuit.
Let's roll indeed. Reminds me of a chant one might hear at an Auburn home game when 'Bama is the visting team: Round the rim and down the hole, roll Tide roll.
[8D]
[quote]Simpson also expressed numerous concerns about the nature of relief sought by Unified and gave the group 30 days to amend its pleading. Simpson said the relief requested by Unified — access to commission records and staff — do not appear directly related to the agency's alleged failure to protect and preserve game, serve the interests of sportsmen and provide adequate hunting opportunities.
''Based on the ambiguous nature of Sportsmen's pleading, it is not possible to discern a legal theory to support the relief requested,'' Simpson wrote.
Despite that, Simpson said there are potential legal grounds for Unified to seek relief. So, the court decided to grant a 30-day extension for amendments rather than dismiss the lawsuit.
Bailey said he plans to meet with Unified officials and have a revised complaint filed with the court prior to the Aug. 19 deadline.
07-29-2006, 12:09 PM
#3
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location:
Posts: 430
RE: LETS ROLL USP !!!!!
It's obvious that the judge wants to hear more. He appears interested in what the USP has to present. He clearly was not interested in what the PGC had to present and rejected them. That in itself says a lot.
I distincty remember on another forum ("Wolf Pile") where Joe Neville and other visionaries predicted that the case would never get this far.
My guess is that there are a whole lot of recipes for Crow being exchanged by "Wolf Pile" members and the PGC.
I distincty remember on another forum ("Wolf Pile") where Joe Neville and other visionaries predicted that the case would never get this far.
My guess is that there are a whole lot of recipes for Crow being exchanged by "Wolf Pile" members and the PGC.
07-29-2006, 03:40 PM
#5
Typical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: PA
Posts: 522
RE: LETS ROLL USP !!!!!
Careful or he'llrepeat that"Let go of the hate" spiel again. Over the years I've noticed it doesn't apply to their side of the haggle, only those that disagree with them.
The feller that made the comment about PFSC and others working with the USP, should know if doesn't already,that the opportunity has been extended on several occasions, but USP has seldom been interested in working with anyone but their attorney or their"I am not a member" mouthpiece/Svengali.
Ain't over until it's over, so neither side should be counting their chickens at this point. Another judge could've just as easily dismissed the suit or accepted it for ajudicationas-presented, without giving USP yet another whack at the pinata. HTH anyone can gloat about winning anything when two thirds of their targeted entities have been dropped, escapes my notice.
The feller that made the comment about PFSC and others working with the USP, should know if doesn't already,that the opportunity has been extended on several occasions, but USP has seldom been interested in working with anyone but their attorney or their"I am not a member" mouthpiece/Svengali.
Ain't over until it's over, so neither side should be counting their chickens at this point. Another judge could've just as easily dismissed the suit or accepted it for ajudicationas-presented, without giving USP yet another whack at the pinata. HTH anyone can gloat about winning anything when two thirds of their targeted entities have been dropped, escapes my notice.
07-29-2006, 04:21 PM
#6
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location:
Posts: 430
RE: LETS ROLL USP !!!!!
I don't know that any organization would want to work with a group with this kind of mindset...
March-03
Our (Penn Fed)official position is unchanged. The PGC reports the herd has grown 20% and deer are more overbaundant than ever. Members should work with the PGC and not against them in helping to reduce the herd everywhere.
Take advantage of the DMAP program, support the early rifle does season when proposed. And use the tags available to harvest as many doe as you can. We suported Dr. Alt the last 5 years and will continue to. Our biologists have hsown that deer cannot be overharvested, they are resiliant and always bounce back. So our postion has not changed, our best hunting is ahead of us.
"HTH anyone can gloat about winning anything when two thirds of their targeted entities have been dropped, escapes my notice"
You may have a point there, but....the one entitie that really counted stuck! And that is very significant.
Must be the judge sees something your tired old eyes can't.
March-03
Our (Penn Fed)official position is unchanged. The PGC reports the herd has grown 20% and deer are more overbaundant than ever. Members should work with the PGC and not against them in helping to reduce the herd everywhere.
Take advantage of the DMAP program, support the early rifle does season when proposed. And use the tags available to harvest as many doe as you can. We suported Dr. Alt the last 5 years and will continue to. Our biologists have hsown that deer cannot be overharvested, they are resiliant and always bounce back. So our postion has not changed, our best hunting is ahead of us.
"HTH anyone can gloat about winning anything when two thirds of their targeted entities have been dropped, escapes my notice"
You may have a point there, but....the one entitie that really counted stuck! And that is very significant.
Must be the judge sees something your tired old eyes can't.
07-31-2006, 03:36 PM
#8
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location:
Posts: 430
RE: LETS ROLL USP !!!!!
"DougF" you must be kidding. I'm sorry, but I must take exception with your latest comment. The PGC still hasn't a clue as to how many deer are out there. They haven't a clue as to how many we killed. This particular aspect has been a joke for decades because they refuse to improve their methods of accounting. They don't even have a 1-800 number to call in a kill for recording. Their recording system is antiquated , to say the least.
The FLIR (flyover) was a joke. They did that in the dead of winter so they could visibly see the animals. Deer will herd up on sunny slopes in very cold winter in large numbers This can be dacieving and give you a false impression as to deer movement and numbers.
Your sure you don't work for or are affiliated with the agency in some shape or form?
The FLIR (flyover) was a joke. They did that in the dead of winter so they could visibly see the animals. Deer will herd up on sunny slopes in very cold winter in large numbers This can be dacieving and give you a false impression as to deer movement and numbers.
Your sure you don't work for or are affiliated with the agency in some shape or form?
07-31-2006, 09:10 PM
#10
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location:
Posts: 99
RE: LETS ROLL USP !!!!!
I'll save him the trouble:
[quote]
Bucks County Courrier Times
Deer management growing
By: CHRIS ENGLISH (Fri, Feb/03/2006)
(snip)
"In many urbanized areas, the deer population has become a problem," said Jerry Feaser, a spokesman for the Pennsylvania Game Commission. "Wherever you have development, it obviously impacts deer movements and deer access. One of the problems in urbanized areas is that it's difficult to get hunters access to hunt lands."
Feaser said the commission doesn't have an estimate of the deer population in the state or in any county, but is working on one. Anything people can do to safely and legally minimize property damage from wildlife is good, he said.
[/quote]
[quote]
Bucks County Courrier Times
Deer management growing
By: CHRIS ENGLISH (Fri, Feb/03/2006)
(snip)
"In many urbanized areas, the deer population has become a problem," said Jerry Feaser, a spokesman for the Pennsylvania Game Commission. "Wherever you have development, it obviously impacts deer movements and deer access. One of the problems in urbanized areas is that it's difficult to get hunters access to hunt lands."
Feaser said the commission doesn't have an estimate of the deer population in the state or in any county, but is working on one. Anything people can do to safely and legally minimize property damage from wildlife is good, he said.
[/quote]