DougE

Crazyhorse,that article backed up exactly what I stated.Elk are primarily grazers.If you look at most of the trees they browse on,you'd see that many are pioneer species that directly compete with what the deer prefer to browse and eventually die off anyway.The elk don't do near as much damage to the habitat as the deer do and it's a proven fact.Elk do alot more digging in the winter time and often the deer are close behind to clean up the grasses that the elk miss.I know it goes against your warped conspiacey theories but the elk actually benefit the deer during periods of heavy snow.

DougE

BH,it takes money and manpower to rid an area of junk trees.fortunately there's other organizations worth supporting such as Pa wildlife habitat unlimited and the grouse society.They justhelped the PGC do a browse cuttwo weeks ago and will be doing another one on feb 24th.Bring your chainsaw to SGL 93 next month and I'll gladly showyou all the habitat work that's been done on the game lands in Clearfield county.I'll even show you the grouse cuts that were recentlt cut.Our game lands have some of the best habitat around and we have plenty of deer and a variety of wildlife as a result.Saying the PGC does nothing to improve the habitat shows your complete lack of knowledge on the subject.It takes time,money and equiptment to make it happena and we're fortunate to have an organization with alot of dedicated volunteers and moneythat works hand in hand with the PGC instead of against it.

If the USP was truly on the hunter's side,they would have taken all the money wasted on that FRIVELOUS LAWSUIT and donated it toward equiptment for the PGC to do more habitat work.That's the way things are done by responsible sportsman and responsible organizations in this part of the state.I see what the PGC actually does and that's why I don't complain.Things go alot better if you get involved in a positive way instead of filing a FRIVELOUS lawsuit that claimed mounatin lions were having a direct impact on the deer herd and that deer were pawing trees.

DougE

The PGC is absolutely doing the job but it dgoes alot further when you have volunteers.It's pathetic that hunters aren't willing to spend more than 20 bucks on a lisence and do no work yet,they expect habitat improvements and more game than the land can support.

Are you willing to back up that staement?Do you really think the food and cover crews sit in a warm building while volunteers are out doing the work?Once again,you have no idea what you're talking about.Instead of complaining,you should really be thanking the PGC for reintroducing all those mountain lions so your world champion lion dogs have something to chase.

DougE

They don't have the manpower because they need more money.Why can't people understand that?

Am I demeening anyone that refuses to do volunteer work?Nope,just the people that complain that nothing is being done and fight against a lisence increase.

This thread IS about sportsman's groups losing memberships do to the PGC's management decisions.If you're going to spend money on membership dues,why not spend the money on groups intent on helping the cause.There's plenty of sportsman's groups that put money and manpower right back in to the habitat.The NWTF,RMEF,RUFFED GROUSE SOCIETY ANDPA WILDLIFE HABITAT UNLIMITED are justa few.The all work closely with the PGC so many of you may not be interested.Still you can sit back complain,support frivelous lawsuits and add more to the conspiracy theories or you can get involved with some excellent organizations that do a tremedous amount of work.If you do that,it becomes apparent that the PGC isn't trying to ruin hunting.

Crazy Horse RVN

I don't think there's a legislator on the Hill who thinks the PGC is doing a good job. Just ask Ed Staback, chairman of the HF&G Committee. The reality of the matter is that the Game Commission is managing our Game Lands for timber rather than for game.

It's common knowledge that there are not nearly enough Food and Cover employees, yet we certainly have no problem appropriating more money for Law Enforcement. Even the MAT Commission said the agency was a Law Enforcement agency that did a little wildlife work.
Try and keep in mind that we license buyers pay the agency to do the job of Habitat Improvement. Do you (DougE-dce) do the body and fender work of your insurance company? If not, why not?

Disappointment with the way the agency manages itself is apparent by the admitted 40 % dissatisfied (and growing)membership of the Penn Fed.

High Country Kid

Perhaps they should spend a little less time studying wood rats and more time managing the habitat?

http://www.sungazette.com/outdoors/articles.asp?articleID=14034

T_in_PA3

HCK,
That's a problem when you have been tasked to manage ALL of the state's wildlife and are supported primarily by hunter's dollars. We foot the bill for all Pennsylvanians benefit.

DougE

I wouldn't ask Ed Staback because he doesn't have a clue.I had the pleasure of listening to his nonsense last year at the Legislative/save the deer/save our job/deny the PGC a lisence increase meeting.Someone mentioned that they were trapping does in the Sproul.He looked all dumbfounded and wanted to know why they were trapping deer in that area and moving them out of there.I stood right there and heard it.Why would I want to hear the opinion of a guy on the house game and fisheries committe that was that clueless?After all it was a highly publicised study and he was totaly uninformed.

The PGC is not managing our game lands for timber.I see what they do on the game lands and it's far from a commercial timber operation.

You don't think law-enforcement is necessary?I know of areas that had more deer poached than were legally harvested this year.I got a call at work last friday about an incident that happened during broad daylight.Our WCO has a huge area and there's no way he can be everywhere at once.Poaching is actually a free for all and it's very easy to get away with.Anyone concerned about low deer numbers should be willing to back a lisence increase because that has a direct bearing on the number of deer out there.

I've never done body work on any of my insured vehicles but I have helped my customers do repairs on their house when the damage was below their deductible.I've actually done that quite a few times and I've helped people out after catostrophic events like fires and bad windstorms.So yes,my chainsaw gets fired up to help the PGC and to help out my customers.Pretty nice guy,huh?

I agree 100% that at least 40% of the hunters are disappointed.Unfortunately,like many on here that just expect out game lands to be clearcut,they don't undertand the issues or the relationship that deer play with the habitat.Perhaps the PGC could do a better job educating the hunters but that would still require a proactive approach on the hunter's part.I see it every year,the naysayers and slfish politicians refuse to show up to see the facts.

T_in_PA3

Coming from a USP mouse jockey. That's credable.

DougE

From my experience our game lands have better habitat than most private land and therefore more deer in many cases.I'm sure some game lands have less deer than comparable private property but the reason for that is simple.Access is not regulated on game lands like it is on private property.Man are you clueless.

What percent timber would you like our game lands to be in?Should they be in fields or maybeyou want them paved.

I never claimed to be a forestry expert but I guarantee that I know more about the subject than you do.I've spent countless hours over the past several yearswith foresters from DCNR,PSU and the US forest service.I've seen the research and have been involved.Anytime you want to challenge me on the subject,go ahead and give it a shot.So far you've come up empty.You seem to have an enormous amount of biased opinions on all the subjects but the only thing you offer is speculation,conspiracy theories and personal attacks.You've never provided one fact to back up your misguided opinion about the deer not hurting the habitat.

My assessment on rep Staback is right on the money.I sat right in front of him and listened to his dribble.The guy is on the house game and fisheries committee and was totaly oblivious to a major doe mortality study.he has no credibilty and you and your misguided friends at the USP have even less.Deer pawing trees?Give me a freakin break.You have the nerve to question my credibility.

If my credibilty is zero,why don't you and the rest of your side show(bring Jimmy)come out here to one of the many habitat tours and show me how everyone else is wrong and you guys are right.Be prepared toexpalin how acid rain isa major concern when all it takes to get decent regeneration is to emiminate one one variable,deer.Bring a cooler with you and I can send back some venison so you don't forget what it tastes like.

It's funny how a guy like yourself with no degrees in forestry or biology can question my opinions and experiences and try and demorize me.Tell me your credentials on why you're an expert and I'm clueless.After that,tell me why I'm wrong and back it up with some facts.