RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

"The pgc crowd are talking on another board about the new bill that would mandate that pgc would set aside at least 10% of the money they get from timbering towards habitat improvement/reforestation efforts. They are DEAD SET againstit, and again we areonly talking TEN STINKING PERCENT!! "


R.S.B.,
Is this statement accurate? If it isn't could you clarify the details of this "new bill"? I would hate to think this is true and a person employed by the PAGC would be aware of this and then go forward with starting a thread that requests suggestions on how Wildlife Management be funded.

If the PAGC is reaping profit from taking from the land they should be putting just as much back into the land. You've heard the saying "robbing Peter to pay Paul" This is exactly what is happening. I understand the PAGC is in desperate need of money and the PAGC is doing what they need to in order to survive and continue to exist as they have. But, you cannot argue that they are of atmuch fault for their current circumstances as anything else, probably more so. They have been doing whatever they want despite what the hunters say or feel. The Xbow inclusionis a prime example. Reap what you sow- Now the PAGC wants us hunters to pay more yet disregard our wishes everytime they see a financial gain from doing so. I don't care if the PAGC ceases to exist. They will be replaced or forced to merge and in the long runa mergerwould be more economical, then some of that admin payroll will be able to go into habitat and wildlife/land management.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Here is the bill: http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&sessYr=2009&sessIn d=0&billBody=H&billTyp=B&billNbr=180&a mp;pn=0179

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

This bill appears to be just another example of the Legislature coming up with bills that don’t fix any problems and only create new problems. It also shows that they once more believe they know about resource management then professionals in those fields.

Earmarked funds frequently are the most wasted money in the system because the money has to spend to do things that frequently aren’t in need of anything being fixed or corrected. To start with mother nature plants over a billion new seedlings on nearly ever acre of mature forest each spring. If nature can’t keep up at that rate of seeding there isn’t much man can do to improve on that. In fact there aren’t enough seedlings available commercially in the entire world to keep up with what nature is already doing in forest plantings for free.

The Game Commission is already mandated to spend $4.25 for every resident and non-resident hunting license and $2.00 for every antler less license sold on habitat management and maintenance projects and that required amount is exceeded every year. Adding more earmarked funds is not the answer to having better habitat or more deer. Sometimes just throwing more money into something doesn’t result in anything more then simply more spent money.

As for your desire for the Game Commission to fold or merge I have to wonder how anyone could think that will result in something better. All of the merger studies conducted by the Legislature have come back stating there would be no significant cost saving but there would be significant expense in the initial merger years. Do you think there isn’t going to be someone to manage wildlife if the Game Commission runs out of money? Who do you think will take over that responsibility and how do think it would be funded in the future if hunters decide they aren’t or can’t continue to adequately fund wildlife management?


R.S Bodenhorn

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

smaller engines dont always save money if your foot is on the floor
trying to keep up to speed when the v8 can get and maintain the speed
easier
I have tryed the small engines in my trucks diffrence of a 400 getting3.5
to a 500 hp getting 4.9 miles a gallon
sometimes heavy duty parts cost alittle more because they are made heavyduty not light

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Neither is giving the PGC a license raise or increased income.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

here is example,real life one.

the employees that were on EXPENSE accounts,they got like 32 cents a mile.

guess what most drove,very small cars and small trucks with 4 wheel drive.

now, if a big ole a truck was better, you would think they would be driving one.

roads they were on with company trucks were very nasty too .

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

do you want to pay more for license,you better care .

if cost cutting is not started ion PGC ,then license fee increase is coming.

rendell just said on tv he is going to merge 500 schools into 100 schools.

no money and he cant raise taxes now in this economy.

will the PGC raise license fees in a depression.;)

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

"This bill appears to be just another example of the Legislature coming up with bills that don’t fix any problems and only create new problems. It also shows that they once more believe they know about resource management then professionals in those fields."

No. What it shows is they are TRYING to force the crooks at pgc to be responsible and reign in the rogue agency.For anyone to ever suggest its a BAD IDEA to designate monies for the sole purpose of habitat improvement... THEY ARE OUT OF THEIR GOURD!!! And the fact you agree shows that you are Definately no friend of the hunter.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

when a study shows how they can use a little car to haul a 70000 pound
trailer better then my star let me know

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

[8D]

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

trailer is just idea i threw out.

when we made our 2 year study we had all kinds of reasons WHY it would not work.

old way is hard to break.

but new way is better than being layed off do to expense of a vehicle.
it did work and saved a lot of money and a few jobs.;)

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Time after time RSB posts well written, professional responses and explanations. No matter if one agrees with all of his content, it has to be acknowledged that he does an exemplary job of keeping his temper in the face of repeated realistic questions, repeat questions, stupid questions and of course unfounded allegations and outright irrational attacks. Even the few times he did digress and react badly, he then very professionally explained himself and noted where he could have done better. Look at his posts and then look at the quote above and other Cornelius quotes and decide for yourself, who's OUT OF THEIR GOURD!!! LOL

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

You seem to be kissing his arse after he told hunters to take a flying leap. Oh,Ok, I guess it isn't as badwith him standing on a ladder so you don't have to bend over to do so.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

RSB intentionally misleads and deceives hunters and manipulates data to support his agenda. He was wrong about the B/D ratios, breeding rates recruitment ,the buck harvest and the reason for late born fawns. It is truly hard to believe that a trained wildlife professional could be so wrong about so many things ,especially after the deer have proven him to be consistently wrong.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Those are just your opinions. I think there are a lot of people that disagree with many of your opinions about a lot of things.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

No they are not just my opinions. The PGC data shows breeding rates decreased by 5% rather than increasing, they show buck harvests did not return to normal after ARs, they show the breeding window did not improve and they show the B/D ratio was 1:2.1 before ARs. You used 5 year averages over and over again to disguise the negative impact of HR and you even omitted the 2002 buck harvest data to disguise how many bucks we carried over before ARs. While BTB has accused me of manipulating and distorting the data you are the true master of the art of deception.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

That would be you and a couple people on here, plus all those suckups on HPA. If you and the PGC would start telling the truth, both would get more respect from hunters. Respect is earned, not demanded.

Most of us are at the point, whenever you post, trying to figure out what you have twisted, rather than taking you posts serious. Lately I haven't even looked at your calculations and only read your twisted answers. After that I wait for some on this board, who keep tract of the PGC statistics, to explain what your numbers really mean and how you distorted them.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

"decide for yourself, who's OUT OF THEIR GOURD!!!"

Why Btb of course. But he'll probably blame the tick venom.:D

Rsb, you dont fare so well on a site where pointing out your lies and complete nonsense andproving it DOESNTget a poster banned.;)

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

That too is nothing more then an opinion.

I don’t distort any of the data I always tell everyone exactly what it is and where it came from. As for using five year averages that too is a widely used and even the most accepted way of determining trends since annual data frequently tends to show high or low bias based on the influence from any one or more of many other factors.

You and some others simply don’t like averages because they prove that the trends frequently don’t support what you want people to believe. You continuously make your objections so the appropriate thing is to just allow people to see both sides and make up their minds are to which seems more logical and consistent with their experiences and knowledge.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Can't wait for the 2008-2009 deer harvest numbers come out. That is when you are going to see the all hell distortion come out from PGCs and arse kissers on here. That is when they will be proven wrong about everything they been saying.:D

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

No one is demanding or even asking for respect.

All I am interested in trying to educate the people that read these boards who have enough commonsense to be able to accept the facts as I see them in an effort to have a better future for our resources.

I have spend over thirty years seeing and experience the damage not educating enough people about the real goals and objectives of scientific wildlife management has caused. We have areas that support very few deer as a result of a failure to educate hunters about the affects of nature when they don’t harvest enough deer and I will do all I can to stop that decline in habitat and deer numbers from expanding to even more areas.

I don’t care if anyone respects that or not. If I help one or two people have a better understanding of the affects of under harvest and how devastating it becomes it will be worth putting up with the insults from uneducated, ill-informed and even a few evil minded people.

I think people of average intelligence will be able to figure out which way they want the future of wildlife management to go and who they want shaping that future.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

But it is not used by the very agency you work for and the only reason you use 5 year averages is to disguise the effects of HR. The PGC increased antlerless tags in 2G from 19K in 2006 to 29K in 2007, based on a 40% increase in the buck harvest in 2006. But after 2007 they revised the increase to 6%, but the 2007 harvest reduced the 2G herd by 23%. Five year averages are meaningles, deceutful and misleading when the goal is to reduce the herd by 5% /yr.
That is just pure nonsense. five year trends are meaningless when a biased individual like you select the five year periods they chose to use while omitting years that don't fit their agenda. the decline in the breeding rates are based on 3 year averages ,but only due to lack of adequate data, the decline in the buck harvest is based on yearly harvest data as it should be. the simple fact is that you hitched yourself to a wagon that is too heavy for you to pull because the facts simply don't support your misguided agenda.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Rsb, when the deception within every single comparison or data you present is clearly pointed out, it would take a true fool to believe it. When you compare years, yet leave out the highs and the lows. Or you compare very strategic years that hide the true trends. Or you you try to twist the numbers into meaning the exact opposite of what they mean. Or when you speak badly about hunters on a continual basis...

The only "educating" you are doing is educating people on how extreme your position and how headstrong you are in your mission of treehugger agendas.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Rsb, when the deception within every single comparison or data you present is clearly pointed out, it would take a true fool to believe it. When you compare years, yet leave out the highs and the lows. Or you compare very strategic years that hide the true trends. Or you you try to twist the numbers into meaning the exact opposite of what they mean. Or when you selectively group numbers together of both very high herdyears and very low totake the emphasis off the current lows.... Or when you speak badly about hunters on a continual basis...

The only "educating" you are doing is educating people on how extreme your position and how headstrong you are in your mission of treehugger agendas.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

No that is just the misrepresentation of the facts spin that you and Bluebird use in your attempt to discredit the data since it doesn’t support the opinions you want people to believe.

I don’t leave data out. I generally use five year averages, when there is five years of data to use. I don’t remove any of the high years or the low years. I also use the five years periods, counting backwards from the most current year data was available, and then use each five year period back from that. When we had data that only when up to 2006 I used the years of 82-86, 87-91, 92-96, 97-01 and 02-06. Once the data for 2007 became available I used the years 83-87, 88-92, 93-97, 98-02 and 03-07.

If you consider that to be biased then you obviously have no idea about statistical analysis methods or procedure.

Once again I must say that just because you don’t like the data or that the data doesn’t support your ranting doesn’t mean the data is not accurate or that it is in any way biased. Should you find the data to be incorrect please provide the corrected data. Otherwise all you are doing it blowing smoke and have no data to support your opinions.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Dick, here are the highlights of your post, if anyone wants to read into you hotwinded posts.

1. To be able to accept the facts as I see them.
2.I will do all I can to stop that decline in habitat and deer numbers from expanding.
3. A better understanding of the affects of under harvest.

You refer to the future of hunting all the time, but never say what you expect. Are you afraid to make a prediction because you haven't been correct so far?

It seems you are only concerned about killing deer and growing trees, do you ever think of over harvest? How many deer PSM do you feel is acceptable, in your WMU, before you would consider thinking about over harvest?

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

most i talk to dont care if PGC is funded at all.

like obama said today.PEOPLE ARE LOSING TRUST IN GOVERNMENT,i think same goes for PGC and DCNR.

with deer huntingas it is, i dont see a lot of support with dollars for PGC.

heck, rendell just said he is closing 400 schools in pa.

rsb, to be honest, PGC will have to cut programs and people have to be looked at and LAYED OFF.

republicans just said THEY CUT MONEY GOING TO STATES,so there goes money we need in the new spending plan.

rendell must have known this or he would not have said that 400 schools are closing.
he also said he wants all state jobs to be looked at and cuts made .

so, if hunters are not seeing deer, if habitat is bad,if few fawns,if doe hunting continues with these seasons/tags,i cant see any reason that new money would come to PGC.

but ,who knows, politicians go which ever way wind blows.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

"Once again I must say that just because you don’t like the data or that the data doesn’t support your ranting doesn’t mean the data is not accurate or that it is in any way biased. Should you find the data to be incorrect please provide the corrected data. Otherwise all you are doing it blowing smoke and have no data to support your opinions."

No. Fact is you sir are aliar and fraud. You use dirty underhanded tactics to attempt to appear otherwise, butit cant be done.;)

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

cornelius,i dont agree with RSB on his info at times, some i do.

you go into data that i am not good at, i like reading both sides.

but, can you help out and quit the LIAR stuff.

words like YOU ARE WRONG ,dont you think would be better on here.

i am not sticking up for RSB,its nice him and RWJ do come on here.same with you and others.

we all feel he wants LESS deer and will say there are too many even if you tell him that 15 deer along road in 12 miles is not alot of deer and that does not mean there is 100 deer WAYBACK,now, i gave it too him but i did NOTCALL HIM A ,YOU KNOW WHAT.:)

how about it, keep bringing up your facts but lets keep it to better way of saying things .

heck, he has called me a KNOTHEAD many times but i still say to him, YOU ARE WRONG.;)

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

You mean like claimingthat PA is the best hunting state in the country and you was proven wrong and didn't use your common sense when you posted your info? You admitted that NY was better for hunting than PA was. Does your lies and mis-information educate people,? It just makes them dumber if they don't look for the truth. The ones on HPA are allready stupid from listening to your crap because when someone speaks against it, They are banned. Good way to educate people when they can't here both sides.

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Sproul, I agree it is distasteful to hafta call someone aliar constantly, but if you look in the dictionary, it is ONE WHO LIES. Thats exactly what RSB is. He INTENTIONALLY lies about the situation continually. Im sorry, but thats unacceptable to let pass. If he says things that arent lies, I dont say a word. But if I say hes lying, then Im sorry, but he ISNT telling the truth about something. And I dont call someone a liar for an OPINION. Its only when they completely intentionally and grosslymisrepresent the facts.

Good point explorer Jack. Hundreds if not thousands have been banned over there through the last few years for daring challenge the pgc screw the hunter campaign. Trying to put on a show of support for pgc...Funny thing is, 99% of those voicing their support are pgc employees, retired pgc employees, family members of pgc employees and dcnr guys! (LOL) Thats not guessing either. That comes from taking part in and reading many many conversations!;)

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

jack,this forum is best.

HPA as you know is run by PGC/DCNR WANNABEES:)

it is 1 sided and yes, you will be banned if you dont back the PGC/DCNR in what they are doing.no doubt about that.

just in my area where i live, 4 people were banned from HPA for going against the HR program on their site.

we are very lucky this forum WILL NOT ALLOW THAT TO HAPPEN.;)

thats why JIM SHOCKEY SAID,i heard about this great forum and people over here, i am happy to be a member;)

but ,we have to treat each other with tactful comments, i know i dont like to be called a KNOTHEAD by RSB but without him and RWJ,who would we get to come on here to share our info with.

you know i argue with DOUGE all time it seems, we all know he is backing the side of HR and his facts are not always ,WELL, LETS JUST SAY THEY ARE NOT FACT...

but without him, it would not show what is TRUTH or NOT.

we need to present our info and go after what is not factual but WE MUST USE facts to make our point and do it so we look PROFESSIONAL,we cant call people KNOTHEaDS like i was called,i know i am not but i used my FACTS to win that side of it ,not using BAD WORDS to win.

you guys all have great info, i learned more on here than i ever thought i would..;)

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

my good friend, well, then lets call him a FIBBER,that sounds better, what do you say

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

If you think I said that New York was in general better deer hunting then Pennsylvania your reading comprehension is seriously deficient.

I am sure new York has some great deer hunting in some areas, but statewide they have not even ranked in the top ten during the most recent years of which data was available. Pennsylvania has never dropped below number four in the nation during the same years.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Just because you don’t like the facts that I post, yet can’t ever seem to come up with any supporting facts to rebut, that doesn’t make it a lie. I lie is something that can be proven to be false. You have never proven anything to be false. You just continuously post your opinions about how it can’t be true because it isn’t what you want to believe. If you find something to be false then prove some supporting facts instead of just your opinions and perceptions.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Hey Sproul I spent the day in North Bend and saw a number of deer (a couple dozen at least) along and out on the ice of the river between Renovo and Emporium, in both counties, on my way home this evening.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

thats means there are HUNDREDS of deer WAYBACK ,yep, WAYBACK

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Actually it probable means the deer are pretty seriously stressed right now from the winter conditions. They are walking on the ice to save energy instead of pushing through the snow as they try to find enough food to survive and produce fawns that can survive after being born next spring.

But, then I was surprised how little snow you have down there compared to what we have.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

my truck is stuck in woods as we speak.

what a day, i was out feeding deer and ran into 3 ft of snow in woods.

what you are seeing is not what is in woods here.

WE ARE LEAVING AT 7 AM TO DIG IT OUT[:@]


as for stressed deer,I AM NOT SEEING IT but the PGC/DCNR WANNABEES are seeing lots of dead deer in clinton.

funny, they always are seeing things we dont see,

RE: How should Wildlife Management be funded?
 

Since when do deer have the choice of walking on snow versus walking on ice or is the ice snow covered? The largest winter deer mortality in recent history occurred due to deer being forced to walk on ice!!!