Oops,Changes you would like for Pa.Hunting Season
#61
I think it's a very good idea blkpowder. No report no license.
One drawback might be that us old guys might have trouble remembering details like dates etc a year after if they want that stuff.
Maybe online or phone in reports either upon harvest or at seasons end with a computerized backup the next license buying season for those who forget.
IE:
1 report kills within 24 hours online or via phone
2 report due at end of season by phone or online even if no harvest
3 reporting either way gets you a confirmation number.
4 Next season, when you go to buy your license, if you didnt do those things above, your application gets flagged and you mustpay an extra fee (say $10 bucks or so) for the late report and report your harvest right then, right there before getting a license.
There'd be some learning curve time of, course, but I'd bet it could be running like a watch within 2-3 years with the proper POS license system in place.
We'd have virtually 100% accuracy with a minimum of expense. Maybe it would even save considerable $$When we consider how much time money and effort is currently expended checking processors and determining our abysmal reporting rate, one can't help think that it could save money too!
One drawback might be that us old guys might have trouble remembering details like dates etc a year after if they want that stuff.
Maybe online or phone in reports either upon harvest or at seasons end with a computerized backup the next license buying season for those who forget.
IE:
1 report kills within 24 hours online or via phone
2 report due at end of season by phone or online even if no harvest
3 reporting either way gets you a confirmation number.
4 Next season, when you go to buy your license, if you didnt do those things above, your application gets flagged and you mustpay an extra fee (say $10 bucks or so) for the late report and report your harvest right then, right there before getting a license.
There'd be some learning curve time of, course, but I'd bet it could be running like a watch within 2-3 years with the proper POS license system in place.
We'd have virtually 100% accuracy with a minimum of expense. Maybe it would even save considerable $$When we consider how much time money and effort is currently expended checking processors and determining our abysmal reporting rate, one can't help think that it could save money too!
#62
1 report kills within 24 hours online or via phone
2 report due at end of season by phone or online even if no harvest
3 reporting either way gets you a confirmation number.
4 Next season, when you go to buy your license, if you didnt do those things above, your application gets flagged and you mustpay an extra fee (say $10 bucks or so) for the late report and report your harvest right then, right there before getting a license.
There'd be some learning curve time of, course, but I'd bet it could be running like a watch within 2-3 years with the proper POS license system in place.
BTB,I think that would work very well. That having to pay extra if you get flagged, would be theinitiative tomake hunters report.[/align]
2 report due at end of season by phone or online even if no harvest
3 reporting either way gets you a confirmation number.
4 Next season, when you go to buy your license, if you didnt do those things above, your application gets flagged and you mustpay an extra fee (say $10 bucks or so) for the late report and report your harvest right then, right there before getting a license.
There'd be some learning curve time of, course, but I'd bet it could be running like a watch within 2-3 years with the proper POS license system in place.
BTB,I think that would work very well. That having to pay extra if you get flagged, would be theinitiative tomake hunters report.[/align]
#63
Why not make hunters pay a deposit up front. Make it $10, $30, or $50 or whatever you want. Make it payable when the license is purchased. Then, you don't get your deposit back until after you have made your report.
#64
That will also work Maverick. However it's done,it will only be the fear of having to pay more that will make them fill a report.[/align]
#65
On line would be the easiest and cheapest, and for all of you that want check stations forget about it, its a dumb expensive ,time and energy wasting failure that just does not need tried.
Incentives will help but I'm not sure what is incentive enough?
Incentives will help but I'm not sure what is incentive enough?

#66
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
What good is knowing how many dead dear there is when they don't know how many live deer we have? You have to have an estimate before the number of dead deer will actual have a reason to do it. So that talk about the mumbo jumbo of reports is bull crap without an estimate number to begin with.They won't give you a number of deer because they don't have a clue or they want you to be clueless as they continue the deer slaughter to make you believe there are more deer than we can kill with all the deer tags being given out. 2G was cut in half for does for one reason and only one reason. To cover their asses when the deer harvest numbers plumetted to a way below harvest number from previous years. Now they have an excuse to cover their screwed up yet successful deer slaughter plan. There are alot of idiotic fools on here who believe as many believe that iraq was the reason for 911 and we must destroy them. Oh the sheeple that live and breed in this country and state is a shame.
#67
ORIGINAL: scorp
What good is knowing how many dead dear there is when they don't know how many live deer we have? You have to have an estimate before the number of dead deer will actual have a reason to do it. So that talk about the mumbo jumbo of reports is bull crap without an estimate number to begin with.They won't give you a number of deer because they don't have a clue or they want you to be clueless as they continue the deer slaughter to make you believe there are more deer than we can kill with all the deer tags being given out. 2G was cut in half for does for one reason and only one reason. To cover their asses when the deer harvest numbers plumetted to a way below harvest number from previous years. Now they have an excuse to cover their screwed up yet successful deer slaughter plan. There are alot of idiotic fools on here who believe as many believe that iraq was the reason for 911 and we must destroy them. Oh the sheeple that live and breed in this country and state is a shame.
What good is knowing how many dead dear there is when they don't know how many live deer we have? You have to have an estimate before the number of dead deer will actual have a reason to do it. So that talk about the mumbo jumbo of reports is bull crap without an estimate number to begin with.They won't give you a number of deer because they don't have a clue or they want you to be clueless as they continue the deer slaughter to make you believe there are more deer than we can kill with all the deer tags being given out. 2G was cut in half for does for one reason and only one reason. To cover their asses when the deer harvest numbers plumetted to a way below harvest number from previous years. Now they have an excuse to cover their screwed up yet successful deer slaughter plan. There are alot of idiotic fools on here who believe as many believe that iraq was the reason for 911 and we must destroy them. Oh the sheeple that live and breed in this country and state is a shame.

I've heard others speak of this 2F .Or is 2G?

#68
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Serious,Its a waiste of time and energy to do a harvest when you have no idea how many deer you have. The only thing it is proving is that the herd is being reduced every year and it is not stabalizing or increasing. If you can't see that or anyone else for that matter, I feel sorry for you and the future generation if people are allowed to breed with that way of thinking. Again,what good is a harvest report if the PGC is not doing anything to it's response? Herd decreases yet the PGC still hands out deer tags. Smart bunch of people. NOT
#70
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
ORIGINAL: bawanajim
I heard some where that the P.G.C. wanted the herd reduced.[:-]Some thing about forest regeneration I think.
I heard some where that the P.G.C. wanted the herd reduced.[:-]Some thing about forest regeneration I think.


