bowtruck

Now as the lazy slob hunters NOT . Sounds like poor excuse fellas .
I wanted xbows ,but didnt like how they approved them when so many voiced that they didnt.
But now they are approved or wait maybe now we should but more clauses in.
No i think anyone on the board that changes mind nowshould get told no and firerd.

Buck Hunter 1

Bowtruck, I really thought you would be on the CO8 side of radical. Different way of looking at it, but thoughtful.

BTBowhunter

Spot on bowtruck!

If I was sure that this thing would definitely not lead to a shorter bow season, I'd be behind that 100% but we have no assurance that if the crossbow increases the bow harvest, that it wont lead to a shorter bow season for everyone.

Bad enough that they crammed it down our throats, the one thing that would make that easier to live with is a way to back out the crossbows if they cause a spike in the archery harvest. there needs to be a way to give it it's own season if it proves to be a problem in the bow season.

Cornelius08

...and I vote they start it the first Monday after thanksgiving, where they belong.

Imho I believe the kill will definately be higher than it would be without. Added opportunity = added kill. Pretty much a given Id say. Therefore, the herd will be somewhat smaller, and the buck quality will beto someunknown yet extentpoorer. May be slight. May be significant in time with increased acceptance and usage. Those are the obvious effects, even if worst case scenario of shortening archery doesnt take place. I think despite any percieved maleffects to the herd, theyd most likely be branded as "acceptable", since they would only somewhat effect hunter satisfaction, and not be a "biological" concern, but I dont find that a reason to celebrate, as the cost isnt worth it imho.

These are my feelings on the issue, but doesnt really matter, as Ive said, I dont believe anything will come of this. They are most likely here, like it or not. I have learned a bit about weiner though, and give him a thumbs up. Not just for being against crossbows, but being passionate about "hunting" enough to care. If he were one of the ecoweiners, theyd most likely not care one way or the other, but support xbows just to kill more deer par for the course, and gaining more tag money. Wether you agree with him or not, could be a premature assessment but it appears he at least does care as a "hunter".

blkpowder

When the PGC first announced they will be taking comments from the public about full inclusion of crossbows,I sent an e-mail to everyone on the voting panel. I also got a response back from all but one! Schleiden was the only one who didn't return a comment from my e-mail. But just as Steel pointed out,For or against full inclusion and you DIDN'T respond on how you felt. Then shame on you for just sitting on your arse and saying nothing. So as BTB pointed out, those who DID respond. It was counted 4 to 1 AGAINST. Now,those on the voting panel against full inclusion,DID NOT want to deny anyone of hunting opportunities. They just wanted to take it slow and see what kind of impact(if any) crossbows are going have on the deer harvest. I think that is fair! For those who want to point out that this state or that state has had full inclusion,I don't want to hear it! This is Pa. I live and hunt in Pa. My concern is what happens in Pa. Now, I wish also to be fair on another issue. "If" it gets voted back to two weeks? What two weeksare really fair? The first two,the first and last week of October. The opening week and the very last week? What is fair and how should the weeks be determined?[/align]

Buck Hunter 1

Fact of the matter, it is in and doing so has locked it 'splace in PA history like the Compound inclusion way back when. Even went so far as to have legislative action to include magnifiying devices added to the bill. If it does for some reason get voted out, then again look at your Board and what they can do w/ your votes and ideas. In/Out and each one can then say "I truly care about the sportspeople in PA". I beleive it is a done deal and over ! If I'm wrong beware the Board that rescinds and changes directions so quickly, is that being cautious and forthright or simply responding to a hot button to be seen as 'good guys'? This just is not as big an issue as has been portrayed on this forum, it is miniscule in the over all scope of issues in PA and nit's Game Mangement programs. So my question is if they now vote down or downgrade the time in the woods allowed by law currently for Xbow hunting, is it okay to raise the license fee seeing their such caring guys and all?????

Maverick 1

I am curious, do you fellows consider crossbows to be archery equipment? If not, what is your definition of archery equipment?

Cornelius08

I think you have it backwards buckhuner1. Most were concerned crossbows were legalized in the first place in an attempt to get a fee increase. Some of the LEGISLATORS who are responsible for granting fee increases wanted crossbows legalized.

Therefore, those who voted NO on the crossbows, put their beliefs first over cash. Lets take two from each side.... who do you think in hindsite cares more about slaughtering more deer and having more cash to contine?? Schleiden + Pallone......Or Weiner and Boop!Schleiden and Pallone are gone. I hope its not overly optimistic to hope that decent commissioners will replace the clowns, but if they do, im sure we would then see many changes.

Buck Hunter 1

CO*, so again I ask if a change is made or if this stays on the books as is, is it okay toi increase your license fees because they care? I guess i am thinking the way you guys attacked this it seems this single issue will save the deer and the PGC from bankruptcy and decimation. I do not see the attacks going on for the other issues / problems w/ the PGC/Board as we know is out there hammering us.

Cornelius08

"CO*, so again I ask if a change is made or if this stays on the books as is, is it okay toi increase your license fees because they care?"

Not sure how that became the issue?? All I said about "caring"was it appears weiner cares as attested to by his passion and "bucking the trend"...and maybe that will help with future decisions on other topics???. He isnt the majority of the board, and I never said anything about the majority of theboard. Also, pgc isnt beingdenied a fee increase because they care or dont care. Its due to the deer situation. And no, I dont support a fee increaseright now, crossbow or no crossbow until responsible change is made to the deer plan as it should be. Or at the very least, would consider supporting if an unbiased clearcut audit is conducting, addressing our real problems and is adhered to by pgc. At any rate, it appears they arent going to get one until and audit is completed. Then from there, who knows what will happen.

"I guess i am thinking the way you guys attacked this it seems this single issue will save the deer and the PGC from bankruptcy and decimation. I do not see the attacks going on for the other issues / problems w/ the PGC/Board as we know is out there hammering us. "

I consider the "deer debacle" to be a bigger concern, and we talk about it often, however that doesnt mean any of us have to turn a blind eye to other issues that we also consider important.