PA deer Audit becomes bigger sham by the day!!
06-07-2009, 06:39 AM
#1
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
PA deer Audit becomes bigger sham by the day!!
http://www.centredaily.com/sports/story/1330969.html
Critics of the Pennsylvania Game Commission have long requested that an outside agency investigate the commission’s deer program. The long-awaited deer audit is about to take place.
For the CDT/Mark Nale
While the number of deer is at the heart of Pennsylvania’s “Deer Wars,” the deer audit will not necessarily address this issue. The audit, however, will evaluate PGC’s liberal use of antlerless permits.
Pennsylvania House Resolution 642, passed last April, directs the Legislative Budget and Finance Committee to conduct an independent third-party, science-based evaluation of the Pennsylvania Game Commission’s deer management program and practices.
The contract to perform the PGC deer audit was awarded to Wildlife Management Institute, a non-profit group. They were formerly headquartered in Washington, D.C., and are currently operating out of three field offices. The Wildlife Management Institute has a long history of doing state agency reviews. They have conducted 70 such audits during their nearly 100-year history. The agreement, signed in late May, will pay WMI $90,215 for conducting their independent evaluation of the commission’s deer management programs.
I was curious as to exactly how such an audit would be conducted and when it would be finished, so I contacted the house Budget and Finance Committee as well as the Wildlife Management Institute to learn the details.
The audit’s scope and depth is determined by a Request for Proposals sent out by the Budget and Finance Committee in June 2008. The five-page document, along with the attached resolution, directs would-be applicants to focus their investigation on answering 15 questions dealing with the PGC’s deer population estimates, the size of wildlife management units, the PGC’s use of deer embryo data, deer health, habitat health, forest regeneration, deer/human conflicts and other issues. The RFP also asks that the audit compare Pennsylvania’s deer management practices to those used by other deer states and to determine what, if any, of their best practices should be used in Pennsylvania.
“We welcome the science-based study and are pleased that it will be accomplished by an entity outside the Commonwealth, one that will have considerable expertise in the appropriate fields,” PGC press secretary Jerry Feaser said.
Advertisement
According to Wildlife Management Institute vice president Scot Williamson, who will be the lead biologist on the independent audit, the process is now underway.
“We are in the final stages of drawing up a request for documentation — a list of information to be supplied by the Game Commission for our audit,” Williamson said. “Some of the information should be easily supplied, while other data will take some time for the agency to assemble.”
Williamson will lead a team of at least two institute staff members and five sub-contracted experts. Team members hail from the states of Colorado, Georgia, Ohio, Vermont and West Virginia. None are from Pennsylvania.
To insure impartiality, the Budget and Finance Committee wanted to select a non-Pennsylvania company. While WMI fits that bill, critics are pointing out that the institute worked for the PGC in 1999, and two of its board members also have Pennsylvania connections.
Peter Duncan, former executive director of the Pennsylvania Game Commission and retired Deputy Commissioner of the NY Department of Environmental Conservation, is the vice-chair of the board. In his long resumé, WMI board member and president Steve Williams lists that he had previously served as deputy executive director for the PGC.
Williamson responded when queried about WMI’s “connections” to Pennsylvania and if they might taint the Institute’s objectivity.
“We have a long-standing history of doing agency reviews, he said. “We are independent and objective — not a membership organization.
“Our board of directors will not have a direct input into the project. They provide oversight on finance, approve our mission and our business model.”
According to Williamson, WMI will review the data that is supplied by the commission and then meet with agency personnel during the summer to get any needed clarification or request additional information.
“We need to know enough about their techniques and methods to know what questions to ask,” Williamson said. “We will then use our own experience, published scientific literature and the methods that other states use to evaluate Pennsylvania’s deer program. Every state agency uses the literature to guide their management process. Pennsylvania is unique in that they have been able to do the science within the borders of the commonwealth. During the audit process, we will look at all of their deer studies.”
If some hunters are expecting the institute to provide an exact count of Pennsylvania’s deer, a question long-asked by the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania, they might be disappointed.
“We are not going out in the field to count deer,” Williamson said. “There will be no independent population survey. We will look at the Commission’s data and the quality of the data and ask if it is defensible and reliable. If their data is up to the task, we will make a population estimate and indicate a level of confidence in the estimate. If the confidence level is too wide, the estimate won’t be worth the paper that it is printed on.
“We are also not going to tell you how many deer you should have; that is for the citizens of the commonwealth to decide,” Williamson continued. “We will look at your deer population goals. Are they responsive, measurable and based on a set of inputs that the public can understand? Does the PGC’s use of antlerless permits serve to move the deer herd towards that goal? We’ll also study their evaluations of deer health, commonwealth interests and forest regeneration.”
Although WMI has until February to complete their evaluation and submit a report, Williamson hopes that the process will be completed long before that.
“I’m the kind of person who likes to jump into a new project, immerse myself and get the job done,” Williamson said. “My expectation and goal would be to get busy and have the audit finished by the end of summer.”
Of course, part of the time factor depends on how quickly the PGC moves to supply the needed data to WMI. According to Feaser, his agency plans to “fully cooperate with the audit team.”
Mark Nale, who lives in the Bald Eagle Valley, is a member of the PA Outdoor Writers Association. He can be reached at [email protected].
http://www.centredaily.com/sports/st...xzz0HktTiQWV&D
Critics of the Pennsylvania Game Commission have long requested that an outside agency investigate the commission’s deer program. The long-awaited deer audit is about to take place.
For the CDT/Mark Nale
While the number of deer is at the heart of Pennsylvania’s “Deer Wars,” the deer audit will not necessarily address this issue. The audit, however, will evaluate PGC’s liberal use of antlerless permits.
Pennsylvania House Resolution 642, passed last April, directs the Legislative Budget and Finance Committee to conduct an independent third-party, science-based evaluation of the Pennsylvania Game Commission’s deer management program and practices.
The contract to perform the PGC deer audit was awarded to Wildlife Management Institute, a non-profit group. They were formerly headquartered in Washington, D.C., and are currently operating out of three field offices. The Wildlife Management Institute has a long history of doing state agency reviews. They have conducted 70 such audits during their nearly 100-year history. The agreement, signed in late May, will pay WMI $90,215 for conducting their independent evaluation of the commission’s deer management programs.
I was curious as to exactly how such an audit would be conducted and when it would be finished, so I contacted the house Budget and Finance Committee as well as the Wildlife Management Institute to learn the details.
The audit’s scope and depth is determined by a Request for Proposals sent out by the Budget and Finance Committee in June 2008. The five-page document, along with the attached resolution, directs would-be applicants to focus their investigation on answering 15 questions dealing with the PGC’s deer population estimates, the size of wildlife management units, the PGC’s use of deer embryo data, deer health, habitat health, forest regeneration, deer/human conflicts and other issues. The RFP also asks that the audit compare Pennsylvania’s deer management practices to those used by other deer states and to determine what, if any, of their best practices should be used in Pennsylvania.
“We welcome the science-based study and are pleased that it will be accomplished by an entity outside the Commonwealth, one that will have considerable expertise in the appropriate fields,” PGC press secretary Jerry Feaser said.
Advertisement
According to Wildlife Management Institute vice president Scot Williamson, who will be the lead biologist on the independent audit, the process is now underway.
“We are in the final stages of drawing up a request for documentation — a list of information to be supplied by the Game Commission for our audit,” Williamson said. “Some of the information should be easily supplied, while other data will take some time for the agency to assemble.”
Williamson will lead a team of at least two institute staff members and five sub-contracted experts. Team members hail from the states of Colorado, Georgia, Ohio, Vermont and West Virginia. None are from Pennsylvania.
To insure impartiality, the Budget and Finance Committee wanted to select a non-Pennsylvania company. While WMI fits that bill, critics are pointing out that the institute worked for the PGC in 1999, and two of its board members also have Pennsylvania connections.
Peter Duncan, former executive director of the Pennsylvania Game Commission and retired Deputy Commissioner of the NY Department of Environmental Conservation, is the vice-chair of the board. In his long resumé, WMI board member and president Steve Williams lists that he had previously served as deputy executive director for the PGC.
Williamson responded when queried about WMI’s “connections” to Pennsylvania and if they might taint the Institute’s objectivity.
“We have a long-standing history of doing agency reviews, he said. “We are independent and objective — not a membership organization.
“Our board of directors will not have a direct input into the project. They provide oversight on finance, approve our mission and our business model.”
According to Williamson, WMI will review the data that is supplied by the commission and then meet with agency personnel during the summer to get any needed clarification or request additional information.
“We need to know enough about their techniques and methods to know what questions to ask,” Williamson said. “We will then use our own experience, published scientific literature and the methods that other states use to evaluate Pennsylvania’s deer program. Every state agency uses the literature to guide their management process. Pennsylvania is unique in that they have been able to do the science within the borders of the commonwealth. During the audit process, we will look at all of their deer studies.”
If some hunters are expecting the institute to provide an exact count of Pennsylvania’s deer, a question long-asked by the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania, they might be disappointed.
“We are not going out in the field to count deer,” Williamson said. “There will be no independent population survey. We will look at the Commission’s data and the quality of the data and ask if it is defensible and reliable. If their data is up to the task, we will make a population estimate and indicate a level of confidence in the estimate. If the confidence level is too wide, the estimate won’t be worth the paper that it is printed on.
“We are also not going to tell you how many deer you should have; that is for the citizens of the commonwealth to decide,” Williamson continued. “We will look at your deer population goals. Are they responsive, measurable and based on a set of inputs that the public can understand? Does the PGC’s use of antlerless permits serve to move the deer herd towards that goal? We’ll also study their evaluations of deer health, commonwealth interests and forest regeneration.”
Although WMI has until February to complete their evaluation and submit a report, Williamson hopes that the process will be completed long before that.
“I’m the kind of person who likes to jump into a new project, immerse myself and get the job done,” Williamson said. “My expectation and goal would be to get busy and have the audit finished by the end of summer.”
Of course, part of the time factor depends on how quickly the PGC moves to supply the needed data to WMI. According to Feaser, his agency plans to “fully cooperate with the audit team.”
Mark Nale, who lives in the Bald Eagle Valley, is a member of the PA Outdoor Writers Association. He can be reached at [email protected].
http://www.centredaily.com/sports/st...xzz0HktTiQWV&D
06-07-2009, 06:51 AM
#2
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
RE: PA deer Audit becomes bigger sham by the day!!
What a joke. Look how quickly this is to be rubber stamped....By the end of summer?? 3 MONTHS!!! Why bother going even that long LMAO! To wield a rubber stamp takes but seconds. Pgc could have thier license fee increase ensured for next year by early this evening Id imagine.[:'(]
Then we have this beauty:
"We are also not going to tell you how many deer you should have; that is for the citizens of the commonwealth to decide,”
SO the problem WILL NOT be addressed!! I didnt expect them to give exact numbers, but The citizens are NOT deciding. PGC is. With input from timber and econuts. Ballpark figures shouldve been at least suggested for various ALTERNATE venues, for example, "if more hunter satisfaction is desired, though not counter to goals of habitat health etc, we would suggest increasing the deer herd in wmu 2z, but not to exceed 15% increase."...
"Williamson continued. “We will look at your deer population goals. Are they responsive, measurable and based on a set of inputs that the public can understand?"
Can the public understand??? Of course they can, WMI themselves are at least partially responsible for the pr behind this sham program in the first place!!! Having already been consulted by pgc for that purpose!
" Does the PGC’s use of antlerless permits serve to move the deer herd towards that goal?"
Of course it does!!! Kill more deer for the ridiculous goals. The goals are in large part the problem in the first place!!
" We’ll also study their evaluations of deer health, commonwealth interests and forest regeneration.”
And what of hunter best interests???
This audit is being done because of huge disatisfaction level among HUNTERS, yet it doesnt seem as if it will address HUNTERS as the main complaintant.
Boys prepared to be hosed.
And not only did pgc work with wmi on MORE THAN ONE occassion, have idiot bryon shissler, pgc deer management team member and our newest pgc commissioner, Putnam, work for them... According to the article, Peter Duncan, FORMER PGC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR is the vice chairman at wmi!!! And another board member, Steve Williams...was deputy executive director at pgc. LMFAO! Yeah, this is R-e-e-e-e-eal unbiased and legitimate! LMAO!
Then we have this beauty:
"We are also not going to tell you how many deer you should have; that is for the citizens of the commonwealth to decide,”
SO the problem WILL NOT be addressed!! I didnt expect them to give exact numbers, but The citizens are NOT deciding. PGC is. With input from timber and econuts. Ballpark figures shouldve been at least suggested for various ALTERNATE venues, for example, "if more hunter satisfaction is desired, though not counter to goals of habitat health etc, we would suggest increasing the deer herd in wmu 2z, but not to exceed 15% increase."...
"Williamson continued. “We will look at your deer population goals. Are they responsive, measurable and based on a set of inputs that the public can understand?"
Can the public understand??? Of course they can, WMI themselves are at least partially responsible for the pr behind this sham program in the first place!!! Having already been consulted by pgc for that purpose!
" Does the PGC’s use of antlerless permits serve to move the deer herd towards that goal?"
Of course it does!!! Kill more deer for the ridiculous goals. The goals are in large part the problem in the first place!!
" We’ll also study their evaluations of deer health, commonwealth interests and forest regeneration.”
And what of hunter best interests???
This audit is being done because of huge disatisfaction level among HUNTERS, yet it doesnt seem as if it will address HUNTERS as the main complaintant.
Boys prepared to be hosed.
And not only did pgc work with wmi on MORE THAN ONE occassion, have idiot bryon shissler, pgc deer management team member and our newest pgc commissioner, Putnam, work for them... According to the article, Peter Duncan, FORMER PGC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR is the vice chairman at wmi!!! And another board member, Steve Williams...was deputy executive director at pgc. LMFAO! Yeah, this is R-e-e-e-e-eal unbiased and legitimate! LMAO!
06-07-2009, 10:54 AM
#3
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
RE: PA deer Audit becomes bigger sham by the day!!
....And now for the funny part.
Scot Williamson.... You know, the lead biologist on to do this project?...and Vice president at wmi!!.....Well just who is he?? Here is some info on him from the Pa game commission website.
"HARRISBURG - Two years after presenting its recommendations on deer management changes to the Pennsylvania Board of Game Commissioners, Scot J. Williamson, former chairman of the Game Commission's Deer Management Working Group (DMWG), came back to offer an appraisal of the agency's progress at implementing DMWG recommendations."
What a &^%$# joke!!! LMFAO. Are these arsehole sobs for real?? Pgcs own AGAIN???[:'(]
Scot Williamson.... You know, the lead biologist on to do this project?...and Vice president at wmi!!.....Well just who is he?? Here is some info on him from the Pa game commission website.
"HARRISBURG - Two years after presenting its recommendations on deer management changes to the Pennsylvania Board of Game Commissioners, Scot J. Williamson, former chairman of the Game Commission's Deer Management Working Group (DMWG), came back to offer an appraisal of the agency's progress at implementing DMWG recommendations."
What a &^%$# joke!!! LMFAO. Are these arsehole sobs for real?? Pgcs own AGAIN???[:'(]
06-10-2009, 02:36 PM
#5
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
RE: PA deer Audit becomes bigger sham by the day!!
You know its bad when you type in deer management in a search engine for a state and half the results are about the need for more trillium and hobblebush.
Ive done searches for just about every whitetail state in the country at various times just studying up, looking into other states to hunt, or compare management to pa's etc, and apparently we are blessed with more ecoextremist idiots than anywhere else in the nation!
IF someone told me 25 years ago that these "type" would be controlling things, Id have said they were crazy....Not in Pa![8D]
Ive done searches for just about every whitetail state in the country at various times just studying up, looking into other states to hunt, or compare management to pa's etc, and apparently we are blessed with more ecoextremist idiots than anywhere else in the nation!
IF someone told me 25 years ago that these "type" would be controlling things, Id have said they were crazy....Not in Pa![8D]
06-10-2009, 03:05 PM
#6
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
RE: PA deer Audit becomes bigger sham by the day!!
Would you please provide a link to the quote. I would like to use it on another MB and ut would be helpful to have the exact time line . Thanks.
ORIGINAL: Cornelius08
....And now for the funny part.
Scot Williamson.... You know, the lead biologist on to do this project?...and Vice president at wmi!!.....Well just who is he?? Here is some info on him from the Pa game commission website.
"HARRISBURG - Two years after presenting its recommendations on deer management changes to the Pennsylvania Board of Game Commissioners, Scot J. Williamson, former chairman of the Game Commission's Deer Management Working Group (DMWG), came back to offer an appraisal of the agency's progress at implementing DMWG recommendations."
What a &^%$# joke!!! LMFAO. Are these arsehole sobs for real?? Pgcs own AGAIN???[:'(]
....And now for the funny part.
Scot Williamson.... You know, the lead biologist on to do this project?...and Vice president at wmi!!.....Well just who is he?? Here is some info on him from the Pa game commission website.
"HARRISBURG - Two years after presenting its recommendations on deer management changes to the Pennsylvania Board of Game Commissioners, Scot J. Williamson, former chairman of the Game Commission's Deer Management Working Group (DMWG), came back to offer an appraisal of the agency's progress at implementing DMWG recommendations."
What a &^%$# joke!!! LMFAO. Are these arsehole sobs for real?? Pgcs own AGAIN???[:'(]
06-11-2009, 09:03 AM
#7
Typical Buck
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 659
RE: PA deer Audit becomes bigger sham by the day!!
You know.....if you are given the chance to grade your own term paper, and you don't get an A....then it's your own fault! At this point I say the hell with the bloody audit. It cannot possible get any more biased or canned outcome. Has anyone at WMI not worked for PGC (or been promised a chair seat after they retire from PGC!) To even let it proceed now is a giant slap in the face to the entire commonwealth. I'd rather go back to whining about needing an audit, than get the big atta boy outcome and rubber stamp that we all know is coming![:@]
06-11-2009, 09:28 AM
#8
Spike
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 64
RE: PA deer Audit becomes bigger sham by the day!!
I see the conspiracies abound here. Catchy thread title. Your the same guy who posts this on some of the few websites your still allowed in within PA., huh guru. I guess your hoping someone will sympathize with you in your last ditch effort to be able to slam the pgc about their deer management before the truth comes out. Even the die-hard pgc bashers who begged for this audit to be done are happy and have publicly stated that WMI was the best choice to have a fair.
"On behalf of the Unified Sportsmen of PA, please allow me to inform you of their decision to support the Wildlife Management Institute as the most logical choice to perform this critical audit of the PGC's deer management program.
Of the three recent responses to your RFP, the Wildlife Management Institute is obviously the best choice. USP recognizes WMI as a professional, qualified and responsible organization. About eight years ago the WMI performed quite admirably managing what was then called the "Deer Management Working Group". Dr. Bolgiano was a member of that group and acquired a great deal of respect for WMI.
WMI is national in their efforts and expertise and staffed with some of the most respected names in the nation. USP has total confidence WMI will approach and execute this audit in the most professional manner possible."
And now here you are trying to discredit the audit despite the effort to make it as fair and unbiased as possible thruout the whole process. What is it you are afraid of? You've only succeeded in illustrating that no matter what, who, when, and where looks at the pgc's plan that you'll deny the results if they're anything other than your preconcived conclusion that you already have and most likely have had for the past decade.
Is it lonely where your at guru?
"On behalf of the Unified Sportsmen of PA, please allow me to inform you of their decision to support the Wildlife Management Institute as the most logical choice to perform this critical audit of the PGC's deer management program.
Of the three recent responses to your RFP, the Wildlife Management Institute is obviously the best choice. USP recognizes WMI as a professional, qualified and responsible organization. About eight years ago the WMI performed quite admirably managing what was then called the "Deer Management Working Group". Dr. Bolgiano was a member of that group and acquired a great deal of respect for WMI.
WMI is national in their efforts and expertise and staffed with some of the most respected names in the nation. USP has total confidence WMI will approach and execute this audit in the most professional manner possible."
And now here you are trying to discredit the audit despite the effort to make it as fair and unbiased as possible thruout the whole process. What is it you are afraid of? You've only succeeded in illustrating that no matter what, who, when, and where looks at the pgc's plan that you'll deny the results if they're anything other than your preconcived conclusion that you already have and most likely have had for the past decade.
Is it lonely where your at guru?
06-11-2009, 11:39 AM
#9
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
RE: PA deer Audit becomes bigger sham by the day!!
"I see the conspiracies abound here. Catchy thread title. Your the same guy who posts this on some of the few websites your still allowed in within PA., huh guru."
I post on several boards. Ive been booted from hpa. But just by knowing my position of anti-pgc deer plan, you already knew that Im sure. Same one 1000's of other pgc nonsupporters have been booted from. Though Im still a member which Im sure will bring you joy in knowing. Though I do not post much on that pgc/dcnr/econut website. Well known for their tolerance of "anti-deer plan" views! LMAO!!!
Btw, which of the several hpa cronies am I replying to, and which is YOUR angle...One of 3 without a doubt dcnr guy, pgc hardcore employee/friend family member of, or econut/audubon joker???? ...Lemme guess, NONE OF THE ABOVE! LMAO!! yeah right..
Not sure which of the devote little damage control crew from HPA you are, sorry, but I do not recall "meathunter" on the pgc arse-kiss board!
" I guess your hoping someone will sympathize with you "
I never seek sympathy. I simply state the facts and echo the feelings of the majority of Pas SPORTSMEN. Those that love pgc about as much as they do a good case of apendicitis.
"On behalf of the Unified Sportsmen of PA, please allow me to inform you of their decision to support the Wildlife Management Institute as the most logical choice to perform this critical audit of the PGC's deer management program.
Of the three recent responses to your RFP, the Wildlife Management Institute is obviously the best choice. USP recognizes WMI as a professional, qualified and responsible organization. About eight years ago the WMI performed quite admirably managing what was then called the "Deer Management Working Group". Dr. Bolgiano was a member of that group and acquired a great deal of respect for WMI.
WMI is national in their efforts and expertise and staffed with some of the most respected names in the nation. USP has total confidence WMI will approach and execute this audit in the most professional manner possible."
Congratulatins. I guess your views are more in line with USP's than mine are.
I post on several boards. Ive been booted from hpa. But just by knowing my position of anti-pgc deer plan, you already knew that Im sure. Same one 1000's of other pgc nonsupporters have been booted from. Though Im still a member which Im sure will bring you joy in knowing. Though I do not post much on that pgc/dcnr/econut website. Well known for their tolerance of "anti-deer plan" views! LMAO!!!
Btw, which of the several hpa cronies am I replying to, and which is YOUR angle...One of 3 without a doubt dcnr guy, pgc hardcore employee/friend family member of, or econut/audubon joker???? ...Lemme guess, NONE OF THE ABOVE! LMAO!! yeah right..
Not sure which of the devote little damage control crew from HPA you are, sorry, but I do not recall "meathunter" on the pgc arse-kiss board!
" I guess your hoping someone will sympathize with you "
I never seek sympathy. I simply state the facts and echo the feelings of the majority of Pas SPORTSMEN. Those that love pgc about as much as they do a good case of apendicitis.
"On behalf of the Unified Sportsmen of PA, please allow me to inform you of their decision to support the Wildlife Management Institute as the most logical choice to perform this critical audit of the PGC's deer management program.
Of the three recent responses to your RFP, the Wildlife Management Institute is obviously the best choice. USP recognizes WMI as a professional, qualified and responsible organization. About eight years ago the WMI performed quite admirably managing what was then called the "Deer Management Working Group". Dr. Bolgiano was a member of that group and acquired a great deal of respect for WMI.
WMI is national in their efforts and expertise and staffed with some of the most respected names in the nation. USP has total confidence WMI will approach and execute this audit in the most professional manner possible."
Congratulatins. I guess your views are more in line with USP's than mine are.
