HOW...do we get the changes we need in PA?
12-17-2009, 07:32 AM
#1
Typical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 659
HOW...do we get the changes we need in PA?
It's pretty much majority agreement that the changes need to come. It's also common agreement on what those changes are/ need to be. Next step, and most difficult is what to do about it, which course of action to pursue. Harassing our state legislators has worked only as far as denying the license increase...effectively stemming the tide...but for how long? Eventually this audit (and we all know how it wil end) will come to an end, the PGC will be praised for their groundbreaking, pioneer style deer management, and we will get hosed again in favor of ecoweenies and birdwatchers. I want some serious, opinions/ input here as to what steps need to be taken from here to see real change. I personally feel that change will only come when we can elect a conservative, grassroots, pro-hunting governor, to begin replacing these wolves of commissioners we have. A governor that isn't afraid to give the bird to the eco extremist lobby. Then we will stand a chance. USP tried to unite the hunters, but ended up being too over the top, and wound up looking like a bunch of fruit cake conspiracy theorists, that most hunters don't want to associate with, even though they share the same concerns. Another sprtsman's group...perhaps a more respected one COULD step up here and lead the charge..maybe the PFSC or UBP who was betrayed by the PGC on the xbow issue could return the knife in the back the PGC gave them. Just my thoughts, but right now we are only buying time and little else.
12-17-2009, 08:13 AM
#2
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Just a couple of comments on your well thought out post there SS.
I dont think our problems are gonna be solved by governor. I could be wrong and would be a very nice surprise if in the future that would prove to be the case. But we've had two in a row, of different party affiliation and same net result. Being the head of dcnr and all that involves AND basically dictating to pgc just does not go hand in hand where we are concerned. Its also not made known their positions on deer management issues when they are running.
On a separate note, I think the new pgc website homepage really is another slap in the face to sportsmen. It now has the highly biased "history of Pa deer management" on the front page! An introduction at the top of the page states that pgc has always had problems with special interests trying to tell them what to do... Very noteworthy, the only mention in the piece that the intro was introducing is HUNTERS. Even calls our involvement "a headache".
Anyone who is a hunter and not completely apalled by such sentiment needs to have their head checked!
I dont think our problems are gonna be solved by governor. I could be wrong and would be a very nice surprise if in the future that would prove to be the case. But we've had two in a row, of different party affiliation and same net result. Being the head of dcnr and all that involves AND basically dictating to pgc just does not go hand in hand where we are concerned. Its also not made known their positions on deer management issues when they are running.
On a separate note, I think the new pgc website homepage really is another slap in the face to sportsmen. It now has the highly biased "history of Pa deer management" on the front page! An introduction at the top of the page states that pgc has always had problems with special interests trying to tell them what to do... Very noteworthy, the only mention in the piece that the intro was introducing is HUNTERS. Even calls our involvement "a headache".
Anyone who is a hunter and not completely apalled by such sentiment needs to have their head checked!
12-17-2009, 08:17 AM
#3
Fork Horn
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 297
It's pretty much majority agreement that the changes need to come. It's also common agreement on what those changes are/ need to be. Next step, and most difficult is what to do about it, which course of action to pursue. Harassing our state legislators has worked only as far as denying the license increase...effectively stemming the tide...but for how long? Eventually this audit (and we all know how it wil end) will come to an end, the PGC will be praised for their groundbreaking, pioneer style deer management, and we will get hosed again in favor of ecoweenies and birdwatchers. I want some serious, opinions/ input here as to what steps need to be taken from here to see real change. I personally feel that change will only come when we can elect a conservative, grassroots, pro-hunting governor, to begin replacing these wolves of commissioners we have. A governor that isn't afraid to give the bird to the eco extremist lobby. Then we will stand a chance. USP tried to unite the hunters, but ended up being too over the top, and wound up looking like a bunch of fruit cake conspiracy theorists, that most hunters don't want to associate with, even though they share the same concerns. Another sprtsman's group...perhaps a more respected one COULD step up here and lead the charge..maybe the PFSC or UBP who was betrayed by the PGC on the xbow issue could return the knife in the back the PGC gave them. Just my thoughts, but right now we are only buying time and little else.
12-17-2009, 08:19 AM
#4
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
"maybe the PFSC "
Never happen. With their pgc yes man history along with them having "nonhunting environmentalists" included in membership, and therefore Id also imagine officers. Would be nice though. Course it would also be nice if i hit the lottery for about 10 mil, and i think my odds would be better of that happening.
Never happen. With their pgc yes man history along with them having "nonhunting environmentalists" included in membership, and therefore Id also imagine officers. Would be nice though. Course it would also be nice if i hit the lottery for about 10 mil, and i think my odds would be better of that happening.
12-17-2009, 08:25 AM
#5
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
"I have been and will continue to be a member of the USP and I would not rule them out. Remember they still do have on on-going lawsuit."
I have followed our situation here in Pa for some time now, and all that entails, including the "players" involved. Where usp is concerned, I dont have any really big problems with them overall, and most of the bad rap they get is because of the damage control influence of the political machine that is hpa. Ive researched several of the claims made against usp that made them sound like total loons made by some of the "honchos" on that site. I have yet to find one based in truth, but instead grossly exaggerated claims. Of course the usp guys couldnt stick up for themselves there, as 90% of them, including any that were vocal, arent permitted to exist there,and the "vocal" non-usp posters who were antipgc deer plan were shown the door as well, with many jokes made by pgc types about the mass departures. As for usp I have no involvement nor personal interest in the pgc supporter smear campaign on them, but do find it a bit "dirty" if you ask me, because as a hunter I dont feel im being treated much better by pgc than usp is.
I have followed our situation here in Pa for some time now, and all that entails, including the "players" involved. Where usp is concerned, I dont have any really big problems with them overall, and most of the bad rap they get is because of the damage control influence of the political machine that is hpa. Ive researched several of the claims made against usp that made them sound like total loons made by some of the "honchos" on that site. I have yet to find one based in truth, but instead grossly exaggerated claims. Of course the usp guys couldnt stick up for themselves there, as 90% of them, including any that were vocal, arent permitted to exist there,and the "vocal" non-usp posters who were antipgc deer plan were shown the door as well, with many jokes made by pgc types about the mass departures. As for usp I have no involvement nor personal interest in the pgc supporter smear campaign on them, but do find it a bit "dirty" if you ask me, because as a hunter I dont feel im being treated much better by pgc than usp is.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 12-17-2009 at 08:29 AM.
12-17-2009, 08:27 AM
#6
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: PA
Posts: 8,167
It will take a well financed group of intelligent sportsmen to put forth an educated proposal as for why and how this state can have and maintain a larger population of deer and the benefits of a larger herd.
The child like, shouting from a soap box approach has proven unproductive and embarrassing as it well should have.The name calling conspiracy theorist have no place in this debate.
the battle is between two groups of people, he one who loose money cause of high deer numbers and those whom loose because of low deer numbers.
A middle road is the answer but its not the answer either side wants to hear.
The child like, shouting from a soap box approach has proven unproductive and embarrassing as it well should have.The name calling conspiracy theorist have no place in this debate.
the battle is between two groups of people, he one who loose money cause of high deer numbers and those whom loose because of low deer numbers.
A middle road is the answer but its not the answer either side wants to hear.
12-17-2009, 08:39 AM
#7
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
"It will take a well financed group of intelligent sportsmen to put forth an educated proposal as for why and how this state can have and maintain a larger population of deer and the benefits of a larger herd."
Proposal to whom?? Pgc? Yeah that'll work.
"The child like, shouting from a soap box approach has proven unproductive"
Of course ignoring the issue has accomplished a ton! lmao. I only shudder to think what things could be and most likely wouldve been like by now if NOONE complained. Im sure our hunting would be even better than it is with NO pressure on them! lmao.
Look what HAS been accomplished, fee increase prevented, got that moron alt the hell outta here, and probably caused pgc to go at a bit less than full throttle. And speaking for myself, I kinda like soapboxes. Because i know what the hell im talking about. Despite what the condescending commission believes.
" and embarrassing as it well should have.The name calling conspiracy theorist have no place in this debate."
Embarrassing would be the attempts to skew polls, the name calling on every post, the personal attacks aimed at creating chaos, and the incessant pgc arse kissing that goes on via a few supporters. Funny you forgot all that? Point out the conspiracy theories? Hard to tell what some think is fact or fiction these days. Are you talking about usp? About posts here? Please elaborate for us. Only "theories" ive seen here have been backed pretty heftily with evidence and proof. But then you probably werent talking about here.
"the battle is between two groups of people, he one who loose money cause of high deer numbers and those whom loose because of low deer numbers."
And audubon/environmentalists. Its a fact. They are a named "stakeholder" and currently a very influential one.
"A middle road is the answer but its not the answer either side wants to hear"
Middle road? Thats exactly where pgc belongs. Right outside of the Elmerton offices thrown out on their keisters.
Proposal to whom?? Pgc? Yeah that'll work.
"The child like, shouting from a soap box approach has proven unproductive"
Of course ignoring the issue has accomplished a ton! lmao. I only shudder to think what things could be and most likely wouldve been like by now if NOONE complained. Im sure our hunting would be even better than it is with NO pressure on them! lmao.
Look what HAS been accomplished, fee increase prevented, got that moron alt the hell outta here, and probably caused pgc to go at a bit less than full throttle. And speaking for myself, I kinda like soapboxes. Because i know what the hell im talking about. Despite what the condescending commission believes." and embarrassing as it well should have.The name calling conspiracy theorist have no place in this debate."
Embarrassing would be the attempts to skew polls, the name calling on every post, the personal attacks aimed at creating chaos, and the incessant pgc arse kissing that goes on via a few supporters. Funny you forgot all that? Point out the conspiracy theories? Hard to tell what some think is fact or fiction these days. Are you talking about usp? About posts here? Please elaborate for us. Only "theories" ive seen here have been backed pretty heftily with evidence and proof. But then you probably werent talking about here.
"the battle is between two groups of people, he one who loose money cause of high deer numbers and those whom loose because of low deer numbers."
And audubon/environmentalists. Its a fact. They are a named "stakeholder" and currently a very influential one.
"A middle road is the answer but its not the answer either side wants to hear"
Middle road? Thats exactly where pgc belongs. Right outside of the Elmerton offices thrown out on their keisters.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 12-17-2009 at 08:55 AM.
12-17-2009, 08:57 AM
#8
Typical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 659
Middle of the road is excatly what I want...No, I don't want uncontrolled herds of demon deer devouring mountainsides and small children. Yes, I want reasonable deer densities that provide enjoyable hunting oppportunites, and that attract and keep young hunters. Right now, we are WAY left of center, imo.
12-17-2009, 09:07 AM
#9
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Southwest Ohio
Posts: 10,277
Kind of a Catch-22 situation fellas. No matter what state you are in, polls, asking around, etc. generally reveal the startling finding that the majority of deer hunters are gonna express displeasure with any policies that result in less chance of them bagging a deer with relative ease. No duh. Yet these are the same people who seem to want to have a primary voice in management decisions. Factor in (as Bawa stated) that some of the most vocal critics are rarely able to carry a calm rational discussion of the issue without screaming conspiracy and/or engaging in ad hominem attacks, and there shouldnt be any surprise to someone who looks at it from an objective perspective that the voices of opposition don't carry as much weight as folks in that group think that it should.
Factor in things such as the most recent studies which show that Pennsylvania is still in the top 5 in the nation for deer-auto collisions (albeit down from #1 prior to full implementation of herd reduction) and plenty of ordinary citizens just don't see what all the fuss is about in terms of lowering the deer population.
Calm down, offer some more informed and convincing arguments that don't sound selfish, don't throw tantrums like a spoiled child just because someone doesn't completely buy into your position, and consider compromise and issues of broader good, and you might actually get some changes that you view to be positive.
Factor in things such as the most recent studies which show that Pennsylvania is still in the top 5 in the nation for deer-auto collisions (albeit down from #1 prior to full implementation of herd reduction) and plenty of ordinary citizens just don't see what all the fuss is about in terms of lowering the deer population.
Calm down, offer some more informed and convincing arguments that don't sound selfish, don't throw tantrums like a spoiled child just because someone doesn't completely buy into your position, and consider compromise and issues of broader good, and you might actually get some changes that you view to be positive.
12-17-2009, 09:07 AM
#10
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Amen!
Im not interested in 2 million deer. Not even concerned about going back to "the old days".... Just a little more responsible management and appropriate deer management huh fellas??
But no change at all is no compromise, and isnt an option that i personally am willing to accept.
Im not interested in 2 million deer. Not even concerned about going back to "the old days".... Just a little more responsible management and appropriate deer management huh fellas??
But no change at all is no compromise, and isnt an option that i personally am willing to accept.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 12-17-2009 at 10:44 AM.