Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Regional Forums > Northeast
What PA needs .................... >

What PA needs ....................

Northeast ME, NH, VT, NY, CT, RI, MA, PA, DE, WV, MD, NJ Remember, the Regional forums are for hunting topics only.

What PA needs ....................

Old 01-07-2010, 01:47 AM
  #211  
Typical Buck
 
Screamin Steel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 659
Default

Originally Posted by bowhunter2117 View Post
Who issues DMAP tags the PGC and if they feel the deer herd is at a satisfactory level then itís the end of the story. PGC should do away with or severely limit the amount of DMAP tags issued, and require proof of deer impact other than a profit and loss spread sheet. So before you use the old argument itís there land to manage as they wish well they are not and have never been charged by any legislative body with deer management that role belongs to the game commission.

Yes, PGC issues the tags. But they also give DCNR free reign in just about every facet og wildlife mgt, in the SF's.....not to mention in light of the blackmailing tactics used by the DCNR to help spur statewide HR, the PGC is basically afraid of the 800 lb gorilla. If the DCNR asked for 300,000 more DMAP tags next year, guess how many they would get?
Screamin Steel is offline  
Old 01-07-2010, 03:51 AM
  #212  
Fork Horn
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location:
Posts: 200
Default

This is where the PGC made a drastic mistake if they would have held their ground and not caved in, if they would have approached hunters through their web page and the media and made the average Joe aware of what was going on I think you would have seen a ground swell of support for a license increase or a call for a game lands stamp, a mandatory 5$ stamp where all money obtained would have been used only for game lands purchases then hunters would have respected the commission. Even now as Doug so often points out the PGC is a lame duck by forfitting their obligation to DCNR. Personally I feel if such a gesture were made today it would go a long way to restoring creditability between the agency and the only group supporting them PA hunters. It would show hunters that the agency is looking for ways to get out from under big brother DCNR and his profit driven motives and terror tactics and retake their obligation to the hunters of this state and the deer. Iím not saying the habitat is not important but deer management on any state grounds should never be profit driven. Even on private ground before dmap tags are issued proof of their need should be addressed. Itís not the game commissionís job to maximize a private land owners timber profits and place those profits above the animals they are sworn to oversee
bowhunter2117 is offline  
Old 01-07-2010, 06:22 AM
  #213  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
Default

Originally Posted by bowhunter2117 View Post
This is where the PGC made a drastic mistake if they would have held their ground and not caved in, if they would have approached hunters through their web page and the media and made the average Joe aware of what was going on I think you would have seen a ground swell of support for a license increase or a call for a game lands stamp, a mandatory 5$ stamp where all money obtained would have been used only for game lands purchases then hunters would have respected the commission. Even now as Doug so often points out the PGC is a lame duck by forfitting their obligation to DCNR. Personally I feel if such a gesture were made today it would go a long way to restoring creditability between the agency and the only group supporting them PA hunters. It would show hunters that the agency is looking for ways to get out from under big brothertHEY DCNR and his profit driven motives and terror tactics and retake their obligation to the hunters of this state and the deer. Iím not saying the habitat is not important but deer management on any state grounds should never be profit driven. Even on private ground before dmap tags are issued proof of their need should be addressed. Itís not the game commissionís job to maximize a private land owners timber profits and place those profits above the animals they are sworn to oversee
I gotta disagree with you tess.Gamelands should be managed for game(not just deer) and they are.No private landowner should have to put up with any animal costing them income.There's no reason that anyone should bear a financial loss to fund someone else's hobby.As a hunter,I'M NOT CRAZY ABOUT dcnr'S MISSION but I understand that what we want as hunters effects the other 92% of residents that don't hunt.The PHGC did not cave into DCNR.They wanted a whole lot more than they actually got.I was involved with setting up a dmap plan for several years.If you want more than 1 tag for every 50 acres of forested land,you do have to show a deer management plan and proof of why you need more dmap coupons.DMAP is one of the best things the PGC has come up with.
DougE is offline  
Old 01-07-2010, 06:27 AM
  #214  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,262
Default

Originally Posted by Screamin Steel View Post
Yes, PGC issues the tags. But they also give DCNR free reign in just about every facet og wildlife mgt, in the SF's.....not to mention in light of the blackmailing tactics used by the DCNR to help spur statewide HR, the PGC is basically afraid of the 800 lb gorilla. If the DCNR asked for 300,000 more DMAP tags next year, guess how many they would get?
Other than applying for and getting dmap tags,give me examples of how DCNR manages every other facet of game management.You are very,very wrong about that.Dcnr wanted,group hunting,tag sharing,baiting,longer seasons,the ability to transfer tags and rifles allowed in all seasons.They got none of that.You guys that hate the PGC and complain about everything they do have no idea what will happen once the PGC goes belly up.
DougE is offline  
Old 01-07-2010, 06:56 AM
  #215  
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Default

".As a hunter,I'M NOT CRAZY ABOUT dcnr'S MISSION but I understand that what we want as hunters effects the other 92% of residents that don't hunt."
There we go with the perpetuating of anti/enviromentalist extreme sentiment/statement again! Cant you guys make a legit argument without reverting to the "we are only 8% why does anyone listen to us" speech? I can show that statement as having been made for years on antihunting message boards and enviro-flake sites, like audubon....Why on earth is it necessary here??? Especially when it is hardly meaningful in any way towards the topic.

Also, please don't pretend that those few who pushed for less deer speak for 92% of the residents! 92% of the residents werent polled. 92% of the residents didnt ask for this extreme deer program, and a helluva lot more than 8% support us as hunters in our positions. I guess none of us 8% have dozens of friends and family members who do not mind if the friggin deer herd is increased a reasonable amount? I guess everyone not including that ton of people oppose us doing so? C'mon doug. Give me a break. Thats ridiculous.

"The PHGC did not cave into DCNR."
Sure they did. The pressures applied are well documented and we all, including you, have seen the proof as its been posted umpteen times on a few boards.

"They wanted a whole lot more than they actually got."
And thats proof? Hardly. Though Id agree currently that not much pressure is necessary when ecoextremists are currently onboard at pgc, so no, i dont completely blame dcnr.
Cornelius08 is offline  
Old 01-07-2010, 07:18 AM
  #216  
Typical Buck
 
Screamin Steel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 659
Default

Originally Posted by DougE View Post
Other than applying for and getting dmap tags,give me examples of how DCNR manages every other facet of game management.You are very,very wrong about that.Dcnr wanted,group hunting,tag sharing,baiting,longer seasons,the ability to transfer tags and rifles allowed in all seasons.They got none of that.You guys that hate the PGC and complain about everything they do have no idea what will happen once the PGC goes belly up.
Then answer me why the DCNR has to have their own wildlife biologists, and while you're at it, shoot a PM to your buddy Merlin Benner (who has been absent for some time on the message boards, ironically ever since BB handed his a$$ to him on another board) and ask him to give you the details of his job desctription. I believe you'll find that his jurisdiction goes beyond deer.
Screamin Steel is offline  
Old 01-07-2010, 07:29 AM
  #217  
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Default

I agree SS. There is so much overlapping management going on its ridiculous. Look at how many of pgc and dcnr's duties overlap...heck even fish & boat! They're all members of the biodiversity partnership, and also all take responsibility for some of the same species. Reptiles amphibians & such would be one example that all 3 claim responsibility. We know how involved both pgc and dcnr are with the deer.....and pgc gives law enforcement support to both of the other 2 agencies. And with species management Pgc is responsible for wildlife including those found on stateforest...and dcnrs interest dont stop with the stateforest boundaries either.

It makes no sense for the citizens of Pa to be paying 2 or 3 agencies to do the same jobs double or in triplicate!

Pgc says they dont have enough money when they take in more than any other game agency im aware of in the nation. In some cases double or triple other states. Not to mention the money the other Pa agencies are recieving to do many of the same jobs. Our situation in Pennsylvania is a complete joke.

Last edited by Cornelius08; 01-07-2010 at 07:53 AM.
Cornelius08 is offline  
Old 01-07-2010, 08:25 AM
  #218  
Fork Horn
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location:
Posts: 200
Default

Originally Posted by DougE View Post
I gotta disagree with you tess.Gamelands should be managed for game(not just deer) and they are.No private landowner should have to put up with any animal costing them income.There's no reason that anyone should bear a financial loss to fund someone else's hobby.As a hunter,I'M NOT CRAZY ABOUT dcnr'S MISSION but I understand that what we want as hunters effects the other 92% of residents that don't hunt.The PHGC did not cave into DCNR.They wanted a whole lot more than they actually got.I was involved with setting up a dmap plan for several years.If you want more than 1 tag for every 50 acres of forested land,you do have to show a deer management plan and proof of why you need more dmap coupons.DMAP is one of the best things the PGC has come up with.
I stated all landowners state and private should be responsible to show proof of deer damage and a true need for dmap coupons ill also include presenting a valid reason that their goals canít be met through the regular anterless allocation. Proof of damage is a far cry from a management plan. Please explain to me what a management plan consists of? And what the qualifications are needed to draw up a plan? there are none any land owner can sit down and in 20 minutes draw up some half baked plan.

please Doug show me where the pgc is responsible to ensure a higher profit margin for any section of land, the game commission is there to manage the game within this state for the benefit of the states citizens they are not there to maximize profit

Last edited by bowhunter2117; 01-07-2010 at 08:27 AM.
bowhunter2117 is offline  
Old 01-07-2010, 08:34 AM
  #219  
Fork Horn
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location:
Posts: 200
Default

Originally Posted by DougE View Post
Other than applying for and getting dmap tags,give me examples of how DCNR manages every other facet of game management.You are very,very wrong about that.Dcnr wanted,group hunting,tag sharing,baiting,longer seasons,the ability to transfer tags and rifles allowed in all seasons.They got none of that.You guys that hate the PGC and complain about everything they do have no idea what will happen once the PGC goes belly up.



longer seasons, the ability to transfer tags tag sharing- give it a few years in the near future passing tags will be here it will start with youth then extend to all hunters

baiting- already here on SRAís and if werenít such a money maker thru citations you can bet your butt it would be legal state wide

longer seasons- what are mentored youth, early muzzle loader, early rifle for JR and SR hunters
bowhunter2117 is offline  
Old 01-07-2010, 08:50 AM
  #220  
Typical Buck
 
Screamin Steel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 659
Default

Originally Posted by bowhunter2117 View Post
I stated all landowners state and private should be responsible to show proof of deer damage and a true need for dmap coupons ill also include presenting a valid reason that their goals canít be met through the regular anterless allocation. Proof of damage is a far cry from a management plan. Please explain to me what a management plan consists of? And what the qualifications are needed to draw up a plan? there are none any land owner can sit down and in 20 minutes draw up some half baked plan.

please Doug show me where the pgc is responsible to ensure a higher profit margin for any section of land, the game commission is there to manage the game within this state for the benefit of the states citizens they are not there to maximize profit
If there are so many deer that a landowner and his neighbors/ family/ friends can't control them through general antlerless allocations, they should consider allowing a few more hunters than their little clique. Plenty enough doe tags and willing hunters out there that most private landowners would probably never have to DMAP.
Screamin Steel is offline  

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.