BREAKING PA buck down 91,000. Hunters down 300K
01-24-2010, 07:11 AM
#11
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
I had a conversation on the phone with a BOC'er the other night, and he said it appeared that license sales will be up by 3% for the 2008-2009 season.
Slinsky and the USP do more harm to us hunters that oppose this DMP than anything else. Just about the time that it looks like we may have the ear of some of the players, they come along and screw everything up. I wish they and their egos would go away forever.
It was 50,000.
Slinsky and the USP do more harm to us hunters that oppose this DMP than anything else. Just about the time that it looks like we may have the ear of some of the players, they come along and screw everything up. I wish they and their egos would go away forever.
It was 50,000.
Thanks Spurs, I screwed up on the number. 50,000 or 15,000 it was a totally ridiculous number and that was the point. Thanks for correcting it though.
I also agree with your assessment of The Slink and USP. Their crowd started their bellowing way back with the first bonus tag and predicted an impending doom in the 80's. It has probably contributed to the deaf ears approach. when legitimate concerns did pop up.
Over reaction on either side of an issue does no one any good.
Maybe the "decline to 50,000 deer" claim belongs in the same category as the "more and bigger bucks" claim
01-24-2010, 07:47 AM
#12
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
I kinda like having slinsky around myself. Hes entertaining. Dont know if its the colorful commentary I get a kick out of, or if its the fire it lights under hpa pgc supporter britches. lol
Most Pa hunters (present company excluded of course)arent overly knowledgable about exacting details because they just dont care to be politically aware, and if it takes a good show on the part of a "colorful" lol speaker to get ANY of them to take action and call legislators etc...More power to em. You have pgc and dcnr spending millions of our hunter & taxpayer dollars to lie to the people to support the sham program.... We have Jimmy.
I'll give credit for the lawsuit, as its a "good" thing imho even though it probably has no chance. Its still applying pressure and helps to highlight how extreme things here have become. I also can appreciate the fact they are against the deer plan and can reach alot more people than most others individually.
Though id agree, there have been some real blunders imho. Among them, being a bit overly colorful from time to time, agreeing to not call wmi imho was a huge mess up, The way some questions had been addressed at senate hearings left alot to be desired...
Btw, in all fairness, alot of the JS ill advised comments were stretched into false allegations on hpa because of their downright hatred because of the threatened lawsuits and being overly vocal against the dmp. The 50,000 comment was but one example. He stated awhile back that if the current herd rate of decrease continued....That by year "2000 whatever" it would be down to 50,000. And that wouldve been a true statement if not taken literally, but considered using the rate of decline for that year....
Example "John" gained 100 pounds this past year. At that rate in 10 years he'll gain over a 1000!" Noones saying john IS actually going to gain a thousand pounds....just pointing out the ridiculously high rate of gain.
I could be mistaken, but from what i read i believe it said or implied nothing that the rate could or would stay the same, or that we'd ever have actually 50,000 deer. Then again that wasnt the first or last attempt to discredit anyone and everyone against the dmp on hpa.
Thing is, he shouldnt say things that can be so easily twisted. Say what you mean and mean what you say. Dont leave room for twisting interpretation.
Most Pa hunters (present company excluded of course)arent overly knowledgable about exacting details because they just dont care to be politically aware, and if it takes a good show on the part of a "colorful" lol speaker to get ANY of them to take action and call legislators etc...More power to em. You have pgc and dcnr spending millions of our hunter & taxpayer dollars to lie to the people to support the sham program.... We have Jimmy.
I'll give credit for the lawsuit, as its a "good" thing imho even though it probably has no chance. Its still applying pressure and helps to highlight how extreme things here have become. I also can appreciate the fact they are against the deer plan and can reach alot more people than most others individually.
Though id agree, there have been some real blunders imho. Among them, being a bit overly colorful from time to time, agreeing to not call wmi imho was a huge mess up, The way some questions had been addressed at senate hearings left alot to be desired...
Btw, in all fairness, alot of the JS ill advised comments were stretched into false allegations on hpa because of their downright hatred because of the threatened lawsuits and being overly vocal against the dmp. The 50,000 comment was but one example. He stated awhile back that if the current herd rate of decrease continued....That by year "2000 whatever" it would be down to 50,000. And that wouldve been a true statement if not taken literally, but considered using the rate of decline for that year....
Example "John" gained 100 pounds this past year. At that rate in 10 years he'll gain over a 1000!" Noones saying john IS actually going to gain a thousand pounds....just pointing out the ridiculously high rate of gain.
I could be mistaken, but from what i read i believe it said or implied nothing that the rate could or would stay the same, or that we'd ever have actually 50,000 deer. Then again that wasnt the first or last attempt to discredit anyone and everyone against the dmp on hpa.
Thing is, he shouldnt say things that can be so easily twisted. Say what you mean and mean what you say. Dont leave room for twisting interpretation.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 01-24-2010 at 07:58 AM.
01-24-2010, 09:10 AM
#13
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
I kinda like having slinsky around myself. Hes entertaining. Dont know if its the colorful commentary I get a kick out of, or if its the fire it lights under hpa pgc supporter britches. lol
Most Pa hunters (present company excluded of course)arent overly knowledgable about exacting details because they just dont care to be politically aware, and if it takes a good show on the part of a "colorful" lol speaker to get ANY of them to take action and call legislators etc...More power to em. You have pgc and dcnr spending millions of our hunter & taxpayer dollars to lie to the people to support the sham program.... We have Jimmy.
I'll give credit for the lawsuit, as its a "good" thing imho even though it probably has no chance. Its still applying pressure and helps to highlight how extreme things here have become. I also can appreciate the fact they are against the deer plan and can reach alot more people than most others individually.
Though id agree, there have been some real blunders imho. Among them, being a bit overly colorful from time to time, agreeing to not call wmi imho was a huge mess up, The way some questions had been addressed at senate hearings left alot to be desired...
Btw, in all fairness, alot of the JS ill advised comments were stretched into false allegations on hpa because of their downright hatred because of the threatened lawsuits and being overly vocal against the dmp. The 50,000 comment was but one example. He stated awhile back that if the current herd rate of decrease continued....That by year "2000 whatever" it would be down to 50,000. And that wouldve been a true statement if not taken literally, but considered using the rate of decline for that year....
Example "John" gained 100 pounds this past year. At that rate in 10 years he'll gain over a 1000!" Noones saying john IS actually going to gain a thousand pounds....just pointing out the ridiculously high rate of gain.
I could be mistaken, but from what i read i believe it said or implied nothing that the rate could or would stay the same, or that we'd ever have actually 50,000 deer. Then again that wasnt the first or last attempt to discredit anyone and everyone against the dmp on hpa. Thing is, he shouldnt say things that can be so easily twisted. Say what you mean and mean what you say. Dont leave room for twisting interpretation.
Most Pa hunters (present company excluded of course)arent overly knowledgable about exacting details because they just dont care to be politically aware, and if it takes a good show on the part of a "colorful" lol speaker to get ANY of them to take action and call legislators etc...More power to em. You have pgc and dcnr spending millions of our hunter & taxpayer dollars to lie to the people to support the sham program.... We have Jimmy.
I'll give credit for the lawsuit, as its a "good" thing imho even though it probably has no chance. Its still applying pressure and helps to highlight how extreme things here have become. I also can appreciate the fact they are against the deer plan and can reach alot more people than most others individually.
Though id agree, there have been some real blunders imho. Among them, being a bit overly colorful from time to time, agreeing to not call wmi imho was a huge mess up, The way some questions had been addressed at senate hearings left alot to be desired...
Btw, in all fairness, alot of the JS ill advised comments were stretched into false allegations on hpa because of their downright hatred because of the threatened lawsuits and being overly vocal against the dmp. The 50,000 comment was but one example. He stated awhile back that if the current herd rate of decrease continued....That by year "2000 whatever" it would be down to 50,000. And that wouldve been a true statement if not taken literally, but considered using the rate of decline for that year....
Example "John" gained 100 pounds this past year. At that rate in 10 years he'll gain over a 1000!" Noones saying john IS actually going to gain a thousand pounds....just pointing out the ridiculously high rate of gain.
I could be mistaken, but from what i read i believe it said or implied nothing that the rate could or would stay the same, or that we'd ever have actually 50,000 deer. Then again that wasnt the first or last attempt to discredit anyone and everyone against the dmp on hpa.
Thing is, he shouldnt say things that can be so easily twisted. Say what you mean and mean what you say. Dont leave room for twisting interpretation.Believe it or not, I pretty much agree.
Especially the part that I bolded and underlined.If Alts more and bigger bucks statement had been assessed using the same measuring stick, wouldn't we all agree that the "more" part wasn't literally possible with HR? Now if you say it's more in terms of percentage of deer sightings it's not quite so inaccurate is it? I certainly see "more" bucks per hunt compared to does than before AR/HR. Not saying thats what he meant, just that it shouldnt have been said without more detail or explanation just like Jimmy the Slink and his 50K deer theory.
01-24-2010, 10:00 AM
#14
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2G Gaines Pa
Posts: 524
The senate hearing testimony by Jim Slinsky and the USP was a huge embarrassment to the anti-DMP movement. It was a like a sideshow to see whose ego could be bolstered the most by giving the most un-scientific answers possible. At that hearing, the USP would have come away with having delivered a knockout punch had BeenThere/BlueBird/Larry been on the hot seat instead of Slinsky, Levengood and Company. For the life of me, I can't remember who the third person was?
Those guys would have a great platform with legitimate concerns with many more supporters if they would just stop taking things so far out into left field.
Those guys would have a great platform with legitimate concerns with many more supporters if they would just stop taking things so far out into left field.
01-24-2010, 11:09 AM
#15
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
The senate hearing testimony by Jim Slinsky and the USP was a huge embarrassment to the anti-DMP movement. It was a like a sideshow to see whose ego could be bolstered the most by giving the most un-scientific answers possible. At that hearing, the USP would have come away with having delivered a knockout punch had BeenThere/BlueBird/Larry been on the hot seat instead of Slinsky, Levengood and Company. For the life of me, I can't remember who the third person was?
Those guys would have a great platform with legitimate concerns with many more supporters if they would just stop taking things so far out into left field.
Those guys would have a great platform with legitimate concerns with many more supporters if they would just stop taking things so far out into left field.
01-24-2010, 12:03 PM
#16
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 1,149
One difference between the USP leadership and bluebird.....
Bluebird is smart.
About AR,down here on the SGL's with low deer populations if it wasn't for AR you wouldn't see any deer.For some reason my son and me hunted the local SGL this year again.Never saw a doe but between the pair of us saw two small bucks which at least keep our attention.He did end up seeing a nice eight though in range in his opinion didn't get a good ethical shot so he let it walk.{briars}
Ar does let some young smaller bucks walk another year to get bigger.
With HR and all the does and button bucks getting killed could you imagine hunting a public area with no AR in place to save a few bucks?
On the other hand in Clearfield I didn't see a deer until I got my buck.Needless to say with HR I think we have to have AR.
Bluebird is smart.
About AR,down here on the SGL's with low deer populations if it wasn't for AR you wouldn't see any deer.For some reason my son and me hunted the local SGL this year again.Never saw a doe but between the pair of us saw two small bucks which at least keep our attention.He did end up seeing a nice eight though in range in his opinion didn't get a good ethical shot so he let it walk.{briars}
Ar does let some young smaller bucks walk another year to get bigger.
With HR and all the does and button bucks getting killed could you imagine hunting a public area with no AR in place to save a few bucks?
On the other hand in Clearfield I didn't see a deer until I got my buck.Needless to say with HR I think we have to have AR.
01-24-2010, 12:13 PM
#17
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
"At that hearing, the USP would have come away with having delivered a knockout punch had BeenThere/BlueBird/Larry been on the hot seat instead of Slinsky, Levengood and Company. For the life of me, I can't remember who the third person was?"
Last edited by Cornelius08; 01-24-2010 at 12:16 PM.
01-24-2010, 12:19 PM
#18
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
As for the ar, I support it as i said. I like the idea of saving some bucks. I believe it adds to the quality of the experience. Esp. if not for all the hr.
But if we werent to have ar, but did have all this hr...It would be ugly. VERY ugly imho. Due to the loss in recruitment via hr, and no bucks saved, the quality would be absolutely atrocious. The number of bucks seen would be much lower as well.
But if we werent to have ar, but did have all this hr...It would be ugly. VERY ugly imho. Due to the loss in recruitment via hr, and no bucks saved, the quality would be absolutely atrocious. The number of bucks seen would be much lower as well.
01-24-2010, 04:58 PM
#19
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Carbon County Pa.
Posts: 601
As for the ar, I support it as i said. I like the idea of saving some bucks. I believe it adds to the quality of the experience. Esp. if not for all the hr.
But if we werent to have ar, but did have all this hr...It would be ugly. VERY ugly imho. Due to the loss in recruitment via hr, and no bucks saved, the quality would be absolutely atrocious. The number of bucks seen would be much lower as well.
But if we werent to have ar, but did have all this hr...It would be ugly. VERY ugly imho. Due to the loss in recruitment via hr, and no bucks saved, the quality would be absolutely atrocious. The number of bucks seen would be much lower as well.
01-24-2010, 05:56 PM
#20
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2G Gaines Pa
Posts: 524
As for the ar, I support it as i said. I like the idea of saving some bucks. I believe it adds to the quality of the experience. Esp. if not for all the hr.
But if we werent to have ar, but did have all this hr...It would be ugly. VERY ugly imho. Due to the loss in recruitment via hr, and no bucks saved, the quality would be absolutely atrocious. The number of bucks seen would be much lower as well.
But if we werent to have ar, but did have all this hr...It would be ugly. VERY ugly imho. Due to the loss in recruitment via hr, and no bucks saved, the quality would be absolutely atrocious. The number of bucks seen would be much lower as well.