PA deer management plan gets an A-
02-23-2010, 06:19 PM
#1
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Morgantown WV USA
Posts: 108
PA deer management plan gets an A-
One of the team members reportedly told a Game Commissioner that — if forced to give the plan a letter grade — he'd give it an A-minus. http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pitt.../s_668221.html
Looks like the internet rumors of a critically flawed
deer management plan are much to do about nothing.
WVGino
Looks like the internet rumors of a critically flawed
deer management plan are much to do about nothing.
WVGino
Last edited by WV Gino; 02-23-2010 at 06:24 PM.
02-23-2010, 09:34 PM
#2
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Not hardly gino.
When one of the "team members" was the ex deputy executive director of the PENNSYLANIA GAME COMMISSION, what grade do you think would be given?
Given all the "critisism" on just about every single facet of the program, it seems not all the "team members" agreed with a-. If they did, id hate to see what it would take to get an F. lmao.
Bob fryes pieces are hardly what one would call unbiased either. His book was supposed to be, but was anything but.
Best part of the article was this:
"Some people don't want to wait up to two decades to increase the deer population, no matter what the recently completed deer audit says.
Several members of the House of Representatives Game and Fisheries Committee told Game Commission staff hours before the audit even became public that they want the agency to ease up on doe harvests.
Hopefully they stick to their guns and arent just blowing smoke. Pgc and their environmentalist allies have been dictating things long enough.
When one of the "team members" was the ex deputy executive director of the PENNSYLANIA GAME COMMISSION, what grade do you think would be given?
Given all the "critisism" on just about every single facet of the program, it seems not all the "team members" agreed with a-. If they did, id hate to see what it would take to get an F. lmao.
Bob fryes pieces are hardly what one would call unbiased either. His book was supposed to be, but was anything but.
Best part of the article was this:
"Some people don't want to wait up to two decades to increase the deer population, no matter what the recently completed deer audit says.
Several members of the House of Representatives Game and Fisheries Committee told Game Commission staff hours before the audit even became public that they want the agency to ease up on doe harvests.
Hopefully they stick to their guns and arent just blowing smoke. Pgc and their environmentalist allies have been dictating things long enough.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 02-23-2010 at 09:50 PM.
02-24-2010, 06:22 AM
#3
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Morgantown WV USA
Posts: 108
>Pgc and their environmentalist allies have been dictating things long enough.
So you would rather have career politicians trying to secure votes to keep themsleves in office dictating things vs. scientific wildlife resource management?
Interesting.
WV Gino
So you would rather have career politicians trying to secure votes to keep themsleves in office dictating things vs. scientific wildlife resource management?
Interesting.
WV Gino
02-24-2010, 06:32 AM
#4
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
Thats the most disturbing trend about this whole DMP controversy. I agree that the PGC is not responsive enough to hunters but the recent trend toward getting career politicians into game management is a start down a slippery slope. Hunters are a mere 8% of their electorate and considering how most elections go with the political wind, it could come back to bite us bad in the future. Flawed as our system may be, it'd be far worse if politicians gain any more influence on it.
02-24-2010, 06:48 AM
#5
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
"So you would rather have career politicians trying to secure votes to keep themsleves in office dictating things vs. scientific wildlife resource management?"
The legislators are already involved deeply anyway, as that how the system was set up. The house, the senate, the governor... All deeply involved in everything from pgc structure to fee increase to oversight to approving law changes. It is what it is, and if we hunters are so apathetic that we dont put that system to work for us...especially when other interest are, then we dont deserve better management.
Course those who strongly support the dmp, who feign the disgust at legislator involvement usually only do so to prevent others from doing it, because they know it is the ONLY thing that CAN evoke change, and they fear sportsmen might undermine the changing of the guard that has taken place.
Last edited by Cornelius08; 02-24-2010 at 07:39 AM.
02-24-2010, 08:21 AM
#6
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Yee-ouch. Just took another look at the "other states" wmi compared Pa's hunting to. lmao.
No...No wisconsin or Michigan... Those were only spoken of as the differences and similarities in management schemes.
Who did they compare our quality of hunting to? lmoa.. No Ohio even though its right next door... No in their charts, we were compared to Connecticut, DELAWARE, MAINE MARYLAND NEW JERSEY RHODE ISLAND VERMONT...Then for the sake of mercy i guess, they threw in two somewhat "normal" sized and deer densitywise states of West Virginia and Virginia that unlike the others arent either rock bottom deer densities or the size of one Pa's larger cities. lol.
No...No wisconsin or Michigan... Those were only spoken of as the differences and similarities in management schemes.
Who did they compare our quality of hunting to? lmoa.. No Ohio even though its right next door... No in their charts, we were compared to Connecticut, DELAWARE, MAINE MARYLAND NEW JERSEY RHODE ISLAND VERMONT...Then for the sake of mercy i guess, they threw in two somewhat "normal" sized and deer densitywise states of West Virginia and Virginia that unlike the others arent either rock bottom deer densities or the size of one Pa's larger cities. lol.
02-24-2010, 08:52 AM
#7
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: York, PA.
Posts: 1,313
Thats the most disturbing trend about this whole DMP controversy. I agree that the PGC is not responsive enough to hunters but the recent trend toward getting career politicians into game management is a start down a slippery slope. Hunters are a mere 8% of their electorate and considering how most elections go with the political wind, it could come back to bite us bad in the future. Flawed as our system may be, it'd be far worse if politicians gain any more influence on it.
For example we have 13 million residents in PA. and I promise you less than 15% of us even think about the whitetail deer unless they happen to be driving down the road and see one feeding in a field etc. and say aw look at bambi, aint it cute!! I hate to break it to you but 85% of us could care less either way about this subject and it never even crosses their mind. Why? Because this subject doesnt effect or CONCERN them either way in their daily lives and they have far greater things that CONCERN them each and every minute of every day that they do care about and that does effect them and their families. Pike
Last edited by J Pike; 02-24-2010 at 09:00 AM.
02-24-2010, 09:28 AM
#8
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW PA USA
Posts: 7,220
BT. quit trying to spin #'s! What % of their electorate do you think actually care about the deer wars at all?
For example we have 13 million residents in PA. and I promise you less than 15% of us even think about the whitetail deer unless they happen to be driving down the road and see one feeding in a field etc. and say aw look at bambi, aint it cute!! I hate to break it to you but 85% of us could care less either way about this subject and it never even crosses their mind. Why? Because this subject doesnt effect or CONCERN them either way in their daily lives and they have far greater things that CONCERN them each and every minute of every day that they do care about and that does effect them and their families. Pike
For example we have 13 million residents in PA. and I promise you less than 15% of us even think about the whitetail deer unless they happen to be driving down the road and see one feeding in a field etc. and say aw look at bambi, aint it cute!! I hate to break it to you but 85% of us could care less either way about this subject and it never even crosses their mind. Why? Because this subject doesnt effect or CONCERN them either way in their daily lives and they have far greater things that CONCERN them each and every minute of every day that they do care about and that does effect them and their families. Pike
I'm not spinning anything. It's not just hunters who care about deer numbers. It's farmers, it's the timber industry, it's homeowners, drivers and more. But what you say does have some merit. The folks who really dont care are the ones where the risks of politics lie.
Consider how most of our elections are decided. Not by the right or the left. Those folks have made up their mind long before most candidates present themselves. Most elections are decided by those folks in the middle without strong principles on either side. That group is the most easily swayed and I daresay often the most uninformed. So lets say that the PGC starts taking public money and the legislature decides to take over game management decisions. Then some well funded group gets the general public in an uproar over lets say, the fact that cubs are legal in bear season. Next thing we know our bear season goes the way of Jersey's. Far fetched? maybe. But would you have believed we'd have the crowd we now have in DC if someone had predicted it 5 years ago?
02-24-2010, 10:23 AM
#9
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: York, PA.
Posts: 1,313
BT. I included farmers and those involved in the timber industry etc. etc. in that 15%, the fact of the matter the large majority of PA. residents could care less about the deer wars! Its not even a small blip on their radar. As far as NJ., OH. has the same type of system that your so scared of, and OH. hunters have a far greater voice than we do even though they make up a smaller % of their voters.
For example their ODNR really could care less about their farm bureau even though it is more powerful than the PA. farm bureau, yet the PGC. shutters in fear every time the PA. bureau speaks.
BT. please answer me this??? What is so independent about the PGC other than funding? the answer is NOTHING! Pike
For example their ODNR really could care less about their farm bureau even though it is more powerful than the PA. farm bureau, yet the PGC. shutters in fear every time the PA. bureau speaks.
BT. please answer me this??? What is so independent about the PGC other than funding? the answer is NOTHING! Pike
02-24-2010, 10:54 AM
#10
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,978
Exactly JP. A few who wanted and got the ear of the game commission are the ones who started the "for gods sake man dont go to the evil legislators" sentiment.
A few well meaning hunters among us fell for it as well. Its time they become educated to the fact that we arent gonna be all of a sudden overtaken by antihunters streaming in because we ask for responsible deer management! lol. Antis are a nonissue currently, and even if they were, they are gonna try to do whatever they do regardless of what we do or say.
A few well meaning hunters among us fell for it as well. Its time they become educated to the fact that we arent gonna be all of a sudden overtaken by antihunters streaming in because we ask for responsible deer management! lol. Antis are a nonissue currently, and even if they were, they are gonna try to do whatever they do regardless of what we do or say.