Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Regional Forums > Northeast
Lawsuit against game commission? >

Lawsuit against game commission?

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

Lawsuit against game commission?

Old 03-06-2011, 12:16 PM
  #1  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
bullmoose38's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 1,689
Default Lawsuit against game commission?

So why did the courts throw out the case? Im just curious. I bet they thought it was ridiculous. lol
bullmoose38 is offline  
Old 03-06-2011, 01:13 PM
  #2  
Fork Horn
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Washington County
Posts: 143
Default

GAME COMMISSION HAILS LATEST COMMONWEALTH COURT RULING DISMISSING CHALLENGE TO DEER MANAGEMENT CASE

HARRISBURG – A Commonwealth Court ruling, handed down Feb. 8, has dismissed the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania’s legal challenge to the Pennsylvania Game Commission’s deer management program, according to Carl G. Roe, agency executive director.

This decision was the second ruling against Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania since 2007, when Commonwealth Court dismissed the organizations lawsuit on procedural grounds.

Roe noted that, in its latest ruling, Commonwealth Court dismissed the lawsuit on the grounds that Unified failed to present evidence to support its case. As part of the ruling, the Court also cancelled the scheduled hearing that had been set for Feb. 28.

“This court ruling is a strong statement that the Game Commission’s deer management program is being conducted in a sound and scientific manner,” Roe said. “In essence, Commonwealth Court’s latest ruling dismissed the challenge because it lacked merit.

“Our hope is that this second ruling will cease the unnecessary expenditure of sportsmen’s dollars and tax dollars fighting frivolous and baseless lawsuits.”

Roe noted that, since 2000, the Game Commission has worked to implement a deer management program that takes into account the concerns of all Pennsylvanians, and the agency has been consistent and open in its approach.

“The deer management plan, which is available on our website, was developed with public input to improve the health of the state’s deer herd; to encourage healthy habitat, which deer and all other wildlife depend on; and to reduce deer-human conflicts,” Roe said. “We believe this deer management program will improve the health of our deer herd and the habitat that supports it and other wildlife.


“From 2000 until 2005, we sought to reduce deer numbers in all Wildlife Management Units. From 2006 until today, except for our most urbanized WMUs – 2B, 5C and 5D – the goal for each of the other 19 WMUs has been to stabilize deer population trends or allow an increase in the deer population trends where habitat and deer reproductive data support such increases.”
WCO R.W.J is offline  
Old 03-06-2011, 01:22 PM
  #3  
Fork Horn
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Washington County
Posts: 143
Default

Foiled again

PGC’s latest challenger on whiteail management has case thrown from court

Mark Nale

February 14, 2011 9:00am EST

A Commonwealth Court ruling handed down Feb. 8 dismissed the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania’s legal challenge to the Pennsylvania Game Commission’s deer management program.


View larger


Another so-called “Deer Wars” battle is over, with the USP losing again.
“This court ruling is a strong statement that the Game Commission’s deer management program is being conducted in a sound and scientific manner,” PGC executive director Carl Roe said. “In essence, Commonwealth Court’s latest ruling dismissed the challenge because it lacked merit.
“Our hope is that this second ruling will cease the unnecessary expenditure of sportsmen’s dollars and tax dollars fighting frivolous and baseless lawsuits.”
It has been over three years since the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania initiated legal action against the game commission. In my humble opinion, the action was a squandering of that group’s funds, and a total waste of the game commission resources, as well as our tax dollars that had to be used in the defense.
This was the second USP lawsuit claiming that the game commission was not managing the deer herd in the best interests of hunters or the deer. The earlier lawsuit had been quickly dismissed by the court.
The Unified Sportsmen petition alleged that “the Commission failed in its duties and responsibilities to preserve and protect the deer herd for Pennsylvanians,” and “the Commission intentionally acted to destroy and diminish Pennsylvania’s deer herd below natural and sustainable population levels.”
I read what they had claimed, and honestly, I did not understand why the second lawsuit was not also quickly dismissed. However, I am not a legal expert, and I guess everyone deserves his day in court. That day had been set for Feb. 28.
Last November, I became a little concerned when I learned that the attorneys for both sides were discussing a settlement. Then I read the USP’s settlement demands as printed in the Nov. 19 issue of Pennsylvania Outdoor News. As reported, their 10
demands included closing all doe hunting on public land, ending antler restrictions, reimbursing the USP for all legal costs, increasing the number of wildlife management units, and stopping the PGC from issuing Deer Management Assistance Program permits on public land. Although the terms “sustainable” and “reasonable” were not defined, the USP also demanded that the commission “maintain a sustainable deer population on all public lands to provide a reasonable opportunity for all public-land hunters to harvest a deer.”
In other words, with no science or factual basis for their claims, it seemed that the Unified Sportsmen wanted to manage the deer herd, instead of the agency that is entrusted with that management. After reading their demands, I knew that a settlement would not be in the cards. Whether you agree with the PGC or not, the agency could not and should not turn over control of deer management to a private group with no expertise.
I was surprised when reading the 22-page court dismissal, which was released on Tuesday. The Commission alleged that the USP failed to produce a single expert who supported their claims. The court document mentions USP testimony from current USP president and former PGC commissioner Steven Mohr, former USP board chair Greg Levengood, chemist N. Charles Bolgiano and radio talk show host and outdoor writer Jim Slinsky.
If I had been trying to discredit the PGC’s deer management program, I would have attempted to produce a series of wildlife biologists who would offer expert testimony refuting the PGC’s program. Very possibly, those experts do not exist, because the PGC’s program, although not perfect, is scientifically sound. So the USP settled for testimony from Slinsky.
According to court documents, Slinsky referred to Pennsylvania concurrent buck and doe seasons as “annihilation.” His non-scientific estimate of the deer population across Pennsylvania is less than three deer per square mile. As I write this, 19 deer are feeding beside my house, and this is one of only several different groups that visit regularly. So I guess that, according to Slinsky, for some reason the deer from over six square miles of habitat have just decided to visit my “backyard.”
Again, according to court documents, Slinsky stated that, “Pennsylvania’s deer management program is out of line with other states.” He also claimed that the program is based on “fraud and lies.” However, according to the Commonwealth Court opinion, despite Slinsky’s claim that he had interviewed “over 1,031 persons, including every major deer project leader in the country,” he offered no specific examples to support his claims.
Judge Barry F. Feudale had some harsh words for Slinsky.
“…Assertions such as those uttered by Slinsky that the commission based its program on ‘fraud and lies’ is the type of tabloid hyperbolic sound bite that lacks factual foundation and strains credulity,” Feudale said. He also admonished Slinsky for unfairly denigrating the Commission’s efforts as well as those of the Unified Sportsmen.
USP vice president Randy Santucci reacted to the court’s ruling with a bit of disbelief.
“Thousands of sportsmen invested tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees, watched this case get legal standing, and develop over 31/ 2 years. We resisted dispositive motions and delay tactics by the PGC, only to be dismissed 21/ 2 weeks before the hearing date,” Santucci said
in an e-mail. “An opportunity has been lost, and the immediate perception now (justified or not) is that this late ruling does not pass the smell test. This needed to go the distance, so we could arrive at a decision based on presentation of all the evidence and expert testimony from both sides.”
While attending the Commission meeting in Harrisburg on Jan. 31, I spoke briefly with — and ended up sitting beside — USP chairman of the board Wayne Haas, of Howard, and Santucci. I will not attempt any direct quotes here, but when the subject of the court case came up, their mood reminded me of two wolves circling what they thought to be a half-dead moose — the PGC.
I will quote Haas’ Jan. 30 letter to the CDT, however. Referring to the Feb. 28 court date, Haas wrote, “The USP will disclose the PGC’s mismanagement to the court and take the final step in changing the PGC’s deer management program.”
With the Feb. 8 court dismissal and a cancelation of the scheduled Feb. 28 court date, I guess that the moose recovered and kicked the hungry wolves in the face.
What lies ahead for the USP is still being discussed within the organization. Santucci said, “The consensus of all directors I have spoken to is, that this is no more than another bump in the road that we have been traveling for the past several years. A bigger bump, yes, but it hasn’t bounced any of us out of the truck. Pennsylvania’s deer herd has reached critical low, if not un-huntable numbers, in many management units. That is what brought us to this point and it wasn’t changed by this ruling.”



Read more: http://www.centredaily.com/2011/02/1...#ixzz1FrR0SfBl
WCO R.W.J is offline  
Old 03-06-2011, 01:24 PM
  #4  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
bullmoose38's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 1,689
Default

Thanks! Im glad they didnt win! I know alot of folks here in my area are embarassed with the way they go about things. They make us hunters look ignorant and uneducated.

Last edited by bullmoose38; 03-06-2011 at 01:31 PM.
bullmoose38 is offline  
Old 03-07-2011, 01:02 PM
  #5  
Giant Nontypical
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: PA.
Posts: 5,195
Default

Originally Posted by bullmoose38
Thanks! Im glad they didnt win! I know alot of folks here in my area are embarassed with the way they go about things. They make us hunters look ignorant and uneducated.
i am LIFE MEMBER OF USP.deer numbers are very low here in clinton county.dcnr does not like deer.all i want to see is at least the 11dpsm that they said we should have.
hunting 5 miles of woods and you see 5 deer or many miles with none.i dont mean dpsm mile ,i mean 5 miles of woods .

most would be very happy to see 11 dpsm that they said we should have.
sproulman is offline  
Old 03-07-2011, 01:34 PM
  #6  
Nontypical Buck
 
BarnesX.308's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Audubon & Red Rock, Penna.
Posts: 4,472
Default

I can see disagreeing with the game commission on this issue, but what was the damage going to be if the USP won?

Gotta' be careful what you wish for. What happens if the PGC goes belly-up? Then the DCNR takes over control of all the SGL? Then what? Bird watching and bike trails. Jogging and site-seeing.

The PGC may not be perfect, but they beat the bunny huggers controling all the land.

Heck, Rendell would have put casinos all over the SGL.
BarnesX.308 is offline  
Old 03-07-2011, 06:09 PM
  #7  
Giant Nontypical
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: PA.
Posts: 5,195
Default

Originally Posted by BarnesX.308
I can see disagreeing with the game commission on this issue, but what was the damage going to be if the USP won?

Gotta' be careful what you wish for. What happens if the PGC goes belly-up? Then the DCNR takes over control of all the SGL? Then what? Bird watching and bike trails. Jogging and site-seeing.

The PGC may not be perfect, but they beat the bunny huggers controling all the land.

Heck, Rendell would have put casinos all over the SGL.
yes, USP does not want merger.dont think for minute that powers to be in pgc are not part of that bird group.

you have to go back and see who and what lead up to this deer kill off.
audobon has influence in pgc and dcnr.look at people who were behind all this. THEY ARE GETTING JOBS IN DCNR/FISH COMMISSION/USWILDLIFE ETC.

YOU SAY ABOUT DCNR TAKING OVER.how about us as sportsmans paying license fees taking over?
how about US picking the commissioners not DCNR/AUDOBON.
how about US for once having voice in what is good for deer other game.

we are losing.no doubt the dcnr has power.they have governors ear.so anything is possible.
you have to watch EVELANDS info on youtube.watch his film and look at PLAYERS at end.these are people that got deer thing going and look at where they are now.
dcnr is place they have gone too.
sproulman is offline  
Old 03-08-2011, 01:53 PM
  #8  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,879
Default

The PGC may not be perfect, but they beat the bunny huggers controling all the land.
But the bunny huggers are controlling the land because they are controlling how the PGC is managing our herd. The MSY CC of over browsed NE hardwoods is over 40 DPSM but the herd in 2G is being managed at 8 DPSM, which is the biodiversity carrying capacity of the habitat.
bluebird2 is offline  
Old 03-09-2011, 04:48 PM
  #9  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,926
Default Must be time

for another PA organizational fundraiser. They sure miss having any wildlife biologists on their staff. Must be all hunters.
Valentine is offline  
Old 03-09-2011, 05:13 PM
  #10  
Giant Nontypical
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: PA.
Posts: 5,195
Default

Originally Posted by Valentine
for another PA organizational fundraiser. They sure miss having any wildlife biologists on their staff. Must be all hunters.
sad that we seem to have to fight for everything these days.why is pgc commissioners not picked by hunters?we have no say.

so we have to raise money to try to stop the system that is not putting our deer herds at very low levels.
this is happening all over country too.not only in pa.

why all of sudden that deer are hated animal in woods .its all money valentine and groups with money are after hunters.
no deer,no hunters and AUDUBON and other nature people will have what they want.

WOODS WITH NO ONE IN IT CONTROLLED BY DCNR .dont think for 1 minute if they could keep us out of woods and on DESIGNATED TRAILS ,they would not do it.
sproulman is offline  

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.