Sunday hunting hearing

Just watched the sunday hunting legislative hearing. Thought it was interesting to say the least. lol.

Sarah Speed of the humane society was there, and testified. Most interesting comment i thought from her was "off topic". Stated more than once that she wanted to DIVERSIfY wildlife FUNDING, so that hunters arent the only ones paying most of the bills so that others could have more say. Funny thats the exact same thing pgc wants and has been lobbying hard for. Not surprising seeing as how she was previously lobbying right along side pgc legislative liason for the "poaching bill" previously.

Then we had some gentlemen from nra i believe it was? That gave some reasons for supporting sunday hunting and cited some stats. I thought they gave a decent presenttion. But when asked questions by the legislators that matttered, they simply did not have the answers and answered several times "we'll have to get back to you on that" and a couple of times answered things that werent asked.

Then we had a representative from Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen Clubs speak. He said it was pretty close split but He stated that Penn Feds official position is that they SUPPORTED sunday hunting by a small margin, and supported transfering the decisionmakeing on the issue by a wide margin. Funny thing is, 2 representatives/legislators in attendance spoke out, one stated that he thought Penn fed had "NO" official position at all on the issue as he understood it, and another did as well saying he thought the same. The one legislator asked the Penn Fed speaker if the organization did a poll of it members. Answer was that they attempted to but "were not able to process it' whatever that means. lmao. So basically he admitted that the higher ups basically made the decision for everyone. lol. The two reps clearly werent happy about how their "club" did business...

Then another thing i found interested was that noone had an answer to the Sunday adding to deer overharvest problem other then, PGC would figure it out. lmao. Only problem is, noone trusts pgc with the deer. Killing too many deer and potential for shortening seasons were mentioned by a couple of legislators and didnt sound like they thought it a good tradeoff possibly as much as a week just to add a sunday was cited as a general example by the legislator.

One legislator also added that one concern is that so many people are upset about the deer situation That although pgc would be making the decisions with the change, he would be the one that gets 1000's of complaints about the deer situation (which apparently would worsen) demanding that he do something.

Not sure if there is enough support or not to make the change. Some reps were clearly for it, and some didnt appear to be.

ORIGINAL: wayne c

Just watched the sunday hunting legislative hearing. Thought it was interesting to say the least. lol.

 
Watched it as well and it was entertaining.

Sarah Speed of the humane society was there, and testified. Most interesting comment i thought from her was "off topic". Stated more than once that she wanted to DIVERSIfY wildlife FUNDING, so that hunters arent the only ones paying most of the bills so that others could have more say. Funny thats the exact same thing pgc wants and has been lobbying hard for. Not surprising seeing as how she was previously lobbying right along side pgc legislative liason for the "poaching bill" previously.

Be interesting to see who walks hand in hand with Sarah about Sunday hunting.

Then we had some gentlemen from nra i believe it was? That gave some reasons for supporting sunday hunting and cited some stats. I thought they gave a decent presenttion. But when asked questions by the legislators that matttered, they simply did not have the answers and answered several times "we'll have to get back to you on that" and a couple of times answered things that werent asked.

 
Good presentation but unprepared.  When the rep was questioning him about shortened season as a result of Sunday hunting elsewhere, he stated we will get back to you.  The fact is nowhere in the country has it happened.  Very big missed opportunity.  Then a rep asked for data to support it helping to recruit kids or increase participation among our youth.  Again, they said they would have to look it up and get back to them.  It was apparent, these reps wanted facts to back up the possible "yes" vote.  Stinks because this was the time to get them out there and it was missed. 

Then we had a representative from Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen Clubs speak. He said it was pretty close split but He stated that Penn Feds official position is that they SUPPORTED sunday hunting by a small margin, and supported transfering the decisionmakeing on the issue by a wide margin. Funny thing is, 2 representatives/legislators in attendance spoke out, one stated that he thought Penn fed had "NO" official position at all on the issue as he understood it, and another did as well saying he thought the same. The one legislator asked the Penn Fed speaker if the organization did a poll of it members. Answer was that they attempted to but "were not able to process it' whatever that means. lmao. So basically he admitted that the higher ups basically made the decision for everyone. lol. The two reps clearly werent happy about how their "club" did business...

 
The PFSC testimony was weak and confusing to the reps.  He could not answer how the PFSC arrived at their position.  After the hearing I heard from several PFSC folks that had much clearer and concise explanations of their position.  That being the majority of their delegates support a regulatory transfer.  The PFSC even upset Staback with his wording which Staback misunderstood the context of. 

Then another thing i found interested was that noone had an answer to the Sunday adding to deer overharvest problem other then, PGC would figure it out. lmao. Only problem is, noone trusts pgc with the deer. Killing too many deer and potential for shortening seasons were mentioned by a couple of legislators and didnt sound like they thought it a good tradeoff possibly as much as a week just to add a sunday was cited as a general example by the legislator.

 
That is where data from other states could have been introduced by the Sportsmen alliance and the NRA but they were not prepared.  It was also evident than some of the legislators do not understand what regulatory control actually means.  It appeared that many though it was a "all in" scenario. 

One legislator also added that one concern is that so many people are upset about the deer situation That although pgc would be making the decisions with the change, he would be the one that gets 1000's of complaints about the deer situation (which apparently would worsen) demanding that he do something.

 
That was funny.  Maybe if he wasn't so concerned about being re-elected and took the time to explain the role of a game agency and a legislature, he wouldn't feel so threatened about losing his job. LOL

Not sure if there is enough support or not to make the change. Some reps were clearly for it, and some didnt appear to be.

It was mixed for sure.  They did say that legislation to transfer regulatory control will be coming.  That is a step in the right direction anyway.  It was also very apparent that some are very confused on the issue and what the process is if a transfer actually happens.  It does seem that it remains all about deer and that the perception is the PGC will instantly add all Sundays to all of our seasons.

A good start with valid points from both sides.  It will take time to sort through the point to seperate fact from fiction and hopefully the outcome will be based on fact.

That is where data from other states could have been introduced by the Sportsmen alliance and the NRA but they were not prepared. It was also evident than some of the legislators do not understand what regulatory control actually means. It appeared that many though it was a "all in" scenario.

I think they understood it completely. They were looking at the obvious consequences of relinquishing that regulatory control. In my view giving control to pgc = implementation. And implementation = more deer dead. And i do NOT trust pgc to do whats right, when they havent over the course of the last decade where our deer herd is concerned.

"It was mixed for sure. They did say that legislation to transfer regulatory control will be coming. That is a step in the right direction anyway."

Ah yes, the "bill" circus. Bounce it around, add an amendment, bounce it around again, send it over there. Put it on the back burner till next year.... Then repeat. lol.

"It was also very apparent that some are very confused on the issue and what the process is if a transfer actually happens. It does seem that it remains all about deer and that the perception is the PGC will instantly add all Sundays to all of our seasons."

First off, many do not TRUST the game commission and with VERY GOOD reason. WIth the problems in place that exist, their judgement on implementing ANYTHING that could have maleffect on the deer herd is basically mud as far as im concerned. The proof is in the pudding. A well documented last decade of mud. And i think that is putting it mildly.

Second, deer season,I dont care how many they add. At the moment I dont want to see one. I dont want ten. The herd has already been overharvested. Adjust things appropriately BEFORE implementing sunday hunting. Our asnine 65000 tags in this unit with a dwindling buck harvest isnt going away even without sundays. How many more days added would be a "good" thing towards countering that overharvest?? Judging by OUR unit dpms, what in gods name gives you any inkling that things would be handled appropriately and that the added harvest would be responsibly accounted for by other changes made? I use our unit not because its thee very worst example of the mismanagement, but its one im most familiar with the facts, and its not pretty either.


We have had 55000!!! or more tags in our unit since the herd was reduced with far fewer tags. There alone should have been an obvious reduction in allocations. The goal was supposed to become stabilization. No...we got 55k instead. lmao. Then we got no reduction when crossbows were legalized, we got no reduction after ehd (unless you count the 60k the year before which didnt all sell anyway but basically the same as the prior years before, and we got no reduction, but an INCREASE in allocation (along with the farce split season which is said will now be a "wash" and same result as our 55k tags previously anway which was overkill) now that our buck harvest is at a many decades low in the unit Having gone from 13700 all the way down to 5800!!. Then Rosenberry even admitted our unit has been declining, after being pointed out in a manner that he could no longer hide he had little choice....even though the goal was supposedly stabilization and everyone knew that wasnt occurring it was ridiculously blatent. Instead of enjoying years of stabilization since 2005 we are sitting on a modern day low herd. After all that, as well as other atrocities committed across the board in the other units in similar or worse manner, i am to believe the appropriate and responsible things will be done by pgc to allocations or season length to allow for Sundays added harvest(if in their infinite wisdom so decide to implement it)? Wrong. Im not willing to support the theory that for some reason now they might find a shred of decency and do the right thing when they havent for over a decade. I may have been in the night but it wasnt last night.

Sorry t make it "all about deer" but it is what it is. Thats the only reason i currently do not support it. The maleffects and putting "faith" in an agency that has done everything in their power to prove that they do not deserve it.

I dont think you believe that dpms. Just trying to "stoke the pro-sunday fire". lol

Most of the legislators thankfully are pro hunting. While we may have issues with how they vote on things at times, one thing we can be and should be thankful for is that we dont have a bunch of antigun, antihunting idiots that would listen to anything speed has to say. Did you see them clearly and openly making fun of her? lol. They actually flat out dismissed her! lol

She supported the poaching bill vocally. So did most hunters. So did pgc. Few would argue against it i believe, and it passed. But SHE had no bearing on the outcome at all. As is the case currently as well. Sunday hunting will either be defeated and pushed along for later "rounds" to be discussed again in another couple of years or it will pass. Neither outcome will be decided by sarah in any way shape or form.

"Which is something that we are fortunate to have here in Pa. at the moment. We should not rest on our laurels though and attempt to remove politics from game management the best we can. "

I agree somewhat. I support that in concept but in practice the devil is in the details. I do not support selectively removing any and all politcal involvement that may be beneficial to me and i believe the majority of sportsmen, when all the really problematic politics are built right into the system and arent going anywhere anytime soon. You also arent gonna have "one side" give up on political lobbying for their views, wanting legislators to get involved with pgc issues at times, why should the "other side" of that particular issue??

There is no reason to fear antihunting or other nonhunting friendly factions being in seats of our legislature any more or less than those very same being on our board of commissioners or upper staff at that management agency pgc. And yes, i include "environmentalist extreme" types in that as well. Not necessarily antihunters but certainly not someone we want in charge of hunting or our game animal management. I believe that is what is occurring, but even if you do not, there is still no reason to believe that is any less a threat and real possibility on into the future then the political pressures that you actually are concerned about outside of the agency.

Also, we CAN vote out alot of legislators who are problematic (ask levdansky), especially given that polls show strong support for hunting even among nonhunters in Pa... but we can do NOTHING about pgc higher ups or the boc.

Careful boyz---
To an ANTI poachers are just another hunter--
  Many really do not see or understand the difference - to them we are all just game killers no matter how we do it.
  My friends in politics truley believe that I hunt property without permission and regardless of legal seasons and limits, shoot whatever is around- they really believe it.  URBIES perception of us all. ( too much Disney)
   Of course they will stand up and fight stuff like poacher issues--be careful who ya hang with though cause they have another target in mind down the road. Chip away-chip away.

"Needs to stop on all accounts."

Starting with pgc & audubon.