"They certainly do. If by "we" you mean deer hunters -- you have to keep in mind that providing lots deer for us to see or shoot is not a priority of the PGC nor should it be.."

Thats hardly what anyone is asking. Providing for hunter satisfaction should most definately be a "priority" perhaps not very top priority, but a high priority none the less. And no, i didnt say a word about providing us with lots of deer to shoot. The term "lots" is wide open to interpretation. What is lots to one person, may be just right, or even too few to many others. But to not care at all about the well being of the sport/lifestyle/management tool/funding source of hunting itself is utterly absurd.

"their duty is to manage ALL wildlife for all Pennsylvanians not just hunters... but you knew that ?????"

Yes. I know that. Just as you know that the statement should not be taken to mean= EXCLUDING HUNTERS.

What is lots to one person, may be just right, or even too few to many others.

actually I think today it is something like this ==

What is huntable to many people and who are satisfied, may be to few for some others

And there in lays the problem...

me == lots in 2F
others == just right in 2F
complainers == too few in 2F

so with just those three opinions about the current number of deer, deer hunters will NEVER agree about the size of the deer herd and in fact never have... I have read countless article from the 1950s thru the 90s where those three opinions are present.. and there are and have always been those like many of us that support the PGC and those like you, beenthere, S-10, and others that just love attacking it when given the chance.

so basically talk about the PGC has not changed and never will == good... okay... terrible
the three sides again



And message boards and the internet give people a chance to express their opinions more than in the past when we did not have this option.. But keep in mind there is a small portion of the hunting community on message boards... especially the number that reply to topics about the PGC or the deer plan... most just read and make up their own minds.. so alot has to do with the way, style, and manner things are presented on the internet that help make up the opinions of others...... not just numbers !!!

And I have found in my life time constant negativity turns people off, no matter what the subject... as does rudeness..........

ORIGINAL: S-10

Danesdad--- Since you seem as adamant as Doc in support of the PGC tell us what positive results you see as a result of AR/HR and what claims they made to sell it that have happened.

That assumption is not correct. I'm not happy with how things are going. The difference between you and me is not our position on the PGC. The difference is WHY it is this way and how it got this way. That's all.

Wayne, I think you are too hostile about the PGC and the way things are going to even have a reasonable discussion about it.

There is no middle ground with you.

we'll see.

Danesdad, thats your opinion and your welcome to them. However despite my feelings about pgcs practices etc. I am very well versed on the topic and very fair. Any statements i make or opinions i express are based upon the facts. Im sorry you feel otherwise, and very sorry that you didnt fair very well in the debate and it caused you to make ridiculous allegations, bizzarre attention seeking lines of singular statement posts, and basically blew a gasket because i didnt agree with you. Oh well, you'll get over it im sure. If you want to get into a pizzing match, go find someone else, im not interested.

"Hopefully, individual statements as posts will make it harder to be taken out of context."

Never took one word of yours out of context. Perhaps youd like to point it out? I see the accusation several times now, but never the example given. Thats what i thought... OR maybe i just took that quote out of context too! If you want to post in a reasonable manner id be happy to reply, until then, I dont have anything more to add.



Doctor trout says:"so with just those three opinions about the current number of deer, deer hunters will NEVER agree about the size of the deer herd and in fact never have... I have read countless article from the 1950s thru the 90s where those three opinions are present.. and there are and have always been those like many of us that support the PGC and those like you, beenthere, S-10, and others that just love attacking it when given the chance."

OF course doc. But the HUGE MAJORITY DO agree, that the reduction went too far. I couldnt care less about chronic complainers and the fact there always have been some complaining no matter what. But we are speaking of epic proportions and totally 100% unacceptable. Thats why pgc is being sued, have been chastised steadily by legislators & hunters alike, they were audited, and being denied a fee increase on our behalf. Hardly just business as usual in Pa deer management. lol

"so basically talk about the PGC has not changed and never will == good... okay... terrible
the three sides again"

They make the appropriate changes and a helluva lot more will think they are good or ok and fewer will think terrible. I didnt disagree with them myself until fairly recently. I had supported them in deer debates on other boards for years until i saw how absolutely ridiculous things were becoming and learned more about the inner workings of it all.

"And I have found in my life time constant negativity turns people off, no matter what the subject... as does rudeness.........."

I reply exactly in same manner of the post i am replying too. At no point did i cross the line or even close, nor do i intend to. Unlike some, my emotions arent an issue. But if its rudeness iget, i keep it within the rules, but im not gonna kiss someone backside or be tread upon. Perhaps before you accuse me falsely of being "rude"...each time you should back it up and look at what im replying to perhaps? If someone treats me with respect i reciprocate 100% of the time. And as for you currently, I feel i have been more than fair to you in replies to your posts and views, so dont know why all of the sudden you would act as if i somehow besmirched you? Or more likely it appears you are just trying to add emphasis to DD'S line of posting, taking the opportunity to get a jab in.

I wrote ===

"And I have found in my life time constant negativity turns people off, no matter what the subject... as does rudeness.........."

Wayne wrote

Perhaps before you accuse me falsely of being "rude"...

appears wayne has a guilty conscience.. I see no where in my post his name or any one else mentioned

??? INTERESTING !!!

That statement is just what it is == something I have learned and was taught in my lifetime and I realize (everyday) today's young people have not and are not being brought up that way...

"the golden rule" got FLUSHED years ago....

"appears wayne has a guilty conscience.. I see no where in my post his name or any one else mentioned"

Seeing as the rest of your reply was directed towards me, i guess maybe i lept to conclusions. Now, would you like to relinquish the pulpit and quit preachin' 'bout the evils of todays youth, and maybe we can allow things to get back on topic?

ORIGINAL: S-10

For what it's worth, for decades I thought the PGC walked on water and wrote several opinions in the papers supporting their actions, rode with them on patrol, and had considered joining them. I even had a couple family members in the agency. In the 90's I started seeing the change in priorties to non-game issues and the lies, half truths, and misleading statements during the last 7 years put me on the other side. We are losing hunting members fast enough without the PGC taking actions to speed up the process. My 2 cents

It appears that you Wayne and I were in the same boat as you supporting the PGC until Alt started lying about the status of our herd. Alt was a good salesman and convinced many hunters that we had many problems with our herd that in reality didn't exist. Even Dr. R. agrees that ARs had no positive effects on the breeding ecology or recruitment And, until the PGC can provide the data that shows that HR resulted in a significant increase in the rate of regeneration the plan will be the biggest farce ever in the history of deer management in PA.

ORIGINAL: S-10

For what it's worth, for decades I thought the PGC walked on water and wrote several opinions in the papers supporting their actions, rode with them on patrol, and had considered joining them. I even had a couple family members in the agency. In the 90's I started seeing the change in priorties to non-game issues and the lies, half truths, and misleading statements during the last 7 years put me on the other side. We are losing hunting members fast enough without the PGC taking actions to speed up the process. My 2 cents

Aren't they supposed to be taking care of non-game species too? Aren't they responsible for the whole shebang and not just deer?

ORIGINAL: S-10

Since all you seem to do is question any facts your given and suggest the folks giving them are conspiricy nuts without being able to produce any facts to support your position I suggest you do the research yourself. That is of course unless you are a troll just tying to keep the pot stirred or support the Audubon and enviromentalists who are only interested in their own issues. Wayne believes strongly but he can produce facts to back up his beliefs. Lets see yours.

Wayne does produce facts, but too often they are clouded by his obvious biases and he misinterprets EVERYTHING I say. He is too rapped up in it emotionally. You are way more convincing than he is (at least to me) because you also produce facts, but you dont take everything I say as a personal insult or cut bits and pieces of it out of context. For you, it seems like more of an intellectual disagreement. For him, it seems like his self esteem is somehow wrapped up in it. Truthfully, I regret getting into this with him because I didn't expect anyone to take it so personally.

"Managing wildlife and its habitat for current and future generations."


OK, as I stated earlier, this statement is on the homepage of the PGCs website. Is this not a fact? If this IS their mission, how does managing things to produce the MAXIMUM number of deer, as they did before AR/HR jibe with this statement? Or do you not believe that prior to AR/HR that the were producing as many deer as possible?

Danes, you have seen our data supporting our position---- lets see yours

Remember, I'm not disputing that deer harvest is down, or that AR is or is not working, or tag alloocations are raised or lowered, or that HR has gone too far in many places. My understanding is that where we disagree is the MOTIVES behind the changes. Am I( right or worng?