PFSC Testimony

If you read through the thing it really doesn't make much sense at all. Are we sure he wasn't drunk or on drugs.
It sounds like the PGC did it right for ninety or a hundred years, screwed it up the next five and now he is worried they are going to go back to where we were. Slams science as not perfect, then slams BOC for questioning the science. He says we( as representing hunters) and then slams the hunters. I'am not sure who he is speaking for and I question if he even knows.

Attacking agency staff’s integrity and motives, and threatening their job status because of their recommendations borders on improper and unethical behavior

I wonder if he realizes that Alt provided more than ample reasons to question the PGC's integrity and motives when he tried to sell the HR plan based on lies and deceit? We now know there was no problem with the health of the herd or the buck breeding ecology. We also know that the PGC continues to lie about stabilizing the herd . So why shouldn't Rosenberry and Wallingford be held accountable for managing the herd for the benefit of DCNR, the timber industry and the Audubon?

FYI ==

Melody Zullinger Schell is still affilated with the PFSC in several ways, the most notable is she is the editor of the "ON TARGET" .. The offical publication of the PFSC...

Who is the "educational branch" for Penn Fed?

No idea what you are talking about....

thought they were gonna cut all ties with "wildlife federation" because of their extremism?

They did -- I see nothing about the NWF on the PFSC website and I remember the vote to no longer be affiliated with them...

Sure glad that "group" doesnt speak for me

and naturally, just like most folks, I could say the same about some other sporting organizations in this state...

you'd NEVER be happy as a member of the PFSC anyhow....

They (PFSC) look at the "big picture' and as your posts show you see only "deer"

done on showing my support for the PFSC for now ... everyone knows I stand behind them and am proud to be a member....

And dont even try to say its the PA wildlife federation and not the national fed..lol. Its a branch of. Just like Pa audubon is a branch of the mothership....er, i mean organization. lol.

"The Pennsylvania Wildlife Federation, the educational branch of the Federation of Sportsman's Clubs, a National Wildlife Federation affiliate, has recognized outstanding Pennsylvanians who have significantly contributed to the conservation of the commonwealth's environment."


So much for the "vote" eh?

I was going to just let this die... but decided to see if I could get some info "cleared" and I did... so I wanted to share this... not sure if I can explain this well on a message board or not.. but here's an attempt....


If you search Pa wildlife federation you find there is a webpage.. you will see there is VERY little there... that's because no one runs or takes care of the webpage.. it is simply there to hold the domain name...

The Pa Wildlife Federation was formed about 35 years ago as a 501 c 3 so they could accept tax deductible donations for educational purposes (a requirement to receive the tax deductible status). So PWF is the Educational Arm of PFSC. The PWF is the PFSC….so to speak. We are one in the same. The Pa Federation of Sportsmens is a 501 C 4 so they are allowed to lobby.. and has a VERY active and informative webpage ......


If you read the articles in the "ON TARGET" on the PWF page, they aren’t in the least bit non-hunting. And they are more or less an organization “in name only” (kinda like a dummy corporation) these days to keep the c 3 status.

The main reason they don’t give it up is because NWF would come in and scope it up, make tons of money and use the PFSC reputation, tout it as a sportsmen’s supported conservation organization for political purposes.

As for PFSC going toward environmental issues…..they always have and always will care about those issues. Their foundation almost 80 years ago was because of an environmental issue…. acid mine drainage damage coal mining was doing to our streams and rivers.

Our history is defined by environmental issues and successes in environmental protections.



You can’t have good hunting and fishing without good conservation….and what is conservation?



The act of conserving; prevention of injury, decay, waste, or loss; preservation: conservation of wildlife; official supervision of rivers, forests, and other natural resources in order to preserve and protect them through prudent management.



Can’t do that without caring about the environment ….and putting the resource first.



But that doesn’t mean we’ve moved away from hunting issues. We are stronger now than ever on 2nd amendment issues….maybe mostly because those issues weren’t issues back in PFSC’s early days. Problem is, there’s now several other “special interest” 2nd amendment groups out there taking credit for a lot of the work PFSC has done/does , and there are several “environmental” groups out there giving the rest of them a bad name.

and as for the vote... and the affilation with the Nat.wildlife fed. ===
just as I said .....

PFSC has no affiliation with NWF. They said they didn’t want us as an affiliate if we wouldn’t make global warming our # 1 issue. We said we would not support global warming period, as we were remaining neutral on the issue. So the affiliation was dissolved about 3 years ago.

BTW... did ya notice this part was NOT in the quote ===== Wayne added it...

a National Wildlife Federation affiliate,

now imho that just shot his creditablity all to hell in my book forever... ... adding something to a quote that is/was not there ......

now if I am wrong and I doubt that I am.. he has every chance in the world to post a link to the exact quote he posted .....

and I will be more than happy to apoligze for "calling him out" on this act..

here's his quote == "The Pennsylvania Wildlife Federation, the educational branch of the Federation of Sportsman's Clubs, a National Wildlife Federation affiliate, has recognized outstanding Pennsylvanians who have significantly contributed to the conservation of the commonwealth's environment."

and here is the quote as written in the article ==

The Pennsylvania Wildlife Federation, the educational branch of the Federation of Sportsman's Clubs, recognizes outstanding Pennsylvanians who have significantly contributed to the conservation of the commonwealth's environment. Additional awards are given in the areas of youth, organization, communication and education.

"now knowing the PFSC had recently broken ties with the NWF, as I stated,.. I just had to find out who had made this false statement...

well I finally traced it down this morning.. it is from the DCNR article on Feb 21, ...get this... 1997 .....

NICE TRY WAYNE !!! "

Nice try at WHAT? lmao. The only reason i posted that statement was to prove who "Pa wildlife federation" was...a shoot off of nwf.

And if you wanted to know where it came from, you didnt have to spend half the night and part of the morning looking... all you had to do was ask! lmao. It was from dcnr website and, Im guessing that dcnr didnt make it up? lol..

The rest:

"THE PENNSYLVANIA WILDLIFE FEDERATION
PWF is the educational arm of PFSC.
Our mission is to educate Pennsylvanians about our environment and
inspire them to protect and conserve our natural resources.
Donations to PWF are tax deductible to the extent provided by law.
Phone 717-232-3480 *

Found in Jan/Feb 2011 issue of "on target".

Click the link and scroll down to page 8.

HERES YOUR LINK LOOKS LIKE A PARTNERSHIP TO ME

Was found right smack dab on your clubs latest issue of "on target" exactly as stated, and as the link provided shows.

When you ever gonna learn i dont lie son? Now click that link, scroll down to the final paragraph, and let me know what it says....Did i add anything? You made the ridiculous claim, now be man enought to retract it, instead of tucking tail and running.



LINK: WRRRRRRONG AGAIN DOC LINK



"The Pennsylvania Wildlife Federation, the educational branch of the Federation of Sportsman's Clubs, a National Wildlife Federation affiliate, has recognized outstanding Pennsylvanians who have significantly contributed to the conservation of the commonwealth's environment. Additional awards are given in the areas of Youth, Organization, Communication and Education. Anyone interested in attending the Conservation Achievement Awards Banquet may contact Susan Harral at the Pennsylvania Wildlife Federation at (717) 232-3480."


BTW, i accept your due apology, for even thinking about trying to besmirch my credibility. lol.

Any other angles youd like to try to explain the extreme groups connection to penn fed away?

No problem doc. Thanks.

Yeah, doc, only problem is, you could not prove that, and i did provide info that leads us to believe otherwise. It definately appears that Penn Fed is STILL in relationship with NWF. Whatever "vote" that occurred previously is obviously now null and void. Maybe that is why people got mad and they are having the financial troubles and loss of membership, staff etc???

If you go to that "pa wildlife federation" site you mentioned, http://www.pawildlife.org/


....there is only one link on it and it takes you straight to here;

NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION

Now i dont know how you feel about this pennfed+wildlife fed affiliation, but if you dont care...You should!

Rocco Ali, PFSC Secretary


PGC Board of Commissioners Meeting
January 30th, 2011

Good afternoon Commissioners, Executive Director Roe, staff and guests. My name is Rocco Ali. I am a past president and currently the secretary of the Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs (PFSC).


Commissioners and staff will come and go, PFSC board members will come and go, and hunters will come and go. Unfortunately the issue of “how many deer are enough or too many” never goes away. PFSC has always been on the side of “Resource First” and while that is good from a conservation standpoint, it has sometimes resulted in criticism from some hunters who felt we were not supportive enough of “hunter satisfaction,” especially in regards to how many deer are enough or too many.


We believe science and habitat should by far be the leading management indicators, but I really think the majority of Pennsylvania hunters don’t want to hear that choice. Many forget the 100 years of wildlife management and conservation that took Pennsylvania out of the dark ages and brought wildlife management, conservation, hunters and hunting, the agency, and the habitat, into the 21st century. Now into the 11th year of the century, the explosions are more robust than the early 1900’s when game and habitat were almost non-existent across Pennsylvania. What has taken almost 90 years of science based management to correct has taken less than 5 years of social and political influences to once again threaten another implosion.


There is no doubt as to the variability and volatility of the herd management dilemma the agency faces. Any one of us responds based on the areas we hunt and the friends we keep. It is far too difficult to paint so broad a picture and at the same time assume anyone is doing complete justice to the situation. There are extremes on both sides of the herd management issue. Science is not perfect as we’ve seen over and over again throughout history.


Now there are reports that several of the commissioners have indicated they are interested in hearing more than just the biologists’ perspective, or perhaps even suggest the biologists should change their perspective. There’s nothing wrong with holding staff accountable, however they should not be attacked for providing the science just because it’s not what you want to hear. Attacking agency staff’s integrity and motives, and threatening their job status because of their recommendations borders on improper and unethical behavior.


The biologists are tasked with providing recommendations based on the science with data to back it up. It is then the commissioners’ job to weigh the science, consider the politico-socio-economic factors, and come up with a balanced approach. Sportsmen, commissioners and the agency should work collaboratively together, not contentiously. It is our hope that all involved could conduct business in a more professional manner.


Socio-economic factors have always been a part of how we’ve managed deer in PA, but they should not be the major influence in deer management, as they sometimes were in the past. While anecdotal reports from hunters in various areas of the state can have some validity attached to them and they should not be totally ignored, they cannot rise to the level of scientifically-gathered data, nor as legitimate, sound evidence of what the situation actually reflects.


While we all know it would be tough for the agency to avoid alienating at least some people no matter what they do, too many hunters have often felt the agency has taken the ‘either you’re with us or against us’ approach. This does little to heal the relationship between the agency and those hunters who feel the agency has gone too far in the herd reduction program. The PGC and many hunters alike have drawn too clear a dividing line between what is science and what is opinion. It’s obviously frustrating to both; but remaining so divided hasn’t helped the situation. There are some who will always be radicals and not want to listen to reason on either side of the deer fence, however this should not give credence to ‘throwing the baby out with the bathwater’ and going back to ways of old.


Thus, we believe trying to increase deer herd numbers with split seasons across the state would certainly be too broad a brush. No-one should be agreeable to less than manageable numbers where habitat will allow. Nor, should anyone be tolerant of too many deer considering the same factors. Closing the first week to antlerless hunting statewide constitutes a “one size fits all” approach – a concept a few commissioners have been touting as a “fatal flaw” of the current program – why is it suddenly an acceptable philosophy?


As you consider the “bigger picture,” please also keep in mind the opportunity our combined season provides, specifically for our youth hunters who usually have limited opportunities to be afield. Regardless of your decision on adding more split seasons, consider allowing our youth hunters be exempt in all WMU’s. If they hold an antlerless tag, allow them the opportunity to fill their tag anytime during the two week rifle season. Allow the same for mentored hunters if/when we pass legislation allowing for the transfer of tags.


Many or our youth hunters no longer even get the first day of the season off school. Eliminating antlerless harvests during the first week will eliminate opportunity for many youth and adults who only get that first day of deer rifle season as a vacation day. We believe the antlerless allocations are a much better method of controlling harvest than reducing season lengths, resulting in less opportunity for all. We respectfully request that a commissioner direct staff to prepare for the April meeting, a scenario which would indicate the amount of antlerless tags necessary per WMU for a two week concurrent season, versus how many tags would achieve a similar harvest with only a one week antlerless season. That should be the issue – not the length of season.
As bear problems continue to mount, we hope you will reinstitute the extended season in those areas. Many of our members are still very disappointed with the closure of the fall turkey season in the southeast, as well as the split fall season. We have concerns about the effects of these changes on the turkey studies currently in progress. We are also starting to hear from members who are concerned with the proposed earlier pheasant season.
Thank you for your time and consideration of our concerns.

+1

We believe the antlerless allocations are a much better method of controlling harvest than reducing season lengths, resulting in less opportunity for all

Be careful what you are agreeing to. What this will do is keep many of the youth from having a tag to use at all. The other way allows more of the youth to hunt deer but for a few days less. Isn't it better to allow the maximum number of young hunters the opportunity to harvest a doe?

Doc says: I'm not happy that link goes to the NWF..

after work I'll make some phone calls and see what I can find out....

Well?