Was Pheasant huntin the State stocked Durham Ct Meadows area years ago with a fine young Setter. Dog went on point and hada get across a small  brook and round some brush to get to her.
 
    Comin round the brush to the dog  heard a muffeled shot- as I came round  some idiot was standin by her holdin up a blown apart bird , Clearly shot right in front of the dogs nose  on the ground. His 2 friends were doin the UH OH shuffle.


--nuff said- aint admittin ta nothin--------

I HATE the new proposed regulation.

ORIGINAL: rmcmillen09

Who is part of the think-tank that put this to the vote ? Too bad the hunters of the Commonwealth couldn't weigh in on this issue.

 
Hunters certainly can weigh in.
 
It is just a proposal and needs to be voted on at the April Commission meeting. If anyone has strong feelings about the subject one way or the other they can contact the Commissioners with their views.
 
That is how the Commission system is designed to work on issues that are social in nature.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn

Would a petition be considered,I have talked to our state rep on other issues or both?

That's where a simple yes or no vote opportunity , from the licensed hunters would be effective coming from the hunters of the Commonwealth to the Commission directly.

WMU 2A last year. I was shocked at the number of hunters that had no idea that the first week was buck only and that the antler restrictions had changed.  One of my relatives didn't know as we were discussing hunting at Thankgiving dinner.  And he was going hunting Monday.
 
Not sure I would want every licensed hunter voting on issues that they care little enough about to know the whys and wheres of each regulation.
 
Plus, opening up voting to licensed hunters allows those not friendly to hunting have a voice just by purchasing a hunting license. 

Way to many arm chair biologists out there that form their opinions on game issues from "camp talk" and info gathered selling cigarettes and Jerky to hunters.

_____________________________

ORIGINAL: rmcmillen09

Respectfully RSB If the hunters were given a voice they might just begin to take notice to things and be better educated on subjects ( look at the pros and cons ) and decide from there . I'm not against the Game Commission but there are hunters afield that see things that graphs and charts just do not reveal.

 
Hunter do already have a voice through the current Commission system. All they have to do is write a letter, pick up the phone, send an e-mail or they can speak directly to all of the Commissioners at once at a Commission meeting.
 
It works to. Most hunters just don’t ever bother to contact a Commissioner about their concerns or thoughts.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn   

ORIGINAL: S-10

As evidenced by the list of changes the BOC has made thus far, if you want something that will help DECREASE the deer herd or turkey population your chances are very good. Other stuff, not so much. RSB is correct about one thing though, too many people do nothing but complain as opposed to contacting the BOC or your local politician. You can bet your arse the AUDUBON is talking to them.

 
That is nothing more than yet another of you highly biased rants.
 
Hunters are certainly listened to even though they are totally split into thousands if not hundreds of thousands of different directions they want the Game Commission to go with the various management directions for each species. Hunters can't seem to agree on what direction anything should go when it comes to managment direction. 
 
Even if they do, and they not only do but should, listen to Audubon and others with a non-game interest why do they think they shouldn’t?
 
In this state the Game Commission is legislatively charged with managing for ALL wildlife and their habitats. Since 88% of the species in this state are never hunted why shouldn’t the Audubon people have a say in what management direction is used to manage for those species hunters have no interest in? The Game Commission has received about 12 million dollars over the past couple years that was specifically ear marked for non-game species management so please explain to us just who should be at the table with ideas on the best possible ways to spend that money so it would benefit those non-game species.
 
Even though people like you see no reason to think of anything you can’t hunt, that opinion and thinking is clearly based on ignorance of the importance of the habitat and food supplies on deer and other wildlife populations. The simple fact is that if the Game Commission had spent the last twenty-five years or so managing for the maximum number of birds and wildflowers instead of the maximum number of deer, as the hunters wanted and demanded, we would have way more deer in nearly all, if not all, areas of this state today than what we do have.
 
R.S. Bodenhorn

Bet there will be a few at the Bluebird field trip to talk game management to.

Can't argue with that either. The antis are using our division against us already.

Plus 3-it goes for anyplace.  Ya dont read bout the Antis infighting do ya ???