You can rant all you want and twist the facts if you want just as the fisher gal has done in pushing this but the fact is 80% of landowners don't want you there and I doubt if they would take kindly to your name calling. They pay the taxes and don't need that attitude.  You should be more concerned about the hunters who will lose access because they will have to find new areas and may just decide your hunting spots look good.
 
No sense carrying this any further, good day.

I'm with S-10 on this one. I believe more will be lost than gained.

HI............  guess whooo?
 
Been a couple of hours since anybody post a comment on this subject and it's raining "cats and dogs" so, I'm back!
 
Some really good points being made on this subject and what I like the most is the passion reflected in each thread.
 
A question I would like to pose is; why would the two politicians introducing this bill, put full control  into the hands of the PGC. (gee, makes one wonder who wrote this bill) If, the politicians were truly(not politically)concerned about the PA. hunter, would they not be wiser to introduce a bill that would start with Sunday hunting (for all species) on PA Gamelands?   Does not, getting a "foot in the door",  get better results compared to "push-n- shove".  
 
BUT WAIT.........  those 'public lands' are over-hunted.........  BULLCHYIT!     Oooops, sorrry, dang rant caught me off guard!
 
I'm still on the fence about hunting on Sunday but then again, I am an ole phart that despises the PGC's plan to reduce the whitetail deer herd for the sake of....... (waaait for it)............ increasing elk herds in PA. 
 
However,  cutting 'doe hunting' to one week is  a move in the right direction.  The best part was making the 'second week' of firearms 'doe season' and to that I say, it's a "foot in the door"
 
As for this proposal getting more land 'posted' I gotta say it will, in certain locations of the state.  My thinking ( ), counties where large communities of religious based families are farming/own land.  I'm not just looking at the Amish/Mennonite communities, I'm talking about the PA. farming community in general.  Many of these people attend the same church, belong to local granges and are members of the PFB.  Certainly, not all these people are opposed to Sunday hunting but, they will support those that do because they know, 'united they stand....'.
 
Yep, strange how a person will allow the killing of an animal 6 days of the week but, on Sunday, "not in my house".
See it how you will but, these people still have a right to their feelings and, in my book should be permitted to exercise that right,how they see fit.
 
We all are aware of the hunting clubs, leasing and posting land for members only hunting.   Clubs provide funds to lease land, buy signs and, manpower to accomplish the task of posting and maintaining signs.  Somebody(s) in that club took the initiative to; locate the land, contact the landowner and, negotiate a lease contract.  And it's no secret   for clubs to have members become dissatisfied, for whatever reason, and leave only to seek happier hunting grounds.
 
Hang in there, my point is about to be made..............
 
Some may be aware of the 'new sheriff in town', he's the guy that does the leg work finding the land, setting up the lease contract(no sunday hunting), gets the land posted, then subleases the land to you.  You lease what you can afford, be it an acre or a hundred acres, the land now becomes your private hunting reserve.  A few buddies get together, lease what they can each afford and no more hunting club!
 
Finding land to lease may be difficult for the sheriff, until landowners are pizzed off by politicians trying to save their political azss pushing for a law that landowners may object to.   In rides the sheriff, bidding goodwill with a plan that will generate; income for the landowner, free labor to post/maintain free signs and, prevent SUNDAY HUNTING on the land.  Word of the lease offer spreads among the landowner community via church meetings or the ho-downs at the local grange.  Not wanting to cause discontent among my neighbors, even though I only own a few acres and I don't oppose the bill, I jump on the bandwagon!  Eventually one becomes many be it, 1 acre of land or one landowner.  
 
If ya think I'm out in left field with this one, Google "lease hunting land in PA."... I dare ya.
 
 When you stop and think that, this idea will be opposed by a very powerful organization having strong opposition against Sunday hunting!  I for one can't help but feel, these two politicians must be morons if they think a bill like this will make it past the trash can.  Errrrrrr, maybe they think we're the morons.........  nah, they wouldn't think that!
 
Do ya think the landowners and farmers would support Sunday hunting if the PGC provided and posted the land, free of charge, with this sign?
 

 
Or would the sheriff stand a better chance if he provides the farmer/owner with an income along with providing and posting, free of charge, this sign? 
 

 
Ummm maybe the law will pass, politicians get re-elected, the PGC gets free range to do as they please aaaaaaand, 'erybody be HAppy, happy............, happy.
 
MAYBE in your dreams...................
 
I gotta get.

That's my point "D", the PA. farmers/landowners do not want anything to do with 'SH" no matter what the PGC and hunters put on the table.  However, land continues to be posted and much of it is from the guys leasing and subleasing.  Landowners get fed up with 'whatever they get fed-up with' and take advantage of some guy offering income and free posting of their land for the right to hunt and/or fish.  Some landowners get so fired-up with whatever fired them up and proceed to convince others to join in on the good deal made leasing the land for hunting/fishing rights.
 
Another point; the PGC would be further off to start with keeping Sunday hunting to the state game lands but, for reasons unknown, the PGC insist they should be the judge and jury as to when, where and, what should be hunted on Sunday.  Why, if there is no devious intentions by the PGC (or someone with-in), must they have such power concerning Sunday hunting? 
 
I dunno, maybe it's a ploy just to get their foot in the door.  Maybe they are willing to negotiate or, make it appear they will negotiate, when in fact they are only after Sunday hunting on game lands.  I do know they are making a lot of people nervous.
 
Time will tell, meanwhile I'll stay on the fence, where it's a bit safer as there seems to be a lot of snakes in the grass with this issue.
 
PS. did ya check out that web site?  There's or, was around 400 acres available not far from me.  I Googled the area when I saw the advertisement and sure enough that area is now posted with signs but, I don't know if it's all been subleased.

DPMS --While it's true the PGC can reduce the deer herd without Sunday hunting, they cannot do it without being obvious about it and further alienating both the hunters and legislature which would put  more negative pressure on them. By ignoring their own surveys and pretending to be helping the hunters by adding Sunday(even though more than half have said they do not want it) they can continue to reduce the deer herd with a lesser amount of negative reaction.
 
As far as opening up 28 million acres to Sunday hunting most of the public land by your own admission is over harvested now and you will lose more private land to ALL hunting for a net loss not even counting the further reduction of an already decimated wildlife population statewide. Look at the PGC's own game estimates, woodcock down. grouse down. ring necks down, rabbits down, squirrels down. deer down, they just finished a turkey survey to determine why they are down by a third statewide from three decades ago. Unless you hunt bear or coyotes the good old days were your grand dad's contrary to your prior claim. there are isolated pockets of good hunting but statewide it is all way down.
 
The folks looking to put more pressure on the states wildlife are either idiots, selfish landowners caring only about themselves in the short term, or have an anti hunting bias and are merely trying to discourage more hunters to get them to drop out. The PGC's own survey showed the two top reasons folks are dropping out is lack of game and lack of places to hunt. You are pushing to make both situations worse. Which category do you fall in?

S-10
DPMS --While it's true the PGC can reduce the deer herd without Sunday hunting, they cannot do it without being obvious about it and further alienating both the hunters and legislature which would put  more negative pressure on them. By ignoring their own surveys and pretending to be helping the hunters by adding Sunday(even though more than half have said they do not want it) they can continue to reduce the deer herd with a lesser amount of negative reaction.

 
I think they were pretty obvious about it in the form of herd reduction. It was sold along with AR, but hunters caught on pretty darn quick. If you are implying that SH is all about wanting to reduce the herd further, I believe you are way off base. They could increase allocations by a few thousands here and there and get the job done. Most hunters are clueless when it comes to regulations, allocations, and the workings of the PGC. They buy their licenses and go hunting. That is part of the reason our herd was able to be dropped so fast with hunters help. Most do not even think about the ramifications of filling all of those doe tags. 
 
BTW, in case you did not know, this board has continued to keep allocations under biologists recommendations. That is just the ebb and flow of changes on the board. 
 
Some of the latest surveys I saw on the issue has 50% supporting Sunday deer hunting. About 75% supporting a regulatory transfer to the PGC and 75% supporting Sunday hunting for small game.
 

As far as opening up 28 million acres to Sunday hunting most of the public land by your own admission is over harvested now and you will lose more private land to ALL hunting for a net loss not even counting the further reduction of an already decimated wildlife population statewide. Look at the PGC's own game estimates, woodcock down. grouse down. ring necks down, rabbits down, squirrels down. deer down, they just finished a turkey survey to determine why they are down by a third statewide from three decades ago. Unless you hunt bear or coyotes the good old days were your grand dad's contrary to your prior claim. there are isolated pockets of good hunting but statewide it is all way down.

 
Some private land will be lost. I suspect most of it will re-open in time. Some landowners will just not allow hunting on Sundays. Some landowners will not change a thing and the millions of private acres that were closed before will now be open. 
 
Most game populations are good. Some are poor. Some are expanding. Woodcock, grouse, pheasant, rabbits, and squirrel populations are not controlled by hunting. So those species are irrelevant as it relates to SH. Deer populations were brought down purposely but our harvest remains good to above average compared to other states. Turkey numbers are down but the current consensus seems to be it is not related to hunting. Again, irrelevant. Bear and elk numbers are increasing and they are expanding their range. So, again, irrelevant. 
 
That brings us back to deer. Whose numbers have ebbed and flowed without SH. The numbers can be increased or decreased with or without it. SH will bring nothing new to the table other than one additional day of the week a hunter may be able to hunt. The PGC is tasked with managing it all. As I said, they have proven to be able to do what they want without it.
 

The folks looking to put more pressure on the states wildlife are either idiots, selfish landowners caring only about themselves in the short term, or have an anti hunting bias and are merely trying to discourage more hunters to get them to drop out. The PGC's own survey showed the two top reasons folks are dropping out is lack of game and lack of places to hunt. You are pushing to make both situations worse. Which category do you fall in?

None of the above because I have shown your concerns about game populations to be pretty much irrelevant. The only species that has the potential to be impacted by a few additional high harvest days is deer. No others are really in play. And, the PGC has proven that they can do what they want with deer with or without it. 
 
As far as lost land. I have made my case. We will lose more to the ever increasing practice of posting land as time goes on, that we would specifically from SH. Without SH, in tens years, we will have more posted land that would would in 5 years with SH. We aregoing to end up in the same place anyways. Land that is specifically posted to all hunting with SH, will re-open in time if hunters were truly welcome in the first place. 
 
So, in closing, the category I fall into is one that believes hunters should support game agencies regulating hunting and not politicians. I could put a pretty specific label on you for choosing politicians over game agencies at a time when hunters, guns, and hunters rights are under attack like never before with some success. 
 
But I won't

Sunday hunting; There is more support for a regulatory transfer every time it comes up. It may be awhile, but we will see it in time. Lots of data debunking every concern.

 
Pretty much incorrect all the way round.   The more support is mostly from some who have no life, yet hate deer, lobbying hard every day including getting people and organizations from out of state involved that don't know or care about the full story.   There is also no data debunking any of the legitimate concerns, that's a flat out lie.
 
As for hunters, I have seen many against it and many for it, and I haven't seen one person change their minds one way or the other since say, 5 years ago.    Not much has changed.  
 

As far as landowners threatening to close their lands down to all hunting. Pathetic and childish.

   
 
Its their land.   Frankly I don't care how mature or immature anyone is if they allow their lands to be used by us for hunting.
 

 If you don't like the stink, don't buy a dairy farm. PGC again reiterated support for a regulatory transfer. 

 
The "stink" didn't exist when those against sunday hunting bought that land.    You want to bring the stink to them now that they did.
 

As I said before, the PGC can increase or decrease deer populations with or without SH. They have proven that to be the case. That is what cracks me up about those that feel SH is all about reducing the deer population. They can do it quite easily already. SH is irrelevant in this case. 

 
Nope sorry.   Incorrect.    There is absolutely no way they can do it now, that is, take the herd as low as they would like across the state.   Impossible.    Lower than now, maybe.    But not where they want to be.    The political pressure from legislators is too hard against it, they will at some point also need a fee increase, and many hunters are tired of the agenda.   Sunday hunting is the key.   #1 tool of reduction.    They can make up all kinds of "other" reasons for it to camo the fact its a huge herd reduction tool that would, when coupled with a fee increase in near future, would allow them to go full force ahead and nothing stopping it.     For you to say they could significantly increase tags or some other bone headed move to make just as much difference and be just as "acceptable" is down-right laughable and nothing more than a self serving statement I think you are smart enough to realize simply isn't true dpms.

S-10
Your claim of game numbers being irrelevant is only irrelevant in your own mind. It is game numbers that drive the whole hunting program.

 
Other than deer, SH and game are irrelevant. It is not in my own mind. You brought up "decimated" game populations and SH would reduce them further.  Woodcock, rabbit, grouse, pheasant, dove populations are not controlled by hunting.  Turkey populations are down but the current concensus seems to be it is not related to hunting. Elk and bear populations are growing. All of the above irrelevant. It is as simple as that. Yes deer is relevant and we have gone around on that. The PGC can do what they want with deer with or without SH.
 
Game numbers are important for sure. The program with your angle is only one game animal comes into play and that is deer. 
 

As for Wayne's claims, based on your comments it is obvious you have been angling to get your quill in the game agency for some reason and it is not to help hunter retention or addition.

 
No clue there. Doesn't surprise me that you would make that assertion though.
 

You ignore the PGC's own surveys, ignore the landowners wishes, ignore half the hunting populations wish's, and ignore or sidestep the documented dimished game populations.

 
I haven't ignored them at all. I have addressed every one of them and got pretty darn specific on some of them. Actually one side wanted to sit down and directly discuss them. Which side would that be? Wait for it.... Wait for it..... Wait for it...... It was the pro SH side. Pretty much shoots that assertion in the foot. 
 

Maybe you are your own one man wrecking crew. For sure your actions will not help in adding new hunters or retaining old ones. Less compettion for you perhaps. G,nite

Good morning. It is quite amusing watching this discussion here and also watching the same discussion from those where SH has been legal for a very long time. You gloom and doom folks have reality punching you in the nose every time you open your eyes. The fact is this law is religious based and does not exist in most of the nation at the present time. Most of the nation seems to be doing quite well with SH. Hunting is the only outdoor activity banned in this state on a certain day of the week. All of the other outdoor activities also involve trespass on private property and they are responsible for more trespass than hunting. Hunting has been proven safer than most of them as well. 
 
 

wayne c 
Actually his efforts as usual are closely aligned and correlated with several others from Pfsc/hush.     Its been my experience over the last 10+ years, dpms is very closely affiliated with their efforts on pretty much all the issues.   Have seen them in action for years on the internet as well as having been privy to quite a bit of legislator received commentary.      Very orchestrated efforts all 'round. 

 
Again, since this seems to be all he has. I am not a PFSC member nor affiliated with them. I did not donate to HUSH, nor am I affiliated with them either. I have never been part of a discussion with either organization about SH.  I feel the PFSC has lost its way on many issues. 
 
I am just one many trying to make a difference. That is all. 
 
Now, I could turn around and try to throw mud at Wayne and label him since many of his views kinda parallel groups that are not friendly to hunters. But.... I won't.  I am better than that. 
 
All of our hearts are in the right place. We just have differences of opinions. If the majority of sportsman gave a rats behind about hunting, we would all be much better off. The reality is few hunters care, and even fewer do anything about it. 

S-10
DPMS ---you say woodcock, rabbit, grouse, pheasant , and turkey numbers are not controlled by hunting. The PGC was established because overhunting was the cause of game loss. That is the whole reason for seasons and bag limits. It wasn't natural causes that led to the extinction of the passenger pigeon. I think your assertions are the ones debunked.

 
Unregulated hunting can certainly have an effect. In this state, those specie populations are not controlled by hunting. We have seen decreased numbers of those species from causes other than hunting. 
 
As I said. Debunked.
 

As for oversight, we all saw how long and how many letters and calls that has taken to get any action on the deer and the PGC is still trying to circumvent their pressure. You have, and HUSH has, committed to pushing for Sunday hunting and just like the liberals with gun control you will tell whatever tale is necessary to advance that cause.  Your misleading statements, omissions, ignoring the facts, and stating that your claims are settled facts are all trademarks of the liberal anti gunners.

 
Oversight is there my friend.  It was and still is. Nothing I have said is not true. 

Ummmmmm.......... If yinz don't mind me askin'.............. Did you guys get any sleep last night?

Again, since this seems to be all he has. I am not a PFSC member nor affiliated with them. I did not donate to HUSH, nor am I affiliated with them either. I have never been part of a discussion with either organization about SH.  I feel the PFSC has lost its way on many issues. 

 
First off, I never said you were a member or not a member.   Frankly I don't care either way.  You are part of their efforts in lobbying closely with coordinated efforts.  And on that, Im not guessing or speculating.   And you can carefully pick your words all you like.   It is what it is.   Though for the record, I don't blame you if you don't want to admit that ya'all work together on issues.   Some of them have lost a lot of credibility these days with many legislators.  
  
 

S-10The PGC WAS ESTABLISHED to enact and enforce game laws and bag limits. There is no other reason for them if not to prevent overharvesting. Are you awake yet?

 
Yep. I agree. Some would argue that deer have been overharvested. I tend to agree. Deer were underharvested under the PGC as well. Point is, that is the ebb and flow of game management. Right now, we seem to be moving towards a will to increase populations. Some thing that can be done with or without SH. Just as they can be reduced. 
 

You are claiming adding an additional day of  hunting per week, the day when most people are free to hunt will not increase the harvest of game species the PGC has already admitted is down in numbers. You say increasing hunting pressure by 15% or more will make no difference in game numbers. And you want to be taken seriously.

 
I did not say additional pressure would not result in an increased harvest. What I said was an additional day would not affect the total population of most of our species we hunt. That is a distinct difference, S-10. It is a simple concept. Really it is. Adding Sundays would not affect most of our game populations one bit. Total populations are controlled by other factors on a great majority of them. 
 

You claim oversight is there. If so how did we get to this place. We doubled the bag limit on gobblers and increased the length of the season from half day to all day at the same time we were doing a 4 year study to see why their numbers are down over 30% statewide. Oversight?Really? LOL

We got into this position for several reasons. As I said before, other than deer, most every other species is irrelevant as it relates to SH. The general assembly is tasked with oversight. If they do not do their duty, it is partly their fault as well if there are issues. The PGC is the agency tasked with regulating hunting in this state, but are the only agency that does it on a part time basis. I support oversight of the PGC. That is how it is supposed to work.

wayne c 
First off, I never said you were a member or not a member.   Frankly I don't care either way.  You are part of their efforts in lobbying closely with coordinated efforts.  And on that, Im not guessing or speculating.   And you can carefully pick your words all you like.   It is what it is.   Though for the record, I don't blame you if you don't want to admit that ya'all work together on issues.   Some of them have lost a lot of credibility these days with many legislators.  

You are absolutely guessing or speculating, and as usual, are incorrect. I have not worked with or together on the issue of SH with any org or any person representing or linked to a org. Some of those you speak of have lost credibility. That is why I  approach issues myself as a individual sportsman with a voice. It has worked well so far. 
 
You obviously care as you keep repeatedly keep bringing up false assertions as an attempt to discredit me. It isn't working.