The HuntingPA.com Outdoor Community banner

1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,541 Posts
what does this have to do with hunting?

(B) A representative of a Pennsylvania-based, nonpartisan organization whose primary mission is to provide Pennsylvania gun owners and outdoors enthusiasts with the information necessary to understand individual rights under the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.
(iii) The President pro tempore of the Senate shall appoint:
(A) A representative of an organization serving and dedicated to preserving individual rights of gun owners under the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution in counties of the second class A, third class, fourth class and sixth class.


isnt Wolf anti-gun?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
882 Posts
This is a joke, right?

So let me see if I have this right. This "council" will be made up of just average joes who want more deer(just look at the council list), and are going to pick a private company that the PGC will have to pay for........to do what the PGC biologist already get paid to do.

I thought the USP just faded away into the night. I stand corrected.


Every single point in this bill is copied right out of the USP website.
I especially "like" how the "Forest and Wildlife Advisory Service" must be a private, PA based company. Does John Eveland still have his PA based company? WMI, who was used in the last audit is from Washington DC, so this would eliminate them as a choice with this bill. The subtleness isn't so subtle.

Since this is the 1st that I've heard of this bill, I'm figuring they wanted to do this a little quieter than the last time they wanted to change the deer program.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,476 Posts
Very perceptive. This is precisely what USP has been lobbying hard for over the past several months.

And they have the perfect ally in Rep. Maloney, who tends to berate the PGC at every House Game and Fisheries gathering.

There are other House members that will sign-on to this travesty, some of which also have a different axe to grind with PGC: They demand higher PILT fees from SGLs, for their county/local governments/school districts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,476 Posts
Some of the same pols currently pounding the PGC over deer and PILT fees, would probably love to be able to snatch-up funds that are now untouchable.

While some yap about combining agencies "like other states", a quick review of many of those states shows that their funding is usually at the mercy of their politicians.

Several states' wildlife agencies have had their funding cut, so the money can be spent on non-wildlife programs.

Remember when Rendell stripped money from the budgets of DEP and DCNR, so he could try to balance his state budgets? Imagine how happy he would've been to also raid the coffers of the PGC back then, were he able to have done so?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
There is a relationship here to SB 1166 in that the two groups who have fought it have gotten themselves written in as Lords over all wildlife and habitat in PA. Read 2083 and look at how USP and FOAC PAC describe themselves on their websites. Do you see any common language?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Did you note that document was saved two weeks before the Bill was released and referred to the government committee. Those guys can see the future and should play the lottery!
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
14,063 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
PFSC Action Alert!








HB 2083 By Maloney. Amends Title 34 (Game), in preliminary provisions adding various definitions, providing for a separate doe and buck seasons, requiring a maximum sustained yield method of deer management, and establishing the Forest and Wildlife Advisory Council and providing for its powers and duties.

- Jun 22, 2016 - Referred to House State Government




House Bill 2083 was recently introduced and referred to the House State Government Committee instead of the House Game & Fish Committee. This bill has the potential to have major negative impacts on wildlife management in Pennsylvania. The bill was introduced by Representative Maloney, and has 26 co-sponsors. The bill is expected to be voted on quickly and is slated to come out of the State Government Committee possibly as early as Tuesday.

HB 2083 calls for:

•A mandatory 3 day doe season

•Changing of the WMU boundaries to reflect actual county boundaries. Deer will then be managed on a county basis

•Design and direct an habitat enhancement program, for all state owned property, that benefits deer and serves the interest of hunting, camp lessee interest, economic interest in rural communities,etc.

•Provide the maximum sustained yield for game, specifically white-tailed deer, to support increased game populations

•Establishment of the Forest and Wildlife Advisory Council to provide the General Assembly and PGC with management recommendations. And to hold the PGC accountable to hunters. Council is appointed by govenor, House, Senate, etc.

•An end to the DMAP program on public lands


While largely centered on deer management, it still has potential to be damaging to wildlife, wildlife management, and the future of the PGC's ability to manage and set seasons and bag limits based on professional and scientific data. Regardless of your personal opinions on the current deer management program, this is a very bad precedent to allow the legislature to mandate wildlife management and season and bag limit decisions based on politics and emotion.

Maximum Sustained Yield (MSY) basically calls for sustaining a population at the pinnacle of carrying capacity. The PGC stopped using this methodology because MSY can cause long-term ecosystem impacts to the forest. The PGC uses an ecosystem management approach which is much more holistic and wildlife friendly. Using MSY as a tool will leave PA with a lot of degraded habitat which will ultimately impact other wildlife such as turkeys and discount the hunting experience.

HB 2083 violates the North American Model of Conservation. Most notably by not using the best science to manage wildlife. And also by taking away management responsibilities from the PGC.

Following is more information on MSY and a copy of the letter PFSC sent to the State Government Committee Members.

Please contact your representative and the members of the committee and let them know you do not support attempts to remove wildlife management decisions, including season and bag regulations, from the PGC's authority. Ask them to oppose HB 2083!

House State Government Committee Members:




[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected];
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
14,063 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
PFSC Letter to House State Government Committee:







Subject: House Bill 2083 (PN 3162) Amends Title 34 (Game), in preliminary provisions adding various definitions, providing for a separate doe and buck seasons, requiring a maximum sustained yield method of deer management, and establishing the Forest and Wildlife Advisory Council and providing for its powers and duties







Members of the House State Government Committee:


The Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs (PFSC), established in 1932, is the largest and most active organization in the commonwealth that works to enhance opportunities relating to hunting, fishing, trapping and the exercise of our second amendment rights. PFSC works with legislators and wildlife resource agencies to achieve goals that are in line with our members and all the citizens of Pennsylvania.


Pennsylvania’s largest sportsmen’s organization OPPOSES House Bill 2083.

House Bill 2083, recently introduced, amends Title 34, The Pennsylvania Game Code. Rather than being referred for consideration to the House Game & Fisheries Committee, HB 2083 was referred to the House State Government Committee. If enacted, HB 2083 would create a “Forest and Wildlife Advisory Council”. This council would be yet another layer of government, comprised of politically appointed volunteers, who would be charged with designing a habitat program for white-tailed deer and other animals in the commonwealth. There is no mention of specific training or education requirements for council members in any area of wildlife management.

This council would dictate policy to the Pennsylvania Game Commission (PGC) and the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR) on matters of wildlife habitat and management. The independence and ability of these two agencies to fulfill their missions, as required by statute, is critical to all Pennsylvanians. Interference by a politically appointed group on matters of policy and operations of wildlife management would be disastrous.

HB 2083 also dictates PGC Seasons and Bag limits for taking of game. This would usurp the current responsibilities of the Game Commission’s Board of Commissioners (appointed by the governor and approved by the senate) who oversee this regulated process constantly.

Further, HB 2083 dictates specific deer hunting regulations as they apply to senior license holders and eliminates the Deer Management Assistance Program (DMAP) on public land. These are clearly matters for the PGC to regulate.

Finally, HB 2083 mandates adoption of “Maximum Sustained Yield”, a wildlife management concept that is at best controversial and that is a conceptual model that has not been implemented as a way to manage fish and wildlife populations by any other state in the union.

Management of wildlife in the commonwealth is clearly the responsibility of the Pennsylvania Game Commission, not the legislature. Habitat management needs to remain with the PGC and DCNR. Current channels that address grievances are in place. PFSC believes that people who have a grievance should use these channels to make change. Instituting another layer of politically motivated and appointed volunteers with no formal training is not in the best interest of the commonwealth’s constituents, wildlife or habitats. Please oppose HB 2083.

Sincerely,
John Ord, PFSC President
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,541 Posts
i also sent an e-mail to everyone listed above. a simple copy and paste of the e-mail addresses was all it took.

i was polite, and explained what a disaster it would be to approve this bill.

all of us should and remind them that all the licensed hunters in this State vote, so do their families and friends.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,476 Posts
Beyond odd that a bill intended to radically alter how PGC goes about it's mandated day to day responsibilities, would go to the House State Government Committee - instead of going before the committee that <span style="font-style: italic">actually</span> considers changes to the titles under which PGC functions?

There's a reason for this bit of chicanery, that might eventually become known. It ahould also throw up a red flag, as to just how ridiculous the bill is?
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top