The HuntingPA.com Outdoor Community banner

1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,261 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Don't know if this has been discussed on here before, but received this email from SCI. Link to the bill is in the first sentence of the email.



Member Alert

Pennsylvania Hunters – Contact Your Rep And Oppose HB 1483
Hunters in Pennsylvania -- your help is needed to defeat House Bill 1483. Introduced by Representative David Maloney (R-130) on Oct. 16, 2017, HB 1483 would jeopardize approximately $25 million in conservation funding generated by Pennsylvania's sportsmen and women and will significantly curtail the Pennsylvania Game Commission's ability to manage the wildlife resources of the Commonwealth.

Use SCI's Action Center to contact your Representative and urge him/her to oppose HB 1483.


Beyond the potentially disastrous loss of $25 million in critical conservation dollars, this bill raises numerous other concerns:
  • Adding an unnecessary level of bureaucracy by creating the "Forest and Wildlife Advisory Council," which inappropriately limits representation for the hunting and angling community and does not require education, training or experience in wildlife management for appointees;
  • Eliminating the Game Commission's ability to adaptively manage wildlife resources through the regulatory process and subjecting management practices to the slow-moving legislative process;
  • Setting permit limits by county based on recommendations of the Advisory Council rather than through professional management standards;
  • Mandating Advisory Council oversight of wildlife management on state-managed lands;
  • Setting three-day antlerless deer hunting seasons;
  • Creating deer hunting regulations that target senior hunting license holders;
  • Eliminating Deer Management Programs on public lands; and
  • Mandating the adoption of a widely controversial and currently unproven "Maximum Sustainable Yield" management concept.
In 2016, Representative Malone introduced the same bill. Eleven sportsmen's organizations, including SCI and two of its Pennsylvania Chapters, sent a letter of opposition explaining how that proposal would have disastrous consequences.

The Game Commission's mission is, "to manage Pennsylvania's wild birds, wild mammals, and their habitats for current and future generations." HB 1483 will negatively impact the ability of the Game Commission to properly carry out its stated mission. It also undermines scientifically-based, professional wildlife management in general.

SCI urges all hunters to contact their Representative and ask him/her to oppose HB 1483.

Safari Club International - First For Hunters is the leader in protecting the freedom to hunt and in promoting wildlife conservation worldwide. SCI's approximately 200 Chapters represent all 50 of the United States as well as 106 other countries. SCI's proactive leadership in a host of cooperative wildlife conservation, outdoor education and humanitarian programs, with the SCI Foundation and other conservation groups, research institutions and government agencies, empowers sportsmen to be contributing community members and participants in sound wildlife management and conservation. Visit the home page www.SafariClub.org, or call (520) 620-1220 for more information.
International Headquarters Tucson, Arizona · Washington, District of Columbia · Ottawa, Canada
www.SafariClub.org
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,487 Posts
Only two sportsmen's groups I know of supporting this, are ACSL and USP, which over the past few years seem to be morphing into one group, given their common supporters and political allies?

PA-NWTF, PA Trappers, United Bowhunters, Pheasants Forever, QDMA, PFSC and pretty much everyone else are opposed, just as they were to last year's similar attempt at usurping PGC's lawful mandates of managing our wildlife and habitats - and handing things over to an appointed group.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,205 Posts
I agree about it's chances but this year the legiscritters are considering putting one executive director in charge of both the PA F&BC and the PA GC. That one scares me more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,487 Posts
If you want to know why this current crop of legislators are "feeling their oats", as far as messing with both wildlife agencies - it's because hardly anyone is voicing their opposition to their shenanigans.

Which is usually the case. Those unhappy with either PGC or Fish and Boat, grumble to their representatives incessantly, always have.

While the vast majority of hunters and anglers blissfully go about enjoying their time outdoors, without really paying much attention to what's been going on.

The single biggest "blip" on the radar screen this year, was finding out a pheasant stamp is required. It was long overdue in my opinion. Had PGC instituted a $10 stamp years ago, it would've been far more palatable to most.

Many non-pheasant hunters have complained for years about the costs of raising/stocking pheasants, as witnessed by many comments here. But it remains a popular past time for many hunters, especially those with dogs.

Last I looked, somewhere around 60K pheasant stamps had been sold to adult and SR hunters. That's a bit less than 10% of all adult/SR hunters.

MYH and JR hunters do not need one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,721 Posts
If you want to know why this current crop of legislators are "feeling their oats", as far as messing with both wildlife agencies - it's because hardly anyone is voicing their opposition to their shenanigans.

Which is usually the case. Those unhappy with either PGC or Fish and Boat, grumble to their representatives incessantly, always have.

While the vast majority of hunters and anglers blissfully go about enjoying their time outdoors, without really paying much attention to what's been going on.

The single biggest "blip" on the radar screen this year, was finding out a pheasant stamp is required. It was long overdue in my opinion. Had PGC instituted a $10 stamp years ago, it would've been far more palatable to most.

Many non-pheasant hunters have complained for years about the costs of raising/stocking pheasants, as witnessed by many comments here. But it remains a popular past time for many hunters, especially those with dogs.

Last I looked, somewhere around 60K pheasant stamps had been sold to adult and SR hunters. That's a bit less than 10% of all adult/SR hunters.

MYH and JR hunters do not need one.

..... 60,000 pheasant permits sold now....eh! :smile_big: Nothing woks better than planting oats... to reap oats.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,721 Posts
If you want to know why this current crop of legislators are "feeling their oats", as far as messing with both wildlife agencies - it's because hardly anyone is voicing their opposition to their shenanigans.

Which is usually the case. Those unhappy with either PGC or Fish and Boat, grumble to their representatives incessantly, always have.

While the vast majority of hunters and anglers blissfully go about enjoying their time outdoors, without really paying much attention to what's been going on.

House Bill 1483, and similar legislation is caused by the PGC. Example....the concentrated management effort applied to vast forested areas of SGLs for neo tropical migrants coming first ..with what ever old growth inclined game animal and predator they can drag along with it..... second. :smile_big:


You' re right Denny. No one is paying attention to what is going on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
185 Posts
And, Curly Maple, can you provide an example of your comment on neotropical migrants and how PGC is accommodating them?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,721 Posts
And, Curly Maple, can you provide an example of your comment on neotropical migrants and how PGC is accommodating them?

Its the management plan for SGL37. .......Predominantly forested. Heavily weighted toward 80 -125 year age class. Priority placed on managing the contiguous forested nature of the SGL. Doing so provides the opportunity to manage habitat for black bear, fisher, and neo tropical migrants.


The only ES planned is for isolated pockets.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
525 Posts
I have been watching this issue, and I as many believe our PGC has problems. I can also understand wanting the PGC to be more, or better accountable for things. HOWEVER--folks by taking a current commission in which we know has problems, and then developing yet another "so-called" over sight group is to me a recipe for disaster. I say this because using our current federal standards in Washington, DC--that's what they do--take a known entity who has issues, and form yet another entity to over see that one, and what we get is a big mess. We get a failed entity overseeing another failed entity who is overseeing yet other failed entities. basically a bureaucracy laden mess.
What we need to do is fix the existing issues we have without heaping more failure on top of it.--How?--well I am unsure, but by piling on yet another agency filled with what could be unqualified people to oversee an already problematic mess cannot have a good outcome. It is my opinion it will only lead to an even bigger mess in which will be even tougher to untangle the problems we have currently.
I find myself still trying to see, and hear both sides of this issue. I am one who simply does not have all the facts on both sides here. I am trying to sort through it.
The one thing I do know is this---For those who simply go out, and buy a hunting license, and pay no attention to what is going on behind the scenes simply not caring whats going on, and allowing others to carry the burden of politics ( I call these people "takers"-taking, and not giving back)--YOU BETTER WAKE UP!
Our sport has a very dark under-belly with lots going on behind the scenes that CAN, and WILL have a very direct outcome--good, or bad.
In the end when folks suddenly stop in their tracks, and ask--"My God--how did we get here in such a deep mess?"--Easy answer--we sat back--uninformed, un-caring, not caring, and paying absolutely no attention to what was going on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,974 Posts
i went to the outdoor show in Erie today and the USP has a booth there, they had a crowd and this is what they are passing out as well as collecting signatures, lots of signatures in support of HB 1483

House Bill 1483 is designed to correct the greatest conservation mistake in the over-one-hundred-year history of the Pennsylvania Game Commission. Recognizing this crisis, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives has designed HB 1483 to resolve this environmental, social, and economic dilemma. Learn about the current forest and wildlife crisis on this website, and become a Friend of Pennsylvania Wildlife. Please urge your House and Senate representatives to support passage of HB 1483.

A Wildlife and Conservation Crisis

Pennsylvania has always been recognized for the vastness of its hardwood forests and abundance of wildlife. Today, however, many of Pennsylvania’s forest-dwelling wildlife species are facing crisis conditions because of deteriorating forests.

Both game and nongame birds and mammals are rapidly declining in numbers because of aging forests that have grown well beyond their most productive years. Old-age forests averaging 80-120 years old are choking out sunlight from reaching the forest floor, and, therefore, preventing the growth of understory vegetation as vital food and cover for wildlife. Populations of ruffed grouse, our State Bird, have now reached a 50-year low, and over 150 other species from white-tailed deer and snowshoe hares to bats, songbirds, and even pollinators such as bees and Monarch butterflies are in rapid decline because of the lack of habitat.

The Pennsylvania Game Commission has failed to recognize this circumstance, and, instead, blamed the lack of understory vegetation on over-browsing by deer. As a result, over a 5-year period from 2000-04 the Commission initiated an assault on the statewide deer herd, our State Mammal, targeting pregnant does and fawns and slaughtering over 2,500,000 deer. From 2005 to the present, they have maintained the assault, leaving only 1-2 deer per square mile in some regions of the state.

Because of the lack of deer and other wildlife, the Legislative Budget and Finance Committee determined that family businesses, rural communities, and the Commonwealth’s economy have lost over $7 billion. As of 2001, these egregious social and economic losses were impacting jobs and our economy at the rate of $501.6 million per year, with over $40 million in lost tax revenues per year due to this crisis. However, as of 2017 these impacts had increased to $1.16 billion per year in lost economic activity for the Commonwealth, especially to rural communities, with an additional $92.5 million in annual lost tax revenues.

HB 1483 will create critical early-growth wildlife habitat across 6,000 square miles of Pennsylvania’s forests; maximize the populations of deer, grouse, and scores of wildlife species; improve the health of the forest ecosystem; revitalize rural communities with $500 million to over $1 billion of annual economic growth; generate nearly $100 million per year in new state tax revenue; and provide multiple-use outdoor recreation opportunities for the enjoyment of all Pennsylvania citizens. HB 1483 will serve the interests of a million sportsmen as well as the outdoor-recreation needs of over 12 million campers, cabin owners, hikers, mountain bikers, wildlife photographers, birdwatchers, and general outdoor enthusiasts.
i didnt see any counter petition at the PGC booth or any other booths to counter what they are doing.

this doesnt look good. and the crowd at the PGC booth was not there, just PFBC and PGC officers talking to each other
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,266 Posts
House Bill 1483, and similar legislation is caused by the PGC. Example....the concentrated management effort applied to vast forested areas of SGLs for neo tropical migrants coming first ..with what ever old growth inclined game animal and predator they can drag along with it..... second. :smile_big:


You' re right Denny. No one is paying attention to what is going on.
Iirc, the pgc is required to manage ALL wildlife in pa, not just the ones we hunt? I heard alot of complaining several years ago about $$ spent on research for white nose syndrome in bats, heck we can't hunt bats! Well, no, but the pgc is required to manage them too, just like deer or turkeys. Probably the same for those neo tropical migrants, no?

Mebey the ones doing the complaining are the ones who aren't paying attention?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,721 Posts
Iirc, the pgc is required to manage ALL wildlife in pa, not just the ones we hunt? I heard alot of complaining several years ago about $$ spent on research for white nose syndrome in bats, heck we can't hunt bats! Well, no, but the pgc is required to manage them too, just like deer or turkeys. Probably the same for those neo tropical migrants, no?

Mebey the ones doing the complaining are the ones who aren't paying attention?

Mebey someday it will become clear as a bell why 49 other states don't have a separate agency relying on hunting license revenue to fund it all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,266 Posts
While that might happen "someday", right now the agency we have is charged with managing all wildlife, not just the ones that are hunted, no? The law says bats and neo tropical migrants are important too, despite what some hunters might think. So those claiming "mismanagement" based simply on game species(deer) don't really have a leg to stand on, no?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,721 Posts
The die was cast when the state dictated what could be cut and what couldn't. The non hunting public took over the future of our SGL system.....some SGLs more than others. The PGC IMO, was never much an advocate for managing our SGLs any differently. Now it's beginning to catch up to them.


Who ever thought of the SGL system was brilliant! If hunters don't have a place to go they wont buy a hunting license. No hunting license revenue, the whole shebang doesn't get funded. At the same time having place to go requires the SGL's to have what hunters will purchase a license for. They will not buy a license to watch neo tropical migrants. The local SGL...the large forested areas are geared toward them, black bear and fisher. A few licenses will certainly be bought for those game animals, but not enough to pay for the PILT.....let alone the light bill at Elmerton Ave.


Tax dollars have to enter into wildlife management. Every other state figured this out a long time ago.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,266 Posts
I doubt that at any time pgc officials ever thought about the sgl's as a way to insure their revenue stream. I do think they were forward thinking enough to want to insure that hunters always had a place to hunt.

I do agree that in some ways their hands are tied by what they can't do in some cases, and what they're required to do in others. Still, a liscense increase would help resolve many of the financial issues, why can't they get that? Oh that's right, politics, nothing to do with habitat or game management, no?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,974 Posts
Pennsylvania is not interested in doing whats right for the people, only whats right for the politicians.

some states have FREE 4 year college. PA could do that but refuse to do so. i wouldnt trust the State to properly run the PGC, to much political pressure from anti hunters and those politicians would cave in the blink of an eye.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,266 Posts
But look what a great job they've done with pensions.....

Wildlife management would be so far down the giveacrap list it might not even be on the list. Too many other ways to influence votors with that money......
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
26,979 Posts
'But Curley doesn't care, he just hates the PGC. Perhaps he was scard by a game warden when he was a toddler.>:)
 
  • Like
Reactions: bohunr

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,266 Posts
Wow, $100 million in NEW tax revenues! I'd sure like to see the paperwork on that.

6000 sq miles of early growth habitat, that's about 3.84 million acres. must be planning on clearcutting the state forests as well as the sgl's.
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top