FORESTS AND WHITETAILS – STRIVING FOR BALANCE
- Thread starter MA VT Flatlander
- Start date
B
bat man
Guest
I have been studying similar all day. They have been sent in to be read at the stakeholder meetings (today is the deadline if you want them read at the meetings).
Forest certification will likely prove to be the smoking gun.
Bowsnbucks
5 year old buck +
I didn't read every word of the link posted by MA VT Flatlander - but I got the direction. I have a suggestion - if the timber and paper industries are so worried about the future of the forests, let's see them cough up some BIG $$$ and pay for fencing to exclude deer from TSI areas or clear cuts, and implement planting programs on a large scale. ( Fencing here usually lasts anywhere from 4 to 10 years before being taken down ). I don't know what goes on in other states, but I've never seen a timber / paper co. planting anything in the mountains of Pa. The fencing we see here is paid for by the taxpayers via the DCNR. Why should only the taxpayers subsidize forest regeneration, when private businesses are the ones profiting?? In Pa., hunting license sales purchase and maintain state game lands. Taxpayer money is not involved, though the public at large can use those lands. To their credit ( and maybe out of necessity because of declining license sales ), the PGC is looking to implement a system where non-hunters who want to use the game lands must pay a fee to hike, bird watch, ride snowmobiles or quads ( where permissible ), or any other non-hunting use. The hunters have paid the way for ALL of it to this day. Does that sound fair ??
B
bat man
Guest
Back in the mode to late 90' your Gary Alt began his rhetoric of trying to find a way to get a group other than hunters to fund the DNR. Enter certified forests that bring cash into the state coffers. I am trying to find out how much cash these programs bring to states like MN and PA, but from what I have read it does not offset the losses of hunter license dollars, but it has effectively reduced and continues to reduce herds in states SFI and FSA certified forest exist.
Bowsnbucks
5 year old buck +
Batman - Hunters here fund the Pa. Game Commission ( PGC ) by license purchases - not the DCNR. Here, DCNR is in charge of state forests, PGC in charge of Game Lands ( which also has forested land. ) 2 separate agencies. Rules are different for both.
The PGC did some polling on whether non-hunters should have access to Game Lands without having to support them financially. ( That debate started when some non - hunting groups wanted to use the Game Lands in a variety of ways that could be detrimental to wildlife and the habitat. Those groups got a little pushy and loud and thus the argument over who had " say " over the game lands. Some of those groups thought - wrongly - that taxpayer dollars bought the Game Lands, and so they should have unfettered access to those lands to do what they want. For decades, the hunters paid the freight for thousands of acres, and had rules set up to safeguard those lands from abuse. Hiking, birdwatching, nature study, etc. was fine. But some of those groups wanted to ride quads & snowmobiles all over the place. Think what a mess THAT would have created !!!
If Gary Alt tried to get sources of funding for the DCNR, I'm not aware of it. Different agency - though God only knows what went on. I'm not familiar with " certified forests " or how they're designated as such, who governs, etc.
The PGC did some polling on whether non-hunters should have access to Game Lands without having to support them financially. ( That debate started when some non - hunting groups wanted to use the Game Lands in a variety of ways that could be detrimental to wildlife and the habitat. Those groups got a little pushy and loud and thus the argument over who had " say " over the game lands. Some of those groups thought - wrongly - that taxpayer dollars bought the Game Lands, and so they should have unfettered access to those lands to do what they want. For decades, the hunters paid the freight for thousands of acres, and had rules set up to safeguard those lands from abuse. Hiking, birdwatching, nature study, etc. was fine. But some of those groups wanted to ride quads & snowmobiles all over the place. Think what a mess THAT would have created !!!
If Gary Alt tried to get sources of funding for the DCNR, I'm not aware of it. Different agency - though God only knows what went on. I'm not familiar with " certified forests " or how they're designated as such, who governs, etc.
B
bat man
Guest
Thank you for that. I am not even sure if our DNR and Foresty are tied or how so. Its all very new and I am digging.
Bowsnbucks
5 year old buck +
Bur - When I read what you Mn. guys describe, it sounds like the same course of action. Here in Pa. the PGC went crazy selling doe tags until the hunters made a big fuss. Then the PGC started to tailor the tag allotments to what the local deer herds were in reality - more or less. Some areas here can take higher tag numbers, some could still have less tags issued. The " one-size-fits-all " pattern of deer reduction was the reason the PGC lost credibility here and I think it's bad ANYWHERE. There's still room for improvement here, but at least it's not as insane as it was.
BTW - I know Alt was getting offers from other states that were trying to lure him away when he was here, but I think it was more for bear expertise as I recall.
BTW - I know Alt was getting offers from other states that were trying to lure him away when he was here, but I think it was more for bear expertise as I recall.
phil@thesidehill
5 year old buck +
I think allowing other groups to purchase access passes to the SGL's is a bad thing....then they have a stake in the game and can leverage their interests against US! If the permits can restrict their access to only during certain parts of the year....then maybe. but truthfully i think that we hunters should continue to foot the bill, and others should take a back seat....that land is ours for hunting. The DCNR's land (state forests and state parks) allow general access all year that should be suffcient for others to recreate on....and if they choose to do so in hunting season then they need be advised that there may be hunters afield!
wiscwhip
5 year old buck +
I would agree phil, the situation you have in PA is pretty unique in that you have the Game Lands as a separate entity from the State Forests, in WI they are called different things but managed essentially the same, by the same group. What they are proposing looks good on paper, but for the reasons you stated it smells of bad ju-ju.
