|
|
Post by Dutch on Jan 24, 2014 14:26:29 GMT -5
The increased gas revenues was one reason they could increase the number of pheasants they raise. I think I saw they want to get the numbers up to about 250,000 or so?
|
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Jan 24, 2014 14:33:04 GMT -5
Why can't they raise 250k deer and stock them?Maybe they should recruit Keith Warren to be the new exec director.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2014 14:35:30 GMT -5
Well then I don't think they need to make anymore stamps to bring in money. Keep it cheap for everyone to enjoy. You want to retain hunters then don't raise the price of the license. I stopped fishing because I feel 31 dollars is a lot for stocked fish.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roosterslammer on Jan 25, 2014 0:37:45 GMT -5
the PFBC is in dire straits. I'm glad it was brought up because it strengthens my argument. A state-run put and take program does not work in the long run. The labor is too expensive and there is no profit incentive driving management. I have said before, if there was a pheasant stamp, you would not see me on the internet discussing this. Whlie the stamp would not recover all of the high costs, it would do enough to lessen the burden on the PGC. The hunter recruitment at all costs needs looked at. Even if you pick up 5,000 hunters a year directly from pheasants, that is $860 per hunter. Some recruited will drop out and some recruited previously will be retained. Still, we are in a very high $$$ range. If the program was ended, license sales would not drop by 90,000. There is no way anybody but a state agency with a desperate focus on hunter recruitment, and special interest groups can support a program with such horrible economics and minuscule real and non-tangible benefits. I would like to see how much it costs a private grower to raise 200,000 pheasants. $4.3 million? I wonder lol. Buy them from a private grower if need be. Put the $$$ saved into habitat. Edit: According to the PF site, it costs $3-$15 to raise one. A wide range, yes. It cost the PGC around $21.00 per bird. That is double what PF claims it is. Wow, your accounting methods could use some work. Figuring it cost $860 for a new pheasant hunter was amusing if nothing else. You allow no benefit for 90,000 pheasant hunters that also benefit from those costs. The comment that a put and take pheasant program can't last was also funny considering that the PGC has been doing it since 1915 and at one time double the amount they are releasing now. If you look into some history on a pheasant stamp, you will see that it has the support of most pheasant hunters and that the state legislators have been the hold up for getting one. I always enjoy how far some people will go to put down something because they personally don't benefit from it. It is good for a certain amount of entertainment value at least rofl |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2014 6:28:05 GMT -5
If the PGC is benefiting from the license sales they have now and no they make money off of there gas lease's there is no need to add stamps and raise prices. The legiscritters were already eyeing up the money the PGC makes off of the gas revenue.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Jan 25, 2014 8:00:17 GMT -5
Yes, at one time they raised around 400,000 birds. I believe that was in the 80's and 90's?
|
|
|
|
Post by ridgecommander on Jan 25, 2014 8:32:58 GMT -5
The question is can the WPRA sustain steady hunting pressure without sacrificing the viability of the program. If the answer is yes, then have at it.
If this is to remain a small operation in a few scattered areas across the state with very limited seasons and limits, lets approach it like many of our waterfowl management areas. That being all hunters having the chance to enjoy hunting wild Pa pheasants by utilizing some sort of draw to do so. The drawing for duck and goose blinds on Pymatuming is huge around here for the dedicated waterfowlers. I can see the same for the WPRAs.
I am not a huge supporter of the program without some sort of pheasant stamp to support it and our pheasant stocking efforts though but if we can soon see steady hunting in these areas, I am willing to support it for the time being.
What I don't want to see is a small select group of hunters being able to hunt these small select areas that we all paid to develop.
|
|
|
|
Post by bawanajim on Jan 25, 2014 9:19:55 GMT -5
The increased gas revenues was one reason they could increase the number of pheasants they raise. I think I saw they want to get the numbers up to about 250,000 or so? As the number raised increases the cost per bird decreases, we are loosing hunters because there is so little to hunt, we have no grouse here, its been 5 plus years since I've seen one, rabbits are making a come back but no one has beagles any more, pheasants are "small game" they are all we have to hunt. |
|
|
|
Post by TusseyMtman on Jan 25, 2014 9:22:52 GMT -5
It would have to be a lottery system, with guides who have access to the private land the birds are on. It would be interesting to observe. lol
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2014 9:24:54 GMT -5
Why can't they raise 250k deer and stock them?Maybe they should recruit Keith Warren to be the new exec director. Simple solution, and one that would warm the hearts of those who want easy hunting. Close down all commercial fenced hunting and deer raising operations and require that the operators release their deer, with no compensation of course. We could call it wealth redistribution? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2014 10:56:10 GMT -5
I hear all the time that there is no small game to hunt. I see many squirrels when I used to hunt bunnies I heard there was none but never had a problem finding them. Grouse are the only thing that is rare to see anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Jan 25, 2014 12:21:35 GMT -5
The increased gas revenues was one reason they could increase the number of pheasants they raise. I think I saw they want to get the numbers up to about 250,000 or so? As the number raised increases the cost per bird decreases, we are loosing hunters because there is so little to hunt, we have no grouse here, its been 5 plus years since I've seen one, rabbits are making a come back but no one has beagles any more, pheasants are "small game" they are all we have to hunt. If you want to hunt grouse then you must go where grouse live. |
|
|
|
Post by bushmaster on Jan 25, 2014 12:36:04 GMT -5
All kinds of small game in the woods.
Just have to put your time in.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roosterslammer on Jan 25, 2014 13:29:53 GMT -5
The question is can the WPRA sustain steady hunting pressure without sacrificing the viability of the program. If the answer is yes, then have at it. If this is to remain a small operation in a few scattered areas across the state with very limited seasons and limits, lets approach it like many of our waterfowl management areas. That being all hunters having the chance to enjoy hunting wild Pa pheasants by utilizing some sort of draw to do so. The drawing for duck and goose blinds on Pymatuming is huge around here for the dedicated waterfowlers. I can see the same for the WPRAs. I am not a huge supporter of the program without some sort of pheasant stamp to support it and our pheasant stocking efforts though but if we can soon see steady hunting in these areas, I am willing to support it for the time being. What I don't want to see is a small select group of hunters being able to hunt these small select areas that we all paid to develop. All good questions that we don't know the answer for because we have not tried to hunt these birds yet. We have discussed all these issues at length and believe there are good ways to achieve a fair access on a controlled basis that will be subject to change based on population growth. This is common in even large well established pheasant populations. The area we trapped birds in Montana was closed to pheasant hunting a couple years ago for the whole season because of a hard winter that greatly reduced bird numbers. Monitoring the population and harvest opportunities will fluctuate depending on the weather and other factors. Making sure these birds do not become available to a small group of wealthy folks has always been a concern and we believe we have that one covered with season and bag limit controls. |
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Jan 25, 2014 13:53:19 GMT -5
Lynn, when are your flushing surveys this year?
|
|
|
|
Post by rober on Jan 25, 2014 15:32:06 GMT -5
The question is can the WPRA sustain steady hunting pressure without sacrificing the viability of the program. If the answer is yes, then have at it. If this is to remain a small operation in a few scattered areas across the state with very limited seasons and limits, lets approach it like many of our waterfowl management areas. That being all hunters having the chance to enjoy hunting wild Pa pheasants by utilizing some sort of draw to do so. The drawing for duck and goose blinds on Pymatuming is huge around here for the dedicated waterfowlers. I can see the same for the WPRAs. I am not a huge supporter of the program without some sort of pheasant stamp to support it and our pheasant stocking efforts though but if we can soon see steady hunting in these areas, I am willing to support it for the time being. What I don't want to see is a small select group of hunters being able to hunt these small select areas that we all paid to develop. All good questions that we don't know the answer for because we have not tried to hunt these birds yet. We have discussed all these issues at length and believe there are good ways to achieve a fair access on a controlled basis that will be subject to change based on population growth. This is common in even large well established pheasant populations. The area we trapped birds in Montana was closed to pheasant hunting a couple years ago for the whole season because of a hard winter that greatly reduced bird numbers. Monitoring the population and harvest opportunities will fluctuate depending on the weather and other factors. Making sure these birds do not become available to a small group of wealthy folks has always been a concern and we believe we have that one covered with season and bag limit controls. But it will only be for the wealthy or the ones who live local to the WPRA's. Who wants to spend a hundred bucks on gas or fuel for one maybe 2 "wild pheasants" The guys who are running the program know this, and now they have there own private flock or "wild pheasants" with only themselves to hunt them. As soon as there is a huntable flock, watch how many lands become "unavailable" for hunting |
|
|
|
Post by Roosterslammer on Jan 25, 2014 22:21:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Roosterslammer on Jan 25, 2014 22:41:28 GMT -5
All good questions that we don't know the answer for because we have not tried to hunt these birds yet. We have discussed all these issues at length and believe there are good ways to achieve a fair access on a controlled basis that will be subject to change based on population growth. This is common in even large well established pheasant populations. The area we trapped birds in Montana was closed to pheasant hunting a couple years ago for the whole season because of a hard winter that greatly reduced bird numbers. Monitoring the population and harvest opportunities will fluctuate depending on the weather and other factors. Making sure these birds do not become available to a small group of wealthy folks has always been a concern and we believe we have that one covered with season and bag limit controls. But it will only be for the wealthy or the ones who live local to the WPRA's. Who wants to spend a hundred bucks on gas or fuel for one maybe 2 "wild pheasants" The guys who are running the program know this, and now they have there own private flock or "wild pheasants" with only themselves to hunt them. As soon as there is a huntable flock, watch how many lands become "unavailable" for hunting Rober, you are not only totally clueless but also insulting with your comments. I know guys who drove to the Midwest and shot two wild pheasants in a week and they went back again! Driving two hours to hunt wild pheasants is no brainer for those who like to hunt wild birds. Now for your last comment. There is a group of guys who have worked for 10 years to establish wild pheasants in this area. Only one is a landowner in the WPRA and he has 5 acres. Nobody has talked to a landowner about leasing or posting any ground for them personally. Now maybe somebody like yourself who doesn't do anything that doesn't benefit them personally can't comprehend such a thing. In any event, you owe me and them an apology. One month ago I bought a 40 acre piece of ground in the WPRA area that I plan to build habitat on for wild pheasants. I hope to someday have a place where I know I and those who have worked hard on this program will have a place to hunt. All of our work to date has been on others with no promise of any benefit. Now I'm sure you think this land purchase was all part of my master plan. You could also look at it as how sure I am this plan will work. Like all other hunting that's done in PA, some will be on private land and some will open to the public. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2014 5:53:02 GMT -5
Why isn't the PGC or DCNR trying this program on game lands or state forests? Why is it only on private land or is there some on public?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Jan 26, 2014 7:33:51 GMT -5
Some of it is public land owned by PPL and also there is an SGL up there as well. Majority is private tho.
When I went on last years flushing survey, I heard there were no pheasants flushed on the PPL land, but when I drove thru there a few times this fall, there was habitat for them. So, I don't know why they did not flush any birds there.
It was very exciting to flush wild birds last winter. I will freely admit that. We also flushed a threatened specie of owl that depends on the warm season grasses for habitat.
Lynn and his group have done an incredible job up there and it is paying dividends, I'm just not 100% sold on how repeatable it is outside that area. Time will tell and I may end up owing Lynn that beer. LOL
|
|
|
|
Post by bawanajim on Jan 26, 2014 8:48:42 GMT -5
If you want to hunt grouse then you must go where grouse live. This is such a profound statement, I will be surprised if some time in the near future we do not hear these very words in a country and western song or see them tattooed in Chinese symbols on a stately woman's neither regions, either way, its deep. |
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Jan 26, 2014 8:51:34 GMT -5
Get over yourself Jim. Tired of your constant negativity and nagging posts.
|
|
|
|
Post by bawanajim on Jan 26, 2014 8:59:39 GMT -5
You've complained about this program for years, like the PGC doesn't have thousands of ways of pissing money away, yet these guys work their butts off on habitat work that benefits every kind of wildlife yet people still beoch.
|
|
|
|
Post by bawanajim on Jan 26, 2014 9:14:14 GMT -5
We are at place in time when our numbers are plummeting and we are in a constant search for ways to increase participation,
here we have a dedicated group of people working with land owners, hunters and concerned citizens on a program that I can see no down side to yet some of you are against it.
|
|
|
|
Post by bawanajim on Jan 26, 2014 9:34:25 GMT -5
It seems in todays world we talk about habitat and how bad it is, yet few programs exist to improve the very habitat wildlife needs, we don't need to end the pheasant program we need to learn from it and expand what works, where it works.
It we want hunting to continue, to expand and to endure it must become more than shooting three grey squirrels, two doe and eleven months of video games.
Habitat work and conservation should be a part of it too. There's a lot more of the whole year that kids aren't hunting than when they when actually are, this pheasant program has plenty of learning opportunities for kids if any one chooses to use them.
|
|
