To the Editor:
It was not too long ago that The Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania was maligned and identified as a radical group not knowing of what they speak ... mainly from staunch supporters of The Pennsylvania Game Commission’s deer program.
Now as USP works closer with the PGC, as close as any other sporting group, history tends to reveal truths which real time circumstance previously obscured, let’s take a look at where things stand today.
There are always two sides to a story. Those that did not agree with the positions of Unified accused us of casting baseless aspersions on The Pennsylvania Game Commission. Doyle Dietz’s article titled “ ‘Unified’ PGC board appears intent on decreasing opportunity” (Republican-Herald, March 15) has stolen this cynic title away from Unified once and for all.
His innuendo regarding commissioners Hoover, Layton, Fox, Weaner and outgoing commissioner Delaney are unfounded and fall into the same judgmental category of those that did not agree or even understand Unified’s positions.
As I near my fourth year as president of USP, I saw a need to bring USP into a more mainstream position, to create an environment that would dismiss the naysayers, and reveal how strongly we align with many sportsmen disagreeing with Pennsylvania’s deer management and other hunting related issues.
We work daily statewide in the best interests of hunting, fishing, trapping and our second amendment gun rights. Yes, our big concerns are still with Pennsylvania deer management, although degraded, deer are still our No. 1 game animal.
Today finds us involved in positive dialogue with the PGC, addressing overreaching management parameters that have proven detrimental to enjoyment of the sport, and are indeed being walked back. We now work together, finding a better balance between resource management, habitat and hunter satisfaction. Much has changed internally within the PGC since our lawsuit and since most of the Carl Roe regime is now gone. It’s not a blame game any longer. It is a solutions game across the board.
The recent modification of the youth mentor plan has Mr. Dietz comparing it to “mankind’s most horrific atrocities.” I hope he was just having a bad literary day.
Yes, we all want early youth involvement in our beloved sport of hunting. But should children age 6 and under, little more than toddlers and maybe some only a couple years out of diapers, be issued big game tags? Since this cut-off age of 6 was arrived at, I have heard nothing but support for this modification from all common-sense sportsmen mentors at recent sporting shows.
There is more to hunting than whether a “stud” 4-, 5- or 6-year-old child can manipulate a firearm or crossbow adequately enough or safely enough. Are they capable of consistently making ethically lethal shots and not just wounding big game? Mentor licenses are still not age restricted, and there are other hunting opportunities outside of big game for 6 and under.
A fringe problem was the use of the mentored youth big-game tags by some mentors. This was being reported back to the agency by Wildlife Conservation Officers in the field. No citations were written because of the gray area like a hunter carrying in a 2- to 4-year-old in one arm and having a 30-06 or 300 Winchester Mag over his other shoulder.
Gray area? You decide.
This circumstance is currently legal, and put law enforcement in a precarious position. Let’s hope this abuse was minimal. Under the new proposed modifications, mentors can pass a big-game tag to a hunter age 6 and under, making that decision a 1-on-1 basis, not a canvassed approval of big-game tag issuance by the PGC.
Do children at this age really understand hunting ethics, which is the first and foremost intent of the mentor program, not just exercising a kill?
Based on last year’s harvest numbers, 96 percent of the mentored youth harvests would not be affected by this change. So in conclusion, is delaying 4 percent of recent mentored youth big-game harvests from hunter age 6 and under akin to “mankind’s most horrific atrocities” as Mr. Dietz identifies? Frankly this just makes good sporting sense.
The bulk of Mr. Dietz’s article seems to be an all-out assault on The Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania. Frankly, this came out of left field, because as I stated earlier, the Unified is involved cordially and credibly with all sporting groups, as well as the hierarchy of the PGC under my presidency. I do not apologize for the firm tactics some before me enacted in the early 2000s, as drastic times called for drastic measures and you just have to get some dirt on you sometimes to make a difference.
It’s ironic how Unified was disparaged when we had strong differences and no contact with the PGC and are now being disparaged once again having a working relationship with the agency? This can only be identified as a personal prejudice against The Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania.
I believe the “grenades” we threw back then helped bring attention to problems, leading to the direction we are headed now.
How my email to PGC commissioners became forwarded outside its intended recipients just shows someone’s intentional malice to create controversy.
I openly admit my request to the commissioners to consider an adjustment to allocations was based on the severity of the northwestern district winter. Early lake-effect snows, followed by intermittent snowfalls, accumulated and maintained nearly two feet deep for months. Sub-zero temperatures ranked February the second coldest in history dating back to the late 1800s. In some areas, snow was crusted over enough to support a 150-pound man.
Mr. Dietz, these are the facts you requested upon which I based my request.
This weather circumstance creates a deadly predation benefit for coyotes who walk/run on top of the crusted snow, while deer break thru unable to sustain speed and stamina to escape.
Can I be wrong? Possibly, but considering these extreme weather circumstances it warrants investigation. Possibly erring on the side of caution this year, my concerns are for the whitetail resource. Most hunters appreciate that type of concern.
Randy Santucci, president Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania