Lisa

I'm not sure your interpretation of what happened at the game commission during
Gary's tenure is entirely accurate or justified, given the changes that have
been made in deer management.

Also, Gary was never head wildlife biologist at the game commission. He was
supervisor of the deer management section, which was part of the Bureau of
Wildlife Management, which has had Cal DuBrock as its director of many years.

Marcus Schneck
The Patriot-News


> Friends, For those of you interested in the deer issue and the threat that
> they pose to ecosystems, you may find the following article of interest.
>
> Gary Alt is the former head wildlife biologist here in PA that fought, and I
> mean fought, for years to change the mentality of our state game commission
> and their attitude towards managing deer. Gary showed them the science and
> they blatantly ignored it. He finally resigned from a long career with this
> agency and is now speaking out against their policies.
>
> It's too bad that it's come to this. We're just glad that Gary's decided to
> stick around and fight for what he believes is right when it comes to
> protecting our valuable forest resources here in PA.
>
> Lisa L. Smith
> Consulting Ecologist
> 286 Stoneylonesome Rd.
> Stahlstown, PA 15687
> wildflower@...
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dave Bonta" <bontasaurus@...>
> To: <pabiodiv@...>
> Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 5:16 PM
> Subject: PABIODIV: Gary Alt - Hunting focus hurts deer management
>
>
> > from the Philly Inquirer
> >
> > Hunting focus hurts deer management
> >
> > By Gary Alt
> >
> > For those of us who drive, garden, own land or value nature, the recent
> > action of the Pennsylvania Game Commission is cause for concern.
> >
> > On April 26, the commission reduced the number of antlerless deer-hunting
> > licenses - the primary tool in controlling deer populations - by 160,000.
> > The most severe cuts were in those state wildlife management units where
> > forest health and regeneration are most threatened by deer overbrowsing.
> >
> > For more than 75 years, the Pennsylvania Game Commission has been hearing
> > from biologists, ecologists and foresters who say that deer need to be
> > balanced with their habitat at numbers the land can sustain without
> > long-term damage from overbrowsing. Without this, we see more clearly than
> > ever that we cannot have safe highways, sustainable agriculture, livable
> > communities or healthy forests. But, so long as the commission is funded
> > primarily through hunters' license fees, this will never happen.
> >
> > Pennsylvania has more deer hunters than any other state in the union. More
> > important, it has the greatest proportion of deer hunters to overall
> > hunters (93 percent). Deer hunters know that when they want something from
> > the commission - in this case, fewer antlerless deer licenses to increase
> > hunting opportunities for those who are licensed - they usually get it.
> >
> > The commission's very name identifies its primary focus - game. In effect,
> > Pennsylvania does not have a wildlife conservation agency or even a
> > wildlife commission. Instead, conservation of our wild bird and mammal
> > populations is entrusted exclusively to the game commission, an
> > organization designed to promote recreational hunting (primarily for deer)
> > and whose programs are funded through recreational hunting fees.
> >
> > The result is that if you don't hunt, you're not a participant in funding
> > wildlife conservation in Pennsylvania and have no influence in how our
> > wildlife resources and their habitats are managed. This may explain why
> > the state lacks a comprehensive wildlife plan, a biodiversity conservation
> > plan, an urban deer management plan, or a plan for dealing with
> > fragmentation, sprawl or invasive exotic species and their impact on
> > native wildlife. It may also explain why the commission spends less than 5
> > percent of its budget on non-game and endangered or threatened wildlife
> > species. In contrast, Missouri includes all of its citizens in the
> > decision-making process and funding by committing 1/8 of 1 percent of its
> > sales tax to fish, wildlife and forest conservation.
> >
> > I am a hunter, but I am also a wildlife ecologist, conservationist, and
> > member of a community. I value hunting as an important part of my life.
> > However, I do not believe that deer management should strive to maintain
> > irresponsibly high deer populations to facilitate hunters' enjoyment at
> > the cost of habitat quality, other wildlife species, or human health and
> > safety. Hunters should maintain deer at levels compatible with their
> > habitat and the broader interests of society. The future of hunting
> > depends on our doing so. Nonetheless, we are failing in this effort.
> >
> > Some hunters and agency personnel suggest we need to strive for
> > compromise. We have already compromised our ecology, economy, and even our
> > safety by carrying too many deer for too long. Pennsylvania drivers kill
> > more deer by accident (a minimum of 80,000 to 100,000 per year) than
> > hunters in many states kill intentionally during hunting seasons. We rank
> > second in the nation for fatal collisions with deer. We have the
> > third-highest incidence of Lyme disease, and deer are the breeding ground
> > for the ticks that spread the disease. And a growing number of homeowners
> > have given up on gardens, ornamental plantings and wildflowers due to
> > deer. A recent report by a group of scientists and policy specialists
> > commissioned by Audubon Pennsylvania and the Pennsylvania Habitat Alliance
> > concluded, "The preponderance of scientific opinions attests that the
> > current high densities of white-tailed deer have seriously degraded the
> > ecological condition of forests in Pennsylvania. Moreover, until deer
> > populations are reduced and maintained at lower levels, it will not be
> > possible to restore key elements of forest health." Pennsylvania deserves
> > wildlife funding, administration and policy that reflect the participation
> > of all its citizens. This broader commitment - which ought to include
> > taxpayer support in some form - is necessary for our large and diverse
> > state to meet the complex natural resource challenges in the 21st century
> > for the benefit of all our society.
> >
> > Dave Bonta
> > PO Box 68
> > Tyrone, PA 16686
> > 814.684.3113
> > *****
> >
> > The Pennsylvania Biodiversity Listserve is intended to promote
> > discussion of biodiversity issues in the state. It is moderated by
> > the Pennsylvania Biodiversity Partnership (PBP) following guidelines
> > posted at http://www.pabiodiversity.org/listserve.html. The opinions
> > expressed in messages are those of the authors and NOT the PBP. To
> > unsubscribe, send the message UNSUBSCRIBE PABIODIV to
> > majordomo@....
> >
> > *****
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>