Vote scheduled to ban all hiking in PA. Game Lands for 130 DAYS per year

[happyslug]

11. And "Hunting" does not always require someone to have a weapon...

If you are "Scouting" for a place to hunt, that is "Hunting" even if you do NOT have a weapon. Technically today, a person "Scouting" does NOT even need to have a hunting license. If this proposed regulation is passed, people may have to have their hunting license on them to show that they are "Hunting" not "Hiking". As to weapons, you can claim you were "scouting" for a place to hunt and thus did not bring your weapon with you.

It would look a bit more convincing if you had a weapon commonly used to hunt what ever is in season, but you can argue you were just scouting for a place to hunt and thus "Hunting" and you have your hunting license to prove it. You tell the game warden that you went out without a weapon for you plan to come back with a weapon to hunt if you find a good place to hunt in, thus you were "Scouting" for a place to hunt NOT hiking.

If you decide to carry a weapon to look more convincing, remember Shotguns are legal for Deer, groundhogs, starlings and turkey. A cheap 20 gauge single barrel that you have in your backpack would supply the evidence you were "Hunting" with a "weapon" (If you store the shotgun in your backpack make sure it is EMPTY, carry a couple of shells in your front pocket to show you have ammon for the shotgun). You could buy a single barrel 20 gauge shotgun NEW for $85 and if you opt for used you could get one a lot cheaper:

http://www.gunsinternational.com/Harrington-Richardson-Shotguns.cfm?cat_id=627

The more I think about it, the more I would just lean to just claiming you were scouting, I suspect most game commission officers would prefer that lie then you carrying a weapon you have never fired. If you decide to carry a weapon, I would avoid a pistol. Pistols are small and easy to carry, but less then ideal for hunting (and require more skill then a shotgun or rifle to use effectively). In Pennsylvania only revolvers are permitted for hunting purposes (along with the few single shots pistols). A shotgun is the best all around hunting weapon. you can find some cheap used one for as low as $50 (I may want to question if there are safe to fire, but if your intention is to hike not hunt who cares if it fires?). If a game warden wants to fire it, that his problem (They should know better and most will see through this charade quickly and endorse it for they know where they pay is coming from i.e. the license fee). I suspect if this rule is passed, as long as you have license you will be viewed as "Hunting" even if you have nothing to hunt with.

Just a comment that given I suspect the push for this rule is REVENUE driven not driven by a desire to restrict hiking. Thus if this rule is passed, just buy a license and never carry a weapon, just claim you are scouting for a place to hunt whatever is in season (and that can include biking on roads open to biking). You will clearly NOT be poaching (no Weapon) which is a major concern for the Game Commission. You have a license and thus must be hunting and it is clear you are NOT hunting anything out of season for you will have no weapon. That you are hiking is unimportant for hiking is part of hunting.

Every time I look at these proposed regulations (and I have caught such proposals before over the last ten or so years), it has always been viewed as a way to increase revenue NOT to restrict hiking. Like many government agency, the Game Commission needs money and our state Legislature does NOT want to help them, even when it comes to non-game animals. Thus the desire to look for additional revenue, not only to help game animals but non-game animals that the Game Commission does try to protect.