Jun 19, 2011 6 min read

Pennsylvania is one of a handful of states – mostly in the northeast – that do not allow Sunday hunting for the most popular big and small game species.

The topic of expanding Sunday hunting was addressed at a House Game and Fisheries Committee hearing at Seven Springs Resort.

As expected, the majority of those testifying favored expanding Sunday hunting.

Many members of the committee did not try to hide the fact that they favor Sunday hunting, a couple members are clearly undecided and genuinely interested in hearing more on the issue, while a few others just sat there, making no comments one way or another.

There is so much at stake, and, unfortunately, many will never be able to see the forest for the trees.

Following introductory remarks by Majority Chairman John R. Evans (R), Minority Chairman Edward G. Staback (D) opened the session and made no bones about where he stood on the issue of Sunday hunting.

The first individuals to testify were speaking for the Pennsylvania Farm Bureau, which is against Sunday hunting.

Joel Rotz, state public relations director for the Farm Bureau said that six days of hunting was enough. He noted that some form of deer hunting is available 103 days a year, including 18 Saturdays, and that doesn’t account for red tag opportunities throughout the growing season, where farmers welcome hunters.

The bureau is made up of private landowners who control 80 percent of the huntable land in the state.

Even if only Game Lands were open on Sunday farmers are concerned about keeping the hunters off private land.

Farmers don’t feel they will benefit from Sunday hunting, and they don’t want it.

Many say there is too much to do to get the youngsters hunting during the week. The farmers’ take on the subject is that the ball fields and soccer fields are packed on Saturdays. They believe it all comes down to priorities. If hunting is the priority for the the parents and the youth, they will do it instead of soccer and football.

Rotz pointed out that a survey conducted by the Pennsylvania Legislative Budget & Finance Committee in 2005 revealed that 80 percent of the landowners who were surveyed did not want Sunday hunting, and nearly half the hunters who responded did not favor expanding Sunday hunting.

Staback continually argued the point that foxes, coyotes and crows can be killed on Sunday, so why not other species, including deer, turkey, bear and all small game species.

Farm Bureau member Nila Cogan, who is a Somerset County farmer and an ordained minister, said that farmers need to spend more time and relax with their families on Sunday without hunters disturbing their day of rest.

She asked, “Why should a particular interest that has the use of the land six days a week outweigh the interest of others who only want one day a week without the concern of hunters sharing the woods?”

She then said, “I’ve heard many farmers say they will post their land, forbidding hunting anytime, if Sunday hunting is allowed.”

An economic impact study designed to show great financial gain if Sunday hunting is allowed was scrutinized, not only because of the numbers, but the thoroughness of the study to include all factors, including the loss of other Sunday activities because people were in fear of going where there was hunting activity.

The second person to testify was Sarah Speed, Pennsylvania state director of The Humane Society of the United States.

As was expected the Humane Society is opposed to Sunday hunting.

Her contention was that with hunting permitted six days a week for most of the year, outdoor enthusiasts deserve the freedom to have just one day a week to enjoy our natural resources in relative peace and quiet without fear for their safety.

Speed also questioned the added economic benefits of Sunday hunting, noting that the report on which proponents base their claims fail to acknowledge the lost revenue from other Sunday recreation that would be lost as a result of Sunday hunting.

Instead of moving ahead, some committee members engaged Speed in a jousting match as to the Humane Society’s real intent concerning hunting and whether or nor not it is an anti-hunting organization.

Speed traded barbs with committee member Rep. Dan Moul (R) and Staback.

The final persons to give testimony represented the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the NRA, the Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs, and the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance.

Most tended to dwell on the economic issues surrounding hunting, especially the economic impact study, which all opponents questioned, which predicted the creation over 8,000 new jobs, more than $245,000 in new wages and generate nearly $764 million in economic activity in the state.

The numbers were based on the assumption that hunters would increase activity by 22 percent. No one bothered to ask what if they opted to hunt on Sunday instead of Wednesday? By most calculations, that wouldn’t change much.

They also argued that lack of Sunday hunting is a major obstacle to the recruitment of new hunters.

Declining hunting license sales were also tossed in the mix.

Everyone had an answer for everything until the question of the resource came up.

When asked what studies had been done on the effect of Sunday hunting on the resource (wildlife), most in favor suddenly became deaf, dumb or both and struggled to find the words to reply.

John Maher, majority chairman of the House Agriculture & Rural Affairs committee posed the question as what would happen to the length of the hunting seasons if Sundays are added, Noting that hunting days would have to be lost elsewhere.

That only makes sense if sound wildlife management practices are followed.

Those in favor of Sunday hunting had no response to his query either.

The subject of Sunday hunting came up a few years ago, and I wrote a column, noting that I felt the negatives outweighed the positives for such a move.

At that time I received some negative feedback, asking how I – as a hunter – can be opposed to Sunday hunting.

As a hunter I can’t answer that, but as a sportsmen, I have to consider the resource over personal gain.

By resource, I mean the game and the land where it lives.

The game needs a rest, too. Our deer herd has been under extreme pressure for years, and in many cases could stand a few less hunting days, not more.

The landowners who provide the habitat for our game species deserve a day of rest also.

If they post their land to all hunting, and the sportsmen of Pennsylvania lose thousands of acres of huntable land, what will have been gained by adding a handful Sunday hunting days to the calendar?

It is an oxymoron when the sportsmen and sportswomen of Pennsylvania, who have complained for years about the deer season and dwindling deer populations, finally begin to see some positive changes in fewer doe hunting days and much-sought antler restriction changes only to ask for another killing day.