ACSL Archives 2017

PLEASE NOTE: We have tried to maintain links where possible,but due to the archival nature of these articles,some links may have changed or be otherwise unavailable.


A new Gallup poll that shows dramatically declining support for a ban on so-called “assault weapons” is proof that more Americans are waking up to the fact that gun bans and restrictive control in general are not the solutions to violent crime, the Second Amendment Foundation said today.

“While extremist anti-gunners in Washington, D.C. push their agenda of public disarmament, this new poll shows that support for the right to keep and bear arms stretches across party lines all over the country,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “Some people may think gun control is an issue that will carry them into the White House, but out here where common sense prevails, the idea of banning guns only puts people in the dog house.”

According to Gallup, only 36 percent of the people support a ban on “assault weapons,” where 44 percent backed the idea in 2012 and 57 percent liked the idea back in 1996. Gottlieb said the past 20 years have allowed Second Amendment organizations to educate the public, and many political leaders, about the false promise of restrictive gun control and outright bans.

“Taking perfectly legal firearms away from law-abiding citizens does nothing to discourage criminals from committing crimes with guns they obtain illegally,” Gottlieb explained. “Demonizing honest citizens who have harmed nobody by blaming their guns for crimes they didn’t commit does not pass the smell test, and the new Gallup results show that an increasing number of Americans have wised up to that.”

Gottlieb was disappointed, though not surprised, that more Democrats than Republicans still favor a ban. But he is encouraged because the poll results suggest that efforts by gun rights organizations to educate the public about Second Amendment issues and the futility of gun bans are working.

“The more people understand that banning guns for law-abiding citizens will not prevent criminals from breaking the law, the less time we will waste on fighting over gun rights and the more time we can spend on finding sensible solutions to lowering the violent crime rates,” Gottlieb concluded.

Source: The Second Amendment


U.S. House Passes NRA-Backed Bill to Protect Second Amendment Rights of America’s Veterans

On Thursday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 1181, the Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act, sponsored by Phil Roe, M.D. (R-TN), Chairman of the House Committee on Veterans Affairs. The bill now moves to the U.S. Senate.

H.R. 1181 in many respects mirrors a recently enacted resolution to repeal an Obama-era Social Security Administration (SSA) rule that sought to deprive certain SSA beneficiaries of their Second Amendment rights.

A federal statute prohibits firearm acquisition or possession by anyone who has been “adjudicated as a mental defective.” The statute, however, does not define the meaning of this term.

Like the SSA, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) interprets the phrase very broadly. It considers any VA beneficiary who is declared “incompetent” to manage his or her benefits and assigned a fiduciary for assistance to be a prohibited “mental defective.”

This is even broader and more arbitrary than the invalidated SSA rule. That rule at least excluded beneficiaries who were minors or of retirement age and applied only where the underlying condition that qualified the person for Disability benefits or Supplemental Security Income was itself a mental condition.

The VA’s practice, however, has no such limitations. It applies to all beneficiaries receiving benefits for any reason who are assigned a fiduciary. The VA’s position is that an admission or finding that a fiduciary is needed is tantamount to an “adjudication” that a person “lacks the mental capacity” to “manage his own affairs.”  

But in most cases, these decisions are summary bureaucratic actions. They very rarely involve a hearing, much less lawyers or judges. So calling them an “adjudication” is inaccurate.

It’s also false to claim that needing help with finances is the sort of “mental defectiveness” Congress intended would prevent a person from being eligible to exercise his or her Second Amendment rights.

Mental health experts warn that there is no connection between financial acumen and a person’s ability safely and responsibly to handle a firearm. That point was made again and again in the context of the debate on the SSA bill.

Thus, the same arguments against the SSA rule apply just as strongly, if not more so, against the VA’s regime.

In other words, the VA’s regime is unconstitutional; inconsistent with the underlying statute; unsupported by science or empirical evidence establishing any link between financial acumen and the ability to safely and responsibly handle firearms; and harmfully stigmatizing. It also serves as a deterrent for vulnerable people who need help and benefits from seeking them.

In addition to all that, it presents the bitter irony of being targeted directly at the very people who bore the cost for the freedoms that all Americans enjoy.

The Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act would correct these deficiencies by ensuring that no beneficiary could be reported to NICS as a prohibited “mental defective” unless a judicial authority (such as a judge or magistrate) first determined the person to be a danger to self or others.

That leaves options in the case of a person experiencing an acute episode of dangerous mental illness, while also ensuring that veterans are not arbitrarily denied their rights without due process of law.

Meanwhile, the media is whipping up the usual frenzy about Congress “giving guns” to the “mentally ill.”

Even the self-styed legal experts from The View got in on the act, going so far as to encourage their viewers to contact their congressional representatives to object. Their comments on the bill and its effects, unsurprisingly, were rife with misunderstanding and misinformation.

Due process, as well as Second Amendment rights, are fundamental liberties that all Americans enjoy. They are exactly the sorts of rights for which America’s veterans have sacrificed so much. The fact that the VA would infringe them in this manner is a national disgrace and one that is long past due for correction.

The NRA thanks Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI), Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), and Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA), as well as Chairman Roe, for their leadership in this critical effort.

The U.S. Senate should swiftly follow their lead and send the Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act to President Trump’s desk.

Source: NRA / ILA


A Declaration of Independence for today

Two-hundred forty years ago a group of men pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honor and embarked on a dangerous journey with an uncertain outcome in an effort to wrest themselves and their country from a despotic monarch and forge a new nation.

When taken in context, the tyranny under which the Founders languished pales in comparison to that we face today, as our Becky Akers so ably wrote last week.

So with apologies to Mr. Jefferson, the drafters and signatories of the original Declaration of Independence, I have taken their framework and drafted a new document stating our new grievances – many of which are eerily similar to those of yesteryear.

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these united States; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of recent presidents, congresses and federal courts is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

They have created a host of Laws, regulations, ordinances and statutes that are most unwholesome and contrary to the public good. Presidents have created laws with the stroke of a pen, congresses have ceded their authority under the Constitution to make law and declare war to both the president and bureaucrats, and the courts have created law from whole cloth and stricken down laws passed by the people, all contrary to the established Constitution.

They have forbidden Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation, till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

They have refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

They have labeled freedom-loving people as dissidents and enemies of the state and sought to have them disarmed.

They have endeavored to prevent the population of these States, for that purpose establishing Laws for Admittance of Foreigners to act on their own behalf; refusing also to pass others to discourage their migrations hither, and raising the limits of foreigners imported.

They have obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing to restrain the bureaucrats and by granting the Judiciary powers it does not possess.

They have erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out our substance and spy on us, rifle through our bank accounts, scan our electronic correspondence, raid our homes and places of business, prevent the self-determination of land use, inspect our gardens and livestock pens, prevent us from determining what is good and proper for consumption and to steal our property.

They have kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies in the form of militarized and federalized police officers who steal our possessions in the name of the “War on Drugs” and the “War on Terror,” who torture us and shoot us in order ensure their own safety; and have militarized a host government alphabet soup agencies with huge stockpiles of weapons and ammunition.

They have affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the civil power.

They have combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

  • For establishing crony Trade pacts with all parts of the world:
  • For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
    For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
  • For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending laws passed by our own Legislatures and voted on by the people, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

They have abdicated Government here, by declaring illegal immigrants in his Protection and waging War against us through an intentional invasion of foreigners.

They are at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation, making war on other nations that have not attacked us and do not threaten us.

They and their minions have excited domestic insurrections amongst us.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have we been wanting in attentions to representatives in Congress. We have warned them from time to time about their attempts to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation from the federal leviathan, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

I, therefore, as a Representative of the people of the united States of America and the readers of Personal Liberty,  appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these states, solemnly publish and declare, That we are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the unlawful U.S. government, and that all political connection between them and the people, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Who will join me?

Source: Bob Livingston (Personal Liberty)



BELLEVUE, WA – Renewed interest by Seattle news outlets in the revenues generated by the City of Seattle’s so-called “gun violence tax” demonstrates that the media is wondering why the city continues to withhold that information, especially considering an ongoing lawsuit by the Second Amendment Foundation and its publication,

“Back in 2015, when the city adopted this gun tax, there were predictions that it would generate between $300,000 and $500,000 in revenue,” SAF founder Alan Gottlieb recalled. “Here we are, more than a year after the tax took effect, and the city still hasn’t released any information. The public has a right to know whether this was an accurate forecast, or just a pie-in-the-sky sales pitch to push this tax into law.

“Other news agencies have sought this information,” he added, “and we invite and challenge the media to join with us in the fight to protect the First Amendment and the people’s right to know because this is clearly a First Amendment issue. The city has argued that releasing the tax revenue information would jeopardize the privacy of the few businesses that have paid the tax, but that argument seems pretty thin. It’s becoming our strong suspicion that the city doesn’t want to release the revenue figure because it doesn’t come close to what they predicted.” senior editor Dave Workman, who is a plaintiff in the case, repeated what has been the publication’s position since the outset: “We have never been interested in disclosing who paid what amount. All we want is an aggregate figure, and the longer the city holds out, the more people will wonder if they’re trying to conceal something.”

A separate lawsuit challenging the tax was filed in late 2015 by SAF, the National Rifle Association and National Shooting Sports Foundation, plus two retail gun dealers. One of those retailers has moved his business outside the city, and the lawsuit asserts this is not a sales tax but a gun control measure that violates Washington State’s preemption statute.

“The City of Seattle is stonewalling us,” Gottlieb stated. “It’s time for them to come clean.”

Source: The Second Amendment Foundation ( 



Qualifying for the National Archery in the Schools Program state championships is happening now.


  • A huge opportunity is “nocking” for Pennsylvania’s student archers.
  • The 2017 National Archery in the Schools Program State Tournament is set to be held March 10 in State College. Qualifying for the state event is currently open across the state. And the Pennsylvania Game Commission is encouraging all schools participating in the program, commonly referred to as NASP, to take part.
  • Teams hoping to make the state tournament must first shoot at one of the many state qualifiers being held across the state. Qualifying opened on Oct. 1 and closes on Feb. 5.  The top 12 teams in each age division, as well as the top 30 individuals in each age class, will earn a ticket to the state championships. 
  • For information on how to host a state qualifier at your school use this link. 
  • The NASP state tournament has been growing each year since its inception in 2011, and the March 10 tournament to be held at the Penn State Multi-Sport Facility figures to include close to 1,000 participants. Students from more than 50 schools across Pennsylvania are expected to participate. The increase is representative of growth in the program statewide.
  • NASP, which started in Kentucky in 2002 and has since gained participants around the globe, came to Pennsylvania in 2005. The Game Commission began coordinating the program in 2010 and, to present, the program has expanded to 237 schools.
  • The tournament should be a sight to see. Ninety-five lanes, each with two archers, will be operating at once. About 9,000 arrows will fly each hour. And somewhere near 46,000 arrows will be shot on the day.
  • This year, there will be over $7,000 in scholarships handed out to the top-performing archers in the state to help pay for college or trade school. 
  • To find a state qualifier tournament in your area, use the NASP Tournament website,
  • Teams are reminded they must be NASP schools and participate in a state qualifier for a chance to qualify for the state championships. 
  • NASP helps school districts in Pennsylvania meet physical-education curriculum requirements standards set by the state Department of Education, and at the same time introduces students to the world of competitive archery.
  • Tournaments are held at the state, national and international levels, and Pennsylvania sent over 160 students to the 2016 national competition, which was held in Louisville, Kentucky;
  • To get NASP started in a Pennsylvania school, contact Todd Holmes, at the Game Commission headquarters, at 717-787-4250 (ext. 3330). Also, “PA NASP” can be found on Facebook at

Source: Pennsylvania Game Commission




The Second Amendment Foundation responded to a biased story about firearms theft that appears in The Trace, an on-line anti-gun-rights publication.

The story concerns gun thefts from vehicles. SAF noted that those guns would not be left in cars were it not for the ridiculous gun control laws supported by wealthy anti-gun elitists who also support the publication.

“Michael Bloomberg and other gun prohibition elitists who bankroll The Trace should be demanding tougher sentences for people who break into cars just to steal guns, rather than whining about law-abiding citizens who are forced to leave guns locked in vehicles because of gun-free zones and other restrictions,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb.

The article contends that gun owners “make it easy for thieves.” In reality, Gottlieb countered, it is laws that prevent legally-armed citizens from carrying their firearms into so-called ‘gun-free zones’ that include restaurants, shopping malls, theaters and other public places. And, he added, the blame also lies with lax enforcement of existing laws that are supposed to punish car prowlers.

“Gun prohibitionists encourage businesses to post their property off limits to legally-carried firearms,” Gottlieb noted. “The best way to keep firearms out of the wrong hands is to make it easier, not harder, for those guns to remain in the right hands. No honest citizen should be forced to leave a legal firearm locked in a vehicle while dining out with friends, or taking their families to a movie, or to a shopping mall, where they might be attacked and seriously injured, without the means to fight back, as last weekend’s incident in Minnesota demonstrated.

“This makes it easier for thieves to steal guns,” he added. “It’s almost as though anti-gunners want car prowlers to take those firearms, and for legal gun owners to be sitting ducks for the next madman with a knife.

“Bloomberg and The Trace don’t seem to understand who the good guys and bad guys are,” Gottlieb concluded.


The Second Amendment Foundation (


Pa. Bill for Mentored Hunters Advances to Full Senate

Legislation that would allow Pennsylvania middle- and high-school-aged kids to try hunting under the direct control of an experienced mentor has cleared the final committee, allowing the bill to be voted on by the full Senate. House Bill 1452 would extend mentored hunting privileges to kids ages 12 to 17.  Mentored hunting is already permitted for people under 12 years old, and for adults.

 “Pennsylvania is the only mentored hunting state that currently prohibits high school and middle school kids from participating in mentored hunting,” said Evan Heusinkveld, president and CEO of the Sportsmen’s Alliance. “Mentored hunting has been shown to be the safest and most effective means of attracting newcomers to hunting. We strongly encourage Pennsylvania senators to allow teenagers to join younger kids and adults in this opportunity.” 

House Bill 1452 was approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee, the final hurdle preventing it from receiving a vote before the entire Senate. The bill was unanimously approved by the Senate Game and Fish Committee on March 22. If approved, it must also be voted on by the full House because of the mentored hunting changes inserted into the bill. HB 1452 also provides discount hunting licenses to trapping instructors. 

The Sportsmen’s Alliance, and the other Families Afield partners (National Shooting Sports Foundation, National Wild Turkey Federation, National Rifle Association and Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation), have successfully championed mentored or apprentice hunting in 39 states since the Families Afield program was launched in 2005. The result has been more than 1.6 million licenses sold, many to suburban and urban people as well as women and girls. 

Pennsylvania was the first state to adopt a Families Afield-style mentored hunting bill for kids in 2006, and has led the nation in mentored hunting license sales ever since. In 2013, the Pennsylvania legislature approved legislation allowing adults to join the program. However, the Pennsylvania Game Commission reported that it needed special authorization to include kids ages 12 to 17. House Bill 1452 would correct that age loophole in the law and open the opportunity to them. 

Source: The Sportsmen’s Alliance


SAF Says Punish Democrats For House Rules Violations 

Reacting to an ethics complaint filed by an independent watchdog group against several House Democrats for violating House rules during their gun control sit-in, the Second Amendment Foundation today said the offenders should be punished for attacking the Second Amendment.

“I hope that these Democrat assault politicians get punished for their ethics violations,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “What they should really get punished for is violating their oath of office to protect our Constitution and the Second Amendment rights it protects.”

The complaint was filed by the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust. It alleges that “House Democrats sent fundraising emails based on action taken in the Members official capacity and using official House images.”

“Bad enough that some House members appear to have exploited the sit-in for their own political purpose,” Gottlieb stated, “but their antics were primarily aimed at eroding the Second Amendment. Whether they like it or not, the right to keep and bear arms is part of the Bill of Rights, and if they can’t abide by that, they should hand in their resignations immediately.”

The partisan sit-in was staged entirely for the purpose of pushing for new gun control measures following the Orlando terror incident.

“In other countries,” Gottlieb observed, “authorities blame such attacks on Islamic or political extremism. But in the United States, Democrats always seem to blame such attacks on the Second Amendment, and they try to penalize 90 million law-abiding gun owners for something they didn’t do.

“If some drunk crashed a car into a school bus,” he noted, “you wouldn’t take car keys away from every motorist or try to ban cars. But these Democrats would rather go after guns because it diverts public attention away from the fact that they have been either unwilling or unable to prevent terror attacks on American soil.”

Source: The Second Amendment Foundation


 Connecticut Judge Grants Immunity to Bushmaster in Case Seeking to Gut the PLCAA

On January 26, 2015, survivors of victims killed by a deranged man at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut sued the maker and distributor of the firearm he used in his crimes.

This afternoon, a judge issued a ruling in the case, Soto v. Bushmaster, that held the defendants were entitled to immunity from the suit.

The defendants in the case originally asked the court to dismiss the complaint under the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which was enacted in 2005 to prohibit frivolous suits against firearm makers for criminal acts committed with their products by unaffiliated third parties. 

In April, the court in the Soto case issued a highly technical ruling that found the defendants had filed the wrong type of motion to invoke the protections of the PLCAA. The court at that time expressed no opinion on the merits of either the complaint or the defenses.

The defendants renewed their claim of immunity under the PLCAA, this time by filing “motions to strike” the plaintiffs’ claims.

In a lengthy decision on the merits, Connecticut Judge Barbara Bellis today granted those motions in their entirety.

Judge Bellis stated in her order: 

Congress, through the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act … has broadly prohibited lawsuits “against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers of firearms … for the harm solely caused by the criminal or unlawful use of firearm products … by others when the produced functioned as designed and intended.” … The present case seeks damages for harms … that were caused solely by the criminal misuse of a weapon by [the perpetrator of the Newtown slayings]. Accordingly, this action falls squarely within the broad immunity provided by the PLCAA.  

The plaintiffs in the case tried to avoid the obvious problems the PLCAA presented for their claims by citing one of the law’s exceptions for “negligent entrustment.” This requires a plaintiff to show that the seller of the product knew, or reasonably should have known, that selling the product to a particular recipient created an unreasonable risk of harm.

In the Newtown case, none of the defendants sold or supplied a firearm directly to the ultimate perpetrator. Instead, the firearm was sold to his mother, who passed the legally required background check. The perpetrator, however, subsequently killed her and stole the firearm he then used in his crimes. 

Nevertheless, the plaintiffs claimed the defendants were negligent for entrusting any member of the general public with the Bushmaster XM-15E2S (an AR-15 variant) used in the crime. Despite the fact the firearm was perfectly legal to sell and own under federal and Connecticut law at the time and that AR-15s are America’s most popular and fastest-selling rifles, the plaintiffs insisted that “civilians are unfit to operate AR-15s.”

Had this claim succeeded, it would have not only been the first time a court essentially banned an otherwise legal class of firearms, it would have essentially gutted the protections of the PLCAA by making courts, rather than legislatures, the ultimate arbiters of what firearms are legal to sell.

Fortunately, Judge Bellis understood this was exactly the sort of claim for which the PLCAA was enacted. It would be impossible for businesses to manufacture and sell firearms to the public if courts could decide, after that fact, that even legal gun were too dangerous for any member of the public to own. 

Judge Bellis also rejected other claims under a PLCAA exception that allows for a lawsuit when a manufacturer or seller knowingly violated a state or federal statute applicable to the sale or marketing of the product, and that violation led to the harms claimed in the suit. For these claims, the plaintiffs cited the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, but the court held they had not alleged the sorts of commercial relationships with the defendants necessary to establish a right of action under that law.

The court’s decision is a reminder of the critical importance of the PLCAA to preserving the Second Amendment in America. It should come as no surprise, then, that Hillary Clinton has promised to pursue repeal of the PLCAA if elected to the presidency.  

It should also come as no surprise that the plaintiffs have already expressed their intention to appeal today’s ruling. We will report on further developments as they occur.

Source: NRA / ILA


Winter boating update

Colder weather is upon us, but you can still enjoy the water.

Be aware that between Nov. 1 and April 30 each year,
Pennsylvania boating law requires a life jacket be worn by ALL people aboard any water craft less than 16 feet in length, which would include small boats, canoes and kayaks.

Wearing a life jacket in cold water may save your life!

The body's first reaction to immersion in cold water is frequently an involuntary gasp, which can lead to swallowing water, and can also lead to changes in heart rhythm.

The colder the water temperature,
the less time a person can remain conscious and survive.

A life jacket will keep you afloat even if your body is unable to respond.

Learn more about
boating in PA on the Fish and Boat Commission website.

As always, if you have any questions or concerns regarding this or any state-related issue, please
contact my office.

Source: Rep. Harry A. Readshaw


Additional State Forest Roads Opening Across the State For Hunting Seasons, Other Outdoor Activities

Hunters and other outdoors enthusiasts heading into Pennsylvania’s state-owned woodlands this autumn will find additional roads open in 18 of the 20 state forest districts, the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources announced today.

“We know improved accessibility and DCNR’s promotion of deer hunting where needed benefits forest regeneration and the overall ecosystem,” said DCNR Secretary Cindy Adams Dunn. “As a result, the Bureau of Forestry is opening more than 540 miles of state forest roads normally open only for administrative use. They again will be available to hunters, hikers, foliage viewers and others visiting state forestlands this fall.”

More than 3,000 miles of state forest roadways will be open during the statewide archery deer season, which opens Saturday, Oct. 1, and closes Saturday, Nov. 12. They will continue to stay open through other hunting seasons continuing into January, 2017.

“Regardless of whether they seek deer, bear, turkey or small game, hunters in our state forests will find more than 90 percent of that land now is within one-half mile of an open road,” said Dunn.

With the hunter in mind, DCNR continues to update a new interactive map of state forestlands across Pennsylvania that offers details on newly opened roads, timber harvesting activity, forestry office contact numbers and more.

Meanwhile, top-quality hunting is offered at many state parks -- especially those in the 12.5-county Pennsylvania Wilds region -- where state forestland often surrounds them. Inexpensive camping can be found at many of those parks.

Primitive camping on state forestlands is also an option, giving hunters a backcountry camping or hunting experience. Camping permits, issued by the managing forest district, are required when camping on state forestlands on designated sites.

Many of these campsites are close to state parks and forestlands enrolled in the Pa. Game Commission’s Deer Management Assistance Program, permitting hunters to take one antlerless deer or more when properly licensed. Hunters are advised to check with state forests district headquarters or state park offices about availability.

Hunters traveling to some north central areas of the state are reminded some hunting areas and travel routes may be impacted by Marcellus Shale-related activities. Some state forest roads may be temporarily closed during drilling operations or other peak periods of heavy use to reduce potential safety hazards.

Some state forest roads only will be opened for the second week of the traditional rifle season because they cannot withstand the expected heavy traffic of the first week of that season. Two- or three-month long openings will be in effect only where there is minimal threat of damage or deterioration to road surfaces or forest surroundings.

For more information on Pennsylvania’s 20 state forest districts and 120 state parks, visit and select “Find a Forest” or “Find a Park.”

The new interactive state forest map can be viewed at

Marcellus Shale information can be found on Bureau of Forestry pages under “Natural Gas Drilling on State Forests.” Camping opportunities and details can be found on both the “Forestry” and “State Park” pages.

Source: PA Department of Conservation and Natural Resources