Debunking the Pennsylvania Game Commission

Pennsylvania Game Commission spokesman Jerry Feaser has been quoted by various newspapers as saying the strange looking animal in the Jacobs photos is "definitely" a "skinny mangy bear." People outside of Pennsylvania may not know about the Pennsylvania Game Commission (PGC) and their approach to mountain lion sightings. Their historical approach to mountain lion sightings is relevant to understanding their approach to the Jacobs photos.

A significant percentage of people in Pennsylvania say the Pennsylvania Game Commission is not entirely trustworthy, because the PGC has stated for years, emphatically, that there are no mountain lions in Pennsylvania, even though hundreds of people in Pennsylvania, including many government employees, have seen mountain lions.

Until recently, whenever the sighting of a mountain lion was reported in PA, the intial response from the PGC was to say the sighting was a misidentification. Whenever a witness strongly contested that reaction, the fall-back response by the PGC was to say the animal might have been an escaped pet mountain lion, at best. The animal could not be a wild mountain lion, because "there are no wild mountain lions in Pennsylvania."

This was the approach of the PGC until a farmer named Roger Madigan saw a mountain lion, along with several other people on his remote rural farm, during a large outdoor party, a party which included a big roast pig barbeque, near the edge of a forest. The mountain lion came and went. No one was attacked or threatenned. In the process of reporting the sighting he inquired if other sightings had been reported in the area. He was told by the PGC that there were no other sightings, and that he himself did not see a mountain lion ... because "there are no mountain lions in Pennsylvania".

That would have been the end of the story if Roger Madigan had not been a Pennsylvania State Senator at the time.

Madigan did not like being told that he did not see a mountain lion. After gathering more information on local sightings he called a meeting in his office with the PGC. He invited another wildlife agency to the meeting -- the only agency that could assert jurisdiction over the heads of the PGC regarding the mountain lion issue. That agency was the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The USFWS can assert jurisdiction regarding moutain lions under the Endangered Species Act.

Senator Madigan is surely an intelligent man. He is surely intelligent enough to know how he would have felt for the rest of his life if a child, possibly his own grandchild, had been killed or mauled by a mountain lion at his party. He would have blamed himself for being unaware of the risk he created with an irresistable mix of stimuli and opportunity. He would have also blamed the PGC for leading him, and everyone else in his community, into a false sense of security about mountain lions.

The push of the meeting in Madigan's office was apparently to force the PGC's official position to something more rational-sounding, like "There might be mountain lions in Pennsylvania."

That change to the official position would not cause public panic ... but it might make the difference between no caution whatsoever, and basic sensible caution, in situations where small children are playing in the woods unattended, perhaps during outdoor summer barbeques where enticing smoke is wafting into the forest. These situations are common in Pennsylvania in the summer. Mere awareness of the potential might prevent a tragedy.

Only those people who attended the meeting in Madigan's office know exactly what was said, but it must have been a proud moment for U.S. federalism, because the USFWS afterward announced that there "needs to be a study" to determine whether mountain lions exist in Pennsylvania, and the study should be conducted directly by the USFWS.

It didn't need to be trumpeted on television news. It was a subtle way to communicate what needed to be communicated, to any citizen down the road who might have a reason to inquire: Yes, there might be mountain lions in Pennsylvania. No person has ever been attacked by one in PA, and no mountain lions have been killed or captured in PA, but that doesn't mean you should completely let your guard down in the woods, especially with small children present. Too many families elsewhere on this continent, especially in Canada, have learned that lesson under tragic circumstances. It should not have to happen in Pennsylvania.

Merely informing people of the possibility of mountain lions in Pennsylvania would not cause a panic, as it never does out west, but the death of a child by a mountain lion in Pennsylvania would create some measure of panic and terror in Pennsylania, and all surrounding states.

The USFWS now asks Pennsylvanians to send sighting reports of mountain lions directly to the USFWS, rather than to the PGC, in apparent recognition of the PGC's long-standing practice of whitewashing any sighting reports sent their way.

The USFWS receives its funding from everyone's taxes, but the PGC receives all of its funding only from the sale of hunting licenses. Revenue from hunting licenses might be reduced if hunters were afraid to go into the woods by themselves, due to fear of a mountain lion attack. The same effect might occur if the wives of hunters were too worried to let their husbands go hunting by themselves. A substantial portion of hunters in Pennsylvania hunt alone.

Public worries about some other strange animal might have the same effect as well.

Immediately after the first story ran about the Jacobs photos (in the Brandford Era newspaper) the PGC chastised the news editor about it. Feaser told him that he was "spreading panic" in Pennsylvania and doing a "disservice to the public". Feaser urged the editor to write a follow-up story with a retraction stating that the strange animal is merely a mangy bear. Feaser said he was "certain" that the Jacob's creature is nothing more than a skinny mangy bear, and he offered a photo of a skinny mangy bear.

The news staff at the Bradford Era newspaper thought the bear in the PGC's photo (shown above) looked distinctly unlike the Jacobs creature in various ways, so they did not promote the PGC's assertion that it is a case of mistaken identity, as Feaser urged them to do.

The PGC's historical approach to mountain lion sightings was inappropriate enough to justify federal intervention ... so should the media defer to their opinion about the Jacobs photos?

-----------------------

SIDE NOTE:

The USFWS will be the agency that asserts jurisdiction over the bigfoot issue at some point down the line. They will assert jurisdiction everywhere in the country, including state lands, private lands, indian reservations and military bases.

At this stage the USFWS needs to get the word out, slowly but surely, to all government employees who interface with the public: When people ask about the "official" government position regarding the ownershp of remains of an animal like a bigfoot, they need to answer the question the same way we do:

"No, you would not be able to keep or sell the dead body of a bigfoot, no matter how you claim to have come across it. Any kind of unique specimen, especially one not previously cataloged, falls naturally under the scope of the Endangered Species Act, and thus falls under the jurisdiction of the USFWS. Any person would be guilty of stealing federal property if the person tried to keep or sell a dead bigfoot, regardless of its alleged origin."

The USFWS can easily justify a reference to these animals among their own ranks, because attempts to hunt and kill vaguely human-shaped animals ... is a danger to the public in itself. Thus regardless of whether sasquatches exist or not, people should be discouraged from trying to kill them.