Merlin Benner could not be reached by phone this evening. Hunting could start this month and will be done at parks and at the golf course before 10:00 AM and after 4:00 PM. More information will be shared at the January 13 meeting. Details are sketchy.
Kristen will be available by phone and email for the next three months. If she feels up to it, she may come to a meeting. Kristen's leave of absence was approved unanimously.
Update January 6, 2014 11:25 AM Our helpful PIO has provided clarification to a Lebo Citizens reader on Facebook.
Update January 6, 2014 11:25 AM Our helpful PIO has provided clarification to a Lebo Citizens reader on Facebook.
Hi Elaine, I missed the discussion meeting on the deer issue but I'm really taken back by your post about an entire street hiring bow hunters to do their own thing without any notice whatsoever. How can all this be legal? Did the commission or the police department have a heads up on this?
ReplyDeleteNick M.
Nick, all legal since they are abiding by the buffer zones. I believe it was Kristen who brought it up at the commission discussion session.
ReplyDeleteWe'll have to watch the video tomorrow.
Elaine
How in the world can this be legal? I would like to know the street where this is happening - so that I can avoid it! I will also tell my teenagers to avoid this street. This makes me so angry! So unsafe and so cruel.
ReplyDeleteObviously, it's a little crazy to have bow hunters hunting in one neighborhood.
ReplyDeleteBut the idea that a neighborhood has "taken matters into their own hands" is actually something that has been a long time coming in Mt Lebanon.
How many neighborhoods and groups have built up frustration because Mt Lebanon has failed to get things right the first to nth time?
If 50 yards is the buffer zone I'd like to know what street has houses with that much personal property without stepping on public property. So technically they would need 50 yards as a buffer plus another amount of personal property to hunt on. Where in Mt. Lebanon could this be?
ReplyDeleteNick M.
Hmmm, if a street can legally hire hunters and kill deer on its own, does it logically follow that a street can, if they impliment PAYT, say F*ck it, we're not paying and hire their own trash service?
ReplyDeleteNice going Commissioner Linfante, way to build that sense of community.
Fraasch's vote was a disappointment.
Maybe it's a street that also gets its own historic district funding and to take part in special $6000 flower beds.
ReplyDeleteIt's hard to believe that this is legal. If it's true, how is the notification of such activity going out to the community?
ReplyDeleteThis is one of the most absurd things about Mt. Lebanon that I have heard in a long time.
This is shocking news, and seems extremely reckless, dangerous, and an accident waiting to happen. It's also shocking that Mt. Lebanon's Commissioners are complicit in the secrecy and cover-up, which put all residents and their children in the area at risk. Why was there no Lebo Alerts given to residents, or school alerts given to parents and their children? Why wasn't this plan presented to the community at a council meeting? I'd like to know who in Mt. Lebanon was responsible for verifying the measurement of 50 yards from all surrounding homes? Who are the hunters that have been invited to use lethal weapons in our community? How were these hunters recruited (I didn't see any ads). Who is overseeing this hunting in our community? Also, whose idea was this, and who coordinated it? How can we trust our own Commission and administration, when they kept this vigilante hunting program secret, and without notifying any residents in our community. This is outrageous!!!!
ReplyDelete11:05
ReplyDelete"Fraasch's vote was a disappointment."
What did she vote for?
State hunting regulations stipulate 150 yards from a school, playground, or nursery. So what about kids and pets playing in residents yards, and kids walking home from school - how is that different from the cause for the 150 yard safety zone?
ReplyDeleteGee, I wonder which Commissioner was behind this secret hunt, and what role the other Commissioners and the administration had in this coordination, and and keeping everything secret and hidden from the public?
ReplyDeleteDamn the codes and ordinances. We have the money and if we want something killed we'll do it.
ReplyDeleteI guess we'll have to take salting and plowing into our own hands as well.
ReplyDelete5 am and not a sign of the snow plow on a fairly busy route people use to go to work.
Guess PW has taken a leave of absence too.
I doubt we will find out where the killing is occurring. The municipality would want to keep that quiet. My comments in the 11/11/14 meeting minutes were "sterilized" by removing MacArthur and substituting near Bethel Park. "She also spoke about a deer she observed with an arrow in it near Bethel Park..."
ReplyDeleteElaine
If I find anyone armed, even with a bow, on my property, they will be considered an armed intruder and I will exercise my rights under PA's Castle Doctrine laws.
ReplyDeleteAnd believe me, it won't be with a bow.
My street isn't plowed either. I heard a salt truck crashed on Sat morning.
ReplyDeleteThe bigger question: will the new school zone lights be in place this morning? they were funded last year to address the fact that the school zone lights do not work during weather delay days.
Let's see if I walk out into my yard and fire so much as a BB and an officer sees me.
ReplyDeleteI'll just tell him I'm a secret hunter.
The vote to allow Linfante's absences was repoorted as unanimous wasn't it, 1:16?
I was AT the meeting last night, and I continue to be stunned by the knowledge that we have "hunters" in camo in trees somewhere in our otherwise peaceful community shooting and killing deer WITH NO NOTICE TO ANYONE THAT THEY ARE DOING IT! And to think that I moved here to get away from the neighborhood drug dealer's activities in a neighboring community! THAT'S IT; I'll be posting my little parcel of land in this exceptional community with conspicuously placed NO HUNTING signs and suggest that others might wish to do the same. This is NOT the community I grew up in!
ReplyDelete9:03 Osage and Scrubgrass had blacktop showing at 6:00 am as far as you could see from Cochran, which was still covered with snow
ReplyDelete"No Hunting" signs--what a great idea! I wonder whether there would be enought other people interested in doing the same thing that we could make it like a silent protest kind of a public statement? Let's take a stand. I'm in. Anyone else?
ReplyDeleteSterilization would stablize the deer population, prevent drift from surrounding communities, and permit the deer numbers to come down over time through atrition. Killing deer will create instability which will result in multiple births from our remaining deer and will also invite new deer from other areas to move in and call this home. Can anyone explain to me why four of the Commissioners are prepared to spend 90% or more of their deer "management" budget (our money, BTW)on killing and a miserly sum no greater than 10% on this highly-effective method? What am I missing, here?
ReplyDeleteSo anyone with a hunting license can now bag a deer if they want?
ReplyDeleteOh, they have to be hired!
Just contracted with myself to cull deer for $5/hour.
I don't know if they are hired, 10:00 AM.
ReplyDeleteI should start selling No Hunting signs with profits going toward a RTK fund.
I am wondering how many in the neighborhood would have been ostracized had they not gone along with the program. A word to the wise; you could be arrested for being in the area of a lawful hunt, so don't even think about trying to stop it. Feeling safe?
The next meeting is January 13. John Bendel will not be there, so Kelly Fraasch should be presiding, with Steve Silverman and Dave Brumfield as the other two commissioners in attendance. If Kristen is well enough, she will be there too.
Will this be enough to get everyone off their duffs and attend the meeting?
Elaine
It is too early for the videos to be posted, but a person who attended last night's meeting told me that Kristen is ENCOURAGING more neighborhoods to take matters into their own hands. Feeling safe?
ReplyDeleteElaine
Just think--soon we could have children playing on a toxic waste dump playing field while dodging terrified deer with arrows sticking out of them, shot by some of the "secret hunters" being attracted by this new insanity. This REALLY IS an exceptional community!!!
ReplyDeleteMt. Lebanon has become a complete embarrassment - a community of characters, many of them really bad
ReplyDeleteElaine, I am trying to find the Facebook post from the concerned citizen regrading the bow and arrow hunt. I cannot find it on FB. Do you have the link?
ReplyDeleteI'm wondering if Mt. Lebo magazine has deleted this post.
It is still there, 12:24 PM. Look for the photo of John Bendel, our new president. it is posted in the comment section. https://www.facebook.com/mtlebanonmagazine?fref=nf
ReplyDeleteKristen Linfante responded to my email about the mtl Magazine FB post with:
Looks like an excellent response. Completely accurate.
Regards,
Kristen Linfante
Commissioner, Ward 3
There was talk about an forthcoming revolution. Little did we expect it to come from Kristen Linfante and the PIO.
Elaine
I don't believe for a moment that this neighborhood hunt was coordinated without a Commissioner, the administration, or maybe even the Chief of Police's help or knowledge. Even Susan Fleming Morgans' response looks pre-prepared and run through legal. Who recruited all the hunters for this hunt? Doesn't Mt. Lebanon have a duty in their mandate to protect residents to double check and enforce this 50 yard Pa Game Commission (PGC) regulation, instead of forwarding all inquires to the PGC. Was Kelly Fraasch kept in the dark about all of this, and what is her reaction? This gives all the appearances of a coordinated major cover-up. What about a FOIA request to Mt. Lebanon and the PGC.
ReplyDeleteHere is a better link to the FB post.
ReplyDeleteElaine
According to the Game Commission, when you give permission to allow hunting on your private property, the 50-yard buffer zone is waived. There must still be a 150 yd. buffer for schools and playgrounds. Feeling safe?
ReplyDeleteElaine
There is an adage in the law that states that what isn't prohibited is permitted. Since this is now a do-it-yourself community, I'm wondering what other inherently dangerous activities we might want to have strangers take into their own hands. What about a citizen police force, for example--I can't remember when I last heard of anyone performing a good old-fashioned citizen's arrest, for instance? Who knew that this peaceful looking community was going to devolve into a bad imitation of the Old West?
ReplyDelete1. If you have rights to hunt on property A but not on property B, you cannot shoot over the property line to property B. This is considered poaching and is illegal.
ReplyDelete2. if you shoot a deer on property A and it runs to property B where you do not have permissions to hunt, you cannot pursue the deer without the property owner's permission. If the hunter enters property B, they are trespassing and can be removed.
That leads to this problem...
if some queen-bee gardener has a hunter shooting deer on her land and the deer runs over to say your land and dies or is wounded, you can deny access. But what do you do with the deer?
OR
If that hunter shoots the deer and they lose track of the deer and it ends up wounded or dead on your land, what are you to do? Can you sue the person who commissioned the hunt?
You could deny access to the land to them but then call the media/video tape it and cause a huge stink. That alone could cause some huge problems for folks in Mt Lebanon who don't like huge stinks.
The question is, who has enough land to allow hunting 25 yards from a road and 150 yards from any structure that is a "dwelling" besides the township? Any hunting in less than that is illegal under PA Fish and Game Commission rules.
Elaine posted, "According to the Game Commission, when you give permission to allow hunting on your private property, the 50-yard buffer zone is waived. There must still be a 150 yd. buffer for schools and playgrounds. Feeling safe?"
ReplyDeleteElaine, if with permission the 50-yd buffer zone is waived, it is only waved on your property. The 50-yd buffer zone is still intact with regard to your neighbor's property.
I still don't understand the logic behind the safety zone being 150 yds. from a school and playgroud, and only 50 yds. from my backyard with my kids playing in it. What's the difference?
Why the secrecy?
ReplyDeleteAre the people that are financing this hunt to ashamed to admit they're doing it?
We hear constantly on this blog that anonymous comments shouldn't be allowed. That there won't be any ramifications for signing comments, yet here we have a group of people afraid to post their street name.
Also the denial that the commissioners don't know the street... really???
Unless this is another Linfante lie and no one is conducting a hunt on private property.
ReplyDeleteMaybe this isn't a cover up by Commissioners as much as a lie by the President...again.
Called the PGC. They know nothing specifically about a hunting program in Mt Lebanon. They noted it is hunting season and hunting is permitted on public lands as well as private, assuming landowner has provided permission. The 50-yard safety buffer from all dwellings remains in effect. The buffer can be removed from a dwelling if the landowner provides permission. However, the buffer remains in effect if neighboring permission is not granted. In other words, if anyone is hunting within 50 yards of your dwelling and you do not grant permission, they cannot hunt. This applies even if they are on a neighbor's property.
ReplyDeleteThis leaves two interesting possibilities: 1. A whole street of citizens banded together and provided blanket permission, 2. Same as 1 plus the municipality provided permission.
The real question is whether they have this right (somewhat doubtful since commission never voted on this, to my knowledge).
While hunting rights in PA are implicit on public lands, there is most certainly a difference between state game lands and our municipal parks (though both are public). At any rate, it would seem that if any hunting is going on in MtL parks, permission must have been granted.
Now that Lebo has started a pay as you shoot program, where will the $68k from the budget go for this year? At least, with this new approach to deer concerns, the entire region will now see Mt Lebanon for what it really is.
ReplyDeleteThe Commissioners, Chief of Police, POI, and Municipal Manager should be asked via email and at the next Commission meeting, on the record, where hunting is going on in Mt. Lebanon, so that we can warn and protect our children, and all of the other pertinent questions raised on this blog. We need to get their lies documented, so that if and when an accident occurs, their intentional withholding of information, that could protect our children can be used in any liability law suite against them. Their primary responsibility is the safety of the residents of Mt. Lebanon. To intentionally withhold information that threatens the safety of the children in Mt. Lebanon is an impeachable and prosecutable action.
ReplyDeletePeople should be contacting Senator Matt Smith and State Rep. Dan Miller, and demanding their involvement in providing information to help Mt. Lebanon's parents protect their children. If they are unwilling to get involved, then maybe we should protest their offices.
ReplyDeleteExactly right, 5:07. If the Game Comission permits the hunt and aren't providing the commissioners, as claimed by the PIO, the location- Smith and Miller need to get it.
ReplyDeleteNone of this- "it's not my job, man."
I believe the law requires that any property owner in PA, who gives permission for hunting on their property, is required to post a hunting notice on their land. I'm wondering that if any person does not give permission for hunting on their property, while other residents do on their street, then, how is this right??? The 50 yard rule still applies. This makes no sense. It would worth driving over to the streets where the deer haters live, and see if signs are posted. Let's see, that would be at least the Foster and Markham Elementary Schools area.
ReplyDeleteThe law permits hunting by licensed hunters anywhere except within 150 yards of school, playground or nursery. The 50 yard safety zone from private property does not apply if the property owner consents and it is 50 yards from a structure, not the property line. There is absolultely no requirement to post a hunting notice on your land if you permit hunting.
ReplyDeleteThank you, 9:15 AM. We get it.
ReplyDeleteElaine
Ok If you get it then stop whining about it. Also, before you or others get any ideas, It is specifically unlawful for anyone to interfere with or hinder a legal hunter while he or she is hunting.
ReplyDeleteWhining? I am well aware that you are legally permitted to endanger lives, specifically when the whole reason why you want to kill deer is "to reduce deer/vehicular accidents."
ReplyDeleteElaine
Yo 9:39:
ReplyDeleteThere is a statute regarding intentionally interfering with a hunter lawfully taking an animal. If someone has reasonable concerns about the legality of hunting, they should be allowed to question the hunters, because there is no intent to interfere but merely concerns regarding the legality of the hunt. Hunting in residential areas in Mt. Lebanon certainly raises concerns about the legality of such hunting regardless of whether those concerns are right or wrong. I think there is some good law on that point. Citing someone for questioning someone hunting in a backyard in Mt. Lebanon would seem to raise 1st amendment concerns. What say you?
The relevant part of the law reads:
ReplyDelete(a) General rule.--Except as otherwise provided in this title, it is unlawful for another person at the location where the activity is taking place to intentionally obstruct or interfere with the lawful taking of wildlife or other activities permitted by this title.
(a.1) Activities which violate section.--A person violates this section when he intentionally or knowingly:
(1) drives or disturbs wildlife for the purpose of disrupting the lawful taking of wildlife where another person is engaged in the process of lawfully taking wildlife or other permitted activities;
(2) blocks, impedes or otherwise harasses another person who is engaged in the process of lawfully taking wildlife or other permitted activities;
(3) uses natural or artificial visual, aural, olfactory or physical stimuli to affect wildlife behavior in order to hinder or prevent the lawful taking of wildlife or other permitted activities;
(4) creates or erects barriers with the intent to deny ingress or egress to areas where the lawful taking of wildlife or other permitted activities may occur;
(5) interjects himself into the line of fire;
(6) affects the condition or placement of personal or public property intended for use in the lawful taking of wildlife or other permitted activities in order to impair its usefulness or prevent its use;
(7) enters or remains upon public lands or upon private lands without permission of the owner or their agent, with intent to violate this section; or
(8) fails to obey the order of any officer whose duty it is to enforce any of the laws of this Commonwealth where such officer observes any conduct which violates this section or has reasonable grounds to believe that any person intends to engage in such conduct.
So if the person seeking to question the hunter distrubes or alerts the deer or gets in the line of fire or is harrassing to the hunter for the purpose of preventing the kill then I think the activity wold be unlawful. Not all speach is protected by the 1st amendment
If the hunt is being conducted on private property and you're not on that private property how can you interfere with the hunter.
ReplyDeleteWhat's to stop you from excercising your right to free expression and sing, call any deer over to you or just jump up and down and make noise as long as it's on your side of the fence.
Fair enough, 11:14. I think the PGC would probably lose if they tried to cite people for questioning hunters in Mt. Lebanon regardless of whether deer were disturbed because merely questioning to determine the legality likely lacks the intent required under the statute. The Haagensen cases are interesting.
ReplyDeleteThe aformentioned law is what is to stop you.
ReplyDeleteReally 11:14, you now telling us that we can't run, jump, make noise, sing or play catch on our own property or in a public park because it may interfere with a hunter on private land that I may not know is even there.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, in my neighborhood no one has a safe zone of 50 yards from my house so we won't be testing my right to behave as I wish on my property because it interferes with a hunter.
If I'm in a Lebo Park engaging legal activities, I'll look forward to being cited for disturbing a hunter.
9:39 AM, I am really disappointed in you. Sometimes Kristen says too much. Well, not sometimes. All the time.
ReplyDeleteElaine
Interesting conversation based on Commissioner Fraasch's question with the Chief of Police. I found it enlightening to what Commissioner Fraasch might be going through with the staff.
ReplyDeleteParaphrasing, Commissioner Fraasch asks about what happens if someone ends up on the Golf Course does the hunter tell the person to leave the golf course because they are hunting.
Simple question, excellent forethought and could likely happen.
Chief's tone was almost combative and not an official answer came from him.
Commissioner Fraasch looks confused by his lack of answer.
Chief almost takes it as if Commissioner Fraasch might encourage someone to fester with the hunters. When in reality, unlike Commissioner Linfante's reality, someone could enter the golf course from the Howe neighborhood and likely not know the hunt is going on because they didn't enter from the main entrance of the golf course. A hunter should or should not notify the resident? Do they stop hunting and notify the other hunters? What if they do notify and the resident that entered the course states their legal right to be on the public land? THIS COULD HAPPEN EASILY AND WHY DOESN'T THE CHIEF HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THIS SITUATION FOR THE COMMISSIONER ASKING!!!!!
Why can't Mt Lebanon get an archery program but a neighborhood can with hired archers? Sound fishy?
ReplyDelete2:20 here's another scenario.
ReplyDeleteLet's say you aand your kids are out and about and you spot an archer and believe he's aiming in your general diection.
Scared you blurt out: "HEY THERE ARE PEOPLE OVER HERE!" and it spooks his deer.
Are you interferring with a hunter or acting in self defense?
2:20 PM, you are very observant.
ReplyDeleteElaine
There has to be an intent to interfere with the archer. Playing in your yard and making noise if you do not know the hunter is there would not be a problem. Yelling "HEY THERE ARE PEOPLE OVER HERE!" may or may not be a problem. If you were legitimately afraid that the archer may not know you are there and you are behind his target and at risk I do not think you will have violated the law by yelling. However, if you are not really in danger (hard to really be in danger if he archery hunting as the shot must me made a very close range) and your real intention by yelling is to stop the hunter from making the kill, you have violated the law.
ReplyDeleteHere's another scenario.
ReplyDeleteYou're on the golf course, legally because shit, you're doing something stupid.... like golfing!
You hit a bad drive out of bounds and seeing it heading toward a hunter you yell FORE.
It spooks his deer and you get cited for inteferring with a hunt. Right 11:14?
I love it when people come on here and play attorney. The bottom line is, you would have to do something like stand in front of a deer as a hunter took aim or sit near a tree stand with a snare drum to be cited.
ReplyDeleteEveryone relax. Better yet, let's follow Michelle Obama'sadvice--if you see something, say something. Start singing or making noise. Tweet out the location of the hunter(s) you see. Take things into our own hands? Ok. Done.
So 3:35 it is your word against the archer.
ReplyDeleteParent: "From my perspective it looked like he was aiming in my direction."
Archer: "I was not, they deliberately yelled to scare off my deer."
Police Dept.: "duh, we don't have a clue, we weren't there because we aren't aware of any hunting."
Great, let's tie up the courts with more lunacy.
How about something logical like its not a good idea to have people shooting stuff in a - what do they call Mt. Lebanon - a built out community.
I'm curious.
ReplyDeleteThese people that are allowing a private hunt... are any the same ones pushing to eliminate the rifle team as a high school sport?
The aformentioned law...what are you 12:33...a cop?
ReplyDeleteOne of those municipal volunteers that wants to fill their freezer with venison perhaps, 6:13.
ReplyDeleteDoesn't want anyone asking if they have a license.
Isn't there a new pellet shooting class offered by the Rec center? I didn't get a leboalert about it but I read about it somewhere. The NRA and u know who are taking over MTL. They will say it's for our safety. My family would have loved keeping the planetarium instead of another rifle range. Can't imagine why that might have been a good choice for everybody.
ReplyDeleteHunter harassment is another uncontitutional law that needs to be challenged. I believe that Jan Haagensen had teamed up with the ACLU to fight this law, but don't know the current status. She approached two hunters hunting on the road adjacent to her property (BTW, I don't believe legal to hunt on a road). She approached them and warned them not to hunt on her property. She was with her elderly mom. She's had hunters shoot at her horses in the pasture, and was terrified they were going to be killed. She called the State Police, and when they came they arrested her. It's a real good old boys network where she lives. I believe she won her local trial, but wanted to take it to the supreme court. Don't know status. ACLU attorney Vic Walczak is one of the best trial lawyers in Pa. I think he lives in USC.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.aclupa.org/ourwork/legal/legaldocket/commonwealthofpennsylvania/http://www.aclupa.org/our-work/legal/legaldocket/commonwealthofpennsylvania/
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Janice Haagensen
In December 3, 2001, Pennsylvania attorney Jan Haagensen spoke to two hunters who were hunting on a road adjacent to her property, in order to prevent them from trespassing on her property. Ms. Haagensen she was charged with criminal harassment under Pennsylvania’s “Hunter Harassment Statute.”
Court/Assoc.: Commonwealth Court
Attorneys/Firms: Kim M. Watterson, Aimee L. Kahan (Reed Smith LLP); Vic Walczak (ACLU of PA)
In December 3, 2001, Pennsylvania attorney Jan Haagensen spoke to two hunters who were hunting on a road adjacent to her property, in order to prevent them from trespassing on her property. Ms. Haagensen she was charged with criminal harassment under Pennsylvania’s “Hunter Harassment Statute.”
The statute was originally passed to protect recreational hunters from interference by the animal protection movement; yet, as it is written, the statute has a much wider reach. Overbroad and vague, the statute criminalizes speech protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article 1 § 7 of the Pennsylvania Constitution. In Ms. Haagenson's case, the trial judge found her guilty of criminal harassment based on the fact that her speech was directed at hunters, speech that would be protected had there been no hunters involved. The statute is a content-based and viewpoint-based restriction that violates the First Amendment.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania has filed an amicus curiae brief in Ms. Haagensen’s appeal. The brief calls on the Commonwealth Court to reverse the trial court’s decision in Ms. Haagensen’s case and to hold that the “Hunter Harassment Statute” is unconstitutional.