TO: The Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
Dear Sir:
I am going to outline the facts of my complaint in this narrative. I believe that this concern of mine is one of Public Safety and could affect countless lives now and in the future. I am Dr. Paul A. Bensur, Jr. I am a psychologist that has worked with children over the last 20 plus years and I have seen the trends and behaviors of this generation and in some regards I would be considered an expert. I am currently employed at Polk Center and still am involved after work with youth programs. I am also a volunteer instructor for the Pennsylvania Game Commission Hunter-Trapper Education division for a total of 10 days out of a calendar year. I am a volunteer and only for those ten days a year.
The issue started February 17 2005 when I wrote a letter to Vern Ross (Exhibit 1). The Pennsylvania Game News reported that they were considering using the Internet for part or most of the hunter-trapper education program. I wrote a letter in response to this issue knowing very well how youth would respond to this and the devaluation of the program. The possible safety issues that could happen when youth who learn hunter-trapper education in a cyberspace environment and not hands on could lead to a serious danger to themselves as well as other hunters in the woods. Hunting and learning to hunt has to be hands on and safety has to be enforced by clear-cut real examples and not computer generated ideas. I received a response back from Mr. Vern Ross, Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Game Commission (Exhibit 2). The letter was more of a it will work letter not acknowledging my concerns over the issues of the students and their learning abilities and how they will use that knowledge in the woods. He really did not answer the question that I posed. I wrote another letter in response to his answer asking the same questions again and making similar statements. I was just looking for some answers and I was concerned about not only public safety but also social issues in families with regards to family bonding being shared in the classroom (Exhibit 3). However I received a response from a Mr. J.Carl Graybill who is the director, Bureau of Information and Education. His letter was very vague at best Exhibit 4). I wrote him another letter further outlining my concerns over the new program that seems to be working so well. It seems that the program was working but it does not seem that any of these new hunters had been in the field yet. I don’t know how he could judge the success of a program without a final outcome study. I wrote him another letter concerning this issue on May 5, 2005(Exhibit 5). I cautioned them on this new program and how it could be a risk to the safety of new and current hunters.
I received a letter back from Mr. J. Carl Graybill (exhibit 6). He failed to acknowledge my concerns over the safety issues as well as the family benefits of the program. I decided at this time since I was going nowhere with Mr. Graybill, I was going to write directly to Mr. Ross. It seems that Mr. Graybill and Mr. Ross were not answering my letters but rather going in some line to justify their position and the direction of the program. At this point I was getting to the point that I wanted him to acknowledge specific facts about the way things have been done versus the way they are going. I believe that I was very specific to what I was looking for and that I wanted to know a few more details (exhibit 7). He did not answer this letter.
However here is where things become a problem. I was called by my local Wildlife Conservation Officer Mike Wojtecki and was told that Regis Senko ,Director of Hunter-Trapper Education in the North-West Region, wanted to see both of us at the regional head quarters. I asked him what was the nature of this meeting and he stated that he did not know. I don’t know if he was lying to me but I mad the scheduled appointment for June 7, 2005 during my lunch break. I work at Polk Center and that is just down the hill from the regional office in Franklin Pennsylvania. I arrived on time and was told that Mr. Wojtecki could not make it. Regis Senko came out to see me and ushered me into a conference room with another officer that I did not know. Regis Senko gave me the Instructor’s job description. And started to lecture me on how he did not like the fact that I was writing letters and that there was a chain of command in writing these types of letters that all employees have to follow. I informed him that I am not an employee of the Pennsylvania Game Commission and at best that I am only a temporary during those 10 days out of a year (exhibit 8). He did not want to listen to that. But facts are as they are; I am an employee of the Department of Public Welfare and not one of his. He did not like that fact and threatened to take my instructors card away. I acted as a private citizen and voiced my opinion on the way that this program is going. The meeting was ugly and at one time I was told that he was talking and that I should listen. I really would like to know who gave the Pennsylvania Game Commission their power to act as they do and then not be held accountable for their actions. I believe that they threatened my freedom of speech when I was told to back off. I also believe my freedom as a citizen was questioned when he was trying to state that I worked for them. Plus the fact that I am a professional in my field of psychology and I know how this group is going to respond if the Internet is being used. I was also lured there without being told the truth of the meeting otherwise I would have brought a witness for myself. They intimidated me and then they tried to coerce me into doing what they want. I was cordial through this meeting and I even offered to fix the situation but they were not listening to me. My rights as a citizen of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania were violated in the form that I was not allowed to speak, that I am not allowed to write letters and that I am not allowed to express myself. After the meeting I wrote a letter to Mr. Ross(exhibit 9) describing what went on at the meeting and basically I told him that he can take my card and my hunting privileges but they do not have the right to tell me that I cannot have the freedom of speech and the press. They need to understand that they are not above the law and they should treat private citizens with at least common decency and not like we are subservient to their wishes and needs. They have violated my rights and now I believe that you the Attorney General should look into this Game Commission and find that they need to be held accountable for their Gestapo tactics and pompousness. Mr. Ross sent me a letter in return(exhibit 10) basically telling me that he will talk to Regis about the incident. It seems that maybe Regis acted in a very unprofessional manner and threatened me along with telling me that I cannot voice my opinion as a private citizen of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in regards to a possible issue that would affect thousands of lives. I believe that I have the right to question their motives. But again, who is the Pennsylvania Game Commission that they can tell me what I can and cannot question. Sir: I appeal to your better judgment in this matter. I believe that I have the right to voice my opinion and ask questions of any program that can and will affect public safety as well as the safety of my own person.
Thank you,
Dr. Paul A. Bensur, Jr.