quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Today is the 87th Anniversary of shooters, hunters, and archers directly funding animals in conserved habitat.

Oddly enough, on this day owns on public land I was the target of “hunter harassment” as defined by Indiana state law.

I know, better writing would have inverted that sentence to prevent starting the sentence w a preposition.

~Ann

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
I support Pittman Robertson in general, but if the sportsmen are paying for it by taxes on hunting and fishing gear, then they should be able to access the land to hunt and fish.

I find putting P-R funds into "urban green spaces" to be a bit improper.

Geez, if they didn't piss it away on bike paths and such, imagine how much more hunting and fishing opportunities we would have?

I agree that restoring predators to their natural ranges in and of itself is not an unreasonable use of the funds as long as the management on the predators is done reasonable with the management of a renewable resource being the goal. I'm not anti wolf, but I am anti making them some sort of sacred species that cannot be hunted or controlled. I am against considering the herbivores to only be food for the predator animals, and hunting by people is only a peripheral concern for management.

Pittman Robertson as it was originally written was a good idea. Too bad we have bastardized it by letting the freeloaders get to decide how the money is spent-- meaning the antis and the preservationists.

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
I support Pittman Robertson in general, but if the sportsmen are paying for it by taxes on hunting and fishing gear, then they should be able to access the land to hunt and fish.

I find putting P-R funds into "urban green spaces" to be a bit improper.

Geez, if they didn't piss it away on bike paths and such, imagine how much more hunting and fishing opportunities we would have?

I agree that restoring predators to their natural ranges in and of itself is not an unreasonable use of the funds as long as the management on the predators is done reasonable with the management of a renewable resource being the goal. I'm not anti wolf, but I am anti making them some sort of sacred species that cannot be hunted or controlled. I am against considering the herbivores to only be food for the predator animals, and hunting by people is only a peripheral concern for management.

Pittman Robertson as it was originally written was a good idea. Too bad we have bastardized it by letting the freeloaders get to decide how the money is spent-- meaning the antis and the preservationists.

"Democracy sucks" would have said the same thing and saved you a bunch of letters.