"The pgc crowd are talking on another board about the new bill that would mandate that pgc would set aside at least 10% of the money they get from timbering towards habitat improvement/reforestation efforts. They are DEAD SET againstit, and again we areonly talking TEN STINKING PERCENT!! "


R.S.B.,
Is this statement accurate? If it isn't could you clarify the details of this "new bill"? I would hate to think this is true and a person employed by the PAGC would be aware of this and then go forward with starting a thread that requests suggestions on how Wildlife Management be funded.

If the PAGC is reaping profit from taking from the land they should be putting just as much back into the land. You've heard the saying "robbing Peter to pay Paul" This is exactly what is happening. I understand the PAGC is in desperate need of money and the PAGC is doing what they need to in order to survive and continue to exist as they have. But, you cannot argue that they are of atmuch fault for their current circumstances as anything else, probably more so. They have been doing whatever they want despite what the hunters say or feel. The Xbow inclusionis a prime example. Reap what you sow- Now the PAGC wants us hunters to pay more yet disregard our wishes everytime they see a financial gain from doing so. I don't care if the PAGC ceases to exist. They will be replaced or forced to merge and in the long runa mergerwould be more economical, then some of that admin payroll will be able to go into habitat and wildlife/land management.