>Other states dont have an environmentalist agenda in place, do a search for any other state you choose and see if you can find 1/10th the amount of pages dedicated to conservation groups and involvement with game management. Then do the same with Pa deer management + audubon or The nature conservancy other groups etc.
>Other states arent being managed by pgc.
>Other states recieving those funds dont have an "independent" agency with no system of checks and balances. They are answerable 100% to the people and the chain of command is quite clear. The paid heads of the agencies gets extremely low approval as our agency has and he's toast. PERIOD. Who you gonna blame with an "independent" agency? The volunteer boc?
I also wouldnt rule out the possibility of alt. funding helping the anti cause. Very nonhunter friendly legislation has been passed in other states in the past. And there is nothing to say it cant ever happen in the future. I see no reason to help the antis with their agenda when we certainly dont have to take that road in the first place.
Germain says: "Don't get me wrong,in a perfect world I'd love to see us continue to fund the PGC but somewhere down the road I doubt we can do it. "
In a perfect world Id like to see that alternate funding, at least for nongame species. But that would be a world where our agency was hunter friendly and could be trusted and if they werent "independant". It would take ALOT of trust in any agency for me to support the option. And i have none in pgc. Id support it only if there were no other option at all. Thats not currently the case. There are other option both now and in the future. I dont think anything should be ruled out completely. My perfect option would be dcnr take over management of nongame. But that would be in the future. There should be no need for it yet. If desparation of the situation were greater in the future, you might just be pleasantly surprised at the options that arise.