HuntingNet.com Forums - PA doe tags Going Going..... soon to be gone!!!

HuntingNet.com Forums (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/)

- Northeast (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/northeast-26/)

- - PA doe tags Going Going..... soon to be gone!!! (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/northeast/297904-pa-doe-tags-going-going-soon-gone.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cornelius08 (Post 3413908)

Maybe if you point out who said that pgc benefitted financially doug, they'll adress it? Ive reread this thread and cant find where anyone has done this.

I dont know that pgc has been paid off by anyone. Though with current levels of corruption, i wouldnt doubt it. Cant prove it, so dont use that as an argument. Dont need to with all the other blackmail and politics running deer management. Imho thats absolutely no better. Hardly makes sense dcnr would have to pay guys that are appointed and can be fired by the head of dcnr...the governor.

Sproul spouted off that it was all about money.Now if the PGC is the one setting seasons and bag limits,it only stands to reason that if this was "all about money" then the PGC would be the one's benefitting financially.I'm just asking,how so?

DCNR is benefitting because they no longer have to spend millions of dollars fencing off their timber sales.While I don't agree with DCNR's mission on everything,they've been pretty fourthright on what they want and why they wanted it.

No , that isn't even close to a logical conclusion. From the beginning it was about more money for DCNR and the timber industry and DCNR blackmailed the PGC and used the political pressure to force the PGC to reduce the herd. The PGC actually lost money since they didn't get their license fee increase.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluebird2 (Post 3413980)

Yep,so it wasn't done for money then,was it?

Not the PGC's money, anyway. Other than indirect result of the sportsmen's opposition resulting in a hold on any license increase. Part of me wants to feel bad for the PGC getting the shaft out of the whole thing, taking the wrap so to speak, but on the other hand if they would have stood against DCNR and the ecolobbyists and Rendells clowns they would have had the hunters support and I belive the license fees they need. Every choice yields a consequence. This is theirs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Screamin Steel (Post 3414036)

Pretty much how I feel. The only thing I would add to this is that I used to pay well over $100 a year for the various tags to hunt. If the PGC can't get by on that, then tough chit.

Quote:

Yep,so it wasn't done for money then,was it?

Of course it was about money and you are in total denial if you think it wasn't. None of us said the PGC was receiving bribes or profiting from decreased license sales. The PGC even wasted the hunters money by hiring WMI to develop a sales plan for to sell the plan to the hunters.

Cornelius seems to think it was for the sake of the eco-weenie,bird watching,tree hugging eco-extremist audubon types.Tell me again how the audubon profited.

If you had to ask that question you really are hopeless and have learned absolutely nothing from our years of debating these issues.
but,since I am a kind hearted individual who has sympathy for the uninformed I will once again quote from the SCS Report, or maybe it was the Audubon Conference Report.

Quote:

Above 8 DPSM you lose the preferred herb and shrub species ,songbird abundance declines =diversity carrying capacity

fewer deer equals more tweety birds.

Quote:

fewer deer equals more tweety birds.

More tweety birds equals more subscriptions for Audubon Magazine.:)

Herbs have many uses. Songbirds are nice. Deer eat good.
I dont think hunting is as bad as some claim.