Pennsylvania Firearm Owners Association
Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 5678910 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 97
  1. #81
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
    (Allegheny County)
    Posts
    2,248
    Rep Power
    21474842

    Default Re: Proposed Second Buck Tag: Admitted Money Grab

    Quote Originally Posted by P89 View Post
    That's $8,849,793 surplus and the greedy fuckers want more.:
    Well, let's examine this for a minute.

    What's the basis of the supposed greed? Are the commission members personally profiting from the increase? Do they get a cut? I kinda think that's not the case.

    If their entity gains more funding, it is true that it potentially gains more power, and therefore THEY gain more power. But is that really "greed"? It may be power hungry, but I don't think that qualifies as greed.

    If they predict, or want to hedge against future revenue decreases (remember, everyone bitches about how hunting is in decline), is getting more money now to make up for less later greedy? I don't think so. Note: I realize they may not be allowed to carry over funds (I don't really know) - I'm just putting this out there.

    Maybe they have some capital improvement plan that would really benefit their constituency - and while they may have a surplus now, it's not enough to make this improvement. Is that greed? No, I don't think so.

    I don't think it is at all reasonable to take the position, "the commission wants more money, therefore it is greedy." You need to fill in a lot of details to substantiate that assertion.

    As for pheasant farms....maybe they closed them due to lack of constituent interest, relative to the cost? I don't know....but kinda need to know what they say about it to make a determination.

  2. #82
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Northcoast, Pennsylvania
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,434
    Rep Power
    21474848

    Default Re: Proposed Second Buck Tag: Admitted Money Grab

    Quote Originally Posted by free View Post
    I don't think it is at all reasonable to take the position, "the commission wants more money, therefore it is greedy." You need to fill in a lot of details to substantiate that assertion.
    .
    I'm as reasonable as the PGC is...and I like saying fuck a lot.
    There's a long history of questionable ethics that has lead me to make those assertions.

  3. #83
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    N.E., Pennsylvania
    (Susquehanna County)
    Posts
    457
    Rep Power
    11205822

    Default Re: Proposed Second Buck Tag: Admitted Money Grab

    Quote Originally Posted by CMP703006 View Post
    In 2016 there were 912,000 buck tags sold with the general license, only 149,000 were used. That is just over 16% of the total available tags,....
    Kills reported and tags used are completely different.. many hunters have a buck tag, and tag their harvested buck.. but never report the kill to PAGC.

    I have no problem with it, but would prefer it be done just like the Elk raffle. If you to into Central and North PA where there are an abundance of camps, and many HIGH $ camps.. I don't want to see camp upon camp with hordes of money hunters with all with double buck tags
    I would rather see hunters pay $10 for a buck tag raffle and if you win one of the 10,000 extra tags you pay the additional money

    I believe I have also noticed a drop in deer population that I would attribute to the growth in Coyote population and how active the yotes are around the time fawns are hitting the ground
    Retired US Army
    NRA Life Member, USCCA
    "Artificial intelligence is no match for Natural Stupidity"

  4. #84
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Lake Effect, Pennsylvania
    (Crawford County)
    Posts
    71
    Rep Power
    1194727

    Default Re: Proposed Second Buck Tag: Admitted Money Grab

    Quote Originally Posted by P89 View Post
    Let's look at PGC's 2016 budget:
    http://www.pgc.pa.gov/InformationRes...e%20Report.pdf

    $108,306,212 in REVENUE alone.
    $99,456,419 in expenditure (and most of those are a joke...43 mil in habitat management, HA!)

    That's $8,849,793 surplus and the greedy fuckers want more.
    Yet in the mean time they closed the pheasant farms.
    If you look at the pie chart on revenue, notice a large chunk of 30% that is labeled “Natural Resources And Rights of way”.....almost 39million. Now you would think that the annual report would feature something in reapgards to how the Game Commission is realizing this revenue and how critical it is to their budget.......no a word. Not a word, because the Game Commission is involved in the sale of the Commonwealths Natural Resources to shale gas operators in the form of leases and royalties. The Game Commission “owns” about 1.5 million acres of which about 90,000 acres are under lease.

    So, why doesn’t the Game Commission ever talk about the other large piece of the pie? Why is it always....license fees? The shale gas industry is returning to Pennsylvania to “uncap” many of those wells and also they have found that not only is there shale gas.....but more oil. In 2011, the Game Commission made 4.7 million and it was up to 22 million a few years later and according to the pie chart it has almost doubled again?

    Is the Game Commission crying with a loaf of bread under its arm?

  5. #85
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    USN Retired, Pennsylvania
    (Monroe County)
    Posts
    2,807
    Rep Power
    21474848

    Default Re: Proposed Second Buck Tag: Admitted Money Grab

    fuck I can't fill the 1st tag

  6. #86
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Sterling, Pennsylvania
    (Wayne County)
    Posts
    4,584
    Rep Power
    21474850

    Default Re: Proposed Second Buck Tag: Admitted Money Grab

    Quote Originally Posted by free View Post
    Are you addressing me?

    We paid a lot of money go to rafting down the Grand Canyon. We paid a lot of money because that's what it cost us. That's a resource that is supposed to be for "all" of us - but it certainly isn't priced that way. Should it be? Should pricing on raft trips down the Grand Canyon be set at a token amount, so that anyone who wants to go do it can afford to do so? Would that make sense? If you think it would, practically-speaking, how do you think that would work out?
    Not addressing anyone in particular just questions.

    The boat load of money that you paid to raft the Grand Canyon, who got the lions share, raft operating company or national park service?

  7. #87
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Northcoast, Pennsylvania
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,434
    Rep Power
    21474848

    Default Re: Proposed Second Buck Tag: Admitted Money Grab

    Quote Originally Posted by Williamsmith View Post

    Is the Game Commission crying with a loaf of bread under its arm?

    You forgot forest products as well.

    At it's core we all know what it is and it has nothing to do with hunting.

  8. #88
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Lake Effect, Pennsylvania
    (Crawford County)
    Posts
    71
    Rep Power
    1194727

    Default Re: Proposed Second Buck Tag: Admitted Money Grab

    Quote Originally Posted by P89 View Post
    You forgot forest products as well.

    At it's core we all know what it is and it has nothing to do with hunting.
    Oh, they actually report that as a separate piece of the pie...6.5 million.

    I’m curious what the outlook for the shale gas lease and royalty income is......I can’t seem to find that out. Huh? I know it must be here somewhere.

  9. #89
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
    (Allegheny County)
    Posts
    2,248
    Rep Power
    21474842

    Default Re: Proposed Second Buck Tag: Admitted Money Grab

    Quote Originally Posted by P89 View Post
    You forgot forest products as well. At it's core we all know what it is and it has nothing to do with hunting.
    Previously in the thread, it is pointed out that the PGC needs to be self-funded, to give it autonomy and avoid interference with science-based decision-making.

    How do you propose it fund itself?

    OK, license fees is one way.
    Taxes on hunting-related products is another.
    Anything else?

    Would you prefer to disallow it from using the resources under its control to generate revenue for itself to pursue its mission? If so, would you object if license fees increased to the amount necessary to cover this lost revenue? Or would you prefer it cut back its activities to the level necessary to only fund them with the existing amount of money it receives from license fees and taxes on hunting-related products? From what I gather reading this thread - that would cut the agency down to about half of its current size - with the corresponding cut in its activities and/or scope of work is is able to accomplish in any given year.

  10. #90
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Lake Effect, Pennsylvania
    (Crawford County)
    Posts
    71
    Rep Power
    1194727

    Default Re: Proposed Second Buck Tag: Admitted Money Grab

    Quote Originally Posted by free View Post
    Previously in the thread, it is pointed out that the PGC needs to be self-funded, to give it autonomy and avoid interference with science-based decision-making.

    How do you propose it fund itself?

    OK, license fees is one way.
    Taxes on hunting-related products is another.
    Anything else?

    Would you prefer to disallow it from using the resources under its control to generate revenue for itself to pursue its mission? If so, would you object if license fees increased to the amount necessary to cover this lost revenue? Or would you prefer it cut back its activities to the level necessary to only fund them with the existing amount of money it receives from license fees and taxes on hunting-related products? From what I gather reading this thread - that would cut the agency down to about half of its current size - with the corresponding cut in its activities and/or scope of work is is able to accomplish in any given year.
    Not to butt in here, but 25% of the pie ....@26.5 million is federal reimbursement aid.....and if you review the US Fish and Wildlife Agency data on all states of the Union you will find PA to be a leader in license sales and it has been consistent for the last half century. It never varies much from 2.5 million licenses sold.

Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 5678910 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. [CLOSED] 12ga 2 3/4....00buck+#1 buck+ #4 buck
    By billy870m9 in forum Classifieds Archive
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: March 6th, 2013, 09:57 PM
  2. Gun Grab Scenario: After the Grab
    By coppery in forum Open Carry
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: October 26th, 2012, 11:50 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: January 23rd, 2009, 06:26 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Local gun shops | Local shooting ranges | Philadelphia Shooting Ranges | Philadelphia Gun Shops | Pittsburgh Shooting Ranges | Pittsburgh Gun Shops