Agree or Disagree Poll

[WNYBuckHunter]

Im not "getting at" anything, Im discussing what the facts are. If you missed it, I originally brought up the P-R funds as an answer to someones suggestion that they would use the CF for General Fund items. Im failing to see what the point is of you replying to what I said. We are saying the same thing lol.

[WNYBuckHunter]

Im also failing to see how you cant understand the logic of more simplicity and less cost equaling more sales. Like I and others have already said, its completely logical, it just stinks of political distraction BS.

[13BVET]

Simplicity, and less cost, existed years ago, and yet hunter numbers still declined-a proven fact. The killer for hunting, at least in my own opinion, is hunting opportunity. Certain parts of the state have been decimated so bad by development, it's not funny. Living in Dutchess County, I know this only too well.

I'm actually giving it up, because there is not enough opportunity here to justify spending a damned dime on a license. I think I went out all of about 6 times this year-a sure sign that I'm definitely losing interest. Hell, we don't even have grouse here anymore. As I said, just not worth anything at this point, as far as I'm concerned.

[mike rossi]

Im also failing to see how you cant understand the logic of more simplicity and less cost equaling more sales. Like I and others have already said, its completely logical, it just stinks of political distraction BS.

The CF is derived from proceeds of license sales by law (assent legistlation) spending of that fund is restricted to a narrow and specific range of uses.

Despite the availability for federal funds matching the states CF 3:1; the fund has been used lightly enough to allow it to have grown. Three advisory boards have recommended rather than use those state and federal conservation funds for the allowable conservation uses to instead reduce the price of sporting licenses. The legislature and governor liked thier recommendation and the rest is history I guess.

Same advisory boards stated the justification of the license fee reduction was to increase conservation funding. Same advisory boards disagree with conservation funds being used to control invasive plants in one of the Finger Lakes. Same advisory group disagrees with the use of EPF to aquire the Finch Land in the north country. Same advisory boards cite lack of boat ramp on Hudson River, after stating the conservation fund is so large they recommend reducing sporting license fees.

Its completely logical corruption...

Edited February 22, 2013 by mike rossi