I 100% agree! It is time for birders to contribute to conservation of the
resource.
Tom Hissong
In a message dated 12/14/2010 1:08:30 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
The non-financial participation of birders in the acquisition and
management of exceptionally fine birding areas that were paid for by hunters and
fisherman is always a contentious one, on all sides of this many-sided issue.
The fact that the Ohio Division of Wildlife gets the vast majority of its
operating funds from the sale of hunting, trapping, and fishing licenses
has been noted.
But what hasn’t been mentioned are the excise taxes on firearms,
ammunition, archery equipment, and fishing gear allowed by the Pittman-Robertson Act
and the related Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act. These taxes on
sportsmen have were instigated by hunting and fishing groups, and are
fully supported by them.
Should there not be, then, a similar conservation excise tax on
binoculars, bird guides, and bird feed? Why not?
–John Blakeman
______________________________________________________________________
Ohio-birds mailing list, a service of the Ohio Ornithological Society.
Our thanks to Miami University for hosting this mailing list.
Additional discussions can be found in our forums, at
www.ohiobirds.org/forum/.
You can join or leave the list, or change your options, at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=OHIO-BIRDS
Send questions or comments about the list to: [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
Ohio-birds mailing list, a service of the Ohio Ornithological Society.
Our thanks to Miami University for hosting this mailing list.
Additional discussions can be found in our forums, at www.ohiobirds.org/forum/.
You can join or leave the list, or change your options, at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=OHIO-BIRDS
Send questions or comments about the list to: [log in to unmask]
|