OHIO-BIRDS Archives

December 2010

OHIO-BIRDS@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Date:
Mon, 13 Dec 2010 12:24:50 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (71 lines)
I noticed you didn't mention the new Ohio Wildlife Legacy Stamp . Russell
Lima, Ohio
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Whan" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 12:19 PM
Subject: [Ohio-birds] Whither conservation dollars for birds?


> It's no big news to readers of this list, but today's New York Times
> (pg. D7) runs an article from the AP, "As Hunting Declines, Conservation
> Efforts Suffer." It makes the point that fading interest in hunting is
> resulting in fewer dollars going to conservation efforts. It also
> laments the loss of income for the sporting industry. The article is
> about Wisconsin's situation, but applies just as much here.
>        Regrettably, the article assumes only one thing can reverse this
> loss
> of conservation dollars: reviving hunting, thus selling more hunting
> licenses, duck stamps, ammunition, traps, etc. This is nonsense, of
> course. There are plenty of other ways to direct more dollars to
> conservation---donations to private organizations, levies for state and
> local park systems, etc., and taxes. Red states like Missouri and
> Arkansas for years have levied state sales taxes dedicated to the
> acquisition and care of wild lands for wildlife, including but not
> limited to species legal to hunt. The Missouri sales tax, first of all
> its kind, and regularly renewed by a good majority of voters, is the
> envy of other states, as are their conservation programs and
> publications. Minnesota voters passed a similar law in 2008, and in the
> last election Iowa voters easily passed a law to make 3/8 of 1% of the
> next tax increase to go to conservation projects. Thus, Iowa residents
> who spend $50,000 a year for taxable goods and services will pay about
> $180 for conservation. Multiply that by millions of people and there's
> some serious money for the outdoors. This is the modern efficient way to
> accomplish these aims, not burdening (or serving) only hunters and
> trappers, or asking birders to pretend to be hunters by buying a duck
> stamp. If you want significant public money to go to birds other than
> game species or raptors, this is the way to go.
> Wear the orange,
> Bill Whan
> Columbus
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
> 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]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2