Jump to content

Caching In Pa State Game Lands


PSUPAUL

Recommended Posts

Why do gamelands exist if we can't use them?

In their eyes game lands exist for the sole purpose of hunting. I am definitely not defending them because we should be able to coexist. But they feel that game lands are bought with money from license sales and should be saved for that purpose. It is a shame because they are a great resource that should not sit idle except for the 2 weeks of deer hunting. Plus, I don't think they realize how many cachers are also hunters.

 

Hopefully a well organized lobbying campaign is all we need to change this stance.

 

edit- Out dadgum typos!!!

Edited by PSUPAUL
Link to comment

Yes, I agree that it would be helpful in our planned lobbying campaign to have letters from geocachers who are hunters (of deer, etc., as well as ammo boxes and tupperware). So, even if you don't *own* a cache on a gamelands, if you are a hunter and enjoy *finding* caches on gamelands, and are willing to participate in this effort, write me to add your name to the growing list.

 

Rock33, your name is of course on the mailing list -- it's just that I haven't mailed anything out to the entire growing group of people YET. I am very grateful to you for the piece of information you were able to forward along. You are a perfect example of why a grassroots effort -- game warden by game warden, regional office by regional office -- is a good way to address this challenge.

Link to comment

I think that geocaching.com should not cave in so easily to any directive from some person in the game commission that has decided to ban geocaching. I believe that this was done arbitrarily and mostly for reasons of convenience rather than any nonsense about porcupines eating geocaches and getting sick. This person is almost certainly not an elected official and it is a fact that the governor and legislature (our elected government) have relatively little oversight over these pseudo-bureaucrats. I believe, however, that there is a process required by law that they must undertake to institute new rules or amend existing ones. Since the existing rules do not address geocaching directly and are only applicable indirectly, maybe, if they really want to get hard-nosed about it, THEY should have to go through said process, which would include an opportunity for public review and comment, to amend their rules before geocaching.com will accept that this is the official policy of the game commission and deny any listings for geocaches hidden on state gamelands. In the meantime, the game commission may try to prosecute each one of us individually for littering if they decide that a few persons hiding boxes of toys in the woods are a sufficient menace to be worthy of the attention of their enforcement personnel. I'll be happy to explain to a judge that my cache isn't litter! In a nutshell, they should not be allowed to be the judge, jury, and executioner and neither should geocaching.com. There is a reason why our federal and state governments have an executive, legislative, and judicial branch. The same is not true for geocaching.com but they should stay out of it and let the system work! We need to let this go. If it gets to the point that we need a lobbying effort, it will already be too late. We'll be crying over beers with the mountain bikers and others who have tried in vain to work within the system of the PGC. Let's forget about this and get back to business as usual. I really would hate to have to list my caches on Navitrash.

Edited by Quest Master
Link to comment

Quest you make valid points but I don't think GC.com is caving in. I just had a cache approved on a SGL yesterday. :lol:

 

People need to understand that the PGC is a small agency and nobody within that agency is elected at all. It is also important to note that gamelands are purchased soley with hunters dollars, not tax revenue, and managed primarily for wildlife and wildlife habitat, not for general recreation. With that being said, they do allow other recreational uses (including Mt biking and horseback riding) mainly as good PR to expose more persons to the positive aspects of gamelands. These other activites are somewhat regulated as not to be counter to the main purpose of the SGL. Apparently, someone within the PGC currently perceives geocaching as an activity that could be counter to the primary purposes of the gamelands and has taken the simple approach to not allow it. In the near future we will working with those persons to help them better understand geocaching and what geocachers can do for them.

 

I can assure everyone that the ball is rolling to find a workable solution to their concerns. I am hopefull this will lead to allowing geocaching on SGL's. Remember those first few days with the DCNR? That is where we are right now with the PGC.

 

Please, please head KA request not to fire off nasty e-mail to PGC Regional Offices. Our approach should be to attract friends with honey and not vineger. Monitor this thread often as there may be a future time for appropriate correspondance from the masses to them. But for now, please let the few "points of contact" with them see what they can do first.

 

Patience here will pay off. Now go CITO this weekend! :lol:

 

Salvelinus

Link to comment

Johnny,

 

I think you've jumped to some conclusions which haven't actually been reached yet, and which I would like very much to avoid. A lot of what you described about the rulemaking process is valid, and can be noted in the discussions that will be held.

 

I'll be glad to talk with you about this while we haul trash out of the City Park tomorrow. Gawd, could you imagine doing a CITO cleanup of SGL 51? We'd need tow trucks and dump trucks.

Link to comment

I would like to through my .02 in on this. As a Pa Hunter and a Geocacher I would be willing to add my voice to any needed to keep the Caches available on PGC lands. I have several planed and all but 2 are on Game lands... (granted another 2 could just as easily be put on State Forest) So add me to the list and I'll get some other help if i can (I know 10 or 15 hunters that i know i could convince that Geocaching is a good thing, if it would help)

 

Thanks,

Windlight

Edited by windlight
Link to comment

Please add our to the list.

 

Seven of our eight Pennsylvania caches are on State Game Land, southeast region. I will forward a list to KA by separate correspondence.

 

NOTE – In eastern Pennsylvania major portions of the Appalachian Trail are located on State Game Land.

Link to comment

Here is the latest news that I have regarding the game lands in PA. After writing a letter to my representative Sandy Major, this is her response, via a phone message from Carol, her office spokesperson.

 

First, she sent regrets that she would not be able to attend our Cardio Event finale at the Elk's. (She was invited to geocache with any of her expeditionary friends, my buds, and me.)

 

Second and most importantly, she stated that the game commission has "no inclination to prohibit geocaching in the game land areas." While the agency has "no desire to promote the endeavor either," as long as it does not involve promotional activities, has no commercial outlet, and does not result in littering, there should be no attempts on the game commission's part to discourage this activity.

 

Finally, Major encouraged us all "to have fun in the woods!"

Link to comment

As one who works with government agencies on a daily basis, I find it completely incredible that ANY government agent would actually make a statement of policy which is committal let alone contreversial.

 

I wish I could get the NJ/PA DEP's to make those kinds of definitive decisions on other cases. I have found that most of the people you can actually reach have no idea what thier regulations say or mean. I have received one to many letters stating "Although not technically required by the regulations of this department, the following are required" to believe that anyone can make a statement that accurately reflects policies. I do environmental engineering work in both states and I am always surprised when I actually reach a state worker with a take charge type of attitude and definite answers.

 

As far as the littelr thing goes, why not just call them "Green Box Trail Markers" and be done with it?

Link to comment

Here we go again. I'll will be contacting my representive in Harrisburg for the second time. One of the young "GeoDawgz" and their mother reported by e-mail that they were told that they could not geocache in the game lands. They were doing a biking cache on a bike friendly part of the game lands in Susquehanna County. I am hoping to get the name of the officer, so I can forward all of this information to my representative. I will keep you posted.

Link to comment
Here is the latest news that I have regarding the game lands in PA. After writing a letter to my representative Sandy Major, this is her response, via a phone message from Carol, her office spokesperson.

 

First, she sent regrets that she would not be able to attend our Cardio Event finale at the Elk's. (She was invited to geocache with any of her expeditionary friends, my buds, and me.)

 

Second and most importantly, she stated that the game commission has "no inclination to prohibit geocaching in the game land areas." While the agency has "no desire to promote the endeavor either," as long as it does not involve promotional activities, has no commercial outlet, and does not result in littering, there should be no attempts on the game commission's part to discourage this activity.

 

Finally, Major encouraged us all "to have fun in the woods!"

 

Here we go again. I'll will be contacting my representive in Harrisburg for the second time. One of the young "GeoDawgz" and their mother reported by e-mail that they were told that they could not geocache in the game lands. They were doing a biking cache on a bike friendly part of the game lands in Susquehanna County. I am hoping to get the name of the officer, so I can forward all of this information to my representative. I will keep you posted.

 

I don't know how it is in PA, but in most states an individual representative (Assemblymen, Representative, Senator, or whatever you call them) has no say over the policies of individual state agencies. Perhaps if they sit on an oversight committee they may have some, but if a DEC ranger tells me its against policy to ride my ATV in a state park, I can't write my state senator, or even governor for permission. Now if you get enough representatives on your side, policy can be changed.

Link to comment

As the approver for western PA facilitated a cache in a PA state game lands area in January 2005, I shall assume that placing a cache in such areas is permitted. We have rural property that abuts a state game lands area; I shall research parts of the game lands for placement of a cache. Just gotta remember to wear my blaze orange.

Link to comment

I don't "facilitate" caches, nor do I "permit" them. Cache owners hide them and land managers permit them. I review the submissions in my area to determine whether they meet this site's listing guidelines. If a cache does, it is listed. If it doesn't, it is not listed. It is safe to assume that a published cache meets the site's listing guidelines.

Link to comment
I don't "facilitate" caches, nor do I "permit" them. Cache owners hide them and land managers permit them. I review the submissions in my area to determine whether they meet this site's listing guidelines. If a cache does, it is listed. If it doesn't, it is not listed. It is safe to assume that a published cache meets the site's listing guidelines.

I was told recently by the Eastern PA approver that caches are OK in SGL's. Is that still true?

Link to comment

Alan2, the answer to your question is already in the part you quoted from K.A.

:D

I review the submissions in my area to determine whether they meet this site's listing guidelines. If a cache does, it is listed. If it doesn't, it is not listed. It is safe to assume that a published cache meets the site's listing guidelines.
Link to comment

That's amazing. I'll wear orange while I'm hiding. Maybe I can bag a few ticks while I'm at it? :D

 

I guess though Oct-Feb are the main hunting seasons. Except no closed season on Starlings and English Sparrows. English Sparrows? :P People hunt sparrows, those cute little gray birds? Is there anything left after they get shot?

Link to comment
That's amazing. I'll wear orange while I'm hiding. Maybe I can bag a few ticks while I'm at it? :)

 

I guess though Oct-Feb are the main hunting seasons. Except no closed season on Starlings and English Sparrows. English Sparrows? :) People hunt sparrows, those cute little gray birds? Is there anything left after they get shot?

I hope not. Neither of these are native species to PA or North America for that matter.

Actually this whole controversy started some time ago. See this cache:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...11-35bce05aee2f

 

"GC8DAC" "It's the pits"

 

I think (IMO) that "officially" their stance is that geocaching isn't allowed. Most likely to keep from being indundated by other organizations wanting to use state game lands for a whole host of non hunting related activities. If they officially endorse Geocaching, then it follows that mountain bikers and rock climbers and a lot of others will want a piece of the pie. It is still State Game Land, bought and paid for by hunters, for hunting and game management. My past experience with an issue related to a historical site that happens to be on State Game Lands is that they will not be inclined to officially allow a non hunting related activity. All it takes is for one Geocacher to louse up a few guys hunting to really push them into an "official" stance. The other side of this is that geocaching, hiking, mountain biking, etc. put a few more eyes in the woods to keep a look out for troublemakers and vandals. I would hope that the PAGC realizes that cachers are more likely a positive influence than a negative. Personally some of my best times have been spent with a deer rifle in one hand and my GPSr in the other, hunting buck and caches at the same time.

Link to comment

My geocache was removed this week from State Game Lands. I was informed via an anonymous account "Nightseeker". I can only assume this is the same person who contacted me last month anonymously as "Beartrppr".

 

Email me if your northeast PA cache was also taken.

Edited by bradladora
Link to comment
My geocache was removed this week from State Game Lands. I was informed via an anonymous account "Nightseeker". I can only assume this is the same person who contacted me last month anonymously as "Beartrppr".

 

Email me if your northeast PA cache was also taken.

I hate to push this thread back up, but don't you think that if they have an "official" policy you would of received an "official" notice that your cache was removed? DCNR, who has an official policy, does just that.

 

There may be anti-geocaching PGC employees taking it upon themselves to remove caches, but if they were acting officailly, I'm pretty sure they are required to tell you so.

 

Make your cache a MOC. At least they will have to pay the money to get the coords.

 

Salvelinus

Link to comment

OK, the reply I got from the Law Enforcement supervisor at the Northeast office is that the official position is that geocaches are permitted as long as cachers don't cause any damage in their placement.

I made my local game comm. contact aware of this and he said go for it.

Link to comment

I think that the position of the PGC is actually that they don't have an "official" position and I, for one, would like to see it stay that way. If we play nice and respect their rules and don't endanger the game or interfere with the hunters, they won't have to adopt an official geocaching policy that could end up being very restrictive. I maintain very informal and cordial relations with a few wardens and land managers. They really don't want to enforce any rules against our silly game but they will if they have to. Don't give them a reason.

Link to comment

I have been in contact with my local office (Northeast Region 570-675-1143 Phill White) and he has given me the illegal line. I just lost my (Decker Oxbow) cache and I have talked to a cacher that has had a cache taken by the game commission! ( Space Oddity was the cache) His cache ammo can was taken and destroyed! When I hurd this I went down and pulled mine ASAP... I hope that there may be some way to confront the main office and inform of our intentions and positive impacts on OUR STATE GAME LANDS that we pay for and pay them to Manage.

Link to comment

They also asked me to tell the Geocaching web site that it is illegal so we all know Not to cache on State Game Lands...

 

To repeat: Phill White from the Northeast Region Law Enforcement Dispatch of the PA State Game Commission @ (570) 657-1143 is the one I talked to on June 30th 2005.

 

Feel free to give him a call if you want: But as of 6/30/2005 my cache is not wellcome on SGL. :D

Link to comment

Does ANYONE have an official statement from the Game Commission headquarters, not a regional office. It seems that some of their staff are either applying their own rules towards Geocaching and ignoring Commission policy. Or their is a policy and no one will tell us. Any approvers have any insight on this?

Link to comment

As I stated back in Mar of 2004 when I started this thread, the official policy is Geocaching is not allowed. I even included an email copy, with names removed, that had the official policy. I think regional offices are choosing to fully adhere to the policy or turn a blind eye depending on the region.

 

I think we do need to get some type of official response and try to set up a meeting with the main office to fight this, it will only get worse as time goes on otherwise.

Link to comment

This is ridiculous -- some of the best caches I've done are on State Game Lands. What's even more ridiculous is that not one single person is being given a straight answer -- there's about twenty different official policies.

 

It's not even clear if the "No Geocaching" rule is just a whim for a couple of low ranking vigilantes (who may or may not even work for the SGL; per "NightSeeker") or if it actually comes from the powers that be in Harrisburg.

 

I say, as a geocacher, some prominent cachers and/or cachers with experience with such organizations should hold a meeting discussing geocaching. There's many wise and articulate ones who are more than capable; it's just time to let them step up.

 

And until I get one single, definitive answer, I will continue to cache on SGL property.

 

Happy Caching!

 

- JD

Link to comment

PSUPaul, I reread the entire thread and their is a post from Keystone where he states he has talked to PGC and they did not have a ban on Geocaching. While your original e-mail had to be sanitized so we could not see who sent it and if they are allowed to make such statements, it reads as an internal policy memo and a rather imperious one at that. As opposed to an official policy statement from PCG.

 

Frankly I do not understand why DCNR has no problems with the issues of Geocaches being considered as litter or somehow damaging vegatation and the PCG does. Perhaps its time to try to talk to PCG as opposed to some isolated land managers selectively enforcing a policy that mya or may not be formally in place.

Link to comment
This is ridiculous -- some of the best caches I've done are on State Game Lands.  What's even more ridiculous is that not one single person is being given a straight answer -- there's about twenty different official policies. 

 

It's not even clear if the "No Geocaching" rule is just a whim for a couple of low ranking vigilantes (who may or may not even work for the SGL; per "NightSeeker") or if it actually comes from the powers that be in Harrisburg.

 

I say, as a geocacher, some prominent cachers and/or cachers with experience with such organizations should hold a meeting discussing geocaching.  There's many wise and articulate ones who are more than capable; it's just time to let them step up.

 

And until I get one single, definitive answer, I will continue to cache on SGL property.

 

Happy Caching!

 

- JD

Everyone needs to calm down and remember that the PGC has no "official" policy. You also need to remember that the 3 pulled caches were all located within the jurisdiction of one regional office. No other caches have been removed outside of this regional office. Remember too that our State approver has had discussions with them and is still approving caches on gamelands.

 

Also, keep in mind that gamelands are not supported by tax dollars. They are supported by license dollars from hunters. For that, hunters needs and desires will, and should, always be given top priority on these lands. It will do us little good as secondary users of these lands to make demands from the PGC as if it is our right to do so. We are seen as guest there, not primary users.

 

Bottom line is to show some tact. Please do not call anyone in the PGC and start complaining about this. Overreacting to a bunch of conflicting statements will just make you look stupid in the long run. Lets wait until something here is more concrete before we do anything, if anything. Knowing the issues this agency is facing right now...if we push a geocaching policy on them, we probably would lose a lot. Eventually, our positive experience with DCNR will pay off here, but the timing right now is bad. As an employee with their sister agency, trust me on that one.

 

For our NE cachers: Keep us posted on what happens. You may want to post your experiences HERE as well. Maybe you should keep your caches out of gamelands for awhile and use DCNR State Parks and Forest instead. Just an idea.

 

Savelinus

 

Salvelinus

Edited by Salvelinus
Link to comment

Salvelinus Posted on Jul 1 2005, 12:18 PM

Also, keep in mind that gamelands are not supported by tax dollars. They are supported by license dollars from hunters. For that, hunters needs and desires will, and should, always be given top priority on these lands. It will do us little good as secondary users of these lands to make demands from the PGC as if it is our right to do so. We are seen as guest there, not primary users.

 

I don't know what good it will do, but I think it's about time to challenge this statement.

 

GAME COMMISSION URGES VOTER SUPPORT FOR GROWING GREENER BALLOT INITIATIVE

 

HARRISBURG - Pennsylvania Game Commission Executive Director Vern Ross today urged all hunters and trappers registered to vote to remember to vote "YES" on the Growing Greener II bond issue that will appear on the May 17th primary ballot.

 

If approved by voters, the $625 million bond issue will fund Gov. Edward G. Rendell's proposed renewal and expansion of the state's Growing Greener program.

 

Under the proposal, Gov. Rendell would fund parks, open space and farmland projects; environmental cleanup; water quality improvements in the state's rivers, streams and lakes; and revitalization projects for older Pennsylvania communities. As part of the initiative, the Game Commission and Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission would share a portion of those funds for infrastructure needs. The agencies will not be required to pay back any portion of the bond debt, nor will there be a matching-fund requirement as was rumored earlier.

 

Ross noted that the Game Commission would benefit from the funding - estimated at $6 million per year - targeted for infrastructure by using the monies to repair and inspect dams, impoundments and bridges; upgrade and repair buildings; and maintain shooting ranges on State Game Lands.

 

In addition, Growing Greener funding would enable the Game Commission to move forward with its plan to implement a point-of-sale system for licenses that would improve customer service and increase the agency's ability to gather more public input.

 

Ross pointed out that the Game Commission received some funding in the 1960s and the 1970s through two previous bond issues - Project 70 and Project 500 - which it used to buy important wildlife areas threatened by development, and to build roads, parking lots, shooting ranges, bridges, impoundments and other utilities on State Game Lands. The agency also used some of the Project 500 monies to pay for construction of environmentally-controlled pheasant brooder houses.

 

 

TESTIMONY BEFORE THE GREEN RIBBON COMMISSION

 

The agency derives nearly 60% of its’ revenue from the sale of hunting and trapping licenses. The remaining revenue is received from federal Pittman-Robertson funds, timber sale revenue, natural resource and rights of way leases and agreements as well as game law fines, Game News subscriptions and interest income. I think it important to note that the agency receives no General Fund appropriation.

 

 

Pittman Robertson Funds

 

The program was designed for wildlife restoration and hunter education and may be used for range development programs.

 

The monies to be used in this assistance is the excise tax of 11% on bows and arrows and parts and accessories, and the excise tax of 10% on pistols and revolvers and the 11% on firearms, other than pistols and revolvers, and shells and cartridges

 

 

Pennsylvania voters back $625 Growing Greener II

 

More than 60 percent of voters favored the bond issue. On the strength of that vote, the Rendell administration hopes to negotiate a bipartisan legislative measure that will allocate and pay for the bond.

 

The funds would be used for "maintenance and protection of the environment, open space and farmland preservation, watershed protection, abandoned mine reclamation, acid mine drainage remediation and other initiatives," according to the ballot statement.

 

 

 

If we buy Guns and Ammunition for target practice or self defense we are subsidizing the Pennsylvania Game Commission.

 

They snuck funding for the Pennsylvania Game Commission into the Growing Greener Bond Initiative so we can pay to fix their Bridges so they can have access to Timber so they can sell it.

 

And notice that Growing Greener is not the first public Bond to fund the Pennsylvania Game Commission.

 

So much for simply being at the mercy of the Pennsylvania Game Commission because we don't pay anything. We might only be second class citizens to the Pennsylvania Game Commission. But that seat in the back of the Bus is not a free ride.

Link to comment
Salvelinus Posted on Jul 1 2005, 12:18 PM
Also, keep in mind that gamelands are not supported by tax dollars. They are supported by license dollars from hunters. For that, hunters needs and desires will, and should, always be given top priority on these lands. It will do us little good as secondary users of these lands to make demands from the PGC as if it is our right to do so. We are seen as guest there, not primary users.

 

I don't know what good it will do, but I think it's about time to challenge this statement.

Well, your getting OT but my statement still holds true for both agencies you mention. I guess I should of said "license fees, excise taxes from resource users, and alternative funding sources" instead of just license fees. I was hoping not to confuse everybody. The fact remains that neither the Fish and Boat Commission or the Game Commission are funded from taxpayers dollars. However, DCNR, PADOT, DEP, etc...are funded from tax dollars.

 

Growing Greener money is not money generated from the general public. It is a fund largly created by increased tipping fees from trash haulers and increased fines from industrial polluters. It is essentially mitigation funding paid for by those that do environmental wrongdoings. In fact, since so many Pennsylvania landfills are being used by out of state trash haulers, particularily NJ and MD, a good portion of the fund is not being paid by persons that reside in Pennsylvania.

 

DEP, DCNR, PFBC, PGC and any organization who applies may be eligible for Growing Greener funding and/or bonds issued on it.

 

You are correct that when you buy ammo and guns for target practice, you are supporting the funding required by the Pittman act, some of which goes to the PGC. However, many gamelands have target ranges which allow you to enjoy that activity on gamelands as well. So they are offering you a service from the dollars they received from your guns and ammo excise tax.

 

Its not important to debate why agencies are funded the way they are. However, its important to know something about it because it could influence how issues are given priority.

 

Salvelinus

Link to comment

I can see how the PGC sees this issue. I thinks the last thing they want to hear is on the first or last day of a big game season; Some hunter REALY MAD about getting in his or her tree stand 2 hours befor day light and all that person saw was a family of Geocacher's (all in orange) pointing in 6 diffferent dicrections and walking around in circles 100 yards from there favorite hunting spot... One yelling I lost the signal, others saying I think its over here, or I hope theres still a Jeep TB in this one.

 

I do think they would get a lot of calls about somthing like that and they would say WHY ARE WE PAYING FOR THIS HUNTING LAND AND IT'S NOT ONLY FOR HUNTING.... Somthing like that.

 

I'm not just tooting my horn, I've been a hunter for 9 years Bow and Gun, I've payed for my Lic. and to this day I have never hunted on Game Lands. I injoy hunting on State forest land. I have run into many hikers and other hunters doing this and I except this fact, Its Public land! But GAME LANDS are a different story...

 

We are the secondary users of this land intended for Hunting and fishing, The best thing for us to do is stay calm.

 

-Hidden Manna

Edited by Hidden Manna
Link to comment

Salvelinus Posted on Jul 1 2005, 02:38 PM

Well, your getting OT

 

If I am Off Topic, then you were off topic first. But I think the funding issue is germane to this discussion. This is not an argument between you and me. This is information for the Geocaching taxpayers of Pennsylvania. Also, you potentially have more inside knowledge than I do. I have to dig to learn as I go. When I perceive one of your statements to be a half truth or even more misleading that that, I will dig for the facts.

 

As I understand, it the Tipping Fee Funds that you refer to are tied to Growing Greener I. But, I had focused on the more recent developments of Growing Greener II.

 

I try to back up what I say with a reference to facts. Here are more facts.

 

Decision Time

 

A year ago, Gov. Edward G. Rendell introduced his Growing Greener II proposal that included a new influx of $800 million to take up where the first phase will end. Its overall purpose was to make Pennsylvania more attractive to industry and tourists by improving our quality of life. The approximate percentages of fund allocations were announced, with the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources getting the lion's share. Rendell's proposal was to be funded through increased pollution taxes and increased fees for trash disposal. The Republican-controlled legislature blocked the program.

 

After a year of stalling, political posturing and the Republican's own version of Growing Greener II, the issue of funding a compromise version Growing Greener II will finally be before the voters.

 

The ballot question states: "Do you favor authorizing the Commonwealth to borrow up to $625 million for the maintenance and protection of the environment, open space and farmland preservation, watershed protection, abandoned mine reclamation, acid mine drainage remediation and other environmental initiatives?"

 

Growing Greener II will help the environment, no doubt about it. However, unlike the $800 million Growing Greener II proposal that Rendell made last year, this is a spending package without funding. It is also a program built on promises, not guarantees. Many promises, such as those to the PGC and PFBC, are all dependent on the passage of additional legislation or the whims of the state government.

 

As a taxpayer, I'd like to know where the money is coming from and exactly where it will be going. However, this compromise version of Growing Greener II is what we have on the table.

 

 

Growing Greener funding

 

The Growing Greener program is a 13-year, $1.24 billion environmental spending program enacted under the leadership of Republican Governor Tom Ridge, and expanded by his successor, Republican Governor Mark Schweiker. All of us, sportsmen and non-sportsmen alike, benefit from this worthy program, and will continue to do so well into the future.

 

Despite a high level of funding already in place, Governor Rendell is proposing an additional $800 million in spending on Growing Greener, which he intends pay for with the sale of state bonds. These bonds, of course, will be paid-off with taxpayer money, derived from the imposition of $150 million in new annual taxes on households and businesses.

 

I have personally met with and discussed these needs with representatives of the PGC and PF&BC. For the record, I fully support using a portion of Growing Greener funding to address these infrastructure needs. However, there are other environmental priorities deserving of our attention as well. The issue is not should we address the two Commission's infrastructure needs. The issue is how much do we allocate among competing interests, and who picks up the tab.

 

Since it is our tax dollars that will pay for any amount of bond financing (sportsmen and non-sportsmen alike), I would hope we all keep an eye on such developments.

 

Sincerely,

 

Jane M. Earll

State Senator-49th District

Link to comment

Salvelinus, my intention was not for a number of angry phone calls; that is not even close to being articulate. Instead, a formal meeting of a couple of people sitting down on both sides.

 

No angry phone calls; riots; mobs -- as noted, they just make the entire thing much worse. Even if the verdict is a solid "no" to geocaching, at least we know what's going on.

 

Hope my thoughts came across much clearer.

 

Thanks!

 

- JD

Link to comment

My daughter and I visited PA from NY specifically to cache in SGL's. No other reason. We stayed a weekend and Pennsylvanians made money from us for lodging, restaurants, gas, gifts, etc. We paid state taxes as well on those items. While I don't think it's appropriate for a New Yorker to get involved in another state's policies, I think all states try to make it attractive to encourage visitors. Maybe you can make lapel buttons similar to the I LOVE NY campaign like I LOVE CACHING in PA.

 

By the way, Hidden Manna, why do you prefer to hunt in State Parks reather than SGL's?

Link to comment

Alan2: By the way, Hidden Manna, why do you prefer to hunt in State Parks reather than SGL's?

 

- I don't hunt on state parks, I like to hunt on state forest land, It gives me much more options... Parking, Over night camping/ hunting and fishing trips!!! They are the best- Hike into an area 3-4 miles from anyone, camp over night. hunt all the next day type of deal.... SGL are a little bit more resricted. The areas are a little bit less hunted.... SGL during hunting season is worse then the city... but just west of the Water Gap there is so much wild life its not funny, sometimes I feel and I see in the lands that I have hunted and fished the best management is no to little management: I just see more wild life on state forest land then SGL.

 

Its also hard to scout and area to hunt that you know on opening day there will be 5-10 other hunter in that same spot! Not my idea of fun.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...