The CT DEPs “Managing Urban Deer in Connecticut–A Guide for Residents and Communities” promotes deer culls as an effective way to regulate the population. Isn the DEP an unbiased agency?
The CT DEP is strongly biased in favor of hunters because wildlife agencies are driven by direct financial incentives to increase the number of hunters in their states. “In 1937, Congress enacted the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act, generally known as the Pittman-Robertson Act after its initial sponsors. The Act’s purpose is to assure some regularity of funding for state wildlife programs. The Pittman-Robertson Act created a fund raised through excise tax on the sales of firearms, shells, cartridges and bows and arrows that is allocated among the sates. Allocation is conditioned upon enactment by the states of provisions that require hunting license revenue to be used only for fish and wildlife programs…The Pittman-Robertson Act further provides that upon application for funding of wildlife projects, the federal government can award grants up to 75% of the total state costs of each project with a ceiling imposed by a calculation of the following: one-half of total Pittman-Rob
Related Questions
- The CT DEPs "Managing Urban Deer in Connecticut--A Guide for Residents and Communities" promotes deer culls as an effective way to regulate the population. Isn the DEP an unbiased agency?
- How can we learn from the experiences of other jurisdictions, especially other communities whose demographics (e.g., large urban area or rural jurisdiction) are similar to ours?
- Can Communities Afford Urban Forest Management?
