| Viewing Single Post From: nanday alert | |
|---|---|
| conure58 | Jan 18 2008, 11:46 AM |
Administrator
|
Too many contradictions. One says: "ALSO, DO NOTE there IS A GRANDFATHERING CLAUSE, Amen to that one, but as I wrote that is NOT the ISSUE, or ENTIRE ISSUE, it is that IF they have erroneous info." Then the next says: "The fact is there is no grandfather clause in the pending proposal (which is a proposal to amend existing Pennsylvania Code Title 58 (Recreation), Part III (Game Commission), Chapter 137 (Wildlife), subsection 137.1 (importation, sale, and release of certain wildlife) )." And these both came from the ICA. Any idea which to believe? It's pretty frustrating not knowing which is 'fact' and it's really bad for anyone in PA with a Nanday. |
 |
|
| nanday alert · Web Links | |
 11:02 AM Nov 28
|
Hosted for free by ZetaBoards
