When I first heard about the new study of ways the Game and Fish & Boat commissions should work together, immediately I thought of Senate Majority Leader Joe Pittman and his comments about a merger of the agencies last year.
At a budget hearing for both commissions in 2024, his first question to then Game Commission Executive Director Bryan Burhans was abrupt: “Why do we need you?” he asked.
Then, looking at Tim Schaeffer, Fish & Boat commission executive director, he said, “I mean, why do we need both of you?”
Later in the hearing, noting that Pennsylvania is the only state in the country to manage fish and wildlife with two separate agencies, Pittman suggested that it’s time to scrap the expensive setup.
“Yes we have a 220-year history of these commissions, and that’s great, but things do change,” he told the directors. “You are an instrument of this commonwealth – we created you and we can change you because it might be time to take a fresh look … to determine whether it may be time for a new, better and more efficient approach on your use of funds.”
It will be interesting to see how Pittman and other lawmakers respond to the study report from Wildlife Management Institute next year.
MORE COVERAGE FROM PENNSYLVANIA OUTDOOR NEWS:
Pennsylvania Game Commission dismisses game warden for misconduct
Here’s the weedy truth about early ice panfish
Tyler Frantz: Bear hunting is prized, precious in Pennsylvania
* One lawmaker who clearly is not looking for a merger of the Game and Fish & Boat commissions is Sen. Greg Rothman, R-Cumberland, Dauphin and Perry counties, chairman of the House Game and Fisheries Committee.
But he does want to see some of their operations consolidated to make them more efficient.
I asked him if the agencies were merged, would it make lawmakers look any differently at the big nest egg – close to $500 million – that the Game Commission has built up in recent years from windfall Marcellus shale natural gas receipts, emanating from the state game lands it owns.
Some lawmakers have sought to raid the fund to use it for projects that don’t benefit wildlife or hunters and trappers. Rothman’s reply was interesting.
“Look, I’ve been probably the loudest since becoming chair of the Senate committee on fish and game, on the fact that that money should be spent – that they (Game Commission) don’t need to have a huge reserve,” he said.
“I’ve been encouraging them to spend the money on capital projects, but not operational. But on the other hand, this may allow them to share some of those resources too, which ultimately will keep license costs low.”
I took that to mean that some of the Game Commission reserves should be spent on water quality or water-related projects under the auspices of the Fish & Boat Commission. Obviously, some will think that’s a good thing – others not so much.
* In this space last issue, I wrongly implied that a resolution sponsored by Rep. Jim Haddock would die. Turns out it passed with a later date.
The House Game and Fisheries Committee approved a resolution to designate this Dec. 27 as “Pennsylvania Elk Hunt Day.” This ceremonial resolution recognizes the history and management of the state’s elk population, celebrates the 102nd anniversary of the first regulated hunt and the 25th anniversary of its reinstatement, and raises public awareness about the importance of elk conservation in the state.