House Game & Fisheries Committee Reports

Report provided by PA legislative services

 

HARRISBURG - (4/3/08, 9:00 a.m., Room 140, Main Capitol)

The House Game and Fisheries Committee met to receive the Pennsylvania Game Commission's Annual Report.

Members in attendance included Chairman Ed Staback (D-Lackawanna), and Representatives Gordon Denlinger (R-Lancaster), Deberah Kula (D-Fayette), Chris Sainato (D-Lawrence), David Millard (R-Columbia), Mike Hanna (D-Clinton), Keith Gillespie (R-York), Scott Perry (R-York), Michael Peifer (R-Pike), Dan Moul (R-Adams), Mark Keller (R-Perry), Rob Kauffman (R-Franklin), Garth Everett (R-Lycoming), Dan Surra (D-Elk), Gary Haluska (D-Cambria), Todd Rock (R-Franklin) and Neal Goodman (D-Schuylkill).

Carl Roe, Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Game Commission, said it has been a very productive but also challenging year for the Commission as it works to manage all wild birds and mammals and their habitats across the state. Roe stressed that habitat is key for all wildlife and he has concerns over the continued encroachment on that habitat and the impact it has on the 465 species they manage. He noted habitat efforts by the Commission that have been bolstered by the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) and the Federal State Wildlife Grant Program.

With regard to its fiscal status, Roe remarked that by the end of June of 2008, the Game Fund will have a balance of around $32 million. A conservative approach to spending, especially on the personnel side, was taken and not all Wildlife Control Officer (WCO) vacancies have been filled. He explained that once money for the Commission's operating expenses are subtracted out, there will be only $10 million to cover any additional expenses over the next three years. He commented that these budget projections take into account that the Commission continues to have vacant positions and yet will still not cover the increased personnel costs that will result from the new state labor contract and the inflationary effect on daily operations. Inflationary pressures, such as the increasing price of gas, continue to affect operations.

He informed the Committee that a recent report shows that PA hunters led the nation by spending a total of 16.86 million days in the field and that hunting in PA is a $3 billion industry that generates over $214 million in state and local taxes. He stressed that none of this money is reinvested back into helping protect and ensure a secure future for the wildlife and related programs that generate these revenues.

Roe then addressed hunting success, saying that while the 2006-2007 season was very productive, they would like to see more hunters taking part in fur taking, particularly for coyotes and foxes. Roe added that the size of the deer herd continues to be an issue in the state and the Commission is considering two new management goals: the first is to manage the deer herd to provide recreation opportunities and the second is to improve the public's knowledge and understanding about deer and the deer management program.

The estimated 2007-2008 deer harvest was approximately 323,070, including 109,200 bucks and 213,870 antlerless deer. Deer hunting is challenging in some areas, but reports show that deer are larger and antler restrictions are working. Roe noted the Commission is emphasizing communication to increase the public's understanding of the deer management program. Several open houses were conducted last fall and there will be seven more this spring.

Roe next spoke about the Commission's program on wind energy that has resulted in the development of a voluntary wind energy cooperative agreement and various protocols that will assist wind energy companies evaluate risk and avoid wildlife impact. Four biologists were hired to monitor the program and to assist wind energy companies to identify appropriate sites.

Roe closed by relating the success of the youth hunt program and inviting everyone to keep that same youthful enthusiasm in mind as they enjoy the outdoors.

Chairman Staback noted that additional biologists were hired to help land owners manage the habitat on their properties. He asked if those biologists are involved in helping to manage the coyote population, which is exploding. Roe responded that the biologists he mentioned were hired with the assistance of a federal grant program and have specific responsibilities and those do not include coyote management. He noted the coyote hunting season is the most liberal of all hunting seasons, it goes on 365 days a year and the Commission encourages more hunters to actively hunt the animals. He said the coyote take last year was approximately 20,000 and could provide the exact number later, after checking a fur taker survey.

Regarding changes in the deer management program, Chairman Staback wanted to know what Roe expected to find with regard to proposed changes. Roe replied that the concept is to see what the deer harvest success rate is with a five-day buck season and a seven-day antlerless season. For the past three years, he said no non-resident hunter bought an antlerless hunting license in the north-central region, one of the prime deer hunting areas of the state. He acknowledged that fewer hunters has an economic impact on the state, but the whole scenario is being studied and analyzed.

Chairman Staback asked how long the program will be in effect before a decision can be reached on further changes. Roe said it would take a minimum of three years before data trends can be analyzed properly. Additionally, he said information on wildlife management units would be driven by data on forest health and herd health.

Rep. Denlinger asked for information on the delay in implementing a point of sale system for licenses and other information. Roe responded that he, too, is frustrated by delays in putting a new system in place. He said the program was paid for in 2004-2005 and the vendor defaulted in installing a system last year. The Commission met with them again and drew up a new contract and there was a pilot program in the fall. The vendor also missed a March 1 deadline for implementing the system. There are three components to the system, one is for license sales, another is for electronic funds transfer and the third is an administrative portion, allowing the Commission to interact with the vendors who sell licenses. He said the sales portion is about 90 percent complete, but the financial component is not even close to being put on line for a test. He added that the company's project management skills are abysmal. Roe added that suggestions to get rid of the vendor altogether were made when they didn't meet the March 1 deadline. However, the Fish and Boat Commission was coming into its peak license sales season and cutting ties to the vendor would have hindered the Fish and Boat Commission's efforts, he explained. The vendor's $5 million bond expires May 31.

Rep. Denlinger inquired if there was any recourse for non-compliance. Roe said those discussions have been taking place and the bond money would reimburse the Commission for its expenses if they sever ties with the vendor responsible for implementing the point of sale system.

Rep. Denlinger queried about analysis of the management of wildlife management units. Roe said the analysis is done regularly, the models are being refined and there will be a second, five-year plan. The Commission is looking at increasing the deer herd in certain areas of the state and is looking ahead to a 10-year plan as it continues to oversee the wildlife management units.

Rep. Denlinger wanted to know if a large number of students for the WCO training classes are turned away each year. Roe said there is a Civil Service process for the WCO positions. Last year there were 900 applicants, the Commission offered spots to 33 individuals, seven of those turned down the offer, a few others walked away from the program and one person had to be removed. He said the overall cost is $2 million, which includes salaries and training.

Rep. Denlinger commented that many residents feel too many out-of-state hunters are coming in for license fees that are too low. Roe said the Commission would welcome the ability to raise the fees at any time.

Rep. Hanna said there should be aggressive timbering in the north-central part of the state while the deer herd is down and asked if the Commission is doing anything about that. Roe said the Commission's approach is different from the Bureau of Forestry's approach in that it is more concerned with habitat maintenance, coupled with forest ecology, than how the land is used for commercial purposes. He noted that the Commission is concerned with forest regeneration in order to maintain proper wildlife habitat.

Rep. Hanna was interested to know if the Commission works with timber cutters to have forest floors limed. Roe said they do some things to improve access for hunters, such as making roads or putting bridges across a stream into forested areas.  Roe noted that there are times when the timber cuts do not produce revenue because of the additional work the timber companies provide to the agency.  Having them lime would serverly cut into any revenues. 

Rep. Everett said there have been concerns over gas leases on some state game lands and wanted to know what the effect of leases is on those lands. Roe said private owners have gas, oil and mineral rights on some lands and the Commission owns some of those rights. He explained the private owners can come in to extract the gas and it has become profitable for some of them to do that. If the wells are on private land that borders state game lands and some of the gas is being pulled from under the game lands, the Commission monitors that closely and there are leases they benefit from with revenues coming from those who owns the rights. It can also require seeding and other improvements to restore and enhance habitat in areas where minerals are extracted. Under a recent contract, they received a 28 percent royalty on a gas lease.

Rep. Everett asked about the Commission's philosophy on supplemental feeding and if any supplemental feeding is considered baiting and is it illegal. Roe responded that by law, bait must be removed at least 30 days before hunting season begins. Feeding is considered baiting when it directly influences an animal's behavior. There is a problem if travel lanes are being created where hunting can take place. During the hunting season, supplemental feeding is considered baiting wildlife into an area and that is illegal. He said supplemental feeding can be used to manipulate animals and the trails they use, and that is not a good wildlife management practice. Rep. Everett said he didn't understand how supplemental feeding on private property is a problem. Roe said that supplemental feeding can still affect wildlife even on a neighboring property to manipulate travel lanes and patterns of animals. He said the best advice is for people to stop supplemental feeding at least thirty days before hunting season begins.

Rep. Gillespie wanted to know where pheasants are coming from that are being imported into the state for the trap and exchange program in Montour County. Roe said the pheasants are coming from Montana, North Dakota and South Dakota, noting approximately 300 birds per year are being brought in. He added that some turkeys are exchanged in the program.

Rep. Gillespie asked if there is a blight on the muskrat population. Roe said he wasn't sure but there has been a decline of the muskrat population and the Commission is looking into the matter.

Rep. Surra expressed disappointment that the point-of-sale system has still not been implemented. He also expressed concern over the decline in the number of hunters in the state. He felt that is due to a combination of an aging hunting population and a disenchantment with the way things are going with the deer herd management program. He asked Roe if he knew how many hunting licenses were sold last year. Roe said the number was down about two percent and is down slightly more than two percent as of mid-March this year. He said exact figures will be available by the end of May. He also said there has been an approximate five percent downward trend from 1999 to 2006.

Rep. Surra expressed dismay at the decline of non-resident hunters when the state's license fees are such a bargain and the negative impact on the state's economy, particularly in the north-central part of the state. Roe attributed it to several factors, including the high price of gas, a reduced herd size and the pattern of hunting has changed. He said many hunters are also now buying their supplies at Wal-Mart, Bass Pro Shops, Gander Mountain and Cabella's, the large retailers that carry outdoor gear and supplies. That has a direct impact on small businesses in rural areas that cater to hunters during the season. He also said the number of hunters is high in the first few days of the season. He commented that hunters are only staying out in the woods for a day or two when they previously stayed for a week or more.

Rep. Millard wanted to know if there are things the Commission is not doing to save money, such as combining efforts with the Fish and Boat Commission and asked his position on a merger. Roe said a study was done a few years ago and came to the conclusion that a significant savings would not be realized under a merger. Also, when he meets with peers in wildlife management from other states and they tell him they have merged with another commission, the wildlife side of the management "falls out of the bottom." He added that WCOs from the Game Commission do help WCOs from the Fish and Boat Commission to enforce laws during their busy season and vice versa and that saves on costs. He said more savings will result once the point-of-sale system is implemented.

Rep. Haluska voiced a complaint from his constituents that the Commission has lost its focus on the management of the deer herd. He said white-tailed deer are the most important and most prized animal for hunters. Roe said the Commission is developing partnerships and is working with sportsmen's groups, such as the Wild Turkey Federation and Pheasants Forever, to manage the population of those animals and their habitat. He noted the wild turkey population is making a comeback in Pennsylvania.

Rep. Haluska said the Game Commission is inflexible in pursuing court cases for violations of the Game Code and other laws regulating hunting and wildlife. Roe said deer are a keystone species. He said they affect every other species in the wild because of their movements and what they eat. He added that the Commission must manage all 465 species of wildlife, not just deer.

Rep. Haluska said the Game Commission does not support supplemental feeding. Roe said it is not illegal to do supplemental feeding but that can increase the carrying capacity of a parcel of land and that affects other people's property.

Rep. Rock asked how he could consider the antlered deer restrictions a success. Roe responded that deer are coming in heavier, with bigger bodies and with larger racks. He said there must be some effort to protect those older deer that will pass along the strongest genes among the herd.

Rep. Rock said pheasant hunting is a good way to get younger hunters into the sport and asked if is a good use of money to import them when there are so many foxes, coyotes and hawks already in the state. Roe explained there are tangential effects to bringing pheasants in as it enhances the wildlife mix. He said there is a challenge to getting the right mix of wildlife and habitat, but agreed that bringing new hunters into the sport through small game hunting is a good strategy.

Rep. Rock inquired about a disease affecting deer. Roe noted that it is called EHD and it is a mite-borne disease. The disease is transferred from one deer to another through the mite. The mites have a six-week lifestyle and that can be affected by weather. Cold weather kills the mites quicker and warm, wet weather prolongs their life cycle. He noted there have been pockets in southwestern Pennsylvania where deer have been adversely affected by the disease.

Rep. Goodman lamented that when he was elected five years ago, the issues before the Game Commission were developing a point-of-sale system, deer herd management, doe licenses, baiting, hunter input into decision making, habitat development and food plots and those are the same issues now. He suggested the Commission contact commercial feed companies that might donate seeds, test soil and come up with plans to create food plots that would attract deer and other animals. He said the Game Commission is not doing enough to develop habitat. Roe countered by saying that the Commission does do a considerable amount of work on habitat development on game lands and that work represents a considerable portion of its budget. He noted that state game lands represent only five percent of the land in Pennsylvania. Eighty percent of land is in private hands. He also commented that the Commission is 30 people short of its total landmanagement personnel complement. He invited all members of the committee to go out into the field to see what it is doing for habitat development and management.

Rep. Moul noted that in his area, sportsmen are banding together and entering into leases of farmland to create private hunting preserves. He asked if that is a trend Roe has seen elsewhere. Roe replied that the leases are not a trend he is aware of but he will take a look at the issue. He is aware that more land is being posted as private. He cautioned that if hunters are creating preserves, eventually the deer will be dispersed outward onto other lands. He also expressed concern that more land being in private hands would force more hunters who don't have permission to hunt on that land to go to state game lands to hunt, potentially making them more crowded during the season.

Chairman Staback wanted to know if an outside audit of the agencies deer management program would indicate it had done a poor job of communicating with the sporting community on its efforts and what could be done differently. Roe said he would welcome an independent audit if it was done by people from outside the state who are using scientific methods. He said it is difficult to measure hunter satisfaction. He said a recent study in Michigan was done and it was found the deer population models were sufficient. He noted that the hunters in Michigan didn't believe the study's findings. Roe said the Commission will continue to inform and communicate with the public.

Click here to read a copy of the Commission's deer management report.

Report by Rick Morrison, PA Legislative Services for PFSC

HARRISBURG - (3/31/08, 12:30 p.m., Room G-50, Irvis Office Building)

The House Game and Fisheries Committee met to consider three bills.

SB 880 Kasunic - (PN 1570) Amends Title 30 (Fish) providing for license vouchers by stating that the commission would make available through its issuing agents vouchers that may be purchased on behalf of a third party. The voucher would be designed on a form designed by the commission and made available to all issuing agents. The voucher may only be redeemed for the class of license or permit indicated on the voucher and for which the applicable fee has been paid by the voucher purchaser. Vouchers would be redeemable prior to their expiration date. The bill also provides for fees for vouchers, places of redemption and restrictions. (Prior Printer Number: 1029) - The bill was unanimously reported as committed.

Gary Moore, of the Fish and Boat Commission, noted this legislation represents the last piece in putting the point of sale system together.

HB 587 Haluska - (PN 653) Amends Title 30 (Fish) repealing provisions granting commissioners the powers of waterways patrolmen. - The bill was unanimously reported as committed.

Rep. Gary Haluska (D-Cambria) noted similar legislation regarding the Game Commission was enacted in 1986.

Rep. Mark Keller (R-Perry) asked if commissioners have been exercising this power and if it has been a problem. Republican Executive Director Dave Combs affirmed it has been exercised, but he is not aware of any improprieties from the Fish and Boat commissioners. Moore noted there have been a few complaints over the years.

Rep. Garth Everett (R-Lycoming) asked if the authority would be restored for those commissioners that complete the necessary training. Chairman Ed Staback (D-Lackawanna) stated the bill completely removes the authority.

HR 642 Levdansky - (PN 3420) Resolution directing the Legislative Budget and Finance Committee to conduct an evaluation and study of the Pennsylvania Game Commission's current deer management program and practices. - The resolution was unanimously reported as committed.

Rep. Dave Levdansky (D-Allegheny) explained his intent in offering the resolution is to gather information to determine if the deer management system recently implemented by the Game Commission is meeting its objectives. He explained the Legislative Budget and Finance Committee (LBFC) would be charged with overseeing the study. This study would provide needed data to have an understanding of how to proceed with deer management, he argued.

Rep. Gordon Denlinger (R-Lancaster) noted Minority Chairman Sam Rohrer (R-Berks) has proposed an audit and he asked if this resolution is similar to that proposal. Minority Chairman Rohrer replied the two are "basically the same direction" and indicated his support.

Minority Chairman Rohrer then asked about the cost of the study. Rep. Levdansky explained the LBFC would oversee the study and be responsible for covering the costs. He noted the committee has indicated it can draw funds from its current budget, so an appropriation will not be needed. Minority Chairman Rohrer then asked about the selection process of the agency that will conduct the audit, noting his concerns about ensuring the study is objective. Rep. Levdansky stated the LBFC officers will vote, guided by staff recommendations, to determine which vendor will receive the contract. He explained the officers represent each party and each chamber.

Rep. Dan Moul (R-Adams) asked about the cost of the study and asked if it would be a qualitative or quantitative study. Rep. Levdansky estimated it to be $100,000 to $200,000. He said it would be a study on deer management.

Rep. Dan Surra (D-Elk) indicated he supports the resolution conceptually, but expressed concern with the details and particularly the language on page two stating "WHEREAS, The PGC is not able to provide an accurate estimate of this Commonwealth's current deer population". He also stated that the study should consider the economic or social impact of the current plan. Rep. Levdansky argued he excluded such issues because they can be "such an extraordinary challenge" and he would like to see the study focus on deer management plans. Rep. Surra countered he may offer an amendment on the floor, stating that it is important to consider herd size in conjunction with the economic impact of changes in deer management to show how the decimated herd has caused economic damage to the counties in the NC region.

Kimberly Collins, PA Legislative Services

HARRISBURG - (2/14/08, 9:00 a.m., Room 205, Ryan Office Building)

The House Game and Fisheries Committee held a public hearing to receive the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission annual report.

Members in attendance included Chairman Edward Staback (D-Lackawanna), Minority Chairman Sam Rohrer (R-Berks), Rep. Dan Surra (D-Elk), Rep. Tim Mahoney (D-Fayette), Rep. Dan Moul (R-Adams), Rep. Scott Perry (R-York), Rep. Michael Peifer (R-Pike), Rep. David Millard (R-Columbia), Rep. Harry Readshaw (D-Allegheny), Rep. Gary Haluska (D-Cambria), Rep. Garth Everett ( R-Lycoming), Rep. Anthony DeLuca (D-Allegheny), Rep. Deberah Kula (D- Fayette), Rep. Neal Goodman (D-Schuylkill), Rep. Chris Sainato (D-Lawrence), Rep. Gordon Denlinger (R-Lancaster), Rep. Keith Gillespie (R-York) and Rep. Rob Kauffman (R-Franklin).

Doug Austen, Executive Director, PA Fish and Boat Commission told the committee his agency is facing new challenges such as a society's declining interest in outdoor activities, water quality issues, invasive and exotic species of fish in Pennsylvania waters and diseases that affect aquatic life. "These will require the Commission to be attentive and proactive to ensure we meet the needs of the angling and boating public," Austen commented. Some of the new measures the Commission has implemented include two opening days of trout season, stocking larger trout, establishing an electronic licensing system and implementation of state-of-the-art effluent filtration systems in state fish hatcheries. The agency also has seen the emergence of an active fishing access program and a grant program that has enhanced 50 boat ramp access projects. He assured the members his agency is committed to its mission of protecting aquatic resources, conservation, and providing fishing and boating opportunities for future generations.

Austen went on to say that the increased revenue the Commission saw from 2005 license fee increases is being eroded by rising energy costs, inflation, increasing personnel expenses related to health care and contact -mandated salary increases. "We all recognize that a future license fee increase is inevitable," he said. However, he noted that instead of waiting for the normal 7- to 10-year cycle for fishing and boating license fees to be increased again, he would like the Legislature to consider authorizing a smaller fee increase before the 2012-2013 fiscal year.

Austen said the PA Automated Licensing Service (PALS) has made the process of purchasing a license more efficient and allows the Commission to provide better service to the public. He said the "Rebuild Pennsylvania" capital funds component of the governor's 2008-09 budget proposal would help the Commission repair and maintain 17 dams recently deemed unsafe. The agency manages nearly 70 dams for the state. Austen also said legislative initiatives, such as House Bill 1436 would help increase the number of children and youth involved in fishing and boating, enabling them to make connections to natural resources and recreational opportunities. He also called for legislative support for strengthening the Recreational Use of Land and Water Act and a new funding stream for fishing and boating access.

Austen said partnerships with the PA Game Commission, the Department of Environmental Protection, federal agencies, various non-governmental organizations such as the Western Pennsylvania Conservancy, Trout Unlimited, Bass Anglers and others, as well as individual anglers and boaters across the state, will help it accomplish its mission in the future.

Chairman Staback asked if the implementation of the PALS system means the Commission is finished with the sale of paper licenses. Austen said yes, the new point-of-sale system enabled them to do away with paper licenses on December 7 of last year. The chairman asked if vendors will have any stock of paper licenses and what would happen if the PALS system shut down temporarily. Austen said all the paper stock from 2007 had been returned to the agency and they purchased paper licenses with no date printed on them. Those could be distributed under an emergency plan within 24 hours if the PALS system would be shut down for some reason.

The chairman wanted to know if the Legislature established new license classifications in the future, would vendors have the ability to issue them through PALS. Austen replied that could be done with a few minor modifications to the system to include those classifications and price changes. There is also software in place so vouchers could be issued. Chairman Staback asked if the Commission still supports the concept of junior licenses. Austen said there is support for the concept and some commissioners are actively engaged with sporting groups across the state to build support for passing legislation enabling junior licenses to be issued.

Chairman Staback wanted to know more about the Commission's spending under Growing Greener 2. Austen replied that the agency got $27.5 million under the program in 2005. Of that, $23.5 million was set aside for hatcheries and dams. The other $4 million would be added to the governor's proposed "Rebuild Pennsylvania" fund and would go towards the repair of unsafe dams. He added that more money is still needed because the cost to repair the seventeen dams currently deemed unsafe will cost more than $77 million.

The chairman asked if the problems at some hatcheries have required the Commission to purchase more fish from vendors to complete its stocking requirements. Austen replied that his agency has had to purchase approximately 100,000 fish from a vendor and there will be new bids solicited for the purchase of more fish this year. He said a related question is "…how many fish do we need?" The correct species, the number of fish and where to stock them is difficult because the public's desire for different fish has changed over time. He said ten years ago there were few people catching and releasing fish, especially trout. Now, more people are catching and releasing trout and that reduces the amount needed to be stocked. Chairman Staback asked if there were producers in the Commonwealth who could supply adequate amounts of fish for sale. Austen replied, "I guess we'll find out." He said four to five years ago there were none that could supply the full number of fish needed, but that may have changed. Bids will be solicited from both in- and out-of-state vendors this year.

Minority Chairman Rohrer was interested to know more about the data being collected through the PALS system. Austen explained the system is enabling the Commission to know more about who its customers are and is helping in marketing its services. They have developed a matching grant program relationship with the Recreational Boating and Fishing Foundation (RBFF) to identify people who purchased a license one year, but didn't purchase one the next year. He said those people are "…the low-hanging fruit in any sort of marketing plan." If the Commission can identify those individuals, it can send out packets or reach them through advertising and promotional campaigns and possibly persuade them to buy a license again in the future. The RBFF program has been successful in other states, he said. One study has shown the number of people who purchase a fishing license one year and don't buy one again the next year was as high as 15 percent over a five- year period. The system will also enable the Commission to develop a database it can use to survey anglers and learn more about their opinions of the agency's services and what the kinds of programs and activities the public wants to see implemented.

Minority Chairman Rohrer expressed concern over how Social Security numbers are being protected to prevent identity theft. Austen said the PALS system requires a license buyer to enter their Social Security number only once. The buyer is then issued a customer number. The agency is also working with the federal government to work around its requirement for Social Security numbers to be collected to identify those who are behind in their child support payments. Austen said the Commission is seeking exemptions to that because "…taking away somebody's fishing and boating privileges is the last thing on a long list of things that would get dead-beat dads to pay up their alimony or child support." It is a long, bureaucratic process, however, and he didn't know when it could be resolved.

Minority Chairman Rohrer brought up the potential for a merger between the PA Game Commission and the Fish and Boat Commission. Austen said the Commission's opinion and his personal opinion is that a merger is unnecessary. He said the two agencies cooperate on a wide range of programs and issues and both function very effectively and efficiently. He and the Commission are opposed to a merger.

Rep. Haluska wanted to know if when he talked about a fish fund, was he also including the boat fund. Austen said yes, they are on parallel tracks. All of the funds are at the point where incomes from license fees exceed their expenditures. That will change around 2012 when the balance in the funds will not be sufficient to meet its needs. Rep. Haluska asked if an increase in license fees is going to be needed. Austen said yes, it will be needed. Rep. Haluska queried about the possibility of increasing the number of fish stocked in streams in western Pennsylvania as the water quality in them improves. Austen replied that they will do the best that they can with the fish they have and it will depend on how many fish they must to buy to meet stocking needs.

Rep. Denlinger said the cleanup of the Chesapeake Bay and waterways that feed into it will be a hot political issue through 2010, particularly in the agricultural community and in municipalities with aging wastewater treatment plants. He asked Austen if he is planning on adding professional staff to work with interested parties on these cleanup efforts. Austen said there will be three people who will be working with partner organizations and other interested parties on those cleanup and ecosystems issues. He said the Commission will also work with anglers and boaters who are concerned with the water quality to get them more involved in the process so they know what needs to be done and to encourage them to get involved in the political process locally to have an affect on the cleanup of the Bay.

Rep. Denlinger inquired about how much would be needed in fee increases. Austen said considering a rate of inflation in the range of three to four percent, an increase of approximately 10 percent would probably be in the correct range if fees were to be increased in the next year. He added, however, that is less than what the fees will have to be increased by if the next hike doesn't come until 2012.

Rep. Denlinger wanted to know what the average cost of repairing the seventeen unsafe dams is. Austen said it ranges from $1.5 million to $12 or $15 million or more, with the average around $5 to $6 million.

Rep. Surra complimented the Steelhead fishery program and said it is an economic development program. He recently met fishermen participating in the program from as far away as Hungary and Poland. He commented that the Legislature and Commission shouldn't necessarily wait until 2012 to increase fees and a smaller increase should be looked at later this year. He asked if the Commission promotes catch and release programs. Austen said the catch and release movement comes from the bass folks and now trout fishermen are participating in the movement. The Commission does not discourage people from taking fish home to eat but they do have brochures on how to handle fish properly and catch and release explanations are part of those.

Rep. Moul asked what can be done about landowners who don't want the Commission to stock streams near their homes because of anglers who harm their property or leave trash behind when they have fished on someone's property. Austen said they encourage people to contact the Commission through its website with the license plate numbers of offenders. The agency's Wildlife Conservation Officers are trained to deal with those kinds of problems. He added that there are some local groups, including a Steelhead fishing group in the Erie area, who adopt a series of landowners to make sure people respect their property rights and help cleanup trash and debris. They have been successful in getting some of those landowners to again allow fishing on their properties.

Rep. Moul wondered if there is an ample number of volunteer deputies. Austen said no, there are not. A major deterrent to recruiting more of them is the number of hours they must spend in training and they only receive a small stipend for expense money. Rep. Moul asked if there is anything that could be done to entice more people to become volunteer deputies. Austen said if they could receive more expense money that might help, but overall volunteer time is at a premium. He said it is a society issue of "…busyness and a lack of willingness" of people to volunteer.

Rep. Goodman asked if the PALS system is run in-house or by an outside vendor. Austen said the Game Commission and the Fish and Boat Commission are joined at the hip in the process. He added that there is an automated licensing service business that administers the program for about a dozen states nationwide.

Rep. Perry said it seemed Austen was suggesting a way to mitigate steep license fee increases every six to seven years was to increase them incrementally more often, and tying the fee hikes to an inflationary index. He then asked if there were other options Austen wanted the committee to consider. Austen said it is a marketing issue and the agency is looking at marketing efforts, such as offering a package of different license types. He also floated the idea of putting licenses on sale in October. Although the fishing and boating seasons are almost over for the year by then, discounting the license fees by 25 percent, for example, might encourage some people to buy a license and revenues could be increased before the year is over. This may lead those same people to purchase a license again the following year. If those marketing programs weren't successful, they could be discontinued to cut losses.

Rep. Perry asked if the Chesapeake Bay cleanup strategy needs would require more infrastructure or more money. Austen said DEP permits they have been given would put them in compliance with Bay cleanup requirements. Rep. Perry asked if there are problems with phosphorous or nitrogen discharge at hatcheries. Austen replied that his agency is working with DEP to get permits and to be in compliance through proper technology use and that would enable them to make sure water leaving hatcheries is cleaner than what is coming in.

Rep. Gillespie inquired if there are problems with PCBs coming out of fish hatcheries. Austen said that was a big issue. He said the situation has gotten much better and they have worked with DEP to address the issue and monitor the Commission's hatchery product. "I think we have pretty much gotten rid PCBs to the best of our knowledge at almost all of our facilities," he stated.

Rep. Gillespie wanted to know how many boating fatalities there were in the state last year and how many were directly alcohol related. Austen said there were 11 boating fatalities last year and four of them were alcohol related. He said there is a full report on the issue and it explains what happened in each accident.

PA Fish and Boat Commission Annual Report

Click here for additional information about programs operated by the PA Fish and Boat Commission

Rick Morrison, PA Legislative Services

HARRISBURG - (2/7/08, 9:00 a.m., Room 140 Main Capitol)

The House Game and Fisheries Committee held a public hearing on House Bill 2205, a measure to increase penalties for poaching wildlife and to promote wildlife preservation.

Members in attendance included Chairman Edward Staback (D-Lackawanna), Minority Chairman Sam Rohrer (R-Berks), Rep. Todd Rock (R-Franklin), Rep. Brad Roae (R-Crawford), Rep. Dan Surra (D-Elk), Rep. Tim Mahoney (D-Fayette), Rep. Deberah Kula (D-Fayette), Rep. Michael McGeehan (D-Philadelphia), Rep. Mike Hanna (D-Clinton), Rep. David Millard (R-Columbia), Rep. Harry Readshaw (D-Allegheny), Rep. Gary Haluska (D-Cambria), Rep. Michael Peifer (R-Pike), Rep. Edward Wojnaroski (D-Cambria), Rep. Garth Everett (R- Lycoming), Rep. Dan Moul (R-Adams), Rep. Rob Kauffman (R-Franklin), Rep. Mark Keller (R-Perry), Rep. Chris Sainato (D-Lawrence), Rep. Keith Gillespie (R-York), Rep. Scott Perry (R-York), Rep. Gordon Denlinger (R-Lancaster) and Rep. Marc Gergely (D-Allegheny).

HB 2205 Staback - (PN 3146) Amends Title 34 (Game) further providing for definitions of "closed season", "contraband", "open season", "poaching" and "violation"; for jurisdiction and penalties by increasing certain fines and penalties; for revocation, suspension or denial of license, permit or registration and for determination of second or subsequent convictions; adding a subchapter providing for forfeiture; further providing for penalties relating to various unlawful activities by increasing certain penalties, for contraband by requiring automatic forfeiture; for prohibited devices and methods by requiring automatic forfeiture; for tagging and reporting big game kills; for penalties for unlawful use of lights while hunting, buying and selling game, trespass on private property while hunting, unlawful killing or taking of big game; and repealing provisions relating to additional penalty for poaching.

Richard Palmer, Director of the Bureau of Wildlife Protection, Pennsylvania Game Commission explained to the committee that increasing penalties for serious cases of poaching is part of this agency's strategic plan. He added that poaching is prevalent throughout the Commonwealth, not only in rural areas, but in suburban and even urban areas. "In fact, over 1,000 prosecutions a year have been made for the past three years directly related to poaching of big game species," Palmer stated. "The current statutory undervaluation of wildlife due to low penalties can create a public and judicial sentiment that these crimes are not important, and are counterproductive to wildlife protection efforts as they do not create an effective deterrent to chronic offenders." Palmer went on to relate the stories of several chronic offenders who have been charged and convicted with numerous violations over many years. He said these repeat offenders are clear examples that the current penalties and license revocations are not effective deterrents. He outlined the most common reasons for poaching as greed, obsessive behavior in collecting antlers, poachers who take pride in their infamous status in their communities and thrill killing with no intention of making use of any part of the animal. "A lesser known cause of poaching is the illegal commercialization of wildlife in the black market trade," he added. "The modern black market trade is growing and can have the same devastating effects to local wildlife populations." Palmer noted the most common animal parts sold on the black market are venison, velvet antler, black bear gall bladders, paws, skulls, claws, as well as feathers and talons from certain birds, like eagles, owls and hawks. He presented information on poaching-related penalties in neighboring states. Palmer also offered comparison examples of how much less severe the penalties are in Pennsylvania for the same offenses.

Chairman Staback asked what part more severe penalties in other states play to deter poaching. Palmer said there are other states that have experienced commercial poaching similar to what is occurring in Pennsylvania. He added that New York has felonies for commercialization of wildlife offenses. West Virginia has strong penalties against killing multiple bears. Other states that have strengthened their penalties to the felony level are Wyoming, Illinois, Virginia, Florida, California, Idaho, Nevada and Texas. He said Colorado has one of the most effective deterrent felonies on the books, especially if only the antlers or other parts of an animal are taken after killing it.

Chairman Staback asked if the states that have adopted felonies have experienced a drop in the number of offenses. Palmer replied that the states he is aware of that have experienced the most reduction in offenses are Colorado and Montana. When the offenses were upgraded to the felony level people began to take them seriously, he added.

Minority Chairman Rohrer queried how joining the interstate predators compact would affect House Bill 2205. Palmer said the compact provides for a reciprocal hunting license revocation in all the other states of the compact. He said it is a significant deterrent and Pennsylvania should look seriously at joining the compact. He said the difference is that this bill deals with penalties for specific criminal violations in Pennsylvania and should be considered as a separate issue from the provisions in the interstate compact.

Minority Chairman Rohrer asked if there is any prohibition against taking other firearms an individual owns that are not used in a poaching offense. Palmer said the firearm taken must have been used in the offense for which the individual is being prosecuted.

Rep. Haluska expressed some concerns with specific sections of the bill that were brought to his attention by a local magistrate in his district. Palmer answered some of the specific concerns and agreed to look at other sections and work to address the concerns with recommended changes in the bill's language.

Rep. Gergely said Pennsylvania is one of only eight states that are not part of the interstate compact and it should join. "We can't be one of the top hunting states and not have reciprocity with other states," in the effort to crack down on poaching. Palmer said there are many people from Pennsylvania who go to other states to hunt. He noted that several western states are begging Pennsylvania officials to join the compact and it should be done so the state doesn't become "a poacher's paradise."

Rep. Haluska said eight years ago the Game Commission was going to institute a point-of-sale plan so it could join the compact and track poachers whose licenses had been revoked in other states. He added that the state still does not have the capability of tracking those individuals.

Melody Zullinger, Executive Director, Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs commented that her organization wholeheartedly supports increasing fines and penalties for violations of the Game Code. "Poaching of big game animals, especially deer continues to be a problem and appears to be one that is on the increase," she said. Zullinger went on to say there are an increasing number of incidents of parents and grandparents encouraging young hunters to engage in illegal activities, such as shooting from vehicles. She called for increased penalties, including mandatory hunting license revocations, for adults who encourage or assist youths in illegal hunting activities. She also encouraged the committee to consider increasing penalties for those convicted of assaulting a Wildlife Control Officer (WCO). She noted that the penalties for offenses committed against certain wildlife are more severe than those for assaulting a WCO. Zullinger added that in addition to House Bill 2205, the Legislature should pass a measure allowing Pennsylvania to join an existing interstate compact agreement that allows member states to punish and revoke the licenses of poaching offenders from other states. Finally, on behalf of the Pennsylvania Deer Association, she said that organization is also supportive of the bill and punishing poachers.

Ed Wentzler, Legislative Director of the United Bowhunters of Pennsylvania, briefly expressed his organization's support of House Bill 2205.

The committee also heard testimony from Andrew Page, Director, Hunting Campaign, Humane Society of the United States. He mentioned that the Society is supportive of House Bill 2205. "Cost must be a deterrent," he stated. "The cost of getting caught must outweigh the risk and profit of poaching." Page went on to say Pennsylvania is second only to Texas in the number of hunting licenses sold. No jail time is provided for poachers unless a violation involves threatened or endangered species. Low penalties send a message to poachers that wildlife in the state has little or no value, he added. "In Pennsylvania, a person may receive the same penalty for illegally killing deer that they might for illegally parking their car." Page also urged the committee to pass legislation to allow Pennsylvania to join the interstate compact to deter poaching across state lines.

Chairman Staback said under Title 18, there are substantially stiffer penalties for cruelty to domesticated animals like dogs and cats than those for killing wildlife. He asked Page if he agreed that penalties for killing wildlife should be as high as those for harming domestic animals. Page said he agrees that the penalties should be on the same level for offenses against both wildlife and domestic animals. He also said states where the reward outweighs the risk become magnets for animal offenses.

Charlie Bolgiano, Legislative Liaison and James Slinsky, Consultant, Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania. Bolgiano explained that when his organization first learned of House Bill 2205, it sounded appealing as a way to help stop serious big game offenses. But, he noted there are sections of the bill that they disagree with. First, the measure may cause an increase in the number of license revocations at a time when the base number of hunters is declining. He also raised an issue over making it unlawful to use lights while hunting, if an ethical hunter is attempting to recover "his or her trophy" just after sunset. Bolgiano also raised concerns over sections in the bill dealing with mistaken kills and not properly signing a hunting license.

Slinsky claimed the bill is too long and complicated for many people and should be split into two separate measures. He said the despicable growth of commercial poaching deserves undivided attention with strong deterrents and aggressive law enforcement. Additionally, he raised concerns over those who kill wildlife in self-defense. He cited the example of black bears who occasionally wanders into residential areas, "…uncomfortably close to children and adults. I should be under no legal obligation to figure out exactly what the bear has on his mind before taking action," Slinsky said. Wildlife that is destructive to a homeowner's property is another example of why an individual should be allowed to defend themselves. He also took issue with seizures of property unrelated to poaching crimes and added, "Prosecuting individuals for felonies is not an area the Agency (Game Commission) has had a great deal of training." Slinsky said he is not soft on poaching activity and it should be curtailed, but warned that "…appropriate action should be taken without violating the principles of cruel and unusual punishment."

Chairman Staback commented that the bill is not written in stone and there are some areas where amendments could be made. He said he will get back to both men on some areas of the bill they have concerns with.

Minority Chairman Rohrer said they raised some legitimate concerns that he agreed with. "Any time we make policy we have to look at unintended consequences," he said.

Rep. Millard asked Slinsky if he could cite any examples of someone shooting an animal in self-defense or that was damaging property. Slinsky said there is a case in Clinton County where a property owner shot an elk that was damaging his trees. The man called the Game Commission to tell them about the incident and he was issued a citation. The man is now appealing the citation and will incur substantial legal fees in his defense. Slinsky said the man should not be prosecuted as a poacher as he was merely abiding by his Constitutional right to defend his property.

Rep. Haluska asked Palmer who would prosecute an individual in a case like the one cited by Slinsky. Palmer said that once it moved through the district magistrate's court, it would be handled by a district attorney or a special prosecutor appointed by a district attorney.

Rep. Hanna said there need to be protections for homeowners defending their property against wildlife damage to reduce the incidence of questionable cases. Slinsky reiterated his position that homeowners who are defending their property shouldn't be prosecuted as poachers and defending themselves shouldn't be an elaborate and expensive process.

Palmer said there are provisions in the wildlife code that protect an individual when they act in self-defense and which protect property and this bill does not amend those provisions.

Rep. Hanna asked Palmer if he supported elk deterrent legislation designed to protect property. Palmer said he isn't familiar with that legislation but is willing to work with the representative on the measure.

Chairman Staback announced the committee will meet on February 13 to hear a report on the Game Commission's annual report and on February 14 to receive the state Fish and Boat Commission's annual report. Both meetings will be in Room 205, Ryan Office Building.

Rick Morrison, PA Legislative Services

 

PHILADELPHIA - (9/27/07, 7:00 p.m., HUB Circa Center, 2929 Arch St)

The House Game and Fisheries Committee held a public hearing on Legislation Creating a Junior Fishing License.

HB 1436 Gergely - (PN 2469) Amends Title 30 (Fish) by creating a youth fishing license that costs $5. Issuing agents would not collect and retain an issuing agent fee for the issuance of youth fishing licenses. The bill states that no person 12 through 15 years of age would fish in any of the waters in PA, excluding boundary waters except for Lake Erie and Presque Isle Bay, without first procuring a youth fishing license. The commission would separately account for the proceeds from the sale of youth fishing licenses and would use those proceeds for programs benefiting youth anglers. Also, no later than March 1 of each year, the commission would submit an annual written report to the Game and Fisheries Committees of the Senate and House that would include information on youth fishing license proceeds, disbursements and expenditures of the proceeds and significant accomplishments of the programs and services supported by the proceeds for the preceding year.

The Committee received testimony from the following:

·  Melody Zullinger, Executive Director, PA Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs

·  Governor's Youth Council for Hunting, Fishing and Conservation

·  Douglas Austen, Ph.D., Executive Director, PA Fish and Boat Commission

·  Ken Undercoffer, President, PA Council of Trout Unlimited

·  Rick Anderson, President, PA BASS Federation Nation

 

HARRISBURG - (06/12/07, 9:00 a.m., 205 Ryan Office Building)

The House Game and Fisheries Committee held a public hearing on House Bill 251.

 

HB 251 Godshall - (PN 283) Amends Title 34 (Game) prohibiting hunting in and around game feeders and game feeding areas by adding a subsection to unlawful devices and methods of hunting, to include hunting any game or wildlife within 150 yards of any game feeder or feeding areas where any natural hay, grass, browse, grain, fruit, nut, salt, chemical, mineral, other food or any combination is used for feeding purposes. There is an exception for areas designated by special regulations where baiting is already allowed.

 

Members in attendance included Chairman Edward Staback (D-Lackawanna) and Representatives Robert Godshall (R-Montgomery), Mark Keller (R-Franklin), Gordon Denlinger (R-Lancaster), Rob Kauffman (R-Cumberland), Michael McGeehan (D-Philadelphia), Gary Haluska (D-Cambria), Harry Readshaw (D-Allegheny), Dan Moul (R-Adams), Garth Everett (R-Lycoming), David Millard (R-Columbia), Dan Surra (D-Elk), Scott Perry (R-York), Marc Gergely (D-Allegheny) and Keith Gillespie (R-York).

 

Melody Zullinger, Executive Director for the PA Federation of Sportsmen Clubs, testified that House Bill 251 sanctions and legalizes broad scale baiting and goes against everything that sportsmen represent with regard to the sport and principle of ethical and fair chase hunting. She worried that because the bill would apply to all game species, it would have an immediate impact on harvest results and ultimately result in the Game Commission issuing fewer tags, permits and/or shorter hunting seasons.

 

Zullinger emphasized that surveys have shown that 71% of hunters do no support the use of food for hunting and the general public has an even higher rate of nonsupport. She stated that a difference cannot be defined between supplemental feeding for health and supplemental feeding for baiting simply by placing a 150-yard perimeter around the food for hunting purposes. Zullinger instead suggested that a better solution would be eliminating all feeding during big game seasons. She added that if there is concern about infringing on rights of property owner who do not hunt, then a section could be added to allow this as long as no one will be hunting on the property and feeders are placed at least 150 yards inside the property lines. She stressed that they would much rather have an all out ban on supplemental feeding 30 days before the start of a big game season until the end of the season.

 

Chairman Staback asked Zullinger how controversial she thought the idea of a total ban on supplemental feeding be in PA. Zullinger speculated it would be controversial but more so with non-hunters. Asked if the Federation has a position on a total ban on supplemental feeding, Zullinger stated they do not but stated her belief that the Federation would support a ban on supplemental feeding during hunting season.

 

Rep. Marc Gergely (D-Allegheny) asked if it would be baiting if an archery hunter went into the woods and shook an apple tree so that some apples fell on the ground. Zullinger stressed that she is not a wildlife conservation officer (WCO) but in her personal opinion it would not be baiting. Gergely stated that some have been convicted of such actions in the past and the real issue is the enforcement aspect. Rep. Gergely asked how to determine what constitutes baiting. Zullinger offered that in her opinion naturally occurring food sources would not be baiting unless they were carried into an area and placed there. Rep. Gergely stressed that he thinks this discussion needs to continue and he has a big problem with how WCOs are enforcing the law.

 

Rep. Haluska expressed surprise that sportsmen are against supplemental feeding when he understands that many sportsmen clubs use supplemental feeding on their grounds. He asked how the clubs feel about a total ban on supplemental feeding. Zullinger stated the question of a total ban has never been asked but clubs have told her they stop feeding 30 days prior to the hunting season. Rep. Haluska informed the Committee that he has drafted legislation to take corn off the list of material considered to be baiting. He said he will be circulating a memo for co-sponsors later today.

 

Rep. Moul asked if it is baiting if a farmer disposes of apples on his property and a neighbor on adjacent private property is hunting deer. Zullinger said that this needs to be worked out in the overall discussion of what constitutes baiting. Asked if this should be up to the discretion of the WCO, Zullinger reiterated that this is why all baiting should be made illegal. This prompted an immediate reply from Rep. Moul, who said that perhaps this is true in a perfect world but people will still feed deer. He stated the bill refers to a perimeter around a feeding station that a hunter would have to be outside of. Zullinger wondered what difference it makes if there is a 150-yard perimeter rule and the hunter still does not know that a feeder was there is the first place. She said this is why hunters have a right to appeal any citation given to them by a WCO.

 

Rep. Godshall opined that supplemental feeding is a long standing tradition in PA that was started by the Game Commission. He explained that when the Commission later decided to try and end this practice, biologists came to the Capitol and testified that the worst thing you can do is to put deer that have gone without sufficient food during the winter on a high protein diet after the hunting season is over. He stressed that since hunting over bait was allowed in the southeast, nobody has stated this is unethical and there has been no outcry for it to stop. He then asked how the Federation could predict that a decrease in the number of bear licenses would result from hunting in a baited area. Zullinger explained that the Game Commission wrote an article stating that if the bear harvest rate was to increase to a level that they deemed unsustainable after hunters were allowed to hunt in a baited area, then the number of bear licenses would have to be decreased. Rep. Godshall retorted that feeders have been out in the woods for years and that there is no science behind such a claim by the Commission. He declared it to be a scare tactic.

 

Rep. Everett recalled how in previous testimony the Commission had explained that if a farmer dumped apples on his farm without the intention of luring in animals for hunting purposes, there would be no violation. He asked how anyone can make a determination of intent. He wondered how food plots could be allowed but if you put out the same food as supplemental feed it is not allowed. Zullinger stressed she is not an attorney and so cannot speak to the determination of intent but reminded the Committee that intent has to be proven under any aspect of the law. Rep. Everett replied that most hunters are not attorneys and they do not know what they can do. Zullinger stated that the easiest thing would be to not put feed out. She reiterated that the Federation believes that if you hunt over feed you are hunting over bait.

 

Rep. Surra said the Federation's testimony shows that something needs to be done. He asked how many states allow supplemental feeding. Zullinger acknowledged she does not know the exact number. Rep. Surra stressed the problem is with law enforcement. He asked if it would be baiting if someone planted a field of corn and let is stand for supplemental feed. Zullinger reminded the Committee again that she is not a WCO but she does not personally think that would be baiting. Asked if that same person put the corn cobs on the ground, if that would be baiting, Zullinger stated she believes it would. Rep. Surra expressed frustration that the current language is too vague to be enforced in a way that sportsmen can understand. He wondered if the answer is an outright ban on supplemental feeding. He asked if it is now the case that a person is guilty until proven innocent. Zullinger stated she does not believe this is the case and that the question of intent has to be proven.

 

Rep. Gillespie asked how many members the Federation represents. Zullinger replied approximately 97,000.

 

Dr. Charles Bolgiano, Director at Large for the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania, testified that the current statute has to be amended to define boundaries that are clearly understood by the sporting community before they enter into a feeding or baited area. He stressed that except in Special Regulation Areas, the Unified's position is that hunting over bait violates fair chase and should remain illegal. He expressed concern, however, that the current law is vague and provides for the advancement of PGC policies, which are not law. Bolgiano added that they are against prohibiting all feeding of deer and turkeys during winter months except in the event of a CWD outbreak.

 

Jim Slinsky, Outdoor Columnist, then spoke, saying that abuse of discretion by WCOs is not a surprise to him and that House Bill 251 makes a great deal of sense in that it establishes legal distances from known baited areas. He quickly added that the repetitive core problem, however, is the abuse of discretion by state agencies. Slinsky speculated that the legislature will be forced in the future to pass legislation to establish limitations of discretion for state agencies.

 

Chairman Staback asked what the two testifiers thought about banning supplemental feeding during hunting season. Slinsky stressed the issue is really overzealous law enforcement. He explained that in some areas of the country, hunting over a baited area is considered sporting because of the types of terrain and habitat found there. He lamented that while in PA this is not the case, supplemental feeding has increased because of the low deer densities. He said the problem is that the Game Commission is being managed from the bottom up.

 

Bolgiano commented that feeding wildlife establishes a special bond between people and wildlife when there is not enough food present. He challenged anyone against this to try and find a legislator willing to introduce legislation to oppose feeding wildlife. Slinsky interjected that the feeding of song birds during the winter would be akin to supplemental feeding.

 

Chairman Staback asked if the gentlemen believe that the hunting public would support a ban on supplemental feeding during the hunting season. Slinsky stated that supplemental feeding would have to be better defined. He also offered that he does not believe the non-hunting public would care. He closed stating that sportsmen do not want to legalize hunting over bait, however.

 

Chairman Staback stated that of all the contacts he has received on this issue, none have been about the abuse of discretion issue just raised. He asked how it would be explained that this bill is not about legalizing baiting but about combating abusive of discretion. Slinsky said the issue would have to be written about and explained to the people. He added that the Game Commission owes the legislature and the people far more policy statements.

 

Rep. Godshall said Game Commission personnel have to know what is legal or illegal and if they don't then the public could not know either.

 

Rep. Everett lamented that what has been spun about House Bill 251 is that it is a baiting bill which is incorrect. He stressed its purpose is to define the difference between supplemental feeding and baiting.

 

Rep. Surra asked what the difference is between standing corn and cobs or corn lying on the ground. Bolgiano explained that the later is an artificial means of increasing the food supply on the ground.

 

Wes Waldron, President of the United Bowhunters of Pennsylvania, testified that while baiting has played a part in hunting in PA , it was most noticeably in times when hunting was for subsistence. He stressed that they believe that approval of House Bill 251 will only increase the complexity of this issue and fail to serve the majority of hunters. Waldron explained that while the rules of fair chase in these situations come into play with hunters there is also the concern of the non-hunting public's perception of baiting violating the premise of fair chase. He also questioned supplemental feeding during the winter months saying that any proof of actual effectiveness is lacking other than to heavily concentrate game in feeding/baiting areas. He suggested that the elimination of any supplemental feeding from 30 days prior to, and until the end of, any big game hunting season is the solution.

 

Chairman Staback wondered if Waldron thought banning supplemental feeding during the hunting season would be controversial. Waldron said while he cannot speak for the non-hunting public, he recently asked 67 hunters if they would be opposed to hunting over bait. He reported that 64 opposed it, 2 supported it and 1 didn't care. Of these hunters, four of the five that belonged to sportsmen clubs that use supplemental feeders said they would support eliminating supplemental feeding completely during the hunting season, added Waldron. Asked if his organization plans on doing a larger poll of its members, Waldron said they will and should have the results in a couple of months.

 

Rep. Everett asked if Waldron personally sees a difference between food plots and supplemental feeding. Waldron replied he views planting things like high quality