2008
PFSC, along with several other
sportsmen's organizations, are again making a concerted effort to push for
a much needed license increase for the Pennsylvania Game Commission.
We are seeking signatures on petitions that will be presented to our
legislators.
“We, the
undersigned, are concerned citizens who urge our Legislators to act now to
increase the fee for a general hunting license. We request a minimum
increase to $35.00 for a general license.
We support maintaining a strong and independent
Game Commission. While we may not
agree with
all PGC decisions on
wildlife management, we
believe a license increase is needed to assure our wildlife is
scientifically managed in the future.”
Download the
Petition
Please make copies
of the petition and take them to your clubs, sportsmen shops, work, or
where ever you can, and collect signatures. Then mail the signed
copies back to PFSC by March 31st, or sooner, so we can compile them and
present them to our legislators.
If we don't
keep our wildlife agency funded, we will be looking at a merger real
soon. Do we want to become even more politicized and allow the
Governor complete control of appointing the head of our wildlife
agencies and having them become a division under DCNR? Does anyone
wonder what their priorities will be if that happens? Remember, a
merger doesn't automatically mean the agencies will get general fund money;
it just means the General Assemble will have total control over how our
license dollars are spent.
If you don't
think we should support a fee increase (or even if you do) please take
the time to read the following. It is from Chuck Lombaerde's
17 year old daughter, Adrienne. (Chuck is PFSC's 2nd Vice President.)
From a youthful perspective I
truly believe the PGC needs the license increase; the Governors Youth
Council has also voted in full majority to support the PGC license
increase.
As a council, we've attended two National Hunting Lobby days in Harrisburg
and have met with our legislators on the issue.
Hunters are already a dying breed and the PGC is vital to hunting in PA and
if it continues in this direction there may be a merge of the PFBC and PGC
down the road and I think that would be horrible.
When put into perspective, the PGC has only had two license increases
within 23 years, the last one being in 1999 increasing the price to
$20.00....
Now, here in 2007, $20 doesn't seem like that much. Prices have inflated
and it is getting harder for everyone to get by.
I understand many of you are in the situation where your pay has not
increased only the amount of everything you pay for has, but in my eyes...
Hunting is something I love, hunting is what I have a passion for, hunting is something that'll always play a large
role in my life... which makes it worth it.
Personally, I understand a lot more money is needed to make things happen
in today's society... and prices are being raised everywhere, whether from
the price of milk, to admission to movies, to costs of home supplies...I
get that... but weighing it all out, the PGC increase still seems best.
Pennsylvania offers a wide
spectrum of possibilities.. and sometimes, I think
people fail to realize the PGC is not responsible for deer or elk only,
they also need to concentrate on the other 465 species of the 467 species
in PA and if they need to raise the price here and there to make the PGC a
success, I'll buy it.
I'm only 17 and I have a whole life ahead of me to live and I know hunting
will always be apart of my life and to already see it suffering worries me.
The PGC is what helps making hunting such a great success in PA, like
recently the PGC can be given great credit for helping the Mentored Youth
Hunt have a successful season.
However, the PGC has been suffering. They suffer because the money that
helps the PGC operate is the revenue from licenses and as the numbers of
hunters dwindle the revenue lessens....
In result:
-outreach educational programs have been cut due to funding
-Pennsylvania Game News is no longer available in school libraries... I no
longer see it in my library and I actually know several kids who enjoyed
reading it in the library...
-Although Youth Pheasant Hunts are looked upon as a put and take exercise,
the Youth Pheasant Hunt still proves to be a valuable hunting recruitment
tool.
-Statistics show women as the fastest growing percentage of license buyers
and hunters, but Becoming an Outdoor Woman was cut due to funding
-Gamelands are understaffed... the PGC in general
is understaffed
So as hunters numbers are diminishing, slowly but surely, so is the success
of the PGC... This needs to stop and I believe a way to help is for this
license increase to go through.
I want to have hunting to be continued to be passed down to generation to
generation and I believe that the PGC is a valuable asset to making that
possible.
Youth recruitments to hunting hopefully increase as the MYH is a great
success with many family bonds forged and memories created, but what helps
also in recruitment are the youth programs (that have been cut), the
educational outreach programs (that have been cut), and the printed
materials (that have been cut to many youths)....
I know much of this has been stated and I'm sorry for the repetition, but
it's just as a youth I feel it's important to emphasize the importance of
the PGC on my life and future generations and why it so definitely needs
this increase...
So when you think about it, please just don't think about how it'll fare on
your wallet, think about how much you love hunting and how much you've enjoyed
it... and think about how much you want PA's next generation to enjoy it
like you did and all the opportunities made possible to hunters statewide
because of the PGC....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
REP. SMITH PROPOSES INCREASED HUNTING LICENSE FEES
3-27-06
By Kimberly Hess, PLS
Rep. Bruce Smith (R-York), Chairman of
the House Game and Fisheries Committee, today introduced a package of legislation to
increase hunting license fees. Rep. Smith explained license fees were last
increased in 1999 and in the past eight years the cost of running the Game
Commission has increased, necessitating an increase.
Rep. Smith explained he has introduced
two pieces of legislation to increase the fees. The first, HB 2600, would
increase the license fee from $19 to $29, and the second, HB 2601, would
increase the fee to $34. He explained the second bill will be necessary
should there be a delay in enactment and the fiscal situation of the PA
Game Commissions worsens.
He stressed that both bills were
formulated by a coalition of nine sportsmen’s clubs. "At the fall
convention of the Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs, delegates from
around the state voted to support a hunting license increase," Rep.
Smith explained.
Both bills would also establish a $10
pheasant stamp and a $5 turkey stamp with the proceeds to be used solely
for the maintenance and operating of programs for preserving and
encouraging the hunting of these species in PA, he noted. (Note: The coalition supports the
agency earmarking those funds for said programs, but we do not support the
legislation making that mandate, so we will ask for that part of the
legislation amended out.)
Rep. Smith argued the increase is needed
to prevent further reductions in Game Commission programs. He stated the
Commission has already taken numerous measures to reduce operating costs,
including:
·
Reduced number of pheasants produced from 200,000 to 100,000 birds
annually. This new production level was
·
based on the number of birds that could be produced without
hiring seasonal workers.
·
Discontinued toll-free numbers at each regional office.
·
Reduced budget for funding the deer fencing program and for bear
damage complaints.
·
Reduced overtime budget.
·
Discontinued publication and distribution of certain educational
materials.
·
Delayed starting a new Wildlife Conservation Officer (WCO) training
class. The last class was held in 2001-02.
·
Currently there are 15 WCO vacancies or 10 percent of the workforce.
However, Rep. Smith said that costs for
the commission will continue to escalate because of contracted increases
included in the master agreement between AFSCME and the Commonwealth.
Rep. Smith also discussed the strategic
plan of the Game Commission, which was created in 2003, but is yet to be
fully implemented. "I would expect the commission to make substantial
progress in implementing that plan before the General Assembly would
consider supporting an increase in license fees," Rep. Smith said.
Rep. Smith argued that the proposed
increase will keep the cost of hunting competitive with that of other
sports and entertainment events.
Rep. Smith has also introduced a third
bill, HB 2602, which would create a $20 conservation stamp for individuals
who use state game lands for any purpose. The proceeds from the stamp would
be deposited into state Game Fund. Rep. Smith explained he introduced a
similar proposal in 1999 with the last fee increase, but it was not
included in the final package.
Rep. Smith argued this legislation is
“an idea worth discussing”, but noted “the sportsmen's group has not
committed to the conservation stamp measure".
Ted Onufrak,
President of the Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs, spoke
briefly in support of the bills, noting the cooperation of Rep. Smith in
crafting the legislation but lack of overall support from the General
Assembly. (View
Ted's comments)
In conclusion, Rep. Smith
stressed that the language contained in the bills is merely a starting
point. He reiterated that the bills are from the sportsmen, not the Game
Commission, noting that the only input form the Commission was a 2005
resolution asking for an increase. He then answered questions from the
media.
How
much revenue would the legislation raise?
Melody Zullinger, Executive Director of
the PA Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs, replied the increase to $29 will
raise an additional $18 million annually and the increase to $34 will raise
$22 million, assuming that sales remain flat. These estimates do not
include the conservation stamp. Rep. Smith noted a 10% decrease in sales is
anticipated.
Did
the Game Commission request a specific amount; do you have a preference
between the two proposals?
Rep. Smith replied he prefers HB 2600,
with the lower increase. He stated the Game Commission will settle for any
increase. He noted the last increase took four years to pass, and as time
goes by the Commission will be in a more difficult position.
How
will the conservation stamp be collected?
Rep. Smith explained other states have
similar programs, noting that he anticipates the Commission will look to
those states for guidance. He stated the provision was stricken in 1999 and
was opposed by the sportsmen’s clubs because they view the state game lands
as belonging to sportsmen because they were purchased using revenue from
hunting license fees. Rep. Smith suggested that the license fee increase
could be less if the conservation stamp is also enacted.
How
will the conservation stamp work?
Rep. Smith
explained the stamp will apply to anyone who accesses the state game lands,
including hunters, horseback riders and birdwatchers. He also briefly
explained the proposed pheasant stamp will be similar to the Fish and Boat
Commission’s trout stamp, as both animals are stocked by the commission.
Is
a 10% decrease a realistic estimate considering all the fee increases?
Rep. Smith replied hunters will decide on their own. He remarked that he is introducing the
bills now as a good faith effort to let the Game Commission know that he
supports the fee increase, regardless of antlerless
allocations. He stated the legislature shouldn’t make decisions based on antlerless allocations or “blackmail” the Game
Commission. Onufrak added that some license
categories are anticipated to increase while others will decrease, so
overall they are anticipating a 10% decrease.
Is
there opposition to the proposal?
Rep. Smith replied any increase is
difficult and challenging. He stated he will not work to get votes for the
bills, and will instead leave that up to the sportsmen’s groups. He urged
supporters to contact their legislators. Rep. Smith stated once there are
enough votes, he will move the bill out of his committee.
So,
if these bills pass, it could cost $50 to hunt?
Rep. Smith explained that if the
conservation stamp passes, that is possible. However, he continued, if the
stamp passes the license fee increase need not be as large. He opined the
chances of the stamp passing are slim, but the issue should be discussed.
Is
eight years between license fee increases a lot of time?
Rep. Smith explained that it is a long time,
based on the increased cost of business during that period. He noted that
many advocate for a cost of living adjustment (COLA), but he does not think
that is “sellable”. Zullinger agreed, noting her organization advocates for
a COLA to be included with HB 2600 so this issue doesn’t have to be
addressed every eight or so years. She noted that not all nine groups that
collaborated on the legislation support every detail of each bill, but this
is a starting point.
With no more questions, Rep. Smith stressed
the importance of encouraging youths to hunt and pointed out that junior
fees are not to be increased in these bills. However, a member of the press
noted that they are indeed increased in the language of the bill. Rep.
Smith stated that is a drafting error and promised to amend it out when the
bill is considered in committee.
Note: There are several errors in the written
legislation. The coalition does not support any increases to the youth
licenses, nor do we support restricted funds for any of the licenses or
tags. You can view our proposal and other reports and comments: http://www.pfsc.org/DraftLicenseProposal.html
Regardless how you feel about
the current deer situation, we can not allow our agency to become fiscally
insolvent. Please call your legislators and ask them to support the
financial stability of our resource agency by supporting a license
increase.
More Links on the License Increase:
Draft Hunting License
Increase Proposal Created
The Need for a Hunting
License Increase
