Sportsmen Against a Merger Forum
April 29th,
2004
PFSC Testimony
Photos
(Need Power Point to View)
PFSC hosted a Sportsmen's Forum on the Merger Issues (HR 15 & HR
22) in Franklin, Venango Co. on April 29th. The meeting was
sponsored and hosted by the NW Division of PFSC. Representatives from
the PGC & PFBC, PFSC, and 4 legislators were present to make statements
and answer question. There were over 200 people in attendance.
PFSC plans to continue to monitor both of these issues, and will plan
future meetings in different parts of the state later this fall if there is
still any movement towards pursuing either issue.
Following are two reports on the meeting by PFSC's Editor and Outdoor
Writer Linda Steiner, and the testimony I presented on behalf of PFSC.
MZ
Opposition to Commission Merger Attracts 200
by Linda Steiner
Although no legislation has yet been introduced in the Pennsylvania
General Assembly to merge the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission with
the Pennsylvania Game Commission, sportsmen and women have been reacting
strongly against the suggestion.
On Thursday evening,
April 30, a public forum on two House of Representatives’ Resolutions
relating to the state commissions overseeing hunting and fishing, drew a
crowd of 200 to the Franklin High School auditorium, in Franklin, PA, to
listen to and ask questions of representatives of the Fish and Boat
Commission, Game Commission, and the Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen’s
Clubs, and four local state Representatives. The meeting was held in
response to reports on House Resolution 15 and House Resolution 222
generated recently by the Legislative Budget and Finance Committee.
HR 15 asked the committee
to look into the feasibility of merging the Fish and Boat Commission with
the Game Commission, primarily as a cost savings to the two financially
strapped agencies. HR 222 asked for a report on how the law enforcement
branches of the commissions could be placed under the Pennsylvania
Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR), and what cost reduction
that would be to the commissions.
The budget committee
found that consolidating the commissions, while keeping them independent
agencies rather than state departments, would save
the commissions about $5 million annually. This would be achieved primarily
through employee reductions, mostly in law enforcement.
Placing the Game
Commission’s Wildlife Conservation Officers and Fish and Boat Commission’s
Waterways Conservation Officers under DCNR would save the commissions
money, but would place the funding responsibility on DCNR. The report on HR
15 found that the cost of operating a combined conservation law enforcement
effort in DCNR would exceed the current total law enforcement costs of the
commissions by $5.8 million, the excess likely to come from the state’s
General Fund.
However, the overwhelming
opposition to the merger at the Franklin
meeting had little, if anything, to do with money.
“Just to save a
gratuitous $5 million a year by merging the Fish and Boat and Game
commissions is like cutting off one foot so you don’t have to buy a shoe,”
said Melody Zullinger, Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Federation of
Sportsmen’s Clubs. The federation, which opposes a merger, represents
68,000 sportsmen and women statewide. Its Northwest Division hosted the
event.
“The reports are
recommending eliminating officers and having the officers only do law
enforcement,” she said. “There’s not been a reference to any impacts to
registered boaters and fishing and hunting license buyers or to the aquatic
or wildlife resource.”
“We know that the
agencies are not perfect, and we need to look at new ways of doing things,”
she said, “but the Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs believes a merger is
major surgery, and the patient will not survive the operation.”
The idea of combining the
Fish and Boat Commission and Game Commission is not new. The last time the
legislature looked into merging them was 1989. That report found that
leaving the two agencies separate and independent was the preferred option.
Pennsylvania is the only
state that has distinct fish and game agencies, although not all of the
others are the result of mergers.
Mike Schmit, Deputy
Executive Director for the Pennsylvania Game Commission, said that 45 of
the 49 state conservation agencies were never separate, but were created as
multi-purpose departments.
“One of the reasons Pennsylvania
is different is we have had the support of the sportsmen and women,” said
Schmit. He said that even the Game Commission could support a consolidation
if it were found to be cost effective, would improve service to the license
buyer, and would improve resource management. But that is not the case,
said Schmit, adding, “We don’t think today is time for that just yet.”
Dr. Douglas Austen,
Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission, recently
took the reins of that agency from a similar post in Illinois.
He, too, said that Pennsylvania
sportsmen and women would be better served by keeping the agencies
independent.
“I believe in the passion
you folks have for your sports and the resource,” said Austen. “You are
willing to stand up for it.”
“We’ll find what works
best for Pennsylvania and run
with that,” he said. “We need to find how the agencies can work together to
resolve some of the issues.” Austen sees the need for closer relationships
with the Department of Environmental Protection and the Department of
Conservation and Natural Resources.
“Our problems aren’t
answered by the merger issue,” said Austen. “The common refrain is the
funding problem.” The Fish and Boat
Commission is currently seeking the passage of House Bill 2155, which would
raise fishing license fees and give the agency much-needed additional
revenue.
Four local legislators
added their voices in opposition of any merger of the commissions.
Rep. Scott Hutchinson said that “big is not necessarily better.
Better service is often done on a smaller scale,” referring to the
super-agency that would be formed by merging the commissions, versus the
current size of the agencies.
“We as sportsmen and
women must be ever vigilant about our rights to go hunting and fishing,”
said Hutchinson. “Unless we
have separate agencies to look out for those rights, in the long run we’re
going to be in big, big trouble.”
Rep. Fred McIlhattan said
in response to a question that an amendment to merge the agencies could not
be added to a must-pass bill in the Legislature, as that would be a
non-germane amendment, but would have to be separate legislation.
Rep Rod Wilt asked the
crowd to notice that “my name is conspicuously absent from this issue.” “I
am certain any problems of Fish and Game will not be fixed, remedied or
addressed by a merger,” he said.
Rep. Jim Lynch said that
“hunting and fishing are under attack in Pennsylvania
and the whole country.” He added, “What you can do is don’t take them for
granted.” Lynch was the only Representative to vote against HR 15. For that
and other support of sportsmen, he recently received the Pennsylvania
Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs’ 2004 Sportsmen’s Legislator of the Year
Award.
Although unable to
attend, Rep. Theresa Forcier sent correspondence stating that she strongly
opposed a merger.
Senator Mary Jo White
wrote that “I am not convinced we should merge these two commissions.” She
said, “I think a great deal of deference must be paid to the sportsmen.
Should (a merger) come up, I will look to the sportsmen in my district.”
Speaking from the crowd,
John Bodner of the Pennsylvania Steelhead Association said, “I don’t want
turkey biologists working on fish projects, or fish biologists working on
game projects. I think the legislators are wasting a lot of time and money
on this issue.”
Randy Culbertson, a
hunting and fishing goods retailer from Knox, said, “Governor Rendell
sweet-talked the teachers and he would like to be a gambler. Don’t be
sweet-talked and don’t gamble on your sport.”
Lawmakers, sportsmen voice opposition to commission merger
By Linda Steiner
4-29-04
Four northwest Pennsylvania
state legislators told sportsmen recently that they were opposed to a
merger of the Pennsylvania Game Commission with the Pennsylvania Fish and
Boat Commission. State Representatives Scott Hutchinson, Fred McIlhattan,
Rod Wilt and Jim Lynch gave 200 sportsmen those assurances during a public
forum held at the Franklin High
School, Franklin,
PA, April 30.
Melody Zullinger,
Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs,
Mike Schmit, Deputy Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Game Commission,
and Dr. Douglas Austen, Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Fish and
Boat Commission also told the crowd that their organizations opposed any
merger of the two natural resource agencies.
The meeting was hosted by
the Northwest Division of the Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs
to help hunters, and anglers and other outdoors enthusiasts better
understand Pennsylvania House of Representatives’ Resolutions 15 and 222.
HR 15 called for the
Legislative Budget and Finance Committee to look into the feasibility of
combining the Pennsylvania Game Commission with the Pennsylvania Fish and
Boat Commission. The committee found that such a merger was feasible and
would save the commissions $5 million annually, mostly through employee
reductions. The consolidated agency would remain independent, as both
commissions are now. Pennsylvania
is the only state that has distinct fish and game commissions.
HR 222 instructed the
committee to consider how the law enforcement functions of the commission
could be placed under the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and
Natural Resources to reduce costs to the Game and Fish and Boat
commissions. The committee found that although there would be a savings to
the commissions, the consolidated officer force under DCNR would require an
additional $5.8 million a year from the state General Fund, above current
operating costs.
Neither option appealed
to the sportsmen at the forum, who, when asked for a show of hands, nearly
unanimously were against any merger of the Fish
and Boat Commission and the Game Commission.
Speaking for the
68,000-member Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs, Zullinger said
that group does not believe that the options explored by HR 15 or HR 222
would benefit the sportsmen of Pennsylvania.
The Federation has seen nothing in either that would benefit the resource
or the resource user and, for those reasons, is against a merger, she said.
In addressing HR 222,
Schmit said that conservation law enforcement is the “roots” of the
Pennsylvania Game Commission, and if that function were taken away from the
agency, “I can’t personally picture how that would advance the profession
of wildlife conservation.”
Before coming to the
Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission, said Dr. Austen, he had worked in a
merged fish and game department, but that is not necessarily what Pennsylvania
needs. “Larger agencies have the ability to do some things better,” said
Austen, “but they can lose the ability to focus on their resource mission.”
In supporting continuing
the independent status of the Fish and Boat Commission and Game Commission,
Rep. Hutchinson said, “The basic premise of the agencies is to be closely
connected to those they are servicing, to have a direct relationship with
the license buyers.”
Rep. McIlhatten said, “We
(the legislature) are not going to be approving this merger in Pennsylvania.” He noted that he has received more
correspondence from constituents on this issue in the last few months than
on any other.
Although the legislators
in attendance all opposed a merger, Rep. Rod Wilt cautioned, “The danger is
not with the legislators you see here tonight,” but with other members of
the state General Assembly. Rep. Lynch said that sportsmen must hold the
legislators’ “feet to the fire” on their stance on the merger and make them
commit in writing.
Currently no legislation
to merge the Fish and Boat Commission with the Game Commission has been
introduced in the Pennsylvania
legislature.
PFSC Testimony
Photos
