TO: House Environmental Resources and Energy Committee

FROM: Joseph J. Neville, Legislative Liaison

DATE: April 21, 2006

SUBJECT: SB 868

The Pennsylvania Game Commission has grave concerns about the impact of SB 868 on the agency. The impact of SB 868 would place the fiscal solvency of the agency in jeopardy.

In FY 05-06, the Pennsylvania Game Commission paid $1,713,865 for in lieu of tax payments for approximately 1.4 million acres of lands, waters, and buildings. The in lieu of tax payment rate was changed in 1995 from 20 cents per acre to each of the school district, the county, and the township to 40 cents an acre to each.

Senate Bill 868, which is currently in the House Environmental Resources and Energy Committee, proposed increasing the rate from 40 cents to $1.20 payable to each of the three municipalities making the total payment of $3.60.

This would increase the total payment from $1,713,865 to $5,141,594. These payments must be processed by September 1^st. of each year. Since the Game Commission does not recognize license revenues before these payments are due, it will be necessary to pay this increased amount out of the unreserved fund balance.

The unreserved fund balance is projected to be approximately $21M as of June 30, 2006. In order to cover expenses for the first two months of the fiscal year, before revenues are recognized, the agency needs approximately $14M. The increase in salaries and benefits for the FY 06-07 is approximately $2.8M. If SB 868 passes, it will cost the Game Commission an increase in excess of $3.4M. This leaves a balance of approximately $800,000 in the Game Fund Reserve. This would be the lowest reserve balance in decades and the fiscal solvency of the agency would be in jeopardy.

It is imperative that we remember that Game Lands are used by all Pennsylvanians. They are set aside for the protection and propagation of our wildlife species. All Pennsylvanians benefit from the continued viability of healthy wildlife populations. Some people benefit by watching wildlife, some by actively harvesting wildlife and some by the simple benefits of living in a viable ecosystem. However, we as a society cannot afford to say that setting aside wildlife lands benefits only a small segment of citizens. It is something that should be addressed by the Commonwealth for the benefit of all its citizens. It is something that can be addressed now by ensuring that any increase in Forest Reserve payments are not placed on one group to the exclusion of others. Instead, the responsible stewardship of our public wildlife lands requires all of society to share in the cost of that land.

Nor can we responsibly shirk this duty of all citizens to share in the cost of public wildlife lands. It is true that all activities on Game Lands, from hiking and biking to hunting and trapping, are regulated so as not to adversely impact the wildlife of Pennsylvania, and to not adversely affect other uses of public wildlife lands. Thus, just as someone cannot ride a horse anywhere in a State Park at any time, nor can someone hunt on most National Park Service property such as the Appalachian Trail, someone cannot rid e a horse or a bike everywhere on Game Lands at any time. However, to say the Game Lands are not used for horseback riding, biking, fishing, boating, birdwatching, cross-country skiing, snowmobiling, or any number of other recreational uses is not accurate. Indeed, just in the Southeast, the Horseshoe Trail crosses parts of three Game Lands. The popular Stoney Creek Trail is almost wholly within a Game Lands. Hiking is generally allowed anywhere outside propagation areas at any time (although for safety’s sake you may be required to wear blaze orange). We live in a modern society with many people. It would be irresponsible to place the cost of everyone’s public wildlife lands on the backs of one relatively small group of users.