Participating in our own demise by John C. Street

According to a recent press release sent out by the Pennsylvania Game Commission, our state wildlife agency is currently swimming in money as a result of cashing in on their (our) Marcellus gas holdings.  

With all this royalty money pouring in, it may seem illogical to stand by the conclusion (posited in my column, “Would you care to make a bet?” CLARION NEWS, April 28, 2011) that we’ll soon be buying our hunting, and most likely our fishing, licenses from the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources.  

Without reservation, I stand by that conclusion and for good reason(s) as I shall quickly explain.  

While both the Game Commission and the Fish and Boat Commission are considered “Independent” agencies (meaning they operate on their own sources of income and are not dependent on the State’s general fund), their budgets must be approved by the Legislator. 

At some point these elected folks are going to look at the declining number of “customers” being served by the agencies and reach the conclusion that duplicitous administrative and law enforcement staffs just don’t make any sense. And they’d need look no further than neighboring states for examples of the benefits of combining their fish and wildlife agencies. 

In actuality, Pennsylvania is one of the last states to have “independent” agencies, let alone stand-alone – and separate – agencies for fish and wildlife. So, despite the general angst that arises every time rumors of a “merger” filter out of Harrisburg, it is logically arguable that this cost saving move will take place sooner rather than later.  

Without building it into a conspiracy theory, it is also apparent the groundwork for a merger is already in place. External organizations (notably, Audubon and the Nature Conservancy) and their puppet state agency (the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources) have already demonstrated their ability to control the wildlife management agenda. And these external “stakeholders” have a lot of support in both the State House and Senate. 

Further, judging by their actions (as opposed to their words of protest), it appears the upper level managers of the Pennsylvania Game Commission are on board with a merger. Why else would they be so tone deaf to a majority of their customers over their management of the state’s deer herd. And why, when legitimate questions are raised regarding the impact of their (mis)management on license sales, do they attempt to “shoot the messengers” who are questioning their “science” rather than engage in an honest discussion of their practices. 

This brings up the second reason I stand by the conclusion we’ll soon be purchasing our hunting and fishing licenses from the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources; the fractious nature of Pennsylvania’s Bloodsport community. 

In the not too distant past, Pennsylvania had one statewide organization, the Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs. Then, as a result of an internecine war, the Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania broke away. 

Since that time, many of the larger counties (like Luzerne and Allegheny) have declared independence and, simultaneously, special interest sportsmen’s organizations - like the United Bowhunters of Pennsylvania - have gone their separate way, advocating for their own perks at the expense of the larger body of participants. 

As a consequence of this fragmentation, Pennsylvania’s Bloodsport community no longer has the ability to uniformly address state-wide issues like the merger of our fish and wildlife agencies and the very real threat this poses to the future of hunting and fishing in Pennsylvania.    

And, while the Bloodsport community becomes more impotent by the day, a conglomerate of other “stakeholders” are becoming more powerful by the minute, using their under-the-radar clout to manipulate our fish and wildlife agencies into executing programs that will, if left unchecked, result in the demise of those agencies. 

The issues that divide Pennsylvania’s Bloodsport community are not inconsequential. These issues are, however, of far less import than the imminent – and obvious - threats to the future of hunting and fishing that should unite us.  

United (or federated or acting in league with one another) we at least have a chance to overcome the undue influence of the “stakeholders” who are attempting to usurp the Bloodsports community’s rightful place at the fish and wildlife management table. 

Divided, as we currently are, we are actively participating in our own demise.