Register now on PaFlyFish.com! Login
HOME FORUM BLOG PHOTOS LINKS


Sponsors

Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users





Study to merge PGC and PFBC

Joined:
2009/2/11 13:14
From Lehigh Valley
Posts: 1269
Offline
I was reading Pa Outdoor News, there is an article in this issue that the Legislature is going to move forward with this Idea. I don't know if I am for or against it. I do know I don't want the DCNR to be part of either entity.

Posted on: 2013/3/25 15:34


Re: Study to merge PGC and PFBC

Joined:
2010/6/26 11:19
From Along the Lehigh Above the Gap
Posts: 7100
Offline
I am for it. We are one of very few states that have separate entities. Additionally, the Game commission receives a lot of fracking funds for the drilling on their lands. Why shouldn't the fish commission receive some of that. I am sure waterways flow through those same lands.

Posted on: 2013/3/25 15:36
_________________
"Four of us wolves, running around the desert together, in Las Vegas, looking for strippers and cocaine. So tonight, I make a toast!"

http://bugflingerandfeatherlasher.blogspot.com/



Re: Study to merge PGC and PFBC
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/9 9:29
From Monessen, PA
Posts: 22233
Offline
It is just a cost-saving measure. The two groups will still have differing interests and domains. They will study it, but politics will prevail.

Posted on: 2013/3/25 15:38
_________________
I don't like scrambled eggs, and I'm glad I don't, because if I liked them, I'd eat them, and I just hate them. --Hank


Re: Study to merge PGC and PFBC

Joined:
2008/1/31 17:19
From Pretty much everywhere at some point, Thorndale today.
Posts: 13423
Offline
As a cost saving measure, whether I'd be for or against matters very much on where the saved costs go!

Posted on: 2013/3/25 15:42


Re: Study to merge PGC and PFBC

Joined:
2007/1/30 10:05
From Jersey Shore, PA
Posts: 472
Offline
Having talked with some folks who have much knowledge on how this has gone in other states, the feeling is the fish always seem to "get the short end of the stick."

I would not support this one.

Posted on: 2013/3/25 18:52


Re: Study to merge PGC and PFBC

Joined:
2006/9/11 12:00
Posts: 275
Offline
Superficially, combining agencies seems good. Fur, fins, feathers, hey, its all good, right? I taught in the Warren Co. School district for 5 years and learned that when you combine something even as cooperative as neighboring school districts, upper-level positions grow. You get so many coordinators and new departments and collaborative organizational heads that, BTW, all make way bigger bucks than Conservation Officers make, who actually do stuff. This isn't like we are folding one game commission into another, we are merging 2, one fish, one fur & fowl. I'm not against it, but through my experience, I'd need to see something solid to be for it.

JBeary

Posted on: 2013/3/25 21:49


Re: Study to merge PGC and PFBC

Joined:
2008/5/29 15:28
From Lititz/Huntingdon
Posts: 932
Offline
Fantastic! Look at the shape of our deer herd in the Commonwealth. Soon the only fish that will be left are carp n suckers. Well, maybe not that bad.

Posted on: 2013/3/26 8:59
_________________
Do'n It Right On The Wrong Side Of Town

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZif22PVohg

The four most effective weapons for taking anothers possessions:
4) knife
3) gun
2) lawyer
1) politician


Re: Study to merge PGC and PFBC

Joined:
2006/12/29 10:00
From Harrisburg
Posts: 2012
Offline
Absolutely agree for a NO!
Why does the PGC get money for use of the land, but the FBC not get money for the use of the water? Cant frack without it and its not like it doesnt effect the creeks.

Posted on: 2013/3/26 11:04
_________________
Resized Image


Re: Study to merge PGC and PFBC

Joined:
2008/5/29 15:28
From Lititz/Huntingdon
Posts: 932
Offline
Quote:

Squaretail wrote:
Absolutely agree for a NO!
Why does the PGC get money for use of the land, but the FBC not get money for the use of the water? Cant frack without it and its not like it doesnt effect the creeks.
\\


Fully agree!

Posted on: 2013/3/26 15:26
_________________
Do'n It Right On The Wrong Side Of Town

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZif22PVohg

The four most effective weapons for taking anothers possessions:
4) knife
3) gun
2) lawyer
1) politician


Re: Study to merge PGC and PFBC

Joined:
2009/4/11 18:51
From State College
Posts: 981
Offline
I'm big time against it, as if our game/fish budgets need cut more.

Posted on: 2013/3/26 15:50
_________________
"If fish had the exact same flavor and alcohol content of PBR, I'd likely be packin' a stringer and old can of night crawlers down to the river"-Hank


Re: Study to merge PGC and PFBC

Joined:
2010/3/10 9:38
From Brookville, PA
Posts: 155
Offline
I am all for it we are way behind the times here.

Posted on: 2013/3/26 16:59


Re: Study to merge PGC and PFBC

Joined:
2012/3/22 15:45
From Cambria Co
Posts: 38
Offline
The problem I see is...hunters hate it because the fishing side would get "their" money and not all but many on the fishing side are all for it so they can get "the hunting" money.

Personally if it was done correctly (which we all know would never happen) it would help greatly. Both sports are suffering from a lack of involvement of youth, the hunting side is a little lucky to have timber and mineral rights to fall back on. I think PA is the only state or one of the only states that have separate departments.

Posted on: 2013/3/27 12:48


Re: Study to merge PGC and PFBC

Joined:
2006/9/13 18:28
From chester ct
Posts: 506
Offline
The late great Leon Chandler told me more than a few times that he thought I was lucky being in Pennsylvania that the 2 agencies were separate. He believed the separation made for better stewardship for the fish.

tl
les

Posted on: 2013/3/27 12:55
_________________
tl
les


Re: Study to merge PGC and PFBC

Joined:
2008/1/31 17:19
From Pretty much everywhere at some point, Thorndale today.
Posts: 13423
Offline
Depends on how it's implemented.

You can do this, and save some money by only having to keep one set of payroll books, only having 1 web manager, eliminating procedural redundancies, etc. Essentially half the management without shrinking the working side of things. And if they go this route, then you should get better service for less. This would be GOOD.

But too often, it goes the other way. And they think they can get away with half the officers, studies, etc. And if you do this, less people have more work to cover. The necessary result is a decrease in service.

Posted on: 2013/3/27 14:38


Re: Study to merge PGC and PFBC

Joined:
2012/3/22 15:45
From Cambria Co
Posts: 38
Offline
pcray...I follow agree. That why I said if they did it right it could work. The problem is it would always be a us against them type of thing. The hunting side would be for hunting stuff and fishing side for fishing stuff. It would be hard to make decisions that would make both sides happy

Posted on: 2013/3/27 15:02






You can view topic.
You cannot start a new topic.
You cannot reply to posts.
You cannot edit your posts.
You cannot delete your posts.
You cannot add new polls.
You cannot vote in polls.
You cannot attach files to posts.
You cannot post without approval.

[Advanced Search]





Site Content
Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!
Stay Connected

twitterfeed.com facebook instagram RSS Feed

Sponsors
Polls
Do you keep a fishing journal?
Yes 52% (85)
No 47% (78)
_PL_TOTALVOTES
The poll closed at 2014/8/22 12:38
1 Comment





Copyright 2014 by PaFlyFish.com | Privacy Policy| Provided by Kile Media Group | Design by 7dana.com