PA Wildlife Agencies In the Red

Particularly the Game Commission seems to think that moving opening days around and expanding Sunday hunting will bring new people into the sport. The Fish Commission wants to dump trout everywhere and call it good.

These are longer term trends and require longer term outlooks and solutions. Societal trends like gaming, year around athletic sports and single parent households have had a far greater impact on outdoor participation than any statutory fix that can be offered.
 
Seems like the COVID bump to outdoor sports might be fading five years later. Personally, I know I wouldn't be able to afford to start as a new hunter. All of my gear, bows, guns, scent control, and other equipment are hand-me-downs from my dad. Starting out fishing is considerably cheaper, as anyone can buy a $15 rod from Walmart. Some kind of gear repository/more learn to hunt programs to try before purchasing a lot of the equipment would also be helpful. However, that stuff costs money and it seems like they're already losing enough.
 
riverwhy said:
Partnering with schools for classes and clubs might be a way to stem the losses we are experiencing in the outdoor pursuits.
Click to expand...
Like the Fish and Water Class (Art Wolf) I had in junior high school way back in the early 70's. We installed Vibert Boxs in Mill Creek, which may or may not account for the wild brown trout in the stream.
 
Realistically speaking, should these agencies be turning a profit in the first place? Seems like they should be designed to break even, or get a larger chunk of our tax dollars appropriated to them so they are well funded. Yes license sales are important, but I think management of wildlife, public lands and the resources associated with them are a worthwhile use of tax payer dollars, even if there is a loss at the end of the fiscal year. These agencies aren't the same as a publicly traded corporation.

Much like public transit, I wouldn't mind paying a little bit more for benefit of the greater good.
 
I am of the possibly flawed opinion that PA has too dang much agency redundancy and consolidation would result in savings at the expense of some bruised egos...

For example, do we really need three separate agencies like the PFBC, PGC & DCNR with separate everything to manage our outdoor resources??

Other states only have ONE with separate divisions which HAS to save money...

While we are at it, does PA really need PennDOT and the PA Turnpike Commission. As it stands now Turnpike Tolls pay for other roadways so what's the point..?
 
Last edited:
Bamboozle said:
While we are at it, does PA really need PennDOT and the PA Turnpike Commission. As it stands now Turnpike Tolls pay for other roadways so what's the point..?
Click to expand...

This goes back to its founding, the Turnpike was founded as a self sustaining entity. PA Act 44 in 2007 mandated that the Turnpike share its toll revenue with PennDOT, which is a "recent" development. One could point to other states like NJ and see that the various toll roads have their own structures separate from the NJDOT.

I believe that was studied at some point recently, though admittedly I am not sure what came of it.
 
tjsingle said:
This goes back to its founding, the Turnpike was founded as a self sustaining entity. PA Act 44 in 2007 mandated that the Turnpike share its toll revenue with PennDOT, which is a "recent" development. One could point to other states like NJ and see that the various toll roads have their own structures separate from the NJDOT.

I believe that was studied at some point recently, though admittedly I am not sure what came of it.
Click to expand...

I know the reasons WHY, it the WHY NOT that confuses me...
 
  • Like
Reactions: CRB
Bamboozle said:
I am of the possibly flawed opinion that PA has to dang much agency redundancy and consolidation would result in savings at the expense of some bruised egos...

For example, do we really need three separate agencies like the PFBC, PGC & DCNR with separate everything to manage our outdoor resources??

Other states only have ONE with separate divisions which HAS to save money...

While we are at it, does PA really need PennDOT and the PA Turnpike Commission. As it stands now Turnpike Tolls pay for other roadways so what's the point..?
Click to expand...
Maybe PA needs their own rendition of DOGE? We'll call it DOSE, Department of State Efficiency. 😉
 
I feel like it was just yesterday when the game commission was accused of buying too much land and were under scrutiny for all the gas related revenue they had collected.
 
State and federal government agencies seldom generate a profit, the main focus should be on maintaining a balanced fiscal budget which rarely happens in government agencies. The biggest challenge facing PA is the separate agencies. The state would definitely benefit from transitioning to one wildlife agency, modelling themselves off of the agencies adopted by Montana, Idaho, Wisconsin, etc. Combining them would create more efficiencies; but would also create operating deficits for a few years.

The new agency could potentially increase the cost of out-of-state hunting licenses similar to states out west. And, since there is consensus against stocking trout in streams that naturally support wild trout, resources should be allocated to stocking only streams incapable of sustaining wild populations, reducing costs associated with raising stocked trout.

While these proposals are not radical, PA has historically been slow to implement changes, for instance Sunday hunting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Harman's North Fork Cottages

Share this page

Back
Top