Merger- game and fish and boat commission.

[Acristickid]

possible merger

 

[RLeep2]

In my lifetime, at any rate, the history of the relationship between the Pennsylvania General Assembly and Commonwealth's semi-autonomous game and fisheries agencies has been first and foremost about attempts by the former to annex and seize the power and authority of the latter. The first step in this process is merging the agencies. The second step is folding the merged agency into DCNR. Once that is done, Poof! Presto Chango!, the agencies are now completely dependent on the General Fund teat. This allows incumbent politicians to appear to be the ones that hand out the “services” currently administrated by the agencies and this is highly coveted as a way to help win elections, much like making a new bridge or playground happen in their district(s). The management of our fish and game resources deserve better.

There may be functions of both agencies that can be combined to aid in overall cost effectiveness, etc. That is certainly possible. However, when I read some of the information on Rep, Causer’s (sponsor of the merger bill..) web site, I have my doubts that he is anywhere near as interested in cost reduction as he is in creating the impression that he, Rep. Causer, his very own self, is the main reason that trout fishing is good in Potter County. Check it out for yourselves…

This is a very old shell game and well known to the players on both sides. So far, we haven’t completely fallen for it. But hope springs eternal in the hearts of politicians who understand that he who controls the dispensation of public services usually gets to eventually retire in office. They’ve never been able to get complete control of the dispensation of game and fisheries goodies and it frustrates them. So, they keep trying…

 

[JackM]

RLees screed smacks of severe cynicism, and reality as well.

 

[JackM]

In PA we have executive functions carried out by independent agencies/bureaus. These independent commissions still have control of their directors from both the legislative and executive side, but the spread of terms of office limits the effect of temporary majorities.

There really is no reason to merge these two commissions. There will be no cost savings other than by reduction of services, which means reduction in qualified staff.

 

[troutbert]

If a whole bunch of legislators were issuing this call, that would be something to take seriously.

But if it's just Clauser, then it's not a serious proposal.

 

[afishinado]

I don't have an answer as to whether the merging of the PFBC and the PGC would be beneficial.

The license purchasing system of both agencies has been merged into a single system. But other than that, the administrative parts are operated separately causing a duplication of efforts, I would guess. Perhaps merging together would save in admin costs.

Second, there is a shortage of WCO's (Wildlife Conservation Officers for the PGC and Waterways Conservation Officers for the PFBC) because of budget shortfalls.

The FBC WCO's law enforcement duties peak in spring through the summer. While the GC duties peak in the fall through early winter. It would seem to me, merging the two commissions would go a long way to add personnel (roughly double) to cover these duties during peak times.

In 49 of 50 states game & fish agencies are combined.

Just some random thoughts.

 

[Maurice]

afishinado wrote:
I don't have an answer as to whether the merging of the PFBC and the PGC would be beneficial.

The license purchasing system of both agencies has been merged into a single system. But other than that, the administrative parts are operated separately causing a duplication of efforts, I would guess. Perhaps merging together would save in admin costs.

Second, there is a shortage of WCO's (Wildlife Conservation Officers for the PGC and Waterways Conservation Officers for the PFBC) because of budget shortfalls.

The FBC WCO's law enforcement duties peak in spring through the summer. While the GC duties peak in the fall through early winter. It would seem to me, merging the two commissions would go a long way to add personnel (roughly double) to cover these duties during peak times.

In 49 of 50 states game & fish agencies are combined.

Just some random thoughts.

In many areas...York County is one, the WCO's assist their sister agencies during peak times. So this sharing of services is already happening.

 

[afishinado]

Maurice wrote:

afishinado wrote:
I don't have an answer as to whether the merging of the PFBC and the PGC would be beneficial.

The license purchasing system of both agencies has been merged into a single system. But other than that, the administrative parts are operated separately causing a duplication of efforts, I would guess. Perhaps merging together would save in admin costs.

Second, there is a shortage of WCO's (Wildlife Conservation Officers for the PGC and Waterways Conservation Officers for the PFBC) because of budget shortfalls.

The FBC WCO's law enforcement duties peak in spring through the summer. While the GC duties peak in the fall through early winter. It would seem to me, merging the two commissions would go a long way to add personnel (roughly double) to cover these duties during peak times.

In 49 of 50 states game & fish agencies are combined.

Just some random thoughts.

In many areas...York County is one, the WCO's assist their sister agencies during peak times. So this sharing of services is already happening.

If you kiss your sister already, why not just marry 'er?! :-o

Yeah Mo, I've seen the same thing in others areas.

How 'bout when Mike is out there surveying streams in the summer? Increasing the number of people available to help with the surveys would help, I would imagine. Same for work on a wildlife survey or project for the PGC.

Like I said, I don't know the answer. There's really not enough info available for us to analyse the situation to make a determination whether merging would be beneficial.

When you have two agencies performing similar functions: using license dollars to protect and regulate wildlife vs fish; one may conclude, like in every other state in the US, that one agency would be more efficient performing the same function for mammals and birds as well as
fish and amphibians.

 

[djs12354]

troutbert wrote:
If a whole bunch of legislators were issuing this call, that would be something to take seriously.

But if it's just Clauser, then it's not a serious proposal.

Troutbert

Every piece of legislation starts somewhere. I hope you are correct in your assessment of the situation and nobody else jumps on his bandwagon.

Rather than take a chance, I chose to take the time to write emails to both legislators for my area and request that they not only not support any such merger, but that they actively oppose it.

Dave

 

[Chaz]

At this point I believe this should be taken seriously. It hasn't been that long since the last proposal the Legislature made to merge the agencies. I believe on one hand that it can be accomplished, on the other hand I don't think there will a dime saved. In fact as a voter, hunter, and fisherman I would demand that the Legislature fund the agencies with every dime they need to be run effectively, without budget cuts or threats thereof. The Legislature should also be funding the pensions of the employees and retired employees.
The Legislature then would have to fund all the research without any politically motivated interference, such as suedo-science in the effort to make the science more palatable to extraction industries, land developers, and other special interest groups that support the Legislatures fiefdoms. If the Legislature can do this, then they get to state their arguments for merger, otherwise shut up and give the agencies what they need to be run effectively, without reducing the services they already are strapped to perform and stop interfering with the science the agencies perform.

 

[krayfish2]

If Chaz's wish came true, my fishing would cost $1500 / year

 

[MKern]

I've heard from inside people that this is brought up constantly because the fish commission struggles to balance a budget and the game commission is better at it.

I would say that regulations of the fish commission might become more streamlined and less convoluted upon merger, especially if traditional game officers now have to learn fishing regulations.

 

[rrt]

I hope this merger never comes to pass. RLeep2's response is really on target.

I am opposed to a merger because I believe the PFBC is a forward-thinking organization, while I believe the PGC has caved in to special interests to the detriment of the PGC's stakeholders: hunters. The PGC's policies have negatively affected wildlife populations on public lands as well. The PFBC works to increase fish populations (eg. wild trout pops have expanded exponentially over the years) and is working hard to get the needed help from DEP to try to help save the Susquehanna River.

I would not like to have the negative influences from the PGC exerting an influence on the PFBC, which I fear would inevitably occur.

 

[lestrout]

The great Leon Chandler, once VP at Cortland Line Co. but always a constant ambassador for our fly fishing sport, told me once that he thought the existence of a separate department charged with minding fishing interests was why Pennsylvania had superior fisheries.

This conversation was before the SMB crash on the Susqy, and before the growth of sentiment against rampant trout stocking (particularly over wild trouts). Leon spent summers in Montana and knew full well about the biology studies there that led to ceasing the stocking of trouts in streams and the subsequent improvement in wild trout fisheries. But I sure wish Leon was still alive so we could have had a followup discussion on this whole issue. He was a wise man, knowledgeable and thoughtful in many areas.

 

[troutbert]

PA has an "independent" agency system. Other states have fisheries within a large DNR agency.

Several posts above have talked about why an "independent" agency should result in better fisheries management, in theory.

But what does the evidence show? How does PA compare with other states in regarding to stocking over native trout? And stocking over wild trout in general?

 

[PocketWater]

http://triblive.com/sports/outdoors/9865688-74/merger-commissions-fish

 

[BrookieChaser]

The one thing a merger will hurt, though from my experience with both agencies I don't see a merger happening at all, is PA's voting with the USF&W. Every state gets one vote per agency, with a separate Game and Fish agency PA gets two votes.

 

[Bonzoso]

afishinado wrote:
I don't have an answer as to whether the merging of the PFBC and the PGC would be beneficial.

The license purchasing system of both agencies has been merged into a single system. But other than that, the administrative parts are operated separately causing a duplication of efforts, I would guess. Perhaps merging together would save in admin costs.

Second, there is a shortage of WCO's (Wildlife Conservation Officers for the PGC and Waterways Conservation Officers for the PFBC) because of budget shortfalls.

The FBC WCO's law enforcement duties peak in spring through the summer. While the GC duties peak in the fall through early winter. It would seem to me, merging the two commissions would go a long way to add personnel (roughly double) to cover these duties during peak times.

In 49 of 50 states game & fish agencies are combined.

Just some random thoughts.

If it's good for 49 of 50 states and PA was the outlier then I would tend to support the the proposal, given our commonwealth's history of corruption.

 

[Chaz]

Bonzoso wrote:

afishinado wrote:
I don't have an answer as to whether the merging of the PFBC and the PGC would be beneficial.

The license purchasing system of both agencies has been merged into a single system. But other than that, the administrative parts are operated separately causing a duplication of efforts, I would guess. Perhaps merging together would save in admin costs.

Second, there is a shortage of WCO's (Wildlife Conservation Officers for the PGC and Waterways Conservation Officers for the PFBC) because of budget shortfalls.

The FBC WCO's law enforcement duties peak in spring through the summer. While the GC duties peak in the fall through early winter. It would seem to me, merging the two commissions would go a long way to add personnel (roughly double) to cover these duties during peak times.

In 49 of 50 states game & fish agencies are combined.

Just some random thoughts.

If it's good for 49 of 50 states and PA was the outlier then I would tend to support the the proposal, given our commonwealth's history of corruption.

but the corruption is in the Legislature and other departments of the Commonwealth. Not necessarily in the 2 agencies.