Afield: PA Senate passes bill that would rob Pennsylvania hunters of $150 million

This is the time of year that I might write about upcoming hunting seasons, fall bird migration, or maybe autumn trout fishing. However, something much more important is in the wind.

In late August, the Pennsylvania Senate added two amendments to House Bill 1300, a usually routine fiscal code bill. One amendment calls for the transfer of $150 million from the Pennsylvania Game Commission’s Game Fund to the Clean Streams Fund. A second change doubles the fee that the Commission pays to local governments in lieu of taxes. According to PGC Executive Director Bryan Burhans, his agency was not contacted by the Senate about either change.

The amended bill passed the Senate by a vote of 29-18 on Aug. 30. The bill, without the amendments, had previously passed the House by a wide margin (191-12). Because of the changes, the bill was returned to the State House for discussion and another vote. It resides there now.

Even though central Pennsylvania has a rich hunting heritage, all of our local senators voted to rob $150 million from the Game Fund. Voting in favor of the steal were Cris Dush (Centre, Clinton, Cameron, Elk, Jefferson and McKean counties); Wayne Langerholc (Centre, Cambria and Clearfield); Judy Ward (Blair, Huntingdon, Juniata, Fulton and Mifflin); and Gene Yaw (Bradford, Lycoming, Sullivan, Tioga and Union). Either these senators do not respect hunters and our money, or they did not realize what they were voting for.

The Game Fund contains the money paid by hunters and trappers for licenses, Pennsylvania’s share of the Pittman-Robertson excise tax on hunting and shooting items, as well as funds derived from the sale of timber, oil, natural gas and coal extracted from the 1.5 million acres of State Game Lands. No general tax money ever goes into the Game Fund.

Not only would this move be an unprecedented stealing of money from hunters and trappers, but it would also jeopardize future Pittman Robertson funding for Pennsylvania. The Game Commission typically receives $30-45 million per year from PR funds. The state’s most recent share was over $40 million.

Burhans called the action by the Senate “illegal.”

“This is a diversion of funds according to the Fish and Wildlife code section 324, title 34,” Burhans said. “We would no longer be eligible for Pittman-Robertson funds — to the tune of $40 million a year. Language was put there to keep something like this from happening.”

The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service has notified the agency that money in the Game Fund is considered license revenue, and removing money from the Game Fund as proposed by the bill would likely be unlawful. It was further stated that this could result in the Game Commission becoming ineligible for future receipt of federal Pittman-Robertson funds. PGC Communications Director Travis Lau elaborated on the issue.

“Money in the Game Fund, by and large, was put there by hunters and trappers like you and me. While the bill states the $150 million proposed to be taken from the Game Fund would come from oil and gas revenues, there’s no way to distinguish oil and gas revenues from other money, such as license sales revenue, in the Game Fund. And, importantly, no oil and gas revenues ever would have been added to the Game Fund in the first place if not for generations of hunters and trappers providing the funding that has built the state game lands system.”

Over 30 organizations have expressed their opposition to the amended bill. They include Ducks Unlimited, National Wild Turkey Federation, Chesapeake Bay Foundation, National Deer Association, Ruffed Grouse Society, Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, and many others.

These groups and the Commission acknowledge that the Clean Streams Fund is a worthy cause — funding the Agriculture Conservation Assistance Program, which provides financial and technical assistance for the implementation of nutrient and sediment management on farms. However, it makes no sense that the cost of this program should be carried out by hunters and trappers.

I contacted my representative and asked that he not vote for HB 1300 unless the amendments are removed. I also called my senator to express my displeasure with his vote. If you are opposed to the amendment, then suggest that you do likewise. The Pennsylvania House is back in session on Monday, and since their schedule is not yet available, another vote on this bill could occur then.

Mark Nale, who lives in the Bald Eagle Valley, is a member of the Pennsylvania Outdoor Writers Association and can be reached at MarkAngler@aol.com .