ORIGINAL: Cornelius08

As we all know pgc has been begging for money singing the same old song.... But it is hard to accept that they need more money when you look at the facts.

The facts being that the license fees are right in line with other states. Lower than some, but higher than others, as in the example WVgino gave us. $33 dollars in WV for a hunting license +fishing license + muzzleloading and archery opportunity included along with trapping!!! WHich would tally well over 100 bucks here in Pa.

Not only that, but when you compare the money being spent, its astronomical. And what are we getting for it beside a good hosing? The deer program being kept alive and in place is nothing more than a huge money sponge for one thing. The extreme amounts of PR attempts to sell it as well as all the manpower and equipment etc. used to maintain it.

Compare to a "normal" state for example. In Virginia, a state similar in size to Pennsylvania, the Dept of game and inland fisheries budget for 2008 was 49,169,152. That is for the management of FISH AND WILDLIFE!

Here in Pa, on the last annual report, the revenue added to the game fund in the one year was 75,031,189.... JUST FOR WILDLIFE, NO FISH MANAGEMENT!!


And these guys are crying poor mouth?!!?! Unbelievable.

Does anyone know if there is any state in the nation that spends more than Pa on wildlife management? Or one where it benefits hunters less?

ORIGINAL: J Pike

Jim and others Ect. I agree that we are truly blessed to have so many acres of public land but the way things are going the PGC isnt going to be able to pay for the upkeep of alot of these lands in the very near future!! But dont worry groups like the Audubon Soc. will be waiting with a large check in hand and a grin from ear to ear to pick up the tab!! Pike

ORIGINAL: R.S.B.


Comparing the funding or hunting license costs for Virginia’s or West Virginia’s wildlife management to Pennsylvania is an apples to pumpkins comparison because both Virginia and West Virginia have State tax funds to manage most of their wildlife while Pennsylvania does not receive any State tax dollars.

Here is a lead into how West Virginia gets their funding.

For most of this century, the sale of licenses and permits to hunters and anglers and matching Federal grant-in-aid programs have been the principal source of revenue for most state fish and wildlife agencies. Today, while license sales and percentage of traditional users are declining, in many states there is an increasing demand on state wildlife agencies for more products and services. As a result, agencies are finding it necessary to search for alternative sources of revenue to fund their fish and wildlife management and conservation efforts and provide services to their constituents.

Virginia is one of only a handful of states in history that has come into a
significant source of alternative funding for fish and wildlife management .
Through House Bill 38, a state code amendment passed in early 1998, the
Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF) will soon begin to
receive a portion of the state’s sales tax on hunting, fishing and wildlife-related
equipment.


Here is the link to this and more:


http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-04162000-20160025/unrestricted/etd.pdf


It appears that in West Virginia their Game and Fish Department only has to manage the species that are legal to take from sport hunting and fishing. All other species are managed through other funding venues of the Wildlife Diversity Program and Natural heritage Programs.

Here is a link:


http://www.wvdnr.gov/Wildlife/Wildlife.shtm


In Pennsylvania though the hunters have to pay for the management of all species of wildlife through Legislative mandate.

Therefore, the hunting license dollars have to spread out into a lot more areas of usage then occur in either of the states you listed.

R.S. Bodenhorn

RSB what is wrong with state game agency's in VA. WVA. and even OH. getting funds from their state's sales taxes?

Also maybe the PGC. could learn a thing or two from WVA. and should lobby to only manage species that are legal to harvest from sport hunting and leave the DCNR. to pick up the tab for the rest!! Pike

ORIGINAL: J Pike




I most certainly don’t think there is anything wrong with those states, or any others, using tax dollars to help fund their wildlife management programs. I wish we could do that in Pennsylvania too; it would allow for better wildlife management programs and funding that all of the state’s citizens were paying for instead of hunters paying for it all.




You would have to take that issue to the State Legislature. They are the ones that set up not only the funding structure but the law that places all wildlife management, (both game and non-game species) as being under the responsibility of the Game Commission. The Legislature also has it set up that hunters pay for all of it except for the little bit of the Federal moneys that can be used for some non-game management.

That is also why I certainly don’t see anything wrong with using money donated from non-hunter groups to help in the management of non-game species, why shouldn’t they help pay for the management of the species of their interest?

It has actually been some of the hunters that lobby against using tax dollars to help fund wildlife management in this state even though nearly all other states do use tax dollars to help management their wildlife. So, when you say the Game Commission should learn a thing or two you are doing nothing more then showing that you really don’t understand how or why the funding is structures as it is. The Game Commission is not opposed to alternative funding provided it doesn’t come with outlandish management demands that would adversely affect using hunting as the primary wildlife management tool for species suited for hunting.

R.S. Bodenhorn