State lawmaker still pushing merger of Pa. Game, Fish commissions
The idea of merging the Pennsylvania Game and Fish and Boat commissions doesn't look to be going away.
State Rep. Martin Causer, the Potter County Republican who sponsored a study examining the pros and cons of a merger, is pushing to make it happen. Causer has been circulating a memo around the Capital asking other lawmakers to sign on as co-sponsors to legislation that would make the two agencies one.
Causer did not return a phone call seeking comment.
His co-sponsorship memorandum makes clear how he feels, though. He wrote that he plans to introduce merger legislation “in the near future” as a cost-savings move.
“Given the concerns about financial difficulties frequently expressed by the agencies and the reality that other states' wildlife agencies can operate efficiently under one umbrella, I believe now is the time to take a more serious look at combining the two commissions into one more streamlined, efficient agency,” Causer wrote.
Pennsylvania is the only state with separate game and fish agencies, he noted. He also pointed out that the Legislative Budget and Finance Committee study of a merger determined combining the game and Fish and Boat commissions could save up to $5 million annually, primarily by eliminating some management positions.
The commissions have said making them into one agency would hurt sportsmen and jeopardize efficiency.
Fish and Boat Commission executive director John Arway said the report also determined his agency is among the most efficient of its kind in the nation, returning more to sportsmen for every dollar spent than any of the other state agencies examined.
The Game Commission also is opposed to a merger.
At least a few lawmakers oppose the idea. Rep. Gary Haluska of Cambria County said at a hearing on the merger hosted by the House of Representatives game and fisheries committee last month that a merger would create problems, not solve them.
Bob Frye is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. Reach him at firstname.lastname@example.org or via Twitter @bobfryeoutdoors.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.