PA. COMMISSIONS Officials mull game-fish merger

The study also will look at alternative funding sources.
HARRISBURG (AP) -- A government agency is preparing to release a study examining the pros and cons of merging the fish and boat commission with the game commission, reviving a contentious proposal opposed by nearly every statewide sportsmen's group.
Declining sales of hunting and fishing licenses, which constitute nearly two-thirds of the two agencies' revenue, have prompted legislators to consider whether a merger could yield savings.
The Legislative Budget and Finance Committee report also will examine the financial condition of both commissions and look at alternative funding sources.
Rising costs
The cost of personnel, equipment and pensions continues to rise as the number of licenses sold drops, and the cost of licenses may one day be prohibitively expensive unless changes are made, said Rep. Bruce Smith, R-York, chairman of the House Game and Fisheries Committee.
"The only means of raising money now is license sales, [so] hunting and fishing could become hobbies of the rich, because the common person might not be able to afford it in the future," said Smith. He said a proposed increase in the cost of fishing licenses and boat registrations is expected to be announced this week.
Game commission spokesman Jerry Feaser acknowledged that hunting license sales have declined about 25 percent from their mid-1980s peak of 1.3 million a year, but said a fee increase that went into effect in 1999 has helped stabilize revenues. Fees vary widely, depending on the type of license and the hunter's age and residency.
The board of game commissioners announced earlier this month that they oppose any merger.
"They've not seen any evidence of any kind of benefit to the hunter [or] benefit to the resource. It would dilute the responsiveness" to hunters, Feaser said.
In January, the fish and boat commission's then-executive director, Peter A. Colangelo, predicted that the study would show that the need for new revenue sources was the biggest challenge facing the agencies. Focusing responsibility for boating and fishing in a single department, Colangelo said, "is good for angling and good for Pennsylvania."
Sportsmen opposed
At a series of five meetings held this summer around the state, sportsmen's groups voiced widespread opposition to any merger.
"Just because you're going to show us some type of savings, you better be able to point out specifically how those savings are going to benefit some resource," said Melody Zullinger, executive director of the 65,000-member Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs. "We've got to think resource first. Cheaper's not always better."
Dave Comes, executive director of the Game and Fisheries Committee, said he expects the study, scheduled for release Nov. 19, will "show some sizable savings," perhaps more than a million dollars a year. The combined operating costs of the two agencies was $112 million last year.
A similar study in 1989 went nowhere because of political turf battles, economic questions, questions about the effect on agency morale and doubts about the wisdom of combining law-enforcement operations.
Consolidation into Conservation and Natural Resources "is the big fear" of hunters and trappers, Zullinger said.
"The governor will have control over where the moneys are spent. [In] a year when they're having a budget deficit, they'll say, 'Oh, we're going to take $12 million from habitat improvement,"' Zullinger said.
Pennsylvania is the only state that operates separate agencies covering fish and aquatic resources on the one hand and wildlife and game resources on the other. All other states have the responsibilities handled by one agency or by two divisions within one agency.
The gamec commission employs 700 people, and the fish and boat commission has 400 employees.