Sunday hunting and governing the game

By CONNIE MERTZ

Sunday hunting was first prohibited in Pennsylvania in 1878, and hunters have grown accustomed to one day of the week being off limits to harvesting game birds or animals. Concerning some hunted species, this may change if HB 1205 has any clout.

Introduced by State Representative Marc Gergely of Allegheny County, the House bill makes note of the overpopulation of deer in special regulation areas and the intensity of the growing problem of nuisance geese. Deer are causing vehicle collisions, and often overbrowse on residential properties, and Lyme disease is on the increase, particularly in highly populated areas.

“Expanding the hunting opportunities for special regulation areas will help to decrease the overall population of deer in these counties and create a safer environment on the roadways and in the woodlots of these populated areas,” Gergely said. “The inclusion of Sunday hunting for waterfowl addresses the issue of high populations of nuisance resident Canadian geese that never leave the state and cause significant damage to farmers’ fields, golf courses, and public parks that have shut down beaches because of outbreaks of E. coli in the lakes.”

Ohio and New York already have Sunday hunting, and this places a hardship on water-fowlers who do their hunting on waterways, which go beyond Pennsylvania’s borders. According to one survey, about half of the hunters polled support limited Sunday hunting.

While HB 1205 sounds good, it leaves some questions. Would one more day of hunting make a substantial difference in controlling overpopulations of deer and geese? Will it cause residential homeowners to curtail their Sunday outdoor activities? Will it really decrease vehicle collisions or make our beaches goose-dropping free?

Then there’s the moral question: Is it right to hunt seven days a week? What other species of wildlife are disturbed in the hunting process? Will hunting deter recreational enjoyment by non-hunters? Sometimes, there are no easy answers; just more questions.

Another hot topic under study is whether or not the Pennsylvania Game and Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission should merge. State Representative Ed Staback of Lackawanna and Wayne Counties and the Democratic chairman of the House Game and Fisheries Committee introduced a resolution this spring that would direct the Joint State Government Commission to study the feasibility of combining the law enforcement responsibilities of the two commissions into a new bureau within the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR).

“From a financial standpoint, it could be extremely cost effective to consolidate these functions under DCNR and create one new classification of conservation officer,” Staback said.

Revenues from hunting and fishing license sales fund both commissions, not tax dollars. About 20 percent of their annual budgets are spent on law enforcement, Staback said.

However, Staback’s legislation (H.R. 222) falls a step short of placing our two agencies under the executive branch, as has been done in many other states. Staback stressed that instead, it keeps the commissions separate because their independent status seems to be very important to hunters and anglers.

According the Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen Clubs, Pennsylvania is the only state with separate funding for both agencies. The federation supports the Game and Fisheries Committee of the House of Representatives in examining all facets of H.R. 222, including the financial feasibility, impact, costs and savings, and eliminating duplications of personnel and services of combining the agencies.

The federation also supports holding public hearings if necessary and has asked for a report no later than November 30.

With law enforcement responsibilities transferred to a new Bureau of Law Enforcement within the DCNR, it is suppose to give the PA Game Commission freedom to be a wildlife management agency.

Staback said, “I introduced this proposal with the hope that it would help steer the ongoing debate over the structure of our wildlife agencies towards a more common middle ground. The resolution would require this idea to be studied in depth, but it would not change current law or the way the two commissions currently operate. Hopefully, it will stimulate a productive public debate on the issue.”

Staback may be contacted by writing to his district office at 307 Betty Street, P.O. Box 305, Archbald-Eynon, PA 18403.