|
|
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE |
|
CONTACT: Victoria L.
Stanish |
State Rep. Mike Hanna |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Editor, Centre Daily Times
FROM: Rep. Mike Hanna
RE: Response to May 13 column on legislation that would shorten Pa. Game Commissioners’ terms
A May 13 guest column in this publication discussed House Bill 1214, which would shorten the term of office for Pennsylvania Game Commissioners from eight to four years. The author, Mark Nale, stated that the bill would undermine the independence of the Game Commission and create an office concerned more with political gains than with proper wildlife management.
The idea that the Game Commission policies are based on science and that politics do not play a part under the current management is ludicrous. The Game Commission bureaucrats continually put forth new decrees based on what they call their “scientific” policy. For example, their one-size-fits-all deer management policy does not differentiate between an area like Bucks County, which needs to further reduce deer numbers to minimize crop damage and human conflict, and an area like north central Pennsylvania, which needs to allow the deer population to increase.
No politics, you say? In a recent effort to bully state Rep. Dan Surra, the author of House Bill 1214, into doing what they want rather than what he thinks is best, the current Game Commission board chose to increase the number of doe licenses by 40 percent in almost all of Rep. Surra’s district, which encompasses Elk County and part of Clearfield County in the north central part of the state.
To warrant such an increase, the Game Commission should be able to present “scientific” data showing that the deer herd in this area is on the rise, but that evidence is lacking. I challenge Mr. Nale to convince any objective observer that the evidence in Rep. Surra’s district supports such an increase in licenses.
Anyone who has followed the actions of the commission over the years knows that they labor under a law-enforcement mentality with little or no emphasis on game management. In fact, their bureaucrats estimate both the annual kill and the herd size, rather than agree to a check-station procedure like many other states, which provide real numbers for determining how many deer are killed and how large the herd is.
A further example of the “lack of politics” in the Game Commission can be seen by the recent change in the president of the commission’s board. Former Commission President Tom Boop voiced his dissatisfaction with the current deer management policy and was swiftly voted out of office. In fact, Commissioner Rush Slidden, whom Mr. Nale claims is a defender of independence, is the leader of the group trying to silence former President Boop for voicing his own views, which differ from the views of the Commission bureaucrats.
In a perfect world, I agree that total independence might be a good thing for the Game Commission. However, a Game Commission run by bureaucrats with a serious lack of accountability does no service to the sportsmen and women of Pennsylvania who are paying the license fees for responsible wildlife management. Rep. Surra’s legislation would provide a level of accountability which is desperately needed in our Game Commission bureaucracy.
Rep. Mike Hanna is a Democrat representing the 76th Legislative District in the state House.