HARRISBURG, Pa., Feb. 1 /PRNewswire/ -- Pennsylvania Game Commission
 officials today delivered the agency's annual report to the House Game and
 Fisheries Committee at an informational meeting in the State Capitol.  To view
 a copy of the annual report, go to the Game Commission's website
 (http://www.pgc.state.pa.us), click on "Annual Reports," then select
 "2003-2004 Legislative Annual Report."  The report will be posted at 1 p.m.
 today.
     Following is the prepared statement delivered to the House Game and
 Fisheries Committee by agency officials.
 
     EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR VERNON ROSS:
     Good morning, Chairman Smith, Chairman Staback and members of the
 committee.
     I have with me today part of the Game Commission team; just a few of the
 many devoted and talented employees we have at the Game Commission and I'd
 like each of them to have a few minutes to address you on specific areas of
 the annual report at the end of my remarks.
     It often pays to look back before looking forward.  In the past five
 years, the Game Commission has made it a high priority to implement programs
 to enhance recruitment and retention so that we can keep our hunting and
 trapping heritage alive and well in Pennsylvania.  Hunting and trapping are
 our state's best means of managing wildlife populations, from deer to beavers,
 from bears to geese.  For that very reason, I'd like to point out some of the
 many opportunities we have created, to not only provide our adult hunters with
 greater opportunities, but to attract our youth as well.
 
     2000
     -- bobcat season
     -- three-day muzzleloader season
     -- two-week concurrent buck/doe for juniors and seniors
 
     2001
     -- first modern day elk season since 1931
     -- expanded October muzzleloader season to 7 days, including 2 Saturdays
     -- three-day October antlerless for junior/senior/disabled/military
        hunters
 
     2002
     -- approved crossbows for elk, deer, and bear rifle seasons
     -- expanded the traditional three-day bear season to deal with localized
        nuisance complaints
 
     2003
     -- DMAP
     -- Additional three-week antlerless season in WMU 5D
 
     Junior hunting opportunities
     -- Youth pheasant hunt (2002)
     -- Youth spring gobbler season (2004)
     -- Special antlerless deer harvesting opportunities (1998, expanded 2000)
     -- Youth squirrel hunt (expanded 2004)
     -- Youth mentoring during the pheasant hunt (2002)
 
     Upcoming opportunities
     -- Second spring gobbler
     -- Cable restraints usage for coyotes/foxes
     -- Update of the Hunter-Trapper Education program
 
     The expanded opportunities have made Pennsylvania one of the few states in
 the nation that is experiencing a gain in our youth hunters.  The past couple
 of years we've seen a gain of two percent or more every year.  That is a
 statistic we are especially proud of and we'd like to continue that trend.
 This year we also have seen a rise in overall license sales by two percent,
 including gains in bear, archery and muzzleloader sales.
     I recognize that despite all of these expanded hunting opportunities, this
 past season has strained the agency's relationship with some of our sportsmen.
 As the Executive Director, I am committed to improving this relationship.  We
 cannot and should not abandon those who have supported the agency through the
 years and who now desperately want to continue to be part of our efforts.
 Hunters and the Pennsylvania Game Commission are inseparable.  You cannot have
 one without the other.
     I think everyone in this room knows I am referring to the deer season.
 Chairman Smith has indicated that he will be holding a hearing on deer
 management with this committee, so today I'll be very brief and leave the
 details to that hearing.  As we recently have stated, we don't know what
 happened this past deer season and we won't know until March when we have all
 the data in and analyzed.  But I can tell you this; we will be giving that
 data a very hard look.  Just like you and the sportsmen, we want to know:
 
     -- Where were the deer killed and, more important, where were the places
 few deer were harvested?
     -- What was the age structure of the deer that were killed?  Are bucks
 getting older?  Are we shooting too many yearlings?  What are the trends in
 the herd in every location in Pennsylvania?
 
     From this information we will be willing to make changes and be both
 flexible and responsive.  Changes in seasons in each WMU are possible.  Not
 every WMU will be treated the same way.
     We must bring a balance to all of our decisions.  That balance comes from
 common sense, open communication and an understanding of those who are
 ultimately affected by our decisions.  Our focus must be on the long-term,
 big-picture wildlife issues without losing our traditional stakeholders or
 alienating our new ones.
     Today, we have more opportunities to hunt than ever before, but we are not
 planning on resting on our laurels.  We will continue to keep an eye on the
 future and find ways to increase the number of Pennsylvanians that enjoy
 hunting and trapping activities.  Hunters and trappers are the original and
 leading wildlife conservation advocates, and the more of them that there are,
 the more support we all can count on.
 
     BUREAU OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR CARL ROE:
     As we move forward with program accountability in the Game Commission, we
 took an important step this year.  This was the first year that we looked at
 measuring the results of our execution of strategic objectives in the
 Strategic Plan.  As you recall, the plan includes both outcome and output
 measures for each of the strategic objectives.  Each objective had a program
 manager and they had the responsibility of coordinating the measurement
 results with other bureaus and the regions.  These measurements are being
 examined and refined to ensure that they lead to a sound conclusion on how
 well the objectives were achieved in the strategic plan.
     We will use the measurements and other inputs to evaluate where we are in
 achieving our strategic objectives.  The evaluation will be used to make
 programmatic adjustments to resources during the re-budget period in late
 spring.  This will help ensure that we are placing resources where we need to
 from a program perspective.
     Additionally, we developed the 2005-06 budget using a zero-based budget
 approach, and we used a programmatic approach to better define actual program
 costs.  The zero-based process was pretty good for an initial effort, and we
 will improve with each iteration.
     The Strategic Plan has several major programs that have not been able to
 be achieved due to a lack of resources.  Some of these programs include: the
 Point-of-Sale License System; a private lands habitat initiative, Acres for
 Wildlife; several wildlife research projects; and an expansion of outreach
 programs just to name a few.  Additionally, from a program point of view we
 need to take care of numerous infrastructure requirements, buildings,
 telephone systems, and capital purchases of both on-road and off-road
 equipment.
     The lack of resources places considerable pressure on other programs.  The
 cost of the new labor contract is placing great pressure on many programs.
 The approximate 13.25 percent increase in pay and benefits over three years
 requires a constant evaluation of where funds are expended.  Since we have
 held the budget to zero growth and revenues have been constant, any increased
 personnel costs have to come out of operational programs, as the Game Fund can
 no longer be drawn down at its current rate.  Consequently, there will
 continue to be a decrease in services and increased limits on the agency's
 ability to achieve the programs in the Strategic Plan and what the public is
 accustomed to receiving.
     Delays in the increase of resources exacerbate the problem as additional
 programs will need to be reduced or cut and the replenishment of the Game Fund
 will take longer the further the Game Fund goes down.
     I believe we have made significant progress in looking at programs,
 measuring their progress and building a budget that is more program oriented.
 It is not as precise as it will be in the future, but we are heading in the
 right direction.  However, without sufficient resources many programs will not
 be achieved and current programs and service levels will be reduced.
 
     BUDGET ANALYST DOT DERR:
     The Game Commission has an authorized complement level of 732 full-time
 equivalent positions.  As of the end of December of 2004, there were 688
 filled positions and 44 vacancies.  The bi-weekly salaries and benefits are in
 excess of $1,160,000.  In addition to the full-time equivalent positions,
 there are approximately 135 authorized wage/seasonal positions.
     The revenues estimated to be received during fiscal year 2003-04 were
 $65.8 million.  Actual revenues received were $63.6 million.  The shortfall
 was due to weather contributing to the lack of timber sales.
     As of the end of December 2004, the agency has received over 75 percent of
 the estimated revenues for the current fiscal year and is confident that the
 revenue projection for this fiscal year will be met.
     The expenditures continue to be closely monitored through monthly reports,
 and projections through the end of the fiscal year also are monitored monthly.
 Cost-saving measures continue to be explored and implemented where possible.
     In-kind services are captured through monthly reports in order to reflect
 a more accurate account of work being conducted for habitat improvement.
 Overtime approval is monitored closely with prior approval and a monthly
 report submitted to the Executive Office.  Personnel Action Requests are
 reviewed and discussed by the Executive Office committee to analyze the need
 for backfilling of positions.
     Given no unanticipated expenses, the Game Commission is committed to
 meeting our agency mission while staying within our authorized spending level
 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2005.
     The fiscal year 2005-06 Budget Request currently is in the Governor's
 Office being reviewed.  This request is based on a zero-based budgeting
 concept.  Over a period of several months, we met with Bureau and Regional
 directors to closely examine projects within program areas and determined
 projected costs based on activities within a project.  Although the zero-based
 budgeting concept is a work in progress, we will continue to work towards this
 goal.
 
     As we get closer to the end of the fiscal year, federal allocations are
 announced and revenues are reviewed, it may be necessary to reprioritize our
 original budget submission to ensure all mandated personnel costs are
 satisfied and operating expenses are covered while staying within our approved
 spending level.  Historically, the first two months of each fiscal year we
 need approximately $13 million to cover personnel expenses and contract
 commitments.
 
     DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MICHAEL SCHMIT:
     The Game Commission has in place a process whereby citizens can register a
 formal complaint against an agency representative.  Once logged into that
 system the complaint is investigated in a timely basis and the complainant and
 employee, or Deputy in the case of Deputy Wildlife Conservation Officers, are
 notified of the finding.
     Given the fact Game Commission employees encounter and interact with
 hundreds of thousands of citizens annually, and with many tens of thousands of
 those interactions being of a law enforcement nature, we are pleased to report
 very low numbers of formal complaints registered against employees.
     During 2004, there were 20 formal complaints lodged against agency
 personnel.
     Of these 20 complaints, 16 have been investigated and final disposition
 letters sent to the complainant.  Four investigations remain open and should
 be concluded by mid-February.
     Of the 16 completed investigations, a finding of sustained was determined
 in 3; a finding of not sustained in 1; a finding of exonerated in 7; a finding
 of resolved in 1; a finding of founded in 1; and a finding of unfounded was
 determined in 3.
     For comparison purposes there were 15 complaints filed against Game
 Commission representatives in 2003, 27 in 2002 and 32 in 2001.
 
     BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR SCOTT KLINGER:
     In January of 2004, I took over as director of the Bureau of Land
 Management.  I am very proud of all the habitat work our employees accomplish
 on our State Game Lands and with our many public access cooperators.  As I
 have told the Executive Director and Commissioners on many occasions, habitat
 is not everything -- it's the only thing.  I truly believe that and so do the
 men and women of the Pennsylvania Game Commission.
     Our Food and Cover Crews and Land Managers spend countless hours
 establishing wildlife habitat improvement projects with our many partners.
 But we can and must do better.  Habitat planning at multiple scales will be
 necessary to ensure wildlife habitats are maintained for future generations.
 We will be reorganizing the Bureau and placing greater emphasis on habitat
 planning in the years ahead.  We need to integrate our wildlife and forest
 planning efforts on the State Game Lands.
     Some important steps have already been made.  We have placed our Regional
 Foresters under the direction of our Regional Directors with policy being
 established by our forestry and wildlife team in Harrisburg.  Regions have
 been given specific habitat targets to achieve through our timber management
 program.  Timber harvesting will be used as a management tool to achieve
 desired future wildlife habitats; so will prescribed burning and other
 management tools.  We also have fielded six Regional Biologists that will
 assist our Foresters and Land Managers in developing integrated wildlife
 management plans for our State Game Lands.
     But, we will do more.  Working with the Department of Conservation and
 Natural Resources' Bureau of Forestry, we are in the process of developing our
 Forest Inventory Team that will give us needed information on the condition of
 our forestlands.  Data collected will tell us how fast our forests are
 growing; growing stocks; estimated yields; and impacts from insects and
 disease.  Data collected will allow us to integrate our timber and wildlife
 program objectives and ensure long-term sustainability of forest and wildlife
 resources.  Forest Planners, Wildlife Planners and Recreation Planners will
 work closely together to develop statewide and Regional State Game Lands
 Plans.  These plans will involve the public.  These plans will allow us to
 better manage our precious State Game Lands in the most cost-effective manner.
 
     At the same time, we need to do a better job working with private
 landowners that care about wildlife.  Nearly 90 percent of all Forest
 Stewardship landowners entered the program because they were interested in
 wildlife.  Working with partners such as Natural Resources Conservation
 Service (NRCS), we have placed 20 Habitat Biologists on the ground to deliver
 Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) and other Farm Bill Programs.
 To date, they have written 128,000 acres of wildlife habitat plans and with
 our food and cover crews coordinated the planting of 88,000 acres of wildlife
 habitat.  In addition, using funds from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, we
 have hired six biologists to work with private landowners on species of
 special concern.
     Conserving and protecting wildlife habitat will be the greatest challenge
 in the 21st century.  It will not be easy.  I look forward to working with all
 of you to ensure that Pennsylvania has a lasting legacy of wildlife and
 wildlife habitat for generations to come.
 
 

SOURCE  Pennsylvania Game Commission