HARRISBURG - (2/7/08, 9:00 a.m., Room 140 Main Capitol)

The House Game and Fisheries Committee held a public hearing on House Bill 2205, a measure to increase penalties for poaching wildlife and to promote wildlife preservation.

Members in attendance included Chairman Edward Staback (D-Lackawanna), Minority Chairman Sam Rohrer (R-Berks), Rep. Todd Rock (R-Franklin), Rep. Brad Roae (R-Crawford), Rep. Dan Surra (D-Elk), Rep. Tim Mahoney (D-Fayette), Rep. Deberah Kula (D-Fayette), Rep. Michael McGeehan (D-Philadelphia), Rep. Mike Hanna (D-Clinton), Rep. David Millard (R-Columbia), Rep. Harry Readshaw (D-Allegheny), Rep. Gary Haluska (D-Cambria), Rep. Michael Peifer (R-Pike), Rep. Edward Wojnaroski (D-Cambria), Rep. Garth Everett (R- Lycoming), Rep. Dan Moul (R-Adams), Rep. Rob Kauffman (R-Franklin), Rep. Mark Keller (R-Perry), Rep. Chris Sainato (D-Lawrence), Rep. Keith Gillespie (R-York), Rep. Scott Perry (R-York), Rep. Gordon Denlinger (R-Lancaster) and Rep. Marc Gergely (D-Allegheny).


HB 2205 Staback - (PN 3146) Amends Title 34 (Game) further providing for definitions of "closed season", "contraband", "open season", "poaching" and "violation"; for jurisdiction and penalties by increasing certain fines and penalties; for revocation, suspension or denial of license, permit or registration and for determination of second or subsequent convictions; adding a subchapter providing for forfeiture; further providing for penalties relating to various unlawful activities by increasing certain penalties, for contraband by requiring automatic forfeiture; for prohibited devices and methods by requiring automatic forfeiture; for tagging and reporting big game kills; for penalties for unlawful use of lights while hunting, buying and selling game, trespass on private property while hunting, unlawful killing or taking of big game; and repealing provisions relating to additional penalty for poaching.

Richard Palmer, Director of the Bureau of Wildlife Protection, Pennsylvania Game Commission explained to the committee that increasing penalties for serious cases of poaching is part of this agency's strategic plan. He added that poaching is prevalent throughout the Commonwealth, not only in rural areas, but in suburban and even urban areas. "In fact, over 1,000 prosecutions a year have been made for the past three years directly related to poaching of big game species," Palmer stated. "The current statutory undervaluation of wildlife due to low penalties can create a public and judicial sentiment that these crimes are not important, and are counterproductive to wildlife protection efforts as they do not create an effective deterrent to chronic offenders." Palmer went on to relate the stories of several chronic offenders who have been charged and convicted with numerous violations over many years. He said these repeat offenders are clear examples that the current penalties and license revocations are not effective deterrents. He outlined the most common reasons for poaching as greed, obsessive behavior in collecting antlers, poachers who take pride in their infamous status in their communities and thrill killing with no intention of making use of any part of the animal. "A lesser known cause of poaching is the illegal commercialization of wildlife in the black market trade," he added. "The modern black market trade is growing and can have the same devastating effects to local wildlife populations." Palmer noted the most common animal parts sold on the black market are venison, velvet antler, black bear gall bladders, paws, skulls, claws, as well as feathers and talons from certain birds, like eagles, owls and hawks. He presented information on poaching-related penalties in neighboring states. Palmer also offered comparison examples of how much less severe the penalties are in Pennsylvania for the same offenses.

Chairman Staback asked what part more severe penalties in other states play to deter poaching. Palmer said there are other states that have experienced commercial poaching similar to what is occurring in Pennsylvania. He added that New York has felonies for commercialization of wildlife offenses. West Virginia has strong penalties against killing multiple bears. Other states that have strengthened their penalties to the felony level are Wyoming, Illinois, Virginia, Florida, California, Idaho, Nevada and Texas. He said Colorado has one of the most effective deterrent felonies on the books, especially if only the antlers or other parts of an animal are taken after killing it.

Chairman Staback asked if the states that have adopted felonies have experienced a drop in the number of offenses. Palmer replied that the states he is aware of that have experienced the most reduction in offenses are Colorado and Montana. When the offenses were upgraded to the felony level people began to take them seriously, he added.

Minority Chairman Rohrer queried how joining the interstate predators compact would affect House Bill 2205. Palmer said the compact provides for a reciprocal hunting license revocation in all the other states of the compact. He said it is a significant deterrent and Pennsylvania should look seriously at joining the compact. He said the difference is that this bill deals with penalties for specific criminal violations in Pennsylvania and should be considered as a separate issue from the provisions in the interstate compact.

Minority Chairman Rohrer asked if there is any prohibition against taking other firearms an individual owns that are not used in a poaching offense. Palmer said the firearm taken must have been used in the offense for which the individual is being prosecuted.

Rep. Haluska expressed some concerns with specific sections of the bill that were brought to his attention by a local magistrate in his district. Palmer answered some of the specific concerns and agreed to look at other sections and work to address the concerns with recommended changes in the bill's language.

Rep. Gergely said Pennsylvania is one of only eight states that are not part of the interstate compact and it should join. "We can't be one of the top hunting states and not have reciprocity with other states," in the effort to crack down on poaching. Palmer said there are many people from Pennsylvania who go to other states to hunt. He noted that several western states are begging Pennsylvania officials to join the compact and it should be done so the state doesn't become "a poacher's paradise."

Rep. Haluska said eight years ago the Game Commission was going to institute a point-of-sale plan so it could join the compact and track poachers whose licenses had been revoked in other states. He added that the state still does not have the capability of tracking those individuals.

Melody Zullinger, Executive Director, Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs commented that her organization wholeheartedly supports increasing fines and penalties for violations of the Game Code. "Poaching of big game animals, especially deer continues to be a problem and appears to be one that is on the increase," she said. Zullinger went on to say there are an increasing number of incidents of parents and grandparents encouraging young hunters to engage in illegal activities, such as shooting from vehicles. She called for increased penalties, including mandatory hunting license revocations, for adults who encourage or assist youths in illegal hunting activities. She also encouraged the committee to consider increasing penalties for those convicted of assaulting a Wildlife Control Officer (WCO). She noted that the penalties for offenses committed against certain wildlife are more severe than those for assaulting a WCO. Zullinger added that in addition to House Bill 2205, the Legislature should pass a measure allowing Pennsylvania to join an existing interstate compact agreement that allows member states to punish and revoke the licenses of poaching offenders from other states. Finally, on behalf of the Pennsylvania Deer Association, she said that organization is also supportive of the bill and punishing poachers.

Ed Wentzler, Legislative Director of the United Bowhunters of Pennsylvania, briefly expressed his organization's support of House Bill 2205.

The committee also heard testimony from Andrew Page, Director, Hunting Campaign, Humane Society of the United States. He mentioned that the Society is supportive of House Bill 2205. "Cost must be a deterrent," he stated. "The cost of getting caught must outweigh the risk and profit of poaching." Page went on to say Pennsylvania is second only to Texas in the number of hunting licenses sold. No jail time is provided for poachers unless a violation involves threatened or endangered species. Low penalties send a message to poachers that wildlife in the state has little or no value, he added. "In Pennsylvania, a person may receive the same penalty for illegally killing deer that they might for illegally parking their car." Page also urged the committee to pass legislation to allow Pennsylvania to join the interstate compact to deter poaching across state lines.

Chairman Staback said under Title 18, there are substantially stiffer penalties for cruelty to domesticated animals like dogs and cats than those for killing wildlife. He asked Page if he agreed that penalties for killing wildlife should be as high as those for harming domestic animals. Page said he agrees that the penalties should be on the same level for offenses against both wildlife and domestic animals. He also said states where the reward outweighs the risk become magnets for animal offenses.

Charlie Bolgiano, Legislative Liaison and James Slinsky, Consultant, Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania. Bolgiano explained that when his organization first learned of House Bill 2205, it sounded appealing as a way to help stop serious big game offenses. But, he noted there are sections of the bill that they disagree with. First, the measure may cause an increase in the number of license revocations at a time when the base number of hunters is declining. He also raised an issue over making it unlawful to use lights while hunting, if an ethical hunter is attempting to recover "his or her trophy" just after sunset. Bolgiano also raised concerns over sections in the bill dealing with mistaken kills and not properly signing a hunting license.

Slinsky claimed the bill is too long and complicated for many people and should be split into two separate measures. He said the despicable growth of commercial poaching deserves undivided attention with strong deterrents and aggressive law enforcement. Additionally, he raised concerns over those who kill wildlife in self-defense. He cited the example of black bears who occasionally wanders into residential areas, "…uncomfortably close to children and adults. I should be under no legal obligation to figure out exactly what the bear has on his mind before taking action," Slinsky said. Wildlife that is destructive to a homeowner's property is another example of why an individual should be allowed to defend themselves. He also took issue with seizures of property unrelated to poaching crimes and added, "Prosecuting individuals for felonies is not an area the Agency (Game Commission) has had a great deal of training." Slinsky said he is not soft on poaching activity and it should be curtailed, but warned that "…appropriate action should be taken without violating the principles of cruel and unusual punishment."

Chairman Staback commented that the bill is not written in stone and there are some areas where amendments could be made. He said he will get back to both men on some areas of the bill they have concerns with.

Minority Chairman Rohrer said they raised some legitimate concerns that he agreed with. "Any time we make policy we have to look at unintended consequences," he said.

Rep. Millard asked Slinsky if he could cite any examples of someone shooting an animal in self-defense or that was damaging property. Slinsky said there is a case in Clinton County where a property owner shot an elk that was damaging his trees. The man called the Game Commission to tell them about the incident and he was issued a citation. The man is now appealing the citation and will incur substantial legal fees in his defense. Slinsky said the man should not be prosecuted as a poacher as he was merely abiding by his Constitutional right to defend his property.

Rep. Haluska asked Palmer who would prosecute an individual in a case like the one cited by Slinsky. Palmer said that once it moved through the district magistrate's court, it would be handled by a district attorney or a special prosecutor appointed by a district attorney.

Rep. Hanna said there need to be protections for homeowners defending their property against wildlife damage to reduce the incidence of questionable cases. Slinsky reiterated his position that homeowners who are defending their property shouldn't be prosecuted as poachers and defending themselves shouldn't be an elaborate and expensive process.

Palmer said there are provisions in the wildlife code that protect an individual when they act in self-defense and which protect property and this bill does not amend those provisions.

Rep. Hanna asked Palmer if he supported elk deterrent legislation designed to protect property. Palmer said he isn't familiar with that legislation but is willing to work with the representative on the measure.

Chairman Staback announced the committee will meet on February 13 to hear a report on the Game Commission's annual report and on February 14 to receive the state Fish and Boat Commission's annual report. Both meetings will be in Room 205, Ryan Office Building.

Rick Morrison, PA Legislative Services