April 14, 2026 · GAME AND FISHERIES · 3,844 words · 7 speakers · 61 segments
Thank you. Please take the roll. Chair Kulik. Here. Rep. Davidson. Designation here. Rep. Doherty. Designation here. Rep. Gunganauer. Rep. Gunz. Rep. Haddock. Rep. Harris. Designation here. Rep. Holenstein. Designation here. Rep. Inglis. Designation here. Rep. Kazim. Designation here. Rep. Mirsky. Rep. Resnick. Designation here. Rep. Steele. Designation here. And Rep. Young. Designation here. Chair Maloney. Here. Rep. Anderson. Designation. Rep. Banta. Here. Rep Cook. Designation. Rep DeVanzo. Designation. Rep Kerwin. Designation. Rep Kuzma. That's designation. I'll have it in front of me. Rep Labs. Warner Way. Designation. Rep. Oldsummer Designation And Rep. Reichert Designation Rep. Smith Rep. Wendley We have a quorum Thank you We're going to go out of order on this We're going to The chair is going to call up House Resolution 468, printers number 3149 from Representative Cooper.
Griffin, will you please read a summary of the resolution? Thank you, Chair. House Resolution 468 from Representative Cooper. This resolution encourages municipal governments and property owners to open their lands to public hunting and increase cooperation with the Game Commission and utilization of their programs, all to better manage suburban deer populations. Thank you.
Representative Cooper, would you like to speak on your resolution?
Yes, please. Thank you for the opportunity. Good morning, everyone. Thank you, Chair Kulik and Chair Maloney, for your leadership and for moving this resolution forward so quickly. Chair Kulik, thank you for joining me as a prime co-sponsor as well. Across southwestern Pennsylvania, deer populations are growing, and the impact is touching more people every year. Chair Kulik, I know you have heard these stories in Allegheny County like I have in Westmoreland. Neighbors are frustrated by ruined gardens, drivers on high alert every dusk and dawn, and families worried about health risks. This isn't just a rural or farming issue anymore. It touches every walk of life. Suburban homeowners, parents pushing strollers and parks, commuters on the road, and seniors trying to enjoy their yards. The problem is real. It's widespread, and it's getting worse. Consider the human financial toll on our roads alone. Reported deer vehicle collisions in Pennsylvania rose 35 percent from 3,618 in 2015 to 5,111 in 2024. And those are the ones that are only officially recorded. Many minor incidents go unreported. Each crash brings repair costs, insurance hikes, injuries, and sometimes tragedies. Pennsylvania consistently ranks among the worst state in the nation for these incidents. We cannot accept this as our new normal. Beyond the roads and damages everywhere, native forests and understory plants are being stripped bare, threatening biodiversity. Homeowners watch helplessly as gardens, hostas, fruit trees, and ornamental landscapings are devoured overnight. Farmers face significant crop losses. Speaking with my farmers is what led me to write this resolution. The amount of crop damage caused by deers to their farms is tremendous. And then there's the hidden health risk. Tick populations are exploding because deer serve as primary hosts and transporters. Lyme disease and other tick-borne illnesses are now reported in all 67 Pennsylvania counties, invading our backyards, parks, and playgrounds. We don't need to invent new laws or expensive programs or more studies. We already have proven effective tools managed through the Pennsylvania Game Commission to restore balance. The solution is straightforward and time-tested, regulated hunting, supported by greater land access for responsible hunters. This resolution simply urges municipalities, landowners, and farmers across the Commonwealth to open appropriate lands to lawful hunters. Access is the missing piece. Without it, even the best management plans fall short. Many communities and local governments simply don't know about the excellent programs already available. DPAPs, Deer Management Assistant Programs, Agricultural Deer Control Programs, Hunter Access Programs, the newly created Certified Hunter Program, which has already shown great success in its initial pilot year by connecting trained, vetted hunters with landowners who need help. We don't need bigger government. We need to use the smart existing tools we have. Hunting is the most effective, biologically sound, cost-efficient way to manage deer numbers. Pennsylvania hunters have a long tradition of responsible stewardship, and they stand ready to help. We have real world proof right here in southwestern Pennsylvania. In Fox Chapel, a controlled archery program in public parks and residential areas has dramatically reduced deer numbers over the years, cutting vehicle collisions from 125 per year to fewer than 20. The town of Mechanilus and other communities have seen similar successes, fewer accidents, less property damage, healthier forests, and greater peace of mind for the residents. These programs work because they are targeted, safe, and community-driven. They restore ecological balance without harming the deer herd long-term. Colleagues, this resolution is not about promoting hunting for its own sake. It's about a practical problem-solving issue. It's about protecting public safety on our roads, safeguarding our environment and gardens, reducing the spread of disease, and helping families and farmers. It's about empowering local communities with information, encouraging partnerships between residents, municipalities, and the Game Commission. By supporting H.R. 468, we send a clear message. Pennsylvania is serious about addressing suburban deer conflicts with common sense proven solutions. We inform our citizens and local governments of the benefits available when they partner with responsible hunters Thank you for allowing me to talk And thank you for bringing this to our committee I appreciate that
Are there any comments from anyone? Chair Maloney?
Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. I would just say that I know you're not a hunter and a sportsman, Rep. Cooper, but I appreciate your concern, and there are many of these issues that have been addressed over the years and or tried to be addressed. I would have focused more on the fact that the municipal land, which to your point is probably the biggest hiccup, I would suggest that taxpayer-funded land should be open to sportsmen as long as we're within our safety zone issues and things like that, to continue that safety. I have hoped that municipalities across the state would have understood that. Some do. And I don't necessarily agree with the rest of the statistics in how doom and gloom we are that the deer are causing all this health and problems across the state. However, the resolution is to encourage municipal government to open their land, which I agree with. Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chair Rapatic. I'd like to thank the maker of the resolution. I'm surprised you're not a hunter by your knowledge. I think too many times we hear from hunters that that might be in a, you know, Pennsylvania is a vast land. And there's different stages of our forests and our hunting grounds. So some area might be light with deer at a certain time. And sometimes our hunters want to be successful and they complain when they don't see a deer. but in other areas, as you brought out, western Pennsylvania, and myself right in Luzerne County, Sunday night I walked out of my garage and I had 12 deer in my front yard eating my flowers. So there's pockets. And sometimes we don't realize as a sportsman group that there's areas of deer that have a high density versus a low density. I think this resolution brings light to that, and you certainly brought out a lot of interesting statistics. You did a lot of homework. In particular, I found it interesting where you talked about the archery, where you had an aggressive archery program to get some deer out of a certain area, and it seemed to work with the statistics that you have. And even hunters, they'll say, oh, that's the insurance agencies pushing that because they don't want deer. They don't want to pay. but it happens. Somebody that's hit three deer in his lifetime with his car or truck, I know that that happens, and it's for real. So this is a great resolution. Anytime we can bring light to a subject that needs a little bit more attention and something positive. So thank you for making that, and I tend to agree with all your statistics. Thank you.
Thank you, Rep.
But there are hot spots throughout Pennsylvania, so it's not a one-size-fits-all. And the Certified Hunter Program, which will hopefully be allowing access to the municipalities, is one that we really want to draw attention to that can help in areas where you have those issues, and we've seen success. So I appreciate your comments. Thank you.
Yeah, thank you so much. And if you're in western Pennsylvania, there is a tremendous deer issue. I have municipalities calling all the time on what they can do. I had four deer living in my backyard all winter. And, you know, we want them there, but, you know, the hazards that are posed by them are tremendous. And especially Allegheny County has just seen a huge rise. in the deer population and the problems that are caused. So thank you so much for bringing this up.
Those in favor of reporting the resolution is committed will vote aye. Those opposed, no. Do we have any negative votes on the resolution? Seeing none, the resolution passes. Thank you. The resolution will be reported as committed. Thank you, Representative Cooper. The chair now calls up House Bill 2363, printers number 3144, from Representative Mirsky.
Paul, will you please read a summary of the bill? This legislation would amend Title 34, Game of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, provide that all tagging reporting requirements be prescribed in regulation and promulgated by the Pennsylvania Game Commission.
All right, Representative Mursky, would you like to speak on the bill?
Thank you. Chair Kulik, Chair Maloney, and other members of the committee, thank you for your consideration of House Bill 2363. House Bill 2363 is a practical, common-sense update to a system that a great deal of hunters in the Commonwealth interact with, the tagging and reporting of big-game harvests. The goal of this legislation is simple, to modernize a process that has not kept pace with the way people communicate, report information, and use technology today. For decades, Pennsylvania has relied on a paper-based tagging and reporting structure, and it has served us well. But it also represents some challenges. Tags can tear, get wet, fall off, or become unreadable. Reporting can be delayed or missed entirely. And the Game Commission depends on timely, accurate harvest data to make decisions and manage our wildlife responsibly. Additionally, young people today, they don't use paper and pencil. Even in school, they use technology to do their tests and to do their work, and they're just used to using technology. House Bill 2363 addresses these issues by giving the Game Commission the flexibility to adopt a modern tagging materials and format, therefore providing hunters with an easier and more efficient way to report big game harvests. When reporting is easier, it's possible that more hunters will participate. It benefits the Game Commission as well, and it benefits our wildlife populations and every Pennsylvanian who values our outdoor heritage. I do want to emphasize what this bill does not do. This bill does not change the seasons. It does not change bag limits. It doesn't alter the fundamental responsibility of hunters. What it does is update the tools used to carry out those responsibilities, tools that should reflect the year we're living in, 2026. Other states have modernized their systems and have seen improvements in data quality, reduced administrative burdens, and higher reporting rates. House Bill 2363 positions Pennsylvania to adopt similar best practices while tailoring them to the needs of our own hunting community. This legislation is the product of conversations with hunters, conservation organizations, and wildlife managers. Their message has been consistent. The system does work, but we can modernize it. My bill is a balanced, reasonable step towards that improvement. I respectfully urge my colleagues to support House Bill 2363 and welcome any questions that you may have. Thank you.
Are there any questions for Representative Marski?
You maloney Yeah I believe Madam Chair we will probably be talking about an amendment That correct So before that amendment comes up, I'd just like to ask you a couple questions, especially since I think the amendment is going to sort of explain my concern.
Yep.
Have you ever tugged a turkey, a bear, or a deer?
A deer.
Did you keep that tag?
I kept the tag, yeah. That was 1989, I think.
Yeah, well, it doesn't matter what year it was. No, no, I'm just saying, yeah.
It's a trophy nonetheless.
But for the most part, I have tremendous concern about why not only the legality that could take place on the field, but that's why the amendment is coming up and I wanted to ask you if you had participated in that
so that you would understand why. Yeah, and I agree to your amendment. The nostalgia of why that tag
is so good. Yeah. Thank you. You're welcome. Anyone else?
Okay, the question is, will the committee report the bill? Chair Maloney is offering amendment A02874. Will the committee agree to the amendment on that question?
Griffin, please read a summary of the amendment to A-02874. Thank you, Chair. Chairman Maloney's amendment would ensure that if a virtual or digital tagging option is made available, then a physical tagging option could also be possible free of charge to the sportsman.
Chair Maloney, any comments on the amendment? Yeah, I just, some of the things that come to my mind, I realize you had some commentary there about timely and young people, and I wish I could say that making something easier for young people was going to bring them front and center, because I don't believe that's going to happen. However, I understand the intent of making some things a little bit more mainstream today. But with the nostalgia of, you know, having a tag, being able to say, look, this is my legal tag to this game is in paper form. And I think it would be extremely difficult to be able to prove that on your phone or to continue to go to some sort of electronic document. The other part is taxidermists would be, I think, in a really tough way about how they would prove whose game is whose without that tag. The butcher would be in the same category, which is why I wanted to make sure that we had the opportunity to keep that tag not always a legal document, but if you use a mountain, sometimes people will put their tag or paper tag with their trophy, if you will. And that's the biggest concern I had with respect to the amendment.
Representative Burski.
I just – I agree with you, and I don't – and I'm going to let our executive director, Mr. Scott, explain it because I think he can explain it a little better. There's still going to be a paper trail. It's not just strictly electronic, so I'll let you explain.
Sure. You know, other states are currently doing this. I'm sure you're aware, Mr. Chairman. I don't know of any problems that have arisen from it, but the commission would have a trail still so that a taxidermist or a processor would be within the legal right to hold the animal, the carcass, and to prepare accordingly.
Thank you for that. I appreciate it. I just want to bring something to your attention that you may not know has happened over the years, because this is very important. So if you're out hunting, you said you've tugged a deer. If you're out hunting in the woods and you are maybe with somebody else or you don't even know, and you hear maybe a firearm, and you go to retrieve what you think is your dispatched animal, if there's a tag on that deer already, is it yours?
No.
Right. So you understand the power of that tag?
Right.
This is a serious matter. I had a brother who lost a bear that he killed because somebody ran over to it, unsportsmanlike, and tug it. You would have a conflicting problem with somebody with their phone. Like, oh, let me show you. I dispatched that animal with my phone. It's no signal. The Amish. it's a plethora of concern for me as to making sure we just keep the paper tag.
And I don't disagree with you, and that's why I'm in favor of your amendment.
Okay, those in favor of the amendment will vote aye. Those no, I am in favor of the amendment and asking for a yes vote. Are there any negative votes on the amendment? Seeing none, the amendment is agreed to. Okay. Those in favor of reporting the bill as amended, is there any debate on the bill? Any debate on the bill as amended? Okay, seeing none, those in favor reporting the bill as amended will vote aye. Those opposed, no. Are there any negative votes on the bill as amended? Thank you. Seeing none, the bill will be reported as amended. Thank you. Thank you, Representative Mirsky. The chair now calls up House Bill 2365, printers number 3146.
Paul, please read a summary of the bill. Thank you, Chair. This legislation would amend Title 34 game of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes to provide for a mentored trapping program.
the question is will the committee report the bill representative mirsky is offering amendment a zero two eight five three will the committee agree to the amendment on that question paul
please read a summary of amendment a zero two eight five three thank you chair this legislation would amend Title 34 to provide that a reduced permit fee for in-state, for resident and non-resident fur dealers to $50 per season per year.
Representative Mursky, any comments on the amendment? Thank you, Madam Chair. This amendment would lower the permit fee for both residents and non-resident fur dealers to $50. This amendment is supported by the Pennsylvania Game Commission, the Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen and Conservationists, the Pennsylvania Trappers Association, and Hunter Nation. All these organizations recognize that in recent years, the declining price of furs has significantly impacted both residents and non-resident fur dealers. According to the information provided by the Game Commission last year non fur dealers purchased four permits at a cost of per permit totaling just while residential fur dealers purchased 55 permits at a price of per permit totaling Based on these numbers, the amendment would result in an estimated $3,700 loss in revenue for the Pennsylvania Game Commission. However, I believe that supporting our struggling fur dealers and ensuring that trapping continues and ideally grows in Pennsylvania is more important than this minimal loss of revenue. Therefore, I ask for an affirmative vote on my amendment.
Thank you. Is there any further debate on the amendment? Seeing none, those in favor of the amendment will vote aye. Those opposed, no. Are there any negative votes on the amendment? Seeing none, the amendment is agreed to. We will now go to the bill. Is there any debate on the bill? Okay, seeing none, those in favor of reporting the bill as amended will vote aye those opposed no
Yes, madam.
Okay, we recognize Chair Maloney.
So I fully supported the amendment as, you know, as we often like to say, a fix. So I'm always in favor of making things a little bit more usable and user-friendly with respect to prices. but as far as this bill was concerned look i've been a long time trapper and hunter and uh this bill to me i was part of the mentoring program so much of what we've done here in many ways has been sort of user-friendly and and better for education and things like that I do have maybe Paul maybe you could maybe enlighten me a little bit about some of the things that have come to my mind about this bill which I believe has great intentions I really do as far as youth but we have a youth mentoring program can you tell me the difference of what we have in place and what this would do
this would simply mimic that sir for the mentored hunting program it would put it into for trapping as well but is that not also available now with the combination license i think this would just put it more in line with what we currently do because under title 34 it's not listed in that way but it's that's what a combination license is so we have the availability to have youth be mentored in hunting and trapping.
Another concern I have is, is there any provisions in here for cable restraints?
No.
Yeah, so again, like I said, I really believe there's great intention. There's things here that have a possibility. A little bit also concerned with do you call yourself an apprentice and then automatically go to a license and you don't take the hunter safety course?
No, that's not correct.
You would still be required.
In the legislation, you have a period of three years, you know, from 12 to 18, or as an adult, somebody similar doing a mentor program for three years, at which time you would still be required to take the basic hunter and trapper education given by the commission. Okay.
I didn't see that. So that's why I was asking the question. I had a couple noted things that were sort of a concern to me about how the process would work. And I wasn't so sure that we needed this when we already had worked pretty hard at a mentoring program that would make this be a reality. I appreciate the amendment to make things simpler. but at this time I cannot support something that I think is gray with respect to how you go from an apprentice to now a licensed hunter. I think there's too much gray in there with respect to I'm very concerned about being too lax in our hunter safety courses and those things that would be addressed, and I don't think this is ready for prime time. Thank you.
Are there any other comments? Any other debate on the bill? Seeing none. Those in favor of reporting the bill as amended will vote aye. Those opposed no. The secretary will take the roll.
Chair Kulik.
Yes.
Rep Davidson. Rep. Doherty. Designation, yes. Rep. Gunganauer. Rep. Gents. Rep. Haddock. Rep. Harris. Designation, yes. Rep. Holenstein. Designation, yes. Rep. Inglis. Designation, yes. Rep. Kazim. Designation, yes. Rep. Mirsky. Rep. Rusnik. Designation, yes. Rep. Steele. Designation, yes. Rep. Young. Designation, yes. Chair Maloney? No. Rep. Anderson? Designation, no. Rep. Banta? Rep. Cook? Designation, no. Rep. Devanzo? Designation, no. Rep. Kerwin? Designation, no. Rep. Kuzma? Rep. Labs? Rep. Oldsummer. Designation, no. Rep. Reichert. Designation, no. Rep. Smith. And Rep. Wintling.
Okay. The bill passes. No further business before this committee. This meeting is adjourned. Thank you. Thank you.