Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, March 10, 1992 TAG: 9203100048
SECTION: SPORTS PAGE: B8 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
Now, it was the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries turn.
"How about helping this agency get more funding," Leon McFillen, board member from Arlington, told the crowd.
He requested everybody stand who would support such an effort. Some 200 did.
McFillen wasn't satisfied.
"Let's see some enthusiasm!"
The crowd cheered.
It was a sound the agency hadn't heard lately.
The day before, board members plowed through a budget that reflected declining revenue: hunting license sales $300,000 below projection; fishing license sales off $150,000; non-game contributions dribbling in at the slowest rate in history.
The law-enforcement division reported cutting $240,000 from its budget by not filling game-warden vacancies. There are 27 fewer wardens in the field than authorized.
The wildlife division has slashed $225,000. It has the lowest number of technicians since the 1970s, including the absence of a biologist assigned to deer, the most popular of the hunted species.
The fish division has cut $125,000.
All this at a time when the agency has been given growing responsibilities.
When the department turned to the General Assembly this session, it found more antagonism than assistance. A troublesome number of bills were introduced that would limit the authority of the 75-year-old agency. Most were carried over to next year.
Some legislators were particularly rough on the department, including Glenn Croshaw, D-Virginia Beach, who once served as a game commissioner.
Joint resolutions were passed to study the effectiveness of the agency's management structure and the potential of combining its programs with the Virginia Institute of Marine Science.
Even old friends of the agency, like Vic Thomas, D-Roanoke, were unable to provide significant new funding. A $5 conservation permit, which would have reaped an estimated $2.8 million in new funds, was defeated.
For the first time, outdoor sportsmen didn't say: "Yeah! We are willing to dig deeper into our pockets to upgrade the fish hatcheries, to provide more boating access, to purchase new wildlife habitat."
In fact, many said just the opposite. A petition by Dave Petrie of Roanoke - and signed by 12 others - suggested the game department's woes are a matter of mismanagement. "Vic Thomas, check for leaks in your own boat," it said.
"I am highly against any increase in license fee, unless the money taken in can be justified," said Daniel Conner of Radford. "In our area, the New River Valley, we don't see any of this money come back."
The agency had little chance to sell the public on its needs. A legislative committee that spent two years studying new funding opportunities dumped the conservation permit bill into the hopper at the last minute.
It would have been a hard sell, anyway. There was the poor economy. Even more troublesome, the department's last fee increase, $1.2 million in boat registration money, had been grabbed by Gov. Douglas Wilder for the General Fund.
Then, too, there is a growing feeling that those who hunt, fish and boat already are paying all the bills, while others who benefit from the department's programs - such as the 2,500 environmental impact statements it handles annually - contribute nothing.
The cheers Saturday were nice, but it is going to take more than that if game and fish programs are to survive.
by CNB