House committee advances bill to let Pennsylvania Game Commission classify hunting and trapping licenses and set fees

The House Game and Fisheries Committee on an in-session roll call voted to report House Bill 2690, which would allow the Pennsylvania Game Commission to establish and maintain classifications of hunting and trapping licenses and set fees for each classification.

Representative Mahaffey, sponsor of the measure, told the committee the change would align the Game Commission’s administrative authority with what the Fish and Boat Commission already has and would make licensing easier to administer. "Now it's time we do it for the game commission," Mahaffey said, arguing the Fish and Boat reforms improved operations for anglers and that similar flexibility could benefit hunters and trappers.

Representative Maloney opposed the bill, citing a history of disputed fee proposals and transparency concerns at the commissions. Maloney told colleagues that granting similar authority to the Game Commission would risk diminishing legislative oversight and said past actions by a commission executive had undercut trust: "So this idea that we can trust this commission with what they do is bad history," she said.

Mahaffey and other supporters responded that the bill’s language preserves the legislature’s role in reviewing and disapproving any fee increases. Mahaffey noted that the general assembly last raised hunting license fees in 1999 and described operational changes at the Game Commission, including partnerships with private breeders that, he said, increased pheasant stocking to "over almost 220 to 250,000 pheasants a year." Representative Haddock added that while the two commissions have different fiscal situations, the proposal puts them on a more level playing field and expressed confidence in the commission’s new leadership.

After brief additional remarks, the committee took a roll-call vote. Members recorded support largely by designation and the chair announced, "The bill passes." The committee reported the bill as committed out of committee for further consideration.

The committee record does not show a numerical tally in the excerpt provided; many members’ responses during the roll call were recorded as "designation" followed by "yes." The transcript reflects debate over institutional history, oversight safeguards and practical impacts on pheasant stocking but does not indicate an immediate fee increase resulting from the committee action.

What happens next: the bill, now reported by the committee, will proceed through the legislative process for further consideration by the full House or other committees as required.