Pennsylvania Game News - February 2020 - 18

states with bounties, game departments
"do not favor this system as a means of
controlling predator populations."
The survey also found that in 11 states
where bounty programs remained, a
majority of hunters and trappers were
against bounties. In seven states, they
favored them.
The survey results turned heads within
the Game Commission. Within months of
assembling the survey's results, Deputy
Executive Director Glenn Bowers asked
Executive Director Merton Golden to
consider a change in the bounty program.
"In attempting to arrive at some means
of gently easing away from some of our
bounty payments, I have given considerable thought to some potential avenues
of approach," Bowers wrote in a May 13,
1964 memo. "One which could perhaps
be given immediate attention would be
to abolish the bounty on the great horned
owl."
Bowers pointed out that over the past
decade, about 1,200 owls had been probated for bounty annually. Statewide, that
amounted to about one owl for every 37.5
square miles.
"It appears rather obvious that taking
one owl every 37.5 square miles is a very
ineffective management tool," Bowers
wrote.
Within a year, the bounty on greathorned owls was gone. Bowers, who had
become the agency's executive director,
pushed the repeal through.
But the Game Commission wasn't
done. Two months later, the commissioners pulled the bounties on red and
gray foxes. Criticism followed. But it
didn't last and prompted no change. The
Game Commission was out of the bounty
business.
It's hard to calculate how much of an
impact paying bounties had on the Game
18

Commission's accomplishments over
time. Overall, the agency has been frugal,
tremendously innovative and has accomplished much over its 125-year existence.
But one can't help but wonder what
else might have been done with the more
than $5 million the agency paid in bounties - maybe $75 million considering
inflation over time.
That's difference-making money.
The Game Commission, though, was
following the fundamental playbook most
resource agencies used in managing game
populations. It also managed wildlife in
a state where organized sportsmen once
had tremendously powerful lobbies and
influence.
It's likely the nation's environmental
awakening in the '60s and the advancement of scientific study to better conservation also influenced the shift away from
bounties. It was time. Overdue, actually.
But not every state abandoned bounties. A call for their end continued into
the 1970s.
"More and more people are feeling
outraged when they hear about a state still
paying bounties," said Leslie Glasgow,
Assistant Secretary of the Interior for
Fish, Wildlife and Parks at the 1970 International Association of Game, Fish and
Conservation Commissioners convention.
"State game officials would be prudent
to take a new look at their predator-control
programs, to make doubly sure they are
aimed at carefully selected targets, and
not at a whole range of animals as in
grandpa's time!"
Without the work and influence of
Bowers, Roberts and Latham, bounties
might have lasted longer. These men are
primarily responsible for closing the door
on bounties and keeping it closed. It was
a pivotal step forward in Pennsylvania's
conservation history.

Pennsylvania Game News - February 2020

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Pennsylvania Game News - February 2020