February started off with two Pennsylvania staples: Phil looking for his shadow and yet another argument about the opening day of deer season. Both have become equally unpredictable and sometimes comical, but the latter has some serious consequences for future deer hunters.

The Pennsylvania Game Commission Board of Commissioners started things off with their late January winter meeting, during which they voted unanimously to continue the Saturday opener. A few days later, the House Game & Fisheries Committee held an “information gathering” meeting, during which members could hear from both sides of the issue. Both sides presented some valuable information, with the Game Commission claiming the change to Saturday increased hunter participation and opponents claiming it has hurt local economies, especially in the northern tier.

Which side of the argument you support is rooted as much in personal belief as it is in science or statistics. However, everyone who hunts or fishes in the Keystone State should share one concern: potential legislative involvement.

House Bill 70, introduced by Rep. Brian Smith, Jefferson & Indiana counties, has already been introduced and is an attempt to legally move the opening day of deer season back to the first Monday after Thanksgiving. While the possibility of the Bill surviving the legislative season is anyone’s guess, its mere existence threatens Pennsylvania’s outdoor sports.

Since their inception, the Game Commission and the Fish & Boat Commission have been empowered to set seasons, sizes, and bag limits through the respective Board of Commissioners. This is not just a tradition or a courtesy; it is specifically written into the Game Code and the Fish & Boat Code — the laws that create and govern each agency. Allowing legislators to change or bypass this step is the first step of a potentially very slippery slope.

Should the opening day not only return to Monday but bond by law, it will not stop the infighting? No matter what day is selected, there will be those who are not happy. It would not, however, be the end of the world. Some hunters may leave the sport, and others will spend less time at camp, but overall, hunting will survive. But once the door is opened and legislators can make one rule, what stops them from making more, including those with disastrous consequences?

Imagine, if you will, a legislator who does not like hunting or, more probably, doesn’t like certain types of hunting. Do you want them to be able to remove seasons for specific species? Eliminate your ability to hunt with a crossbow or muzzleloader? How about that legislator does not hate hunting but enjoys snowmobiling, dirt bike riding, or bird watching and decides their hobbies are a better use of State Game Lands?

Think it will never happen? Remember, we live in a state where you can’t purchase a vehicle on Sunday, sing in the bathtub (yep, since 1969), or fire a cannon during a wedding, among many other crazy prohibitions. Not only did each of these laws begin with a legislator, as crazy as they sound, but enough others voted “Yes” for them to become law. Anything is possible.

Although the respective Commissioners are not perfect and often have their own personal agendas, they generally do a good job of listening to the customers (e.g., hunters and anglers) and Commission staff before making a decision they believe is in the best interest of the sport and the resource. It is often a balancing act, but politics is not tipping the scales.