CHARLESTON, W.Va. — A bill aimed at restructuring the West Virginia Department of Commerce could have major effects on the structure of the West Virginia Division of Natural Resources and consequently the state’s hunters and anglers.

House Bill 2008 already won approval in the House of Delegates and is now headed to the Senate for consideration.

Among the noted changes is the removal of civil service protection for employees in the Division of Natural Resources. Those protections are often the best line of defense for mid-level and senior-level managers in the agency when they must make at times unpopular, but necessary, decisions or recommendations about wildlife and fish management.

All new hires within the agency and those who leave their present position for a new position or accept a promotion would lose the the safeguard.

Rank and file employees at DNR who chose to remain anonymous for this story to speak frankly have indicated the change would negatively affect their desire to advance in their career.

They believed the change would also hurt the agency’s effort to recruit new and qualified biologists, technicians, wildlife and fisheries specialists, hatchery personnel and many other positions within the agency.

A proposed amendment to remove the civil service provision from the bill on the House floor was rejected. However, a second floor amendment with another set of concerns for sportsmen was adopted.

The amendment offered by Delegate David Kelly (R-Tyler) would move the the Natural Resources Police out of the Department of Commerce and into the Department of Homeland Security.

“I decided it might be a good time to offer up an amendment to move them over to Homeland Security where it seemed to make sense they would go,” said Kelly, a former two term sheriff and chief deputy.

He added, “That’s where most of the other police officers are and they operate. It just seemed to be the right time to have that discussion with DNR.”

Such a move is not unprecedented. Alaska, Oregon, and several other states handle wildlife law enforcement through other agencies besides their version of DNR. In several states, wildlife law enforcement is an arm of the State Police. However the structure can be tricky.

West Virginia’s Natural Resources Police have full police power, just like state trooper. However, those positions are largely funded by hunting and fishing license revenue.

Under federal law those dollars cannot be used for any other purpose. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service requires states that receive federal aid under the Pittman-Robertson and Dingel-Johnson Acts to have a state code that earmarks hunting and fishing license money exclusively for wildlife restoration, game and fish management and wildlife law enforcement and education.

The agency developed an accounting system that provided a clear division between work that natural resources police do for game and fish law enforcement and those duties associated with other non-agency related work.

Every five to seven years states are audited to insure compliance. If any license money or federal excise taxes directed to a state through the Wildlife and Sportfish Restoration Acts is found in diversion, the state could face the potential of losing the money or being forced to pay it back. The West Virginia DNR’s law enforcement accounting system was born out of one of those federal audits back in 2000.

“I was not aware of all of that, but I’m willing to take a look at what to do. We don’t want them to lose their federal funding. That’s not the intent of this amendment,” Kelly said.

West Virginia DNR receives $11 to $12 million annually from the federal excise taxes on guns, ammunition and other sporting goods. The agency in recent years has also received a windfall of several million dollars annually from oil and gas royalties on Wildlife Management Areas.

Because those areas were purchased and are managed with license dollars, state code specifies all royalties for any extractions are protected exclusively for fish and wildlife management.

Kelly said since the passage of the measure in the House, he and fellow House members have learned much more about the potential pitfalls of such delicate moves and plan to further examine the measure.

“I met with them (DNR) yesterday and discussed their concerns and absolutely said we would take those up. We will continue to meet with them and continue to have dialogue with the Senate and the governor, who has indicated he would like to sit down with us,” said Kelly.

As for the civil service protections for the DNR staff, Kelly added he sympathized with those concerns as well.

“I understand their concern and it’s a concern a lot of folks have. I think we’ll have a conversation that will include that,” he said.