Hunter hunting rifle blaze orange
Shutterstock
Previous Post
Next Post

From the National Shooting Sports Foundation . . .

NSSF, the trade association for the firearm industry, previously announced an initiative designed to strengthen ties between all excise tax-paying manufacturers—firearms and ammunition, archery equipment, marine and sport fishing equipment—and the state agencies that use these funds to conserve wildlife and habitats through the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration program of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

The NSSF website that will host videos and other materials highlights industry contributions to this partnership. The second video focuses on the wildlife management efforts put forth by the Nevada Department of Wildlife working in this instance with Bighorn Sheep. The funding for this work is covered-in-part by matching funds provided by excise taxes that are distributed through the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration program.

Since 1937 when the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act was enacted (today better known as the Pittman-Robertson Act), the manufacturers of firearms, ammunition and archery equipment have been part of a network consisting of sportsmen and women, state fish and wildlife agencies and USFWS to collect and distribute excise taxes—some $14 billion during this period—on their products for the benefit of wildlife conservation, hunter education and shooting ranges.

“It is an incredible model of conservation funding that benefits all Americans, not just hunters and target shooters, and helps ensure sustainable wildlife and habitat for future generations. Our industry’s contributions to this program are something we’ve long been proud of, and we want the employees of companies and state agencies to be also, which is why we’re proud to be involved with the Partner with a Payer program,” said NSSF President and CEO Joe Bartozzi.

The Partner with a Payer initiative was developed to help generations of workers in the industry, state agencies and USFWS attain a better understanding of this public-private partnership, the roles we all play and the many benefits we have available to us in return.

Partner with a Payer also arranges for industry employees to see conservation science taking place in the field, such as at black bear research projects. “These connections between industry professionals and state agency scientists and researchers builds long-lasting appreciation for each other’s work and also the funding that makes so much of what we enjoy possible,” said Bartozzi.

There are several more videos highlighting additional aspects of this unique public-private partnership that will be added to the site in the weeks to come. The videos were expertly produced by Shine United LLC / Kingdom Filmworks for the National Shooting Sports Foundation through a Multistate Conservation Grant awarded by the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Programs of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

 

 

Previous Post
Next Post

28 COMMENTS

  1. Pittman-Robertson is wrong and fraudulent. Supporting conservation is nice, but the trillions of dollars of other taxes we pay should cover it.

  2. I don’t hunt. Why should my defensive, liberty defending, and plinking firearms and ammo be specially taxed for conservation?
    Fraud
    Fraud
    Fraud
    Regular income tax, property tax, and sales tax ought to be enough to cover conservation.

  3. Art, I’m sorry you don’t hint or fish. You’re really missing out. Of course, I’m sure you’ve never visited a national, state, or local park that benefited from the Pittman, Robertson Act. Enjoy your time on only privately owned property.

    • Gadsden,
      I pay thousands and thousands of dollars in Federal, State, and local taxes every year. Around 40% of every dollar I make goes to the government. It is more than enough to pay for conservation. The fact that the government pisses that money away on stupid crap doesn’t justify them taxing my guns and ammo for unrelated conservation projects.

      I do fish by the way, and it has nothing to do with 22lr, 9mm, or 5.56 ammo. Taxing my pole, hooks, or lures for aquatic conservation might make sense.

      Pittman-Robertson is fraud, and they apparently tricked you into thinking it is beneficial.

  4. I myself kinda like the conservation act.
    I hunt and fish though.
    Even if I didnt I’d still think ” What the hell, this money is helping a duck and some fish.”
    Give a little.,get back a lot.

    • When it comes to our Federal Gov, it actually works out to – give a lot (all Federal taxes combined) and get a little (conservation and a few other good things) back.

    • Maybe my main complaint is that the Gov wastes our money in general. 😠
      Conservation is one of the better uses.😁

  5. The government is the safest way to ensure that your money is taken by force and used in the most inefficient, corrupt way. If they would ask you to voluntarily donate to a transparent wildlife charity with actual accountability to you, the donor, or they’d never get any money again, that would be great. Cheap guns and ammo if you can’t afford it otherwise, and the certainty that your money is put to good use if you can spare a dollar.

  6. Art, 40%? That begs the question why are you still there? You don’t like Pittman Robertson? Fine. Not much we can do about the taxes. (Except I live in a state where private sales are, well, private. So, fuck the government and their taxes.) On the other hand, I don’t mind paying the Pittman/Robertson tax. Supports things I believe in. In the meantime, a neighbor and his son were killed by the tornadoes in KY/TN. They were on a guided duck hunt. Paying Pittman/Robertson taxes, hunting licences, duck stamps, all to support something they loved.

    • I am sorry to hear about your neighbor. That is a true tragedy. My heart goes out to their families. Thank you for the reminder to pray for the grieving and the suffering.

      My comment on 40% is just a rough estimate, including income tax, social security tax, medicare tax, gas tax, sales tax, property tax, and all the myriad other minor taxes. My state and locality don’t have an income tax.

      Tax freedom day this year was May 31st. All the money we earned to that point went to the government. That should be enough for them to fund conservation.

      https://www.adamsmith.org/taxfreedomday/

      I’m not going to celebrate Pittman Robertson. It is morally wrong to tax self defense and the arms securing a free people, to pay for something unrelated (conservation – even though it is a good thing).

    • Let me know when you decide to actually believe in the freedom the Gadsen Flag represents, and quit cheering on theft by means of big government.

  7. Taxation on the 2nd Amendment is theft. In Missouri we pay for conservation with a 1/2 cent sales tax (approved by imitative petition).
    If conservation is such a big deal EVERYBODY should (and do in Missouri) pay.
    Pittman Robison is just a gimme for Fudds by taxing self defense and concealed carry practice ammo. Where are the public ranges to practice self defense skills?

  8. Missouri, I bought your licenses for years. Shoulder mounts and ducks on my wall today. Columbia is a nice town, if a bit left. Pittman Robertson was a thing long, and I mean long, before the Elmer Fudd thing came along. You guys can piss and moan all you want, but the Fudds were supporting 2A before that piece of shit was even a twinkle in Stoner’s eye.

  9. Missouri, one other thing. Where are the ranges? The one I shot on for years after I ETSd in 83 was of Springhill Rd. in the Apalachicola National Forrest. A very nice range. A sign at the entrance paid tribute to the Pittman Roberson Act. It was always busy.

    • I grew up in Columbia, Mo; it is now home to the left with a gang problem and frequent shootings downtown. I drive 10 minutes to my private range which costs me $60 a year in JCMO, not a 1000 miles.

      You keep your musket, I’ll build & load my own tax 10/11% tax free.

  10. A last thought. I’m glad that my money supported wild habit in Missouri. Eagle Bluffs in particular. That was some waterfowl shooting.

  11. Why are we wasting bazillions of dollars on habitat improvement and hunter ed when the Federal government could be spending it productively on violence interrupters to improve habitat in Chicago and critical race theory ed?

    It must be raaaacist. Gotta be.

  12. While it is true that the P-R legislation was written at the behest of hunters and conservationists, it is also true that at that time, those two groups were largely comprised of the same people. The group of firearms enthusiasts at that time were also the same people—very few were non-hunting firearms enthusiasts.

    There is no doubt that the third group has increased in number over time. One need not be a hunter to enjoy a benefit from this excise tax, but if a sufficient number of detractors exist, then they may follow the example of the original group. Petition Congress.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here