by John Merwin

For all the grousing I hear about federal and state governments these days, there’s still a silver lining for state fish-and-wildlife budgets. Most states are in terrible financial shape these days. That’s the bad news. The good news is that the primary sources of state fish-and-wildlife funding are protected by law from political pillaging as budget officials seek to fill gaps elsewhere. Here’s how it works...

You and I as sportsmen ultimately pay federal excise taxes on everything from rifles and ammunition to fishing rods and reels to recreational boating fuel. More correctly, the manufacturers pay the taxes and then include them in the purchase price that we pay.

Importantly, those tax revenues are specifically dedicated to fish and wildlife. That is, dedicated by federal law. So that tax money—millions of dollars a year—can‘t be diverted to other programs such as highways or agriculture.

Second, those tax monies are distributed to the states each year by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Here again, those distributions are specifically dedicated for fish-and-wildlife. Even better, and as a condition of those distributions, each receiving state must agree not to divert state fishing and hunting license revenues to any purpose other than fish and wildlife.

Excise tax monies and sporting-license sales are the two primary revenue sources for all state fish-and-wildlife agencies. By federal law, both are protected no matter how bad a state’s budget scenario happens to be.

Various governors and other state officials have tried over the past few years to dip into those protected funds. Then they have backed off, red-faced at not having checked how things worked in the first place.

So however much you might agree or disagree with how your state’s wildlife agency spends its money, at least be grateful that it has some money to spend in the first place. Without the sorts of protection I’ve described, the sporting-license fees and taxes that you pay would, indeed, by diverted into some highway project--leaving fish, wildlife, and all of us holding the short end of the stick.

Comments (10)

from Koldkut wrote 1 year 21 weeks ago

Buy more gear, you're paying for the resource that way.

+1 Good Comment? Yes | No | Report

from bs1827 wrote 1 year 21 weeks ago

This can be used as an excellent excuse to buy more gear! If anyone ever questions why I'm buying more gear I'll just say that I need it for my specific reason then add that I'm also supporting wildlife and conservation through my purchases. Then they can't say no!

0 Good Comment? Yes | No | Report

from JOHN ANDERSON wrote 1 year 21 weeks ago

It's tough at 9.00 an hr to keep up on the latest gear license,etc,etc.Not to mention stay current with any programs or mag subscriptions.Sportsmen not only get the short end of the stick its a damn big one.But we continue to pay.We Sportsmen are a very precious resource!

0 Good Comment? Yes | No | Report

from Bernie wrote 1 year 21 weeks ago

John, you are referring to the Pittman-Robertson Act of the 1930s and the Dingell-Johnson Act of the early '50s. As you point out, both are marvelous pieces of ingenuity that are designed to fund wildlife and fishery projects, and immune from the greedy fingers of politicians. Too bad no one thought to set up the Social Security system with similar safeguards.

+2 Good Comment? Yes | No | Report

from jamesti wrote 1 year 21 weeks ago

no go. tell me why new york raised the price on their fishing liscence from $19 to $29 to increase stocking programs and now they are decreasing it this year. i don't want to hear anymore excuses. new york is full of criminals and i am getting sick of it. the whole system is a criminal enterprise. take a long look at yours, too.

0 Good Comment? Yes | No | Report

from Koldkut wrote 1 year 21 weeks ago

James, Sportsfishers excise tax falls into a different category of money and it's not a catch all to pay for all of a states expenses, the licensing in CO is worse than even the 29 you pay in NY, and we get taxed in a worse way out here with the habitat stamp.

0 Good Comment? Yes | No | Report

from jamesti wrote 1 year 21 weeks ago

i agree with you on the habitat stamp, koldkut. i never could figure out why i had to pay the extra 5 bucks for that when i was buying a hunting or fishing liscence. it's the ones who don't who should have to buy one. and then they want to charge you 20 bucks to get into the national park! very crooked!

+1 Good Comment? Yes | No | Report

from shane wrote 1 year 21 weeks ago

James, you raise a good point that's been mentioned somewhere on F&S online before. Why are we footing the whole bill? So many people enjoy the resources, the habitat, the fauna, but we pay for it ourselves, and yet we take second seat to other forms of recreation fairly often. What's the deal? Either we get a bigger say on land use, or the other folks need to start contributing. No respect...

0 Good Comment? Yes | No | Report

from jamesti wrote 1 year 21 weeks ago

agreed, shane. too much politics leads to corruption.

+1 Good Comment? Yes | No | Report

from mudpuppy wrote 1 year 20 weeks ago

You must not fish or hunt in Gworgia. The legeslators have wrangled most of the license fee and wildlife tag profits into the general fund for their random ransacking. I and several other (more legitimate) TU supporters have decided to return our wildlife tags next renewal since the amoount dedicated to wildlife will be pilfered for other, more important earmarks.

Say... more billboards, pavement and unsold subdivisions.

+1 Good Comment? Yes | No | Report

Post a Comment

 

All submitted comments are subject to the rules set forth in our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

from Bernie wrote 1 year 21 weeks ago

John, you are referring to the Pittman-Robertson Act of the 1930s and the Dingell-Johnson Act of the early '50s. As you point out, both are marvelous pieces of ingenuity that are designed to fund wildlife and fishery projects, and immune from the greedy fingers of politicians. Too bad no one thought to set up the Social Security system with similar safeguards.

+2 Good Comment? Yes | No | Report

from Koldkut wrote 1 year 21 weeks ago

Buy more gear, you're paying for the resource that way.

+1 Good Comment? Yes | No | Report

from jamesti wrote 1 year 21 weeks ago

i agree with you on the habitat stamp, koldkut. i never could figure out why i had to pay the extra 5 bucks for that when i was buying a hunting or fishing liscence. it's the ones who don't who should have to buy one. and then they want to charge you 20 bucks to get into the national park! very crooked!

+1 Good Comment? Yes | No | Report

from jamesti wrote 1 year 21 weeks ago

agreed, shane. too much politics leads to corruption.

+1 Good Comment? Yes | No | Report

from mudpuppy wrote 1 year 20 weeks ago

You must not fish or hunt in Gworgia. The legeslators have wrangled most of the license fee and wildlife tag profits into the general fund for their random ransacking. I and several other (more legitimate) TU supporters have decided to return our wildlife tags next renewal since the amoount dedicated to wildlife will be pilfered for other, more important earmarks.

Say... more billboards, pavement and unsold subdivisions.

+1 Good Comment? Yes | No | Report

from bs1827 wrote 1 year 21 weeks ago

This can be used as an excellent excuse to buy more gear! If anyone ever questions why I'm buying more gear I'll just say that I need it for my specific reason then add that I'm also supporting wildlife and conservation through my purchases. Then they can't say no!

0 Good Comment? Yes | No | Report

from JOHN ANDERSON wrote 1 year 21 weeks ago

It's tough at 9.00 an hr to keep up on the latest gear license,etc,etc.Not to mention stay current with any programs or mag subscriptions.Sportsmen not only get the short end of the stick its a damn big one.But we continue to pay.We Sportsmen are a very precious resource!

0 Good Comment? Yes | No | Report

from jamesti wrote 1 year 21 weeks ago

no go. tell me why new york raised the price on their fishing liscence from $19 to $29 to increase stocking programs and now they are decreasing it this year. i don't want to hear anymore excuses. new york is full of criminals and i am getting sick of it. the whole system is a criminal enterprise. take a long look at yours, too.

0 Good Comment? Yes | No | Report

from Koldkut wrote 1 year 21 weeks ago

James, Sportsfishers excise tax falls into a different category of money and it's not a catch all to pay for all of a states expenses, the licensing in CO is worse than even the 29 you pay in NY, and we get taxed in a worse way out here with the habitat stamp.

0 Good Comment? Yes | No | Report

from shane wrote 1 year 21 weeks ago

James, you raise a good point that's been mentioned somewhere on F&S online before. Why are we footing the whole bill? So many people enjoy the resources, the habitat, the fauna, but we pay for it ourselves, and yet we take second seat to other forms of recreation fairly often. What's the deal? Either we get a bigger say on land use, or the other folks need to start contributing. No respect...

0 Good Comment? Yes | No | Report

Post a Comment

 

All submitted comments are subject to the rules set forth in our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.