The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old November 13, 2012, 08:17 PM   #1
FrankenMauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: 1B ID
Posts: 6,996
All States set to lose Federal wildlife management funding

I tried searching, to see if this was covered a few weeks ago, but didn't have any hits. So...

The White House, in August 2011, released a report, suggesting that Pittman-Robertson funds be sequestered (frozen) until further notice. Congress obliged, and included that recommendation in the Budget Control Act of 2011. No changes have been made since, and the funds will be frozen beginning in 2013.
http://www.nrahuntersrights.org/Article.aspx?id=7299
http://www.sportsmenslink.org/the-me...h-and-wildlife

As the articles point out, those are the funds used for wildlife management and conservation, across the United States; and come from the 10% and 11% excise taxes on firearms, ammunition, and archery gear. In some states, those funds are a significant portion of their wildlife management budgets.

This will have a big impact on Wildlife Management agencies across the United States, and may nearly kill some agencies. Wyoming, for example, is currently dealing with a massive wildlife budget crisis and diminishing Deer and Antelope herds, and would be completely crippled by the further loss of Pittman-Robertson funds. It could, quite literally, mean the end of affordable hunting in Wyoming and states in similar situations.

Quote:
In just one example of possible impacts on a state agency, West Virginia DNR Director Curtis Taylor told West Virginia Metro News that sequestration could mean a loss of $800,000 in funding for game management, research and restoration and fisheries programs. Public rifle ranges and campgrounds on public hunting areas would have to be closed, among other effects. "They're talking about doing this for nine years," said Taylor. "At the end of nine years, we'll be lucky to keep the lights on."
(Emphasis mine.)

Worst of all, there is currently no way for Congress to touch the Pittman-Robertson trust fund. They can't actually use this money for anything else. Unless they repeal the P-R Act and pass new legislation in place of it, this money is only accessible by the states. But, the Federal government is still going to freeze a portion of the funds, and deny the states access to it.

Spread the word.
Talk to your Senators and Representatives. Talk to your State officials.
Talk to your local businesses that will be impacted by a loss of wildlife management funding. (Hunters won't buy gear, ammo, or new hunting weapons if they aren't going hunting.)
If this remains unchanged, it will have a trickle-down effect on everyone involved in shooting sports, not just hunters and state agencies.
__________________
"Such is the strange way that man works -- first he virtually destroys a species and then does everything in his power to restore it."
FrankenMauser is offline  
Old November 13, 2012, 10:40 PM   #2
Vermonter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 17, 2010
Posts: 956
Wow

I had no idea. We need to make this very well known. Lets make this the most popular thread on this board and a stickey.
Vermonter is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 12:38 AM   #3
warbirdlover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2009
Location: central Wisconsin
Posts: 2,324
Some states will just have to raise the cost of hunting licenses. Kind of reminds me how our wonderful government "dived" into the SS funds justifying it with BS.
warbirdlover is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 03:11 AM   #4
FrankenMauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: 1B ID
Posts: 6,996
Quote:
Some states will just have to raise the cost of hunting licenses.
Montana just did that 2(?) years ago.
It cost them far more than they calculated it would save. By increasing permit fees so much in a single year, they scared off more the majority of their non-resident hunters and fair portion of resident hunters. The loss of revenue from the application fees, alone, really hurt the budget.
Rather than increasing revenue, they actually crippled themselves and alienated a lot of hunters.
__________________
"Such is the strange way that man works -- first he virtually destroys a species and then does everything in his power to restore it."
FrankenMauser is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 06:48 AM   #5
rebs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 10, 2012
Posts: 2,295
and these are the people representing us, once again representing themselves
rebs is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 07:27 AM   #6
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 5,825
You all are not really saying you want the federal government to spend money, are you?
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.
BlueTrain is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 07:40 AM   #7
Saltydog235
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2010
Location: Pawleys Island
Posts: 1,169
Might not be a bad thing to get them out of it entirely. They have completely wrecked the fishing industry on the East Coast with their regulations based on junk science and not actual data being provided by fishermen. I can only imagine what they are doing to federal forest land and game management.
Saltydog235 is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 07:46 AM   #8
youngunz4life
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2010
Location: United States of America
Posts: 1,877
this is unfortunate but

you do realize Sir a lot of this is due to compromise as well as the fact that there is a lot of anti federal govt sentiment at the moment @ least as far as the private sector is concerned(with concerns ab equal rights), right?

many, many agencies(federal) are feeling this pinch & many times as well people don't realize that multiple agencies are being scapegoated because they are federal(like they are the problem because they are "fat cat" federals)

case in point: these important agencies you mention in OP
__________________
"Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!" -Admiral Farragut @ Battle of Mobile Bay 05AUG1864
youngunz4life is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 08:05 AM   #9
jmr40
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 15, 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 6,177
If the money is not going to be used as intended the tax should be dropped. It won't happen without pressure. I could see this going to the Supreme Court over legalities.
jmr40 is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 08:16 AM   #10
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 5,825
So how many fishermen have you talked to? My impression from speaking to at least one (former) fishing boat captain is that the problem with the fishing industry is that they're running out of fish. Fishermen from the Chesapeake Bay have gone as far as the Gulf of Mexico to fish. It's not rocket science.

It is possible for federal lands to be well managed, be they national parks, national forests or range lands. In theory, it is equally possible for state lands to be well managed, too. Naturally, there are competing interests and apparently no one wants to actually bear any of the costs. The anti-socialist element would privatize all such places, no doubt. Hunting and fishing is only one of the uses of federal lands and it probably isn't the largest. I suspect that much of the hatred directed at federal land managers is because of the simple fact that some people can't do whatever they want, whenever they want, where ever they want to do it. How'd you like to be a forest ranger, huh?

Rich people do their hunting on private lands anyway.
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.
BlueTrain is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 08:34 AM   #11
PeterGreg
Member
 
Join Date: February 24, 2012
Posts: 71
Suprise, Suprise this started with the Clinton's by diverting part of the money to non-game species. The libs hate guns and hunting they hate gunowners and hunters so why wouldn't they steal this money? who knows maybe the lack of funds will help them with another goal of shutting down public hunting lands.
PeterGreg is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 09:17 AM   #12
JimPage
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 21, 2010
Location: Rome, NY
Posts: 650
In the Federal Government "trust fund" is a fiction. Just like Social Security is supposed to be a trust fund. Do you trust the feds (pun intended) to use the funds for conservation? No way. End result will be loss of the funds to the states but NOT an end to the tax.
__________________
Jim Page

Cogito, ergo armatum sum
JimPage is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 10:04 AM   #13
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,647
Given the importance of this issue, we're going to move this one to Law & Civil Rights. Let's remember that the rules prohibit general Republican/Democrat political broadsides and stick to discussion of the issue at hand.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 11:52 AM   #14
Wyoredman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 6, 2011
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 1,266
FrankenMauser:

I hope you don't mind, I would like to copy your post and place it on my Facebook page. You have informed me about a threat to something I hold dear to my heart, the funding of wildlife management, and I want to pass it along to my friends.

I have also written my congress woman and senators. I suggest we all do the same.

Finally, I feel guilty that I did not know about this earlier, as I try and pride myself on knowing current events.

Thnaks again for the heads up!
__________________
Go Pokes!
Go Rams!
Wyoredman is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 03:20 PM   #15
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,323
It's down-right hard to keep track of all the federal legislation that gets passed. Even the NRA didn't pick up on this, as evidenced by the 10-19-2012 date on their article.

So don't feel too badly you didn't know. I suspect this was an amendment that was tacked on (in one of the Houses) and no-one really thought much of it. Or the consequences. Hence, no publicity.

We really need every hunter and sports-shooter to contact their Representatives and Senators and voice our opposition to this withholding of much needed funds -- Before they all decide to raid it, as was done years ago with the Social Security Trust Fund.

It is much easier to stop this now, rather than wait for what comes down the pike.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 05:33 PM   #16
FrankenMauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: 1B ID
Posts: 6,996
Quote:
I hope you don't mind, I would like to copy your post and place it on my Facebook page. You have informed me about a threat to something I hold dear to my heart, the funding of wildlife management, and I want to pass it along to my friends.
Go ahead. Spread the word.

I've done the same, but many of my Facebook friends are complacent and ignorant. So, it won't go very far.
__________________
"Such is the strange way that man works -- first he virtually destroys a species and then does everything in his power to restore it."
FrankenMauser is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 07:10 PM   #17
fishbones182
Member
 
Join Date: August 1, 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 98
Quote:
So how many fishermen have you talked to? My impression from speaking to at least one (former) fishing boat captain is that the problem with the fishing industry is that they're running out of fish. Fishermen from the Chesapeake Bay have gone as far as the Gulf of Mexico to fish. It's not rocket science.
Here in the wonderful Gulf of Mexico i can tell you the problem with the fishing. Its the commercial fisherman who puts out 3 miles worth of hooks and kills everything they catch by the time its retrieved from the water its already dead. So there are millions of grouper, amber jack, king fish and many others that are juvenile fish that are killed for no good reason. Here in Fl they blame it on the recreational fisherman saying we have over fished the stocks not the commercial fisherman's fault who put millions of dollars in the governments hands. Florida is also one of the states that has the most public hunting lands available for use by the public and some of the best maintained areas i have visited. That is slowly coming to an end as the piggy bank is emptied they are beginning to clear cut the lands for the timber for the cash. Of course this is all just my observation on whats going on here. I would also suggest if your states offer lifetime hunting and fishing licenses that you buy them. I have them for myself and children and since we already have them they cover any additional permits or fees that may be applied to our wonderful sport. Hows that fiscal cliff looking now. Looks really close if you ask me.
fishbones182 is offline  
Old November 15, 2012, 01:21 AM   #18
FrankenMauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: 1B ID
Posts: 6,996
I don't want to drag this too far into fishing territory, but...

Quote:
Here in the wonderful Gulf of Mexico i can tell you the problem with the fishing. Its the commercial fisherman who puts out 3 miles worth of hooks and kills everything they catch by the time its retrieved from the water its already dead. So there are millions of grouper, amber jack, king fish and many others that are juvenile fish that are killed for no good reason. Here in Fl they blame it on the recreational fisherman saying we have over fished the stocks not the commercial fisherman's fault who put millions of dollars in the governments hands.
My experience in Florida agrees with that.
For 3 years, I had a room mate that was a deck hand on three commercial boats out of Destin. I'll spare you the details of lost long-lines and blatantly illegal operations, but... He figured that for every legal fish they sold, there were 3 dead fish in the Gulf (out of season, not legal size, or partially eaten), and 3 fish sold on the black market (to make up for lost long-lines and leaders). And, that doesn't even take shark trips into account, where they'd just slice the fins off and toss the carcass.

But, commercial fishing and its dark side are a different subject.
Let's try to stick to the Pittman-Robertson funds being sequestered.
__________________
"Such is the strange way that man works -- first he virtually destroys a species and then does everything in his power to restore it."
FrankenMauser is offline  
Old November 17, 2012, 12:56 AM   #19
FrankenMauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: 1B ID
Posts: 6,996
The current "Sportsman's Act of 2012" (S. 3525) seeks, among other things, to amend the Pittman-Robertson Act to create provisions for shooting range acquisition, expansion, and construction by states using some Pittman-Robertson funds; but fails to address the sequestration.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sportsman's Act of 2012
Target Practice and Marksmanship Training Support Act - Amends the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act to:
(1) authorize a state to pay up to 90% of the costs of acquiring land for, expanding, or constructing a public target range;
(2) authorize a state to elect to allocate 10% of a specified amount apportioned to it from the federal aid to wildlife restoration fund for such costs;
(3) limit the federal share of such costs under such Act to 90%; and
(4) require amounts provided for such costs under such Act to remain available for expenditure and obligation for five fiscal years.
The bill is scheduled for a vote in the Senate on November 26, 2012.


This may be a good opportunity to get your opinion out to your Senator(s), while another Pittman-Robertson issue is on the table. The NRA's "Write Your Representatives" tool is an easy place to start.

Don't hesitate to contact your Representatives, either. The bill seems likely to pass the Senate without much opposition.
(I need to find out why one of my Senators voted against letting it advance. It makes me wonder if I missed something important.)
__________________
"Such is the strange way that man works -- first he virtually destroys a species and then does everything in his power to restore it."
FrankenMauser is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.11253 seconds with 9 queries