TexasCHLforum.com

The Pittman-Robertson Act of 1937 provided an 11% excise tax on firearms and ammunition to be used solely for wildlife management, restoration and acquisition of habitat. It was driven by hunters, sportsmen and wildlife conservationist. Monies are distributed to states based on their submitting annual plans for use of the funds and they must provide 25% of the allocation ie Federal 75% and States 25% (generally from hunting license revenue). Pittman-Roberston is responsible for saving and restoring many species that are enjoyed by everyone not just hunters as well as land that everyone can use for recreation, but with out hunters the states could not allocate the 25% match. The white-tailed deer, wild turkey and many species of water fowl including the wood duck were saved with the P-R Act. Many other species were at the brink of elimination as well due to market hunters, habitat destruction and mis-management. Similar legislation was passed for archery and fishing known as the Dingell-Johnson Act in the 1970's. There have been changes to the bill that allocates monies for firearm and hunter education, which I have no issue with. The chipping process by politicians never ends once it starts. I will be surprised if many public ranges are built.

I don't like this bill. Pittman-Robertson has been kept sacrosanct for use of it's revenue since it was originally passed in the depression years. That it was passed in the middle of an epic economic morass is an indication of how impassioned hunters were about the subject. Even end runs by the Clinton administration were shot down. It's for wildlife restoration, management and habitation. We certainly need funds for shooting ranges but robbing this fund is wrong and will surely result in further erosion of the original use of that money. rant complete