Understanding The Pittman-Robertson Act

Last week I put up a call to action in regards to the RETURN Act introduced into the House of Representatives.  This ill-informed piece of legislation, and quite frankly just political theater, aims to gut a critical source of funding for wildlife conservation in this nation.  If you have not yet read that blog post do me a favor, go back and check it out.  If you agree, go check out our social media platforms and share the discussions we have on the topic there.  

    After writing the post about the RETURN Act I thought it would be good to do a follow up post discussing what the Pittman-Robertson Act actually is.  I myself did not fully understand what it was or that it even existed for many years.  It is not unusual for many who are affected by this 85 year old piece of legislation to be unaware of its existence.  So let us take a closer look into what it is so we can all have a better understanding, even if it is a bit basic.  

    In the early 1900s the United States was finally coming to grips with the reality of its declining wildlife populations.  There were many who saw this long before but as a whole we did not see real legislative action in how we would fund any solution.  It was through what was essentially a grassroots movement of outdoors men and women that provided the genesis of what would become the Pittman-Robertson Act, officially known as the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act of 1937.  Take a good look at that date.  If you know your history this was right in the middle of the Great Depression and here, we have the people telling the government that they are willing to have more money taken out of their pockets to fix the conservation dilemma facing the nation.  

     The overwhelmingly bipartisan support and passage of this legislation is the basis for much of the funding that is provided by the federal government down to the states to fund wildlife conservation programs.  Manufacturers of products such as firearms, ammunition, archery equipment, and a select few others are required to pay an 11% excise tax on these products.  It is important to note this is paid by the industry and not the consumer, although it could be argued that it is just passed through to the consumer in the price of the product sold.  This money is then put into a fund that is used to help state wildlife agencies fund their programs.  

     One of the caveats of this legislation is that the funding was not allowed to be diverted for any other purpose.  As a condition for receiving funds the states were required to have laws in place protecting the funds from being used elsewhere.  How the fund works is through a matching system where the federal government matches the state agency’s funding for given approved programs.  This partly why there is such a reliance on hunting license sales by state wildlife agencies as this is where much of those dollars come from.  It is another reason we have seen such an increase in non-resident fees as hunter numbers decline.  State agencies are trying to protect the residents and passing on the cost to non-residents.  

    Diving down into just what the excise tax applies to there are five total categories.  They include; handguns, other firearms such as rifles, carbines, machine guns, shotguns, fowling pieces, and antique firearms.  Additionally, ammunition (shells and cartridges), firearm parts and accessories and archery equipment are all subject to the excise tax.  Of note all but handguns pay the 11% tax, they only pay 10% of the wholesale price.   Archery equipment was not part of the original legislation and was added later when it was modernized and only accounts for approximately 6% annually.  

    Revenue received from the excise tax goes into to the Wildlife Restoration Account, which is administered by the Fish and Wildlife Service.  There are six categories that are funded from the Wildlife Restoration Account including; program administration, traditional multistate conservation grants, “R3” (“Recruit, Retain, Reactivate”) multistate grants, enhanced hunter education and safety grants, basic hunter education and safety grants and wildlife restoration grants.  Much of the funding, close to 80% is allocated to wildlife restoration grants.  In fiscal year 2021, $679 billion was provided to the states and at 80% that is approximately $545 billion dollars provided to wildlife restoration grants.  

    I know this is a pretty basic understanding that I have provide for you on Pittman-Robertson but I hope it gives you a start.  If you are truly interested in learning more just hit up the internet for some answers.  There is a ton of information out there available from reliable sources that can educate you.  You could even go to YouTube and check out people like Randy Newberg, who talks about Pittman-Robertson extensively.  If we want to be serious about wildlife conservation then we need to get smart.