Pittman Robertson fund grab

Boskee

Long Time Member
Messages
4,859
Well here's more proof they're going after PROTECTED HUNTING & FISHING FUNDING

hope this works. I got this in an email from AZ Game and Fish the other day. Haven't seen mention of it on MOnster Muleys and hope I didn't miss it and I'm double posting:

Oct. 24, 2012

Federal government targets sportsmen's dollars to reduce deficit
Conservation of wildlife resources and your outdoor recreation heritage is at risk!



?The Greatest Story Never Told? is the mantra being extolled by the nation?s wildlife conservation community in celebration of the 75th anniversary of the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Fund (WSFR). Farsighted and forward-looking sportsmen worked with Congress in 1937 to pass the Pittman-Robertson Act, whereby excise taxes on hunting equipment flow into a trust fund that is one of the most significant sources of funding for state wildlife conservation efforts. Subsequent amendments of the act and passage of the Dingell-Johnson Act and the Wallop-Breaux Act have since added excise taxes from fishing equipment, archery tackle and motorboat fuel to grow the funding available for wildlife conservation. By law, your dollars are allocated to each state to support important conservation work on the ground and to keep critical wildlife programs going. Since 1939, the State of Arizona has integrated these funds, along with dedication of license-based revenues, into the core of our financing for wildlife conservation. With these resources, the state has been able to restore elk and bighorn sheep populations, construct and operate boat ramps and shooting ranges, restore native trout species, develop a modern hatchery program and continue conservation of our wildlife heritage.

Your funds have been untouched in the 75 year history of the WSFR fund and have been used only for conservation. In order to participate in the program and receive these funds, each state and territory made legal, binding commitments that these funds (and license fees) would be used only for wildlife conservation in specific, approved programs. Ironically, the current administration?s Office of Management and Budget has decided that your funds must be withheld (sequestered) under provisions of the Budget Control Act of 2012. While this action only keeps funds from being allocated to state wildlife agencies (for now) and does not in and of itself divert your funds, it does set the stage for future Congressional action which could sweep these funds from the trust accounts into the federal treasury. The fact that this diversion is occurring during the 75th anniversary of the WSFR Act is the ultimate irony. Federal agencies charged with the fiduciary protection of this trust fund are now the architects of the only authorized diversion in the fund?s history.

Because of explicit language in the original acts, these funds are to be allocated to the states and are not subject to annual Congressional appropriation. It is difficult to understand how these funds are now subject to the provisions of the Budget Control Act of 2012. Excise taxes would still be collected from manufacturers of hunting and fishing equipment and excise taxes would be paid by hunters, anglers, archers, boaters and shooters. Interest will still accrue in the various accounts. However, the new action of the Budget Control Act automatically denies the full allocation of funds to each state for their intended purpose of fish and wildlife conservation. This should be a critical concern to all sportsmen and conservationists. Under the Department of Interior?s Fish and Wildlife Service, every state would see funding reductions in administration, multi-state grants, boating safety, wildlife and sport fish restoration (WSFR) that will directly affect the department's ability to do on-the-ground conservation, permanent agency jobs, agency resources and agencies? ability to provide public access for hunting, fishing, boating and shooting. Conservation of wildlife resources and your outdoor recreation heritage is at risk, no matter what your choice of hobby, sport or pursuit. For Arizona, the impact for 2013 could be as much as $3 million with cuts to Wildlife Restoration, Sport Fish Restoration, Boating Safety and other programs.

State wildlife agencies have been working diligently with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Department of Interior to exempt State Trust Funds from being sequestered, but to no avail. Remember, these are your dollars as a sportsman or as a manufacturer of hunting and fishing equipment. If you are an Arizona citizen, your dollars support wildlife-related recreation that is a $2 billion economic driver annually; more than golf, more than professional sports. The federal administration needs to know how the sequestration of these funds and the impacts on your programs here in Arizona will affect you personally (contacts listed below). You may also want to contact your Congressional Representatives on this issue.


DOI Secretary Ken Salazar

Department of the Interior

1849 C Street, N.W.

Washington DC 20240

Phone: (202) 208-3100

Email. feedbackios.doi.gov



USFWS Director Dan Ashe

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
1849 C Street, NW
Washington, DC 20240

Phone: 1-800-344-WILD

Email. http://www.fws.gov/duspit/contactus.htm



White House ? Council on Environmental Quality

Council on Environmental Quality

722 Jackson Place, N.W.

Washington, DC 20503

Phone: (202) 395-5750

Email: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/submit-questions-and-comments


The Arizona Game and Fish Department prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, age, or disability in its programs and activities. If anyone believes that they have been discriminated against in any of the AGFD?s programs or activities, including employment practices, they may file a complaint with the Deputy Director, 5000 W. Carefree Highway, Phoenix, AZ 85086-5000, (602) 942-3000, or with the Fish and Wildlife Service, 4040 N. Fairfax Dr. Ste. 130, Arlington, VA 22203. Persons with a disability may request a reasonable accommodation or this document in an alternative format by contacting the Deputy Director as listed above.
_________________________
 
That's our greedy current administration at work.
First they "hold" it, then they take it. Classic stuff right there.
Thanks for the heads-up.
Zeke
 
Thanks Nemont for setting the record straight.

Let me rephrase: Damn greedy polititions!

Zeke
 
Remember what the old crazy people said. The government who hands you everything can take it all away. Yall all thought I was crazy when I told you wildlife needs to be capitolized and privatized. You always said it was our wildlife but the king is now deciding its future because we thought it was better for him to call the shots.
 
Not the first time this has happened. The Clinton Admin. misappropriated Pittman-Robertson funds and were successfully
sued for it.
 
Utah
No UT-1 Bishop, Rob [R]
Aye UT-2 Matheson, Jim [D]
No UT-3 Chaffetz, Jason [R]

This is how UT guys voted.
 
>Utah
>No UT-1 Bishop, Rob
>[R]
>Aye UT-2 Matheson, Jim
>[D]
>No UT-3 Chaffetz, Jason
>[R]
>
>This is how UT guys voted.
>

Hopefully it's one of Matheson's last votes.
 
Matheson has pulled strong sportsman's support for years. Too bad he talks one way at sportsman banquets and votes another. The PR funds are vital to the management of wildlife.
 
GUYS you need to follow how your elected officials have supported hunting, fishing and guns in the past. They voted this way as a political ploy. Remember when Obama denied that he had anything to do with susquestration when Romney brought it up during the debates? He lied and denied any involvement with the bill! A simple fact check will confirm it. Why would the guys that supported gun rights, passed a national hunting bill, and supported hunting and fishing legislation expose themselves on this. The dems brought it up and the republicans helped them approve it so they could use it against them. That's why Obama denied it because the cuts & language in the bill in the legislation would hurt him with voters so he lied. Romney didn't do it so if Obama said he passed it all Romney had to do was tell America just how the cuts would effect them. Think Obama would want the gun owners, hunters and fishermen knowing he was planning on taking their money? Think how many votes it would cost him.. millions

There's a thread on the political form and that's why a snapshot on here wouldn't be giving your elected officials who've supported us a fair shake.

I posted this up a while back

Here's a bill HR 4089 that just passed the house it called the Sportsmens Heritage Act of 2012 and is protective hunting legislation. The link gives you how the representative voted on the bill. It's pretty clear which party opposes our right to hunt by the vote but we did have some democrats that supported it.


http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/112-2012/h164

This is why a snapshot may not be fair to your reps. The guys that supported this legislation are supporting you! For the senate you have to base your decision on how they've supported you in the past. It's politics boys and support the guys that supported you! hope this helps!
 
In 1995 USFWS used the Federal Excise Tax money to reintroduce the Gray Wolf. And hunters and fishermen foot the bill with the Pittman-Robetson act monies. Now that is just wrong.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom