November 14, 2019

So Where Does Your PR – DJ Money Go?

Here’s a list of grant monies awarded for programs for the fiscal year 2017. The money comes from Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson federal excise tax and totals nearly $6 million. <<<Read More>>>

 

Share

Secretary Zinke Announces More Than $1.1 Billion for Sportsmen & Conservation

Press Release from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service:

This year marks $20 billion in hunter and angler conservation funding

Date: March 20, 2018
Contact: Interior_Press@ios.doi.gov

HORICON, Wisc. – Today U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke traveled to Horicon, Wisconsin, where he announced more than $1.1 billion in annual national funding for state wildlife agencies from revenues generated by the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration and Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration (PRDJ) acts. The Secretary presented a ceremonial check to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources for $34,966,603 while visiting the Horicon Marsh State Wildlife Area. State-by-state listings of the final Fiscal Year 2018 apportionments of Wildlife Restoration Program fund can be found here and the Sport Fish Restoration Program fund here. Allocations of the funds are authorized by Congress. To date, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has distributed more than $20.2 billion in apportionments for state conservation and recreation projects.

“American sportsmen and women are some of our best conservationists and they contribute billions of dollars toward wildlife conservation and sportsmen access every year through the Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson Acts,” said Secretary Zinke. “For nearly eighty years, states have been able to fund important conservation initiatives thanks to the more than $20 billion that has generated nationwide. Every time a firearm, fishing pole, hook, bullet, motor boat or boat fuel is sold, part of that cost goes to fund conservation. The best way to increase funding for conservation and sportsmen access is to increase the number of hunters and anglers in our woods and waters. The American conservation model has been replicated all over the world because it works.”

The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources manages over 11,000 acres of the Horicon Marsh and almost every habitat project they complete includes PRDJ dollars, including prescribed burning, invasive species treatments, wetland berm maintenance, prairie seeding and restoration, timber stand improvement.

The funds, which are distributed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, support critical state conservation and outdoor recreation projects. They are derived from excise taxes paid by the hunting, shooting, boating and angling industries on firearms, bows and ammunition and sport fishing tackle, some boat engines, and small engine fuel.

Wisconsin boaters generate $1.18 billion of economic impact annually while hunting contributes to $2.5 billion in yearly economic impact. Angling creates over 21,000 jobs while impacting the economy to the tune of $2.3 billion each year.

“These funds are integral to our ability to provide hunting and fishing access, restore habitat and manage species at the state level,” said Daniel L. Meyer, Secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. “We greatly value the partnership we have with the Service and the Department of Interior.”

STATE TOTAL – SPORT FISH RESTORATION (FY18) TOTAL – ALL WILDLIFE FUNDS (FY18) TOTAL – ALL FUNDS (FY18)
ALABAMA $6,151,179 $19,360,421 $25,511,600
ALASKA $17,595,874 $33,455,771 $51,051,645
AMERICAN SAMOA $1,173,058 $1,328,563 $2,501,621
ARIZONA $7,154,503 $22,080,003 $29,234,506
ARKANSAS $5,348,981 $13,221,723 $18,570,704
CALIFORNIA $16,513,733 $26,037,993 $42,551,726
COLORADO $9,143,673 $19,872,123 $29,015,796
CONNECTICUT $3,519,175 $5,901,190 $9,420,365
DELAWARE $3,519,175 $4,785,824 $8,304,999
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA $1,173,058 $0 $1,173,058
FLORIDA $12,236,611 $14,351,398 $26,588,009
GEORGIA $8,041,424 $23,213,465 $31,254,889
GUAM $1,173,058 $1,328,563 $2,501,621
HAWAII $3,519,175 $4,785,824 $8,304,999
IDAHO $6,430,284 $15,474,320 $21,904,604
ILLINOIS $6,593,209 $16,335,080 $22,928,289
INDIANA $4,577,731 $13,573,699 $18,151,430
IOWA $4,513,130 $11,515,178 $16,028,308
KANSAS $4,981,927 $14,646,057 $19,627,984
KENTUCKY $5,198,763 $14,127,290 $19,326,053
LOUISIANA $6,908,171 $15,884,383 $22,792,554
MAINE $3,519,175 $8,055,283 $11,574,458
MARYLAND $3,519,175 $7,754,551 $11,273,726
MASSACHUSETTS $3,519,175 $7,986,372 $11,505,547
MICHIGAN $10,692,452 $24,296,525 $34,988,977
MINNESOTA $12,500,370 $23,400,370 $35,900,740
MISSISSIPPI $4,009,209 $12,144,757 $16,153,966
MISSOURI $7,677,750 $21,117,103 $28,794,853
MONTANA $8,648,987 $21,131,270 $29,780,257
N. MARIANA ISLANDS $1,173,058 $1,328,563 $2,501,621
NEBRASKA $4,483,366 $12,833,330 $17,316,696
NEVADA $4,974,601 $13,948,153 $18,922,754
NEW HAMPSHIRE $3,519,175 $4,785,824 $8,304,999
NEW JERSEY $3,519,175 $7,986,372 $11,505,547
NEW MEXICO $6,244,495 $15,787,434 $22,031,929
NEW YORK $7,820,180 $20,862,345 $28,682,525
NORTH CAROLINA $10,344,499 $21,338,737 $31,683,236
NORTH DAKOTA $4,130,618 $11,377,784 $15,508,402
OHIO $6,898,966 $16,457,632 $23,356,598
OKLAHOMA $7,695,368 $19,907,732 $27,603,100
OREGON $7,820,246 $17,690,588 $25,510,834
PENNSYLVANIA $8,571,622 $28,157,633 $36,729,255
PUERTO RICO $3,519,175 $3,452,263 $6,971,438
RHODE ISLAND $3,519,175 $4,785,824 $8,304,999
SOUTH CAROLINA $4,899,188 $10,678,793 $15,577,981
SOUTH DAKOTA $4,490,053 $13,775,104 $18,265,157
TENNESSEE $7,457,271 $22,544,767 $30,002,038
TEXAS $17,595,874 $36,656,319 $54,252,193
UTAH $6,405,939 $14,616,342 $21,022,281
VERMONT $3,519,175 $4,785,824 $8,304,999
VIRGIN ISLANDS $1,173,058 $1,328,563 $2,501,621
VIRGINIA $5,204,846 $14,176,335 $19,381,181
WASHINGTON $7,112,530 $15,120,458 $22,232,988
WEST VIRGINIA $3,519,175 $8,209,596 $11,728,771
WISCONSIN $11,424,513 $23,542,090 $34,966,603
WYOMING $5,329,957 $13,861,148 $19,191,105
       
TOTAL  $351,917,483 $797,160,652 $1,149,078,135

The recipient state wildlife agencies have matched these funds with approximately $6.7 billion throughout the years, primarily through hunting and fishing license revenues.

For more information about the WSFR program visit http://wsfrprograms.fws.gov/.

Share

Zinke, DOI Continue Inept Ways

Maybe if Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke had a director for the Fish and Wildlife Service, he would have another half-baked brain to help him not screw more things up.

According to a press release issued by the Department of Interior (DOI) it was announced the amount of money each state would be allotted from Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson Excise Taxes. These taxes are paid on designated sporting goods and goes to a coffer within the Federal Government. After entities like the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, an environmental group that basically spends most of its money on finding ways to end hunting, trapping and fishing nationwide, a formula is used to return those excise taxes to each state to be used specifically for promoting and enhancing hunting, fishing and trapping. That formula is based on the amount of money collected and the number of hunting, fishing and trapping licenses sold.

However, in this press release, Maine has not been allotted one red cent. How can that be?

It was pointed out to me that the DOI is planning to give Maine $11.2 million in federal wildlife funds (wherever that money comes from) and was suggested that Zinke will make that announcement when he visits Maine to look over the newly designated National Monument, Katahdin Woods and Waters.

However, is it even legal, according to the laws guiding the Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson taxes, to exempt any state from receiving the funds that should be coming to them according to that law? It would seem to me that if such a thing were legal, it’s a terrible loophole that could be used as a political tool.

It shouldn’t matter if the DOI intends to give Maine $11 or $11.2 million, by law and by the right thing to do, Maine has excise tax money coming to it and they should get it.

Is this simply some kind of misunderstanding or a misprint? Is the $11.2 million, if it is being sent to Maine, part or all of the money from P-R and D-J? Was Maine left off the press release by error? Is all of this another example of the Trump Administration’s inability to do much of anything right?

Certainly the Federal Government should not be allowed, under any circumstances to exempt any state from receiving funds that should be coming to them. The law wasn’t devised that way and this matter should be corrected.

Share

Taxpayers Funding the Industrial Complex

This is nothing new, right? We all know that for a very long time us taxpayers have been funding just about every pet project of some corrupt, fascistic politician and all his or her crony buddies for personal gain and political votes. Here’s another look at the hegemony thriving in this country, when powers of the industrial complex wield their control over government, forcing the government’s hand, which then becomes the responsibility of contracted citizens (you and me) to pay taxes and more taxes to fund the criminal enterprise – and liking it. One such example is found in an article at the Wall Street Journal. Unfortunately this article is behind a paywall.

Yvon Chouinard, founder of Patagonia, it turns out, spends lots and lots of time and money lobbying the Federal Government to do things like TAKE more and more land from the states/people for the main reason to have more and more land where his customers can do things like hike and camp and rock climb, etc., which places him and his company in a position to profit monetarily. The Federal Government taking land is nothing new. But are they really taking it? I’ll leave that discussion for another time.

The problem with this scenario is that the contracted citizen is left with the bill to subsidize the company of Patagonia by providing its customers a place to play. The more places to play the more money Patagonia stands to make. In addition, if companies like Patagonia can continue to successfully lobby the Federal Government to restrict use of those lands to only the activities of which they provide gear for, all the more money and exclusivity.

The taxpayer’s responsibility grows however. We know that the Federal Government is seriously in arrears in maintenance and upkeep of the land they already have in direct control. The cost of such maintenance falls on the taxpayer. The Federal Government needs at least an additional $20 billion dollars each year just to keep up with the federal land maintained. It seems ridiculous to keep adding to the shortfall by taking over more land…unless of course the powerful Industrial Complex forces presidents, like Barack Obama, to keep creating national monuments, perhaps knowing full well that Congress would not approve taking over more land for more parks. Or maybe it’s not forcing anybody to do anything. Aren’t they all in it together?

We know that just before Obama left office he designated two new national monuments – Katahdin Woods and Waters in Maine and Bears Ears in Utah. We now know that Chouinard lobbied Obama very hard to get the Utah national monument in order to pad his own wallet at our expense.

In both cases, Maine and Utah governments are working hard to get President Trump to somehow overturn the designation of the two monuments. It appears quite clear that the majority of the people did not want either of the two monuments but the Federal Hegemony cannot be reeled in.

In addition, the author of the WSJ piece suggested that a solution to this problem would be to implement an excise tax on camping, hiking, mountain biking, rock climbing, etc. gear, similar to the Pittman-Robertson excise tax on shooting and hunting gear, and the Dingell-Johnson excise tax on fishing gear, to fund the upkeep of federal lands and/or to get that section of the outdoor sports and recreation industry to begin paying their way. I’m not so sure that this would actually solve anything and might create more problems if not implemented properly. Otherwise, the present act of federal takeover of land and lobbying efforts would not bring into check the hegemony but might expand it even further. I would have to examine this very closely.

Share

Proposal: Annual Certification of State’s Hunting and Fishing License Sales

I. Abstract

    The Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 669 et
seq.) and the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 777 
et seq., except 777e-1) provide authority for Federal assistance to the 
States for management and restoration of fish and wildlife. These Acts 
and our regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR 
80, subpart D, require that States, territories, and the District of 
Columbia annually certify their hunting and fishing license sales. 
States, territories, and the District of Columbia that receive grants 
under these Acts use FWS Forms 3-154a (Part I--Certification) and 3-
154b (Part II--Summary of Hunting and Sport Fishing Licenses Issued) to 
certify the number and amount of hunting and fishing license sales. We 
use the information collected to apportion and distribute funds 
according to the formula specified in each Act.<<<For more information and where  to comment>>>
Share

Hunters, Anglers Fund America’s Conservation Efforts

Press Release from the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation:

MISSOULA, Mont.—New statistics recently released by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) show hunters and anglers generated $1.1 billion in 2014. That funding will be distributed to state and territorial fish and wildlife agencies to support America’s conservation and recreation projects.

“‘Hunting Is Conservation‘ is not just a motto or a theme or a mantra. It’s truth,” said David Allen, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation president and CEO. “Sportsmen and women who hunt and fish are the people who generate the funds for on-the-ground conservation and wildlife management efforts from coast to coast.”

The funding is raised through the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration and Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration programs which place excise taxes on the sale of firearms, ammunition, archery equipment, fishing equipment, electric boat motors, and from taxes on the purchase of motorboat fuel.

“These funds are the cornerstone of state-based efforts that are critical to the preservation of America’s wildlife and natural resources,” said Service Director Dan Ashe. “But they are also the fuel for a massive financial engine that benefits outdoor recreationists, hunters, boaters and anglers, equipment manufacturers and retailers, and local and regional economies. Their value cannot be overstated in providing opportunities for the next generation of Americans to get outdoors, experience our wild places and learn the importance of conserving our natural heritage.”

“It is thanks to this significant financial investment made by America’s sportsmen and women and the hunting, shooting sports, angling and boating industries that state and territorial fish and wildlife agencies can deliver science-based conservation on the ground,” said Larry Voyles, Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies president and Arizona Game and Fish Department director. “The Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program has made the difference between the survival and abundance of some species and it helps agencies, like mine, manage a vast estate of lands and waters and connect more people to wildlife-related recreation.”

Funding generated by RMEF’s volunteers and members in 2014 furthered the Elk Foundation’s conservation mission by helping complete 253 land and habitat stewardship projects that protected or enhanced 160,180 acres of elk habitat and opened or secured public access to 61,817 acres.

“We are so grateful for our dedicated volunteers and members, as well as sportsmen and women around the country for their passion for land and wildlife conservation,” added Allen.

Go here to see a state-by-state breakdown of the funding distribution.

Share

A Made Up Issue About Pittman-Robertson Money and Wolves

wake-up-america

The Idaho Statesmen trumps up a story that isn’t, I suppose to sell copies. According to Rocky Barker there’s a problem with whether or not Idaho is going to utilize Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson excise tax money to prop up the coffers of a fascist bill, painted as a means of controlling wolves, and making the sportsmen pay for it. The fake “concern” is whether or not using P-R/D-J money to kill wolves is in violation of the excise tax law.

If Mr. Barker believes this to be an “issue” where was he on this issue when P-R/D-J money was stolen by the millions from sportsmen to illegally bring the wolves to Idaho in the first place? Isn’t that an issue? Or how about the fact that the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies convinced Congress to give them some of that excise tax money to fund their anti-hunting programs? Does that make sense? Where’s the uproar? What’s the issue? P-R/D-J monies have been abused for so many years by fish and game departments and now, out of the blue, somebody thinks wasting P-R/D-J money to kill some wolves might be in violation of the law? Oh, I get it. It’s because it’s about wolves. Everything for the G.I. wolves, that’s it.

Give me a break!

I have written in the past about this ridiculous bill that forces hunters to pay for damages done by Government Issued wolves and the crooks that pulled it off. That’s like asking a patient to pay for damages done by an incompetent doctor. Where’s the outrage? I hear nothing but crickets! Have we become that communistic in our non thinking ways that we cannot even see the damned government is making us pay for our own rope to hang ourselves with?

Share