Pittman-Robertson Act: 70 years of conservation dollars
This tax on hunting equipment has provided $5-billion for conservation over the last 75 years. It has done a lot of good, but it also ties the USFWS to”game” wildlife rather than wildlife in general. Regardless of your view, every conservationist should know about Pittman-Robertson and the related Dingell-Johnson Act (Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act) which is funded by a tax on sports fisheries equipment.
Story. Pittman-Robertson Act: 70 years of conservation dollars. Since 1939, taxes on archery, shooting and hunting equipment have meant nearly $5 billion for conservation. By Jeff Dute. Outdoors Editor. Press Register (Huntsville)

Ralph Maughan
Dr. Ralph Maughan is professor emeritus of political science at Idaho State University. He has been a Western Watersheds Project Board Member off and on for many years, and also its President. For many years he produced Ralph Maughan's Wolf Report. He was a founder of the Greater Yellowstone Coalition. He and Jackie Johnson Maughan wrote three editions of "Hiking Idaho." He also wrote "Beyond the Tetons" and "Backpacking Wyoming's Teton and Washakie Wilderness." He created and is the administrator of The Wildlife News.
2 Responses to Pittman-Robertson Act: 70 years of conservation dollars
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Recent Posts
- Another Misleading New York Times Fire Article August 4, 2022
- San Pedro Grazing Challenged August 3, 2022
- M-44 Ban On Public Lands Near Enactment August 1, 2022
- Michael Garrity–Working to Protect the Northern Rockies Ecosystem July 31, 2022
- NYT Promotes Logging in Yosemite NP July 28, 2022
Recent Comments
- Mark L on Another Misleading New York Times Fire Article
- Ida Lupine on M-44 Ban On Public Lands Near Enactment
- Beeline on Another Misleading New York Times Fire Article
- Ida Lupine on Michael Garrity–Working to Protect the Northern Rockies Ecosystem
- Ida Lupine on Michael Garrity–Working to Protect the Northern Rockies Ecosystem
- Susan on Another Misleading New York Times Fire Article
- rastadoggie on San Pedro Grazing Challenged
- rastadoggie on Michael Garrity–Working to Protect the Northern Rockies Ecosystem
- Karl J. Findling on San Pedro Grazing Challenged
- Maggie Frazier on M-44 Ban On Public Lands Near Enactment
- MK Ray on M-44 Ban On Public Lands Near Enactment
- Robert Goldman on A White Mountain National Park? Has its time arrived?
- lou on NYT Promotes Logging in Yosemite NP
- Ida Lupine on NYT Promotes Logging in Yosemite NP
- Maggie Frazier on NYT Promotes Logging in Yosemite NP
The PR Act has done a lot for wildlife conservation but it is very frustrating that wildlife watching makes so much money and none of it goes to wildlife conservation – must goes to the general economy. There should be a tax on all cameras, binoculars, spotting scopes, etc, to have non-hunters pay for wildlife conservation as well. At least a 1 % tax would add tons to wildlife conservation.
I agree. The non-consumptive users should pay their fair share too.