$BILLIONS$ for Conservation, PAID BY.......
Luke Owen, PG MS4CECI, NPDES Training Institute
Keeping Water in Your Life and Life in Your Water?
Unknown to most American's, there are two groups of donors that invest billions of dollars per year into wildlife conservation. More money than all environmental protection organizations ever dreamed of doing, combined! One such group in 2013 alone invested $522,552,011; AND the second group invested $359,871,868.
You might ask....WHO IN THE WORLD PAID SUCH BIG BUCKs for WILDLIFE CONSERVATION so we can hunt, fish and enjoy our American Liberty? The answer is....... you! If you have ever bought a firearm, bullets, bows or arrows, a fishing pole or a hook, consider yourself one of the most rabid environmental conservationists the world has ever known. Today, at a time when record federal deficits, slashed budgets and ideologically inspired attacks on conservation are going crazy, passage of the Pittman-Roberston Act Act of 1937 and the Dingell-Johnson Act of 1950 never seemed so important, or so visionary.
Read the article printed by Field & Stream to learn more and gather some gratitude and pride for American Ingenuity!
Environmental Scientist, CPESC - Compliance, Water Quality, Erosion & Sediment Control, Wetlands, Stormwater Mgt
7 年First let me say that I'm sure there are many hunters and fisherman who really are conservationists and have a strong environmental ethic. But, to say that all hunters and fisherman naturally are would be presumptuous (and wrong). The money comes through taxes they pay on the licenses, guns, ammo, boats and equipment they buy. As this article suggests, many of them don't even know about the tax or what it does. Also, as we know, the motives behind the huge jump in the number of gun and ammunition sales during the Obama years surely wasn't because more people wanted to go game hunting. Although the taxes these type of gun and ammunition sales brought in for conservation was an unexpected bonus, to say that it came from conservation-minded people is not necessarily true. The test would be to find out if it was a voluntary contribution they were being asked for ("Thank you for your purchase. Would you like to add $10 to your purchase to go to conservation?"), rather than a mandatory tax, how many people would give it, every time. Then compare the annual dollar amount taken in with voluntary contributions with the annual amount brought in in voluntary contributions for conservation by all of the various environmental and conservation groups, such as The Nature Conservancy, Ducks Unlimited, Land Trusts, and so on. Mind you, I am not suggesting that this test actually be carried out. I am absolutely for the continuation of Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson! In fact, I wish there was a similar tax on other outdoor recreation items such as tents and canoes/kayaks and field guides and binoculars. That way, ALL of us who are conservationists and environmentalists and enjoy the outdoors can say that we are contributing in equal measure!
Keeping Water in Your Life and Life in Your Water?
9 年It's amazing how many people don't put that together Stephen. It's not that people are dumb, it's because we're all busy doing our thing and most people born in a city do not think about environmental conservation although they enjoy the benefits of it. We need to be spreading the word in a practical fashion that will help people become aware the critical relationship between our natural resources and America's quality of life.