The Backpack Tax

[Dill]

(08-13-2019, 09:05 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: The problem is that there has been a declining number of hunters and anglers over the years. There is also a threat to wildlife habitats, our wild places that many people enjoy. Hikers, bikers, campers, water skiers, recreational boaters, etc. There has been a decline in funding to protect these places over the years which has threatened our public lands because Pittman and Dingell funds make up the majority of the money states have to maintain these places. Groups like the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership have been saying for decades, now, that recreational users of our public lands should also help pay for the preservation of these lands. This is what is called "the backpack tax" as it would create an excise tax on items like backpacks, tents, and other equipment commonly used for outdoor activities.

Now, "the backpack tax" isn't a new idea. There is an industry group that was created in the '80s with the primary purpose of combating this idea. But now, as we have seen this problem further exacerbated, this debate it ramping up, again.

Now, I don't expect much action on this with the current political climate and with a director of BLM in favor of selling off our lands, but what do you think about this idea to help fund wilderness conservation?

Yow.  I purchased a hunting-fishing license every year from age 12-22. I'm 68 now and have only purchased one since then.  My children will never go hunting or fishing.  If that is a national trend, while the population continues to grow, then we have a problem.

What if the BLM director sells off public lands to fund parks and such?

The burden should not all be on hunters, especially if there numbers are declining. Maybe the tax could be extended to recreational vehicles as well.