Below the Radar: Modernizing the Pittman-Robertson Fund for Tomorrow’s Needs Act

JJ Sutton Barbary Sheep Hunt with the Brenton USA Premium AR Hunting Rifle
JJ Sutton Barbary Sheep Hunt with the Brenton USA Premium AR Hunting Rifle

United States – -( The Pittman-Robertson Act doesn’t get mentioned a lot. But this legislation passed in 1937, with updates in 1970, 1972, 1974, 1984, 1989, and 2000, has been a major contributor for wildlife conservation and in promoting hunter education. Over the years, over $10 billion has been collected for the purposes of that act. But while it has done well so far, it could stand to be tweaked for the 2020s.

Fortunately, there is an effort to make some changes to this fund to keep not just wildlife conservation going, but also hunting. One of these changes will ultimately be a great benefit the fight for our Second Amendment rights. Those changes are in S 2092, the Modernizing the Pittman-Robertson Fund for Tomorrow's Needs Act, introduced by Senator James Risch (R-ID), a Second Amendment champion.

“This legislation will make important updates to the Pittman-Robertson Fund to ensure future generations can carry on this treasured pastime of hunting and recreational shooting while conserving wildlife for outdoorsmen and women to enjoy and experience,” Risch said in a release issued by his office.

Among those improvements are provisions that now allow states to promote hunting and recreational shooting. The sad fact is, hunting license sales have been in decline, and as hunting declines, it isn’t just the sportsmen who will suffer – the wildlife does as well. The fact is, there is a need to recruit new hunters and recreational shooters, to retain the current hunters and recreational shooters, and to get hunters and recreational shooters who aren’t doing either any more back into the shooting sports.

This not only will increase the funds that help wildlife conservation, but it also will strengthen the Second Amendment. This might sound counter-intuitive, but the more people who hunt and who are involved in recreational shooting, the harder it will be to demonize gunowners in general, which has become a strategy used by anti-Second Amendment extremists.

These days, hunters may be as likely to use a modern multi-purpose semiautomatic firearm like the Rock River Arms LAR-308, Springfield M1A, or a DS Arms SA 58 as they are a Remington 700, Browning A-Bolt, or a Winchester 70. Just the imagery of a hunter using one of the former three while deer hunting would do a lot to counter the propaganda from the likes of Shannon Watts.

The fact is, modernizing the Pittman-Robertson Act, especially to allow states to recruit, retain, and re-activate hunters and recreational shooters, will be a benefit to efforts to preserve the Second Amendment. While its primary purpose has been for protection from tyranny, it also provides personal protection, and it serves as a means to protect people from going hungry (via hunting).

Second Amendment supporters should contact their Senators and Representative and politely urge them to support S 2092. As important as fighting gun bans in the present it, we must also keep an eye towards the future.

About Harold Hutchison

Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post,, and other national websites.

Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
4 months ago

I wish I could believe that. But I know hunters who thinks AR’s and AK’s should be banned because they don’t need them to hunt with. Along with any other “military style weapons”.

I tell them Paul Revere didn’t ride his horse and yell out, “Big Deer with Antlers are Coming”!

But don’t seem to get it or care.

They want more restriction on getting guns, do away with carry permits and so on. Quite incredible.

4 months ago

Its the States, charging ridiculous fee’s for permits while bike trails are made with our money which in turn generate ZERO revenue from the state. Then the bicyclists say there’s too many spider webs across the trail and the ride down the most dangerous road you can imagine wearing black or other dark colors.
“…and I’ll shall confound them.”