Analysis of dedicated revenue scale and diversity among U.S. state fish and wildlife agencies

Abstract

State fish and wildlife agencies in the United States depend on consistent, dedicated revenue to study, manage, and conserve wildlife. As hunters comprise a declining portion of the population in the United States and firearms excise taxes are increasingly paid by non-hunters, states are exploring ways to diversify their revenue streams beyond the user-pay model of the American System of Conservation Funding. To quantify the variety and scale of dedicated revenue streams, we surveyed all 50 state fish and wildlife agencies and compiled a revenue portfolio for fiscal years (FY) 2018 and 2019. We cataloged revenue from 25 policy mechanisms and assessed the influence of covariates related to politics, wildlife values, and demographics on revenue diversification. Most dedicated revenue was derived from 3 primary sources: 1) hunting, fishing, and trapping license sales ($\overline{x}$ = 42.5%, SD = 15%, range = 13–90%, n = 50), 2) Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Grants ($\overline{x}$ = 18%, SD = 10%, range = 0–40%, n = 50; e.g., Pittman-Robertson), and 3) Federal Aid in Sportfish Restoration Grants ($\overline{x}$ = 8.4%, SD = 12%, range = 0–79%, n = 50; e.g., Dingell-Johnson). Combined, these 3 sources accounted for an average of 69% of dedicated revenue per state (SD = 16%, range = 32–96%, n = 50). Other revenue sources ranged from sales taxes and boat registrations to public land user fees and license plates. Collectively, agencies reported $3.7 billion in dedicated revenue in FY2019 ($\overline{x}$ = $75.9 million, SD = $57.7 million, range = $3.7–241 million, n = 50). We did not find that political, cultural, or demographic covariates influenced revenue diversification. These research outputs can serve as a resource for state wildlife agencies seeking to analyze the resilience of their revenue portfolios or increase revenue by establishing or expanding non-traditional revenue sources. For stakeholders, having a thorough understanding of state wildlife agency revenue mechanisms can guide opportunities to partner with agencies to fund shared conservation initiatives.