85 



1 Johnson /Pittman-Robertson/Wallop-Breaux in that they are not 



2 exempt from paying federal teixes on sporting equipment, gasoline, 



3 boats, motors, and trailers, etc., and they do provide significant 



4 opportunities for recreation to the general public. These taxes have 



5 traditionally been reserved for use by states and territories, but 



6 constitute a model from which a similar mechanism can be developed 



7 to support the Tribal funding necessary to drive this Act. Of 



8 paramount importance to the funding programs is the ability to keep 



9 fish, wildlife and recreation funds in the fish, wildlife and recreation 



10 Tribal programs in competition with all other Tribal needs. The 



11 existing Federal Aides Program can again serve as a model upon 



12 which Tribal funding can be based. The use of federal funds to 



13 match Tribal contributions can provide political stability to the fish, 



14 wildlife and recreation management programs. Loss of Native 



15 American Fish & Wildlife Enhancement Act (NAFWE Act) funding if 



16 Tribes reprioritize their existing fish, wildlife and recreation federal 



17 monies or earned revenues from license sales, etc., could be a 



18 powerful tool to assist Tribal Governments in the decision making 



19 process. 



20 Non-Tribal funding of the NAFWE Act is justifiable as a 



21 result of key contributions that Tribal Government resources are 



22 making to the nation as a whole. Fish, wildlife and recreation 



23 resources are providing many opportunities for the general public 



24 to recreate and earn a living through guiding and tourism related 



11 



