20 



dercut the whole intent of your bill? So anyone who would like to 

 address that, I would appreciate your comments. 



Mr. McDowell. Yes. I will address that. We have done a lot of— 

 first of all, we have done an awful lot of interviews and breakout 

 groups with the users of this type of equipment. This is the way 

 they want to pay. I would also point out that it is a sliding scale 

 that we have developed, and we will work with industry, work with 

 members of the industry community to take a look at this and have 

 worked with them. In other words, on some equipment, it will be 

 a quarter of one percent, and on others, it will be five percent. 



I think that this is what the users want. So I think to a degree 

 if the manufacturers name it something else, the users are not 

 going to buy it as often as they are. I am not a marketing special- 

 ist, but all the users that we have spoken to will identify with the 

 "Teaming with Wildlife" logo on these things — this equipment, hik- 

 ing boots, bicycles, whatever — and will identify that with contribut- 

 ing back to the resource. They are more likely to stick to the prod- 

 ucts that, in fact, are targeted that way. 



Mr. TORKILDSEN. If I could just follow up on that, if that is the 

 intent, would anyone consider making this a voluntary item where 

 you do use the logo and people who want to help can make sure 

 they purchase a product with that logo? Would you consider a vol- 

 untary instead of a mandatory tax? 



Mr. McDowell. Voluntary kinds of things don't work I don't 

 think in terms of consistency, and that is what we need. We need 

 consistency because the projects that we will undertake have to 

 deal with long-term solutions. 



And, you know, in my State, we have one-third of the entire 

 world's population of one species of shorebirds. And if we don't pro- 

 vide recreational opportunities there, we don't provide value there, 

 then that population worldwide is going to be in trouble. The peo- 

 ple will identify with that. The people will identify with the prod- 

 ucts used for that. 



I might point out that Swift Optics supports this, and many of 

 the companies in the bird-watching business support this — a lot of 

 the optical companies. And so they have identified the people. They 

 know, for example, how much their binoculars, what style, what- 

 ever is used for bird-watching. And with that symbol on it, I think 

 that is what is going to direct the public back to the product. 



Mr. TORKILDSEN. Would anyone else like to comment on that at 

 all? 



Mr. Mallman. Yes, I would. I think your points are well taken, 

 and there is certainly a real incentive for some companies to try 

 to avoid this tax or user fee. Unfortunately, I don't think a vol- 

 untary program would be fair for the companies who do want to 

 participate and who recognize the seriousness of the situation we 

 are trying to correct. It allows other companies to actually take ad- 

 vantage of the growth in the business because of the efforts of our 

 nongame specialists, while making just a few pay for the services. 



On the other issue that you brought up, and this is a very impor- 

 tant one, and that is when you mentioned the luxury tax and its 

 impact on sales of certain things, this has been the biggest objec- 

 tion voiced by the people — the companies in our industry. 



