96 



Recreationists proposed to be taxed are generally satisfied with their 

 present experiences, including opportunities for wildlife-associated 

 activities, and do not appear to be very motivated to pay taxes for 

 additional services. Further, those who view wildlife or watch birds, too, 

 are quite satisfied with current opportunities. 



This data, and that for the sutjsequent finding, are also drawn from the 

 1996 Recreation Roundtable in-person survey of 2,000 Americans during 

 April and May 1996. 



Our camping customers are generally less optimistic than wildlife viewers 

 about whether recreation opportunities are getting better, presumably 

 because of budget cutbacks at federal and state recreation sites. 



A great deal of emphasis has been placed on the success of the Wallop-Breaux 

 and Pittman-Robertson programs by proponents of the "Teaming with Wildlife" 

 initiative. The Coleman Company is proud that it was a supporter of the legislation 

 which created Wallop-Breaux and has aided its operations subsequently. Our 

 company is in the boating and fishing businesses and does generate revenues for the 

 Wallop-Breaux fund through Coleman brand products. We see a clear and 

 fundamental difference between "Teaming" and Wallop-Breaux, however. Wallop- 

 Breaux imposes taxes on a narrow band of fishing and boating products and dedicates 

 all revenues to programs with clear and direct benefits for American anglers and 

 boaters. The "Teaming" proposal would tax a broad range of products — from skis to 

 sport utility vehicles to tents to hiking boots - and dedicate use of the receipts to a 

 narrow range of programs, at best indirectly benefiting most of those paying the tax. 



