shooting ranges

The NSSF sent out an alert yesterday that the Senate Environmental and Public Works Subcommittee will hold hearings on S. 1249 – the Target Practice and Marksmanship Training Act of 2012 – which is sponsored by Sen. Mark Udall (D-CO).

The Senate Environment and Public Works subcommittee will hold a hearing tomorrow, Tuesday, April 24, at 10:15 a.m., on several bills important to sportsmen and sprotswomen, including NSSF’s priority this legislative session–S. 1249, the Target Practice and Marksmanship Training Support Act. The bill, introduced by Senator Mark Udall (D-CO), would allow states to expand their use of Pittman-Robertson funds to develop or expand public target shooting facilities. Amending the restrictions on Pittman-Robertson funds for this purpose is long overdue. More public shooting ranges are needed throughout the country to accommodate the rapidly growing number of target shooters who contribute to P-R funding through purchases of firearms and ammunition. Learn more about this bill and write your senators to support it.

 You can read the full text of the bill here and read more about it here and here.

The Target Practice and Marksmanship Training Support Act of 2011 was introduced by Sen. Mark Udall (D-CO) on June 22nd.

Former Rep. Betsy Markey (D-CO-4) introduced a very similar bill in the 111th Congress. That bill, H. 3781, never made it out of committee.

This bill has the support of the National Shooting Sports Foundation which is a bit change from earlier years. As Michael Bane said in a blog post, this is a recognition that Gun Culture v. 2.0 will be the future of the shooting sports. He also notes that our enemies know that if they can deprive us of a place to shoot, they can limit our growth.

This is HUGE! One of the baseline strategies of our enemies — perhaps the only one that has been working, BTW — has been to deprive us of places to shoot. A significant amount of revenue flowing into range development, coupled with pushing federal land management agencies to allow land for ranges (a big issue here in Colorado), is a very important start.

This is a good bill that deserves our support. Increasing places to shoot – especially free or low cost ones – is critical if we want to introduce new people to shooting. The days of shooting in your back yard are over in most places throughout the United States. While the bulk of open lands are in the western United States, there are quite a  number of National Forests east of the Mississippi. Moreover, the bill would allow support for public ranges on non-Federal land so state, county, and municipal lands could also be used for ranges.

The text of S. 1249 was finally released and can be seen below.

112th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. 1249

To amend the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act to facilitate the establishment of additional or expanded public target ranges in certain States.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

June 22, 2011

Mr. UDALL of Colorado (for himself, Mr. RISCH, Mr. TESTER, and Mr. BENNET) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

A BILL

To amend the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act to facilitate the establishment of additional or expanded public target ranges in certain States.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Target Practice and Marksmanship Training Support Act’.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS; PURPOSE.

(a) Findings- Congress finds that–

(1) the use of firearms and archery equipment for target practice and marksmanship training activities on Federal land is allowed, except to the extent specific portions of that land have been closed to those activities;

(2) in recent years preceding the date of enactment of this Act, portions of Federal land have been closed to target practice and marksmanship training for many reasons;

(3) the availability of public target ranges on non-Federal land has been declining for a variety of reasons, including continued population growth and development near former ranges;

(4) providing opportunities for target practice and marksmanship training at public target ranges on Federal and non-Federal land can help–

(A) to promote enjoyment of shooting, recreational, and hunting activities; and

(B) to ensure safe and convenient locations for those activities;

(5) Federal law in effect on the date of enactment of this Act, including the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 669 et seq.), provides Federal support for construction and expansion of public target ranges by making available to States amounts that may be used for construction, operation, and maintenance of public target ranges; and

(6) it is in the public interest to provide increased Federal support to facilitate the construction or expansion of public target ranges.

(b) Purpose- The purpose of this Act is to facilitate the construction and expansion of public target ranges, including ranges on Federal land managed by the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management.

SEC. 3. DEFINITION OF PUBLIC TARGET RANGE.

In this Act, the term `public target range’ means a specific location that–

(1) is identified by a governmental agency for recreational shooting;

(2) is open to the public;

(3) may be supervised; and

(4) may accommodate archery or rifle, pistol, or shotgun shooting.

SEC. 4. AMENDMENTS TO PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION ACT.

(a) Definitions- Section 2 of the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 669a) is amended–

(1) by redesignating paragraphs (2) through (8) as paragraphs (3) through (9), respectively; and

(2) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:

`(2) the term `public target range’ means a specific location that–

`(A) is identified by a governmental agency for recreational shooting;

`(B) is open to the public;

`(C) may be supervised; and

`(D) may accommodate archery or rifle, pistol, or shotgun shooting;’.

(b) Expenditures for Management of Wildlife Areas and Resources- Section 8(b) of the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 669g(b)) is amended–

(1) by striking `(b) Each State’ and inserting the following:

`(b) Expenditures for Management of Wildlife Areas and Resources-

`(1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (2), each State’;

(2) in paragraph (1) (as so designated), by striking `construction, operation,’ and inserting `operation’;

(3) in the second sentence, by striking `The non-Federal share’ and inserting the following:

`(3) NON-FEDERAL SHARE- The non-Federal share’;

(4) in the third sentence, by striking `The Secretary’ and inserting the following:

`(4) REGULATIONS- The Secretary’; and

(5) by inserting after paragraph (1) (as designated by paragraph (1) of this subsection) the following:

`(2) EXCEPTION- Notwithstanding the limitation described in paragraph (1), a State may pay up to 90 percent of the cost of acquiring land for, expanding, or constructing a public target range.’.

(c) Firearm and Bow Hunter Education and Safety Program Grants- Section 10 of the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 669h-1) is amended–

(1) in subsection (a), by adding at the end the following:

`(3) ALLOCATION OF ADDITIONAL AMOUNTS- Of the amount apportioned to a State for any fiscal year under section 4(b), the State may elect to allocate not more than 10 percent, to be combined with the amount apportioned to the State under paragraph (1) for that fiscal year, for acquiring land for, expanding, or constructing a public target range.’;

(2) by striking subsection (b) and inserting the following:

`(b) Cost Sharing-

`(1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (2), the Federal share of the cost of any activity carried out using a grant under this section shall not exceed 75 percent of the total cost of the activity.

`(2) PUBLIC TARGET RANGE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION- The Federal share of the cost of acquiring land for, expanding, or constructing a public target range in a State on Federal or non-Federal land pursuant to this section or section 8(b) shall not exceed 90 percent of the cost of the activity.’; and

(3) in subsection (c)(1)–

(A) by striking `Amounts made’ and inserting the following:

`(A) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in subparagraph (B), amounts made’; and

(B) by adding at the end the following:

`(B) EXCEPTION- Amounts provided for acquiring land for, constructing, or expanding a public target range shall remain available for expenditure and obligation during the 5-fiscal-year period beginning on October 1 of the first fiscal year for which the amounts are made available.’.

SEC. 5. LIMITS ON LIABILITY.

(a) Discretionary Function- For purposes of chapter 171 of title 28, United States Code (commonly referred to as the `Federal Tort Claims Act’), any action by an agent or employee of the United States to manage or allow the use of Federal land for purposes of target practice or marksmanship training by a member of the public shall be considered to be the exercise or performance of a discretionary function.

(b) Civil Action or Claims- Except to the extent provided in chapter 171 of title 28, United States Code, the United States shall not be subject to any civil action or claim for money damages for any injury to or loss of property, personal injury, or death caused by an activity occurring at a public target range that is–

(1) funded in whole or in part by the Federal Government pursuant to the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 669 et seq.); or

(2) located on Federal land.

SEC. 6. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING COOPERATION.

It is the sense of Congress that, consistent with applicable laws and regulations, the Chief of the Forest Service and the Director of the Bureau of Land Management should cooperate with State and local authorities and other entities to carry out waste removal and other activities on any Federal land used as a public target range to encourage continued use of that land for target practice or marksmanship training.

While the text to Senator Mark Udall’s S. 1249 is still not available, I was able to find his release on the bill which gives a broad outline. All in all it looks like a good bill.

Here in western North Carolina we are surrounded by Federal lands with two National Forests, one National Park, and TVA maintained land. In many of the counties, the amount of Federally owned land reaches 90%. Even with all that Federal land, there is one public range maintained by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission and three (and maybe a fourth) maintained by the USFS in Nantahala National Forest. There are none that I can find in Pisgah National Forest which borders the largest city in western North Carolina – Asheville.

Posted: Wednesday, June 22, 2011

Today, Mark Udall re-introduced legislation to help states construct and maintain safe public shooting ranges. The bill, the Target Practice and Marksmanship Training Support Act, would help ensure that there are enough accessible ranges where hunters and marksmen can safely practice recreational shooting.

Under current law – the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act – an excise tax is collected on sporting equipment and ammunition, which states can use for activities such as wildlife restoration and hunter education programs. However, it has limited effectiveness in establishing and maintaining shooting ranges, which are declining in number. Udall’s Target Practice and Marksmanship Training Support Act, co-sponsored by Senators Jim Risch, Michael Bennet and Jon Tester, would amend the law to give states more flexibility to use existing funds to create and maintain shooting ranges.

“The number of places in our communities and on public lands where Colorado sportsmen and women can safely shoot and target practice has steadily dwindled,” Udall said. “This bill would give states more flexibility to use federal dollars – that have already been allocated to them – to create safe, new public places to shoot. It would be a triple win for sporting and conservation communities: states can create higher quality and safer shooting ranges, more Coloradans can take up the sport, and it would generate more money for future conservation and hunter education efforts.”

Udall’s bill would:
• Increase the amount of money states can contribute from their allotted Pittman-Robertson funds to 90 percent of the cost to improve or construct a public target range from the current limit of 75 percent. This would reduce local and state matching requirements from 25 percent to 10 percent.

• Allow the Pittman-Robertson funds allotted to a state to remain available and accrue for five fiscal years for use in acquiring land for, expanding, or constructing a public target range on federal or non-federal land. Under current law, states must use these funds within one year.

• Limit the legal liability exposure to the federal land management agencies regarding the management and use of federal land for target practice or marksmanship training.

• Encourage the federal land management agencies to cooperate with state and local authorities to maintain target ranges on federal land so as to encourage their continued use.