PFBC Exec Tim Schaeffer explains the catch and release of federal funding
That trend continued recently as Schaeffer traveled to Erie to brief members of the Pennsylvania Outdoor Writers Association on agency updates, including a breakdown of how federal funds are obtained and redistributed.
'Federal revenue – which represents roughly one-fourth of PFBC's total funding – comes from a national excise tax on fishing and boating gear,' Schaeffer explained. 'This money is allocated via a formula that is based on geographic location and fishing license sales.'
The Sport Fish Restoration Act, also known as the Dingell-Johnson Act, was enacted in 1950 to provide federal funding to state fish and wildlife agencies for restoration, conservation, management and enhancement of sport fishing opportunities. In 1984, that program was expanded by the Wallop-Breaux Amendment to include excise taxes on a wider variety of fishing equipment, including motorboat fuel, imported boat duties and fishing tackle.
This amendment provided additional funding for boating access development and aquatic resource education programs, essentially creating a system through which the consumer directly benefits from the dollars they spend. Anglers and boaters purchase equipment to enjoy their favorite pastimes, and a portion of their investment comes right back to improve fishing access while ensuring abundant, sustainable fish populations in well- managed fisheries.
According to PFBC reports, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, which manages the Sport Fish and Wildlife Restoration budget, apportioned $381,827,198 in grants to state sport fish programs during the 2024 federal fiscal year. The program's North Atlantic- Appalachian Region received $62,573,512 for distribution among 14 states, with Pennsylvania receiving $9,320,492 – the largest apportionment to any state in the region. Of this total, $7,922,419 was allocated for freshwater fish and $1,398,074 was earmarked for boating access.
'This funding represents a significant portion of the PFBC's annual budget, and we've been able to steward that apportionment through a variety of programs that share these federal funds,' Schaeffer said.
Fisheries Management receives the largest slice of the pie for studies that assess the impact of management techniques, including stocking, wild fish, habitat modifications and regulations on respective fisheries to meet program objectives.
Aquatic Resource Education provides educational opportunities and outreach activities to target audiences, including the development and delivery of materials and training to aid in angler recruitment, reactivation and retention.
Another portion goes to Maintenance of Public Access Facilities, including approximately 250 PFBC-owned and managed facilities that were acquired or developed with both federal and non-federal funds, to provide fishing and boating opportunities.
Fifteen percent of Dingell-Johnson funds must be used on Recreational Boating Access, so the PFBC's Boating Facility Grant Program provides grants to eligible entities for the construction and improvement of public boat access facilities. Another program, the Boating Infrastructure Grant provides funding for tie-up and docking facilities for transient, non-trailered vessels such as scenic river cruise boats in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia that bring economic value to the area.
The Clean Vessel Act supports the construction, renovation, operation and maintenanceof pump-out stations and waste reception facilities to meet the needs of recreationalboaters at public marinas and locally operated boat access areas.
Lastly, Recreational Boating Safety has been prioritized, as the program helps fund the development and delivery of effective public boating education programs, implementation of strategies to reduce boating fatalities and incidents, and the enforcement of boating laws and regulations.
Even with budget changes at the national level, Schaeffer is optimistic that this critical funding will remain intact, which should help prevent an increase in fishing license costs.
'We think these excise taxes are safe, because they are applied directly by the manufacturers into the consumer pricing, and it is extracted as 10-percent of the totalsale,' Schaeffer said. 'I've walked through the halls of outdoor shows, explaining to vendors how we use these excise tax dollars.
'Most businesses didn't know what their money was going towards, but they were pleased to hear it's being used to directly benefit their customers.'
Just like catch-and-release fishing, these funds are redistributed for others to enjoy.
(Frantz is a past president of the Pennsylvania Outdoor Writers Association. Contact the writer: outdoors@republicanherald.com)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 minutes ago
- Yahoo
First Eagle Investments Announces Closing of Majority Investment by Genstar Capital
Firm enters a new phase in its evolution while preserving its independence and investment-led culture NEW YORK, August 18, 2025--(BUSINESS WIRE)--First Eagle Investments ("First Eagle"), an independent, privately owned investment management firm, today announced the closing of a majority investment in the company by private equity funds managed by Genstar Capital ("Genstar"), a leading private equity firm focused on targeted segments of the financial services, software, healthcare and industrials sectors. First announced in March, the deal bolsters First Eagle's ongoing strategy of investing in its core business while also thoughtfully expanding the range of high-quality, differentiated investment solutions available to clients globally. With approximately $161 billion in assets under management as of June 30, 2025, First Eagle manages equity, fixed income, alternative credit and multi-asset strategies grounded in a benchmark-agnostic, downside-aware approach. "This is an exciting moment for First Eagle," said Mehdi Mahmud, President and Chief Executive Officer. "Genstar's partnership will accelerate the pace at which we expand our investment capabilities and client reach, both organically and through acquisitions, without compromising our independence and autonomy. Our commitment to client outcomes remains undivided, and we expect this new dynamic will enhance the value we are able to deliver to them." "We've long admired First Eagle's thoughtful approach to building enduring client relationships," said Tony Salewski, Managing Partner of Genstar Capital. "As majority investor, we're excited to support Mehdi and the team as they build on that foundation—scaling the firm's strengths, pursuing thoughtful growth, and continuing to meet the evolving needs of investors with clarity and conviction." The closing also marks the successful exit of previous majority owners Blackstone and Corsair, which first invested in First Eagle in 2015. Over nearly a decade of partnership, First Eagle broadly diversified its product suite—most notably through the acquisition of alternative credit capabilities—and expanded its distribution footprint across institutional and wealth channels. First Eagle's leadership will continue to oversee the firm's day-to-day operations and set its strategic direction, with the philosophy and culture of its investment teams unchanged. First Eagle's leadership team has retained a meaningful ownership stake in the firm, underscoring its ongoing commitment to the company's success as it enters its next phase of growth alongside Genstar. About First Eagle Investments First Eagle Investments is an independent, privately owned investment management firm headquartered in New York with approximately $161 billion in assets under management as of June 30, 2025. Dedicated to providing prudent stewardship of client assets, the firm focuses on active, fundamental and benchmark-agnostic investing, with a strong emphasis on downside mitigation. With a heritage dating back to 1864, First Eagle strives to help clients avoid permanent impairment of capital and earn attractive returns through widely varied economic cycles. The firm's investment capabilities include equity, fixed income, alternative credit and multi-asset strategies. For more information, please visit About Genstar Capital Genstar Capital ( is a leading private equity firm that has been actively investing in high-quality companies for over 30 years. Based in San Francisco, Genstar works in partnership with its management teams and its network of strategic advisors to transform its portfolio companies into industry-leading businesses. Genstar currently has approximately $50 billion of assets under management and targets investments focused on targeted segments of the financial services, software, healthcare, and industrials industries. With the investment from Genstar, First Eagle joins a portfolio of leading platforms within the investment management ecosystem, including ACA Group, Apex Group, Ascensus, Cerity Partners, Cetera Financial Group, Docupace, Mercer Advisors, Numerix, Orion and others. About Blackstone Blackstone is the world's largest alternative asset manager. Blackstone seeks to deliver compelling returns for institutional and individual investors by strengthening the companies in which the firm invests. Blackstone's $1.2 trillion in assets under management include global investment strategies focused on real estate, private equity, credit, infrastructure, life sciences, growth equity, secondaries and hedge funds. Further information is available at Follow @blackstone on LinkedIn, X (Twitter), and Instagram. About Corsair Corsair is a specialist investment firm offering opportunities for investors and solutions for companies across its private markets Buyouts and Infrastructure businesses. The firm's buyouts business is a financial services investor focused on making control investments in three verticals: Payments, Software, and Business Services. The infrastructure business operates as a strategic partnership with Investcorp as of December 2023. Investcorp Corsair focuses primarily on value-add opportunities in transportation, logistics, and associated infrastructure subsectors, blending operating platforms and deep sectoral expertise with equity sponsorship. Corsair has invested $13.6 billion in capital across buyouts and infrastructure since inception. For more information, please visit and follow us on LinkedIn. View source version on Contacts First Eagle InvestmentsPholida Genstar CapitalFGS GlobalGenstarCapital@ BlackstoneMatt CorsairProsek PartnersTrevor Gibbons/Ryan Smithpro-corsair@
Yahoo
4 minutes ago
- Yahoo
AI could deliver $920B in annual net benefits to S&P 500 firms
-- Artificial intelligence could generate annual net benefits of roughly $920 billion for S&P 500 companies, according to Morgan Stanley (NYSE:MS). The bank said in a note Monday that its analysis points to '$13-16 trillion in long-term market value creation potential for the S&P 500' driven by AI adoption. The report highlights that '90% of occupations will to some degree be impacted by AI automation and augmentation,' with the potential benefits coming from both cost reductions and productivity gains. Morgan Stanley noted that agentic AI, essentially software-based applications, will likely have 'a broader impact on jobs relative to embodied AI,' with greater scope for augmentation rather than outright replacement. Sector exposure is said to vary widely. The bank found that Consumer Staples Distribution/Retail, Real Estate Management & Development, and Transportation could each see savings above 100% of estimated 2026 pretax earnings. Health Care Equipment & Services was also flagged as a major beneficiary. By contrast, Technology Hardware & Equipment and Semiconductors show relatively muted effects. Morgan Stanley emphasised that the value creation potential, equal to 24-29% of current S&P 500 market capitalisation, is 'fundamentally bullish for AI enablers and adopters.' It added that the return on the roughly $3 trillion in expected global AI capex through 2028 in areas such as data centres and chips 'is attractive.' While the $920 billion figure represents a full-adoption scenario that may take years to achieve, the bank argued that the long-term opportunity is likely far larger. 'AI adoption market value creation potential, beyond the confines of the S&P 500, is likely to be multiples of the $13-16 trillion,' Morgan Stanley said. Related articles AI could deliver $920B in annual net benefits to S&P 500 firms Madrigal stock falls after Novo Nordisk's Wegovy wins FDA approval for MASH Evercore ISI initiates tactical calls on BJ's, Target and Lowe's ahead of earnings
Yahoo
4 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Great Gambling Class Action Wave: A Payout For Lawyers, Not Players
Class action lawsuits in the gambling industry are everywhere, but a closer look reveals a startling truth: They have become a new, industrialized legal business model where the lawyers get paid, but most players see little to nothing. From DraftKings to sweepstakes casinos, law firms are filing often, promising justice and accountability for operators. The headlines certainly make it sound like players are winning big. We hear of a $155 million settlement against Big Fish Games, a $12 million payment from FanDuel and DraftKings, and a $3.5 million settlement from SpinX Games. Even Coinbase paid $2.25 million over a crypto sweepstakes controversy. But these numbers tell only half the story. The journey from a lawsuit filing to a meaningful payout is a brutal one for class members, but often a highly profitable one for the legal firms behind the litigation. The filing frenzy: a numbers game The class action landscape is a numbers game. While filing a lawsuit might seem straightforward, the journey is not. According to empirical studies, nearly four out of every five lawsuits initially filed as class actions are never actually certified. That's an 80% failure rate right out of the gate. These cases are often dismissed or revert to individual claims too small to pursue economically. As John Holden, a law professor at Oklahoma State University, explains, 'When you announce that you're filing a class action lawsuit against DraftKings or a sweepstakes company, you're at the starter pistol of an ultra marathon.' This high-volume, high-risk approach is particularly evident in the gambling industry. Multiple class actions against VGW Holdings (the company behind LuckyLand Slots and Chumba Casino) were dismissed, often due to enforceable arbitration clauses that force disputes into individual arbitration, fundamentally undermining the class action's purpose. This industrialized approach to litigation — where a law firm files a similar case against different companies dozens of times — is a strategy of volume. The hope is that a few will survive the 'significant early filters' of the motion to dismiss and motion for class certification, which the Institute for Legal Reform highlights as key hurdles. Another issue: making sure people in the 'class' want to be part of the whole shebang. 'Class actions do have a number of unique hurdles, such as class certification motions and fairness hearings, that we don't see in other forms of litigation, but it's due to the fact that attorneys are hoping to represent individuals who usually haven't affirmatively opted in to such a representation and will lose the right to sue individually if they don't opt out of the class,' said Evan Davis, head of the gaming and sports practice at Royer Cooper Cohen Braunfeld LLC. 'The court needs to ensure that these individuals are being treated fairly by the court system and that they are receiving an appropriate benefit from the litigation.' The settlement reality check Even when cases survive and result in settlements, the outcomes for individual players are often underwhelming. A study of federal court class actions found that in over half of all cases studied, members of the proposed class received zero relief. When settlements are reached, the gap between the headline amount and what players actually receive is enormous. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) reported that the median claims rate was just 9% in 2019. For settlements involving over 2.7 million class members, the average claims rate dropped to a mere 1.4%, as reported by Harvard Law professor William B. Rubenstein. This leaves a significant portion of the settlement pool unclaimed. While the lawyers take a guaranteed, substantial cut — often in the millions — the payouts for individuals are typically modest, often in the double and low triple digits. The low participation rates are due to practical frustrations: Settlement notifications often look like junk mail, and the claim process can be onerous. The extended timeline of class action litigation, which adds 'many additional months to your case,' as Holden said, also creates financial pressure that pushes firms toward settlement. 'They take even longer than regular litigation because you've got to go find the class, you've got to get the class certified,' Holden noted. 'So basically you're having this other legal process play out before you get to the next legal process. You're adding on many additional months to your case.' This extended timeline creates financial pressure, especially when facing well-resourced defendants. 'If you were to bring a class action against Google or something, they have infinite money — they can litigate forever if they wanted to,' Holden explained. 'Certainly the top tiers of the gambling industry are incredibly well resourced, so efficiency sort of pushes towards settlement for a lot of these.' As one analysis noted, sweepstakes casino operators 'will invariably settle' to avoid a jury trial that could fundamentally dismantle their business models. This creates a cycle where companies pay to continue operating while plaintiffs' attorneys develop increasingly sophisticated strategies for the next round of litigation. But settling may be losing some luster, Davis points out. 'Some of the recent gaming-related class actions that have been filed are somewhat unique because they are being brought pursuant to state laws and in some cases limited to individuals within certain states — they are not traditional nationwide class actions like you'd typically see in antitrust or pharmaceutical cases,' Davis said. 'This means that a settlement of one case won't necessarily affect the cases that have been filed alleging violations of other states' laws, which in turn means that a defendant may be less likely to settle because it will still be incurring significant legal costs in defending the remaining cases.' The new legal playbook Gaming companies aren't sitting idle. The rise of this legal cottage industry has spurred a sophisticated defense playbook that goes well beyond seeking quick settlements. Arbitration clauses have become powerful weapons, forcing disputes into individual arbitration rather than collective lawsuits. Perhaps the most intriguing development is the increasing use of civil RICO claims. Attorneys are drawing parallels to successful litigation against the opioid industry, alleging that gambling companies use systemic fraudulent practices to foster addiction. The approach got a boost when Schlesinger Law Offices publicly committed to taking legal action against online sports betting platforms, explicitly drawing parallels to their work against Big Tobacco and stating their intent to pursue companies for 'allegedly pushing problem gamblers into debt through deceptive, predatory, and harmful business practices.' Holden sees these cases as potentially a world apart from typical consumer protection class actions. 'When you see particular individuals associated with them, like a lawyer who litigated tobacco litigation, it triggers that this is perhaps different than some of these other ones that are out there,' he said. This is a stark contrast to the historical context of gambling litigation, where compulsive gamblers had a 'long, unsuccessful history' of lawsuits against the industry. The rapid expansion of online gambling has created new vulnerabilities that this new legal cottage industry is actively exploiting. The great gambling class action wave is not about to end. As long as the potential for multimillion-dollar legal fees exists, a steady stream of lawsuits from opportunistic lawyers will follow. For the law firms involved, the odds are in their favor, as this is a high-volume business. But for individual players hoping for significant compensation, the odds remain stubbornly long — much like the games themselves.
