Sierra recently published an article about the Pittman-Robertson Act, an 80-year-old piece of legislation that directs funds from a tax on the sale of guns and ammunition to state wildlife conservation programs. Pittman-Robertson dollars fund 75 to 80 percent of state conservation programs for both game and nongame species; $1.1 billion was distributed this year alone for wildlife protection in Pittman-Robertson funds.

Especially in the wake of shootings like the Parkland, Florida, massacre, gun ownership is an emotional issue, and it’s important to make clear where the Sierra Club stands on gun control.

The Sierra Club supports an assault weapons ban, stricter gun control laws including background checks, and banning lead in ammunition. At the same time, the organization’s official policy about wildlife and native plant management recognizes that lawful hunting and fishing are an acceptable strategy for the management of natural areas, as long as such hunting and fishing are based on scientific data, consistent with all other management purposes and necessary for the protection of wildlife populations. The Sierra Club opposes all sport hunting in national parks, which are set aside for the preservation of natural landscapes and wildlife.

“The Pittman-Robertson Act does good things for wildlife conservation funding, but that good must be weighed against the great harm to society caused by the sale of assault weapons, loose background checks, gun-sale loopholes, and lead-based ammunition that threatens wildlife and the environment,” says Bruce Hamilton, deputy executive director of the Sierra Club. “The Sierra Club supports commonsense gun control regulation, while allowing legitimate hunters to continue to have access to safe guns and ammunition to practice their sport. One can favor Pittman-Robertson and still favor regulation of guns and ammunition.”

The Sierra Club also believes that hunting and fishing is defensible only when it is managed in a way that benefits wildlife and ecosystems. The organization opposes the use of toxic lead ammunition, which is harmful to both human and environmental health. Although selling more ammunition is good for wildlife in terms of the Pittman-Robertson funds it generates, those benefits are undercut if they come from ammunition that is poisoning wildlife and the natural environment.

Gun control is an emotionally charged topic for obvious reasons, and it is important to understand the full scope of such issues during these critical moments. While the Sierra Club stands with groups that are fighting to ban assault rifles and bump stocks that have been used in horrific mass shootings, it’s important to note that assault rifles are not synonymous with hunting rifles, and not all hunters share the National Rifle Association’s opposition to any meaningful gun control measures. According to one poll, 77 percent of gun owners are in support of background checks. It is also necessary to emphasize that, by design, the Pittman-Robertson Act ensures that funds are directed only toward state wildlife conservation and management programs. The law does not allow the funds to be used by gun lobbies or for any other purpose besides conservation.

The Sierra Club believes that hunters who are committed to ecological values have an important role to play in advocating for commonsense gun control measures.