Skip to content

· Public charity

Backcountry Hunters & Anglers

BACKCOUNTRY HUNTERS & ANGLERS seeks to ensure north america's outdoor heritage of hunting and fishing in a natural setting, through education and work on behalf of wild public lands and waters.

$45k
Granted FY2023
3
Grants FY2023
3
States reached
$16k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2023.

Environment$137kAnimals$50kRecreation & Sports$10kEducation$6k
02FY2023 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $27,591, the rows itemized in this filing. The $44,941 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $17,350 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k2 grants · $11k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $16k
$6,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$2.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HUNTERS OF COLOR$16,391
UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA RENO FOUNDATION$6,000
CONGRESSIONAL SPORTSMEN'S FOUNDATION$5,200
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY20–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 47% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 7%MONTANA WILDERNESS ASSOCIATION: $10k → 9%THEODORE ROOSEVELT CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIP INC: $50k → 14%HUNTERS OF COLOR: $16k → 18%NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $50k → 6%TROUT UNLIMITED: $50k → 7%UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA RENO FOUNDATION: $6k → 10%CONGRESSIONAL SPORTSMEN'S FOUNDATION: $5k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Idaho Wildlife Federation

The Idaho Wildlife Federation (IWF) promotes the conservation of Idaho's wildlife heritage and legacy of sporting opportunities for the current and future generations.

Animals
2
Wild Salmon Rivers

To conserve functioning salmon/steelhead eco-system at watershed levels, integrate angling activities with basic scientific research, collect raw data, monitor environmental functions, salmon/steelhead population dynamics, public…

Environment
3
The Izaak Walton League of America

To conserve, restore and promote the sustainable use and enjoyment of our natural resources, including soil, air, woods, water and wildlife.

Environment
4
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
5
Teton Regional Land Trust Inc

The mission of the teton regional land trust is to conserve working farms and ranches, fish and wildlife habitat, and scenic open spaces in eastern idaho for this and future generations.

Environment
6
Coalition to Protect Michigan Resources

The coalition to protect michigan resources's mission is to be a strong voice for the equitable co-management of michigan's fisheries, with both the great lakes and inland lakes and streams, to insure that conservation principles remain in…

Environment
7
Resource Renewal Institute

The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.

Environment
8
Idaho Conservation League Inc

Icl's mission is to create a conservation community and pragmatic, enduring solutions that protect and restore the air you breathe, the water you drink, and the land and wildlife you love.

—
9
Swan Valley Connections

Maintain the swan valley's unique natural resources and ensure that a vibrant human community can sustain itself through stewardship, education, economic viability, and conservation on public and private lands.

Environment
10
Institute for Journalism & Natural Resources

The organization pursues higher standards of news coverage of natural resources and the environment -- standards of accuracy, fairness, balance, depth and context.

Arts & Culture
11
The Grand Canyon Trust Inc

The mission of the grand canyon trust is to safeguard the wonders of the grand canyon and the colorado plateau, while supporting the rights of its native peoples.

Environment
12
Climate Conservation Dba Center for Large Landscape Conservation

We bring science, policy, and proven solutions directly to communities working to restore the integrity and natural connectivity of the landscapes in which they live. (see schedule o)

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership Inc; the most unlike its peers is University of Nevada Reno Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

8 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 9 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
7/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THEODORE ROOSEVELT CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIP INC: $50,000 · AnimalsTHEODORE ROOSEVELT CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIP INCNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $50,000 · AnimalsNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATIONTROUT UNLIMITED INC: $50,000 · AnimalsTROUT UNLIMITED INCHUNTERS OF COLOR: $16,391 · Recreation & SportsHUNTERS OF COL…International Mountain Bicycling Association: $10,000 · Recreation & SportsInternational …UNIVERSITY OF WYOMING: $5,750 · OtherCONGRESSIONAL SPORTSMEN'S FOUNDATION: $5,200 · OtherMONTANA WILDERNESS ASSOCIATION: $10,000 · EnvironmentUniversity of Nevada Reno Foundation: $6,000 · Education
Animals$150,000Recreation & Sports$26,391Other$10,950Environment$10,000Education$6,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHEODORE ROOSEVELT CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIP INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTROUT UNLIMITED INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHUNTERS OF COLOR: $16,391 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetMONTANA WILDERNESS ASSOCIATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetInternational Mountain Bicycling Association: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetUniversity of Nevada Reno Foundation: $6,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCONGRESSIONAL SPORTSMEN'S FOUNDATION: $5,200 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust IncIN10.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Backcountry Hunters & Anglers funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Backcountry Hunters & Anglers. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 4%
  • Hunters of Color: 4% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25
How this is measured
Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.

On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 9 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder made grants.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Backcountry Hunters & Anglers’ filings →

More from the funding graph