Sport Fish and Wildlife Restoration and Associated Grant Programs Program Update March 2006 Including a Special Highlight Section of Region 2

              Sport Fish and Wildlife
Restoration and
Associated Grant
Programs
Program Update March 2006
Including a Special Highlight Section of Region 2
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Former Assistant Director, Mitch King’s Comments ....................................................................1
Acting Regional Director Southwest Region, Dr. Benjamin N. Tuggle’s Comments..............3
News Section.......................................................................................................................................5
Staff Directory, Federal Assistance, Washington, D.C. Office....................................................9
Federal Assistance Program – Overview ....................................................................................10
Focus on Specific Programs and Activities ................................................................................11
State Wildlife Grants ............................................................................................12
Landowner Incentive Program ..........................................................................12
State Apportionment from Sport Fish Restoration
Program Reaches All Time High........................................................................13
Wildlife Restoration Apportionment Reaches New Levels............................14
State Audits ............................................................................................................15
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Announces Fiscal Year 2005
Boating Infrastructure Grant Program Awards ..............................................16
States Increase eLicense Certifications Through iFAIMS............................18
National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated
Recreation ..............................................................................................................18
New Survey Report—
Black Bass and Trout Fishing in the United States ........................................18
More Than $15 Million In Coastal Grants Will Go To 12 States,
Interior Secretary Announces ............................................................................19
Fiscal Year 2006 National Coastal Wetlands Conservation
Grant Projects ......................................................................................................20
Clean Vessel Act Pumpout Grant Program Awards Announced ..................24
Public Access Civil Rights Program ..................................................................25
Multistate Conservation Grant Program..........................................................25
Federal Assistance National Training Program ..............................................29
Multistate Conservation Grants
FAIMS/FBMS........................................................................................................29
Special Highlight Section of Region 2 ..........................................................................................30
Table of
Contents
I would like to spend my space in this
Program Update saying a couple of
“good-byes” and emphasizing a couple of
very important activities in Federal
Assistance.
The Retirement of a Great Man
Most of you know that Kris LaMontagne
is about to retire from a long and
productive career with the Service. For
the past 5+ years, Kris has offered his
talents to the Federal Assistance
program, and we owe him a great debt for
the time he has spent with us. Kris
stepped in as Chief of Federal Assistance
when the program was undergoing a very
high level of scrutiny. His high ethical
standards, his fantastic management
talents, his straightforward way of
communicating; and his diligence were
what kept the program on course through
those very rough times. His shoes will be
tough to fill.
Kris – The Federal Assistance Program
will miss you (personally and
professionally) when you leave us. On
behalf of all of us in Federal Assistance –
THANK YOU AND BEST WISHES in
your retirement.
Kris LaMontagne
A Change in the Assistant
Director Position
As you have probably heard, Director
Hall has asked me to take the position of
Regional Director for the Mountain-
Prairie Region (Denver) and I have
accepted. In the short 16 months that I
have had the pleasure of being in this
position, we have done some great things.
We have turned the corner in our
relationships with the Hill, the States and
our industry partners. We have kicked off
a new conservation initiative (State
Wildlife Grants) that will one day equal
the importance of the Wildlife and Sport
Fish Restoration programs. We have seen
a marked increase in available fuel tax
funding for the Sport Fish Restoration
program. We have taken on one of the
most significant problems facing the
program (excise tax issues) with some
great success. We are just getting started
with a coordinated effort to make sure
that hunters and anglers know about the
excise tax program and manufacturers
know how their contributions are being
spent and appreciate the tax. The rest of
the Service is now beginning to better
understand what we in Federal Assistance
do and the contributions we are making to
the Service’s conservation goals. This has
been an amazing 16 months and I have
really appreciated the opportunity to
come along for the ride. THANK YOU.
State Wildlife Grants
You’ve heard me refer to the State
Wildlife Grant program as a “New Era in
Fish and Wildlife Conservation.” Indeed it
is just that. We are setting the stage for a
significant funding source that is
specifically earmarked for our State
partners to use for the conservation and
management of fish and wildlife species of
special concern.
By last October, all 56 States,
Commonwealths, territories, and the
District of Columbia had submitted their
proposed strategies. I was absolutely
amazed at the hard work and innovative
thinking that these entities put into this
effort. Each took a different approach,
some were similar, some were very
March 2006 1
Comments from
Former Assistant
Director for
Wildlife and Sport
Fish Restoration
Programs
Mitch King
2 March 2006
interesting, but all represented a strong
commitment by our partners to see this
program succeed.
I want to take just a minute to say thank
you to the National Advisory Acceptance
Team (NAAT) and their support staff. As
you may know, the Director identified this
State/FWS partnership to help him
review these strategies and make
recommendations to him on whether to
approve, conditionally approve or reject
them. The NAAT includes the ARDs for
Migratory Birds and State Programs
from each of the seven Service Regions
(Chris McKay, Nancy Gloman, John
Christian, EJ Williams, Sherry Morgan,
Paul Gertler and Doug Alcorn), and a
State Director representing each of the
four Regional Associations of Fish and
Wildlife Agencies (Ed Parker - CT, Noel
Holcomb - GA, Mike McKenna - ND and
Jeff Koenings - WA). Until very recently, I
had the opportunity to co-chair the team,
along with Ron Regan (from Vermont)
who represented the International
Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies.
Over the past six months, this team (along
with a long list of support staff) have
taken the time to carefully read each of
these strategies and come together at five
week long meeting (with several more to
go) to compare notes and make
recommendations on each of the
strategies. They are taking their
responsibilities seriously and are doing a
great service to their State partners, the
FWS and anyone interested in natural
resource conservation. Hats off to them
for a job well done!
Excise Taxes
During my first few days on this job, I
was told that we had some very significant
problems relative to collecting and
accounting for excise taxes. Consequently,
Glen Salmon (Chair of the Trust Funds
Committee of the International
Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies)
and I placed a high priority on
reinvigorating the working group that
focused on excise tax collections. We
brought Internal Revenue Service (IRS)
leadership to the table and heard a strong
message from industry that the
inconsistent application of excise tax laws,
regulations and guidance was creating a
situation where some in the industry
were able to exploit varying IRS
interpretations into a competitive market
advantage. We, along with IRS,
immediately began to focus on this issue
with the ultimate goal of eliminating any
competitive advantage attributable to the
excise tax.
IRS hired and trained several new
auditors that focus exclusively on the
fishing and archery excise taxes. They
also initiated a very comprehensive review
of the laws, the regulations and their
guidance to eliminate any inconsistencies
in industry interpretation and auditor
application of the excise tax program. We
helped by coordinating a forum between
IRS, industry and the States for the
exchange of ideas and issues.
It has taken nearly 16 months, but we are
finally to the point where IRS is ready to
officially release their new guidance. Just
a few weeks back, we saw the results of
their hard work. While I can’t say
everyone was happy with the outcome,
I can say that they have successfully
eliminated any avenue for innovative
industry accountants to use the excise tax
to gain a competitive advantage over their
competitors. In that respect, this effort
has been a great success. I want to thank
IRS for their commitment to this task.
I also want to personally thank Pam
Matthes. Without a doubt, much of the
success of this effort was directly
attributable to her diligence.
This working group has made a lot of
progress over the last 16 months, but
there is plenty more work to do. We will
now begin to focus on working with IRS
and TTB to verify and more closely track
excise tax collections. It is important that
we fully understand the tax cycle––from
the manufacturer’s payment to the
distribution to the States. Pam––your
diligence is still needed!
Signing Off
Let me close by saying once again,
THANK YOU for the opportunity to work
with each and every one of you on this
very important piece of natural resource
conservation. It has been an informative
and rewarding time and it is with mixed
emotions that I pass the baton to the next
Assistant Director.
This edition of the Federal Assistance
Program Update highlights the Fish and
Wildlife Service’s Southwest Region, the
States of Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico,
and Arizona. This Region is made up of
some of the most varied ecosystems in
North America. Vast expanses of the
Sonoran desert and the Chihuahuan
desert occur through the southern
portions of Arizona and New Mexico. The
High Plains short grass prairies of
western Oklahoma, the Texas panhandle,
and eastern New Mexico are part of a vast
prairie ecosystem drained by rivers
flowing eastward toward big rivers that
drain into the Gulf of Mexico. The central
Texas Edwards Plateau or “hill country”
is unique in its canyons, woodlands and
spring-fed rivers. These rivers run
through the Texas coastal plains into the
seven bays and estuaries of the Texas gulf
coast and the Laguna Madre barrier
islands, a stopover and home to millions of
migratory birds every winter and spring.
East Texas and southeast Oklahoma
include the western limits of the eastern
deciduous and southern pine forests,
drained by rivers with ancient big river
species such as the paddlefish and the
alligator snapping turtle.
From the call of spring peepers in its
eastern forests to the wing beats of
migratory birds, to the rush of hoof of the
Sonoran pronghorn in Arizona, the
Southwest Region has a complex and
sometimes unique array of wildlife and
sport fish management and recreational
opportunities. The Southwest is an
outdoor enthusiast’s cornucopia from bass
fishing in Texas lakes, fly fishing for trout
in the mountain streams, elk hunting in
the forests, to birding in the lower Rio
Grande and the Sky Islands of Arizona. A
large percentage of Southwesterners are
involved with hunting and fishing and they
have a great interest in the opportunities
provided by the Federal Assistance
programs. In New Mexico alone there are
289,000 resident fishing license holders
and New Mexico’s population is only 1.7
million.
To place the scope of the Region’s fish and
wildlife management needs in perspective,
according to the Service’s 2001 national
survey, almost 8 million of the Southwest
Region’s residents (33 percent of the
population 16 years and older) participate
in wildlife recreation activities. In addition
to anglers and hunters, wildlife watchers
comprise about 50 percent of each
number. These wildlife enthusiasts
annually spend approximately $8 billion
on fishing, hunting, and wildlife watching
activities. These 8 million people are
directly affected by the grant programs
administered by the Southwest Region’s
Federal Assistance Division.
The Southwest Region is committed to
fulfilling its responsibilities to its trust
resources and the American people
through partnerships. The Federal
Assistance Division works closely with the
four States, tribes, and others to make
resources available through 12 grant
programs. These grants provide target
ranges, boating access, hunting and
fishing opportunities, habitat protection,
and enhancement and recovery of
endangered and threatened species. The
Service’s grant programs help each State
or tribe achieve its own objectives while
contributing to national conservation
goals.
Some of the best conservation and
environmental protection results when
States, landowners, hunters, anglers,
Native Americans, boaters, and others
work together. This is a great strength of
these programs. In the last fiscal year,
Federal Assistance in this Region
provided approximately $80 million in
grants to the four states.
In the Southwest Region, about 75
percent of all land ownership is private.
In Texas and Oklahoma, 98 percent of
land ownership is private. If we are going
to meet our obligation to the American
people to protect our rich natural
resources legacy, it is imperative that
Federal and State governments work with
landowners to conserve habitat and
March 2006 3
Comments from
Dr. Benjamin
Tuggle, Acting
Regional Director,
Southwest Region
Dr. Benjamin Tuggle
endangered, threatened, and candidate
species. The Landowner Incentive
program, the State Wildlife Grants, and
the Cooperative Endangered Species
Conservation Fund have provided the
Service with the opportunity to work with
the States, local governments and
landowners to benefit a diverse array of
at-risk species including the ocelot,
aplomado falcon, and Chihuahua chub. In
the Southwest Region, plants, mollusks,
insects, fish, amphibians, reptiles, and
mammals have benefited from these grant
programs.
There are 83 tribes and pueblos in the
Southwest Region. Some of the very best
habitat is found on reservations and
pueblo lands because of the legacy of
stewardship of the lands practiced by
Native American peoples. The Federal
Assistance Division works closely with the
Region’s Tribal Liaison to fund projects
proposed by the tribes and pueblos. In
FY05, eight tribes and pueblos received
grants totaling $1.7 million.
In this publication, you can read about
some of the activities funded through the
Federal Assistance Division. I am proud of
the partnerships that we have forged in
this Region among the Service and the
States and tribes. Together we are doing
good work and making a difference.
4 March 2006
Ocelot/USFWS
March 2006 5
Rowan Gould, previously the Regional
Director in Alaska, has moved to
Washington, D.C., to fill the position of
Assistant Director for Wildlife and Sport
Fish Restoration. This position works
closely with State fish and wildlife
agencies and oversees the Service’s
Federal Assistance program which
annually provides millions of dollars in
grants to states and other partners.
Rowan holds a PhD. in fish pathology and
fish biology from Oregon State University.
Before going to Alaska as Regional
Director in 2003, he served as Deputy
Regional Director for the Pacific Region
in Portland, Oregon. He has served as
Deputy Assistant Director of Fisheries in
Washington, D.C., in Alaska as Assistant
Regional Director for Refuges and
Wildlife from 1991-1995, and as Assistant
Regional Director for Ecological Services
and Fisheries from 1987-1991, and held
several research positions with the
Service.
Welcome Rowan, we are happy you are on
board!
New Assistant Director for Wildlife
and Sport Fish Restoration
Federal Assistance Personnel and
Projects Recognized by the States
Organization for Boating Access
The States Organization for Boating
Access (SOBA) recognized two individuals
from the Division of Federal Assistance
for their efforts with promoting boating
access opportunities and dedication to the
States with their boating programs at
their national meeting in the fall of 2005.
Jerry Novotny, a long-time Federal
Assistance employee from the Portland
Regional Office, received SOBA’s Special
Recognition Award for his many years
and efforts with partnering with States
and SOBA to improve boating programs.
SOBA also recognized retired Region 5
Federal Assistance Chief Dr. Bob Sousa
with the Outstanding Service Award. Bob
was instrumentally involved in the
development of the Wallop-Breaux
Amendments, and participated in the
organizational meeting that gave birth to
SOBA in the 1980s.
SOBA also recognized several projects
funded through Service grant programs
and the Sport Fishing and Boating Safety
Fund at their national meeting. Award
winners include:
State Clean Vessel Act Program
Excellence Award- The Oregon State
Marine Board was recognized for their
dedication and excellence in implementing
the Clean Vessel Act program in the
State’s inland and coastal waters.
News Section
Rowan Gould
6 March 2006
Small Boating Access Project of the
Year- The Oregon Marine Board was
recognized for their renovation of the
Lincoln County, Oregon, boating access
site. This site provides access to the Siletz
River at river mile 16.3. Project activities
included replacement of the boat ramp
and enhancing the existing parking area.
The enhanced parking area was designed
to maximize the number of vehicle spaces
and also to improve traffic circulation.
Cooperators in the project also included
the Oregon Department of Fish and
Wildlife and also Lincoln County. The
project was completed using Sport Fish
Restoration funds (Oregon project F-111-
D-218).
Midsize Boating Access Project of the
Year- The Maryland Department of
Natural Resources was recognized by the
States Organization for Boating Access
for renovation of the Franklin Street Boat
Ramp in 2005. Improvements to the
Franklin Street Boat Ramp site consisted
of removal of the existing concrete boat
ramps and support bulkhead and
replacement of the support bulkhead and
construction of two new launching lanes
with two accessible floating boarding
piers. The renovations at the Franklin
Street launching facility will provide
necessary upgrades and safety
improvements to allow the growing
numbers of boating and fishing public to
have continued opportunities for safe
access to the recreational fisheries
existing in the surrounding waters. The
project was funded using Sport Fish
Restoration program funds.
Large Boating Access Project of the
Year- The Alaska Department of Game
and Fish was recognized for their efforts
with the Amalga Harbor Ramp
Rehabilitation project (Alaska Sport Fish
Restoration Project F-13-D-80) which
provides anglers and boaters access to the
marine waters of Stephens Passage and
Lynn Canal north of Juneau. A single lane
launch ramp had been constructed in
Amalga Harbor in 1971 and in 1987 a
second ramp was added. Since 1987
recreational boat use in the Juneau area
has increased over 50 percent. This
project rehabilitated and extended the
existing launch ramps to accommodate
larger boats, improved the boarding float,
and expanded the parking lot. The
improvements reduced congestion,
shortened launch and retrieval times, and
provide a safe and efficient facility.
Marinas and Harbors Project of the
Year- The Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission and the city of
Tampa, Florida, were recognized for their
Boating Infrastructure Grant program
project completed at the Marjorie Park
Marina. The marina at this facility has
undergone an extensive renovation. Using
a combination of both Tier 1 and Tier 2
awards from the Boating Infrastructure
Grant program, the city has added almost
1,000 feet of additional docking space with
electricity and water services for
transient boaters.
Dr. Bob Sousa
Jerry Novotny
News Section
The California/Nevada Operations (CNO)
Office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service is pleased to announce the
formation of a branch office of the
Division of Federal Assistance within the
CNO. This new office has assumed the
Federal Assistance program in California
and Nevada from the Region 1 Office in
Portland Oregon. The effective date for
the new office was June 13, 2005. The
CNO Office wishes to thank the Region 1
Federal Assistance folks for all their help
and assistance during the transition
period––we could not have done it without
you!
Laura Valoppi is the new Chief of Federal
Assistance for CNO. Laura has worked
for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for
over 8 years. She has served in the
Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office for 4
years in the Endangered Species
Program, working on Habitat
Conservation Plans, Safe Harbor
Agreements, and Section 6 non-traditional
grants. For the previous 4 years she was
in the Environmental Contaminants
program in the Sacramento office, where
she worked on natural resource damage
assessments and wildlife toxicology issues.
Prior to working for the Service, she
worked for several years as a human
health and wildlife toxicologist for the
State of California. Laura holds a
Bachelor of Science degree in natural
resources management from University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, and a Master of
Science degree in Water Science from the
University of California, Davis.
Tracey Vriens is the new Grants Fiscal
Officer for CNO. Tracey has worked for
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for 10
years. She worked from May 2002-July
2005 as the Program Analyst for Federal
Assistance in the Washington, D.C.,
Office. She also worked as the Fiscal
Specialist for Federal Assistance in the
Region 1 Office in Portland, Oregon, from
July 1995-May 2002. Prior to working for
the Service, she worked for 6 years for the
National Marine Fisheries Service.
Phil Morrison, Rachel Miller and Becky
Miller are grants management specialists
for the CNO. Philip Morrison has worked
for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for
15 years. He served in the Partners for
Fish and Wildlife program in Sacramento
for the last 2 1/2 years. Prior to coming to
March 2006 7
Announcing a New Federal
Assistance Office
Members of the Service’s Division of
Federal Assistance’s newly opened
California/Nevada Operations (CNO)
office include from L to R, starting in
back: Laura Valoppi (Chief of Federal
Assistance- CNO), Tracey Vriens (Grants
Fiscal Officer), Becky Miller (Grants
Management Specialist), Phil Morrison
(Grants Management Specialist). Rachel
Miller was not available for the photo.
News Section
California, he served as a Federal Permits
and Projects biologist at the New
England Field Office in Concord, New
Hampshire. There he reviewed
development proposals and State and
Federal projects for compliance with
wetland and other environmental
regulations. Philip holds a Bachelor of
Science degree in forestry from Louisiana
State University and a Master of Science
degree in Wildlife Ecology from
Mississippi State University.
Rachel Miller arrived at CNO in October
2005, fresh from Region 1 Federal
Assistance and is happy to continue
working with California and Nevada
partners on many of the same grants and
issues she did in Portland. Prior to coming
to Federal Assistance in 2002, Rachel
worked for the Service since 1993 in
several positions, all with Ecological
Services in R1 and R3. She worked at R1
Endangered Species, the Oregon State
Snake River Basin, and East Lansing
Fish and Wildlife Offices. Prior to that,
Rachel worked for the U.S. Forest Service
and earned her Master of Science at
Oregon State University and Bachelor of
Science at Michigan State University.
Becky Miller is new to the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and the Federal
government. She joined the CNO in
October 2005 after working 18 years for
the State of California. Most of her 18
years working for State government were
with the California Department of Fish
and Game (CDFG). Her last position was
as the Section 6 and State Wildlife Grant
Coordinator for the CDFG, where Becky
coordinated and/or managed more than 70
Federal Assistance grants. Prior to that
Becky worked for a variety of CDFG
programs including the coordination of
conservation planning and restoration for
wetlands and riparian habitat, and the
conservation and recovery of nongame
fish and invertebrate species. She spent 3
years working for the CDFG Project
WILD environmental education program
and 3 years as staff biologist for the
California Fish and Game Commission.
Becky also spent 2 years working for the
California State Water Resources Control
Board managing U.S. EPA Clean Water
Act grants. Becky, a Sacramento-area
native, has a Bachelor of Arts degree in
Environmental Biology from California
State University, Sacramento.
8 March 2006
News Section
Staff Directory
Federal
Assistance
Washington DC
Office
Federal Assistance Main Phone Number
703/358 2156
Web Address
http://federalaid.fws.gov
Rowan Gould, Assistant Director for
Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration
Programs
Vacant, Division Chief
Jim Greer, Deputy Division Chief -
Operations
Doug Gentile, Civil Rights Coordinator
for Public Access
Jimmye Kane, Lead Secretary
Pam Matthes, Multistate Conservation
Grants Coordinator
Vacant, Secretary
Branch of Budget and Administration
Tom Jeffrey, Branch Chief - Budget
Development and Execution - Program
Management
Mary Grieco, Administrative Officer
Vacant, Program Support Assistant
Vacant, Program Analyst
Branch of Information Management
Lori Bennett, Branch Chief
Vacant, Fiscal Management - Audit
Liaison
Ed Duda, System Developer
Michele Storz, IT Specialist
Jeffrey Graves, Server Support - Web Site
Support
Pete Hitchcock, Network Engineer,
Security Officer, Acting FAIMS Lead
C. J. Huang, Database Administrator
Sandie Lehberger, Administrative
Technician
David Washington, ADP Systems Support -
ADP Acquisition Support
Debbie Wircenske, Help Desk and Fiscal
Administration Training
Luther Zachary, FAIMS Branch Chief
Branch of Grants Operations and Policy
Tom Barnes, Branch Chief
Brian Bohnsack, Sport Fish Restoration
Coastal Wetlands - Clean Vessel Act -
Boating Infrastructure Grants
Kim Galvan, Regulations - Support staff for
Joint Federal/State Task Force for Federal
Assistance
Genevieve Pullis-LaRouche, State Wildlife
Grants - Landowner Incentive Program
Vacant, Regulations - Education Liaison
Chris Burkett, IPA - State Wildlife Grants
Branch of Audits
Pat McHugh, Branch Chief - Audits
Ord Bargerstock, Systems Accountant -
Audit Resolution
Branch of Surveys
Sylvia Cabrera, Branch Chief - National
Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-
Associated Recreation
Richard Aiken, Economist - National
Survey
Jerry Leonard, Economist - National
Survey
Branch of Training
Steve Leggans, Branch Chief
Julie Schroyer, Administrative Analyst
Debbie Unbehagen, Grants Management
Specialist (Instructor)
Scott McKnight, Grants Management
Specialist (Instructor)
March 2006 9
The goal of the Federal Assistance
program is to work with States to
conserve, protect, and enhance fish,
wildlife, their habitats, and the hunting,
sport fishing, and recreational boating
opportunities they provide. The Federal
Assistance Program is responsible for
administering the following Programs:
n Wildlife Restoration
n Sport Fish Restoration
n Clean Vessel Act
n Boating Infrastructure Grants
n National Coastal Wetlands Conservation
Grants
n Multistate Conservation Grants
n State Wildlife Grants
n Landowner Incentive
n Hunter Education and Safety Program
In addition, Federal Assistance provides
grant management support for
endangered species traditional section 6,
Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) Land
Acquisition, HCP Planning, and Recovery
Land Acquisition grant programs. The
following is an update on the
accomplishments of the Federal
Assistance program and its partners with
these grant programs.
10 March 2006
Federal
Assistance
Program Overview
Texas coastal estuary/USFWS
March 2006 11
Focus on Specific
Programs and
Activities
Landowner Incentive Program
On September 16, 2005, the Service
published a Notice in the Federal
Register (70 FR 54765) requesting
comments on the proposed revisions to
the National Review Team Ranking
Criteria Guidance for Tier 2 Landowner
Incentive (LIP) program Grant
Proposals. The Service received 28
written responses by the close of the
comment period on October 31, 2005. The
responses came from 25 State fish and
wildlife agencies, one nongovernmental
organization, and two private citizens.
The Service received a total of 21
substantive comments regarding the
ranking criteria guidance. Based on these
substantive comments, a few additional
revisions to the ranking criteria were
made. Overall, the Service believes these
changes to the ranking criteria guidance
will allow reviewers to more fairly assess
the merit of Tier 2 LIP grant proposals.
The Service has provided via the Federal
Register the final National Review Team
Ranking Criteria Guidance for Tier 2 LIP
Grant Proposals, and responses to the
substantive comments that were
received.
Also by way of the Federal Register, the
Service has requested proposals for fiscal
year 2006 funding under the LIP
Program for conservation grants to
States, the District of Columbia, Puerto
Rico, Guam, the United States Virgin
Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands,
and American Samoa. The approximate
level of funding for Tier 1 and Tier 2
grants is $18.9 million. Each State may
apply for up to $180,000 in Tier 1 funds
and up to $945,000 in combined Tier 1 and
Tier 2 funding.
Major Milestones Met for State
Wildlife Grants
On October 1, 2005, the State Wildlife
Grants program reached an important
milestone: all 56 Comprehensive Wildlife
Conservation Strategies (Strategies) were
submitted to the Service. These
Strategies were required for States,
Commonwealths, territories, and the
District of Columbia to continue to receive
State Wildlife Grants. These documents
represent an ambitious undertaking and
identify the species of greatest
conservation need and critical habitats
found within each State. Likewise, the
Strategies identify conservation concerns
affecting species and habitats, detail
necessary conservation actions to
conserve these resources, and outline how
species, habitats, and conservation efforts
will be monitored, evaluated, and
adaptively managed over time. Finally, the
Strategies describe how conservation
partners and the public will be involved in
the implementation and revision of each
Strategy over the next decade.
Beginning in July 2005, the National
Advisory Acceptance Team (NAAT) began
working to review the Strategies to
determine if they satisfactorily addressed
the eight required elements. At their
February 2006 meeting, the NAAT
completed its initial review of all 56
Strategies. Overall, 38 have either been
approved by the Service Director or have
been recommended for approval by the
NAAT. The remaining Strategies have
either been conditionally approved or
recommended for conditional approval by
the NAAT. Of the strategies that were
conditionally approved by the Director,
three have been resubmitted to the NAAT
and have been subsequently
recommended for approval.
At the national level, a number of efforts
are underway to support the Strategies
and the State Wildlife Grants program.
Service personnel continue to meet with
Congressional staffers to help elected
officials understand the value of the
Strategies and the conservation
opportunities they represent. Likewise,
Service personnel are promoting the
strategies within the Service, the
Department of the Interior, and other
Federal agencies to make resources
managers aware of the Strategies and
explain how these documents could
facilitate their efforts. Finally, a number of
Service personnel are involved in drafting
new administrative guideline documents
to assist States as they move from
planning and writing to implementing
their Strategies.
12 March 2006
March 2006 13
State Apportionment from Sport Fish
Restoration Program Reaches
All-Time High
State fish and wildlife agencies and
America’s anglers benefited in fiscal year
2005 from the all time highest single year
apportionment from the Sport Fish
Restoration (SFR) program. The total
apportionment from the SFR program in
fiscal year 2005 was $294,691,282, which
included a carryover of $20.4 million of
program funds from fiscal year 2004
funds. The carryover of funds was the
first ever for the program. The Service
had to withhold program funds during
2004 to ensure that adequate funds were
available for the various program
reauthorization proposals (e.g., Clean
Vessel Act, Boating Infrastructure Grant,
and the U.S. Coast Guard’s Recreational
Boating Safety Program) that were being
considered by Congress and which are
funded from the Sport Fishing and
Boating Trust Fund (previously known as
the Aquatic Resources Trust Fund).
The Sport Fish Restoration program has
now apportioned more than $4.75 billion to
State agencies for the fisheries
conservation programs since its inception.
The Program’s stable funding continues to
allow States to develop successful
fisheries and boating opportunities. The
Service and State cooperators achieved
many significant accomplishments in FY
2005. Some of these include:
n Training more than 390,000 students
about aquatic education and
conservation;
n Stocking more than 180,000,000 fish;
n Managing more than 760 boating access
sites;
n Maintaining more than 1,800 fishing
areas and access sites; and
n Developing/renovating 10 fish hatchery
facilities.
In addition to these accomplishments, four
specific projects were recognized by the
American Fisheries Society’s Fisheries
Administrator’s Section as their
“Outstanding Federal Aid in Sport Fish
Awards of the Year.” These projects
include the following:
Sport Fishery Development and
Management Category: Laurel Bed
Lake Restoration - The Virginia
Department of Game and Inland Fisheries
used Sport Fish Restoration Funds to
restore this 330-acre lake in Russell
County. The lake’s pH was restored to
suitable levels by an extensive liming
project completed by the Virginia
department. The lake is now restored and
efforts are underway to restore its brook
trout fishery. In addition, smallmouth bass
have been stocked to provide anglers a
different species to pursue. Laurel Lake is
located in the scenic Clinch Mountain
Wildlife Management area.
Aquatic Education Category: Kid’s
Fishing Clinics - The Florida Fish and
Wildlife Conservation Commission was
recognized for their aquatic education
program efforts in providing kids’ fishing
clinics throughout the State. Florida has
14 March 2006
one of the premier kids’ fishing clinic
programs in the country and thousands of
children experience their first fishing
opportunity annually through this
program. Florida has developed a
comprehensive program that combines an
aggressive fish stocking program in
coordination with the aquatic education
clinics to ensure that the young anglers
have a quality fishing experience that
hopefully leads to lifelong participation in
angling.
Research and Survey Category: Lake
Michigan Technical Committee,
Salmonid Working Group - This
multiagency collaboration of State and
Federal fishery management agencies has
led the management of the salmonid
species in Lake Michigan. This group’s
efforts are essential in maintaining and
improving the economically important
salmonid species in Lake Michigan.
Wildlife Restoration Apportionment
Reaches New Levels
The apportionment from the Wildlife
Restoration program reached an all time
high in fiscal year 2005. The total
apportionment was $235,455,853 and the
program has now awarded almost $4.8
billion since 1939 for wildlife conservation
efforts in the United States, benefiting
countless species of animals, as well as
hunters and wildlife enthusiasts. The
funding increase is largely the result of
increased excise tax collections from
firearms.
Since the beginning of the program,
States and territories have used over half
of the Wildlife Restoration program funds
to buy, develop, maintain, and operate
wildlife management areas. Over 4 million
acres have been purchased outright since
the program began—enough to cover all
of Connecticut and Rhode Island—and
some 40 million acres—an area larger
than the State of Wisconsin—are
managed for wildlife under agreements
with landowners. Along with habitat
acquisition, better management methods
have yielded remarkable results. Over the
last 65+ years, the Wildlife Restoration
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Final Apportionment of Dingell-Johnson
Sport Fish Restoration Funds for Fiscal Year 2005
Sport Fish
State Restoration
ALABAMA ...................................................................................................................................$4,422,820
ALASKA .......................................................................................................................................14,734,564
ARIZONA .......................................................................................................................................5,922,343
ARKANSAS ...................................................................................................................................5,642,674
CALIFORNIA ..............................................................................................................................14,734,564
COLORADO ...................................................................................................................................7,008,028
CONNECTICUT ............................................................................................................................2,946,913
DELAWARE .................................................................................................................................2,946,913
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ..........................................................................................................982,304
FLORIDA .......................................................................................................................................7,914,307
GEORGIA .......................................................................................................................................5,633,286
HAWAII ...........................................................................................................................................2,946,913
IDAHO .............................................................................................................................................5,001,608
ILLINOIS .......................................................................................................................................5,892,633
INDIANA .......................................................................................................................................4,043,934
IOWA ...............................................................................................................................................4,232,551
KANSAS .........................................................................................................................................4,262,230
KENTUCKY ...................................................................................................................................4,629,054
LOUISIANA ...................................................................................................................................5,200,984
MAINE ...........................................................................................................................................2,946,913
MARYLAND .................................................................................................................................2,946,913
MASSACHUSETTS ......................................................................................................................2,946,913
MICHIGAN ...................................................................................................................................9,945,909
MINNESOTA ...............................................................................................................................11,165,735
MISSISSIPPI .................................................................................................................................3,650,051
MISSOURI .....................................................................................................................................7,134,020
MONTANA .....................................................................................................................................7,019,722
NEBRASKA ...................................................................................................................................3,630,946
NEVADA .........................................................................................................................................4,414,267
NEW HAMPSHIRE ......................................................................................................................2,946,913
NEW JERSEY ...............................................................................................................................2,946,913
NEW MEXICO ..............................................................................................................................5,132,285
NEW YORK ...................................................................................................................................7,396,138
NORTH CAROLINA ....................................................................................................................5,494,411
NORTH DAKOTA ..........................................................................................................................3,278,612
OHIO ...............................................................................................................................................6,878,971
OKLAHOMA .................................................................................................................................5,623,487
OREGON .........................................................................................................................................7,087,755
PENNSYLVANIA ..........................................................................................................................7,489,335
RHODE ISLAND ..........................................................................................................................2,946,913
SOUTH CAROLINA ....................................................................................................................3,702,853
SOUTH DAKOTA ..........................................................................................................................3,699,812
TENNESSEE ...............................................................................................................................7,029,132
TEXAS ...........................................................................................................................................14,734,564
UTAH ...............................................................................................................................................4,899,623
VERMONT .....................................................................................................................................2,946,913
VIRGINIA .......................................................................................................................................4,731,149
WASHINGTON ..............................................................................................................................6,124,056
WEST VIRGINIA ..........................................................................................................................2,946,913
WISCONSIN ...............................................................................................................................10,191,022
WYOMING .....................................................................................................................................4,687,372
AMERICAN SAMOA ......................................................................................................................982,304
GUAM .................................................................................................................................................982,304
N. MARIANA ISLANDS ................................................................................................................982,304
PUERTO RICO ..............................................................................................................................2,946,912
VIRGIN ISLANDS ..........................................................................................................................982,304
TOTAL .......................................................................................................................................$294,691,282
program has played a major role in
restoring many species to abundance,
including the North American elk, wild
turkey, wood duck, white-tailed deer, and
pronghorn antelope. Some of the more
notable 2005 accomplishments with
Wildlife Restoration program funds in
fiscal year 2005:
n operations and maintenance for State
facilities and areas encompassing more
than 10 million acres;
n 907,392 acres of habitat improved for
game and non-game species;
n 2,368 scientific research projects––
including propagation, biology,
utilization, and habitat needs––
of species;
n 29,361 private landowners received
technical assistance on wildlife
management on their property
nationwide; and
n 7,781 animals (e.g., pronghorn, wild
turkey, etc.) were stocked as part of
species restoration efforts.
State Audits
The Division of Federal Assistance is
coming to the end of the current cycle of
State audits being conducted by the
Department of Interior Office of
Inspector General. There are currently 16
audits in process. To date the Division has
received 36 final reports for the current
cycle of audits. All remaining audits will
be started by September 2006. Our
experiences and the feedback from the
audits continue to be very positive. The
Division strives to maintain open lines of
communication between the auditors,
grantees, and Federal Assistance offices,
and all comments and suggestions on our
audit program are welcome.
The next 5-year cycle of state audits will
begin October 2006. The Division will
continue our relationship with the
Department of the Interior Office of
Inspector General for audit services. In
addition to the mandatory examinations of
the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration
program grants, the next cycle will include
awards from the Landowner Incentive
March 2006 15
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Final Apportionment of Pittman-Robertson
Wildlife Restoration Funds for Fiscal Year 2005
Hunter Education TOTAL
Wildlife* FY '04 Sec. 10 FY 2005 FY 2005 Wildlife +
STATE Restoration Reverted Funds TOTAL Section 4 Section 10 Hunter Ed
ALABAMA $3,185,681 $0 $3,185,681 $863,851 $180,544 $4,230,076
ALASKA 9,423,210 37,383 9,460,593 382,777 80,000 9,923,370
ARIZONA 4,478,083 0 4,478,083 996,627 208,294 5,683,004
ARKANSAS 3,944,958 37,383 3,982,341 382,777 80,000 4,445,118
CALIFORNIA 6,618,008 0 6,618,008 1,148,328 240,000 8,006,336
COLORADO 4,974,212 0 4,974,212 835,521 174,624 5,984,357
CONNECTICUT 942,322 0 942,322 661,532 138,260 1,742,114
DELAWARE 942,322 3,739 946,061 382,777 80,000 1,408,838
FLORIDA 2,812,063 37,383 2,849,446 1,148,328 240,000 4,237,774
GEORGIA 3,776,908 0 3,776,908 1,148,328 240,000 5,165,236
HAWAII 942,322 0 942,322 382,777 80,000 1,405,099
IDAHO 3,972,723 37,383 4,010,106 382,777 80,000 4,472,883
ILLINOIS 3,468,951 0 3,468,951 1,148,328 240,000 4,857,279
INDIANA 2,501,762 0 2,501,762 1,148,328 240,000 3,890,090
IOWA 3,312,473 37,383 3,349,856 568,439 118,804 4,037,099
KANSAS 3,630,786 37,383 3,668,169 382,777 80,000 4,130,946
KENTUCKY 3,325,605 37,383 3,362,988 785,115 164,089 4,312,192
LOUISIANA 3,059,393 0 3,059,393 868,100 181,432 4,108,925
MAINE 2,213,097 0 2,213,097 382,777 80,000 2,675,874
MARYLAND 1,069,146 0 1,069,146 1,028,844 215,028 2,313,018
MASSACHUSETTS 942,322 0 942,322 1,148,328 240,000 2,330,650
MICHIGAN 7,033,923 37,383 7,071,306 1,148,328 240,000 8,459,634
MINNESOTA 6,012,917 0 6,012,917 955,610 199,722 7,168,249
MISSISSIPPI 2,854,470 37,383 2,891,853 552,576 115,488 3,559,917
MISSOURI 5,387,714 37,383 5,425,097 1,086,872 227,156 6,739,125
MONTANA 5,766,550 37,383 5,803,933 382,777 80,000 6,266,710
NEBRASKA 3,366,336 0 3,366,336 382,777 80,000 3,829,113
NEVADA 3,634,464 0 3,634,464 382,777 80,000 4,097,241
NEW HAMPSHIRE 942,322 37,383 979,705 382,777 80,000 1,442,482
NEW JERSEY 942,322 0 942,322 1,148,328 240,000 2,330,650
NEW MEXICO 4,261,695 37,383 4,299,078 382,777 80,000 4,761,855
NEW YORK 5,394,676 0 5,394,676 1,148,328 240,000 6,783,004
NORTH CAROLINA 4,216,470 37,383 4,253,853 1,148,328 240,000 5,642,181
NORTH DAKOTA 2,981,275 0 2,981,275 382,777 80,000 3,444,052
OHIO 3,838,454 37,383 3,875,837 1,148,328 240,000 5,264,165
OKLAHOMA 4,098,639 0 4,098,639 670,291 140,090 4,909,020
OREGON 4,678,449 0 4,678,449 664,608 138,903 5,481,960
PENNSYLVANIA 7,592,665 0 7,592,665 1,148,328 240,000 8,980,993
RHODE ISLAND 942,322 0 942,322 382,777 80,000 1,405,099
SOUTH CAROLINA 1,303,704 37,383 1,341,087 779,335 162,881 2,283,303
SOUTH DAKOTA 3,553,023 0 3,553,023 382,777 80,000 4,015,800
TENNESSEE 5,708,427 37,383 5,745,810 1,105,145 230,974 7,081,929
TEXAS 9,423,210 0 9,423,210 1,148,328 240,000 10,811,538
UTAH 3,456,882 0 3,456,882 382,777 80,000 3,919,659
VERMONT 942,322 0 942,322 382,777 80,000 1,405,099
VIRGINIA 3,070,037 0 3,070,037 1,148,328 240,000 4,458,365
WASHINGTON 3,204,707 0 3,204,707 1,144,934 239,290 4,588,931
WEST VIRGINIA 2,331,008 37,383 2,368,391 382,777 80,000 2,831,168
WISCONSIN 6,059,066 37,383 6,096,449 1,041,896 217,756 7,356,101
WYOMING 3,731,061 0 3,731,061 382,777 80,000 4,193,838
AMERICAN SAMOA 314,107 0 314,107 63,796 13,333 391,236
GUAM 314,107 0 314,107 63,796 13,333 391,236
N. MARIANA ISLANDS 314,107 0 314,107 63,796 13,333 391,236
PUERTO RICO 942,321 0 942,321 63,796 13,333 1,019,450
VIRGIN ISLANDS 314,107 0 314,107 63,796 13,333 391,236
TOTAL $188,464,206 $714,016 $189,178,222 $38,277,631 $8,000,000 $235,455,853
*The Wildlife apportionment includes adjustments for revised South Carolina license certifications.
program and the State Wildlife Grants to
the scope of audits. This expands our audit
coverage and provides a new level of
effective and efficient monitoring of new
programs.
The State audits that are currently in the
fieldwork stage are:
Arizona
Delaware
Georgia
Hawaii
Maryland
Oklahoma
South Carolina
For additional information on this issue,
please contact Patrick McHugh.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Announces Fiscal Year 2005 Boating
Infrastructure Grant Program Awards
Congress approved additional funding for
Federal fiscal year 2005 for the Boating
Infrastructure Grant program in late
September 2005 as part of a technical
corrections bill to the then recently passed
Safe, Accountable, Flexible and Efficient
Transportation Equity Act (a.k.a.,
Highway Bill). As a result, the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service announced additional
Tier 2 Boating Infrastructure Grant (BIG)
program awards for Federal fiscal year
2005 this past October. Specifically, the
Service awarded more than $4 million in
Tier 2 BIG grants to eight States for their
efforts in providing additional facilities for
recreational boaters. The States were
Kentucky, Maryland, Ohio, New Jersey,
Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and
Washington.
Because Congress made more money
available this fiscal year, this round of
grants builds upon BIG grants awarded in
spring 2005. At that time, the Service
awarded three large competitive grants to
Maine, South Carolina and Virginia and 33
Tier 1 grants to State agencies
responsible for boating. With the
additional funds approved by Congress,
the combined total of Tier 2 awards for
fiscal year 2005 exceeded $5 million.
Money for BIG comes from the Sport Fish
Restoration and Boating Trust Fund. This
fund is supported by excise taxes paid on
certain fishing and boating equipment.
“Boating can make an important
contribution to local economies,” said
Interior Secretary Gale Norton. “These
grants empower State and local
governments and other partners to
improve recreational boating and fishing
opportunities, strengthening community
ties to the water’s edge by enhancing
access to recreational, historic, cultural,
natural and scenic resources for millions
of boat owners.”
The BIG program has two levels of
funding, Tier-1 and Tier-2. Under the
Tier-1 portion, all States and territories
can receive up to $100,000 to construct or
improve docking facilities for transient
(short term, non-trailerable boats) without
competing against other proposals. The
Tier-2 portion of the BIG program
enables larger projects to compete for
available funding.
The BIG Tier-2 proposals are reviewed by
a panel of Service representatives, as well
as a committee from the Sport Fishing
and Boating Partnership Council. The
Council, a federally chartered body which
advises the Secretary of the Interior and
the Service on recreational fishing and
boating issues, made an initial funding
recommendation to the Service based on a
review of project proposals by a Council-appointed
committee.
The grant awards announced in October
included:
Annapolis City Dock, Maryland—
In cooperation with the Maryland
Department of Natural Resources, the
city of Annapolis was awarded $500,000
to replace and upgrade an existing
boardwalk, provide 20 transient boat slips
and associated utilities connections, and
replace an adjacent deteriorated
bulkhead. The project will provide
additional economic impact to the local
community by providing additional
docking space for transient boats.
16 March 2006
Fulton Harbor (Aransas County
Navigation District No. 1), Texas—
In cooperation with Texas Parks and
Wildlife Department, the Aransas County
Navigation District was awarded $422,685
to construct 15 new slips designated for
use by transient boats at Fulton Harbor.
Currently there are no dedicated
transient docking facilities and the
existing slips are at 100 percent
occupancy. Fulton Harbor is located on the
mid-Texas Gulf coast near the cities of
Rockport and Fulton. These additional
slips will significantly increase the
opportunities for larger recreational boats
to visit the area.
Cumberland Yacht Harbor, Nashville,
Tennessee— In cooperation with the
Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency, the
Cumberland Yacht Harbor was awarded
$376,172 to construct a 680 foot dock, 20
slips and restrooms for boaters, as well as
dredging access to the marina. The
Cumberland Yacht Harbor is a planned
waterfront community near the central
business district of Nashville. The
facilities will provide boaters access to
Nashville’s many attractions, including
the National Football League’s Titan
Stadium.
Glass City Municipal Marina, Toledo,
Ohio—In cooperation with the Ohio
Department of Natural Resources
Division of Watercraft, the city of Toledo
was awarded $226,500 to provide transient
moorage for boaters visiting the new 125-
acre Marina District being developed on
the now closed First Energy/Toledo
Edison Acme Power Plant Site. Within the
Marina District will be residences,
commercial retail stores, restaurants, a
Hovercraft port, a marine passenger
terminal, and the Glass City municipal
marina. This marina will have 100 boat
slips, 20 of which will be dedicated for
transient use. The 20 slips will provide an
opportunity for traveling boaters to visit
the stores and restaurants planned.
Port of Everett, Washington—
In cooperation with the Washington
Interagency Committee for Outdoor
Recreation, the city of Everett was
awarded $995,000 to develop 42 slips with
utilities for transient boats. The slips will
provide access to the new waterfront
redevelopment in Everett. The facility will
also provide a safe moorage during winds
and storms.
Kenlake Marina, Kentucky—This
project was awarded $198,000 to construct
an 830- foot floating dock with connections
for electrical, water, cable television, and
wireless internet service. It will be able to
accommodate more than 40 vessels.
Nauticus Marina, Norfolk, Virginia—
In cooperation with the Virginia
Department of Health, the city of Norfolk
was awarded $228,540 for the Nauticus
Maritime Center Marina. The award will
be used to increase transient boating
access to this popular attraction, including
floating docks with utilities and restroom
facilities. Norfolk is an important stopping
point for boaters along the Intracoastal
Waterway. The new facilities will provide
access to the Nauticus Maritime Center,
which attracts over 400,000 visitors
annually.
Town of Occoquan, Virginia—
In cooperation with the Virginia
Department of Health, the town of
Occoquan was awarded $166,500 to
construct 24 slips with utility services and
a restroom. The new facilities will provide
boaters access to this quaint Virginia town
known for its arts and craft festivals and
other regional activities.
Tuckerton Seaport, New Jersey —
In cooperation with the New Jersey Office
of Maritime Resources, the Tuckerton
Seaport was awarded $495,596 to
construct 120 feet of new floating docks
with utilities, new restrooms and showers,
as well as conducting one-time access
dredging to the facility. Tuckerton Seaport
is about 15 miles west of Long Beach
Island and 30 miles north of Atlantic City.
The facilities will provide access to many
local and regional attractions.
Port of Wahkiakum, Washington—
In cooperation with the Washington
Interagency Committee for Outdoor
Recreation, the Port District of
Wahkiakum County was awarded $202,712
to develop 24 new slips, increasing the
current capacity by 24 percent for short
term boaters in this popular boating area
along the West Coast. The slips will
provide boaters with access to the town of
Cathlamet and its festivals and events.
For more information on this program,
contact Brian Bohnsack at 703/358 2156.
March 2006 17
Fulton Harbor/BoatUS
States Increase eLicense
Certifications Through iFAIMS
The Federal Assistance Information
Management System internet interface
known as iFAIMS located at
http://faims.fws.gov allows States to
electronically submit and certify annual
hunting and fishing license data to U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service. License
certification is an essential part of the
apportionment process for the Wildlife
and Sport Fish Restoration grant
programs. Currently, about 64 percent of
the States submitted license data
electronically. This is a 20 percent increase
from the previous year. In addition, about
52 percent of the States certified license
holders electronically to the Service. To
submit and certify electronically, contact
your Regional Federal Assistance office
for access requirements and to request
the required professional version of Adobe
Acrobat software.
Historical information on license sales and
revenue is located on the Division’s web
site (http://federalasst.fws.gov). Additional
information on license certification and
income can be obtained by contacting Lori
Bennett (703/358-2033:
Lori_Bennett@fws.gov).
National Survey of Fishing, Hunting,
and Wildlife-Associated Recreation
Preparations are underway to begin data
collection for the 11th National Survey
conducted since 1955. The Service
sponsors the survey every 5 years at the
request of State fish and wildlife agencies.
It will be similar in content, scope, and
methodology to those conducted in 1991,
1996, and 2001—so their estimates will be
comparable.
The Census Bureau will collect the
information using computer-assisted
telephone and in-person interviewing. The
US Fish and Wildlife Service manages the
Survey, analyzes the data, prepares the
reports, and provides assistance and
information to users.
The Office of Management and Budget
has approved the Service’s request to
conduct the Survey and has given us the
official OMB number, 1018-0088.
Computerized interview instruments have
been prepared and tested, and training
manuals written for about 1,000
interviewers who will collect data using
laptops.
The Census Bureau will begin collecting
information in April 2006. It will contact
90,000 households to identify samples of
31,500 sportspersons and 24,300 wildlife
watchers. Census will ask these
individuals detailed questions about their
fishing, hunting, and wildlife-watching
activities and expenditures. This will be
accomplished in three interview waves
conducted in April and September 2006
and in January 2007.
The 2006 Survey will generate
information identified as priority data
needed by the States, Service, non-governmental
organizations, and other
major survey users. General categories of
information collected include the number
of participants in different types of fish
and wildlife consumptive and
nonconsumptive recreational activities,
the extent of participation (days and
trips), and related trip and equipment
expenditures. The survey is one of the
Nation’s most important sources of
information on fish and wildlife recreation.
We continue to seek cost-effective
methods for the survey. In 2006 the
Census Bureau will conduct a side-by-side
test to determine the viability of using
State fishing and hunting license
databases as a supplement to the
traditional Census household databases.
If viable, the use of State databases could
reduce costs considerably for future
surveys because Census would not have to
sample as many households as it does now.
The 2006 Survey is funded by grants from
the Multistate Conservation grant
programs of the Wildlife and Sport Fish
Restoration Programs. Products will
include preliminary reports, a final
national and 50 State reports, CDs, and
quick-facts brochures. All data and
reports will be available on a website.
The Service also produces reports based
on existing survey data. Addenda to the
2001 Survey include the following 10
reports: Birding in the United States: A
Demographic and Economic Analysis;
2001 National and State Economic
Impacts of Wildlife Watching; Net
Economic Values for Wildlife-Related
Recreation in 2001; Participation and
Expenditure Patterns of African-
American, Hispanic, and Female
Hunters and Anglers; Fishing and
Hunting 1991-2001: Avid, Casual, and
Intermediate Participation Trends; Deer
Hunting in the United States: An
Analysis of Hunter Demographics and
Behavior; The Relationship between
Wildlife Watchers, Hunters, and Anglers;
Private and Public Land Use by Hunters;
and Economic Impact of Waterfowl
Hunting in the United States.
New Survey Report— Black Bass
and Trout Fishing in the United States
Black bass and trout are two of the most
prominent species of fish sought by
anglers in the U.S. Of all anglers who
fished in freshwater other than the Great
Lakes in 2001, 38 percent sought black
bass and 28 percent sought trout. Among
the States, Virginia had the highest
18 March 2006
percent of freshwater resident and
nonresident anglers seeking bass with 54
percent. Alabama, New Jersey, and
Tennessee also ranked high with over 50
percent. As for trout fishing, more than 80
percent of freshwater anglers fishing in
Wyoming, Montana, and Colorado sought
trout.
The report provides estimates of total
participants and days of participation at
national and State levels. In 2001, at the
national level there were 10.7 million
anglers who fished for bass nearly 160
million days, and there were 7.8 million
trout anglers who fished 83 million days.
Additionally, the report provides
information on the socioeconomic
characteristics, expenditures, and boating
usage of bass and trout anglers. The
socioeconomic characteristics section
compares the characteristics of all
freshwater, bass, and trout anglers. They
have a similar distribution of participants
by age, with individuals who are 35 to 44
years old comprising the majority of
participants for each. Bass anglers and all
freshwater anglers have a similar
educational distribution, but trout anglers
have a slightly higher proportion with 4
years of college of more. Both bass and
trout anglers have higher incomes on
average than do all freshwater anglers.
Expenditures by bass and trout anglers
reveal the economic importance of both
species. Bass anglers spent $10.2 billion
on trips and equipment in pursuit of
freshwater fishing, and trout anglers
spent $6.4 billion.
A boating usage section examines the
extent of boating usage among anglers
and uses a regression model to examine
the impact that a variety of variables have
on the probability that an angler will
participate in boating. Overall, 65% of
bass anglers and 48% of trout anglers
fished from a boat at least one day.
Copies of survey reports are available on
request or are accessible through the
following website:
http://federalaid.fws.gov. For more
information you also may contact the
Service’s survey staff.
More Than $15 Million In National
Coastal Wetlands Conservation
Grants Awarded To 12 States
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
awarded more than $15 million in grants
to 12 states to help conserve, restore and
protect coastal wetlands, Interior
Secretary Gale Norton announced in late
December 2005. National Coastal
Wetlands Conservation grants are
awarded to States through a competitive
process. The program is funded under
provisions of the 1990 Coastal Wetlands
Planning, Protection and Restoration Act,
with funding provided by the Sport
Fishing and Boating Trust Fund.
States awarded funding in FY2006 under
the National Coastal Wetlands
Conservation Grant Program include
Alabama, Alaska, California, Georgia,
Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts,
Michigan, New Jersey, Texas and
Washington.
The grants provide funding for 19 projects
and will be supplemented with more than
$12 million from State and private
partners. The grants are used to acquire,
restore or enhance coastal wetlands for
long-term conservation benefits to wildlife
and habitat. Partners in this year’s
March 2006 19
projects include State and local
governments, private landowners and
conservation groups such as The Nature
Conservancy, Ducks Unlimited, Scenic
Galveston, Inc., Wildlife Forever
Foundation, and many others.
“When people at so many different levels
come together in these kinds of projects,
everybody wins,” Norton said. “This is the
kind of effort that makes it possible for us
to leave a real legacy for our children and
grandchildren.”
“These are win-win projects,” said Service
Director Dale Hall. “I’m very excited
when we’re able to leverage the taxpayer
dollar with our partners and get a lot
more value for the money.”
Including the 2006 grants, the Service has
awarded more than $165 million in grants
to States and insular areas since the
program began; when the 2006 projects
are complete, they will have protected,
restored or enhanced about 14,000 acres.
A total of more than 200,000 acres will
have been protected or restored since the
grant program began.
For more information, contact the
National Coastal Wetlands Conservation
Grant Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive,
Arlington, VA 22203, or Division of
Federal Assistance, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive,
Arlington, VA 22203, or visit the
program’s home page at
http://www.fws.gov/coastal/CoastalGrants/
The following is a summary of the fiscal
year 2006 awards.
Fiscal Year 2006 National Coastal
Wetlands Conservation Grant
Projects
Alabama
Point Caddy Wetlands. The Alabama
Department of Conservation and Natural
Resources will purchase 1730 acres on
Grand Bay in the Mississippi Sound.
Another 239 acres are being provided as
match. The Grand Bay wetlands provide
habitat to recreationally important fish
species like spotted sea trout, red snapper
and red drum and coastal-dependent and
migratory birds.
Partners: The Nature Conservancy of
Alabama and the Mobile Bay National
Estuary Program.
Coastal grant request: ................$ 928,000
State share: ..................................$ 745,150
Partners’ share: ..........................$ 197,700
Total cost: ......................................$1,870,850
Alaska
Eagle River South Estuary. Alaska’s
Department of Natural Resources will
protect 236 acres near Juneau through a
combination of conservation easements
and acquisitions. This project will help
protect the water quality of Dowitcher
Slough and the mouth of the Eagle River
which is important for marine mammals,
including the threatened Steller sea lion,
and for a number of fish species, including
pink, chum and sockeye salmon.
Partners: The City and Borough of
Juneau, Southeast Alaska Council of Boy
Scouts of America, Simpson, Tillinghast,
Sorenson & Logenbaugh, Horan and
Company, and an anonymous donor
working through the Southeast Alaska
Land Trust.
Coastal grant request:.................. $606,065
State share: ......................................$ 250
Partners’ share: ..............................$293,250
Total cost: ........................................$899,565
Long Lagoon Coastal Habitat
Protection. The Department of Natural
Resources in Alaska plans to acquire 1,002
acres on north Afognak Island’s coastline.
The coastline of Afognak Island provides
feeding, pupping, and calving habitats for
14 species of marine mammals including
sea otters, seals and several varieties of
whales. Anglers, hunters, kayakers and
campers will also benefit from this
acquisition.
Coastal grant request: ................$ 888,300
Partners’ share: ..........................$ 454,750
Total cost: ......................................$1,343,050
Nushagak Bay/Wood-Tikchik State
Park: Final Phase. Alaska’s Department
of Natural Resources will acquire a
perpetual conservation easement on
2,788 acres within the Nushagak Bay
Watershed. This includes 4 miles along the
Agulowak River, a major anadromous fish
system that provides spawning habitat for
nearly 2 million adult salmon.
Partners: The Conservation Fund and the
Nushagak-Mulchatna Wood-Tikchik Land
Trust.
Coastal grant share:....................$ 928,000
Partners’ share: ..........................$ 455,000
Total cost: ......................................$1,383,000
20 March 2006
California
Arcata Baylands Restoration/
Enhancement Project. The California
State Coastal Conservancy, with
assistance from the State Wildlife
Conservation Board and the California
Department of Game, as part of a larger
560+ acre project, will purchase 77 acres
of land and restore 85 acres of wetland
habitats adjacent to Humboldt Bay. This
restoration will help to improve tidal flow
and reestablish native vegetation along
Jacoby Creek and Gannon Slough.
Humboldt Bay is one of California’s most
important stopovers for migrating birds.
Partners: The City of Arcata and the
Pacific States Marine Fisheries
Commission.
Coastal grant request: ................$ 928,000
State share: ..................................$1,082,400
Partners’ share: ..........................$ 37,000
Total cost: ......................................$2,047,400
Georgia
Sansavilla Wetlands Acquisition. The
Department of Natural Resources in the
State of Georgia will acquire 1,250 acres
and 4.5 miles along the Altamaha River.
The Altamaha River Basin is recognized
as aWestern Hemisphere Shorebird
Reserve Network site and an Important
Birding Area by both the Audubon
Society and the American Bird
Conservancy.
Partner: The Nature Conservancy.
Coastal grant request: ................$ 928,000
Partner’s share: ..........................$1,000,000
Total cost: ......................................$1,928,000
Hawaii
Kawainui Marsh Wetland Restoration
and Enhancement. Hawaii’s Department
of Land and Natural Resources plans to
restore 20 acres and enhance 60 acres of
coastal wetlands and associated uplands at
Kawainui Marsh in Honolulu County. The
project area is part of a wetland complex
that was recently added to the Convention
of Wetlands of International Importance,
recognizing it as a significant wetland on
an international scale.
Partners: Castle Foundation, The Wildlife
Society, Le Jardin Academy, Kailua Urban
Design Task Force, City and County of
Honolulu.
Coastal grant request: ................ $646,250
State share: ......................................$ 50,000
Partners’ share: ..............................$262,500
Total cost: ........................................$958,750
Illinois
Hegewisch Marsh Restoration. The
Office of the Lieutenant Governor, in
cooperation with the Illinois Department
of Natural Resources and Environmental
Protection Agency, will restore 55 acres of
a 100-acre coastal wetland of Lake
Michigan within the 4,800 acre Calumet
Open Space Reserve in south Chicago.
Restoration will include the removal of
non-natives, planting native plants and
excavations to provide more emergent
wetlands areas.
Partners: City of Chicago, the
Conservation Fund and the Field Museum
of Natural History.
Coastal grant request: .............. $ 750,000
State share: ....................................$ 218,501
Partners’ share: ............................$ 292,038
Total cost: ......................................$1,260,539
Maine
Thomas Island Habitat Protection.
Maine’s Department of Inland Fisheries
and Wildlife will acquire 122 acres,
including the 62-acre Thomas Island in
Hancock County. Thomas Island provides
high-quality foraging, migration,
breeding, and wintering habitat for a long
list of bird species. Long-term protection
of this habitat will also help buffer and
contribute to the biological integrity of the
Maine Coastal Island National Wildlife
Refuge.
Partners: Maine Coast Heritage Trust,
Ducks Unlimited and an individual
landowner.
Coastal grant request: .................. $453,000
Partner’s share: ..............................$305,000
Total cost: ........................................$758,000
Massachusetts
Great Neck and Moody Island.
The Department of Conservation and
Recreation in Massachusetts plans to
acquire 254 acres of wetlands and
buffering uplands at the mouth of the
Ipswich and Eagle Rivers, which drain
directly into Plum Island Sound. The
proposed acquisition is immediately
adjacent to and/or in the vicinity of 7,000
acres of permanently protected public and
private conservation areas, including the
Parker River National Wildlife Refuge.
Partners: Town of Ipswich and Fields
Pond Foundation.
March 2006 21
Coastal grant request:.............. $ 846,000
State share: ..................................$ 100,000
Partners’ share: ..........................$ 919,840
Total cost: ......................................$1,865,840
Salisbury Marsh Land Acquisition.
The Department of Fish and Game in
Massachusetts will acquire about 256
acres of salt marsh and estuary habitat in
the Salisbury Marsh in Essex County. The
Salisbury marsh has been designated as
an important habitat for the American
black duck, a species that has been
identified as a high priority in the North
American Waterfowl Management Plan.
Partners: Essex County Greenbelt
Association and Essex County
Sportsmen’s Association.
Coastal grant request:.................. $525,400
State share: ......................................$228,063
Partners’ share: ..............................$ 26,000
Total cost: ........................................$779,463
Michigan
Detroit River Wetland Restoration and
Enhancement. Michigan’s Department of
Natural Resources will restore or enhance
65 acres in and adjacent to the Detroit
River International Wildlife Refuge. The
Canada-United States North American
Waterfowl Management Plan has
identified the Detroit River and western
Lake Erie as one of the 34 waterfowl
areas of major concern.
Partners: Wayne County, Friends of the
Detroit River and Integrated Vegetation
Management Partners, Inc.
Coastal grant request: .............. $ 746,000
Partners’ share: ..........................$ 535,000
Total cost: ......................................$1,281,000
Keweenaw County Land Acquisition.
The Michigan Department of Natural
Resources will acquire 1,475 acres along
the coast of Lake Superior on the
Keweenaw Peninsula in Keweenaw
County. Three federally-listed species that
would benefit include the gray wolf,
Canada lynx and bald eagle.
Partners: North Woods Conservancy, The
Nature Conservancy and Eagle Harbor
Township.
Coastal grant request: ................$ 928,000
State share: ..................................$ 200,200
Partners’ share: ..........................$ 797,875
Total cost: ......................................$1,926,075
New Jersey
De Soi-Stinger Property Acquisition.
The New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection will acquire 164
acres of important migratory bird
stopover habitat on the lower Cape May
peninsula. This area is recognized as one
of the most significant concentration areas
for migratory birds in the world.
Coastal grant request: ................$ 928,000
State share: ..................................$2,197,400
Partners’ share: ..........................$ 297,000
Total cost: ......................................$3,422,400
Texas
North Deer Island, Protection and
Restoration, Phase II. Texas Parks and
Wildlife Department, in cooperation with
the Texas General Land Office, will
protect 82 acres of habitat from erosion
and to restore 8 acres of estuarine marsh
on North Deer Island in Galveston
County. Phase II is the final part of a plan
to protect and restore over 135 acres of
habitats associated with the island. North
Deer Island is the largest rookery island
in the Galveston Bay system and is used
each year by up to 30,000 breeding pairs
of 19 species of coastal-dependent birds
including over 1,000 nesting pairs of
federally listed brown pelican.
Partners: Galveston Bay Estuary
Program, Gulf of Mexico Program, the
Service’s Coastal Program in Texas, Texas
Genco EcoCenter, and Audubon Houston.
Coastal grant request: ................$ 653,300
State share: ..................................$ 350,000
Partners’ share: ..........................$ 167,000
Total cost: ......................................$1,170,300
22 March 2006
Brown pelican/USFWS
Black duck/USFWS
Washington
Crockett Lake Coastal Wetlands
Acquisition and Protection.Washington
State Parks and Recreation will acquire
and permanently protect 355 acres at
Crockett Lake in Island County. With the
addition of this acreage, almost the entire
Crockett Lake wetland system
(approximately 700 acres) will be
protected. Crockett Lake is a shallow,
brackish lake and complex of salt and
freshwater marshes, is an important
habitat for resident and migratory birds,
and provides estuarine rearing and
foraging habitat for salmonids and other
fish species.
Partners: Whidbey Camaro Land Trust,
Washington Trout, Ebey’s Landing
National Historical Reserve Trust Board,
National Park Service, Whidbey Chapter
of the Audubon Society, and an individual
landowner.
Coastal grant request: .............. $ 850,700
Partners’ share: ..........................$ 345,000
Total cost: ......................................$1,195,700
Eld Inlet Tidelands and Freshwater
Wetlands. The Washington Department
of Ecology, in conjunction with the
Washington State Coastal Protection
Fund, will purchase a conservation
easement to permanently protect 2.5
miles of marine shoreline and restrict
development on 203 acres in Eld Inlet,
which is in the southern portion of Puget
Sound. The project would benefit a variety
of species including anadromous fish and
migratory and resident waterfowl.
Partners: The Trust for Public Lands,
Capitol Land Trust, and Entrix.
Coastal grant request: ................$ 799,000
State share: ..................................$ 50,000
Partners’ share: ..........................$ 339,000
Total cost: ......................................$1,188,000
Port Susan Phase 2: Acquisition and
Protection. The Washington Department
of Fish and Wildlife, in conjunction with
Washington State Salmon Recovery
Funding Board, will purchase 3,318 acres
and conservation easements on another 63
acres in Port Susan Bay in Puget Sound.
When combined with existing reserves in
Port Susan Bay, this proposal will
contribute to a contiguous tidelands
system totaling more than 7,000 acres.
Over 30 shorebird species regularly use
Port Susan Bay and it provides important
habitats for several species of fish,
including federally listed chinook salmon
and bull trout.
Partners: Whidbey Camano Land Trust,
The Nature Conservancy, Washington
Trout, Pacific Coast Joint Venture,
Stillaguamish Tribe, Ducks Unlimited,
and individual community volunteers.
Coastal grant request: ................$ 928,000
State share: ..................................$ 385,000
Partners’ share: ..........................$ 15,000
Total cost: ......................................$1,328,000
Qwuloolt Project, Phase IV—Estuarine
Restoration. The Washington
Department of Ecology plans to remove
segments of a dike along Ebey Slough in
the lower Snohomish River watershed to
restore about 390 acres of intertidal
estuarine wetlands. This project will
restore important intertidal transitional
salmon habitat benefiting the threatened
Puget Sound chinook salmon and many
other species, including resident and
migratory birds.
Partners: Tulalip Tribes, the Natural
Resources Damage Assessment Trustees
for the Tulalip Landfill Superfund Site,
and the City of Maryville.
Coastal grant request:.............. $ 902,400
Partners’ share: ..........................$ 440,000
Total cost: ......................................$1,342,000
March 2006 23
Fiscal Year 2005 Clean Vessel Act
Pumpout Grant Program Awards
Announced
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s
Clean Vessel Act grant program received
its normal annual funding authorization
for fiscal year 2005 from Congress during
the last week of the Federal fiscal year
this past fall. As a result, the Service
awarded $10.2 million to 27 States under
the Clean Vessel Act grant program in
October, 2005. The grant awards will fund
construction of sewage dump stations and
pumpout stations for recreational boaters
and educational programs that inform
boaters about the importance of proper
waste disposal. The awards will fund
approximately $8.2 million of coastal
projects and $2.0 million of inland
projects.
“The Fish and Wildlife Service is working
with the U.S. Coast Guard, the
Environmental Protection Agency, the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, marine industry
organizations, and others at the local level
to educate the public in ways that will
protect fish and marine habitat,” said
Interior Secretary Gale Norton. “Since its
inception, 49 states have participated in
this program that improves the quality of
our Nation’s water and conserves fish and
wildlife resources.”
Congress passed the Clean Vessel Act in
1992, which established a Federal grant
program administered by the Service, to
help reduce pollution from vessel sewage
discharges. Funding comes from the Sport
Fishing and Boating Trust Fund, made up
of revenues from excise taxes on fishing
equipment, boats, and motorboat fuels.
The Clean Vessel Act requires that
pumpout stations in coastal environments
receive funding preference, although
proposals for inland facilities are also
eligible for funding from the program.
Federal funds can constitute up to 75
percent of all approved projects, with the
remaining funds provided by the States or
marinas. The Service has awarded more
24 March 2006
FY 2005 Clean Vessel Act Awards
State Project Type Proposed Final Award
Alabama ................................................................Coastal ................................................$41,250
Alabama ................................................................Inland..................................................$56,140
Arkansas ................................................................Inland..................................................$89,850
California ..............................................................Coastal ..........................................$1,024,897
California ..............................................................Inland................................................$516,879
Colorado ................................................................Inland..................................................$17,738
Connecticut............................................................Coastal ..............................................$713,495
Connecticut............................................................Inland..................................................$38,682
Florida....................................................................Coastal ..........................................$1,024,897
Florida....................................................................Inland................................................$349,229
Idaho ......................................................................Inland..................................................$14,000
Indiana ..................................................................Coastal ................................................$55,797
Indiana ..................................................................Inland..................................................$55,796
Kentucky................................................................Inland..................................................$89,250
Maine......................................................................Coastal ..............................................$326,420
Maryland................................................................Coastal ..............................................$641,000
Massachusetts ......................................................Coastal ..............................................$854,669
Michigan ................................................................Coastal ................................................$60,000
Missouri..................................................................Inland..................................................$36,000
Nevada ..................................................................Inland..................................................$18,750
New Hampshire....................................................Coastal ..............................................$165,672
New Hampshire....................................................Inland..................................................$41,561
New Jersey............................................................Coastal ..............................................$505,638
New York................................................................Coastal ..............................................$552,648
New York................................................................Inland................................................$150,399
North Carolina......................................................Coastal ................................................$51,000
North Carolina......................................................Inland..................................................$50,000
Oklahoma ..............................................................Inland..................................................$11,897
Oregon....................................................................Coastal ..............................................$343,683
Oregon....................................................................Inland................................................$186,782
Pennsylvania..........................................................Coastal ................................................$57,125
Pennsylvania..........................................................Inland..................................................$34,875
South Carolina ......................................................Coastal ..........................................$1,024,897
Tennessee ..............................................................Inland................................................$135,523
Texas ......................................................................Inland................................................$132,371
Washington ............................................................Coastal ..............................................$725,000
Washington ............................................................Inland..................................................$55,155
Total ..............................................................................................................................$10,248,965
than $90 million to States for their Clean
Vessel Act programs and efforts.
Raw or poorly treated sewage can spread
disease; contaminate shellfish beds and
lower oxygen levels in water. Waterborne
diseases including hepatitis, typhoid and
cholera can be transmitted by shellfish.
Organic matter in sewage is decomposed
in the water by bacteria. During this
process, the bacteria use oxygen. As a
result, sewage in the water may deplete
the water’s oxygen level, causing stress to
fish and other aquatic animals.
For more information on the Clean Vessel
Act grant program, please contact Brian
Bohnsack at 703/358-2156.
The award amounts are as follows:
Public Access Civil Rights Program
The Division of Federal Assistance
enforces Federal civil rights laws and
regulations, on behalf of the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, to ensure that recipients
of Federal assistance do not discriminate
of the basis of race, color, national origin,
sex, disability or age in the administration
of their programs to the public. The public
access civil rights program, funded
separately from Federal assistance grant
programs, is responsible for key civil
rights laws such as Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990, Title IX of the
Education Amendments of 1972, and a
host of other laws, regulations and
Presidential Executive Orders.
The Division of Federal Assistance works
in close partnership with its State fish and
wildlife agency recipients to assist them in
a pro-active way in their understanding of
the civil rights requirements, encourage
voluntary compliance, and promote early
resolution of civil rights conflicts. Civil
rights monitoring of recipients is handled
via processing of civil rights complaints;
conducting periodic system reviews of
State agencies; and providing technical
guidance and information on civil rights
trends to our State partners.
Inclusion of all demographic groups in
State agency programs and activities,
especially traditionally underserved
minority groups and persons with
disabilities, is enhanced through active
liaisons and partnerships between
multicultural groups and the State fish
and wildlife agencies. Minority and
disability group liaisons also can help
facilitate the early resolution of
complaints and other disputes; provide
experiential advice from persons with
disabilities on barrier removal; assist the
State agencies in providing services to
clients who have limited English
proficiency (LEP); provide input on
avoiding adverse impacts of
environmental decisions on minority and
low income communities; and assist State
agencies in increasing the racial/ethnic
and gender diversity of their workforces.
Most importantly, multicultural
partnerships help promote the
conservation mission of the State
agencies, and participation in recreational
programs, by involving larger numbers of
communities and demographic groups in
these efforts.
Fiscal year 2005 was a particularly active
and successful year for the civil rights
program. Thirty-nine complaints were
resolved, adjudicated or closed. Nine
systemic reviews of State agencies were
completed. Various training sessions,
technical assistance contacts and updates
on public civil rights were accomplished.
Active liaisons are being pursued with
several national minority and disability
groups. Key aspects of new Presidential
Executive Order 13347 regarding the
inclusion of persons with disabilities in
emergency preparedness plans of
federally funded buildings, was
communicated to State agencies. A public
access civil rights Web site was developed,
linked to the Fish and Wildlife Home page
under the “PACR” heading. The Service’s
Division of Federal Assistance was
instrumental in the formation of a new
interagency external civil rights
association, to promote the visibility and
best practices of external civil rights
government-wide.
Fiscal year 2005 also marked the
resumption of the very successful
Federally Assisted Civil Rights Award
program. State agencies are invited to
submit nominations for the Award, which
recognizes excellence and national
benchmarks in promoting equal access to
State agency programs for various
racial/ethnic groups, genders and persons
with disabilities. Awards are selected
based upon criteria linked to the Federal
civil rights requirements. Nominations for
the Award are received in the Division of
Federal Assistance until July 31. After
that, an independent panel selects the
winner, and that State agency is honored
at a special ceremony.
Multistate Conservation
Grant Program
Multistate Conservation Grants are
awarded cooperatively with the
International Association of Fish and
Wildlife Agencies (IAFWA). These grants
support products and solve high priority
problems affecting States on a regional or
national basis and allow for efficient use of
limited resources to address the national
conservation needs of States established
through the IAFWA. Examples below
highlight the broad array of projects
supported by Multistate Conservation
grants. To learn more about all projects
funded and the benefits derived from the
Multistate Conservation Grant Program,
please visit http://faims.fws.gov.
American Woodcock Conservation
Initiative: Atlantic Northern Forest Bird
Conservation Region
The American Woodcock Conservation
Initiative is a Federal-State-Private
Partnership envisioned to benefit
woodcock habitat on a landscape scale
through coordinated research, further
development of wildlife/forest best
management practices, implementation
guidelines, and technical education
assistance directed toward private
March 2006 25
landowners. This grant funds on-the-ground
private land management
practices, provide outreach to private
landowners, and monitor the woodcock
population in response to management
practices. This grant will help recover a
declining upland game bird species.
Data-Driven Strategies to
Recruit and Retain Anglers
Many States have spent millions to
implement electronic licensing systems
and more are considering such
investments. These systems have
generated a wealth of under-used data
that States could employ to better
understand sportsmen. Increasing their
knowledge of customers will help boost
angler numbers and participation rates
while improving communications between
States and the license holder. This grant
will allow the IAFWA and American
Sportfishing Association (ASA) to
complete their efforts to mine state
license databases to increase our
collective knowledge of license buyers and
trends.
This grant entails analyzing multiple
years of detailed license records. For each
State, 3 to 5 years of license sales records
will be combined into one file, allowing
ASA to track how frequently different
type of sportsmen (categorized by age,
neighborhood, ethnicity, etc. obtain
licenses and the type of licenses
preferred. Then, trends can be identified
regarding the type of person who is likely
to fish, where to find those people, and
characteristics of all types of licensed
anglers (frequent, infrequent, urban,
education, etc.). Software will be
employed to do this process. The results
of this grant will be to boost angler
numbers and participation levels,
maximize the value of license databases,
and improve communications with license
buyers and the public.
26 March 2006
American woodcock/USFWS
Explore Archery: A Process for Strategic
Placement of Archery Ranges
This project is to establish a process for
strategically developing archery ranges in
cooperation with State agency partners.
Starting with an inventory of archery
ranges, this process would use Geographic
Information Systems (GIS) techniques to
determine the areas of greatest need for
archery shooting opportunities. The
process would use census data, electronic
hunting license data and location
information for school archery programs,
clubs, private and public archery ranges,
and retail shops. Information on the
location of lands owned by schools and
public agencies (local, State, and Federal)
will be added as layers. The completed
maps will be used to identify potential
locations and partners for developing
public archery ranges in areas of greatest
need for beginner archers and
bowhunters.
An Aquatic Habitat Plan for the
Southeastern United States
This grant will develop an aquatic habitat
plan for the Southeast. The Southeast
Aquatic Habitat Plan (SAHP) will include
quantified and geographically referenced
targets for protection, restoration, or
enhancement of specific habitat types at a
landscape level. A key strategy in the
approach for developing the SAHP will be
to build on data, experience and efforts of
the Southeast Aquatic Resources
Partnership (SARP) in preparing
watershed management plans in four key
watersheds and integrating aquatic
planning outputs of the State
Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation
Strategies (CWCS). The SARP will also
begin the formation of aquatic joint
ventures to implement the SAHP and
sponsor Hazard Analysis Critical Control
Point (HACCP) training for State fish
hatchery and private aquaculture
personnel to help reduce problems caused
by aquatic nuisance species, a major
aquatic habitat issue in the Southeast. The
project addresses the development of a
regional aquatic habitat plan that directly
supports the National Fish Habitat
Initiative and that can be used as a model
for similar regional plans; initiation of
joint ventures to begin implementing the
regional plan; and facilitating the use of
best management practices for reducing
habitat impacts of aquatic nuisance
species. The project will be evaluated
through feedback from stakeholders,
monitoring to evaluate habitat targets and
criteria, numbers of aquatic joint ventures
initiated and their success in
implementing on-the-ground habitat
projects and through a follow-up
questionnaire to evaluate the HACCP)
training.
March 2006 27
28 March 2006
List of Projects Recommended by IAFWA for Funding Under the Multistate Conservation Grant Program in Fiscal Year 2006
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Contingent
Contingent
Contingent
Contingent
06-
003
06-
004
06-
005
06-
006
06-
007
06-
008
06-
009
06-
010
06-
011
06-
020
06-
024
06-
029
06-
032
06-
034
06-
039
06-
040
06-
052
06-
055
06-
056
06-
022
06-
025
06-
050
06-
057
Complete the Approval
Requirements for AQUI-S®,
Zero Withdrawal Anesthetic
Data-Driven Strategies to
Recruit and Retain Anglers
Multistate Conservation Grant
Program Coordination
Development and coordination,
IAFWA N.A. Conservation
Education Strategy
Clarifying Population Objectives
for Waterfowl Habitat and
Harvest Management
Training Opportunities for New
Trapper Education Program
Materials
Review of Conservation
Practices Used on Conservation
Reserve Program Land
(Conservation Security
Program) Evaluating the
Integration of Fish & Wildlife
Coordination of Farm Bill
Conservation Initiative: Atlantic
Northern Forest Bird
Conservation
American Woodcock
Conservation Wildlife
Management Initiative: Atlantic
Northern Forest Bird Institute
Conservation
Regional model for development
and implementation of a
comprehensive bird
Explore Archery: A process for
strategic placement of archery
ranges
Production of a "Guide to Fishing
and Boating with Children"
An Aquatic Habitat Plan for the
southeastern United States
Implementation of the National
CP33 Monitoring Program
Building the Interstate Capacity
of the Northern Bobwhite
Conservation Initiative
Project Manager and
Coordinator for the 2006
National Survey of Fishing,
Hunting
Sage-Grouse Interstate Working
Group Coordinator
Advancing Human Dimensions
Expertise among Fish and
Wildlife Agencies
International Instream Flow
Program Initiative
Fisheries Database Summit II,
Data to Support the National
Fish Habitat Initiative
Midwest Driftless Area Fish
Habitat Restoration Effort
Western Native Trout Initiative
$25,157.00
$160,452.00
$48,484.00
$41,800.00
$39,700.00
$37,500.00
$28,287.50
$109,000.00
$132,500.00
$173,608.00
$49,059.00
$24,000.00
$95,700.00
$94,600.00
$188,365.00
$50,344.00
$72,325.00
$27,500.00
Not
Approved
$28,287.50
$22,000.00
$159,483.00
$43,000.00
$235,950.00
$87,500.00
$200,080.50
$94,564.50
$106,321.00
$52,204.00
$72,325.00
$210,606.00
$82,000.00
$188,365.00
$235,955.00
$160,452.00
$302,064.00
$372,900.00
$93,500.00
$60,500.00
$79,400.00
$75,000.00
$113,150.00
$66,000.00
$517,826.00
$81,000.00
$109,000.00
$257,000.00$
707,850.00
$239,500.00
$1,168,589.00
$101,475.00
$287,247.00
$262,000.00
$95,700.00
$192,500.00
$565,095.00
$104,477.00
$50,344.00
$72,325.00
Not
Approved
$28,287.50
$124,500.00
$200,080.50
$94,564.50
$156,000.00
$97,900.00
$188,365.00
$52,204.00
$72,325.00
$22,000.00
$170,983.00
$235,950.00
$89,500.00
$210,606.00
$48,484.00
$41,800.00
$66,000.00
$60,500.00
$39,700.00
$37,500.00
$28,287.50
$22,000.00
$187,360.00
$38,000.00
$235,950.00
$62,500.00
$173,608.00
$101,475.00
$49,059.00
IAFWA
IAFWA
IAFWA
IAFWA
IAFWA
IAFWA
IAFWA
IAFWA
IAFWA
Wildlife Management
Institute
American Bird
Conservancy
Bowhunting
Preservation
Alliance
Future Fisherman
Foundation
Georgia Department
of Natural Resources
Mississippi State
University
Tennessee Wildlife
Resources Agency
USFWS
Western Assoc. of Fish
&Wildlife Agencies
Western Assoc. of Fish
&Wildlife Agencies
Instream Flow Council
(IFC)
American Fisheries
Society - Computer
User Section
Trout Unlimited -
Midwest Office
Western Assoc. of Fish
&Wildlife Agencies
Priority ID Project Title Submitter 2006 2006 2007 2007 2008 2008 Total
List Wildlife Sport Fish Wildlife Sport Fish Wildlife Sport Fish Grant
Restoration Restoration Restoration Restoration Restoration Restoration Request
Federal Assistance National
Training Program
The National Federal Assistance Training
Program, located at the National
Conservation Training Center in
Shepherdstown, WV, is part of the
Washington Office of Federal Assistance.
The training program develops and
delivers grants management training for
Federal Assistance staff and State fish
and wildlife agency grantees. These
training courses increase the knowledge,
skills and abilities of State and Federal
personnel who manage Federal assistance
grants. This training helps to ensure that
Federal assistance grant managers
consistently apply the laws, rules, and
policies that govern Federal assistance
program administration.
Since 1996, almost 1,500 State and Federal
assistance grant managers and grantees
have received training through courses
and workshops developed by, or offered in
cooperation with, the Federal Assistance
Training Program.
Training offered includes: Basic Grants
Management Course, Project Leaders
Course, Federal Assistance Audit
Training, Grant Writing Workshop,
Compliance Issues Workshop, and
GroupSystems Leader Training. Online
training modules covering an introduction
to Federal assistance grant programs and
processes and a familiarization to the
Federal Assistance Toolkit were also made
available in 2005. An advanced grant
management course covering fiscal,
programmatic, and compliance issues is
scheduled as a pilot course for October
2006.
Course descriptions, an on-line
application, training materials, and other
grant manager’s resources are available
on the Federal Assistance Training
Program web site at:
http://training.fws.gov/fedaid/.
For additional information contact Steve
Leggans at the National Conservation
Training Center at 304/876-7927.
FAIMS/FBMS
The Department of Interior’s planned
deployment of its new Financial and
Business Management System (FBMS),
which is being implemented to manage all
aspects of business operations, has been
delayed. Implementation in the Fish and
Wildlife Service is now scheduled for
October 2007. This also delays deployment
of the FBMS eGrants Plus grants
management module which will replace
the Federal Assistance Information
Management System (FAIMS).
FAIMS is used by the Service to manage
the complete life cycle of over half a billion
dollars in grants annually. In January
2006 FAIMS entered its eighth year of
operation. Since inception, FAIMS has
processed 12,315 Grant Agreements and
managed $5.6 billion in obligations and
$4.5 billion in payments.
Upgrades required to modernize the
FAIMS infrastructure are underway. The
server hardware, operating system
software, database software and
application software are being updated to
facilitate continued vendor support and
enhance system security. These upgrades
will require that the entire FAIMS system
be thoroughly retested before deployment
into production. The updated system will
also have to undergo a lengthy multistep
process which includes a thorough
security analysis in order to re-attain
Certification and Accreditation.
In 2006 emphasis will also be placed on:
1. Refinement of internal controls for
FAIMS maintenance, testing, and
operations.
2. Refinements to the FAIMS Land
module required to meet user needs for
easier entry of legacy data and
enhanced reporting capabilities.
3. Enhancements to various aspects of
system security.
4. Working with departmental staff
toward implementation of the FBMS
eGrants Plus and Real Property
modules.
March 2006 29
30 March 2006
Special Highlight Section
of Region 2
Southwest Region - Administration
The Southwest Region, Federal
Assistance Division annually administers
about $80 million authorized under 12
grant programs for eligible State fish and
wildlife agencies and tribes in Arizona,
New Mexico, Oklahoma and Texas.
Currently there are nine people working
in the Division located in Albuquerque,
New Mexico. Historically, the Division’s
focus has been the very successful Sport
Fish and Wildlife Restoration programs.
However, over the past several years new
grant programs have been authorized by
Congress that expand conservation and
management possibilities to nongame,
species-at-risk and endangered species,
boating access, private and tribal lands
and wetland protection. A web site
describing the grant programs and
highlighting individual programs and
projects of the Southwest Region partners
is at: http://www.fws.gov/southwest/fedaid/
Contact for more information:
505/248-7450
Chief, Federal Assistance Division:
Joyce Johnson
Wildlife Restoration, Landowner
Incentive Program, Tribal Wildlife and
Landowner Incentive Programs:
Penny Bartnicki
Sport Fish Restoration:
Harold Namminga
State Wildlife Grants:
Bob Anderson
Boating Access, Clean Vessel Act, Boating
Infrastructure Grants:
Susan MacMullin
Endangered Species, Coastal Wetlands,
Hunter and Aquatic Education:
Debra Jones
Land Acquisition:
Carlotta Ortiz
Fiscal and Audit Specialist:
Lorraine Manzanares
Administrative Support:
Beverly Lucero
Assistant Regional Director for
Migratory Birds And State Programs
Nancy Gloman
Oklahoma Anglers Benefiting From
Streams Management Program
The Oklahoma streams management
program is charged with enhancing
angling, water quality and fish habitat in
streams using applied management
practices. The rapidly evolving program
was created in 1998 with minimal
resources and the hiring of one biologist.
Today, a crew of two biologists, two
supporting technicians and a program
coordinator stationed at three Regional
Offices work together on improving
Oklahoma’s streams.
This new program is accomplished
cooperatively with funding from the Sport
Fish Restoration Program funds, anglers’
license dollars and lots of donations and
volunteers from the businesses and
stream anglers in local communities.
A key element of the program is
improving advocacy and stewardship of
stream ecosystems on a State and local
scale. Other goals include assessing
condition of in-stream habitat, sport fish
populations, and watershed health in key
Oklahoma streams. Tailrace fisheries also
receive significant attention from the
program.
Almost all successful endeavors start with
a solid foundation of knowledge. The
Oklahoma Department of Wildlife
Conservation’s streams program
personnel have to understand a broad
range of disciplines and stay abreast of
current stream research. Extensive
formal training in applied streams
management is ongoing for all stream
management staff so program goals can
be effectively accomplished.
One ongoing successful project activity is
the Lower Mountain Fork River instream
habitat enhancement project. This reach
of stream is a cold water tailwater race
now supporting a year-round trout
fishery.
A variety of structures were used to
improve habitat quality and availability.
Each habitat enhancement method added
a unique set of habitat and hydraulic
characteristics to the river. Check dams
deepened shallow reaches upstream by
impounding water and by created plunge
pools downstream. Useable area
increased longitudinally while fish
movement potential was maintained.
Weirs increased habitat quality, diversity
and availability across the channel cross-section.
Log and rock vanes stabilized
March 2006 31
Special Highlight Section of Region 2
laterally eroding banks, restored natural
channel geometry and increased trout
habitat.
Decreased sediment and creation of small
scour holes associated with the end of
vanes provided thermal and predatory
refuges for trout. Cross vanes reduced
stream bank erosion and retained proper
channel width-to-depth ratios regardless
of discharge by continuously placing the
thalweg in the channel center. Deepened
stream reaches created by these
structures significantly increased fish
carrying capacity and migration potential.
Boulder clusters offer hydraulic relief
from water current and strategic feeding
zones for fish.
Restored reach
32 March 2006
Eroded bank before restoration
River restoration above. Rock vanes below.
Special Highlight Section of Region 2
Oklahoma’s Hackberry Flat Wetlands
Restored Through Partnerships and
Wildlife Restoration Funds
Hackberry Flat Wildlife Management
Area, located in Southwest Oklahoma, is
the State’s largest depressional wetland.
Throughout most of the 20th century, the
area was not an oasis for migrating birds.
The area was drained in the early part of
the century when a massive, four-mile
long drainage ditch was created. However,
the low spots still held water when it
rained, which made farming very difficult
on Hackberry Flat.
A massive restoration effort, which began
in 1993, involved various corporations,
businesses, and the City of Frederick in a
partnership that also included State and
Federal agencies and nonprofit
conservation organizations. The Oklahoma
Department of Wildlife Conservation
constructed nearly 40 miles of levees and
ditches to form a honeycomb of large
ponds, which allows managed flooding of
the wetlands.
Hackberry Flat now encompasses more
than 7,000 acres of prime migratory bird
habitat. The area was featured in a recent
issue of Field and Stream magazine as
one of the top 25 public land hot spots in
the U.S. and called the area a “magnet for
waterfowl.”
Hackberry Flat –
Return of the Wetlands
It was once just a headache for local
farmers - an obstacle that stood in the way
of spring planting and fall harvesting.
Local lore says the flood-prone soils of
Hackberry Flat could swallow up a tractor
in just a heavy fog.
How times change. Today the Hackberry
Flat Wildlife Management Area provides
an important feeding and resting point for
thousands of prairie birds and diverse
recreation opportunities for people
craving outdoor experiences. Located in
southwest Oklahoma near Frederick, the
legendary wetland has been restored
through the generous help of many
partners, including the Wildlife
March 2006 33
Hackberry Flat wetlands aerial view.
Hackberry Flat wetlands provide an important resting and feeding area.
Special Highlight Section of Region 2
Restoration Program and the Oklahoma
Department of Wildlife Conservation.
Yesterday
The history of the area shows how things
often come full circle. When pioneers
arrived on the plains of southwest
Oklahoma a century ago, they
encountered clouds of waterfowl so thick
that they reportedly darkened the skies
over Frederick. The area’s abundant
wildlife even earned the attention of
President Theodore Roosevelt, who
visited and hunted near Hackberry Flat.
Along with wildlife, pioneers also found
very fertile soils in the area that became
known as Hackberry Flat. However,
farming the flood-prone landscape proved
exceedingly difficult.
In the early 1900s, locals drained the area
by constructing a massive ditch, some 4
miles long, using hand shovels, mule
teams and later a steam shovel. For the
next two generations area residents
maintained the area as farmland instead
of the wetland it had been for so many
years.
Over the past century, biologists have
learned that wetlands are not only
extremely beneficial to wildlife, they also
serve as natural environmental purifiers.
Unfortunately, Oklahoma has lost two-thirds
of its wetlands to agricultural,
industrial and residential development.
The restoration of Hackberry Flat
represents a significant effort to reclaim
lost ground, while reclaiming an important
part of our natural heritage.
It took a Herculean effort to drain the
massive wetland and its restoration
wouldn’t happen overnight. The
restoration took three components: the
vision to see a wetland that had not
functioned in nearly 90 years; the
cooperation of a wide and varied spectrum
of partners; and lastly, many years of hard
work.
In 1993, the Oklahoma Department of
Wildlife Conservation began purchasing
the property, totaling 7,120 acres, from 30
willing sellers. With the help of its many
partners, the Department built nearly
40 miles of levees and ditches to form a
honeycomb of wetland units that allow
managers to flood any part of the area
according to the needs of migrating birds.
A 17-mile aqueduct connecting Hackberry
Flat to Tom Steed Reservoir was a critical
component in the process. The pipeline
assures a dependable water supply even
during dry years. More than 9 miles of
water distribution canals and 92 different
water control structures give managers a
wide variety of management options.
It did not take long for the restoration
project to bear fruit either.Within the
first year shorebirds that had not nested
in southwest Oklahoma in decades were
nesting on the restored wetland.
Today
At any time of the year, whether during
the muggy heat of summer or the bitter
cold of winter one can find visitors at
Hackberry Flat, both avian and human.
It is a cyclical ebb and flow. In the fall and
winter months hunters chase their winged
quarry across the Flat. In the spring and
summer months birdwatchers travel from
miles around to see an incredible diversity
of birds.
It is no longer a secret that the area can
offer fantastic waterfowl hunting.
Hundreds of thousands of mallards, teal,
Canada geese, sandhill cranes and other
waterfowl descend on Hackberry every
fall. The area also offers some of the best
dove hunting in Oklahoma. On a good day,
you will see thousands of doves.
In less than a decade, Hackberry Flat has
become a premier destination for birders.
More than 175 species have been
identified during surveys, with such rare
and uncommon species as the black-necked
stilt, long-billed curlew and white-faced
ibis being seen, including many that
34 March 2006
Special Highlight Section of Region 2
stay to nest and raise their young. The
sheer numbers of birds and the relatively
easy access make this area stand out as
one of the best birdwatching locations in
the state.
Tomorrow
Ducks Unlimited described Hackberry
Flat as one of the most significant wetland
restoration projects in North America.
However, Oklahoma is not finished with
the area’s transformation. In the coming
years the area will face many more
challenges, many of which will be
addressed using Wildlife Restoration
Program funds.
In a matter of months construction will
begin on a one-of-kind Hackberry Flat
Visitor Center. The 4,600 square foot
facility will serve as a jumping-off point
for visitors to the area. Included in the
interpretive displays will be information
on the area’s history, species of special
interest and maps to help newcomers
navigate the area. The center will also
provide meeting spaces for students and a
workspace for on-site research. An
existing boardwalk will be connected via a
trail to the visitor center that will usher
visitors into the heart of the wetland.
Along with the new center, additional
observation towers and viewing platforms
are in the development stages. These
facilities, to be funded in part with Wildlife
Restoration Program funds, will provide
even more access for visitors to enjoy the
area’s fantastic bird life.
Hackberry Flat Wildlife Management
Area is also becoming a major factor in
the in a new and innovative program––the
Great Plains Trail of Oklahoma. The
highway-based wildlife viewing trail will
highlight the wide variety of natural
beauty in western Oklahoma. Hackberry
Flat will be a major destination for trail
tourists, while both raising the awareness
about the state’s outdoor heritage and
attracting visitors from across the nation
to southwest Oklahoma communities.
Biologists are also keeping their eyes on
the future. Managers are working to
increase the native plant food plots on the
area, as well as improve hunter
opportunity on the area. A large reservoir
has been completed on the northwest
corner of the area. The reservoir will
serve a trio of purposes. First, it will
provide flood control and help to protect
the areas many dikes and water control
structures. Second, it will provide a refuge
and deep-water habitat for migrating
waterfowl. And lastly, it will allow
managers to distribute water more evenly
and more precisely throughout the winter
months to provide habitat for waterfowl.
Whatever the future holds for Hackberry
Flat Wildlife Management Area, one thing
is certain, future success will depend upon
the cooperation of dedicated partners. The
restoration effort of this wetland jewel
was not carried solely on the back of one
agency or organization and likewise its
future will not rest on any one individual.
The area will reach its fullest and
brightest potential when committed
conservationists join together to afford
future generations a glimpse of the beauty
of Oklahoma’s outdoor heritage.
Oklahoma Brings Fishing
Close to Home
The Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration
Program is providing Federal funding to
provide Oklahoma metropolitan residents
quality fishing within a neighborhood-based
Close-to-Home Fishing Program by
focusing on angler desires, use and
benefits, and by implementing
management techniques on urban ponds.
The Oklahoma Department of Wildlife
Conservation and the Oklahoma City
Parks & Recreation Department worked
cooperatively for many years on fisheries
management in the City’s three water
supply reservoirs. During the Wildlife
Department Fisheries Division’s strategic
planning process “Fisheries Future 2000”,
urban fisheries were identified as a
priority program. In 2002, the Close-to-
Home Fishing Program formalized an
agreement between the Wildlife
Department and Oklahoma City to put
greater emphasis on intensive
management of park ponds and
homeowners’ association lakes. Municipal
fisheries staff time is documented and
used as in-kind match for Sport Fish
Restoration funds to expand management
programs.
Using Sport Fish Restoration Program
funds, the Oklahoma Department of
Wildlife Conservation and Oklahoma City
have stocked fish into neighborhood ponds
and lakes, improved fishing access and
opportunities, as well as improved fish
habitat through installation of pond
aeration systems.
Under cooperative fisheries management
agreements between Oklahoma
municipalities and the Wildlife
Department, the designated bodies of
water have special fishing regulations
designed to improve and expand “Close to
Home” fishing opportunities in
metropolitan areas.
Participating municipalities are Oklahoma
City, Del City, Yukon, Harrah, Edmond,
Lawton, Mustang and Norman.
March 2006 35
Special Highlight Section of Region 2
Apache Trout Restoration and
Recovery in Arizona Expedited with
Sport Fish Restoration Funds
The Apache trout is one of two native
trout in Arizona. Sport Fish Restoration
financing has been used to enhance and
improve the distribution and restoration
of Apache trout within its native range in
eastern Arizona.
Apache trout is a bit unusual in that it is
both a sport fish and a federally listed
threatened species. Sport fishing, under
the management of the Arizona Game and
Fish Department and the White Mountain
Apache Tribe is possible under an
Endangered Species 4d rule that allows
for managed fishing and, where
appropriate, regulated harvest.
A wide range of partners are currently
involved in an effort to restore the Apache
trout, and are striving to achieve what is
necessary to remove the threats to the
species and remove it from the list of
threatened and endangered species. The
partnership includes the US Fish and
Wildlife Service, the US Forest Service,
the White Mountain Apache Tribe, Trout
Unlimited, the Federation of Flyfishers,
and many others. Sport Fish Restoration
funds are integrated into a broad
financing approach that uses the
strengths that many of partners bring to
the table.
Much of the effort to restore Apache trout
distribution focuses on headwater streams
in the Salt River and Little Colorado
River watersheds of eastern Arizona.
These small streams present the
opportunity to ameliorate threats to the
species, and set it on course to recovery.
A principle threat to the species is the
potential for hybridization with other
nonnative trout, or even competition and
predation from nonnative trout.
Nonnative trout were introduced widely
throughout northern Arizona over the last
century as food fish and for recreation.
Restoration efforts focus on the creation
of isolating factors (barriers) that ensure
that Apache trout populations can persist
without threats of hybridizing with
rainbow trout or competition with brown
trout or brook trout. The basic strategy
includes the creation of barriers (or using
natural ones) that prevents the mixing of
native Apache trout populations with
nonnative trouts. In some instances, fish
must be removed from stream reaches
above these barriers to ensure that pure
Apache trout populations can be
established or conserved. If fish must be
removed, the identified course of action is
renovation with antimycin.
Apache trout are restocked when
necessary to establish new populations.
Sport Fish Restoration has provided a
keystone for financing these kinds of
projects by providing the professional
personnel needed to get the job done. The
Department also uses Arizona Heritage
Funds, Arizona Wildlife Conservation
Funds, and partner funds (such as
Embrace-a-Stream grants) administered
through Trout Unlimited.
Restoration is a key component of
Arizona’s approach to Apache trout
management, but it is not the only one.
The National Fish Hatchery System is a
key partner in the efforts to restore
Apache trout, and to produce Apache
trout for recreational fishery resources.
Both the Arizona Game and Fish
Department and the White Mountain
Apache tribe provide fishing opportunities
for this very unusual fi