2007 Administrative Guidelines for State Wildlife Grants

STEVEN A. McCALEB
103 ALVERADO DRIVE
LONG BEACH, MISSISSIPPI 39560
PHONE & FAX: (228)-868-8428

E-MAIL: mccaleb4thdist@aol.com

WEB SITE: www.mississippiwebsite.com

This still doesn't stop the Secretary of State from providing grant money to WRANPS through the Mississippi Tidelands Trust Funds and the Mississippi Department of Marine Resources.

Mr. McCaleb:

Eligibility guidelines may be found at the following website: http://federalaid.fws.gov/swg/2007%20SWG%20Guidelines.pdf

The work generally performed by wildlife rehabilitation centers is not listed as a recommended action or activity in Mississippi's Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy. Therefore I would not expect such centers to be eligible for funding under the State Wildlife Grants program.

NO WATER AT WRANPS, SO NO TIDAL SURGE, THIS IS AN OVERHEAD PROJECTION OF WRANPS

On November 5, 2001, President Bush signed the Department of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2002, which created the State Wildlife Grants (SWG) program. As indicated within this legislation, these grants were established, “…for the development and implementation of programs for the benefit of wildlife and their habitat, including species that are not hunted or fished…” Since its creation, the SWG program has received annual Congressional appropriations that are administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). The Service apportions these funds, using a legislated formula based on human population and geographic area, to fish and wildlife agencies within the States, Territories, and the District of Columbia (States).

In addition to complying with 43 CFR Part 12, 2 CFR 225, OMB Circulars (A-87, A-102, and A-133), the National Environmental Policy Act, Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and other applicable federal laws and regulations, Congress stipulated that each State fish and wildlife agency that wished to participate in the SWG program must develop a Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy (Strategy) by October 1, 2005. Each Strategy was required to address eight elements listed in Section VII.

Once completed, the Strategies were submitted to the National Advisory Acceptance Team (NAAT) through the Service’s Regional offices. The NAAT was composed of 13 wildlife professionals representing the Service and the regional associations of State fish and wildlife agencies. The NAAT reviewed each Strategy to determine if it satisfactorily addressed each of the eight required elements. Its findings and recommendations were presented to the Service's Director who decided whether a Strategy was approved, conditionally approved, or disapproved.

Following the Strategy review and approval process, State fish and wildlife agencies and Service grant administrators were faced with new challenges related to Strategy implementation. Some of these included the variable funding appropriated to SWG, Congressional expectation that more SWG funding be spent on implementation grants, emerging conservation issues, the participation of new partners, and changes to Federal Assistance procedures. To ease this transition and promote consistency, the SWG Guidance Working Group, composed of wildlife professionals from the Service and several State fish and wildlife agencies, was formed to update the guidelines used to administer the SWG program.

This document provides guidance on how to implement and consistently administer the SWG program and accomplish the purposes intended by Congress. This guidance replaces the original guidelines issued in 2002.

For the purposes of this guidance, education is defined as actions or efforts meant to achieve learning objectives or increase the public’s knowledge or understanding of wildlife or wildlife conservation through instruction or distribution of materials. It also includes efforts to provide general information in response to inquiries from the public or partners about conservation programs, actions, or activities.

For the purposes of this guidance document, law enforcement is defined as any effort meant to compel the observance of laws or regulations.

To carry out actions required by a federal or state agency through law, regulation or statute to compensate for adverse impacts to natural resources caused by a Federal, State, or private entity.

Any agency, organization, or entity desiring to participate in the planning or implementation of a State’s Strategy. Partners can include, but are not limited to, Federal agencies, State agencies, local agencies, Indian Tribes, nonprofit organizations, academic institutions, industry groups, and private individuals.

For the purpose of this guidance, the word State is used as defined in 43 CFR 12.43 which includes the 50 United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands, and American Samoa.

Each State determined these species in the context of developing its Strategy. These species must be fauna, not flora, and may include terrestrial, aquatic, marine, and invertebrate species. A State’s list of species of greatest conservation need may include currently listed Federal and State endangered or threatened species and other species of concern. The composition of this list is expected to change over time as the status and conservation needs of species change within a State.

States have adopted a variety of terms to refer to a Strategy. The most common of these are: State Wildlife Action Plan; Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Plan; Wildlife Conservation Plan, and Wildlife Conservation Strategy.

SWG money that has been apportioned to a State but not obligated to a specific project through an approved grant. SWG monies are available for obligation for two years ending September 30 of the second Federal fiscal year after they were apportioned.

Any species of wild, free-ranging fauna, including terrestrial, aquatic, marine, and invertebrate species. This term also includes fauna in captive-breeding programs intended for reintroduction or augmentation of extirpated or depleted populations of indigenous species within suitable habitat.

Outdoor leisure activities associated with wildlife including, but not limited to, hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography.

This guidance is effective on January 1, 2007 and replaces the SWG guidance issued in 2002.

On January 1, 2007, any existing unobligated funds will be administered under this new guidance. Money obligated to a grant before January 1, 2007, will be administered under the 2002 guidance until the grant is closed.

Grants awarded in the Federal Assistance Information Management System (FAIMS) before January 1, 2007 may be extended and increased in value if the grant conforms to the new guidelines. If there is no change to the scope of work, a grant period may be extended under the 2002 guidance. However, if the grant does not conform to the new guidelines, then no additional money may be obligated on or after January 1, 2007. Similarly, changes may not be made to the scope of an existing grant (i.e., with an effective approval date prior to January 1, 2007) unless the grant conforms to the new guidelines. Starting January 1, 2007, new grants will be awarded and administered under the new guidelines.

Funds that are deobligated from an existing grant are “recoveries” and may be reobligated in another grant if their two-year period of availability has not passed (see Section XI, D and E). Otherwise, the funds will be reverted and added to the next year’s program for apportionments to all states. When funds are reobligated on or after January 1, 2007, the resulting grant will be administered under the new guidance.

Funds apportioned for Fiscal Year 2007 will be administered under the new guidance, even if those funds are apportioned before January 1, 2007.

The Department of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2002 (PL 107-63), first authorized the SWG program.

The SWG program is funded by annual Congressional appropriations that are administered by the Service.

Grants may only be awarded to the fish and wildlife agency in each of the 50 States, District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S.

Virgin Islands (States) once the State’s Strategy has been approved by the Service’s Director. Once its Strategy has been approved, each State fish and wildlife agency may receive SWG funds through approved grants for activities compatible with both the following guidelines and the State agency’s authority under State law.

The FY 2002 State Wildlife Grants legislation appropriated $5 million for a competitive grant program specifically for Federally recognized Indian Tribes. Between FY 2003 and FY2006, this program received an annual average annual appropriation of $5.7 million. For Tribal Wildlife Grant information contact:

B. Effects of State Wildlife Grants legislation on other Federal Assistance Programs

The legislative language that established SWG did not result in changes to any existing Federal Assistance program.

In addition to complying with 43 CFR Part 12, OMB Circulars (A-87, A-102, and A-133), the National Environmental Policy Act, Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and other applicable Federal laws and regulations, Congress stipulated that each State fish and wildlife agency that wished to participate in the SWG program have an approved (Strategy). These documents were required to include information on:

1. the distribution and abundance of species of wildlife, including low and declining populations as each State fish and wildlife agency deemed appropriate, that are indicative of the diversity and health of wildlife of the State; (In subsequent discussions, these species were referred to as Species of Greatest Conservation Need or SGCN.)

2. the location and relative condition of key habitats and community types essential to the conservation of each State’s SGCN;

3. the problems which may adversely affect SGCN or their habitats, and priority research and surveys needed to identify factors which may assist in restoration and improved conservation of SGCN and their habitats;

4. the actions necessary to conserve SGCN and their habitats and establishes priorities for implementing such conservation actions;

5. the provisions for periodic monitoring of SGCN and their habitats, for monitoring the effectiveness of conservation actions, and for adapting conservation actions as appropriate to respond to new information or changing conditions;

6. each State’s provisions to review its Strategy at intervals not to exceed ten years;

7. each State’s provisions for coordination during the development, implementation, review, and revision of its Strategy with Federal, State, and local agencies and Indian

Tribes that manage significant areas of land or water within the State, or administer programs that significantly affect the conservation of species or their habitats; and

8. each State’s provisions to provide the necessary public participation in the development, revision, and implementation of its Strategy.

If a State’s Strategy is conditionally approved, then the State will have six months, after receipt of the Service Director’s letter of notification, to resubmit a revised Strategy for approval. During those six months and while the revised Strategy is being reviewed by the Service, the State is eligible to receive SWG funds, and may continue to obligate funds through new grant actions. If the State fails to submit a revised Strategy after six months, or if the revised Strategy fails to satisfy one or more of the required elements, that Strategy will be disapproved. The deadline for resubmission of a revised Strategy may be extended at the Service Director’s discretion.

All strategies were submitted by October 2005 and were either approved or conditionally approved. If a State's Strategy is conditionally approved and the State fails to submit a revised Strategy after six months, or if the revised Strategy fails to satisfy one or more of the required elements, that Strategy will be disapproved. If a State's Strategy is disapproved, the State is no longer eligible to receive newly apportioned SWG funds and will not be allowed to obligate additional funds from available apportionments. Should the State elect to submit a revised Strategy in the future, it may do so but, until a Strategy is approved, the State will not be eligible to receive any new apportionments from the program or obligate funds from available apportionments.

Active grants that were approved before the Strategy was disapproved will continue to be funded through their current end date. However, States will not be allowed to extend a grant or change objectives within an active grant until the State’s Strategy has been approved.

States wishing to participate in the SWG program must comply with 43 CFR Part 12, 2 CFR 225, OMB Circulars (A-87, A-102, and A-133), the National Environmental Policy Act, Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and other applicable Federal laws, regulations, and policies.

As indicated within the FY2006 SWG apportionments cover letter from the Service’s Director to the Directors of the State wildlife management agencies, “Congress intends that (State Wildlife Grants) should be used to address the species and their habitats identified in State Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Plans/Strategies.” Unless otherwise noted, SWG funds must be used to address conservation needs, such as research, surveys, species and habitat management, and monitoring, identified within a State’s Strategy. SWG monies may also be used to update, revise, or modify a State’s Strategy. Activities that meet these criteria and are consistent with current program guidance are eligible for funding. Consistent with the Department of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2002, and subsequent related legislation, priority for use of these funds should be placed on those

species of greatest conservation need, taking into consideration the relative level of funding available for the conservation of those species.

When submitting a SWG grant application, a State must clearly indicate how the proposed grant objectives address one or more of the conservation needs identified within its Strategy. Work on species, habitats, or conservation issues not identified within a State’s Strategy may be allowed as indicated within Section XH.

Per House Report 109-080, written to accompany HR 2361 for FY06 appropriations, "Funds made available under this account should be added to revenues from existing State sources and not serve as a substitute for revenues from such sources.”

State Wildlife Grant money may be used to fund two distinct types of activities: planning and implementation.

For the purposes of this program, three types of activities qualify as planning actions and are eligible for the planning match (75% Federal/25% State). These include:

1. Efforts to update, modify, or revise a State’s Strategy. This category of planning activity includes the writing, printing, production, and distribution of either the complete Strategy or portions of the Strategy such as online documents, excerpts, or summary publications.

2. Efforts to collect public opinion information or input, via surveys, polling, public meetings, focus groups, or other methodologies, that will be used to guide State efforts to update, modify, or revise its Strategy.

3. Processes, such as coordination meetings that build or strengthen collaboration between the State and partners (Federal, State, Tribal, industry, private, and others) as they work to update, modify, or revise their Strategy.

All other activities eligible for funding under the State Wildlife Grants program, such as species monitoring, habitat evaluations, evaluating the effectiveness of conservation actions, program administration, and developing and maintaining systems to record, store, or disseminate information will be considered to be implementation efforts and will receive a maximum reimbursement of 50 percent of total project costs when described in an approved grant document.

An individual grant proposal may contain both planning and implementation activities. In these cases, the State, within its grant proposal, must estimate the proportion of time and/or costs allocated to planning activities and implementation activities. In order to be eligible for the appropriate reimbursement percentage, the State must utilize a cost accounting system that is capable of accounting for costs incurred for each type of activity (i.e., planning versus implementation) separately.

Under certain conditions, SWG money may be used to fund education and law enforcement activities. In order for an education or law enforcement objective to be eligible for SWG funding, these activities must constitute a minor portion of a grant’s project, must be critical to the project’s success, and must specifically address a threat or issue identified within the State’s Strategy. “Minor” is considered to be no more than 10 percent of a project’s cost. The following are examples of grant projects that include eligible education and law enforcement activities.

A State’s Strategy indicates a population of timber rattlesnake, on a State conservation area, has declined dramatically due to habitat loss and degradation. The Strategy also indicates this population is impacted by members of the public who routinely kill the snakes they encounter. Biologists have determined that most snakes are killed during the spring and fall when the reptiles congregate in and around dens. The grant project is primarily designed to conserve this species by improving degraded habitat through use of controlled burns on bluff prairies. However, for this effort to be effective, a limited amount of project funds will be used to develop and post signs which notify the public that killing this species within the conservation area is illegal, develop educational materials to explain the purpose of the refuge, and patrol the area to enforce protections for this species, especially during spring and fall.

A State’s Strategy has identified improper grazing, invasive vegetation, and disturbed fire regimes as the primary causes for loss and degradation of greater sage grouse habitat. In this State, most of the remaining habitat occurs on private land. As described within the Strategy, this grant project will establish local working groups to protect existing habitat and enhance fragmented and degraded habitat by purchasing conservation easements and fee title acquisition from willing landowners, and helping landowners develop management plans for farming and ranching operations that will be consistent with the Strategy. This grant will also fund a biologist to coordinate the working groups’ efforts. To generate interest and participation in this program, an education component is needed up front to inform private landowners of the goals of the working groups, the value of healthy ecosystems, and the economic benefits of cooperative, proactive, efforts to conserve this species. To implement this educational program, the State fish and wildlife agency will use a small portion (approximately 5%) of the grant funds to contract the Farm Bureau to conduct workshops and demonstration tours to provide private landowners an overview of the working groups’ potential efforts and the benefits those efforts would provide.

SWG money may not be used to fund projects that will specifically initiate, encourage, or enhance wildlife-associated recreation.

SWG money may not be used to pay for the establishment, publication and dissemination of regulations that a State issues pertaining to the protection and utilization of fish and wildlife resources. This includes laws, orders, seasonal regulations, bag limits, creel limits, license fees, etc. This does not prohibit the scientific collection of information needed to support management recommendations

SWG money may be used to address nuisance wildlife or situations involving damage caused by wildlife only if their emphasis is the conservation of SGCN and/or their habitats as indicated within a State’s Strategy.

F. Environmental Review, Habitat Evaluation, Permit Review (Section 404), and Similar Functions

SWG money may be used to conduct environmental reviews, habitat evaluations, permit reviews related to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and similar functions necessary to protect wildlife habitat if the emphasis is the conservation of SGCN and their habitats as indicated within a State’s Strategy.

G. Pre-Award Cost Reimbursement for Activities that took place prior to Federal Assistance Approval of the Effective Start Date for a SWG Grant.

Only expenses incurred and budgeted during the grant period are reimbursable; the grant period begins with the effective date established at the time the grant is approved and defined in the Federal Assistance Manual (FAM 522 FW 25). However, a State may request reimbursement for pre-award costs for certain necessary expenses detailed in the grant. Pre-award costs are those incurred prior to the effective date of the award where such costs are necessary to comply with the proposed delivery schedule or period of performance. Such costs are allowable only if the grant is awarded and only to the extent that they would have been allowable if incurred after the date of the award and only with the written approval of the awarding agency (OMB Circular A-87, 2 CFR 225).

H. Use of SWG Funds to Address Critical Priority Issues not Identified Within a Strategy.

Congress intends the Strategies to be adaptive to new information or circumstances. As such, SWG funds may be used to respond to emerging or crisis situations that are not represented within a Strategy. However, within the grant application or amendment, the State must fully describe the emerging or crisis situation and indicate if funds must be reallocated from efforts already underway, identify the species or habitats that will benefit from the proposed action, and commit to monitoring the effectiveness of the proposed conservation action so future management activities can be appropriately adapted. Finally, the state must commit to incorporating this new priority within the next version of its Strategy, if it remains an emerging or critical issue.

Grant applications or amendments that include issues not identified within a Strategy must be reviewed by the Assistant Regional Director (ARD) for Migratory Birds and State Programs

for approval. If the ARD finds that the project is not eligible, the decision may be appealed to the Regional Director.

A small illegally introduced population of bullfrogs is discovered in a desert watershed. This watershed is one of two known habitats used by a rare endemic frog which is identified as a SGCN within the State’s Strategy. The bullfrogs have been observed eating both the native frog and the native frog’s prey base. Unless immediate action is taken, biologists believe the native frog could be extirpated from this watershed within a few years. Some fear this situation, if left unaddressed, could cause the native frog to be protected under the Federal Endangered Species Act, which would have a dramatic impact on the human communities within the two habitat areas. Given the limited number of bullfrogs that have been observed, biologists believe an immediate eradication effort could be successful in eliminating this threat. However, success will depend on implementing the project before the bullfrogs breed and a handful of individuals increases to a population of thousands.

SWG monies may not be used for the purpose of mitigating fish or wildlife habitat losses, where the obligation to mitigate is incurred by another Federal agency, State agency, or private entity. Nor may the value of property purchased with SWG monies be used for similar purposes.

The Federal share of planning grants (see IX above) shall not exceed 75 percent of the total cost, and the Federal share of implementation grants (see IX above) shall not exceed 50 percent of the total cost. The Insular Areas of the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands are waived from matching requirements for this program (based on 48 U.S.C.A. 1469a. (d)).

Nonfederal contributions may consist of cash and allowable in-kind contributions as defined in 43 CFR Part 12.64.

The SWG program is funded with annual Congressional appropriations and is subject to annual fluctuations or cessation of program funding. Therefore, the SWG program should not be considered a permanent source of Federal funds.

SWG funds must be obligated within two years ending September 30 of the second Federal fiscal year after which they were apportioned or the remaining unobligated dollars revert to the Service. Reverted unobligated funds lose their original fiscal year identity and are added to the next year’s SWG appropriation for apportionment to all the States.

If SWG funds are obligated through an approved grant but are not expended at the time the grant is closed, the unexpended balance is deobligated from the grant and is “recovered” by the State. If recovered funds are deobligated during the two-year period of availability, the State may request to reobligate them toward an existing or new grant, subject to conditions set in Section III above. If recovered funds are reobligated in this manner, they will be subject to all the terms and requirements of the SWG program. SWG funds recovered after their period of availability will revert to the Service, lose their original fiscal year identity, and will be added to the next year’s SWG appropriation for apportionment to all the States.

The Division of Federal Assistance does not have authority to invest SWG funds. Therefore the SWG program will not accrue interest.

States must comply with the requirements in OMB Circular A-133 and 43 CFR Parts 12.66 and 12.82. The audit of the States’ SWG programs by the Service will be included in the 5-year Federal Assistance program audits beginning in FY2007.

For guidance related to Program Income, please refer to 43 CFR 12.65 and Director Dale Hall’s memorandum to the Service Directorate (Dec. 12, 2005) which describes grant requirements and program income guidance for third party commitments under the State Wildlife Grants Program and the Landowner Incentive Program.

For guidance related to Third Party Commitments, please refer 43 CFR 12.64 and Director Dale Hall’s memorandum to the Service Directorate (Dec. 12, 2005) which describes grant requirements and program income guidance for third party commitments under the State Wildlife Grants Program and the Landowner Incentive Program.

States will submit grant documents to the appropriate U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regional office, where regional office staff will review and administer them. Regional offices are located at:

Region 1: (serving Hawaii, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, and the Pacific Territories)

Region 3: (serving Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, and Wisconsin)

Region 4: (serving Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.)

Region 5: (serving Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington D.C., and West Virginia)

Region 6 (serving Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming):

1. Application for Federal Assistance (Form SF-424, Form SF-424 a-d as necessary);

• the geographic location of the project and areas to be served by the proposed project,

• how a proposed activity addresses a conservation need identified within the State’s Strategy, and

As applicable, at the time of the grant application, applicants may also be asked to provide:

• the relationship between a project and other work planned, anticipated, or underway under Federal Assistance; and

• information that clarifies discrepancies, inconsistencies, or unclear terms

The format, level of detail, and other aspects of completed grant documents shall incorporate guidance found within the Federal Assistance Manual. Finally, applicants must provide certifications in compliance with 43 CFR 12(E) (Buy American Requirements for Assistance Programs), 43 CFR 18, 43 CFR 42 (Administration and Audit Requirements and Cost Principals for Assistance Programs), and 43 CFR 43 (Governmentwide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace).

In accepting Federal funds, States and other grantees must comply with all applicable Federal laws, regulations, and policies. The Division of Federal Assistance will handle compliance with the same methods utilized for the Wildlife Restoration and Sport Fish Restoration programs. The regional office staff will work with each State to ensure projects meet the requirements in a consistent way.

As with other federal grant programs in the Department of the Interior, 43 CFR Part 12 provides general grant guidance and OMB Circular A-87 provides guidance on cost principles.

The following list of legislative documents represents actions from the program’s authorization through the 109th Congress.