|

Background Information
The history of wildlife management in this country has been
primarily focused on game management. A snapshot of wildlife legislation of
the twentieth century illustrates this.
The Pittman-Robertson Act of 1937 (Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act)
was designed to support selection, restoration, rehabilitation and improvement
of wildlife habitat, research and information distribution. A 1970 amendment
added hunter training programs and maintenance and support of public target
ranges. Because the funding is derived from excise taxes on the sale of
sporting arms, hand guns, ammunition, and archery equipment, the focus on game
species seemed logical.
The Dingell-Johnston Act of 1950 (Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act)
intended a similar program as Pittman-Robertson for the management,
conservation, and restoration of fishery resources. Similarly, funding is
derived from the sale of fishing gear. An amendment adopted in 1990 hinted at
a shift in the our understanding of the needs of wildlife and fish with the
call for wetlands conservation, as habitat protection.
Legislation supporting non-game species, although in existence, has been
hampered by smaller funding sources and, more importantly by a lack of
understanding as to what a non-game species is. We have legislation protecting
migratory birds, some of which are game species and some not. We have
legislation protecting rare and endangered species but what about those
species which are not covered by the Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson
Acts which are not endangered?
In 1980, the Forsythe-Chaffee Act (Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act) was
passed. This act called for comprehensive wildlife management plans, including
non-game species. This was a step in the right direction as it supported
integrating efforts to keep the common species common, in addition to managing
for game and conservation of rare species. Unfortunately, although the
legislation was passed, the funding was never forthcoming.
Fast
forward to the 1990’s. A coalition of state management agencies, known as
Teaming With Wildlife (www.teaming.com) , private commercial ventures and
individuals amasses bipartisan support for the Conservation and Reinvestment
Act (CARA). This act would have guaranteed a long term funding source (15
years) to support efforts in state, federal and local conservation programs.
The goals of Title III of this act were threefold: 1 – to prevent species from
becoming endangered, 2- to enhance outdoor recreation experiences, and 3 – to
foster a responsible stewardship ethic through conservation education.
Although CARA passed a House vote in 2000 and 2001, it never made it to the
Senate floor.
Instead, the Commerce, Justice and State Appropriations Act provided a
smaller, temporary funding source in 2000, called the Wildlife Conservation
and Restoration Program (WCRP). These monies were transferred to the
Department of the Interior, intending to enhance fish and wildlife
conservation and restoration efforts, including wildlife related education and
recreation projects.
This brings us to the present and the next major funding source for wildlife
conservation, the State Wildlife Grants (SWG). These monies, derived from the
Land and Water Conservation Fund, were first appropriated for FY 2002 in the
Department of the Interior’s appropriations budget, and continued annually,
with current discussions on FY 2005. This program aims to fill the holes left
by previous legislation. The goal is not only to protect and restore
endangered species but to keep the common species from becoming endangered in
the first place. Until now, we have lacked the means to plan and prioritize
comprehensively for all wildlife, due to limited funding and limited programs.
The creation of the Wildlife Diversity Conservation Plan allows MD State
agencies and their partners to do this.
The coalition of state agencies and private and commercial partners that
spearheaded the effort to obtain stable, long-term funding deserve our thanks
for making tremendous strides toward that goal. Once wildlife conservation
plans have been developed, it is hoped that Congress will be able to rely on
this information to set reasonable funding thresholds to meet our long-term
wildlife conservation objectives. Keep abreast of progress via www.teaming.com.
|