NY.gov Portal State Agency Listing Search all of NY.gov
D E C banner
D E C banner

Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy (CWCS) Background

Conserving New York's Wildlife

Introduction

The Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy (CWCS) was completed by the Division of Fish, Wildlife and Marine Resources (DFWMR) of NYSDEC in September of 2005 to address the wildlife species in greatest need of conservation in the state. It was submitted to the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to establish New York's eligibility to receive State Wildlife Grant (SWG) funds which are apportioned by the USFWS. Final acceptance of the CWCS was received on April 21, 2006. The acceptance of the CWCS will ensure that New York continues to receive available SWG funding from Congress every year.

The CWCS utilizes the best available data on the status of fish and wildlife species to define a vision and establish a strategy for state wildlife conservation and funding. The objectives and goals defined within the CWCS will receive millions of dollars in federal funds to address the entire diversity of fish and wildlife and their habitats. New York State will implement the State Wildlife Grants Program and the recommendations of the Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy with conservation partners by sharing grant funds and providing an infrastructure to manage the data necessary to track progress in this endeavor. NYS DEC will also serve as an organizing force to enhance communications and cooperation among partners statewide.

The CWCS is a collaborative effort among agencies, organizations and individuals with an interest in New York's wildlife. For day to day implementation, a State Wildlife Grants Guidance Team has been convened. This team includes staff of NYSDEC, NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, and NYS DOS.

History of Conservation Funding in New York State

By the early 1900s, wildlife populations throughout the United States, especially game species, were declining due to exploitation, habitat destruction, and a lack of regulation and enforcement. As a result, dedicated conservation and wildlife restoration efforts began. In 1908, New York became the first state to require a hunting license for the taking of wildlife, and by 1949, all hunters and anglers were required to be licensed in order to hunt and fish in the state.

The Conservation Fund was established in 1925 to provide a stable, long-term source of revenue to help support the NYSDEC fish, wildlife and marine resources program. These funds come primarily from the sale of hunting, fishing and sporting licenses and provide about $40 million a year for fish and wildlife conservation. Today, this revenue remains the core of fish and wildlife funding in New York State.

In 1937, states received a boost to their conservation funding when the United States Congress passed the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act which imposes an excise tax on hunting equipment. In 1950, additional monies became available via the Dingell-Johnson (D-J) Sportfish Restoration Act. The D-J Act created a parallel program to manage, conserve, and restore fishery resources.

With hunting and fishing harvest better regulated, game fish and wildlife species rebounded. Wildlife management areas were established, wildlife habitats were actively managed, and populations were augmented or restored with transplanted animals. However, many non-game species continued to decline in numbers. In an effort to address the continuing decline of non-game species, a number of new laws were introduced.

The first major legislation in this area was the 1973 Endangered Species Act, a program intended to conserve threatened and endangered plants, animals, and the habitats in which they are found. The program targeted over 1,000 species nationwide in need of preventative action. However, many non-game species, particularly those not depleted to the point of becoming endangered, were still not addressed by any of these management programs.

To address the need for non-game species protection, in 1980 Congress approved The Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, commonly known as the Nongame Act (16 U.S.C. 2901-2911; 94 Stat. 1322). The Act encouraged states to develop conservation plans for non-game fish and wildlife species that were not endangered, but may become so in the future if they remained unprotected. The Act, although recognizing the need for states to develop and implement conservation plans, did not provide federal funding to states to accomplish this task.

Many options were considered as a means to provide revenue for expanded wildlife management - the most influential was Teaming With Wildlife (TWW), which was comprised of 3,000 organizations and businesses including the International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (IAWFA). The goal of the TWW coalition was to promote wildlife diversity by providing funding for the protection of non-game species. The coalition modeled a tax-based plan on the Sport Fish and Wildlife Restoration Acts, placing a small fee on recreational equipment and other supplies such as back packs, sleeping bags, bird seed, binoculars, film and field guides. The user fee mechanism would have raised an expected $350 million investment in the conservation of wildlife species and their habitats, as well as outdoor recreation and conservation education programs. For two years, TWW petitioned Congress to pass legislation that would provide funding for protection of non-game species. However, little consensus was found in Congress to pass the TWW proposal and an alternative funding source for state-based wildlife programs was pursued.

In 1998 the Conservation and Reinvestment Act (CARA), H.R. 4717, was introduced in Congress. The bill shared the same principles as the TWW proposal and would provide $3.1 billion annually for 15 years to state, federal and local conservation programs for wildlife restoration, parks and outdoor recreation, coastal conservation, and historic preservation. Known in Congress as CARA and in the Senate as the Reinvestment and Environmental Restoration Act (RERA, S.2566), the bills would receive funding from a portion of the income derived from federal offshore oil and natural gas leases in the Outer Continental Shelf. The CARA passed in Congress in May 2000, but failed to pass in the Senate and was not signed into law.

Although CARA officially failed in the Senate, the legislature did approve a program in 2001 called the State Wildlife Grants (SWG), which was widely viewed as a compromise to the CARA legislation. More information about the SWG program can be found here.

Eight Required Elements to be Included in CWCS

Congress identified eight elements were addressed in developing these wildlife conservation strategies (see below). Further, the strategy aimed to identify and be focused on the "species in greatest need of conservation," yet address the "full array of wildlife" and wildlife-related issues. The CWCS addresses the eight elements below:

  1. Information on the distribution and abundance of species of wildlife, including low and declining populations as the state fish and wildlife agency deems appropriate, that are indicative of the diversity and health of the State's wildlife; and,
  2. Descriptions of locations and relative condition of key habitats and community types essential to conservation of species identified in (1); and,
  3. Descriptions of problems which may adversely affect species identified in (1) or their habitats, and priority research and survey efforts needed to identify factors which may assist in restoration and improved conservation of these species and habitats; and,
  4. Descriptions of conservation actions proposed to conserve the identified species and habitats and priorities for implementing such actions; and,
  5. Proposed plans for monitoring species identified in (1) and their habitats, for monitoring the effectiveness of the conservation actions proposed in (4), and for adapting these conservation actions to respond appropriately to new information or changing conditions; and,
  6. Descriptions of procedures to review the plan at intervals not to exceed ten years; and,
  7. Plans for coordinating the development, implementation, review, and revision of the plan with Federal, State, and local agencies and Indian tribes that manage significant land and water areas within the State or administer programs that significantly affect the conservation of identified species and habitats; and
  8. Congress also affirmed through this legislation, that broad public participation is an essential element of developing and implementing these plans, the projects that are carried out while these plans are developed, and the Species in Greatest Need of Conservation that Congress has indicated such programs and projects are intended to emphasize.