State Wildlife Action Plan

State Wildlife Action Plan
Name	State Wildlife Action Plan
Type	Conservation policy
Jurisdiction	United States
Established	2000s
Responsible	State fish and wildlife agencies

State Wildlife Action Plan is a strategic conservation document prepared by each U.S. state and territorial wildlife agency to identify species of greatest conservation need and prioritize actions for their recovery. These plans coordinate among agencies such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, National Park Service, and regional entities like the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. They intersect with statutes, programs, and funding mechanisms including the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act, the Endangered Species Act, and appropriations from congressional committees such as the House Committee on Natural Resources.

Overview

State Wildlife Action Plans (SWAPs) synthesize information on native species, habitats, and threats to guide conservation actions across landscapes managed by entities like the Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, and state departments including the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. Plans often map priority watersheds, ecoregions, and corridors used by species listed under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora and referenced by research institutions such as the Smithsonian Institution, National Audubon Society, The Nature Conservancy, and universities like University of California, Davis and Colorado State University. SWAPs link conservation measures to landscape-scale initiatives such as the North American Waterfowl Management Plan, the North American Bird Conservation Initiative, the Landscape Conservation Cooperatives, and regional partnerships like the Gulf Restoration Network and the Appalachian Regional Commission.

History and Legal Framework

The modern SWAP concept emerged amid conservation reforms and funding programs in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, influenced by landmark statutes such as the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and international agreements like the Ramsar Convention. Early templates drew on conservation planning from organizations including the World Wildlife Fund, the IUCN, and the Smithsonian Migratory Bird Center. Federal guidance from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and appropriations under the U.S. Congress encouraged state adoption through mechanisms like the State Wildlife Grant Program, established by the Consolidated Appropriations Act. Judicial and administrative decisions by courts such as the U.S. Supreme Court and agencies including the Government Accountability Office have influenced funding priorities, compliance, and review processes. Major disasters—hurricanes like Hurricane Katrina, oil incidents like the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, and wildfires such as the Camp Fire (2018)—have also shaped statutory interpretations and plan revisions.

Development Process and Components

SWAP development engages stakeholders spanning federal agencies—U.S. Geological Survey, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries—state agencies—Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation—tribal governments like the Navajo Nation and organizations including Ducks Unlimited, Trout Unlimited, Defenders of Wildlife, Sierra Club, Conservation International, and academic partners such as Michigan State University and Duke University. Components include species accounts referencing taxa covered by the American Ornithological Society, Herpetologists' League, American Fisheries Society, and databases like the Global Biodiversity Information Facility and NatureServe. Plans incorporate habitat conservation strategies informed by mapping tools developed at agencies such as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and institutions like ESRI and the USGS National Map. Public engagement processes often involve hearings before state legislatures and advisory bodies such as the North American Wetlands Conservation Council.

Implementation and Funding

Implementation relies on collaborative projects led by state agencies and partners including The Nature Conservancy, National Wildlife Federation, World Resources Institute, and local land trusts such as Open Space Institute and the Land Trust Alliance. Funding streams include the Wildlife Restoration and Basic Hunter Education Grants, the State Wildlife Grant Program, federal appropriations authorized by committees like the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, private philanthropy from foundations such as the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and the Packard Foundation, mitigation funds tied to projects permitted by the Army Corps of Engineers and overseen by the Environmental Protection Agency, and mitigation banking administered under policies influenced by the U.S. Department of the Interior. Implementation frequently integrates cross-sector initiatives involving the Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Bureau of Reclamation, and energy agencies such as the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission when addressing impacts from projects by corporations like ExxonMobil or utilities regulated by state public utility commissions.

Monitoring, Evaluation, and Adaptive Management

Monitoring frameworks in SWAPs draw on methodologies used by the North American Breeding Bird Survey, the Long Term Ecological Research Network, the National Phenology Network, and programs run by the U.S. Geological Survey and NOAA. Evaluation uses metrics aligned with goals from the Convention on Biological Diversity and guidance from the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Adaptive management cycles are informed by case studies from sites such as Yellowstone National Park, Everglades National Park, Great Smoky Mountains National Park, and landscape-scale conservation examples like the Chesapeake Bay Program and the Mississippi River Basin Healthy Watersheds Initiative. Peer review and scientific advisory panels often include experts from institutions like Harvard University, Stanford University, Cornell Lab of Ornithology, and professional societies such as the Ecological Society of America.

State and Federal Roles and Coordination

Coordination requires clear roles among state agencies (e.g., Ohio Department of Natural Resources), federal entities (e.g., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service), tribal governments, regional compacts like the Interstate Fishery Management Program, and multistate collaboratives such as the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission and the Pacific Fishery Management Council. Cooperative agreements and memoranda involve agencies including the National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, and funding partners such as the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and Wildlife Management Institute. Interagency coordination has been showcased in responses to crises involving NOAA Fisheries and U.S. Coast Guard operations, collaborative recovery plans under the Endangered Species Act, and landscape initiatives tied to the America the Beautiful conservation goals.

Category:Conservation policy