**Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program -- 2006**

In 2006 Colorado is again using a Call for Proposals format to deliver
the Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program. As in 2005, larger scale
projects that have significant beneficial impacts on the declining
species and associated habitats listed below, multiple landowner
participation, and promoting partnerships will be emphasized. Habitat
projects for other, non-priority, wildlife species will be considered
depending on number of proposals received and available funds, but will
receive a lower priority.

All proposals **MUST** be reviewed and signed by both the District
Conservationist and appropriate NRCS, CDOW, USFWS-PFW, or Private Lands
biologist before being submitted to the NRCS State office for funding
consideration.

***The process for 2006 will involve the following steps:***

1\. If the local NRCS office is not sponsoring the proposal, the
proposal sponsor shall contact the local NRCS office and inform them of
proposal development intentions.

2\. The proposal will be developed addressing all of the 8 elements
listed below under proposal contents in as much detail as possible.

3\. Once the proposal is completed it should be reviewed and signed by
the District Conservationist and NRCS/CDOW biologist.

4\. The proposal will then be sent to the NRCS State Office by November
1, 2005.

5\. A proposal review committee will prioritize the proposals using the
attached prioritization tool.

6\. After the committee prioritizes the proposals into high medium and
low priority they will rank the highest priority proposals first with
the attached ranking form and recommend funding the proposals according
to the ranking.

If there is money left after funding high priority proposals the medium
and low priority proposals will be ranked and funded accordingly.

7\. The proposal sponsors will be notified of funding by December 15,
2005.

8\. Sponsors for multiple applicant proposals will then need to develop
a ranking tool to select the applications for funding. These ranking
tools will be completed, reviewed by NRCS ARC for programs and in place
for use by February 1, 2006.

9\. Proposal sponsors will then select the applications and work with
NRCS to plan individual projects and get them in the contracting system
by June 1, 2006.

***Proposals that are received in the NRCS state office by November 1,
2005 will be screened using the following questions:***

**[High Priority Proposals]{.underline}** must have a **YES** answer for
the following.

1\. **Does the proposal target one or more of the following priority
species?**

Gunnison sage grouse, greater sage grouse, Columbian sharp-tailed
grouse, plains sharp-tailed grouse, lesser prairie chicken, southwestern
willow flycatcher, western yellow-billed cuckoo, imperiled bird species
associated with the short- grass prairie including shorebirds that
utilize playas, or listed eastern plains native fish.

2\. **Does the proposal enhance or restore a priority habitat type
listed below?**

Sagebrush steppe, mountain shrub/grassland, riparian, short grass
prairie, sand sage/grasslands, or playa lake.

3\. **Is the proposal area located within or adjacent to the identified
occupied range of the targeted species?**

4\. Does the proposal identify and address limiting life history
requirements, urgent threats, habitat issues, or other conservation
needs of the targeted species?

**[Medium Priority Proposals]{.underline}** must have a **YES** answer
for the following.

1\. Does the proposal target a State or Federal T&E species or State
species of concern that is not listed above?

2\. Does the proposal enhance or restore the appropriate habitat type
associated with the targeted species?

3.  Is the proposal area located within or adjacent to the identified
    occupied range of the targeted species?

4.  Does the proposal identify and address limiting life history
    requirements, urgent threats, habitat issues, or other conservation
    needs of the targeted species?

**[Low Priority]{.underline}** -- all other proposals that do not meet
criteria above

**PROPOSALS NEED TO INCLUDE:**

***In order to rank the proposals the following information needs to be
included with the application:***

**Pictures can be helpful!**

**Species:** List the specific wildlife specie(s) that your proposed
project is targeting. Priority species for 2006 projects are: Gunnison
sage grouse, greater sage grouse, Columbian sharp-tailed grouse, plains
sharp-tailed grouse, lesser prairie chicken, southwestern willow
flycatcher, western yellow-billed cuckoo, imperiled bird species
associated with the shortgrass prairie including shorebirds that utilize
playas, and listed eastern plains native fish.

**Limiting Factors:** Identify the limiting factor(s), threat(s),
habitat requirement(s), or other conservation need(s) of the targeted
specie(s) and explain how the proposed project will address the limiting
factor(s). What is the anticipated response of the target species
population if the project is completed?

**Habitat:** Describe the habitat that you will be improving (***Show
how many acres of wildlife habitat you actually expect to create or
enhance due to the project***). Describe current condition of the
existing habitat along with the expected condition of habitat after the
project is completed. Priority habitats for 2006 projects are: sagebrush
steppe, mountain shrub/grasslands, riparian, shortgrass prairie,
sand-sage/grasslands, and playas.

**Location:** Is the project located within the occupied range of the
target species? Does the species currently inhabit the project site or
project vicinity? If the project is located in potential range but is
not currently inhabited by the target species, explain how the project
will benefit the species? Please include appropriate maps. Contact local
Colorado Division of Wildlife or NRCS biologists for specific species
information.

**Practices:** Give details of the practices that will be applied.
Extents and costs are important. Provide an estimate of the total
project acres treated by practice.

**Management:** Explain how the individual projects will be managed to
benefit the targeted species. For example, if a proposal requires
landowners to implement new grazing management actions, explain reason
for the changes, describe the new prescriptions (timing, duration, and
intensity) and state the expected results.

**Management of adjacent lands:** Explain in detail how lands adjacent
to the project are managed? Are they in public ownership? Are they in
easements? If so, what type of easements? Are adjacent lands enrolled in
wildlife programs or otherwise being managed for wildlife?

**Landowner Cooperation:** How many landowners are involved in the
project? List the landowners and what they propose to do on their land;
how many acres each landowner expects to treat. What, if any, other
contributions landowners may bring to the project.

**Cost:** In as much detail as possible, show expected costs of the
project. Itemize expected expenditures and be specific on what you want
cost share assistance for.

**Partnerships:** Explain partnership commitments to the project. Be
very specific. Who has committed to what and how much is the commitment
worth? Is the commitment actual hard money, in kind contribution, or
other? Is the commitment in writing, verbal, or just hearsay? Priority
will be given to projects with written partner commitments.

***After the Proposals are prioritized by the State WHIP selection
committee, proposals will be ranked using the following ranking
system.***

Each of the following items will be reviewed by the State WHIP selection
Committee and assigned a point value of 1-10. Proposals will be compared
to each other to determine point assignment. Proposals with highest
total points will be considered for funding first.

1)  Proximity to important habitats and core populations of the targeted
    species.

Points\_\_\_\_\_\_**\_**

2\) Proximity to areas that are protected and/or managed to benefit the
target species (duration of protection and degree of management will be
considered).

Points\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

3\) The degree that proposed practices address identified limiting
factors, threats, or other conservation needs of the targeted species.

Points\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

4\) The duration that proposed practices and management will be
effective (easements and other protection of areas being treated will be
considered).

Points\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

5\) Number of participants (landowners) included in proposal.

Points\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

6\) Scale of the project in relation to the habitat needs of the
targeted species.

Points \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

7\) The number of partners, degree of commitment and type of
contributions.

Points\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

8)  Cost effectiveness points will equal 800/Total Cost to NRCS per Acre
    treated. Acres treated are acres that will realize resource
    improvement due to application of practices used in this ranking)
    **10 points max**

> Points\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**Total Points**\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

## Tie Breaker = Total cost to NRCS per acre treated. Same figure used in item11 above. 

## 

##  \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_