# Presentation: 182531

## Wildlife & Sport Fish Restoration Program

- Assistant Director for Wildlife & Sport Fish Restoration Program

**Notes:**
I want to thank all of you for attending and I truly appreciate the opportunity to share my thoughts with you on the most important conservation and recreation grant programs in the country. I know there are some new faces in the group, including my own.  So for those of you that I have not met yet, I am the Assistant Director for the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.  Since most of you do not have the organizational chart of the Fish and Wildlife Service memorized, I over see the Division of Federal Assistance and report directly to the Director of the Service.  I do want to welcome our new members.  This group has been around a couple of years and we are tackling some of the challenges facing the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program.  The original actions of this group focused on clarifying some excise tax issues specific to the fishing and hunting equipment manufacturers. We are now expanding this group to include more stakeholders in these programs, including boating groups and others.  Some of the issues we will be working on with this group will help to shape the conservation and recreation opportunities for ourselves and children and even our grandchildren.

## North American Wildlife Conservation Model

**Fish and wildlife belong to all North American citizens.**
**Fish and wildlife must be managed in such a way that their populations will be sustained forever.**

## Wildlife Conservation ModelPrinciples

- Wildlife as Public Trust Resources;
- Elimination of Markets for Game;
- Allocation of Wildlife by Law;
- Wildlife Should Only be Killed for a Legitimate Purpose;
- Wildlife Are Considered an International Resource;
- Science is the Proper Tool for Discharge of Wildlife Policy;
- Democracy of Hunting.

## Wildlife & Sport FishRestoration Programs

- Long history of success
- Funded through excise taxes on shooting, archery, angling, and recreational boating equipment

**Notes:**
The Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Programs are the most successful conservation programs in our nation’s history.  The programs have a long history of success and many of you and your organizations represented in the room today are not letting the programs rest on their laurels.  Indeed the programs have been modified through the years and now encompass a wide range of activities ranging from teaching children the principles of hunting safety to providing docking facilities for large transient boats and providing grants for pumping sewage from recreational boats.  The input and activities of this group will help to ensure the success of these programs for years to come.

THE most successful conservation programs in our Nation’s history
WR passed in 1937
Also known as the Pittman – Robertson Act

SFR passed in 1950 – mirrored the Wildlife Restoration Act
Also known as the Dingell–Johnson Act

When turkey were scarce and wood ducks thought to be nearing extinction – progressive hunters, conservationists, manufacturers joined forces with State F&W Agencies to protect America’s wildlife.

Careful human action, applied through science of wildlife management was critical to the survival of many of the Nation’s most treasured wildlife species.

## Cycle of Success

**Cycle of Success**

**U.S . Fish & Wildlife Service allocates funds to State fish & wildlife agencies.**

**Better fishing, boating,  hunting & wildlife-associated recreation.**

**State agencies implement programs & projects.**

**Anglers, hunters, boaters,                                purchase fishing/                                        hunting equipment &                                 motor boat fuels.**

**States receive grants.**

**Manufacturers pay excise tax on that equipment and boaters pay fuel taxes.**

**Notes:**
The Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Programs are based on the “user pay- user benefit” principle and we like to think of the programs as having a cycle of success.  The cycle of success starts with the manufacturers and the excise taxes that are paid on certain hunting and fishing equipment items and also through fuels taxes.  These taxes are collected by our federal partners including the Internal Revenue Service, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) and even the Customs and Border Patrol.  I don’t know about you, but when I was surprised to learn the diversity of our federal partners.  And we have enjoyed some long standing relationships with these partners.  They are to be commended for their efforts to increase the awareness of the importance of their efforts to the conservation of our resources and also opportunities for outdoor recreation that result from their efforts.  After the taxes are collected by our Federal partners, the Service awards the program funds out to our state partners for their efforts to conserve fish and wildlife resources and to provide boating access opportunities to the public.  In turn,  the State’s efforts result in more and better opportunities for our hunters, anglers, and boaters to enjoy the resource and ultimately purchase products that start the cycle all over again! 

The grant programs are now approaching almost $1 billion annually in funds that are awarded out to State agencies for their conservation and recreational boating programs.  The Sport Fish Restoration “family” of programs are at an all –time high due largely to the efforts of several organizations represented in the room here today.  The American League of Anglers and Boaters (which many of your organizations belong to) was able to convince Congress about the importance of the Sport Fish Restoration grant programs and was successful in recapturing approximately $100 million of  fuels taxes attributable to boaters that was being redirected to the Federal debt. This all occurred in the last Highway Bill passed by Congress in August of 2005, which is known as the SAFETEA-LU.  Fiscal Year 2007 is the first year that these funds are making it out to the States in the form of grants.  We will all need to work together now and in the future to ensure that these programs continue to receive Congress’ support and we are already looking forward to the next Highway Bill reauthorization which will occur in 2009. 

Alternate speaker’s notes follow:
Taxes are paid by manufacturers and collected by Alcohol & Tobacco Tax & Trade Bureau (TTB) and Department of Treasury Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and Dept of Homeland Security Customs & Border Protection (CBP).

USFWS WSFR Programs allocates funds to state wildlife agencies through several grant programs.

State agencies use funds to implement programs and projects such as: Habitat Restoration; Research; Management; Education; Access to recreation and resources.

The results/benefits are:
For hunters/anglers/boaters: Increased opportunities, choices & wildlife associated recreation
For manufacturers/retailers: Sales, Growth & strong economy
For wildlife : improved habitat and healthy wildlife populations

Alternate language taken from the Sport Fish & Wildlife Restoration Partnership Power Pack 10/2001 “Cycle of Success” outreach effort.

Anglers, hunters, boaters, and recreational shooting sports participants purchase equipment.
Making a difference for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Resources
The Sport Fish and Wildlife restoration programs have made a difference between survival and abundance of some species. Many Fish and wildlife populations are at historically high levels. Americans enjoy more hunting, fishing and wildlife viewing opportunities than ever before. Together the two programs have built a solid base for the conservation of our nations Fish and wildlife resources.

Manufacturers pay an excise tax on that equipment.
User Pay/User Benefit
The Sport Fish and Wildlife Restoration Programs work effectively because they use the simple concept of "user pay/user benefit." The hunting equipment and fishing tackle industries pay manufacturers excise tax levy on a variety of sporting equipment and fuel. The tax is reflected in the retail price. Boaters pay the federal sales tax on motor boat fuel at the pump. These users pay a little more for their equipment, but benefit from the increased opportunities to enjoy the resources protected by funds raised through these taxes.
The programs provide another important benefit to State fish and wildlife agencies:

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service allocates funds to state fish and wildlife agencies.
Program Management and Administration
Successful management of these programs relies on both federal and state governments working in partnership. Program funding and administration take place at the federal level. Resource management decisions are made at the state level.

Sport Fish and Wildlife restoration funds are distributed between states and territories using formulas based on each state's land and water area, population, and number of licensed hunters or anglers. No state can receive more than 5% or less than 1% of the total funds. Territories receive smaller amounts.

State fish and wildlife agencies implement programs and projects.
Project Funding
A hallmark of the programs-and one of the most important reasons for their resounding success-is that the States determine the projects needed to meet their own resource needs. The federal government is not involved in developing or prioritizing state projects, but is responsible for ensuring that the programs are effective in meeting the sport fish and wildlife restoration goals of each state.

State fish and wildlife agencies apply for their apportioned funds through grants process. States must provide at least 25% of the grant project cost, often using hunting or fishing license revenues for the match. Payment is made on a cost reimbursement basis after the work is completed.

However, before a State can even be considered for participation in the program, it must have enacted legislation prohibiting the diversion of hunting license fees for any purpose other than the administration of the State fish and wildlife agency. This requirement is original in order to guarantee that both federal and state earmarked funds will be used solely for fish and wildlife restoration and management purposes.

Result: Better hunting, fishing, boating and wildlife-oriented recreation.
Congress has amended the Wildlife Restoration Act and the Sport Fish Restoration Act over the years. Additional hunting and fishing items are taxed. The types of restoration projects have expanded to keep up with the demands and needs of hunters, recreational shooters, anglers, and boaters.

## Wildlife Restoration$215M - 2007

- Can be used for:
- Reintroduction of declining wildlife species
- Wildlife population surveys
- Species research
- Hunter Education
- Acquisition of wildlife habitat
- Shooting Ranges

**Notes:**
The stalwart grant program for the Service is the Wildlife Restoration program.  It is celebrating its 70th anniversary this year.  It is commonly known as the Pittman-Robertson program because these individuals were its sponsors in Congress.  This program provides funding for wildlife restoration and conservation efforts, as well as hunter education and the development of shooting ranges.  The program provides funding for mammals and birds so the critter will have to have fur or feathers to be potentially eligible for these funds to be spent on.  Wildlife Restoration program funds can be used on non-game species, despite the common belief they cannot.  You will notice that law enforcement is not listed as an eligible activity to receive funding from this program. When these programs were first passed, most states had law enforcement officers but lacked wildlife biologists and the program sponsors understood the importance that the developing fields of wildlife management conservation would have on the resources.  Since its inception, the Wildlife Restoration program has apportioned more than $5 billion to States for their wildlife conservation and hunter education programs.

## Manufacturer’s Excise TaxesCollected Annually for Wildlife Restoration

**Manufacturer’s Excise Taxes****Collected Annually for Wildlife Restoration**

**Notes:**
Make reference to current year’s amounts collected for use in Wildlife Restoration grant programs.

FY 2007 Gross Receipts (rounded to nearest 1000)
Firearms		83,992,000
Pistols/Revolvers	52,691,000
Ammunition		72,053,000
Bows/Arrows	26,154,000
Total		       234,890,000

Include trends info if available.

## Manufacturer’s Excise Taxes are collected

**on firearms, ammo, and archery equipment.**

**Wildlife Trust Fund ****receives revenue.**

**Funds are distributed to**
**grant programs, administration, States and Territories.**

**Notes:**
Provide participants with the Wildlife Restoration Act handout and discuss the various taxes collected, deductions made prior to funds being apportioned to States/Territories, etc.

Use the handout to review the revenue sources to the Wildlife Restoration Program and their distribution.  In fiscal year 2007 apportionments to states totaled $215 million dollars. 

I wanted to give you an idea of how the excise taxes are collected and disbursed to the various grant programs from the Wildlife Restoration Account.  As you can see, the Wildlife Restoration Account funds several important grant programs, including not only the Wildlife Restoration program but also a portion of the North American Wetlands Conservation program (known as NAWCA) is funded from the interest on the account and also a portion of the Multistate Conservation grant program.

Summary:
1. Wildlife Restoration Funds are collected from three main sources during each federal fiscal year.
2. These funds are collected by Alcohol & Tobacco Tax & Trade Bureau (TTB) and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) are in Dept of Treasury
Customs & Border Protection (CBP) is in Dept of Homeland Security. 
3. Congress earmarked $9 million to provide for USFWS-FA administration of the program.
4. Congress earmarked $7.5 to 8 million for hunter education/shooting range enhancements.
5. Interest on the account is used to support the North American Wetlands Conservation Programs.
6. The remaining funds are apportioned to the states based on the formula.
7. Reverted (unused after 2 years) funds go to the USFWS Migratory Bird Program

## Wildlife Trust Funds are apportioned annually to States/Territories through the Wildlife Restoration Grant Program.

**Notes:**
Provide participants with the Wildlife Restoration Apportionment Formula chart and discuss the formulas used to distribute WR and HE funds to States and Territories.

2007 Apportionments
Wildlife Restoration Program $215.1 million
Hunter Education Programs $51.2 million (includes all Hunter Ed. Section 4 & 10)

Note:
Wildlife and Hunter Education Section 4 funds unused after 2 years revert to the USFWS Migratory Bird Program.

Hunter Education Section 10 (enhancement) funds unused after one year revert to the Section 10 HE funds for re-apportionment using the Section 10 apportionment process.

I have given you a handout with the fiscal year 2007 apportionments from the Wildlife Restoration program.  The apportionment for the non-Hunter Education portion of this program is determined by the area of a state and also the number of paid hunting license holders.  These factors are weighted equally.  Many of you may have seen state fish and wildlife agencies trying to increase the number of individuals purchasing hunting licenses through hunter recruitment programs or through removing exemptions for individuals such as senior citizens.  This is one of the primary reasons why states do this in order to increase their federal apportionment from the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration programs.

## Hunter Education Programs

-   Provides funding to develop/maintain/enhance:
- Hunting education & sporting firearm safety programs
- Bow hunter and archery education and safety programs
- Archery and firearm shooting ranges

- Courtesy of Kentucky DNR

**Notes:**
There are 2 different aspects of the Hunter Education program funding available from the Wildlife Restoration program.   In recent years Congress has set aside $8 million annually from the Wildlife Restoration account for a new Hunter Education program.  These are the Section 10 funds identified in your handouts.  Millions of students have been trained in safe and ethical hunting practices as a result of these funds and States have also used these funds to develop hundreds of shooting and target ranges throughout the country.

One of the most recent accomplishments with the Hunter Education funds is the development of archery programs in schools that are helping to bring our youth into the shooting sports and hunting.

## Multi-State Conservation Grants

- This competitive grant program provides $6 million annually for fish and wildlife conservation projects identified by the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies.

**Notes:**
The Multistate Conservation grant program is a relatively new grant program for the Fish and Wildlife Service and it is administered with the assistance of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (AFWA).  This grant program targets potential projects of national or regional scope and has funded a wide range of projects. 

$3 million annually from Wildlife Restoration funds and $3 million annually from Sport Fish Restoration funds.

This competitive grant program administered in cooperation with the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (AFWA) provides grants for projects that benefit 26 or more states, or a majority of states in designated Regions.

Projects include those defined each year by the AFWA as being a National Conservation Need.

Some examples of funded grants include:
The National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation.

Title:  Conservation Leaders for Tomorrow: Exposing University Wildlife and Other Natural  Resource Students to Hunting and the Hunter’s Role in Conservation
Submitter:  Wildlife Management Institute, Washington DC
Objectives:  This project addresses 2007 NCN #2: To develop and continue programs that support recruitment and participation in outdoor recreation that financially secure and sustain the North American hunting, fishing, and trapping heritage. The objective to provide, through highly coordinated workshops, insight and understanding about the biological, social, and economic dimensions and personnel values of recreational hunting, to persons committed to enter or already in the natural resources management profession and who have had little or no direct exposure to or experience with hunting.

Best Practices in Hunting and Shooting Sports Recruitment & Retention
Submitter:  National Shooting Sports Foundation, Connecticut
Objective:  This proposal addresses NCN #2: Develop and continue programs that support recruitment and continued participation in outdoor recreation that financially secure and sustain the North American hunting, fishing, and trapping heritage. The objective is to develop research-based best professional practices and user-friendly tools that state wildlife agencies and their partner organizations can use to create, enhance, and evaluate recruitment and retention programs for hunting and shooting sports. If every state adopts these best practices when developing its hunting and shooting sports programs, the potential increase in participation could be exponential. 

Title:  Disease Training for Wildlife Biologists
Submitter:  University of Georgia
Objectives:  This grant addresses NCN #1, A National Fish and Wildlife Health Initiative. The objectives of this grant are to provide state wildlife biologists with additional training that will enhance their effectiveness in a working environment increasingly influenced by disease issues of significance to wildlife, humans and/or domestic animals. This will be accomplished through a series of training programs and development of instructional materials that will be made available to all wildlife biologists and wildlife-health professionals.  

## Sport Fish Restoration$349M - 2007

- Can be used for:
- Fish research
- Reintroducing declining Sport Fish species
- Restoring aquatic habitat
- Aquatic Education
- Constructing boat ramps and fishing piers
- Boating Access

**Notes:**
The Sport Fish Restoration grant program is the stalwart fisheries conservation grant program.  While through most of this talk I have talked about the overall “family” of Sport Fish Restoration funds, here I am talking specifically about the Sport Fish Restoration grant program, which many of you also probably know by its common name of the Dingell-Johnson or Wallop-Breaux program.  Dingell and Johnson were the program’s original Congressional sponsors in 1950 when it was passed.  Senators Wallop and Breaux were the Congressional sponsors to the Act in the 1980s when the Act was amended to include more items being taxed, which resulted in significantly more funding for the program.  An important distinction with this program is that it must be used on sport fish species.  It cannot be used on fish species that are not considered as sport.  Thus research on mussels or most minnow species would not be allowable under this program.  And, it is through this program that the Fish and Wildlife Service provides States with their primary funding source for boating access projects. As a general rule, States must spend 15% of their annual apportionment from the Sport Fish Restoration program on boating access.  In fiscal year 2997, that will equate to approximately $52 million of funds from this program.  This program is credited with the recovery of many economically import sport fish species and has helped develop some world class fisheries such as the largemouth bass fishery at Lake Fork in Texas and the blue ribbon trout fisheries in the West. 

## SPORT FISH RESTORATION EXCISE TAXESCollected Annually

**Notes:**
Make reference to current year’s amounts collected for use in Sport Fish Restoration grant programs.

FY 2007 Gross Receipts (rounded to nearest 1000)
Customs/Import Duties		46,886,000		  7%
Fishing Equipment			71,451,000		11%
Gas-Motorboat		       365,001,000		59%
Gas-Small Engines		       102,002,000		16%
Rods,Tackle Boxes
& Electric Motors			42,296,000		  7%
Total Receipts		       627,636,000

Include trends info if available.

As I mentioned, the Wallop-Breaux amendment dramatically increased funding for the Sport Fish Restoration program.  One of the most important items this amendment accomplished was to capture a portion of the federal fuels taxes associated with boating.  As a result, fuels taxes have played an increasingly important role in this programs funding.  With the passage of the SAFETEA-LU bill, fuels taxes attributed to boaters now comprise the large majority of the revenue sources to the Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund (which most of you know by its former name the Aquatic Resources Trust Fund) The SAFETEA-LU act changed the name of the Trust Fund. 

## Sport Fish Restoration & Boating Trust Fund

**Manufacturer’s excise taxes on fishing equipment** **, import duties, motorboat & small engine fuel taxes, and interest earned on Trust Fund are collected.**

**Sport Fish Restoration & Boating Trust Fund**
**receives revenue.**

**Funds are distributed to**
**grant programs, administration, States and Territories.**

**Notes:**
Provide participants with the Sport Fish Restoration Act Handout and discuss the various taxes collected, deductions made prior to funds being apportioned to States/Territories, etc.

Note: the funding sources, methods of distribution, and recipients of these funds is more complex/involved that those related to the Wildlife Trust Fund.

Some of the provisions of SAFETEA-LU changed the distribution of funds between the various grant programs within the overall Sport Fish Restoration family of programs.  Here is the current distribution.  As you can see, almost all of the grant programs now receive a percentage of the overall receipts into the Trust Fund.  This ties us all together in that if the Trust fund receipts increase, all of the grant programs benefit.  Conversely, if the receipts decrease, then the grant programs share the burden equally.  Many of you may not recognize the National Outreach and Communications program in this chart.  These are the funds that go to the Recreational Boating and Fishing Foundation (RBFF).  And some of you may not realize that the U.S. Coast Guard’s Recreational Boating Safety grant program is also funded through the Trust Fund.  The Boating Safety program receives 18.5% of the overall receipts into the Trust Fund.  As you can see, the Trust Fund supports quite a few programs and covers a wide range of missions ranging from conserving wetlands to removing sewage from recreational boats through the Clean Vessel Act program.

Summary:
$9.2 M for FWS Administration
$16.4 M for Coastal Wetlands Act (includes COE and FWS Grants)
$10 M for National Outreach & Communications Program (RBFF)
$12.5 M for Clean Vessel Act
$12.5 M for Boating Infrastructure Grants
$3 M Multi-state Conservation Grants (part of the $6 million total for these grant each year)
$16.4 M for USCG Recreational Boating Safety Program
$400K Sport Fishing Boating Partnership Council
$800K for 4 Fish Commissions ($200K each)

The remaining 57% ($349 million) of the fund is apportioned to States/Territories for Sport Fish Restoration programs.

## Sport Fish Restoration & Boating Trust Funds

**are apportioned annually to States/Territories through the Sport Fish Restoration Grant Program.**

**Notes:**
Provide participants with the Sport Fish  Restoration Apportionment Formula chart and discuss the formulas used to distribute SFR funds to States and Territories.

57% ($349 million in 2007) of the Trust Fund is apportioned to States/Territories for Sport Fish Restoration programs.

Once again, just concentrating on the Sport Fish Restoration grant program, not the family of funds, the individual state apportionment from this program uses a formula similar to the Wildlife Restoration grant program.  However, this program does place a bit more emphasis on fishing license holders.  You should also probably be aware that the coastal states must break down their apportionment at the state level into marine and freshwater components and spend their annual apportionment in accordance with the proportion of saltwater and inland anglers.  On a national perspective, this is very important to fisheries management because our population is increasingly moving to coastal areas.

Note: Remember, there are other programs funded from the Trust Fund. These include the following:
Coastal Wetlands
Boating Safety
Boating Infrastructure Grant Program
Clean Vessel Act (pump out stations)
Recreational Boating & Fishing Foundation
Sport Fishing Boating Partnership Council
4 Fish Commissions

## Boating Infrastructure Grant Program

**Noncompetitive Grants (Tier I)**
**Competitive Grants**
**(Tier II)**

- Funding tie-up facilities for transient, non-trailerable boats longer than 26 feet.

**Notes:**
Funding to construct, renovate, or maintain tie-up facilities for transient, non-trailerable recreational vessels that are longer than 26 feet.

Includes noncompetitive (Tier I (approximately 10%)) and competitive (Tier II) grants.

The Boating Infrastructure Grant program is one of the Service’s most competitive and unique grant programs.  The program provides funding for large, transient boats.  This program has a lot of success stories in the arena of economic development as local communities complete projects with these funds and then reap the benefits from boaters’ expenditures.  Oregon and Tennessee have completed boating trails with these funds, which are a series of docking facilities along rivers to allow boaters to travel along these states’ waterways in their boats and enjoy the local attractions.

## Clean Vessel Act

- Provides funding for pump out and dump stations for the disposal of vessel sewage.

**Notes:**
The Clean Vessel Act grant program provides funding for sewage pump out programs for states.  This program has been around since the early 1990s and states have developed some effective programs that have resulted in cleaner waters and healthier aquatic ecosystems.

More than 1 million gallons of sewage disposed annually.

##  Coastal Wetlands

**Funds wetlands work in:**
- Louisiana by COE ($76.4 million)
- North American Wetlands Conservation Act ($16.4 million) - FWS
- National Coastal Wetlands ($16.4 million) – FWS

**Notes:**
The Sport Fish Restoration family of funds provides significant funding for coastal wetlands conservation and restoration efforts.  As you saw, 18.5% of the overall receipts into the Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund are used to fund coastal wetlands projects.  Of this total, 70% goes to the Corps of Engineers for wetlands work in the state of Louisiana.  These efforts undoubtedly helped to reduce some of the impacts of the devastating hurricanes that have hit Louisiana in recent years.  The remaining 30% of the coastal wetlands funds are divided equally and used to fund two Service grant programs.  One of these is the National Coastal Wetlands Conservation Grant program and the other is the North American Wetlands Conservation Act grant program, also known as NAWCA.  If you will remember, the interest from the Wildlife Restoration Account is also a funding source for the NAWCA grant program. 

This picture is:
Coastal Wetlands AL-GrandBay

## Program Integrity 

- WSFR Program Administration Audits
- Annually
- State (Grantee) Programmatic/Fiscal Audits
- 5 year Cycle

**Notes:**
Examples of the continuous scrutiny these program undergo annually:

WSFR Admin
Annual FWS Financial Statement Audits
Annual OMB Circular A-123 Reviews
Annual Payment Risk Reviews
Biennial Administrative Funds Audit 
Annual Internal Control Review of the Federal Assistance Information Management System (FAIMS) 
Annual FAIMS Contingency Test
Certification/Accreditation Updates

State Agency (Grantee Audits)
5 year cyclical audits ( - supported by all States)
Conducted by Third Party (FWS-OIG) to ensures equity.
Findings – used to improve program performance

## Current Wildlife & Sport Fish Restoration Program Issues	

- Few Recognize the Importance of Excise Taxes to these Programs and to the North American Conservation Model
- Pending reauthorization of the Sport Fish Restoration Program
- Concerns about declining participation rates for hunting/angling

**Notes:**
We have quite a few challenges facing us and we all are in this boat together so to speak.  I am focusing my efforts on increasing the recognition of the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration programs and their importance to conservation and recreation in the US.  I believe these programs future depends on more and better understanding of these programs by state and federal agencies, as well as industry associations and organizations and perhaps most importantly the users themselves. Another challenge is simply getting folks outside and participating in hunting, fishing or boating.  We have the preliminary results in from the National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-Associated Recreation and some of the trends are perhaps cause for alarm.  And finally, we will soon be faced with the reauthorization of significant portions of the Sport Fish Restoration programs when the SAFETEA-LU Highway Bill expires.

There are some trends that have long been predicted by human dimensions researchers that are now evident in the survey.  Of particular importance is that fishing participation has declined 12%, although from a manufacturer’s perspective you will notice that these individuals are continuing to spend quite a bit of money while fishing.  The hunting trend is continuing to decline and their expenditures are decreasing as well.  On a brighter note, the number of individuals that participated in wildlife watching has increased and their expenditures are increasing.  While this may be good for the manufacturers, many of the items that they use is likely not taxed so little conservation benefits may result from this increase.

The decline in saltwater fishing was a surprise.  In general our population is moving to coastal areas and saltwater fishing is predicted to increase.  We believe one of the many factors that may have influenced this was the devastating hurricanes in the Gulf states.  These states are still recovering from the hurricanes and many individuals simply have moved away from the coast as a result.  The decline in small game participation is of concern since this is the type of hunting that individuals are most commonly initiated into the sport of hunting.  Quite a few factors are likely to be causing this, including the nationwide decline of bobwhite quail, reduced public access and others.

Summary of Trends 2001 to 2006
Fishing 
Participation:  12% decrease
Freshwater, except Great Lakes:  11% decrease
Great Lakes:  23% decrease
Saltwater:  15% decrease
Total expenditures:  No change (Among all expenditures, there is a 5% increase for fishing equipment.)
Hunting 
Participation:  4% decrease
Big Game:  2%  decrease (probably not statistically significant)
Small Game:  12% decrease 
Migratory Bird:  22% decrease
Other Animal:  8% increase
Total expenditures:  3% decrease (Among all expenditures, there is a 3% increase for hunting equipment.) 
Wildlife Watching 
Participation:  8% increase
Expenditures:  2% increase 

## Questions or Comments

**Notes:**
Thanks for your attention.  I look forward to working with you all in the future as we work on the many opportunities these grant programs provide us.

Any questions? Comments?