01

A report published jointly by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, 

with support from the National Wildlife Federation, The Wildlife Society, and the American Fisheries Society.

The State and Tribal

Wildlife Grant Programs 

20 Years of Conservation Success

September 2020

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
02

This document is published by the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration 

(WSFR) Program, a division of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Ser-

vice), with technical and financial support from the Service’s National 

Native American Programs and from the Association of Fish and Wild-

life Agencies (AFWA). 

Recommended Citation: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2020. The 

State and Tribal Wildlife Grant Programs: 20 Years of Conservation Success. 

United States Department of the Interior. Van Ryzin, P.J. (Ed.). 

Major Contributors: Mark Humpert, (AFWA); Paul Van Ryzin (Ser-

vice); DJ Monette, (Service); Diana Swan-Pinion (Service), Daniel 

Brauning (Pennyslvania Game Commission), Jon Ambrose (Georgia 

Department of Natural Resources), Tom Jones (Arizona Game and Fish 

Department), Scott Johnson (Indiana Department of Natural Resourc-

es), Kelly Helper (President, AFWA), Aurelia Skipwith (Director, Ser-

vice).

Special Thanks: Support for this publication was provided by AFWA’s 

Wildlife Diversity Conservation and Funding Committee. State natural 

resources agency biologists, program managers, and other staff pro-

vided data, draft narrative, review, and editing to finalize the project 

features that make up the majority of this report. Tribal Liaisons with 

the Service’s National Native American Programs provided data, draft 

narrative, and editing for project features in cooperation with tribal 

government biologists and program managers. Additional review and 

editing of project features was provided by the Service’s regional State 

Wildlife Grant Program managers. Layout and document production 

was provided by Mark Newcastle (Service). Brad Gunn, Christy Vig-

fusson, and Paul Rauch (Service) provided review and editing, staff 

support, communications, and coordination with AFWA’s Wildlife 

Diversity and Funding Committee. The National Wildlife Federation, 

The Wildlife Society, and the American Fisheries Society provided 

communications support to share this report with the greater conser-

vation community. 

Front Cover Photo: Regal Fritillary Nectaring on Echinacea at Stone 

State Park, Sioux City, Iowa. Photo: Jessica Fliginger.

Report Organization: This report features project highlights from 

conservation agencies of all 56 states, commonwealths, and territories 

of the United States and from conservation agencies of selected fed-

erally-recognized tribes. States and tribes are organized in this report 

based on geographic location of these agencies and their alignment 

within boundaries of the Northeast, Southeast, Midwest, and Western 

Associations of Fish and Wildlife Agencies.
i

The State and Tribal

Wildlife Grant Programs 

20 Years of Conservation Success

September 2020

A report published jointly by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the 

Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, with support from the National 

Wildlife Federation, The Wildlife Society, and the American Fisheries Society.
ii
iii

FOREWORDS

AFWA/Service Foreword

Twenty years ago, recognizing the need for additional proactive con-

servation for our Nation’s fish and wildlife, Congress created the State 

and Tribal Wildlife Grant Programs. These programs re-shaped how 

state and tribal fish and wildlife agencies manage the tens of thousands 

of species entrusted in their care. This report highlights some of the 

successes of the programs over the last two decades. Much like how 

these programs brought change, the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 that 

swept across our country and globe this year has left an indelible mark. 

During this time, millions of people have poured into natural areas to 

reconnect with nature, find solace, and responsibly recreate. The work 

funded through the State and Tribal Wildlife Grant Programs has nev-

er been more important or urgent.

The State Wildlife Grant Program was created in 2000 and the Tribal 

Wildlife Grant Program in 2001. These programs launched new part-

nerships—between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and the 

states, commonwealths, territories, and tribes—to undertake monu-

mental conservation challenges. Since then, these partnerships have fo-

cused on implementing conservation actions aimed at preventing new 

federal listings of threatened and endangered species, recovering those 

species already listed, and ensuring that tribal communities are able 

to maintain traditional subsistence-based lifestyles reliant on healthy 

populations of fish and wildlife.

During the initial years of the programs, fish and wildlife agencies 

and their private and public partners embarked on an unprecedented 

effort to develop Wildlife Action Plans for every state, territory, com-

monwealth, and the District of Columbia. When completed, the plans 

identified over 12,000 rare, declining, and imperiled fish and wildlife 

and the conservation actions needed for their recovery. Development 

of these plans was historic, providing the first nationwide blueprint for 

conserving fish and wildlife. Service staff were there every step of the 

way to support this daunting undertaking.

As you will see in this report, these programs have leveraged millions 

of dollars in state and private resources to implement the Wildlife Ac-

tion Plans. The State and Tribal Wildlife Grant Programs give fish and 

wildlife agencies flexibility in the approaches they use. In rural states 

like South Dakota, personal connections with ranchers and farmers 

who manage most of the state’s land are key to successful conservation. 

Tribal communities have the flexibility to focus program resources on 

any species of traditional value, including federally listed species. Na-

tionwide, the programs support survey and monitoring that provides 

crucial data to the Service to make species listing determinations, or 

in many cases to provide scientific evidence that federal listing is not 

warranted. The programs fund the full suite of conservation activi-
iv

ties including habitat restoration and management, land protection, 

research, and species reintroduction. Although the programs have 

achieved many successes on public lands, they also support voluntary 

conservation on private lands where most at-risk fish and wildlife are 

found. 

It has become abundantly clear this year, that as much as fish and 

wildlife need us, we need healthy and sustainable fish and wildlife even 

more. We hope you enjoy this report and can get outside to witness the 

diversity of birds, mammals, fish, frogs, turtles, and insects that these 

programs and wildlife professionals are working hard to conserve.

Kelly Hepler

President of AFWA

Secretary of South Dakota Department 

Game, Fish and Parks

Aurelia Skipwith

Director, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
v

Native American Program Foreword 

Since its inception nearly 20 years ago, the competitive Tribal Wildlife 

Grants (TWG) Program has awarded more than $94 million to federally recognized Native American Tribes throughout the United States, 

providing support for approximately 506 conservation projects in 

Indian Country. These grants benefit a wide range of fish, wildlife, and 

habitats, including species of Native American cultural or traditional 

importance and species that are not hunted or fished. 

By reducing threats to these species, the TWG Program directly benefits many Tribes, whose members depend on these species for subsistence, cultural uses, and their livelihoods. Tribes use certain species 

as traditional food sources, and species of cultural importance are a 

necessary component of tribal sovereignty. 

Using a multi-partner approach that often involves inter-tribal organizations, state and federal agencies, and volunteers, Tribes often use 

TWG Program funds as “seed” money to launch key programs, facilities, and partnerships that continue to deliver results. TWG Program 

funds also are used to develop the capacity of tribal natural resources 

agencies to address species conservation. 

The TWG Program has helped Tribes achieve numerous conservation 

successes in Indian Country. For example, in 2004, the Iowa Tribe of 

Oklahoma received TWG Program funds to establish an eagle aviary to 

nurse sick or injured eagles back to health for eventual release back to 

the wild and to provide a lifelong sanctuary for eagles whose wounds 

prevent them from returning to the wild. The eagles benefit as does the 

Tribe, whose members will be able to use the birds’ molted feathers for 

ceremonial purposes. 

In Minnesota, the Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians used TWG 

Program funds to inventory, monitor, and understand movement 

patterns, habitat use, and factors affecting gray wolves to help responsibly manage the species on Red Lake lands. This project is producing 

a better understanding of gray wolf territorial boundaries, habitat use 

and requirements, movement patterns, and mortality factors on Tribal 

lands.

In Alaska, the Chickaloon Native Village received TWG Program funds 

to restore and enhance fish passage and in-stream salmon habitat diversity and to restore salmon populations within the Matanuska River 

watershed due to adverse anthropogenic activities within the watershed. 
vi

I am proud of all that the TWG Program has accomplished and know 

the Tribes’ use of these funds will paint a bright future for the nation’s 

wildlife, natural resources, and all Americans.

Scott Aikin

National Native American Programs Coordinator,

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
vii

Contents

FOREWORDS.............................................................................................................III

AFWA/Service Foreword.................................................................................................................................iii

Native American Program Foreword.................................................................................................................v

INTRODUCTION

The State and Tribal Wildlife Grant Programs Turn 20........................................................................................1

NATIONAL CONSERVATION HIGHLIGHT ................................................................... 7

Freshwater Mussel Conservation......................................................................................................................7

NORTHEAST REGION HIGHLIGHTS...........................................................................11

STATE HIGHLIGHTS.................................................................................................. 13

Connecticut: Bats..........................................................................................................................................13

Delaware: Breeding Birds of Delaware............................................................................................................15

District of Columbia: Northern River Otter.......................................................................................................17

Maine: Yellow-Banded Bumble Bee...............................................................................................................19

Maryland: Tiger Salamander .........................................................................................................................21

Massachusetts: Brook Floater........................................................................................................................23

New Hampshire: Technical Assistance and Training .........................................................................................25

New Jersey: Habitat Connectivity...................................................................................................................27

New York: Eastern Massasauga.....................................................................................................................29

Pennsylvania: Golden-winged Warbler ...........................................................................................................31

Pennsylvania: Native Fishes..........................................................................................................................33

Rhode Island: Jonah Crab..............................................................................................................................36

Vermont: Spiny Softshell Turtle......................................................................................................................37

Virginia: River Restoration.............................................................................................................................39

West Virginia: Pollinator Initiative..................................................................................................................41

REGIONAL CONSERVATION HIGHLIGHT.................................................................. 43

Blanding’s Turtle..........................................................................................................................................43

TRIBAL HIGHLIGHTS................................................................................................ 46

Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe of New York: Native Plant Restoration......................................................................46

Seneca Nation of Indians of New York: Aquatic Species Conservation................................................................47

SOUTHEAST REGION HIGHLIGHTS........................................................................... 49

STATE HIGHLIGHTS.................................................................................................. 51

Alabama: Eastern Indigo Snake.....................................................................................................................51

Arkansas: Red-cockaded Woodpecker ............................................................................................................53

Florida: Manatee..........................................................................................................................................55

Georgia: Gopher Tortoise...............................................................................................................................57

Louisiana: Louisiana Black Bear.....................................................................................................................59

Mississippi: Frecklebelly Madtom...................................................................................................................61

North Carolina: Carolina Pygmy Sunfish.........................................................................................................63
viii

Oklahoma: Ozark Emerald............................................................................................................................65

Puerto Rico: Puerto Rican Parrot ....................................................................................................................67

South Carolina: Diamondback Terrapin...........................................................................................................69

Tennessee: Pale Lilliput.................................................................................................................................71

Texas: Guadalupe Bass..................................................................................................................................73

U.S. Virgin Islands: St. Croix Ground Lizard.....................................................................................................75

REGIONAL CONSERVATION HIGHLIGHT.................................................................. 77

Gopher Frog.................................................................................................................................................77

TRIBAL HIGHLIGHTS................................................................................................ 79

Catawba Indian Nation of South Carolina: Habitat Enhancement......................................................................79

Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians of North Carolina: Protecting Natural Heritage and Livelihoods.......................81

Tonkawa Tribe of Oklahoma: Pollinator Conservation.......................................................................................83

MIDWEST REGION HIGHLIGHTS.............................................................................. 85

STATE HIGHLIGHTS.................................................................................................. 87

Illinois: Jefferson Salamander .......................................................................................................................87

Indiana: Outreach Campaign for Endangered Mussels .....................................................................................89

Iowa: Regal Fritillary....................................................................................................................................91

Kansas: Fish Passage Construction and Post-Construction Monitoring...............................................................93

Kentucky: Center for Mollusk Conservation .....................................................................................................95

Michigan: Kirtland’s Warbler..........................................................................................................................97

Minnesota: Leonard’s Skipper........................................................................................................................99

Missouri: Regal Fritillary.............................................................................................................................101

Nebraska: North American River Otter..........................................................................................................103

North Dakota: American Marten..................................................................................................................105

Ohio: Cerulean Warbler...............................................................................................................................107

South Dakota: Greater Sage-Grouse.............................................................................................................109

Wisconsin: Rusty Patched Bumble Bee.........................................................................................................111

REGIONAL CONSERVATION HIGHLIGHT.................................................................113

Hellbender.................................................................................................................................................113

TRIBAL HIGHLIGHT.................................................................................................117

Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe: Snowshoe Hare and Fisher Conservation.............................................................117

WESTERN REGION HIGHLIGHTS.............................................................................119

STATE HIGHLIGHTS.................................................................................................121

Alaska: Little Brown Bat..............................................................................................................................121

American Samoa: Habitat Mapping and Classification...................................................................................123

Arizona: Chiricahua Leopard Frog.................................................................................................................125

California: Sierra Nevada Red Fox................................................................................................................127

Colorado: Lesser Prairie-Chicken..................................................................................................................129

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands: Micronesian Gecko..............................................................131

Guam: Green and Hawksbill Sea Turtles.......................................................................................................133

Hawaii: Kiwikiu (Maui Parrotbill).................................................................................................................135

Idaho: Fisher—Northern Rocky Mountain Distinct Population Segment ........................................................137

Montana: Trumpeter Swan..........................................................................................................................139
ix

Nevada: California Spotted Owl...................................................................................................................141

New Mexico: Peñasco Least Chipmunk .........................................................................................................143

Oregon: Western Pond Turtle.......................................................................................................................145

Utah: Boreal Toad......................................................................................................................................147

Washington: Fisher.....................................................................................................................................149

Wyoming: White-Tailed Prairie Dog .............................................................................................................151

REGIONAL CONSERVATION HIGHLIGHTS.............................................................. 153

Wolverine..................................................................................................................................................153

Arkansas Darter..........................................................................................................................................157

TRIBAL HIGHLIGHTS...............................................................................................159

Chickaloon Native Village of Alaska: Salmon Conservation.............................................................................159

Sitka Tribe of Alaska: Shellfish Conservation.................................................................................................161

Hopi Tribe of Arizona: Golden Eagle Conservation..........................................................................................163

Yurok Tribe of California: California Condor Recovery .....................................................................................165

Nez Perce Tribe of Idaho, Oregon and Washington: California Condor Conservation..........................................167

Pyramid Lake Paiute of Nevada: Bighorn Sheep............................................................................................169

Taos Pueblo of New Mexico: Conservation Corps............................................................................................171

Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Suislaw Indians of Oregon: Pacific Lamprey..........................173

Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde of Oregon: Prairie and Oak Savannah Restoration....................................175

Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe of Washington: Pacific Lamprey............................................................................177
x
1

Introduction

The State and Tribal Wildlife 

Grant Programs Turn 20

in fish and wildlife conservation 

strategies to prevent species 

from becoming endangered and 

accelerate efforts to restore those 

already endangered or threatened. Similarly, the primary 

purpose of the Tribal Wildlife 

Grant Program is to help tribes 

conserve species of traditional 

and cultural significance, including fish, wildlife, and plants. 

Both Programs support state and 

tribal projects designed to assess 

the status of fish and wildlife and 

implement actions to spur their 

conservation. Both Programs also 

support local decision-making 

and encourage the involvement 

of broad constituencies who have 

an interest in conserving the resources they know and treasure. 

State and tribal fish and wildlife 

agencies employ staff with expertise in planning, monitoring, 

research, and species and habitat 

The dawn of the new decade 

marks the 20th anniversary of two 

important milestones for fish and 

wildlife conservation. Congress 

created the State Wildlife Grant 

Program in 2000 and the Tribal 

Wildlife Grant Program in 2001 

to provide critical funding to 

state, territorial, commonwealth, 

District of Columbia (D.C.), and 

tribal fish and wildlife agencies to 

conserve at-risk fish and wildlife. 

These programs, administered 

by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service’s Wildlife and Sport Fish 

Restoration Program, filled a 

significant void in conservation 

funding and opened the door to 

a new era of partnership between 

federal, state, and tribal governments.

The primary purpose of the 

State Wildlife Grant Program is 

to help states proactively invest 

Snapshot of the State 

and Tribal Wildlife Grant 

Programs

Formula State Wildlife Grant 

Program

• Created by Congress in 

2000

• Funds distributed through 

formula to all 56 U.S. 

states, territories, and 

D.C.

• Apportionments based on 

population and land area

Tribal Wildlife Grant Program

• Created by Congress in 

2001

• Funds distributed through 

competitive awards to 

federally-recognized tribes

• Maximum award of 

$200,000

Competitive State Wildlife Grant 

Program

• Created by Congress in 

2007

• Funds distributed through 

competitive awards to 

states, territories and D.C. 

• Maximum award of 

$1,000,000

State fish and wildlife agencies in the 

West are using State Wildlife Grant 

Program funds to conserve and protect 

the Short-Eared Owl. 

Photo: Bob Tregilus, used with permission. 

Three-year project volunteer, Northeastern 

California, 2018.
2

management, and they leverage 

resources from many interested 

parties to bolster federal investments.

These Programs support state 

and tribal government agencies, 

acknowledging their unique responsibilities and authorities for 

management of our Nation’s fish 

and wildlife. The work of state 

and tribal fish and wildlife agencies is guided in part by Wildlife 

Action Plans—also known as 

Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategies—which were 

mandated by Congress. These 

natural resources agencies collaborate with industry, universities, 

non-profit conservation organizations, private landowners, citizens, and other local, state, and 

federal government agencies to 

implement innovate conservation 

strategies across the country. The 

State and Tribal Wildlife Grant 

Programs and the agencies that 

receive funding have launched a 

multitude of new partnerships 

to conserve fish and wildlife and 

their habitats. Abundant species 

populations and high-quality habitats benefit millions of 

Americans who use and enjoy 

them. 

During the last 20 years, the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service has 

distributed over $1 billion to the 

56 states, territories, commonwealths, and D.C. through the 

State Wildlife Grant Program using a formula based on land area 

and population. State agencies 

Source: Association of Fish and Wildlife 

Agencies, Wildlife Funding Survey. Survey 

and Analysis Provided by Southwick and 

Associates. December 7, 2012.

Wildlife watching is a favorite pastime enjoyed annually by an average of 

100 million Americans of all ages and backgrounds. 

Photo: Texas Parks and Wildlife Department..

Funding Sources

for Wildlife Action Plan Implementation

Federal

State

55%

Private

Other

36%

6% 3%

Blue Ribbon Panel on 

Sustaining America’s Diverse 

Fish and Wildlife Resources

In 2016, the Association of Fish 

and Wildlife Agencies organized 

a Blue Ribbon Panel comprised 

of 26 leaders from business, 

conservation and outdoor 

recreation. It was charged with 

examining the current system 

of conservation funding and 

recommend changes that would 

lead to greater sustainability for 

all fish and wildlife. The Panel was 

chaired by John Morris, Founder 

of Bass Pro Shops, and David 

Freudenthal, former Governor of 

Wyoming.

More Information: 

https://www.fishwildlife.org/

application/files/8015/1382/2345/

BlueRibbonPanel_ShortReport.pdf
3

provide at least 25 percent of project costs in non-federal matching 

funds. Since 2008, a portion of 

the State Wildlife Grant Program funding has been used for 

competitive grants to encourage 

interstate collaboration, innovation, and species conservation at 

larger scales. 

From a high of $90 million in Fiscal Year 2010, the State Wildlife 

Grant Program’s average annual 

appropriation more recently 

has been about a third less, or 

$67 million per Fiscal Year. This 

is far less than the estimated 

$1.3 billion recommended by the 

Blue Ribbon Panel on Sustaining America’s Diverse Fish and 

Wildlife Resources that is needed to fully implement the State 

Wildlife Action Plans (see sidebar). Congress has introduced the 

Recovering America’s Wildlife Act

to address the shortfall. 

The Tribal Wildlife Grant Program was started in 2001 to 

support conservation projects 

that benefit fish, wildlife, and 

plants on tribal lands, including 

species of Native American cultural or traditional importance. 

Funds are made available by the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

to the 584 federally-recognized 

tribes in the U.S. through competitive grants. Demand for 

Tribal Wildlife Grant Program 

funds by tribes is high and only 

about 25 percent of applicants are 

awarded funds each year. 

Tribal Wildlife Grant Program 

funds are used to conserve tribal 

food sources like Salmon, Walleye, Elk, Caribou, and Bighorn 

Sheep. The funding also helps 

tribes assist in the recovery of 

species that are federally listed 

under the Endangered Species 

Act, such as California Condor 

and Black-Footed Ferret. Since 

its inception, the competitive 

Tribal Wildlife Grant Program has awarded more than 

$94 million to tribes, supporting 

over 500 conservation projects 

throughout Indian Country. 

Wildlife Action Plans: A NationWide Conservation Blueprint

The use of State Wildlife Grant 

Program funding is guided by 

State Wildlife Action Plans. In 

2005, fish and wildlife agencies in 

each of the 56 states, territories, 

commonwealths, and D.C. subSource: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

The SWG Program’s Value to 

America

In 2019, Service managers 

produced a research paper titled 

The State Wildlife Grant Program: 

Measuring the Value of a Proactive 

Conservation Program. 

Key findings:

• The SWG Program added 

$3 billion in short-term 

value to local economies 

and supported the 

creation of 18,000 jobs 

between 2001 until 2015.

• American wildlife watchers 

are willing to pay over 

$100 million annually 

to maintain populations 

of just one SGCN—the 

whooping crane.

• A variety of SGCN 

conserved in part with 

SWG Program funding 

provide essential services 

like pest control and water 

purification.

• From 2001 to 2015, 

the SWG Program 

supported conservation 

of 55 percent of federally 

listed species which were 

later delisted under the 

ESA, and 24 percent 

of candidate species 

later removed from 

consideration for federal 

listing due to recovery 

or sufficient species 

information.

More Information:

https://doi.org/10.3996/112017-

JFWM-092

 $-

 $10,000,000

 $20,000,000

 $30,000,000

 $40,000,000

 $50,000,000

 $60,000,000

 $70,000,000

 $80,000,000

 $90,000,000

 $100,000,000

20012002200320042005200620072008200920102011201220132014201520162017201820192020

State and Tribal Wildlife Grant Programs

Funding Levels, Fiscal Year 2002–2020

 Formula SWG Tribal Wildlife Grants Competitive SWG
4

mitted their first Wildlife Action 

Plans to the Service for approval. 

This marked the first time in 

history that coast-to-coast comprehensive planning for fish and 

wildlife conservation was implemented on a national scale. 

Each agency is required to address eight planning elements 

(see sidebar) and must review 

and revise the plan at least once 

every ten years. A cornerstone of 

each plan is the identification of 

Species of Greatest Conservation 

Need (SGCN), with input from 

leading scientists in each state 

or region. The planning process 

is informed by citizens, experts 

from universities, non-profit 

organizations, and state, federal 

and local government agencies. 

Public meetings are held to 

gather input from wildlife and 

outdoor recreation enthusiasts, 

farmers and ranchers, business 

owners and others. This high 

level of engagement helps ensure 

the plans are balanced and are 

able to leverage the resources and 

capacity of the public and private 

sectors. 

Wildlife Action Plans provide a 

framework for national consistency while preserving state-level 

authority in conservation decision-making. Many states have 

designated personnel that lead 

implementation of their plan in 

coordination with their many 

partners. Each plan is posted 

online and some include online 

tools to make them more accessible to partners and the public.

A Complementary Approach 

The federal Endangered Species 

Act (ESA), passed in 1973, is a 

bedrock environmental law that 

provides a funding and regulatory framework to help prevent the 

extinction of America’s animals 

and plants. Currently there are 

over 720 animals listed as threatened or endangered under the 

ESA in the United States. State 

Wildlife Action Plans include 

most of these species as SGCN 

but also many others that are 

rare, declining or on a path to 

possible future ESA listing. The 

State and Tribal Wildlife Grant 

Programs support proactive conservation that helps keep management of fish and wildlife in 

the hands of the states, commonwealths, territories, and tribes. In 

doing so, the Programs help limit 

Tiana Sayre and Christy release 

Condor 208.

Photo: Chris West, Senior Biologist, Yurok 

Tribe.

EIGHT REQUIRED ELEMENTS 

OF WILDLIFE ACTION 

PLANS:

1. Abundance of Declining 

Species

2. Condition of key habitats

3. Threats or data gaps

4. Needed conservation 

actions

5. Monitoring needs

6. Plan revision schedule

7. Partner coordination

8. Public involvement

More information: 

https://www.fishwildlife.org/afwainforms/state-wildlife-action-plans 

Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 
5

costs of federal species listing and 

recovery. 

Enhancing Outdoor Recreation 

and Local Economies

Our Nation’s fish and wildlife are 

a source of joy and inspiration to 

millions of people. In an average 

year, 100 million U.S. residents 

participate in some form of wildlife-related recreation. In 2016, 

wildlife watchers spent $75.9 billion on equipment, travel, and 

related costs, providing revenues 

for communities and companies 

that maintain jobs and support 

families.1 The State and Tribal 

Wildlife Grant Programs help ensure the stability and viability of 

a vast range of watchable wildlife 

throughout the United States.

Demonstrating Our Success

The State and Tribal Wildlife 

Grant Programs support America’s state and tribal natural 

resources agencies and their 

many partners in the conserva1 2016 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation. 

https://www.census.gov/content/dam/

Census/library/visualizations/2016/

demo/fhw16-qkfact.pdf

tion of species of fish and wildlife 

that are treasured throughout 

the United States today. This 

report provides a sampling of the 

species, habitats, and people that 

have benefited from state and 

tribal conservation initiatives, 

supported in part with funding 

from these Programs. Projects 

and programs designed and implemented by these agencies:

•	 Launch multi-state, rangewide species conservation 

efforts highlighting the 

power of sharing information and collaborating 

across borders and disciplines.

•	 Support a wide variety of 

projects and programs to 

help tribal communities 

protect and enhance species of cultural and traditional value.

•	 Protect and increase populations of species through 

research, habitat management and improvement, 

captive rearing and release, 

and many other actions. 

•	 Improve water quality, 

provide insect pest control, 

and protect pollinators 

The Crawfish Frog is one of many 

unique and beautiful Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need (SCGN) 

identified in the State Wildlife Action 

Plans. 

Photo: Michael Lannoo. Originally published 

in “The Call of The Crawfish Frog” by 

Michael J. Lannoo and Rochelle Stiles, Taylor 

& Francis, 2020 and used with permission of 

the photographer. 

Learning about raptors during a 

community event. 

Photo: Texas Parks and Wildlife Department.
6

that support agricultural 

production.

•	 Provide critical information leading to down-listing and de-listing of state 

threatened and endangered 

species.

•	 Contribute significantly 

to U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service recovery plans for 

federally listed species, 

helping to down-list and 

de-list threatened and 

endangered species.

•	 Address species data gaps 

that help the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service determine 

that numerous species are 

not warranted for listing 

under the Endangered 

Species Act. 

•	 Engage community scientists, farmers and ranchers, 

university experts, industry stakeholders, and many 

others to find common 

ground and leverage Program investments many 

times over. 

•	 Provide educational 

opportunities and offer 

amenities that enhance the 

quality of wildlife-based 

experiences for millions of 

Americans.

The stories in this report demonstrate how a diversity of perspectives, expertise, and resources 

can make a difference for the 

conservation of all our Nation’s 

species. These projects show how 

dedicated, inclusive teams are 

ensuring that American families 

throughout the United States 

have the opportunity to share in 

all of our natural heritage. 
7

NATIONAL CONSERVATION HIGHLIGHT 

Freshwater Mussel Conservation

ing to protection and restoration 

in watersheds across the United 

States. Here are a few highlights 

of the many ways State Wildlife 

Grant Program funding is being 

used to help recover federally 

listed species, to help keep other 

mussels species from declining to 

levels that require new listings, 

and to help ensure common mussels species populations remain 

stable in our Nation’s rivers and 

streams.

Alabama

The Alabama Aquatic Biodiversity Center (AABC) is the largest 

state non-game species recovery 

program of its kind in the United 

States. The mission of AABC is 

to promote the conservation and 

restoration of rare freshwater 

species in Alabama waters, and 

in turn, restore cleaner water in 

Alabama’s waterways. The State 

Wildlife Grant Program has 

supported the development of 

the AABC for many years. Recent 

work has focused on developing 

culture methods to grow and 

release aquatic invertebrates into 

regional waterways. The AABC 

has cultured and released many 

thousands of mussels, in some 

cases establishing new populations of federally listed or candidate species that may positively 

impact future Service listing 

decisions. 

Indiana

The Indiana Department of 

Natural Resources has used 

North America has the highest 

diversity of freshwater mussels 

in the world, with 297 known 

species and subspecies. About 

three-quarters of these species are endangered or at risk, 

and dozens are already extinct. 

Among the most common threats 

to America’s freshwater mussels 

are stream fragmentation caused 

by dams, water quality degradation, aquatic invasive species, and 

illegal harvesting. 

Mussels are filter feeders that 

live on river bottoms, where 

they remove contaminants from 

water including suspended solids, 

bacteria, and algae. This is an 

important “ecosystem service” 

that can help protect water quality for human use, filtering 12 

to 15 gallons per mussel per day. 

Freshwater mussels are also an 

important food source for a variety of fish and wildlife, including 

otters, herons, and many sport 

fish. Midwestern and northeastern states in particular are home 

to the majority of mussel species 

identified in the State Wildlife 

Action Plans. However, many 

western states including Alaska, 

California, Hawaii, Texas, Idaho 

and Oregon also list one or more 

mussel species as Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need in 

their plans. 

The State Wildlife Grant Program continues to be a critical 

resource for state fish and wildlife agencies in addressing this 

national wildlife crisis. Many 

states have significantly advanced 

mussel conservation science leadBrook Floater, a freshwater mussel 

native to the eastern United States, 

was petitioned for federal listing in 

2010. Due in part to efforts of multiple 

states to conserve and restore the 

species, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service determined in 2019 that it is 

not warranted for listing under the 

Endangered Species Act. 

Photo: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
8

State Wildlife Grant Program 

funding and partnered with 

Purdue University to launch an 

outreach campaign to increase 

awareness of freshwater mussels and help foster behaviors 

that can help protect them. 

The campaign reached out to 

boaters and anglers as well as 

private landowners who reside 

on or near the Tippecanoe River. 

Indiana is home to ten federally 

listed mussels, and six of those 

species reside primarily in the 

Tippecanoe River. The campaign 

has demonstrated to visitors and 

residents how to promote good 

water quality to help protect their 

many imperiled mussel species.

Kentucky

For nearly 20 years, the Kentucky 

Department of Fish and Wildlife 

Resources has been developing 

a conservation program for the 

state’s imperiled freshwater 

mollusks. The agency’s Center for Mollusk Conservation 

(CMC) is now a world-renowned 

propagation facility visited by 

students and professionals from 

around the world. The agency 

has developed new techniques to 

raise mussels and other freshwater mollusks in vitro, without 

the need for fish hosts. These 

effective propagation techniques 

mean that large-scale rearing 

and release is now possible in 

Kentucky and neighboring states. 

The CMC’s overall goal is to 

preclude new state and federal 

listings of aquatic species, and 

help recover and restore imperiled species. 

Massachusetts

Massachusetts Division of 

Fisheries and Wildlife has been 

a leader in the Northeast in 

launching the Brook Floater 

Range-Wide Conservation and 

Restoration Initiative. Using a 

2016 Competitive State Wildlife 

Grant (C-SWG) Program award, 

the agency established the Brook 

Floater Working Group, which 

now represents 13 states where 

the species is present. This group 

has achieved key conservation 

successes including development 

of standard survey and monitorIndiana Department of Natural 

Resources biologist samples for mussels 

in the Tippecanoe River. 

Photo: Indiana Department of Natural 

Resources. 
9

ing protocols, and modelling of 

habitat suitability across the species’ range. Data and analyses on 

Brook Floater developed by state 

agencies and partners were used 

by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in species status assessment 

and in a final decision in 2019 

that listing the species under the 

Endangered Species Act is not 

warranted.

Minnesota

In Minnesota, 28 of the state’s 51 

native mussel species are listed 

as endangered, threatened, or 

of special concern. Three other 

species have been extirpated, and 

at least three more species are in 

imminent danger of extirpation. 

Minnesota Department of Natural Resource’s Center for Aquatic 

Mollusk Programs (CAMP) is 

busy re-building populations 

of threatened and endangered 

native mussel species through a 

propagation program. Recently 

CAMP propagated 14,000 federally endangered Baby Snuffbox 

mussels. These mussels will continue to grow in the lab over the 

summer, then placed in containers to overwinter in the river, and 

will eventually be released in the 

Mississippi River. 

New York

The New York State Department 

of Environmental Conservation 

received pooled State Wildlife 

Grant Program funds through 

the northeast states’ Regional 

Conservation Needs Program, as 

well as additional Competitive 

State Wildlife Grant (C-SWG) 

Program funding, for Brook 

Floater conservation. The agency 

conducted a status assessment in 

the state, developed new sampling protocols, and contributed 

to the Service’s “not warranted” 

finding in 2019. 

Ohio

The Ohio Department of Natural 

Resources, Division of Wildlife 

continues to fund research at 

Ohio State University and the 

Freshwater Mussel Conservation 

Facility located at the Columbus 

Zoo and Aquarium. New in vitro

propagation methods will be used 

for reintroduction of state-listed mussels in Ohio waters. The 

agency has also translocated 

federally endangered Northern 

Monitoring for Brook Floater in 

the Neversink River in southeastern 

New  York. 

Photo: Andrew Gascho-Landis, State 

University of New York-Cobleskill.

Student intern Emma Ceplecha holds 

several hundred Black Sandshell 

mussels CAMP is growing in Eastside 

Lake in Austin, Minnesota, for 

reintroduction into the Cedar River.
10

Riffleshell and Clubshell mussels 

from the upper Allegheny River 

in Pennsylvania to creeks and rivers in Ohio. The goal is to release 

enough animals to allow them to 

reproduce and establish self-sustaining populations. 

Oklahoma

The State Wildlife Grant Program has supported targeted 

surveys for all of the highest 

ranked freshwater mussel species identified in Oklahoma’s 

Wildlife Action Plan, including 

Rabbitsfoot, Pyramid Pigtoe, and 

Southern Hickorynut mussels. 

A partnership was established 

including Kansas Department 

of Wildlife, Parks and Tourism, 

Missouri State University, the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

and the Peoria Tribe to reestablish the Rabbitsfoot in remaining 

suitable habitat in the Verdigris 

River. This intermediate outcome 

helps conservationists move closer to recovering the Rabbitsfoot 

mussel and potentially down-listing or de-listing the species under 

the Endangered Species Act. 

Tennessee

In Tennessee, the State Wildlife 

Grant Program partially supports 

the State Mollusk Recovery Program and the Cumberland River 

Aquatic Center in their efforts 

to propagate juvenile mussels. 

Hundreds of Pale Liliput mussels 

have been raised, tagged, and 

released in Tennessee rivers since 

2017. Pale Liliput is a critically endangered species that has experienced a major range reduction. 

The species is now found only 

in northern Alabama and southeastern Tennessee.

West Virginia

In West Virginia, the Division of 

Natural Resources’ Mussel Survey 

Protocols are designed to document the potential presence or 

absence of federally listed mussel 

species as well as provide for the 

long-term sustainability of native 

mussel communities in the state. 

State Wildlife Grant Program 

funds support surveys, long-term 

monitoring, mussel restoration, 

and data capture from external 

sources. State wildlife agencies 

across the country have adapted 

the West Virginia Mussel Survey 

Protocols for their use. 

“These animals that 

we take for granted 

are fascinating; we 

can’t give up on them.”

Dr. G. Thomas Watters

Ohio State University

10

West Virginia Division of Natural 

Resources staff stocking the federally 

endangered Northern Riffleshell in the 

Elk River, West Virginia.

Photo: Janet Clayton. 
11

NORTHEAST REGION HIGHLIGHTS
12
13

STATE HIGHLIGHTS

Connecticut

Bats

Partners

Wildlife Management Institute, 

Sanders Environmental, Public 

and Private Landowners, Land 

Trusts, Municipalities, and other 

State Agencies

Methods

Cave Gating, Coordination 

Results

Bat-friendly cave enclosures are 

good for bats and people. Installation of gates helps private 

landowners by limiting trespassing and disturbance at sensitive 

sites, often resulting in reduced 

enforcement costs. Gates provide a reduced risk of liability for 

landowners with caves on their 

property. 

Status

Federally Endangered, Candidate, 

and At-Risk

Project Summary

The Connecticut Department of 

Energy and Environmental Protection participates with northeastern state agencies in an innovative resource-sharing program 

designed to advance large-scale 

conservation across jurisdictional 

boundaries. Since wildlife disease 

such as White-Nose Syndrome 

does not respect borders, an effective bat conservation strategy 

requires cooperation and sharing 

of information and resources on 

a regional basis.

In 2017, State Wildlife Grant 

(SWG) Program funding allocated through the northeast states’ 

Regional Conservation Needs 

(RCN) Program supported the 

installation and repair of gates at 

bat hibernation sites in Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, 

and New Hampshire. Bat-friendly gates are designed to allow bats 

to freely pass through the gates 

while preventing unauthorized 

human entry and associated 

disturbance. Experts on bat 

physiology estimate that for each 

arousal, a bat can burn as much 

as 10 days’ worth of stored body 

fat. Limiting human disturbance 

at these regionally important hibernation sites provides benefits 

to bats that are already devastated by disease.

A federally-endangered Indiana Bat. 

Other bat species are undergoing 

Species Status Assessments by the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, including 

Tri-colored Bat, Little Brown Bat, and 

Northern Long-eared Bat. 

Photo: Ryan Hagerty, USFWS.

Program Funding

SWG (RCN) Program

CDEEP/Partners

$57,000

TOTAL

$18,000 $39,000
14

Future Needs

There is a great need to protect 

many bat species in the United 

States, which face serious threats. 

Massachusetts Department 

of Energy and Environmental 

Protection and the northeastern 

states would direct additional 

funding toward maintenance 

of gates, and coordination with 

landowners and cave organizations for new installations.

More Information

https://rcngrants.org/content/

bat-cave-gating

Connecticut Wildlife Action Plan

The Connecticut Wildlife Action Plan was revised in 2015. 

The plan identifies 567 Species 

of Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with river basins, forests, wetlands, caves, and coastal 

beaches. Key threats to species 

include habitat loss and fragmentation, disturbance, invasive 

species, and lack of protection. 

Priority conservation actions 

identified in the plan include 

increased monitoring and data 

collection, enhanced management and protection, and outreach. More than 70 academic, 

agency, and conservation partners, and hundreds of members 

of the public, participated in the 

development and review of the 

plan. Contact the Connecticut 

Department of Energy and Environmental Protection’s Wildlife 

Division to learn more.

“This project is critical 

for the protection of 

bats decimated by 

White Nose Syndrome 

and helps ensure the 

secondary threat of 

disturbance is reduced 

or eliminated. This 

project also provides 

additional protection 

as bat populations 

begin to recover.” 

Jenny Dickson

Connecticut Department of Energy 

and Environmental Protection
15

Delaware

Breeding Birds of Delaware

Methods

Research, Monitoring

Results

The Atlas helps DFW and partners establish protocols for 

analyzing population dynamics 

and assess species population 

changes relative to the first 

Breeding Bird Atlas. This information is necessary for developing general and species-specific 

conservation guidance used to 

benefit Delaware’s birds. As a 

result of this effort, six species 

were removed from Delaware’s 

State Endangered Species List 

including Brown Creeper, Bald 

Eagle, Cooper’s Hawk, Northern 

Parula, Loggerhead Shrike, and 

Red-Headed Woodpecker. 

Future Needs

Without additional resources, 

DFW is limited in its capacity to implement conservation 

activities identified through 

this project, including habitat 

management that could improve 

breeding bird populations. Future 

support is necessary to expand 

Status

State-Listed Endangered

Project Summary

Delaware Division of Fish and 

Wildlife (DFW) developed the 

Breeding Bird Atlas to determine 

current distribution of all bird 

species breeding within Delaware, including within specially 

designated conservation areas. 

The project was supported in 

part by funding from the State 

Wildlife Grant (SWG) Program. 

The Breeding Bird Atlas includes 

detailed maps and summaries 

of the breeding habits of these 

birds. This ongoing effort provides important trend information derived through analysis of 

changes in species population 

data. The Atlas provides a permanent record of information on 

breeding birds and is accessible 

to many conservation partners in 

Delaware.

Partner

U.S. Geological Survey’s Patuxent 

Wildlife Research Center

Program Funding

SWG Program

DFW/Partners

$675,000

TOTAL

$506,250 $168,750
16

the scale of current conservation 

efforts. 

Delaware Wildlife Action Plan

The Delaware Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2015. The 

plan identifies 688 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with priority forests, 

beaches, dunes, early successional 

habitat, marine and freshwater 

wetlands and rivers. Key threats 

to species include climate change 

and severe weather that cause 

salinity changes and intrusion, 

invasive species, habitat loss, land 

conversion, ditching, extraction, 

and dams. Priority actions 

include technical assistance and 

support to conservation partners 

and private landowners, developing and implementing adaptation 

strategies, improving laws and 

policies, increasing awareness 

through conservation education, 

data collection and management, 

direct management of species 

and habitats, and land protection. More than 60 conservation 

partners contributed to the 

development of the plan. Contact 

the Delaware Division of Fish & 

Wildlife to learn more.  
17

District of Columbia

Northern River Otter

Methods

Research, Inventory/Monitoring, 

Species Management, Stream 

Restoration 

Results

Due to major stream restoration 

efforts in several tributaries to 

the Anacostia River, more sightings of River Otter have been 

documented by FWD. These 

and other efforts have resulted 

in water quality improvements 

that enhance opportunities for 

recreation and appreciation of 

wildlife in the District of Columbia and the surrounding states of 

Maryland and Virginia. Cleaner 

water helps FWD move toward 

their goal of sustainable fishing 

in the Anacostia, which would 

also increase revenue from fishing licenses. License revenue is an 

important source of funding for 

further species protection, manNorth American River Otter at Pelican 

Island National Wildlife Refuge. 

Florida, 2012. 

Photo: Keenan Adams, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service.

Status

Species of Greatest Conservation 

Need

Project Summary

By the early 1900s, North American River Otter populations 

had declined throughout large 

portions of their historic range 

in North America. In recent 

decades, improvements in water 

quality and controls on harvest 

have permitted River Otters to 

regain portions of their range in 

many areas. The Fisheries and 

Wildlife Division (FWD) of the 

District of Columbia’s Department of Energy and Environment 

identifies River Otter as a Tier 1 

species in its Wildlife Action 

Plan. FWD has implemented a 

variety of projects since 2012 to 

benefit the species in the Anacostia River watershed, with support 

from the State Wildlife Grant 

(SWG) Program. These projects 

have provided benefits to a wide 

variety of other species, including 

fish, shore birds, butterflies, and 

many others. River restoration 

projects also help improve water 

quality.

Partners

U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

National Park Service, U.S. 

National Arboretum, Anacostia 

River Watershed Society

Program Funding

SWG Program

FWD/Partners

$90,000

TOTAL

$31,500 $58,500
18

agement, and recovery efforts in 

the District of Columbia. 

Future Needs

Additional conservation actions 

to benefit River Otter in the 

District of Columbia are needed 

to build upon new partnerships 

and to continue improving water 

quality in the Anacostia and other watersheds. Funding is needed 

to maintain inventory and monitoring of the species and other 

listed conservation actions identified in the District of Columbia 

Wildlife Action Plan. 

District of Columbia 

Wildlife Action Plan

The District of Columbia Wildlife Action Plan was revised in 

2015. The plan identifies 205 

Species of Greatest Conservation Need associated with rivers, 

streams, riparian and upland 

forests, bogs, wetlands, mudflats, 

vernal pools, springs, and seeps. 

Key threats to species include 

invasive species, habitat loss, 

pollution and runoff, ecosystem 

modifications, and lack of protection. Priority conservation 

actions include early detection 

of new invasive species, habitat 

restoration, deer and goose management, and restoring hydrology. More than 30 conservation 

partners and many members of 

the public participated in the 

development of the plan. Contact 

the District of Columbia Department of Energy and Environment, Fisheries and Wildlife 

Division to learn more.

“Seeing River Otters 

present in the 

Anacostia River has 

been an encouraging 

sign that the health 

of the river is going in 

a positive direction.”

Lindsay Rohrbaugh

Biologist

Department of Energy and Environment

Springhouse Run, a river restoration 

site completed by the Department of 

Energy and Environment in the U.S. 

Arboretum in Washington, D.C. where 

River Otters are now living. 

Photo: District of Columbia Department of 

Energy and Environment. 
19

Maine

Yellow-Banded Bumble Bee

Methods

Research, Species Status 

Assessment 

Results

MDIFW found this species to be 

relatively widespread and present 

in higher numbers than in previous years. It was found at more 

than 250 locations in more than 

170 townships in all 16 counties 

across Maine. In 2019, the Service determined that range-wide 

listing was not warranted, noting 

the recent insights that some 

populations had improved markedly as pivotal to the decision.

Future Needs

Establishing baseline distributions of Yellow-Banded Bumble Bees and other bumble bee 

species enables periodic sampling 

efforts to monitor for potential 

population changes. Increased 

knowledge of the status of bumble bees and pollinators is critical 

to agriculture-related industries 

and natural resource agencies 

alike. 

Status

Not Warranted for Federal 

Listing (2019)

Project Summary

The Maine Bumble Bee Atlas 

(MBBA) began in 2015 utilizing 

mostly citizen scientists to collect 

data on bumble bees, a guild 

of insects with widely reported 

declines. The Maine Department 

of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife 

(MDIFW) seeks to document the 

current diversity and distribution 

of the state’s bumble bees and 

confirm the occurrence of previously reported species. In 2016, 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

announced a positive “90-day 

finding” that the Yellow-Banded 

Bumble Bee warranted a full review and potential listing under 

the Endangered Species Act. The 

timeliness of the MBBA initiative 

could not have been better for 

informing the Service’s Species 

Status Assessment of the Yellow-Banded Bumble Bee.

Partners

University of Maine–Farmington, 

University of Maine–Orono

Program Funding

SWG Program

MDIFW/Partners

$46,170

TOTAL

$25,000 $21,170
20

Maine Wildlife Action Plan

The Maine Wildlife Action Plan

was revised in 2015. The plan 

identifies 378 Species of Greatest 

Conservation Need associated 

with salt marshes, northern peatlands, northern hardwood and 

conifer forests, subtidal mollusk 

reefs, intertidal mudflats, and 

alpine habitats. Threats include 

habitat shifting or alteration 

due to climate change and sea 

level rise, invasive species and 

diseases, residential and commercial development, and lack of 

information on species. Priority 

conservation actions include 

increasing habitat connectivity, 

monitoring, control of invasive 

species, improving mapping, 

technical assistance, and outreach. More than 100 conservation partners were involved in the 

development of the plan. Contact 

the Maine Department of Inland 

Fisheries & Wildlife to learn 

more.
21

Maryland

Tiger Salamander

Methods

Monitoring, Habitat Restoration/

Management

Results

Maryland Department of Natural 

Resources biologists are reporting a dramatic increase in the reproducing population of America’s largest terrestrial salamander 

in their spring 2020 surveys.

Future Needs

Additional resources are needed 

to expand habitat restoration for 

the Tiger Salamander, ensuring 

numbers will continue to increase and helping meet criteria 

for de-listing as endangered in 

Maryland.

Maryland Wildlife Action Plan

The Maryland Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2016. The 

plan identifies 610 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with streams, rivers, 

bays, ocean, coastal beaches, wetlands, forests, cliffs, and barrens. 

Key threats include habitat loss 

and fragmentation, modification 

of natural processes, invasive 

species, pollution, and climate-related alterations. Priority 

A Tiger Salamander relaxes with 

Maryland’s biologists, taking a break 

from an unusually successful breeding 

season.

Photo: Andy Adams.

Status

State-Listed as Endangered

Project Summary

Tiger salamanders spend most of 

their lives underground with the 

exception of the breeding season 

when they journey to small freshwater ponds to mate. Declines 

in tiger salamander populations 

are largely due to the loss of 

Delmarva bays and surrounding 

forests. Delmarva bays are freshwater wetlands on Maryland’s 

Eastern Shore that usually have 

standing water in the winter and 

spring, and then gradually dry 

out through the summer. These 

special habitats are home to dozens of rare plants and animals. 

The Maryland Department of 

Natural Resources (MDNR) has 

been working for years to reverse this trend and restore these 

wetlands on state and private 

land by returning their hydrology 

and vegetation to their natural 

conditions. Through years of intensive management efforts, bays 

that were previously dark and 

overgrown are now open, sunny, 

and full of tiger salamander egg 

masses. 

Partners

Maryland Department of the 

Environment, Susquehannock 

Wildlife Society, Salisbury 

University

Program Funding

SWG Program

MDNR/Partners

$300,000

TOTAL

$150,000 $150,000
22

conservation actions include land 

protection, restoring natural processes, enhanced management, 

targeted monitoring and data 

collection, implementing climate 

adaptation strategies, and education and outreach. More than 

50 conservation partners and 

many members of the public participated in the development and 

review of the plan. Contact the 

Maryland Department of Natural 

Resources Wildlife and Heritage 

Service to learn more.

“It’s great to see 

[tiger salamanders] 

having such a great 

year. They are really 

responding well 

to their restored 

habitat. If they keep 

this up, one day 

we hope to declare 

them recovered 

and take them off 

the [Maryland] 

endangered 

species list.”

Beth Schlimm

Biologist

Maryland Department of 

Natural Resources

Tiger Salamander is state-listed as 

endangered in Maryland. 

Photo: Andy Adams.
23

Massachusetts

Brook Floater

Partners

U.S. Geological Survey—

Massachusetts Cooperative 

Fisheries & Wildlife Research 

Unit, Cooperating State Agencies, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service—

Cronin Aquatic Resources Center

Methods

Research, Monitoring, 

Coordination, Planning, 

Modeling/Mapping 

Results

MassWildlife and partners 

expanded the BFWG to more 

than 30 active participants, representing 13 states, two federal 

agencies, academic institutions, 

and one Canadian province. The 

group has developed and applied 

standard survey and population 

monitoring protocols in over 

seven states, collecting population status and habitat data for 

Status

Not Warranted for Federal Listing (2019)

Project Summary

Competitive State Wildlife Grant 

(C-SWG) Program funds were 

awarded in 2016 to Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and 

Wildlife (MassWildlife) and three 

other partner states for Brook 

Floater conservation. MassWildlife has been the lead state in 

cooperation with the U.S. Geological Survey’s Massachusetts 

Cooperative Fish and Wildlife 

Research Unit. The primary 

objective of this regional effort 

is to begin developing a strategic 

conservation and restoration plan 

for the Brook Floater, an imperiled freshwater mussel species, 

across its range. This initiative 

builds from a Regional Conservation Needs Grant, which focused 

on gathering all available information on Brook Floater and 

assessing threats across its range. 

Regional Conservation Needs 

projects are selected by a technical committee staffed by state 

fish and wildlife agencies in the 

northeast, and funds are derived 

from pooled State Wildlife Grant 

Program funds. Among many 

objectives for this initiative is the 

formation of the Brook Floater 

Working Group (BFWG), a core 

group of researchers and conservation practitioners engaged 

in collaborative problem solving 

toward conservation objectives 

for this species.

A tagged Brook Floater. 

Photo: MassWildlife.

Program Funding

SWG Program

MassWildlife/Partners

$717,000

TOTAL

$217,000 $500,000
24

Brook Floater and several other 

mussel species listed as Species 

of Greatest Conservation Need in 

partnering states’ Wildlife Action 

Plans. Other results of this effort 

include identification of host 

fishes and propagation methods 

for population restoration, and 

habitat needs and suitability 

across the species’ range. The 

team has developed conservation 

decision and planning tools and 

outreach materials, and conducted citizen science and outreach 

opportunities in the field. Data, 

analyses, and contributions from 

this project on Brook Floater 

and others funded through the 

State Wildlife Grant Program 

were used in the Service’s Species Status Assessment (SSA) 

and final decision. Collaborative 

efforts of the BFWG and partner 

states were noted in the SSA as a 

contributing factor to the likely 

persistence of the species.

Future Needs

Continued land protection and 

water quality improvements 

throughout the range of the 

Brook Floater are needed. Populations are fragmented and small 

so population restoration including reintroduction and augmentation will be needed in many 

parts of the range.

More Information

https://sterrett.wixsite.com/bfwg

https://rcngrants.org/content/

conservation-status-brook-floater-mussel-alasmidonta-varicosa-northeastern-united-states

https://www.fws.gov/news/

ShowNews.cfm?ID=90D449F5-

B2B9-4DB6-400EEC6C1DE71A12

Massachusetts Wildlife Action Plan

The Massachusetts Wildlife 

Action Plan was revised in 2015. 

The plan identifies 570 Species 

of Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with mainstems of 

the Connecticut and Merrimack 

Rivers, grasslands, upland forests, 

and salt marshes. Key threats 

include habitat loss and fragmentation, lack of appropriate 

habitat management, and lack of 

sufficient open space protection. 

Priority conservation actions 

include targeted protection and 

management of species habitats. 

More than a dozen major conservation partners and many members of the public participated in 

the development and review of 

the plan. Contact the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and 

Wildlife to learn more.

“While the threats 

to brook floater 

are significant and 

ongoing, what makes 

conservation success 

stories are the people 

behind them, like the 

collaborators on these 

projects, working 

tirelessly together 

to come up with 

large-scale solutions. 

Collectively, these 

research projects lead 

partners closer to 

restoring brook floater 

populations so the 

species can persist 

long into the future.” 

Ayla Skorupa

PhD Student

University of Massachusetts Amherst

From Scientists Without Borders 

– Range – Wide Conservation for 

a Freshwater Mussel At Risk
25

New Hampshire

Technical Assistance and Training

New Hampshire Association of 

Conservation Commissions

Methods

Training, Technical Assistance

Results

Since 2008, the TAFW Program 

has provided technical assistance to over 90 New Hampshire 

communities, some of which 

have received multiple contacts 

to further their implementation 

of Wildlife Action Plan priorities. 

Communities are now engaged in 

local conservation and are using 

the New Hampshire Wildlife 

Action Plan to prioritize efforts. 

Communities receiving technical assistance from TAFW have 

prioritized and executed land 

conservation projects, conducted habitat management and 

restoration, inventoried wildlife 

populations, and developed conStatus

Numerous Species of Greatest 

Conservation Need

Project Summary

Taking Action for Wildlife 

(TAFW) is a partnership between 

the University of New Hampshire Cooperative Extension, the 

New Hampshire Fish & Game 

Department, and New Hampshire Association of Conservation Commissions. The program 

provides resources, tools, and 

training for conserving New 

Hampshire’s wildlife and habitats 

to communities, land trusts and 

conservation groups, landowners, 

volunteers, and others, using the 

New Hampshire Wildlife Action Plan as a primary resource. 

Technical assistance includes 

meetings, workshops, trainings, 

an e-newsletter and a website 

with information and resources. Between 2017 and 2019, the 

TAFW Team enhanced technical 

assistance to all audiences with a 

new streamlined web experience 

that includes a searchable database of actions, audience resource 

pages, and stories to inspire. The 

University of New Hampshire 

Cooperative Extension contributes a significant portion of 

total project costs in non-federal 

matching funds. 

Partners

University of New Hampshire 

Cooperative Extension, 

Communities like the Town of 

Campton, New Hampshire are learning 

how to implement the New Hampshire 

Wildlife Action Plan through events 

like this bog walk. 

Photo: Lea Stewart. 
26

servation plans for town properties. The TAFW team has also 

produced landowner stewardship 

brochures for 12 Wildlife Action 

Plan Habitats (e.g., grasslands, 

vernal pools) and the following 

Species of Greatest Conservation 

Need: Blanding’s Turtle, New 

England Cottontail Rabbit, Black 

Racer, Brook Trout, and eight 

New Hampshire bats. These 

brochures are used by the TAFW 

team when providing technical assistance to landowners 

and brochures can be accessed 

through TAFW website. 

Future Needs

Additional resources are needed 

to provide financial assistance 

opportunities to other communities for Wildlife Action Plan 

implementation. 

More Information 

Taking Action for Wildlife 

Website:

https://takingactionforwildlife.

org/

NH Wildlife Action Plan:

https://www.wildlife.state.nh.us/

wildlife/wap.html

Blanding’s turtle landowner 

stewardship brochure:

https://extension.unh.

edu/resource/blanding%E2%80%99s-turtles-new-hampshire-brochure

Town of Amherst Grassland 

Management Planning Project:

https://takingactionforwildlife.org/article/guide-grasslands-town-amherst-commits-managing-bird-habitat-0

New Hampshire Wildlife Action Plan

The New Hampshire Wildlife 

Action Plan was revised in 2015. 

The plan identifies 169 Species 

of Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with forests, wetlands, 

freshwater aquatic, terrestrial, and coastal habitats. Key 

threats include commercial and 

residential development, pollution, disease, natural systems 

modifications (e.g., dams and 

undersized culverts), and climate 

change. Priority conservation 

actions include on-the-ground 

habitat work, land conservation, 

research, monitoring, collaboration with partners, and technical assistance. More than 100 

conservation partners and many 

members of the public participated in the development and review 

of the plan. Contact the New 

Hampshire Fish and Game’s 

Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Program to learn more. 

“Taking Action 

for Wildlife has 

empowered hundreds 

of communities, 

land managers, and 

landowners to take 

a meaningful role in 

implementing New 

Hampshire’s Wildlife 

Action Plan, benefiting 

numerous Species of 

Greatest Conservation 

Need and resulting in 

inspirational stories 

throughout the state.”

Mike Marchand

Supervisor

Nongame and Endangered 

Wildlife Program

New Hampshire Fish and Game

Member

Taking Action for Wildlife

Residents of the Town of Bath, New 

Hampshire, participate in a Brook 

Trout survey with New Hampshire Fish 

and Game staff. 

Photo: New Hampshire Fish and Game. 
27

New Jersey

Habitat Connectivity

the CHANJ mapping, guidance 

document, and communications 

plan.

Partners

New Jersey Department of 

Transportation, The Nature 

Conservancy of New Jersey

Methods

Training, Partner Engagement, 

Land-Use Planning

Results

Regional Action Teams are in 

place to mobilize partners when 

conservation opportunities arise. 

At least 127 land-based animal 

species in New Jersey stand to 

benefit from the CHANJ effort, 

including 82 Species of Greatest 

Conservation Need such as Bog 

Turtle, Bobcat, Blue-spotted 

Salamander, and Northern Diamond-backed Terrapin.

NJDFW Endangered and Nongame 

Species Program’s CHANJ Team, 

exhibiting at the annual NJ Land 

Conservation Rally.

Photo: Liz Silvernail.

Status

Multiple Species of Greatest 

Conservation Need

Project Summary

New Jersey Division of Fish 

and Wildlife (NJDFW) created 

its Connecting Habitat Across 

New Jersey (CHANJ) project to 

make the state’s fragmented 

landscape friendlier to wildlife 

movement, with support from 

the State Wildlife Grant (SWG) 

Program. CHANJ offers an interactive online mapping tool that 

highlights areas across New Jersey that are critical for wildlife 

connectivity, and a guidance 

document that helps many different users make strategic choices 

about preserving land, restoring habitat, and mitigating the 

effects of roads on wildlife. Since 

2012, over 100 partners from 

more than 40 different organizations and agencies participated 

in working groups that informed 

Program Funding

SWG Program

NJDFW/Partners

$350,000

TOTAL

$122,500 $227,500
28

Future Needs

Significantly greater funding 

is needed to support strategic 

implementation actions to secure 

and restore habitat connectivity 

across New Jersey’s landscape, including land acquisition, habitat 

restoration, and road mitigation 

projects.

More Information

www.CHANJ.nj.gov

New Jersey Wildlife Action Plan

The New Jersey Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2017. The 

plan identifies 656 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with forests, wetlands, 

rivers, and coastal habitats. Key 

threats to species include habitat 

loss and fragmentation, disturbance, invasive species, and lack 

of protection. Priority conservation actions include research, 

monitoring, development of best 

management practices, and riparian buffer restoration. More than 

50 stakeholder groups and many 

members of the public participated in the development of the 

plan. Contact the New Jersey 

Division of Fish and Wildlife to 

learn more.

“CHANJ gives us a 

literal roadmap for 

focusing our efforts 

ahead, filling in the 

gaps, and securing 

a legacy of healthy, 

connected ecosystems 

for the future.”

Dave Golden

Director

New Jersey Department 

of Fish and Wildlife
29

New York

Eastern Massasauga

actions necessary to restore the 

species. 

Partners

State University of New York’s 

College of Environmental Science 

and Forestry 

Methods

Research, Monitoring, Habitat 

Creation, Enhancement, and 

Protection

Results 

In the last seven years, over 

32 acres of gestation habitat 

for Eastern Massasauga have 

been created and maintained. 

This habitat management both 

increases productivity of the 

rattlesnakes and allows for easier 

population monitoring of gestating females, with as many as 

New York State Department of 

Environmental Conservation 

(NYSDEC) staff creating new basking 

habitat for Massasauga. 

Photo: NYSDEC.

Status

Federally Threatened (2016)

Project Summary

New York has two remaining 

populations of Eastern Massasauga, with only one present 

on public land. Building upon 

earlier work supported by the 

State Wildlife Grant (SWG) Program evaluating habitat use by 

the species, the New York State 

Department of Environmental 

Conservation (NYSDEC) initiated a project in 2012 to improve 

gestation habitat at one of these 

two sites where habitat has been 

lost due to succession. NYSDEC’s 

work on Massasauga was initiated well before the species was 

listed in 2016. The draft recovery 

plan for the species identifies 

habitat management, habitat protection, and population monitoring as three of the major recovery 

Program Funding

SWG Program

NYSDEC/Partners

$380,000

TOTAL

$122,500 $227,500
30

26 gravid females recorded in 

the new habitats in just a single 

season. In addition, all of the 

habitat improved through this 

project occurs on permanently 

protected lands. This ensures 

that these management actions 

will be able to provide benefits 

to the Massasauga for as long as 

possible. These public areas are 

also regularly patrolled by state 

law enforcement personnel, so 

the areas can be monitored for 

unauthorized disturbance or 

collection. New York is at the 

edge of the current range for the 

species as well, so maintenance 

of this population helps maintain 

the rangewide diversity of the 

species. 

Future Needs

All created habitats need to be 

maintained. Recurring management to keep the 32 acres of 

gestation habitat in excellent 

condition will be necessary, at an 

estimated cost of about $20,000 

per year.

New York Wildlife Action Plan

The New York Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2015. The 

plan identifies 366 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with terrestrial, freshwater, and marine habitats. Key 

threats include habitat loss and 

fragmentation, invasive species, 

pollution, and climate change. 

Priority conservation actions 

include habitat management and 

restoration, water quality protection, population monitoring, and 

public outreach. Development 

of the plan was guided by an 

advisory committee made up of 

25 partners and comments were 

received from over 2000 members of the public. Contact the 

New York State Department of 

Environmental Conservation to 

learn more.

“New York has the 

good fortune to have 

the easternmost 

population of the 

entire Massasauga 

range secure on 

permanently protected 

land. Work funded 

through the State 

Wildlife Grant 

Program has allowed 

us to take action to 

improve habitat at 

this location to help 

secure the future 

of this species both 

within New York and 

throughout its range.”

Department of Environmental 

Conservation

New York State
31

Pennsylvania

Golden-winged Warbler

comprehensive long-term recovery efforts for Species of Greatest 

Conservation Need. Ongoing response monitoring on public and 

private lands is revealing signs of 

success.

Partners

U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServicePartners for Fish and Wildlife, 

Natural Resources Conservation 

Service, Pennsylvania 

Department of Conservation 

and Natural Resources, Indiana 

University of Pennsylvania, 

American Bird Conservancy, 

Pheasants Forever, National 

Fish and Wildlife Foundation, 

National Wild Turkey Federation, 

Golden-winged Warbler Working 

Group, Appalachian Mountain 

Joint Venture

Status

Under Review for Federal Listing

Project Summary

The Golden-winged Warbler 

(GWWA) is a forest-associated 

songbird and a Pennsylvania 

Species of Greatest Conservation Need that has experienced 

long-term population declines. It 

is currently being considered for 

Endangered Species Act protection. In 2011, Pennsylvania Game 

Commission (PGC) used State 

Wildlife Grant (SWG) Program 

funding to establish more than 

5,000 acres of young forest nesting habitat on State Game Lands, 

following science-based best 

management practices developed 

in 2010 by Indiana University of 

Pennsylvania and American Bird 

Conservancy. More importantly, this SWG Program success 

helped promote the expansion 

of forest management efforts 

range wide. Specifically, PGC and 

partners proposed to the Natural 

Resources Conservation Services 

(NRCS) that GWWA should be a 

focal species for their Working 

Lands for Wildlife Program. The 

GWWA was ultimately selected 

as an NRCS national-level focal 

species, which brought dedicated funding for technical and 

financial assistance to private 

landowners to create GWWA 

nesting habitat. This partnership-based initiative to recover 

GWWA demonstrates how SWG 

Program funds can provide the 

initial boost needed to launch 

A male Golden-winged Warbler. 

Photo: Halie Parker.

Program Funding

SWG Program

PGC/Partners

$349,300

TOTAL

$145,000 $204,300
32

Methods

Research, Monitoring, Planning, 

Habitat Enhancement and 

Management, Private Landowner 

Agreements, Coordination

Results

The PGC and partners continue 

to implement large-scale habitat 

projects that are critical for the 

species’ recovery. The partners 

supported a full-time public 

lands Golden-winged Warbler 

forester who helped design and 

implement habitat enhancements 

for this high-priority species on 

State Game Lands. Additionally, 

private lands foresters and planners currently work closely with 

partners to improve habitats for 

the species on private lands. Due 

to these efforts, NRCS has obligated more than $7 million in financial assistance to landowners 

enrolled in the Working Lands 

for Wildlife Program. Between 

2012 and 2019, over 11,200 acres 

were enrolled in the Working 

Lands for Wildlife Program for 

GWWA in Pennsylvania. 

Future Needs

To help avert the potential 

federal listing of Golden-winged 

Warbler, the Pennsylvania Game 

Commission needs increased 

and reliable funding to monitor 

the effectiveness of forest habitat 

improvements and expand forest 

management to benefit the species on additional acres of public 

and, in particular, private lands. 

“The State Wildlife 

Grant Program 

provided critical 

resources to launch 

our partnership’s 

comprehensive effort 

to help recover 

Golden-winged 

Warbler breeding 

populations on public 

and private lands 

in Pennsylvania 

and beyond.” 

Dr. Jeff Larkin

Professor

Indiana University of Pennsylvania
33

Pennsylvania

Native Fishes

Gilt Darter is among the state de-listed 

Pennsylvania freshwater fishes targeted 

for surveying and inventory with SWG 

Program funds. 

Photo: Robert W. Criswell. 

Status

Chesapeake Logperch (StateListed as Threatened in 2012, 

Under Review for Federal 

Listing); Gilt Darter (state 

delisted in 2015)

Project Summary

Contemporary, high-quality 

data are crucial for informing 

conservation actions to secure 

Species of Greatest Conservation 

Need. For the Pennsylvania Fish 

& Boat Commission (PFBC), State 

Wildlife Grant (SWG) Program 

funds have supported surveying 

and inventory projects to fill 

data gaps in the distribution and 

population status of numerous 

multiple-jurisdictional species.

Partners

Robert W. Criswell of The 

Pennsylvania Biological Survey, 

Dr. Jay Stauffer, Jr. of The 

Pennsylvania State University

Methods

Research, Monitoring 

Results

Data obtained through ongoing 

efforts of PFBC supported by the 

State Wildlife Grant Program 

have contributed to delisting of 

22 Pennsylvania endangered, 

threatened or candidate fish 

species. Another four species are 

currently proposed for delisting, 

but the process is still ongoing as 

of 2020. Delisting species at the 

state level reduces administrative 

and technical burdens of both 

environmental permit applicants 

and agency environmental permit review staff. 

Future Needs

Various environmental stressors continue to impact native 

fish species and their habitats 

in Pennsylvania. Since 2009, 

five species have been newly 

state-listed to the Pennsylvania 

endangered and threatened lists 

after exhaustive assessments 

in Pennsylvania. Additional 

resources for monitoring are 

required to evaluate these and 

other populations for long-term 

management.

Program Funding

SWG Program

PFBC/Partners

$1,501,800

TOTAL

$657,000 $844,800
34

Pennsylvania fish species delisted between 2009 and 2019 and their designation 

(i.e., Pennsylvania Endangered, Threatened, or Candidate) prior to delisting.

Information gained through State and Tribal Wildlife Grant projects were 

instrumental in these state de-listings.

Common Name Scientific NameEndangeredThreatenedCandidateDe-listed

RULEMAKING 

DATE

PA BULLETIN 

ISSUE

Gravel Chub Erimystax 

x-punctatus X X 03/16/2019 49.Pa.B.1323

Central 

Mudminnow Umbra limi X X 03/16/2019 49.Pa.B.1323

Eastern 

Mudminnow Umbra pygmaea X X 03/16/2019 49.Pa.B.1323

Banded Sunfish Enneacanthus 

obesus X X 03/16/2019 49.Pa.B.1323

Mountain Brook 

Lamprey

Ichthyomyzon 

greeleyi X X 09/03/16 46 Pa.B. 5731

Ohio Lamprey Ichthyomyzon 

bdellium X X 09/03/16 46 Pa.B. 5731

Bowfin Amia calva X X 09/03/16 46 Pa.B. 5731

Bluebreast Darter Etheostoma 

camrum X X 07/18/15 45 Pa.B. 3841

Spotted Darter Etheostoma 

maculatum X X 07/18/15 45 Pa.B. 3841

Tippecanoe 

Darter

Etheostoma 

tippecanoe X X 07/18/15 45 Pa.B. 3841

Gilt Darter Percina evides X X 07/18/15 45 Pa.B. 3841

American Brook 

Lamprey

Lampetra 

appendix X X 12/22/12 42 Pa.B. 7684

Silver Chub Macrhybopsis 

storeriana X X 07/03/10 40 Pa.B. 3664

Mooneye Hiodon tergisus X X 07/03/10 40 Pa.B. 3664

Skipjack Herring Alosa 

chrysochloris X X 07/03/10 40 Pa.B. 3664

Goldeye Hiodon alosoides X X 07/03/10 40 Pa.B. 3664

Brook Silverside Labidesthes 

sicculus X X 07/03/10 40 Pa.B. 3664

Smallmouth 

Buffalo Ictiobus bubalus X X 03/07/09 39 Pa.B. 1202

Longhead Darter Percina 

macrocephala X X 03/07/09 39 Pa.B. 1202

Channel Darter Percina copelandi X X 03/07/09 39 Pa.B. 1202

River Redhorse Moxostoma 

carinatum X X 03/07/09 39 Pa.B. 1202

Longnose Gar Lepisteous osseus X X 03/07/09 39 Pa.B. 1202

“We have made 

27 adjustments to 

our endangered, 

threatened, and 

candidate fish lists 

in Pennsylvania with 

the vast majority 

being delistings. 

These regulatory 

changes have resulted 

from intense status 

assessments and 

adaptive management 

made possible by 

State Wildlife Grant 

Program funding.” 

Doug Fischer

Ichthyologist

PFBC
35

Pennsylvania Wildlife Action Plan

The Pennsylvania Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in September 

2015. The plan identifies 664 Species of Greatest Conservation 

Need associated with over 66 key 

habitats, including streams and 

rivers, forests, wetlands, caves, 

and Great Lakes shoreline. Key 

threats to species include habitat loss and fragmentation, 

pollution, invasive species, and 

disease. Priority conservation 

actions identified in the plan 

include increased monitoring 

and data collection, habitat 

management and acquisition, 

and technical assistance to 

private landowners. More than 

100 conservation partners and 

many members of the public 

participated in the development 

and review of the plan. Contact 

the Pennsylvania Game Commission or Pennsylvania Fish & Boat 

Commission to learn more. 

Chesapeake Logperch. 

Photo: Doug Fischer, Pennsylvania Fish and 

Boat Commission.
36

Rhode Island

Jonah Crab

in peer-reviewed journals and 

will be incorporated into future 

assessments of the species. Data 

products from this project have 

expanded current knowledge of 

the Jonah Crab, allowing for informed, sustainable management 

of its fishery moving forward. 

Future Needs

Data gaps remain which must be 

addressed to support informed, 

sustainable management of the 

fishery in the future. These data 

gaps are related to Jonah Crab 

geographic distribution and 

movement patterns, fishery dynamics, and reproductive cycles.

Rhode Island Wildlife Action Plan

The Rhode Island Wildlife 

Action Plan was revised in 2015. 

The plan identifies 454 Species 

of Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with forest communities, freshwater wetlands, 

streams, estuaries, marine 

systems, and other habitats. Key 

threats include habitat loss and 

fragmentation, human disturbance and take, invasive species, 

and pollution. Priority conservation actions include land and 

water protection, land and water 

management, stronger laws and 

policies, and increased education 

and awareness. Nearly 175 conservation professionals, stakeholders and members of the public participated in development 

of the plan. Contact the Rhode 

Island Department of Environmental Management’s Division of 

Fish and Wildlife to learn more.

Jonah Crab. 

Photo: National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA).

Status

Species of Greatest Conservation 

Need

Project Summary

The Jonah Crab has long been 

harvested as bycatch in the United 

States American lobster fishery. 

In recent years, however, targeted 

fishing of Jonah Crab has increased 

in concurrence with the decline of 

the southern New England lobster 

fishery. Scientific research efforts 

have lagged behind the growth of 

the Jonah Crab fishery—the status 

of the resource remains unknown 

and the biology of the crab is poorly understood. The Rhode Island 

Department of Environmental 

Management (RIDEM) executed 

this project using State Wildlife 

Grant (SWG) Program funding and 

state resources to directly address 

knowledge gaps in the Jonah Crab 

fishery in order to develop management guidelines to prevent 

overfishing.

Partners

University of Rhode Island, 

Rhode Island Department of 

Environmental Management, 

Division of Marine Resources

Methods

Research, Modeling, Stakeholder 

Engagement 

Results

The information collected in 

these studies was published 

Program Funding

SWG Program

RIDEM/Partners

$170,400

TOTAL

$109,000 $61,400
37

Vermont

Spiny Softshell Turtle

Partners contribute through 

raising late hatchlings in captivity until they are larger in size 

and more likely to survive after 

release. 

Partners

ECHO Leahy Center for Lake 

Champlain, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture Wildlife Services, 

Wildlife and Fisheries Society at 

the University of Vermont

Methods

Habitat Management, Captive 

Rearing and Release, Training, 

Landowner Partnerships

Results

The number of successful nests 

increased from nine in 2004, to 

97 in 2018. VFWD and partners 

are observing more nests with 

small clutches, which may indiLake Champlain’s Spiny Softshell turtle 

population, and this hatchling, are 

growing thanks to an international 

partnership of agencies, organizations 

and individuals and the State Wildlife 

Grant Program.

 Photo: Tom Rogers.

Status

State-Listed as Threatened

Project Summary

The Spiny Softshell Turtle 

survives winters under the ice 

of Lake Champlain, the only 

New England location where it 

is a native species. Widespread 

shoreline development has greatly restricted the Spiny Softshell’s 

nesting habitat, and mammal 

predators are a continuous threat 

on remaining nesting beaches. 

For over 20 years, the Vermont 

Fish and Wildlife Department 

(VFWD) has been working with 

partners on both sides of the 

international border to protect 

and manage the turtle’s remaining nesting sites, with support 

from the State Wildlife Grant 

(SWG) Program. The partners are 

enhancing habitat and reducing 

depredation to increase nesting 

success and hatchling emergence. 

Program Funding

SWG Program

VFWD/Partners

$50,000

TOTAL

$17,500 $32,500
38

cate the recruitment of young 

nesters. Although the species is 

not federally listed, these proactive conservation efforts can 

help preclude the need for listing 

if species numbers continue to 

decline. 

Future Needs

The small number of communal 

nesting sites require ongoing care 

and management. Vegetation 

must be cleared annually from 

the shale beach so turtles can 

dig nests to deposit their eggs. 

Monitoring is required while eggs 

are incubating to keep skunks, 

raccoons, foxes and other predators at bay.

More Information 

https://vtfishandwildlife.com/

learn-more/vermont-critters/reptiles/eastern-spiny-softshell-turtle

Vermont Wildlife Action Plan

The Vermont Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2015. The 

plan identifies 977 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need. 

Key threats include loss and 

degradation of habitat, impacts 

from roads and transportation 

systems, pollution and sedimentation, invasive species, information needs and data gaps, 

and climate change. Priority 

conservation actions include 

education and technical assistance to landowners and land 

managers, financial and economic incentives, and promoting 

wildlife-compatible resource use. 

More than 50 conservation partners assisted with development 

of the plan. Contact the Vermont 

Fish & Wildlife Department to 

learn more.

“We’re proud to 

help conserve the 

softshell turtle.”

Partnering Private Landowner
39

Virginia

River Restoration

the stream migrated, more refuse 

was washed downstream. 

In this part of Virginia, the 2015 

Wildlife Action Plan prioritizes 

efforts to enhance, maintain, 

and restore aquatic and riparian 

habitats specifically by reducing 

sediment, nutrients, pesticides, 

and other pollutants that enter 

waterways. Using $100,000 of 

State Wildlife Grant Program 

funds as seed money, the Virginia Department of Game and 

Inland Fisheries (VDGIF) formed 

a partnership with the Town of 

Elkton, the Central Shenandoah 

Planning District Commission, 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and other agencies to raise 

an additional $560,000 to restore 

the site to a safe and stable condition—benefitting both wildlife 

and people.  

After completion of this partnership 

effort, the cut bank has been protected, 

creating a stable condition that 

benefits both wildlife and people. 

Photo: VDGIF.

Status

Numerous Aquatic Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need

Project Summary

The South Fork of the Shenandoah River flows through the 

Town of Elkton in Rockingham 

County, Virginia. During the last 

several decades, the river’s course 

has shifted, causing the loss of 

the eastern floodplain and the 

creation of a vertical cut bank. At 

its worst, the cut bank extended 

more than 500 feet and was up 

to 15 feet high. Annually, this 

site contributed several hundred 

cubic yards of sediment into the 

river and the Chesapeake Bay 

watershed. The problem was 

compounded as the area being 

eroded contained a buried, early 

20th century garbage dump. As 

Program Funding

SWG Program

VDGIF/Town/Partners

$660,000

TOTAL

$560,000 $100,000
40

Partners

Town of Elkton, Virginia, Central 

Shenandoah Planning District 

Commission, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service

Methods

Monitoring, Coordination, 

Construction 

Results

The cut bank has been stabilized, 

the erosion has ceased, and additional plantings are underway 

to further secure this conservation investment. Numerous 

species of greatest conservation 

need benefited from this restoration including the mussels 

Green Floater, Brook Floater, and 

Triangle Floater. Other aquatic 

species benefiting from the reduction in sedimentation include 

American Eel, Pearl Dace, LongEar Sunfish, and scores of other 

downstream species occurring 

between the restoration site and 

the Chesapeake Bay. Boaters and 

anglers also benefit since erosion from the site had previously 

degraded a boat ramp located just 

downstream from the cut bank.  

Future Needs

VDGIF would utilize additional 

funding to continue pursuing 

their Wildlife Action Plan goal to 

enhance, maintain, and restore 

aquatic and riparian habitats in 

other watersheds in Virginia. 

Virginia Wildlife Action Plan

The Virginia Wildlife Action Plan

was revised in 2015. The plan 

identifies 883 Species of Greatest 

Conservation Need associated 

with beaches, dunes, mudflats, 

wetlands, riparian zones, open 

habitats, forests, and subterranean habitats. Key threats 

include land use changes, invasive species, climate change, and 

pollution. Priority conservation 

actions include monitoring and 

research, land acquisition, invasive species control, water quality improvements, and habitat 

and grazing management. Over 

50 conservation partners and 

many members of the public assisted with development and review of the plan. Contact the Virginia Department of Game and 

Inland Fisheries to learn more.  
41

West Virginia

Pollinator Initiative

wildlife biologists and technical 

specialists demonstrated the importance of pollinators, habitat 

creation, safe and effective herbicide use, site preparation, appropriate seed mixes, and different 

planting techniques.

Partners

Natural Resources Conservation 

Service, West Virginia University 

Extension, West Virginia 

Department of Agriculture, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service—

Partners Program

Methods

Research, Coordination, 

Planning, Outreach and 

Education

Results

A key output of this project is 

the West Virginia Monarch and 

Pollinator Strategic Plan. Several 

hundred people have attendPrivate landowners and other land 

managers learn how to create and 

enhance pollinator habitat in a 

workshop co-hosted by WVDNR’s 

Wildlife Diversity Unit and West 

Virginia University Extension. 

Photo: WVDNR.

Status

Rusty-Patched Bumble Bee—

Federally Endangered (2016), 

Monarch Butterfly—Under 

Review for Federal Listing

Project Summary

The West Virginia Wildlife 

Action Plan identifies habitat 

loss, widespread insecticide use, 

disease, and invasive species 

as major threats to pollinators 

in West Virginia. To assess the 

threats to pollinators, the West 

Virginia Division of Natural Resources (WVDNR) participated in 

a five-state effort that included a 

wetland butterfly assessment and 

assembly of the Atlas of West Virginia Butterflies and Moths, 

supported in part by the State 

Wildlife Grant (SWG) Program.

In April 2018, WVDNR’s Wildlife Diversity Unit convened a 

Monarch Summit to develop a 

strategy for advancing Monarch 

conservation in the Mountain 

State. Stakeholders included 

naturalists, farmers, city managers, oil and gas industry representatives, forestry professionals, 

highway planners, and wildlife 

professionals. Participants shared 

their concerns and challenges, 

and what they are doing to create 

or provide habitat for Monarch 

Butterfly and other pollinators. 

The Wildlife Diversity Unit also 

partnered with West Virginia 

University Extension to host 

pollinator workshops where 

Program Funding

SWG Program

WVDNR/Partners

$75,000

TOTAL

$15,000 $60,000
42

ed workshops to learn about 

enhancing habitat to benefit 

pollinators in the Mountain 

State. WVDNR also supports a 

pollinator habitat specialist that 

designs pollinator management 

plans on private lands. Landowners, agencies and industry now 

embrace pollinator conservation 

and look to the Wildlife Diversity 

Unit for guidance and leadership. This transfer of knowledge 

and technology is resulting in 

management changes to benefit 

Monarch Butterfly and other 

pollinators on thousands of acres 

of habitats in West Virginia. 

With efforts of other states, these 

proactive strategies may help 

avert the need to list the Monarch, and contribute to recovery 

and potential future de-listing of 

Rusty-Patched Bumble Bee.

Agricultural producers benefit 

from large-scale implementation 

of pollinator friendly practices, 

including increased pollination 

leading to better yields over time. 

A more diverse insect community 

also results in less pesticide use 

on farms. 

Future Needs

Additional resources are needed to maintain the pollinator 

habitat specialist position so that 

more private landowners who are 

willing to restore and enhance 

pollinator habitat on their lands 

can be served. Ongoing funding 

would help WVDNR conduct 

additional monitoring used to 

develop and refine monitoring 

protocols and species distribution 

models for pollinator species.

More Information

https://www.wvmonarch.org/

West Virginia Wildlife Action Plan

The West Virginia Wildlife 

Action Plan was revised in 2015. 

The plan identifies 1,233 Species 

of Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with rivers, forests, 

barrens, wetlands, and caves. 

Key threats include habitat loss, 

habitat degradation, disease, 

competition, and predation. 

Priority conservation actions 

include collaboration with the 

forest management community 

and Division of Highways, and 

identification of conservation 

focus areas to direct conservation actions. Eight conservation 

partners, agency staff, and members of the public participated in 

development and review of the 

plan. Contact the West Virginia 

Division of Natural Resources to 

learn more. 

Monarch Butterfly helps pollinate 

wildflowers. This celebrated butterfly 

is currently under review by the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service for potential 

listing under the Endangered Species 

Act. 

Photo: Brett Billings, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service.
43

REGIONAL CONSERVATION HIGHLIGHT

Blanding’s Turtle

In 2004, New Hampshire Fish 

and Game convened a meeting 

of biologists involved in Blanding’s Turtle conservation from 

the New England states where 

it occurs—Massachusetts, New 

Hampshire, and Maine. They 

discussed needs, challenges, and 

charted a path forward together. With support from the State 

Wildlife Grant Program and the 

Regional Conservation Needs 

Program, that path has turned 

into a roadmap for collaborative 

turtle conservation across the 

Northeast region. 

Today there are also Regional 

Working Groups led by state 

agencies for Wood Turtle, Spotted Turtle, Bog Turtle, and 

Eastern Box Turtle, that are 

producing species status assessments, conservation plans, maps 

of high priority sites, and habitat 

improvements. 

Partners in the Northeast 

Collaborate for Lasting 

Turtle Conservation 

Despite the clichés about their 

kind, Blanding’s Turtles, a species 

native to 15 states and maritime 

Canada, are known for getting 

around. 

“They can move miles in the 

course of a season,” said Michael 

Marchand, Wildlife Diversity 

Program Administrator at the 

New Hampshire Department of 

Fish and Game. “A female might 

travel half a mile just looking for 

a place to make a nest.” 

For an animal that’s less than 10 

inches long, that’s a long way to go. 

For a wildlife biologist like 

Marchand, it’s also a conservation challenge.

Blanding’s Turtles’ high mobility 

puts them in conflict with ours. 

“Crossing roads is a big threat 

for this species,” Marchand said. 

“Their habitat overlaps some of 

the highest population density 

areas in New England—southern Maine, southeastern New 

Hampshire, and eastern Massachusetts.” 

But this species’ penchant for 

moving around the landscape 

also provided incentive for 

collaboration. “We recognized 

that the challenges facing this 

species crossed boundaries, and 

that we could do more to address 

its needs by working together,” 

Marchand said. 

The Blanding’s Turtle Working Group, 

with representatives from northeastern 

state fish and wildlife agencies and 

other partners. 

Photo: Mike Marchand, 2018.
44

“Blanding’s Turtle felt like a turning point,” said Mike Jones, the 

state herpetologist for the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and 

Wildlife, who has been involved 

in conservation planning, supported by the State Wildlife 

Grant Program, for several species. “It demonstrated that states 

recognized the value in finding 

common ground in their work on 

this species.” Although Blanding’s 

Turtle was considered a species 

of concern in New England, New 

York, and Pennsylvania, at the 

outset of the collaboration each 

state was at a different stage in 

management. “Some had been 

working on Blanding’s Turtle for 

years and were already funding 

work on the ground,” said Liz 

Willey, a professor of Environmental Studies and Sustainability at Antioch University New 

England, who co-authored the 

conservation plans for Blanding’s 

and Wood Turtle with Jones.

“But they wanted to know: what 

did it all add up to for the species 

as a whole?” she said. “With a 

combined approach, they could 

share information to address 

challenges across state lines.” 

Once the Blanding’s Turtle working group had gained momentum, one of the first steps toward 

collaborative conservation was 

a standard sampling protocol. 

With input from biologists in 

each state, the working group 

combined key elements from 

different survey methodologies 

within a statistical framework. 

The goal was to figure out: what 

data did they all need to collect in 

order to understand the species’ 

big-picture needs? 

 “We wanted to focus on not just 

where the population is now, but 

where it will be over the course of 

the next 100 years,” Willey said. 

That’s important because Blanding’s Turtle habitat is also highly 

dynamic. These turtles often rely 

on beaver wetlands, an impermanent landscape feature that 

succeeds into forest when beaver 

abandon a site. “We wanted to 

capture long-term succession on 

the landscape, to make sure turtles could move around as they 

needed,” she said. 

That landscape perspective revealed that New Hampshire had 

a larger role in Blanding’s Turtle 

conservation than expected. “Prior to the survey, we knew we had 

some Blanding’s Turtle habitat 

here and there,” Marchand said. 

“Afterwards, we found that New 

Hampshire represents 40 percent 

of the overall distribution of species in the Northeast.”

The initial State Wildlife Grant 

Program-supported project also 

included a genetic component 

that revealed something new 

about some of the known populations of Blanding’s Turtles. “It 

helped us identify high priority 

populations from a genetic standpoint—those with genetic diversity or distinction,” Willey said, 

adding, “Populations that may 

not have been prioritized originally, but could have a unique 

evolutionary capacity that we 

want to preserve.” 

With a second project, supported 

this time with Competitive State 

Wildlife Grant (C-SWG) Program 

funding, the partners focused 

on targeted implementation to 

protect and enhance the priority 

populations. 

The Regional Conservation Needs Grant 

Program

Innovating for Range-Wide 

Species Conservation

State Wildlife Action Plans deal 

with rare species, hard-to-count 

species, habitats that cross state 

boundaries, and resources that 

are conserved most effectively on 

a regional scale. A mechanism 

to share expertise and funding 

to address these landscapescale issues greatly enhances 

collaboration and likelihood of 

success, resulting in more effective 

conservation of these species.

Working across state lines 

with a mix of state and federal 

dollars is extremely difficult. It 

requires adequate structural and 

personnel resources to coordinate, 

implement, monitor, and report on 

complex projects.

State fish and wildlife agency 

directors in the northeast portion 

of the U.S. support a coordinated 

regional approach and in 2006, 

developed a cooperative program 

to address issues and opportunities 

of regional concern. The Regional 

Conservation Needs (RCN) 

Grant Program was approved 

in April 2007, supported by a 

voluntary contribution from each 

northeastern state in the amount 

of 4% of each agency’s annual 

State Wildlife Grant Program 

apportionment. The purpose of 

the RCN Program is to develop, 

coordinate, and implement 

conservation actions that are 

regional or sub-regional in scope 

and that incorporate and build 

upon the many existing regional 

initiatives.
45

While strategic land protection 

and technical assistance to land-

owners and land managers are 

top priorities at many sites, the 

best conservation opportunities 

varied from state to state, and 

across priority sites. The prime 

habitat for Blanding’s Turtle in 

Massachusetts occurs in areas 

most vulnerable to development. 

Equipped with the regional 

conservation plan, Jones said, 

“The states and their partners 

have been able to direct millions 

of dollars toward conservation 

activities within Blanding’s Tur-

tle core areas, leveraging effort 

across several state and federal 

agencies.”

For Marchand, that’s the added 

value of collaboration. “Our goal 

is to make the most effective and 

efficient decisions to advance the 

conservation of the species,” he 

said, noting that historically, con-

servation on behalf of Blanding’s 

Turtle in New Hampshire was 

more opportunistic. “Now we 

can target collective funding and 

effort to the best sites, to make 

sure they stay that way.” 

Conservation Crisis

Turtle Trafficking

Native turtles are disappearing 

from lands and waters across 

the country at the hands of 

domestic and international wildlife 

traffickers. In the past three years 

alone, wildlife inspectors with the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have 

intercepted outbound shipments 

containing more than 10,000 

individual turtles representing 13 

different native turtle species. 

Alarmed about the ecological 

consequences of this growing 

threat for both rare and common 

turtle species, staff from state 

and federal agencies along 

with nonprofit partners are 

taking action: establishing multiagency and multi-disciplinary 

collaboratives, identifying 

information gaps and scientific 

needs, and forming a united 

front against criminals who are 

trafficking in our natural heritage. 

The turtle-trafficking crisis touches 

every part of our country — no 

turtle species is safe from this 

threat, and we all have a role 

to play in protecting them. By 

supporting scientific tools, turtle 

housing capacity, repatriation 

protocols, and partner networks, 

we can optimize our response, and 

help offset the population damage 

with evidence-based approaches.
46

TRIBAL HIGHLIGHTS

Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe of New York 

Native Plant Restoration

Saratoga Tree Nursery, Mid-Atlantic Regional Seed Bank, 

Confederated Tribes of the Grand 

Ronde Community of Oregon, 

Natural Resources Conservation 

Service, Franklin Soil and Water 

Conservation District, Akwesasne Cultural Center, Akwesasne Task Force on the Environment, Akwesasne Freedom 

School

Methods

Plant Propagation, Habitat 

Restoration, Coordination, 

Training, Facility Development 

Results

This project will result in new infrastructure and capacity building for the Saint Regis Mohawk 

Tribe’s ongoing conservation 

efforts. Funding will be used 

within the next year to build a 

greenhouse, which enables longterm benefits to conservation 

and habitat restoration on tribal 

lands. Additionally, the Saint 

Regis Mohawk Tribe is gaining 

hands-on training from key partners in the facility.

Future Needs

Future funding will help the 

Tribe expand habitat restoration 

efforts to include additional 

species of cultural and traditional importance, including River 

Otter, Beaver, Northern Pike, 

Muskellunge, Tiger Muskellunge, 

Bobcat, and Hermit Thrush. 

The Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe is using 

Tribal Wildlife Grant Program funding 

to construct a native plant facility to 

help restore plant communities and 

provide habitat for many species, 

including bumble bees. 

Photo: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Project Summary

The Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe’s 

Native Plants Restoration and 

Capacity Building Project uses the 

Tribal Wildlife Grant Program to 

help develop tribal capacities to 

operate and manage a native plant 

nursery operation. Native plant 

species will be grown for use in 

habitat enhancement efforts that 

benefit fish and wildlife species of 

tribal cultural and traditional importance. Native plant restoration 

sites will benefit habitats by reducing sediment loading and improving water quality for fish and other 

aquatic organisms affected by 

turbidity and nutrients caused by 

power dam impacts. Many species 

of culturally important fish and 

wildlife have suffered the negative 

effects of degraded habitats within 

the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribal 

Territory. Some of the species that 

will benefit include Muskrat, Snapping Turtle, Yellow Perch, Walleye, 

Lake Sturgeon, Ruffed Grouse, 

Deer, and Wilson’s Snipe. Tribal 

clans value these species as sources 

of food and organic materials for 

leather preservation, skin moisturizer, and other purposes.

Project Cost

Tribal Wildlife Grant 

Program—$199,998; other 

resources are provided by the 

Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe as 

voluntary cost share

Partners

New York State Department of 

Environmental Conservation’s 

Program Funding

TWG Program

$217,602

TOTAL

$199,998

Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe

$17,604
47

Seneca Nation of Indians of New York

Aquatic Species Conservation

provided by the Seneca Nation of 

Indians 

Partners

The Buffalo Zoo, New York State 

Department of Conservation, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Pennsylvania Conservancy, 

New York State Department 

of Transportation, Natural 

Resources Conservation Service, 

National Fish and Wildlife 

Foundation 

Methods

Facility Development, Plant 

Propagation, Habitat Protection 

and Restoration 

Results

The Seneca Nation implemented over five miles of in-stream 

restoration including placement 

of natural habitat structures, 

bank stabilization, and in-stream 

pooling structures. Five acres 

of wetland were preserved and 

Eastern Brook Trout. 

Photo: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Project Summary

A primary goal of the Seneca 

Nation is to protect and preserve Seneca lands and natural 

resources to benefit all Seneca 

members and future generations. The Seneca Nation utilized 

support from the Tribal Wildlife 

Grant Program to conduct longterm fish and wildlife habitat 

improvement on tribal lands, including conservation focused on 

Blanding’s Turtle, Eastern Brook 

Trout, and Eastern Hellbender. Funding was used to build a 

tribal fish hatchery, as well as a 

Blanding’s Turtle rearing facility. 

These facilities, and the Nation’s 

educational outreach activities, 

help provide long-term benefits to tribal lands and families 

through species conservation and 

restoration. 

Project Cost

Tribal Wildlife Grant 

Program—$199,480; more than 

$80,000 in other resources 

Program Funding

TWG Program

Seneca Nation of Indians

$279,480

TOTAL

$80,000 $199,480
48

protected for threatened species 

living within the Seneca Nation 

Territories. Two miles of riparian 

buffer plantings were installed 

using native indigenous species. 

These restoration efforts created a natural buffer and filter for 

streams within tribal lands. The 

restoration also provided bank 

stabilization, resulting in wildlife 

habitat enhancement and protection.

Future Needs

Future funding would help the 

Seneca Nation continue to protect and restore habitats for species that are important to tribal 

members, while also contributing 

to regional conservation efforts 

implemented by state fish and 

wildlife agencies that benefit 

at-risk species, such as Blanding’s 

Turtle and Eastern Hellbender. 
49

SOUTHEAST REGION HIGHLIGHTS
50
51

STATE HIGHLIGHTS

Alabama

Eastern Indigo Snake

The first evidence of reproduction of 

the Eastern Indigo Snake in the wild 

in Alabama was recently discovered in 

Conecuh National Forest. 

Photo: Francesca Erickson.

more scheduled for release in the 

spring of 2020. Breeding has been 

documented by observing gravid 

females and through game camera monitoring. In January 2020, 

the first wild Eastern Indigo 

Snake was observed in almost 60 

years in Alabama. This hatchling 

was verification that released 

snakes were breeding and behaving as wild snakes, and reproduction is taking place. 

Future Needs

Additional resources are needed 

to continue reintroduction of this 

species. With additional funding, partners can monitor for the 

emerging snake disease, cryptosporidium, as well as maintain 

genetic diversity and support 

breeding facility operations.

More Information

https://www.outdooralabama.

com/node/3479

Status

Federally Threatened (1978)

Project Summary

In 2010, the Alabama Division 

of Wildlife & Freshwater Fisheries (ALWFF) started an Eastern 

Indigo Snake repatriation project 

at Conecuh National Forest in 

Covington County, Alabama. The 

last known documented report 

of this species in the wild was in 

1954. This large-scale initiative 

was the impetus for establishing 

the species’ own breeding facility, 

The Orianne Center for Indigo 

Conservation, in Eustis, Florida. 

A monitoring program is in place 

to track project success through 

snake health, movements, behaviors, and survival. These efforts 

have been supported in part by 

the State Wildlife Grant (SWG) 

Program.

Partners

Auburn Museum of Natural 

History, U.S. Forest Service, 

Orianne Center for Indigo 

Conservation, Birmingham Zoo, 

Zoo Atlanta, Zoo Tampa, Welaka 

National Fish Hatchery

Methods

Monitoring, Captive Rearing, and 

Release 

Results

To date, 191 Eastern Indigo 

Snakes have been released, with 

Program Funding

SWG Program

ALWFF/Partners

$1,315,700

TOTAL

$572,700 $743,000
52

Alabama Wildlife Action Plan

The Alabama Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2015. The 

plan identifies 366 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with river basins, forests, wetlands, caves, and coastal 

beaches. Key threats to species 

include habitat loss and fragmentation, disturbance, invasive 

species, and lack of protection. 

Priority conservation actions 

include increased monitoring 

and data collection, enhanced 

management and protection, and 

outreach. More than 40 conservation partners and many members of the public participated in 

the development and review of 

the plan. Contact the Alabama 

Department of Conservation and 

Natural Resources to learn more.

“It’s a huge testimony 

to the State Wildlife 

Grant Program and 

working toward the 

recovery of a federally 

listed species.”

Traci Wood

Habitat & Species 

Conservation Coordinator

Alabama Wildlife & Freshwater Fisheries
53

Arkansas

Red-cockaded Woodpecker

A Red-Cockaded Woodpecker at 

Warren Prairie, Arkansas. 

Photo: Bill Holimon, Arkansas Natural 

Heritage Commission. 

Status

Federally Endangered (1970) 

under the Endangered Species 

Preservation Act

Project Summary

The Arkansas Game and Fish 

Commission (AGFC) uses State 

Wildlife Grant (SWG) Program 

funds along with state resources 

to improve habitat for a wide 

variety of Species of Greatest 

Conservation Need identified 

in the Arkansas State Wildlife 

Action Plan. AGFC has made 

investments over several year for 

species, such as the Red-cockaded Woodpecker, that require 

open grassland and open woodland habitats. Recent conservation work for this and other 

species has been conducted at 

the Warren Prairie Natural Area 

located in southeast Arkansas. 

This project is a good example 

of restoring habitat to benefit 

Species of Greatest Conservation 

need and the potential of these 

projects to benefit threatened and 

endangered species.

Partners

Arkansas Natural Heritage 

Commission, The Nature 

Conservancy, Potlatch Forest 

Holdings, Inc.

Methods

Research, Monitoring, Habitat 

Management 

Results

Habitat restoration included the 

use of prescribed fire and mechanical thinning treatments 

on 1,375 acres to create a more 

Program Funding

SWG Program

AGFC/Partners

$112,000

TOTAL

$56,000 $56,000
54

open structure favored by several 

bird species, including Red-cockaded Woodpecker. Monitoring 

showed that Henslow’s Sparrows, 

Brown-headed Nuthatches, and 

Red-headed Woodpeckers, all 

species of concern in Arkansas, 

increased in abundance in response to these treatments. After 

the completion of this project, 

habitat quality at Warren Prairie 

was determined to be suitable for 

the endangered Red-cockaded 

Woodpecker. Five pairs of subadult birds were reintroduced to 

the site in October 2010. The following year, three of these pairs 

were breeding. In 2019, nesting 

and fledging success were at an 

all-time high for the area.

Future Needs

AGFC needs additional support 

for continued maintenance of 

open woodland habitat structure 

and monitoring of Red-cockaded 

Woodpecker clusters. 

More Information

https://www.fws.gov/rcwrecovery/rcw.html

https://www.fws.gov/rcwrecovery/files/rcwoodpecker.pdf

Arkansas Wildlife Action Plan

The Arkansas Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2015. The 

plan identifies 380 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with prairies, caves, 

wetlands, rivers, and streams. 

Key threats include habitat loss 

and fragmentation, incompatible 

habitat practices, aquatic passage 

barriers, and urban development. 

Priority conservation actions 

identified in the plan include 

habitat restoration, habitat 

protection, threat abatement, 

and fire management. A diverse 

group of conservation partners 

and many members of the public 

participated in the development 

and review of the plan. Contact 

the Arkansas Game and Fish 

Commission to learn more.

“These endangered 

birds are benefiting 

greatly from the 

State Wildlife Grant 

Program and we are 

very appreciative 

of our state and 

federal partners who 

oversee the grant 

program for their 

part in this project’s 

ongoing success.”

 Bill Holimon

Director

 Arkansas Natural 

Heritage Commission

Henslow’s Sparrow is a Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need in 30 

states. Many of these states list the 

species as threatened or endangered. 

Photo: Chris Young. Data: U.S. Geological 

Survey, https://www1.usgs.gov/csas/swap/

species_view.html. 
55

Florida

Manatee

Partners

Southwest Florida Water 

Management District, St. Martins 

Marsh Aquatic Preserve, Big 

Bend Seagrasses Aquatic 

Preserve, Suwannee River Water 

Management District, The Nature 

Conservancy, NOAA Center for 

Coastal Fisheries and Habitat 

Research, Lippincott Consulting 

LLC

Methods

Research, Monitoring, Habitat 

Protection, Enhancement, and 

Management

Results

As a result of FWC’s and their 

many partners’ efforts, the 

Florida Manatee population has 

grown to a minimum of 7,520 

animals today. In early 2017, the 

Florida Manatee was reclassified 

from an endangered to a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. This change 

in the species status is based on 

an increasing population and the 

establishment of effective protection measures to ensure the 

continued conservation of the 

species.

Future Needs

Ongoing monitoring and other 

conservation to benefit Florida 

Manatees could help the species 

fully recover if population trends 

continue and additional habitat 

is permanently protected. 

Status

Federally Reclassified from 

Endangered to Threatened (2017)

Project Summary

The Florida Manatee is an iconic 

native species found in many 

of Florida’s rivers, bays, canals, 

estuaries and coastal areas. 

The population has grown to a 

minimum of 7,520 animals today

and as a result, in early 2017 was 

reclassified from an endangered 

to a threatened species under 

the Endangered Species Act. The 

State Wildlife Grant Program 

has contributed to the successful 

and continued recovery with a 

multitude of conservation actions 

to benefit this species. Projects 

to help sustain a healthy Florida Manatee population include 

spring conservation, seagrass restoration, mapping, research, and 

monitoring, and estuarine habitat enhancement. The Florida 

Fish and Wildlife Conservation 

Commission (FWC), along with 

other partners and stakeholders, 

manages and protects Florida’s 

seagrass and warm water habitat 

resources favored by Manatees. 

Today, Manatees are considered 

one of Florida’s keystone species 

whose behavior can alert researchers to the environmental 

and habitat changes that may 

otherwise go unnoticed in Florida’s waterways.

After Hurricane Hermine in September 

2016, seven Manatees were stranded in 

the golf course pond at the Plantation 

on Crystal River. At the start of the 

February FWC Commission Meeting, 

Chairman Brian Yablonski recognized 

Inn staff members who assisted in the 

rescue. 

Photo: Karen Parker, FWC. Attribution 

license: https://creativecommons.org/

licenses/by-nd/2.0/legalcode.

Program Funding

SWG Program

FWC/Partners

$1,219,000

TOTAL

$583,000 $636,000
56

More Information

https://myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/wildlife/manatee/how-tohelp/

Florida Wildlife Action Plan

The Florida Wildlife Action Plan

was revised in 2019. The plan 

identifies 690 Species of Greatest 

Conservation Need associated 

within terrestrial, freshwater, 

and marine habitats, and urban 

and working lands. Key threats 

to species include residential and 

commercial development, human 

disturbance, invasive species, and 

climate change. Priority conservation actions identified in the 

plan include increased monitoring and data collection, habitat 

restoration, and outreach. Over 

100 conservation partners and 

members of the public participated in the development and review 

of the plan. Contact the Florida 

Fish and Wildlife Conservation 

Commission to learn more.

“Florida Fish & 

Wildlife Conservation 

Commission 

continues to protect 

and conserve 

Manatees and their 

habitat through 

programs operated 

in the Division of 

Habitat and Species 

Conservation, the 

Fish & Wildlife 

Research Institute, 

and the Division of 

Law Enforcement.”

Florida Fish & Wildlife 

Conservation Commission 
57

Georgia

Gopher Tortoise

Results

When the GTCI started, 36 

of Georgia’s 123 known viable 

tortoise populations were permanently protected. At present 

GDNR has protected 53 populations, and projects in progress 

will lead to permanent protection 

of seven additional populations. 

In addition to these conservation 

outcomes, the GTCI also improves and makes available large 

public land areas for hunting, 

fishing, hiking, camping, and 

wildlife watching. 

Future Needs

Additional and ongoing funds are 

needed for protecting at least six 

more viable populations, outreach to private landowners, and 

establishing stewardship endowments and developing long-term 

management plans, especially for 

recently protected properties.

Juvenile Gopher Tortoise. 

Photo: Georgia Department of Natural 

Resources.

Status

Federal Candidate

Project Summary

Since 2009, the State Wildlife 

Grant (SWG) Program has been 

a primary resource for tortoise 

conservation led by the Georgia 

Department of Natural Resources 

(GDNR). The goal of the Georgia 

Gopher Tortoise Conservation 

Initiative (GTCI) is to protect and 

manage 65 viable gopher tortoise 

populations in Georgia to help 

preclude listing of this keystone 

species under the Endangered 

Species Act. Multiple projects utilize a proactive approach, investing in habitat that protects both 

the economic viability of the 

state and many species of conservation concern. Many sectors of 

the Georgia economy, including 

forestry, agriculture, transportation, commercial development, 

and activities on military bases 

could be negatively affected by a 

federal listing. 

Partners

U.S. Department of Defense, 

U.S. Forest Service, The Nature 

Conservancy of Georgia, Private 

Foundations

Methods

Monitoring, Prescribed Fire and 

Other Habitat Management, 

Forest Restoration 

Program Funding

SWG Program

GDNR/Partners

$5,657,000

TOTAL

$2,687,000 $2,960,000
58

More Information

https://www.georgiaconservancy.

org/gophertortoise

Georgia Wildlife Action Plan

The Georgia Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2015. The 

plan identifies 640 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with calcareous flatwoods, mountain bogs, granite 

outcrops, longleaf pine savannas, 

caves, maritime forests, and other 

habitats. Key threats to species 

include habitat loss and fragmentation, altered hydrology, invasive 

species, and altered fire regimes. 

Priority conservation actions 

identified in the plan include increased monitoring and surveys, 

habitat restoration, rare species 

recovery, environmental education, and outreach to private 

landowners. Over 100 conservation partners and many members 

of the public participated in the 

development and review of the 

plan. Contact the Georgia DNR 

Wildlife Resources Division to 

learn more.

“We all have the same 

objective: can we save 

this critter without 

more regulation? 

We’re all smart 

enough to see that 

more regulations could 

be the future if we 

don’t work this out.”

Doug Miell

Energy and Natural 

Resources Consultant

Georgia Chamber of Commerce

An adult Gopher Tortoise. 

Photo: Georgia Department of Natural 

Resources. 
59

Louisiana

Louisiana Black Bear

Partners

University of Tennessee, Black 

Bear Conservation Committee, 

St. Mary Parish

Methods

Research/Genetic Analysis, 

Habitat Restoration, Training, 

Outreach/Education, Technical 

Assistance

Results

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service establishes de-listing criteria 

to determine how and when a 

species may be removed from 

federal listing. Reforestation was 

one of the criteria for the Louisiana Black Bear. LDWF restored 

nearly 800 acres of bottomland 

hardwood forest, a major contribution to the recovery of the 

species. Outreach and Technical 

Assistance have resulted in fewer 

Louisiana Black Bear has staged a 

major comeback due in large part to 

efforts of LDWF and its partners, using 

funding from the State Wildlife Grant 

Program. 

Photo: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Status

Federally De-Listed Due to 

Recovery (2016)

Project Summary

The Louisiana Black Bear is the 

state mammal of Louisiana, and 

occurs in Louisiana, east Texas, 

and western Mississippi. By 1980, 

biologists estimated that more 

than 80 percent of the bear’s 

habitat had been modified or destroyed. In 1992, Louisiana Black 

Bear was listed as threatened by 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

under the Endangered Species 

Act. For nearly 10 years, the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and 

Fisheries (LDWF) has utilized 

State Wildlife Grant (SWG) Program funding and other resources to implement a broad suite of 

conservation actions to benefit 

this unique species. 

Program Funding

SWG Program

LDWF/Partners

$1,213,000

TOTAL

$431,000 $782,000
60

human/bear conflicts. The Service de-listed the Louisiana Black 

Bear in 2016.

Future Needs

Louisiana Black Bear will require 

periodic monitoring and ongoing management to ensure its 

long-term recovery. In addition, 

LDWF’s Wildlife Action Plan 

includes many other priority 

conservation actions that are 

necessary to help recover other 

federally listed species and avert 

future listings through proactive 

measures. 

More Information

https://www.wlf.louisiana.gov/

subhome/louisiana-black-bear

Louisiana Wildlife Action Plan

The Louisiana Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2015, with 

a minor revision completed in 

2019. The plan identifies 345 

Species of Greatest Conservation 

Need associated with grasslands, 

savannahs and woodlands, barrier islands, forests, and ephemeral ponds. Key threats include 

habitat loss and fragmentation, 

disturbance, invasive species, and 

climate change. Priority conservation actions include increased 

monitoring and data collection, 

development of best management 

practices, protection, creation, 

and maintenance of high-quality 

habitat, and stewardship. More 

than 100 conservation partners 

and many members of the public 

participated in the development 

and review of the plan. Contact 

the Louisiana Department of 

Wildlife and Fisheries to learn 

more.

“I know the actions 

we have taken 

as a Department 

with our partners 

in conservation 

have been key to 

the relatively rapid 

recovery of our 

Louisiana Black Bear.” 

Maria Davidson

Louisiana Department of 

Wildlife and Fisheries
61

Mississippi

Frecklebelly Madtom

the State Wildlife Grant (SWG) 

Program. In partnership with 

the Service’s Private John Allen 

National Fish Hatchery, MDWFP 

collected broodstock for propagation. The agency is planning a 

reintroduction in a 40-kilometer 

stream within the Tombigbee 

River along with three years of 

monitoring.

Partners

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Louisiana Department of 

Wildlife and Fisheries 

Methods

Research, Monitoring, Captive 

Breeding and Release

Mississippi Department of Wildlife, 

Fisheries, and Parks staff collecting 

Frecklebelly Madtom on the Pearl River 

with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

and private landowners. 

Photo: MDWFP.

Status

Petitioned for Federal Listing 

(2010)—Listing Averted 

Project Summary

The Frecklebelly Madtom was 

petitioned for federal listing in 

2010 due to declines across the 

range of the species in the Pearl 

and Mobile Rivers. The low 

presence at historic sites coupled 

with low relative abundance 

demonstrated a need to reassess the status of the species. In 

coordination with the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, the Mississippi Department of Wildlife, 

Fisheries, and Parks (MDWFP) 

and Louisiana Department of 

Wildlife and Fisheries sampled 

nearly 180 sites in the Pearl and 

Mobile Rivers for presence of this 

small freshwater catfish. Support 

for this effort was provided by 

Program Funding

SWG Program

MDFWP/Partners

$18,600

TOTAL

$6,510 $12,090
62

Results

Species monitoring determined 

a presence of 81 to 89 percent in 

the Pearl and Mobile Rivers at 

sampled localities. This project 

established that the species status 

is stable throughout its range in 

the Pearl River in Mississippi and 

Louisiana and the tributaries to 

the Mobile River in Mississippi.

Future Needs

The species is still absent from 

68 percent of its overall historic 

range in the Mobile River in 

Mississippi inundated by the 

Tennessee–Tombigbee Waterway. Additional resources are 

needed to continue raising and 

releasing the fish in its historic 

range to ensure Freckebelly 

Madtom does not require federal listing in the future.

Mississippi Wildlife Action Plan

The Mississippi Wildlife Action Plan was revised in 2015. 

The plan identifies 310 Species 

of Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with river basins, forests, wetlands, caves, and coastal 

beaches. Key threats to species 

include habitat loss and fragmentation, disturbance, invasive 

species, and lack of protection. 

Priority conservation actions 

include increased monitoring 

and data collection, enhanced 

management and protection, and 

outreach. More than 189 conservation partners and many members of the public participated in 

the development and review of 

the plan. Contact the Mississippi 

Department of Wildlife, Fisheries 

and Parks to learn more.

“The quality work 

we receive from the 

State Wildlife Grant 

Program is invaluable 

for us to meet our 

agency’s mission.”

Amy Carson

Biologist

Mississippi Ecological 

Services Field Office

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Project partners sampled nearly 180 

sites in the Pearl and Mobile Rivers for 

presence of Frecklebelly Madtom, a 

small freshwater catfish. 

Photo: Matthew D. Wagner, State 

Ichthyologist/Curator of Fishes, Mississippi 

Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Parks: 

Mississippi Museum of Natural Science.
63

North Carolina

Carolina Pygmy Sunfish

Methods

Research, Monitoring, Habitat 

Protection and Enhancement 

Results

The Carolina Pygmy Sunfish was 

petitioned for federal listing in 

April 2010. Prior to this petition, 

the Carolina Pygmy Sunfish was 

a Category 2 Candidate for listing. Following this survey work, 

the petition was withdrawn by 

the petitioner. 

Future Needs

The North Carolina Wildlife 

Resources Commission will 

continue to monitor the species 

to determine if additional conservation actions are warranted. 

This species is being included in 

a state-wide Safe Harbor/CanPygmy Sunfish was petitioned for 

federal listing, but the North Carolina 

Wildlife Resources Commission 

determined the abundance of the fish 

which resulted in withdrawal of the 

petition. 

Photo: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Status

Petitioned for Federal Listing 

(2010)—Listing Averted

Project Summary

The Carolina Pygmy Sunfish is 

a small fish, less than 1.5 inches long, found only in streams, 

ditches, and wetlands in five 

counties in North Carolina. The 

isolation of the Carolina Pygmy Sunfish makes it vulnerable 

to development, pollution, and 

habitat alterations. Urbanization 

has been associated with local 

disappearances. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) has used State 

Wildlife Grant (SWG) Program 

funds in combination with agency resources to conduct surveys 

to determine the abundance of 

the fish in an effort to address 

a petition for federal listing in 

2010. This species was previously 

considered imperiled but much of 

this perception was due to a lack 

of dedicated survey work on this 

species. Pygmy Sunfish is hard to 

collect and needs targeted efforts 

to detect. This species underscores the need to have dedicated 

funding to be able to undertake 

concentrated survey and conservation work for species that have 

few other funding sources.

Partners

South Carolina Department of 

Natural Resources, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, NOAA Fisheries, 

Three Oaks Engineering 

Program Funding

SWG Program

NCWRC/Partners

$66,500

TOTAL

$16,500 $50,000
64

didate Conservation Agreement 

with Assurances so the species 

can be stocked in unoccupied 

suitable habitat if necessary at 

some point in the future. Additional resources may be necessary 

to implement stream restoration 

and other habitat enhancement 

or management activities to help 

avert the need for federal listing.

North Carolina Wildlife Action Plan

The North Carolina Wildlife 

Action Plan was revised in 2015. 

The plan identifies 457 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need associated with rivers and streams, 

freshwater and marine wetlands, 

forests, grasslands, beaches, and 

caves. Key threats include habitat 

fragmentation, land conversion, 

habitat loss, invasive species, disease and pathogens, and climate 

change. Priority conservation 

actions include land protection, 

population monitoring and data 

collection, habitat management, 

education and outreach, and 

species propagation. The plan 

was developed in coordination 

with more than 40 organizations 

and many members of the public. 

Contact the North Carolina 

Wildlife Resources Commission

for more information. 

“[The Carolina Pygmy 

Sunfish] is one of those 

species that shows the 

importance of getting 

accurate and complete 

information. When it 

was petitioned, I was 

sure it would need 

listing. But after doing 

more thorough survey 

and monitoring work, 

it looked a lot more 

secure than I originally 

thought. It also shows 

the value of working 

as a region.” 

Todd Ewing

North Carolina Wildlife 

Resources Commission
65

Oklahoma

Ozark Emerald

acquisition project using SWG 

Program funds. The ODWC 

purchased the 180-acre Girdner 

Tract for addition to the Cookson 

Hills Wildlife Management Area. 

The Girdner Tract encompasses a 

small spring-fed watershed where 

Ozark Emeralds have been found 

and are presumed to breed.

Partners

Oklahoma Natural Heritage 

Inventory 

Methods

Research, Monitoring, Real 

Property Acquisition

Ozark Emerald near the Kiamichi River 

in Le Flore County Oklahoma. 

Photo: Oklahoma Biological Survey.

Status

Petitioned for Federal Listing 

(2010)—Listing Averted

Project Summary

State Wildlife Grant (SWG) 

Program funds were used by 

the Oklahoma Department of 

Wildlife Conservation (ODWC) 

to support a multi-species status 

survey over a three-year period 

for a group of endemic dragonflies in eastern Oklahoma that 

are identified in the Oklahoma 

Wildlife Action Plan. The least 

common of the three species is 

the Ozark Emerald, which has 

been documented in Oklahoma 

fewer than ten times since it was 

described in the 1930s. Immediately prior to the initiation of this 

project, the Ozark Emerald was 

petitioned for listing under the 

ESA due to its rarity and limited 

geographic range. Ozark Emerald also benefitted from a land 

Program Funding

SWG Program

ODWC/Partners

$146,000

TOTAL

$51,000 $95,000
66

Results

The project increased the number of sites known to support 

Ozark Emeralds to 32 within 

Oklahoma. As a result of the 

surveys, the petition to federally 

list the Ozark Emerald was withdrawn before a 12-month finding 

was developed by the Service. 

Precluding the need to list Ozark 

Emerald helped ODWC and partners avoid potential regulatory 

constraints.

Future Needs

Periodic monitoring of selected 

watersheds is needed and additional information about this 

species’ life cycle is critical for 

informing ongoing management 

and conservation of Ozark Emerald. 

More Information

https://www.wildlifedepartment.

com/sites/default/files/Final%20

Report%20T-73-1%20Ozark%20

Emerald%20F13AF01188.pdf

Oklahoma Wildlife Action Plan

The Oklahoma Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2015. The 

plan identifies 310 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need that 

are associated with bottomland 

hardwood forest, tallgrass prairie, 

shinnery oak shrubland, gypsum 

and limestone caves, and streams. 

Key threats identified in the plan 

include habitat loss and fragmentation, the disruption of historic 

fire and grazing cycles, the alteration of stream channels, and 

invasive species. Priority conservation actions include restoration 

and conservation of key natural 

communities, increased monitoring and data collection for rare 

wildlife species, restoration of 

stream channel and floodplain 

habitats, and re-establishment of 

periodic fire and seasonal grazing. More than 135 conservation 

partners representing 40 organizations and agencies contributed 

to the development and review of 

the plan. Contact the Oklahoma 

Department of Wildlife Conservation to learn more.

“The State Wildlife 

Grant Program 

was instrumental in 

helping to preclude 

the need to list the 

Ozark Emerald under 

the Endangered 

Species Act. It gave 

Oklahoma the 

resources to support 

a comprehensive 

status survey and to 

conserve the habitat 

supporting one of 

the newly discovered 

populations.”

Mark Howery

Wildlife Diversity Biologist

Oklahoma Department of 

Wildlife Conservation
67

Puerto Rico

Puerto Rican Parrot

Results

To date, populations of Puerto Rican Parrot have survived 

despite the hurricanes and other 

natural disasters that have affected the territory. PRDNER and 

State Wildlife Grant Program 

funding have played complementary roles in preventing extinction of this rare and beautiful 

bird.

Future Needs

The population still relies on 

captive breeding and release, 

so ongoing funding to support 

this critical conservation work is 

needed.

Puerto Rico Wildlife Action Plan

The Puerto Rico State Wildlife 

Action Plan was revised in 2015. 

The plan identifies 283 Species 

of Greatest Conservation Need 

within an array of habitats. Key 

threats and stressors include development, forest fragmentation, 

Puerto Rican Parrot. 

Photo: Tom MacKenzie, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service. 2007.

Status

Federally Endangered (1967, 1973)

Project Summary

Recovery actions to benefit the 

Puerto Rican Parrot include a 

five-year effort to enhance and 

create parrot habitat corridors 

in the areas between two state 

forests in Puerto Rico—the 

Rio Abajo and Maricao forests. 

The Puerto Rico Department 

of Natural and Environmental 

Resources (PRDNER) also utilizes State Wildlife Grant (SWG) 

Program and other partner funds 

to support the captive breeding 

and release of the Puerto Rican 

Parrot. Captive-bred individuals 

are reintroduced to the wild, 

helping them maintain a viable population size despite the 

regular threats of hurricanes, 

habitat loss and fragmentation, 

and invasive predators. PRDNER 

monitors the wild population and 

manages their nests to increase 

parrot survival. 

Partners

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

U.S. Forest Service

Methods

Research, Monitoring, Habitat 

Protection, Enhancement and 

Management, Captive Rearing 

and Release

Program Funding

SWG Program

PRDNER

$3,973,600

TOTAL

$1,361,000 $2,612,600
68

wildfires, hurricanes, climate 

change, invasive species, pests, 

and diseases. Priority conservation actions include development 

of a strong private lands program, 

strengthening of the existing 

natural heritage program, identification of waterfowl focus and 

critical wildlife areas, conserving 

working forest landscapes, and 

protecting forests and wildlife. 

Over 40 agency staff and partners from academia and private 

organizations assisted with 

development of the plan. Contact the Puerto Rico Department 

of Natural and Environmental 

Resources to learn more.
69

South Carolina

Diamondback Terrapin

breeding. SCDNR documented 

declines in Diamondback Terrapin populations related to habitat 

loss and destruction, vehicular 

mortality, and predation of eggs 

and young. In response, the agency has implemented a variety of 

research, monitoring, and protection measures to understand the 

species’ occurrence and movements and help reduce mortality 

related to bycatch in crab traps. 

SCDNR staff have also investigated the feasibility of head-starting 

Terrapins. Husbandry studies 

provide SCDNR the opportunity 

to be proactive by establishing 

the steps needed to assist Terrapin populations in the event of 

further declines. This method 

may be used to culture Terrapins 

in captivity to supplement depleted wild populations. More recent 

studies have focused on assessing 

Terrapin habitat to understand 

factors in nest success and to 

identify locations for future reintroduction efforts.

Jeff Schwenter, Wildlife Biologist with 

South Carolina Department of Natural 

Resources (SCDNR), Marine Resources 

Division holds a Diamondback 

Terrapin. 

Photo: SCDNR.

Status

Petitioned for Federal Listing 

(2011)—Listing Averted

Project Summary

Over the last 12 years, the South 

Carolina Department of Natural Resources (SCDNR) and its 

partners have used State Wildlife 

Grant (SWG) Program funds 

along with agency and partner 

resources to study the aquatic 

Diamondback Terrapin’s life 

history traits and habitat use. 

These Terrapins live in brackish 

water in coastal salt marshes 

and eat snails, fiddler crabs, and 

other invertebrates. They are 

important to the marsh ecosystem because they keep certain 

problematic snail populations 

under control. Terrapins are a 

long-lived species—over 30 years 

in captivity—but this means it 

takes a long time for individuals to become adults and start 

Program Funding

SWG Program

SCDNR/Partners

$993,500

TOTAL

$353,250 $640,250
70

Partners

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

College of Charleston, 

Charleston Water System 

Methods

Research, Monitoring, Bycatch 

Reduction Device Development, 

Habitat Analysis 

Results

Projects using citizen science 

sightings have been successful 

with over 400 reports documented over the past four years. 

Valuable information has been 

obtained, including information on verified mating behavior 

and nesting females. These nest 

locations are being used to augment access to eggs for hatching 

success, survival, and growth 

of hatchlings in relation to nest 

temperatures. 

Future Needs

Widespread adoption of bycatch 

reduction devices is required 

before significant conservation 

benefits for the Diamondback 

Terrapin can be realized. SCDNR 

will continue outreach and education efforts in pursuit of this 

goal. Future work will also need 

to evaluate variability in Terrapin and Blue Crabs to ensure 

that device design is appropriate 

throughout South Carolina. 

SCDNR requires ongoing support 

to continue the study of hatchling and juvenile habitat needs 

and survival, identification of 

prime nesting locations along the 

coast, and development of density and abundance estimates.

More Information

http://www.dnr.sc.gov/swap/conserve/diamondterrapin.html

South Carolina Wildlife Action Plan

The South Carolina Wildlife 

Action Plan was revised in 2015. 

The plan identifies 828 Species 

of Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with upland and 

bottomland forest, freshwater 

wetlands, rock outcrops, coastal 

beaches, and estuarine and marine systems. Key threats include 

habitat loss and fragmentation, 

disturbance, invasive species, and 

climate change. Priority conservation actions include increased 

monitoring and data collection, 

enhanced management, land 

acquisition, and outreach. More 

than 70 conservation partners 

participated in the development 

and review of the Plan. Contact 

the South Carolina Department 

of Natural Resources to learn 

more.

“A decade of reliable 

SWG Program 

support enabled us 

to systematically 

address multiple 

critical aspects 

of Diamondback 

Terrapin life history, 

which in turn led to 

improved approaches 

for managing 

known threats.” 

Mike Arendt

Assistant Marine Scientist

Marine Resources Division

South Carolina Department 

of Natural Resources
71

Tennessee

Pale Lilliput

and Elk Rivers where they will be 

monitored and maintained.

Future Needs

Continued funding for the Cumberland River Aquatic Center is 

needed to increase production of 

Pale Lilliput mussels in captivity 

for release in Tennessee Rivers. 

Support is also necessary for 

ongoing monitoring and other 

activities needed for active participation in species recovery at 

the state level. 

Tennessee Wildlife Action Plan

The Tennessee Wildlife Action Plan was revised in 2015 in 

collaboration with The Nature 

Conservancy. The plan identifies 

1,499 Species of Greatest Conservation Need within 59 priority 

terrestrial ecological systems and 

12 priority aquatic subregions. 

Pale Lilliput. 

Photo: Dick Biggins.

Status

Federally Endangered (1976)

Project Summary

Pale Lilliput is a critically endangered freshwater mussel that 

is facing an extremely high risk 

of extinction in Tennessee and 

throughout its range, which includes portions of Alabama. The 

Tennessee Wildlife Resources 

Agency is utilizing State Wildlife 

Grant (SWG) Program funding along with state funds, the 

Service’s Cooperative Endangered 

Species Conservation Fund, and 

other resources to ensure the 

species does not disappear from 

Tennessee or become extinct. 

Partners

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Tennessee Technical University, 

Alabama Department of 

Conservation and Natural 

Resources

Methods

Research, Monitoring, Habitat 

Management, Captive Rearing 

and Release 

Results

With ever-improving husbandry 

techniques, the survival rate of 

Pale Lilliput juveniles reached 

99 percent—an exceptional 

growth rate for propagated mussels. Approximately 400 tagged 

mussels were released in the Duck 

Program Funding

SWG Program

TWRA/Partners

$15,500

TOTAL

$5,500 $10,000
72

Key threats include urbanization, 

agricultural land management, 

forestry practices, water management, energy development, transportation and utility corridors, 

and climate change. Priority conservation actions include improving habitat quality and quantity, 

restoring species populations, 

invasive species management, 

control of pathogens, climate 

change abatement, partnership 

development, effective environmental review and regulatory 

programs, expanded habitat 

acquisition and management, 

private landowner incentives and 

engagement, education, research, 

and monitoring. Over 40 experts 

and more than 30 agency and 

nonprofit partners assisted with 

development of the plan. Contact 

the Tennessee Wildlife Resources 

Agency for more information.

“Success in 

conservation by 

propagation is a long 

journey of saving 

the species from 

going extinct and is 

impossible to achieve 

without the support 

from State Wildlife 

Grant Program.”

Dan Hua

Malacologist

Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency 
73

Texas

Guadalupe Bass

Partnership, Texas Council of Fly 

Fishers International

Methods

Conservation Stocking, Habitat 

Restoration, Invasive Species 

Management, Monitoring

Results

The TPWD strategic plan goal of 

establishing and maintaining 10 

genetically pure, self-sustaining 

populations throughout the species’ native range was achieved in 

2018. 

Future Needs

Additional funding is needed to 

assess the status of populations 

of Guadalupe Bass in several 

other Texas creeks and rivers. 

Additionally, continued investments are needed for restoration 

and preservation of aquifer levels, 

Guadalupe Bass Release. 

Photo: Chase A. Fountain, Texas Parks and 

Wildlife.

Status

Species of Greatest Conservation 

Need

Project Summary

Guadalupe Bass, the State Fish of 

Texas, are endemic to the clear, 

spring-fed rivers of the Texas Hill 

Country. Populations are threatened with local extirpation from 

habitat degradation, flow alteration, and hybridization with 

non-native Smallmouth Bass. 

Recent restoration of Guadalupe 

Bass led by the Texas Parks and 

Wildlife Department (TPWD) in 

the Blanco, Llano, and San Antonio Rivers demonstrates what can 

be achieved when partners rally 

around a shared conservation 

vision. Ongoing projects center 

on the preservation of intact 

populations of Guadalupe Bass in 

Brushy and Gorman creeks and 

the Pedernales and lower Colorado Rivers. State Wildlife Grant 

(SWG) Program funding has supported Guadalupe Bass conservation in Texas since 2009. A 2015 

study conducted by TPWD and 

Texas Tech University showed 

that stream fishing in Texas Hill 

Country rivers generated an economic value of over $71 million 

during a 16-month period.

Partners

Hill Country Alliance, Llano 

River Watershed Alliance, 

The Nature Conservancy, 

San Antonio River Authority, 

Southeast Aquatic Resources 

Program Funding

SWG Program

TPWD/Partners

$1,442,700

TOTAL

$505,000 $937,700
74

springs, instream, and riparian 

habitats throughout the Texas 

Hill Country.

More Information

https://tpwd.texas.gov/publications/pwdpubs/media/pwd_rp_

t3200_2079_19.pdf

Texas Wildlife Action Plan

The Texas Conservation Action 

Plan was revised in 2012. The 

plan identifies 1,309 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need associated with forests, woodlands, 

shrublands, grasslands, marine 

and freshwater wetlands, rivers, 

deserts, and coastal beaches. Key 

threats include habitat loss and 

fragmentation, invasive species, 

disease and pathogens, power 

development and transmission, 

resource extraction, forest management, infrastructure, water 

and land management, lack of 

information, and disturbance. 

Priority conservation actions 

include direct management, 

habitat restoration and creation, 

land protection, conservation 

area designation, environmental review, planning, technical 

assistance, data management, 

education, and incentives. Nearly 

200 agencies and organizations 

and many members of the public 

participated in the development 

of the plan. Contact the Texas 

Parks and Wildlife Department

to learn more.

“To catch a 

Guadalupe Bass from 

one of the rocky, 

spring-fed rivers of 

the Texas Hill Country 

should be on the 

bucket list of every 

Texan. Concerted 

efforts are being 

made by TPWD and 

an extraordinary 

network of public and 

private partners to 

ensure that current 

and future generations 

are able to experience 

this storied fish.” 

Tim Birdsong

Chief of Habitat Conservation

Texas Parks and Wildlife Department
75

U.S. Virgin Islands

St. Croix Ground Lizard

holder meetings and building and 

testing habitat structures. 

Future Needs

After completion of this experimental project, DFW will develop 

a plan with guidelines and protocols for raising and releasing St. 

Croix Ground Lizard into historic 

habitats. 

More Information

https://www.fws.gov/uploadedFiles/St.%20Croix%20Lizard%20

ENG%20fact%20sheet.pdf

U.S. Virgin Islands 

Wildlife Action Plan

The Virgin Islands Wildlife 

Action Plan was revised in 2018. 

The plan identifies 139 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need associated with forests, mangroves, 

U.S. Virgin Islands is exempt from 

State Wildlife Grant Program matching 

requirements.

Endangered St. Croix Ground Lizard. 

Photo: Nicole F. Angeli

Status

Federally Endangered (1977)

Project Summary

Maintaining self-sustaining 

populations of threatened and 

endangered species through 

management action may require 

experimental approaches. The 

U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI) Division of Fish and Wildlife (DFW) 

is working to repatriate the St. 

Croix Ground Lizard to habitats 

within its historic range where 

the species was once common, 

prior to introduction of the 

Mongoose to the USVI. Locations 

for lizard reintroductions were 

determined based on partner 

input, and special predator-proof 

cages will be used in raising and 

observing the species prior to 

release. 

Partners

Private Landowners, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, University 

of the Virgin Islands, USVI Port 

Authority

Methods

Planning, Stakeholder 

Engagement, Habitat 

Management/Protection, 

Translocation

Results

The program is ongoing, but the 

partners have already achieved 

significant results through stakeProgram Funding

SWG Program

DFW/Partners

$66,500

TOTAL

$66,500
76

coral reefs, freshwater ponds, and 

salt flats. Key threats to species 

include habitat loss, invasive species, wildlife disease, and climate 

change. Priority conservation 

actions include increased habitat 

and species protection, habitat 

and species management protection, research, and outreach. 

Development and review of the 

plan included many conservation 

partners and public participation. Contact the Virgin Islands 

Department of Planning and 

Natural Resources to learn more.
77

REGIONAL CONSERVATION HIGHLIGHT

Gopher Frog

mortality, as well as diseases such 

as Chytrid fungus and Ranavirus.

To contribute substantially to the 

Service’s Species Status Assessment of Gopher Frog, North and 

South Carolina agencies must 

continue to seek new populations 

and monitor known populations, 

particularly for evidence of successful reproduction and recruitment. Additional resources are 

needed to estimate population 

sizes and densities, continue restoration of uplands and wetlands, 

and continue population augmentation through head-starting. Additional support for evaluating head-starting programs 

and ongoing genetic analysis of 

restored populations is needed 

to assist the agencies in making 

translocation decisions. The two 

states are working to provide 

technical guidance and outreach 

to constituents and the public, so 

that conservation efforts can be 

expanded to other lands within 

the Gopher Frog’s range.

Gopher Frog, a species currently under 

review for listing as threatened or 

endangered under the Endangered 

Species Act. 

Photo: Jeff Hall. 

North Carolina Wildlife Resources 

Commission’s Gopher Frog headstarting tanks. 

Photo: Jeff Hall. 

States

North Carolina and South 

Carolina

Status

Petitioned for federal listing 

(2012). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service determined that the 

Gopher Frog may warrant protection, pending a Species Status 

Assessment.

The Gopher Frog resembles a 

toad in many ways—from its 

warty skin to its large head and 

chunky body. It has prominent, 

cobblestone-like warts and 

distinct folds along the sides of 

its body. Color ranges from pale 

gray to tan to nearly black with 

numerous dark spots. Its belly is 

mottled with dark pigment and 

it has yellow or orange on the 

concealed surfaces of the thighs 

and groin. These rare frogs occur 

in scattered localities in the 

Sandhills and Atlantic Coastal 

Plain in the Carolinas. Biologists 

know little about their natural 

history outside the breeding season. Adults spend much of their 

time underground. Gopher Frogs 

commonly use the burrows of the 

Gopher Tortoise as hiding places 

in the deep south, including in 

South Carolina. In North Carolina, Gopher Frogs hide in stump 

holes, root tunnels and mammal and crayfish burrows since 

Gopher Tortoises are not found 

in the state. Ongoing threats to 

Gopher Frog include fragmentation and loss of habitat and road 
78

North Carolina

The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) 

has been working with many 

partners for 12 years to conserve 

the Gopher Frog in North Carolina, with support from the State 

Wildlife Grant Program and 

partner contributions. Surveys 

for the Gopher Frog have detected a decline in this species 

from 23 to 7 populations within 

the state. Partners in Gopher 

Frog conservation in North Carolina include the U.S. Forest 

Service, Department of Defense, 

North Carolina Zoo, North Carolina Aquariums, North Carolina 

Plant Conservation Program, 

several universities, and other 

state agencies. Conservation 

actions have included surveys for 

new populations and monitoring 

of existing populations, genetic 

analyses, restoration and creation 

of ponds, restoration of uplands, 

and head-starting to augment 

populations. Biologists collect 

Gopher Frog eggs from the wild 

and raise tadpoles in captivity, which protects them from 

predators, habitat degradation, 

and other environmental factors. 

When the tadpoles metamorphose into juvenile frogs, they are 

returned to the ponds where the 

eggs originated. Genetic analyses 

may help direct future translocation of frogs among populations. Since the releases began 

in 2011, more than 3,200 frogs 

have been released in southeastern North Carolina. Some of the 

frogs released to the wild have 

been outfitted with transmitters, 

and they are being monitored 

with radio-telemetry to learn 

more about their movements, 

habitat needs, and survival.

South Carolina

The South Carolina Department 

of Natural Resources is working 

in the state’s coastal plain to conserve this state-endangered species identified in the South Carolina Wildlife Action Plan as a 

“species of highest concern.” The 

agency has identified extirpations 

and strongholds of Gopher Frogs 

in South Carolina. This monitoring work has led to additional 

conservation activities for Gopher Frog such as wetland restoration, which benefits numerous 

species identified in the Wildlife 

Action Plan. Through seed funding from the State Wildlife Grant 

Program, additional funding 

opportunities to address conservation concerns such as habitat 

restoration have been leveraged. 

The agency has also initiated artificial population augmentation 

through head-starting.

More Information 

http://www.dnr.sc.gov/swap/supplemental/reptilesandamphibians/pondbreedingamphibiansguild2015.pdf

https://www.ncwildlife.org/

Learning/Species/Amphibians/

Carolina-Gopher-Frog

https://www.fws.gov/charleston/

pdf/ARS%20fact%20sheets%20

for%20web/carolina%20gopher%20frog%20fact%20sheet_

SC_2016.pdf

“The partnership 

between the North 

Carolina Zoo and 

North Carolina 

Wildlife Resources 

Commission has 

led to early success 

in helping with the 

recovery efforts of 

the Gopher Frog. 

We’ve conducted 

numerous surveys, 

tracked dozens of 

froglets, and released 

more than 1,000 of 

these endangered 

pineland inhabitants.” 

Mr. Dustin Smith

North Carolina Zoo

The Carolina Gopher Frog resembles 

a toad in many ways—from its warty 

skin to its large head and chunky body. 

It has prominent, cobblestone-like 

warts and distinct folds along the sides 

of its body. 

Photo: Andrew Grosse, South Carolina 

Department of Natural Resources.
79

TRIBAL HIGHLIGHTS

Catawba Indian Nation of South Carolina

Habitat Enhancement

Project Cost

Tribal Wildlife Grant 

Program—$174,500 

Partners

Gary Peters, Biologist, National 

Wild Turkey Federation, and a 

USDA certified Technical Service 

Provider

Methods

Monitoring, Coordination, 

Habitat Creation, Enhancement, 

and Management 

Results

Prescribed burning was planned 

and conducted in-house with 

tribal staff in early 2016. Approximately 17 acres of pine 

stands were burned and cleared 

of undergrowth to increase the 

health of the pine forest and 

The Catawba Wildlife Reserve 

Enhancement Project restored a 

wide array of flowering plants that 

will benefit pollinators like Monarch 

Butterfly. 

Photo: Ryan Hagerty, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service.

Project Summary

The Catawba Indian Nation of 

South Carolina utilized Tribal 

Wildlife Grant Program funding 

to develop tribal capacity for food 

production and wildlife habitat 

management. The overarching 

goal of the Catawba Wildlife 

Preserve Enhancement Project 

is to ensure that effective land 

and wildlife habitat conservation 

activities and culturally-relevant 

tribal traditions are practiced and 

preserved. The use and conservation of tribal land will help 

to ensure member well-being 

and natural resource protection 

through land and wildlife habitat stewardship. The project 

supports healthy, self-sustaining 

wildlife populations that will 

be shared with Catawba Indian 

Nation tribal members for generations to come.

Program Funding

TWG Program

$174,500

TOTAL

$174,500

This chart does not depict additional 

tribal and other resources contributing 

to the success of this project.
80

create new foliage for wildlife. 

Approximately five acres of land 

were plowed, disked, limed, fertilized, and planted for wildlife 

food plots. Over 160 trees were 

planted adjacent to many of the 

existing fields and food plots on 

the Catawba Preserve including 

Gobbler Sawtooth Oaks, American and Common Persimmons, 

Apples, Crabapples, and Chickasaw Plums. These trees provide 

a source of food both for tribal 

members and for wildlife such as 

butterflies, birds, and mammals 

that the Tribe seeks to attract 

and sustain. Students also utilize 

the Catawba Preserve for education on historic and traditional 

environmental practices such as 

the traditional use of indigenous 

plants and animals for subsistence and physical well-being.

Future Needs

The Tribe has plans for ongoing 

wildlife monitoring and habitat 

assessment. Naturalized plots 

are being established to benefit 

Monarch Butterfly, with the hope 

that additional funding can be 

secured to further this work.

“The Catawba Indian 

Nation is honored that 

we were chosen for 

this opportunity and 

we’re beyond proud 

of the work we were 

able to accomplish 

for the preservation 

of our tribal wildlife.”

Catawba Nation Tribal Leader
81

Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians of North Carolina

Protecting Natural Heritage 

and Livelihoods

Program Cost

Tribal Wildlife Grant 

Program—$1.3 million over a 

12-year period; other resources 

provided by the Eastern Band of 

Cherokee Indians—$650,000

Partners

North Carolina Wildlife 

Resource Commission, Great 

Smoky Mountains National Park, 

Western Carolina University

Methods

Research, Monitoring, 

Coordination, Training 

Results

A critical component of the Cherokee tourist economy is tied to 

the work of the Band’s Fisheries 

and Wildlife Management Office. 

This includes management 

A White-Tailed Deer restoration project 

made possible through collaboration 

between the Eastern Band of Cherokee 

Indians (EBCI), the North Carolina 

Wildlife Resources Commission, North 

Carolina State Parks, and the Great 

Smoky Mountains National Park. 

Photo: EBCI.

Project Summary

The Cherokee people possess a 

long history of natural resource 

stewardship dating back thousands of years. Sustaining fish 

and wildlife populations in a 

changing world is an integral 

part of maintaining Cherokee 

livelihood. Cherokee lands and 

waters support diverse communities of fish, mammals, birds, 

amphibians, reptiles, and invertebrates. This biological diversity 

is intricately tied to Cherokee 

culture with thousands of species 

playing critical roles in subsistence, arts, medicine, ceremonies, 

and stories. The Eastern Band of 

Cherokee Indians has relied on 

the Tribal Wildlife Grant Program over the past 12 years to 

help build the capacity of its Fisheries and Wildlife Management 

Office for monitoring, regulating, 

and maintaining the Band’s fish 

and wildlife resources for current 

and future generations.

Program Funding

TWG Program

Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians

$1,950,000

TOTAL

$650,000 $1,300,000
82

efforts to sustain wildlife populations and provide tourists with 

viewing opportunities for species 

such as Elk. Projects focused on 

fisheries monitoring and aquatic 

ecosystem restoration also help 

to support a lucrative recreational fishing program for the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians.

Future Needs

Ongoing support is needed for 

translating new knowledge into 

science-based management of a 

wide variety of species. To adequately manage its abundant fish 

and wildlife resources, the Band 

must conduct more research and 

partner with state, federal and 

academic institutions. Additional funding would help the Band 

obtain more training for in-house 

research, species monitoring, and 

analysis. 

The Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians 

has used Tribal Wildlife Grant Program 

funding to support monitoring of Black 

Bear (YoNa) and other science-based 

management actions. 

Photo: EBCI.
83

Tonkawa Tribe of Oklahoma

Pollinator Conservation

Partners

U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

The Learning Center of the 

Euchee Butterfly Farm

Methods

Planning, Habitat Creation, 

Enhancement and Management, 

Education/Outreach 

Results

Greater community awareness 

of pollinator conservation efforts 

and how to support them is a key 

anticipated benefit of the project. 

Both the school garden and other 

pollinator habitat created and 

enhanced by tribal members will 

benefit Black Swallowtail and 

Monarch Butterfly, the latter of 

which is under review for listing 

Black Swallowtail is one pollinator 

species that will benefit from this 

project. 

Photo: John Flannery, Creative Commons 

/ Flickr. License: https://creativecommons.

org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode. 

Project Summary

For the Tonkawa Tribe of Oklahoma, bees are the symbol of 

honesty, pure thinking, willingness, and drive. Many tribes 

consider butterflies to be symbols 

of good luck, and some have 

taboos against killing them. 

The Tonkawa Tribe is creating a 

medicine wheel garden at Chilocco Boarding School north of 

Newkirk, Oklahoma. The garden 

will include pollinator-friendly 

plants like Indian Paintbrush, 

Coneflower, and Prairie Sunflower, as well as a water source. 

The Medicine Wheel, known as 

the Sacred Hoop, has been used 

by generations of various Native 

American tribes for health and 

healing. This medicine wheel 

garden will provide bee- and butterfly-friendly flowers, herbs and 

shrubs. Community education on 

the importance of maintaining 

habitat for pollinators will include publication of eight articles 

about bees and butterflies in the 

tribal newspaper. Brochures will 

be created and distributed in 

the community to promote the 

importance of pollinator conservation. 

Project Cost

Tribal Wildlife Grant Program— 

$149,000; other resources 

provided by Johnson O’Malley, 

Tonkawa Tribal Committee

Program Funding

TWG Program

$149,000

TOTAL

$149,000

This chart does not depict additional 

tribal and other resources contributing 

to the success of this project.
84

under the Endangered Species 

Act.

Future Needs

Additional support would be important in assisting tribal members and partners with research, 

monitoring, and habitat creation 

and enhancement for pollinators.

More Information

https://www.fws.gov/savethemonarch/

Monarch butterfly on a flower on 

Oklahoma. 

Photo: Carolyn. Creative Commons / Flickr. 

License: https://creativecommons.org/

licenses/by-nd/2.0/legalcode.

“The Tribal Wildlife 

Grant Program helps 

many species, even 

pollinators. Grants 

that support tribal 

sovereignty, culture 

and language are 

additional benefits 

from the program.”

Mary Elder

Assistant Regional Director–

External Affairs

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
85

MIDWEST REGION HIGHLIGHTS
86
87

STATE HIGHLIGHTS

Illinois

Jefferson Salamander

built across a range of Illinois 

habitats and provide a fairly 

cost-efficient and easily replicated 

conservation tool for common 

and rare species alike.

Partners

Illinois Natural History Survey, 

National Great Rivers Research 

and Education Center

Methods

Habitat Restoration/

Management, Monitoring/

Assessment, Applied Research

Results

The Illinois Department of 

Natural Resources found that the 

ponds created for new habitat 

were colonized by a number of 

Species of Greatest ConservaJefferson Salamander is listed as 

threatened in Illinois, and is a Species 

of Greatest Conservation Need in the 

Illinois Wildlife Action Plan. 

Photo: John Crawford, National Great River 

Research and Education Center.

Status

State-Listed as Threatened

Project Summary

Jefferson Salamander is native 

to the northeastern United 

States and Canada. In Illinois, it 

is listed as threatened and also 

identified as a Species of Greatest 

Conservation Need in the state’s 

Wildlife Action Plan. In Ontario, 

Canada, it has been classified 

as an endangered species since 

2011. The Illinois Department of 

Natural Resources (IDNR) used 

State Wildlife Grant Program 

funding along with state resources to construct ephemeral ponds 

in State Parks to create breeding 

habitat for a variety of rare and 

declining amphibians. IDNR has 

also continually monitored use of 

the ponds by a variety of species. 

Ephemeral ponds can be easily 

Program Funding

SWG Program

IDNR/Partners

$310,000

TOTAL

$110,000 $200,000
88

tion Need, including Jefferson 

Salamander, which is found in 

only two counties in Illinois. As 

a result of these efforts, IDNR 

now considers the species more 

stable in Illinois. Other species 

that benefit from construction of 

ephemeral ponds include Wood 

Frogs, Spring Peepers, and Spotted Salamanders. 

Future Needs

Ongoing habitat maintenance 

and expansion of availability 

of ephemeral pond habitats is 

needed to ensure populations of 

Jefferson Salamander and other 

Species of Greatest Conservation 

Need can be stabilized and any 

requirement for future listing 

under the Endangered Species 

Act can be avoided.

Illinois Wildlife Action Plan

The Illinois Wildlife Action Plan

was revised in 2015. The plan 

identifies 421 Species of Greatest Conservation Need and 309 

Watch List species associated 

with grasslands, forests, woodlands, streams, and wetlands. Key 

threats include habitat fragmentation, climate change, invasive 

species, hydrologic change, and 

pollution. Priority conservation 

actions include habitat management using natural disturbance 

regimes, developing resiliency 

and connectedness within habitats, and fostering a connection 

to SGCN and their habitats 

among the public. More than 220 

individuals from 81 partnering 

organizations and many members of the public participated in 

the development and review of 

the plan.  Contact the Illinois Department of Natural Resources to 

learn more.

“The Illinois 

Department of Natural 

Resources continues 

to conduct critical 

work restoring and 

enhancing at-risk 

wildlife populations 

and their habitats 

that is only possible 

due to the presence 

of the State Wildlife 

Grant Program.”

Leon C. Hinz Jr., Ph.D.

Wildlife Action Plan Coordinator

Illinois Department of 

Natural Resources
89

Indiana

Outreach Campaign for 

Endangered Mussels

University to develop an outreach 

campaign to increase awareness 

of mussels and foster positive 

behaviors to benefit them. The 

State Wildlife Grant (SWG) Program provided key funding, along 

with resources from the Service’s 

Cooperative Endangered Species 

Conservation Fund, Purdue University, and IDNR.

The “Heart of the Tippy” campaign identified two stakeholder 

groups: recreational users (canoeists, anglers) and landowners 

along the Tippecanoe. Outreach 

strategies used community-based 

social marketing to develop messages to help improve water quality. Floating keychains, bobbers, 

and other items with key messages were distributed at community 

events, bait shops, and local properties. The website (https://www.

purdue.edu/extension/mussels/) 

has activities for river residents, 

children, recreationists, and 

Status

Six Federally-Listed Mussel 

Species

Project Summary

More than half of the mussels 

in the midwestern United States 

are endangered, threatened, or 

a state species of concern. In Indiana, the Clubshell is one of six 

federally-listed mussels that now 

reside primarily in the Tippecanoe River, which is the only place 

in Indiana where a reproducing 

population of Clubshell is still 

found. Mussels are filter feeders 

that can live for many years on 

the bottom of a river, traits that 

make them excellent indicators 

of water quality and overall river 

health. Because of the benefits mussels provide and their 

imperiled status, the Indiana 

Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) partnered with Purdue 

These Purdue University students 

are spreading the message to protect 

mussels and their habitats by “Taking 

the Pledge” at a community event. 

Photo: Belyna Bentlage, Purdue University.

Program Funding

SWG Program

IDNR/Partners

$290,000

TOTAL

$119,000 $171,000
90

anglers as well as downloadable 

brochures and lesson plans.

Partners

Purdue University, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service—

Cooperative Endangered Species 

Conservation Fund 

Methods

Online, Mail, and In-Person 

Surveys 

Results

The campaign increased public 

awareness and appreciation of 

mussels and instilled positive 

behaviors among stakeholders. 

More than 400 people pledged to 

improve water quality and protect mussel habitat in and along 

the Tippecanoe River.

Future Needs

Within the Tippecanoe River 

drainage, future support would 

help IDNR implement conservation actions to improve water 

quality and investigate the underlying factors contributing to 

the continuing decline of several 

SGCN freshwater mussel species 

in Indiana. Additional funding 

would be directed toward further augmentations and reintroductions of freshwater mussels 

identified in the Indiana Wildlife 

Action Plan.

More Information

https://www.fws.gov/endangered/grants/

Indiana Wildlife Action Plan

The Indiana Wildlife Action Plan

was revised in 2015. The plan 

identifies more than 150 Species 

of Greatest Conservation Need 

and associated with natural 

lakes, hardwood forests, shrub 

wetlands, caves, and grasslands. 

Key threats include habitat loss 

and degradation, modification of 

natural systems, disturbance, and 

invasive species. Priority conservation actions include land and 

water protection, restoration of 

natural habitats, invasive species 

control, and increased education 

and public awareness. More than 

150 conservation partners and 

many members of the public participated in the development and 

review of the plan. To learn more 

contact the Indiana Department 

of Natural Resources.

“Effective species 

management 

and conservation 

incorporates the 

beliefs and values 

of citizens and 

stakeholders.” 

Brad Feaster

Division of Fish and Wildlife

Indiana Department of 

Natural Resources
91

Iowa

Regal Fritillary

Results

Regal Fritillary is on the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service’s National 

Listing Workplan. IADNR is 

planning and implementing proactive conservation of the species 

in advance of a listing decision in 

2022 in an effort to avert the need 

for listing under the Endangered 

Species Act. 

Iowa Wildlife Action Plan

The Iowa Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2015. The 

plan identifies 405 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with grasslands, forests, wetlands, lakes, and rivers. 

Key threats to species include 

habitat loss and fragmentation, 

degradation of habitat from 

Monitoring technician holds a Regal 

Fritillary caught at Stone State Park

Photo: Thomas Hennessey.

Status

Proposed Federally Threatened 

(2015), Scheduled for Federal 

Listing Review (2022) 

Project Summary

The Regal Fritillary is a prairie-specialist species which has 

two known larval hostplants that 

are native to Iowa: Prairie Violet 

and Bird’s Foot Violet. Hostplant 

availability is a potentially limiting factor for the Regal Fritillary, 

so the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IADNR) is working 

to ramp up production of these 

violets for inclusion in planting 

mixes for prairie restorations. 

The agency also provides funding to landowners for habitat 

improvements benefitting Regal 

Fritillary on private lands. Partial 

support for these timely conservation efforts is provided by 

the State Wildlife Grant (SWG) 

Program.

Partners

Private landowners, Iowa 

State University, Pheasants 

Forever, Nebraska Game and 

Parks Commission, Minnesota 

Department of Natural Resources

Methods

Prairie Restoration and 

Management, Development of 

Guidance for Land Managers, 

Modeling/Mapping; Private 

Landowner Conservation 

Agreements

Program Funding

SWG Program

IADNR/Partners

$874,000

TOTAL

$282,100 $591,900
92

invasive species and modification 

of natural systems, and lack of 

protection. Priority conservation 

actions include monitoring, use 

of adaptive management, and 

increased habitat management 

and protection. Representatives 

from over 50 conservation partners and members of the public 

participated in the development 

and review of the plan. Contact 

the Iowa Department of Natural 

Resources to learn more.

“The funding provided 

to Stone State Park 

played a critical role in 

managing for rare and 

sensitive species such 

as the Regal Fritillary.”

Jason Dykstra

Stone State Park

 Sioux Fall, Iowa

Bird’s-Foot Violet is one of two larval 

hostplants of the Regal Fritillary. 

Photo: M. Larson, MassWildlife.
93

Kansas

Fish Passage Construction and 

Post-Construction Monitoring

of the renovation of the Lincoln 

Street Dam on the Arkansas 

River in the City of Wichita, with 

consultation from Kansas Wild-

life, Parks, and Tourism. The 

fishway was the first of its kind, 

built for passage of smaller-bod-

ied fishes including multiple 

Species of Greatest Conservation 

Need recognized in the Kansas 

Wildlife Action Plan. Engineers 

were able to incorporate aesthetic 

improvements and canoe and 

kayak passage as well. A project 

of this scope requires consider-

able funding, as well as permits 

and zoning across multiple juris-

dictions. Post construction mon-

itoring was funded through the 

State Wildlife Grant Program. 

Partners

City of Wichita, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, MKEC 

Engineering, Federal Highway 

Administration, Kansas 

Department of Transportation, 

U.S. Coast Guard, University 

of Illinois—Ven Te Chow 

Hydrosystems Laboratory, 

Kansas State University

Methods

Fish Passage Design and 

Construction, Coordination 

Results

Species benefitting from the con-

struction of the dam include the 

Plains Minnow, Silver Chub, Pep-

pered Chub, Arkansas River Shin-

er, and Arkansas Darter. Emerald 

Status

Native Fish Species of Greatest 

Conservation Need

Project Summary

Riverine habitat in Kansas has 

been highly fragmented in part 

because of barriers such as lowhead dams. This fragmentation 

has led to the decline of sever-

al native fish species and very 

dissimilar fish assemblages above 

and below impoundments. A 

fishway was constructed as part 

The Silver Chub is a large very silvery 

minnow with a small mouth and 

overhanging snout. They have no 

distinct spots or other markings on the 

body and have a very small barbel at 

the rear edge of the upper jaw in each 

corner of the mouth. 

Photo: Sam Stukel, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service.
94

Shiners were found upstream of 

the dam for the first time in 20 

years. Post-construction monitoring of the fish community in 

the Arkansas River adjacent to 

the fish passage has documented 

27 species of the fish using the 

passageway. The upstream fish 

assemblage more resembled the 

downstream assemblage not long 

after competition of the passageway. 

Future Needs

Additional funds would allow 

Kansas Wildlife, Parks, and 

Tourism to build upon their fish 

passage construction expertise 

and remove other barriers to fish 

passage within the state.

Kansas Wildlife Action Plan

The Kansas Wildlife Action Plan

was revised in 2016. The plan 

identifies 285 Species of Greatest 

Conservation Need associated 

with prairies, shrublands, forests, 

woodland floodplains, wetlands, 

streams, and caves. Key threats 

include habitat loss and fragmentation, natural systems modifications, invasive and non-native 

species, and climate change. 

Priority conservation actions 

include increased monitoring 

and data collection, enhanced 

management and protection, and 

expanded outreach. More than 67 

conservation partners and many 

members of the public participated in the development and review 

of the plan. Contact the Kansas 

Department of Wildlife, Parks 

and Tourism to learn more.

Plains Minnow is one of several native fishes benefiting from the fishway 

constructed by Kansas Wildlife, Parks, and Tourism on the Arkansas River.

Photo: Matt Wagner ©SDGFP & SDBOR.
95

Kentucky

Center for Mollusk Conservation

fer knowledge to other states and 

countries where it is urgently 

needed. The CMC has utilized 

State Wildlife Grant (SWG) 

Program funding for facility 

construction, management and 

mussel propagation. The CMC’s 

goal is to preclude listings and 

help recover and restore imperiled aquatic species.

Partners

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Wolf Creek National Fish 

Hatchery, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service Kentucky Field Office, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Ohio Field Office, Minor Clark 

Hatchery (KDFWR), Kentucky 

Waterways Alliance, Mussel 

Mitigation Trust, Mammoth 

Cave National Park, ACORPS 

Mussel culture and propagation at 

the Center for Mollusk Conservation 

includes advanced techniques for 

handling juveniles and their food. 

Photo: Kentucky Department of Fish and 

Wildlife Resources. 

Status

Various Federally- and StateListed Mussel Species

Project Summary

The Kentucky Department of 

Fish and Wildlife Resources 

(KDFWR) began investing in 

freshwater mollusk conservation 

nearly twenty years ago. When 

State Malacologist Dr. Monte 

McGregor was hired, he was 

given the task of creating a conservation program for Kentucky’s 

imperiled freshwater mollusks. 

With only some empty garage 

bays and no water source, Dr. McGregor and his team managed to 

set up a work space and begin the 

arduous task of understanding 

mollusk reproductive biology, dietary needs and animal husbandry techniques critical to meeting 

this conservation challenge. In 

addition to traditional propagation measures using fish hosts, 

Dr. McGregor and his team have 

developed cutting-edge techniques to raise animals in vitro. 

This highly successful technique 

has led to critical conservation 

successes with federally endangered species such as the Purple 

Catspaw, Golden Riffleshell and 

Pink Mucket.

Today, KDFWR’s Center for 

Mollusk Conservation (CMC) 

is a premier freshwater mussel 

propagation facility. Students, 

conservation professionals, and 

others have visited from around 

the world to learn and help transProgram Funding

SWG Program

KDFWR/Partners

$5,206,100

TOTAL

$2,152,600 $3,053,500
96

Methods

Research, Monitoring, 

Captive Rearing and Release, 

Coordination 

Results

To date, there have been tens of 

thousands of animals of more 

than thirty species released back 

into the waters of Kentucky and 

partnering states, contributing 

significantly to the recovery and 

management of freshwater mussels. With KDFWR’s structured 

long-term monitoring program, 

scientists are seeing solid signs 

of natural reproduction and 

recruitment into populations. 

This conservation success shows 

that an early investment can help 

prevent listing of animals under 

the Endangered Species Act. This 

legacy would not be possible 

without critical funding from the 

State Wildlife Grant Program. 

Future Needs

Because the CMC is operational 

year-round, scientists stand ready 

to receive and propagate animals 

when opportunity arises. For 

example, only three individuals 

of the Golden Riffleshell were 

located in a neighboring state 

and the CMC was able to produce 

1,600 individuals for release. 

Mussel declines across the United 

States are resulting in federal 

listing at an increasing rate. 

Additional and ongoing funding 

for the CMC is needed to help delist, down-list, and avert future 

listings of mussels in Kentucky 

and many other states. 

Kentucky Wildlife Action Plan

The Kentucky Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2013. The 

plan identifies 301 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with upland forests, 

grasslands, wetlands, rivers, 

streams, and karst topography. 

Key threats to species include 

habitat loss and degradation, 

pollution and siltation, species 

and habitat fragmentation, 

and competition from invasive 

species. Priority conservation 

actions include habitat protection and restoration, increased 

survey, monitoring and research, 

and partnerships designed to promote habitat connectivity. Many 

conservation partners, wildlife 

professionals, and members of 

the public participated in development of the plan. Contact the 

Kentucky Department of Fish 

and Wildlife Resources to learn 

more.

Thousands of Pink Muckets have been 

reared and released from efforts at the 

Center for Mollusk Conservation. 

Photo: Kentucky Department of Fish and 

Wildlife Resources.

“Conservation 

and restoration of 

imperiled freshwater 

mussels is the primary 

mission of the 

Center for Mollusk 

Conservation.” 

Kentucky Department of Fish 

and Wildlife Resources
97

Michigan

Kirtland’s Warbler

Partners

American Forest Foundation, 

Arbor Day Foundation, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest 

Service, Kirtland’s Warbler 

Alliance

Methods

Timber harvest and reforestation, 

Brown-headed Cowbird control

Results

Due to the efforts of MDNR and 

its many partners, Kirtland’s 

Warbler was removed from the 

list of federal threatened and 

endangered species in 2019. 

Currently, there are an estimated 

2,300 breeding pairs. The population has exceeded the goals 

identified in the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service Recovery Plan 

Kirtland’s Warbler. 

Photo: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Status

Recovered and Federally DeListed (2019)

Project Summary

Kirtland’s Warbler is a small 

yellow songbird that overwinters 

in the Bahamas but returns each 

year to Michigan, Wisconsin and 

Ontario for summer breeding 

in jack pine forest habitats. Due 

to fire suppression, competition 

from cowbirds, and other threats, 

Kirtland’s Warbler numbers fell 

to under 170 breeding pairs in 

the 1970s and 80s. Since 2008, 

the Michigan Department of 

Natural Resources (MDNR) has 

utilized State Wildlife Grant 

(SWG) Program funding along 

with revenues from timber sales, 

which help offset the cost of jack 

pine habitat restoration.

Program Funding

SWG Program

MDNR/Partners

$2,121,350

TOTAL

$730,550 $1,390,800
98

for the past 17 years and continues to expand.

Future Needs

Despite recovery and removal 

of the Kirtland’s Warbler from 

protection under the Endangered 

Species Act, actions are still 

needed to ensure their continued 

success. Partners will continue to 

manage for their habitat, and the 

Michigan DNR will continue to 

manage Cowbirds as needed. 

Michigan Wildlife Action Plan

The Michigan Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2015. The 

plan identifies 301 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with rivers, streams, 

inland lakes, wetlands, forests, 

grasslands, and the Great Lakes. 

Key threats to species include 

habitat fragmentation and disturbance, toxicants, invasive species, and lack of awareness about 

species. Priority conservation 

actions include surveys and monitoring, habitat protection and 

restoration, and outreach. More 

than 38 conservation partners 

and many members of the public 

participated in the development 

and review of the plan. Contact 

the Michigan Department of 

Natural Resources to learn more.

“The [Kirtland’s 

Warbler’s] recovery 

provides dramatic 

testimony to what 

conservation 

organizations, 

governments and 

businesses can 

accomplish when they 

come together for the 

good of the resource.”

Dan Eichinger

Director

Michigan Department of 

Natural Resources 
99

Minnesota

Leonard’s Skipper

Resources, The Nature 

Conservancy

Methods

Habitat Restoration and 

Enhancement, Landowner 

Agreements, Technical 

Assistance, Coordination 

Results

MNDNR’s work has helped 

increase the habitat available for 

the state’s Species of Greatest 

Conservation Need and increased 

connectivity between public and 

private lands. Their work has 

resulted in significant habitat 

enhancement and protection 

across the Driftless Area. In 

Minnesota alone, MNDNR has 

worked to improve or restore over 

7,000 acres of public and private 

Leonard’s Skipper, a Minnesota 

species of special concern, can benefit 

from bluff prairie restoration. More 

than 7,000 acres have been improved 

through projects supported by the State 

Wildlife Grant Program. 

Photo: E. Hoaglund, MN DNR.

Status

Species of Greatest Conservation 

Need / Species of Concern

Project Summary

As one of North America’s most 

important natural resources, the 

ancient Driftless Area supports 

a diversity of plants and animals 

unique to the Upper Midwest. 

Private land makes up the majority of this unglaciated region, 

and these properties are essential 

for successful regional species 

conservation. Since 2011, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR) has partnered 

with both Iowa and Wisconsin to 

manage multiple awards through 

the Competitive State Wildlife 

Grant (C-SWG) Program. With 

additional support from Minnesota’s Nongame Wildlife Fund, 

Outdoor Heritage Fund, and the 

Environmental and Natural Resources Trust Fund, MNDNR is 

working to restore and enhance 

both public and private lands 

using prescribed burning, conservation grazing, invasive plant 

control, and prairie plantings. 

These activities benefit numerous Minnesota Wildlife Action 

Plan species including Leonard’s 

Skipper, Rusty Patched Bumble 

Bee, Blanding’s Turtle and WhipPoor-Will. 

Partners

Iowa Department of Natural 

Resources, Wisconsin 

Department of Natural 

Program Funding

SWG Program

MNDNR/Partners

$1,795,000

TOTAL

$495,000 $1,300,000
100

lands, conducted over 250 site 

visits with private landowners to 

help guide species management, 

and provided public workshops 

to others on at-risk species 

needs and habitat management. 

The agency has demonstrated 

through surveys and monitoring 

that targeted species presence 

has increased on many sites 

benefiting from habitat management. For example, Leonard’s 

Skipper, a state-listed species of 

special concern, was found at 

four actively managed prairies in 

the southeast. Likewise, Dusted 

Skipper, a species that has disappeared from the western prairie 

range, was also found at multiple 

sites.

Future Needs

MNDNR needs ongoing funding for conservation of bluffland 

prairies through prescribed 

burning, conservation grazing 

and habitat restoration efforts. 

Long-term species response 

monitoring needs to be conducted in order to determine species 

population trends associated 

with habitat management.

More Information

https://blogs.mprnews.org/statewide/2013/08/goats-have-an-appetite-for-buckthorn-in-se-minnesota/

https://www.brainerddispatch.

com/news/science-and-nature/4038255-DNR-needed-helpmanaging-prairies-on-steep-hillsides.-They-called-on-goats.

Minnesota Wildlife Action Plan

The Minnesota Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2015. The 

plan identifies 345 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with forests, prairies, 

and wetlands. Key threats include 

habitat loss and degradation, 

fragmentation, invasive species, 

and climate change. Priority 

conservation actions include 

habitat management, restoration, 

protection, monitoring, and data 

management. Approximately 

45 conservation partners assisted 

with development of the plan. 

Contact the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to 

learn more.

Goats get the best view from a bluff 

prairie near Rushford, Minnesota. 

MNDNR uses goats for invasive species 

control in key habitats where they 

graze on plants like European and 

Glossy Buckthorn.

Photo: J. Micheel, Chimney Rock Forestry, 

LLC.
101

Missouri

Regal Fritillary

Partners

Farm Service Agency, Missouri 

Prairie Foundation, Natural 

Resources Conservation Service, 

Pheasants Forever and Quail 

Forever, St. Louis Zoo WildCare 

Institute, University of Missouri, 

The Nature Conservancy, and 

Private Landowners

Methods

Habitat Creation, Enhancement, 

and Protection, Research, 

Monitoring, Coordination 

Results

The Upper Osage Grasslands 

currently includes more than 

7,000 acres of native tallgrass 

prairie. An additional 2,100 acres 

of public land was restored to 

upland prairie or wet prairie systems. In addition to many plant 

Species of Greatest Conservation Need that were restored via 

A researcher explains the effects of 

management at a workshop for 

managers and landowners. 

Photo: Missouri Department of 

Conservation.

Status

Proposed Federally Threatened 

(2015), Scheduled for Federal 

Listing Review (2022) 

Project Summary

The Upper Osage Grasslands is 

one of the largest and best landscapes for focused native prairie 

and grasslands conservation in 

Missouri. During a three-year period beginning in 2014, the Missouri Department of Conservation (MDC) retired cropland and 

old pasture, then removed hard 

woody cover and invasive species. 

These areas were restored with 

diverse native prairie plantings. 

In addition, each year the Department conducts field surveys 

and inventories to determine the 

presence, condition, conservation 

need, and recovery management actions for many different 

species of concern. These essential coordination efforts and the 

surveys and inventories critical 

to informing them would not be 

possible without the support of 

the State Wildlife Grant (SWG) 

Program. The MDC also uses 

SWG Program funds to support 

coordination efforts with staff, 

landowners, and other partners 

that are essential to focusing 

limited resources on the highest 

priority needs. Funding from 

the SWG Program also supports 

habitat and species surveys and 

inventories necessary for effective 

species management.

Program Funding

SWG Program

MDC/Partners

$2,220,000

TOTAL

$1,165,000 $1,055,000
102

planting on these sites, monitoring detected the recolonization of 

the Blue Sage Bee—a prairie-obligate found for the first time on 

a reconstructed prairie. Federally 

endangered American Burying 

Beetles released at Wah’Kon-Tah 

Prairie were found to be using 

prairie restorations in this project 

at two other Conservation Areas 

10 miles away.

Prairies in this geography are 

included in an ongoing statewide population survey of Regal 

Fritillary to inform the proposed 

listing decision. Previous efforts 

by Kansas and Missouri have 

provided sufficient information 

to help determine that federal 

listing of Regal Fritillary was not 

warranted in the early 2000s.

Future Needs

Native grasslands and prairies 

are one of the most imperiled 

ecosystems in Missouri. Sustaining these ecosystems also helps 

to improve recovery chances for 

equally imperiled species such 

as the Blue Sage Bee, Henslow’s 

Sparrow, Monarch Butterfly, 

Blacknose Shiner, Mead’s Milkweed, and many more. Additional 

support is needed for habitat 

management, species restoration, 

and monitoring, and technical assistance. With sufficient 

resources, Missouri can help recover a greater number of species, 

and help avert the need for future 

listings.

More Information

https://mdc.mo.gov/property/priority-geographies/upper-osage-grasslands

https://www.stlzoo.org/conservation/wildcare-institute/americanburyingbeetleconse

https://mdc.mo.gov/property/priority-geographies

Missouri Wildlife Action Plan

The Missouri Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2015 and is 

currently being updated. The 

plan identifies 166 conservation 

opportunity areas (COAs) that 

represent the most important 

places to sustain Missouri’s 

primary natural communities 

on which 678 Species of Greatest 

Conservation Need depend. Nine 

of these COAs have been designated as priority geographies 

with increased conservation 

focus and investment, including 

special teams and partners that 

develop and implement operational plans. Key threats include 

habitat loss and fragmentation, 

disturbance and altered function, 

and invasive species. Priority 

conservation actions include 

increased landowner assistance, 

monitoring and data collection, 

enhanced and prioritized public 

land management, and outreach 

and citizen engagement. More 

than 40 conservation partners 

and many members of the public 

participated in the development 

and review of the plan. Contact the Missouri Department of 

Conservation to learn more.

“The coordination 

needed to implement 

these projects, and the 

survey and inventory 

data essential to 

focusing limited 

resources effectively, 

was supported largely 

by the State Wildlife 

Grant Program.”

Bob Merz

Assistant Director, WildCare Institute

Director, Center for American 

Burying Beetle Conservation

Saint Louis Zoo

A Regal Fritillary is one of multiple 

species of greatest conservation 

need to be documented within the 

prairie restorations. 

Photo: Missouri Department of 

Conservation.
103

Nebraska

North American River Otter

partnerships among organizations and landowners. 

Partners

Nebraska Cooperative Fish 

and Wildlife Research Unit, 

University of Nebraska–Lincoln, 

The Nature Conservancy, The 

Crane Trust, Lincoln Children’s 

Zoo, Missouri Department of 

Conservation, Fur Trappers, 

Private Landowners

Methods

Translocation and 

Reintroduction from Alaska 

and Louisiana to Nebraska 

Restoration Sites, Research, 

Monitoring, Habitat 

Management, Genetic Testing, 

Modelling

Once extirpated from Nebraska, North 

American River Otters were returned 

to their native waters in 1986 and have 

been successful on their journey to 

recovery. 

Photo: Nebraskaland.

Status

State-Listed as Threatened (2000)

Project Summary

Once a common mammal in 

Nebraska, River Otters had been 

extirpated from the state by the 

early 1900s. River Otters were 

state-listed as endangered in 

1986, and a reintroduction program started the same year. In 

2000, the species was down-listed by Nebraska Game and Parks 

Commission (NGPC) to threatened because of substantial progress towards recovery. Since then, 

NGPC has utilized funding from 

the State Wildlife Grant (SWG) 

Program to help maintain and 

increase River Otter numbers 

in the state. Biologists continue 

to monitor the expansion of the 

species. The recovery of the River 

Otter in Nebraska demonstrates 

the strength in conservation 

Program Funding

SWG Program

NGPC/Partners

$405,000

TOTAL

$105,000 $300,000
104

Results

River Otters in Nebraska are now 

healthy and nearly self-sustaining because of these conservation 

efforts. The data collected clearly 

demonstrate a healthy, reproductively viable, and expanding population of River Otters in Nebraska. In recognition of the current 

status of this species, NGPC is in 

the process of delisting the North 

American River Otter under the 

Nebraska Nongame and Endangered Species Conservation Act. 

Future Needs

Basic periodic monitoring may 

still be needed but the population 

is now secure in Nebraska. Monitoring of the River Otter population would include locations 

of observations from the public 

and NGPC, federal agencies, and 

non-governmental agencies. In 

addition, carcasses of incidentally 

trapped River Otters will still be 

collected. Sign surveys at bridges, 

trail camera based surveys, or 

searches by kayak/canoes will be 

used as needed to assess changes 

in distribution.

Nebraska Wildlife Action Plan

The Nebraska Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2011, with a 

minor revision in 2018. The plan 

identifies 735 Species of Greatest 

Conservation Need associated 

with over 35 Biologically Unique 

Landscapes that include river 

basins, prairies, forests, bluffs, 

and wetlands. Key threats to 

species include invasive species, 

alteration of natural disturbances 

like burning and grazing, altered 

hydrology of rivers and streams, 

wetland drainage, habitat conversion and fragmentation, and 

lack of awareness and knowledge about biodiversity. Priority 

conservation actions include 

increased collaboration, environmental education, conservation 

incentives, and management and 

expansion of public and private 

conservation lands. Approximately 50 conservation partners 

and organizations were involved 

in the last revision of the plan. 

Contact the Nebraska Game and 

Parks Commission to learn more.
105

North Dakota

American Marten

Methods

Research, Monitoring 

Results

This project led to inclusion of 

American Marten as a Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need in 

NDGFD’s Wildlife Action Plan. 

It resulted in increased interest 

among wildlife watchers and as 

a potential future game species. 

This visibility is attracting new 

conservation partners with additional conservation resources.

Future Needs

Further study of American Marten in North Dakota is needed to 

better understand the population 

dynamics of the species. With 

this new information, NDGFD 

will be able to protect and manTrail camera photo of Marten from 

survey. The project partners were able 

to document a previously unknown 

breeding population of Marten, and 

increased interest in the species among 

wildlife watchers. 

Photo: North Dakota Game and Fish 

Department. 

Status

Species of Greatest Conservation 

Need

Project Summary

Using State Wildlife Grant (SWG) 

Program funds along with state 

and other resources, North Dakota Game and Fish Department 

(NDGFD) conducted a survey of 

meso-carnivores to document a 

rising population of River Otters 

and Fishers in North Dakota. 

The project was a special success 

because NDGFD was also able to 

document a previously unknown 

breeding population of American 

Martens in the Turtle Mountains 

region of north-central North 

Dakota.

Partners

Frostburg State University

Program Funding

SWG Program

NDGFD/Partners

$110,000

TOTAL

$30,000 $80,000
106

age the species for the benefit of 

North Dakotans. 

More Information

https://gf.nd.gov/wildlife/id/carnivores/marten

North Dakota Wildlife Action Plan

The North Dakota Wildlife 

Action Plan was revised in 2015. 

The plan identifies 115 Species 

of Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with grasslands, rivers 

and streams, riparian areas, wetlands, and badlands. Key threats 

to species include habitat loss and 

fragmentation, disturbance, invasive species, and development. 

Priority conservation actions 

include, wildlife friendly land 

management, land protection, 

outreach to private landowners, 

research, and monitoring. More 

than 50 conservation participated 

in the development and review 

of the plan. Contact the North 

Dakota Game and Fish Department to learn more.

“Without State Wildlife 

Grant Program 

funding we would 

not have been able 

to know as much 

about these unique 

mammals as we do 

now. It continues to 

be our best tool to 

help those species 

that are most in need 

of conservation in 

North Dakota.”

Patrick Isakson

Conservation Biologist

North Dakota Game and 

Fish Department 
107

Ohio

Cerulean Warbler

projects for forest habitat which 

benefit a variety of birds, including the Cerulean Warbler. Project funding has included grants 

through the State Wildlife Grant 

(SWG) Program, along with state 

and other partner resources.

Partners

Ohio State University, 

Appalachian Mountains Joint 

Venture, Ohio Bird Conservation 

Initiative

Methods

Research, Monitoring, Habitat 

Management, Outreach/

Education, Technical Assistance, 

Landowner Agreements

Cerulean Warblers prefer interior forest with canopy gaps. 

Photo: Nina Harfmann.

Status

State Species of Concern

Project Summary

Cerulean Warblers have declined by about 70 percent over 

the last several decades. Large 

southeastern Ohio woodlands 

support some of the best remaining breeding populations in the 

state. Wherever mature deciduous woodlands—particularly 

oak-hickory forests—occur in 

Ohio, Cerulean Warblers should 

be members of the nesting fauna. 

These warblers prefer interior 

forest with canopy gaps and 

normally avoid isolated woodlots 

in open landscapes. For 10 years, 

the Ohio Division of Wildlife 

(ODOW) has engaged in numerous ongoing management 

Program Funding

SWG Program

ODOW/Partners

$110,000

TOTAL

$30,000 $80,000
108

Results

ODOW was instrumental in 

supporting research and management activities in southeastern 

Ohio to benefit Cerulean Warblers and other small-scale disturbance specialists. In addition, 

the agency supports the Ohio 

Bird Conservation Initiative, the 

Appalachian Mountains Joint 

Venture, and the Upper Mississippi River/Great Lakes Region 

Joint Venture to promote migratory bird conservation planning 

and management actions across 

the state and region.

Future Needs

Additional funding is needed 

for continued sustainable forest 

management, outreach/education, coordination, and technical 

assistance to benefit the Cerulean Warbler.

Ohio Wildlife Action Plan

The Ohio Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2015. The 

plan identifies 405 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with 15 key habitats, 

including forests, grasslands, 

wetlands, Lake Erie, and the 

Ohio River and its tributaries. 

Key threats to species include 

habitat loss and fragmentation, 

pollution, and invasive species. 

Priority conservation actions 

identified in the plan include 

monitoring, management, education, and outreach. More than 

130 conservation partners and 

members of the public participated in the development and review 

of the plan. Contact the Ohio Division of Wildlife to learn more.

“The long-term 

success of [Cerulean 

Warbler] will depend 

on continued largescale coordination and 

efforts to work with 

landowners to manage 

habitats on privately 

owned property.”

Matthew Shumar

Program Coordinator

Ohio Bird Conservation Initiative 
109

South Dakota

Greater Sage-Grouse

Partners

Bureau of Reclamation, South 

Dakota State University, U.S. 

Forest Service, Bureau of Land 

Management, Natural Resources 

Conservation Service

Methods

Research, Monitoring, Habitat 

Analysis, Modeling, Mapping, 

Landowner Agreements

Results

SDGFP learned that mammals 

are the leading suspected cause 

of mortality on Sage-Grouse 

hens. The agency’s studies also 

found that broods favor areas 

with higher abundance of beetles 

and areas with high sagebrush 

canopy cover and tall grass, 

while avoiding areas with high 

amounts of grass and litter cover. 

Sage-Grouse with broods selected areas near water and away 

from roads and forests. SDGFP’s 

Status

Not Warranted for Federal 

Listing (2015)

Project Summary

South Dakota Game, Fish and 

Parks (SDGFP) and its partners 

have been active participants 

in the effort to inventory and 

monitor the state’s sagebrush 

habitats and the wildlife associated with these areas, including 

Greater Sage-Grouse and other 

Species of Greatest Conservation Need. Using State Wildlife 

Grant (SWG) Program funds, the 

agency has spent over a decade 

leading the first comprehensive 

mapping of remaining big sagebrush in western South Dakota. 

The agency also has worked with 

partners during this period to 

assess habitat conditions in core 

sagebrush habitat, including at 

Greater Sage-Grouse leks. Most 

recently, SWG Program funds 

have supported a PhD research 

project to better understand factors that influence survival, nest 

success and nest site selection in 

a species that is declining and 

on the periphery of its range in 

South Dakota. In addition to this 

critical research and mapping 

effort, SDGFP supports a Farm 

Bill Biologist dedicated to implementing the Natural Resources 

Conservation Service’s Sage 

Grouse Initiative and to assisting 

landowners in managing and 

restoring rangeland habitats to 

benefit Greater Sage-Grouse. 

Program Funding

SWG Program

SDGFP/Partners

$93,000

TOTAL

$23,000 $70,000

SDGFP biologist capturing and 

tagging Greater Sage-Grouse for a 

study on reproductive ecology and 

habitat selection in Harding County, 

South Dakota. 

Photo: Lindsey Parsons.
110

identified Sage-Grouse core areas 

were adopted by the Bureau of 

Land Management as Priority 

Habitat Areas, receiving additional resources for conservation. 

Resource Selection Models and 

associated maps have been developed and will be used to refine 

the designated Sage-Grouse core 

area in the state. The Service’s 

2015 decision not to list the species helped SDGFP and partners 

avoid additional environmental 

review clearances which would 

have added to the complexity of 

working directly with Greater 

Sage-Grouse. 

Future Needs

SDGFP needs to continue monitoring South Dakota’s small, 

isolated Greater Sage-Grouse 

population and assessing impacts 

of continued mining and wind 

energy development within the 

range of this species in South Dakota. Additional resources would 

help the agency manage and 

preserve sagebrush habitats on 

public lands and encourage sagebrush maintenance on private 

lands in the face of conversion 

for agricultural uses, invasion of 

weeds and annual grasses, and 

overgrazing. 

More Information

South Dakota Wildlife Action 

Plan Explorer: https://apps.

sd.gov/gf43wap/

South Dakota Wildlife Action Plan

The South Dakota Wildlife Action Plan was approved in 2015. 

The plan identifies 104 Species 

of Greatest Conservation Need 

with strong association to grassland habitats, prairie pothole 

wetlands, and riparian streams. 

Threats include habitat conversion, invasive species, suppression of natural disturbances, 

aquatic impacts from adjacent 

land practices, and flood control 

and channelization. Conservation actions include collection of 

biological information on species 

abundance and distribution, 

and development of voluntary 

partnerships with governmental agencies, tribes, farmers and 

ranchers. Fifty-six species experts 

and 55 governmental entities 

assisted with development of 

the plan. Contact South Dakota 

Game, Fish and Parks for more 

information.

“Although South 

Dakota is on the 

fringe of the range 

of the Greater SageGrouse, we have 

spent significant 

time and resources 

on sagebrush 

habitats and sageassociated wildlife 

to better understand 

and manage these 

components of 

South Dakota’s 

natural heritage.”

Eileen Dowd Stukel

Senior Wildlife Diversity Biologist 

South Dakota Game, Fish and Parks
111

Wisconsin

Rusty Patched Bumble Bee

Bumble Bee at sites in 12 new 

counties, as well as an additional 

266 locations of the other seven 

bumble bee Species of Greatest 

Conservation Need found in 

the state. This information will 

improve conservation planning 

and management actions for 

these important pollinators and 

their habitat. Data gathered by B3 

volunteers and WDNR staff have 

been entered into the Natural 

Heritage Inventory (NHI) database. NHI data are used for the 

WDNR’s Endangered Resources 

Review program to implement 

best management practices to 

benefit Rusty Patched Bumble 

Bee. 

Future Needs

Locating new sites occupied by 

Rusty Patched Bumble Bee in 

Central and North Central WisVolunteers taking photos of bumble 

bees during a Wisconsin Bumble Bee 

Brigade training at Schlitz Audubon 

Nature Center. 

Photo: Eva Lewandowski.

Status

Federally Endangered (2017)

Project Summary

In 2018, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 

(WDNR) started the Wisconsin 

Bumble Bee Brigade (B3) citizen 

science project to answer questions on species distributions, 

habitat requirements, phenology, and population status. State 

Wildlife Grant (SWG) Program 

funds were used to offer 10 trainings to 198 people. WDNR will 

also develop additional online 

resources to engage and retain 

volunteers and to continue to 

document and monitor populations of Rusty Patched Bumble 

Bee.

Partners

University of Wisconsin 

(UW)—Madison Arboretum, 

UW–Madison Entomology, UW–

Green Bay, Bumble Bee Brigade 

Volunteers, Xerces Society

Methods

Research, Monitoring, Training 

Results

In two seasons, B3 volunteers 

have spent over 1,000 hours afield 

and greatly expanded WDNR’s 

knowledge of the distribution 

of this species in Wisconsin. B3 

volunteers and WDNR staff surveys have found Rusty Patched 

Program Funding

SWG Program

WDNR/Partners

$87,000

TOTAL

$18,000 $69,000
112

consin will be important to fill in 

knowledge gaps due to a lack of 

existing survey data.

Wisconsin Wildlife Action Plan

The Wisconsin Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2015. The 

Plan identifies 417 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with 104 natural community types. Key threats include 

invasive species and disease, habitat loss, fragmentation and degradation from development and 

resource use, and modification 

of environmental processes such 

as water extraction. Changing 

precipitation, temperature, and 

extreme weather events exacerbate these threats. Priority conservation actions include integrated and comprehensive policy, 

management and best practices, 

and public awareness and participation. The plan was developed 

with input from 30 organizations 

and 235 conservation and species 

experts. Contact the Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources—Bureau of Natural Heritage 

Conservation to learn more.

“Thank you for putting 

this important project 

together! I really 

enjoyed learning 

more about this 

fascinating subject!” 

Wisconsin Bumble Bee 

Brigade Volunteer

Rusty Patched Bumble Bee on Joe Pye 

Weed at Wapello Land and Water 

Reserve.

Photo: Angella Moorehouse, Natural Areas 

Preservation Specialist, Illinois Nature 

Preserves Commission.
113

REGIONAL CONSERVATION HIGHLIGHT

Hellbender

Ozark Hellbender was federally 

listed as endangered in 2011. 

Eastern Hellbenders are a large, 

long-lived aquatic salamander 

species that inhabit highly oxygenated cold-water streams and 

rivers from southern New York 

State to northern Georgia (see 

map). This fully aquatic salamander is a prehistoric survivor that 

lived at the same time as Mastodons. Due to their sensitivity to 

environmental factors and slow 

rate of maturation, Hellbenders are especially vulnerable to 

decline and potential extirpation 

or extinction. Hellbenders are 

listed as a Species of Greatest 

Conservation Need in the Wildlife Action Plans of every state in 

which they occur.

Range of the two Hellbender subspecies. 

Map: U.S. Geological Survey.

Range

Southern New York to Northern 

Georgia and westward to 

Missouri

Status

Eastern Hellbender was petitioned for listing under the 

Endangered Species Act in 2010. 

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service found the Hellbender may 

warrant protection pending a 

Species Status Assessment, which 

was conducted in 2017–2018. In 

2019, the Service announced it 

had determined not to list the 

subspecies as a whole, but did 

propose to list the populations 

in Missouri as endangered. The 
114

The following summaries highlight work undertaken by state 

fish and wildlife agencies and 

their partners in a sampling of 

states where Eastern Hellbender 

occur. In addition to monitoring 

and research, these and other 

state agencies have been working for years together to actively 

support this unique species. 

State agencies and their partners 

work to improve river and stream 

water quality to ensure suitable 

habitat, expand Hellbender populations through head-starting to 

ensure redundancy, and maintain and expand captive-rearing 

capacity to increase opportunities for population establishment 

and reproduction.

These significant investments—

along with those of other state 

and federal agencies, private 

landowners, universities, zoos, 

and other organizations—likely 

played a role in the Service’s 2019 

decision not to list the entire 

Eastern Hellbender subspecies 

under the Endangered Species Act.

Indiana

More than a decade ago, the 

Indiana Department of Natural 

Resources (DNR) partnered with 

Purdue University to develop a 

comprehensive model for Hellbender conservation. Without 

prompt action, this ancient 

amphibian was destined to 

disappear from Indiana. The 

agency and its many partners 

have invested State Wildlife 

Grant Program funds and other 

resources in researching various methods of captive-rearing 

to help increase survival after 

release. Partners are continuing 

to evaluate habitat throughout 

southern Indiana to determine 

suitable release sites outside of 

the Blue River. To date, Purdue 

University and the Indiana DNR, 

in partnership with various Indiana zoos, the Ohio Department 

of Natural Resources, and the 

Kentucky Division of Fish and 

Wildlife Resources, have collected over 1,000 eggs, released 

200 Hellbenders into the Blue 

River, and plan to release nearly 

500 additional juveniles by 2023. 

Now, after years of population 

Biologists with the New York State 

Department of Environmental 

Conservation (NYSEC) monitor 

Eastern Hellbender in New York. 

Photo: Anne Rothrock, NYSDEC.

Project partners releasing a juvenile 

Hellbender in the Blue River of Indiana. 

Photo: Indiana Department of Natural 

Resources.
115

and habitat assessments, public 

outreach, and expanding partner 

involvement, Hellbenders have a 

fighting chance in Indiana. 

Missouri

Eastern and Ozark Hellbenders 

are state-listed as endangered in 

Missouri. The Missouri Department of Conservation (MDC) 

began working in 2002 with partners including the Saint Louis 

Zoo, other state fish and wildlife 

agencies, and various federal 

agencies including the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service to establish 

a long-term monitoring, captive 

propagation, and augmentation 

program for both Eastern and 

Ozark Hellbenders. Using State 

Wildlife Grant Program funding 

and other resources, Hellbender 

captive-breeding and collection 

of eggs in the wild has continued 

to be successful, with more than 

8,000 animals released in seven rivers since 2010. MDC also 

implements surveys to monitor populations of Eastern and 

Ozark Hellbenders throughout 

their range in Missouri, and 

establish population trends. Artificial nest boxes were designed 

and installed in streams with 

mature Hellbender populations 

to increase suitable shelters for 

nesting. This innovative design 

has been successful, producing 

62 clutches of eggs since 2010. 

Although Missouri’s Hellbender 

populations continue to be at 

risk, the innovative efforts of 

MDC and partners have succeeded in changing the trajectory of 

these species from “imminent 

danger of extinction” to “likely to 

recover.”

New York

Since 2008, the New York State 

Department of Environmental 

Conservation (NYSDEC) has 

used State Wildlife Grant Program funding along with expert 

knowledge and other technical and financial support from 

zoos, universities, and conservation organizations to evaluate 

head-starting as a means of 

increasing recruitment of Eastern Hellbenders. Egg masses were 

collected from wild breeding 

Hellbenders and reared in captivity for periods ranging from 

3–8 years prior to release back 

into the watersheds the eggs were 

collected from. Monitoring of 

released Hellbenders has helped 

identify the role of chytrid fungus in limiting survivorship of 

head-started animals. NYSDEC 

has evaluated the benefit of habitat enhancement efforts such as 

the placement of large flat rocks 

and manufactured “Hellbender 

Huts” to improve nesting habitat for the species. The agency 

has demonstrated that habitat 

enhancements are being used by 

breeding Hellbenders.

North Carolina

The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) 

has used State Wildlife Grant 

Program funding over the past 

13 years to monitor Eastern 

Hellbender populations, conduct 

applied research, and address 

threats to the species at each life 

stage. The agency has employed 

new methods such as environmental DNA and artificial nesting habitats, and recently is focused on determining prevalence 

of various amphibian diseases 

among Hellbenders. NCWRC 

has produced technical guidance, 

“Our community 

knows that the health 

and well-being of our 

Hellbenders are a 

valued reflection of 

the health and vigor 

of our river ecosystem 

and our community.”

Ranger Bob

O’Bannon 

Woods State Park

Indiana

Hellbender eggs inside an artificial 

nest box.

Photo: Jeff Briggler.
116

augmented habitat features, and 

improved water quality through 

stream restoration projects. The 

agency and its partners have initiated the North Carolina Giant 

Salamander Network to bring 

together experts, researchers, 

advocates, and land managers to 

enhance communication, data 

sharing, and further Eastern 

Hellbender conservation efforts.

Ohio

The Ohio Department of Natural 

Resources, Division of Wildlife 

has partnered with The Ohio 

State University, Ohio University, Columbus and Toledo Zoos, 

PENTA Career Center, Soil and 

Water Conservation Districts 

in Columbiana, Jefferson, and 

Belmont Counties, and others 

to form the Ohio Hellbender 

Partnership. Using State Wildlife 

Grant Program funds and other 

state and partner resources, the 

Partnership released 1,120 captive-reared Eastern Hellbenders 

into ten watersheds over an eightyear period. Along with efforts 

to restore stream habitats and 

provide community outreach, the 

Hellbender head-start program 

is working to reverse the precipitous decline of this rare amphibian by establishing multiple 

self-sustaining populations in 

Ohio. The Partnership is continuing to monitor populations 

and identify factors responsible 

for the low levels of recruitment.

“This ‘head-starting’ 

program will enable 

us to release young 

Hellbenders back 

to the wild at a lifestage that may enable 

them to survive and 

thrive in New York.”

Patricia Riexinger

Division of Fish and Wildlife

New York State Department of 

Environmental Conservation

Eastern Hellbenders can be difficult to 

spot amid the cobble of river bottoms. 

Photo: Lori Williams.
117

TRIBAL HIGHLIGHT

Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe

Snowshoe Hare and 

Fisher Conservation

Hares are also a prey species for 

many predators. Keeping their 

populations healthy benefits the 

entire food web. 

Project Cost

Tribal Wildlife Grant 

Program—$196,400; other 

resources provided by the Band 

and partners—$130,000.

Partners

University of Minnesota, North 

Carolina State University, 

Minnesota Department of 

Natural Resources, U.S. Forest 

Service—Chippewa National 

Forest

Methods

Research, Monitoring, 

Coordination

Project Summary

In 2015, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service provided the Leech Lake 

Band of Ojibwe with a Tribal 

Wildlife Grant Program award to 

research the influence of forest 

structure and composition on the 

space use, survival, and interactions of Snowshoe Hare and Fisher. As part of this research, tribal 

biologists trapped and used radio 

telemetry collars to study Snowshoe Hares and Fishers to understand how the two species interact in reservation forests. The 

project was intended to inform 

forest management practices, 

helping the Leech Lake Band 

of Ojibwe manage sustainable 

populations of the two interrelated species. The project helped 

the Band find solutions to the 

declining Hare and Fisher populations and allow tribal members 

to continue their subsistence 

living by hunting Snowshoe Hare 

for traditional meals. Snowshoe 

This Snowshoe Hare was trapped 

and collared by the Leech Lake 

Band of Ojibwe Division of Resource 

Management. 

Photo: Alejandro Morales, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service. 

Program Funding

TWG Program

Leech Lake Band and others

$326,400

TOTAL

$130,000 $196,400
118

Results

The Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe 

is using science and their traditional ecological knowledge to 

assess Snowshoe Hare and Fisher 

populations on their reservation 

located in north-central Minnesota. The Snowshoe Hare is a 

traditional and cultural resource 

for its meat and fur, playing 

an integral part of subsistence 

living. 

Future Needs

Ongoing funding for the Leech 

Lake Band of Ojibwe is important for future actions that use 

new information obtained in this 

project to improve survival of 

Snowshoe Hare on tribal lands. 

Additional resources are needed 

for further investigations that 

can help the Band identify specific strategies that will ensure 

abundant populations of the 

species for the benefit of future 

generations.

More Information

https://www.fws.gov/midwest/

insider3/June16Story16.htm

The Fisher (Martes pennanti), also 

referred to as fisher cat, is a mediumsized mammal native to North 

America. 

Photo: Ron Dunnington, 2010. Flickr 

Creative Commons License: https://

creativecommons.org/licenses/by-ncnd/4.0/. 
119

WESTERN REGION HIGHLIGHTS
120
121

STATE HIGHLIGHTS

Alaska

Little Brown Bat

Partners

U.S. Forest Service, National Park 

Service

Methods

Monitoring Via Radiotelemetry, 

Scent Dogs, Trail Cameras, and 

Bat Detectors

Results

ADF&G’s efforts have confirmed 

non-cavernous hibernacula and 

swarming behavior at these sites. 

Their new methods will enable 

ADF&G to model bat winter 

habitat in southeast Alaska and 

conserve critical bat habitat. 

Future Needs

Additional resources are needed 

to help ADF&G identify specific 

overwintering habitats, expand 

acoustic monitoring, and identify and increase protections for 

Little Brown Bat (Myotis) with band. 

Photo: Alaska Department of Fish and Game.

Status

Scheduled for Federal Listing 

Review (2023)

Project Summary

Eastern and Midwestern populations of the Little Brown 

Bat (LBB) have been devastated 

in recent years by white-nose 

syndrome, a fungal disease that 

attacks hibernating bats. Due 

to a lack of information about 

the overwintering behavior of 

LBB in the western portion of its 

range, Alaska Department of Fish 

and Game (ADF&G) is unable to 

assess and manage the potential impacts of the disease. The 

agency has used State Wildlife 

Grant (SWG) Program funds 

for nine field seasons to identify 

and characterize the structures 

and microclimates the bat uses 

for hibernation and to develop 

new methods for identifying 

hibernacula and overwintering 

habitat.

Program Funding

SWG Program

ADF&G/Partners

$900,000

TOTAL

$300,000 $600,000
122

foraging and summer roosting 

habitats. 

Alaska Wildlife Action Plan

The Alaska Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2015. The 

plan identifies 326 vertebrates 

as Species of Greatest Conservation Need associated with sea 

ice, tundra, glacially influenced 

rivers, streams and fjords, permafrost associated wetlands, beaches and sea cliffs, temperate rain 

forest, and marine nearshore and 

shelf. Key threats include climate 

change, oil spills, and invasive 

species. Priority conservation actions include increased monitoring and data collection, research 

to understand species declines, 

surveys of high use areas to inform management and land use 

planning, and invasive species 

control. Overall, Alaska has very 

healthy habitats and abundant 

wildlife populations due to its 

location, large size, small human 

population, and minimally modified lands. The plan was developed with input from agencies, 

private conservation organizations, academic institutions, and 

the public. Contact the Alaska 

Department of Fish and Game to 

learn more.

Wildlife biologist Laura Beard removes 

a bat from a mist net. 

Photo: Alaska Department of Fish and Game.
123

American Samoa

Habitat Mapping and Classification

ping is essential for targeting 

high-value conservation areas for 

future protection. For example, 

this project determined that the 

Island of Aunu’u is comprised of 

30 percent wetland habitat and 

61 percent marsh wetland habitats, while wetlands cover less 

than one percent of the major 

islands of American Samoa. 

Wetlands provide important 

habitat for several at-risk species 

identified in the American Samoa 

Wildlife Action Plan.

Future Needs

Additional funding is needed to 

continue monitoring of at-risk 

species and protection of important habitats such as those identified in this project. Ongoing 

support will help DMWR collaborate with other federal agencies 

and partners. 

Coastline of the Island of Tutuila, 

American Samoa. 

Photo: National Park Service.

Status

Multiple SGCN and Federally 

Listed Species

Project Summary

The American Samoa Wildlife 

Action Plan identified a need for 

updated and detailed habitat 

maps for the territory’s islands. 

The plan noted that previous 

mapping was outdated or too 

generalized to meet the needs of 

wildlife biologists. The goal of 

the American Samoa Department 

of Marine and Wildlife Resources 

(DMWR) Habitat Mapping Project was to produce detailed and 

accurate habitat maps throughout American Samoa using a 

classification scheme specific to 

the vegetation of Samoa. The 

resulting map products provide 

an important dataset to facilitate 

the monitoring and management 

of wildlife and wildlife habitat in 

American Samoa.

Partners

U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service—State Wildlife Grant 

(SWG) Program and Wildlife 

Restoration Program

Methods

Mapping Using Remote Sensing 

and LIDAR, Field Sampling

Results

Information obtained through 

habitat classification and mapAmerican Samoa is exempt from 

the State Wildlife Grant Program 

matching requirement. Additional 

funds for this project were provided 

through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service’s Wildlife Restoration Program.

Program Funding

SWG Program

Wildlife Restoration Program

$424,500

TOTAL

$294,600 $129,900
124

American Samoa Wildlife Action Plan

The American Samoa Wildlife Action Plan was revised 

in 2015. The plan identifies 60 

Species of Greatest Conservation 

Need associated with terrestrial 

and marine ecosystems throughout the Territory. Key threats to 

species include habitat loss and 

fragmentation, invasive species, 

disease, and climate change. 

The Fruit Bat is a Species of Greatest 

Conservation Need in the American 

Samoa Wildlife Action Plan. 

Photo: National Park Service. 

Priority conservation actions 

include partnerships with other 

conservation agencies and organizations to establish connected 

habitats, engagement in largescale watershed planning, and 

expansion of data collection and 

monitoring for Species of Greatest Conservation Need. Many 

conservation partners and members of the public participated in 

the development of the plan. 
125

Arizona

Chiricahua Leopard Frog

species. Like other threatened or 

endangered species listed under 

the Endangered Species Act, the 

frog has required intensive efforts 

for many years and has only been 

successful due to the combined 

efforts of state, federal, and 

private partners. Multiple State 

Wildlife Grant (SWG) Program 

awards have been combined over 

these 15 years along with state 

matching resources to support 

this recovery program.

Partners

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

U.S. Forest Service, The Phoenix 

Zoo, University of Arizona, 

Arizona Game and Fish biologist 

releases a Chiricahua Leopard Frog. 

Photo: Arizona Game and Fish Department.

Status

Federally Threatened (2002)

Project Summary

For 15 years, the Arizona Game 

and Fish Department (AGFD) has 

taken a lead role in managing the 

recovery of several federally listed 

species in Arizona, including the 

Chiricahua Leopard Frog. Among 

eight land units identified in the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s 

recovery plan for the Chiricahua 

Leopard Frog, seven lie all or partially in Arizona. The Chiricahua 

Leopard Frog has declined in this 

range mainly due to amphibian 

disease, habitat loss, and invasive 

Program Funding

SWG Program

AGFD/Partners

$4,500,000

TOTAL

$3,400,000 $1,100,000
126

Private Landowners including 

Livestock Ranchers. 

Methods

Captive Propagation and Release, 

Habitat Restoration, Invasive 

Bullfrog Eradication, Private 

Landowner Agreements

Results

AGFD’s efforts include removal of 

invasive bullfrogs from hundreds 

of square miles of Chiricahua 

Leopard Frog habitat. Tens of 

thousands of frogs, tadpoles, and 

egg masses have been released 

in over 400 translocations to 

149 sites. Monitoring of these 

sites has shown a 400 percent 

increase in occupancy. AGFD and 

partners have met the recovery 

plan goals for one of the land 

units located in or partially in 

Arizona. 

Future Needs

Although AGFD and their partners have made great strides 

toward recovery of this species 

in Arizona, more must be done 

before the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service may consider de-listing 

Chiricahua Leopard Frog. The 

agency is using State Wildlife 

Grant Program funds to support 

a genomics study that is expected 

to improve translocation success. 

Continued surveying of more 

remote sites along with ongoing 

bullfrog removal are necessary to 

continue making progress toward 

recovery. 

Arizona Wildlife Action Plan

The Arizona Wildlife Action Plan

was revised in 2012 and is currently being updated. The plan 

identifies 528 Species of Greatest 

Conservation Need associated 

with desert scrub, grasslands, 

woodlands and forests, and 

aquatic and riparian areas. Key 

threats to species include human 

population growth, altered hydrological and fire regimes, invasive species, disease, and climate 

change. Priority conservation 

actions include partnerships with 

land managers to establish resilient connected habitats, engagement in large scale watershed 

planning, expansion of citizen 

science and volunteer programs 

for data collection and monitoring, and partnerships with 

industry to minimize impacts to 

wildlife. More than 60 conservation partners and many members 

of the public participated in the 

development of the plan. Contact the Arizona Game and Fish 

Department to learn more.

“Management for 

a single species, 

whether that be cattle 

or an endangered 

species, is flawed. It 

is the management of 

an entire ecosystem 

that creates the best 

functioning system, 

and yields the best 

results for all species.” 

Arizona Rancher and Chiricahua 

Leopard Frog Safe Harbor Participant

Conservation of the Chiricahua 

Leopard Frog has required intensive 

efforts for many years and has only 

been successful due to the combined 

efforts of state, federal, and private 

partners. 

Photo: Allison Leigh Smith. 
127

California

Sierra Nevada Red Fox

Methods

Research, Monitoring Including 

Satellite Telemetry, Planning, 

Coordination

Results

This project is yielding significant new information on the 

basic biology and ecology of the 

Sierra Nevada Red Fox. This 

information will be included in a 

Conservation Strategy currently 

under development and will help 

guide future research needs and 

management actions. 

Future Needs

Although the species as a whole 

was determined Not Warranted 

for listing under the Endangered 

Species Act in 2015, the Sierra 

Nevada Distinct Population 

Segment of the fox was proposed 

for listing by the Service in 2020. 

CDFW needs continued funding for basic research, including 

investigations of population size 

A male Red Fox is released by CDFW 

employees after being examined and 

fitted with a satellite tracking collar. 

February 13, 2018. Lassen National 

Forest. 

Photo: Corrie McFarland. 

Status

Not Warranted for Federal 

Listing (2015)

Project Summary

The California Department of 

Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) is 

investigating the health, reproductive biology, habitat use, 

and causes of mortality of the 

Sierra Nevada Red Fox in the 

Lassen Peak area. This rare fox 

is state-listed as threatened and 

is also described as a Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need that 

is highly vulnerable to climate 

change in California’s 2015 State 

Wildlife Action Plan. Sierra 

Nevada Red Fox distribution has 

declined significantly over the 

past century, and little is known 

about its ecology or population 

size. CDFW used State Wildlife 

Grant (SWG) Program funds over 

the past three years to address 

these data gaps, and to better 

understand potential factors 

limiting the fox’s expansion into 

unoccupied but seemingly suitable habitat in the Sierra Nevada 

and Cascade Ranges.

Partners

Lassen Volcanic National Park, 

University of California–Davis, 

U.S. Forest Service—Lassen 

National Forest

Program Funding

SWG Program

CDFW/Partners

$345,600

TOTAL

$121,000 $224,600
128

and trend, survival/mortality, 

habitat use, interactions and 

competition with other carnivores, and related work. This 

ongoing research provides essential scientific information that 

will inform future U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service listing decisions. 

More Information

https://www.fws.gov/news/

ShowNews.cfm?ref=service-proposes-federal-protections-for-california-population-of-one-of-&_

ID=36508

California Wildlife Action Plan

The California Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2015. The 

plan identifies 1,153 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with 55 key habitats/

ecosystems. Key threats include 

habitat loss, conversion and 

fragmentation due to various 

human activities that are coupled 

with other drivers such as invasive species and issues related to 

climate change including wildfire, drought and ocean acidification. Priority conservation 

actions encompass various topics 

including science and technology, 

outreach, partnership-building, 

law and policy, and integrated 

planning and management. Over 

380 individuals assisted with 

development of the plan and its 

nine companion plans which 

summarize actions needed for 

implementing the plan. Contact 

the California Department of 

Fish and Wildlife to learn more. 

“This project has 

yielded significant 

insights into the 

ecology of these foxes 

which will help the 

Department and other 

managers conserve 

the population.”

California Department of 

Fish and Wildlife 
129

Colorado

Lesser Prairie-Chicken

Colorado Parks and Wildlife biologists 

release Lesser Prairie-Chicken on the 

Comanche National Grasslands in 

southeastern Colorado. 

Photo: Colorado Parks and Wildlife.

(SWG) Program funds were combined with Wildlife Restoration 

Program funding from the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service and 

various sources of non-federal 

matching resources from the 

two states and their university 

partners to make this project 

possible. 

Partners

Kansas Department of Wildlife, 

Parks, and Tourism, Kansas State 

University, U.S. Forest Service

Methods

Research, Monitoring, 

Translocation, Coordination, 

Landowner Agreements

Results

Between 2016 and 2019, the 

partnership conducted four 

month-long trapping and translocation operations requiring 

many hours at remote field 

stations in western Kansas. The 

partnership trapped and transStatus

Under Review for Federal Listing

Project Summary

The Lesser Prairie-Chicken is 

the iconic prairie grouse of the 

southern Great Plains. However, 

numbers have declined drastically in a portion of the Sand 

Sagebrush Ecoregion near the 

Cimarron National Grasslands in 

southwestern Kansas and the Comanche National Grasslands in 

southeastern Colorado. Colorado 

Parks and Wildlife (CPW) and 

Kansas Department of Wildlife, 

Parks and Tourism (KDWPT) 

partnered with Kansas State 

University and the U.S. Forest 

Service to implement a three-year 

translocation project. The goal of 

this partnership is to secure the 

long-term persistence, resiliency, 

and distribution of Lesser Prairie-Chicken populations within 

the Sand Sagebrush Ecoregion by 

restoring core populations. Three 

graduate students from Kansas 

State University assisted with 

this project. State Wildlife Grant 

Program Funding

SWG Program

CPW/KDWPT

$504,400

TOTAL

$159,000 $345,400
130

located 411 Lesser Prairie-Chickens from the Short-grass Prairie 

Ecoregion in Kansas to the Sand 

Sagebrush Ecoregion. In early 

May of 2020, one full year after 

the last bird was released, Colorado and Kansas biologists and 

technicians found 115 male birds 

and 20 active leks on or near the 

Comanche and Cimarron National Grasslands. These leks, 

established by the translocated 

birds and their offspring, indicate 

that theLesser Prairie-Chicken 

has once again returned to the 

region’s prairie. 

This partnership effort to restore 

resiliency to the Lesser Prairie-Chicken population in the 

Sand Sagebrush Ecoregion seeks 

to increase long-term redundancy and representation across the 

species’ range. Combined with 

similar efforts in the West, these 

proactive strategies can positively 

impact the Service listing decision for Lesser Prairie-Chicken.

Future Needs

Broad-scale funding will be 

necessary to further incentivize 

conservation and restoration 

of prairie grasslands for species 

such as the Lesser Prairie-Chicken. Farm Bill programs, non-governmental organization support, 

investment from renewable and 

nonrenewable energy industry 

partners, and dedicated state and 

federal habitat funding are all 

necessary to maintain the southern Great Plains and its cherished 

species.

More Information

https://youtu.be/xG_7hajky-Q

Colorado Wildlife Action Plan

The Colorado Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2015. The 

plan identifies 159 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need associated with river basins, forests, 

wetlands, grasslands, and shrublands. Key threats to species 

include habitat loss and fragmentation, disturbance, invasive 

species, and lack of protection. 

Key conservation actions include 

increased monitoring and data 

collection, enhanced management and protection, and outreach. More than 20 conservation 

partners and many members of 

the public participated in the development and review of the plan. 

Contact the Colorado Division of 

Parks and Wildlife to learn more.

“This multi-state 

partnership, focused 

at a landscape 

scale, demonstrates 

what collaborative 

management efforts 

can do to restore a 

species to an area. 

However, agency 

partnership is just 

one component of the 

project. Landowner 

support and access 

to private lands was 

critical for capture of 

birds and continues 

to be essential for 

long-term monitoring. 

Recovery of this 

amazing species 

requires all of us 

working together.”

Liza Rossi

Bird Conservation Coordinator 

Colorado Parks and Wildlife

Colorado Parks and Wildlife biologists 

and a Kansas State University 

Graduate Student apply a transmitter 

to a Lesser Prairie-Chicken. 

Photo: Colorado Parks and Wildlife.
131

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands

Micronesian Gecko

used the information to develop 

a model of Micronesian Gecko 

distribution on Saipan. USGS 

provided technical expertise and 

other resources that were essential to the success of this project.

Partner

U.S. Geological Survey

Methods

Research, Monitoring

Results

This project showed that Micronesian Geckos are more common 

than previously thought and that 

they are currently found only at 

higher elevation locations away 

from Saipan’s coastal areas where 

development pressure is highest. Data will be used for future 

habitat and species management 

to benefit the Gecko and other 

at-risk species. From this experience, DFW and USGS know and 

value what each other brings to a 

partnership. This project directly 

led to a partnership on a larger 

project to control feral ungulates 

on the island of Alamagan for the 

benefit of the federally endangered Mariana Skink.

Future Needs

Priority needs for future conservation activities include: validating the Gecko distribution model, 

conducting similar studies on 

two other islands, implementing 

long-term monitoring of terMicronesian Gecko. 

Photo: Eric Hileman, U.S. Geological Survey.

The Commonwealth of the Northern 

Mariana Islands is exempt from State 

Wildlife Grant Program matching 

requirements.

Status

State Threatened and 

Endangered 

Project Summary

In 2018, the Commonwealth of 

the Northern Mariana Islands 

(CNMI) Division of Fish and 

Wildlife (DFW) and the U.S. 

Geological Survey (USGS) partnered to implement the first 

landscape-scale survey of herpetofauna on Saipan, the largest and most populated of the 

Northern Mariana Islands. The 

Micronesian Gecko, a CNMI-listed species, was a particular focus. 

Project funding was provided by 

the State Wildlife Grant (SWG) 

Program. This effort was the first 

large-scale collaboration between 

DFW and USGS on an applied 

research project. The partners 

Program Funding

SWG Program

DOI/USGS

$60,000

TOTAL

$46,000 $14,000
132

restrial reptiles, and acquiring 

easements or real property where 

Micronesian Gecko hotspots are 

vulnerable to development. 

Commonwealth of the Northern 

Mariana Islands (CNMI) 

Wildlife Action Plan

The CNMI Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2015. The 

plan identifies 60 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need associated with forests, grasslands, 

wetlands, caves, shorelines, coral 

reefs, seagrass beds, and open 

ocean. Key threats to species 

include invasive species, development, climate change, military 

expansion, pollution, unsustainable harvest or hunting, tourism 

and recreation, natural disasters, 

and wildfires. Priority conservation actions identified in the 

plan include invasive species 

prevention, improving effectiveness of conservation regulations, 

increased monitoring and data 

collection, continued adaptive 

management, and public outreach. More than 20 conservation 

partners and numerous members 

of the public participated in the 

development and review of the 

plan. Contact the CNMI Division of Fish and Wildlife to learn 

more.

 “Our agency has 

extremely limited 

funding available for 

reptile conservation. 

This was our first 

major project 

addressing the 

conservation needs 

of any terrestrial 

reptile, so I am very 

pleased with the 

successful outcome.”

Manny M. Pangelinan

Director

CNMI Department of Fish and Wildlife 
133

Guam

Green and Hawksbill Sea Turtles

Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, U.S. Department 

of Defense

Methods

Monitoring; landowner outreach 

and education

Results

Using information acquired 

through this project, the Guam 

Division of Aquatic and Wildlife 

Resources will develop management strategies to increase 

recruitment of sea turtles from 

Guam beaches.

Guam Wildlife Action Plan

The Guam Wildlife Action Plan 

was revised in 2015. The plan 

Hawksbill Sea Turtle. 

Photo: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Guam is exempt from the State 

Wildlife Grant Program matching 

requirements. 

Status

Federally Endangered 

Project Summary

The Guam Division of Aquatic 

and Wildlife Resources is implementing an island-wide sea turtle 

nesting habitat assessment. The 

agency is working to identify 

active sea turtle nesting habitat, 

identify threats to sea turtles, 

and determine nesting success 

through on-going monitoring. 

Project funding is provided by 

the State Wildlife Grant (SWG) 

Program.

Partners

Hagaan Watch (a volunteer 

monitoring group), National 

Program Funding

SWG Program

$126,000

TOTAL

$126,000
134

identifies 77 invertebrate and 

vertebrate Species of Greatest 

Conservation Need associated 

with habitats from limestone forests, savannas, beach strand forests, wetlands, to sea grass beds, 

lagoons, and coral reefs. Key 

threats to species are introduced 

invasive plants and animals, land 

development and use patterns 

contributing to habitat loss, and 

climate change. The introduced 

predatory Brown Tree Snake is, 

perhaps, the single major contributor to extinctions of many of 

Guam’s native birds. Control or 

eradication of introduced species, 

captive breeding and translocation of federally endangered or 

locally extirpated species, designation of protected terrestrial 

and marine conservation areas, 

increasing scientific information 

of species, and community education and outreach are identified 

as key priority conservation actions. The plan was developed in 

consultation with many subject 

matter experts from federal and 

state agencies, academic institutions, and non-governmental 

organizations, along with public 

input. Contact the Guam Department of Agriculture and its 

Division of Aquatic and Wildlife 

Resources to learn more.

Tatiana Perez Borja, left in bright 

green, and Josefa “Sefa” Muñoz, right 

in blue, both formerly of the University 

of Guam Sea Grant Program, assist 

Guam Department of Agriculture’s 

Division of Aquatic and Wildlife 

Resources with a green sea turtle nest 

inventory. 

Photo: Cristian “CJ” Cayanan, Biologist, 

Guam Division of Aquatic and Wildlife 

Resources. 
135

Hawaii

Kiwikiu (Maui Parrotbill)

sands of hours of seed collection 

from within the reserve and 

other protected lands, propagation of seedlings at nurseries, 

and finally transportation and 

planting in the reserve. In total, 

project managers planted over 

69,000 native seedlings of 22 species in the reserve. These join 

over 200,000 planted by the State 

of Hawaii in the greater reserve 

areas. Community volunteers 

contributed to the restoration 

of the reserve, providing at least 

45 percent of the overall field 

hours planting and conducting 

other restoration activities. These 

community volunteers leave their 

experience with a personal stake 

in the project and in the overall 

conservation of the forest and its 

inhabitants. The contributions 

of volunteers and other resources 

from project partners were used 

as match to secure State Wildlife 

Grant (SWG) Program funding 

from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service. 

Partners

University of Hawaii Pacific 

Cooperative Studies Unit, 

American Bird Conservancy, Na 

Koa Manu Conservation

Young Ohia trees to be planted in 

Nakula Natural Area Reserve, Maui, 

Hawaii. 

Photo: Hawaii Division of Forestry and 

Wildlife.

Status

Federally Threatened (2017)

Project Summary

Hawaii Division of Forestry and 

Wildlife’s (HDFW) Maui Forest 

Bird Recovery Project has conducted forest recovery actions 

in Nakula Natural Area Reserve 

(reserve) since 2012 in preparation 

for a planned reintroduction of 

the endangered Kiwikiu to this 

portion of the species’ former 

range. Hawaii Division of Forestry and Wildlife has conducted 

research and restoration actions 

on 100 acres of the Wailaulau 

Unit of the reserve. These include 

experimental research on the 

best restoration practices, extensive planting of native seedlings, 

erosion control, enhancement of 

natural regeneration, and removal of non-native grasses. Planting 

native seedlings involves thouProgram Funding

SWG Program

HDFW/Partners

$1,642,950

TOTAL

$520,790 $1,122,160
136

Methods

Research, Monitoring, Habitat 

Creation, Enhancement and 

Management

Results

The conservation actions that 

have taken place in the reserve 

have transformed the habitat 

from highly degraded and fragmented remnant forest to an 

increasingly dense, diverse, and 

connected forest. Experimental trials indicated that natural 

regeneration was limited to a few 

common species in the first few 

years after fences were erected 

and non-native ungulates were 

excluded. While these species 

continued to make up the majority of new trees recruited through 

2019, natural germination is now 

being observed in numerous 

additional species. Many of the 

planted and naturally germinated 

seedlings are beginning to reach 

maturity, exponentially increasing the overall reproductive output of native plant species within 

the preserve. Forest restoration 

is essential for supporting an increase in Kiwikiu abundance and 

distribution on Maui.

Future Needs

While natural regeneration continues to take hold in the reserve 

and surrounding areas, the diversity that will be needed to make 

the area fully functional habitat 

will require continuing planting 

of native species. There is a need 

for landscape-scale mosquito 

control and disease management. 

Although the reserve habitat is 

more degraded than currently 

occupied Kiwikiu habitat, the released birds responded very well 

to the available restored habitat.

More Information

www.mauiforestbirds.org

https://wildlife.org/conservationists-race-to-save-hawaiian-kiwikiu-honeycreeper/

https://www.audubon.org/magazine/september-october-2015/

how-scientists-are-racing-saverare

Roberts, C. 2019. Restoring A Native Hawaiian Ecosystem. Maui 

No Ka Oi Magazine November 

2019

Hawaii Wildlife Action Plan

The Hawaii State Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2015. The 

plan includes 6,252 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need, including many endemics that are 

associated alpine, subterranean, 

streams, estuaries, and marine 

habitats. Key threats to species 

are habitat loss and fragmentation, disturbance, invasive species, lack of protection, climate 

change, lack of information, lack 

of compliance with laws and 

regulations, overharvesting, and 

excessive extraction and use. 

Priority conservation actions 

include managing and protecting 

native species, controlling invasive species, management and 

recovery of species, monitoring 

and data collection, supporting 

partnerships, outreach and education to improve understanding 

of native wildlife, policy changes 

and enhancing funding. Nearly 

70 conservation partners and citizens participated in development 

of the plan. Contact the Hawaii 

Division of Forestry and Wildlife

to learn more.

“Before humans came 

to Hawaii, there 

were no rats that ate 

the birds’ eggs, and 

no mosquitoes that 

spread diseases to 

which the birds have 

no immunity. Since 

we are at the root of 

these problems, it is 

our duty to save these 

birds from extinction.”

 Hanna Mounce

Coordinator

Maui Forest Bird Recovery Project

Kiwikiu was listed by the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service as threatened in 2017. 

Photo: Zach Pezzillo, Maui Forest Bird 

Recovery Project.
137

Idaho

Fisher—Northern Rocky Mountain 

Distinct Population Segment 

species. The agency used DNA 

hair snaring as well as satellite 

radio collars to collect occurrence 

and movement data. These data 

were used to produce models of 

Fisher distribution and habitat 

preference. Over time, numerous 

partners joined the effort and 

brought considerable funds and 

resources to expand and support 

the project. 

Partners

University of Idaho, 

PotlatchDeltic Corporation, 

U.S. Forest Service–Nez Perce–

Clearwater National Forest, 

Yellowstone to Yukon 

Conservation Initiative, Idaho 

Conservation League, National 

Council for Air and Stream 

Improvement

Dr. Joel Sauder of IDFG conducts 

vital sign monitoring of Fisher while 

attaching a satellite-based radio collar. 

Photo: Chris Claire. 

Status

Not Warranted for Federal 

Listing (2011 and 2017) 

Project Summary

State Wildlife Grant (SWG) 

Program funds helped catalyze 

a multi-year, multi-organization effort to better understand 

the habitat needs of Fishers in 

north-central Idaho. Prior to 

this work the Fisher had received 

little conservation attention and 

its low densities and presumed 

association with mature and oldgrowth forest types meant there 

was high probability of future 

petitions for listing under the 

Endangered Species Act (ESA). To 

proactively address this knowledge gap, Idaho Fish and Game 

(IDFG) initiated a project to better understand the distribution 

and habitat requirements of the 

“The Idaho Fisher 

project has provided 

the needed science 

to maintain state 

management of the 

species and provide 

the information for 

future planning efforts 

to support a balanced 

approach between the 

economic vitality of the 

State and its wildlife.”

Joshua Uriarte

Terrestrial Species Program 

Manager and Policy Advisor

Idaho Governor’s Office of 

Species Conservation

Program Funding

SWG Program

IDFG/Partners

$250,000

TOTAL

$150,000 $100,000
138

Methods

Research, Monitoring, Modeling, 

Coordination

Results

This project generated Fisher 

habitat preference information 

that contributed to the Service’s 

Not Warranted finding for the 

Northern Rocky Mountain 

Distinct Population Segment. 

As a result, the state of Idaho 

retained management authority 

for the species, thereby helping 

to preserve timber-based jobs 

and benefiting local economies of 

north-central Idaho. This understanding of habitat requirements 

and suitable habitat constitutes 

the best available science on 

Fishers in Idaho and continues to 

shape conservation actions and 

local forest management into 

the future. State Wildlife Grant 

Program funding has distinctly influenced the forthcoming 

Nez Perce–Clearwater National 

Forest Plan, and provides essential information for IDFG’s Fisher 

conservation and management 

plan, which is currently under 

development.

Future Needs

Since the distribution and preferred habitat of Fishers overlaps 

with forests managed for multiple uses including timber production, there will be a long-term 

need to monitor populations to 

ensure Fishers remain secure and 

ESA protections are not required 

in the future.

More Information

Significant translocation work 

has occurred to restore Fisher to 

its historic range in the State of 

Washington. See the Washington 

State Fisher project description 

for more information on this 

related effort.

Idaho Wildlife Action Plan

The Idaho State Wildlife Action Plan was revised in 2016. 

The plan identifies 205 Species 

of Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with alpine and high 

montane, aspen forest and woodland, dry and mesic forest, riverine–riparian, sagebrush steppe, 

caves, and wetlands. Key threats 

include native habitat conversion due to noxious weeds and 

invasive annual grasses as well as 

development and related infrastructure, altered fire regimes, 

and wildlife disease. Priority 

conservation actions include the 

use of American Beaver to improve stream health for working 

landscapes and wildlife, mitigating impacts of invasive plant and 

animal species, restoring natural 

fire intervals that promote historical forest and rangeland conditions, and addressing impacts of 

disease and pesticides on fish and 

wildlife. More than 90 conservation partners and many members 

of the public participated in the 

development and review of the 

plan. Contact the Idaho Department of Fish and Game to learn 

more.

“The Idaho Fisher 

project has been 

a great example 

of large private 

landowner 

collaboration 

and has ensured 

all affected 

stakeholders will be 

involved in the longterm conservation 

of this species.”

Mike Houser

Manager 

Certification & Environment

PotlatchDeltic

Survey stations employed a remote 

camera, a hair-snaring device, a bone 

and an automated scent pump to 

attract and document the presence of 

Fishers. 

Photo: Idaho Department of Fish and Game.
139

Montana

Trumpeter Swan

the population until seven pairs 

of swans successfully fledge 

cygnets (young swans) for two 

consecutive years. State Wildlife 

Grant (SWG) Program and FWP 

funds used in this project have 

been supplemented with partner 

funds, volunteer support, and 

other resources that amount to 

many thousands of dollars over 

the past sixteen years. New releases are occurring in the Madison Valley of Southwest Montana 

with similar resources.

Partners

Blackfoot Challenge, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, Blackfoot 

Valley landowners

Methods

Monitoring, Reintroduction, 

Wetland Restoration, 

Coordination 

Trumpeter Swans. 

Photo: Tom Koerner, U.S Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Mountain-Prairie Region.

Status

Species of Greatest Conservation 

Need

Project Summary

Trumpeter Swans were classified as Tier 1 Species of Greatest 

Conservation need in Montana’s 

original State Wildlife Action 

Plan, which was published in 

2006 and has been updated regularly since then by Montana Fish, 

Wildlife, and Parks (FWP). The 

habitat needed by nesting Trumpeter Swans includes wetlands 

and riparian areas. Since 2004, 

FWP, the Blackfoot Challenge, 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

and a host of partners including 

private landowners have been 

working cooperatively to restore 

Trumpeter Swans to wetlands 

in the Blackfoot watershed. The 

goal of the program is to restore 

Program Funding

SWG Program

MFWP

$1,075,000

TOTAL

$175,000 $200,000

Other—U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

$700,000
140

Results

In 2011, Trumpeter Swans successfully nested and fledged 

cygnets in the Blackfoot watershed for the first time in potentially two centuries. Since then, 

the population has continued 

to rebound. Blackfoot wetlands 

hosted a record number of 13 

Trumpeter Swan pairs, five of 

which produced 20 cygnets, in 

2018. In addition to Swan recovery, FWP has found that wetlands restoration and protection 

has contributed to significant 

community pride in healthy habitats and wildlife populations.

Future Needs

Trumpeter Swans are being 

reintroduced in other wetlands to 

build similar support for wildlife 

and to achieve successful species 

recovery. Additional support 

would allow FWP to expand 

these efforts to other watersheds 

with suitable habitat.

More Information

https://issuu.com/montanaoutdoors/docs/cskt_swans1

Montana Wildlife Action Plan

The Montana Wildlife Action Plan was revised in 2015. The 

plan identifies 128 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with streams, rivers, 

lakes, reservoirs, wetlands, forests, grasslands, and sagebrush. 

Key threats include habitat loss 

or change, disease, pollution, 

climate change, and invasive 

species. Priority conservation 

actions include collaboration 

and outreach, habitat protection 

and management, planning and 

review, and technical assistance. 

Many agency staff, conservation 

partners and the public participated in the development of 

the plan. Contact Montana Fish 

Wildlife and Parks to learn more. 

“Trumpeter Swans tug 

at the heartstrings of 

people in this valley. 

When I have coffee 

at a local café or 

meet with a local 

landowner, I hear their 

stories about swans 

flying over their land 

and how incredible 

that experience was.” 

Greg Neudecker 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
141

Nevada

California Spotted Owl

Results

This project determined that 

the Carson Range can support 

breeding pairs which is critical new information. Knowing 

the locations of Spotted Owl 

nests is essential to protecting them. NDOW used survey 

results to work with forestry and 

land-management partners to 

minimize nest disturbance and 

ensure that suitable habitat is 

conserved. Data obtained in this 

project contributed to the 2019 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

finding that the species is not 

warranted for federal listing.

Future Needs

A large portion of the Carson 

Range remains unsurveyed for 

California Spotted Owl. Additional survey work is needed in 

Female and juvenile California Spotted 

Owls photographed near their nest in 

Nevada’s Carson Range in July 2015. 

Photo: Mark Enders, NDOW.

Status

Not Warranted for Federal 

Listing (2019)

Project Summary

After receiving a petition to list 

the California Spotted Owl, the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

issued a positive 90-day finding 

in 2015. In Nevada, California 

Spotted Owls occur in a single 

mountain range, the Carson 

Range, and were first confirmed 

to nest there in 2009. Nevada 

Department of Wildlife (NDOW) 

has been conducting surveys for 

the species since then, with more 

than 330 surveys throughout its 

range. In addition to support 

from the State Wildlife Grant 

(SWG) Program, field work was 

supported in part by the Lake 

Tahoe Environmental Improvement Program which contributed 

$46,000 toward the cost of survey 

crews and NDOW staff salaries.

Partners

Great Basin Institute, U.S. Forest 

Service, Nevada Department 

of Conservation and Natural 

Resources 

Methods

Research, Monitoring, 

Coordination, Habitat 

Management, Technical 

Assistance

Program Funding

SWG Program

NDOW/Partners

$85,150

TOTAL

$56,150 $29,000
142

roadless and wilderness areas to 

gain a better understanding of 

the species’ distribution in the 

Carson Range and to protect 

additional active territories from 

disturbance. 

Nevada Wildlife Action Plan

The Nevada Wildlife Action Plan

was revised in 2012. The plan 

identifies 256 Species of Greatest 

Conservation Need associated 

with sagebrush, Mojave warm 

desert shrub, aspen woodland, 

marshes, and sand dunes. Key 

threats include habitat loss and 

fragmentation, wildfires, invasive species, disease, and climate 

change. Priority conservation 

include increased monitoring and 

data collection, enhanced management and protection, and outreach. Eight formal partners and 

many informal partners and the 

public assisted with development 

of the plan. Contact the Nevada 

Department of Wildlife to learn 

more.

“California Spotted Owls 

are tied to some of the 

most pristine habitats in 

Nevada’s Carson Range, 

and the management 

decisions we make 

today will benefit a 

suite of important 

species in Nevada for 

generations to come.” 

Mark Enders

NDOW Biologist
143

New Mexico

Peñasco Least Chipmunk

and radio telemetry. Basic information on the distribution and 

habitat associations of the chipmunk is a data gap that must be 

addressed for conservation and 

management of the chipmunk to 

proceed. Both distribution and 

habitat association data collected 

with the support of State Wildlife 

Grant (SWG) Program funds are 

very important in informing the 

final listing decision that will be 

made for this candidate for federal listing under the ESA.

Partners

New Mexico State University, 

Frey Biological Research, 

U.S. Forest Service

Methods

Research, Monitoring 

Penasco Least Chipmunk with an ear 

tag for monitoring. 

Photo: Jim Stuart.

Status

Candidate for Federal Listing 

Project Summary

The Peñasco Least Chipmunk is 

listed as endangered by the State 

of New Mexico and is a candidate 

for federal listing under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). It is 

only known to persist in the Sierra Blanca subrange of the Sacramento Mountains, New Mexico. 

Surveys conducted by researchers 

at New Mexico State University 

under a contract with the New 

Mexico Department of Game and 

Fish (NMDGF) in 2016 were the 

first to document the presence of 

this species in the Sierra Blanca 

subrange. The goal of further 

research conducted between 2018 

and 2019 was to evaluate the 

chipmunk’s distribution, habitat 

selection, and ecological interactions based on camera traps 

Program Funding

SWG Program

NMDGF/Partners

$102,500

TOTAL

$36,000 $66,500
144

“The information 

being gathered 

by researchers at 

New Mexico State 

University regarding 

the Peñasco Least 

Chipmunk is crucial 

to furthering the 

conservation of this 

candidate species 

and making a wellinformed decision 

regarding its listing 

at the federal level.” 

Ginny Seamster

Program Coordinator

Share with Wildlife Program

Results

This project documented the species in new locations and highlighted a previously unrecognized 

part of the Sacramento Mountains as an important area for 

future conservation. In addition, 

the researchers demonstrated 

that Peñasco Least Chipmunk 

could be distinguished from the 

similar Gray-Footed Chipmunk 

using photographs. They placed 

camera traps at 239 locations 

throughout the Sierra Blanca 

subrange, based on land cover 

type and elevation. The researchers radio-tracked 16 chipmunks 

at the Lookout Mountain–Ice 

Springs study area. Data obtained 

by NMDGF contractors suggest 

that Peñasco Least Chipmunks 

are habitat specialists and that 

conservation of the Lookout 

Mountain–Ice Springs subpopulation should focus on maintaining old growth Engelmann’s 

spruce forest and a shrub understory.

Future Needs

Additional resources are needed 

to retain old growth stands of 

spruce, which are threatened by 

disease and wildfire in synergy 

with climate change. NMDGF 

will also need to implement 

conservation actions to protect 

chipmunk cover provided by 

shrubs and other understory 

species, which may be impacted 

by grazing or browsing. 

More Information

Report on Peñasco Least Chipmunk monitoring by Dr. Jennifer Frey: http://www.wildlife.

state.nm.us/download/conservation/share-with-wildlife/

reports/2016/Survey-for-the-Penasco-least-chipmunk-Tamias-minimus-atristriatus-_-Jennifer-Frey.pdf

New Mexico Wildlife Action Plan

The New Mexico Wildlife Action Plan was revised in 2017. 

The plan identifies 235 Species 

of Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with 41 key terrestrial 

and aquatic habitats. Key threats 

include development, agriculture, 

energy production, and natural 

system modifications. Priority 

conservation actions include research and monitoring, improved 

threat assessment, project review, 

collaboration, and outreach. Over 

42 federal, state, and education 

institutions, agency staff, and 

many members of the public participated in development of the 

plan. Contact the New Mexico 

Department of Game and Fish to 

learn more.
145

Oregon

Western Pond Turtle

Partners

The Oregon Wildlife Foundation, 

Cities of Albany, Eugene, and 

Salem, Salem Audubon Society, 

Port of Portland, Oregon Zoo, 

Washington Department of 

Fish and Wildlife, California 

Department of Fish and Wildlife, 

Center for Natural Lands 

Management, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service

Methods

Nesting Area Enhancement and 

Protection, Overwintering and 

Foraging Habitat Improvement, 

Invasive Non-native Turtle 

Removal, Standardized 

Occupancy Surveys to determine 

status and distribution in Oregon

Results

Timely monitoring and information sharing using standardized 

survey methods may help the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

determine the species is not 

warranted for listing under the 

ESA in 2021. Additionally, project 

funds are supporting local jobs 

and providing an opportunity for 

citizen scientist involvement. 

Future Needs

To help ensure long-term viability of Western Pond Turtles in 

A Western Pond Turtle hatchling just 

emerged from its nest in the Willamette 

Valley. 

Photo: Courtesy of Samara Group.

Status

Scheduled for Federal Listing 

Review (2021)

Project Summary

The Western Pond Turtle is 

currently under review for federal 

listing. If implemented in a timely manner, conservation actions 

identified in the Western Pond 

Turtle Range-Wide Management 

Strategy could preclude the need 

to list Western Pond Turtles under the Endangered Species Act 

(ESA). The Oregon Department 

of Fish and Wildlife (ODF&W) is 

working with the states of Washington and California to contribute key data toward the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service’s listing 

decision and identify priority 

conservation areas for future protection. Funding from the State 

Wildlife Grant Program, along 

with state and partner resources, 

has supported this timely, proactive conservation work.

Program Funding

SWG Program

ODF&W/Partners

$200,000

TOTAL

$80,000 $120,000
146

the wild, additional funding is 

needed to research genetic variability and threats, implement 

best management practices, and 

conduct outreach and education. 

Oregon Wildlife Action Plan

The Oregon Wildlife Conservation Strategy was revised in 

2016. The strategy identifies 294 

Species of Greatest Conservation Need associated with late 

successional forests, sagebrush 

habitats, grasslands, estuaries, 

and wetlands. Key threats include 

climate change, land use changes, 

invasive species, and barriers to 

animal movement. Priority conservation actions include managing impacts from climate change, 

monitoring, research, improving 

connectivity, outreach, education, urban area conservation, 

planning and regulations, and 

voluntary conservation. More 

than 200 conservation partners 

assisted in the development and 

review of the strategy. Contact 

the Oregon Department of Fish 

and Wildlife to learn more. 

“State Wildlife Grant 

Program funding, 

along with a strong 

partnership with 

Oregon Department 

of Fish and Wildlife, 

has allowed the City 

to take Western Pond 

Turtle conservation 

work to a level that 

we couldn’t easily 

achieve on our own.” 

Lauri Holts

Ecologist

City of Eugene Parks and Open Space
147

Utah

Boreal Toad

Methods

Surveys / Monitoring, Habitat 

Protection, Enhancement and 

Management, Captive Rearing 

and Release

Results

UDWR is presently analyzing 

23 years of Boreal Toad monitoring data. Using the data in population modeling and viability 

analyses, the agency has determined that many of the state’s 

Boreal Toad populations are stable and even slightly increasing. 

This information will be essential to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service and other conservation 

partners in future status reviews 

and for direct management of 

Boreal Toad and its habitat.

Boreal Toad. 

Photo: Utah Division of Wildlife Resources.

Status

Not Warranted for Federal 

Listing (2017)

Project Summary

In Utah, Boreal Toad conservation began more than 20 years 

ago with inventory and monitoring of the species. At that time, 

little was known about the 

natural history and distribution 

of Boreal Toad in the state. Utah 

Division of Wildlife Resources 

(UDWR) first developed a baseline understanding of the species, 

then began implementing habitat protection and restoration. 

Eventually, some hatchery and 

augmentation activities produced 

results for the weakest population. Similar work is occurring 

in other states including neighboring Colorado, using State 

Wildlife Grant (SWG) Program 

funds along with state and many 

other partner resources. In Utah, 

state funding has largely been 

contributed from the Endangered 

Species Mitigation Fund and the 

Watershed Restoration Initiative.

Partners

iNaturalist, U.S. Forest 

Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, U.S. Bureau of Land 

Management, Hogle Zoo, Denver 

Zoo, Wild Utah Project, Private 

Landowners

Program Funding

SWG Program

UDWR/Partners

$183,300

TOTAL

$70,800 $112,500
148

“Our State Wildlife 

Grant Program 

allocation, along 

with Utah’s matching 

funds, supports the 

essential core of our 

Endangered Species 

Act listing-prevention 

program: our staff. I 

doubt we would have 

been able to complete 

the long-term Boreal 

Toad conservation 

work, or much other 

ESA listing-prevention 

work, without the 

SWG Program 

allocation and the 

permanent staff that 

this funding enables us 

to recruit and retain.”

Drew Dittmer

Herpetologist and Native 

Species Coordinator

Utah Division of Wildlife Resources

Future Needs

Even though the Service’s 2017 

Not Warranted decision ensured that Boreal Toad was not 

federally listed as threatened or 

endangered, biologists are still 

monitoring Utah populations 

and tracking toad sightings. 

More Information

https://www.youtube.com/

watch?v=xjC_54E169M&t=6s

Utah Wildlife Action Plan

The Utah Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2015. The plan 

identifies 141 Species of Greatest 

Conservation Need associated 

During the last 25 years, 21 species with Utah populations have been petitioned for 

federal listing, but the vast majority were found Not Warranted, largely due to State 

Wildlife Grant Program funding. 

From: “The Power of Proactive Conservation,” a report published by the Utah Department of 

Natural Resources. November 2018. Available at https://wildlife.utah.gov/pdf/WAP/follow-upreport.pdf. 

Species USFWS Decision Year Decided

Southwestern willow flycatcher Listed—Endangered 1995

Columbia spotted frog Not warranted for ESA listing 2002

Yellowstone cutthroat trout Not warranted for ESA listing 2006

Colorado River cutthroat troat Not warranted for ESA listing 2007

Bonneville cutthroat trout Not warranted for ESA listing 2008

Pygmy rabbit Not warranted for ESA listing 2010

American pika Not warranted for ESA listing 2010

Northern leopard frog Not warranted for ESA listing 2011

Northern leatherside chub Not warranted for ESA listing 2011

Gila monster Not warranted for ESA listing 2011

American bison Not warranted for ESA listing 2011

Gunnison’s prairie dog Not warranted for ESA listing 2013

Yellow-billed cuckoo (western DPS) Listed—Threatened 2014

Gunnison sage-grouse Listed—Threatened 2014

Least chub Not warranted for ESA listing 2014

Greater sage-grouse Not warranted for ESA listing 2015

Boreal toad Not warranted for ESA listing 2017

Bifid duct pyrg Not warranted for ESA listing 2017

White-tailed prairie dog Not warranted for ESA listing 2017

Virgin River spinedace Under review Under review

Wolverine Under review Under review

with forests, grasslands, sagebrush, 

shrub, rivers, and wetlands. Key 

threats include water use and development (exacerbated by increasingly variable temperatures and 

precipitation), invasive species, departure from natural fire regimes, 

data gaps, inadequate understanding of species, and insufficient 

inventory and assessment. Priority conservation actions include 

habitat and species management 

and protection, water conservation 

and management, grazing management, corridor conservation, 

recreation management, and monitoring. Approximately 20 conservation partners and stakeholders 

assisted with development of the 

plan. Contact the Utah Division of 

Wildlife Resources to learn more.
149

Washington

Fisher

Columbia and Alberta to provide healthy Fishers for release 

in Washington. Released Fishers 

have been monitored via telemetry to determine the early success 

in each reintroduction area, and 

success over a longer period has 

also been assessed in the Olympic 

Recovery Area. Complementing 

reintroduction actions, WDFW 

and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service worked with non-federal 

forest landowners to develop and 

implement a Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances (CCAA) for the Fisher.

By investing early in proactive 

conservation actions including 

the CCAA, WDFW and partners 

have jump-started Fisher recovery before the species was considered for listing under the Endangered Species Act. The CCAA 

has facilitated the participation 

of owners of private and comProject funding represents only the 

portion of this overall reintroduction 

effort that was supported with funding 

from the State Wildlife Grant Program 

and WDFW. 

Status

State-Listed Endangered

Project Summary

To recover Fishers in Washington, a group of conservation 

partners including Washington 

Department of Fish and Wildlife 

(WDFW) have reintroduced 260 

Fishers from 2008 to 2020 in 

three recovery areas in Washington State, including the Olympic, South Cascade, and North 

Cascade Mountains. In 2020, the 

partners reached Fisher release 

goals in all three recovery areas. WDFW used State Wildlife 

Grant (SWG) Program funds to 

support this effort, which complemented funding from the 

National Park Service and other 

partners. Reintroduction efforts 

also depended on assistance from 

Canadian partners in British 

Fisher being released by National 

Park Service partners in the 

North Cascades Ecosystem of 

Washington, October 2019. 

Photo: K. Rine, National Park Service.

Program Funding

SWG Program

WDFW/Partners

$135,000

TOTAL

$35,000 $100,000
150

mercial working timber lands to 

continue working and managing 

their lands in concert with Fisher 

recovery. Ultimately, a recovered 

Fisher population could lead to 

a well-managed and responsible 

trapping program in Washington. 

Partners

National Park Service, 

Conservation Northwest, U.S. 

Forest Service, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Point Defiance 

Zoo and Aquarium/Northwest 

Trek Wildlife Park, Calgary 

Zoo, National Fish and Wildlife 

Foundation

Methods

Monitoring, Species 

Reintroduction, Landowner 

Agreements 

Results

While it is too early to know if 

the Fisher reintroductions have 

been successful in reestablishing self-sustaining populations, 

there have been positive indications based on results from the 

long-term monitoring efforts in 

the Olympic Recovery Area, as 

well as monitoring in the South 

Cascades. Fishers are widely 

distributed and there is evidence 

of reproduction. Initial telemetry 

monitoring of released Fishers is 

still ongoing in the North Cascades reintroduction area, and 

a long-term monitoring project 

is being planned for the entire 

Cascades Recovery Area. To 

date, over 60 landowners have 

enrolled their lands protecting 

over 3.3 million acres of forests 

habitats. 

Future Needs

Further monitoring is needed to 

ensure that the translocations 

have resulted in established 

populations in the Olympic and 

Cascade Recovery Areas, and 

to inform any need to augment 

reintroduced populations. Additional funding could enable 

WDFW to expand Fisher restoration efforts within its historic 

range. 

Washington Wildlife Action Plan

The Washington Wildlife Action Plan was revised in 2015. 

The plan identifies 268 Species 

of Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with bogs, dune, riparian woodland, conifer swamp, 

marshes and mudflats, prairie 

and savannahs, shrub-steppe, 

and oak and pine woodlands. 

Key threats include habitat loss 

and fragmentation, disturbance, 

invasive species, lack of protection, and climate change. Priority 

conservation actions include 

population assessments and 

inventory, habitat protection and 

restoration, and species-specific 

threat abatement. Approximately 

250 individuals and organizations 

provided input during development of the plan. Contact the 

Washington Department of Fish 

and Wildlife to learn more.

“People have been 

working tirelessly to 

restore this mysterious 

and rare carnivore to 

the Cascades, and 

now that we’ve met 

our release goals, we 

anticipate that Fishers 

will continue to settle 

into the recovery 

areas, find mates, 

and provide the 

foundation for a large, 

healthy population 

in Washington.”

Jeff Lewis

Mesocarnivore Conservation Biologist

Washington Department 

of Fish and Wildlife
151

Wyoming

White-Tailed Prairie Dog

Wildlife, Utah Division of 

Wildlife Resources

Methods

Research, Monitoring, RangeWide Mapping 

Results

Work conducted as part of this 

project helped the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service determine that 

the species was not warranted 

for federal listing in 2017. Federal 

listing would likely impact development in western Wyoming, 

and the Wyoming economy.

White-Tailed Prairie Dog. 

Photo: Tom Koerner, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service.

Status

Not Warranted for Federal 

Listing (2017)

Project Summary

Due to a 90 percent decline in 

the historic range of the WhiteTailed Prairie Dog, the species 

was petitioned for federal listing. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service published a 12-month 

finding of Not Warranted in 

2010. After a 2014 court order to 

reevaluate the species’ status, a 

Species Status Assessment was 

initiated. The Wyoming Game 

and Fish Department (WGFD), in 

coordination with the state fish 

and wildlife agencies of Colorado 

and Utah, performed range-wide 

species mapping to determine 

occupancy, with support from 

the State Wildlife Grant (SWG) 

Program. New information was 

compared to data from previous 

efforts to determine population status of the Prairie Dog in 

Wyoming. Additional support 

and funding was provided by the 

Service’s Wyoming Ecological 

Services Field Office. In 2017, 

the Service again determined 

the White-Tailed Prairie Dog is 

not warranted for federal listing. 

SWG Program funding was an 

important resource impacting 

this decision. 

Partners

Wyoming Natural Diversity 

Database, Colorado Parks and 

Program Funding

SWG Program

WGFD/Partners

$134,900

TOTAL

$35,600 $99,300
152

“Many species of 

Conservation Need 

are linked to habitat 

provided by Prairie 

Dogs in Wyoming. 

Understanding 

populations through 

time allows the 

Department to better 

manage for this 

species and ensure 

their persistence.”

Wyoming Game and Fish Department

Future Needs

Additional resources are needed for monitoring and mapping 

efforts to contribute to future 

federal listing decisions affecting 

the species.

More Information

https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/content/PDF/Hunting/JCRS/

JCR_NONGAMEACR_2016.pdf

Wyoming State Wildlife Action Plan

The Wyoming Wildlife Action 

Plan was revised in 2017. The 

plan identifies 229 Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need 

associated with 11 terrestrial habitat types and 6 aquatic 

basins. Key threats include rural 

subdivision and development, energy development, invasive 

species, climate change, and disruption of historic disturbance 

regimes. Priority conservation 

actions identified in the plan 

include increased monitoring 

and data collection, enhanced 

management and protection, 

and outreach. Many conservation partners and members of 

the public participated in development and review of the plan. 

Contact the Wyoming Game and 

Fish Department to learn more.  
153

REGIONAL CONSERVATION HIGHLIGHTS

Wolverine

in 2015, the four state wildlife 

agencies collaborated to leverage Competitive State Wildlife 

Grant (C-SWG) Program funding 

with state and other resources 

to address information needs. 

A camera survey established a 

baseline of Wolverine occurrence 

across the four states for future 

monitoring planned at five-year 

intervals. Connectivity modeling that included analysis of 

climate change scenarios helped 

the partners evaluate opportunities for conserving priority 

areas that connect populations. 

The concept of a pre-listing “10j” 

(experimental non-essential) 

population was advanced to facilitate reintroductions to restore 

populations. These actions of the 

partnering state fish and wildlife 

agencies are a proactive approach 

that may prevent the need to 

federally list the Wolverine. 

The Western States Wolverine 

Conservation Project has developed 

a proactive plan for Wolverine 

conservation, pooling resources and 

skillsets to identify and fund beneficial 

actions on a continental scale. 

Photo: Mark Packila, Montana.

States

Idaho, Montana, Washington, 

and Wyoming

Status

Proposed Threatened (2013)

Project Summary

Idaho, Montana, Washington, 

and Wyoming partnered with 

federal, tribal, university, and 

non-government entities to 

address contemporary issues 

concerning Wolverine across 

the western United States. 

The Western States Wolverine 

Conservation Project focuses 

on connecting the landscapes 

where Wolverines currently 

exist, restoring the species to 

areas of historical distribution, 

and monitoring this uncommon 

inhabitant of remote wilderness 

with camera surveys. Beginning 

Program Funding

States

NFWF

$1,269,500

TOTAL

$150,000 $440,000

C-SWG

GNLCC

NPS

USFS

$385,000

$199,500

$60,000 $35,000
154

Partners

Idaho, Montana, Washington, 

and Wyoming State Fish and 

Wildlife Agencies, National 

Genomics Center for Wildlife 

and Fish Conservation, U.S. 

Forest Service, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, National Park 

Service, University of Montana 

and Montana State University, 

Northern Arapaho, Eastern 

Shoshone, and Confederated 

Salish and Kootenai Tribes, 

Woodland Park Zoo

Methods

Research, Monitoring, Modeling 

Results

During the winters of 2015–2016 

in Wyoming and 2016–2017 in 

all four states, the camera survey 

documented presence of Wolverines across their known range, 

an area of nearly 55,000 square 

miles. Wolverines were confirmed with remote cameras and 

hair snares at roughly one-third 

of the cells sampled but modeling 

suggests they likely were present in roughly half of the entire 

survey area. The monitoring 

effort will be repeated in 2021 

across an expanded study area 

including eight western states to 

assess whether the distribution 

of Wolverines, and potentially 

other forest carnivore species, is 

shrinking, expanding or holding 

steady. Some large areas of the 

historical Wolverine distribution 

remain unoccupied in Colorado 

and California, and progress was 

made in developing a program 

to provide regulatory assurances 

for states under section 10j of 

the Endangered Species Act, if 

they were to reintroduce Wolverines prior to a future listing. 

The project used previously-collected telemetry data to identify 

likely dispersal routes between 

mountain ranges, with the aim 

of providing maps to land trusts 

working on securing easements 

with willing private landowners 

to connect the public lands of the 

Rocky Mountain West. Together, 

these conservation elements are 

key to conserving Wolverines 

across the western United States. 

Conservation actions for Wolverines can also result in largescale conservation of many other 

sensitive species. 

Future Needs

The Western States Wolverine 

Conservation Project would 

benefit from additional funding 

to conduct analyses to inform the 

effects of human and environmental activities on changes in 

Wolverine occupancy. 

“I’ve never seen such 

extensive collaboration 

among agencies 

and NGOs in my 

entire career”

Bob Lanka

Wyoming Game and Fish (retired)

“Knowing that the 

species is here and 

recovering gives us 

additional incentive 

to learn more about 

what factors affect 

where Wolverines can 

and can’t occur” 

Robert Long

Woodland Park Zoo 

Detections from the camera survey 

were used to model the probability 

of Wolverine occupancy across the 

northwestern US, illustrating regional 

differences in likelihood of Wolverine 

occurrence and establishing the 

baseline to which future surveys will be 

compared. 

Map: Western States Wolverine Conservation 

Project.
155

Wolverine distribution in Idaho, as 

defined by the camera survey, was 

as expected, but information at the 

individual level was added value. Four 

individuals known from previous 

studies were confirmed as still present 

on the landscape. 

Photo: Idaho Department of Fish and Game.

Female F39 and male M40 at a camera 

station on the Okanogan-Wenatchee 

National Forest in Washington. The 

camera survey indicated a broader 

distribution of wolverines than 

expected in the Cascade Range, notably 

south of Interstate 90. 

Photo: Washington Department of Fish and 

Wildlife.

A female wolverine detected in the 

Wind River Mountains in Wyoming at 

the southern edge of current wolverine 

distribution. Her identify was 

confirmed by DNA collected at the site. 

She was 12 years old and still residing 

in the same area where she was last 

documented in 2007. 

Photo: Wyoming Game and Fish 

Department.
156

More Information

https://idfg.idaho.gov/species/

bibliography/1911590

http://fwp.mt.gov/mtoutdoors/

HTML/articles/2018/wolverineproject.html
157

Arkansas Darter

The Arkansas River from its source in Colorado to its confluence with the 

Mississippi River. 

Source: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Arkansas_river_basin_map.png.

Male Arkansas Darter. 

Photo: Ryan Waters, Kansas Department of 

Wildlife, Parks, and Tourism.

Arkansas darter broodstocks. 

CPW has stocked the Darter in 

12 locations, establishing three 

new populations and augmenting several others in decline. 

The existence and success of this 

captive rearing program played 

a role in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s 2016 finding that 

the species is not warranted for 

federal listing. Video feature: 

https://www.youtube.com/

watch?v=GrXsrRVv22I.

States

Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, 

Missouri, and Oklahoma

Status

Federal Candidate Species 

(1989–2016), Determined Not 

Warranted in 2016 

Colorado

Colorado Parks and Wildlife 

(CPW) relies on State Wildlife Grant Program funding to 

support captive rearing of 

Arkansas darter at the Native 

Aquatic Species Restoration 

Facility near Alamosa, Colorado. The hatchery has been 

in operation since 2002, and 

currently maintains three 
158

Kansas

Arkansas Darter occurrences 

have been tracked by the Kansas 

Department of Wildlife, Parks, 

and Tourism Stream Survey 

Program for 25 years. The removal of invasive red cedar trees 

in riparian and upland areas 

where Arkansas Darters habitat 

occurs has resulted in increased 

stream flow, with some perennial 

streams flowing for the first time 

in years. Once flow was restored 

to these prairie streams, the 

Arkansas Darter was typically 

one of the first species to reappear. Additionally, funding was 

provided for fish passage for dam 

replacement on the Arkansas River, allowing for connection of upand downstream populations of 

Arkansas Darters. See the Kansas 

State Highlight in this report for 

more information.

Oklahoma

Between 2014 and 2016, the 

Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation conducted surveys to revisit most of the historic 

sites for Arkansas Darters across 

northern Oklahoma. Darter populations persisted at more than 

80 percent of these locations and 

this survey data will serve as the 

basis for a long-term monitoring 

program. Additionally, funding 

from the State Wildlife Grant 

Program were used to purchase 

the McKinny Ranch in 2010, 

which protects a series of springfed pools along West Anderson 

Creek that support a robust and 

stable population of Arkansas 

Darters.

Missouri

Although the Arkansas River 

flows directly through Oklahoma 

into Arkansas, upper portions 

of the river’s watershed begin in 

Missouri. These tributaries to the 

Arkansas River provide habitat 

for Arkansas Darter as well, and 

the Missouri Department of Conservation (MDC) has surveyed for 

the species in the southwestern 

part of the state. MDC used other 

funding sources for this monitoring and did not spend State 

Wildlife Grant Program funds for 

this purpose. However, information on the species’ range and 

abundance was shared with the 

other state fish and wildlife agencies working together to support 

Arkansas Darter populations. 

Arkansas

The Arkansas Game and Fish 

Commission is restoring native 

prairie and riparian habitats for 

the Arkansas Darter, one of the 

rarest fish in Arkansas. Optimal 

habitat for this species is springfed streams that run through 

undisturbed prairie. Land-use 

changes have led to an overgrowth of woody and invasive 

plant species completely shading 

previously sunlit streams. At Wilson Springs Conservation Area, 

restoration activities focused on 

the removal of non-native Amur 

Honeysuckle and other vegetation from the Wilson Spring 

riparian zone and surrounding 

19-acre savannah. This treatment 

successfully opened the canopy, 

helping provide conditions most 

suitable to the Arkansas Darter. 

During an October 2014 survey, 

52 Darters were netted and quickly released in the newly restored 

habitat. Surveys in an unrestored 

tributary at the same property 

yielded only seven Darters. 

 

 

Biologists from The Nature 

Conservancy and Arkansas Game and 

Fish Commission (AGFC) surveying for 

Arkansas Darter in a restored stream at 

Wilson Springs Conservation Area. 

Photo: Arkansas Game and Fish 

Commission.

“The State Wildlife 

Grant Program has 

been absolutely critical 

for the continued 

operation and 

success of the Native 

Aquatic Species 

Restoration Facility, 

which has contributed 

significantly to 

“not warranted” 

findings for two 

candidate species 

and the recovery 

of numerous other 

state-listed fishes.”

Harry Crockett

Fisheries Biologist

Colorado Parks and Wildlife 
159

TRIBAL HIGHLIGHTS

Chickaloon Native Village of Alaska

Salmon Conservation

Affairs—Alaska Subsistence 

Division

Methods

Research, Monitoring, Coordination, Training 

Results

This project provided Chickaloon 

Native Village and the regional 

conservation community with 

new data about juvenile salmon. This data is being used to 

protect salmon habitats during 

important salmon life stages and 

demonstrate the importance of 

salmon habitat diversity. The 

information will help educate 

youth in the tribe and the greater community about the species, and help ensure that this 

culturally-significant resource 

is preserved for generations to 

come. This project provided 

Chickaloon Native Village Fisheries 

Technicians PIT tagging juvenile 

salmon. 

Photo: Chickaloon Native Village.

Project Summary

The Chickaloon Native Village 

of Alaska (CNV) implemented a 

juvenile salmon research project 

in the Matanuska Watershed to 

obtain important data on salmon 

that is necessary for effective resource management. This project 

described temporal and spatial 

distribution of juvenile Chinook 

and Coho Salmon in Moose 

Creek using passive integrated 

transducer (PIT) tag technology, 

and described growth rates of juvenile Chinook and Coho Salmon 

using fork length measurements. 

Tribal Fisheries Technicians collected baseline water quality data 

on Moose Creek and other tributaries of the Matanuska River. 

CNV Fisheries staff also worked 

to build and strengthen cooperative partnerships with federal 

and state agencies, and watershed 

and fish habitat coalitions. This 

project benefits several anadromous species, including culturally significant Chinook Salmon 

and Coho Salmon.

Project Cost

Tribal Wildlife Grant 

Program—$179,500; other 

resources provided by CNV and 

the Bureau of Indian Affairs

Partners

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service—

Anchorage Field Office, Alaska 

Department of Fish and Game—

Palmer Office, Bureau of Indian 

Program Funding

TWG Program

$179,500

TOTAL

$179,500

This chart does not depict additional 

tribal and other resources contributing 

to the success of this project.
160

economic benefits of training and 

employment for several community members. Additionally, the 

project demonstrated that Chickaloon Native Village conducts 

credible salmon research and 

utilizes partnerships with federal 

and state agencies. An important 

result is improved understanding 

and protection of a subsistence 

and cultural resource upon which 

many Alaskan residents depend. 

Future Needs

Ongoing funding is needed to 

support CNV staff engagement in 

community, regional, and state 

conservation organizations and 

efforts.

“We are grateful to 

the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service and 

the Tribal Wildlife 

Grant Program for 

providing funding for 

projects that protect 

important cultural 

species. Additionally, 

we appreciate the 

ease of reporting 

and communicating 

with the Service 

for this project.”

Chickaloon Native Village Member

Chickaloon Native Village Fisheries 

Technician collecting juvenile salmon 

in a minnow trap. 

Photo: Chickaloon Native Village.
161

Sitka Tribe of Alaska

Shellfish Conservation

Partners

The Tribes of SEATOR are: Central Council Tlinglit and Haida 

Indian Tribes of Alaska, Chikoot 

Indian Association, Craig Tribal 

Council, Hoonah Indian Association, Hydaburg Cooperative 

Association, Ketchikan Indian 

Association, Klawock Cooperative Association, Organized Village of Kake, Organized Village 

of Kasaan, Petersburg Indian 

Association, Skagway Traditional 

Council, Wrangell Cooperative 

Association, and Yakutat Tlingit 

Tribe 

Methods

Research, Monitoring, 

Coordination, Training 

Results

Since 2018, the Sitka Tribe of 

Alaska has provided training, supplies, and support for 

Project Summary

Shellfish are an important subsistence food for Native peoples 

of Southeast Alaska and an 

integral part of Native culture, 

identity and tribal sovereignty. 

In 2018, the Sitka Tribe of Alaska worked with the Southeast 

Alaska Tribal Research Group 

(SEATOR) partners to conduct an 

assessment of subsistence shellfish, to help ensure sustainable 

management of this important 

traditional resource. This partnership of 14 Southeast Alaska 

tribes collected data on biomass, 

abundance, growth, and distribution of important subsistence 

populations of butter clams, littleneck clams, and cockles. This 

project provides information and 

resources for participating tribes 

to make decisions that impact 

their traditional foods, food 

security, and tribal sovereignty. 

The project promotes education, 

monitoring, and ownership of 

shellfish resources by southeast 

Alaska tribal communities.

Project Cost

Tribal Wildlife Grant 

Program—$200,000; other 

resources were provided by 

SEATOR members and the 

Environmental Protection 

Agency, National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration, 

Bureau of Indian Affairs, and 

others

Finding Butter Clams at Point Louisa, 

Juneau, Alaska. 

Photo: Lindsey Pierce of Central Council 

Tlinglit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska.

Program Funding

TWG Program

$200,000

TOTAL

$200,000

This chart does not depict additional 

tribal and other resources contributing 

to the success of this project.
162

SEATOR partners and their 

tribal communities to conduct 

35 population assessments of key 

subsistence shellfish on beaches 

throughout Southeast Alaska. 

This effort complements existing 

SEATOR harmful algal bloom 

monitoring and biotoxin testing 

in shellfish, enabling tribes to 

sustainably manage their own resources and confirm when shellfish may be unsafe to harvest. 

Future Needs

Future funding for the Sitka 

Tribe of Alaska and SEATOR 

partners is needed to continue 

shellfish monitoring, partner 

collaboration, and to help build 

capacity for additional science-based species monitoring 

and analysis. 

More Information

Hoonah Indian Association Biomass Survey Story is available at 

https://www.hia-env.

org/2018/07/25/trayls-crew-blazes-way-to-community-subsistence-resource-assessment/

“There is a Tlingit 

saying that goes, 

‘when the tide is 

out the table is 

set.’ Our oceans 

are our gardens 

and produce many 

nutrient-dense foods 

that have nourished 

our communities, 

physically and 

spiritually, since time 

immemorial. The 

surveys provide us 

with an additional lens 

to better understand 

our relationship with 

our traditional foods. 

This data will help our 

people stay resilient 

and healthy in an 

ever-changing world.” 

Jennifer Hanlon

Yakutat Tlingit Tribe

SEATOR partners at the 2018 shellfish survey demonstration workshop in Sitka, 

Alaska. 

Photo: Sitka Tribe of Alaska.
163

Hopi Tribe of Arizona

Golden Eagle Conservation

Partners

Navajo Nation, Jicarilla Apache 

Tribe, American Eagle Research 

Institute, U.S Fish and Wildlife 

Service 

Methods

Research, Monitoring, 

Coordination 

Results

The Hopi achieved their research 

goals through implementation 

of occupancy and reproductive assessment surveys, a prey 

population assessment, and by 

tagging breeding young males 

for presence and absence surveys 

telemetry. 

Golden Eagle on top of his prey. 

Photo: yrjö jyske, Creative 

Commons. License: https://

creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ 

Project Summary

The Hopi Tribe, in coordination 

with the Navajo Nation, American Eagle Research Institute, 

Jicarilla Apache Tribe and the U.S 

Fish and Wildlife Service, initiated a joint study of the ecology of 

Golden Eagles nesting in the Four 

Corners Region of the Colorado 

Plateau. This 12-year research 

study is not yet fully funded. The 

Tribal Wildlife Grant Program 

assisted the Hopi in gathering 

data for use in future planned 

research. 

Project Cost

Tribal Wildlife Grant 

Program—$200,000; other 

non-federal resources and 

funding—$127,800

Program Funding

TWG Program

Non-Federal Resources

$327,800

TOTAL

$127,800 $200,000
164

Future Needs

This larger research study has 

been designed for a 12-year term. 

A Tribal Wildlife Grant Program 

award in 2019 helped to ensure 

initial data collection, but ongoing support is essential to completion of the research. 

“The Service is glad 

the Tribal Wildlife 

Grant Program can 

help the Hopi Tribe 

study the Golden 

Eagle’s ecology for 

the continuing benefit 

for their culture.” 

Mary Elder

Assistant Regional Director 

of External Affairs

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Adult Golden Eagle feeding their 

offspring. 

Photo: Mick Thompson. Creative Commons. 

License: https://creativecommons.org/

licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
165

Yurok Tribe of California

California Condor Recovery

Project Cost

Tribal Wildlife Grant 

Program—$200,000; other 

resources provided by 

partners—$39,800

Partners

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

National Park Service

Methods

Outreach/Education, 

Monitoring, Facility 

Construction and Management, 

Translocation

Results

The Yurok Tribe conducted vital 

communications, education, and 

outreach with hunters, helping 

them understand how lead ammunition can be harmful to the 

Condor and other species. Tribal 

Wildlife Grant Program funding 

was integral in the planning and 

development of the Yurok Tribe’s 

Project Summary

Prey-go-neesh (California Condor) once lived among the giant 

trees and pristine rivers in the 

Greater Yurok Ancestral Region 

of northern California. By the 

mid-20th century, Condor populations had dropped dramatically, and by 1967 the California 

Condor was listed as federally 

endangered. Today, the Yurok 

Tribe is combining funding from 

the Tribal Wildlife Grant Program with the Tribe’s resources 

and support from other partners 

to implement three key actions 

contributing to Condor recovery. 

Tribal specialists and partners 

conducted outreach to hunters 

to provide education on reducing 

lead ammunition when hunting 

in northern California. The Tribe 

also used Tribal Wildlife Grant 

Program funds and resources 

from their many partners to design and build a Condor management facility to protect and treat 

them for chronic lead exposure. 

Finally, the Tribe developed a 

plan for reintroducing California 

Condors into the Greater Yurok 

Ancestral Region and Redwood 

National Park in late 2020. 

Reintroductions require close 

coordination with federal, state, 

and non-governmental partners 

to jointly address permitting, 

infrastructure and logistics, 

management strategies, and data 

collection and continuity. 

Tiana Williams-Claussen, Director of 

the Yurok Tribe Wildlife Department, 

restrains a California Condor so 

that an Oregon Zoo veterinarian 

can perform a health assessment in 

preparation of release to the wild. 

Photo: Chris West, Senior Biologist.

Program Funding

TWG Program

Yurok Tribe/Other Partners

$239,800

TOTAL

$39,800 $200,000
166

Condor management facility, a 

necessary investment before the 

Tribe could meet its ultimate 

goal of reintroducing California 

Condor on ancestral lands. The 

Tribe and partners are anticipating Condor release in late 2020, a 

major achievement highlighting 

the power and value of partnerships in effective conservation. 

Future Needs

Additional funding is needed for 

the new facility for continued 

Condor protection and monitoring. Various partners have 

committed to future support 

based on a Memorandum of Understanding that the Yurok Tribe 

signed along with the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, National 

Park Service, and other private 

and non-profit organizations. 

Yurok Council member and Yurok 

spiritual leader, Richard Myers, reaches 

out to Condor 139, being held by lead 

LA Zoo Condor keeper, Mike Clark. 

Photo: Chris West, Senior Biologist. 
167

Nez Perce Tribe of Idaho, Oregon and Washington

California Condor Conservation

public lands characterized by 

extensive canyons, grazing lands, 

and mixed forest lands. This target for Condor restoration by the 

Tribe is defined by areas of high 

topographical relief that promote 

soaring conditions with constant 

wind and thermal activity. Elevation changes provide for seasonal 

habitat use by the Condor, as well 

as an abundance of caves which 

provide suitable release sites with 

year-round crew access. Both 

Phase 1 and 2 of this project focus 

on determining the best reintroduction sites in Hells Canyon, 

and drafting a coordinated management plan for Condors. This 

project also supports the work of 

the Yurok Tribe in California on 

Condor reintroduction.

California Condor became extinct in the wild in 1987 but has been reintroduced. 

Photo: Ian Shive, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Project Summary

The California Condor is the 

largest North American land 

bird. It has been federally protected as an endangered species 

since 1967. Threats to this unique 

species include exposure to lead, 

wind energy development, transmission lines, and socio-political 

factors. The Nez Perce Tribe used 

Tribal Wildlife Grant Program 

funding to assess habitats and 

plan for the reintroduction of 

condors in Hells Canyon. The 

greater Hells Canyon area of 

the Blue Mountains Ecoregion 

contains high quality nesting, 

roosting and foraging habitat for 

Condors in close proximity. This 

area represents one of the best 

available habitats for an inland 

Pacific Northwest Condor population. The Hells Canyon area 

is largely comprised of remote 

Program Funding

TWG Program

$200,000

TOTAL

$200,000

This chart does not depict additional 

tribal and other resources contributing 

to the success of this project.
168

Project Cost

Tribal Wildlife Grant 

Program—$200,000; other 

resources provided by the Nez 

Perce Tribe and Oregon Zoo

Partners

The Oregon Zoo, Greater Hells 

Canyon Council, Oregon Wild

Methods

Research, Monitoring, 

Coordination, Planning 

Results

Returning qú’nes (Condor) to the 

Nimiipuu homeland represents a 

spiritual and cultural renewal for 

the Tribe and provides another 

safeguard for continued existence 

of qú’nes in the face of a future 

increasingly impacted by extreme 

weather events.

Future Needs

Future funding is needed to 

continue work on reintroduction 

of the Condor on tribal lands in 

Oregon, Washington, and Idaho.
169

Pyramid Lake Paiute of Nevada

Bighorn Sheep

Project Cost

Tribal Wildlife Grant 

Program—$200,000; matching 

funds provided by the Pyramid 

Lake Paiute Tribe—$47,000

Partners

Nevada Department of Wildlife, 

University of Nevada—Reno 

Natural Resources and 

Environmental Sciences 

Department

Methods

Research, Monitoring, 

Coordination, Translocation 

Results

Through this project, the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe translocated 22 Bighorn Sheep to the reservation. Tribal staff collaborated 

Project Summary

The Pyramid Lake Paiute Reservation’s historic population 

of Bighorn Sheep was extirpated 150 years ago due to deadly 

livestock-borne diseases. Building 

upon partnerships and new capacity, the Tribe applied for and 

received Tribal Wildlife Grant 

Program funding to restore this 

culturally important species 

on tribal lands. This project 

included translocation of Bighorn Sheep to the Pyramid Lake 

Paiute Reservation. Tribal staff 

also monitored and documented 

ungulate distribution, density 

and health in accordance with 

standardized procedures. The 

Tribe established regulations and 

ordinances for ungulate management and protection in order to 

ensure Bighorn Sheep thrive and 

grow on tribal lands. 

The Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe and 

partners release Bighorn Sheep on the 

Reservation. 

Photo: Nevada Department of Wildlife.

Program Funding

TWG Program

Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe

$247,000

TOTAL

$47,000 $200,000
170

with the Nevada Department of 

Wildlife on Bighorn Sheep conservation actions and developed a 

Bighorn Sheep Management Plan 

to guide future management on 

tribal lands. 

Future Needs

Additional funding is needed for 

monitoring and supporting best 

management practices to help 

prevent deadly outbreaks of local 

livestock-borne diseases. Ground 

surveying will be conducted 

throughout 2020 to ensure the 

sustainability of the species into 

the future.

“No individual 

sovereign can manage 

wildlife; all sovereigns 

have to work together 

to ensure conservation 

for future generations. 

Accomplishing and 

expanding mutual 

goals boils down to 

communicating with 

Tribes in a meaningful 

way. Seeing the 

Tribe’s ability to 

not only operate 

independently, but 

in concert with state 

and federal agencies 

is enriching to see 

as a tribal member 

myself. This type of 

coordination was a 

missing component 

in the past, so I’m 

hoping to see more 

collaborative efforts 

like this in the future.” 

Tribal Member and U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service Biologist

The Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe 

relocated 22 Bighorn Sheep to tribal 

lands. This culturally important 

species had been extirpated from 

reservation lands 150 years ago due 

to wildlife disease.

Photo: Ryan Hagerty, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service.
171

Taos Pueblo of New Mexico

Conservation Corps

Results

The project helped the Taos 

Pueblo tribal community protect 

the Rio Grande Cutthroat Trout, 

a species that is valuable to the 

Pueblo for cultural, environmental, and recreational purposes. 

All Conservation Corps members 

were enrolled tribal members of 

Taos Pueblo and the project took 

place entirely within Taos Pueblo 

trust lands. 

Future Needs

Ongoing support for the Taos 

Pueblo Conservation Corps 

would allow this program to continue to benefit tribal youth, as 

well as provide key information 

to inform management of Cutthroat Trout in the Rio Grande. 

More Information

https://www.taospueblo.org/cms/

natural-resources

Taos Tribal Member fishing in the 

Rio Grande River. 

Photo: New Mexico Wildlife Federation. 

Project Summary

The Taos Pueblo used Tribal 

Wildlife Grant Program funds 

to develop and sustain the Taos 

Pueblo Conservation Corps. This 

Conservation Corps has been implemented with Rocky Mountain 

Youth Corps and Trout Unlimited. Conservation Corps members 

have worked on environmental 

monitoring of native Cutthroat 

Trout and other species, and 

non-native fish species removal. 

These objectives were accomplished by recruiting, hiring and 

training a Taos youth conservation crew that performed project 

conservation actions, including 

monitoring and research, along 

the Rio Jemez River. The Cutthroat Trout is a popular sport 

fish species within the Taos 

Pueblo tribal community.

Project Cost

Tribal Wildlife Grant 

Program—$136,500; other 

resources provided by Rocky 

Mountain Youth Corps and Trout 

Unlimited

Partners

Rocky Mountain Youth Corps, 

Trout Unlimited, New Mexico 

Department of Game and Fish

Methods

Monitoring, Coordination, 

Training, Species Management

Program Funding

TWG Program

$136,500

TOTAL

$136,500

This chart does not depict additional 

tribal and other resources contributing 

to the success of this project.
172

Southwest Tribal Youth paddling on the Rio Grande River. 

Photo: New Mexico Wildlife Federation. 
173

Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Suislaw Indians of Oregon

Pacific Lamprey

Results

Tribal conservationists conducted an in-stream survey and 

documented Lamprey spawning 

habitat conditions and passage 

impediments. Once identified, 

staff focused on mitigating 

Lamprey passage impediments, 

in part through constructing 

a Lamprey passage structure 

at the Eel Creek Dam to allow 

for Lamprey access to Eel Lake. 

Tribal staff also developed and 

tested monitoring and reporting 

protocols to provide baseline data 

on which future initiatives can be 

evaluated.

Future Needs

The need for Pacific Lamprey 

conservation on tribal lands in 

Oregon is ongoing. Activities in 

Phase 2 of this project will be 

focused on monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of the 

Project Summary

Pacific Lamprey return to rivers 

along the West Coast to spawn, 

where they are used by the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower 

Umpqua, and Suislaw Indians as 

a vital traditional food source. 

Substantial declines of Pacific 

Lamprey are linked to restricted 

river and stream passage, reduced 

flows, and water quality degradation. The Confederated Tribes 

used funding from the Tribal 

Wildlife Grant Program to develop a 30-Year Lamprey Conservation Plan that aims to restore 

Pacific Lamprey in the waterways 

and lakes of the Tenmile Lakes 

Basin. Pacific Lamprey are listed 

as a state sensitive species in Oregon and are considered a “firstfood” to the Confederated Tribes 

with important links to tribal 

culture.

Project Cost

Tribal Wildlife Grant 

Program—$220,000 awarded 

in two grants; other resources 

provided by the Confederated 

Tribes 

Partners

Tenmile Lamprey Group, Oregon 

Department of Fish and Wildlife, 

Tenmile Lakes Basin Partnership 

Methods

Research, Monitoring, Planning, 

Coordination

A Pacific Lamprey rests in swift 

current by suctioning onto bedrock. 

Photo: Jeremy Monroe, Fresh Waters 

Illustrated. Creative Commons / Flickr. 

License: https://creativecommons.org/

licenses/by-nc/4.0/legalcode. 

Program Funding

TWG Program

$220,000

TOTAL

$220,000

This chart does not depict additional 

tribal and other resources contributing 

to the success of this project.
174

lamprey passage structure and its 

effect on Pacific Lamprey distribution within the Eel Lake Basin. 

Additional removal of barriers to 

Pacific Lamprey movements are 

needed.

More Information

https://www.fws.gov/pacificlamprey/Documents/Fact%20

Sheets/LampreyCI%20Fact%20

Sheet_01_01_2017.pdf
175

Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde of Oregon

Prairie and Oak Savannah Restoration

Project Cost

Tribal Wildlife Grant Program—$200,000; additional 

resources provided by the Grand 

Ronde Tribes and others

Partners

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service—

Willamette Valley National 

Wildlife Refuge, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service—Partners for 

Fish and Wildlife Program, 

Institute of Applied Ecology, 

Lomakatsi Restoration Project, 

Benton County Soil and Water 

Conservation District, Long Tom 

Watershed Council

Methods

Research, Monitoring, 

Coordination, Habitat 

Restoration, Conservation 

Easements

Columbian White-Tailed Deer is listed 

as threatened under the Endangered 

Species Act. 

Photo: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Project Summary

Historic upland prairie and 

oak savanna habitats and other 

habitats have rapidly decreased 

in the Willamette Basin due to 

residential and agricultural development. This imperiled habitat, 

of ancestral significance to the 

Grand Ronde Tribes, supports 

unique and significant biological 

diversity. However, over 95 percent of potential and existing 

habitat is unprotected and in private ownership. Of the remaining 

acreage, only a small percentage 

is managed for conservation. The 

native plants and animals of the 

Willamette Valley are essential 

resources to the Confederated 

Tribes as they form the foundation of historic traditions and 

values. The partnerships developed from this restoration project support tribal cultural values 

and provide conservation benefits 

to the Willamette Valley Region. 

Program Funding

TWG Program

$200,000

TOTAL

$200,000

This chart does not depict additional 

tribal and other resources contributing 

to the success of this project.
176

Results

The Confederated Tribes of 

Grand Ronde used Tribal Wildlife 

Grant funding to conduct habitat 

assessments on 172 acres of Rattlesnake Butte 3, and developed 

conservation treatment prescriptions for restoration of approximately 97 acres of oak habitat. 

These lands are home to a wide 

variety of rare and declining species, including Columbian WhiteTailed Deer, which is listed as 

threatened under the Endangered 

Species Act. The Grand Ronde 

Tribe is also protecting Rattlesnake Butte 3 in perpetuity with 

a conservation easement agreement with the Bonneville Power 

Administration’s Willamette 

Wildlife Mitigation Program.

Future Needs

Continuous restoration of the 

Confederated Tribes’ historic 

lands and habitats is vital to 

reestablishment of functioning 

ecosystems supporting the needs 

of tribal members. The Grand 

Ronde Confederated Tribes were 

awarded Tribal Wildlife Grant 

Program funding for a second 

phase of this work and will 

continue its partnership with the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s 

Partners for Fish and Wildlife 

Program and others working on 

recovering and enhancing this 

important habitat. 

One of the last remaining oak savanna 

habitats on Bald Top at William L. 

Finley National Wildlife Refuge, 

Oregon. 

Photo: George Gentry, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service. 
177

Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe of Washington

Pacific Lamprey

vide advancement opportunities 

for tribal youth.

Project Cost

Tribal Wildlife Grant 

Program—$187,300; other 

resources including other federal 

and non-federal matching funds 

and resources—$250,000

Partners

National Marine Fisheries 

Service, Olympic National Park, 

U.S. Geological Survey, Peninsula 

College, Western Washington 

University, Huxley College

Methods

Research, Monitoring, 

Coordination, Training 

Results

Armed with the results of this 

research, the Tribe will be able 

to make adaptive management 

decisions that will increase the 

overall success of their ecosystem 

restoration efforts benefiting 

Pacific Lamprey and other species. An additional benefit from 

this research is that training and 

equipment obtained in the course 

of this project will position the 

Tribe in its goal to reclaim management and stewardship of its 

cultural and natural resources.

Lower Elwha Klallam Tribal elder and 

Fisheries Technician Ernest “Sonny” 

Sampson releasing a newly radio 

tagged Pacific Lamprey into the Elwha 

River. 

Photo: Tiffany Royal, Northwest Indian 

Fisheries Commission. 

Project Summary

The primary objective of this 

project was to document the 

recolonization of the Elwha River 

drainage by Pacific Lamprey 

following the removal of two 

dams in what remains the world’s 

largest dam removal effort. 

Pacific Lamprey have long been 

a celebrated species among the 

Tribe as a cultural and traditional 

resource. Tribal staff documented successful adult migration to 

spawning sites, nest building, and 

larval rearing using radiotelemetry and passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags. Nest surveys 

confirmed successful spawning.

Electrofishing surveys and analysis of larvae also demonstrated 

successful larval rearing and 

evaluated the colonization rates 

in the Elwha River drainage. 

The Tribe collaborated with 

other scientists, agencies, and 

students, giving tribal staff the 

knowledge and tools necessary 

to continue monitoring Lamprey beyond the funding period. 

Technical support from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, the Olympic 

National Park, and U.S. Geological Survey scientists broadened 

the knowledge base of tribal 

biologists. Working with other 

agencies fostered relationships 

resulting in long-term partnerships and future opportunities 

to collaborate. Mentoring local 

students helped the Tribe recruit 

future employees and will proProgram Funding

TWG Program

Other Federal/Non-Federal Funds

$437,300

TOTAL

$250,000 $187,300
178

Future Needs

The Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe 

would benefit from ongoing 

support for research on the longterm recolonization of the Pacific 

Lamprey into reaches of rivers 

that are now accessible to this 

important tribal food source.