September 2001

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Sport Fish and Wildlife

Restoration 

Program Update September 2001
cover photo: Photodisc
i

Table of

Contents

September 2001

Assistant Director Comments ii

Staff Directory, Federal Aid, Washington Office iv

Federal Aid Grant Programs - Overview 1

Focus on Specific Programs and Activities 3

DCAA Audit 3

Federal Aid Information Systems 4

National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife Associated Recreation 5

Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Programs Improvement Act of 2000 6

Multistate Conservation Grant Program 7

National Coastal Wetlands Conservation Grant Program 9

Aquatic Resource Education Program 10

Hunter Education Section 10 11

Appendices 13

Photodisc
ii September 2001

Assistant

Director

Comments

This was an extremely busy year for

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s

(Service) Federal Aid employees. They

worked hard to bring the programs

they administer into full compliance

with the Wildlife and Sport Fish

Restoration Programs Improvement

Act of 2000. They were simultaneously

dealing with significant issues

concerning the future conduct of the

Federal Aid Audit Program.

A report detailing our efforts to

institute measures required in the

Improvement Act was submitted to

Congress and will be available to the

public on the Service’s Federal Aid

web site (www.fs.r9.fws.gov). Report

highlights include: start-up of the $6

million Multistate Conservation Grant

Program with 14 projects funded;

establishment of procedures to

administer the new Firearm and Bow

Hunter Education Safety Program

Grants to fund hunter education and

shooting range construction;

implementation of procedures to meet

the 12 allowable categories of

administrative expenses required by

the Improvement Act; reduction of

administrative budgets for the

programs from $32 million in Fiscal

Year 2000 to $18 million in Fiscal Year

2001; and apportionment of $5.5

million in administrative cost savings

to the states. 

To meet the administrative cost

reductions required by the

Improvement Act, the Service will

reduce the number of Federal Aid

employees nationwide from 147 in

Fiscal Year 2000 to 104 in Fiscal Year

2003. This reduced staffing level

presents one of the larger challenges

we face as we move forward.

The Improvement Act eliminated

funding for the Fish and Wildlife

Reference Service and the

Management Assistance Team, two

Federal Aid activities that were

popular with the states. Fortunately,

with help from the International

Association of Fish and Wildlife

Agencies (IAFWA), we were able to

use the Multistate Conservation Grant

Program to enable these services to

continue. We are also using Multistate

Conservation Grant funding for the

first time to pay for the 2001 National

Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and

Wildlife Associated Recreation. This

will be the 10th survey since 1955 and

has become the Nation’s most

important source of information on

wildlife-related recreation,

participation, and economic benefits.

You can expect publication of the

National report by November, 2002,

with the state reports to follow in

December. 

Two important new programs, 

the Boating Infrastructure Grant

(BIG) Program and the Wildlife

Conservation Restoration Program

(WCRP) also got underway this year.

The Service announced the availability

of $16 million in BIG Program grants

for this fiscal year and announced the

first cycle of projects to be funded.

Working in close cooperation with the

IAFWA and several states, we

launched the $50 million WCRP. As

part of this effort, I am pleased to

report we have approved WCRP

comprehensive plans for all 50 states

and the 6 territories and that many

states already have initiated projects.

Finally, following a thorough review of

the Defense Audit Contract Agency

(DCAA) state audits, the Service

decided to terminate its Memorandum

of Understanding with DCAA. We are

working closely with DCAA, our Office

of Inspector General, and other

Interior Department offices to ensure

that this termination will not interfere

unduly in the audit process. We will

work closely with the states to

complete open audits in a timely

manner and ensure that states have

full involvement in completing the

audit process.
September 2001 iii

The coming years will be challenging

ones for the Service’s Federal Aid

programs. With reduced staff levels

we will have to adapt to Congressional

mandates, implement new grant

programs, administer existing grant

programs, and maintain a strong

relationship with our state partners.

Nonetheless, based on what we have

accomplished in 2001, I am confident

that our well trained, dedicated

professional staff is up to the

challenge. While we move forward to

improve management of what is

arguably the Nation’s most effective

conservation program, I predict we

will see a notable improvement in the

delivery of services to you, our

customers.

USFWS
iv September 2001

Kris E. LaMontagne 

Division Chief

* Larry Bandolin 

Deputy Division Chief - Operations

Jimmye Kane 

Secretary

Branch of Budget and

Administration

Tom Jeffrey 

Branch Chief - Budget 

Development and Execution -

Program Management - Special

Projects

Mary Jones 

Administrative Officer

Branch of FAIMS and ADP Support

Bill Conlin 

Branch Chief - Information Resources

and ADP Management - ADP Support

- Federal Aid Information

Management System (FAIMS)

Jeffrey Graves 

Server Support - Web Site Support 

David Washington 

ADP Systems Support - ADP

Acquisition Support 

Branch of Grants Operations and

Policy

Gary Reinitz 

Branch Chief - Policy - National Issue

Management

Jack Hicks 

Regulation - FWS Manual -

Hunter/Aquatic Education

* Michael Vanderford 

CVA - BIG - National Coastal

Wetlands Conservation GrantsWildlife Restoration Program -

Partnerships for Wildlife Program

* Tim Hess 

WCRP - Sport Fish Restoration

Program

* Chris McKay 

(Internal Partner with RBFF)

Multistate Conservation Grant

Program

Branch of Audits and Cash

Management

Lanny Moore 

Branch Chief - Audits - Cash

Management

* Ord Bargerstock 

Systems Accountant - Regions 4 & 5 -

Audit Resolution

* Pat McHugh 

Systems Accountant - Regions 3, 6, &

7 - Audit Program Oversight

* Kate Gilliam 

Systems Accountant - Regions 1 & 2 -

Lessons Learned - Future Audit Plans

Branch of Surveys

Sylvia Cabrera 

Branch Chief - National Survey of

Fishing Hunting and Wildlife

Associated Recreation

Richard Aiken 

Economist - National Survey

Genevieve Pullis 

Economist - National Survey

Branch of Training

Steve Leggans 

Branch Chief

Blake Weirich 

Assistant Training Coordinator

Left the WO

Bill Gruber 

Accountant, Retired

Steve Farrell 

transferred to WO Refuges

Pete Peterson 

transferred to DOI

Michelle Morman 

transferred to WO Refuges 

Staff Directory

Federal Aid

Washington

Office

* New in this position.

Division of Federal Aid

Washington Office

4401 N. Fairfax Drice

Suite 140

Arlington, VA 22203

Main: 703/358 2156

Fax: 703/358 1837

Internet home page:

http://fa.r9.fws.gov
September 2001 1

Federal Aid

Grant Programs

Overview The goal of the Federal Aid Program

is to strengthen the ability of state and

territorial fish and wildlife agencies to

meet effectively the consumptive and

non-consumptive needs of the public

for fish and wildlife resources. The

Federal Aid Program is responsible

for administering the following

programs:

■ Wildlife Restoration 

■ Sport Fish Restoration

■ Clean Vessel Pumpout

■ Boating Infrastructure Grant

■ National Coastal Wetlands

Conservation Grant

■ Partnerships for Wildlife Grant 

■ Wildlife Conservation and

Restoration 

■ Multistate Conservation Grant 

The Federal Aid in Wildlife

Restoration Act was approved by

Congress on September 2, 1937, and

began functioning on July 1, 1938. The

purpose of this Act is to provide

funding for the selection, restoration,

rehabilitation and improvement of

wildlife habitat, wildlife management

research and the distribution of

information produced by the projects.

Congress amended the Act October

23, 1970, to include funding for hunter

training programs and the

development, operation and

maintenance of public target ranges.

Funds are derived from an 11 percent

Federal excise tax on sporting arms,

ammunition, and archery equipment,

and a 10 percent tax on handguns.

Additional funds are also collected

from a 12.4 percent tax on archery

equipment. These funds are

apportioned each year to the states

and territories (except Puerto Rico) by

the Department of the Interior on the

basis of formulas set forth in the Act. 

The Federal Aid in Sport Fish

Restoration Act, commonly referred to

as the Dingell-Johnson Act was passed

on August 9, 1950. It was modeled

after the Federal Aid in Wildlife

Restoration Act to create a parallel

program for fish management,

conservation, and restoration. The

Program is funded by a 10 percent

Federal excise tax on fishing rods,

reels, creels, lures, flies and artificial

baits and a 3 percent tax on electronic

fishing motors and sonar fish finders.

These funds are also apportioned each

year to the states and territories

(except Puerto Rico) by the

Department of the Interior on the

basis of a formula set forth in the Act. 

The Clean Vessel Act was passed in

1992 to help reduce pollution from

vessel sewage discharges. The Act

established a Federal grant program

to the states to be administered by the

Service and funded by the Sport Fish

Restoration Account of the Aquatic

Resource’s Trust Fund. Federal funds

can cover up to 75 percent of all

approved project costs with the

remaining funds provided by the

states or marinas. Grants are available

to the states on a competitive basis for

the construction and/or renovation,

operation, and maintenance of

pumpout and portable toilet dump

stations. After states submit grant

proposals to the Service for review, the

Service’s Division of Federal Aid then

convenes a panel including

representatives from the Divisions’

Washington Office, the National

Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration, the Environmental

Protection Agency, and the U.S. Coast

Guard to rank proposals. Awards are

made shortly afterward.

The Boating Infrastructure Grant

(BIG) Program provides $32 million

over four years (2000- 2003) for grants

to the states and territories, local

governments and private marinas. The

purpose of the grants is to encourage

states, in cooperation with local and

private interests, to install, renovate

and maintain tie-up facilities for

nontrailerable recreational boats. 
2 September 2001

The Sport Fishing and Boating Partnership Council annually

recommends grants for funding to the

Service. 

The Coastal Wetlands Planning,

Protection and Restoration Act is

funded by 18 percent of the Sport Fish

Restoration Account or 100 percent of

the excise tax on small engine fuel

(whichever is greater). The program

provides 15 percent of the funds (not

to exceed $15 million) for the National

Coastal Wetlands Conservation Grant

Program. The Service provides

Coastal Wetlands Grants to states 

and territories for coastal wetlands

acquisition, restoration and

enhancement. Congress reauthorized

The Coastal Wetlands Planning,

Protection and Restoration Act in

November, 2000, through Fiscal Year

2009.

The purpose of the Partnerships for Wildlife Grant Program is to establish

partnerships among the Service,

states and territories, non-government

organizations and individuals. The

program is to support wildlife

conservation and appreciation

projects, encourage states and

territories to more fully use

public/private partnerships to carry

out wildlife conservation and

appreciation projects, and encourage

private donations and partnerships to

carry out wildlife conservation and

appreciation projects. The Partnerships for Wildlife Grant

Program is designed to have 1/3

contributions each for a given project

from the Service, the sponsor state,

and a private party. For Fiscal Year

2001, $1,052,158 was made available to

grantees under this program.

The Wildlife Conservation and

Restoration Program was authorized

by Congress in 2000, and implemented

in Fiscal Year 2001. State and

territorial fish and wildlife agencies

are encouraged to participate with the Federal Government, other state

agencies, wildlife conservation

organizations and outdoor recreation

and conservation interests through

cooperative planning and

implementation of the Wildlife

Conservation and Restoration

Program. Wildlife conservation,

wildlife conservation education, and

wildlife-associated recreation activities

are all eligible for funding. Public input

and participation is actively sought by

the states in conducting this program.

The program was funded with $50

million for Fiscal Year 2001 with the

funds being apportioned to the states

and territories by formula.

The new Multistate Conservation

Grant Program provides up to $6

million annually to projects that

benefit resources in unique and

innovative ways. The projects

recommended for funding to the

Secretary of Interior by the IAFWA

must benefit 26 states, a majority of

states in a Service Region, or a

regional association of state fish and

wildlife agencies. There were 14 grants

awarded in Fiscal Year 2001.

The above programs are designed to

help conserve, develop, and enhance

the Nation’s fish and wildlife

resources, and to protect their habitats

for the continuing benefit of the

American people.
September 2001 3

Focus on

Specific

Programs and

Activities

DCAA Audit The Service’s Division of Federal Aid

provided notice to the Defense

Contracting Audit Agency (DCAA) that

it is terminating the Memorandum of

Understanding under which DCAA

conducts state audits for Federal Aid.

The termination of the MOU with

DCAA while audits are still underway

raised some understandable questions

regarding the completion of current

and future audits. The disengagement

process is still in negotiation and some

details remain to be worked out. We are

working closely with DCAA, our Office

of Inspector General and others to

assure a smooth transition. We are

confident all issues will be resolved

satisfactorily and equitably.

Our clear intent is to give the states the

best service we can. We will continue to

work closely with Regional Offices and

the states to complete open audits in a

timely fashion. States will continue to

have the same opportunities for input

into completing the audit process.

Teams of auditors from Federal Aid

Washington and Regional Offices along

with state representatives and staff

from several Department of Interior

Offices will participate in completing

the current audit process.

In addition to ongoing efforts to

complete open audits, we are

undertaking actions to improve the

next cycle of audits. To this end, we are

conducting a “lessons learned analysis”

based on data gleaned from audit

findings and additional data gathered

from Regional Offices, and eventually,

the states. From the “lessons learned

analysis” we will have the information

necessary to write a revised audit

scope of work and provide a more

consistent and standardized application

of the audit program. The addition of

two auditors in the Washington Office

will enable the Service to provide more

oversight during the next state audit

process. The Washington auditors will

participate in the entrance conference,

field work, review of working papers,

and provide input to the content of

draft reports. With your assistance we

believe we can improve the process for

conducting future audits. 

Working through our Regional Offices,

we will keep our state partners

informed of developments regarding

the evolution of the audit process.

Photodisc
4 September 2001

The FAIMS team added two modules

to FAIMS. The Lands Component

allows the user to record greater detail

in grant accomplishment records

including information about the type of

interest acquired. Regional files of

scanned documents (maps and legal

descriptions) associated with the

acquisition are but two examples of

records that can be added. The Alerts

Component allows individual

notification of Federal Aid staff about a

variety of processing actions needed.

These range from performance

reports received for which

accomplishment records have yet to be

created, to the pending expiration of

Grant Agreements or Applications for

Federal Assistance. These alerts

provide an immediate link to the

appropriate records facilitating timely

resolution of each potential issue.

Another time saving feature of FAIMS

that improves Regional Office

efficiency is the integration of a letter

generation capability with

WordPerfect. This allows each

Regional Office to format letters

informing grantees about the outcome

of proposal and grant reviews with

reference to grant records supporting

the approval decision.

FAIMS was modified to accept entries

for eight new grant programs. The

programs are; Habitat Conservation

Plan (HCP) Land Acquisition,

Candidate Conservation Agreement,

HCP Planning Grants, Safe Harbor,

Species Recovery Land Acquisition,

HCP Land Acquisition Grants to

States (all endangered species

related), Boating Infrastructure Grant,

Section 10 Hunter Education, and

Wildlife Conservation and Restoration.

Instructions about how to set up new

grant programs at both the regional

and national level were added to the

on-line help system. The

apportionment calculations, previously

a stand alone program, was added to

FAIMS and the sub-program

accounting codes long used by Federal

Aid were aligned to match those codes

used by the Service’s Federal

Financial System (FFS), thus

improving system synchronization.

Finally, two new reports were created.

A state report that summarizes

awarded grants by Region, state,

program, and Fiscal Year replaces the

former Federal Aid Annual Report

that often was long delayed in

production. A Federal Aid Accrual

Report predicts the amount of grant

funds likely to be drawn by the end of

the fiscal year from the date of the

latest payment made to the grantee.

The Federal Aid Washington Office

now uses FAIMS for the various

grants it administers. An improvement

in the ability to capture proposal

evaluation and ranking notes along

with the objective/benefits notes in

FAIMS helps facilitate interactive

review of competitive grant proposals

between the Regions and the

Washington Office.

Efforts are now underway to provide

our state clients access to FAIMS data

and reports through the Internet,

beginning a process that eventually

could lead to electronic grant

processing.

Federal Aid

Information

Systems 
September 2001 5

National

Survey of

Fishing,

Hunting, and

Wildlife

Associated

Recreation

The 2001 Survey is the 10th sponsored

by the Service since 1955. It is

conducted every 5 years at the request

of the state fish and wildlife agencies

and has become one of the Nation’s

most important sources of information

on wildlife-related recreation

participation and expenditures. 

The FHWAR Survey grants-in-aid

subcommittee of the IAFWA

recommended in March 1999, that the

Service conduct the next survey in

200l. The subcommittee recommended

a survey comparable to the 1991 and

1996 surveys to maintain trend

information; an increase in sample

sizes to recapture some state-level

data lost when samples were reduced

to cut costs in 1996; and the Bureau of

Census (Census) to conduct the

Survey. The recommended funding

level was $12.5 million for data

collection. Due to funding constraints,

the Service could budget only $10.2

million. Although this means that

sample sizes cannot be increased, the

survey estimates will be comparable to

the 1996 survey. 

The Service signed an agreement in

June 1999, with Census to conduct the

2001 Survey. The Service staff met

with state technical committee

members and non-governmental

organizations to determine survey

content. Input also was obtained from

Federal agencies, researchers, and

other major survey users. September

18, 2000, the Office of Management

and Budget approved the Service’s

request to conduct the 2001 Survey. 

Census completed data collection for

the survey screen and first detailed

interview wave from April 1 through

May 31, 2001. Information is collected

through computer-assisted interviews,

which are conducted primarily by

telephone, with in-person interviews

conducted when necessary. Census

completed screening interviews of

over 52,000 households. Household

interviews were conducted to identify

samples of 30,000 sportsmen (anglers

and hunters) and 15,000 wildlife

watchers (wildlife feeders, observers,

and photographers) for the detailed

interview phase of the survey. Census

asked individual respondents about

their 2001 activities and expenditures

in three detailed interview waves

conducted in May. Interviews will be

repeated in September 2001, and

January 2002.

Future Milestones:

■ September- October 2001, Census

will conduct the second detailed

interview wave.

■ January- March 2002, the third

detailed interview wave will be

conducted. Census will complete

data collection in March 2002.

■ July 2002, we will begin publishing

preliminary estimates on

participation and expenditures for

fishing, hunting, and wildlifeassociated recreation.

■ November 2002, the final National

Report will be published. 

■ December 2002, we will begin

publishing the state reports.

■ Survey products will include 2

preliminary reports, a final national

and 50 state reports, technical

reports, a CD-ROM, and a quick

facts brochure. Reports will be

accessible on the Internet.

1996 FHWAR Survey 

Information on the 1996 FHWAR

Survey reports is available on the

Service’s Home Page at the following

url: http://far9.fws.gov.surveys.

surveys.html
6 September 2001

As required by the Act, a Report to

Congress was prepared and

forwarded to Congress in late August

2001. After review by Congress this

report will appear on the Federal Aid

Home Page (http://fa.r9.fws.gov/). This

report details actions taken by the

Division to implement the Wildlife and

Sport Fish Restoration Programs

Improvement Act of 2000. 

The Improvement Act reduces the

funding available for Program

administration, and Federal Aid will

reduce staffing and implement other

cuts to comply with these limits. To

stay within budgetary limits, Federal

Aid will reduce staff from145 FTEs in

Fiscal Year 2000 to 104.5 FTEs in

Fiscal Year 2003. Cost savings

resulting from administrative

reductions will be apportioned to the

states via the normal allocation

formula. To date Federal Aid has

apportioned $5.5 million of

administrative savings to the states.

Wildlife and

Sport Fish

Restoration

Programs

Improvement

Act of 2000

USFWS
September 2001 7

Multistate

Conservation

Grant

Program

The Multistate Conservation Grant

Program replaced the Federal Aid

administrative grants in Fiscal Year

2001. Furthering the partnership

between the Service and the states,

Congress stipulated that the IAFWA

would collect, consider, and

recommend grant proposals for

funding under this program. The

grant program is intended to fund

grants meeting national conservation

needs as defined by the IAFWA and

benefitting a majority of the states in

the United States, Service Region or

IAFWA Region.

Using pre-established national

conservation needs criteria, the

IAFWA recommended 14 grants

for funding during Fiscal

Year 2001. With

concurrence from the

Service Director,

Federal Aid funded all 14 grants,

totaling $5,635,835, by May 7, 2001.

The Division’s support for the program

focuses on grants administration,

monitoring and communications. In

addition, the Division is developing a

policy and procedures manual for the

Multistate Conservation Grant

Program, which is to be finished by

November 3, 2001. Lastly, the Division

is on call to provide technical advice to

the IAFWA as the Fiscal Year 2002

Multistate Conservation Grant

proposals are evaluated. The IAFWA’s

priority list of recommended project

proposals is due to the Service by

October 1, 2001.

Both, the Management Assistance

Team and the Fish and Wildlife

Reference Service which were

previously funded with Federal Aid

administrative dollars, are now funded

competitively under the Multistate

Conservation Grant Program, and

managed by or through the IAFWA.

USFWS
8 September 2001

Complete list of Multistate Conservation Grants Program Projects Funded for Fiscal Year 2001

Recipient Project Title Federal Award 

KRA Corporation Operate the Fish and Wildlife Reference Service $259, 482 

Silver Spring, MD 

National Shooting Sports Foundation Step Outside: recruiting new audiences to shooting $179,900 

Newton, CT sports, archery, hunting and fishing through one-on-one 

invitations and focused outreach activities 

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife- $2,790,696 

Arlington, VA Associated Recreation 

University of Wisconsin- Assisting States in Reaching Underrepresented Groups, $279,460

Stevens Point Specifically Ethnic Minorities and Women with Disabilities, 

Stevens Point, WI through the Becoming an Outdoors-Woman Program 

Responsive Management Factors Related to Hunting and Fishing Initiation, $336,720 

Harrisonburg, VA Participation, and Retention Among the Nation’s Youth 

Center for Wildlife Law Wildlife Law News Quarterly Publication $10,000

Albuquerque, NM 

IAFWA Workshops on Integrated Migratory Bird Management $298,350

Washington, DC 

Future Fisherman Foundation Strengthen and Expand the Nation’s “Hooked on Fishing - $150,125

Alexandria, VA Not on Drugs” Program 

Council for Environmental Education Science and Civics: Sustaining Wildlife Involving High $54,716

Houston, TX School Students in Addressing Wildlife Needs 

IAFWA The Analytical Support of Pivotal Efficacy Trials for $36,689

Washington, DC Florfenicol Use in Public Fisheries 

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service The Collection of Pivotal Field Efficacy Data to $216,775 

Bozeman, MT Support a New Animal Drug Approval for the Use of Florfenicol

(AquaflorTM) to Control Mortality Caused by Bacterial 

Pathogens in Cultured Fish 

IAFWA Automated Wildlife Data Systems Project Coordination $193,050 

Washington, DC 

IAFWA Outreach Project––Improving National Wildlife Capture Programs $327,376 

Washington, DC & Implementing Best Management Practices 

IAFWA Management Assistance Team for State Fish and Wildlife Agencies $502,496 

Washington, DC 
September 2001 9

National

Coastal

Wetlands

Conservation

Grant

Program

The Director of the Service

administers the National Coastal

Wetlands Conservation Grant

Program. All coastal states (except

Louisiana) and the trust territories are

eligible to submit project proposals to

the appropriate Service Regional

Office annually. The Division of

Federal Aid and the Division of Fish

and Wildlife Management Assistance

and Habitat Restoration conduct a

cross-program review of project

proposals. Finally, the Director selects

and awards the successful grants.

Through the Coastal Wetlands

Conservation Grant Program, the

Service provides up to $15 million

annually. Results of the last four years

are as follows:

A total of 25 coastal states and one

territory received funding under this

program between 1992 and 2001, for a

total of 181 projects. Project

participants in this program are

generally state and territorial

agencies, but have included county and

municipal governments and nongovernment organizations. For the 

$90 million granted since 1992,

approximately one hundred and five

thousand acres have or will be

protected and/or restored.

FY # of Projects Awarded Acres 

1998 20 $9.8M 12,680

1999 18 $9.8M 24,900

2000 25 $11.8M 5,500

2001 22 $15M 11,350

USFWS
10 September 2001

The Aquatic Resource Education

Program helps people understand,

enjoy and conserve the aquatic natural

resources of the nation. States have

the option of using up to 15% of their

annual Sport Fish Restoration

apportionment for aquatic resource

education programs and outreach and

communications projects. Although

funding for aquatic education is

optional, 45 states, the District of

Columbia and all of the territories

choose to spend some of their dollars

on aquatic education. In Fiscal Year

2000, we obligated more than $13.7

million of Sport Fish Restoration

funds on these programs.

The states tailor their programs to

their specific aquatic resources and

citizen needs. The programs provide a

hands-on, field-oriented approach to

education and strive to offer

educational opportunities to a variety

of audiences across the state. Using

such methods as workshops,

producing curriculum and other

educational materials, volunteer-led

clinics, and summer programs, states

reach teachers, school students (K-12

and college), youth groups enrolled in

Aquatic

Resource

Education

Program

recreation programs, urban youth and

families, landowners, and visitors to

state hatcheries, aquariums and

education centers. Program topics

vary but may cover freshwater, marine

and estuarine ecology, watersheds,

functions and values of wetlands,

fisheries biology and management, and

fishing skills, safety and ethics.

Aquatic resource education programs

give non-anglers, especially youth, the

skills and opportunities to make

fishing a lifetime pursuit. Some

programs work to develop stewardship

behavior through environmental issue

investigation and critical thinking

skills training as well as citizen action

projects.

To stretch dollars and expertise, states

forge partnerships, with colleges and

universities, other state resource and

education agencies, local recreation

departments, tackle manufacturers

and retailers, community groups, city

youth organizations, summer camps,

and local and national conservation

organizations. In recent years, many

states have tied their programs to 

new state education and student

performance standards, thus

increasing their use in schools. States

also use evaluation research to

strengthen all aspects of their aquatic

education programs.

States often use the value of time

donated by skilled volunteers as part

or all of their required 25% state

matching funds. This “in-kind” match

may come from teachers who attend

agency weekend workshops, trained

volunteers who join the program and

teach fishing skills and basic fish

biology to youth, and other interested

citizens who donate time and expertise

to help with programs. Many local

communities and businesses also

donate materials and equipment,

meeting space, and transportation, 

all of which contribute to support the

statewide education programs.

USFWS
September 2001 11

Hunter

Education

Section 10

Section 10 of the Wildlife and Sport

Fish Restoration Programs

Improvement Act of 2000 allocated

$7.5 million for Fiscal Year 2001 for

enhancement of hunter education

programs. Apportionment and

expenditure data, and accomplishment

reports are available through FAIMS

or on the Federal Aid Home Page.

The following is the interim policy of

the Service with regard to these funds:

1. The Service will apportion Section

10 funds using the same formula as

other Wildlife Restoration Hunter

Education funds [Section 4(c)].

2. Until a state has fully obligated its

Section 4(c) apportionment, it can

only use its Section 10

apportionment to enhance hunter

education related programs as

described in 3a and 3b.

3a.The purposes described in Section

10(A) are: (i) the enhancement of

hunter education programs, hunter

and sporting firearm safety

programs, and hunter development

programs; (ii) the enhancement of

interstate coordination and

development of hunter education

and shooting range programs; (iii)

the enhancement of bow hunter and

archery education, safety, and

development programs; and (iv) the

enhancement of construction or

development of firearm shooting

ranges and archery ranges, and the

updating of safety features of

firearm shooting ranges and

archery ranges. 

3b.Section 10 monies are intended to

supplement, not replace, Section

4(c) funds, thereby enhancing

hunter education. The

Congressional Record states these

funds can be used to “hire

additional staff for hunter education

programs; provide additional

materials for hunter education

courses; enhance and modernize

materials as needed; investigate

new technologies and delivery

methods; develop and evaluate

home study courses; create

advanced hunter education courses;

perform programmatic evaluations

and monitoring of hunter education

classes; improve and enhance

training for hunter education

instructors.” All of these items are

considered to enhance the Hunter

Education Program.

4. After a state obligates its current

year Section 4(c) apportionment for

hunter education purposes, a state

may obligate its Section 10 funds

for any eligible wildlife restoration

or hunter education projects. Prior

to obligating the full Section 4(c)

apportionment a state may only

obligate Section 10 funds for hunter

education purposes.

5. Section 10 funds are 1-year funds

and any funds not obligated in the

current year’s apportionment are

reapportioned to those states that

have fully obligated their Section

4(c) funds on hunter education

projects. The funds are

reapportioned in the following year

under Section 3(a) of the Wildlife

Restoration Act as additional

regular P-R funds.

6. The Service will track obligations

and expenditures of Section 10

funds through a dedicated

subactivity code in the Service’s

accounting systems.

This policy is consistent with what

Congress intended when they passed

the Improvement Act. It provides

States with flexibility, while enhancing

hunting and shooting activities and

projects. 

The Division provided additional

support for the programs objectives by

developing a baseline of past Hunter

Education Program spending for each

state as another measure of enhanced

spending by the states. This baseline

measure may be used in conjunction

with other measures of Hunter

Education Program enhancement.
Hunter Education (HE) Funds and Decision Tree

12 September 2001

Wildlife

Restoration (WR)

Account

Sec 4(c) 2-year $

Sec 10 1-year $

Is current FY Sec 4(c) $ fully

obligated for HE projects?

Section 10 $ may be used for

HE enhancement only

Regular Wildlife

Restoration Account

Apportionment to

States, 2-year $

Special Wildlife Restoration Account

for unobligated Sec 10 $ . 

Reapportionment to States that obligated

all of their Sec 4(c) $ for HE in the

previous year, 2-year $

 Are all Sec 10 $ obligated? Are all Sec 10 $ obligated?

Section 10 $ may be used for

HE or WR projects

Complete Complete

List of States that fully

obligated current FY Sec 4(c)

$ for HE projects

No

Yes No Yes No

Yes
September 2001 13

All the information and tables

previously found in the appendices in

earlier Program Updates are now on

the Federal Aid Home Page where

they are maintained at:

http://fa.r9.fws.gov/

Appendices

Photodisc
U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Division of Federal Aid

http://www.fws.gov

September 2001