Page History
...
Yes. A letter, signed by the Director of the State fish and wildlife agency responsible for the submission, should accompany the Plan. Read More
3. Should the State identify significant changes made to the Plan and how the revised Plan continues to address the eight elements (see Guidance for Wildlife Action Plan Review and Revisions, 2007)?
...
Yes. Congress intended that the revised Plans be comprehensive documents for all wildlife in a State, regardless of jurisdiction. However, the criteria used to designate Species of Greatest Conservation Need are determined by each State in conjunction with stakeholders and partners. Therefore, a smaller subset of wildlife in a state may be designated as Species of Greatest Conservation Need, with specific conservation actions designed to address the threats to those species. If limited information about a species group is available, a State may include a description of how they are collecting and identifying this information for future revisions of the Plan. Existing species management plans, particularly for species that may be under the jurisdiction of another government entity, may be incorporated by reference with a brief summary included in the Plan. Read More
6. Should the revised Plan include a list of species of greatest conservation need (SGCN)?
...
Congress' definition of "wildlife" in the legislation did not include plants; however, a State may choose to incorporate plants in the development of the Plan (see Q&A #9 for related guidance). Read More
9. May the Plan include conservation actions, such as wildlife education, recreation, and law enforcement that are not eligible for funding under the State Wildlife Grants program?
...
Yes. As required in element 7, the State fish and wildlife agency must describe how it gathered input from Federal, State, and local agencies and Indian tribes that manage significant land and water areas. Read More
12. What must a State do to demonstrate adequate public involvement in the revision of a Plan?
The State must ensure that the general public has an opportunity to review and comment on the revised Plan and should provide written description of this process as part of the revision. At a minimum, the State should inform the public that a draft Plan is available for review and request comments over a reasonable period of time (e.g., 30 days). Notifying the public of the State’s intent to revise its Plan early in the revision process is also considered a best practice. Read More
13. Are State Plans required to address coordination with adjoining States in revising their Plans?
No. States are encouraged to coordinate, but they are not required to address this coordination with neighboring States in their revised Plans. Many States have worked together on common wildlife conservation issues, including sharing of species lists and comparing drafts to look for commonality and consistency. Read More
14. To what degree should States bordering Canada and Mexico coordinate with these countries?
Describing collaboration with adjacent countries is not part of a required element. However, if species of conservation need and their habitats are shared with these countries, the Plans would benefit from this information and any identified joint conservation actions. Read More
15. What are the minimum requirements for Plan review prior to October 1, 2015?
...
