1. NAWCA North American Wetlands Conservation Act

2. North American Waterfowl Management Plan NAWCA – North American Wetland Conservation Act Wetland Conservation Act Found a need for funding to protect and restore wetlands Envisioned a federal funding program Developed a system to bring partners together to access these funds (Joint Ventures)

3. Establishment Act passed in 1989 Act passed in 1989 Currently authorized up to $75 Million Currently authorized up to $75 Million In addition to appropriations, program funding comes sources such as fines, Federal fuel excise taxes (for coastal ecosystem projects) and interest. In addition to appropriations, program funding comes sources such as fines, Federal fuel excise taxes (for coastal ecosystem projects) and interest. FY 2008 total funding = $84.4 Million FY 2008 total funding = $84.4 Million Funds projects in CN, MX and the US Funds projects in CN, MX and the US

4. Act Implementation Joint Ventures are the venue through which NAWCA grants are run. NAWCA proposals should be submitted with know- ledge of the JV “responsible” for the project area. JV’s rank multiple projects within same funding cycle. Ranks contribute to funding decisions.

5. Types of Grants Two types available: Standard – $75,001 to $1 Million funding (3 grants funded in NM) Small – up to $75,000 funding (0 grants funded in NM)

6. Standard Grant Requirements 1:1 match required. But best to propose at least a 2 non-federal: 1 federal dollar match. 1:1 match required. But best to propose at least a 2 non-federal: 1 federal dollar match. High documented waterfowl use or the ability to show that “they will come” High documented waterfowl use or the ability to show that “they will come” Partners are everything – you’ll need many with several giving 10% of the request in match Partners are everything – you’ll need many with several giving 10% of the request in match Location, location, location Location, location, location Putting land under perpetual easement or outright purchase is highly valued by the grantor as are Putting land under perpetual easement or outright purchase is highly valued by the grantor as are Declining wetland types Declining wetland types Documented benefit to other wetland-dependent birds and T&E species Documented benefit to other wetland-dependent birds and T&E species

7. Small NAWCAs are often better for areas with isolated, small or linear wetlands or linear wetlands $2.5 Million in FY 2008 for Small Grants Program Small Grants Program = 33+ grants = 33+ grants

8. Fewer requirements: Much less writing; 5 pages maximum Fewer overall match dollars needed More emphasis on habitat than waterfowl Smaller landscapes Fewer partners Works well with riparian areas riparian areas

9. Potential Regulatory requirements after grant receipt: Acquisition support letter Acquisition support letter Historic Preservation Survey Historic Preservation Survey Contaminants Survey Contaminants Survey NEPA NEPA U.S. Federal restrictions on purchases U.S. Federal restrictions on purchases Before you begin….

10. JV administrative boundaries JV administrative boundaries Intermountain West Playa Lakes

11. How grant funds may be spent equipment expenses that are prorated; equipment expenses that are prorated; material and supply costs; material and supply costs; annual payments for conservation agreements of at least 15 years or for the maximum duration allowed by State law; annual payments for conservation agreements of at least 15 years or for the maximum duration allowed by State law; restoration or protection costs; and restoration or protection costs; and initial management costs. initial management costs.

12. Match Requirements Must be at least 1:1 match. More non-federal to federal is better Must be at least 1:1 match. More non-federal to federal is better May use non-federal funds or in-kind contributed no earlier than 2 years prior to the date the proposal is submitted or during the 2-year grant agreement period May use non-federal funds or in-kind contributed no earlier than 2 years prior to the date the proposal is submitted or during the 2-year grant agreement period Funds cannot have been used to match any other federal funds Funds cannot have been used to match any other federal funds Must send letters from all contributors, noting value of contribution, with the application Must send letters from all contributors, noting value of contribution, with the application

13. Potential Sources for matching funds Potential Sources for matching funds Bird habitat groups – DU, NWTF, PF, QU, etc. City and County funds Civic or community groups NMDGF other state resource agencies (Forestry, State Parks) Private landowners RC & D’s Soil and Water conservation districts Sportsman’s clubs Tourism groups or boosters TNC, TPL and land trusts– acquisitions or easements Tribal dollars Universities and colleges Volunteer efforts

14. Summary Small NAWCA proposals make sense for our area: 1) relatively sparse populations; few corporations 1) relatively sparse populations; few corporations 2) few “easy” non-federal dollars 2) few “easy” non-federal dollars 3) many private landowners 3) many private landowners 4) scattered or linear wetlands 4) scattered or linear wetlands 5) few large concentrations of waterfowl 5) few large concentrations of waterfowl

15. Talk to JV staff. Playa Lakes www.pljv.org Intermountain West www.iwjv.org Deadline for small grants will be November 28 For further information check out: www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/Grants/NAWCA/Small/index.shtm www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/Grants/NAWCA/Small/index.shtm