Investing in Wildlife: State Wildlife Funding Campaigns by Cindy McKinney Lauren Ris Heather Rorer Sara Williams A project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Natural Resources and Environment School of Natural Resources and Environment University of Michigan April 2005 Faculty advisors: Associate Professor Julia M. Wondolleck, PhD Professor Steven L. Yaffee, PhD ABSTRACT In order to help states create and implement funding mechanisms to meet the State Wildlife Grants match requirement, this report describes a number of innovative approaches that various states have taken to secure funding for wildlife conservation, and highlights the key attributes of successful funding mechanisms. The report is based on case studies of 15 different funding mechanisms, representing 14 different states and eight different mechanism types. These specific case studies were recommended by professionals familiar with conservation funding and by staff at the International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. The cases highlight the attributes of innovative and successful mechanisms, their campaigns, and provide important lessons for future attempts to create new funding mechanisms. A cross-case analysis revealed several factors that have led to successful funding mechanisms which were grouped into five categories. These categories include: factors considered in choosing a mechanism; process followed in choosing a mechanism and planning a campaign; building support; dealing with challenges and opposition; and factors relating to administering the mechanism. From the analysis, recommendations were developed to provide guidance for natural resource managers interested in creating and implementing wildlife funding campaigns. iii AUTHORS For over a century, the University of Michigan School of Natural Resources and Environment has been a leader in natural resource and environmental research. Many master’s degree candidates are required to complete an interdisciplinary, team-based research project in which students work closely with a client to propose solutions to a current environmental problem. This research was conducted in fulfillment of this degree requirement. Four second year students, in the Resource Policy and Behavior Program, composed the project team: Cindy McKinney graduated from Southern Methodist University with a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering. Before returning to school, Cindy worked for Raytheon Systems Company in Dallas, TX and Avaya Communication in Denver, CO. As a Doris Duke Conservation Fellow, she recently completed an internship with The Nature Conservancy. Lauren Ris graduated from Willamette University with a B.A. in English and Environmental Science. After graduating, Lauren worked for the National Wildlife Federation in Boulder, CO. As a Doris Duke Conservation Fellow, Lauren recently worked for the Shared Strategy of Puget Sound. Heather Rorer graduated from Yale University with a B.A. in Psychology. Heather worked for the Southeast Michigan Land Conservancy in Ann Arbor, MI before returning to school. As a Doris Duke Conservation Fellow, Heather recently interned with the Natural Resources Defense Council. Sara Williams graduated from Cornell University with a B.S. in Environmental Policy. After graduation, Sara worked for the Idaho Conservation League in Sun Valley, ID and the Environmental Policy Center in San Francisco, CA. As a Doris Duke Conservation Fellow, Sara recently worked as an Environmental Fellow for Senator Dianne Feinstein. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS It took a lot of hard work and dedication from many people to produce this report. This section gives a brief description of all the people and organizations that were involved in making this project a reality. The International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies The International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (IAFWA) has been a key organization in promoting sound resource management and strengthening federal, state, and private cooperation in protecting and managing fish and wildlife and their habitats in the public interest. IAFWA's members include the fish and wildlife agencies of the states, provinces, and federal governments of the United States and Canada. Throughout the one and a half year process Naomi Edelson and Dave Chadwick provided much of the information, advice, contacts, and financial support needed to make this project a reality. The Ecosystem Management Initiative The Ecosystem Management Initiative (EMI) is housed in the School of Natural Resources and Environment at the University of Michigan. EMI’s mission is to promote sustainable natural resource management through ecosystem-based teaching, research, and outreach. Professors Julia Wondolleck and Steven Yaffee served as the advisors for the project and provided invaluable guidance and direction. In addition, EMI provided significant financial support for the project. We would also like to thank the following people for their time and help in answering countless questions through the interview process and beyond: Carol Baudler Carrol Henderson George Smith Sue Brick Doug Hunt Rollie Sparrowe Beth Brown Cliff Jones Ken Speake Jonathon Brown Steve Kraatz Ron Stanley Chris Burkett Rich Larson Sally Stockwell Ernest Cook Bruce McCloskey John Sunderland Nancy Delmar Jerry McCollum Michelle Sydeman Cal DuBrock Corky Palmer Ollie Torgerson Ken Elowe Walter Pomeroy Jeff Waldon Frank Felbaum Matt Robus David Waller Mary Fields Brad Rowse Becky Wajda Rebecca Frank Lydia Saldana David Whitehurst Walt Gasson Andy Sansom Daniel Zekor David Goad Duane Shroufe Robert Savannah, of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, provided the black and white wildlife illustrations. The team would also like to thank the Educational Foundation of America and the School of Natural Resources for financial support of the project. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract.............................................................................................................................iii Authors.............................................................................................................................. iv Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................... v Table of Contents ............................................................................................................. vi SECTION ONE – INTRODUCTION .................................................................... 9 1 Introduction..................................................................................................................11 2 An Overview of Wildlife Funding .............................................................................. 12 3 Methods......................................................................................................................... 17 SECTION TWO – CASE STUDIES................................................................... 27 4 State of Alaska Wildlife Viewing Pass......................................................................... 29 5 State of Arizona Heritage Fund .................................................................................. 37 6 State of Arkansas Conservation Sales Tax ................................................................. 48 7 State of Colorado Great Outdoors Colorado Trust Fund........................................... 61 8 State of Georgia Nongame Wildlife Tags.................................................................... 72 9 State of Georgia Mini-Case: Heritage Fund Amendment.......................................... 83 10 State of Maine Maine Outdoor Heritage Fund......................................................... 86 11 State of Minnesota Nongame Wildlife Checkoff Fund ............................................ 99 12 State of Missouri Conservation Sales Tax .............................................................. 108 13 State of Nevada Mining Program............................................................................ 119 14 State of Pennsylvania Conservation License Plate................................................. 128 15 State of Texas Sporting Goods Sales Tax................................................................ 139 16 State of Virginia House Bill 38................................................................................ 149 vi 17 State Of Washington Personalized License Plates................................................ 159 18 State of Wyoming Wildlife Legacy Trust ................................................................ 168 SECTION THREE – CONCLUSIONS .............................................................. 181 19 Key Findings & Case Study Analysis..................................................................... 183 20 Recommendations.................................................................................................... 211 21 Conclusion ................................................................................................................ 218 SECTION FOUR – APPENDICES .................................................................. 221 Appendix A Reference Materials ................................................................................. 223 Appendix B Case Study Questions ............................................................................... 237 Appendix C Case Summaries ....................................................................................... 241 Appendix