Wildlife Agency Relevance and Funding

State wildlife agencies have broad responsibilities to conserve all wildlife for present and future generations, but limited capacity to fulfill these responsibilities due to severely constrained funding. Through license sales, hunters and anglers have disproportionately footed much of the bill for state wildlife agencies, and their ongoing contributions are essential to the conservation of hundreds of species. However, wildlife agencies are mandated to conserve thousands of species, including those that are not hunted or fished. Even if more federal funding is made available from the proposed Recovering America’s Wildlife Act, state wildlife agencies need additional, broad-based public funding to conserve all biodiversity within state borders and provide all people with opportunities to enjoy and benefit from wildlife conservation.

State wildlife agencies have broad responsibilities to conserve wildlife on behalf of all people. Hunting and fishing license sales provide critical funding to state wildlife agencies to conserve hundreds of species, yet there are thousands of species within states and many are in greater need of conservation efforts. In addition to more broad-based public funding, many wildlife agencies need greater authority to conserve all state biodiversity and stay accountable to diverse public values and interests.

Most over-arching state wildlife management decisions are made by a governor-appointed wildlife commission, board, or council. However, commissions have historically been homogenous in demographic makeup and primarily representative of hunting, fishing, and agricultural interests. By improving appointment criteria to encourage people of diverse backgrounds, knowledge, and experience to join state wildlife commissions, states can improve their ability to make science-based decisions for preventing biodiversity loss while staying accountable to a variety of public values and interests.