Copyright
Unknown.

National Fish and Wildlife Foundation reauthorization : hearing before the Subcommittee on Environment and Natural Resources of the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, House of Representatives, One Hundred Third Congress, first session, on reauthorizing the National Fish and Wildlife Foundat online

. (page 7 of 14)
Online LibraryUnknownNational Fish and Wildlife Foundation reauthorization : hearing before the Subcommittee on Environment and Natural Resources of the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, House of Representatives, One Hundred Third Congress, first session, on reauthorizing the National Fish and Wildlife Foundat → online text (page 7 of 14)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


Kenneth H. Hofmann, Secretary
Concord, California



Eugene Bay (term expired July 1992)
New York, New York



Magalen O. Bryant
Middleburg, Virginia



Thomas G. McMillan (term expired February 1993)
Reno, Nevada



Neil L. Oldridge
Wilmington, Delaware



J.C. Perkins
Warren, Michiga



Beatrice C. Pickens (term expired November 1992)
Dallas, Texas



Steve Robinson (temi expired January 1993)
Boise, Idaho



David B. Rockland, PhD.
Washington. D.C.



Richard Schuize
Arlington, Virginia



A. Marshall Acuff, Jr.
James A. Baker IV
George Bariey. Jr.
Perry R. Bass
Kenneth Berlin
Michael Brerman
John M. Camp 111
Tony Coelho
Leonard S. Coleman
Jeff Curtis
Alex Echols
Marshall Field
David Gibbons
John W. Hanes. Jr.
C. Wolcott Henry III
Bert Jones
William G. Ken-
D.W. Larson
James A. Lichalowich
Kevin Lynch
Julie Packard
George D. Pence
Sumner Pingree
Nathaniel P. Reed
Jeff Schneider
Tod Sedgwick
Nancy N. Weyerhaeuser
John C. Whitaker
Charles Wilkiason
Joseph H. Williams
Martin F. Wood



Lindsay Thomas
Atlanta, Georgia



Brig. Gen. Charies E. Yeager
Cedar Ridge, California



John Turner (ex officio)
Washington, DC.



CovEK More than 350 species of birds migrate between wintering grounds in the tropics of Mexico, Central and South America, and the
West Indies (front) and their breeding grounds in the temperate forests of the United States and Canada (back). Kendahl Janjubb of Mi.ssoula.
Montana, has captured the essence of this migrating drama in a poster supported by the Exxon Corporation, This poster, as well as the Nancy
Howe print and stamp (page 2-3) and the Nils Obel pnnt and p<.)ster (page 13) can be purchased by calling tlie Foundauon's Development
Department at 202-857-0166.



YCiril PAPER



«



61







T




72-588 0-93-3



62



From the Chairman . . .



EVERY YEAR the National Fish
and Wildlife Foundation fine-
tunes its conservation initia-
tives. Fiscal year 1992 was no
exception. We launched Bring Back the
Natives, a national venture with the
Bureau of Land Management and the
USDA-Forest Service that is the first
habitat-based fisheries protection
program in the country. To spur wetland
preservation on private lands, we
established the Partners on Private Lands
program under the auspices our North
American Wetlands Partnership.
Through our Partners in Flight program,
aimed at protecting both breeding and
wintering grounds for migrating song-
birds, we orchestrated a landmark event
in 1992: a national training workshop
that brought together more than 1,000
researchers and land stewards to share
information on managing habitats for
Neotropical migrant birds And through
our education initiative, we pined a
diverse group of corporations, govern-
ment agencies, and other conservation
organizations to fund the publication of
full-color, state-by-state guides to
premier wildlife viewing legations. Six
guides (Arizona, California, Indiana,
North Carolina, North Dakota, and
Texas) made their debut in 1992 with
Foundation support.

In 1992, the Foundation generated
more than $19 million for 165 "on-the-
ground " conservation projects (an all-
time high) by raising $12 5 million in
private resources, more than matching
its $6.5 million commitment in federal
funds. Here's a sampling of what those
dollars are buying:

■ In Louisiana, nearly 1,400 acres of «eu'
marshlands are being created for
migratory songbirds and waterfowl.

■ A project has been launched to bring
Atlantic salmon back to spawning
grounds in the northeastern U.S.

■ Across America, hands-on educational
programs on nature for elementary and
high school students, especially urban



youths, are in the works.

■ Critical wetland protection and
restoration is underway at Kelly's Slough
in North Dakota, in Kansas's renowned
Cheyenne Bottoms, along the Texas
Gulf Coast, in California's Sacramento
Valley, and in the ACE River Basin of
South Carolina.

And beyond our borders:

■ In the Gulf of California, a census of
the world's smallest cetacean, the
critically endangered vaquita, will help
spark a recovery plan for the species.

News of these projects and of the
Foundation's efforts circulated nation-
wide in 1992. Stories appeared in The
Wall Street Journal, The Los Angeles
Times. The Washington Post, U.S. News &
World Report, Sports Illustrated, and
National Geographic Television cover-
age of the Foundation's Neotropical
migratory bird conservation and wetland
programs aired on NBC and ESPN. Local
TV stations in Texas, Arizona, and
Washington, D.C., also broadcast news
of the Foundation. A full-page ad for last
year's Conservation Stamp and Print
appeared in the March 1992 issue of
Field & Stream. Since marketing our first
print in 1987, print and stamp sales have
generated more than $1.9 million for the
Foundation's conservation programs.

"Settling In, " the painting of tfiree
snow geese shown here, is Nancy
Howe's fme work for our Sixth Annual
Conservation Stamp and Print. An avid
conservationist, Ms. Howe uses her art
to help restore waterfowl habitat. She is
the first woman to win the Federal Duck
Stamp Contest.

Fiscal year 1992 also saw some
internal changes for the Foundation:
Eugene A. Bay, Ir., of our Board of
Directors retired in 1992, andJ.C
Perkins replaced him. And I'm pleased
to say that Amos S. Eno, formerly the
Foundation's acting dirertor, is now our
executive director.

Amos is fond of saying that the
Foundation gives money tlie old-




fashioned way: it makes its grantees
work for it. Any grant we give must be
matched by at least an equal amount in
state and private funds. And, because
the projects we support are carefully
evaluated and managed, we know that
your contributions — and those of all our
partners — are serving conservation in
the best possible way. Don't forget, the
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation is



63




the only conservation organization that
can match the dollars you donate for
conservation with federal dollars. Please
join us in 1993-



"Settling In. " artist Saucy fJuuv i acrylic painting of snoiv geese for the Fouiuiatiun s
Sixth Annual Conservation Stamp and Print. (See inside front cover for ordering
detaik).




John L. Morris
Chairman of the Board



64



Investing in the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation



1992 Donor Highlights



THE FouNDAHON feccives an
annual appropriation from
Congress that is dedicated
exclusively to conser\'ation
grants. As a result, our staff and board
members must raise the funds needed
for the organization's operating ex-
penses from private sources, such as
charitable donations from other founda-
tions, individuals, corporations; from the
Combined Federal Campaign; and from
marketing and licensing revenues. In
1992, the Foundation raised $2.2 million
from our small, though exceptional,
group of supporters.

During fiscal year 1992, the Founda-
tion continued to receive a broad range
of support from foundations, individuals,
and corporations. We are pleased to
report that the Chairman's Council
(donors whose annual unrestricted gift
for the Foundations operating expenses
amounts to $1,000 or more) gained 4l
new members in 1992 and raised
$389,767 — up by 61 percent from fiscal
year 1991, the year it was established.
Thirty-tJiree donors renewed their
membership on the council last year. It
is an honor to recognize the following
foundations, corporations, and individu-
als who are members of the Chairman's
Council, the backbone of the Foun-
dation's donor base:

Anonymous (2)

Mr. and Mrs. A. Marshall Acuff, Jr.

AFTCO Manufacturing Company, Inc.

Mr. A. Gifford Agnew

Arthur Anderson & Company

Gerson and Barbara Bakar Philanthropic

Fund
Baker & Botts
Mr. Lee M, Bass
Mr. and Mrs, Peny R. Bass
Bass Pro Shops, Inc.
Mr. Eugene A. Bay, Jr.
Mr. and Mrs. John P. Belli
Mr. Kenneth Berlin
Richard C. Blum & Associates
Mr. G. Michael Boswell



Brunswick Foundation, Inc.

Ms. Magalen O. Bryant

Camp Younts Foundation

Mr. Donald A. Carr

Mr. John Winston Childs

Coleman Company, Inc.

Mr. T. Halter Cunningham

Gaylord Donnelley '83 Gift Trust

The Charles Engelhard Foundation

Mrs. Amos Eno

Mr. & Mrs. Russell Farabee

Federal Cartridge Company

Mr. Malcolm S. Forbes, Jr.

The Franklin Mint

Grady-White Boats

Mr. & Mrs. Alan Greenberg

Mr. & Mrs, George C, Hixon

Mr. Kermeth H. Hofmann

Mr, Peter H. Huizenga

Ms. Caroline Rose Hunt

The Robert S. & Grayce B, Ken-
Foundation

Little River Foundation

Louisiana-Pacific Foundation

Mr. & Mrs. Tav Lupton

Mr. & Mrs. Thomas M, Massengale

Mr. John L. Morris

National Wildlife Federation

The Nature Conservancy: California
Chapter

The Nature Conservancy: North Carolina
Chapter

Mr. & Mrs. George Neff

Norcross Wildlife Foundation, Inc.

Ohrstrom Foundation

Mr. Ricard R. Ohrstrom

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.

Phillips Petroleum Foundation, Inc.

Mr. & Mrs. T. Boone Pickens

Mr. and Mrs. L. Richardson Preyer, Jr.

Mr Nathaniel P. Reed

Remington Amis Company

Mr. Phillip B. Rooney

Rosewood Corporation

Schlumberger Foundation

Mr. Charles Schwab

Mr. Stephen Sloan

Mr, Edgar O. Smith

Times Mirror Magazines. Inc

Union Camp Charitable Trust



Waste Management, inc.

Weeden Foundation

Mr. Christopher M. Weld

Mr. & Mrs. F.T. Weyerhaeuser

Weyerhaeuser Company Foundation

Mrs. John Campbell While

Mr. WUliam R. Wiggins

Mr. Joseph H. Williams

The Williams Companies Foundation, Inc.

The Williams Companies, Inc.

Mr. & Mrs. Martin Wood

Wright & McGill Company

In ADDinoN to Chairman's Council
donations, 27 donors contributed
$1,040,601 to fund the cost of the
Foundation's specific conservation
initiatives: wetlands, fisheries. Neotrop-
ical migratory birds, conservation
education, wildlife and habitat, and our
annual fisheries and wildlife assessment
studies and publications.

The Foundation also received
$378,238 in 1992 from the Combmed
Federal Campaign. Hundreds of federal,
state, and local government employees
made regular contributions to the
Foundation by choosing our number.
0892, in the campaign's listed charities.
Also, through our cause-related market-
ing efforts, we received $70,330 from the
sale of various items produced by
Franklin Mint. The Foundation's Annual
Stamp and Print Program generated
$65,739.

The Foundation's founding legislation
requires that federally appropriated
matching funds be awarded for conser-
vation projects and be matched by
nonfederal funds on at least a 1 to 1
basis. In 1992. we were able to main-
tain a ratio of 2 to 1 through commit-
ments of nonfederal matching dollars.
Our supporters know that for every
dollar tliey donate to the NaUonal Fish
and Wildlife Foundation, another $2 are
leveraged for a diverse portfolio of
projects.

To all our donors: we are completely
dependent on your contributions — the



65




funds that fuel tfie Foundation's engine.
Because of your continued, vital sup-
port, we are able to carry on our work
of identify'ing conservation priorities,
developing conservation solutions,
administering and evaluating grants,
printing and distributing our publica-
tions, and holding our Fisheries
Colloquiums. Thank you all for your
vole of confidence in our efforts.

To those of you who are thinking
about supporting the Foundation, here
are a few reasons why others have
chosen to do so:

Paul Tudor Jones n, Chairman and
Chief Executive OfiBcer, Tudor
Investment Corporation, New York:

"The National Fish and Wildlife Founda-
tion is a dynamic, entrepreneurial
solution for the urgent conservation
issues we face across the country. My
love of the outdoors borders on the
fanatical and preserving them for my
daughters is a top priority of mine.
Also, as a money manager, I know
performance is the only thing that
matters professionally. And the Founda-
tion provides more than just an appeal-



ing spin on environmental issues. It is
number one in my book on perfor-
mance in wildlife conservation. "

C. J. Silas, Chairman and Cliief
Executive Ofificer, Phillips Petroleiun
Company, Oklahoma:

"The staff and management of the
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
possess the intelligence, efficiency and
enthusiasm that makes the organization
the idea! partner for joint ventures in the
environment. The effectiveness of
Phillips' environmental outreach has
f)een multiplied through the Founda-
tion's ability to bring together diverse
and seemingly disparate parmers, whose
combined efforts far exceed the sum of
their individual contributions."

Edward Skloot, Executive Director,
Surdna Foundation, Inc., New York:

"When we think of cost-effectiveness,
well-focused grant-making, we think of
the National Fish and Wildlife Founda-
tion. Its Fisheries Conservation and
Management Program is helping to chart
the course of marine conservation in this



Following winter rains, the waters of a
^_ rare vernal pool evaporate and are
^m replaced by golden blossoms.



country and others, by providing
expertise and cfiallenging challenge
grants."

Kenneth H. Hofmann, Board Mem-
ber since 1987, President, The
Ho&nann Company, California:

"The Foundation presents a refreshing
alternative in the conservation arena.
This group wants to work with everyone
and use existing programs and instiw-
tions, for one singular mission — to
search out and fund ground-breaking
activities that hold the promise of
stemming the loss of our natural heri-
tage. The record speaks for itself — more
than 660 diverse projects in six years!"

Marvin D. Melnikoff, Vice President,
The Franklin Mint, Pennsylvania:

"The Foundation's quiet and effective
reputation in the intemational conserva-
tion community allows our products to
be presented with credibility and
dignity — the way both of our organiza-
tions wish to be viewed. It has been a
mutually beneficial partnership — one of
the ver\' best in cause-related marketing."

Robert D. Nelson, Director, Wildlife
and Fisheries, USDA Forest Service,
Washington, D.C.:

"The National Fish and Wildlife Founda-
tion is the key catalyst in leveraging
funds for habitat improvements on
public lands. Thousands of Forest
Service employees and partners imple-
ment Foundation projects on National
Forests and Grasslands and many
proudly designate the Foundation as a
charity in the Combined Federal Cam-
paign Program."



66



Investing in Partnerships



by Amos S. Eno, Executive Director



No MAN IS AN ISLAND. Nof is any
conservation organization.
Success or failure is mea-
sured by the organization's
ability to worlt with others, to forge
partnerships for achieving shared goals.

The National Fish and Wildlife
Foundation embodies partnerships. In
fact, what we do specifically is develop
partnerships. Every grant we make for a
conservation project involves partners,
indeed requires them. The reasoa-' The
Foundation's core funding is appropri-
ated annually from the U.S. Congress,
and the law requires that these grant
funds miisth^ matched al least one for
one by nonfederal sources. The Founda-
tion and its grantees collectively must
raise the matching dollars.

The Foundation manages its federal
appropriations as a venture capital fund
for conservation investments and
leverages this capital as much as
possible. Consequently, in the past six
years, we have achieved an average
match of $2.03 in nonfederal monies for
each federal dollar And we often
negotiate a $4 or greater match for each
federal $1.

Realizing these matches means
securing partners for our conservation
investments, and we do this bener than
anyone else. In our brief six-year
existence, and despite few staiT mem-
bers, we have engaged in more conser-
vation partnerships than any other
organization in America To date, the
Foundation has awarded 660 grants that,
when leveraged with our partners,
produced more than $79 million for 255
different conservation organizations or
agencies. Our partners include some 20
federal agencies, all tfiree U.S. Armed
SeA'ices, 58 state and provincial govern-
ment agencies, more than 150 other
conservation organizations, and 330
corporations.

What distinguishes the National Fish
and WUdlife Foundation from other
nonprofit conservation organizations?



First, because of our ability to attract
parmers, bring the public and private
seaors together, and leverage resources,
we can invest in an exceptional number
and variety of conservation projects,
whether they focus on Siberian tiger
studies or restoration of native fisheries.
As a result, our con.servation programs
are far broader than those of most other
nonprofits. They encompass scientific
research, public outreach and education,
wildlife management, species recovery,
and habitat acquisition, protection, and
restoration.

Second, the Foundation does not
base its invesmient strategy solely on
conservation issues that most appeal to




Piping plofer. targeted for protection
through a Foundation-funded project.

donors. We determine what the real
environmental problems are and how
existing agencies and programs — with
our help — can solve those problems
Then, we bring people together (again)
to champion recognizable, definable
solutions. For instance, our Fisheries
Colloquium, which was held twice in
1992, gathers together representatives
from environmentally concerned
philanthropic foundations and provides
them with an understanding of what is
needed in fisheries conservation. It also
helps them focus their efforts. In effect,
we're the conservation movement's
"think tank."



Third, besides leveraging your private
conservation dollars, we don't use your
money to build a conservation bureau-
cracy; our fund-raising and administra-
tive overhead is never more than 5
percent — the lowest in the business.
Foundation project development,
management, and evaluation costs are
10 percent. As a result, no less tfian 85
cents of each dollar we receive goes into
real projects "on the ground "

Fourth, unlike the majority of other
conservation groups in the country, the
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
can turn its (and your) conservation
investments into public policy. All
projects we support are reviewed and
evaluated by federal, state, corporate,
and conservation-community peers
before and after their implementation.
Successful efforts are often adopted by
the agencies using or evaluating them,
thus causing the conservation initiatives
or projects we inve.st in to become
institutionalized.

For example, in 1987, we funded a
pilot program in Idaho to test "gap
analysis" and a new mapping technol-
ogy called geographic information
.systems, or GIS. Essentially, gap analysis
amasses data on the locations of threat-
ened and endangered species and
compares it to information on the
locations of existing protected lands. GIS
turns the species data into computer-
crafted, color-coded maps of species
habitats. Then, by electronically overlay-
ing those maps witli the boundaries of
existing parks, preserves, and refuges,
gaps are revealed in the protective
network. The results in Idaho were so
striking (for instance, it was found that
most vegetative types are not protected)
that gap analysis is now a $2.4 million
item on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service's yearly budget. What's more, the
agency is planning to map every state.

Over the last 20 years the environmen-
tal movement has been effective in



4



I



67



Value of Projects by Initiative, 19861992



achieving broad, beneficial changes in
our nation's environmental policies and
attitudes- But it has failed to achieve
long-term conservation goals. Today,
duck populations are still at their lowest
levels in history, and we continue to
lose almost 500,000 acres of wetlands
each year. Both the nation's irjand and
marine native fisheries are near total
collapse, with more tlian 200 species
listed as endangered, threatened, or
over-exploited. The federal endangered
species list, which currently includes
1,278 different plants and animals, is
growing at a rate of more than 100
species a year. Neotropical migratory
birds — the songbirds that hail our
springs and surruners — are declining en
masse. In the eastern U.S. and prairie
states, for example, more than 70
percent of the migratory songbird
species being monitored (such as
orioles, bobolinks, and cerulean war-
blers) are dwindling at rates of 3 to 5
percent a year.

These crises exist in part because
environmental reformers have sought
worthy goals using limited means. Most
have built their crusades on the twin
pillars of aggressive advocacy (lobbying)
and litigation, which often causes
polarization — namely the alienation of
corporate America and of citizens who
could be adversely affected by the
implementation of a reformer's policies.

What tcK) often has been missing in
the environmental movement, what is
often still missing, is a proactive invest-
ment strategy that involves all necessary
partners: federal and state agencies,
corporations, conservation organizations,
and — of greatest importance — tfie "local
parmers " living in areas most affected by
conservation efforts. Partnerships are the
key to achieving local suppon for
conservation initiatives to ensure tJieir
success.

We at the National Fish and Wildlife
Foundation are convinced that a posi-
tive, proactive investment strategy that




brings together the public and private
sectors is essential for the conservation
of fish, wildlife, and plant resources.
Two of the best examples of this kind of
successful partnering are the North
American Waterfowl Management Plan
(NAWMP) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service's Partners for Wildlife program.
Under NAWMP, we have funded more
than 165 wetland consenation projects
in the U.S. and Canada, and each of
those projects has involved multiple
federal, state, and private partners. One,
for instance — the Playa Lakes Joint
Venture — is teaming up the Phillips
Petroleum Company; Ducks Unlimited;
state agencies in Texas, Kansas, Okla-
homa, New Mexico, and Colorado; the
Fish and Wildlife Service; private
landowners; and the Foundation.

Another of our undertakings is the
conservation of Neotropical migratory
birds, fittingly called Parmers in Flight.
To date, this initiative boasts 14 active
federal agencies, 25 nonprofit conserva-
tion organizations, and 13 corporations
representing the nation's forest products
industry.

In some cases, the Foundation is
literally underwriting new tecfinologies,
such as gap analysis and a semiperme-
able-membrane device that could
revolutionize water-quality monitoring.
Or we're championing new manage-
ment philosophies, as is true of Bring



Back the Natives, a national campaign
we launched with the USDA-Forest
Service and the Bureau of Land Manage-
ment to restore native fishes to river
systems on public lands. Rather than
focusing on creating hatcheries behind
dams or restocking destroyed fisheries'
habitats, our goal in this campaign is the
management of whole river stretches,
entire watershed ecosystems, for native
fishes. This is no small task: the Center
for Marine Conservation found that
fewer than a dozen professionals are
dedicated to fisheries conservation issues
in the U.S. nonprofit community. (The
Foundation now has a quarter of these
experts. ) Again, parmering has made
this venture possible — and successful,
on Idaho's South Fork of the Snake
River. There, the Foundation, The
Nature Conservancy, dedicated citizens
of the South Fork Coalition, many
individuals, and such corporate allies as
The Orvis Company are well on their
way to securing a 25-mile reach of the
60-mile river.

All told, the National Fish and
Wildlife Foundation can put together the
best parmerships for the best conserva-
tion results. In forging these parmer-
ships, we aaively invest in the restora-
tion of the nation's fish and wildlife.
Ultimately, these are also wise invest-
ments in the conservafion of all species,
especially our own.



t>»



Investing en Neotropicai Migrants



A Partnership of the Americas



EACH SPRING, the United States
and Canada are literally
invaded by more than 350
species of migratory birds that
have wintered in Mexico, Central
America, South America, and the West
Indies. Many of these species, called
Neotropical migrants, are among
birdwatchers' favorites: hawks, swal-


1 2 3 4 5 7 9 10 11 12 13 14

Online LibraryUnknownNational Fish and Wildlife Foundation reauthorization : hearing before the Subcommittee on Environment and Natural Resources of the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, House of Representatives, One Hundred Third Congress, first session, on reauthorizing the National Fish and Wildlife Foundat → online text (page 7 of 14)