National Fish and Wildlife Foundation

1. National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Chesapeake Business Plan Progress Report

2. Chesapeake Bay Stewardship Fund • Who We Are • Chartered by Congress in 1984 • 30 member Board appointed by Secretary of the Interior • Includes FWS Director & NOAA Administrator • What We Do • Sustain, restore, enhance the nation’s natural heritage • Bring collaboration among federal agencies & private funders • Create common ground among diverse interests • How We Do It • Leverage private money with public funding – average 3:1 • On-the-ground conservation projects through grant making

3. How We Do It $ $ Non-Federal Partners Federal Government • Corporations • Foundations • Private Donors • States • NGOs • Mitigation & Settlements • Appropriations • Cooperative Agreements Convener of focused, leveraged funding & leadership for priority wildlife & habitat conservation through grant making Species Places Issues

4. NFWF Regional Contacts

5. Our Results Overview of NFWF Funds Invested Trend NFWF Grant Leverage FY 1984-2011

6. Current Federal Partners

7. Corporate and Foundation Partners

8. Chesapeake Bay Stewardship Fund • Investments in the Chesapeake • Since 1998 and in partnership with US EPA and others, NFWF has invested more than $60M in cost-effective strategies for restoring the Chesapeake Bay. • Conservation Outcomes include: • Restored 122,000 acres of habitat • Established 132 acres of oyster reefs • Conserved 144,000 acres of forest and farmland • Reduced 6.4M lbs of N and 1.8M lbs of P • Drove innovation and community involvement

9. Chesapeake Bay Stewardship Fund:Leveraged Fund with Multiple Partners Grant Funding Available: 2000-2011

10. Strategy to date: • Distributed investments • Focused heavily on water quality • About 35% to NGOs, 25% to universities, 20% to state governments and 20% to local governments

11. High Conservation Impact: Strengthening our Investments in the Chesapeake Bay • Business Plan Strategy Seeks to: • Build on Prior Successes • Accomplish WQ, Habitat and Species Goals Simultaneously • Support Latest Bay Strategy • Establish a Species Focus and Set Conservation Goals • Target Investments and Practices • Drive Innovation and Policy NFWF INVESTMENTS Recover Species Improve Water Quality Restore Habitat

12. Chesapeake Bay Business Plan Strategies • Focus on High Priority Targeted Watersheds. • Using a science-based approach/feasibility screen, identified watersheds where investments result in wq, habitat and species improvements • Tackle Cross-Cutting Issues. • Building on prior investments, focus funds on innovation and technology that tackle issues that matter across the watershed – manure management, stormwater, local government finance. • Accelerate the Pace and Drive Down Costs. Support new restoration methods, leverage cost-share programs, advance eco-system markets and enhance technical assistance and capacity. • Expand Information and Technology Transfer. • Ensure that information and technology is shared across key stakeholder groups to encourage adoption of best practices.

13. Business Planning Process Science- Based Analysis Watershed Rankings Draft Goals, Indicators & Budget Feasibility Filter Stakeholder Involvement Operationalize the Plan Sub-watershed analysis: physical, and biological data, development trends, species specific information Mapped data to identify areas of intersection: water quality, habitat restoration and species resources Analyze capacity, track record, existing strategies, and opportunities to leverage resources Technical Fora with scientists and policy makers, GIT team meetings, discussions with stakeholders Examine CBP goals, establish funding expectations incorporate NFWF conservation objectives and set targets Work with federal, state and local gov’ts, non-profits and landowners to develop investment strategies in targeted watersheds, work on 2013 RFP, build partnerships

14. Business Plan Analysis: Maximizing Investments for Water Quality, Habitat Restoration, and Species Recovery

15. Base Maps Stream Health Source: U.S. EPA Stream Health Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor No Data We care most about streams that are “Poor” to “Good”, eliminating “Excellent” and “Very Poor”

16. Base Maps Vulnerability to Development Pressure Source: USGS Development Pressure Very Low Low Moderate High For agriculture and restoration, we want to make investments where the land use is not likely to change soon.

17. Base Maps Priority Areas for Nitrogen & Phosphorus Source: U.S. EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office

18. Establishing Our Criteria Where do these criteria intersect? Low Vulnerability to Development Pressure Priority Areas for Nitrogen & Phosphorus Moderate Stream Health

19. Establishing Our Criteria Moderate Stream Health AND Low Vulnerability to Development AND Priority Areas for N & P = Potential Areas for Stream Restoration and Pollution Reduction

20. Stream Restoration: A Focus on Eastern Brook Trout

21. Eastern Brook Trout Eastern Brook Trout Population Status Source: Eastern Brook Trout Joint Venture Population Status Present: Intact Present: Qualitative Present: Reduced Present: Greatly Reduced Extirpated or Absent Unknown or Never Occurred Let’s also remove “Present: Intact” since protection is not the main goal of these funds.

22. Eastern Brook Trout Where do these areas intersect? Opportunities for Eastern Brook Trout Conservation and Habitat Enhancement Potential Areas for Stream Restoration and Pollution Reduction

23. Eastern Brook Trout Potential Priority Areas Priority Investment Areas for Eastern Brook Trout Habitat Restoration with Significant Pollution Reduction Benefits to the Bay

24. Marine and Coastal: Focus on Oysters and River Herring

25. Oyster Reef Potential Priority Areas Maryland Oyster Restoration Priorities as Initial Focus Source: MD DNR

26. Oyster Reef Restoration Virginia Oyster Restoration Priorities (projected) Source: NOAA CBPO

27. River Herring

28. River Herring Priority Watersheds for River Herring Conservation Source: USDA-NRCS Priority Watersheds

29. River Herring Where do these areas intersect? Potential Areas for Stream Restoration and Pollution Reduction Priority Watersheds for River Herring Conservation

30. River Herring Potential Priority Areas Priority Investment Areas for River Herring Habitat Restoration with Pollution Reduction Benefits

31. Priority Areas for Business Plan Implementation Priority Investment Areas for Oyster Reef Restoration Priority Investment Areas for Eastern Brook Trout Habitat Restoration Priority Investment Areas for River Herring Habitat Restoration

32. Chesapeake Bay Stewardship Fund Targeted Watersheds Eastern Brook Trout Habitat River Herring Habitat Unadilla Headwaters Both EBT and RH Habitat Oyster Priority Areas Tioughnioga Headwaters Chemung Headwaters Middle Susquehanna Watersheds West Branch Susquehanna River Watersheds Juniata River Watersheds Lower Susquehanna and Conestoga River Watersheds Conodoguinet Creek Headwaters Upper Potomac River Watersheds Upper Eastern Shore Shenandoah Valley Middle Eastern Shore Lower Eastern Shore Virginia’s Upper Neck Lower James River Rappahannock and Rapidan Headwaters

34. Chesapeake Bay Stewardship Fund: Development of an Expanded Brook Trout Restoration Strategy & Business Plan • Expand EBT Business Plan Goals • Increase the number of sub-watersheds classified as healthy for EBT populations by improving 12 subwatersheds by 2025 or 20% of the overall Chesapeake Bay Program goal. • Establish self-sustaining brook trout populations in 15 known extirpated subwatersheds by 2018.

36. Restoring Native Brook Trout • Restoring Water Quality and Brook Trout In Pennsylvania • Partnership of TNC, CBF, TU • Leveraging NRCS Cost-Share Programs • Focusing on Specific Brook Trout Subwatersheds • Restoring Habitat • Restore 6 miles of riparian forests • Restore 4 to 12 acres of early successional forest • Restore/enhanc 12 to 18 acres of wetlands • Improving Water Quality • Reduce 3,200 pds of N • Reduce 1,200 pds of P

37. Oyster Reef Restoration Draft Goal Accelerate Oyster Restoration Goal Restore native oyster populations in five (5) sub-watersheds in the Chesapeake Bay by 2025 or 25% of the overall Chesapeake Bay Program oyster goal. Restore 150 to 175 acres of oyster reefs.

38. Bringing Back Chesapeake Oysters • Accelerating the Pace of Oyster Restoration • Partnership of ORP, MD DNR, ACOE, NOAA • Implementing Targeted Restoration in Harris Creek • Supporting Oyster Blue Print for River • Focus of Fisheries GIT and State and Federal Agencies • Project will help to restore 10-12 Acres of oyster habitat • Plant 40-50 million oyster spat on shell • Evaluate the value of oyster reefs as an effective BMP

39. River Herring Restoration Goal Development River Herring Focus Restore historical river herring migratory routes by opening 200 additional stream miles by 2025 Establish quantitative river herring run counts in targeted rivers Subwatersheds in the Upper Bay and Lower Susquehanna where EBT overlap in distribution with current or historical runs of river herring.

40. Restoring Historic Fish Migratory Routes • Partnership of American Rivers, MD DNR, NOAA Restoration Center and the Town of Centerville • Removing Centreville Dam and Restoring Access to 13 miles of habitat for River Herring • Priority of the CBP Fish Passage Workgroup • Improving functionality of upstream habitat and improving water quality through a variety of upstream enhancements • Part of larger Corsica River Watershed Project

41. Cross-Cutting Issues, Systemic Challenges The Business Plan will also: 1. Support Blue Crab fisheries management to achieve target abundance goal. 2. Support Policy and Innovation Solutions, including manure to energy technologies, stormwater solutions, and local government finance 3. Support efforts to strengthen delivery of technical assistance to landowners and build capacity

42. Accelerating Pace, Driving Down Costs • Improving Buffer Performance in Lower Susquehanna • Ensuring consistent and regular buffer maintenance • Farmers collectively contract with private landscapers to perform maintenance • Increasing Enrollment (and re-enrollment) in CREP • Addressing imbalance in sign up among • Farm Bill programs • Using grant funds to pick up conservation • that EQIP leaves on the table, but requires • CREP sign up in exchange for assistance • Reducing Costs of Forest Buffer Restoration • Demonstrating cost-effectiveness of alternatives to armies of volunteers or contractors planting seedlings (natural revegetation, seeding, live stakes, etc.)

43. TacklingSystemic Challenges • Separating the N and P in Manure from Small Dairies • Demonstrating transportable, farm-to-farm separation technologies that make it possible for farmers to put the N where they want it, and move the P to places that need it • Testing two technologies, conducting a feasibility study for community-wide deployment in Lancaster • Engaging Private Sector to Provide Up Front Capital for High Cost Stormwater Retrofits • Borrow “power purchase agreement” model from renewable energy sector – investors install retrofits and sell credits back to landowner who then receives benefit of reduced SW utility fee

44. Next Steps • Operationalize Plans • Contracting with Kristen Saacke-Blunk (formerly PSU Extension) and Jeff Horan (MD DNR/FWS) to advance step-down approach • Define investment strategies for subwatersheds w/ federal, state and local gov’ts, funding partners and non-profits • Expand Technical and Funding Partnerships • Participate on GIT Teams and MD Oyster Advisory Board • Refine Chesapeake Stewardship Fund RFP for FY13