FWS Fish & Aquatic Resources Strategic Vision & Needs Assessment Project Update

1. FWS Fish & Aquatic Resources StrategicVision & Needs Assessment Project Update

2. What has the FWS Asked the SFBPC to Undertake? • Assistance of SFBPC requested by FWS Director in renewing the strategic vision for fish and aquatic resources within the FWS.

3. Why is the Project Needed? • Current Strategic Plan for Fisheries Program (2004-2008) needs revision and updating. • Stakeholders & Partners expressed concern over draft Strategic Plan for 2009-2013 and need to re-examine priorities. • Current plan & vision do not reflect some new conservation challenges Why has the FWS Asked the SFBPC to Assist? • Council’s ability to engage partners, stakeholders and experts is integral to FWS ability to successfully address the nation’s aquatic resource challenges. • Due to previous work of the SFBPC

4. Long of History of Involvement in FWS Fisheries Program. Forms Foundation of Current Strategic Vision Effort.

5. SFBPC: Scope & objective The Council will advise the Secretary of the Interior and the Director of the Service about aquatic conservation endeavors that benefit recreational fishery resources and recreational boating and that encourage partnerships among industry, the public, and government.

6. 2002. A Partnership Agenda for Fisheries Conservation. Recommendations addressed accountability, stakeholder involvement, habitat, native species conservation, mitigation and many other topics. Report called for development of a National Aquatic Habitat Plan.

7. 2002. Conserving America’s Fisheries, Fisheries Program Vision for the Future developed by FWS. Partners provided input on critical needs for aquatic resources and consensus on the most appropriate role for the Fisheries Program through SFBPC. 2006. Fisheries Program’s continuing strategic planning process to define and measure success results in National Fisheries Program Strategic Plan, FY 2004-2008.

8. 2005. SFBPC completes an independent evaluation of the FWS Fisheries Program, as required by the OMB Performance Assessment Rating Tool (PART) process 2010. SFBPC completes second programmatic evaluation of FWS Fisheries Program for FY 2005-2009.

9. FWS Fish & Aquatic Resources Strategic Vision & Needs Assessment

10. Strategic Vision & Needs Assessment Project – Fish & Aquatic Resource Conservation across the FWS • Assistance of SFBPC requested by FWS Director in renewing the strategic vision for fish and aquatic resources within the FWS. • Convene a diverse group of stakeholders to assist in this strategic planning effort. • Council’s ability to engage partners, stakeholders and experts is integral to FWS ability to successfully address the nation’s aquatic resource challenges.

11. Basis for the Effort • Grounded on previous SFBPC efforts, e.g. Hatchery Report, Partnership Agenda and Programmatic Assessments. • Builds on 2004-2008 FWS Strategic Plan and 2012 issue white papers. • Not “starting from scratch!”

12. Revised Project Scope • Not focused solely on the “Fisheries Program”, but on the fish & aquatic resource conservation activities of FWS. • Needs Assessment: What are critical fish & aquatic resource conservation priorities. Are they currently being addressed within FWS? If not, what is missing? • Determine what other FWS programs conduct “fish & aquatic resource conservation” activities. • Define “fish & aquatic resources” from the perspective of the SFBPC & the broader community? • Throughout the process the SFBPC will assure that stakeholders & partners have continuing opportunity to review all work products prior to final Council consideration.

13. Process • Phase I: Revise Strategic Vision & Needs Assessment • Steering Committee meeting with SFBPC, June 6-7, DC • Compile Fisheries Community Contact List • Phase II: Ensure buy-in and ownership by partners (July – December 2012) • Ongoing discussions among Steering Committee • Stakeholder Input Sessions (at meetings)  We Are Here! • Stakeholder Input Webinars (partners, FWS field staff) • One-on-One Briefings (e.g., NFHAP Board, July/Oct) • Web site & online comment forms • Phase III: Develop final Strategic Vision & Needs Assessment • Present final products to SFBPC • Transmit to FWS Director by Spring 2013

14. Leadership & Input • FWS Team – 9 ARDs or designees, representatives from other FWS programs. • SFBPC Steering Committee – FWS+SFBPC Fisheries Issues Committee +broad community representation. • External Stakeholders & Partners • Join the discussion at http://fishplan.org

15. Fisheries Strategic Plan Steering Committee - FWS Jared Brandwein, National Wildlife Refuge System Michael Carrier, R1 ARD, Portland, OR Robert Clarke, R8 Fish. Ops. Super., Sacramento, CA Kate Freund, Office of the Science Advisor Doug Frugé, R6 Fisheries Program Supervisor, Denver, CO Jaime Geiger, R5 ARD, Hadley, MA Linda Kelsey, R4 ARD, Atlanta, GA Steve Klosiewski, R7 DARD, Anchorage, AK Mike Oetker, R2 ARD, Albuquerque, NM Rick Sayers, HCPs, Recovery & State Grants Todd Turner, R3 ARD, Bloomington, MN Jeff Underwood, Assistant Director, Fisheries (Acting) Mike Weimer, Chief, Fisheries (Acting)

16. Fisheries Strategic Plan Steering Committee - External States: Mike Armstrong, Arkansas Game and Fish Commission Tom Champeau, Florida F&W Conservation Commission Joe Larscheid, Iowa DNR Steve Perry, New Hampshire F&G Dept Larry Riley, Arizona G&F Dept Tribes: Michael Grayum, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission Jim Zorn, Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission Other Feds: Nathaniel Gillespie, USDA Forest Service Christine Moffitt, University of Idaho Coop (USGS) NGOs: Noreen Clough, BASS Fred Harris, American Fisheries Society Gary Kania, Congressional Sportmen’s Foundation Scott Kovarovics, Izaak Walton League Mike Nussman, American Sportfishing Association Tom Sadler, Middle River Group Mark Smith, The Nature Conservancy Chris Williams, American Rivers Krystyna Wolniakowski, National Fish & Wildlife Foundation Scott Yates, Trout Unlimited Academia: Elise Irwin, Auburn University Jesse Trushenski, Southern Illinois University

17. Strategic Vision & Needs AssessmentStructure Drafts available online as developed: • Preamble/Setting the Stage - Case for Action, Situation Analysis • A Mandate for Fisheries Conservation • Introduction • Strategic Approach • Mission-Vision-Challenge-Values • Goals • Needs Assessment • Objectives • Strategies • Activities • Outcomes

18. Part I Draft (10-5-2012) Strategic Vision – How to Get There Goals • Protect, restore, and maintain resilient, functional aquatic habitats. • Conserve and recover fish and other aquatic species at self-sustaining levels. • Provide for recreational fishing and other public uses and enjoyment of aquatic resources. • Meet Tribal and other trust responsibilities. In pursuing these goals, the Service will • Use and provide partners with the best available science. • Maintain mission-critical assets, and • Be an effective and accountable partner.

19. Tell your colleagues to join us at the2012 Stakeholder Input & Briefings • Oct 8 – SEAFWA, Hot Springs, AR • Oct 10 – Sportfishing Summit (ASA), Hilton Head, SC • Oct 16-17 – NFHAP Board, Big Cedar, MO • Nov 7-8 – SFBPC, Corpus Christi, TX • Dec 10 – Midwest Fish & Wildlife Conference • Jan, 2013 – Western Association F&W meeting • Webinars – FWS field staff & fisheries community • Completion – Spring 2013

20. For more information: Sign up for E-news to 400+ fisheries contacts Visit the web site for background, meetings, online comment form (http://fishplan.org/)

21. Contact Us!Project Coordination & Staffing: • Doug Hobbs, Coordinator for the SFBPC U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arlington, VA doug_hobbs@fws.gov, (703) 358-2336 • Whitney Tilt, Project Leader Conservation BenchMarks, Bozeman, MT whitneytilt@gmail.com, (406) 223-8972 • Dave Case, Project Leader DJ Case & Associates, Mishawaka, IN dave@djcase.com, (574) 258-0100

22. FWS Fish & Aquatic ResourcesReview of Part 1: Preamble – Mandate – Strategic Approach

23. Preamble/Setting the Stage • Case for Action • Economic value of aquatic resources -- Any additional sources of data? • Habitat alteration • Invasive species • Situation Analysis • Globalization of trade and transportation • Climate change • Economic pressure • Landscape-scale ecosystem-based management • Public perception of fisheries research and management • Electronic communication and social networking

24. Mandate & Introduction Mandate for Fisheries Conservation • Principle Legislation and Examples of Other Authorities • Regionally Specific Authorities • Administration & Congressional appropriations • Effect on setting priorities Introduction • Description of format of plan, its layout and methodology

25. Strategic Approach Summary of the FWS Fish and Aquatic Resources program comprised of four elements: • Mission- purpose and primary objectives, consistent with the overall mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. • Vision- desired future conditions. • Challenge - broad situational analysis of the challenges in which the FWS will operate to achieve its strategic objectives. • Values– Elements of the mission statement outlining how the FWS will conduct itself, with whom, and for what benefit.

26. Part I Draft (10-5-2012)Agency Mission:The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is working with others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people.

27. Part I Draft (10-5-2012)Vision: We act in partnership to conserve fish and aquatic resources for the continuing benefit and enjoyment of the American People. By realizing this vision the Service assists in creating sustainable populations of fish and other aquatic species and resilient habitats providing benefit to the nation’s quality of life and economy.

28. Part I Draft (10-5-2012)Our Challenge: We accept the challenges of conserving the Nation’s fish and its aquatic resources in the face of declining and diminished aquatic habitats, expanding human population centers, competition for human and financial resources, and the uncertainties of managing these resources in light of climate change, invasive species, and other uncertainties. We recognize the need to respond decisively and effectively to emerging issues. Economic limitations and the demand for a more effective government require strong leadership in the FWS and federal administration to ensure that financial and staff resources are optimized through responsive prioritization of programs and activities.

29. Part I Draft (10-5-2012)Values • We • Act in Partnership • To conserve fish and aquatic resources • For the continuing benefit and enjoyment • Of the American People.

30. Values (1 of 5) Part I Draft (10-5-2012) • We –As the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, we serve the American people as public servants. We work with Federal, State and International natural resource managers, tribes, industry, private landowners and others, as stewards of the nation’s fish and aquatic resources. We respect the jurisdiction, authority, beliefs and opinions of our state, tribal and international stakeholders and partners. We recognize a diverse, well trained and equipped workforce is our most valuable resource.

31. Values (2 of 5) Part I Draft (10-5-2012) • Act in Partnership– The task of aquatic resource conservation is too big to accomplish alone. Recognizing the Service, outside of the National Wildlife Refuge System lands, typically does not own the land and waters on which fish and other aquatic resources depend, we collaborate with and support the aquatic conservation actions of our state, tribal and international stakeholders and partners. We acknowledge the need to engage our stakeholders and partners openly and often. At the national and international level, we provide critical support for interjurisdictional coordination and cooperation.

32. Values (3 of 5) Part I Draft (10-5-2012) • To Conserve Fish and other Aquatic Resources – Using the best science and knowledge available, we work to conserve aquatic resources, and their associated habitats, in cooperation with federal, state, tribal and other natural resource managers. We strive to maintain or restore resilience in aquatic systems. We will lead in such areas as technical assistance, science and technology, fish culture, fishing and other recreational opportunities, refugia for threatened and endangered species, prevention and control of aquatic invasive species, the Aquatic Animal Drug Approval Partnership, and fish health. We support conservation at the landscape scale through the National Fish Habitat Partnerships, National Fish Passage Program, and other cooperative efforts. The Service must assess the impacts of hatchery reform, the increasing importance of imperiled species restoration, as well as a number of other emerging issues in hatchery operations and the uses of hatchery-origin aquatic animals in support of a balanced approach to mitigation and conservation. We provide vital funding to assist the cooperative work of our stakeholders and partners. We will use the principles of adaptive management to continually improve and refine the conservation of the public’s fish and aquatic resources.

33. Values (4 of 5) Part I Draft (10-5-2012) • For the Continuing Benefit and Enjoyment – Our mission has a direct impact on the nation’s quality of life. Benefits arising from our efforts include ecosystem services and biological diversity, jobs and revenue generation, commercial and subsistence fisheries, cultural and historical resources, treaty and trust responsibilities to tribes. We provide access to and support for recreational fishing and other sustainable use and enjoyment of fish and aquatic resources. Our activities help connect people to nature and the outdoors, as well as with the importance of a healthy and productive natural environment. Just as importantly, our cooperative actions create opportunities for the future through improved management techniques, economic value, outdoor experiences and other activities.

34. Values (5 of 5) Part I Draft (10-5-2012) • Of the American People – We are public servants. We owe the American People hard work, integrity, fairness and an objective, science-based voice in the conservation of their natural resources for present and future generations.