Bill Overview
Title: Recovering America’s Wildlife Act of 2021
Description: This bill provides funding for the conservation or restoration of wildlife and plant species of greatest conservation need, including endangered or threatened species, and establishes related requirements. TITLE I--WILDLIFE CONSERVATION AND RESTORATION (Sec. 101) This title establishes and funds a subaccount of the Wildlife Conservation and Restoration Account, which was established under the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act. The subaccount must be used to support efforts of states, territories, or the District of Columbia to recover and manage wildlife and plant species of greatest conservation need. The Department of the Interior must use a portion of the funding from the subaccount for grants to state fish and wildlife departments, the District of Columbia fish and wildlife department, fish and wildlife departments of territories, nonprofit organizations, or regional associations of fish and wildlife departments. The grants must be used for innovative recovery efforts for species of greatest conservation need, species listed as endangered or threatened species, or the habitats of such species. Funding for the subaccount must supplement existing funds available to the states from funds distributed under the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act and the Wildlife Conservation and Restoration Account. Recipients of the funding from the subaccount must match federal funds as specified by the title. The Government Accountability Office must study and report on the progress of states, territories, the District of Columbia, and Indian tribes in protecting species of greatest conservation need, endangered species, and threatened species. TITLE II--TRIBAL WILDLIFE CONSERVATION AND RESTORATION (Sec. 201) This title establishes and funds a Tribal Wildlife Conservation and Restoration Account to support Indian tribes' efforts to recover and manage wildlife and plant species of greatest conservation need. Indian tribes are not required to provide matching funds. TITLE III--ENDANGERED SPECIES RECOVERY AND HABITAT CONSERVATION LEGACY FUND (Sec. 301) This title establishes and funds through FY2026 the Endangered Species Recovery and Habitat Conservation Legacy Fund. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service must use the fund to (1) implement an Endangered Species Recovery Grant Program; (2) address its interagency consultation responsibilities under the Endangered Species Act of 1973; (3) work with nonfederal entities to conserve wildlife habitat and at-risk species, threatened or endangered species, or species proposed to be listed as threatened or endangered species; or (4) address the development and permitting of voluntary conservation agreements under such act. Amounts made available under the fund must supplement other federal amounts made available to carry out such activities. The President must annually submit to Congress, together with the annual budget of the United States, a list of threatened species and endangered species for which recovery plans will be developed or implemented with amounts from the Endangered Species Recovery and Habitat Conservation Legacy Fund. TITLE IV--REPORT (Sec. 401) Interior must also report on information concerning the amount of grants and contracts that were awarded or are allocated under this bill to Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic-serving educational institutions, tribally controlled colleges and universities, minority-serving educational institutions, minority-owned business enterprises, women-owned business enterprises, and community-based organizations that are principally administered by, operated by, or serving minority communities.
Sponsors: Rep. Dingell, Debbie [D-MI-12]
Target Audience
Population: Global nature enthusiasts and communities benefiting from biodiversity
Estimated Size: 330000000
- The bill focuses on wildlife and plant species, so it primarily impacts the biodiversity across the regions involved.
- Given it funds state, territory, and tribal conservation and restoration programs, local communities would experience ecological benefits.
- The implementation of conservation projects can create jobs and involve citizens, impacting those employed in ecology, conservation, environmental science, and related infrastructure projects.
- Recreational users such as hikers, birdwatchers, and hunters might be affected due to changes in wildlife populations and available environments.
Reasoning
- The policy will particularly impact local communities involved in or near conservation projects as it promotes biodiversity and employment through environmental projects.
- Native American communities will experience direct benefits via the Tribal Wildlife Conservation and Restoration Account.
- People employed in environmental sciences, conservation work, and related infrastructure will likely see job enhancements.
- Recreational users such as hikers, and birdwatchers may see changes in their activities due to better environments and potentially more wildlife.
Simulated Interviews
Wildlife Biologist (Montana)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is beneficial as it ensures the survival of species that are currently vulnerable.
- Funding will allow us to expand conservation efforts and create better management plans.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 3 |
Retired Teacher (Arizona)
Age: 66 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I enjoy watching the local wildlife, and I am excited about the positive changes this policy can bring.
- This is good for our community and future generations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 2 |
Environmental Engineer (Oregon)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The funding will help execute necessary projects that we’ve had on hold due to budget constraints.
- It gives a greater purpose and motivates me in my career.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Software Developer (New York)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I spend a lot of my free time in nature and am happy about any efforts to conserve it.
- I think this policy might indirectly affect people in urban areas like me by enhancing nearby green spaces.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Tribal Leader (Wisconsin)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is crucial for the sustainability of our environment and culture.
- Access to these funds means we can protect sacred sites and native species.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 2 |
Recreational Hunter (Florida)
Age: 47 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Healthy wildlife populations are important for ethical hunting practices.
- This policy is a positive step for sustainable wildlife management.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Rancher (Texas)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Such initiatives can potentially encroach on my land, but I see the necessity of conservation.
- If managed well, this could benefit the local ecosystem and improve land value.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 1 |
Undergraduate Student (California)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Access to these programs provides hands-on experience and funding for our research.
- It aligns perfectly with my career goals in conservation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Fisherwoman (Alaska)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Conservation helps maintain fish populations vital to my livelihood.
- It's crucial to sustain our resources long-term, though it may restrict immediate fishing activities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 1 |
Retired Farmer (South Dakota)
Age: 70 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I’ve seen firsthand the impact of habitat loss.
- This policy ensures future generations will have a better relationship with the land.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 1 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $1000000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $1200000000)
Year 2: $1050000000 (Low: $850000000, High: $1250000000)
Year 3: $1100000000 (Low: $900000000, High: $1300000000)
Year 5: $1200000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $1400000000)
Year 10: $1350000000 (Low: $1150000000, High: $1500000000)
Year 100: $1500000000 (Low: $1350000000, High: $1650000000)
Key Considerations
- The implementation of effective management and restoration strategies is crucial to achieving intended biodiversity outcomes.
- Coordination with tribal, state, and local authorities will be essential for effective allocation and use of funds.
- Economic benefits are maximized when conservation projects also target eco-tourism and related sectors.