Cover

CHAPTER 1I: APPROACH AND METHODS 27

Congress has been that it meets unfunded wildlife conservation needs. As such, state wildlife

agencies have been cautioned against using these funds to supplement traditional management

programs such as endangered and threatened species recovery, sport fish management or game

management. The CWCS Technical Committee chose to follow an evaluation method that several

states are using which incorporates a consideration of alternative funding availability as an

evaluation criterion. Incorporating this criterion does not eliminate endangered, threatened, game

and sport fish species from the list of species of greatest conservation need; however, it does lower

their ranking relative to other species. A sport fish, game mammal or game bird species which is

eligible for funding under the existing Dingell Johnson (DJ)/Wallop-Breaux (WB) or Pittman-

Robertson (PR) federal aid programs or a federally listed or candidate species (Endangered Species

Act or ESA) receives fewer points because there is an existing funding avenue to meet their needs.

Game and sport fish species receive one (1) point. (Note that there are approximately 100 species

sharing nearly $600 million annually nationwide). Federally endangered or threatened species

receive two (2) points This is one point higher because there are more species (about 500)

competing for fewer dollars (less than $200 million) nationwide.

3 points - Species not targeted for management funding under ESA, P-R or D-J Programs

2 points - Species is listed as federally endangered or threatened and is eligible for management

funding under the ESA.

1 point - Species is eligible for management funding as a sport fish, game bird or game mammal

C) Percent of Population Size or Geographic Range within Mississippi 1 – 4 points

This criterion evaluates how important the state of Mississippi is to the conservation of the species.

A species receives a higher score if it is found only in Mississippi (endemic) and/or a few

surrounding states and a lower score if Mississippi is on the periphery of its range. This takes into

consideration the national intent to place funding where it can be most effective — usually within

the heart of a specie’s geographic range. Because population size is unknown for most species, the

geographic range can be used as a surrogate for population size.

4 points - Species endemic to Mississippi

3 points - Mississippi encompasses >25% of the species' range

2 points - Mississippi encompasses 5-25% of the species’ range

1 point - Mississippi encompasses < 5% of the species’ range

D) Trend in Population Size 1 – 3 points

For this criterion, population size refers to the total theoretical number of individuals of the species
that reside in or migrate through the state. Scientists, through the survey included in Appendix III,
were asked to subjectively evaluate whether the populations numbers for each species are
increasing, stable, or declining. These evaluations were based on the knowledge of the scientists