Whit Fosburgh

April 16, 2021

What Hunters and Anglers Need to Know About “30 by 30”

Sportsmen and sportswomen must play a role in the effort to conserve 30 percent of the world’s lands and waters by 2030—here’s what 30 by 30 is (and what it isn’t) 

Almost immediately after the inauguration, the Biden Administration announced its support for a global conservation initiative known as 30 by 30—the goal of conserving 30 percent of the planet’s lands and waters by 2030.

News about the initiative spread fast across several media outlets and has left many, including sportsmen and sportswomen, wondering what this effort is and where it is headed. Words like “protection” or “designation,” often strike fear among landowners, politicians, industry executives, and even some conservation groups. Especially when used with broad strokes that allow people’s imaginations to wander and reach sweeping conclusions. Predictably, many immediately criticized the 30 by 30 initiative and expressed fear of classic top-down federal restrictions.

This doesn’t have to be the case. The administration’s directives specifically call for “conserving” 30 percent of our lands and water, not “protecting” them. What’s the difference? As Theodore Roosevelt and others have noted for more than a century, humans are a part of the land and can wisely use that land, conserving it and nature for future generations. Moreover, the Biden order calls for a deliberative stakeholder process to determine what will be considered “conserved.” This is good news for our community as it provides us with an opportunity to help shape 30 by 30.

Based on the administration’s messaging and direction thus far, it appears that more than just wilderness, national monuments, and national parks would be part of what we consider conserved habitats. It will also include working lands that are managed for long-term ecological sustainability. Because sportsmen and women depend on functional habitats for our pastimes, we have an historic opportunity to turn this initiative into a real win-win for fish and wildlife, landowners, our changing climate, outdoor recreation, and our economy.

 

 

30 by 30 is a laudable goal that could benefit our community greatly if implemented successfully. Here’s what you as hunters and anglers need to know to push for conservation goals as part of this initiative.

30 by 30 is supported by scientists.

The Biden Administration didn’t come up with 30 by 30. Scientists have championed the initiative for years to conserve biodiversity and mitigate the impacts of climate change. The hunting and fishing community has been on the front lines of conservation for more than a century and we know that science-based conservation for game species also benefits ecosystem health, biodiversity, and local communities. Efforts to mitigate climate change through proven natural solutions will also benefit biodiversity, habitat, and the hunting and fishing community while contributing to 30 by 30 goals.

Conservation must be clearly defined.

This is critical to understanding what, where, and how lands managed specifically for conservation—under public and private ownership and beyond just permanently protected areas—are contributing to the broader goals of 30 by 30. Our community believes that contributions from long-term or permanent easements on private lands, Conservation Reserve Program enrollments, and other conservation measures can and should be rolled into the initiative.

If conserving biodiversity is also a goal, I would argue that well-managed national forests should be considered “conserved.” Prudent timber harvest can help reduce wildfire and provide critical habitat diversity.

We need to know where we stand in relation to the goal.

The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that 12 percent of the country’s lands are already permanently protected, and studies show about 26 percent of U.S. ocean waters, mostly in the Pacific, are currently protected. How to achieve the remaining 18 percent of land needs to be defined. While we don’t have an acreage total for lands that would be considered “conserved,” meeting the 30 by 30 target will require an additional area twice the size of Texas—that’s more than 440 million acres—within the next 10 years.

Hunters and anglers need a seat at the table.

As always, science-based conservation measures should be developed through a stakeholder-driven process that includes sportsmen and women, private landowners, states, tribes, industry, and others. If it is to succeed, this will be critical in defining the goals and definitions for habitats to include for 30 by 30.

Moreover, access, including hunting, fishing and general recreation, should be encouraged as long as it is well managed. Conservation requires public support, and we help achieve that by letting people enjoy conserved areas. The TRCP has joined with other hunting and fishing organizations to ensure our community has a seat at the table and that the initiative recognizes the important role of sportsmen and sportswomen in powering conservation in the U.S.

Community-driven conservation is key.

We will need our local communities, both urban and rural, to be fully invested in the broad conservation outcomes envisioned by the 30 by 30 initiative. With the challenges of a changing climate, fire, invasive species, and other stressors affecting our fish and wildlife habitat and natural systems in the U.S., conservation approaches are most durable and lasting when they are well-grounded in local communities and in building trust and common ground with local decision-makers. This is also an opportunity to ensure we are building toward conservation outcomes that create equitable access to nature, clean water, and recreation.

Freshwater needs to be included.

Connectivity is fundamental to improving biodiversity and should be of paramount importance when considering which lands, waters, and conservation actions will contribute to 30 by 30 goals. Freshwater connectivity, and the critical role freshwater plays within our landscape, is an important factor for the administration to consider as it develops next steps for 30 by 30.

30 by 30 should not ignore degraded habitats that need restoration.

There are millions of acres of degraded habitats across the country warranting restoration. Restored habitats will ultimately contribute to the goals of 30 by 30 over time and investments need to be made to combat invasive plants and restore ecological function to damaged ecosystems. Programs supported by sportsmen and women that have provided millions of dollars of investment into habitat restoration will need to be included in the solution set for this initiative. This includes the North American Wetlands Conservation Act, the National Fish Habitat Partnership, the Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program, and the Environmental Quality Incentive Program.

It is incumbent on our community to work with Congress, states, local governments, and all stakeholders on defining conservation that works to achieve long-term goals. Any legislation must also tie together 30 by 30 goals with ecosystem health, robust fish and wildlife populations, climate benefits, and economic stimulus—particularly through investments in job-creating conservation projects and better access to outdoor recreation.

And, importantly, implementation of the 30 by 30 initiative must not divert funding from ongoing conservation, restoration, or natural resource management activities.

 

Learn More

The TRCP, along with 50 other groups, has signed onto this statement from the hunting and fishing community, which outlines the 30 by 30 policies that support existing habitat management approaches and recognize hunting and fishing as important and sustainable activities. Learn more at huntfish3030.com.

Images courtesy of the U.S. Forest Service

5 Responses to “What Hunters and Anglers Need to Know About “30 by 30””

  1. Curt Nizzoli

    While I support a “30 by 30” concept, this was proposed by Biden’s puppet-masters. So, I do expect a Agenda 21 type legislative effort that will be pushed by the UN environmental orgs, CBD, Sierra Club, WWF, and all the other “plaintiffs” we’ve seen with the wolf delistings. It will be an attorney’s dream scenario with the fore mentioned organizations reaping hundreds of millions in legal fees, just for filing a lawsuit and getting one tiny concession from the “plaintiff” which we all know is the American taxpayer.

    And, what happens if they can’t get to 30% without a 5% “donation” from private landowners? Since it’s the government and the UN that will be the drivers of this, I will remain extremely skeptical that the end result will benefit sportsmen and women. Or landowners.

    Now, if this were driven by the private landowners via TRCP, RMEF, MDF, WSF, TU, DU, NWTF, PF, SCI and other “real conservation groups”, I’d be onboard. But, being at the table with the same crooks and liars from the pro-wolf camp will spell disaster.

    • Christopher Reiger

      Former President Trump’s EO established only a council to review ways the US could participate in the global One Trillion Tree Initiative. The EO doesn’t require any trees to be planted. And, no, this new 30×30 EO doesn’t halt Trump’s tree council EO; they’re unrelated.

  2. I have done my share of lobbying at the state and national level, and the old adage still holds, if you arent at the table you may be whats for dinner. to not sit at this table and help shape this concept would be foolish at best and a possible disaster. as we try to recruit new sportsmen into the field, what we find is a shortage of suitable area for these new sportsmen to go forth. this concept has the potential of supplying some of that need and doing so much more good with biodiversity and water quality.

  3. John Sweet

    While I’m skeptical of the motives of many of 30 x 30’s proponents I believe that all pro-sportsmen conservation organizations need to be fully-engaged in this program. If we advocate diligently and effectively it will be a windfall for hunters and fishers at a key time in history. This is the type of program that we need in order to save the future of sports afield on an overpopulated planet. I’m glad that TRCP, RMEF, DU and others will be there.

Leave a Reply to Curt Nizzoli

Click here to cancel reply.

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Comments must be under 1000 characters.

Preserving Pennsylvania Streams: The Klondike Property

This video is the third in a series detailing conservation projects powered by Pennsylvania’s Keystone Recreation, Park & Conservation Fund that benefit hunters and anglers. Since 1993, the Keystone Fund has continued to provide state-level matching dollars for a variety of conservation projects, including land acquisition, river conservation, and trail work. This series is the result of a collaboration between the TRCP and Trout Unlimited where the goal is simply to celebrate conservation success stories that make us all proud to be able to hunt and fish in Pennsylvania. The videos highlight just a few of the projects powered by this critical source of conservation funding. For more information on the Keystone Fund, you can visit: https://keystonefund.org

 

 

If you want to see the downstream effects of conserving important headwaters, look no further than the former Klondike Property in Gouldsboro, Pa.—the origin of the Lehigh River, which is one of the largest tributaries to the Delaware. By preserving just 500 acres, including 200 acres of wetlands, conservationists have successfully protected the source of drinking water for 180,000 Pennsylvanians. These acres are also open to the public for hunting and fishing, which boosts the local outdoor recreation economy.

It’s a good lesson about what’s possible with dedicated conservation funding and many willing partners.

The Klondike Property was acquired in 2018 by Wildlands Conservancy and was transferred to the Pennsylvania Game Commission to expand State Game Lands 312, which was also gifted by Wildlands Conservancy and partners in 1991. The incredible opportunity to secure this area for future generations was made possible with $1 million from the Keystone Recreation, Park & Conservation Fund and matching contributions from local stakeholders, private donors, and sportsmen’s groups. This included Hokendauqua Trout Unlimited, three chapters of the National Wild Turkey Federation, the Northampton County Federation of Sportsmen, and the Lehigh Valley Chapter of the Ruffed Grouse Society.

A diverse partnership was key, but the match alone wouldn’t have covered the cost. “Without having the state funding it’s very difficult to do the projects that we do to make sure that nature is accessible to all,” says Chris Kocher, president of Wildlands Conservancy.

As locals Holly Sheisley and Nate Fronk share in our latest video, the Klondike acquisition provided the perfect opportunity for Holly to harvest her first goose—a milestone in their relationship and the start to a shared pursuit they will hopefully enjoy for years to come.

“I’ve been hunting for almost ten years now,” says Fronk, chair of the Pennsylvania Chapter of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers. “It’s so cool getting to share with Holly what means so much to me.” Sheisley agrees: “Being with your best friend, those stories that you share, there’s nothing like it.”

“Conserving [these lands] and making sure they’re open to the public is the best way to make sure we have hunting and fishing into the future,” says Fronk. Having dedicated state conservation funding like the Keystone Recreation, Park & Conservation Fund is making this possible across Pennsylvania.

Carl Erquiaga

April 9, 2021

Getting Up to Speed on the Ruby Mountains Protection Act

Why here, why now with this priority legislation?

Last month, Senator Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada reintroduced the Ruby Mountains Protection Act to Congress. In case you haven’t heard of this bill, your memory of the details is a little fuzzy, or you have questions about it, here’s a quick refresher on why the Rubies need sportsmen and sportswomen to speak up for their protection:

What are the basics?

Originally introduced to the United States Senate in February of 2019, the Ruby Mountains Protection Act would prohibit oil and gas leasing in the Ruby Mountains, one of the most important landscapes in Nevada for fish, wildlife, and sportsmen and sportswomen. If passed into law, the bill would not affect other multiple uses in the area, including mining, and it would help ensure that future generations are able to experience the tremendous hunting and fishing opportunities in the Rubies.

What makes the Rubies special?

The Rubies stretch for nearly 100 miles south of Secret Pass in Elko County, with ten peaks higher than 10,000 feet and considerable snowfall that feeds the Humboldt River and the marshes of the Ruby Lake National Wildlife Refuge. These rugged, glacier-carved mountains and their cold, clear streams provide a wide variety of fish and wildlife habitat, as well as an abundance of opportunity for hunters and anglers.

The Ruby Mountain mule deer herd is Nevada’s largest and travels along a 100-mile migration route that is the longest in the state. Conserving this corridor is crucial to the health and resiliency of the deer herd. Researchers have shown that energy infrastructure on migration corridors and winter range for mule deer has a direct, measurable impact on the health of a herd, with reduced reproductive rates, poorer animal condition, higher winter mortality, and fewer overall deer. In Wyoming, studies have demonstrated herd populations declining by as much as 36 percent during a period of energy development, and those areas saw a reduction in the number of tags issued to hunters.

Why is this necessary? And why now?

Skeptics say that the bill is unnecessary because the Rubies aren’t a particularly promising location for energy production. While it is true that the Forest Service has determined that there is low potential for oil and gas development, speculators have nonetheless filed for leases in the area on multiple occasions in recent years. While some of the lease requests were located in the rough, granite crags where there is little potential, more than 60,000 acres included on the second round of nominations were on the west edge of the Rubies from Harrison Pass to the southern forest boundary. This less rugged area is much more likely to attract exploration and development by speculators. What’s particularly concerning is that this is where the Ruby deer herd migration corridor is most concentrated and in the direct path of proposed leasing.

Aren’t the Rubies already protected?

While past applications to lease have been denied, there is no guarantee that will be the case next time. And energy developers have shown no signs of being deterred by the Forest Service’s determination: Only days after the agency denied authorization for leasing 54,000 acres in Nevada’s Ruby Mountains, energy developers submitted two new requests to open this prized landscape to oil and gas drilling. A private entity filed new Expressions of Interest (EOIs) to lease 88,000 acres for oil and gas development in the Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest. Many of the parcels would affect the same areas previously rejected for leasing. Land management agencies can change priorities and come up with different determinations depending on changes in administration, which is why a more durable solution through the legislative process is needed.

Isn’t this just a proposal to close off public lands?

Simply put, no. The bill would not affect any of the multiple uses, recreational or commercial, currently going on in the Rubies. Hunting, fishing, hiking, backpacking, motorized travel on currently open roads would be unaffected by this withdrawal. Grazing, mining, private land access, shooting, backcountry skiing and all other current uses would continue without being affected. This bill wouldn’t change the Ruby Mountains as they are used today—it would ensure they continue to offer all of these opportunities into the future.

Historically, 90 percent of lands managed by BLM have been available for oil and gas leasing, even in places with no or little potential for development. Energy leasing on lands with high potential and low impacts should be where efforts are concentrated. The Rubies are just the opposite: low potential for development with high impacts on wildlife, scenic values, and recreational opportunity.

In 2019, more than a million acres of land in Nevada were offered for lease, yet less than seven percent of that acreage even received a bid. Agencies are currently spending taxpayer dollars offering low potential parcels for sale that nobody wants to buy, and these precious resources could be better spent managing the lands and resources that we all own.

Who supports the bill?

The Ruby Mountains Protection Act has robust support from diverse stakeholders including elected officials at various levels, tribal governments, and different types of public land users.

Sportsmen and sportswomen have been among the most vocal in support of the bill. In 2019, fifteen hunting, fishing, and wildlife conservation organizations formed the Sportsmen for the Rubies, a coalition to raise awareness, both around the state and in Washington, D.C., of the potential threats posed by energy development in the area.

What can I do to help?

Congress needs to hear from us to get this law passed. Speak up at sportsmenfortherubies.com.

 

 

Photo: Loren Chipman via Flickr

Ed Arnett

April 8, 2021

What’s Behind the 80% Drop in Sage Grouse Populations

Here’s why these once abundant game birds are in even worse shape than we thought and what must come next in the effort to restore sagebrush habitat

Springtime in the West brings many familiar sounds to those spending time in the outdoors, and few can rival the peculiarity and excitement of hearing male sage grouse calling to potential mates as they dance on their breeding grounds. Known as leks, these literal stomping grounds are where biologists can reliably count birds with some degree of consistency to gauge the health of the species.

But fewer and fewer male sage grouse are showing up to leks, and that has scientists, managers, and sportsmen and women deeply concerned.

In fact, the U.S. Geological Survey recently released a grim report on sage grouse populations. Their analysis showed that there are 80 percent fewer males dancing on their leks across the Western landscape than in 1965, and half of that loss has occurred in just the last 17 years. The long-term trend averages out to be about 3 percent fewer birds at leks each year.

While some areas are showing recent increases in bird abundance, about 45 percent of remaining leks are predicted to disappear in the next 20 years and 78 percent could be gone in 56 years—unless conditions change.

I’ve explained in previous blogs that short-term and long-term factors can affect lek counts, which is why year-over-year gains shouldn’t necessarily be celebrated. (Read more about that here.) Strong precipitation for a single season or two may boost sage grouse numbers in a state or region, but the overall downward trend has actually continued and deepened for this iconic game bird.

 

 

In a separate announcement in early March, the USGS reported that only 55 percent of the historical extent of sagebrush habitat now remains. Here are five key reasons why:

Ten percent of sagebrush has been converted to cropland.

Studies demonstrate that tillage rates of only about a quarter of a given landscape around leks can cause male grouse to abandon them. Cropland conversion also fragments the landscape more broadly and reduces the suitability of the remaining smaller patches of sagebrush. Cultivated lands no longer in production can take decades to recover and may even be permanently degraded from prior use of herbicides.

Energy development and mining have affected millions of acres of sagebrush.

This includes activities related to oil and gas and renewables, such as wind and solar. Impacts from development are well documented and remove habitat outright or render some of the remaining habitat nearby unusable to sage grouse due to disturbance around the infrastructure.

More than 20 percent of sagebrush habitat in the Rocky Mountain region has been affected by oil and gas development and mining. We also know that millions of acres of priority sage grouse habitat were leased for oil and gas development during the last administration, and many impacts from existing development were never fully mitigated in recent years.

Conifers are creating imbalance on the landscape.

Across the West, juniper and pinyon pine trees—native species to these landscapes—have expanded dramatically since European settlement and this has consequences for sagebrush and wildlife. Conifer expansion changes the vegetation and can negatively alter wildlife use, water and nutrient cycles, carbon storage, and resistance to invasion from invasive plant species. Removing conifer trees in sagebrush stimulates the growth of forbs and bunchgrasses up to 20 times over. Unfortunately, while conifer removal has occurred across wide swaths of land in the West, the expansion continues to outpace removal, and we continue losing ground to this threat.

Climate change is accelerating threats to habitat.

Parts of the West are experiencing a 20-year megadrought, a clear sign that our changing climate is altering landscapes and making it more difficult to repair them once they are damaged. Warmer spring temperatures mean drier soil earlier in the season, and that leads to longer periods of hot and dry conditions during summer. In turn, these hotter and drier conditions leave plants with less resistance to wildfire.

These altered fire cycles have had enormous impacts on sage country, where fire season is now 134 percent longer. The enormity of these fires has also increased substantially over the past two decades, according to the USGS report. Since 2000, more that 20 percent of priority habitat management areas for sage grouse within the Great Basin alone have burned, in part due to climate conditions. And the next few decades are predicted to be even worse, further threatening the sagebrush ecosystem without serious investment and intervention.

Invasive cheatgrass is fueling more (and hotter) fires.

And then there’s cheatgrass—an insidious non-native annual grass that has expanded across the West and particularly in the arid Great Basin region. This invasive species contributed to altering the normal fire cycle, producing much larger and more intense and frequent wildfires that consume huge expanses of sagebrush. Left unchecked, invasive plants degrade plant communities, wildlife habitat, and migratory corridors and threaten wildlife survival. They also can cause significant negative economic impacts.

Worse yet, like expanding conifers and wildfires, current management programs are addressing less than 10 percent of cheatgrass infestations—far more acres are becoming infected than are being treated, and agencies will continue to struggle to keep pace without robust funding.

The truth is that no one factor is affecting the entire range of the greater sage grouse, but this holistic and long-term picture of loss in sage grouse country points to one sure thing: an immediate need to conserve remaining habitat AND provide greater investments in sagebrush restoration.

 

 

What Comes Next for Sage Grouse Conservation

There was some good news in the USGS reports: Scientists have developed some amazing new tools to help wildlife managers better detect when sage grouse populations may be in trouble. These “early warning systems” will hopefully improve the ability to address problems faster as conservation plans are being implemented.

The Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies has also been developing a broader sagebrush conservation strategy to help guide the collective efforts of local, state, tribal, and federal government agencies and nongovernmental stakeholders across all scales to conserve the sagebrush ecosystem.

Still, just implementing the current conservation plans and mitigating all future impacts may not be enough. With so many millions of acres of sagebrush in degraded conditions, we need massive investments in habitat restoration on top of implementing the conservation plans already in place.

Combating cheatgrass will take years and likely billions of dollars of investment. Removing invading conifers that can overtake sagebrush habitats already has been conducted across the West, but not nearly fast enough or across enough acres.

However, with challenges like these also come opportunities. The Biden Administration has put forth an aggressive climate change agenda and could be sold on restoration efforts in the sagebrush ecosystem that can put people to work while improving carbon storage and the resilience of these habitats to climate change.

This is an opportunity, if we view it as such. We need Congress, federal and state agencies, and the private sector to make the necessary investments in conservation and restoration that will reap many rewards for all stakeholders in the future.

Sportsmen and women have, of course, been on the frontlines of sage grouse conservation for decades, and our dollars—through licenses, habitat stamps, and Pittman-Robertson funds—have and will continue to support sage grouse conservation.

We’ve also sacrificed along the way. Over the past several years, most Western state wildlife agencies have made major adjustments to the harvest of sage grouse. Season closures have been carried out the right way where it has mattered most.

It has been demonstrated time and time again that regulated hunting of sage grouse is not a major threat to overall population status, but these continued downward trends cannot be ignored by state wildlife agencies. Hunters may yet again see more changes to hunting seasons and bag limits, and perhaps closures, in the coming years because of habitat losses.

Our state wildlife agencies must do their jobs and will continually adjust the harvest to ensure that less than 10 percent of the estimated total population of sage grouse are taken each fall. But sportsmen and women must do theirs too.

One fear is that with more hunting restrictions and closures hunters will lose interest in sage grouse and conservation of its ecosystem. However, this is not the time to relax on advocating for strengthening conservation efforts.

Reversing these population and habitat trends was never going to be an easy task – even back when the bird was first proposed for listing as threatened or endangered. Now, the hole to dig out of is even deeper. We still need all hands on deck in sage grouse country, and that includes sportsmen and sportswomen advocating for decisive steps to conserve the sagebrush ecosystem.

Images courtesy of USFWS, Tom Koerner

Derek Eberly

April 2, 2021

Preserving Pennsylvania Streams: Monocacy Creek

This video is the second in a series detailing conservation projects powered by Pennsylvania’s Keystone Recreation, Park & Conservation Fund that benefit hunters and anglers. Since 1993, the Keystone Fund has continued to provide state-level matching dollars for a variety of conservation projects, including land acquisition, river conservation, and trail work. This series is the result of a collaboration between the TRCP and Trout Unlimited where the goal is simply to celebrate conservation success stories that make us all proud to be able to hunt and fish in Pennsylvania. The videos highlight just a few of the projects powered by this critical source of conservation funding. For more information on the Keystone Fund, you can visit: https://keystonefund.org.

Warmer weather and blooming forsythia and cherry blossoms are more than just the harbingers of spring in Pennsylvania. For anglers, these are the signals that soon the air above our best trout streams will be filled with mayflies, and the waters below will be teeming with hungry, rising trout.

Spring means the beginning of another trout season. For many, the smells, sounds, and sights of spring conjure memories of past adventures with friends and family, while simultaneously calling us back to the water.

In the Lehigh Valley, you don’t have to look very far to find quality wild trout habitat. That’s good news for anglers living in one of the most densely populated areas in the state. The Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton area is blessed with some of Pennsylvania’s best limestone spring creeks—famously challenging, yet productive trout streams. Among these well-known “limestoners” is Monocacy Creek, which flows south through the heart of Bethlehem and eventually into the Lehigh River, a quality wild trout river in its own right.

The presence of wild trout in this urban gem is no accident: It is the result of decades of stewardship. Like many urban wild trout streams in Pennsylvania, the Monocacy has seen its fair share of challenges. In 1989, a nearby chemical spill killed more than 30,000 fish, many of them wild brown trout. Since then, the area has experienced a boom in development, resulting in challenges with polluted stormwater runoff and degraded streambank habitat.

Enter the Monocacy Chapter of Trout Unlimited and Monocacy Watershed Association. Members of these conservation organizations have worked hand in hand with Bethlehem municipal departments and other conservation organizations to preserve coldwater trout habitat along the creek through various projects funded by the Keystone Recreation, Park, and Conservation Fund and the state’s Environmental Stewardship Fund.

Many of these projects not only restore or improve habitat—they also help to mitigate the impacts of flooding and provide better access to anglers from the surrounding communities and beyond. (For a local perspective on the popularity of Monocacy Creek, check out this blog from angler Michael Evanko.)

Spring in Pennsylvania means another trout season full of making memories and forging connections outdoors. It’s also a good time to take a moment and recognize the tools, projects, and programs that gave us the places we love to fish.

Unfortunately, our work is not done. April showers may bring May flowers, but they are a reminder of the stormwater runoff challenges and need for streambank stabilization made possible by state-funded conservation. Spring is also traditionally the beginning of the state budget season, when funding in the Keystone Fund and Environmental Stewardship Fund has perennially come under threat.

Take a look at what these funds mean to local angler Jose DeJesus, a member of Monocacy TU and Monocacy Watershed Association. Listen as he shares his story of chasing trout over a lifetime on the Monocacy.

HOW YOU CAN HELP

CONSERVATION WORKS FOR AMERICA

As our nation rebounds from the COVID pandemic, policymakers are considering significant investments in infrastructure. Hunters and anglers see this as an opportunity to create conservation jobs, restore habitat, and boost fish and wildlife populations.

Learn More
Subscribe

You have Successfully Subscribed!

You have Successfully Subscribed!

You have Successfully Subscribed!

You have Successfully Subscribed!

You have Successfully Subscribed!