U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: FY2018 Appropriations
link to page 1 link to page 2 link to page 1 link to page 2 
September 6, 2017
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: FY2018 Appropriations
Congress generally funds the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2018), as reported,
Service (FWS, an agency within the Department of the
would appropriate $1.48 billion. The enacted FY2017
Interior [DOI]) in Title I of annual appropriations laws for
appropriation was $1.52 billion. The Resource Management
the Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related
(RM) account encompasses most of the appropriated funds
Agencies.
(for FY2018, 88.37% of the budget request and 84.31%
under H.R. 3354), with the balance included in eight
FWS appropriations fund the conservation, protection, and
accounts (Figure 2). The budget request would eliminate
enhancement of fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats.
eight activities funded in FY2017 to provide for additional
This is accomplished through various actions: resource
focus on existing responsibilities (Table 1). H.R. 3354
management and conservation, construction projects, land
would provide funding for all accounts and all but one
acquisition, and payments and grants to states and other
activity funded in FY2017, although in some cases at lower
parties. In addition to discretionary appropriations, FWS
funding levels. No activities were proposed for elimination
receives mandatory appropriations, most of which are
by both the Administration’s request and H.R. 3354.
disbursed directly to states. In FY2018, $1.46 billion was
proposed for mandatory appropriations. Issues for Congress
Table 1. Proposed Activity Eliminations in FY2018:
include the aggregate level of FWS funding and its
Budget Request and H.R. 3354
distribution across the categories of activities, including
(nominal $ in millions)
proposed elimination of some activities. Congress also is
FY2017
considering certain FWS regulatory and policy issues as
Activity (Account)
Enacted
part of appropriations deliberations.
Cooperative Landscape Conservation (RM)
$12.99
Introduction to FWS Discretionary
Appropriations
Science Support (RM)
16.99
Discretionary appropriations for FWS provide funding to
Acquisitions (LA)
27.41
carry out most of the agency’s essential functions. The
Highland Conservation Grants (LA)
10.00
relationship between budget requests and enacted levels has
fluctuated in recent years (Figure 1).
Recreational Access (LA)
2.50
Figure 1. FWS Discretionary Funding, FY2004-FY2018
Land Acquisition (CESCF)
30.80
Payments in Lieu of Taxes (NWRF)
13.23
State Wildlife Grants (Competitive) (STWG)
6.36
Land Protection Planning (LA)
0.47
Source: H.Rept. 115-238, pp. 150-155.
Notes: Budget request in plain text; H.R. 3354 in bold. Account
initials are shown in parentheses after each activity (RM = Resource
Management; see Figure 2 for other accounts).
Resource Management
The RM account includes eight activities, including
Ecological Services (within the account, the budget
requested 19.6% of the RM total for this activity, whereas
H.R. 3354 requested 19.0%), Habitat Conservation (5.0%;
5.4%), National Wildlife Refuge System (40.8%; 38.8%),
Conservation and Enforcement (11.4%; 11.1%), Fish and
Sources: Congressional Research Service (CRS), with data from
Aquatic Conservation (11.9%; 12.8%), Cooperative
FWS Budget Justifications and House Reports.
Landscape Conservation (0%; 1.0%), Science Support (0%;
Notes: *FY2009 enacted amount included $280 million through an
emergency appropriation in P.L. 111-5.
1.4%), and General Operations (11.3%; 10.5%).
FY2018 FWS Appropriations
The Ecological Services activity includes funding to carry
In its budget request for discretionary appropriations in
out activities authorized in the Endangered Species Act of
FY2018, the Trump Administration requested $1.30 billion.
1973 (ESA; 16 U.S.C. §1533). The report accompanying
H.R. 3354 (Department of the Interior, Environment, and
H.R. 3354 emphasizes that FWS should work closely with
https://crsreports.congress.gov
link to page 2 link to page 1 link to page 2
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: FY2018 Appropriations
states to carry out ESA activities and that ESA can affect
Figure 2. Recent Enacted and Proposed FWS
economic growth and job creation.
Discretionary Appropriations by Account
Other activities in the RM account target the deferred
maintenance backlog in the National Wildlife Refuge
System; ongoing fish hatchery operations; and addressing
wildlife trafficking to conserve wildlife, improve national
security, and streamline the processing of lawful cargo.
The budget request would eliminate funding for the
Cooperative Landscape Conservation and Science Support
activities, which support non-regulatory conservation
partnerships and conservation science, respectively. The
budget request suggests moving many of the provided
services to other sections of FWS. H.R. 3354 would fund
both activities at the FY2017 enacted level, though with a
shift in the sub-activity distribution within Science Support.
Construction and Land Acquisition
Source: CRS, with data from H.Rept. 115-238, pp. 150-155.
Note: Resource Management account not included in figure.
The Construction account funds engineering design,
construction, and maintenance throughout FWS facilities
Policy Issues
and infrastructure through three activities: Line Item
Several policy issues are addressed in the FWS budget
Construction Projects, Bridge and Dam Safety Programs,
request and H.R. 3354. The Federal Lands Recreation
and Nationwide Engineering Service.
Enhancement Act (FLREA; 16 U.S.C. §6809) authorizes
five agencies, including FWS, to collect and expend
The Nationwide Engineering Service and Construction
recreation fees. Authority for FLREA is set to expire at the
Projects activities are the same in both the budget request
end of FY2018. Both the budget request and H.R. 3354
and H.R. 3354. Both are lower than the FY2017 enacted
acknowledge FLREA’s sunset and provide language to
level. H.R. 3354 would fund Dam Safety Programs equal to
delay its expiration. Section 416 in Title IV of H.R. 3354
the FY2017 enacted level ($1.97 million), which is higher
would provide for a one-year extension of FLREA. The
than in the budget request ($1.23 million).
budget request supports permanent authorization but also
includes a one-year extension as a precaution. Additionally,
Funding for the Land Acquisition account is used to acquire
the budget request proposes providing access to the coastal
land for recreation and conservation purposes. Proposed
plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to
funding differs significantly between the budget request and
develop mineral resources, including oil (for more on
H.R. 3354, both of which are below FY2017 enacted levels
ANWR, see CRS Report RL33872, Arctic National Wildlife
(Figure 2). The main difference is the Acquisition activity
Refuge (ANWR): An Overview) and asks for a language
(Federal Refuges/Projects in the budget request). The
change to provide FWS with the authority to seek
budget request would eliminate funding, whereas H.R. 3354
compensation from responsible parties that injure or destroy
would cut funding to 58.4% of the enacted level ($27.41
FWS resources. H.R. 3354 did not include the ANWR or
million). The budget request would shift priority to existing
compensation provisions.
responsibilities rather than new acquisitions.
Regulatory Issues
The budget request would eliminate funding for Highlands
H.R. 3354 also contains several general provisions in Title I
Conservation Act (HCA) grants and Recreational Access
that affect FWS regulatory activities. Sections 113 and 117
activities. Proposals to eliminate HCA funding have been
would restrict funding for some ESA activities for the
included in several past budget requests but never enacted.
greater sage-grouse and the gray wolf, respectively. Section
H.R. 3354 would fund these activities, although at a lower
116 would direct DOI to reissue the final rules designating
level for Recreational Access. The report accompanying
and delisting the gray wolf Western Great Lake Distinct
H.R. 3354 references the benefits of public-private
Population Segment (76 Fed. Reg. 81666 et seq.) and
partnerships, such as HCA grants, to leverage federal funds.
delisting the gray wolf in Wyoming (77 Fed. Reg. 55530 et
Conservation Funds
seq.) and would make these rules exempt from judicial
review.
The remaining six accounts are for funds related to FWS
conservation and grant programs that support several grant,
financial, and technical assistance programs to states,
R. Eliot Crafton, Analyst in Natural Resources Policy
international partners, and other stakeholders. The budget
IF10724
request would eliminate three activities within these funds
(Table 1); H.R. 3354 would provide funding at or near the
FY2017 enacted level for all six accounts (Figure 2).
https://crsreports.congress.gov
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: FY2018 Appropriations
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF10724 · VERSION 3 · NEW
September 6, 2017
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: FY2018 Appropriations
Congress generally funds the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2018), as reported,
Service (FWS, an agency within the Department of the
would appropriate $1.48 billion. The enacted FY2017
Interior [DOI]) in Title I of annual appropriations laws for
appropriation was $1.52 billion. The Resource Management
the Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related
(RM) account encompasses most of the appropriated funds
Agencies.
(for FY2018, 88.37% of the budget request and 84.31%
under H.R. 3354), with the balance included in eight
FWS appropriations fund the conservation, protection, and
accounts (Figure 2). The budget request would eliminate
enhancement of fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats.
eight activities funded in FY2017 to provide for additional
This is accomplished through various actions: resource
focus on existing responsibilities (Table 1). H.R. 3354
management and conservation, construction projects, land
would provide funding for all accounts and all but one
acquisition, and payments and grants to states and other
activity funded in FY2017, although in some cases at lower
parties. In addition to discretionary appropriations, FWS
funding levels. No activities were proposed for elimination
receives mandatory appropriations, most of which are
by both the Administration’s request and H.R. 3354.
disbursed directly to states. In FY2018, $1.46 billion was
proposed for mandatory appropriations. Issues for Congress
Table 1. Proposed Activity Eliminations in FY2018:
include the aggregate level of FWS funding and its
Budget Request and H.R. 3354
distribution across the categories of activities, including
(nominal $ in millions)
proposed elimination of some activities. Congress also is
FY2017
considering certain FWS regulatory and policy issues as
Activity (Account)
Enacted
part of appropriations deliberations.
Cooperative Landscape Conservation (RM)
$12.99
Introduction to FWS Discretionary
Appropriations
Science Support (RM)
16.99
Discretionary appropriations for FWS provide funding to
Acquisitions (LA)
27.41
carry out most of the agency’s essential functions. The
Highland Conservation Grants (LA)
10.00
relationship between budget requests and enacted levels has
fluctuated in recent years (Figure 1).
Recreational Access (LA)
2.50
Figure 1. FWS Discretionary Funding, FY2004-FY2018
Land Acquisition (CESCF)
30.80
Payments in Lieu of Taxes (NWRF)
13.23
State Wildlife Grants (Competitive) (STWG)
6.36
Land Protection Planning (LA)
0.47
Source: H.Rept. 115-238, pp. 150-155.
Notes: Budget request in plain text; H.R. 3354 in bold. Account
initials are shown in parentheses after each activity (RM = Resource
Management; see Figure 2 for other accounts).
Resource Management
The RM account includes eight activities, including
Ecological Services (within the account, the budget
requested 19.6% of the RM total for this activity, whereas
H.R. 3354 requested 19.0%), Habitat Conservation (5.0%;
5.4%), National Wildlife Refuge System (40.8%; 38.8%),
Conservation and Enforcement (11.4%; 11.1%), Fish and
Sources: Congressional Research Service (CRS), with data from
Aquatic Conservation (11.9%; 12.8%), Cooperative
FWS Budget Justifications and House Reports.
Landscape Conservation (0%; 1.0%), Science Support (0%;
Notes: *FY2009 enacted amount included $280 million through an
emergency appropriation in P.L. 111-5.
1.4%), and General Operations (11.3%; 10.5%).
FY2018 FWS Appropriations
The Ecological Services activity includes funding to carry
In its budget request for discretionary appropriations in
out activities authorized in the Endangered Species Act of
FY2018, the Trump Administration requested $1.30 billion.
1973 (ESA; 16 U.S.C. §1533). The report accompanying
H.R. 3354 (Department of the Interior, Environment, and
H.R. 3354 emphasizes that FWS should work closely with
https://crsreports.congress.gov
link to page 2 link to page 1 link to page 2
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: FY2018 Appropriations
states to carry out ESA activities and that ESA can affect
Figure 2. Recent Enacted and Proposed FWS
economic growth and job creation.
Discretionary Appropriations by Account
Other activities in the RM account target the deferred
maintenance backlog in the National Wildlife Refuge
System; ongoing fish hatchery operations; and addressing
wildlife trafficking to conserve wildlife, improve national
security, and streamline the processing of lawful cargo.
The budget request would eliminate funding for the
Cooperative Landscape Conservation and Science Support
activities, which support non-regulatory conservation
partnerships and conservation science, respectively. The
budget request suggests moving many of the provided
services to other sections of FWS. H.R. 3354 would fund
both activities at the FY2017 enacted level, though with a
shift in the sub-activity distribution within Science Support.
Construction and Land Acquisition
Source: CRS, with data from H.Rept. 115-238, pp. 150-155.
Note: Resource Management account not included in figure.
The Construction account funds engineering design,
construction, and maintenance throughout FWS facilities
Policy Issues
and infrastructure through three activities: Line Item
Several policy issues are addressed in the FWS budget
Construction Projects, Bridge and Dam Safety Programs,
request and H.R. 3354. The Federal Lands Recreation
and Nationwide Engineering Service.
Enhancement Act (FLREA; 16 U.S.C. §6809) authorizes
five agencies, including FWS, to collect and expend
The Nationwide Engineering Service and Construction
recreation fees. Authority for FLREA is set to expire at the
Projects activities are the same in both the budget request
end of FY2018. Both the budget request and H.R. 3354
and H.R. 3354. Both are lower than the FY2017 enacted
acknowledge FLREA’s sunset and provide language to
level. H.R. 3354 would fund Dam Safety Programs equal to
delay its expiration. Section 416 in Title IV of H.R. 3354
the FY2017 enacted level ($1.97 million), which is higher
would provide for a one-year extension of FLREA. The
than in the budget request ($1.23 million).
budget request supports permanent authorization but also
includes a one-year extension as a precaution. Additionally,
Funding for the Land Acquisition account is used to acquire
the budget request proposes providing access to the coastal
land for recreation and conservation purposes. Proposed
plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to
funding differs significantly between the budget request and
develop mineral resources, including oil (for more on
H.R. 3354, both of which are below FY2017 enacted levels
ANWR, see CRS Report RL33872, Arctic National Wildlife
(Figure 2). The main difference is the Acquisition activity
Refuge (ANWR): An Overview) and asks for a language
(Federal Refuges/Projects in the budget request). The
change to provide FWS with the authority to seek
budget request would eliminate funding, whereas H.R. 3354
compensation from responsible parties that injure or destroy
would cut funding to 58.4% of the enacted level ($27.41
FWS resources. H.R. 3354 did not include the ANWR or
million). The budget request would shift priority to existing
compensation provisions.
responsibilities rather than new acquisitions.
Regulatory Issues
The budget request would eliminate funding for Highlands
H.R. 3354 also contains several general provisions in Title I
Conservation Act (HCA) grants and Recreational Access
that affect FWS regulatory activities. Sections 113 and 117
activities. Proposals to eliminate HCA funding have been
would restrict funding for some ESA activities for the
included in several past budget requests but never enacted.
greater sage-grouse and the gray wolf, respectively. Section
H.R. 3354 would fund these activities, although at a lower
116 would direct DOI to reissue the final rules designating
level for Recreational Access. The report accompanying
and delisting the gray wolf Western Great Lake Distinct
H.R. 3354 references the benefits of public-private
Population Segment (76 Fed. Reg. 81666 et seq.) and
partnerships, such as HCA grants, to leverage federal funds.
delisting the gray wolf in Wyoming (77 Fed. Reg. 55530 et
Conservation Funds
seq.) and would make these rules exempt from judicial
review.
The remaining six accounts are for funds related to FWS
conservation and grant programs that support several grant,
financial, and technical assistance programs to states,
R. Eliot Crafton, Analyst in Natural Resources Policy
international partners, and other stakeholders. The budget
IF10724
request would eliminate three activities within these funds
(Table 1); H.R. 3354 would provide funding at or near the
FY2017 enacted level for all six accounts (Figure 2).
https://crsreports.congress.gov
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: FY2018 Appropriations
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF10724 · VERSION 3 · NEW