NOFOSutton4.13.2017.docx

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge System-Division of Biological Sciences

Preventing the Extinction of Masked Bobwhite Quail in North America: establishment of a second captive population in the United States to maximize recovery Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 15.650

Notice of Funding Opportunity

I. Description of Funding Opportunity This agreement between the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (Service) and the George Miksch Sutton Avian Research Center (Sutton) is hereby entered into in accordance with 505 DM 2.14 B(4) and seeks to prevent extinction of the masked bobwhite within the United States and further bobwhite recovery by accomplishing the following actions: 1) renovation of an existing rearing structure located in Bartlesville, Oklahoma, on the grounds of Sutton to house, propagate, and condition masked bobwhite for release in the United States and Mexico; 2) propagate and condition masked bobwhite; and 3) monitoring survival of released birds within the framework of Adaptive Management and Strategic Habitat Conservation (SHC). The ability of the Service to recover masked bobwhite is an important component of its mission. The authorizing statute is: Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, as amended, 16 U.S.C. (742f (a)(4); Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 661.; Fish and Wildlife Improvement Act of 1978, as amended (16 U.S.C. 753), Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965, as amended (16 U.S.C. 4601-4 through 11), Endangered Species Act of 1973, Public Law 93-205, 87 Stat. 884, Endangered Species Act Amendments of 1978, Public Law 95-632, 92 Stat. 3751, and Endangered Species Act Amendments of 1982, Public Law 97-304, 96 Stat. 1411.

II. Award Information This Single Source Award in the amount of $2,000,000 is being awarded to Sutton in accordance with the Department of the Interior (DOI) Policy 505 DM 2.14 B(4) Unique Qualifications. Multiple awards are anticipated with a period of performance of May 2017- May 2022. This group has had a strong partnership with the Service since 2007. Sutton is an ideal partner due to their expertise in ornithology, positive association with Attwater’s Prairie Chicken (Tympanuchus cupido attwateri) recovery and their contributions to rearing, releasing and exceeding recovery goals for the Bald Eagle in Oklahoma. As part of the captive rearing of Bald Eagles, Sutton produced over 60,000 feeder quail per year. In addition, Sutton has extensive experience with avian research and monitoring. Under this agreement Sutton will: 1) provide architectural drawings for approval by the Service and Masked Bobwhite Recovery Team (MBRT); 2) lead the renovation/construction and overall establishment of a second secure facility, that meets or exceeds animal welfare standards, in the USA for housing and propagating masked bobwhite quail, based on approved plans; 3) lead the development of husbandry and conditioning protocols, while working closely with the Service, MBRT and other experts; 4) work closely with the Service, MBRT and other experts to lead the development of health, disease, biosecurity and genetic management plans; 5) lead captive breeding and conditioning of birds at the facility; 6) lead processes to obtain permits and screening for transfer of eggs or birds to release sites; 7) co-lead the release and monitoring of captive reared birds, on federal lands or other lands deemed suitable by the Service staff and the MBRT; 8) co-lead monitoring data management; 9) manage propagation and conditioning data, analyze and report on results as deemed necessary; 10) maintain exhaustive records on eggs received, survivorship and mortality of captive birds, birds transferred for release, and stud book data.

The Service will be substantially involved in projects under this funding opportunity. In particular, the Service will be responsible for the following: 1) approval of final specifications for the facility; 2) inspections during the renovation/construction phase; 3) working with Sutton to develop husbandry and conditioning protocols; 4) working with Sutton to develop health, disease, biosecurity and genetic management plans; 5) approve plans and protocols; 6) co-lead processes to obtain permits and screening for transfer of eggs or birds to Sutton; 7) lead development of monitoring protocols; 8) assist with monitoring of birds via telemetry; 9) co-lead monitoring data management; 10) lead analysis of data and publications; and 11) lead logistics and communications for work in Mexico. This recipient and project meet the legislative intent of P.L. 111-88 Sec 112. SEC. 112. U.S. non-profit, non-governmental organizations must provide a copy of their Section 501(c)(3) or (4) status determination letter received from the Internal Revenue Service.

III. Basic Eligibility Requirements Eligible Applicants:

This Single Source Award in the amount of $2,000,000 is being awarded to Sutton in accordance with the DOI Policy 505 DM 2.14 B(4) Unique Qualifications. This group has had a strong partnership with the Service since 2007. Sutton is an ideal partner due to their expertise in ornithology, positive association with Attwater’s Prairie Chicken (Tympanuchus cupido attwateri) recovery and their contributions to rearing, releasing and exceeding recovery goals for the Bald Eagle in Oklahoma. As part of the captive rearing of Bald Eagles, Sutton produced over 60,000 feeder quail per year. In addition, Sutton has extensive experience with avian research and monitoring. U.S. non-profit, non-governmental organizations with 501(c)(3) Internal Revenue Status (IRS) must provide a copy of their status determination letter received from the IRS”

Federal law mandates that all entities applying for Federal financial assistance must have a valid Dun & Bradstreet Data Universal Number System (DUNS) number and have a current registration in the System for Award Management (SAM). See Title 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 25 for more information. Exemptions: The SAM registration requirement does not apply to individuals submitting an application on their own behalf and not on behalf of a company or other for-profit entity, state, local or Tribal government, academia or other type of organization.

A. DUNS Registration Request a DUNS number at http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform. For technical difficulties, contact Dun & Bradstreet by email at: govt@dnb.com, or by calling the Government Customer Resource Center at voice phone: 866-705-5711 or TTY line: 877-807-1679 (hearing impaired customers only). Once assigned a DUNS number, entities are responsible for maintaining up-to-date information with Dun & Bradstreet.

B. Entity Registration in SAM Register in SAM at www.sam.gov. Once registered in SAM, entities must renew and revalidate their SAM registration at least every 12 months from the date previously registered. Entities are strongly urged to revalidate their registration as often as needed to ensure that their information is up to date and in synch with changes that may have been made to DUNS and IRS information. Foreign entities who wish to be paid directly to a United States bank account must enter and maintain valid and current banking information in SAM.

Note: The official U.S. government website address for SAM is www.sam.gov. There is NO COST to register in or access SAM.gov. There are third-party vendors who charge a fee in exchange for registering entities in SAM; please be aware that you can register to do business with the U.S. government FOR FREE directly in SAM at www.sam.gov.

C. Excluded Entities Applicant entities or their key project personnel identified in the SAM.gov Exclusions database as ineligible, prohibited/restricted or excluded from receiving Federal contracts, certain subcontracts, and certain Federal assistance and benefits will not be considered for Federal funding, as applicable to the funding being requested under this Federal program. The Service conducts a review of the SAM.gov Exclusions database for all applicant entities and their key project personnel prior to award.

D. Cost Sharing or Matching: A minimum match of $259,000 is required in the form of staff time, existing structure and telemetry equipment.

IV. Application Requirements To be considered for funding under this funding opportunity, an application must contain:

A. A completed, signed and dated Application for Federal Assistance form SF-424). The SF-424 form is available online at http://apply07.grants.gov/apply/FormLinks?family=15.

Do not include other Federal sources of funding, requested or approved, in the total entered in the “Federal” funding box on the Application for Federal Assistance form. Enter only the amount being requested under this program in the “Federal” funding box. Include any other Federal sources of funding in the total funding entered in the “Other” box.

B. Project Summary Funding for this agreement, Preventing the Extinction of Masked Bobwhite Quail in North America: establishment of a second captive population in the United States to maximize recovery, is for Sutton to related projects to accomplishing the following actions: 1) renovation of an existing rearing structure located in Bartlesville, Oklahoma on the grounds of Sutton to house, propagate and condition masked bobwhite for release in the U.S. and Mexico, 2) propagate and condition masked bobwhite, and 3) monitoring survival of released birds within the framework of Adaptive Management and SHC.

C. Project Narrative

1. Statement of Need: The masked bobwhite quail (Colinus virginianus ridgwayi) is a distinctive subspecies of the northern bobwhite that was listed as an endangered species in 1967 after a century of decline in its range in Sonora, Mexico, and southern Arizona, USA. After being feared extinct in the 1940s and 1950s, a remnant population was discovered in northern Sonora in 1964 (Gallizioli et al. 1967). This population, near BANWR (i.e., Rancho El Carrizo and surrounding ranches near Benjamín Hill in Sonora, Mexico), declined and retracted over the ensuing decades, with the last bird being observed in 2007 (Gómez Limón 2008); currently the location of any remaining wild birds range-wide is unknown. In the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s some of the wild Mexican population was used as a source of birds to create a captive population in the United States. These birds have been maintained in captivity and used for releases on BANWR since 1985. Occasional wild-born birds have been suspected on BANWR over the years, but no self-sustaining populations are presently known.

The United States captive population of approximately 900 birds is housed in the rearing facility on BANWR. Due to the risks inherent to housing these endangered birds in a sole location, establishing an additional United States captive population is a high priority. These risks include, but are not limited to, a catastrophic event eradicating the captive population. For example, in the early 2000s, pipes burst due to unusually cold ambient temperatures, allowing the ceiling to collapse and icy water to dump onto the captive flock. A bacterial outbreak in 2007 killed a number of birds and several other smaller bacterial outbreaks have occurred since the establishment of the flock at BANWR.

In 2007, the culmination of these threats increased interest in accomplishing the recovery goal of establishing a second United States captive population and initiated the now strong partnership with Sutton. Sutton is an ideal partner due to their expertise in ornithology, positive association with Attwater’s Prairie Chicken (Tympanuchus cupido attwateri) recovery and their contributions to rearing, releasing and exceeding recovery goals for the Bald Eagle in Oklahoma. As part of the captive rearing of Bald Eagles, Sutton produced over 60,000 feeder quail per year. No masked bobwhite breeding has occurred on BANWR since 2015. As the population ages, its physical and genetic vigor is decreased. The program requires the assistance of Sutton to ensure the availability of breeding stock. Otherwise, in <5 years the Unites States captive population will not be available.

The goal for this new facility will be to house masked bobwhite for captive propagation, conditioning, and release into the wild both on BANWR and in Sonora, Mexico. The Sutton facility will accommodate the two leading approaches to masked bobwhite rearing - the Natural Nester and a parent reared system developed by Tall Timbers Research Station (Tall Timbers). Experts at Sutton will provide the following: nutrition; sanitary, uncrowded enclosures; disease and parasite control; a sound genetic management scheme with pedigree records; and production of vigorous, healthy chicks for release with a well-managed incubation program and chick-rearing facility. In addition to implementation of improved rearing techniques, we will implement various techniques for conditioning quail and monitor the effectiveness by evaluating the physical condition of the birds and their respond to predators.

To complement the successful creation of an additional masked bobwhite population, a cross-programmatic effort was initiated in 2016 by the Southwest Region’s National Wildlife Refuges and Ecological Services programs to systematically survey the historical range of masked bobwhite. This scientifically rigorous survey is designed to locate wild masked bobwhite and assess habitat conditions to quantitatively target priority release and habitat enhancement sites to accommodate the reintroduction of masked bobwhite in the wild. This masked bobwhite population survey, habitat modeling and on-the-ground field work will be provided in-kind by the Service’s Southwest Region. Partnerships in Mexico are on-going and property owners are collaborating in field work. In addition, a permanent GS-11 Quail Biologist has joined the team within the Refuges division to implement promising approaches to increase survival of released birds on BANWR and in Sonora (i.e. habitat management), lead release efforts, and post-release monitoring. This work is being informed by a Region 2 funded Masked Bobwhite Habitat Suitability model as well as a Joint Fire Science Program (JFSP) funded project addressing the effects of management actions on habitat conditions for masked bobwhite on BANWR.

This effort seeks to prevent extinction of the masked bobwhite within the United States and progress bobwhite recovery by accomplishing the following three actions identified in multiple planning documents: 1) securing the captive population of masked bobwhite from extinction through the establishment of a second U.S. captive population and biosecurity program, 2) propagating and conditioning masked bobwhite, and 3) monitoring survival of released birds in the United States and Mexico within the framework of Adaptive Management and SHC.

2. Project Goals and Objectives: Securing the highly precarious status of the masked bobwhite by building a new population will reduce risks to the remaining masked bobwhite, reinvigorate the breeding and release potential, and provide a greater number of masked bobwhite for release using a scientifically sound approach.

Goal: Secure the captive population of masked bobwhite from extinction through the establishment of a second United States captive population and biosecurity program at Sutton and release birds to establish a wild population. (Masked Bobwhite Recovery Plan: Recovery Actions 1, 1.2, 2.11, 2.54, 3; BANWR CCP: Goal 1, Objective 8; USFWS Masked Bobwhite 5-Year Review: Recommendations for Future Actions; USFWS Strategic Plan for MBQ Recovery: Future Directions Objective 3; USFWS Conservation and Management of Masked Bobwhite Quail Future Direction: Emphasis Areas 3 and 4).

Objectives:

A. Within 1 year from date of funding, establish a masked bobwhite captive breeding facility and conditioning pens at Sutton following architectural drawings. The facility will be equipped with materials and supplies needed to house at least 300 masked bobwhite.

B. Provide scientific and financial support to Sutton to assist with protocol development, labor and operational cost for the first year to propagate and condition masked bobwhite for release into the wild in the United States and Mexico.

C. Release masked bobwhite in the United States and Mexico at the most suitable sites identified by the JFSP results and surveys in Sonora, MX. Post-release monitoring of quail survival via peer-reviewed protocol.

Long-term Goal furthered by proposed work: Meet the Recovery Criteria of establishing two viable populations in the United States and two or more in Mexico (Masked Bobwhite Recovery Plan, 1995).

3. Project Activities, Methods and Timetable: We propose a three-part strategy to protect the masked bobwhite from extinction, produce quail suitable for release, and monitor survival of released masked bobwhite.

Objective A: Establish Captive breeding facility at Sutton

1. Develop propagation, rearing, and pre-release conditioning protocols

1. Create health and disease, biosecurity and genetic management plans

1. Modify facility to prepare for housing at least 300 masked bobwhite

1. Construct conditioning pens to prepare birds for release in the wild

1. Set up incubation and brooding rooms as well as indoor/outdoor runs and breeding pens.

Objective B: Propagate and condition masked bobwhite for release

1. Transport birds or eggs from BANWR to Sutton

1. Breed to protect the captive population, aid in the maintenance of physical and genetic vigor, and produce masked bobwhite in sufficient numbers to support releases in the United States and Mexico.

1. Condition masked bobwhite

1. Monitor success of conditioning

1. Manage data, analyze and report on results

1. Integrate results into future rearing and conditioning protocols

Objective C: Release masked bobwhite and monitor survival

1. Refine current protocol for masked bobwhite releases and monitoring quail survival

1. Transport eggs or birds from Sutton to release site

1. Release birds fitted with radio collars in highest ranking sites based on habitat characteristics

1. Daily tracking of birds for survival (i.e., monitor to evaluate effectiveness)

1. Manage data

1. Analysis data

1. Report on findings and use information to refine management actions

Develop husbandry protocols, conditioning protocols, as well as health, disease, biosecurity and genetic management plans

Summer 2017

4. Stakeholder Coordination/Involvement: The Service and the MBRT has collaborated with Sutton since 2007. In anticipation of this project, Service staff visited with Sutton in 2016. In addition, Sutton has worked extensively with Keleher Architects to develop a preliminary framework for the success of the renovation and is collaborating extensively internally to capitalize on lessons learned in the Attwater Prairie-Chicken breeding program. These lessons are being applied to recovery approaches for the masked bobwhite.

5. Project Monitoring and Evaluation: Monitoring Objectives A and B: Initial monitoring and evaluation for the Sutton facility will be accomplished through close coordination with Sutton before, during and after construction is complete. The Service and members of the MBRT will be engaged during the construction process and ensure the building is equipped to safely house masked bobwhite according to the specification agreed on and to animal welfare standards. Once the building has been completed and the quail transferred to Sutton, the birds’ health and safety will be monitored by the Service’s animal welfare veterinarian Samantha Gibbs, as well as veterinarians utilized by Sutton.

A Memorandum of Understanding between the Service and Sutton will be established to ensure all objectives pertaining to chick production, rearing and conditioning are met, protocols and plans are developed and all facets of the program are being tracked via data collection and management that all parties can access. All information will also be uploaded into ServCat. To ensure rigor, quail rearing, conditioning and monitoring protocols as well as all plans will be vetted through internal and external peer-review. Effectiveness of conditioning will be monitored by evaluating the physical condition of the birds and their response to predators. Architectural draws as well as all protocols will be approved by Service staff and the MBRT prior to beginning construction.

All work is contingent on funding availability. In the event that the focus of the masked bobwhite program shifts away from recovery via the captive population, the captive population will be moved off the grounds of Sutton at the expense of the Service.

Monitoring Objectives C: We will use radio telemetry to compare survival rates between treatment A (Natural Nester) and treatment B (Tall Timbers) in combination with various conditioning techniques while accounting for site and annual effects. We conducted a preliminary power analysis to determine sample sizes needed to detect a 10 percent difference in survival between captive propagation treatments. This analysis suggested at least 55 to 60 samples were needed per treatment. Assuming equal survival rates between the sexes and a 50:50 sex ratio at release, increasing survival by 10 percent ensures males and females survive and can reproduce in the wild the next year. We intend to compare differences each year for the next 3 years.

Roles of Investigators and Associated Personnel in Monitoring Activities:

(Spanish speaker)

*Data will be stored on a DOI server located at the Tucson Arizona Inventory and Monitoring office and DOI policies will be adhered to for server management. The data will made public through the Service’s ServCat following project completion.

6. Description of Entities Undertaking the Project: Sutton was founded in 1983 with the mission of finding cooperative conservation solutions for birds and the natural world through science and education. Sutton is a private, nonprofit organization located near Bartlesville, Oklahoma.

Sutton has become a leader in avian research and conservation and has conducted intensive, conservation-oriented, ecological field research on declining grassland birds, developed and applied techniques for the reintroduction and monitoring of Southern Bald Eagles, managed the successful captive breeding of endangered species and performed bird surveys across the world.

Donald H. Wolfe, Senior Biologist Project Role: Primary Contact and Biologist G.M. Sutton Avian Research Center P.O. Box 2007 Bartlesville, OK 74005 dwolfe@suttoncenter.org 918-336-7778

Mr. Wolfe received his B. Sc. in biology from Bartlesville Wesleyan College (now Oklahoma Wesleyan University), 1984. He has been employed by Sutton since the year of his graduation and is currently a Senior Biologist. During his tenure at Sutton he has conducted a wide variety of duties including 1) started and maintained a large Coturnix Quail operation, raising upwards of 60,000 quail/year for feeding captive birds of prey, 2) incubation, hatching, and rearing of young Southern Bald Eagles; construction of eagle hack sites in Oklahoma; assisted in release of Bald Eagles; care of captive raptors used for breeding and/or education, including Bald Eagles, Golden Eagles, Cape Griffons, Andean Condors, Pygmy Falcons, Peregrine Falcons, Prairie Falcons, and Gyrfalcons, 3) general maintenance and grounds keeping, 4) supervising field activities and analyzing results associated with study of declining prairie birds, nesting raptor surveys effects of maneuver activity and management practices at Fort Military Reservation on nesting birds, 5) effects of turnpike right-of-way treatment on nesting birds, 6) studied effects of grazing regimes on shortgrass prairie nesting songbirds, and Greater Prairie-Chickens. Mr. Wolfe is currently managing Lesser Prairie-Chicken studies and conservation efforts, conducting state-wide surveys for White-tailed Ptarmigan in New Mexico, and conducting thermal ecology studies on endangered Masked Bobwhite in Arizona. During his carrier he has authored or coauthored over 30 peer-reviewed publications on Greater Prairie-Chickens, Lesser Prairie-Chickens or White-tailed Ptarmigan, and over 20 publications on other avian species.

Other professional services include: peer-review of dozens of manuscripts for at least 12 different professional journals; North American Co-Editor of Grouse News Scientific Committee for the North American Grouse Partnership, MBRT Member.

John Toepfer, PhD, STCP/Hamerstrom Prairie Grouse Research Chair Project Role: Advisory G.M. Sutton Avian Research Center P.O. Box 2007 Bartlesville, OK 74005 jtoepfer@coredcs.com 701-866-0499

A native of Wisconsin, John E. Toepfer earned his B.S. and M.S. in 1972 and 1976 at UW-Stevens Point where he developed a life-long interest in prairie-chickens and a special friendship with Drs. Frederick and Frances Hamerstrom. As part of his Ph.D. work he made the first attempt to reintroduce prairie-chickens in Wisconsin at Crex Meadows Wildlife Area in northwest Wisconsin.

In 1978 he followed radio-marked sandhill cranes from Wisconsin/Minnesota to Florida and back documenting the migration routes and stopover areas that are now being used to reestablish an eastern population of whooping cranes.

He earned a PhD in Biological Sciences at Montana State University with his thesis on “The Ecology of the Greater Prairie-Chicken as Related to Reintroductions.” As a Professor at Little Hoop Community College at Fort Totten Indian Reservation in North Dakota, he developed the first Tribal College Native American Wildlife Program and was instrumental in the development of the Inter-Tribal Bison Cooperative.

Dr. Toepfer has also developed radio-marking, trapping and handling methods for American bitterns to study basic life history, and located wintering areas and documented migration routes using telemetry and satellite transmitters.

In 1992-1993 he translocated prairie-chickens from Minnesota into Illinois to initiate the successful genetic rescue of prairie-chickens in that state.

Since 1996, he has served as Research Consultant conducting field research on prairie grouse with the Society of Tympanuchus Cupido Pinnatus, Ltd. (STCP). To address their concerns, and at the request of STCP Council members regarding the future of prairie-chickens in Wisconsin, he developed and carried out STCP’s field research project: Prairie Chickens & Grasslands: 2000 and Beyond.

Dr. Toepfer serves on the Attwater’s Prairie-Chicken Recovery Team and on the Board of the North American Grouse Partnership. In 2003, he received The Hamerstrom Award from the National Prairie Grouse Technical Council for outstanding contributions in the field of prairie grouse biology. In 2009, he was the recipient of the Minnesota Award by the Minnesota Chapter of the Wildlife Society. This is the Chapter’s highest award and is presented to individuals that have made outstanding contributions to Minnesota’s wildlife and natural resources.

Dr. Toepfer is currently serving as the Principal Investigator on STCP’s prairie-chicken research project in the Sandhills of Nebraska, perhaps the last, best place to study a large, stable population of prairie-chickens in native habitat.

Lena C. Larson, PhD, Acting Director Project Role: Administrative and Advisory G.M. Sutton Avian Research Center P.O. Box 2007 Bartlesville, OK 74005 llarson@suttoncenter.org 918-336-7778

Lena C. Larsson has a Bachelor of Science in Biology – Ecology, Behavior, and Evolution – from University of California San Diego (Magna Cum Laude) and a Master of Science in Population Genetics from Stockholm University. She began working in the field with greater prairie-chickens for Sutton Avian Research Center 1998-1999, then returned to Stockholm University where she attained a Ph.D. in Population Genetics 2008, disentangling genetic structure of Baltic herring. Her PhD work included field and laboratory as well as teaching conservation biology and basic statistics. She returned to Oklahoma and Sutton in 2009 as a postdoc, and became the Assistant Director in 2012. She was a principal investigator for lesser prairie-chicken research and saturation surveys in western Oklahoma. She organizes citizen scientists who help keep track of bald eagle nests in Oklahoma, and besides prairie-chicken research, work together with Don Wolfe on New Mexico white-tailed ptarmigan populations. She currently serves as the Acting Executive Director for Sutton and is heavily involved in the Attwater’s prairie-chicken recovery program with the establishment of a captive breeding facility in Oklahoma.

7. Sustainability: Establishment of the captive facility at Sutton is a finite project; however, propagation, conditioning, releases and monitoring of birds are expected to continue past the term of this agreement. The Service and Sutton staff will continue to implement the results of monitoring to inform decisions within an Adaptive Management framework and SHC. These future activities will be funded through acquisition of grant funds by Sutton as well as Service funds.

8. Literature Cited

Gallizioli, S., S. Levy, and J. Levy. 1967. Can the masked bobwhite be saved from extinction? Audubon Field Notes 2:571–575.

Gómez Limón, E. 2008. Reporte, 2008. Codorniz Mascarita (Colinus virginianus ridgwayi) Monitoreo 2008, Sonora, Mexico. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 2. Sonoran Joint Venture. Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge. FWS-201817J824. 45 pp.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. Masked bobwhite recovery plan. Second revision. Albuquerque, New Mexico.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife. 2010. 5-Year Review of Masked Bobwhite Quail (Colinus virginianus ridgwayi).

U.S. Fish and Wildlife. 2012. USFWS 2012 -- MBQ Recovery Team MBQ Propagation and Release Guidelines.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife. 2014. USFWS Conservation and Management of Masked Bobwhite Quail: Future Direction (March 17, 2014). Internal document. Albuquerque, New Mexico.

9. Map of Project Area:

Figure 1. Sutton Avian Research Center relative to BANWR and potential release sites surveyed and ranked in Sonora Mexico as in-kind in 2016

D. Budget Form Complete the Budget Information for Non-Construction Programs (SF 424A) or Budget Information for Construction Programs (SF 424C) form. Use the SF 424A if your project does not include construction and the SF 424C if the project includes construction or land acquisition. The budget forms are available on the Internet at http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/forms/sf-424-family.html#sortby=1. When developing your budget, keep in mind that financial assistance awards and subawards are subject to the Federal cost principles in Title 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, as applicable to the recipient organization type. Links to the full text of the Federal cost principles are available on the Internet at http://www.ecfr.gov/.

Note on Multiple Federal Funding Sources: If the project budget includes multiple Federal funding sources, you must show the funds being requested from this Federal program on the budget form separately from any other requested/secured Federal sources of funding. Enter the funds being requested from this Federal program in the first row of the Budget Summary section of the form, and then enter funding related to other Federal programs in the subsequent row(s). Be sure to enter each Federal program’s CFDA number in the corresponding fields on the form. The CFDA number for this Federal program appears on the first page of this funding opportunity.

E. Budget Justification In a separate narrative titled “Budget Justification”, explain and justify all requested budget items/costs. Detail how the SF 424 Budget Object Class Category totals were determined and demonstrate a clear connection between costs and the proposed project activities. For personnel salary costs, include the base-line salary figures and the estimates of time (as percentages) to be directly charged to the project. Describe any item that under the applicable Federal cost principles requires the Service’s approval and estimate its cost.

If Federally-funded equipment will be used for the project, provide a list of that equipment, including the Federal funding source.

Required Indirect Cost Statement: Recipients that do not have an approved indirect cost rate cannot charge indirect costs to their Federal award. All applicants except individuals applying for funds separate from a business or non-profit organization he/she may operate must include in the budget justification narrative one of the following statements and attach to their application any required documentation identified in the applicable statement:

“We are:

1. A [insert your organization type; U.S. states and local governments, please use one of the statements above or below] that has previously negotiated or currently has an approved indirect cost rate with our cognizant agency. Our indirect cost rate is [insert rate]. [Insert either: “A copy of our most recently approved but expired rate agreement is attached. In the event an award is made, we will submit an indirect cost rate proposal to our cognizant agency within 90 calendar days after the award is made.” or “A copy of our current, approved rate agreement(s) is attached.”]

2. A [insert your organization type] that has never submitted an indirect cost rate proposal to our cognizant agency. Our indirect cost rate is [insert rate]. In the event an award is made, we will submit an indirect cost rate proposal to our cognizant agency within 90 calendar days after the award is made.

3. A [insert your organization type] that has never submitted an indirect cost rate proposal to our cognizant agency and has an indirect cost rate that is lower than 10%. Our indirect cost rate is [insert rate; must be lower than 10%]. However, in the event an award is made, we will not be able to meet the requirement to submit an indirect cost rate proposal to our cognizant agency within 90 calendar days after award. We request as a condition of award to charge a flat indirect cost rate of [insert rate; must be lower than 10%] of [insert a clear description of the direct cost base against which your rate is charged (e.g., salaries; salaries and fringe benefits; or modified total direct costs). However, please note that your organization cannot charge indirect costs in excess of the indirect costs that would be recovered if applied against modified total direct costs as defined in 2 CFR 220.68]. We understand that we must notify the Service in writing immediately if we establish an approved rate with our cognizant agency at any point during the award period.

4. A [insert your organization type] that has never submitted an indirect cost rate proposal to our cognizant agency and has an indirect cost rate that is 10% or higher. Our indirect cost rate is [insert your organization’s indirect rate; must be 10% or higher]. However, in the event an award is made, we will not be able to meet the requirement to submit an indirect cost rate proposal to our cognizant agency within 90 calendar days after award. We request as a condition of award to charge a flat de minimis indirect cost rate of 10% of modified total direct costs as defined in 2 CFR 200.68. We understand that we must notify the Service in writing immediately if we do establish an approved rate with our cognizant agency at any point during the award period. We understand that additional Federal funds may not be available to support an unexpected increase in indirect costs during the project period and such changes are subject to review, negotiation, and prior approval by the Service.

5. A [insert your organization type] that will charge all costs directly.

All applicants are hereby notified of the following:

· Recipients without an approved indirect cost rate are prohibited from charging indirect costs to a Federal award. Accepting a flat de minimis rate as a condition of award is an approved rate.

· Failure to establish an approved rate during the award period renders all costs otherwise allocable as indirect costs unallowable under the award.

· Recipients may not charge to their Service award any indirect costs calculated against the portion of total direct project costs paid by any other Federal funding source or non-Federal partner.

· Recipients must have prior written approval from the Service to transfer unallowable indirect costs to amounts budgeted for direct costs or to satisfy cost-sharing or matching requirements under the award.

· Recipients are prohibited from shifting unallowable indirect costs to another Federal award unless specifically authorized to do so by legislation.

Applicants who are individuals applying for funds separate from a business or non-profit organization he/she may operate are not eligible to charge indirect costs to their award. If you are an individual applying for funding, do not include any indirect costs in your proposed budget.

For more information on indirect cost rates, see the Service’s Indirect Costs and Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreements guidance document on the Internet at https://www.fws.gov/grants/atc.html.

Negotiating an Indirect Cost Rate with the DOI: Entities that do not have a NICRA must first have an open, active Federal award before they can submit an indirect cost rate proposal to their cognizant agency. The Federal awarding agency that provides the largest amount of direct funding to your organization is your cognizant agency, unless otherwise assigned by the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB). If the DOI is your cognizant agency, your indirect cost rate will be negotiated by the Interior Business Center (IBC). For more information, contact the IBC at:

Indirect Cost Services Acquisition Services Directorate, Interior Business Center U.S. Department of the Interior 650 Capitol Mall, Suite 7-400 Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone: 916-930-3803 Email: Through https://www.doi.gov/ibc/contactus/ibcfeedback web form Internet address: https://www.doi.gov/ibc/services/finance/indirect-cost-services

F. Single Audit Reporting Statements: As required in Title 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Subpart F, all U.S. states, local governments, federally-recognized Indian tribal governments, and non-profit organizations expending $750,000 USD or more in Federal award funds in a fiscal year must submit a Single Audit report for that year through the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s Internet Data Entry System. All U.S. state, local government, federally-recognized Indian tribal government and non-profit applicants must provide a statement regarding if your organization was/was not required to submit a Single Audit report for the organization’s most recently closed fiscal year and, if so, state if that report is available on the Federal Audit Clearinghouse Single Audit Database website (https://harvester.census.gov/facweb/) and provide the EIN under which that report was submitted. Include these statements at the end of the Project Narrative in a section titled “Single Audit Reporting Statements”.

G. Assurances: Include the appropriate signed and dated Assurances form available at http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/forms/sf-424-family.html#sortby=1. Use the Assurances for Construction Programs (SF 424D) for construction and land acquisition projects. Use the Assurances for Non-Construction Programs (SF 424B) for all other projects. The form includes a statement that some of the assurances may not be applicable to your organization and/or your project or program. Signing this form does not make you or your organization subject to laws that are otherwise not applicable to you or your organization. Changing, crossing out, or making notations on the form before signing has no impact on the applicability of law.

H. Certification and Disclosure of Lobbying Activities: Under Title 31 of the United States Code, Section 1352, an applicant or recipient must not use any federally appropriated funds (both annually appropriated and continuing appropriations) or matching funds under a grant or cooperative agreement award to pay any person for lobbying in connection with the award. Lobbying is defined as influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress connection with the award. Submission of an application also represents the applicant’s certification of the statements in 43 CFR Part 18, Appendix A-Certification Regarding Lobbying. If you/your organization have/has made or agrees to make any payment using non-appropriated funds for lobbying in connection with this proposal AND the Federal share exceeds $100,000, complete and submit the SF LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities form available at http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/forms/post-award-reporting-forms.html#sortby=1. See 43 CFR, Subpart 18.100 for more information on when additional submission of this form is required.

I. Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Applicants must notify the Service in writing of any actual or potential conflicts of interest that are known at the time of application or that may arise during the life of this award, in the event an award is made. Conflicts of interest include any relationship or matter which might place the recipient, the recipient’s employees, or the recipient’s subrecipients in a position of conflict, real or apparent, between their responsibilities under the award and any other outside interests. Conflicts of interest may also include, but are not limited to, direct or indirect financial interests, close personal relationships, positions of trust in outside organizations, consideration of future employment arrangements with a different organization, or decision-making affecting the award that would cause a reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts to question the impartiality of the applicant, the applicant’s employees, or the applicant’s future subrecipients in the matter. Upon receipt of such a notice, the Service Project Officer in consultation with their Ethics Counselor will determine if a conflict of interest exists and, if so, if there are any possible actions to be taken by the applicant to reduce or resolve the conflict. Failure to resolve conflicts of interest in a manner that satisfies the Service may result in the project not being select for funding.

J. Required Overlap/Duplication Statement: Applicants must provide a statement that addresses if there is any overlap between the proposed project and any other active or anticipated projects in terms of activities, costs, or time commitment of key personnel. If any overlap exists, applicants must provide a description of the overlap in their application. Applicants must also state if the proposal submitted for consideration under this program is/is not in any way duplicative of any proposal that was/will be submitted for funding consideration to any other potential funding source (Federal or non-Federal). If such a circumstance exists, applicants must detail when the other duplicative proposal(s) were submitted, to whom (entity name and program), and when funding decisions are expected to be announced. If at any time a proposal is awarded funds that would be duplicative of the funding requested from the Service, applicants must notify the Service point of contact for this funding opportunity immediately.

Application Checklist

· Evidence of non-profit status: If a non-profit organization, a copy of their Section 501(c)(3) or (4) status determination letter received from the Internal Revenue Service.

· SF 424, Application for Federal Assistance: A complete, signed and dated SF 424, SF 424-Mandatory, or SF 424-Individual form.

· Project summary

· Project narrative

· Timetable

· Description of key personnel qualifications

· Single Audit Reporting statement: If a U.S. state, local government, federally-recognized Indian tribal government, or non-profit organization, statements regarding applicability of and compliance with Single Audit reporting requirements.

· SF 424 budget form: A complete SF 424C Budget Information form.

· Budget justification

· Insurance and Policy Requirements

· Federally-funded equipment list: If Federally-funded equipment will be used for the project, a list of that equipment

· Indirect cost statement

· NICRA: When applicable, a copy of the organization’s current Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement.

· SF 424 Assurances form: Signed and dated SF 424D Assurances form.

· SF LLL form: If applicable, completed SF-LLL Disclosure of Lobbying Activities form.

· Conflict of Interest disclosure, when applicable.

· Overlap/Duplication statement

Failure to provide complete information may cause delays, postponement, or rejection of the application.

V. Submission Instructions SUBMISSION DEADLINE: April 27, 2017, by 4 p.m. MDT

Intergovernmental Review: Before submitting an application, U.S. state and local government applicants should visit the following website (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants_spoc/) to determine whether their application is subject to the state intergovernmental review process under Executive Order (E.O.) 12372 “Intergovernmental review of Federal Programs.” E.O. 12372 was issued to foster the intergovernmental partnership and strengthen federalism by relying on state and local processes for the coordination and review of proposed Federal financial assistance and direct Federal development. The E.O. allows each state to designate an entity to perform this function. The official list of designated entities is posted on the website. Contact your state’s designated entity for more information on the process the state requires to be followed when applying for assistance. States that do not have a designated entity listed on the website have chosen not to participate in the review process.

Download the Application Package linked to this Funding Opportunity on Grants.gov to begin the application process. Downloading and saving the Application Package to your computer makes the required government-wide standard forms fillable and printable. Completed applications may be submitted by mail, by email, electronically through Grants.gov, or as otherwise described in the Grants.gov funding opportunity. Please select ONE of the submission options:

To submit an application by mail:

Number all pages of your printed application. Mail one, single-sided, unbound copy (do not staple or otherwise permanently bind pages) of your complete application to the Service program point of contact identified in the Grants.gov funding opportunity.

The required SF 424 Application for Federal Assistance and Assurances forms and any other required standard forms MUST be signed by your organization’s authorized official. The Signature and Date fields on the standard forms downloaded from Grants.gov are pre-populated with the text “Completed by Grants.gov upon submission” or “Completed on submission to Grants.gov”.