Many important institutional needs were identified by stakeholders, partners and DEWAP teams. The number of priority administrative needs and actions identified during this DEWAP revision process will require significant effort within DNREC. However, the extent to which they can be implemented is also dependent upon external factors outside of the agency’s control. Several long-standing constraints limit the Department’s ability to fully implement the DEWAP including a need for increased capacity and a need for advocacy from partners and the public to increase available resources.

Historically, DFW budgets and staffing levels have not been able to keep up with the needs of wildlife in Delaware. Whereas hunting and fishing license fees allow matching of existing federal aid for game and fish research and management, there remains insufficient in-house capacity and match for all non-game wildlife taxa and SGCN. In many cases, conservation partners have had to fulfill that role. DFW cannot fully carry out its mission and implement the DEWAP until these capacity issues are addressed. Multiple stakeholders and key partners voiced concerns about the need for additional funding sources and capacity so that the Division can more fully achieve its mission.

Working in advance of issues rather than reacting to them will help mitigate impacts on fish and wildlife and their habitats. Planning can be done at many scales – nationally, regionally, statewide, and locally. All of these scales have the ability to promote sound conservation practices that can maximize benefit to Delaware’s fish and wildlife in the short and longer term.  

The DEWAP has considered and incorporated by reference many partner plans and programs from endangered species Recovery Plans to the Delaware Statewide Forest Strategy and Delaware’s Climate Action Plan. This provides support for shared priorities and maximizes coordination between local, state, and federal agencies. Partners have the opportunity to include DEWAP information and actions in their planning. In particular, DEWAP habitat maps can be incorporated into state and local land use planning. Next steps could include developing customized information or maps at a finer municipal scale to incorporate these WAP priorities into additional statewide and municipal land use decisions.

Specific planning actions include assisting partners in implementing their plans for SGCN and key habitats, as well as incorporating the DEWAP priorities into partners’ plans. Examples include coordination and DEWAP integration with the Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT), statewide planning, and comprehensive local and municipal plans. Outcomes measured for the administrative conservation actions below would include increased (agency and partner) capacity and development of new and enhanced administrative means (incentives and structure) to conserve the SGCN and key habitats and implement the priority actions identified in this DEWAP.

Planning occurs at many levels, and the DEWAP should be used to inform at local, state, regional and national levels. Planning at the regional level will continue through DNREC support of the RCN and other key regional coordination and prioritization efforts. 

Delaware supports important Northeast regional efforts to address climate change through the Regional Conservation Needs (RCN) program and the Northeast Fish and Wildlife Diversity Technical Committee (NEFWDTC). This included advising the Northeast Climate Science Center’s (NECSC) synthesis of regional information on climate change (Staudinger et al. 2024). This will be applied over the next decade through implementation of the 2025 DEWAP along with the priority actions from the climate framework and actions to protect habitats identified to be at high risk from sea level rise (SLR) in the SLR vulnerability assessment. To help communities plan for the impacts of climate change, federal, state, and local governments, universities and non-profit organizations have developed various tools that pertain to Delaware including the following. 

Developing adaptation strategies for individual species depends on the vulnerability of specific species independent of, or in addition to, the vulnerability of the habitats within which they are found. In general, strategies employed to mitigate impacts to vulnerable habitats would also benefit resident species, although there are a number of characteristics that may increase a particular species’ vulnerability. 

The NECASC Regional Synthesis identified the following specific factors: 

• Shifts in Range, Elevation or Depth: Climate change will affect plant community composition through changes in temperature, hydrology, and disturbance regimes (storms, fires, insect outbreaks, and diseases). These habitat changes will have direct effects on population sizes that can be supported by suitable habitat (both aquatic and terrestrial). As with diet, species that utilize a broader range of habitat types will be less vulnerable to climate change. When habitats are degraded or become unsuitable (for any reason), species’ abilities to find new habitat depend on their mobility and the connectivity of suitable habitat. 
• Shifts in Morphology or Phenology: Changes in organism size, or physical and functional alterations that occur in the body’s systems. In addition to the importance of timing of food availability, some species rely on environmental cues for breeding or migration. Monitoring programs will be needed to determine when populations are declining due to changes in timing and management activities (harvest, stocking, etc.) may be adjusted. 
• Changes in Population: Changes in population size or population trends due to changing climate, possibly through changing food availability, phenological mismatch, indirect effects or other causes. 
• Indirect Effects:  Consequences that arise not from a direct cause-and-effect relationship, but rather from a chain of events or a mediating factor. 

Additional factors can also be affected by climate change, such as: 

• Diet: Climate change can affect species populations by increasing or decreasing the availability of a primary food source or by changing the seasonal timing of the availability of the food source. In general, species that eat a wide variety of foods are less vulnerable than species that depend on specific foods. 
• Disease: Higher temperatures can increase growth rates, strains, distribution of disease carriers, and susceptibility of the host animal to diseases and parasites, especially for aquatic species. 
• Competition and inter-dependence: Because some species are benefited by changes in climate and habitat while others are negatively impacted, changes in the competitive balance between species or the dependent relationships between species are expected. These changes are complex and likely to be surprising, even with strong monitoring efforts. In the future, new/novel climate niches and associated habitats may completely disrupt established competitive and dependent relationships between species. 

In particular, the strategy of introducing species to areas outside their historical range to secure their future under climate change is a controversial adaptation action. Referred to as “managed relocation,” “assisted migration,” or “assisted colonization,” there has been considerable debate in the literature concerning the implementation of this methodology (Beardmore and Winder 2011; Rout et al. 2013). One question is whether such introductions are worth the financial costs and ecological risks, i.e., what might be the potential collateral damage to the ecosystem at the introduction site. Although the small size of Delaware limits the efficacy of conducting such projects within the state, it may be prudent to develop policies regarding managed relocations in advance of requests to conduct such projects. This regional context informed and helped frame the DEWAP approach to climate change. 

The 2021 Delaware Climate Action Plan provides recommendations to minimize greenhouse gas emissions and maximize resilience to climate change impacts and further includes risks to wildlife and actions to be taken to benefit Delaware’s Wildlife. We expect the 2025 Delaware Climate Action Plan to be released on a similar timeframe as the 2025 DEWAP. 

Actions to address the impacts of climate change on SGCN have been, and continue to be, conducted throughout Delaware by state and federal agencies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and private landowners. Current projects include the restoration of marshes vulnerable to sea level rise; adaptive and strategic retreat of coastal impoundments to provide tidal buffers from coastal storms; creating new impoundments from adjacent agricultural fields to provide strategic retreat of existing coastal impoundments; and restoration of coastal forests damaged by saltwater intrusion associated with storm surges. All of these projects attempt to examine future climate change scenarios and protect SGCN and their habitats from the effects of climate change and sea level rise. However, increased funding and capacity will be required over the next decade to scale these efforts up to the level necessary to address the magnitude of this threat to Delaware’s SGCN. 

The outcomes measured for the climate change preparedness conservation actions include: 

• Percent of planning and climate preparedness actions implemented as planned;
• Evidence that clear planning needs and outcomes have been identified with input from relevant users;
• Evidence that the planning clearly provides relevant information and process to relevant audiences to achieve the desired response;
• Evidence that planning is reducing key threats; and
• Response of the SGCN and key habitat would be measured to determine if the outcomes were achieved. If not, adaptive management would be applied. 

Enforcing laws, and creating regulations and policies to ensure fish, wildlife, and their habitats persist in the future are important roles of DNREC. These laws and policies can prevent detrimental impacts through permitting and environmental review and can promote conservation practices through financial incentives or by generating funding.  

Actions identified in this category address the fundamental objective of protecting Delaware’s SGCN and their habitats. Human activities, including excessive visitation, may result in direct physical damage to wildlife and habitats. For example, at sandy beaches used as nesting areas by plovers and terns, human activity impacts reproductive success of these ground-nesting species. Other examples include the need to minimize impacts of collection and harvesting of native species in need of conservation by evaluation of current policies and regulations. Development and enforcement of laws, regulations, and policies to conserve Delaware’s SGCN and key habitats are an important aspect of DNREC’s mission. 

Creating laws and policies to ensure fish, wildlife, and their habitats persist in the future is another important role of DNREC DFW. These laws and policies can prevent detrimental impacts on wildlife and their habitats and promote conservation practices through financial incentives or generating funding. The outcomes measured for the law and policy conservation actions below include:

• Percent of law and policy actions implemented as planned; 
• Evidence that law and policy change/ action is reducing key threats;  
• Degree to which target SGCN, or key habitats, respond as expected from new or improved law and policy changes; and 
• Response of the SGCN and key habitat would be measured to determine if the outcomes were achieved. If not, adaptive management would be applied. 

The DEWAP identifies several actions to address the need for additional support for conservation education and awareness. It calls for an increase in communication and outreach to diverse audiences, including private landowners, state and federal regulatory agencies, land trusts, other NGOs, municipalities, schools and the public. 

Such actions fulfill the fundamental objective and need to inform Delaware’s public and stakeholders. It is necessary to develop cost-effective ways to create effective outreach to parties who can assist with wildlife conservation. Partners, especially NGOs, offer excellent collaborative opportunities, through their facilities and communications, to expand information dissemination for the conservation of SGCN and their habitats. 

Outcomes measured for the education and outreach conservation actions below include:  

• Percent of education and outreach actions implemented as planned; 
• Evidence that education and outreach clearly provide relevant information and format to relevant audiences to achieve increased awareness, behavior change and other desired response; and 
• Response of the SGCN and key habitat to determine if the outcomes were achieved. If not, adaptive management would be applied. 

This category of actions addresses the need to inform and partner with key public and private conservation entities in the state. There are a number of existing programs within Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), USFWS, DelDOT, Delaware Department of Agriculture (DDA), and other agencies designed to promote opportunities for private landowners and other entities to enhance wildlife conservation and habitat management on their properties. Landowners may be eligible for funding to perform the task but may be unaware of the many partners’ programs that offer financial and technical assistance. Working with such local, state, regional, and federal partners facilitates a coordinated landowner outreach effort and maximizes the conservation program delivery to preserve the integrity of these important parcels and focal areas. 

DNREC can provide technical assistance to DelDOT and municipalities to mitigate the effects of roads and other barriers to wildlife travel. Roads constrain the extent and mobility of wildlife populations whether through direct mortality or acting as impassable barriers. Roadways serve as conduits for the introduction of contaminants, invasive species, and other secondary effects of human infrastructure. For example, vegetation control and herbicide treatments and deicing salts from road run-off can affect fish and wildlife. Road lighting attracts and impacts night-flying moths and other beneficial insects. Potential mitigating actions include more wildlife-friendly designs for energy efficiency and replacement of stream culverts; strategic road placement to minimize the spread of invasive species, especially on public lands; reducing drainage and other road run-off into nearby wetlands; and making connections across or underneath roads to allow for travel and to extend the effective preserve size.  

For each of the conservation actions below, the response of a SGCN and key habitat would be measured to determine if the outcomes were achieved. If not, adaptive management would be applied. Outcomes measured for technical assistance actions below include  

• Number of individuals receiving technical assistance sorted by topic/action; 
• Percent of target audience met across project sorted by topic/action; 
• Percent of initiatives that show a reduction in key threats being addressed; and 
• Response of the SGCN and key habitat to determine if the outcomes were achieved. If not, adaptive management would be applied. 

DNREC provides other types of technical assistance to both public and private landowners. For example, Best Management Practices (BMPs) are established guidelines for minimizing adverse impacts to fish, wildlife, and their habitats (e.g. water quality) that landowners can apply to minimize the impact of commercial, industrial, or residential activities. Technical assistance and BMPs could help address widespread issues such as invasive species or encourage more wildlife-friendly practices by the public in their own backyards.

Several federal and state programs provide technical and cost share assistance to landowners for habitat management to protect, restore, enhance and manage habitats that support fish, wildlife and plant species considered at risk. Cost share projects include creation of wildlife habitat (including pollinators), reverting field restoration, warm season grass planting, control of invasives, and wetlands restoration. 

Data collection (research, inventory, survey, monitoring) needs were identified for many SGCN and key habitats in Delaware. Specific actions to fill data gaps are listed under the appropriate habitat and taxa sections in the DEWAP Database. As data collection and management improve, key habitat and landscape-level maps and tools can be created to assist local land-use boards and commissions in reviewing development projects that may adversely impact SGCN or their key habitats. A more comprehensive wildlife database addressing current status and distribution through GIS mapping could support the development of improved statewide strategies for specific key habitats on state and private lands. Providing this information to partners, private landowners, local/town land managers, and land-use decision-making bodies is crucial to addressing the growing issues and pressures that Delaware’s fish and wildlife face. 

Scientific inventory and geospatial data in Delaware are improving but still are not sufficient to produce accurate distribution and status maps for SGCN or all of the key habitats, or the associated vegetative communities. The field inventories and analyses to provide the data and mapping capabilities for the conservation of these SGCN fish and wildlife species and key habitats remain a priority research and general planning need. 

Improving the mapping of key habitats statewide helps direct distribution and abundance surveys of SGCN (particularly invertebrates) within these key habitats and associated vegetative communities. It also improves information on the locations and relative conditions of key habitats essential to the conservation of SGCN characteristic of or restricted to these habitats. This also allows for analyses and monitoring of the key habitats and their relative condition within their ecological contexts and helps to develop a framework for their conservation within Delaware’s waters and landscape. 

The DEWAP recognizes that assessment and monitoring of wildlife populations and their key habitats require performance measures upon which to evaluate the effectiveness of the process. However, it is not possible to conduct annual inventories for most SGCN. There is a need to develop an effective monitoring framework for a wide array of SGCN and their key habitats and to assess and monitor the status of these species in the most effective and efficient way. This would position DNREC and its partners to better address emerging needs such as disease and invasive species.

Continuing collaboration with partners to collect and analyze spatial and digital data on Delaware’s waters and landscape will provide improved information and opportunity to assess and monitor the extent and condition of key habitats. Additional assessment and monitoring approaches can be incorporated into the WAP monitoring needs such as periodic checks of forest health, water quality, and other environmental monitoring programs that are already conducted in Delaware. These will all be evaluated in order to develop an effective monitoring framework for application to SGCN and key habitats, as well as monitoring their spatial and temporal effectiveness. 

DEWAP indicators and performance measures for projects that involve data collection and analysis include the following and are a component of the DEWAP database: 

• Evidence that clear management needs and outcomes have been identified with input from relevant data users; 
• Evidence that the researcher clearly provides answers to relevant questions; 
• Evidence that data is reaching relevant audiences;
• Evidence that data collection effort resulted in conservation action recommendations; and
• Evidence data are being used to inform conservation actions. 

Conserving SGCN and their key habitats is a fundamental objective of the DEWAP revision. The Northeast Lexicon, through use of the CMP, defines these activities as managing the biotic, abiotic, and anthropogenic aspects of wildlife habitat, and management including individuals of a targeted population, species, taxon, or guild. Direct management of natural resources is one of the primary missions of DNREC. 

Many factors influence management of natural resources, including staffing, budgets, policies that may not have the needed public support/understanding (e.g. creating early successional habitat), lack of knowledge regarding species status or habitat needs, and conflicting land uses.  

The spread of invasive species is a major challenge to direct management. Understanding invasive species impacts and invasion processes is essential for determining appropriate management actions. New invasive species continue to appear and more can be expected given that increasing temperature and other climate change factors exacerbate invasion processes. An additional factor that can promote the spread of invasive species is related to the overabundance of White-tailed Deer. 

Throughout Delaware’s coastal marshes, SWG and Pittman-Robertson-funded control programs for Phragmites and other invasive plant species have helped restore thousands of acres of impoundments, fresh and brackish tidal marsh habitat, and early successional habitat critical to numerous SGCN on both public and private lands.

For the conservation actions below, the response of SGCN and key habitat would be measured to determine if the outcomes were achieved. If not, adaptive management would be applied. DEWAP indicators and performance measures for projects that involve Direct Management of Natural Resources include the following: 

• Percent management actions implemented as planned;
• Evidence that direct management action is reducing key threats; 
• Degree to which target SGCN respond as expected from direct management actions; 
• Degree to which target habitats/processes respond as expected from direct management actions; 
• Species Measures (e.g., population size, reproductive success); and 
• Habitat Measures (e.g., size, condition). 

Protecting SGCN and their habitats through land acquisition and easement is another means of conserving these species in Delaware. Land protection actions were identified as critical to address the threat of habitat loss due to development and habitat degradation. The DEWAP recognizes that conservation needs to be conducted at all spatial scales, from broad landscapes to the smallest backyard. All municipalities, land trusts, and citizens have the capacity to contribute to conservation of the state’s fish and wildlife. 

In Delaware, most existing preserves are not large enough to support some vulnerable species, due to pressures from public use of the preserves and indirect influences from surrounding land uses. Therefore, a strategy of increasing the size of protected preserves and connecting them to other conserved areas is needed. If acquisitions are prioritized with wildlife conservation as a primary goal, then issues such as habitat management, human disturbance, mortality of animals, and connectivity can be more strategically addressed.

Protection of aquatic systems is also challenging because inputs generated throughout an entire watershed, including contaminants and invasive species, can impact aquatic habitats at great distances from their sources. Freshwater aquatic systems are used for power generation, drinking water, and irrigation, putting additional stresses on these systems. Programs to restore stream connectivity and improve or maintain flow rates and water quality must be expanded. 

An example of collaborative habitat acquisition facilitated by SWGs was the purchase of the Wright properties by DFW in 2011. A SWG grant helped DNREC DFW acquire 210 forested acres, with 144 acres being adjacent to an existing state wildlife area (Nanticoke Wildlife Management Area), the remaining 68-acre tract adjoining the Ellis C. and ABC Woodlands Tracts of the Nanticoke WMA. DFW identified these properties as priority areas to protect Key Wildlife Habitats and SGCN due to the diverse mid-successional pine forests providing habitat for a variety of species such as the Delmarva fox squirrel, Northern parula and Cope’s grey treefrog. Additionally, protecting these areas ensures that legal activities like hunting are still able to occur despite increased development on surrounding lands. This project was supported financially by the Wildlife Restoration Program. Other land acquisitions continue to involve conservation partner organizations in prioritization and funding. 

The DEWAP indicators and performance measures for projects are listed below and are a component of the DEWAP database: 

• % of prioritized land purchased, leased, or put into easement 
• % of protected land with management and monitoring plans that outline steps required to achieve desired conservation results
• % of land acquisition actions in which management plans are being implemented
• % of initiatives that show a reduction in key threats being addressed by management plan
• % of protected lands at the time of renewal that are: a) renewed; b) converted from lease to easement or c) converted to acquisition 
• % of easements or leases in compliance