I see wildlife Photography web sites, forums, youtubers, Facebook posters, and such saying they are "Award Winning Photographers" how do you win awards? are there contests? Are there any geared towards amateur/beginning wildlife photographers I can strive to earn?
Award Winning is not very descriptive. It's the consistency over time that ends up speaking for itself.
I was committee chair for NANPA's Showcase competition, and I judge a lot of images. I also have completed PPA's three day judges training program and judged for PPA.
The level of competition makes a big difference. Most of the top images in the NANPA Showcase come from amateurs - but the images are very good and pros do participate - just not in the numbers you see from amateurs. Most winners in the BBC competition are professionals, but it has a lot of participation from amateurs. Amateur work at the top level is just as good as professional work. The difference is often the time a professional puts into their work, so they may have more opportunities - or they may be so busy with jobs for clients that they don't shoot for competitions. For a professional, competitions can be part of building a brand name and word of mouth.
There is a difference between an excellent photo and a competition image. Competition images need the WOW factor while an excellent photo may be more subtle. Judges of competitions see hundreds or thousands of images, and winners need to stand out. For wildlife, that's usually unique action and timing. In NANPA's Showcase, 75% of the Top 100 bird photos are in flight, in combat, or involve food. The numbers are similar for mammals. The timing is normally around breeding plumage or the right time of year if that applies to the subject. Portraits can be successful, but they need to be exceptional.
Subject matter needs to be new or fresh - not the same subject everyone else is submitting. Bear images from Brooks Falls tend to be very similar and common. They are excellent photos individually, but if you go to Brooks Falls you'll have an image of a bear catching a fish in the air. Large wading birds are very common - in a recent competition I judged there were 65 images out of 250 submissions that contained Great Blue Herons, Spoonbills or Egrets - all common, slow moving birds. The same competition had seven osprey images - and all but one were carrying a fish. If the subject is common, your image better be spectacular.
As to the image itself, it needs to demonstrate excellence. It has to be sharp - but not overly sharpened. It needs great lighting complementing the subject rather than being something you need to overcome. That probably means the image was not taken during the middle of the day. I look for minimal noise and evidence of deep cropping - the image needs to be large enough in the frame that the feathers or fur show detail without processing artifacts. Backgrounds need to be appropriate - not distracting and hopefully complementing the image. A plain blue sky is pretty boring, but some level of out of focus context or a nice background is a positive. Little things need to be addressed in editing - stray debris or hair needs to be fixed as you would with a portrait.
To get a good idea of what it takes, take a look at past winners. Look not only at what they photographed, but the direction of the light, the subject matter, and the context so you can recognize what the special sauce is that made the image a finalist or a winner.
Finally, you don't enter competitions just to win. It's a good way to have someone else evaluate your work and provide feedback. You might consider portfolio reviews to get feedback on your images. Just keep in mind that individual judges will have different perspectives, expertise, and hot buttons. I remember seeing the results of one competition and two of the three judges gave an image a perfect score, while the third judge gave it a score that was just average. Her comment - it's just a landscape (she was an editor at a wildlife publication). The image would have won the competition if she had scored it Very Good - not even Excellent. I saw a large print of the image a few months later selling in a well known gallery for $30,000.