Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Wildlife Management Mid-Late 1800s • Market hunting caused dramatic reductions in some species and extinction of others (passenger pigeon) • States passed laws – Licenses required – Prohibited market hunting – Set aside game refuges Wildlife Management Mid-Late 1800s • Sportsman's groups actively assist in conservation – Hunting license proceeds used to protect game species – State Fish and Wildlife agencies are still funded by license revenues • But - still working to extirpate top predators Fisheries Management Mid-Late 1800s • Depletion of Game Fish Populations – Some limits placed on commercial harvest from inland waters • Hatcheries developed in 1870s – with federal assistance – Little attention paid to habitat, behavior, survival of hatchery fish, genetic mixing – Or additional harvest limits and habitat protection Fish and Wildlife Management • Who should manage fish and wildlife – the States or the Federal Government?? – 1870s-1890s – Supreme Court cases – Resident fish and wildlife considered the property of the state in which they reside • Most hunting and fishing regulations set by states to this day • Enforcement action also mostly by states – even on federal land Fish and Wildlife Management • Federal Role – Could ban hunting (e.g. Yellowstone - 1894) and regulate harvests on federal lands – Responsible for managing migratory fish and wildlife • USFWS Predecessor Agencies – 1871 - Bureau of Fisheries in Dept of Commerce – 1886 – Bureau of Biological Survey in Dept of Agriculture Federal Fish and Wildlife Management • 1900 – Lacey Act – Prohibits interstate transport of game taken in violation of state law • Provides for federal assistance to states ÄGave states a tool to end market hunting and enforce harvest limits Federal Fish and Wildlife Management • 1906 Antiquities Act – President could withdraw federal lands for refuges • Pelican Island (1903) • National Bison (1908) and Elk (1912) Ranges Federal Fish and Wildlife Management • 1913-1934 – Migratory Bird Acts (3) – Treaty-making powers for protecting migratory waterfowl – federal responsibility for hunting limits – DOI authority to purchase land for wildlife/ waterfowl refuges and sanctuaries – Federal Duck Stamp Program – “User Pays” • About 2 million acres purchased with initial proceeds Federal Fish and Wildlife Management • 1934 Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act – Federal agencies to evaluate effects of federal projects on F&W and habitat • e.g. Army Corps water projects – Advise on mitigation and compensation actions – Continues as major role of US FWS today US Fish and Wildlife Service • 1940 President Roosevelt Created Fish and Wildlife Service – Consolidates Bureaus of Fisheries and Biological Survery in Department of the Interior • Mission – Primary: migratory waterfowl management – Also: hatcheries, coordination, and refuges US Fish and Wildlife Service • 1956 – Fish and Wildlife Act – FWS given authority to consult in a wide variety of actions, including technical assistance to states – “for the protection, conservation, and advancement of fish and wildlife resources” US Fish and Wildlife Service • 1966 – National Refuge System Admin. Act – Game and wildlife refuges, waterfowl sanctuaries and management areas combined into National Wildlife Refuge System – But – no clear objectives for the entire system • Each refuge still has own mandates – Other “compatible uses” also allowed – Many conflicts US Fish and Wildlife Service • National Refuge System – Still growing – 77 million acres in AK (1980) – Purpose have been further specified and a national mission has been defined • Theme: wildlife conservation in balance with wildlife-oriented recreation and other compatible human uses – However - conflicts continue • Still no whole system management US Fish and Wildlife Service • FWS is more than just a land management agency: – – – – – – Refuge System Hatchery operation and stocking assistance Migratory Waterfowl – interstate and international Technical and Financial Assistance to States Coordination – “trustee” for F&W Endangered Species Protection and Management Endangered Species Act 1973 (Amended 1978) • Endangered species a national concern – responsibility of the FWS and NMFS • Listing process for “threatened”and “endangered” – Present or threatened destruction or modification of habitat – Overharvest – Disease or predation – Inadequacy of existing regulatory protection – Other natural or human factors affecting the continued existence of the species Endangered Species Act 1973 (Amended 1978) • All federal agencies required to act to restore listed species and their habitat – Generally prohibited any entity (federal, state, private) from “taking” – killing, harming or harassing • Emphasis on habitat protection, including designation of critical habitat where ES are the major concern Endangered Species Act • 109 on original list – mostly charismatic megafauna • Now adding mostly plants and invertebrates • As of 9/1/03: – 987 listed endangered species (217 threatened) in US (plus 558 international species) – Several thousand US candidate species Endangered Species Act Recovery Plans • Recovery plans required for each listed species • Goal: restore to “viable, self-sustaining part of their ecosystem” • Recovery plans completed for 1003 US species (priority based on degree of threat) – Not all being fully implemented – Species extinct before listed or plans complete Endangered Species Act • Effectiveness? – More than “Emergency Room Conservation” • Conserve habitat for multiple species (biodiversity) – Adequate critical habitat designation – Political will and commitment of resources – Greater emphasis on active management ÄLink to Ecosystem Management Role of Science in ESA • Originally, ESA protection based only on scientific data • 1978 - “God Squad” – set up to balance protection with other interests • Uncertainty in Decision-Making: – How to clearly define: • endangered, threatened • viable populations – Less certain and non-immediate factors are discounted in listing and protection process Role of Science • Base decisions on science alone? – Participation of scientists in political process? – Policy-maker responsibilities? • “Directed” or “Focused” research – Problem with bias? • Case-by-case decisions v. uniform listing criteria – Flexibility v. potential for bias • If ESA not as effective as hoped, whose fault is it?