Climate Change Adaptation for the US National Wildlife Refuge System

2009 ◽  
Vol 44 (6) ◽  
pp. 1043-1052 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brad Griffith ◽  
J. Michael Scott ◽  
Robert Adamcik ◽  
Daniel Ashe ◽  
Brian Czech ◽  
...  
BioScience ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 64 (11) ◽  
pp. 993-1005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert L. Fischman ◽  
Vicky J. Meretsky ◽  
Alexei Babko ◽  
Michael Kennedy ◽  
Lei Liu ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 92 (2) ◽  
pp. 783-804 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qiao Hu ◽  
Zhenghong Tang ◽  
Lei Zhang ◽  
Yuanyuan Xu ◽  
Xiaolin Wu ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kent Andersson ◽  
Craig A. Davis ◽  
Grant Harris ◽  
David A. Haukos

Abstract Within the U.S. portion of the Central Flyway, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service manages waterfowl on numerous individual units (i.e., Refuges) within the National Wildlife Refuge System. Presently, the extent of waterfowl use that Refuges receive and the contribution of Refuges to waterfowl populations (i.e., the proportion of the Central Flyway population registered at each Refuge) remain unassessed. Such an evaluation would help determine to what extent Refuges support waterfowl relative to stated targets, aid in identifying species requiring management attention, inform management targets, and improve fiscal efficiencies. Using historic monitoring data (1954–2008), we performed this assessment for 23 Refuges in Texas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Nebraska during migration and wintering months (October–March). We examined six dabbling ducks and two diving ducks, plus all dabbling ducks and all diving ducks across two periods (long-term [all data] and short-term [last 10 October–March periods]). Individual Refuge use was represented by the sum of monthly duck count averages for October–March. We used two indices of Refuge contribution: peak contribution and January contribution. Peak contribution was the highest monthly count average for each October–March period divided by the indexed population total for the Central Flyway in the corresponding year; January contribution used the January count average divided by the corresponding population index. Generally, Refuges in Kansas, Nebraska, and New Mexico recorded most use and contribution for mallards Anas platyrhynchos. Refuges along the Texas Gulf Coast recorded most use and contribution for other dabbling ducks, with Laguna Atascosa and Aransas (including Matagorda Island) recording most use for diving ducks. The long-term total January contribution of the assessed Refuges to ducks wintering in the Central Flyway was greatest for green-winged teal Anas crecca with 35%; 12–15% for American wigeon Mareca americana, gadwall Mareca strepera, and northern pintail Anas acuta; and 7–8% for mallard and mottled duck Anas fulvigula. Results indicated that the reliance on the National Wildlife Refuge System decreased for these ducks, with evidence suggesting that, for several species, the assessed Refuges may be operating at carrying capacity. Future analyses could be more detailed and informative were Refuges to implement a single consistent survey methodology that incorporated estimations of detection bias in the survey process, while concomitantly recording habitat metrics on and neighboring each Refuge.


2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (03) ◽  
pp. 445-467 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jia Li ◽  
Michael Mullan ◽  
Jennifer Helgeson

Abstract:The development of national and sectoral climate change adaptation strategies is burgeoning in the US and elsewhere in response to damages from extreme events and projected future risks from climate change. Increasingly, decision makers are requesting information on the economic damages of climate change as well as costs, benefits, and tradeoffs of alternative actions to inform climate adaptation decisions. This paper provides a practical view of the applications of economic analysis to aid climate change adaptation decision making, with a focus on benefit-cost analysis (BCA). We review the recent developments and applications of BCA with implications for climate risk management and adaptation decision making, both in the US and other Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. We found that BCA is still in early stages of development for evaluating adaptation decisions, and to date is mostly being applied to investment project-based appraisals. Moreover, the best practices of economic analysis are not fully reflected in the BCAs of climate adaptation-relevant decisions. The diversity of adaptation measures and decision-making contexts suggest that evaluation of adaptation measures may require multiple analytical methods. The economic tools and information would need to be transparent, accessible, and match with the decision contexts to be effective in enhancing decision making. Based on the current evidence, a set of analytical considerations is proposed for improving economic analysis of climate adaptation that includes the need to better address uncertainty and to understand the cross-sector and general equilibrium effects of sectoral and national adaptation policy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document