scholarly journals Comprehensive conservation planning and ecological sustainability within the United States National Wildlife Refuge System

2008 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 38-44
Author(s):  
Richard L. Schroeder
10.1068/d75j ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 727-744 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juanita Sundberg ◽  
Bonnie Kaserman

Recent strategies to enforce the United States boundary with Mexico have shifted undocumented immigrants into remote lands federally designated as protected areas (as in national park or national wildlife refuge). Government and media institutions represent such entries as a threat to nature. In this paper we argue that representations and interpretations of threats to nature in border-protected areas are laden with identity attachments. In repeatedly defining that which is threatened as ‘American’, such discourses work to draw boundaries around the nation, thereby narrating inclusion and exclusion.


2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 406-422 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael D. Dixon ◽  
Kevin Heist ◽  
Karl Tinsley

Abstract Bats face an unprecedented array of threats in the early 21st century, from traditional concerns such as habitat loss, to white nose syndrome and collisions with wind turbines. These growing challenges arise when the National Wildlife Refuge System, a system of public lands and waters that provides habitat for nearly every bat species in North America north of Mexico, is beginning its first revision cycle for its management plans, known as Comprehensive Conservation Plans. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is thus uniquely positioned to assess its current contribution to sustaining viable populations of bats in the United States and incorporate those findings into the biological objectives that will guide Refuge management for the next 15 y. We present a review of the degree to which the first generation of Comprehensive Conservation Plans addresses bat conservation, and we provide recommendations to guide managers, planners, and partners in the development of the second generation of these Comprehensive Conservation Plans.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam C. Turner ◽  
Margaret A. Young ◽  
Maureen R. McClung ◽  
Matthew D. Moran

AbstractEcosystem services (ES) have been well studied in most biomes, but the Arctic tundra has received little attention, despite covering over 10% of terrestrial Earth. Using established ES methodologies, we calculated values for the United States Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, a region virtually undisturbed by humans, but slated for future oil and gas drilling. We estimated the Refuge is worth about 1,709 USD/hectare/year, equal to over 13 billion USD annually.Globally important services, such as climate regulation (e.g., carbon storage) and non-use services (e.g., aesthetic information), contributed the most value and were similar to valuations from more productive ecosystems. Local services made smaller contributions to the total, but they remain vitally important to local indigenous cultures. Strikingly, a contingent valuation survey of U.S. residents found that, after neutral educational information, willingness-to-pay to maintain the Refuge in its current state exceeded estimated values of the oil and gas deposits.Our study shows that citizens may value Arctic habitats beyond their traditional economic development potential. Our comprehensive ecosystem services valuation suggests that maintaining the Refuge in its current condition (i.e., de facto wilderness) with its full range of ES is more valuable to humanity compared to development for oil and gas.


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.


2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 250-265
Author(s):  
William R. Brignon ◽  
Carl B. Schreck ◽  
Howard A. Schaller

Abstract More than 1,500 species of plants and animals in the United States are listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act and habitat destruction is the leading cause of population decline. However, developing conservation plans that are consistent with a diversity of stakeholder (e.g., states, tribes, private landowners) values is difficult. Adaptive management and structured decision-making are frameworks that resource managers can use to integrate diverse and conflicting stakeholder value systems into species recovery planning. Within this framework difficult decisions are deconstructed into the three basic components: explicit, quantifiable objectives that represent stakeholder values; mathematical models used to predict the effect of management decisions on the outcome of objectives; and management alternatives or actions. We use Bull Trout Salvelinus confluentus, a species listed in 1999 as threatened pursuant to the Endangered Species Act, as an example of how structured decision-making transparently incorporates stakeholder values and biological information into conservation planning and the decision process. Three moral philosophies—consequentialism, deontology, and virtue theory—suggest that structured decision-making is a justified method that can guide natural resource decisions in the future, consistent with United States Congress' mandate, and will honor society's obligation to recover Endangered Species Act listed species and their habitats. Natural sciences offer a biological basis for predicting the outcomes of decisions. Additionally, an understanding of how to integrate humanities into scientifically defensible conservation planning is helpful in providing the foundation for lasting and effective species conservation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document