428,008 research outputs found
National fish, wildlife and plants climate adaptation strategy
No full textThe purpose of the National Fish, Wildlife and
Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy is to inspire
and enable natural resource administrators,
elected officials, and other decision makers
to take action to adapt to a changing climate.
Adaptation actions are vital to sustaining the
nation’s ecosystems and natural resources—
as well as the human uses and values that
the natural world provides.http://www.wildlifeadaptationstrategy.gov/pdf/NFWPCAS-Final.pdfNational Fish, Wildlife and Plants
Climate Adaptation Strategy
Recommended citationNational Fish, Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaptation Partnership.
2012.
National Fish, Wildlife and Plants
Climate Adaptation Strategy.Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies,
Council on Environmental Quality, Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Washington, DC.
Cover credits: Children in woods, Steve
Hillebrand. Horse-eye jacks, National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration. Painted Hills,
Jane Pellicciotto. Pelican, George Andrejko/
Arizona Game and Fish Department.
Design and layout: Jane Pellicciotto/
Allegro DesignThis publication is printed on FSC-certified
paper in the United States.
ISBN: 978-1-938956-00-3
DOI : 10.3996/082012-FWSReport-1
wildlifeadaptationstrategy.gov
about this report
This report was produced by an inter-
governmental working group of federal, state,
and tribal agency representatives at the
request of the U.S. Government. Therefore,
the report is in the public domain. Some
materials used in the report are copyrighted
and permission was granted to the U.S.
Government for their publication in this
report. For subsequent uses that include
such copyrighted materials, permission
for reproduction must be sought from the
copyright holder. In all cases, credit must be
given for copyrighted materials.
For more information, contact:Mark Shaff er
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
[email protected]
703-358-2603
Roger Griff is
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[email protected]
301-427-8134
ARPITA ITA CHOUDHURY
Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies
[email protected]
202-624-5853
DI SCLAIME R
This Strategy is not a final agency action
subject to judicial review, nor is it considered a
rule. Nothing in this report is meant to affect
the substantive or legal rights of third parties
or bind government agencies.
Photo cr editscover: Children in woods , Steve Hill ebr and.
Horse-eye jac ks, National Oc eanic and Atmosph eric
Administration. Painted Hills, Jane Pell icc iotto.
Pelican , Georg e Andrejko/Ar izona Game and
Fish Department
acknowl edgement
This Strategy was produced by an
intergovernmental working group of federal,
state and tribal agency professionals whose
expertise, knowledge and dedication brought
the report to completion (see Appendix E). The
Strategy would not have been possible without
the research, monitoring and assessment
activities of the nation’s scientific community
on natural resource conservation in a changing
climate. The Strategy also benefited greatly
from input from a variety of non-governmental
organizations and the public.National Fish, Wildlife and Plants
Climate Adaptation Strategy
authors
National Fish, Wildlife, and Plants Climate
Adaptation Partnershipii | National Fish, Wildlife & Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy
Inside
Preface 1
Executive Summary 2
CH.1 About the 7
Strategy
1.1 A Broad National Effort 7
1.2 Origins and Development 8
1.3 The Case for Action 9
1.3.1 The Climate is Changing 9
1.3.2 Impacts to Fish, Wildlife, 11
and Plants
1.3.3 Ecosystem Services 12
1.3.4 Adaptation to Climate Change 14
1.4 Purpose, Vision, and 17
Guiding Principles
1.5 Risk and Uncertainty 18
CH.2 Impacts of 19
Climate Change &
Ocean Acidification
2.1 GHG-induced Changes 19
to the Climate and Ocean
2.2 Existing Stressors on Fish, 21
Wildlife, and Plants
2.3 Climate Change Impacts 25
on Fish, Wildlife, and Plants
2.3.1 Forest Ecosystems 31
2.3.2 Shrubland Ecosystems 33
2.3.3 Grassland Ecosystems 33
2.3.4 Desert Ecosystems 34
2.3.5 Arctic Tundra Ecosystems 36
2.3.6 Inland Water Ecosystems 39
2.3.7 Coastal Ecosystems 42
2.3.8 Marine Ecosystems 47
2.4 Impacts on Ecosystem 51
ServicesThe purpose of the National Fish, Wildlife and
Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy is to inspire
and enable natural resource administrators, elected officials, and other decision makers
to take action to adapt to a changing climate.
Adaptation actions are vital to sustaining the nation’s ecosystems and natural resources —
as well as the human uses and values that
the natural world provides.g
a
ryry
w
i
s
e
g
a
ryry
w
i
s
e
noaa
Paul
S
u
nd
b
e
rgInside the Strategy | iii
Resources 93
Literature Cited 93
Appendix A: 103
Supporting MaterialsEcosystem-Specific Background Papers 103
Related Resources, Reports, and 103
Materials
Appendix B: Glossary 105
Appendix C: Acronyms 108
Appendix D: Scientific Names 109
Appendix E: Team Members 110
CH.3 Climate 53
Adaptation Goals,
Strategies & Actions
GOAL 1: Conserve habitat to support 55
healthy fish, wildlife, and plant
populations and ecosystem functions
in a changing climate.
GOAL 2: Manage species and habitats 60
to protect ecosystem functions and
provide sustainable cultural, subsistence,
recreational, and commercial use in
a changing climate.
GOAL 3: Enhance capacity for effective 63
management in a changing climate.
GOAL 4: Support adaptive 67
management in a changing climate
through integrated observation and
monitoring and use of decision
support tools.
GOAL 5: Increase knowledge and 71
information on impacts and responses
of fish, wildlife, and plants to a changing
climate.
GOAL 6: Increase awareness and 74
motivate action to safeguard fish,
wildlife, and plants in a changing climate.
GOAL 7: Reduce non-climate stressors 76
to help fish, wildlife, plants, and
ecosystems adapt to a changing climate.
CH.4 Opportunities 79
for Multiple Sectors
4.1 Agriculture 81
4.2 Energy 83
4.3 Housing and Urbanization 84
4.4 Transportation and 86
Infrastructure
4.5 Water Resources 86
CH.5 Integration & 88
Implementation
5.1 Strategy Integration 88
5.2 Strategy Implementation 90
usfws
USFWS/Jo
shu
a Win
e
usfws
ni
gh
t
s
k
y
:
O
k
l
a
h
oma
D
e
p
a
r
tment o
f
Wi
l
d
l
i
f
e Con
s
e
r
vation6 | National Fish, Wildlife & Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy
Our climate is changing, and these changes
are already impacting the nation’svaluable
natural resources and the people, communities,
and economies that depend on them.
PrefacePreface | 1
that can be taken, or at least initiated,
over the next !ve to ten years in the
context of the changes to our climate that
are already occurring, and those that are
projected by the end of the century. It is
designed to be a key part of the nation’s
larger response to a changing climate,
and to guide responsible actions by
natural resource managers, conservation
partners, and other decision makers at
all levels. "e Strategy was produced by
federal, state, and tribal representatives
and has been coordinated with a variety
of other climate change adaptation e#orts
at national, state, and tribal levels.
The overarching goal of the
Strategy is a simple one:
to inspire, enable, and increase
meaningful action that helps
safeguard the nation’s natural
resources in a changing climate.
"e overarching goal of the Strategy
is a simple one: to inspire, enable, and
increase meaningful action that helps
safeguard the nation’s natural resources
in a changing climate. Admittedly, the
task ahead is a daunting one, especially if
the world fails to make serious e#orts to
reduce emissions of GHGs. But we can
make a di#erence. To do that, we must
begin now to prepare for a future unlike
the recent past.
The observed changes in climate have
been attributed to the increasing
levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other
greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the atmo-sphere, which have set in motion a series
of changes in the planet’s climate system.
Far greater changes are inevitable not
only because emissions will continue, but
also because CO2 stays in the atmosphere
for a long time. Even if further GHG
emissions were halted today, alterations
already underway in the Earth’s climate
will last for hundreds or thousands of
years. If GHG emissions continue, as is
currently more likely, the planet’s average
temperature is projected to rise by 2.0
to 11.5 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of
the century, with accompanying major
changes in extreme weather events,
variable and/or inconsistent weather
patterns, sea level rise, and changing
ocean conditions including increased
acidi!cation.
Safeguarding our valuable living
resources in a changing climate for
current and future generations is a
serious and urgent problem. Addressing
the problem requires action now to
understand current impacts, assess future
risks, and prepare for and adapt to a
changing climate. "is National Fish,
Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaptation
Strategy (herea$er Strategy) is a call to
action–a framework for e#ective steps
These impacts are expected to increase with continued changes in the
planet’s climate system, putting many of the nation’s valuable natural resources
at risk. Action is needed now to reduce these impacts (including reducing the
drivers of climate change) and help sustain the natural resources and services
the nation depends on.
Because the development of this adapta-tion
Strategy will only be worthwhile if it
leads to meaningful action, it is directly
aimed at several key groups: natural
resource management agency leaders and
sta# (federal, state, and tribal); elected
o%cials in both executive and legisla-tive government branches (federal, state,
local, and tribal); leaders in industries
that depend on and can impact natural
resources, such as agriculture, forestry,
and recreation; and private landowners,
whose role is crucial because they own
more than 70 percent of the land in the
United States.
"e Strategy should also be useful for
decision makers in sectors that a#ect
natural resources (such as agriculture,
energy, urban development, transporta-tion, and water resource management),
for conservation partners, for educators,
and for the interested public, whose input
and decisions will have major impacts on
safeguarding the nation’s living resources
in the face of climate change. "e Strategy
also should be useful to those in other
countries dealing with these same issues
and those dealing with the international
dimensions of climate adaptation.
USFWS
2 | National Fish, Wildlife & Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy
Executive Summary
Fish, wildlife, and plants provide jobs, food, clean
water, storm protection, health benefits and many other important ecosystem services that support people, communities and economies across the nation every day. The observed changes in the climate are already impacting these valuable resources and systems. These impacts are expected to increase with continued changes in the planet’s climate system.
Action is needed now to help safeguard these natural resources and the communities and economies that depend on them.
Measurements unequivocally show
that average surface air tempera-tures in the United States have risen two
degrees Fahrenheit (°F) over the last
50 years. The science strongly supports
the finding that the underlying cause
of these changes is the accumulation of
heat-trapping carbon dioxide (CO2) and
other greenhouse gases (GHG) in the
atmosphere. If GHG emissions continue
unabated, the planet’s average tempera-ture is projected to rise by an additional
2.0 to 11.5 °F by the end of the century,
with accompanying increases in extreme
weather events, variable and/or incon-sistent weather patterns, sea levels and
other factors with significant impacts
on natural environments and the vital
services they provide.
Faced with a future climate that will
be unlike that of the recent past, the
nation has the opportunity to act now
to reduce the impacts of climate change
on its valuable natural resources and
resource-dependent communities and
businesses. Preparing for and addressing
these changes in the near term can help
increase the efficiency and effectiveness
of actions to reduce negative impacts
and take advantage of potential benefits
from a changing climate (climate adap-tation). In 2009, Congress recognized
the need for a national government-
“...develop a national,
government-wide strategy to
address climate impacts on fish,
wildlife, plants, and associated
ecological processes.”
—Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Ag encies Appr opr iations Ac t, 2010g
a
ryry
w
i
s
e
Executive Summary | 3
and other decision makers to take
effective steps towards climate change
adaptation over the next five to ten years.
Federal, state, and tribal governments
and conservation partners are encour-aged to read the Strategy in its entirety
to identify intersections between the
document and their mission areas and
activities.
The Strategy is guided by nine principles.
These principles include collaborating
across all levels of government, working
with non-government entities such as
private landowners and other sectors like
agriculture and energy, and engaging the
public. It is also important to use the best
available science—and to identify where
science and management capabilities
must be improved or enhanced. When
adaptation steps are taken, it is crucial
to carefully monitor actual outcomes in
order to adjust future actions to make
them more effective, an iterative process
called adaptive management. We must
also link efforts within the U.S. with
wide climate adaptation strategy for fish,
wildlife, plants, and ecosystems, asking
the Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ) and the U.S. Department of the
Interior (DOI) to develop such a strategy.
CEQ and DOI responded by assembling
an unprecedented partnership of federal,
state, and tribal fish and wildlife conser-vation agencies to draft the document.
More than 90 diverse technical, scientific,
and management experts from across the
country participated in drafting the
technical content of the document.
The result is The National Fish, Wildlife
and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy
(hereafter Strategy). The Strategy is the
first joint effort of three levels of govern-ment (federal, state, and tribal) that have
primary authority and responsibility for
the living resources of the United States
to identify what must be done to help
these resources become more resilient,
adapt to, and survive a warming climate.
It is designed to inspire and enable
natural resource managers, legislators,
efforts internationally to build resil-ience and adaptation for species that
migrate and depend on areas beyond
U.S. borders. Finally, given the size and
urgency of the challenge, we must begin
acting now.
Climate Change
Impacts on Natural
Systems
The Strategy details the current and
expected future impacts of climate
change on the eight major ecosystem
types in the United States (Chapter 2).
For example, warmer temperatures
and changing precipitation patterns are
expected to cause more fires and more
pest outbreaks, such as the mountain
pine beetle epidemic in western forests,
while some types of forests will displace
what is now tundra. Grasslands and
shrublands are likely to be invaded by
non-native species and suffer wetland
losses from drier conditions, which
would decrease nesting habitat for water-fowl. Deserts are expected to get hotter
and drier, accelerating existing declines
in species like the Saguaro cactus.
Climate change is expected to be
especially dramatic in the Arctic.
Temperature increases in northern
Alaska would change tussock tundra
into shrublands, leading to increased fire
risk. In addition, the thawing of frozen
organic material in soils would release
huge amounts of GHGs, contributing to
climate change. In coastal and marine
areas, the loss of sea ice and changing
ocean conditions are threatening key
species such as walrus, ice seals and polar
bears as well as the lifestyles and subsis-tence economics of indigenous peoples.
Global annual
average
temperature from
1901–2000,
indicating a
clear long-term
global warming
trend. Orange
bars indicate
temperatures
above and blue
bars indicate
temperatures
below the average.
The black line
shows atmospheric
carbon dioxide
(CO2) concentration
in parts per
million (ppm).
58.5°F
280
300
320
340
360
380
400
260
58.0°F
57.5°F
57.0°F
56.5°F
CO2 CONCENTRATION (PPM)
1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000
Global Temperature and Carbon Dioxidesource: us gcrp 2009. Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States.
4 | National Fish, Wildlife & Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy
areas (including refugia and corridors
of habitat that allow species to migrate),
and areas where habitat restoration can
promote resiliency and adaptation of
species and ecosystem functions.
In addition to traditional habitat restora-tion and protection efforts, this Strategy
envisions innovative opportunities for
creating additional habitat. For example,
the U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA) works with farmers and ranchers
to cost-share conservation practices that
benefit at-risk, threatened, or endan-gered species, such as the lesser prairie
chicken. These efforts may be useful in
responding to climate change as well as
other existing conservation challenges.
Similarly, adjusting rice farming practices
in Louisiana could provide valuable new
resources for a variety of waterfowl and
shorebirds whose habitat is now disap-pearing because of wetland loss and sea
level rise.
It is also possible to use applied manage-ment to make habitats and species
more resistant to climate change so
they continue to provide sustainable
cultural, subsistence, recreational, and
commercial uses. For example, managing
stream corridors to preserve functional
processes and reconnect channels with
well-vegetated floodplains may help
to ensure a steady supply of ground-water recharge that maintains coldwater
species even when air temperatures rise.
Floodplains serve as vital hydrologic
capacitors, and may become even more
important in many parts of the country
as more precipitation falls as rain instead
of snow. Protecting and restoring stream
habitats to maintain more narrow and
deep stream beds and riparian shade
cover can also help keep water tempera-tures cool in a warming climate.
Climate Change
Adaptation Strategies
and Actions
The Strategy describes steps that can
be taken to address these impacts and
help conserve ecosystems and make them
more resilient (Chapter 3). Proposed
strategies and actions along with check-lists to monitor progress are organized
under seven major goals in the Strategy:
1 |
Conserve and connect habitat
2 |
Manage species and habitats
3 |
Enhance management capacity
4 |
Support adaptive management
5 |
Increase knowledge and information
6 |
Increase awareness and motivate action
7 |
Reduce non-climate stressors
Many proposed actions describe types of
conservation activities that management
agencies have traditionally undertaken
but that will continue to be useful in a
period of climate change. Other actions
are designed specifically to respond to
the new challenges posed by climate
change.
An extremely important approach for
helping fish, wildlife, and plants adapt
to climate change is conserving enough
suitable habitat to sustain diverse and
healthy populations. Many wildlife
refuges and habitats could lose some of
their original values, as the plants and
animals they safeguard are forced to
move into more hospitable climes. As a
result, there is an urgent need to identify
the best candidates for new conservation
Rivers, streams, and lakes face higher
temperatures that harm coldwater
species like salmon and trout, while sea
level rise threatens coastal marshes and
beaches, which are crucial habitats for
many species, such as the diamondback
terrapin and the piping plover.
Since water can absorb CO2 from the air,
the rising levels of the gas in the atmo-sphere and accompanying absorption
into the oceans have caused ocean waters
to become 30 percent more acidic since
1750. Acidification is already affecting
the reproduction of organisms such as
oysters. As the pH of seawater continues
to drop, major impacts on aquatic ecosys-tems and species are expected.
Executive Summary
Loss of arctic ice means loss of valuable
habitat for many marine species.
USFWS/Joel
G
arlich-
M
iller
Executive Summary | 5
of ecosystem services provided by well-
functioning ecosystems also are needed.
For example, there may be fewer salmon
for commercial and recreational harvest,
as well as for traditional ceremonial and
cultural practices of indigenous peoples.
Adaptation efforts will be most successful
if they have broad support and if key
groups are motivated to take action
themselves. Efforts to increase aware-ness and motivate action should be
targeted toward elected officials, public
and private decision makers, groups that
are interested in learning more about
climate change, private landowners, and
natural resource user groups. Engaging
these stakeholders early and repeatedly to
increase awareness of climate change, to
develop integrated adaptation responses,
and to motivate their participation is key
to making this Strategy work.
Reducing existing stressors on fish, wild-life, and plants may be one of the most
effective, and doable, ways to increase
resilience to climate change. Many
existing non-climate stressors may be
exacerbated by climate change. In partic-ular, avoiding, reducing and addressing
the ongoing habitat degradation (e.g.,
pollution, loss of open space) associ-ated with human development is critical
and requires collaboration with land-use
planners and private land owners. Taking
steps to reduce stressors not related to
climate, such as fig
fish and fishery products microbiology bacteria causing fish spoilage
No full textThis material describe bacteria which causing spoilage in fish and seafood products
2001 Accountability Report of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
No full textThe report reviews the accountability of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service during 2001.Shared Commitments
To Conservation
2001 Accountability Report of the
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Larry Aumiller/USFWS
2001 Accountability Report i
Table of Contents
I. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Page
History and Mission..............................................................................................................iii
Organization of the Service ..................................................................................................iv
Message from the Acting Director ......................................................................................vii
II. Supplementary Stewardship Information
Stewardship Lands ................................................................................................................1
Stewardship Lands and Facilities and Their Locations.........................................1
Uses of Stewardship Lands...................................................................................2
Revenue from Stewardship Assets .......................................................................3
Investments in Non-Federal Physical Property......................................................3
Net Change in Stewardship Land Acreage from 2000 to 2001 ............................5
Condition of Stewardship Lands ...........................................................................6
Heritage Assets .....................................................................................................................7
Condition of Heritage Asset Facilities...................................................................7
Cultural Resources.................................................................................................7
Museum Collections..............................................................................................8
Special Designations.............................................................................................8
III. Supplementary Information on Service Performance
The Year at a Glance ...........................................................................................................13
Sustainability of Fish and Wildlife Populations ..................................................13
Habitat Conservation...........................................................................................16
Linking Wildlife and People.................................................................................19
Partnerships in Natural Resources .....................................................................20
Facilities Management ........................................................................................................20
Equipment Replacement and Repair ...................................................................22
Management Controls and Legal Compliance ....................................................................22
Service Performance Trends................................................................................................23
Expected Changes in the Work of the Service....................................................23
Improving Delivery of Services............................................................................23
IV. Service Financial Performance
Message from the Chief Financial Officer...........................................................................25
Financial Highlights .............................................................................................................26
Reporting the Aquatic Resources Trust Fund on this Year s
Financial Statements...........................................................................26
Environmental Cleanup Liabilities.......................................................................26
Service Financial Performance ............................................................................26
Improving Financial Transaction Processes and Results ....................................26
Improving Cost Recovery and Cost Allocation Practices.....................................27
Limitations of the Financial Statements..............................................................................29
Principal Financial Statements ............................................................................................30
Notes to the Principal Financial Statements.......................................................................35
Combining Statement of Budgetary Resources...................................................................49
Independent Auditors Report..............................................................................................50
ii U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Dan O’Neal/USFWS
2001 Accountability Report iii
History and Mission
As an asset of tremendous
environmental, recreational, and
economic importance, this Nation’s fish
and wildlife resources represent a vital
part of our natural heritage - one that is
facing increasing pressures every day.
For this reason, the mission of the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) grows
more complex and critical every day. As
the Service continues to look for new and
better ways to conserve, protect, and
enhance fish and wildlife and their
habitat, its major responsibilities remain
focused on migratory birds, endangered
species, certain marine mammals, and
freshwater and anadromous fish.
History of the Service
The Service’s origins date back to 1871
when Congress established the U.S. Fish
Commission to study the decrease in the
Nation’s food fish and recommend ways
to reverse the decline. Placed under the
Department of Commerce in 1903, it was
renamed the Bureau of Fisheries.
Meanwhile Congress created an Office of
Economic Ornithology in the
Department of Agriculture in 1885 to
study the food habits and migratory
patterns of birds, especially those that
had an effect on agriculture. After
several more name changes, this office
was renamed the Bureau of Biological
Survey in 1905.
The Bureaus of Fisheries and Biological
Survey were transferred to the
Department of the Interior in 1939, and
in 1940, were combined and named the
Fish and Wildlife Service. Further
reorganization came in 1956 when the
Fish and Wildlife Act created the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service and
established within the agency two
separate bureaus - Commercial Fisheries
and Sport Fisheries and Wildlife.
The Bureau of Commercial Fisheries was
transferred to the Department of
Commerce in 1970 and is now known as
the National Marine Fisheries Service.
The Bureau of Sport Fisheries and
Wildlife remained in Interior. In 1974,
the “Bureau” name was dropped and the
agency is now simply called the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service. In 1993, the
Service’s research activities were
transferred to the U.S. Geological
Survey.
Today, the Service employs
approximately 7,900 personnel and is
supported by a volunteer force of
approximately 36,000 citizens. Although
the Service is headquartered in
Washington, D.C., over 80 percent of the
workforce is located in local communities
across the Nation at over 700 field
stations and supported by seven regional
offices. As a result of our community
level of involvement, the majority of
Service employees has routine contact
with the public.
Mission of the Service
The Service’s mission is working with
others to conserve, protect and enhance
fish, wildlife, and plants and their
habitats for the continuing benefit of the
American people.
Since before recorded history, fish and
wildlife resources in North America have
been an integral part of human life. We
know that the earliest Americans
depended on fish and wildlife for both life
sustenance and spiritual nourishment.
The kinship of aboriginal Americans to
these resources is seen today in their
religious and cultural activities. The sea
turtle is viewed as the symbol of eternal
life with the great creator. Salmon and
other anadromous fishes were and still
are celebrated as symbols of the renewal
of life. Wildlife served as the spiritual
connection with ones ancestors and the
creator of all life.
When settlers came to America, they
found a land teeming with wildlife. Like
Native Americans, they depended on the
land’s rich wildlife heritage for food and
clothing. Colonies were located near
rivers for commerce and travel and for a
rich supply of fish and wildlife for food.
The new settlers fully intended that
freedom to hunt for food and to secure
water for life would be the right of all,
regardless of heritage or status. The
framers of our Constitution recognized
this and placed great emphasis on
natural rights and natural laws. Because
of the American ideal to respect fish and
wildlife as a resource available for the
use and enjoyment of all, it is revered as
a public trust resource - a resource
deserving the public’s attention and
participatory guidance. The United
States continues to refine the body of
case law and statutes governing the
stewardship of fish and wildlife
resources.
Communities and people throughout the
United States have a strong commitment
to the fish and wildlife resources today.
Many communities realize tremendous
economic benefits from tourism and
visitors that come specifically to enjoy
watching and pursuing fish and wildlife.
Hunting and fishing remain strong
components of community culture all
along the great river systems of the
Nation. Americans value and respect
their natural resource heritage.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has
the privilege of being the primary agency
responsible for the protection,
conservation, and renewal of these
resources for this and future generations.
We accept this responsibility and
challenge with optimism and resolve to
pass along to future generations of
stewards a fish and wildlife resource
heritage that is as strong or stronger
than when it was entrusted to us.
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service
iv U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
As shown in the accompanying
organization chart, the Directorate of the
Service is comprised of the Director and
Deputy Director, eight Assistant
Directors, the Chief of the National
Wildlife Refuge System, all located in
Washington, D.C., and seven Regional
Directors, located throughout the United
States. Service headquarters is located
in Washington, D.C. and Arlington,
Virginia, with field units in Denver,
Colorado, and Shepherdstown, West
Virginia. Regional Offices are located
throughout the United States. Region 1,
located in Portland, Oregon, serves
California, Hawaii, Idaho, Nevada,
Oregon, and Washington, as well as the
Trust Territories of the Pacific. Region 2,
located in Albuquerque, New Mexico,
serves Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma
and Texas. Region 3, located in
Minneapolis, Minnesota, serves Indiana,
Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota,
Missouri, Ohio, and Wisconsin. Region 4,
located in Atlanta, Georgia, serves
Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia,
Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North
Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee,
Organization of the Service
as well as Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands.
Region 5, located in Hadley,
Massachusetts, serves Connecticut,
Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts,
Maryland, New Hampshire, New Jersey,
New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island,
Virginia, Vermont, and West Virginia, and
the District of Columbia. Region 6,
located in Denver, Colorado, serves
Kansas, Montana, North Dakota, South
Dakota, Nebraska, Colorado, Utah and
Wyoming. Region 7, located in
Anchorage, Alaska serves the entire
state of Alaska.
In the Department of the Interior, the
Service’s Director reports to the
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife
and Parks and has direct line authority
over Service headquarters and seven
regional offices. Assistant Directors and
the Chief of the National Wildlife Refuge
System provide policy, program
management and administrative support
to the Director. Regional Directors guide
policy and program implementation
through their field structures and
coordinate activities with Service
partners.
2001 Accountability Report v
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Organization
Director
Deputy Director(s)
Chief, National Wildlife
Refuge System
Assistant Director
Migratory Birds &
State Programs
Assistant Director
Fisheries & Habitat
Conservation
Assistant Director
Endangered Species
Assistant Director
International Affairs
Assistant Director
Law Enforcement
Assistant Director
External Affairs
Assistant Director
Budget, Planning and
Human Resources
Assistant Director
Business Management &
Operations
Division of Management
Authority
Division of Law
Enforcement Operations
Division of
Special Operations
Division of Scientific
Authority
Division of Congressional
& Legislative Affairs
Division of Public Affairs
Division of
Personnel
Division of Diversity &
Civil Rights
Division of Engineering
Division of Contracting &
General Services
Division of Endangered
Species
Clark R. Bavin
National Forensics
Laboratory
Division of International
Conservation
Native American Liaison
National Conservation
Training Center
Division of Policy &
Directives Management
Division of Budget
Division of Safety,
Health, and Aviation
Division of Economics
Division of Finance
Division of Information
Resources Management
Division of Fish &
Wildlife Management
Assistance
& Habitat Restoration
Division of Federal
Program Activities
Division of the National
Fish Hatchery
System
Division of Environmental
Quality
Division of Migratory Bird
Management
Federal Duck Stamp
Division
Division of Bird Habitat
Conservation
Division of Realty
Division of Visitor
Services &
Communication
Division of Conservation,
Planning & Policy
Regional Director
Region 6
Denver, CO
Regional Director
Region 7
Anchorage, AK
Regional Director
Region 5
Hadley, MA
Regional Director
Region 4
Atlanta, GA
Regional Director
Region 3
Minneapolis, MN
Regional Director
Region 2
Albuquerque, NM
Regional Director
Region 1
Portland, OR
Division of Federal Aid
Conservation
Partnerships Liaison
Divison
Division of Natural
Resources
Division of Policy &
Directives Management
vi U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Richard Forbes/USFWS
2001 Accountability Report vii
I am pleased to present the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service’s 2001 Accountability
Report. This report highlights our
accomplishments for Fiscal Year 2001,
both in financial and non-financial terms,
to give you a better understanding of
what we do, how we do it, and how we
manage resources to conserve fish,
wildlife, and plants and their habitats for
the benefit of this and future generations.
We are primarily a scientific
organization, composed of fisheries and
wildlife biologists, wildlife law
enforcement officers, botanists,
ecologists, and outdoor recreation
interpretation specialists and planners.
The challenge for these professionals is
not simply controlling the numbers of
waterfowl harvested or fish caught.
Service employees work with our
partners – private citizens, local
communities, State and Federal agencies,
Native American Tribes, foreign
governments and others – to promote a
coordinated domestic and international
strategy to protect, restore and enhance
the world’s diverse wildlife.
This report shows how the Service faces
complex biodiversity and biological
sustainability issues and implements the
directives of Congress and the American
people in our shared commitment to
conservation. It is through these efforts
that present and future generations can
experience nature as it is, rather than
through museum exhibitions of nature as
it was.
We hope you will find this report both
enlightening and informative.
Marshall P. Jones, Jr.
Acting Director
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Message from the Acting Director
viii U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Pam Thiel/USFWS
2001 Accountability Report 1
Stewardship Information
Supplementary
By law and treaty, the Service has
national and international management
and law enforcement responsibilities for
migratory birds, threatened and
endangered species, fisheries and many
marine mammals. Also, the Service
assists State and Tribal governments and
other Federal agencies in protecting
America’s fish and wildlife resources.
Further, the Service manages more than
95 million acres in the National Wildlife
Refuge System (NWRS) and the
National Fish Hatchery System (NFHS).
These lands and the fish and wildlife
resources they support are valued for
their environmental and cultural
resources, educational and scientific
benefits, recreational and scenic values,
and the revenue they provide to the
Federal Government, States, and
counties.
Stewardship Lands
Stewardship Lands and Facilities and
Their Locations
The Service manages land in all 50
States, some of the Pacific Islands, the
U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, and Puerto
Rico. More than 80 percent of the
acreage of the Service’s land holdings are
in Alaska. Lands within the NWRS
include more than 537 refuge units, 202
Waterfowl Production Area Counties,
and 50 Coordination Areas. Lands and
facilities within the NFHS comprise 70
National Fish Hatcheries, seven Fish
Technology Centers, nine Fish Health
Centers, and one Historical National
Fish Hatchery, located in 34 States. This
represents a change from FY 2000 by
counting Dexter (NM), Mora (NM), San
Marcos (TX), Bears Bluff (SC), and
Lamar (PA) National Fish Hatcheries as
separate units rather than as complexes
with other facilities. Also, Berkshire
NFH, Massachusetts, was not counted as
it is no longer operated by the Service.
Figure 1 displays the acreage owned by
the Service. Lands are acquired through
a variety of methods, including
withdrawal from the public domain, fee
title purchase, transfer of jurisdiction,
donation, or gift. Figure 2 shows the
percentage of stewardship lands acquired
through these different methods. Lands
are purchased through two primary
sources of funding, the Migratory Bird
Conservation Fund and the Land and
Water Conservation Fund.
Annual Stewardship Information for the Years Ended September 30, 2001 and 2000
(Acres in Thousands)
2001 2000
Sites Acres Sites Acres
National Wildlife Refuge System:
National Wildlife Refuges 537 89,146 530 87,790
Coordination Areas 50 197 50 197
Waterfowl Production Areas 202 728 201 725
Total NWRS 789 90,071 781 88,712
Total NFHS 87 12 83 12
Total FWS Lands 876 90,083 864 88,724
Figure 1
2 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Uses of Stewardship Lands
Lands managed within the NWRS are
used to conserve and manage fish,
wildlife and plant resources for the
benefit of present and future generations.
The protected habitat is as diverse as the
wild things living there. Service
stewardship lands protect tundra,
grasslands, deserts, forests, rivers,
marshes, swamps, and remote islands -
virtually every type of habitat and
landscape found in the United States.
to fish, or to study and learn about
wildlife and their needs.
Stewardship of the Nation’s fishery and
aquatic resources, through the NFHS,
has been a core responsibility of the
Service for more than 120 years.
Although the Service does not own all the
lands and facilities in the NFHS, the
Service participates in managing units
within the NFHS, which comprises
National Fish Hatcheries, Fish Health
Centers, and Fish Technology Centers.
Stewardship of
the Nation’s
fishery and
aquatic
resources,
through the
NFHS, has
been a core
responsibility of
the Service for
over 120 years.
Large mouth bass fishing
USFWS Photo
Figure 2
Methods and P ercentage of S tewards hip L ands Acquired
Withdrawn from
Public Domain
90.3%
FWS Purchased
5.2%
Non-Federal
Donations
0.8%
Federal Transfers
3.7%
The fish, wildlife and plants that live on
refuges are the heritage of a wild
America that was, and continues today in
the NWRS. The refuge system watches
over more than 700 species of birds, 220
species of mammals, 250 reptile and
amphibian species, more than 200 species
of fish, at least 260 threatened and
endangered species, and countless
species of invertebrates and plants. They
come as flocks, herds, coveys, gaggles,
schools, pairs and loners. The Service
protects, restores, and manages our fish,
wildlife, plant, land, and water heritage.
We count it, study it, band it, mark it, and
reintroduce it and we let wildlife
reproduce naturally by managing its
home and its habitat. On many refuges
the Service must restore what was
ditched, drained and cleared and actively
manage wetlands, grasslands, forests,
and to a lesser extent, croplands to
provide the variety of habitat needed by
diverse fish and wildlife species. Control
of invasive and exotic pest plants and
animals is essential to retain or restore
native fish, wildlife, and plants. More
than three million acres of NWRS lands
are restored and enhanced each year.
While the needs of fish and wildlife must
come first, refuges welcome those who
want to enjoy the natural world, to
observe or photograph wildlife, to hunt or
Many of our hatcheries serve as outdoor
laboratories for school groups,
environmental organizations, and
universities. Visitor centers on
hatcheries provide public educational
opportunities for approximately three
million visitors each year. Fish Health
Centers focus on cooperative work
conducted by Federal, State and Tribal
fishery managers to identify and control
fish pathogens and diseases, particularly
in wild stocks. Fish Technology Centers
emphasize scientific management of fish
stocks and aquatic communities by
improving technologies in fish
propagation, broodstock management,
stock assessment, and aquaculture.
NFHS lands also provide refugia,
technology development and captive
pr
Recommended from our members
The development and testing of techniques for studying the behavior of juvenile salmonids in reservoirs
No full text"The Oregon Fish Commission received a contract from the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, under the Saltonstall-Kennedy Act for a study to develop methods for determining the behavior of juvenile salmonids in reservoirs. The study, consisting of a literature survey and field program, was conducted in Felton and North Fork Reservoirs on the Deschutes and Clackamas Rivers, Oregon, between September 30, 1959 and January 31, 1962. Pelton Reservoir contains chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), blueback salmon (0. nerka), and summer-run steelhead trout (Salmo airdneri); North Fork Reservoir contains chinook salmon, silver salmon (0. kisutch 1 and winter-run steelhead trout. Equipment tested included SCUBA (self-contained underwater breathing apparatus) for direct observation, gill nets for capture, and sonar for indirect observation of fish." (Abstract From Author
Quantitative estimates of fish abundance from boat electrofishing
No full textMultiple removals by boat electro-fishing were used to estimate fish populations in non-wadeable habitats in New Zealand lakes and rivers. Mean capture probability was 0.47±h0.10 (± 95% CI) from 35 population estimates made with 2-7 successive removals. The relationship between the population estimate from the Zippin method (Y)and the number of fish caught in the first removal (X) was significant (adjusted r2=0.84, P<0.001; Figure 2). The least-squares regression was Y = 1.55X 1.23. Mean density ± 95% confidence interval for 13 fishing occasions was 30±27 fish 100 m-
2. Mean biomass of fish for sites was 78±39 g m-2 (range 29 to 245 g m-2). Koi carp comprised the largest proportion of the fish biomass wherever they were present. The high biomasses of koi carp estimated in these results (mean 56±33 g m-2) suggest that they can reach problematic abundances in New Zealand. Bioniass of spawning koi carp can exceed 400 g m-2
Can fish really feel pain?
No full textWe review studies claiming that fish feel pain and find deficiencies in the methods used for pain identification, particularly for distinguishing unconscious detection of injurious stimuli (nociception) from conscious pain. Results were also frequently misinterpreted and not replicable, so claims that fish feel pain remain unsubstantiated. Comparable problems exist in studies of invertebrates. In contrast, an extensive literature involving surgeries with fishes shows normal feeding and activity immediately or soon after surgery. C fiber nociceptors, the most prevalent type in mammals and responsible for excruciating pain in humans, are rare in teleosts and absent in elasmobranchs studied to date. A-delta nociceptors, not yet found in elasmobranchs, but relatively common in teleosts, likely serve rapid, less noxious injury signaling, triggering escape and avoidance responses. Clearly, fishes have survived well without the full range of nociception typical of humans or other mammals, a circumstance according well with the absence of the specialized cortical regions necessary for pain in humans. We evaluate recent claims for consciousness in fishes, but find these claims lack adequate supporting evidence, neurological feasibility, or the likelihood that consciousness would be adaptive. Even if fishes were conscious, it is unwarranted to assume that they possess a human-like capacity for pain. Overall, the behavioral and neurobiological evidence reviewed shows fish responses to nociceptive stimuli are limited and fishes are unlikely to experience pain
Recommended from our members
Analysis of Ichthyomechanical Data for Fish Passage or Exclusion System Design
No full textFish speed and stamina, locomotion, and the mechanics of fish swimming, are key to the development and design of passage, exclusion, and guidance systems such as fishways (including culverts), fish screens, fish barriers (including sea lamprey velocity barriers), and fish louvers. The large amount of data available, although primarily from laboratory respirometer studies and unevenly distributed between species, offered an opportunity to consider its systematic application to the development, design, and testing of such devices. With this motive, comprehensive searches were made and literature on fish swimming performance tests was compiled, and published data were entered on spreadsheets. This data base includes the following information: scientific and common fish species name, swimming mode, fish length (l in m), swimming speed (U in m/s), endurance or time to fatigue (t in s), water temperature during testing, life stage (e.g. juvenile or adult), test method (e.g. constant or increasing velocity), number of fish tested, regressions of swimming speed versus fish length for specific endurance times as reported in the literature, publication reference (author and date), and relevant comments (Katopodis and Gervais 1991). The data base may be consulted for information on specific species, although many species either have very limited data or are not represented at all. The data base, which is available on request, is presently been revised and updated. Investigators with additional data which do not appear in primary publications, are encouraged to provide it for inclusion
Survey of Specific Fish Pathogens in Free-Ranging Fish from Devils Lake, North Dakota
No full textSeveral biological surveys have been performed at Devils Lake, North Dakota to provide timely
information to resource managers to assess the potential for biota transfer from the operation of
an outlet designed to carry water to the Sheyenne River. In July, 2005 more than 300 fish were
collected from Devils Lake and tested for fish pathogens and parasites using protocols and
procedures of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wild Fish Health Survey. Eight fish
health biologists from the Bozeman and LaCrosse Fish Health Centers worked cooperatively
with the Missouri River Fish and Wildlife Management Assistance Office, North Dakota Game
and Fish Department, and the Spirit Lake Nation to collect samples from seven different species
of fish. Fish were sampled with a variety of gear types from two main areas of the lake over a
five day period. The catch was composed of black crappie, fathead minnow, northern pike,
walleye, white bass, white sucker, and yellow perch. Testing for fish pathogens and parasites
involved four main components. First, immediately upon capture, fish were examined externally
and internally for gross signs of disease or other abnormalities. Next, representative samples
from each species were examined for external and internal parasites. Then, specific tissues
samples were collected using aseptic field techniques and were transferred to the laboratories for
pathogens screening using standardized assays. Finally, tissue samples were further tested with
highly specific corroborative or confirmatory assays whenever suspect pathogens were detected
with screening methods. Results of the pathogen survey were completed within 30 d of sampling.
No viral fish pathogens were detected in standard cell culture assays from any species of fish.
Two ciliated protozoan parasites, Epistylis sp. and Trichodina sp., were observed in wet mounts
of skin scrapings during parasite screening. Additionally, larval forms of the parasitic nematode
Contracaecum sp. were recovered from walleye. Three parasitic cestodes were found including
Bothriocephalus custpidatus in walleye, Proteocephalus pinguis in northern pike, and Ligula
intestinalis in fathead minnow and yellow perch. Major microbial findings included the isolation
of six species of bacteria representing both Gram-negative and Gram-positive organisms. Motile
aeromonids, such as A. hydrophila, were the most common Gram-negative bacteria and where recovered from six of the seven species of fish sampled. Other less common species included
Pleisomonas shigelloides and Pseudomonas putrifaciens. Two Gram-positive bacteria were also
cultured including Corynebacterium renale and Streptococcus sobrinus. In addition, antigen of
Renibacterium salmoninarum was detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) in
very low levels from all species. However, since active infection with R. salmoninarum was not
confirmed in these populations by the highly specific polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay,
there was reason to believe the low ELISA optical density values represented false-positive
readings. Other than R. salmoninarum, none of the other fish pathogens listed in the National
Wild Fish Health Survey were detected in fish from Devils Lake. Likewise, none of the
prohibitive fish pathogens found in most state or federal regulations or policies were recovered
during the survey. Overall, fish appeared in good general health. Further discussions of major
findings from the Devils Lake survey are presented here
Survey of Specific Fish Pathogens and Parasites in Free-Ranging Fish from Devils Lake and the Sheyenne and Red Rivers in North Dakota
No full textWe present results of a th ird fish pathogen and parasite survey at Devils Lake and a second
survey of the Sheyenne and Red rivers in North Dakota. Surveys were performed to provide
information to resource managers to assess the potential for biota transfer from operation of an
outlet on Devils Lake to the Sheyenne River. Fish health biologists from Bozeman, Dexter,
Idaho, and Lacrosse Fish Health Centers (FHC) worked cooperatively with the Missouri River
Fish and Wildlife Management Assistance Office, Valley City National Fish Hatchery, North
Dakota Game and Fish Department, and the Spirit Lake Nation to collect samples from the three
bodies of water. In September 2006, 387 fish were collected from two sampling areas on Devils
Lake. During October 2006, we collected 78 fish from the Sheyenne River near the southern
boundary of the Spirit Lake Nation and 72 fish from the Red River south of Fargo, North
Dakota. The catch on Devils Lake was composed of black crappie, fathead minnow, northern
pike, walleye, white bass, white sucker, and yellow perch. We collected black bullhead, northern
pike, tadpole madtom, walleye, and white sucker from the Sheyenne River, and channel catfish,
freshwater drum, goldeye, sauger, stonecat, and walleye from the Red River. Fish were tested
for the presence or absence of pathogens and parasites using protocols and procedures of the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wild Fish Health Survey. Five main components of the
survey included: I) record catch results and weigh and measure fish; 2) perform external and
internal examination for gross signs of disease or other abnormalities, 3) aseptic collection of
specific tissues samples; 4) external and internal parasites survey; and 5) application of
standardized screening and confirmatory assays for specific fish pathogens.
Overall, fish appeared in good general health. We did not detect any fish virus in standard
cell culture assays from the three bodies of water. Major microbial findings included the
isolation several Gram-negative motile bacteria from the Families Aeromonadaceae,
Enterobacteriaceae, and Pseudomonadaceae. Many of the bacteria within these families are
normal constituents of aquatic ecosystems or are considered normal flora of animal gastrointestinal tracts. Aeromonas hydrophila, Hafnia alvei, Pseudomonas fluorescens and
Pseudomonas sp. were the most commonly isolated species from these groups. No Grampositive
bacteria were found during the surveys although antigen of Renibacterium
salmoninarum was detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) in very low levels
from several species collected from all three bodies of water. Active infection with R.
salmoninarum was not confirmed in these populations by the highly specific polymerase chain
reaction (PCR) assay and there was reason to believe low ELISA optical density values may
have represented false-positive readings. Other than R. salmoninarum, none of the fish
pathogens listed in the National Wild Fish Health Survey were detected in fish from Devils Lake
or the Red and Sheyenne rivers. Likewise, none of the regulated or prohibited fish pathogens
indicated in federal fish health inspection policies were detected.
At Devils Lake, we observed or recovered parasites from all species offish surveyed except
white sucker. One ciliated protozoan parasite, Trichodina sp., was observed in wet mounts of
gill filaments of yellow perch and skin scrapings from walleye and yellow perch. Five species of
parasites from the Class Trematoda were found. At Devils Lake, Gyrodactylus hoffmani was
observed on the fins of fathead minnow. Neascus of Posthodiplotomum sp. was found in fathead
minnow and black crappie. Diplostomum spathaceum was observed in the lens of eyes from
fathead minnow. We found Paurorhynchus hiodontis encysted in mesenteric tissues of goldeye
collected from the Red River. Three parasites of the Class Cestoidea were found including adult
Bothriocephalus cuspidatus in walleye, metacestodes of Bothriocephalus sp. in black crappie,
fathead minnow, and walleye. In addition, Proteocephalus pinguis was observed in northern
pike, and Ligula intestinalis in fathead minnow. Larval forms of the parasitic nematode
Contracaecum sp. were recovered from black crappie, white bass, and walleye at Devils Lake,
and from black bullhead, tadpole madtom, and walleye from the Sheyenne River. A presumptive
finding of a second or third larval stage of Raphidascaris acus was made from a nematode found
in mesenteric tissues of yellow perch at Devils Lake
Consumer Interest and Marketing Potential of Information on Fish Labels
No full textFood labels are an important source of information to consumers. However, little scientific evidence is available on the type of information consumers seek on product labels and how consumers use food labels. The objective of this study is to assess consumers’ use of mandatory information cues and interest in potential information cues placed on fish labels, packages or shelves in five European countries. A cross-sectional consumer survey was carried out in November-December 2004 in five European countries: Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, Poland and Spain and a sample representative for age and region within each country has been obtained. Total sample size is 4,786. The results show a high use of on-label information cues; hence, labels were found as good, and potentially market effective sources of information. Consumers were most familiar with expiry date, price, species name and weight and they felt able to derive clear quality expectations from the information these cues convey. Consumers displayed the strongest interest in an additional information cues, such as safety guarantee and a quality mark for seafood. Cross-country differences in both use and interest in fish information cues were observed.consumer, fish, label, Consumer/Household Economics, Marketing,
- …
