U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Director’s Priorities the end of my ﬁrst year as Director, I...

Director’s PrioritiesFY1999–2000

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

At the end of my first year asDirector, I reflected on the recentsuccesses and upcoming challengesfor the Fish and Wildlife Service andour trust resources. Having spent ayear traveling through each ofregions and listening to hundreds,maybe thousands of employees, Igained a keen awareness of wherewe all see the Fish and WildlifeService heading.

In my report to employees at theend of last year, I translated yoursuggestions and concerns into thesefour Service Priorities for the nexttwo years:

■ Strengthening the ecosystemapproach to fish and wildlifeconservation,

■ Lifting the conservation ofmigratory birds to a higher level,

■ Leading efforts to prevent theintroduction and spread of invasivespecies, and

■ Setting the course for the future ofthe Refuge System.

Committing to those priorities wasthe easy part. The difficult part wasdeciding what to do about them andhow to demonstrate marked successat the end of the two year time-line.For that I called on our AssistantDirectors, who in turn assembledcross-region, cross-program teamsof employees, to make specificrecommendations and commitmentsfor success. Those items arecontained in this Action Plan.

Having sent it through anexhaustive review, I now expect tohold this Action Plan up as abenchmark for our success. Like anyblueprint, these specific goals willrequire flexibility and adaptation.However, it’s rewarding to know thatsome of these goals have alreadybeen accomplished in many parts ofthe country.

I appreciate the hard work that went into producing this ActionPlan, the thoughtfulness of thosewho commented on it, and thecommitment of all of us who willmake it a reality.

In my upcoming travels into the field and meetings here in theWashington Office, I look forward tocharting our progress on each ofthese items. If each of these actionsare treated like another species on abirders life-list, I hope to cross manyof them off of mine in the next 18months.

Message from the Director

1

Message from the Director. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

National Wildlife Refuge System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Migratory Bird Conservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Invasive Species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Ecosystem Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Appendix: Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Contents

2

Vision

“The mission of the NationalWildlife Refuge System is toadminister a national network oflands and waters for theconservation, management, andwhere appropriate, restoration ofthe fish, wildlife, and plant resourcesand their habitats within the UnitedStates for the benefit of present andfuture generations of Americans.”

National Wildlife Refuge SystemImprovement Act of 1997

Introduction

The American character has beenmolded by its connections with theland and its spirit fortified by a closeconnection with the wild creatures ofprairie, forest, coast, marsh, andriver. The American spirit ofindependence and self-sufficiencybecame legendary. Settlement of thecontinent often spurred anuntempered exploitation of wildlifeand its habitat. The clouds ofpassenger pigeons vanished and thethunder of bison was silenced.

These changes in the natural world did not go unnoticed. Earlyconservation movements wererooted in the reaction of people who saw the devastation of markethunting and were appalled by theslaughter of birds for fashion. Thesepeople caught the ear of presidentsand others who crafted theprinciples of modern wildlifeconservation.

It was in these times the NationalWildlife Refuge System was born.It was born on an island in Florida’sIndian River with a promise fromPresident Theodore Roosevelt; andcarried out by a boat builder, cook,and orange grower, Paul Kroegel.Quietly, the first refuge proclaimed adetermined, emerging consciousnessabout the value of things natural,wild, and free. Pelican Island was apromise to preserve wildlife andhabitat for its own sake and thebenefit of the American people.

Today, the System has grown tomore than 93 million acres in size.It includes more than 500 refugesand over 3,000 waterfowl productionareas spread across all 50 states and

National Wildlife Refuge System

3

Red Tailed Hawk, Bosque del Apache NWR. Photo by Karen Hollingsworth.

several territories protecting a vastarray of the nation’s ecosystems.Refuges are gifts to the Nation’speople and to generations yetunborn. Most of all, each refuge andwaterfowl production area is land.They provide a sense of place, oftimeless connections to the naturalworld. They are places to rediscoverthe “sense of wonder” RachelCarson so eloquently described.

However, for many years the Systemfunctioned without an organic act.Refuges were established by apatchwork of Executive Orders andother laws. Uses and activitiesallowed on refuges varied greatlyand did not always complement thewildlife purposes.

Charting a course for the futureThis all changed in 1997 with thesigning of the National WildlifeRefuge System Improvement Act.The Act provided a mission for theSystem, and clear standards for itsmanagement, use, planning, andgrowth. Forcefully, faithfully, andconsistently implementing this lawwill provide a solid foundation as theSystem approaches its secondcentury of service to wildlife,habitat, and people.

In October 1998, a historic first-evernational gathering of refugemanagers took place in Keystone,Colorado. One result of thisconference was Fulfilling thePromise, a document thatarticulates a clear vision of thefuture of the System andrecommendations on how this visioncan be achieved. The objectivesincluded here are a subset of therecommendations in Fulfilling thePromise, and achieving them will bea key part of the Service’s concertedeffort to protect America’s wildlifeand habitat legacy for futuregenerations.

Action Plan

Goal 1: Conserve wilderness valueswithin the Refuge System.

Wilderness, due to its very nature,is extremely important to theconservation of biodiversity withinthe System. Wilderness is areservoir of biological diversity andnatural ecological and evolutionaryprocesses. Wilderness is also a wayof perceiving and valuing; it is asmuch about a relationship with theland as a condition of it. Wilderness isa symbolic landscape, encompassingvalues and benefits that extendbeyond its boundaries.

Currently, there are 20 million acresof wilderness in the Refuge System.The Service needs to evaluate theseareas, internally and externally, and become a full partner in theinteragency wilderness managementcommunity.

Action: Director will issue a memothat states that the Wilderness Actestablishes wilderness as a purpose

of the encompassing administrativeunit, that proposed wilderness areasshould be managed as if they weredesignated wilderness (except forAlaska), and that training is anintegral component of soundmanagement. The memo will clarifythe criteria for wildernessdesignation and ask for formaldesignation of Regional WildernessCoordinators. (ARW/RF. Target:July 1999).

Opportunity: Members ofDirectorate participate in 50thAnniversary celebration ofpublication of A Sand CountyAlmanac being sponsored by acoalition of organizations. A specialevent would be an ideal opportunityto promote the 35th anniversary ofthe Wilderness Act. An event couldbe tied to establishment of an AldoLeopold National Wildlife Refuge(Public involvement and planningcurrently underway in Wisconsin).

Opportunity: Member ofDirectorate initiates and participatesin a 25-year anniversary celebration

4


Kodiak Bear, Dog Salmon Creek, AK. Photo by Dave Menke.

of wilderness establishment onOkefenokee National WildlifeRefuge (this could be celebrated asan early National Wildlife RefugeWeek event since it takes placeOctober 1). Partners should beencouraged to participate.

Action: ARW/RF will take lead oncompleting revision of WildernessManagement Chapters for theService Manual. (Team membersreceive draft management chaptersin July 1999. Draft chaptercompleted September 1999).

Action: ARW/RF and Regions willwork with BLM, NPS, and USFS todevelop consistent policies to helpunify the National WildernessPreservation System. (Continuing;initial meeting of AgencyDirectors — September 1999).

Opportunity: Director recommendsthe Secretary invite agencies to awilderness management forum todevelop consistent managementpolicies in support of Secretary’sProtect Our Parks and RefugesInitiative.

Opportunity: Director submits awilderness proposal to the Secretaryfor recommendation to the Congressin support of the President’s LandsLegacy and the Secretary’s ProtectOur Parks and Refuges Initiative.Memorandum will be transmitted toRegional Directors directingcertification that Wilderness StudyAreas are being managedappropriately and the lands continueto support wilderness designation.

Action: Regions will identify areasthat qualify as Wilderness StudyAreas on all refuges that have notconducted a formal wildernessreview and on refuges that haveadded significant acreage since theirlast formal wilderness review.(Regional Directors. Target:September 1999).

Action: Regional WildernessCoordinators will work with ArthurCarhart staff to develop andmaintain a strategic plan forwilderness training that identifiestraining needs for personnel, locationand position of personnel, and a planfor implementing the training. TheWashington Office WildernessCoordinator will complete an annualreport on wilderness trainingaccomplishments. (RegionalDirectors. Target: June 1999;ARW/RF. Target: September 1999).

Opportunity: Member ofDirectorate addresses participantsat the September 1999, NationalWilderness Stewardship courseregarding Service leadership andnew initiatives for protectingwilderness.

Action: Regional and WashingtonOffice Wilderness Coordinators willreview all Wilderness ManagementPlans for consistency with Servicewilderness policy. (ARW will draftpolicy memorandum by September1999. Target for initial reviews:December 1999).

Action: RONS and MMS will beupdated so that activities that willbenefit wilderness and other specialmanagement areas are identified.National Wilderness Coordinatorwill work with RMIS coordinator tonotify regional RMIS coordinatorsof change. (ARW. Target: May 1999).

Goal 2: Ensure good scientificinformation and expertise for soundmanagement decisions.

In order to make sound managementdecisions, refuge managers musthave reliable information aboutcausal relationships between habitatquality and quantity, and fish andwildlife population dynamics. Aninterdisciplinary biologicalworkforce will help meet theseinformation needs. This workforcewill need opportunities for continuing

education and interaction with thelarger professional community inorder to keep abreast of the latestscientific developments.

Action: Establish draft policy onmaintaining biological integrity ofthe Refuge System as called for inthe Refuge Improvement Act.(ARW/RF. Target: July 1999).

Action: Direct an analysis of currentrefuge staffing relative to eachstation’s administrative complexity,and determine minimum levels ofstaffing on all refuges. Ensure eachrefuge has RONS project supportingstaffing analysis. (ARW/RF. Target:May 1999).

Action: Establish or designate atleast one Regional Refuge Biologistposition assigned to the ARW/PARD. Assure that these individualsmeet at least annually to ensurebiological programs are consistentwith Biological Needs Assessment.(Regional Directors. Target: October1999).

Action: Designate cross-programteams of biologists in each Region toprovide biological technical supportto field stations. (ARW/RF willprepare memorandum for Directorto send to Regions. Target: June1999).

Action: Develop a process forbiological field station evaluationsand conduct at least one pilot in eachRegion. (ARW/RF will developbiological review guidelines. Target:August 1999; Regional RefugeBiologists conduct pilot reviews.Target: November 1999).

Action: Encourage biological staff toparticipate in professional societiesand technical meetings as part ofannual 40 hours of training andcontinuing education. (ARW/RF willdraft memorandum. Target: June1999).

5


Action: Develop with NCTC aRefuge Academy module related tothe administration of a System-widebiological program. Module wouldinclude standardized implementationof policies related to inventory/monitoring, planning, developmentof biological objectives, andstrategies for adaptive habitatmanagement. (ARW, NCTC. Target:Implement module in FY 2000).

Opportunity: Director or AssistantDirector announces development ofstanding committee on RefugeSystem training issues, to becomprised cooperatively ofindividuals from the Division ofRefuges and NCTC, and relatedARW programs, which woulddevelop training needs, policy, andprograms for refuge staff.

Action: Develop an annual or bi-annual forum on refuge biology inconjunction with the annual meetingof The Wildlife Society. The technicalmeeting would feature papers andother presentations on refugebiology by and for station biologicalstaff from across all Regions. Allbiological staff would be encouragedto attend. (ARW will coordinate firstforum. Target: FY 2000).

Opportunity: Director openstechnical meeting with keynoteaddress emphasizing science-basedbiology as the core of refugemanagement and the conservationmission of the Refuge System.

Goal 3: Provide a strong Refuge LawEnforcement Program to assurepublic safety and resourceprotection.

Protecting refuge resources, andassuring the safety of visitors areamong the most fundamentalresponsibilities of refuge managers.Law enforcement responsibilitiesare carried out by full time andcollateral duty refuge officers whoseline of work daily puts them in

harms way. For example, recentcrime statistics for one year revealedthat refuges were the scene of sevenhomicides, 26 assaults, two rapes,200 burglaries, over 4,000 acts ofvandalism, and 10,000 naturalresource violations. In addition,refuge lands are the scenes of alarge number of drug-relatedcrimes. In 1998 there was a total of346 drug related crimes on refugelands and 25 tons of marijuana andnearly two tons of cocaine worth$200 million seized on Service lands.More disturbing, an estimated oneout of every 10 drug violationsoccurred in association with ahunting or fishing activity. It is clearthat public safety and resourceprotection require the Service’smost professional and dedicatedefforts to assure safe and enjoyableexperiences for refuge visitors.

The Service must work harder toincrease staff and funding while alsoworking more effectively with theresources at hand. This will meanmaintaining and continuouslyimproving training efforts,improving policies to reduce officerliability and enhance visitor andofficer safety. It will mean trainingand equipping refuge officers withthe specialized equipment and skillsthey will need to meet the challengesof the 21st century. It will also meanimproving opportunities for careerenhancement through developmentof a career ladder within the Serviceand by assuring consistency inrecruiting and in the application ofstandards that are used to select andsupervise refuge law enforcementofficers.

Action: Hire a national lawenforcement coordinator to bestationed in the Division of Refugesin Arlington, Virginia, per staffingplan. (ARW/RF. Target: June 1999).

Opportunity: Director or AssistantDirector stresses the importance ofthe role of refuge law enforcement

officers in address to the RefugeOfficer Basic School, Federal LawEnforcement Training Center BasicTraining, or through otheropportunities.

Opportunity: Members ofDirectorate communicate interestand support for refuge officerprogram through established mediasuch as Fish and Wildlife News,People Land and Water, and pressreleases noting significant refugelaw enforcement successes.

Action: Establish standards/criteriato aid in determining which positionsshould be designated for full orcollateral duty law enforcement aswell as standards for therecommended law enforcementstaffing patterns at field stations.(ARW/RF, draft standards ready forprogram review. Target: July 1999).

Action: Establish a standard positiondescription for full-time refugeofficers to be used throughout theRefuge System. The standardposition description shouldincorporate the requirementsnecessary to qualify for 6(c) specialretirement and have a gradestructure that provides for a careerladder. (ARW/RF, draft positiondescription ready for programreview. Target: July 1999).

Goal 4: Provide consistent policieson Refuge uses for implementation ofthe Refuge Improvement Act.

The Refuge Improvement Actclearly defined the mission of theNational Wildlife Refuge Systemand provided guidance on thepriorities to be considered inmanagement of the System. Thelaw now clearly states that theneeds of fish, wildlife, and plantscome first.

Congress also established prioritiesfor which types of public use shouldbe facilitated when compatible with

6


the mission of the System and thepurpose of the refuge. Thesepriority public uses are as follows:hunting, fishing, wildlifeobservation, wildlife photography,environmental education, andinterpretation.

To implement the RefugeImprovement Act, comprehensivelywritten, consistently applied policiesmust be developed. These policiesmust result in clear guidance on theapplication of the compatibilitystandard, address how the sixpriority public uses will beadministered, and provide guidanceon assessing the appropriateness ofother uses of the System.

Action: Finalize Service Manualchapter and regulations establishingthe process for determiningcompatible uses. (ARW/RF. Target:Late 1999).

Action: Finalize Service Manualchapter on ComprehensiveConservation Planning. (ARW/RF.Target: Late 1999).

Action: Finalize Service Manualchapter providing guidance ondetermining the appropriateness ofrefuge uses that are not priorityuses under the RefugeImprovement Act. (ARW/RF, draftpolicy ready for program review.Target: June 1999).

Action: Finalize Service manualchapters on administration andmanagement of priority public uses.(ARW/RF, draft policy ready forprogram review. Target: August1999).

Opportunity: Director, AssistantSecretary, and Secretary announcemajor policies developed under theRefuge Improvement Act throughpress conferences and Congressionaland constituent briefings. Theseannouncements are opportunities to raise awareness of refugemanagement and strengthenrelationships with key partners.

Action: Public Use MinimumRequirements for refuges will beupdated to include the intent of theRefuge Improvement Act andprovide consistent nationalstandards for offering the highestquality visitor programs andfacilities. Formal review process will be established in all Regions.Station evaluations of fulfilling these requirements will be used todevelop RONS and MMS packages.(ARW/RF, draft standards ready for program review. Target: August 1999).

Goal 5: Enhance communitypartnerships to assure conservationof Refuge resources.

Today, the System benefits from the work of more than 30,000volunteers who annually contributemore than one million hours peryear supporting almost every facetof refuge management.

The System also benefits frompartnerships with citizen groups who organize to support individualrefuges in protecting resources.Experience has shown that Serviceemployees who take the time toserve as envoys in their communitiescan accomplish great things for theirrefuge and the System.

7


Red Tailed Hawk, Desoto NWR. Photo by Dave Menke.

To that end, the Service needs toenhance its capacity to meet thechallenge of developing communitypartnerships for the System. Inparticular, the Refuge SupportGroup Initiative will continue,community partnership training andnetworking opportunities will beexpanded, and the National WildlifeRefuge System Volunteer andCommunity PartnershipEnhancement Act will beimplemented. Refuge managers alsoneed more flexibility to work withconcessionaires providing services tothe public on refuges.

All programs must work together toachieve ecosystem goals. Refugescan serve as important anchors ofhabitat, maintaining biologicaldiversity, and leading toconservation of additional lands andwaters.

Action: Encourage cross programexpertise in all ComprehensiveConservation Planning teams.(ARW/RF will incorporate into draftplanning policy. Target: May 1999).

Opportunity: Members ofDirectorate will attend ecosystemteam meetings and stress howRefuges can help other Serviceprograms meet objectives.

Action: Cross program teams willreview draft refuge managementpolicies. (ARW/RF, now andcontinuing).

Opportunity: Director or AssistantDirector address program issues atone or more community partnershiptraining workshops.

Action: Complete an implementationplan for the Volunteer andCommunity PartnershipEnhancement Act, including acharter for an implementation team.(ARW. Target: August 1999).

Opportunity: Director and AssistantDirector approve and sign charterand implementation plan and fundteam’s efforts.

Action: Develop budget initiative forFY 2000 to begin implementation ofVolunteer and CommunityPartnership Enhancement Act.(ARW/RF. Target: December 1998).

Action: Draft legislative amendmentfor exemption from 40 USC 303(b)that will allow concessionaires tomake repairs and improvements toconcession facilities. (AEA, ARW.Target: June 1999).

Action: Continue to provide supportto the Cooperative Alliance forRefuge Enhancement. (Ongoingsupport, ARW/RF).

Opportunity: Members of theDirectorate will highlight crossprogram, ecosystem, andpartnership successes in speakingengagements.

Goal 6: Enlarge the number of U.S.Citizens who know and appreciatethe values of the National WildlifeRefuge System.

Five years ago, the Service began aconcerted effort to build publicrecognition and support for theSystem by implementing anationwide communications strategycalled the 100 on 100 OutreachCampaign. The key strategy behindthis campaign is a focus oncommunications with five priorityaudiences considered to have thegreatest opportunity to support theSystem.

The campaign and investments inoutreach personnel at all levels havehelped bring about many successesfor the System, including passage ofthe Refuge Improvement Act, thesolidification of 18 sportsmen’s andenvironmental groups into theCooperative Alliance for RefugeEnhancement, and the largestfunding increase in the System’shistory to address maintenance andoperations needs.

8


Tundra Swans and white fronted geese, Lower Klamath NWR. Photo by Tupper Ansel Blake.

Action: Develop charter, expertisequalifications, and guidelines on therole of the Refuge System OutreachTeam. (ARW/RF. Target: June 1999).

Action: Refine Refuge SystemOutreach Campaign document toensure strategic activities byformalizing key messages, evaluatingneeds for baseline information onpublic knowledge of the System,clarifying expectations for workingwith core audiences, and improvingguidance on delivery of messages tothose audiences. The refinedcampaign will also incorporate newefforts such as the National OutreachStrategy, Refuge Improvement Act,and Volunteer and CommunityPartnership Enhancement Act. Inaddition, it will outline a CentennialPublicity Campaign that will raisevisibility for all Service programs asa major focus of outreach efforts forthe next few years. (ARW, ExternalAffairs. Target: June 1999).

Opportunity: The Director andAssistant Director continue tosupport the Refuge SystemOutreach Campaign to advanceinternal buy-in and ensure strategicoutreach efforts are carried out.This support will becomeincreasingly important leading up tothe Centennial, which presents anexceptional opportunity to raisevisibility of the Service.

Opportunity: The Director andAssistant Director are involved inspecial events, majorannouncements on Refuge Systemissues, and in combating threats torefuges with national implications,which offer opportunities to raisepublic awareness of the RefugeSystem’s important role in wildlifeconservation.

Action: Reevaluate established datesof National Wildlife Refuge Weekand recommend alternatives.(Refuge outreach team. Completedin time for Refuge Week 2000).

Action: Recruit celebrities to helppromote activities outlined in theCentennial Publicity Campaign(Refuge outreach team, ExternalAffairs, Directorate. Continuingprocess).

Opportunity: The Director andAssistant Director help recruitcelebrity spokespersons for theCentennial products and activities.

Action: Identify high profile specialevents for the Centennialcelebration, such as establishment ofa Theodore Roosevelt NationalWildlife Refuge and a historicalcelebration at Pelican Island in 2003.(Refuge outreach team, ExternalAffairs. Target: November 1999).

Opportunity: The Director’s andAssistant Director’s involvement inplanning Centennial activitiesmaximize potential for visibility.

Goal 7: Provide a national approachfor selecting and prioritizing landsfor acquisition, incorporating thegoals of trust resource conservation,biological integrity, diversity,environmental health, and ecosystemconservation.

The Service recognizes that one ofthe most important challenges in theland acquisition process is thedevelopment of integrated Nationaland Regional habitat goals andobjectives. Additional data on North American floral and faunaldistribution, species conservationstatus, and land cover informationwill help focus acquisition priorities.

National guidance will ensure thatthe Service is pointed in the rightdirection and achieving themaximum possible benefit from landacquisitions and protection. Thisguidance will provide consistentdirection in defining the areas ofgreatest conservation concern.

Opportunity: The Director willappoint a task force to develop anationwide process and policy forselecting lands for acquisitionpriority. The process will involve allService programs and will establishguidance appropriate for ecosystemteams to use in developingacquisition goals and priority sites ineach Region.

Goal 8: Improve employees’ ability toeasily locate guidance on Refugemanagement and operations.

Conversion of guidance and policycontained in various Fish andWildlife Service management andadministrative manuals andhandbooks into the Service Manualwas mandated by the Director in thelate 1980s. In its current state,accessing appropriate refuge policiesin the Service Manual is complicatedby the dispersal of these policiesthrough a much larger documentcovering all Service activities.Finding all the pertinent policieswhich need to be reviewed whenmaking a management decision iscomplicated and the likelihood that apertinent policy will be overlookedincreases.

The preparation of a “refugemanual” which gathers together allpolicies pertinent to refugemanagement activities would greatlyenhance the effective implementationof those policies. The manual shouldbe made available on-line to ensurethat the most current policies areavailable in a timely manner.

Action: Restore the Refuge Manualand establish a site on the Internetand/or Intranet where all pertinentpolicies can be accessed. (ARW/RF.Target: December 1999).

9


Goal 9: Reduce the negative impactscaused by problem and invasivespecies on Refuge lands andecosystems.

Habitat alteration has resulted inmajor changes in wildlife populationnumbers and the way they aredistributed. Exotic speciesintroductions and expansion ofspecies to areas where they are notendemic have caused native speciesto be displaced or reduced. Feralanimals have direct impacts onwildlife populations. Policies need tobe developed providing soundjustification for reducing impacts ofpredators and competitors on fish,wildlife, and plants. Clear messageson restoring ecological balance mustbe provided to stakeholders.

Action: Revise Service manualchapter on trapping. (ARW/RF,draft chapter available for review.Target: March 1999).

Action: Adjust staffing to designateNational Invasive SpeciesCoordinator in the Division ofRefuges. (ARW/RF. Target:May 1999).

Action: Regional Directors (R2, R3,R4, R6) are directed to establish ajoint coordinator position to supportimplementation of the mid-continentsnow goose management plan. Thecoordinator will be stationed in the mid-continent flyway area tocoordinate management plan withpartners. Coordinator would serveas Service liaison and workcooperatively to ensure that Refuges are responsive to recentConservation Order for white goosemanagement. (ARW/RF will draftmemorandum for Director’ssignature. Target: June 1999).

Action: Establish cross-programteam to develop a plan forprioritizing invasive species threatson System units. This could beaccomplished by each Regionappointing or hiring an invasivespecies specialist with funds fromInvasive Species budget initiative.(Regional Directors. Target: October2000).

Action: Establish position to developmosquito management policy andmanagement handbook. Workcooperatively with states, AmericanMosquito Control Association andDistricts, local municipalities,counties, and specialists in mosquitomanagement to develop biologicallysound guidelines for use by refuges.(ARW/RF. Target: May 1999).

Opportunity: Members of theDirectorate highlight problem andinvasive species issues in speakingengagements.

Opportunity: Director ensuresinvasive species issues on refugesare represented in Departmentalinitiatives and events.

10


Vision

Leadership in migratory birdconservation is globallyacknowledged because of the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service’sdemonstrated successes inpromoting and maintaining healthymigratory bird populations.

Introduction

Migratory birds have beenrecognized as an indispensableresource ever since the first humansarrived in North America. Theyhave important recreational,aesthetic, and cultural values, andtheir economic impact in the UnitedStates alone has been estimated atalmost $20 billion annually. The U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service has thelegislative mandate, as well as themoral responsibility, to provideleadership in the conservation ofmigratory birds.

The past few decades have beenwitness to alarming and unnaturalpopulation declines of many birdspecies. Conversely, some speciesare exhibiting artificial populationexplosions that quickly exceed thecarrying capacity of importantecosystems. From the tallestmountaintops, to tallgrass prairies,to coastal marshes, America’smigratory birds are part of everyecosystem and they are in trouble.They indicate the health of ourworld: if we are able to conservehealthy bird populations then it islikely our own landscapes will behealthy.

Fortunately, concern for birdpopulations by State and Federalnatural resource agencies,conservation organizations,businesses, industry, public andprivate institutions, and citizens hasbegun to coalesce during the past 10years. Substantial scientificinvestigation and conservation

planning have been completed, andthe ground work for strongpartnerships has been forged. Thisdocument and its call for action areintended to help the U.S. Fish andWildlife Service build upon itssuccesses, but also to recognize thatthe institution of migratory birdconservation must grow and evolve.The conservation problems facedtoday are larger in scope, morecomplex, and more demanding offiscal and personnel resources thanat any time in the past. To beeffective in addressing theseproblems, the Service must seekapproaches to conservation that aremore pro-active, cost-effective, andadaptable.

A more strategic approach tomigratory bird conservation mustbegin with an acknowledgment thatlocal problems are often a result ofevents occurring at large, oftenmultiple, scales; that humansocioeconomic systems are as mucha part of the ecology as soil, water,and birds; and that managementgoals should include ecologicalunderstanding, as well as social andeconomic product. In fact, the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service implicitlyrecognized these themes in its“ecosystem approach” to resourcemanagement. Embodied in theecosystem approach is the idea thatit is the myriad connections —among ecological events at differentplaces and times; among birds,people, and their environment; andbetween research andmanagement — that hold the key tomeeting the conservation challengesnow facing the Nation.

Recent events make this a pivotaltime in migratory bird conservation.The North American WaterfowlManagement Plan has been in placefor just over 10 years and alreadyhas become the model of modernwildlife conservation. Othermigratory bird interests arefollowing suit, and large-scale,

Migratory Bird ConservationRising to a New Level

11

strategic planning efforts areunderway in earnest for landbirds,shorebirds, and colonial waterbirds.The Commission for EnvironmentalCooperation, created by the NorthAmerican Free Trade Agreement, isproviding a forum for improvingcoordination and cooperation amongvarious bird conservation initiatives.The motivation for cooperation isstraightforward — the need tointegrate planning, implementation,and evaluation efforts to ensuremaximum program efficiency. Donecorrectly, this integration has thepotential to elicit public support thatis both broad and deep.

A common interest that hasemerged from the dialogue is“regionally-based, biologically-driven, landscape-orientedpartnerships delivering the fullspectrum of bird conservation acrossthe entirety of the North Americancontinent.” The phrase “regionally-based” is an acknowledgment thatconservation actions should have ageographically and ecologicallyexplicit focus. “Biologically-driven”is a recognition that effectiveconservation depends on the abilityto predict reliably the responses ofbirds to management interventions.“Landscape-oriented” involves anacknowledgment that migratorybird habitats often are part ofworking landscapes that sustainhuman communities. In“partnerships” there is a recognitionthat the Service needs to reach outto those interested in sustainableecosystems in order to forge newalliances for the conservation ofmigratory birds. The “full spectrumof bird conservation” means that theService will not confine its actions tobenefit only a portion of the birds,e.g., hunted species; but will findways its activities will benefit allbirds for which the agency isfederally responsible. This documentis intended to identify specificactions that will support andcomplement these strategic themes.

Each action identifies a newinitiative, or significant re-emphasisof an existing one, that willcontribute substantially to theconservation of migratory birdswithin existing budgets. The actionshighlighted here are not all-inclusiveand it is understood that many otherexisting and new initiatives will alsocontribute to achieving the vision.Associated with some of the actionsare “opportunities” which detailways in which the Directorate cansupport those actions. All actionsinclude references to individuals andoffices that will have the lead for theaction. For clarity, these referencesdo not always include all of the otherindividuals and offices that will beinvolved in completing the action.

Background

The Service has an array of toolsthat are used to conserve migratorybirds. All parts of the Service cancontribute to this Action Plan. TheMigratory Bird ManagementProgram (coordinated by the Officeof Migratory Bird Management inconjunction with regional and fieldoffices) and the North AmericanWaterfowl Management Plan(coordinated by the North AmericanWaterfowl and Wetlands Office inconjunction with many partners) arethe traditional stalwarts ofmigratory bird conservation for theService. They have reached out andembraced new initiatives thatinclude all species, all habitats, andmany other nations. The result isthat Partners in Flight, NationalShorebird Conservation Plan, andother consortiums are prepared toassist the Service in implementingscience-based landbird, shorebird,and colonial waterbird conservationand monitoring plans.

A 15-year initiative to incorporatethe best science, the desires of localcommunities, and a long-term visionfor conservation of fish, wildlife, and

plants is underway in the NationalWildlife Refuge System.Comprehensive Conservation Planswill be made for each of the 516National Wildlife Refuges. TheNWRS is re-establishing itself asthe land-based anchor of migratorybird conservation in the UnitedStates. However, this system alone,or even all public lands takentogether, cannot adequatelypreserve the rich diversity ofmigratory birds or their habitats.The Service’s private landsprograms, including Partners forFish and Wildlife and the privatelands component of CoastalPrograms, serve as an effectivecomplement to habitat conservationon Federal and State properties.Private lands projects not onlyrestore and enhance key habitats formigratory birds, but mostimportantly gain the understandingand commitment from privatelandowners about the need toconserve our natural resources.Habitat conservation will continue tobe one of the most effective ways tobuild the ecosystem approach forbird conservation within and beyondFederal land borders.

In addition to habitat loss, modernlifestyles themselves create hazardsfor migratory birds. TheEnvironmental Contaminants andLaw Enforcement programs seeksolutions to these environmentalobstacles, through sound science andpublic education, before theyimpinge upon the integrity ofmigratory bird populations. Whenproactive endeavors fail to curbdestructive activities, otherregulatory and enforcement actionsare necessary to help secure thoseimperiled populations.

Unfortunately, even the full thrust ofService activities and those of itspartners have not precludedproblems that severely impact somespecies. For those threatened andendangered species, as well as

12

Migratory Bird Conservation

species whose populationtrajectories possibly indicate a needfor future listing, the EndangeredSpecies Program provides a lastattempt to pull species back fromthe brink of extinction. This safetynet, and the public outreach thatgoes along with it, providesAmericans with a “wake-up call”that they are about to lose a uniqueorganism that can never berecovered.

Migratory birds are somewhatunusual in the animal world in thatthey range across thousands of milesduring their annual cycle. Hence, asconservation biologists agree,actions directed only at a portion ofthe annual geographic range areunlikely to safeguard susceptiblemigratory birds from populationproblems. International Affairsprovides that critical internationallink to tropical and Pacific Rimpartners. The Service is able toassist these nations with projectsthat can secure the long-termpersistence of migratory birds.

All of these elements of the Servicerequire strong communication to thepeople of the Americas and beyond.In this regard, the Office of PublicAffairs is developing acommunications strategy tocomplement the actions outlinedbelow. Through these actions andgaining better understanding andsupport by the American people, theService is poised to rise to a newlevel of migratory bird conservationfor the 21st century.

Several core messages are evidentand should be communicated topartners and the American public:

1. Migratory birds are an excellentindicator of the overall health of anecosystem. When bird species aredeclining, everyone should beconcerned.

13


Swainson’s Hawk, Bosque del Apache NWR. Photo by Karen Hollingsworth.

2. For the vast majority of people,birds represent the sole everydaycontact they have with wildlife. Theyconnect all of us, from city dwellersto rural farmers, to the environment.

3. Migratory birds face seriouschallenges. Many species are indecline because of habitat loss,collisions with man-made objects,and contaminants. Basic knowledgeabout the health of many species islacking.

4. Migratory birds cross boundaries,ecosystems and nations. Protectingthem must be a cooperative effortthat involves multiple jurisdictionsand interests.

5. Success will come from regionallybased, biologically driven,landscape-oriented partnershipsdelivering the full spectrum of birdconservation across the entirety ofthe North American continent.

6. Migratory birds are an incrediblyvaluable resource, contributingeconomically, aesthetically, andsocially to America’s citizens.Millions of people “connect” withbirds through bird watching andhunting.

In order to achieve our vision formigratory bird conservation, theService will focus on four majorgoals:

1. Conserve bird populations andtheir habitats.

2. Implement conservationstrategies to reduce overabundantpopulations.

3. Increase effectiveness throughpartnerships.

4. Raise public awareness.

To achieve these goals, this planidentifies a series of action items andopportunities involving cooperativeefforts across Service program linesand with a wide variety of externalpartners. This is the essence of theService’s commitment to ecosystemapproach. In addition, specific actionitems are identified which will helpinvolve and empower the Service’secosystem teams to make a majorcontribution to migratory birdconservation.

Action Plan

Goal 1: Conserve Bird Populationsand Their Habitats.

In 1998 two courts ruled thatFederal agencies were not subject tothe prohibitions under theMigratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA).An Executive Order would provideguidance to the “Federal Family” toimprove bird conservation efforts. Inaddition, authority on the high seasis needed to conserve short-tailedalbatross and other species ofconcern.

Action: President signs ExecutiveOrder regarding Migratory BirdTreaty Act by October 1999. (ARW/MBMO, AEA/PA)

Opportunity: Director, Secretary,and other agency heads attendsigning of Executive Order.

Action: Develop an effectiveinitiative for inreach and outreachand technical assistance thatprovides Federal agencies withguidance for successfully operatingunder the Migratory Bird TreatyAct Executive Order by January2000. (ARW/MBMO)

Action: Develop national policy andlegal basis for extending authority ofthe Migratory Bird Treaty Act toU.S. citizens and U.S. flagships on

the high seas by May 1999. (ARW/MBMO)

Opportunity: Director makesannouncement with National MarineFisheries Service at NorthAmerican Wildlife and ResourcesConference or at an annual meetingof a large NGO.

Action: Create Migratory BirdTreaty Act information andeducation materials by January2000, that explain the Service’sresponsibilities and permits, as wellas Service program operationsunder the Act. (ARW/MBMO, LE,AEA/PA)

Action: Participate with all otherService permit-issuing programs ina Permits Reform effort designed toenhance conservation cooperationwith scientific community, foster useof permits as conservation tools, andbetter serve the regulated public.(ARW/MBMO, AIA/OMA, AES/TE,LE)

Opportunity: Directorate deliverspublic addresses on Service goal ofmaking intentions of MBTA clear tothe public and to specific migratorybirds users and cooperators.

Action: By December 1999, establishmanagement bodies, involvingNative, Federal, and State of Alaskarepresentatives, to facilitatesubsistence management andconservation of migratory birdsunder the 1997 protocols to the 1918and 1936 Migratory Bird Treaties.(RD 7).

Opportunity: Public event in Alaskaat the first formal meeting ofmanagement bodies.

Action: Propose first annualsubsistence hunting regulations forAlaska by April 2001. (RD 7, ARW/MBMO).

14


Action: Develop an effective strategyand regulations to permit the take ofperegrine falcons upon the Servicesproposed delisting (August 1999).(ARW/MBMO, AES/TE).

Action: Work more closely with thebird community to developrehabilitation guidelines that willaccommodate the public need,handle birds in a humane manner,and maintain the conservation ethicthat permits were established under.Produce subsequent guidance and aproposed rule on rehabilitationpermits in the Federal Register byJune 2000. (ARW/MBMO, RDs 1-7).

Action: Revise Migratory BirdPermits parts 21.1-14 (Introductionto General Requirements andExceptions) and parts 21.24 –25(Taxidermist and Waterfowl sale anddisposal), including updates, plainlanguage and fact sheets, by May2000. The revisions will clearlyexplain the permitting process and why it is important to theconservation of migratory birds, and will give nationwide consistencyto the process. (ARW/MBMO, RDs 1-7).

Action: Convene a professionallyfacilitated meeting in October 1999,that brings together partiesinterested in the issue of migratorybird/telecommunicationsinteractions. This meeting will begina dialogue about minimizing thelethal effects telecommunicationsstructures have on migratory birds.(ARW/MBMO, RDs 1-7, AES/HC)

Action: Restore the capabilities ofthe National Wildlife Forensic Labby December 2000, to provide birdidentification services for LawEnforcement and other Serviceprograms. (LE, ARW/MBMO)

Opportunity: Director informs otheragencies and partners of increasedService capability to assist in birdidentification.

Action: Develop FY2001 budgetinitiative by July 1999, to providegreater staff support towardsreducing unlawful take of migratorybirds. (LE).

Opportunity: Directorate profilesLaw Enforcement success stories tohighlight the demonstrated need andthe benefit of law enforcementactions towards the conservation ofmigratory birds.

Action: The National Wildlife RefugeSystem will develop a consistentmonitoring and assessment protocolsufficient to maintain the integrityand diversity of migratory birds onrefuges (ARW/RF, RDs 1-7).

Action: Use LWCF appropriationsto acquire additional lands forhabitats that constitute importantmigratory bird habitat. (ARW/RF,RE, RDs 1-7).

Opportunity: Complete AldoLeopold NWR acquisition decisiondocument by September 1999. RD-3attend dedication ceremony,highlighting Leopold’s “land ethic”and how the refuge benefitsmigratory birds.

Action: Develop and implementnational guidance forComprehensive ConservationPlanning process on NationalWildlife Refuges to incorporateinformation (e.g., the species ofconcern, suggested monitoringprotocols) listed in nationalconservation plans (i.e., Partners inFlight, Colonial WaterbirdConservation Plan, Shorebird Plan)to the greatest extent possible.Guidance will be ready by October1999, and implementation will occuras plans are finalized. (Development:ARW/RF; implementation: RDs 1-7ensure plans have followedguidance).

Action: Provide technical expertiseand oversight to CCP planning

teams to incorporate the latestavailable information on the statusof and management opportunitiesfor migratory birds such as Partnersin Flight Plans. (RDs 1-7, EcosystemTeams).

Opportunity: As an example,Stillwater National Wildlife Refugewill complete its CCP andincorporate shorebird information.The Regional Director (R1) can thenpreside over American BirdConservancy designation ofStillwater NWR as an ImportantBird Area for shorebirds.

Action: Designate appropriaterefuges as Important Bird Areas,Western Hemisphere ShorebirdReserve sites, and Ramsar Wetlandsof International Importance.Designate 10 additional refuges byJuly 2000. (ARW/RF, RDs 1-7).

Opportunity: AD — InternationalAffairs and Regional Director (R6)attend Ramsar dedication ceremonyat Sand Lake NWR, May, 1999, aspart of International Migratory BirdDay. Also, Directorate isrepresented at dedicationceremonies at other sites.

Action: Work with other countriesthrough the Trilateral Committeeand non-governmental organizationsto reduce impacts of pesticide use onmigratory birds by recommendingreduced-risk pesticides, education,and Integrated Pest Managementtechniques. (AES/EC, ARW/MBMO,AIA/OIA).

Action: Enhance capability of theService’s new InternationalConservation Corps (ICC) toprovide effective and rapid technicalguidance for international migratorybird management projects bySeptember 2000. (AIA/OIA).

Opportunity: Directorateencourages Service personnel withthe necessary technical expertise to

15


participate in ICC projects formigratory bird conservation.

Action: Increase support forcoordinating and integrating thevarious migratory bird conservationinitiatives relating to Latin Americaand the Caribbean. (AIA/OIA).

Action: Increase support byDecember 2000, for the WingedAmbassadors’ migratory birdconservation initiative in LatinAmerica and the Caribbean thatfocuses on sustaining importanthabitats and reversing habitat lossand degradation. (AIA/OIA).

Opportunity: During 1999, IMBD,highlight success of WingedAmbassadors at Caribbean embassyevent that celebrates the initiative’sachievements for migratory birdconservation.

Action: By the end of 2000, producethe technical protocol to implementfully adaptive harvest management,by accounting for all major mallardstocks and by allowing for flyway-specific selection of regulatoryalternatives. (ARW/MBMO).

Opportunity: Director resurrectsoriginal AHM Task Force tomaintain commitment to theseobjectives.

Action: Develop an internationaladaptive harvest managementframework for black ducks throughfinancial and technical support of theBlack Duck Joint Venture byDecember 2000. (ARW/MBMO andNAWWO).

Action: By the end of 1999, executean MOA with NASA’s Earth ScienceStrategic Enterprise to explore theapplication of remote sensing andattendant technologies to the large-scale monitoring of migratory birdhabitat. (ARW/MBMO, NAWWO).

Opportunity: Director signs MOAwith NASA Administrator.

Action: Develop monitoring andassessment infrastructure withinJoint Ventures to support deliveryand evaluation of NAWMP andother migratory bird initiatives,through innovative partnershipsamong MBMO, NAWWO, BRDScience Centers, Cooperative Fishand Wildlife Research Units, NRCSWildlife Habitat ManagementInstitute, Universities, DucksUnlimited, NASA, and others. (RDs1-7, ARW/NAWWO).

Opportunity: Showcase one or moreJoint Ventures where monitoringand assessment programs arehaving a demonstrable impact on

habitat management activities (e.g.,Prairie Pothole or Lower MississippiValley JV’s).

Goal 2: Implement ConservationStrategies to Reduce OverabundantPopulations

The mid-continent population oflight geese (Ross and Snow) hastripled within the last thirty years toapproximately 3 million birds. Thislarge population is now damagingfragile tundra habitat that they andother species depend upon.

Action: Develop a strategy (througha steering committee which includesEcosystem Team representation) toaddress long-term solutions,including communications, to

16


Altamira Oriole, Santa Ana NWR. Photo by Karen Hollingsworth.

managing overabundant snow goosepopulations in North America byJuly, 2000. (ARW/MBMO, RDs 3, 4,5, 6).

Action: Developed and implementeda conservation order by February,1999, that will reduce the number ofmid-continent light geese that havebecome seriously injurious to theirarctic breeding habitat and habitatimportant to other migratory birds.(ARW/MBMO).

Action: Allocate $200,000 withinService budget to leverageadditional funds, throughpartnerships with states and NGOs,to establish and improve habitat andpopulation evaluation andmonitoring programs for assessmentof snow goose management actionsby January, 2000. (ARW/MBMO,RDs 3,4, 5, 6).

Action: Develop a regulation thatprovides for the implementation of aconservation or depredation orderfor resident Canada geese in theAtlantic, Mississippi, Central, andPacific Flyways by January, 2001.(ARW/MBMO, RDs 1-6).

Action: Provide technical assistance(e.g., pamphlets) and signagreements with States,municipalities, and other entities(e.g., U.S. Golf Association, NationalLeague of Cities) to reduce nuisanceCanada goose populations. (RDs 1-7,ARW/MBMO, AEA/PA).

Action: In conjunction with U.S.Department of Agriculture, developa strategic management plan fordouble-crested cormorants thatreviews the significance of predationon sport and commercial fisheriesand provides strategies foridentifying and resolving conflicts.(ARW/MBMO, RDs 3,4,5, USDA).

Goal 3: Increase EffectivenessThrough Partnerships

Private landowners control millionsof acres of key habitat. The NorthAmerican Bird ConservationInitiative (NABCI), launched in1999, provides a forum to expandconservation of all birds in thehemisphere through regionallybased, biologically drivenpartnerships. Expandedpartnerships in the rest of thewestern hemisphere and in theNorth Pacific are also vital.

Action: Expand partnerships withprivate landowners, Land Trusts andother conservation partners torestore and protect importantnesting and feeding habitat formigratory waterfowl and neotropicalmigratory birds. Target Director’swildlife restoration funds to restorecoastal islands in the Gulf of Maine,native prairie communities in theMidwest and Great Plains, riparianhabitats in arid ecosystems andalong coastal streams, and longleafpine communities in the Southeast.(AEA/FA, AES/HC, RDs 1-7,Ecosystem Teams).

Action: Develop and implementguidance that encourages fieldbiologists in the Partners for Fishand Wildlife Program and CoastalProgram to 1) focus on migratorybirds when planning andimplementing habitat restorationand protection projects, 2) reach outto new partners with specificinterests in birds, and 3) enhanceinformation exchange with partnersand other Service programsregarding important migratory birdhabitats. (AES/HC, RDs 1-7,Ecosystem Teams).

Action: Adopt new geographic units,“Bird Conservation Regions”,developed under NABCI forecologically based planning,implementation, and evaluation ofcooperative bird conservation in the

U.S. by December, 1999. (ARW/MBMO and NAWWO).

Action: Support NABCI byproviding major support (viastaffing, funding, technicalassistance, partnershipdevelopment) in 1999 forimplementation of two internationaltransboundary migratory bird “jointventures.” One venture would be inthe Mexico/US border region, suchas the Sonoran Desert, and one inthe Canada/US border region, suchas the northern forest. (ARW, ARW/MBMO, ARW/NAWWO, andAIA/OIA).

Opportunity: Director announces(with partners) creation of a new“joint venture” and its importance tointernational bird conservation.Suggested venue: North AmericanWildlife and Natural ResourcesConference.

Action: During the 106th Congress,work actively to support passage ofthe Neotropical Migratory BirdConservation Act along with anappropriation for its implementationand, subsequently, initiateimplementation of the hemisphere-wide migratory bird conservationprogram which it creates. (AIA/OIA,ARW/MBMO, AEA/LS).

Action: Open additional two“Centers of Excellence forMigratory Birds and EcosystemManagement”, one in Costa Rica andone elsewhere in Latin America, byDecember, 2000, to train wildlifescientists and reserve managers inthe principles of migratory birdconservation. (AIA/OIA).

Action: Identify joint projects underbinational migratory bird treatieswith Canada, Mexico, Russia andJapan by October, 1999, to promoteconservation of migratory birds.(ARW/MBMO, RDs 1-7, AIA/OIA).

17


Opportunity: Directorate (WO andRO) participates in meetings withcounterparts in Mexico, Russia andJapan to identify projects.

Action: Establish regional migratorybird and ecosystem conservationliaisons throughout Latin Americaand the Caribbean who would helplink and coordinate international anddomestic efforts to conservemigratory birds and facilitate thedevelopment of in-countryprograms. (AIA/OIA, ARW/MBMO).

Partnerships with other Federalagencies are essential to addressmajor migratory bird issues such as:1) indications that pesticides kill over67 million birds annually, 2) loss ofhabitat, and 3) mortality caused bymarine fisheries operations.

Action: Work with EPA’s Fate andEffects Branch, Registration Branchand Branch of Endangered SpeciesProtection to establish a process byDecember, 2000, for using FWSexpertise in evaluating the effects ofpesticides on migratory birds andother non-target organisms.(AES/EC).

Action: Develop MOU by December,2000, with National MarineFisheries Service to reduce avianbycatch through preventativemeasures and facilitate futureparticipation with states andfisheries commissions. (ARW/MBMO).

Action: Work with the StateDepartment through August, 2000,to seek increased funding forwetland habitat conservation underthe Wetlands for the Futureinitiative of the Ramsar WetlandsConvention. (AIA/OIA and ARW/NAWWO).

Opportunity: Director, AIA, ARWand staff meet with StateDepartment’s Deputy AssistantSecretary for Environment and staffto discuss migratory bird andwetland strategies.

Action: Create teams (3 biologistsper region) of technical advisors, byidentifying new FY2000 FTEs andcurrent staff, to assist FWSecosystem teams, other federalagencies (e.g., DOD, BLM, BOR,DOT) and others to better assessimpacts to migratory birds duringproject planning and better managetheir land holdings and activities formigratory birds. (RDs 1-7).

Action: Support completion of theNorth American Colonial WaterbirdPlan with new FY2000 FTEs.(ARW/MBMO).

Opportunity: Director emphasizesFWS commitment to ColonialWaterbird conservation at meetingof all Colonial Waterbird Planparticipants in spring, 1999.

Opportunity: RDs and Directorparticipate in activities surroundingthe release of Colonial WaterbirdPlan in late 2000.

Action: Support completion andimplementation of the NationalShorebird Conservation Plan withnew FY2000 FTEs. (Completion:ARW/MBMO; implementation: RDs1-7/Ecosystem Teams).

Opportunity: Director stressesstrong FWS commitment tocompletion of shorebird plan atnational Shorebird Plan meeting inSeptember 1999.

Opportunity: RDs and Directorparticipate in activities surroundingcompletion of the Shorebird Plan inlate 1999.

Action: Create an urban “treaty” tobe signed by five major cities nearareas of special importance tomigratory birds. Treaties will heraldour migratory birds in each city andprovide funds for schools and citycouncils to complete joint projectsunder FWS banner by December2000. NCTC to develop a longdistance learning programassociated with the “treaty” efforts.(AEA/PA, ARW/MBMO, NCTC)

Opportunity: Director and RDs sign“treaties” in public ceremonies; signfirst treaty, with Washington, D.C.,on International Migratory BirdDay, 1999.

Action: Support and expand theShorebird Sister School Program tothe entire United States and toneighboring countries by 2001.(NCTC, RDs 1-7, ARW/MBMO,AIA/OIA).

Action: Contact the National GirlScout and Boy Scout Council todevelop a badge for migratory birdprojects and host a Migratory BirdDay at the annual Council meeting.(NCTC, ARW/MBMO).

Goal 4: Raise Public Awareness.

Action: Develop outreach materialsto explain, particularly to farmersand ranchers, the effects ofpesticides on migratory birds andhow one can select and applypesticides wisely. (AES/EC andAEA/PA).

Action: Create outreach materialsthat highlight the activities of theWinged Ambassadors LatinAmerican and Caribbean Programby September, 2000. (AIA/OIA andAEA/PA).

Action: Publicize how theBorderlands Program with Mexicocontributes to the conservation ofmigratory birds by September, 2000.(AIA/OIA, AEA/PA, RD-2).

18


Action: Develop and implement byDecember 2000, a forestmanagement outreach strategy withthe U.S. Forest Service that informsthe public and professional resourcemanagers about the value andnecessity of actively managing someforests for the benefit of migratorybirds. (ARW/MBMO and AEA/PA).

Action: As Partners in Flight BirdConservation Plans are released andimplemented throughout thecountry, highlight at least oneexemplary plan from each region.(RDs 1-7).

Opportunity: RDs and Directorparticipate in InternationalMigratory Bird Day events andemphasize implementation of BirdConservation Plans. Participation inInternational Migratory Bird Daycontinues to grow each year. Itprovides an excellent forum forgetting bird conservation messagesto thousands of people.

Action: Explore a Presidentialproclamation and encourage Statesto sign gubernatorial proclamationsand sponsor 1999 InternationalMigratory Bird Day activities.(AEA/PA and ARW/MBMO).

Opportunity: Secretary sends aletter to all governors, highlightingthe economic and ecologicalimportance of birds and encouragingIMBD participation.

Action: By February, 2000 completeState of the Birds, a document thatdetails the current status oflandbirds in the U.S. and promotesPartners in Flight and othermigratory bird initiatives. (ARW/MBMO).

Opportunity: Director to unveil thenew publication at InternationalMigratory Bird Day activities inMay 2000.

Action: Develop a short videopresentation imparting a generalmigratory bird conservationmessage that could be used byService personnel throughout thecountry. (NCTC, ARW/MBMO,ARW/NAWWO).

19


20

Vision

The ecological and economic impactsof invasive species are betterunderstood and the Nation hasmechanisms in place to prevent theirintroduction and spread.

Introduction

With new invasions of alien speciesand their associated ecological andeconomic impacts occurring at anaccelerating rate, there remainslittle question that invasive alienspecies represent one of the mostinsidious and challenging resourceproblems facing Federal, State, andTribal governments, and the privatesector. Nonnative plants and animalsin the United States now number atleast 6,300, with new invasionsoccurring on a weekly basis. Agrowing global economy, newtransportation routes, and quickertransit times have all led to aproliferation of invasive species.

The Service has a long history ofaddressing invasive alien species.From noxious weed issues onNational Wildlife Refuges tocontrolling sea lamprey in the GreatLakes, the Service has led the nationfor decades in combating invadersand their associated economic andecological impacts. For example, theService’s Fisheries Programprovides regional and nationalcoordination for aquatic invasivespecies, plays a leadership role inimplementing the NonindigenousAquatic Nuisance Prevention andControl Act of 1990, and conductssea lamprey control in the U.S.portion of the Great Lakes. NationalWildlife Refuges deal with a host ofinvasive weed problems and havedeveloped cutting edge controlmethods, including biocontrol andprescribed burns. Through its lawenforcement program, the Servicehas the authority to enforce

injurious/invasive fish and wildlifelaws involving interstate commercefor all 50 States. Other programs,such as Endangered Species,Habitat Conservation, the NationalFish Hatchery System, and theOffices of Management andScientific Authority all address theissue with a variety of on-the-groundactions and policy initiatives.

The Service is prepared to expandits leadership role and has issued a“call to arms” to identify additionalactions, steps, and authoritiesneeded to prevent the introductionand spread of invasive species andcontrol or manage those alreadyestablished. The Service has over700 field offices, hatcheries, andrefuges and a wealth of biologicaland policy expertise that can helpstem the tide of unwanted species.The Service’s 52 ecosystem teamsare also critical to the effort as theyprovide cross programmaticcoordination, communicate directlywith local partners, and undertakeprioritized on-the-ground projects.

Over the next two years, the Servicewill develop and implement anaggressive program to enhance theService’s capability and leadershiprole to respond effectively to presentand future invasive species problemsand issues, especially those thatadversely impact the Nation’s fishand wildlife resources.

The strategy is to pursue a variety ofon-the-ground, policy, and outreachactions to address the invasivespecies issue. All Service offices andecosystem teams will focus effortsvia the following goal statements:

1. Enhance leadership.

2. Take direct action.

3. Raise awareness.

Invasive SpeciesA Call to Arms

21

Invasive Species

Action Plan

Goal 1: Enhance Leadership

Through legislative and policyaction, along with partnerships withFederal, State, Tribal, and Privatepartners, the Service will provideNational and Internationalleadership as the invasive speciesissue continues to grow.

Action: Utilize the 9th AnnualInternational Zebra Mussel andAquatic Nuisance SpeciesConference and associated meetingof the Aquatic Nuisance SpeciesTask Force as a forum to introducethe Service’s invasive speciesstrategy. (D, AF, AEA).

Action: Establish and includeobjectives, performance measures,and workload indicators related tothe introduction and spread ofinvasive species in the Service’sstrategic plan (GPRA). (D, AF, ARW,AES, ALE, APB).

Action: Request the Secretary toappoint the Director to representhim as a co-chair of the InvasiveSpecies Council, as established byExecutive Order, including housingof the Executive Director of theCouncil and appropriate staff. (D).

Action: Establish a small workinggroup chaired by the AD —Fisheries to review Service functionsand responsibilities related toinvasive species and recommend tothe Director the most effective andefficient organizational structure.(D).

Action: Issue guidance to theDirectorate instructing them whereappropriate to integrate invasivespecies prevention and controlefforts into all aspects of theiroperations, including the crossprogrammatic efforts of ecosystemteams. (D).

Action: Develop and issue guidancefor the Partners for Fish andWildlife Program to contribute tothe identification, prevention, andcontrol of invasive species impactson native species and their habitats.(D, AES).

Action: Work with the pet industryand the American Zoo and AquariumAssociation to encourage adoption ofvoluntary measures that will preventintroductions and spread of invasivespecies, and to build consensus foradditional legislative and/orregulatory solutions if needed.(D, AF, AIA, LE, AES).

Action: Develop and issue a Servicepolicy for appropriate use of non-native species and strains. (D, AES,AF, ARW).

Action: In addition to the GreatLakes Fisheries Convention withCanada, use bilateral agreementswith Mexico, Canada, South Africa,Russia, and China to addresscommon invasive species problem,through cooperative projects. (AIA,AF, ARW, AES).

Action: Through Clean Water ActionPlan involvement and in cooperationand consultation with othergovernment entities andstakeholders (AES, AF, ARW):

1. Develop a Unified Federal Policyto assist watershed management andplanning efforts to addressdeleterious effects of invasivespecies on native species and theirassociated habitats, and

2. Establish compatible datastandards, resources classifications,inventory methods and protocols forstakeholder use when completingwatershed based assessments ofinvasive species.

Action: Conduct a review of Serviceinvasive species legislativeauthorities and develop proposed

language to fill gaps, such as theneed to deny import of knowninvasive species posing a threat andthe permitting of biological agentinvasive species control. (AEA, AES,AF, AIA, ALE, ARW).

Action: Establish a Service team toreview and update regulations andprocedures for implementing theInjurious Wildlife Provisions of theLacey Act of 1990 (18 U.S.C. 42) andwork with the Pet Industry AdvisoryCouncil and other interested partiesto develop support for additionalinjurious wildlife listings. (ALE,AF, AIA).

Action: Develop and offer an invasivespecies course to train Serviceemployees and others to assessinvasive species impacts, developcontrol plans, and ensurecommunication with other agenciesand the public. (NCTC).

Action: Beyond the FY2000 budgetrequest, evaluate cross-programfunding needs to enhance invasivespecies efforts. (AES, AEA, AF,AIA, ALE, APB, ARW).

Goal 2: Take Direct Action

The Service will identify specificinvasive species threats and developand take direct action to preventintroductions, control spread, andmitigate associated impacts.

Action: Provide an IPA to theWestern Governors Association towork with State, Federal, and Tribalagencies, and industry to supportthe Association’s invasive speciesinitiative. (D, AF, ARW, RDs 1, 2,6, 7).

Action: Encourage development ofand provide implementation fundingfor State and Interstate AquaticNuisance Species ManagementPlans. (AF, RDs).

Action: Encourage and facilitateRegional coordination of AquaticNuisance Species efforts by way ofestablishment of a Gulf of MexicoRegional Panel, and a NortheastRegional Panel. (AF, RDs 2, 4, 5).

Action: Using the successful SouthDakota Integrated PestManagement activity conducted byRegion 6, as an example, eachRegion will establish at least onedemonstration area for thesepractices on Service lands. (ARW,AF, RDs).

Action: Initiate a comprehensivesurvey of harmful invasive speciespopulations and their impacts onService lands: (AES, AF, ARW,RDs). The Service should conduct aninitial survey using availableinformation, develop Refuge andNational Fish Hatchery guidance forconducting and completing thesurvey, enlist citizen volunteers incompleting surveys, and centralizeService survey data in the USGSFlorida Caribbean Science Center inGainesville, Florida.

Action: Begin implementing a pilotprogram required by P.L. 105-322 todevelop measures to eradicate orcontrol nutria and restoremarshlands damaged by nutria.(ARW).

Action: Select 10 National WildlifeRefuges and two National FishHatcheries impacted by invasivespecies and implement appropriatecontrol and mitigation activities. (AF,ARW, RDs).

Goal 3: Raise Awareness

The Service will elevate thediscussion of invasive species andtheir impacts to all audiences,ranging from children’s programs tointernational forums.

Action: Initiate discussion with keymembers of the InternationalAssociation of Fish and WildlifeAgencies (IAFWA) to developshared efforts. Use IAFWA AnnualMeeting to encourage members tobecome more engaged with invasivespecies issues (i.e., uniform injuriousspecies lists). (D, AES, AIA, AEA,AF, ARW, RDs).

Action: Publish a report of invasivespecies in “hot spots” of aquatic andterrestrial biodiversity accompaniedby specific recommended actions toprotect “at risk” native speciescommunities. (D, AIA, AES, AEA,AF, ARW, RDs).

Action: Encourage and facilitate thedevelopment of an Invasive Speciesinitiative for Oceania under SouthPacific Regional EnvironmentalProgram auspices. (AF, ARW, AIA).

Action: Use CITES to addressinternational aspect of movement ofspecies (AIA, AF):

1. Engage the CITES AnimalsCommittee to raise consciousnesswithin the international community.

2. In consultation with stakeholders,investigate opportunities to addressinvasive species through CITES anddevelop proposals and discussionpapers for the next CITES meetingin April 2000.

Action: Federal Aid will hold a seriesof workshops with States and otherpartners to identify and addressopportunities to prevent theintroduction, spread, and control ofinvasive species by way of FederalAid funded projects. (AEA).

Action: Prepare generic invasivespecies information packets for usewith the press and others, including(AEA, AIA, NCTC, AF, ARW, AES,RDs): invasive species issuebrochure, biologues on high profilespecies, photos (slide and graphicsfiles) and video B-roll, “America’sLeast Wanted” poster, and fact sheeton Service efforts and contacts.

Action: Washington and RegionalExternal Affairs offices will properlypublicize activities undertaken aspart of this initiative. (AEA, RDs).

Action: Post Invasive speciesinformation and links on theService’s home page. (AA, AES,AEA, AF, AIA, NCTC, RDs).

Action: Prepare traveling displaysfor each Region on invasive species“Wildlife on the Move” for use atzoos, aquaria, airports, and otherappropriate forums. (AEA, RDs).

22

Invasive Species

Vision

Unite all Service programs to leador support ecosystem levelconservation through a moretechnically capable and culturallydiverse organization. The Servicewill accomplish this by involvingstakeholders through local action,applying scientific expertise,managing land and water, andapplying appropriateregulations.(Fish and WildlifeDirectorate, 1998).

Introduction

“A thing is right when it tends topreserve the integrity, stability, andbeauty of the biotic community. It iswrong when it tends otherwise.” — Aldo Leopold

In 1994, the Service adopted the“Ecosystem Approach to Fish andWildlife Conservation,” answeringAldo Leopold’s call to treat thelandscape as a community, a wholemuch greater than the sum of the

parts. The Ecosystem Approachachieves landscape-levelconservation of fish, wildlife, plants,and their habitats through crossprogram coordination within theService and partnership withorganizations and individualsexternal to the Service.

The Service established 53Ecosystem Units based on U.S.Geological Survey watersheds. The Directorate envisionedecosystem teams as the forum forcommunication and cooperationamong refuges, hatcheries, fisheries,and Ecological Services field stationsas well as other components of theService.

At the Service’s request, the OhioState University completed anassessment of the Service’secosystem approach in March 1998.The study identified managementand organizational improvementsthat would support the ecosystemapproach. The OSU assessment teampresented the Service Directoratewith 12 recommendations to increase

Ecosystem Approach

23

Partners/multi-agencies, NCTC, WV. Photo by Ryan Hagerty.

consistency, improve internaloperations, and strengthen programadvocacy. The Directorate’s responseto the report resulted in severalchanges. An important change is inplace in the Regional Offices where agroup of Geographic AssistantRegional Directors, ProgramAssistant Regional Directors, andProgram Supervisors are working toensure that Service resources areapplied to problems in the mosteffective and efficient manner.

As part of a continuing commitmentto meet resource needs and employeeconcerns during this transition, theDirectorate established a nationalEcosystem ApproachImplementation Team to identifybarriers and make recommendationsto implement the Service’secosystem approach. The teamconsists of members with diversebackgrounds from all programs andgeographic regions of the Service.They have provided a variety ofrecommendations on belt-tighteningmeasures, and guidance to teams onroles and responsibilities,communication, and training needsamong others. The team is workingon additional recommendations onpartnerships, awards, and othersignificant issues of concern.

Ensuring that the EcosystemApproach continues to develop andtake root in the daily culture of theService is very important to thisagency. This Ecosystem Approachinitiative was developed tostrengthen the support to theecosystem teams, and identify teampriorities and successful models ofcooperation that can be shared withother ecosystem teams. Tostrengthen the ecosystem approachin the next two years, all Serviceprograms must become moreinvolved in the ecosystem team’sactivities. To achieve this goal, allemployees at every level of theorganization must be moreknowledgeable of the Ecosystem

Approach and understand that it is abetter way of doing business. Thisincludes those individualsresponsible for contracting,personnel, equal opportunity, andother support functions andoccupations who may be indirectlysupporting ecosystem teams.

Although this initiative includesmany new action items, many weredeveloped from other sources —the Implementation Teamrecommendations to the Directorate,Washington Office Involvement inthe Ecosystem Approach teamreport, the Ohio State UniversityReport, and the Directorate’sResponse to that report. In somecases, the actions already have beenimplemented, but they are includedhere for the sake of completeness.

The action items focus on (1)leadership and accountability, (2)communications and coordination,(3) ecosystem teams support andpartnering, (4) structure andbudgets and (5) consistent policy,definitions, and planning.Completion of these items will helpthe Service meet the mountingconservation challenges that areahead in the 21st century.

To accomplish these actions, theService needs to:

1. Exhibit strong leadership andaccountability.

2. Improve communication andcoordination.

3. Provide the Ecosystem Teamsadequate support and increasepartnerships.

4. Determine obstacles toimplementation related to thestructure and budget.

5. Develop consistent Service policy,definitions, and planning processes.

All action items outlined in thisinitiative are substantial, requiringthe agency to focus on several at one time. However, leadership,accountability and communicationswill receive priority attention as theyshow the Service’s commitment tothe ecosystem approach, and ensureecosystem teams have the supportand resources needed to address the migratory birds, refuges, andinvasive species priorities outlined in other sections.

Action Plan

Goal 1: Exhibit strong leadership andaccountability.

I. Leadership and Accountability

There is a need actively and openly toguide full adoption of the ecosystemapproach into all aspects of Serviceoperations with accompanyingperformance reviews.

Action: By October 1, 1999, draftsuggested language to be includedas a critical result in employees,managers, and Senior ExecutiveService’s performance standards onthe importance of supporting theecosystem approach and ecosystemteam activities. This involvesrequiring that support for theecosystem approach be incorporatedin the day-to-day activities of allService employees, includingadministrative and support staff.(AD-PB).

Action: By July 1, 1999, incorporatethe accomplishments of theecosystem approach into evaluationcriteria for recommendations andapprovals of performance awardsand bonuses for SES employees.(Directorate).

Action: Ensure that all individualsnamed as Program Supervisors havethe appropriate experience. (AD-PBwith Program Assistant Directors).

24

Ecosystem Approach

Action: By November 1, 1999,develop a mechanism to fostercommunication among the GARDson a national level providingopportunities to exchange ideas onimplementing the ecosystemapproach. (Special Assistant toDeputy Director, GARDs).

Action: By January, 1, 2000, ensurethat all ecosystem teams have takenNCTC’s team effectiveness survey.Follow up with additional trainingfor teams, as appropriate. (RegionalDirectors, GARDs, NCTC).

Action: By June 1, 1999, provide theDirector with specific action itemsthat implement the roles andresponsibilities of the WashingtonOffice staff in the EcosystemApproach. (ADs, Chief-LawEnforcement, and OHR).

Action: Periodically, dedicate D\DD’sstaff meetings to discussions of theWashington Office staff involvementin ecosystem approach. (AEA).

Action: By May 30, 1999, nominateone ecosystem team per Region tomake a presentation on teamactivities for the Director, AssistantDirectors, and appropriate staff inthe Washington office. (RegionalDirectors).

Action: By June 1, 1999, provide theDirector with mechanisms to rewardteams as well as individual and crossprogrammatic efforts implementingthe ecosystem approach. (DeputyDirector, Implementation Team,AD-PB).

Action: By July 1, 1999, includecareer advancement elementsrelated to the ecosystem approach inthe Leadership DevelopmentGuidance document. (Deputy ADsand RDs).

Goal 2: Improve communications andcoordination.

Better communications arenecessary to ensure that Serviceemployees at all levels in the agencyare knowledgeable about theEcosystem Approach and to buildunderstanding of and support for theEcosystem Approach betweenService employees and importantexternal audiences. Internally, theService Directorate mustcommunicate directly andconsistently with employeesregarding the ecosystem approachand how activities are undertakenand achievements reported.Externally, the Service Directoratemust communicate directly andconsistently with audiences,including Members of Congress andtheir staffs, State and local electedofficials, State fish and wildlifeagencies, conservation andconstituent groups, and the newsmedia.

Action: By May 15, 1999, establish aregular “Ecosystem Approach” pagein Fish and Wildlife News tohighlight ecosystem approachactivities and accomplishments.(Deputy Director, ImplementationTeam, AEA).

Action: By May 30, 1999, identify anoutreach contact for each ecosystemteam. (Regional Director, GARDs,Ecosystem Teams).

Action: By October 1, 1999, use theService’s national outreach plan todevelop a communication outreachplan and supporting materialsregarding the ecosystem approachfor use by the Service Directorate.(AEA).

Action: By October 1, 1999, updateand improve ecosystem approachweb pages and provide for theircontinuing maintenance. (AD-AA,AD-AEA, Special Assistant to theDeputy Director).

Action: By May 1, 2000, ensure that outreach support is available toeach team to develop and promoteinformation for internal publicationsand news media. (RegionalDirectors).

Action: By July 1, 2000, visit at leastone ecosystem team meeting.(Directorate).

Action: Beginning May 30, 1999,brief members of Congress and staffas well as other external audienceson the ecosystem approach andsuccesses of the ecosystem teams’on-the-ground activities. (Director,Deputy Director, AD-AEA, AD-PB,RDs, and Ecosystem Teams).

Action: Beginning March 1, 1999,extend invitations to externalaudiences to visit ecosystem teamprojects. (Regional Directors,Ecosystem Team Leaders).

Action: Beginning May 30, 1999, ona quarterly basis, provide a list ofteam meetings or events that offeropportunities for participation bythe members of the ServiceDirectorate. (Ecosystem TeamLeaders, Regional Directors).

Action: By October 1, 1999, providethe Director with highlights ofseveral successful ecosystem teamprojects. (Assistant Directors, RDs).

Action: By January 1 of each year,consolidate these highlights into asingle Service publication. This“Ecosystem Highlights document”will be used with internal andexternal audiences to explain andillustrate the Ecosystem Approach.(Regional Directors, AD-AEA).

Goal 3: Provide the ecosystem teamsadequate support and increasepartnerships.

Ecosystem team roles andresponsibilities should be clearly

25

Ecosystem Approach

defined and stakeholders andinterested partners fully involved.

Action: By May 30, 1999, reissue thememorandum outlining the roles andresponsibilities of the GeographicAssistant Regional Directors, andProgram Assistant RegionalDirectors as a Director’s Order.(AD-PB).

Action: By August 1, 1999, completethe Ecosystem Teams Roles andResponsibilities guidance document.GARDs will familiarize themselveswith this document and utilize it andother guidance to ensure productiveteam activity. ( Deputy Director,Implementation Team, GARDs).

By October 1, 1999, develop amechanism (i.e., team leaders’meetings) to communicate successfulteam approaches to other regionalmanagers. (GARDs).

Action: By May 30, 1999, convene ateam to develop a strategy/guidanceon successful partnerships withstakeholders. Provide appropriaterecommendations as they aredeveloped. Complete the draftoutline by June 1, 1999, and a final byApril, 2000. (Director, AD-AEA).

Goal 4: Determine obstacles toimplementation related to structureand budget.

A budgetary framework should beprovided for full implementation ofthe Ecosystem Approach to fish andwildlife conservation.

Action: By June 1, 1999, schedulemeetings with Congressional staffand determine institutional barriersto translate ecosystem priorities intoService budget submissions toCongress. Make recommendationsfor change. (AD-PB, AEA).

Action: By April 1, 1999, issuewritten Regional memorandum inconsultation with the ecosystemteams clarifying how ecosystemteams in each Region will beinvolved in the Regional budgetdevelopment process. (RegionalDirectors).

Action: Each year identify nationalbudget thrusts at the springDirectorate budget meeting.(Directorate).

Action: By September 1, 1999, issueguidance that recognizes ecosystemteam priorities in Regional budgetallocations. Encourage appropriateflexibility in these allocations. (ADs,AD-PB, RDs).

Action: By September 1, 1999, reviewand appropriately revise all programbudget allocations, criteria, andwork activity guidances to theRegions to ensure that theyincorporate the implementation ofthe ecosystem approach in allService activities. (All AssistantDirectors).

Action: Continue the belt-tighteningmeasures outlined by the Director toreduce impact on field budgets untilthe end of FY 99. These measuresinclude Washington Office supportfor salaries of Washington Officestaff who transfer to GARD, PARD,and Program Supervisor positions;10 percent travel reduction forRegional and Washington Offices;and abolishing or delayingbackfilling of certain vacantpositions. (Directorate).

Action: Continue to provideemployees the adequate justificationfor any significant budget reductionsin field. (Regional Directors).

Goal 5: Develop consistent Servicepolicy, definitions, and planningprocesses.

Action is needed to develop policyand fully and consistently describeand define the ecosystem andaccompanying roles andresponsibilities for implementation.

Action: By May 30, 1999, issue aDirector’s Order requiring that all revised/updated guidance andpolicy documents incorporate theimportance of the ecosystemapproach to fish and wildlifeconservation in day-to-day activities.(DD, AD-PB).

Action: By October 1, 2000, revisethe chapter in the Service manual onthe Ecosystem Approach and makeit widely available. (AD-PB).

Action: By October 1, 2000, includeelements of the EcosystemApproach in all appropriate NCTCcourses to ensure that employeeshave a common technical and policyunderstanding. (Director-NCTC).

The action items are all substantialwith many to focus on at one time.Service managers must exhibitstrong support, and it is imperativethat employees and externalpartners are aware of team activitiesand accomplishments. Therefore,leadership and accountability andcommunications will receive priorityattention as they will show theService’s commitment to theEcosystem Approach and ensureecosystem teams have the supportresources they need to address otherService priorities.

26

Ecosystem Approach

AEA: Assistant Director, ExternalAffairs

AES: Assistant Director, EcologicalServices

AHM: Adaptive HarvestManagement

AIA: Assistant Director,International Affairs

ARW: Assistant Director, Refugesand Wildlife

BLM: Bureau of Land Management

BRD: Biological Resources Division(USGS)

BOR: Bureau of Reclamation

DOD: Department of Defense

DOT: Department of Transportation

EC: Environmental Contaminants

FA: Federal Aid

HC: Habitat Conservation

IA: International Affairs

ICC: International ConservationCorps

IMBD: International MigratoryBird Day

JV: Joint Venture

LE: Law Enforcement

LS: Legislative Services

LWCF: Land and WaterConservation Fund

MBMO: Office of Migratory BirdManagement

MOA: Memorandum of Agreement

MOU: Memorandum ofUnderstanding

NABCI: North American BirdConservation Initiative

NAWMP: North AmericanWaterfowl Management Plan

NAWWO: North AmericanWaterfowl and Wetlands Office

NASA: National Aeronautics andSpace Administration

NCTC: National ConservationTraining Center

NGO: Non-GovernmentalOrganization

NRCS: Natural ResourceConservation Service (USDA)

NWRS: National Wildlife RefugeSystem

OIA: Office of International Affairs

PA: Public Affairs

PIF: Partners in Flight

RE: Division of Realty

RD: Regional Director

RF: Division of Refuges

TE: Division of Endangered Species

USDA: United States Departmentof Agriculture

USGS: United States GeologicalSurvey

Appendix: Abbreviations

27

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service1849 C Street, NWWashington, DC 20240

202/208 4131Fax: 202/208 7407http://www.fws.gov/

Date post:	09-Jul-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	vuthien
View:	213 times
Download:	0 times

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Director’s Priorities the end of my ﬁrst year as Director, I...

Documents