Emergency Room Conservation

1
Emergency Room Conservation

• We provide economic and emotional support for
  protection of biological diversity into those few
  species least likely to benefit from it. Scott
  et al. (1987)
• Wildlife is best managed before becoming
  endangered. Squires et al. (1998)

2
ESA Is Reactive

• Early intervention is critical, but species get
  listed when pops are very low
• Analysis by Wilcove et al. (1993)
• Vertebrates (median number surviving endangered
  - 408, threatened 4161)
• Plants (median number surviving endangered - 99)
• Listing so late may explain why so few species
  recovered

3
Managing Species Before They Become Too Rare

• Identify and then list the species to watch
• Lists, lists, and listsEveryone has a list.
• USFS, BLM, FWS, NHP, Audubon, each State, etc.
• Species of concern
• Species at risk
• Sensitive species
• Candidate species

4
The Most Important List (USFWS)

• Candidate Species
• Category 1 sufficient info to support a proposed
  listing
• Category 2 some info indicating species in
  trouble but not enough to determine if proposed
  listing is appropriate
• In 1996 terminology and procedures changed
• USFWS got rid of Category 2
• Only Category 1 species - now called candidate
  species
• Combined animal and plant lists

5
Why Did The USFWS Get Rid Of C2 Species?

• Many different organizations now tracking rare
  species - not so in early days
• Duplication of effort and cost
• NOW NATURESERVE allows more centralized tracking
  of these species
• Quality of information varied considerably
• From over 4000 species to 200 species on the
  various lists
• Public confusion, C-2 candidates not a component
  of ESA
• Better to only list species with likelihood of
  listing in future
• Using old C-2 as species of concern was
  inappropriate as it is not a complete list

6
How did the USFWS go about the change?

• Proposed change (federal register Dec. 5, 1996)
• 163 comments (159 expressed concerns, 3 neutral
  or supported)
• Acknowledge that act is reactive not proactive

7
Federal Status Definitions

• Endangered, Threatened (as before)
• Proposed Endangered--proposed for listing
• Proposed Threatened--proposed for listing
• Candidate
• Taxa for which the Service currently has
  sufficient information on biological
  vulnerability and threats on hand to support the
  issuance of a proposed rule to list, but issuance
  of the proposed rule is precluded
• warranted but precluded 12 month rulings

8
Unofficial Status

• Species at Risk
• entire realm of species of concern to service,
  but no official status
• former C2 species
• special funding for research each year

9
How Are Candidate Species Managed?

• Petitioned species for which 12-month finding
  reported warranted or warranted but precluded
  become candidate species
• In limbo of listing process without protection,
  but often times research is done to find out more
  about the species and determine if it should in
  fact be listed
• Annual notice of review for candidate species
  is published in Federal Register and on USFWS
  candidate conservation page

10
Purpose of Candidates

• No statutory protection under ESA
• but candidate conservation plans can be developed
• Provide advance notice of potential listings for
  planners and developers
• Solicit input from interested parties to identify
  candidates that do and do not need listing
• Solicit information on how prioritize the order
  of species for listing

11
Candidate Stats

• 1999
• 258 candidates (154 plants, 104 animals)
• 56 proposed as T or E
• These should be considered in land use planning
• 18 candidates from 1997 that are here removed
• 93 candidates from 1997 that are now listed
• 15 proposed from 1997 that are now withdrawn
• Pretty similar in subsequent years
• 279 candidates in 2006

12
(No Transcript)
13
(No Transcript)
14
Candidate Conservation Agreements (with
Assurances)

• Although there is no formal protection for
  candidates until they are listed, CCAs can
  promote their conservation
• similar to safe harbor agreements except not for
  listed species
• purpose is to be proactive and benefit species so
  they are not listed
• must show benefit to species that if undertaken
  by other property owners would cumulatively be
  significant enough to remove need to list

15
Details of CCAs

• Formal agreements between service and non-federal
  land owners to address the conservation needs of
  proposed or candidate species before listing
• describe pop levels and habitat characteristics
  of covered species
• describe management action of owner to conserve
  species
• estimate conservation benefit as a result of
  management
• list assurance that service wont require more
  from the landowner if the species is listed
• describe monitoring to see if management works
• clause to allow service to rescue individuals
  that will be taken

16
Rationale for CCAs

• Better than managing to discourage use of land by
  species likely to be listed
• Management will contribute significantly to
  elimination of need to list species by proactive
  management
• Existing important habitats are maintained or
  enhanced

17
What Benefits Accrue to Species

• Acceptable benefits include
• (1) reduce fragmentation,
• (2) restore/enhance habitat,
• (3) increase habitat connectivity,
• (4) maintain or increase number of individuals,
• (5) reduce catastrophic events,
• (6) establish buffers for protected areas,
• (7) experiment with new management ideas
• Must be long-term, but need not be permanent

18
What Does Landowner Get?

• Enhancement of survival permit (Sect. 10(a)(1)(A)
  of ESA)
• authorizes incidental take and habitat
  modification to return property to conditions
  agreed on in the CCA if species are listed
• No surprises
• no future regulatory obligations in excell of
  those agreed to at time of CCA

19
Other Sensitive Species Lists

• USFS has listed 2339 species as sensitive
• Species identified by a Regional Forester for
  which population viability is a concern -
  significant population decline or habitat
  reduction
• 74 plants, 20 vertebrates, 6 invertebrates

20
USFS Region 1 Criteria For Animals

• Need total score gt 18 to be considered sensitive
  (15 for plants)
• Abundance (in Region 1)
• Extremely rare (9 - lt 500 indiv), Rare (6 -
  500-1000), Uncommon (3 - 1000-5000), Common (0 -
  gt 5000)
• Distribution
• Endemic to region (6), Disjunct (4), Peripheral
  (2), Widespread (0)
• Degree of threat of habitat loss
• High (9), Moderate (6), None (0)
• Population Impacts by Extrinsic Events
  (predation, harvest, etc)
• Significant (3), Moderate (2), None (0)

21
Remaining USFS Criteria

• Specialized Habitat/ Ecological Amplitude
• Narrow (3), Intermediate (1), None (0)
• Downward Population Trends
• Yes (6), Possible (3), No (0)

22
Does it Work?

• Squires et al. (1998)
• Queried USFS biologists
• 35 of management actions modified for sensitive
  species
• rarely if ever deny project for sensitive species
• timing and design of project are changed
• Forces multi-species management
• Mean 12 sensitive species (vertebrates) per
  district
• Only 1 species per district had a management
  plan!
• Is there enough money to go around?

23
Challenges to Sensitive Species Management
(Squires et al. 1998, Groves 1994)

• MULTI-agency, -disciplinary, -species,
  -troublesome
• need to work on coordination all the time
• need to operate effectively in a bureaucracy
• Funding, funding, funding
• lower priority

24
Examples

• Partners in Flight
• Wolverines, Coeur dAlene Salamander, Harlequin
  Duck, Goshawk (Groves 1994)
• define the problem
• consult experts
• measure success
• work the bureaucracy
• build support
• achieve conservation

25
References

• Squires, J. R., G. D. Hayward, and J. F. Gore.
  1998. The role of sensitive species in avian
  conservation. Pp. 155-176. In. J. M. Marzluff and
  R. Sallabanks (eds.) Avian Conservation. Island
  Press.
• Scott, J. M. et al. 1987. Species richness A
  geographical appraoch to protection of biological
  divesity. BioScience 39782-788.
• Wilcove, McMillan, M. and K.C. Winston. 1993.
  What exactly is an endangered species? An
  analysis of the U. S. endangered species list
  1985-1991. Conservation Biology 787-93.
• Groves, C. R. 1994. Candidate and sensitive
  species programs. Pp227-250. In T. W. Clark, R.
  P. Reading, and A. L. Clarke (eds.) Endangered
  species recovery finding the lessons, improving
  the process. Island Press