Implementing Ecosystem Management in Public Agencies: Lessons from the U.S. Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service

Abstract:  Ecosystem management was formally adopted over a decade ago by many U.S. natural resource agencies, including the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management. This approach calls for management based on stakeholder collaboration; interagency cooperation; integration of scientific, social, and economic information; preservation of ecological processes; and adaptive management. Results of previous studies indicate differences in the extent to which particular components of ecosystem management would be implemented within the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management and suggest a number of barriers thought to impede implementation. Drawing on survey and interview data from agency personnel and stakeholders, we compared levels of ecosystem-management implementation in the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management and identified the most important barriers to implementation. Agency personnel perceived similarly high levels of implementation on many ecosystem-management components, whereas stakeholders perceived lower levels. Agencies were most challenged by implementation of preservation of ecological processes, adaptive management, and integration of social and economic information, whereas the most significant barriers to implementation were political, cultural, and legal.     

Conservation Science and Forest Service Policy for Roadless Areas

Abstract:  Questions persist regarding whether the science of conservation biology can successfully affect environmental decision making. One of the most prominent fields of intersection between conservation science and environmental policy is public-lands debates in the United States. I reviewed the role of conservation science in the roadless-area policies of the U.S. Forest Service. Since 1971, the Forest Service has systematically evaluated roadless areas on national forests three times, most recently during the Clinton administration's Roadless Area Conservation Review (1998–2000) ( U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service 2000b ). Drawing on the agency's environmental impact statements and supporting documents and the internal records of conservation organizations, I examined the changing goals, methodology, and outcome of roadless-area advocacy and policy. Since the 1970s, conservation science has successfully informed public and administrative concern for roadless-area protection. Conservation science has transformed public discourse regarding roadless areas and has changed the scope and rationale of national conservation organizations' goals for roadless-area policy from protecting some to protecting all remaining national forest roadless areas. The Forest Service has increasingly drawn on the lessons of conservation biology to justify its methodology and its administrative recommendations to protect roadless areas. The 2000 Roadless Area Conservation Review resulted in a recommendation to protect all remaining national forest roadless areas, up from 22% of roadless areas in the first roadless review. Despite the scientific merits of recent roadless-area advocacy and policy, however, such initiatives have faced political difficulties. The emphasis on large-scale, top-down, national approaches to conservation policy has rendered such policies politically problematic.     

The Northwest Forest Plan as a Model for Broad-Scale Ecosystem Management: a Social Perspective

Abstract:  I evaluated the Northwest Forest Plan as a model for ecosystem management to achieve social and economic goals in communities located around federal forests in the U.S. Pacific Northwest. My assessment is based on the results of socioeconomic monitoring conducted to evaluate progress in achieving the plan's goals during its first 10 years. The assessment criteria I used related to economic development and social justice. The Northwest Forest Plan incorporated economic development and social justice goals in its design. Socioeconomic monitoring results indicate that plan implementation to achieve those goals met with mixed success, however. I hypothesize there are two important reasons the plan's socioeconomic goals were not fully met: some of the key assumptions underlying the implementation strategies were flawed and agency institutional capacity to achieve the goals was limited. To improve broad-scale ecosystem management in the future, decision makers should ensure that natural-resource management policies are socially acceptable; land-management agencies have the institutional capacity to achieve their management goals; and social and economic management goals (and the strategies for implementing them) are based on accurate assumptions about the relations between the resources being managed and well-being in local communities. One of the difficulties of incorporating economic development and social justice goals in conservation initiatives is finding ways to link conservation behavior and development activities. From a social perspective, the Northwest Forest Plan as a model for ecosystem management is perhaps most valuable in its attempt to link the biophysical and socioeconomic goals of forest management by creating high-quality jobs for residents of forest communities in forest stewardship and ecosystem management work, thereby contributing to conservation.     

What Is Ecosystem Management?

The evolving concept of ecosystem management is the focus of much current debate. To clarify discussion and provide a framework for implementation, I trace the historical development of ecosystem management, provide a working definition, and summarize dominant themes taken from an extensive literature review. The general goal of maintaining ecological integrity is discussed along with five specific goals: maintaining viable populations, ecosystem representation, maintaining ecological process (ie., natural disturbance regimes), protecting evolutionary potential of species and ecosystems, and accommodating human use in light of the above. Short-term policy implications of ecosystem management for several groups of key actors (scientists, policymakers, managers, citizens) are discussed. Long-term (> 100 years) policy implications are also reviewed including reframing environmental values, fostering cooperation, and evaluating success. Ecosystem management is not just about science nor is it simply an extension of traditional resource management; it offers a fundamental reframing of bow humans may work with nature.     

Breaking through the Crisis in Marine Conservation and Management: Insights from the Philosophies of Ed Ricketts

Abstract:  Over the last decade, 2 major U.S. commissions on ocean policy and a wide range of independent sources have argued that ocean ecosystems are in a period of crisis and that current policies are inadequate to prevent further ecological damage. These sources have advocated ecosystem-based management as an approach to address conservation issues in the oceans, but managers remain uncertain as to how to implement ecosystem-based approaches in the real world. We argue that the philosophies of Edward F. Ricketts, a mid-20th-century marine ecologist, offer a framework and clear guidance for taking an ecosystem approach to marine conservation. Ricketts' philosophies, which were grounded in basic observations of natural history, espoused building a holistic picture of the natural world, including the influence of humans, through repeated observation. This approach, when applied to conservation, grounds management in what is observable in nature, encourages early action in the face of uncertainty, and supports an adaptive approach to management as new information becomes available. Ricketts' philosophy of "breaking through," which focuses on getting beyond crisis and conflict through honest debate of different parties' needs (rather than forcing compromise of differing positions), emphasizes the social dimension of natural resource management. New observational technologies, long-term ecological data sets, and especially advances in the social sciences made available since Ricketts' time greatly enhance the utility of Ricketts' philosophy of marine conservation.     

Reflections on "What is Ecosystem Management?"

I review 10 dominant themes of ecosystem management described in the paper "What is Ecosystem Management?" (Grumbine 1994a) based on feedback received from managers actively implementing ecosystem management projects in the field. My emphasis is on practical advice from working professionals for working professionals. Key points include the importance of managing for ecological integrity, the need for social as well as scientific data, suggestions for implementing cooperation strategies and conservation partnerships, a pragmatic definition of adaptive management, and first steps toward changing the structure of natural resource organizations. As ecosystem management evolves, the pressure for change within traditional resource management agencies appears to be reaching a critical point.     

Simple Spatial Modeling Tool for Prioritizing Prescribed Burning Activities at the Landscape Scale

Abstract:   Resources for prescribed fire are frequently insufficient to manage public lands for all conservation and resource management objectives, necessitating prioritization of the application of fire across the landscape within any given year. Defining tradeoffs when applying prescribed fire to large landscapes is problematic not only because of the complexity of weighing competing management objectives at the landscape scale, but also because of the difficult nature of independently applying need-to-burn criteria to large areas. We present a case study of a simple modeling process implemented at Eglin Air Force Base in the Florida Panhandle (U.S.A.) to prioritize the application of prescribed fire. In a workshop setting, managers and biologists identified key conservation criteria and landscape management objectives that drive the application of prescribed fire. Remote sensing and other spatial data were developed to directly or indirectly represent all these criteria. Using geographic information system software, managers and biologists weighted each criterion according to its relative contribution to overall burn prioritization, and individual values for the criterion were scored according to how they influence the need to burn. Subsequently, this process has been validated and modified through ecological monitoring. This modeling process has also been applied to the 77,400-ha Blackwater River State Forest, public land adjacent to Eglin Air Force Base, demonstrating its applicability to lands with varying management priorities. The advantages of this model-based approach for prioritizing prescribed fire include the reliance on accessible, inexpensive software, the development of spatially explicit management objectives, the ease of transferability, and clearly stated assumptions about management that may be tested and reviewed through monitoring and public comment.     

Conservation of the Northern Spotted Owl under the Northwest Forest Plan

Abstract:  Development of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) was motivated by concerns about the overharvest of late-seral forests and the effects of intensive forest management on the long-term viability of the Northern Spotted Owl ( Strix occidentalis caurina ). Following several years of intense political and legal debates, the final NWFP was approved in 1994. Even though the plan evolved with a broad ecosystem perspective, it remained anchored in the Spotted Owl reserve design proposed in 1990. Based on a criterion of stable or increasing populations, a decade later it remains unclear whether the enactment of the NWFP has improved the conservation status of Spotted Owls. The results of intensive monitoring of several Spotted Owl populations for over a decade suggest a continuing range-wide decline even though rates of timber harvest have declined dramatically on federal lands. The cause of the decline is difficult to determine because the research needed to establish cause and effect relations has not been done. One plausible hypothesis is that the owl's life history greatly constrains its rate of population growth even when habitat is no longer limiting. Since enactment of the NWFP, new threats have arisen, including the movement of Barred Owls ( S. varia ) into the range of the Spotted Owl, political pressure to increase levels of timber harvest, and recent changes to forest laws that eliminate the requirement to assess the viability of wildlife populations on U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service lands. At this time is appears that Spotted Owl conservation rests critically on continued implementation of the protections afforded by the NWFP and the U.S. Endangered Species Act.     

Assessing the components of adaptive capacity to improve conservation and management efforts under global change

Natural‐resource managers and other conservation practitioners are under unprecedented pressure to categorize and quantify the vulnerability of natural systems based on assessment of the exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity of species to climate change. Despite the urgent need for these assessments, neither the theoretical basis of adaptive capacity nor the practical issues underlying its quantification has been articulated in a manner that is directly applicable to natural‐resource management. Both are critical for researchers, managers, and other conservation practitioners to develop reliable strategies for assessing adaptive capacity. Drawing from principles of classical and contemporary research and examples from terrestrial, marine, plant, and animal systems, we examined broadly the theory behind the concept of adaptive capacity. We then considered how interdisciplinary, trait‐ and triage‐based approaches encompassing the oft‐overlooked interactions among components of adaptive capacity can be used to identify species and populations likely to have higher (or lower) adaptive capacity. We identified the challenges and value of such endeavors and argue for a concerted interdisciplinary research approach that combines ecology, ecological genetics, and eco‐physiology to reflect the interacting components of adaptive capacity. We aimed to provide a basis for constructive discussion between natural‐resource managers and researchers, discussions urgently needed to identify research directions that will deliver answers to real‐world questions facing resource managers, other conservation practitioners, and policy makers. Directing research to both seek general patterns and identify ways to facilitate adaptive capacity of key species and populations within species, will enable conservation ecologists and resource managers to maximize returns on research and management investment and arrive at novel and dynamic management and policy decisions.     

Science and Society: Marine Reserve Design for the California Channel Islands

Abstract:  We explored the interaction of science and society in attempts to restore impaired marine ecosystems in Channel Islands National Park and National Marine Sanctuary, California. Deteriorating resource conditions triggered a community's desire to change public policy. Channel Islands National Park, one of 40 marine protected areas in the U.S. National Park System, was proclaimed a national monument in 1938 and expanded substantially in 1980 by an act of Congress. Collapse of marine life populations and loss of 80% of the giant kelp (Macrocystis pyrifera) forests in the park between 1980 and 1998 showed that habitat and water quality protection alone had not secured sustainable ocean ecosystems or fisheries. The failed fishery management strategies and practices prompted formal community and agency requests in 1998 for a network of reserves protected from direct fishing impacts to serve as marine recovery areas. A 2-year attempt to build a community consensus based on science for a reserve network successfully identified recovery goals for fisheries, biodiversity, education, economics, and heritage values. Nevertheless, the community group failed to garner unanimous support for a specific reserve network to achieve those common goals. The group submitted a recommendation, supported by 14 of 16 members, to state and federal authorities in 2001 for action in their respective jurisdictions. California adopted the half of the network in state waters in 2003. This process exposed the socioeconomic factors involved in the design of marine protected areas that can be negotiated successfully among groups of people and factors determined by nature that cannot be negotiated. Understanding the differences among the factors was crucial in reaching consensus and changing public policy.     

Who's Who in Conservation Biology—an Authorship Analysis

Abstract:  As the flagship journal of the field, Conservation Biology represents a multidisciplinary, global constituency of conservation professionals—a constituency composed of more than 5200 authors representing 1500 organizations and 89 countries. Using bibliometric records of research published in Conservation Biology , I evaluated trends in authorship of research papers from 1987 to 2005. Authorship diversified and became increasingly collaborative over time. North Americans now compose one-half of primary authorship, down from 75% in the 1990s, and European primary authors contribute a quarter of the journal's contributed research. Forty-five countries were represented in volume 19 of the journal. The top three most-cited authors are Australian. The percentage of single-authored papers declined from 57% in 1987 to 18% in 2005. Collectively, academic institutions contribute the most research to Conservation Biology , although a government agency, the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, was the single most-productive organization. The maturing of conservation biology as a discipline, the complex geographic and multidisciplinary nature of conservation questions, and the increased ease of communication in a technologically connected world contribute to the increasingly diverse and collaborative Conservation Biology authorship.     

The Biopolitics of the Mt. Graham Red Squirrel (Tamiasciuris hudsonicus grahamensis)

This essay presents (1) a short status summary on the population biology of the Mt. Graham red squirrel on the Pinaleño Mountains, Arizona; (2) a biopolitical history of the controversy surrounding the Mt. Graham red squirrel, the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and the astronomical consortium that has constructed two telescopes within the squirrel's critical habitat; and (3) a discussion of specific biopolitical issues related to the squirrel's taxonomy, minimal viable habitat, critical habitat, population viability analysis, risk management, and Congressional actions to by-pass its own laws. The biopolitical history shows how specific administrative actions within the U.S. Forest Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and special interest politics by the Arizona Congressional delegation and the University of Arizona prevented an accurate assessment of the status of the Mt. Graham red squirrel and implementation of alternatives to insure its survival and recovery. Conservation biology can influence management decisions when not overridden by special-favor politics. To improve the influence of the science of conservation biology, I recommend that the ESA language protecting isolated populations (Section 3) remain intact and that the ESA make a legal distinction (Section 4) between minimal viable habitat and critical habitat. To improve the application of the ESA, I recommend that Congress require committee hearings before it can exempt a project from federal environmental laws; that fraudulent Biological Opinions automatically trigger a complete review of long-term viability; that conservation biologists prepare a handbook for the Fish and Wildlife Service on risk assessment techniques; that all data and analyses within the Biological Opinion include a ranking by their statistical and biological certainty as well as a worst-case scenario; and that each Biological Opinion be certified as risk averse.     

The Need to Disentangle Key Concepts from Ecosystem‐Approach Jargon

The ecosystem approach—as endorsed by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CDB) in 2000—is a strategy for holistic, sustainable, and equitable natural resource management, to be implemented via the 12 Malawi Principles. These principles describe the need to manage nature in terms of dynamic ecosystems, while fully engaging with local peoples. It is an ambitious concept. Today, the term is common throughout the research and policy literature on environmental management. However, multiple meanings have been attached to the term, resulting in confusion. We reviewed references to the ecosystem approach from 1957 to 2012 and identified 3 primary uses: as an alternative to ecosystem management or ecosystem‐based management; in reference to an integrated and equitable approach to resource management as per the CBD; and as a term signifying a focus on understanding and valuing ecosystem services. Although uses of this term and its variants may overlap in meaning, typically, they do not entirely reflect the ethos of the ecosystem approach as defined by the CBD. For example, there is presently an increasing emphasis on ecosystem services, but focusing on these alone does not promote decentralization of management or use of all forms of knowledge, both of which are integral to the CBD's concept. We highlight that the Malawi Principles are at risk of being forgotten. To better understand these principles, more effort to implement them is required. Such efforts should be evaluated, ideally with comparative approaches, before allowing the CBD's concept of holistic and socially engaged management to be abandoned or superseded. It is possible that attempts to implement all 12 principles together will face many challenges, but they may also offer a unique way to promote holistic and equitable governance of natural resources. Therefore, we believe that the CBD's concept of the ecosystem approach demands more attention. La Necesidad de Desenredar Conceptos Clave del Argot Ambiente‐Estrategia     

Critique of the Evolutionarily Significant Unit as a Definition for "Distinct Population Segments" under the U.S. Endangered Species Act

The U.S. Endangered Species Act grants protection to species, subspecies, and "distinct population segments" of vertebrate species. Historically, Congress included distinct population segments into endangered species legislation to enable the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to implement a flexible and pragmatic approach in listing populations of vertebrate species. Recently, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service have proposed a policy that would narrowly define distinct population segments as evolutionarily significant units based on morphological and genetic distinctiveness between populations. Historically, the power to list species or populations as distinct population segments has been used to tailor management practices to unique circumstances; grant varied levels of protection in different parts of a species' range; protect species from extinction in significant portions of their ranges as well as to protect populations that are unique evolutionary entities. A strict redefinition of distinct population segments as evolutionarily significant units will compromise management efforts because the role of demographic and behavioral data will be reduced. Furthermore, strictly cultural, economic, or geographic justifications for listing populations as threatened or endangered will be greatly curtailed.     

Biodiversity Conservation and Indigenous Land Management in the Era of Self‐Determination

Abstract: Indigenous people inhabit approximately 85% of areas designated for biodiversity conservation worldwide. They also continue to struggle for recognition and preservation of cultural identities, lifestyles, and livelihoods—a struggle contingent on control and protection of traditional lands and associated natural resources (hereafter, self‐determination). Indigenous lands and the biodiversity they support are increasingly threatened because of human population growth and per capita consumption. Application of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to tribal lands in the United States provides a rich example of the articulation between biodiversity conservation and indigenous peoples' struggle for self‐determination. We found a paradoxical relationship whereby tribal governments are simultaneously and contradictorily sovereign nations; yet their communities depend on the U.S. government for protection through the federal‐trust doctrine. The unique legal status of tribal lands, their importance for conserving federally protected species, and federal environmental regulations' failure to define applicability to tribal lands creates conflict between tribal sovereignty, self‐determination, and constitutional authority. We reviewed Secretarial Order 3206, the U.S. policy on “American Indian tribal rights, federal–tribal trust responsibilities, and the ESA,” and evaluated how it influences ESA implementation on tribal lands. We found improved biodiversity conservation and tribal self‐determination requires revision of the fiduciary relationship between the federal government and the tribes to establish clear, legal definitions regarding land rights, applicability of environmental laws, and financial responsibilities. Such actions will allow provision of adequate funding and training to tribal leaders and resource managers, government agency personnel responsible for biodiversity conservation and land management, and environmental policy makers. Increased capacity, cooperation, and knowledge transfer among tribes and conservationists will improve biodiversity conservation and indigenous self‐determination.     

Taxonomic Considerations in Listing Subspecies Under the U.S. Endangered Species Act

Abstract:  The U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) allows listing of subspecies and other groupings below the rank of species. This provides the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service with a means to target the most critical unit in need of conservation. Although roughly one-quarter of listed taxa are subspecies, these management agencies are hindered by uncertainties about taxonomic standards during listing or delisting activities. In a review of taxonomic publications and societies, we found few subspecies lists and none that stated standardized criteria for determining subspecific taxa. Lack of criteria is attributed to a centuries-old debate over species and subspecies concepts. Nevertheless, the critical need to resolve this debate for ESA listings led us to propose that minimal biological criteria to define disjunct subspecies (legally or taxonomically) should include the discreteness and significance criteria of distinct population segments (as defined under the ESA). Our subspecies criteria are in stark contrast to that proposed by supporters of the phylogenetic species concept and provide a clear distinction between species and subspecies. Efforts to eliminate or reduce ambiguity associated with subspecies-level classifications will assist with ESA listing decisions. Thus, we urge professional taxonomic societies to publish and periodically update peer-reviewed species and subspecies lists. This effort must be paralleled throughout the world for efficient taxonomic conservation to take place.     

Beyond Biogeography: a Framework for Involving the Public in Planning of U.S. Marine Protected Areas

Abstract:  Planning of marine protected areas (MPAs) is highlighted in the conservation literature but is not explored in much detail. Many researchers acknowledge the importance of involving the public in MPA planning, but there is limited guidance on how to do this in an effective manner. I present a framework for involving the public in planning of U.S. MPAs. Derived from empirically and theoretically based research on public participation in U.S. natural resource management, this framework is composed of factors that influence the success of participatory processes: active participant involvement, complete information exchange, fair decision making, efficient administration, and positive participant interactions. Processes incorporating these factors will produce decisions that are more likely to be supported by stakeholders, meet management objectives, and fulfill conservation goals. This framework contributes to the MPA social science literature and responds to calls in the conservation literature to increase the use of social science research to inform conservation decision making.     

Accounting for Uncertainty in Making Species Protection Decisions

Abstract:  Uncertainty gives rise to two decision errors in implementing the U.S. Endangered Species Act: listing species that are not in danger of extinction and delisting species that are in danger of extinction. I evaluated four methods (minimum standard, precautionary principle, minimax regret criterion, adaptive management) for deciding whether to list or delist a species when there is uncertainty about how those decisions are likely to influence survival of the species. A safe minimum standard criterion preserves some minimum amount or safe standard (population) of a species unless maintaining that amount generates unacceptable social cost. The precautionary principle favors not delisting a species when there is insufficient evidence on the efficacy of state management plans for protecting them. A minimax regret criterion selects the delisting decision that minimizes the maximum loss likely to occur under alternative ecosystem states. When the cost of making a correct decision is less than the cost of making an incorrect decision, the minimax regret criteria indicates that delisting is the optimal decision. Active adaptive management employs statistically valid experiments to test hypotheses about the likely impacts of delisting decisions. Safe minimum standard and minimax regret criterion are not compatible with the U.S. Endangered Species Act. The precautionary principle comes closest to describing how federal agencies make delisting decisions. Active adaptive management is scientifically superior to the other methods but is costly and time consuming and may not be compatible with the U.S. National Environmental Policy Act.     

A Practice-based Approach to Ecosystem Management

Ecosystem management is a rapidly evolving philosophy or paradigm of natural resource management intended to sustain the integrity of ecosystems. The problem is that principles of ecosystem management are unsatisfactory for practical purposes. Three major approaches to the problem are evaluated: (1) clarification of the goals of ecosystem management, (2) construction of a better scientific foundation for management decisions, and (3) comparative appraisal of current practices. The evaluation concludes that neither of the first two approaches is necessary or sufficient for better management decisions because better decisions depend upon the complexities of particular contexts. The third, practice-based approach makes the most of the limited human capacity to cope with the complexities of ecosystem management in order to improve principles of ecosystem management, to inform particular management decisions through improved principles, and to incorporate clearer goals and a better scientific foundation as they become available. The evaluation draws on experience and disciplines beyond conservation biology and natural resource management, including policy sciences.