New Directions in Conservation for the National Wildlife Refuge System

Abstract The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 includes the nation's broadest statutory commitment to ecosystem protection: to “ensure that the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the system are maintained.” The act also directs the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to expand the scope of conservation monitoring, assessment, and management beyond refuge boundaries to encompass surrounding landscapes. The act thus gives the FWS a leadership role in developing research and management partnerships with other agencies, organizations, and neighboring landowners. Increasing research capacity and scientific expertise, and strengthening institutional resolve to limit activities that impede the attainment of this directive, are challenges for the FWS. Success requires reexamination of existing priorities, refocused training, the acquisition of new funding and technical expertise, and creative application of those new skills to meet the law's broad mandate.

[1]  R. Schroeder,et al.  Managing National Wildlife Refuges for Historic or Non-Historic Conditions: Determining the Role of the Refuge in the Ecosystem , 2007 .

[2]  T. Loveland,et al.  National Wildlife Refuge System: Ecological Context and Integrity , 2005 .

[3]  Robert B. Keiter,et al.  Ecological Concepts, Legal Standards, and Public Land Law: An Analysis and Assessment , 2005 .

[4]  Robert L. Fischman.  The Meanings of Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health , 2005 .

[5]  Gerald J. Niemi,et al.  Application of Ecological Indicators , 2004 .

[6]  A. Machado,et al.  An index of naturalness , 2004 .

[7]  J. Estes,et al.  Ecological Effectiveness: Conservation Goals for Interactive Species , 2003 .

[8]  Ryder W. Miller.  The National Wildlife Refuges: Coordinating A Conservation System Through Law , 2003 .

[9]  J. Karr,et al.  A terrestrial arthropod index of biological integrity for shrub-steppe landscapes , 2003 .

[10]  K. Oakley,et al.  Guidelines for long-term monitoring protocols , 2003 .

[11]  W. Davis,et al.  Developing Biological Indicators : Lessons Learned from Mid-Atlantic Streams , 2003 .

[12]  T. Rooney,et al.  The Modified Floristic Quality Index , 2002 .

[13]  J. P. Grime,et al.  Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning: Current Knowledge and Future Challenges , 2001, Science.

[14]  L. Jackson,et al.  BIRD GUILDS AS INDICATORS OF ECOLOGICAL CONDITION IN THE CENTRAL APPALACHIANS , 2000 .

[15]  C. Millar,et al.  THE ROLE OF CLIMATE CHANGE IN INTERPRETING HISTORICAL VARIABILITY , 1999 .

[16]  M. H. Olson,et al.  The Role of Migratory Waterfowl as Nutrient Vectors in a Managed Wetland , 1998 .

[17]  J. Karr,et al.  Restoring life in running waters : better biological monitoring , 1998 .

[18]  Paul C. Paquet,et al.  Conservation Biology and Carnivore Conservation in the Rocky Mountains , 1996 .

[19]  C. Holling,et al.  Command and Control and the Pathology of Natural Resource Management , 1996 .

[20]  Reed F. Noss,et al.  Endangered Ecosystems of the United States: A Preliminary Assessment of Loss and Degradation , 1996, Restoration & Management Notes.

[21]  Wayne S. Davis,et al.  Biological assessment and criteria : tools for water resource planning and decision making , 1995 .

[22]  Reed F. Noss,et al.  Saving Nature's Legacy: Protecting And Restoring Biodiversity , 1994 .

[23]  J. Karr.  Biological Integrity: A Long-Neglected Aspect of Water Resource Management. , 1991, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.