Non-native insects and pathogens are seriously harming natural and human-managed forests. Invasive pests and forest diseases, in concert with other anthropogenic disturbances such as land clearing and changes in fire regimes, are dramatically altering the composition and structure of many forests in North America, the United Kingdom, continental Europe, Australia, China, Africa and elsewhere. Further, they inflict high costs on society, including: the costs of prevention, control and eradication of the harmful organisms; costs of removing diseased trees; direct market losses (e.g., timber and nursery industries); and loss of nonmarket benefits, including wildlife habitat for vast numbers of species, carbon sequestration to mitigate global warming, and recreational and aesthetic benefits for humans. In connection with the recognition of 2011 as the ‘International Year of the Forest’, SCB recently released a report on ‘Recommendations for Protecting Forests From Introduced Forest Pests and Plant Pathogens’ (available here).
This detailed report builds on SCB’s earlier declaration in support of the International Year of the Forest.
The Fish and Wildlife Service has proposed removing gray wolves in Wyoming from the list of threatened species and returning them to state management. The state of Wyoming has proposed a management plan that divides the state into three zones: 1) a Wolf Trophy Game Management Area (WTGMA) where wolf hunting is seasonally permitted, 2) the remainder of the state where a designation of the species as a ‘predator’ allows year-round unrestricted hunting and other forms of lethal control, and 3) seasonal expansion of the WTGMA by 80 km southward for 4.5 months during peak wolf dispersal season. While in some respects the Wyoming wolf population is healthy and may merit delisting, SCB-North America Section is concerned that a problematic precedent for connectivity is being proposed in this management plan. The plan envisions that artificial translocation (e.g., movement of wolves in trucks) is adequate for recovery in place of allowing natural dispersal between wolf populations.
Read more…
SCB’s North America section has previously commented on the proposed construction of the Keystone XL pipeline because the pipeline controversy touches on broader concerns regarding sustainable energy and wildlife conservation (see here and here). The White House has announced plans to delay a decision on permitting the pipeline in order to allow more scrutiny of these and other concerns (news report).
In response to the announcement, SCB President Paul Beier joined Policy Committee Member and Canadian scientist, Paul Paquet, in issuing the following statement: “SCB plans to continue its strong scrutiny of the entire tar sands process as well as any alternate routes for the Keystone XL and Enbridge Pipelines. It seems likely that any routes will still cause great harm to the whooping crane, several ecosystems in Canada and the United States, and the earth’s climate.”
[This post is an update as we missed posting the document in July] In July of this year, SCB, along with the Wildlife Society, the Ecological Society of America, and the American Statistical Association, sent a letter to the House of Representatives urging representatives to support an amendment by Norm Dicks blocking efforts to suspend listings of endangered species. The House subsequently did vote to strip the Endangered Listing Ban from the Interior Appropriations Bill. 37 Republicans bucked their leadership and voted with all but two Democrats to allow new listings of endangered species to continue. SCB continues to explore additional opportunities to collaborate with other scientific societies on similar policy issues.
SCB’s North America section has been extensively involved in policy issues surrounding the proposed construction of the Keystone XL pipeline because the pipeline controversy touches on broader concerns regarding sustainable energy and wildlife conservation. On October 9, SCB submitted comments on the State Department’s finding that the permit to allow the Keystone XL pipeline would be in the national interest.
The full comments are here. Also see SCB previous comments on the pipeline. The six questions are:
1) If you cannot adequately assess the effects of the pipeline and alternatives to it, how can you determine that it would be in the national interest?
2) How can the Secretary comply with her duties to ensure that her action will not be likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the endangered whooping crane when neither her Biological Assessment nor the Interior Secretaries’ Biological Opinion consider the impact of the oil sands developments and the pipeline that makes them probable on the northern third of the habitat?
3) How can the Secretary find the pipeline to be in the national interest when Canada’s own Environment Commissioner has found that the effects are poorly understood, poorly controlled and will diminish the effectiveness of Canada’s participation in international agreements for the control of climate change and the reduction of greenhouse gases?
4) Will approving the permit reduce our environmental and other security risks more than choosing more prudent available alternatives?
5) Will approving the permit guarantee a source of transportation fuel for the U.S. at any reasonable price considering the competing bidders who will be much less constrained by market prices? Or will it merely guarantee access to those very bidders who would not otherwise have that access at all?
6) Why cause serious environmental harm and raise serious security risks — and reduce room for renewable energy — by permitting the pipeline, when we can conserve wildlife and supply our energy needs with secure, safe, clean, renewable energy in ways that can probably provide more permanent jobs across the US?
Keystone XL Pipeline Would Threaten Highly Endangered Whooping Cranes
WASHINGTON DC — As climate scientists, farmers, conservation groups and concerned citizens continue two weeks of protests at the White House in opposition to permitting a large new pipeline to carry partially refined tar from Alberta to the Gulf Coast, the world’s largest international conservation science society reminded the Obama Administration of the hazards the pipeline poses to the environment, particularly the highly endangered whooping crane.
“In addition to its well known climate change impact, the Keystone XL pipeline would threaten the whooping crane — one of the most highly endangered birds in the world — from one end of its migration route and habitat to the other,” said Dominick DellaSala, an ecologist and president of the North American Section of the Society for Conservation Biology.
Last year, the Society for Conservation Biology (SCB) sent detailed comments to the State Department and other federal agencies explaining that the proposed pipeline and those it would connect to follows the migration of the endangered whooping crane for nearly its entire route. The risk of highly toxic oil spills and the dramatic expansion of tailing ponds could jeopardize the survival of the bird that the Fish and Wildlife Service calls one of the most famous symbols of America’s dedication to saving its wild national heritage.
Read more…
SCB’s North America section today submitted comments on proposed changes to wolf recovery policy in the US, including development of a ‘National Wolf Strategy’.
SCBNA suggested that the FWS:
1) Ensure that the National Wolf Strategy, proposed delisting of the western Great Lakes distinct population segment of the gray wolf (Canis lupus), proposed revision of the historic range of the gray wolf (Canis lupus), rangewide review of Canis lycaon in the United States and Canada, and status reviews for the gray wolf (Canis lupus) in the Pacific Northwest and Mexican wolves (Canis lupus baileyi) in the southwest United States and Mexico meets the standards of use of “best scientific and commercial data” as required under the ESA, in part by subjecting each to independent scientific peer review;
2) Consider both the intent of the ESA and relevant ecology and conservation science when defining the concepts of ‘range’ and ‘significant portion of range’;
3) Consider recent genetic research in evaluating the significance of potential listing units;
4) Resolve taxonomic issues more fully before removing protections from (delisting) wolf-like canids in the northeastern United States, and separate the taxonomic reclassification issues in the proposed rule from other proposed actions;
5) Consider the relevance of wolf metapopulation ecology and historic genetic population structure when applying DPS concept; and
6) Use current population viability analysis (PVA) methodologies to support recovery planning at both the national and regional level.
You can download the full comments here.
The National Forest Management Act (NFMA) and regulations based on it provide the framework for the management of 155 National Forests and 20 Grasslands, and are the key guidelines for ensuring that these lands help safeguard biodiversity. NFMA regulations are currently under revision, after a set of regulations enacted under the Bush administration was invalidated by the courts. A panel of scientists convened by SCB reviewed the new draft regulations. The scientists reviewed each of five focus areas in the agencies’ draft Environmental Impact Statement on the service’s proposed rule. While reviewers noted that the planning rule was in certain respects a marked improvement over the 1982 forest rule that is currently in effect, they called on the Forest Service to make improvements in order to reach the agencies’ stated goal of protecting water and wildlife in a changing climate and to meet the requirements of the law in today’s world. Read more…
Expansion of renewable energy infrastructure is an important goal but creates complex questions regarding how the renewable footprint can be expanded while minimizng adverse impacts on biodiversity. SCB recently submitted comments to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service suggesting how conservation science can best inform their current process of developing Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines.
In December 2010, peer reviewers from three scientific societies (SCB, AOU, and TWS) reviewed the recovery plan for the threatened Northern Spotted Owl (see earlier blog post here). The reviewers found the plan was still inadequate in several major aspects. In particular, the reviews noted that the draft plan was released before completion of the habitat modeling that would be used to design the network of habitat reserves. Recently, the FWS has released Appendix C to the recovery plan, which describes in more detail those modeling methods. Despite a short comment timeline, SCB was able to recruit some of the same peer reviewers to review the Appendix. The reviewers generally found the methodology appropriate, but criticized the fact that there was still no information on the actual reserve scenarios that would be evaluated. Read more…
