This policy document is apparently "in the works" and being submitted and endorsed by the groups listed at the end of the document. For brevity I deleted the list of policy papers---The Westerner
CASE FOR A JOINT SECRETARIAL ORDER
DEPARTMENTS OF AGRICULTURE, COMMERCE, ENERGY, INTERIOR
With consideration for the roles and responsibilities of other Departments
The Challenge: Habitat loss, fragmentation and climate change
Landscape scale habitat loss and fragmentation threaten the future integrity of our nation’s natural heritage by disrupting important ecological interactions and patterns of movement. Such disruptions undermine the health of wildlife populations and the likelihood they will persist over the long term. Climate change is adding to these cumulative impacts by exacerbating the negative effects of habitat loss and fragmentation. Local climate disruptions will cause changes in long term ecological cycles of fire, drought, and flood, as well as in seasonal patterns of precipitation and temperature. In response, many species will need to adjust home ranges and movement patterns to adapt to climate-driven shifts in habitat. However, in many cases, fragmentation will impede such adaptation, potentially resulting in isolated plant and wildlife populations that will be highly vulnerable to extirpation or extinction.
One hundred years ago, America faced the prospect of dramatic changes to our natural heritage as a result of the industrial revolution and the rush to exploit our natural resources. We met this challenge by establishing parks, refuges, forests and other protected areas for the benefit of all Americans. Our forebears also established a new generation of directives to guide the federal land, water and wildlife agencies in the management of these irreplaceable resources. Today, we face a challenge of similar historical significance in the form of global climate change, the loss of biodiversity and habitat fragmentation due to widespread human-induced land and water use changes.
Federal resource agencies, as well as Congress, have an opportunity to successfully address this challenge by taking immediate steps to prioritize the protection of ecological connectivity, which encompasses both functional and structural connectivity for plants and animals. This will ensure that agencies with responsibility for America’s lands, waters and wildlife cooperate to further these priorities. In doing so, they must recognize that this issue transcends jurisdictions; therefore, it is imperative that federal agencies, states, tribes, landowners and other partners work in cooperation.
A Solution: Maintain and restore ecological connectivity
Leading scientists agree that the number one recommendation for counteracting the negative consequences of climate change to wildlife is to increase connectivity (see Heller and Zavaleta. 2009. Biodiversity management in the face of climate change: a synthesis of 20 years of recommendations. Biological Conservation). Connected habitats allow species an opportunity to adapt to local shifts in habitat through migration, dispersal and movement. As a result, effective management of our public lands and waters must incorporate measures for identifying and protecting ecological connectivity for plants and animals.
‘Connectivity’ can be broken down into ‘structural connectivity’ and ‘functional connectivity.’ Structural connectivity refers to the physical relationship between landscape elements whereas functional connectivity describes the degree to which landscapes actually facilitate or impede the movement of organisms and processes. Functional connectivity is a product of both structure and the response of organisms and processes to this structure. Distinguishing between these two types of connectivity is important because structural connectivity does not imply functional connectivity. In general, when we use the term ‘connectivity’ or “ecological connectivity” we are using the functional definition.
Federal and State Recognition of the Importance of Connectivity
Federal agencies and state governments are recognizing both the intrinsic value of ecological connectivity to species persistence, for economic sustainability and as a means of addressing the challenge of adapting to climate change. This recognition is documented by the following policy papers and actions, some wholly, others with portions, focused on maintaining connectivity:
{Deleted}
From Policy to Implementation: a Joint Secretarial Order
A Secretarial Order issued jointly by the Departments with primary responsibility for our lands, waters and wildlife, will elevate to priority-status ecological connectivity as a key climate adaptation strategy, as well as a means to counter habitat fragmentation. This will allow agencies to move expeditiously and collaboratively across Departments and with partners to take action. An Order will direct federal agencies to identify measures and take concrete actions that address the challenge of ensuring adequate levels of ecological connectivity are maintained and restored to achieve a sustainable future.
Suggested components of a Secretarial Order:
(a) Evaluate the effect of agency plans and actions on ecological connectivity for terrestrial and aquatic plants and animals and take such actions as are necessary and consistent with law to protect or restore connectivity (e.g., standards, guidelines, administrative designations, rulemaking).
(b) Assess the quality and availability of existing and potential core habitats (e.g., national parks, national wildlife refuges, roadless areas, wilderness study areas) for terrestrial and aquatic species and ensure connectivity between these areas exist; incorporate the best available scientific information to assess the likely impacts of climate change on these cores and corridors and plan to adapt to those likely changes.
(c) Prioritize the management of fish, wildlife and native plants and their habitats on public lands and waters in a manner that protects, expands and enhances the options for wildlife and plants to move and adapt to climate change and habitat fragmentation.
(d) Work collaboratively with State and local governments, Indian tribes, and non-governmental organizations to manage and conserve habitats and ecological connectivity to achieve the purposes and goals outlined in (a) through (c) above, and coordinate these activities with ongoing efforts, such as the Western Governors’ Association’s state-based Decision Support Systems.
(e) Monitor and evaluate the effect of federal, state, and tribal actions on ecological connectivity and where appropriate adapt actions to obtain the goals of this Order.
(f) Provide clear timelines for action to implement the Order that give guidance and certainty to federal agencies and stakeholders.
(g) Ground the Order in each Department’s statutory authorities and responsibilities – e.g., the National Environmental Policy Act – to provide the Order with sufficient strength.
(h) Direct the Order’s provisions to be converted into Departmental regulations, rules, policies and procedures so that the protection of ecological connectivity is institutionalized.
Acknowledgements:
This document reflects input from the following groups: American Wildlands, Center for Large Landscape Conservation (CLLC), Center for Native Ecosystems, Conservation Northwest, Defenders of Wildlife, Environmental Defense Fund, Freedom to Roam, Grand Canyon Wildlands Council, Sierra Club, Sonoran Institute, The Wilderness Society, Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, Western Environmental Law Center, Western Wildlife Conservancy, Wildlands Network, Wildlife Conservation Society, and Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative.
No comments:
Post a Comment