Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · 5222032

North American migratory bird management issues

Abstract

As human population and industry have grown in North America, land-use practices have greatly altered the landscape. As a result of this changed landscape, several migratory bird populations have declined in recent years. For waterbirds, there have been several milestones: the 1986 North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) and the 1989 North American Wetlands Conservation Act. As a result, the United States and Canada have established 12 habitat and 2 species joint ventures. The primary emphasis of waterfowl management in Canada-U.S. has been land purchase and lease, wetland restoration, and coordination of harvest rates. Because of its different biological and cultural context, Mexico has established other conservation priorities. Mexico has had a long-standing concern to conserve its biodiversity and, in addition, conservation of Mexican resources goes hand in hand with human community development. Unlike Canada-U.S., wetland conservation projects in'Mexico include information gathering, environmental education, and management planning for its 32 priority wetlands. For migratory landbirds' scientists attribute declines in several migrant populations to forest fragmentation on the breeding grounds, deforestation on the wintering grounds, pesticide poisoning, or the cumulative effects of habitat changes. In 1990, the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Program, commonly known as Partners in Flight-Aves de las Americas-was initiated. The next step that is being proposed is the formation of a habitat conservation plan for landbirds modeled after the NAWMP. Management of migratory birds requires a strong international approach in order to coordinate actions for the benefit of migratory birds, their habitats, and the uses they provide.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M.H. Wilson, D.A. Ryan. 1995. North American migratory bird management issues. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/5222032

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Can we manage for biological diversity in the absence of science?

Conservation of biological diversity is dependent on sound scientific information about underlying ecological processes. Current knowledge of the composition, distribution, abundance and life cycles of most species of plants and animals is incomplete, insufficient, unreliable, or nonexistent. Contemporary managers are also confronted with additional levels of complexity related to varying degrees of knowledge and understanding about interactions of species and ecosystems. Consequently, traditional species-oriented management schemes may have unintended consequences and ecosystem-oriented management initiatives may fail in the face of inadequate or fragmentary information on the structure, function, and dynamics of biotic communities and ecological systems. Nevertheless, resource managers must make decisions and manage based on the best biological information currently available. Adaptive resource management may represent a management paradigm that allows managers to learn something about the species or systems that they are managing while they are managing, but potential pitfalls lurk for such approaches. In addition to lack of control over the primary physical, chemical, and ecological processes, managers also lack control over social, economic, and political parameters affecting resource management options. Moreover, appropriate goals may be difficult to identify and criteria for determining success may be elusive. Some management responsibilities do not lend themselves to adaptive strategies. Finally, the lessons learned from adaptive management are usually obtained from a highly situational context that may limit applicability in a wider range of situations or undermine confidence that problems and solutions were properly diagnosed and addressed. Several scenarios are critically examined where adaptive management approaches may be inappropriate or ineffective and where management for biological diversity may be infeasible or inefficient without a sound scientific basis. Whereas some level of management must exist to meet agency responsibilities, more research is needed to conserve biological diversity.

Wildlife Society Annual Conference