A summary of recommendations on practical steps to implement an ecosystem approach in the area of habitat management.
For purposes of data management and communication, establish a "clearing house" and data management system; specific actions include: identify existing information management systems; determine needs of existing and potential users; and develop a vision, strategy, and actions through a partnership effort
Lead organizations could include: International Joint Commission, Great Lakes Commission, Great Lakes Fishery Commission, a consortium of federal, provincial, and state agencies, or the Nature Conservancy
Acceptance of leadership role by one or more entities; the need to inventory and describe existing information management systems and those under development; determination of information management needs of existing and potential users; development and acceptance of a vision, strategy, and action plan; and sufficient funding and staff support for implementation
The International Joint Commission (or alternatively one of the other entities named earlier) should be requested to:
Incorporate habitat protection into master land-use plans, zoning ordinances, regional plans, watershed master plans, etc., thus increasing habitat protection efforts by alerting stakeholders to the presence of habitat worthy of protection
Lead agency charged with preparing the plan (local, regional, or county planning commission; state, provincial, or federal agency responsible for land-water resources in watershed)
Cost of undertaking habitat inventory; perception that habitat protection: has an adverse economic impact on landowners or local economy, is currently reflected in plans and zoning, or is not important in some areas ("plenty of natural areas")
Use naturalist club, local knowledge, or other resources to prepare habitat inventory; quantify economic impact of setting aside habitat (use cost-benefit models to test alternative plans); update all plans with new information to ensure habitat protection is adequately addressed; review future goals of the planning unit, demonstrate the impacts various levels of development have on habitat, and ensure habitat protection and rehabilitation is adequately addressed
Seek permanent protection of critical habitat of ecological significance (wetlands, floodplains, etc.) by: purchasing habitat and placing appropriate perpetual restrictions on the property; purchasing development rights to restrict inappropriate development; utilizing conservation easements on lands to protect habitat values; providing tax incentives and/or breaks for protection
Partnerships need to be developed among: federal, state, and provincial agencies (to utilize funds and provide incentives), counties-regions-municipalities (to utilize bond issues and landfill royalties, purchase development rights), and land trust organizations (to provide volunteers and hold third party easements) to pool resources and move forward
Securing adequate funding; developing an institutional structure which is flexible enough to respond to land protection opportunities; lack of political will; lack of understanding of the value of preserving habitat; in Canada, nongovernmental organizations are not allowed to hold easements; tax laws often discourage donation of properties
Undertake an educational program to document that purchasing land and restricting development, even if using new tax money, is cheaper than allowing urban sprawl and habitat destruction; initiate master plan, perhaps on a state-wide and province-wide level, to identify critical resources and show the level of permanent resource protection which should occur; develop an appropriate institutional framework (perhaps a separate authority needs to be created which would not be overburdened with legislative requirements); develop criteria for which types of habitats are to be protected along with a priority ranking system; encourage corporations to donate lands for conservation; increase use of eminent domain/tax incentives for property acquisition; legislative reform to remove barriers to property donation
Take a regional-community wide planning perspective (greater emphasis on aquatic habitat by: 1) compiling inventory of shorelines and biotic communities; 2) ensuring public participation; 3) forming committee of interested parties; 4) developing a plan that explores options, including soft engineering to restore and enhance habitats
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (designs with limits); federal- state-provincial agencies (assure environmental friendliness); federal-state-provincial wildlife agencies (assure maximum wildlife benefits); public organizations (assure plan meets community needs)
Money; incompatible objectives; apathy of public and governmental agencies
Explore maximum number of funding sources and liaison with state, provincial, and federal politicians; communicate early on in the process before objectives are "engraved in stone" (priority should be placed on education); communicate importance and benefits clearly and forcefully through broad-based education
Initiate wetland restoration by first planning locations and functions of "new" wetlands (multi-function wetlands are preferred); build forested, emergent, and submergent wetlands and include upland buffers and water quality protection measures; wetland restoration efforts should include enhancement, creation, rehabilitation, regeneration, and reclamation
Public and private sector stakeholders
Expand scope of stream rehabilitation efforts to provide benefits on an ecosystem scale; proceed stepwise from isolating non- compatible land use (livestock access) through streambank stabilization to stream channel design and restoration of flood plain attributes; design habitat complexity in flood plain, thus creating corridors to link other habitats
If stream rehabilitation is already planned, agency or nongovernmental person can revise field plans to design more diverse habitat; resource management agency is likely to initiate and coordinate implementation, but recruitment of partners, community groups, and landowners is vital
Can involve added cost in constructing pools, etc.; may have difficulty modelling annual streamflow range with respect to channel capacity, hence floodplain extent; requires empirical information (or interpret from vegetation) to correctly design habitat features; may require further landowner negotiations
Approach potential funding partners (like community groups); understand hydrology to better predict flood conditions
Establish citizen stewardship program where people are trained to help inventory habitat, talk to landowners about habitat values and provide advice on protection and enhancement, talk to agency people about habitat enhancement on lands which they manage
Watershed councils, conservation organizations, or nongovernmental environmental group, with support from government agencies
Funding; working relationships with experts to train people and guide the program
Support from municipalities and agencies; associations working with university and/or government scientists
Create environmental management councils (county level) and conservation advisory councils (township level) to focus on habitat issues at the local level (model the programs after existing ones in New York and six New England states, and Ecological and Environmental Advisory Councils in Southern Ontario)
Introduce legislation at state level authorizing creation of councils; state and local governments should match a small amount of funds for council operations; councils serve in an advisory capacity to local governments on environment and habitat issues
In times of shrinking state and provincial budgets, the climate for new environmental legislation is not good; in lieu of legislation, councils could start without authorization and operate informally
Use experience in six New England states and Southern Ontario (e.g. in Hamilton, Ontario it is called the Environmentally Sensitive Areas Impact Evaluation Group) with existing programs to develop model legislation for introduction in states and provinces without such programs; explore non-legislative options for creating councils; hold a workshop and have council members of existing programs exchange ideas/case histories with individuals and groups interested in starting councils in their communities
Encourage education of professionals via workshops, training, etc.; establish inter-agency planning meetings to identify common ground and objectives; ensure on-going project development and review process
Potentially a basin commission could act as a lead; probably best achieved through multi-agency or stakeholder board or commission
Money; time; personnel; traditional role/mission conflicts
Encourage stewardship ideal at landowner/landholder developer and agency levels
Encourage landowner contact program to protect private land with significant habitat by providing educational materials to landowners; voluntary stewardship agreements are used to protect property
In Ontario, this program was begun by University of Guelph and later taken up by government agencies; recently the establishment of non-government land trusts have proven effective
Resistance from some landowners; lack of trust; limited funding of non-governmental organizations; moving from voluntary stewardship agreements to more formal arrangements
True partnerships between nongovernmental organizations and governments (e.g. Hamilton Harbour Watershed Stewardship Program; Bay Area Restoration Council initiates contact with landowner and Hamilton Region Conservation Authority provides technical expertise and logistical and program support); governments must provide seed money to nongovernmental organizations to help run these programs
Municipalities with responsibilities for land use development must make better use of community volunteers with expertise, skills, and information; Naturalist Clubs can provide knowledge, skill, expertise, and high quality data, and can act as catalysts to attract other partners, including governments and foundations
Local nature clubs in partnership with planning agencies (e.g. the Hamilton Naturalist Club conducted a $250,000 inventory of natural areas in Hamilton-Wentworth; a multi-stakeholder steering committee coordinated the effort; funds were provided by numerous partners (one municipality provided $70,000)
Lack of availability of Naturalist Clubs with skills and drive; willingness of government to share control of projects; building relationships and trust among partners; using data collected by Naturalist Clubs haphazardly; attracting new, younger, more active members to Naturalist Clubs
Local groups must be given more responsibility by governments and must be empowered to accomplish specific projects; build trust between local groups and governments by joint involvement in projects (true partnerships); attract more "birders" to the process of protection and rehabilitation of habitat; place greater emphasis on training of volunteers; design standardized data collection forms for "birders" and formalize data collection practices
Ensure that all construction and maintenance projects for structures (e.g. breakwalls, piers) address secondary benefits of incidental habitat
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Canada Department of Public Works, in cooperation with other federal, state, and provincial agencies, and other stakeholders
Low priority; limited funding; slowing down project implementation; broadening the required disciplinary expertise on project teams
Establish multi-disciplinary teams early on in a project; quantify full ecological benefits expected from each project; perform adequate assessment and monitoring to evaluate effectiveness; disseminate broadly all information on effectiveness and benefits