The effects of lead agency, nongovernmental organizations, and recovery team membership on the identification of critical habitat for species at risk: Insights from the Canadian experience

Environmental Reviews

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 93-102

  Taylor, Eric B ^a   Pinkus, Susan ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^b Sierra Legal Defence Fund   (Canada)

Author keywords

Conservation policy; Critical habitat; Recovery strategy; Species at risk

Indexed keywords

CONSERVATION POLICY; CRITICAL HABITAT; FEDERAL COURT RULING; NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS; RECOVERY PLANNING; RECOVERY POLICY; RECOVERY STRATEGIES; SPECIES AT RISKS;

BIOLOGY; ECOSYSTEMS; PESTICIDE EFFECTS;

RECOVERY;

EID: 84878828064     PISSN: 11818700     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1139/er-2013-0002     Document Type: Review

References (53)

1. Abbitt R.J.F. Scott J.M. 2001. Examining differences between recovered and endangered species. Conserv. Biol. 15: 1274-1284. 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2001. 00430.x.
2. Aldridge, C.L. 2005. Habitats for persistence of greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) in Alberta, Canada. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB.
3. Aldridge C.L. Boyce M.S. 2007. Linking occurrence and fitness to persistence: habitat-based approach for endangered greater sage-grouse. Ecol. Appl. 17: 508-526. 10.1890/05-1871. 17489256.
4. Brooks T.M. Mittermeier R.A., da Fonseca G.A.B. Gerlach J. Hoffmann M. Lamoreux J.F. Mittermeier C.G. Pilgrim J.D. Rodrigues A.S.L. 2006. Global biodiversity conservation priorities. Science, 313: 58-61. 10.1126/science. 1127609. 16825561.
5. Campbell, J. 2009. Environmental Defence Fund et al. vs. the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans. Docket T-1529-07, 2009 FC 878. Available from http://reports.fja.gc.ca/eng/2009/2009fc878.html.
6. Chan K.M.A. 2008. Value and advocacy in conservation biology: crisis discipline or discipline in crisis? Conserv. Biol. 22: 1-3. 10.1111/j.1523-1739. 2007.00869.x. 18254846.
7. Chao G.T. O'Leary-Kelly A.M. Wolf S. Klein H.J. Gardner P.D. 1994. Organizational socialization: Its content and consequences. J. Appl. Psychol. 79: 730-743. 10.1037/0021-9010.79.5.730.
8. Chilliwack Times, Feb. 1 2011. 'Wake-up call' for property owners-Les fears expropriation without compensation. Available from http://www. chilliwacktimes.com/news/Wake+call+property+owners/4202645/story.html [accessed 12 December 2012].
9. Clark J.A. Harvey E. 2002. Assessing multi-species recovery plans under the Endangered Species Act. Ecol. Appl. 12: 655-662. 10.1890/1051-0761(2002) 012[0655:AMSRPU]2.0.CO;2.
10. Clark, T.M., Reading, R.P., and Clarke, A.L. 1994. Endangered species recovery: finding the lessons, improving the process. Island Press, Washington, D.C.
11. Dudgeon D. Arthington A.H. Gessner M.O. Kawabata Z. Knowler D. Leveque C.L. Naiman R.J. Prieur-Richard A.H. Soto D. Stiassny M.L.J. Sullivan C.A. 2006. Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges. Biol. Rev. 81: 163-182. 10.1017/S1464793105006950. 16336747.
12. Favaro B. Reynolds J.D. Cote I.M. 2012. Canada's weakening aquatic protection. Science, 337: 154. 10.1126/science.1225523. 22722248.
13. Findlay C.S. Elgie S. Giles B. Burr L. 2009. Species listing under Canada's Species at Risk Act. Conserv. Biol. 23: 1609-1617. 10.1111/j.1523-1739. 2009.01255.x. 19500120.
14. Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 2008. Recovery Strategy for the Northern and Southern Resident Killer Whales (Orcinus orca) in Canada. Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series, Fisheries & Oceans Canada, Ottawa, ix + 81 pp. Available from http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/virtual-sara/files/plans/rs- epaulard-killer-whale-1011-eng.pdf [accessed 12 December 2012].
15. Gerber L.R. Schultz C.B. 2001. Authorship and the use of biological information in endangered species recovery plans. Conserv. Biol. 15: 1308-1314. 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2001.00110.x.
16. Greenwald N. Suckling K.F. Pimm S.L. 2012. Critical habitat and the role of peer review in government decisions. BioScience, 62: 686-690. 10.1525/bio.2012.62.7.11.
17. Hoekstra J.M. Fagan W.F. Bradley J.E. 2002. A critical role for critical habitat in the recovery planning process? Not yet. Ecol. Appl. 12: 701-707. 10.1890/1051-0761(2002)012[0701:ACRFCH]2.0.CO;2.
18. Hutchings J.A. Festa-Bianchet M. 2009 a. Scientific advice on species at risk: a comparative analysis of status assessments of polar bear, Ursus maritimus. Environ. Rev. 17: 45-51. 10.1139/A09-002.
19. Hutchings J.A. Festa-Bianchet M. 2009 b. Canadian species at risk (2006-2008), with particular emphasis on fishes. Environ. Rev. 17: 53-65. 10.1139/A09-003.
20. Hutchings J.A. Walters C. Haedrich R.L. 1997. Is scientific inquiry incompatible with government information control? Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 54: 1198-1210. 10.1139/f97-051.
21. Hutton, D., and Dixon, B. (Editors) 2000. Endangered species threatened convention: the past, present and future of CITES, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. Earthscan Publications Ltd., London.
22. Illical M. Harrison K. 2007. Protecting endangered species in the US and Canada: the role of negative lesson drawing. Can. Polit. Sci. 40: 367-394. 10.1017/S0008423907070175.
23. Kerkvliet J. Langpap C. 2007. Learning from endangered and threatened species recovery programs: A case study using U.S. Endangered Species Act recovery scores. Ecol. Econ. 63: 499-510. 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.12.007.
24. Lackey R.T. 2007. Science, scientists, and policy advocacy. Conserv. Biol. 21: 12-17. 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00639.x. 17298504.
25. Lackey R.T. 2009. Challenges to sustaining diadromous fishes through 2100: lessons learned from Western North America. Am. Fish. Soc. Symp. 69: 609-617.
26. Ludwig D. Hilborn R. Walters C. 1993. Uncertainty, resource exploitation, and conservation: lessons from history. Science, 260: 17-18. 10.1126/science.260.5104.17. 17793516.
27. Lungle, K., and Pruss, S. 2007. Recovery Strategy for the Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus urophasianus) in Canada [Proposed]. Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series. Parks Canada Agency. Ottawa. vii + 43 pp.
28. Male T.D. Bean M.J. 2005. Measuring progress in US endangered species legislation. Ecol. Lett. 8: 986-992. 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00806.x.
29. Meffe G.K. Boersma P.D. Murphy D.D. Noon B.R. Pulliam H.R. Soule M.E. Waller D.M. 1998. Independent scientific review in natural resource management. Conserv. Biol. 12: 268-270. 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1998.012002268.x.
30. Mooers A.O. Prugh L.R. Festa-Bianchet M. Hutchings J.A. 2007. Biases in legal listing under Canadian endangered species legislation. Conserv. Biol. 21: 572-575. 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00689.x. 17531035.
31. Mooers A.O. Doak D.F. Findlay C.S. Green D.M. Grouios C. Manne L.L. Rashvand A. Rudd M.A. Whitton J. 2010. Science, policy, and species at risk in Canada. BioScience, 60: 843-849. 10.1525/bio.2010.60.10.11.
32. Nature. 2012. Frozen out: Canada's government should free its scientists to speak to the press, as its US counterpart has (editorial). Nature, 483: 6. 10.1038/483006a. 22382940.
33. Norris S. 2004. Only 30: A portrait of the Endangered Species Act as a young law. BioScience, 54: 288-294. 10.1641/0006-3568(2004)054[0288:OAPOTE]2.0. CO;2.
34. Office of the Auditor General of Canada (OAG). 2008. March 2008 Status Report of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development. Chapter 5. Available from http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl-cesd- 200803-e-30125.html [accessed 12 December 2012].
35. O'Hara K. 2010. Canada must free scientists to talk to journalists. Nature, 467: 501. 10.1038/467501a. 20881970.
36. Pearson, M.P. 2004. The ecology, status, and recovery potential of Nooksack dace and Salish sucker in Canada. Ph.D. thesis, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC.
37. Pearson M.P. 2007. An assessment of potential critical habitat for Nooksack dace (Rhinichthys cataractae) and Salish sucker (Catostomus sp.). DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Res. Doc. 2007/058.
38. Pearson, M.P., Hatfield, T., McPhail, J.D., Richardson, J.S., Rosenfeld, J.S., Schreier, H., Schluter, D., Sneep, D.J., Stejpovic, M., Taylor, E.B., and Wood, P.M. 2007. Draft Recovery Strategy for Nooksack Dace (Rhinichthys cataractae) in Canada [Proposed]. Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series. Vancouver: Fisheries and Oceans Canada. ix + 31pp. Available from http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/virtual-sara/files/plans/rs-nooksack-dace-0707-e. pdf [accessed 12 December 2012].
39. Ricciardi A. Rasmussen J.B. 1999. Extinction rates of North American freshwater fauna. Conserv. Biol. 13: 1220-1222. 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1999.98380. x.
40. Richardson J.S. Taylor E.B. Schluter D. Pearson M. Hatfield T. 2010. Do riparian zones qualify as critical habitat for endangered freshwater fishes? Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 67: 1197-1204. 10.1139/F10-063.
41. Rosenfeld J.S. Hatfield T. 2006. Information needs for assessing critical habitat of freshwater fish. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 63: 683-698. 10.1139/f05-242.
42. Rudd M.A. 2009. National values for regional aquatic species at risk in Canada. Endangered Species Res. 6: 239-249. 10.3354/esr00160.
43. Russell, J. 2010. David Suzuki Foundation et al. vs. the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and Environment Canada. Docket T-541-09, 2010 FC 1233. Available from http://reports.fja.gc.ca/eng/2012/2010fc1233.html [accessed 12 December 2012].
44. Schindler D.W. 1992. A view of NAPAP from north of the border. Ecol. Appl. 2: 124-130. 10.2307/1941768.
45. Schultz J.A. Darling E.S. Cote I.M. 2013. What is an endangered species worth? Threshold costs for protecting imperiled fishes in Canada. Marine Policy, 42: 125-132. 10.1016/j.marpol.2013.01.021.
46. Schwartz M.W. 2008. The performance of the Endangered Species Act. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 39: 279-299. 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.39.110707.173538.
47. Species at Risk Act. 2002. R. S. C., c 29. s 2 (1).
48. Taylor M.F.J. Suckling K.F. Rachlinski J.J. 2005. The effectiveness of the Endangered Species Act: a quantitative analysis. BioScience, 55: 360-367. 10.1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0360:TEOTES]2.0.CO;2.
49. VanMaanen J. 1975. Police socialization: a longitudinal examination of job attitudes in an urban police department. Admin. Sci. Quart. 20: 207-228. 10.2307/2391695.
50. Ward E.J. Holmes E.E. Balcomb K.C. 2009. Quantifying the effects of prey abundance on killer whale reproduction. J. Appl. Ecol. 46: 632-640. 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01647.x.
51. Wilhere G.F. 2012. Inadvertent Advocacy. Conserv. Biol. 26: 39-46. 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01805.x. 22280324.
52. Williams R. Krkošek M. Ashe E. Branch T.A. Clark S. Hammond P.S. Hoyt E. Noren D.P. Rosen D. Winship A. 2011. Competing conservation objectives for predators and prey: estimating killer whale prey requirements for chinook salmon. PLoS ONE, 6: e26738. 10.1371/journal.pone.0026738. 22096495.
53. Zinn, J. 2009. Alberta Wilderness Association et al. vs. Minister of Environment. Docket T-241-08 2009 FC 710. Available from http://reports.fja.gc. ca/eng/2009/2009fc710.html [accessed 12 December 2012].