Comprehensive conservation planning and ecological sustainability within the United States National Wildlife Refuge System

References

• Bernhardt, E., Palmer, M., Allan, J., Alexander, G., Barnas, K., Brooks, S., Carr, J., Clayton, S., Dahm, C., Follstad-Shah, J., Galat, D., Gloss, S., Goodwin, P., Hart, D., Hassett, B., Jenkinson, R., Katz, S., Kondolf, G., Lake, P., Lave, R., Meyer, J., O’Donnell, T., Pagano, L., Powell, B., & Sudduth, E. 2005. Synthesizing U.S. river restoration efforts. Science 308(5722):636–637.
   Google Scholar
• Christensen, J., Mullins, G., Danter, K., Norland, E., & Griest, D. 1998. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecosystem Approach to Fish and Wildlife Conservation. Ohio Cooperative Fish & Wildlife Research Unit, Work Order 30 Final Report. Columbus, OH: Ecological Communications Lab, The Ohio State University.
   Google Scholar
• Coppedge B., Engle, D., Masters, R., & Gregory, M. 2006. Development of a grassland integrity index based on breeding bird assemblages. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 118(1–3):125–145.
   Google Scholar
• Czech, B. 2000. Economic growth as the limiting factor for wildlife conservation. Wildlife Society Bulletin 28(1):4–14.
   Google Scholar
• Czech, B. 2005. The capacity of the National Wildlife Refuge System to conserve threatened and endangered animal species in the United States. Conservation Biology 19(4):1246– 1253.
   Google Scholar
• Egler, F. 1977. The Nature of Vegetation: Its Management and Mismanagement. Norfolk, CT: Aton Forest.
   Google Scholar
• Fischman, R. 2003. The National Wildlife Refuges: Coordinating a Conservation System through Law. Washington, DC: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Franklin, J. 1993. Preserving biodiversity: species, ecosystems, or landscapes? Ecological Applications 3(2):202–205.
   Google Scholar
• Hilderbrand, R., Watts, A., & Randle, A. 2005. The myths of restoration ecology. Ecology and Society 10(1):19.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, B. 1999. The role of adaptive management as an operational approach for resource management agencies. Conservation Ecology 3(2):8.
   Google Scholar
• Marschner, F. 1974. The Original Vegetation of Minnesota (Map). St. Paul, MN: U.S. Forest Service, North Central Experiment Station.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, L. 2006. Establishing Empirical Bases for Sustainability Objectives. Monitoring Science and Technology Symposium: Unifying Knowledge for Sustainability in the Western Hemisphere Proceedings. September 20–24, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service.
   Google Scholar
• Meretsky, V., Fischman, R., Karr, J., Ashe, D., Scott, J., Noss, R., & Schroeder, R. 2006. New directions in conservation for the National Wildlife Refuge System. BioScience 56(2):135–143.
   Google Scholar
• Mooney, H. & Sala, O. 1993. Science and sustainable use. Ecological Applications 3(4):564–566.
   Google Scholar
• National Ecological Assessment Team. 2006. Strategic Habitat Conservation. A Report from the National Ecological Assessment Team. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Geological Survey. http://www.fws.gov/southwest/About%20Us/SHC%20NEAT_Final_Rpt.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• North American Waterfowl Management Plan. 2004. North American Waterfowl Management Plan 2004. Implementation Framework: Strengthening the Biological Foundation. Canadian Wildlife Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales. http://www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/NAWMP/files/ImplementationFramework.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Ortega M., Velasco, J., Millán, A., & Guerrero, C. 2004. An ecological integrity index for littoral wetlands in agricultural catchments of semiarid Mediterranean regions. Environmental Management 33(3):412–430.
   Google Scholar
• Palmer, M., Bernhardt, E., Chornesky, E., Collins, S., Dobson, A., Duke, C., Gold, B., Jacobson, R., Kingsland, S., Kranz, R., Mappin, M., Martinez, M., Micheli, F., Morse, J., Pace, M., Pascual, M., Palumbi, S., Reichman, O., Townsend, A., & Turner, M. 2005. Ecological science and sustainability for the 21st century. Frontiers in Ecology 3(1):4–11.
   Google Scholar
• Pullin, A., Knight, T., Stone, D., & Charman, K. 2004. Do conservation managers use scientific evidence to support their decision-making? Biological Conservation 119(2):245–252.
   Google Scholar
• Schroeder, R. 2004. Setting Objectives for Ecosystem Restoration: An Examination of National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plans. The First National Conference on Ecosystem Restoration (NCER): Sustainable Ecosystem Restoration through Integration of Science, Planning and Policy. December 6–10, Lake Buena Vista, FL.
   Google Scholar
• Schroeder, R., Holler, J., & Taylor, J. 2004. Managing national wildlife refuges for historic or non-historic conditions: determining the role of the refuge in the ecosystem. Natural Resources Journal 44(4):1185–1210.
   Google Scholar
• Schroeder, R. 2006. A system to evaluate the quality of restoration objectives using National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plans as a case study. Journal for Nature Conservation 14(3–4):200–206.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, J., Loveland, T., Gergely, K., Strittholt, J., & Staus, N. 2004. National Wildlife Refuge System: ecological context and integrity. Natural Resources Journal 44(4):1041–1066.
   Google Scholar
• Tear, T., Kareiva, P., Angermeier, P., Comer, P., Czech, B., Kautz, R., Landon, L., Mehlman, D., Murphy, K., Ruckelshaus, M., Scott, J., & Wilhere, G. 2005. How much is enough? The recurrent problem of setting measurable objectives in conservation. BioScience 55(10):835–849.
   Google Scholar
• Twedt, D., Pashley, D., Hunter, C., Mueller, A., Brown, C., & Ford, B. 1999. Mississippi Alluvial Valley Bird Conservation Plan. http://www.blm.gov/wildlife/plan/MAV_plan.html.February 21, 2008.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1981. Standards for the Development of Habitat Suitability Index Models. ESM 103. Washington, DC: Division of Ecological Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. Ecosystem Approach to Fish and Wildlife Conservation. National Policy Issuance 95-03. Washington, DC: Division of Policy and Directives Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996. Ecosystem Approach to Fish and Wildlife Conservation. 052 FW 1, Concept. Washington, DC: Office of the Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2000. Comprehensive Conserva- tion Planning Process. 602 FW 3. Washington, DC: Division of Refuges, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2001. Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health. 601 FW 3. Washington, DC: Division of Natural Resources, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Seedskadee National Wildlife Refuge. Comprehensive Conservation Plan. Denver, Colorado: Division of Refuge Planning, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 6. http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/planning/States/Wyoming/Seedskadee/Final/sdk_final_ccp.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2005a. Lake Ophelia National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan. http://www.fws.gov/southeast/planning/LakeOFinalPg.html.February 21, 2008.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2005b. Sherburne National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan. http://www.fws.gov/Midwest/Planning/sherburne/ccp/FinalCCP.pdf.February 21, 2008
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2006a. National Wildlife Refuge System Mission and Goals and Refuge Purposes. 601 FW 1. Washington, DC: Division of Conservation, Planning and Policy, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. Defining Joint Ventures. http://www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/JointVentures/DefineJV.shtm. February 21, 2008.
   Google Scholar