National wildlife refuge system: Ecological context and integrity

被引:0
|
作者
Scott, JM
Loveland, T
Gergely, K [1 ]
Strittholt, J
Staus, N
机构
[1] Univ Idaho, US Geol Survey, Coll Nat Resources, Dept Fisheries & Wildlife, Moscow, ID 83843 USA
[2] Univ Idaho, Cooperat Res Unit, Coll Nat Resources, Dept Fisheries & Wildlife, Moscow, ID 83843 USA
[3] US Geol Survey, EROS Data Ctr, Sioux Falls, SD USA
[4] US Geol Survey, Gap Anal Program, Moscow, ID 83843 USA
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The Refuge Improvement Act of 1997 established a statutory mission and management standards for the National Wildlife Refuge system. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service subsequently issued a policy for ensuring the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the system. This policy requires understanding the management objectives of each refuge in a local, regional, and national context. An assessment of the refuge system in a national and regional context reveals that refuges are typically smaller than many conservation holdings and are unevenly distributed across the conterminous U.S. Western rangelands, coastal wetlands, and northern grasslands; wetlands are the best-represented ecosystems, while temperate forests have the poorest representation. In contrast to other agency holdings or management designations in the national protected areas network (e.g., national parks, national forests, wilderness areas), refuges tend to occupy sites at lower elevations and that have higher productivity and soil quality. This difference points to the important contribution of the refuges in providing much needed ecological balance within the national protected areas network. However, the ecological integrity of the refuge system is challenged by the proximity of individual refuges to development. Overall, the refuges are becoming islands in a landscape matrix of urban and agricultural development. This creates future challenges for meeting management objectives to ensure the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the system. If the policy to ensure biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the refuge system is to be successful, it may be more important to address issues about what happens on adjacent lands than uses within refuges.
引用
收藏
页码:1041 / 1066
页数:26
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] National Wildlife Refuge system
    Wilson, AD
    SEA TECHNOLOGY, 2000, 41 (10) : 41 - 41
  • [3] The Cost of Conservation: The National Wildlife Refuge System
    Smiley, Sarah A.
    BIOSCIENCE, 2008, 58 (11) : 1014 - 1014
  • [4] Ecological risk assessment: Seal Beach, California National Wildlife Refuge
    Vernon, KJ
    Kuo, J
    WETLANDS & REMEDIATION: AN INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE, 2000, : 49 - 57
  • [5] New directions in conservation for the National Wildlife Refuge System
    Meretsky, VJ
    Fischman, RL
    Karr, JR
    Ashe, DM
    Scott, JM
    Noss, RF
    Schroeder, RL
    BIOSCIENCE, 2006, 56 (02) : 135 - 143
  • [6] The National Wildlife Refuge System: The next 100 years
    West, RL
    Rundle, D
    Takekawa, J
    Holle, DG
    Kallin, S
    TRANSACTIONS OF THE SIXTY-EIGHTH NORTH AMERICAN WILDLIFE AND NATURAL RESOURCES CONFERENCE, 2003, : 80 - 92
  • [7] ARCTIC NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE
    PLOTKIN, SE
    ENVIRONMENT, 1989, 31 (07): : 2 - 4
  • [8] Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
    Finkmoore, RJ
    NATURAL RESOURCES JOURNAL, 2004, 44 (04) : 1239 - 1259
  • [9] The National Wildlife Refuge System: A century of conservation, realizing the enduring values of national wildlife refuges
    Nussman, JM
    TRANSACTIONS OF THE SIXTY-EIGHTH NORTH AMERICAN WILDLIFE AND NATURAL RESOURCES CONFERENCE, 2003, : 55 - 61
  • [10] Property price effects of a national wildlife refuge: Great Meadows National Wildlife Refuge in Massachusetts
    Neumann, Bradley C.
    Boyle, Kevin J.
    Bell, Kathleen R.
    LAND USE POLICY, 2009, 26 (04) : 1011 - 1019