1 / 20

MIGRATORY BIRD MANAGEMENT

MIGRATORY BIRD MANAGEMENT. FEDERAL GOV’T RESPONSIBLE INTER-STATE RESOURCE LACEY ACT – 1900 Gave authority over interstate transportation of illegal wildlife INTERNATIONAL RESOURCE ONLY FEDS. DEAL WITH TREATIES

fleur-solis
Download Presentation

MIGRATORY BIRD MANAGEMENT

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. MIGRATORY BIRD MANAGEMENT • FEDERAL GOV’T RESPONSIBLE • INTER-STATE RESOURCE • LACEY ACT – 1900 • Gave authority over interstate transportation of illegal wildlife • INTERNATIONAL RESOURCE • ONLY FEDS. DEAL WITH TREATIES • Authority expanded by treaty with Great Britain (actually Canada in 1916, Mexico in 1936, etc.) • These treaties later are ratified to become law

  2. Treaties • MIGRATORY BIRD ACT (1918): A + B • UPDATED/ REAUTHORIZED C + D • CONVENTION ON NATURE PROTECTION AND WILDLIFE PRESERVATION IN THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE: E • CONVENTION ON WETLANDS OF INTERNATIONAL IMPORTANCE (ESP. AS WATERFOWL HABITAT: F • A. U.S. - CANADA: 1916 • B. U.S. - MEXICO: 1936 • C. U.S. - JAPAN: 1972 • D. U.S. - U.S.S.R: 1976 • E. U.S. - 17 OTHERS: 1940 • F. 7 OTHERS (NOT U.S.): 1975 (U.S. IN 1988)

  3. Federal laws pertaining to Migratory Wildlife • Migratory bird act (1918) • Implemented treaties • Prohibits hunting of insectivores • Provides a uniform system of protection • Covers management of species injurious to agriculture • Later amended to set certain closed seasons, refuges, habitat enhancement, exchange of research data, regulation of hunting, and native rights • Migratory Waterfowl Act (1929) • Established refuge system and research on migratory birds, but provided no funding

  4. More Federal laws • Migratory Bird Hunting Stamp Act (1934) • Known as duck stamp act • Changed in 1976 to “Migratory bird hunting and conservation stamp act” • All waterfowl hunters required to by the stamp in addition to their state license • Cost $1 in 1934 • Cost $15 in 2002 • Actually created refuges and funded research

  5. Duck Stamp History

  6. Duck Stamp Examples

  7. More federal laws • Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act (1937) • Known as the Pittman-Robertson Act • 11% excise tax on firearms and amunition • Shared with states to fund management, habitat acquisition, and research • requires 25% match from state • Allocation to a state depends on land area, population, and number of licensed hunters

  8. A few more laws • Central Valley Project (1954) • Water delivery into San Joaquin Valley for waterfowl • Endangered Species Act (1973) • Earlier acts passed in 1966 and 1969 too • Calls for listing, having, taking, selling, transporting, etc. • Protects habitat too! • Other laws

  9. Conservation issues lead towaterfowl management • Draining of western wetlands by the Bureau of reclamation (early 1900’s) • Nation’s first waterfowl refuge established: • Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuge (1908) • 1930’s drought and “dust bowl” era • In 1946 state management agencies formed • Joint Black Duck Committee • Joint Waterfowl Committee • 1947 – USFWS divided nation into 4 regions called “flyways” for setting hunting regulations

  10. Flyway system history • Also in 1947 the Mississippi Flyway Technical Committee formed • 1951 – Association of Game, Fish, and Conservation Commissions passed “resolution #10” calling for flyway councils • 1952 – Flyway councils were founded • Atlantic, Mississippi, Central, Pacific • National Council too

  11. FLYWAY COUNCIL • 1. COORDINATE WATERFOWL MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES OF THE STATES IN THE FLYWAY • 2. PROMOTE MEMBER ACTIVITIES THAT SERVE A LONG TERM TO THE RESOURCE • 3. PROVIDE A POINT OF CONTACT BETWEEN USFWS AND STATES FOR FLYWAY ISSUES • 4. ADVISE USFWS ON WATERFOWL MANAGEMENT NEEDS, INCLUDING HARVEST REGULATIONS • 5. ASSIST WITH THE NATIONAL WATERFOWL MANAGEMENT PLAN ACTIVITIES

  12. The flyway councils • One voting member from each state • Usually the “director” from that state • Each state has a specialist or team of specialists that attend “technical sessions” • Committee meetings to deal with specific species, habitat, or project issues • The individual flyway councils • Recommends harvest regulations to the National Flyway Council • Organizes population surveys • Sets up banding programs • Coordinates hunter surveys • Implements research and habitat projects

  13. National Flyway Council • Comprised of 2 voting members from each flyway AND special interest organizations (DU, WMI, etc.) • Recommend regulations to the Director of the USFWS • Recommends regulations to the Secretary of Interior • Signs regulations into law • Requires posting in the “Federal Register” before regs officially become law • Congress may intervene during this period

  14. Timetable for setting harvest regulations • January – USFWS present preliminary regulations for public comment, holding 2 public hearings • Data include previous fall harvest and population information, habitat conditions, and recent population trends • February - Flyway councils meet to review available data • March – National Flyway Council meeting • Held in conjunction with the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference • June – USFWS publishes regulations on early seasons • States write specific regulations • May be more but not less restrictive • July – individual councils meet again to consider breeding ground surveys and to set later season regulations • September – Regular season regulations recommendations are forwarded up the line so final leaflets are available to hunters in late September

  15. Fall flight forecast for mallards Based on procedures published in the Journal of Wildlife Management in 1969 (Geis et al. 1969; jwm 33:848-859) Y = 7.926 + 1.468X1 - 0.624X2 – 0.028X3 + 0.016X4 Y = predicted number of young (millions) X1 = number of July ponds (millions) X2 = continental mallard breeding population (from May pond count) X3 = percentage of May ponds remaining in July X4 = index to number of broods (unadjusted; thousands) 99% CI = +/- 7% of Y Fall population = Y + X2 – 5% of X2 = Y + 0.95X2

  16. MALLARD POPULATION + HARVEST STATISTICS a - MAY POND DATA b - PRODUCTION + (BREEDING POP - 5%) c - WING SURVEY / MAIL QUESTIONNAIRE d - DIFFERENCE (TO GET NEXT - YEAR’S BREEDING POP) TO GET TOTAL AS CALCULATED FROM BANDING DATA

  17. How to adjust harvest • Could adjust “bag” limits • Daily • Posession • Season\ • Could set Quota • Could use a “point system” • Can adjust season length

  18. DUCK HARVEST BY 5-DAY INTERVALS BASED ON 40-DAY SEASON, WING SURVEY DATA 1969-70 % OF HARVEST DAYSKENTUCKYMINNESOTA 1-5 15.6 47.8 1-10 25.9 62.2 1-15 38.0 73.7 1-20 48.0 82.3 1-25 61.8 89.0 1-30 74.8 93.8 1-35 86.4 97.1 1-40 100.0 100.0 1-45 108.9 101.9 1-50 - - 1-55 - -

  19. Other Aspects of harvest regulations? • Early seasons • Non-toxic shot • Non-game species

More Related