DOCSLIB.ORG

Deeper Learning

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

ADEEPER STRATEGY PLANNINGLEARNING TOOL FORSO EVERYONE WESTERN CAN CONSERVATIONSUCCEED IN A CHANGING WORLD THE WILLIAM AND FLORA HEWLETT FOUNDATION EDUCATIONENVIRONMENT PROGRAM PROGRAM STRATEGIC PLAN MARCH 22,2011 2010 Prepared by The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and Redstone Strategy Group TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY ...............................................................................................................3 1. WHAT IS THE TOOL’S PURPOSE? .....................................................................5 The tool suggests philanthropic investments ........................................................... 5 The suggestions are based on expected return estimates ......................................... 6 These suggestions are one step in the planning process .......................................... 6 2. WHAT IS THE FOUNDATION’S GOAL FOR THE WEST? ..................................7 Ensuring ecological integrity from the Rockies to the Pacific .................................. 7 Ecological integrity has six main components ......................................................... 8 Targets are set for each component of ecological integrity ...................................... 9 3. WHAT CHANGES ARE NEEDED TO REACH THE GOAL? ..............................14 Integrity estimates take into account different levels of protection ....................... 14 Integrity is estimated based on intensity of human uses ....................................... 15 4. HOW CAN THE FOUNDATION IMPROVE ECOLOGICAL INTEGRITY? .........20 A number of possible investments are considered ................................................. 20 Expected return estimates suggest the most effective investments ....................... 21 Published research and expert input are used to estimate expected return .......... 23 Integer optimization identifies a straw-man portfolio of investments ................... 24 5. WHAT ARE THE RESULTS AND HOW WILL THEY BE USED? .......................26 The suggested straw-man portfolio results in a mix of investments ...................... 26 Assumptions can affect the results, but the strategy is largely stable .................... 27 The tool’s suggestions are part of a multi-step planning process ........................... 29 6. HOW CAN THE FOUNDATION FURTHER IMPROVE THE TOOL? .................31 APPENDIX 1: PARCELS, ECOSYSTEMS, AND SPECIES .................................33 APPENDIX 2: HUMAN USE INPUTS AND ASSUMPTIONS .............................50 APPENDIX 3: SENSITIVITY SCENARIOS .........................................................60 APPENDIX 4: SOURCES ......................................................................................61 2 SUMMARY THIS DOCUMENT DESCRIBES A STRATEGY PLANNING TOOL USED BY the Hewlett Foundation to inform its Western conservation investments. The tool suggests specific philanthropic investments to help the Foundation achieve its Western conservation goals. 1. WHAT IS THE TOOL’S PURPOSE? The strategy planning tool suggests a straw-man portfolio of philanthropic investments. It is used as a starting point for planning that also incorporates expert advice. 2. WHAT IS THE FOUNDATION’S GOAL FOR THE WEST? The Foundation’s goal is to ensure the ecological integrity of the West to benefit wildlife and people. The strategy planning tool includes targets for ecosystems, species, core areas, connectivity corridors, greenhouse gas emissions, and sustainable human uses. The specific targets are guided by scientific and other expert input and are updated as information improves. 3. WHAT CHANGES ARE NEEDED TO REACH THE GOAL? Current integrity is estimated for ecosystems, species’ ranges, core areas, and corridors through analysis of human uses. These integrity levels are then compared to the Foundation’s targets to identify areas that can benefit from investments. 4. HOW CAN THE FOUNDATION IMPROVE ECOLOGICAL INTEGRITY? The tool suggests specific philanthropic investments to improve ecological integrity in areas that are below the Foundation’s targets. The tool estimates expected returns (ERs) to compare the likelihood-adjusted cost-effectiveness of the possible investments. 3 4 A STRATEGY PLANNING TOOL FOR WESTERN CONSERVATION 5. WHAT ARE THE RESULTS AND HOW WILL THEY BE USED? The tool suggests a mix of place-based and West-wide investments that are relatively stable with changes in assumptions. Beginning with this mix, the Foundation’s investment decisions then incorporate internal discussion, expert input, and consultation with potential partner funders and grantees. The result is ambitious: it requires Hewlett to invest over many years and to partner with other funders and government entities. 6. HOW CAN THE FOUNDATION FURTHER IMPROVE THE TOOL? The tool has already been significantly enhanced based on a peer review. Changing needs and data will no doubt result in furthur opportunities for improvement. This final chapter lists four changes that are likely to be valuable over time. 1 WHAT IS THE TOOL’S PURPOSE? THE STRATEGY PLANNING TOOL SUGGESTS A STRAW-MAN PORTFOLIO of philanthropic investments. It is used as a starting place for planning that also incorporates expert advice. The Hewlett Foundation has a strong tradition of work on Western conserva- tion issues. Over more than thirty years of work, the Foundation has invested $215 million in the West. Currently, it spends about $25 million on the topic each year. In an effort to maximize these investments, the Foundation is undertaking a review of its strategy in the region. As one part of this review, the Foundation decided to examine quantitative tradeoffs between potential investments in the West. The Foundation developed a strategy planning tool to make approximate data-based comparisons of different investments that could serve as a starting place for detailed strategy planning. This chapter describes the tool and its intended contribution to the full strategy planning process. THE TOOL SUGGESTS PHILANTHROPIC INVESTMENTS The strategy planning tool suggests high-return investments to be included in the Foundation’s plan for the West. It differs from conservation modeling tools, which are designed to suggest specific geographic priority areas with a high level of resolution. This tool identifies specific philanthropic investments to improve broad areas that are below conservation targets. The output of the tool is a straw-man portfolio of investments that could cost-effectively achieve all of the Foundation’s goals in the West. Since the Hewlett Foundation achieves its aims through grantmaking, a specific portfolio of possible grantable activities is more valuable than a list of priority places. The Foundation recognizes that the results of the tool are an approximation. A variety of simplifying assumptions were made to allow for comparisons and actionable recommendations at the scale of the entire West. The tool results are 5 6 A STRATEGY PLANNING TOOL FOR WESTERN CONSERVATION meant to be further refined and ground-truthed through a planning process involving the Foundation, outside experts, possible partner funders, and grant- ees to create a comprehensive conservation plan for the West. An explicit conservation plan for the whole West is valuable for several reasons. It allows the Foundation to be sure that its investments are working together to achieve lasting success in the region. It also allows the Foundation to closely measure progress towards this overall goal. Lastly, a detailed strategic plan is useful internally and with other potential funders to make the case for addi- tional funding. THE SUGGESTIONS ARE BASED ON EXPECTED RETURN ESTIMATES The portfolio of suggested investments is developed using expected return (ER) estimates. ER compares philanthropic investments based on their poten- tial impact, likelihood of success, and expected cost. Based on a number of explicit assumptions, the tool suggests investments that appear to have high potential to cost-effectively achieve the Foundation’s goals. This straw-man set of investments includes both place-based work that directly benefit priority regions and West-wide investments that improve large areas, including priority regions. Through an optimization process, a portfolio of possible high-expected return investments is suggested to achieve the Foundation’s goals while minimizing cost. THESE SUGGESTIONS ARE ONE STEP IN THE PLANNING PROCESS The quantitative comparisons performed by the strategy planning tool are meant to inform the strategy planning process, not replace it. During the initial development of the tool, outside experts and Foundation staff were heavily involved in developing assumptions and evaluating preliminary outputs. These staff and outside experts are expected to continue their involvement as the tool is further refined. In addition, the portfolio of investments generated by the strategy planning tool was reviewed both internally and externally (Figure 1). Some of the suggested strategies have been changed or eliminated based on the experience and knowledge of experts in the field, conditions on the ground in priority areas, and other FIGURE 1 Strategy planning subtle factors that were not captured by the tool. process 2 WHAT IS THE FOUNDATION’S GOAL FOR THE WEST? THE FOUNDATION’S GOAL IS TO ENSURE THE ECOLOGICAL INTEGRITY of the West to benefit wildlife and people. The strategy planning tool includes targets for ecosystems, species, core areas, connectivity corridors, greenhouse gas emissions, and sustainable human
Recommended publications
  • Utah Prairie Dogs Range from 12 – 16 Inches Dog

    Utah Prairie Dogs Range from 12 – 16 Inches Dog

    National Park Service Bryce Canyon U.S. Department of the Interior Bryce Canyon National Park Utah Prairie Dog (Cynomys parvidens) All photos by Kevin Doxstater Prairie Dogs are ground-dwelling members of the squirrel family found only in North America. There are five species within the genus and the Utah Prairie Dog is the smallest member of the group. Restricted to the southwestern corner of Utah, they are a threatened species that has suffered population declines due to habitat loss and other factors. Vital Statistics Utah Prairie Dogs range from 12 – 16 inches Dog . Utah Prairie Dogs reach maturity in (30.5 – 40.6 cm) in length and weigh from 1 year; females have a life span of about 1 – 3 pounds (.45 – 1.4 kg). Color ranges 8 years, males live approximately 5 years. from cinnamon to clay and they have a fairly Interestingly, they are the only non- distinct black eyebrow (or stripe) not seen fish vertebrate species endemic (found in any of the other 4 prairie dog species. nowhere else in the world) to the State of Their short tail is white tipped like that of Utah. their close relative the White-tailed Prairie Habitat and Diet Like the other members of the genus, for the remaining time. These include Utah Prairie Dogs live in colonies or serving as a sentry looking for intruders or “towns” in meadows with short grasses. predators, play, mutual grooming, defense Individual colonies will be further divided of territory or young, or burrow and nest into territories occupied by social groups construction.
  • Status Review Finding for the Black-Tailed Prairie Dog

    Status Review Finding for the Black-Tailed Prairie Dog

    QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS REGARDING THE STATUS REVIEW FINDING FOR THE BLACK-TAILED PRAIRIE DOG What are the findings of the black-tailed prairie dog status review? The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has completed a status review of the black-tailed prairie dog and has determined it does not warrant protection as a threatened or endangered species under the Endangered Species Act. The Service bases its conclusion for this finding after a thorough review of all the available scientific and commercial information regarding the status of the black-tailed prairie dog and the potential impacts to the species. What is a status review? A status review, also known as a 12-month finding, makes public the Service=s decision on a petition to list a species as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act. The finding is based on a thorough assessment of the available information on the species, as detailed in the species= status review. One of three possible conclusions can be reached as part of the finding: that listing is warranted, not warranted, or warranted but presently precluded by other higher-priority listing activities involving other species. In the case of black-tailed prairie dog, the Service found that the black-tailed prairie dog is not likely to become a threatened or endangered species within the foreseeable future in all or a significant portion of its range. Therefore, listing of the black-tailed prairie dog as a threatened or endangered species under the Endangered Species Act is not warranted at this time. What specifically does the Service look at to determine if a species needs to be listed as threatened or endangered? We consider the factors specified in the Endangered Species Act to determine whether a species meets the definition of “threatened” or “endangered” per the criteria stated in the Act.
  • Rapid Watershed Assessment Tularosa Valley Watershed

    Rapid Watershed Assessment Tularosa Valley Watershed

    Tularosa Valley Watershed (HUC8 13050003) Rapid Watershed Assessment Tularosa Valley Watershed 1 Tularosa Valley Watershed (HUC8 13050003) The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 2 Tularosa Valley Watershed (HUC8 13050003) Table of Contents Overview ......................................................................................................................................... 5 Physical Setting ............................................................................................................................... 7 Precipitation .................................................................................................................................
  • Threats to Cross-Border Wildlife Linkages in the Sky Islands Wildlands Network

    Threats to Cross-Border Wildlife Linkages in the Sky Islands Wildlands Network

    Threats to Cross-Border Wildlife Linkages in the Sky Islands Wildlands Network Kim Vacariu Wildlands Project, Tucson, AZ Abstract—One of the greatest challenges facing conservationists in the Sky Islands region is finding a realistic means to maintain historic travel routes for wide-ranging species crossing the United States-Mexico border. This challenge is made difficult due to the ongoing efforts by the Federal government to install additional security infrastructure to stem the flood of undocumented immigrants now entering southern Arizona. Existing and proposed fencing, solid steel walls, all- night stadium lighting, vehicle barriers, an immense network of roads, a 24-hour flow of patrol vehicles, and low-level aircraft overflights are creating an impenetrable barrier to trans-border wildlife movement. Creative solutions are needed now. northern Mexico, and the Sky Islands of southeastern Arizona Introduction were maintained. In 2000, the Wildlands Project and regional partner groups, The SIWN CP identified numerous threats to a healthy including the Sky Island Alliance, published a conservation landscape in the Sky Islands, including fragmentation of plan covering more than 10 million acres of valuable wildlife habitat by roads, fences, and subdivisions; loss or extirpation habitat in the Sky Islands ecoregion of southeast Arizona and of numerous species; loss of natural disturbance regimes such southwest New Mexico. The document, known as the Sky as fire; loss of riparian areas, streams, and watersheds; inva- Islands Wildlands Network Conservation Plan (SIWN CP), is sion by exotic species; and loss of native forests to logging based on the basic tenets of conservation biology, and a sci- and other development.
  • Sonoran Desert GEORGE GENTRY/FWSGEORGE the Sonoran Desert Has 2,000 Endemic Plant Species—More Than Anywhere Else in North America

    Sonoran Desert GEORGE GENTRY/FWSGEORGE the Sonoran Desert Has 2,000 Endemic Plant Species—More Than Anywhere Else in North America

    in the shadow of the wall: borderlands conservation hotspots on the line Borderlands Conservation Hotspot 2. Sonoran Desert GEORGE GENTRY/FWSGEORGE The Sonoran Desert has 2,000 endemic plant species—more than anywhere else in North America. hink deserts are wastelands? A visit to one of the national monuments or national wildlife refuges in the Sonoran Desert could change your mind. These borderlands are teeming with plants and animals impressively adapted to extreme conditions. T During your visit you might encounter a biologist, a volunteer or a local activist in awe of the place and dedicated to protecting it. The Sonoran Desert is so important to the natural heritage of the United States and Mexico that both countries are vested in conservation lands and programs and on a joint mission to preserve it. “A border wall,” says one conservation coalition leader, “harms our mission” (Campbell 2017). The Sonoran Desert is one of the largest intact wild areas mountains, where they find nesting cavities and swoop in the country, 100,387 square miles stretching across the between cactuses and trees to hunt lizards and other prey. southwestern United States and northwestern Mexico. This Rare desert bighorn sheep stick to the steep, rocky slopes of desert is renowned for columnar cactuses like saguaro, organ isolated desert mountain ranges where they keep a watchful pipe and cardón. Lesser known is the fact that the Sonoran eye for predators. One of the most endangered mammals in Desert has more endemic plant species—2,000—than North America, Sonoran pronghorn still occasionally cross anywhere else in North America (Nabhan 2017).
  • BYE, BYE BIRDIE Introduction

    BYE, BYE BIRDIE Introduction

    BYE, BYE BIRDIE introduction Humankind is now precipitating the extinction of large numbers Studies For Our Global Future of animals, birds, insects, and plants. Despite human activity, extinction occurs at a natural rate of about one to three species per year. Current estimates suggest that we are losing species at 1,000 to 10,000 times the natural rate. This means that concept dozens of species could be going extinct every day. Between The rate of wildlife endangerment is human impact on the natural world and issues brought on by an increasing and difficult decisions are required increasingly warm climate, over 500 known species could face to determine how to prioritize efforts to save 1 extinction by 2040. endangered species. objectives Scientists believe that many of the species being lost carry untold potential benefits for the health and economic stability Students will be able to: of the planet. With limited funding available for conservation, • Develop and apply a list of criteria that can many believe that humanity should make some tough choices be used to make decisions about protecting and decide which species can and should be saved. endangered species. • Conduct research on an endangered species Vocabulary: biodiversity, ecosystems, ecosystem services, and effectively communicate to classmates endangered species, extinction, indicator species, IUCN Red List its importance and why it should be saved. of Threatened Species, keystone species, poaching, umbrella subjects species Environmental Science (General and AP), Biology, English Language Arts materials skills Critical thinking, researching, comparing and • Research Guide (provided) evaluating, public speaking, decision making method Students determine a list of criteria to use procedure when deciding the fate of endangered species, then conduct research on a specific species 1.
  • The Wildlands Project Outside North America

    The Wildlands Project Outside North America

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by PDXScholar Portland State University PDXScholar Political Science Faculty Publications and Political Science Presentations 2003 The iW ldlands Project Outside North America David Johns Portland State University Let us know how access to this document benefits ouy . Follow this and additional works at: http://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/polisci_fac Part of the Environmental Policy Commons, and the Political Science Commons Citation Details Johns, David. The iW ldlands Project Outside North America. USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-27. 2003 This Article is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Political Science Faculty Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Wildlands Project Outside North America David M. Johns Abstract—The Wildlands Project seeks to create a connected greatly by the loss of connectivity. The legal boundaries of system of protected areas across North America that will ensure the protected areas were becoming actual boundaries as devel- survival of all native species, including top predators and wide- opment and conversion consumed intervening unprotected ranging species, in the context of fully functioning ecosystems. Core wildlands. These actual boundaries were biologically inad- protected areas are designated based on the biological needs of key equate to sustain species and processes over the long haul, species and the requirements of critical ecological processes. To even within the biggest islands like Yellowstone National work they must have, or will be restored to have, those attributes Park.
  • Morphological Divergence of Native and Recently Established Populations of White Sands Pupfish (Cyprinodon Tularosa) Author(S): Michael L

    Morphological Divergence of Native and Recently Established Populations of White Sands Pupfish (Cyprinodon Tularosa) Author(S): Michael L

    Morphological Divergence of Native and Recently Established Populations of White Sands Pupfish (Cyprinodon tularosa) Author(s): Michael L. Collyer, James M. Novak, Craig A. Stockwell Source: Copeia, Vol. 2005, No. 1 (Feb. 24, 2005), pp. 1-11 Published by: American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4098615 . Accessed: 13/01/2011 13:16 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asih. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Copeia. http://www.jstor.org 2005, No.
  • White Sands Department of the Interior White Sands National Monument

    White Sands Department of the Interior White Sands National Monument

    National Park Service White Sands Department of the Interior White Sands National Monument Common Animal Species List NPS Photo/© Sally King Sally Photo/© NPS hite Sands National Monument is home to over 500 different animal Wspecies. Despite the harsh environment of the dunefield, these incredible creatures have learned to adapt and survive in this southern New Mexico desert. While many of these animals are nocturnal, there are still signs of their activity well into the daylight hours. Keep your eyes open and watch for evidence of the many animal species, both large and small, that call White Sands their home. Amphibians Commonly Seen: 6 Species Great Plains Toad Spadefoot Toads (three species) Reptiles Commonly Seen: 26 Species Lizards Snakes Bleached Earless Lizard Plains Blackhead Snake Collared Lizard Prarie Rattlesnake Desert Spiny Lizard Sonora Gopher Snake Horned Lizard (two species) Western Coachwhip Snake Little Striped Whiptail Lizard Western Diamondback Snake Long-nosed Leopard Lizard New Mexico Whiptail Lizard Southern Prarie Lizard Mammals Commonly Seen: 44 Species Apache Pocket Mouse Grey Fox Badger Kit Fox Blacktail Jackrabbit Kangaroo Rat Bobcat Oryx (African) Coyote Pallid Bat Deer Mouse Porcupine Desert Cottontail White-footed Mouse Desert Pocket Gopher Woodrat (three species) Fish White Sands Pupfish 1 Species Invertebrates Commonly Seen: 500+ Species Black Widow Nevada Buck Moth Caterpillar 100+ Families Camel Cricket Tarantula 12 Orders Carpenter Bee Tarantula Hawk Wasp Darkling Beetle White-Lined Sphinx Moth To learn more about White Sands, visit http://www.nps.gov/whsa The Mexican spadefoot toad is the breed and feed on insects. These official state amphibian of New amphibians lay eggs in the pools of Mexico and gets its name from the water that form during this rainy distinctive spade-like projections season.
  • Recovery of the Utah Prairie Dog: Public Perception and Cattle Grazing As a Management Tool

    Recovery of the Utah Prairie Dog: Public Perception and Cattle Grazing As a Management Tool

    Amendment to the Biological Assessment for the Potential Effects of Managing the Payette National Forest on the Northern Idaho Ground Squirrel Brownlee River Section 7 Watershed Volume 2 Ongoing and New Actions 29 September 2008 Payette National Forest McCall, Idaho Prepared by: 29 September 2008 Ana E. Dronkert Egnew Date Forest Wildlife Biologist Payette National Forest Preparation Assistance by Rodger Nelson Acting Forest Fisheries Biologist Payette National Forest I. INTRODUCTION — SUMMARY OF AMENDMENTS A. AMENDMENT TO THE DESCRIPTION OF THE FEDERAL ACTION AND DETERMINATION OF THE EFFECTS OF LIVESTOCK GRAZING ALLOTMENTS This document amends Biological Assessment for the Potential Effects of Managing the Payette National Forest in the Brownlee Section 7 Watershed on Northern Idaho Ground Squirrel and Lynx (Richards and Dronkert Egnew 2008a). The determination of effects to northern Idaho ground squirrel (NIDGS) from the Lick Creek, Bear Creek, Wildhorse/Crooked River, Steves Creek, and Smith Mountain livestock grazing allotments was May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect (NLAA). The analysis and rationale for the determination is provided on pages 54-56 of Richards and Dronkert Egnew (2008a). Based on additional information and discussions by the Level 1 Team members, we have decided that the potential for effects are low, but not negligible; therefore, our determination is revised to: May Affect, Likely to Adversely Affect (LAA). Revision of our original determination was based in part on direction provided by regulatory agencies (National Marine Fisheries Service and Fish and Wildlife Service) on effects determinations for listed species (emphasis added): The conclusion that a project is not likely to adversely affect a listed species is appropriate when effects on listed species are expected to be discountable, or insignificant, or completely beneficial.
  • Rewilding Earth Best of 2019 Rewilding Earth Best of 2019

    Rewilding Earth Best of 2019 Rewilding Earth Best of 2019

    Rewilding Earth Best of 2019 Rewilding Earth Best of 2019 Edited by John Davis & Susan Morgan Rewilding Earth Best of 2019 Edited by John Davis & Susan Morgan Essex Editions Rewilding Earth: Best of 2019 Copyright © 2020 Editors John Davis & Susan Morgan Cover Painting © Steven Kellogg Photos on Back Cover: Susan Morgan © John Miles John Davis © Kim Vacariu All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, without written permission from the publisher, except for educational purposes or for the inclusion of brief quotations in a review. Published in the United States by Essex Editions. ISBN: 978-1-7335190-3-8 Library of Congress Control Number: 2020905445 Essex Editions Post O"ce Box 25 Essex, New York 12936 www.essexeditions.com [email protected] T#$%& '( C')*&)*+ Introduction by John Miles and Susan Morgan .................................................................................................. 1 Eagle Mountain Success by Jon Leibowitz .......................................................................................................... 3 Forever Wild by Sophi Veltrop ........................................................................................................................... 8 Adirondack Wildways Update by John Davis ..................................................................................................... 9 Wildlife Crossings
  • Utah Prairie

    Utah Prairie

    RAC AGENDA – March 2015 Revised February 17, 2015 1. Welcome, RAC Introductions and RAC Procedure - RAC Chair 2. Approval of Agenda and Minutes ACTION - RAC Chair 3. Wildlife Board Meeting Update INFORMATIONAL - RAC Chair 4. Regional Update INFORMATIONAL - DWR Regional Supervisor 5. Utah Prairie Dog Management Plan ACTION - NRO – Martin Bushman – Assistant Attorney General - CRO – Chris Keleher – Deputy Director, Species Recovery Program - NERO – Adam Kavalunas – Utah Prairie Dog Biologist - SERO – Jessica Van Woeart – Sensitive Species Biologist - SRO – Kevin Bunnell – Southern Region Supervisor 6. R657-70 Taking Utah Prairie Dog – New Rule ACTION R657-19 Taking Nongame Mammals – Amendments R657-3 Collection, Importation, Transportation and Possession of Animals - Amendments - NRO – Martin Bushman – Assistant Attorney General - CRO – Chris Keleher – Deputy Director, Species Recovery Program - NERO – Adam Kavalunas – Utah Prairie Dog Biologist - SERO – Jessica Van Woeart – Sensitive Species Biologist - SRO – Kevin Bunnell – Southern Region Supervisor Region Specific Items – to be presented in the specified region only. CRO Central Region Managers – Question and Answer Session INFORMATION John Fairchild, Central Region Supervisor Meeting Locations SR RAC – March 3rd, 6:30 PM CR RAC – March 3rd, 6:30 PM Cedar City Middle School CR Conference Center 2215 W. Royal Hunte Dr., Cedar 1115 N. Main Street, Springville SER RAC – March 3rd, 6:30 PM NR RAC – March 3rd, 6:30 PM John Wesley Powell Museum Brigham City Community Center 1765 E. Main St., Green River 24 N. 300 W., Brigham City NER RAC – March 3rd, 6:30 PM Board Meeting – March 5th, 9:00 AM Wildlife Resources NER Office DNR, Boardroom 318 N. Vernal Ave, Vernal 1594 W.