DOCSLIB.ORG

U.S. State Agencies and the Canadian Provinces

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
U.S. State Agencies and the Canadian Provinces Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies and State Fish and Wildlife Agencies International Collaborations 2017-2018 XXIII Meeting of the Canada/Mexico/U.S. Trilateral Committee for Wildlife and Ecosystem Conservation and Management April 9-12, 2018, Shepherdstown, West Virginia United States Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies and State Agencies Report to the Executive Table AFWA and State Agencies Report on International Projects and Actions Trilateral Committee Meeting, 2018 – Shepherdstown, West Virginia, United States Page 2 Table of Contents Global Forums ................................................................................................................................ 3 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES) .............. 3 The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands .................................................................................................. 3 International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) ....................................................................... 4 The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) ...................................................................................... 4 The Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species Wild Animals (CMS) ................................ 4 Western Hemisphere ....................................................................................................................... 4 WESTERN HEMISPHERE SHOREBIRD RESERVE NETWORK .................................................................................. 4 Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act (NMBCA) ....................................................................... 5 Southern Wings ..................................................................................................................................... 5 Conservation Business Plans for BirdS .................................................................................................. 7 Atlantic Flyway Shorebird Business Strategy ........................................................................................ 7 Pacific Flyway Shorebird Conservation Strategy ................................................................................... 7 North America ................................................................................................................................ 8 Trilateral Committee for Wildlife and Ecosystem Conservation and Management ............................. 8 Monarch Butterfly Conservation .......................................................................................................... 8 North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) and North American Wetlands Conservation Act (NAWCA) ................................................................................................................... 9 Flyway Councils ................................................................................................................................... 10 Amphibian and Reptile Conservation ................................................................................................. 11 Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCC) ...................................................................................... 12 Binational: Mexico-U.S. ............................................................................................................... 12 Mexican Wolf Recovery ...................................................................................................................... 12 Joint Ventures ..................................................................................................................................... 13 Border Governors Wildlife Table ........................................................................................................ 14 U.S.-Mexico Border State Wildlife Agencies ....................................................................................... 14 Binational: Canada-U.S. ............................................................................................................... 22 Trapping work with Canada ................................................................................................................ 22 Canadian Wildlife Directors Committee ............................................................................................. 22 AFWA and State Agencies Report on International Projects and Actions Trilateral Committee Meeting, 2018 – Shepherdstown, West Virginia, United States Page 3 State Fish and Wildlife Agencies work throughout the world on conservation issues both as individual states and as members of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (AFWA). They understand that achieving conservation goals requires a global scale approach especially for migratory species. This is not comprehensive report but rather a summary of major ongoing international projects and action taken by AFWA and state fish and wildlife agencies. -Global Forums- Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES) International treaties, agreements and initiatives offer opportunities and challenges to state fish and wildlife agency management. Understanding and engaging in international forums is important. Especially for CITES, the state agencies working relationship with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is critical for both partners. The fish and wildlife agencies in the 50 states of the United States and their supporting regional and national organizations (Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies and the Associations of Midwest, Northeast, Southeastern, and Western Fish and Wildlife Agencies) have participated in CITES since its inception. The CITES Technical Work Group, comprised of one representative from each of the four Regional Associations, has worked in partnership with the USFWS to engage on CITES issues since 1992 and has proven to be both effective and efficient. The Work Group functions under the leadership of the AFWA International Relations Committee and works closely with the AFWA International Director. They collaborate with USFWS to provide input on species status, management, and international trade to help ensure that actions taken through CITES support the conservation of wildlife in the U.S. The CITES Technical Work Group has representatives from each Regional Association that include SEAFWA – Buddy Baker (LA); NEAFWA – Rick Jacobson (CT); MAFWA – Carolyn Caldwell (OH); WAFWA – Jim deVos (AZ). They represented the state fish and wildlife agencies and when applicable Provincial and Territorial interests at the Animals, Plants, and Standing Committees, CITES work group, and interagency meetings in 2017. The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands The Convention on Wetlands of International Importance, called the Ramsar Convention, is an intergovernmental treaty that provides the framework for national action and international cooperation for the conservation and wise use of wetlands and their resources. AFWA represents the State Fish and Wildlife Agencies on the U.S. National Ramsar Committee. The Committee has helped designate 38 Ramsar wetlands in the U.S., supports sites needs for outreach and communication, and helps where possible on addressing threats to Ramsar sites. (http://www.ramsarcommittee.us). AFWA’s International Relations Director participated in the most recent U.S. National Ramsar Committee meeting in February 2017. The focus of the meeting was on how to support the current sites, how to strategically grow the number of sites, and what the priorities of the Committee should be. AFWA and State Agencies Report on International Projects and Actions Trilateral Committee Meeting, 2018 – Shepherdstown, West Virginia, United States Page 4 International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) The Association is a member of IUCN on behalf of the state fish and wildlife agencies. Founded in 1948, IUCN’s mission is to influence, encourage and assist societies throughout the world to conserve the integrity and diversity of nature and to ensure that any use of natural resources is equitable and ecologically sustainable. Today it has more than 1,300. The last IUCN World Conservation Congress was October 2016. AFWA teamed up with other like-minded organizations to influence decisions and discussions on topics such as waterfowl conservation, trophy hunting, climate change, livelihoods, and the use of lead ammunition. The Association also is an active member of the Sustainable Use and Livelihoods Specialists Group. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) a legally binding instrument that aims to promote "the conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of its components, and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources." It entered into force in 1993. Sustainable use of biological diversity is one of the three objectives set out in the Convention. Various measures are to be undertaken by signatories to promote sustainable use of biological diversity. The U.S. is not a Party to the CBD; therefore, the state fish and wildlife agencies are not directly impacted by decisions made by the CBD. However, the strong stance on sustainable use of biodiversity makes this convention extremely useful to the state fish and wildlife agencies as they promote and advocate for sustainable use of wildlife at home and abroad. Last year the Association participated as a member
Load more

Recommended publications
  • To: Donita Cotter, Monarch Conservation Strategy Coordinator From: Dr. Benjamin N. Tuggle, Regional Director, Southwest
    To: Donita Cotter, Monarch Conservation Strategy Coordinator From: Dr. Benjamin N. Tuggle, Regional Director, Southwest Region (R2) Subject: Region 2 Monarch Butterfly Conservation Strategy and Action Plan Template Date: November 12, 2014 On 4 September 2014, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Director issued a memorandum to the Service Directorate to develop a Service strategy for monarch conservation addressing plans for habitat restoration and enhancement, education and outreach, and monitoring and research needs. On October 7, the Director sent an email to all Regional Directors challenging them to commit to a goal of 100 Million Monarchs by 2020, and for Region 2 to provide a goal of 20,000 acres of new habitat for monarchs. The Director’s requests followed an agreement among President Obama, President Peña Nieto of Mexico, and Prime Minister Harper of Canada to “establish a working group to ensure the conservation of the Monarch butterfly, a species that symbolizes our association.” Also, on June 20, 2014, President Obama signed a Presidential Memorandum, “Creating a Federal Strategy to Promote the Health of Honey Bees and Other Pollinators,” outlining an expedited agenda to address the devastating declines in honey bees and native pollinators, including the monarch butterfly. Secretary Jewell tasked the Director with convening an interagency High Level Working Group to develop and implement a U.S. strategy for monarch conservation, coordinate our efforts with Mexico and Canada through the Trilateral Committee, and ensure that the monarch strategy is coordinated with development of the Federal Pollinator Strategy and DOI assignments in the Presidential Memo. To accomplish these initiatives and provide information to update the 2008 North American Monarch Conservation Plan by March 2015 and completion of the Federal Pollinator Strategy due to the White House mid-December 2014, the following tasks were specifically requested in the Director’s memorandum: I.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Monarch Conservation Implementation Plan
    2019 Monarch Conservation Implementation Plan Prepared by the Monarch Joint Venture staff and partner organizations. 1 | Page Contents Executive Summary 3 Plan Priorities 4 Monarch Habitat Conservation, Maintenance and Enhancement 4 Education to Enhance Awareness of Monarch Conservation Issues and Opportunities 5 Research and Monitoring to Inform Monarch Conservation Efforts 5 Partnerships and collaboration to advance monarch conservation 5 Monarch Joint Venture Mission and Vision 6 2019 Monarch Conservation Implementation Plan 6 Priority 1: Monarch Habitat Conservation, Maintenance and Enhancement 7 Objective 1: Create, restore, enhance, and maintain habitat on public and private lands. 7 Objective 2: Develop consistent, regionally appropriate Asclepias and nectar resources for habitat enhancement and creation on public and private lands. 15 Objective 3: Address overwintering habitat issues in the United States. 18 Priority 2: Education to Enhance Awareness of Monarch Conservation Issues & Opportunities 19 Objective 1: Raise awareness to increase conservation actions and support for monarchs. 19 Objective 2: Increase learning about monarchs and their habitat in formal and informal settings. 24 Objective 3: Foster networking between stakeholders involved in monarch conservation. 26 Priority 3: Research and Monitoring to Inform Monarch Conservation Efforts 28 Objective 1: Study monarch habitat and population status. 28 Objective 2: Expand citizen science and other monitoring, data exchange, and data analyses to inform conservation efforts.
    [Show full text]
  • 1995-2006 Activities Report
    WILDLIFE WITHOUT BORDERS WILDLIFE WITHOUT BORDERS WITHOUT WILDLIFE M E X I C O The most wonderful mystery of life may well be EDITORIAL DIRECTION Office of International Affairs U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service the means by which it created so much diversity www.fws.gov PRODUCTION from so little physical matter. The biosphere, all Agrupación Sierra Madre, S.C. www.sierramadre.com.mx EDITORIAL REVISION organisms combined, makes up only about one Carole Bullard PHOTOGRAPHS All by Patricio Robles Gil part in ten billion [email protected] Excepting: Fabricio Feduchi, p. 13 of the earth’s mass. [email protected] Patricia Rojo, pp. 22-23 [email protected] Fulvio Eccardi, p. 39 It is sparsely distributed through MEXICO [email protected] Jaime Rojo, pp. 44-45 [email protected] a kilometre-thick layer of soil, Antonio Ramírez, Cover (Bat) On p. 1, Tamul waterfall. San Luis Potosí On p. 2, Lacandon rainforest water, and air stretched over On p. 128, Fisherman. Centla wetlands, Tabasco All rights reserved © 2007, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service a half billion square kilometres of surface. The rights of the photographs belongs to each photographer PRINTED IN Impresora Transcontinental de México EDWARD O. WILSON 1992 Photo: NASA U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE DIVISION OF INTERNATIONAL CONSERVATION WILDLIFE WITHOUT BORDERS MEXICO ACTIVITIES REPORT 1995-2006 U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE At their roots, all things hold hands. & When a tree falls down in the forest, SECRETARÍA DE MEDIO AMBIENTE Y RECURSOS NATURALES MEXICO a star falls down from the sky. CHAN K’IN LACANDON ELDER LACANDON RAINFOREST CHIAPAS, MEXICO FOREWORD onservation of biological diversity has truly arrived significant contributions in time, dedication, and C as a global priority.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Biology of Tile Marsh Fritillary Butterfly Euphydryas a Urinia
    CONSERVATION BIOLOGY OF TILE MARSH FRITILLARY BUTTERFLY EUPHYDRYAS A URINIA CAROLINE ROSE BULMAN Submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Leeds School of Biology Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation September 2001 The candidate confirms that the work submitted is her own and that appropriate credit has been given where reference has been made to the work of others. 11 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am indebted to Chris Thomas for his constant advice, support, inspiration and above all enthusiasm for this project. Robert Wilson has been especially helpful and I am very grateful for his assistance, in particular with the rPM. Alison Holt and Lucia Galvez Bravo made the many months of fieldwork both productive and enjoyable, for which I am very grateful. Thanks to Atte Moilanen for providing advice and software for the IFM, Otso Ovaskainen for calculating the metapopulation capacity and to Niklas Wahlberg and Ilkka Hanski for discussion. This work would have been impossible without the assistance of the following people andlor organisations: Butterfly Conservation (Martin Warren, Richard Fox, Paul Kirland, Nigel Bourn, Russel Hobson) and Branch volunteers (especially Bill Shreeve and BNM recorders), the Countryside Council for Wales (Adrian Fowles, David Wheeler, Justin Lyons, Andy Polkey, Les Colley, Karen Heppingstall), English Nature (David Sheppard, Dee Stephens, Frank Mawby, Judith Murray), Dartmoor National Park (Norman Baldock), Dorset \)Ji\thife Trust (Sharoii Pd'bot), )eNorI Cornwall Wildlife Trust, Somerset Wildlife Trust, the National Trust, Dorset Environmental Records Centre, Somerset Environmental Records Centre, Domino Joyce, Stephen Hartley, David Blakeley, Martin Lappage, David Hardy, David & Liz Woolley, David & Ruth Pritchard, and the many landowners who granted access permission.
    [Show full text]
  • Landscape-Scale Conservation for Butterflies and Moths Lessons from the UK Landscape-Scale Conservation for Butterflies and Moths: Lessons from the UK
    Landscape-scale conservation for butterflies and moths Lessons from the UK Landscape-scale conservation for butterflies and moths: lessons from the UK Landscape-scale conservation for butterflies and moths | 1 Landscape-scale conservation for butterflies and moths: lessons from the UK by Sam Ellis, Nigel Bourn and Caroline Bulman This report would not have been possible without the significant support of the national Government Agencies: Natural England, Scottish Natural Heritage and Countryside Council for Wales, as well as the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation, who together grant-aided the development of most of our landscape-scale projects. We are also indebted to the volunteers who have contributed to these projects, including those from some of Butterfly Conservation’s network of 31 Branches around the UK, but also from our many partner organisations. We are also grateful to all the landowners and land managers who have allowed Butterfly Conservation, its contractors and volunteers access to their land to enable project delivery. Special thanks are due to: Karen Aylward (Natural England), Norman Baldock (Dartmoor National Park Authority), Anja Borsje (previous Two Moors Threatened Butterfly ProjectOfficer, Butterfly Conservation), Gill Barter (Countryside Council for Wales), Steve Batt (Warwickshire Wildlife Trust), Frank Berney (University of Sunderland), Richard Boles (Forestry Commission England), Rona Charles (North York Moors National Park Authority), Mike Clark, Paul Dunn (Glamorgan Heritage Coast), Mike Enfield (Kent Wildlife Trust),
    [Show full text]
  • Butterfly Conservation's Uk Conservation Strategy 2025
    BUTTERFLY CONSERVATION’S UK CONSERVATION STRATEGY 2025 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 3 2. WHY CONSERVE BUTTERFLIES AND MOTHS? ........................................................................ 3 3. THE DECLINING STATUS OF BUTTERFLIES AND MOTHS ...................................................... 3 3.1 Species Trends ............................................................................................................................. 4 3.2 Grouped Species Trends .............................................................................................................. 4 4. DRIVERS OF DECLINE ................................................................................................................. 6 5. HABITAT SPECIALISTS AND WIDER COUNTRYSIDE SPECIES .............................................. 7 5.1 Conserving Habitat Specialist Species ......................................................................................... 8 5.2 Conserving Wider Countryside Species ....................................................................................... 8 6. SPECIES RECOVERY STRATEGY AND THE SPECIES RECOVERY CURVE ........................ 10 6.1 STATUS ASSESSMENT (Stage 1): PRIORITISING THREATENED SPECIES........................ 12 6.1.1 Assessing UK Threat Priority using Distribution and Abundance Criteria ........................... 12 6.1.2 Changing Threat Status of UK Butterflies ...........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Buglife Strategy 2021-2030
    Buglife Strategy 2021-2030 The winning image in the ‘Aquatic Bugs’ category 2020. A diamond squid, shot in Siladen, Indonesia during a blackwater dive © Galice Hoarau Cover photo - An acorn weevil Curculio glandium takes flight, first place in the ‘Beetles’ category 2020 © Christian Brockes Buglife - The Invertebrate Conservation Trust is a company limited by guarantee, Registered in England at The Lindens, 86 Lincoln Rd, Peterborough, PE1 2SN Company no. 4132695 Registered charity no. 1092293 Scottish charity no. SC040004 President – Germaine Greer Chairman – Steve Ormerod Chief Executive – Matt Shardlow Contents Why bugs need Buglife ............................................................................................................ 3 Buglife’s identity ..................................................................................................................... 4 Our Vision ..................................................................................................................................... 4 Our Mission ................................................................................................................................... 4 Our Strapline ................................................................................................................................. 4 Our Character ................................................................................................................................ 4 Buglife’s outcomes .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Western Monarch Butterfly Conservation Plan 2018-2068
    DRAFT 2018Westmonarchpubliccommdft.20181105 DRAFT WESTERN MONARCH BUTTERFLY CONSERVATION PLAN 2018-2068 Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies October 2018 DRAFT 2018Westmonarchpubliccommdft.20181105 DRAFT Western Monarch Butterfly Conservation Plan 2018–2068 Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies Prepared by Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies Western Monarch Working Group Taylor Cotten – Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Jim DeVos – Arizona Game and Fish Department Chris Keleher – Utah Department of Natural Resources Stafford Lehr – California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Executive Sponsor Samantha Marcum – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Karen Miner – California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Working Group Chair Jennifer Newmark – Nevada Department of Wildlife Davia Palmeri – Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Rex Sallabanks – Idaho Department of Fish and Game Maria Ulloa Bustos – Bureau of Land Management Bill Van Pelt – Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies Mindy Wheeler – Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Contributing Authors Cheri Boucher – Arizona Game and Fish Department Vikki Finn – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Region Mike Houts – Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies Ann Potter – Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Daydre Roser – California Department of Fish and Wildlife Helen Swagerty – California Department of Fish and Wildlife Leona Svancara – Idaho Department of Fish and Game Paul Thompson – Utah Department of Natural Resources Editor: Beth Waterbury – Idaho Department of Fish and Game, retired Recommended citation: Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. 2018. Western monarch butterfly conservation plan, 2018– 2068. Version 1.0. Cover photo credits: Left: Adult monarchs nectaring on showy milkweed. Photo: Idaho Department of Fish and Game.
    [Show full text]
  • Landscape-Scale Conservation of Farmland Moths
    CHAPTER 8 Landscape-scale conservation of farmland moths Thomas Merckx and David W. Macdonald When through the old oak forest I am gone, Let me not wander in a barren dream John Keats, On Sitting Down to Read King Lear Once Again. 8.1 Scope of agri-environment schemes the ecosystem services (such as crop pollination, pest control, water retention, and soil protection) provided Biodiversity has declined substantially throughout by the adjoining non-farmed land. Nevertheless, some much of the European wider countryside. The most biodiversity of the original ecosystems may be re- promising tools to reverse these declines are widely tained within farmland ecosystems, its amount heavily thought to be agri-environment schemes (AES) (Don- dependent on the spatial extent and degree of farm- ald and Evans 2006). These governmental schemes land intensification. Indeed, although species typic- provide financial rewards for ‘environmentally ally ‘prefer’ one ecosystem, they often occur in, and friendly’ methods of farmland management. However, use resources from, neighbouring ecosystems (Pereira AES do not always produce significant biodiversity and Daily 2006; Dennis 2010). As such, many species benefits (Kleijn et al. 2006; Batáry et al. 2010). For ex- may manage to persist within farmland systems, with ample, in the UK, the broad and shallow ‘Entry Level at least some of them, such as the speckled wood Pa- Stewardship’ has often been unrewarding for wildlife rarge aegeria, originally a woodland butterfly, adapting (e.g. Davey et al. 2010, but see Baker et al. 2012), but, to these ‘novel’ ecosystems (Merckx et al. 2003). As a in many cases, the more targeted ‘higher level’ scheme result, extensively farmed systems can often be char- has exceeded expectations (Jeremy Thomas, pers.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildflower-Rich Brownfields Can Be Refuges for Butterflies That Have Declined Across the UK Due to Agricultural Intensification and Afforestation
    © Scott Shanks Wildflower-rich brownfields can be refuges for butterflies that have declined across the UK due to agricultural intensification and afforestation. The mosaic of habitats that develop on some brownfields can be the sole resources in the landscape that provide butterflies with all of the appropriate larval foodplants, adult nectar sources, bare ground and shelter required to survive. Around 30 butterfly species can regularly exploit brownfields, including scarce and declining species that rely heavily on a network of brownfields to support populations. Key species of butterfly on brownfields remains. The Small blue is rare and localised throughout the UK, with populations in England, Scotland Wales and Ireland, This document focuses on five species, the Small blue (Cupido but its stronghold is in the south of England. The Grayling is minimus), Grayling (Hipparchia semele), Dingy skipper (Erynnis found throughout the UK, but it has a mainly coastal tages), Grizzled skipper (Pyrgus malvae) and Wall (Lasiommata megera). Other butterflies which can be strongly reliant on distribution, with inland colonies typically on heathland or brownfields include Common blue (Polyommatus Icarus), brownfield sites. The Dingy skipper is found throughout the Brown argus (Aricia agestis), Small copper (Lycaena phlaeas), UK, but with a stronghold in central and southern England. Essex skipper (Thymelicus lineola), Dark green fritillary Key brownfield habitat features for butterflies (Argynnis aglaja), Marbled white (Melanargia galathea) and Small heath (Coenonympha pamphilus). Warm, sunny microclimate on dry, well-drained soils. Bare ground for basking and warm microclimate. Species distributions Specific larval foodplants in abundance. All five butterfly species have suffered from significant declines Diverse nectar resource for adults during flight period.
    [Show full text]
  • Managing Woodland for Butterflies and Moths
    Managing woodland for butterflies and moths Why manage woodland at all? Surely a natural woodland, without (or with minimum) intervention would best supply sustainable habitat for butterflies and moths? The answer lies in the processes cleared woodland habitats. The For many species, the speed and that have formed our present natural processes that produce such extent of this change has made it landscape. Almost no woodland habitats within woodland (such as very difficult to adapt and landscape in Britain today can be considered fires, storms and the natural collapse changes have reduced opportunities wholly natural. We have inherited a of aging trees) typically occur too to relocate to suitable habitat long history of forestry use that has infrequently to provide the continuous elsewhere. substantially modified even our most cycle of clearings needed by these ancient woodlands. We have, and species. Woodlands would also have Overall objectives still are, continuously changing the been subject to regular, extensive This guide outlines specific woodland composition and structure of woods grazing and browsing by large management options designed to to meet our needs. The woodland herbivores which are now absent, benefit butterflies and moths. These wildlife we see today is a product of and these effects are not replicated options are designed to achieve the that history and many Lepidoptera by the increasing number of deer following overall objectives: survive in woodland habitats only now browsing our woods. The small because of repeated human use of size and fragmentation of most • Structural complexity woodland resources. woods in the UK also prevent natural • Habitat diversity processes operating at a sufficient scale to conserve the full range of • Foodplant diversity woodland wildlife.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecoregional Conservation Assessment of the Chihuahuan Desert
    Ecoregional Conservation Assessment of the Chihuahuan Desert Second Edition, Revised July 2004 Copyright ©, 2002, 2004 Pronatura Noreste, The Nature Conservancy and World Wildlife Fund Ecoregional Conservation Assessment of the Chihuahuan Desert Second Edition, Revised July 2004 Copyright © 2002, 2004 In partnership with The Nature Conservancy and The World Wildlife Fund Front Cover Photo Credits: Aplomado Falcon – Profauna, A.C.; Collared peccary – Gary Bell; Yucca – Jennifer Montoya; White-sided jackrabbit – Profauna, A.C.; White-fin pupfish – John Rinne; Cactus and yucca woodland – John Karges; Todsen’s pennyroyal – Rob Taylor; Black grama grasslands – Gary Bell; Cuatro Cienegas wetlands – John Karges. Executive Summary The Chihuahuan Desert (CD) Ecoregion encompasses some 70 million hectares occupying much of the Mexican states of Chihuahua, Coahuila, Durango, Zacatecas, large portions of San Luis Potosi, Nuevo Leon, and significant areas of Texas and New Mexico in the United States. The area is characterized by the basins and ranges of the Mexican Plateau, surrounded by the foothills of the Sierra Madre Oriental on the east and the Sierra Madre Occidental on the west. While wetter than some North American desert areas, the Chihuahuan Desert experiences hot summers, cool, dry winters, and intermittent rainfall mostly of monsoonal origins during the summer months. The vegetation of the ecoregion is typically grassland and desert scrub, with areas of chaparral and woodland in the mountains and narrow ribbons of riparian forest and scrub along stream channels and springs. With the notable exception of the Rio Grande and its tributaries, most river systems are within closed basins and many streams and springs are isolated.
    [Show full text]