Search

The Arctic Council working group, the Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF) established the Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Programme (CBMP), an international network of scientists, governments, Indigenous organizations, and conservation groups working to harmonize and integrate efforts to extend and develop monitoring and assessment of the Arctic's biodiversity. Its relevance stretches beyond the Arctic to a broad range of regional and global initiatives and agreements. This paper describes the process and approach taken in the last two decades to develop and implement the CBMP. It documents challenges encountered, lessons learnt, and solutions, and considers how it has been a model for national, regional, and global monitoring programmes; explores how it has impacted Arctic biodiversity monitoring, assessment, and policy and concludes with observations on key issues and next steps. The following are overarching prerequisites identified in the implementation of the CBMP: effective coordination, sufficient and sustained funding, improved standards and protocols, co-production of knowledge and equitable involvement of IK approaches, data management to facilitating regional analysis and comparisons, communication and outreach to raising awareness and engagement in the programme, ensuring resources to engage in international fora to ensuring programme implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Describes an approach to teaching written reports and how the author adapted this approach for her students. Discovers ways to use the process approach to writing in interesting ways that take the students beyond the personal narrative. (MG)

State fish and wildlife agencies in the United States are confronted with the realities of a rapidly changing society. With declines in historical sources of revenue and the growth of diverse voices with values that differ from those emphasized by traditional policies and user groups, agencies are faced with diminishing relevancy and are encountering institutional challenges that inhibit their ability to serve the broader public. Here, in collaboration with a group of fish and wildlife agency leaders from 11 states, conservation professionals, and academics, we employ qualitative methods and concepts from systems theory to develop an integrative model of a state wildlife agency. We use this model to identify leverage points to induce transformational change toward an ideal future state: one driven by a system of shared values toward wildlife and a mission to improve quality of life for all people. Our findings point to the importance of developing interventions that will lead to changes in agency culture, systems of governance, and policy and action, and enhance the accessibility of natural resources and opportunities for diverse publics to engage with and benefit from fish and wildlife. We offer recommendations for state wildlife agencies to engage in adaptive organizational change and for university programs to support agency needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In many states, case law, statutes, or constitutions establish a "public trust in wildlife," a derivative of the public trust doctrine. Although interpretation differs across jurisdictions, the underlying principle of wildlife as a public trust resource, explicitly expressed or not, carries with it broad obligations and standards of trust administration by government to ensure benefits of wildlife are available to all citizens, present and future. The standards for execution of responsibilities by trustees (elected officials or their appointees, such as commissions) and trust managers (e.g., wildlife professionals working for state wildlife agencies) require understanding beneficiaries' varied interests in the wildlife resource, which in turn requires effective public input and involvement, following the precepts of good governance, such as inclusiveness, openness, fairness, transparency, and accountability. Managing wildlife resources as public trust assets entails providing sustainable net benefits from the existence of wildlife and its co-existence with humans. Wildlife managers need an approach to wildlife management that is philosophically consistent with the benefits-production focus of trust administration. We explain that impacts management is such an approach, essentially tailor-made for fulfilling trust-management responsibilities because of its focus on diverse, stakeholder-value-defined outcomes (desired impacts) and its reliance on stakeholders' input for identifying and weighing competing outcomes desired by them. Impacts management is a wildlife resource management approach for providing sustainable, highly relevant public trust administration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]