GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, DC 20548

October 31, 2002

The Honorable Max Baucus

The Honorable Lincoln D. Chafee

United States Senate

Subject: Transboundary Species: Potential Impact to Species

The United States/Canada Softwood Lumber Agreement expired in March 2001. As

part of the preparation process for renegotiating the agreement, the United States

Trade Representative requested public comment on softwood lumber trade

issues between the United States and Canada and on Canadian softwood lumbering

practices. The comments received included allegations that Canadian lumbering

and forestry practices were affecting animal species with U.S./Canadian ranges

(transboundary species) that are listed as threatened or endangered in the United

States. To consider these comments as well as provide useful information to the

U.S. Trade Representative in the renegotiations, the Department of the Interior,

with the Department’s U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (FWS) assistance, prepared

a conservation status report on selected species that may be affected by the new

agreement. The status report presented summaries of information on eight

transboundary species and reached preliminary conclusions of potential impact to

four species.

You asked us to review the information and the process that Interior used to develop

the January 2001 status report as well as provide you with updated information

concerning several specific transboundary species. Accordingly, this report

describes the (1) supporting information that FWS used and the process it followed

when compiling its information for the Department of the Interior’s January 2001

conservation status report on selected threatened or endangered species with

U.S./Canadian ranges; and (2) existing U.S. and Canadian efforts aimed at protecting,

monitoring, and facilitating the eventual recovery of four transboundary species—the

bull trout, grizzly bear, marbled murrelet, and woodland caribou—listed as

threatened or endangered in the United States.

On October 4, 2002, we briefed your offices on the results of our work. This report

transmits the materials used during that briefing.

Results in Brief

In compiling the information for the Department of the Interior’s 2001 conservation

status report for the U.S. Trade Representative, the Fish and Wildlife Service relied

chiefly on previously published material and internal agency documents, such as
Page 2 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

individual species recovery plans, Federal Register listing information, other

administrative records, and public comments received. According to the FWS official

we contacted, FWS headquarters had to compile the report under a tight time frame

and did not have time to consult with the regional recovery team coordinators

responsible for monitoring the species or seek updated information to supplement

the information used from dated species recovery plans. From our analysis of the

report and our discussions with U.S. and Canadian wildlife officials, we believe that

the report, among other things,

• understates the extent of cooperation between U.S. and Canadian officials

to monitor, protect, and recover transboundary populations of species

listed as threatened or endangered in the United States. In particular, the

report did not fully capture the extent of data exchange or joint initiatives

undertaken, and

• gives little attention to certain threats to the species, such as predation,

residential and commercial development, and human recreational

activities, that, according to governmental wildlife officials, are equal or

greater threats to transboundary species recovery than, for example,

logging and logging roads.

Whereas the inclusion of such updated information has the potential to change the

details presented in the report, we do not believe that the additional information

would alter the report’s general findings.

The United States and Canada similarly engage in processes—both on their

respective side of the border and in collaboration with one another—aimed at

protecting, monitoring, and facilitating the eventual recovery of the bull trout, grizzly

bear, marbled murrelet, and woodland caribou. Specifically, wildlife officials on each

side grant species a special protective status; outline the threats to the species;

collect diverse sources of data to monitor the species’ habitat and population trends;

undertake specific species recovery, protection, and coordination activities; and

encounter similar obstacles in their attempts to assess the species and facilitate its

recovery. Furthermore, U.S. and Canadian officials often work in tandem by jointly

participating in conferences on species recovery issues; consistently sharing species

monitoring data and other technical information; and for certain species like the

woodland caribou, jointly participate in the development of recovery plans.

Supplemental Information

In addition to the presentation slides used during our briefing, we also are enclosing

the other documents discussed during that meeting (see enc. I). Specifically, we are

enclosing:

• the timetable for preparing the January 9, 2001 report (enc. II);

• the authorizing legislation and agreements related to the protection of

species at risk in the United States and Canada (enc. III);
Page 3 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

• the process for listing species in the United States and Canada (enc. IV);

and

• an overview of species-specific information (enc. V).

These materials supplement the content in the presentation slides.

Scope and Methodology

To respond to the above objectives, we met with representatives of the Department

of the Interior and FWS, the recovery coordinators for the four species, and federal

and provincial wildlife officials from Alberta and British Columbia. We reviewed

documents associated with managing and recovering the four species. We also

contacted and obtained documents from environmental organizations and industry

associations.

The maps that we present in enclosure V do not include the historical range or entire

current range and may not be drawn to scale. We provided the maps, however, to

provide readers with a general geographical reference to the range of habitat for

these four transboundary species.

We performed our work on this assignment from March 2002 to September 2002 in

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. A detailed

description of our scope and methodology is included as enclosure VI.

Agency Comments

While we did not receive comments on a draft of this report, we did hold exit

conferences with the various U.S. and Canadian officials that we met in the course of

our review and obtained oral comments. During the exit conferences we discussed

the information used to develop the briefing slides and supplemental enclosures with

appropriate U.S. and Canadian officials. Generally, the officials indicated that the

information was accurate and provided a good, general overview of their respective

species management and recovery programs. The officials also provided some

technical clarifications that we have incorporated as appropriate.

- - - - -

As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce the contents of this report

earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from the report date. At that

time, copies of this report will be available at no charge on GAO’s Web site at

http://www.gao.gov.
Page 4 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

If you or your staff have any questions on the matters discussed in this report,

you may contact me at (202) 512-3841. Major contributors to this report were Linda L.

Harmon, Michael J. Rahl, and Jonathan McMurray.

Barry T. Hill

Director, Natural Resources

 and Environment

Enclosures - 6
Enclosure I

Page 5 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

1

Briefing for Congressional Requesters

Report Analysis and Information on Four

U.S./Canadian Transboundary Species

Listed as Threatened or Endangered in

the United States

October 4, 2002
Enclosure I

Page 6 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

2

Objectives

• Describe the supporting information that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service (FWS) used and the process it followed when compiling

information for the Department of the Interior’s 2001 conservation

status report on selected threatened or endangered species with

U.S./Canadian ranges.

• Describe existing U.S. and Canadian efforts aimed at protecting,

monitoring, and facilitating the eventual recovery of four transboundary

species listed as threatened or endangered in the United States—the

bull trout, grizzly bear, marbled murrelet, and woodland caribou.
Enclosure I

Page 7 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

3

Scope and Methodology

• Reviewed species recovery plans, Federal Register species

listings, background materials, and evaluative studies on the

four species.

• Interviewed Department of the Interior officials; FWS officials (in

headquarters and the regions) and FWS recovery coordinators

for the four species.

• Interviewed (1) provincial fish and wildlife officials; biologists,

wildlife; forestry; and recreational specialists in Alberta and

British Columbia and (2) Parks Canada and Canadian Wildlife

Service officials responsible for managing the four species.
Enclosure I

Page 8 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

4

Scope and Methodology

(continued)

• Contacted representatives from environmental organizations

and industry associations and reviewed documents provided.
Enclosure I

Page 9 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

5

Results in Brief

In compiling information for the 2001 conservation status report for

the U.S. Trade Representative, FWS

• consulted previously published material, public comments, and

internal agency documents and

• did not consult with its regional recovery team coordinators

responsible for monitoring the species or seek updated

information to supplement the information found in older

species recovery plans.
Enclosure I

Page 10 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

6

Results in Brief

(continued)

Wildlife officials in the United States and Canada similarly engage

in processes—both on their respective side of the border and in

collaboration with one another—aimed at identifying, listing,

protecting, and monitoring the eventual recovery of the bull trout,

grizzly bear, marbled murrelet, and woodland caribou.
Enclosure I

Page 11 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

7

Compiling the January 2001 Report
Enclosure I

Page 12 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

8

Genesis of the January 2001 Report

• The U.S. Trade Representative asked the Department of the

Interior to provide information on the potential environmental effects

of the U.S./Canada Softwood Lumber Agreement and to review the

public comments received on these issues.

• Interior requests that FWS prepare preliminary write-ups on issues

related to transboundary species for its report Summary of the

Conservation Status of Selected Forest-Related Species with

U.S./Canada Ranges.
Enclosure I

Page 13 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

9

Purpose of January 2001 Report

Department of the Interior officials indicated that the report

• was intended to review the state of knowledge on the status of

certain species with transboundary ranges in light of public

comments alleging threats to species due to timber harvesting in

Canada, much of which is exported to the United States,

• was a brief overview based on immediately available knowledge

and was not intended to be a thorough review such as the review of

a species’ biological status required under section 4 of the

Endangered Species Act,
Enclosure I

Page 14 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

10

Purpose of January 2001 Report

(continued)

• focused on the effects relating to logging and forest management to

help government officials consider these public concerns, not

because it reached a conclusion that those are the most important

threats for any given species even though, in most cases, these

effects are significant.
Enclosure I

Page 15 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

11

Information Contained in the January

2001 Report

The report summarized the readily available information on the

• biological and legal status of eight species said to be potentially

affected by Canadian timber harvesting;

• threats to these species;

• transboundary aspects of these species, such as range;

• effects of Canadian timber practices on these species; and

• extent of U.S./Canadian cooperation in efforts to study,

conserve, or manage these species.
Enclosure I

Page 16 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

12

Information Consulted in Preparing the

January 2001 Report

In compiling its report, FWS used

• published documents (no new research conducted),

• existing recovery plans and listing information,

• Federal Register notices and public comments, and

• administrative records and general staff knowledge.
Enclosure I

Page 17 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

13

Information Not Considered in Preparing

the January 2001 Report

When compiling information for the 2001 report,

• FWS did not review or consider a number of available articles,

papers, and other literature on Canadian lumbering practices and

their potential impact on transboundary species;

• concerns raised in these articles and papers generally echoed the

concerns raised in the public comments that FWS had reviewed;

and

• further consideration of these sources would not have changed the

focus or the content of the January 2001 report, according to FWS.
Enclosure I

Page 18 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

14

GAO Analysis of the January 2001

Report

The report

• understated the extent of cooperation between U.S. and

Canadian officials to monitor, protect, and recover threatened

or endangered species and

• gave little attention to certain threats to the species, such as

predation, residential and commercial development, and human

recreational activities, that were equal or greater threats to

transboundary species recovery than, for example, logging and

logging roads.
Enclosure I

Page 19 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

15

U.S. and Canadian Efforts to

Protect, Monitor, and Recover

Transboundary Species
Enclosure I

Page 20 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

16

Efforts to Protect, Monitor, and Recover

Four Transboundary Species

 Wildlife officials in the United States and Canada similarly engage

in identification, listing, protection, and recovery activities and

programs for the four species. Specifically, they

• grant the species a special protective status;

• identify the threats to the species;

• collect diverse sources of data to monitor the species’ habitat

and population trends;

• undertake specific species recovery, protection, and

coordination activities; and

• encounter similar obstacles in their attempts to assess the

species and facilitate its recovery.
Enclosure I

Page 21 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

17

Special Designation of Species

Threatened Threatened b Threatened Woodland Endangered a

caribou

 aThe government of Canada classifies the Southern Mountain population as “threatened” and the Northern Mountain population as

 “special concern.” The Southern Mountain population includes the herd that is transboundary.

 bAlberta does not share transboundary populations with the United States. The provinces’ populations of concern are shared with

 British Columbia.

Marbled murrelet Threatened Threatened (Not applicable) Threatened

Grizzly bear Threatened Special concern (Under review) Special concern

Bull trout Threatened (Not assessed) Special concern Vulnerable

 British

 Alberta Columbia

 Government of

 Species United States Canada
Enclosure I

Page 22 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

18

Threats to the Species

• Roads/Highways.

• Recreation—hunting, fishing, camping, and snowmobiles.

• Predation.

• Commercial and residential development.

• Irrigation projects.

• Resource extraction/use—lumbering, mining, and grazing.
Enclosure I

Page 23 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

19

Data Collected to Monitor Species

• Credible species sightings, annual species and nest counts to

determine reproductive success, population baselines, census, and

trends.

• Radio telemetry, satellite information, radar information, and DNA

analysis for range assessments; uses of, and obstacles to, habitat

access; and linkage zones between habitats.

• Law enforcement, accident reports, hunting and fishing records, and

found dead specimens to determine mortality factors.

• Best scientific data available and peer-reviewed protocols are to be

used to better ensure accuracy, consistency, and reliability of data.
Enclosure I

Page 24 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

20

Recovery and Protection Activities

• Adjust or eliminate land use and resource extraction activities.

• Limit public access to species habitat.

• Restrict commercial recreation enterprises.

• Restore, protect, or enhance species habitat.

• Augment species populations.

• Prohibit or restrict fishing or hunting.

• Manage predators.

• Implement community outreach and educational programs.
Enclosure I

Page 25 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

21

Coordination and Cooperative Activities

• Joint participation on recovery teams and development of

recovery plans.

• Joint participation on species technical committees.

• Joint research and sharing of research data.

• Joint habitat-mapping efforts.

• Sharing of aerial monitoring and other technical data.
Enclosure I

Page 26 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

22

Coordination and Cooperative Activities

(continued)

• Augmentation of U.S. species populations.

• Annual and ad hoc workshops on current species issues,

monitoring effectiveness, and evaluation methodology.

• Use of scientific data gathering protocols to better ensure the

collection of consistent data.

• International agreement on gill netting to minimize the number

of birds caught in fish nets and joint oil spill response strategy.

• Land exchanges to protect species habitat.
Enclosure I

Page 27 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

23

Obstacles to Recovery Assessment

Efforts

• Limited staff and resources.

• Solitary/Secretive species are difficult to track.

• Downsizing and reduced funding have decreased amount of

scientific research conducted.

• Seasonal limitations and inclement weather impede data

collection.

• Monitoring techniques are difficult, time-consuming, and

expensive.
Enclosure II

Page 28 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

Presented below are the key dates relating the development and issuance of the

January 9, 2001 report entitled Summary of the Conservation Status of Selected

Forest-Related Species with U.S./Canada Ranges prepared by the Department of the

Interior, with assistance of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. That report was in

response to a request for assistance in assessing the public comments received by the

U.S. Trade Representative regarding the environmental concerns as they relate to the

renegotiation of the U.S./Canada Softwood Lumber Agreement.

Date Action/Activity

Mar. 2, 2000 U.S. Trade Representative issues Federal Register notice

(65 F.R. 11363) requesting public comment regarding softwood

lumber practices in Canada and softwood lumber trade between

the United States and Canada.

Aug. 4, 2000 Deputy Secretary of the Interior identifies focal point for

coordinating Interior’s role in studying the environmental issues

relating to U.S./ Canadian softwood lumber trade.

Aug. 28, 2000 Interior seeks information from FWS responding to four questions

regarding eight U.S.-listed transboundary species identified as

potentially affected by Canadian lumbering practices.

Aug. 28, 2000-

Sept. 29, 2000

FWS considers transboundary aspects of eight U.S.-listed species

as well as the issues identified in public comments.

Sept. 29, 2000 FWS provides write-ups on the eight species to Interior.

Fall 2000 Interagency coordination/working group discusses issues, and

Interior and FWS review FWS’ write-ups (informal process).

Oct. 22, 2000 Interior sends outline of proposed report to U.S. Trade

Representative.

Oct. 25, 2000 U.S. Trade Representative circulates the outline of the proposed

report to the interagency coordinating/working group.

Oct. 25, 2000 –

Nov. 2000

Interior consolidates FWS’s write-ups into report format. Interior

circulates two report iterations internally.

Time Table for Preparation of January 9, 2001 Report
Enclosure II

Page 29 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

Date Action/Activity

Nov. 3, 2000 Interior internally circulates copies of a revised draft and sends it

to FWS’s Acting Assistant Director for International Activities.

Fall/Winter

2000-2001

Interior shows the draft to the U.S. Trade Representative.

Jan. 9, 2001 Interior finalizes report.

Jan. 18, 2001 Interior delivers final report to the U.S. Trade Representative.
Enclosure III

Page 30 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

Listed below are the key legislation or signed agreements that establish the

framework for endangered species protection in the United States, in Canada, and in

the provinces of Alberta and British Columbia.

Location Legislation or Agreement

U.S. Government ! Endangered Species Act

! Migratory Bird Treaty Act

! Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management

Act

! National Forest Management Act

! Federal Land Policy and Management Act

! National Environmental Policy Act

! Framework for Cooperation Between the U.S.

Department of the Interior and Environment Canada in

the Protection and Recovery of Wild Species at Risk.

Government of

Canada

! Species At Risk Act (federal law under consideration)

! The Fisheries Act

! Migratory Birds Convention Act

! Canadian Wildlife Act

! National Parks Act

! Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk (agreed to by

federal/provincal/territorial agencies)

! United Nations’ Convention on Conservation of

Biological Diversity

! Framework for Cooperation Between the U.S.

Department of the Interior and Environment Canada in

the Protection and Recovery of Wild Species at Risk.

Province of Alberta ! Wildlife Act

! Forests Act

! Fisheries Act

! Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk.

Province of British

Columbia

! Forest Practices Code of British Columbia Act

! Wildlife Act

! Forest Land Reserve Act

! Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk.

Authorizing Legislation and Agreements Related to Species at Risk

in the United States and Canada
Enclosure IV

Page 31 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

The United States, the government of Canada, and the Provinces of Alberta and

British Columbia each follow a process by which individual species are assessed and

may be granted a special designation if found to be under threat. Presented below is

a brief overview of the process that each governmental organization follows in

making the decision to list or not list a species.

U.S. Government

• The Fish and Wildlife Service lists species as a result of initiating an

evaluation or as a result of being petitioned by an individual, group, or

agency to list a species. If petitioned, established time frames apply.

• Ninety-day finding on sufficiency of petition information to support

whether the listing may be warranted. If so, FWS begins detailed

biological evaluation.

• Twelve-month finding, on the basis of biological information alone, on

whether the petitioned species should be listed. Self-initiated listing

based on species priority. Decision to propose listing published in the

Federal Register.

• Final rule to list or withdraw the proposed listing issued within 12

months after evaluating any additional information and public

comments. This period can be extended to a maximum of 18 months if

there is a disagreement about the sufficiency or accuracy of the

available biological data.

• Risk categories include the following:

• Endangered—a species that is in danger of extinction throughout

all or a significant portion of its range.

• Threatened—a species that is likely to become endangered in the

foreseeable future.

• Recovery plans generally to be completed within 2.5 years of listing and

reviewed/revised as information warrants.

Government of Canada

• The Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada

(COSEWIC) produces the official list of Canadian species at risk.

Species are listed as the result of a four-step process.

• Eligibility of species is determined on the basis of validity of

species or subspecies, Canadian native, regularity of occurrence,

Process for Listing Species
Enclosure IV

Page 32 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

and whether species require Canadian lands or waters for a key

part of their life cycle.

• Species specialist groups develop prioritized lists of candidate

species.

• Status reports developed to assess risk of extinction. May be

commissioned by COSEWIC or submitted by any person.

• Final status determination published as the public record and

provided to the Canadian Endangered Species Conservation

Council.

• Risk categories include the following:

• Extinct—a species that no longer exists.

• Extirpated—a species that no longer exists in the wild in Canada

but occurs elsewhere.

• Endangered—a species facing imminent extirpation or extinction.

• Threatened—a species that is likely to become endangered if

limiting factors are not reversed.

• Special concern—a species of special concern because of

characteristics that make it particularly sensitive to human

activities or natural events.

• Not at risk—a species that has been evaluated and found to be not

at risk.

• Data deficient—a species for which there is insufficient scientific

information to support status designation.

• The Canadian Endangered Species Conservation Council accepts the

COSEWIC list and determines the priorities for recovery actions.

• Under the Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk, the jurisdictions

agree to prepare recovery strategies within specified timelines and to

report annually to the public on the status of recovery actions across

Canada.

Province of Alberta

• The Alberta Wildlife Management Division of the Ministry of

Sustainable Resource Development ranks the general status of each

Alberta species and identifies initial priorities for species assessment,

the species for which additional data need to be collected, and potential

species needing management efforts.
Enclosure IV

Page 33 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

• The Alberta Wildlife Management Division works with the Alberta

Conservation Association to develop a detailed status report for species

determined to potentially need management attention—“at risk” or

“may be at risk” species.

• The Scientific Subcommittee of the Endangered Species Conservation

Committee receives the detailed status report to perform an

independent biological assessment of the level of risk. The

subcommittee’s recommendation regarding the level of risk is referred

to the full committee.

• The Endangered Species Conservation Committee recommends the

legal designation and protections for threatened and endangered

species to the Minister of Sustainable Resource Development.

• The Minister of Sustainable Resource Development must decide

whether to designate the species under the Wildlife Act. The

Endangered Species Conservation Committee prepares and oversees

the implementation of an initial conservation action statement for

designated species identifying actions to be taken to conserve the

species while a recovery plan is being developed.

• Risk categories include the following:

• Extinct—a species that no longer exists.

• Extirpated—a species that no longer exists in the wild in Alberta

but occur elsewhere in the wild.

• Endangered—a species facing imminent extirpation or extinction.

• Threatened—a species that is likely to become endangered if

limiting factors are not reversed.

• Special concern—a species of special concern because of

characteristics that make it particularly sensitive to human

activities or natural events.

• Data deficient—a species for which there is insufficient scientific

information to support status designation.

• Recovery plans to be completed within 2 years of listing for threatened

species, within 1 year for endangered species, and generally

reviewed/revised every 5 years.
Enclosure IV

Page 34 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

Province of British Columbia

• The Conservation Data Centre in the Ministry of Sustainable Resource

Management annually assesses the degree of conservation risk for

species for the purpose of identifying those most at risk, as well as to

establish baseline ranks for each species. The Centre uses a standard

set of criteria developed over 25 years by the international organization

of NatureServe (formerly associated with the U.S. Nature

Conservancy).

• Uses a global, national, and subnational rank for the species’ range.

Ranking assigns a risk of extinction score to each species. The

Conservation Data Centre assigns the provincial rank solely on the

basis of the status within British Columbia. NatureServe scientists

assign the global and national ranks with guidance from various experts

in North America.

• Compiles three lists of species—red, blue, and yellow—sorted by

conservation risk. The red list includes species that are legally

designated as endangered or threatened under the Wildlife Act, are

extirpated, or are candidates for such designation. The blue list

includes species not immediately threatened but of concern because of

sensitivity to human activities or natural events. The yellow list

includes all species not included on the red or blue lists.

• Risk categories include the following:

• Extinct—a species that no longer exists.

• Extirpated—a species that no longer exists in the wild in British

Columbia but occurs elsewhere.

• Endangered—a species facing imminent extirpation or extinction

from British Columbia.

• Threatened—a species that is likely to become endangered if

limiting factors are not reversed.

• Vulnerable—a species of special concern because of

characteristics that make it particularly sensitive to human

activities or natural events.

• Not at Risk—a species that has been evaluated and found to be not

at risk.

• Indeterminate—a species for which there is insufficient scientific

information to support a determination of status.
Enclosure IV

Page 35 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

• Recovery plans are to be completed within 2 years of listing for

threatened species, and within 1 year for endangered species, and are

generally reviewed/revised every 5 years.
Enclosure V

Page 36 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

Overview of Species-Specific Information

To identify the United States and Canadian efforts for protecting, monitoring, and

facilitating the eventual recovery of four transboundary species listed as threatened

or endangered in the United States, we spoke with wildlife officials in the Provinces

of Alberta and British Columbia and the four Fish and Wildlife Service recovery

coordinators for the bull trout, grizzly bear, marbled murrelet, and woodland caribou.

We discussed the transboundary ranges of the species, the special designation

afforded the species by these governmental units, the threats to the species, the types

of data collected to monitor the impacts on and the population trends of the species,

the recovery and protection activities undertaken, and the coordination and

cooperative efforts between these entities.

Presented below is an overview of the results of these discussions. In addition, we

have included maps to provide the reader with an overview of the general

geographical locations that transboundary populations of these species currently

inhabit. The maps are intended only to provide the reader with a general reference to

the locations we are discussing. The species’ historic ranges are not indicated, nor

are the maps drawn to scale. Also, while the species-specific information is not

intended to be all-inclusive, it serves to demonstrate that wildlife officials in both

countries engage in similar activities and programs aimed at the eventual recovery of

these four species, and that they face similar obstacles in accomplishing these goals.
Enclosure V

Page 37 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

Bull Trout

Figure 1: Bull Trout’s Transboundary Range

Source: GAO.

Status Listing

United States Threatened

Government of Canada Not assessed

Province of Alberta Special concern

Province of British Columbia Vulnerable
Enclosure V

Page 38 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

Threats to the Species

• Introduction of nonnative species results in predation, competition,

displacement, and interbreeding.

• Habitat fragmentation caused by road building, culverts, dams, and/or

weirs potentially resulting in the genetic isolation of the fish population.

• Habitat degradation and effects on water quality caused by dams and

hydroelectric operations; dewatering of streams for irrigation purposes;

and grazing, mining, legacy effects of lumbering practices, and road

development.

• Legal and illegal fishing and increased accessibility to habitat by fishermen

using available roads.

Data Collected and Used to Monitor Species Population

• Measuring population census, population trends, and range of habitat—

data on redd (nests) counts, counts of fish at fish fences and by electro

fishing and snorkeling surveys; monitoring of tagged fish, and tracking of

implanted fish with radio telemetry; DNA analysis to assess species

identification and genetic classification; and quality and quantity of habitat.

• Mortality factors—number of fish killed by environmental occurrences,

number of legal fish harvested (creel counts); and law enforcement data on

fish illegally harvested.

Efforts to Manage Species

• Recovery and protection activities—establish zero-take limits and catchand release requirements; repair or redesign culverts, dams, and weirs;

modify dam operations to allow for improved fish passage; redesign

irrigation mechanisms; increase stream buffers to reduce siltation and

lower water temperature; restrict the placement of forest roads to reduce

access by fishermen; establish temporary seasonal road closures, stream

closures, and/or adjust open season dates to protect bull trout breeding

populations; restrict types of gear or bait used; watershed restoration

activities such as restoring physical habitat and nutrient levels; and public

outreach and education to foster efforts for protection of the species and

the habitat.

• Coordination activities—British Columbia, Alberta, and Parks Canada

participate on U.S. recovery teams; joint U.S. and Canadian research such

as that being sponsored by Trout Unlimited (a group that focuses on trout

conservation), the Bonneville Power Administration, and the Bureau of

Reclamation; international symposiums resulting in documents dealing
Enclosure V

Page 39 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

with international ecology and management of the bull trout; cooperative

monitoring programs; joint workshops on monitoring and evaluation; and

cooperation and communications at the technical level.

Obstacles to Assessment Efforts

• Inclement weather and instream conditions limit year-round data

collection.

• Number of staff available to monitor is limited compared to the significant

number of streams and number of distinct bull trout populations.

• Funding.
Enclosure V

Page 40 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

Grizzly Bear

Figure 2: Grizzly Bear’s Transboundary Range

Source: GAO.

Status Listing

United States Threatened

Government of Canada Special concern

Province of Alberta Under review

Province of British Columbia Special concern

Threats to the Species

• Habitat degradation caused by mining, forestry, and agricultural practices.

• Habitat fragmentation caused by residential, commercial, and

transportation development.

• Low reproductive rate.
Enclosure V

Page 41 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

• Human activities—illegal hunting, recreation.

Data Collected and Used to Monitor Species Population

• Population estimates—credible bear sightings, DNA population inventories

and radio-telemetry-based research, and annual sow with cub count.

• Population trends—data from radio-collars looking for survivorship, and

reproductive rates.

• Mortality factors—number of bears killed by autos or trains, harvested

legally (hunting) or illegally (poaching), destruction of problem bears,

specimens found dead.

• Species’ response to habitat changes—research on the effects of harvesting

and road building, DNA analysis to measure mobility within the species’

range, data from radio- and global-positioning satellite collars.

Efforts to Manage Species

• Recovery and protection activities—community outreach and educational

programs; elimination of, or restrictions on, hunting; identification,

preservation, and protection of critical habitat; modification of forest plans

to protect habitat; and modification of physical barriers.

• Coordination activities—joint participation in both U.S. and British

Columbia recovery teams; joint participation in technical committees—

such as the Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee, the Rocky Mountain

Grizzly Bear Planning Committee, or the Grizzly Bear Scientific Advisory

Committee; joint research and shared data; joint habitat management

mapping efforts; and the Province of British Columbia’s augmenting the

U.S. population of grizzlies.

Obstacles to Assessment Efforts

• Limited funding and staff availability within agencies.

• Solitary species make opportunity for sightings difficult.

• Collars and collaring activities are expensive.

• Annual hibernation limits seasonal window for tracking and monitoring.
Enclosure V

Page 42 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

Marbled Murrelet

Figure 3: Marbled Murrelet’s Range

Source: GAO.

Status Listing

United States Threatened

Government of Canada Threatened

Province of Alberta Not applicable

Province of British Columbia Threatened

Threats to the Species

• Habitat losses and fragmentation caused by harvesting of old growth

timber and fires. Existing trees may take more than 100 years to become

old growth (old growth being trees 140 to 250+ years old).
Enclosure V

Page 43 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

• Nest predation by crows, jays, ravens, squirrels, and mice.

• Oil spills—major occurrences.

• Entanglement in fishing nets while searching for food.

• Low reproductive rate.

Data Collected and Used to Monitor Species Population

• Population census and trends—“at sea” bird counts; marine radar counts;

field surveys to determine habitat usage; capturing and banding to measure

adult survival and to track movement; monitoring habitat and nesting use;

developing habitat maps from satellite images and forest cover maps; and

radio telemetry to monitor habitat use, nesting success, and movement.

• Mortality—observer surveys to determine number of birds caught in fishing

nets, number of birds killed in major oil spills, and number of eggs or

young found dead on the ground.

Efforts to Manage Species

• Recovery and protection activities—interagency implementation of the

Pacific Northwest Forest Plan; establishing wildlife habitat protection

measures in known nesting areas; modifying fishing nets to reduce

entanglements; outlawing monofilament fishing nets in British Columbia;

exchanging lands to protect habitat; Canadian timber purchasers

voluntarily deferring the harvesting of old growth timber; encouraging use

of habitat conservation plans; excluding net fishing in key murrelet

concentration areas in the Puget Sound; and considering habitat in land use

planning activities.

• Cooperative activities—joint participation in the Pacific Seabird Group and

its Marbled Murrelet Technical Committee; international agreement on gill

net fishers to minimize the number of birds caught in fishing nets; joint oil

spill strategy to respond to spills; collaborative research efforts; annual and

ad hoc workshops; informal communications to share program and

research information; interagency teams to assess effectiveness

monitoring; changing management actions at national and state parks—for

example, changing the timing of operations, and finding better ways to

manage garbage; using different silvicultural techniques to accelerate

habitat growth; and the use of Pacific Seabird Group protocols for bird

counts in forest surveys to better ensure the collection of reliable and

consistent data.
Enclosure V

Page 44 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

Obstacles to Assessment Efforts

• Evasive species make it difficult to track because they travel at dawn and

dusk.

• Individual nesting places difficult to locate because they are located high

on a limb in old growth forests.

• Lack of scientific evidence on the extent of north/south migration and

whether the species migrates across the border.

• Tagged birds may not fly inland to nest.

• Downsizing and reduced funding have decreased amount of research and

increased the difficulty of obtaining implementation funding and attracting

expertise.
Enclosure V

Page 45 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

Woodland Caribou

Figure 4: Woodland Caribou’s Transboundary Range

Source: GAO.

Status Listing

United States Endangered

Government of Canada Threateneda

Province of Alberta Threatenedb

Province of British Columbia Threatened

a

The government of Canada classifies the Southern Mountain population as “threatened” and the Northern

Mountain National Ecological Area population as “special concern.” The Southern Mountain National Ecological

Area population includes the herd that is transboundary.

b

Alberta does not share transboundary populations with the United States. The province’s populations of

concern are shared with British Columbia.
Enclosure V

Page 46 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

Threats to the Species

• Predation by cougars, potential threats by bears.

• Winter recreation—snowmobiles and helicopter skiing.

• Habitat degradation—cumulative effects of historical timber harvests and

fire, logging on state and private lands, increased recreational access

provided by forest road construction.

• Habitat fragmentation—roads and highways/timber harvests/wildfires.

• Poaching/accidental killings.

• Weather conditions potentially reduce food sources.

Data Collected and Used to Monitor Species Population

• Population census and population trends—data from radio collars and

aerial sightings.

• Mortality factors—data from radio collars, law enforcement data on

poaching, vehicle fatalities, specimens found dead.

Efforts to Manage Species

• Recovery and protection activities—predator management through white

tail deer and cougar harvests, guidelines for protecting and managing

caribou habitat to be considered in land use planning, hunting of caribou

herds prohibited and hunting seasons for other species may be closed in

caribou habitat to prevent accidental shootings, establishing park and

wildlife management recovery areas in caribou habitat recovery areas,

voluntary road closures to limit access to back country recreation and

legislative closures implemented where necessary, restrictions on

commercial recreation enterprises; reward systems for reporting poachers;

and community outreach and hunter education programs.

• Coordination activities—Joint U.S./Canadian representation on the

International Woodland Caribou Recovery Team, which meets

semiannually and develops and implements recovery actions for the

transboundary population; joint U.S./Canadian participation on the

International Mountain Caribou Technical Committee which was

established as an international multiagency group of researchers,

biologists, resource managers, industry representatives, and other

concerned parties interested in recovering transboundary and South

Purcell populations; the sharing of technical information as needed and at

semiannual meetings and the sharing of enforcement information; the
Enclosure V

Page 47 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

undertaking of joint recreation management planning and strategies; states

conduct aerial monitoring using Endangered Species Act funding and share

information with the Fish and Wildlife Service and British Columbia; the

exchanging of U.S. Forest Service land to protect caribou habitat; joint

predator/prey research and management practices; and transplant efforts

by Canada to supplement the U.S. caribou population.

Obstacles to Assessment Efforts

• Weather conditions affect ability to conduct population census by aerial

monitoring.

• Differing public opinions on forest management and uses versus protection

of the species.

• Funding.
Enclosure VI

Page 48 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

The United States/Canada Softwood Lumber Agreement expired in March 2001. As

part of the preparation process for renegotiating the agreement, the U.S. Trade

Representative requested public comment on softwood lumber trade issues between

the United States and Canada and on Canadian softwood lumbering practices. The

comments received included allegations that Canadian lumbering and forestry

practices were affecting animal species with U.S./Canadian ranges that are listed as

threatened or endangered in the United States. To consider these comments as well

as to provide the U.S. Trade Representative with useful information in the

renegotiations, the Department of the Interior, with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s

assistance, prepared a conservation status report on selected species that may be

affected by the new agreement. The status report presented summaries of

information on eight transboundary species and reached preliminary conclusions of

potential impact on four species.

We reviewed the information and the process that Interior used to develop the

January 2001 report, and to provide updated information concerning several specific

transboundary species. Specifically, we describe (1) the supporting information that

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service used, and the process it followed when compiling

its information for the Department of the Interior’s January 2001 conservation status

report on selected threatened or endangered species with U.S./Canada ranges; and

(2) existing U.S. and Canadian efforts aimed at protecting, monitoring, and

facilitating the eventual recovery of four transboundary species—the bull trout,

grizzly bear, marbled murrelet, and woodland caribou—listed as threatened or

endangered in the United States.

Department of the Interior’s January 2001 Report for the U.S. Trade

Representative

To determine what information FWS used when assisting the Department of the

Interior to prepare the January 2001 report, we spoke with the FWS official who

compiled FWS’ input for the report and reviewed recovery plans, Federal Register

species listings, and species background materials. We traced the content of the

January report for the four species back to the respective recovery plans or listing

documents and discussed the other sources of information not readily identified in

the recovery plans or listing documents with the FWS official. To determine whether

the content of the January 2001 report generally reflected the current status of the

four species, we reviewed the report with the four species recovery coordinators and

discussed whether more recent information should have been included.

To determine whether the January 2001 report considered information external to

FWS, we reviewed the public comments received by the U.S. Trade Representative

relative to the U.S./Canada Softwood Lumber Trade Agreement and discussed

whether the FWS official considered these comments in compiling the report. In

addition, we contacted representatives from environmental organizations and

industry associations to determine whether they were aware of studies that existed

Scope and Methodology
Enclosure VI

Page 49 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

when the FWS compiled the January 2001 report that assessed the impacts of

Canadian lumber practices on the U.S. populations of the four transboundary species.

The organizations provided us with some known studies, which we discussed with

the FWS official. We discussed with the FWS official whether the information

contained in these studies had been considered when compiling the January 2001

report or if the consideration of this information would have changed the report’s

content or focus.

To determine the process that FWS and Interior followed when compiling the

January 2001 conservation status report, we met with the Interior and FWS officials

involved in preparing the report, obtained documents relating to the development of

the report, and developed a timeline of the tasks and activities involved in producing

the report for the U.S. Trade Representative.

U.S./Canadian Efforts to Protect, Monitor, and Recover Four Transboundary

Species

To determine the U.S. efforts to protect, monitor, and recover the four transboundary

species, we met with FWS regional officials and recovery coordinators responsible

for the bull trout, grizzly bear, marbled murrelet, and woodland caribou. To

determine the Canadian efforts, we met with federal and provincial fish and wildlife

officials in Alberta and British Columbia involved with the four species. Specifically,

we met with representatives of the federal Canadian Wildlife Service and Parks

Canada; Alberta provincial representatives of the Fish and Wildlife Division,

Sustainable Resource Development; and British Columbia provincial representatives

of the (1) Biodiversity Branch, Ministry of Water, Land, and Air Protection;

(2) Ministry of Forests; and (3) Conservation Data Centre.

From both the U.S. and Canadian officials, we obtained information on the pertinent

laws, agreements, and processes affecting their programs undertaken to protect and

recover the various species. In addition, we obtained general background on the

respective species and obtained evaluative and monitoring data. Specifically, for

each species, we determined the

• transboundary range of the U.S./Canadian populations,

• special designation afforded the species,

• threats to the species,

• types of data collected and used to establish and monitor baseline

population data and trends,

• types of programs or activities undertaken to protect and recover the

species,

• coordination activities between the United States and Canada, and
Enclosure VI

Page 50 GAO-03-211R Impact on Transboundary Species

• obstacles faced by the governmental units in assessing and monitoring the

species.

Data Limitations

While the above information reflects a broad perspective of U.S. and Canadian fish

and wildlife operations, we did not undertake a detailed assessment of program

implementation on either side of the border.

In addition, in the species-specific information in enclosure V, we included maps to

provide the reader with a general geographical reference for the transboundary

ranges that these species currently inhabit. The maps are intended only to provide the

reader with a general reference to the locations we are discussing. The historic

ranges are not included nor are the maps fully drawn to scale.

Finally, we included the marbled murrlet in our assessment despite the fact that

scientific evidence is unavailable to support that the species is truly transmigratory.

As such, the map for the marbled murrelet depicts its entire range rather than a

transboundary range as was done with the other species.

(360172)