Search

Search Results

• 31. [Article] Report of International Coastal Atlas Network Workshop 4: Formalizing the Network, Engaging the Mediterranean

  From November 16 to 20, 2009, the International Coastal Atlas Network (ICAN) held a workshop on “Formalizing the Network, Engaging the Mediterranean” at the Adriatico Guest House of the UNESCO International ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Report of International Coastal Atlas Network Workshop 4: Formalizing the Network, Engaging the Mediterranean Author: Dwyer, Ned, Kopke, Kathrin, Wright, Dawn, O'Dea, Liz From November 16 to 20, 2009, the International Coastal Atlas Network (ICAN) held a workshop on “Formalizing the Network, Engaging the Mediterranean” at the Adriatico Guest House of the UNESCO International Centre for Theoretical Physics in Trieste, Italy. The workshop (aka “ICAN 4”) engaged 32 participants from 12 countries, representing 26 organizations and multiple areas of scientific and technical expertise. This meeting was a follow-up to the successful 2008 workshop on “Federated Coastal Atlases: Building the Interoperable Approach” (aka “ICAN 3”) held in Copenhagen, Denmark, as well as the 2007 workshop on “Coastal Atlas Interoperability” (aka “ICAN 2” in Corvallis, Oregon, USA) and the 2006 meeting “Potentials and Limitations of Coastal Web Atlases” (aka “ICAN 1” in Cork, Ireland). ICAN 3 continued the momentum by identifying the additional opportunities for partnering on coastal web atlas development throughout Europe, demonstrating the atlas interoperability prototype to the European Environment Agency and its many partners, and initiating the development of a long-term strategy and governance model for ICAN. ICAN 2 examined best practices for achieving interoperability between atlases, and led to the design of a demonstration interoperability prototype using the metadata catalogues of two atlases. ICAN 1 examined state-of-the-art developments in coastal web atlases (CWAs) from Europe and the U.S., shared several case studies and lessons learned, and established key issues and recommendations related to the design, data requirements, technology and institutional capacity needed for these atlases. At the conclusion of ICAN 3 it was abundantly clear that ICAN had grown from a simple idea to the cusp of a formal virtual organization, which had captured the interest of the European Environment Agency (EEA), the European Commission, UNESCO, and several government agencies, companies, non-governmental organizations, and universities. However, much more work needed to be accomplished. Therefore, the activities of ICAN 4 included:  Discussions of final implementation structures for governance (including formal procedures for receiving new members), technical activities, and continued identification of funding opportunities, so that ICAN can formally incorporate as a virtual organization (aka “community of practice”).  Presentations on emerging atlases in European countries (especially the Mediterranean) and beyond that are making themselves relevant through policy, environmental and socio-economic indicator work and related themes.  Continued progress on our ontology and semantic interoperability work, with an eye also toward articulating the benefits of semantic interoperability at a broader scale to non-specialists. In this we look forward to the advice and assistance of MMI and SeaDataNet, as well as to the new NETMAR (Open Service Network for Marine Environmental Data) initiative, which has already developed conceptual framework documents in this area. To this end, we also: o Held a small “workshop within a workshop” for atlas administrators on how to become a new node in interoperability prototype. o Initiated strategies on making further improvements to all those nodes (according to the Shared Environmental Information Systems (SEIS) principles of sharing information for multiple purposes, using data and systems that are accessible and interoperable). o Facilitated further work on partnerships, infrastructure and data exchange formats, all with the overall objective of enabling the nodes to share and communicate with each other, avoid duplication, and streamline information management. Presentations and discussion of user issues, including better knowledge of our atlas users, their needs, and on continued inventory, assessment, and evaluation of atlases. To this end, we discussed as part of a small “workshop within a workshop” how to improve the functionality of CWAs for general users, especially as the technology continues to change.  Small group meetings on potential funding opportunities on both sides of the Atlantic (European Union, US National Science Foundation and government agencies) in order to continue the work of ICAN.  Initiation of plans for a major ICAN presence at Littoral 2010 in London (European ICAN partners), as well as a standalone ICAN Americas meeting in Wisconsin, USA. In addition, the ICAN workshop took place around a two-day Workshop on Maritime and Coastal Information Systems, organised by the EEA’s Environmental Information and Observation Network (EIONET), which was open to ICAN 4 attendees as well. The main objective of this meeting was to inform the many participating countries of the EIONET National Reference Centre (NRC) network and to allow for a first exchange of views on scope and roles in the new formation for this entity. Four participants of ICAN 4 were invited to give presentations at the EEA/EIONET workshop, which allowed EEA/EIONET to explore collaboration opportunities as a result of ICAN’s emergence. The US National Science Foundation (NSF) had originally awarded support for two ICAN workshops, so there will be a 5th international workshop (aka ICAN 5), at the headquarters of the UNESCO International Oceanographic Data and Information Exchange (IODE) in Oostende, Belgium, August 31 to September 2, 2011. IODE will co-host CoastGIS 2011 in Oostende immediately following ICAN 5. Objectives of ICAN 5 will include follow-up activities that we did not have time to accomplish at ICAN 4, including:  Continued progress on our ontology and semantic interoperability work, but with an eye also toward articulating the benefits of semantic interoperability at a broader scale, to non-specialists.  Continued engagement and servicing of users of coastal web atlases, and on continued inventory, assessment, and evaluation of atlases.  Revisiting the main recommendations of the ICAN 1, especially evaluating atlas impact, and developing analysis and decision-support tools in atlases.  Forming proposal teams and submissions to the next available and appropriate NSF and other grant competitions (e.g., NSF Partnerships for International Research and Education, NSF Community-Based Data Interoperability Networks, NOAA, European Framework Program, InterReg, and ESF ).  Exchanging lessons learned in spatial data infrastructure between the US, European INSPIRE and other national and regional efforts.  Continued implementation and improvement of new governance, strategic planning, and technical working groups. Title: Report of International Coastal Atlas Network Workshop 4: Formalizing the Network, Engaging the Mediterranean Author: Dwyer, Ned, Kopke, Kathrin, Wright, Dawn, O'Dea, Liz From November 16 to 20, 2009, the International Coastal Atlas Network (ICAN) held a workshop on “Formalizing the Network, Engaging the Mediterranean” at the Adriatico Guest House of the UNESCO International Centre for Theoretical Physics in Trieste, Italy. The workshop (aka “ICAN 4”) engaged 32 participants from 12 countries, representing 26 organizations and multiple areas of scientific and technical expertise. This meeting was a follow-up to the successful 2008 workshop on “Federated Coastal Atlases: Building the Interoperable Approach” (aka “ICAN 3”) held in Copenhagen, Denmark, as well as the 2007 workshop on “Coastal Atlas Interoperability” (aka “ICAN 2” in Corvallis, Oregon, USA) and the 2006 meeting “Potentials and Limitations of Coastal Web Atlases” (aka “ICAN 1” in Cork, Ireland). ICAN 3 continued the momentum by identifying the additional opportunities for partnering on coastal web atlas development throughout Europe, demonstrating the atlas interoperability prototype to the European Environment Agency and its many partners, and initiating the development of a long-term strategy and governance model for ICAN. ICAN 2 examined best practices for achieving interoperability between atlases, and led to the design of a demonstration interoperability prototype using the metadata catalogues of two atlases. ICAN 1 examined state-of-the-art developments in coastal web atlases (CWAs) from Europe and the U.S., shared several case studies and lessons learned, and established key issues and recommendations related to the design, data requirements, technology and institutional capacity needed for these atlases. At the conclusion of ICAN 3 it was abundantly clear that ICAN had grown from a simple idea to the cusp of a formal virtual organization, which had captured the interest of the European Environment Agency (EEA), the European Commission, UNESCO, and several government agencies, companies, non-governmental organizations, and universities. However, much more work needed to be accomplished. Therefore, the activities of ICAN 4 included:  Discussions of final implementation structures for governance (including formal procedures for receiving new members), technical activities, and continued identification of funding opportunities, so that ICAN can formally incorporate as a virtual organization (aka “community of practice”).  Presentations on emerging atlases in European countries (especially the Mediterranean) and beyond that are making themselves relevant through policy, environmental and socio-economic indicator work and related themes.  Continued progress on our ontology and semantic interoperability work, with an eye also toward articulating the benefits of semantic interoperability at a broader scale to non-specialists. In this we look forward to the advice and assistance of MMI and SeaDataNet, as well as to the new NETMAR (Open Service Network for Marine Environmental Data) initiative, which has already developed conceptual framework documents in this area. To this end, we also: o Held a small “workshop within a workshop” for atlas administrators on how to become a new node in interoperability prototype. o Initiated strategies on making further improvements to all those nodes (according to the Shared Environmental Information Systems (SEIS) principles of sharing information for multiple purposes, using data and systems that are accessible and interoperable). o Facilitated further work on partnerships, infrastructure and data exchange formats, all with the overall objective of enabling the nodes to share and communicate with each other, avoid duplication, and streamline information management. Presentations and discussion of user issues, including better knowledge of our atlas users, their needs, and on continued inventory, assessment, and evaluation of atlases. To this end, we discussed as part of a small “workshop within a workshop” how to improve the functionality of CWAs for general users, especially as the technology continues to change.  Small group meetings on potential funding opportunities on both sides of the Atlantic (European Union, US National Science Foundation and government agencies) in order to continue the work of ICAN.  Initiation of plans for a major ICAN presence at Littoral 2010 in London (European ICAN partners), as well as a standalone ICAN Americas meeting in Wisconsin, USA. In addition, the ICAN workshop took place around a two-day Workshop on Maritime and Coastal Information Systems, organised by the EEA’s Environmental Information and Observation Network (EIONET), which was open to ICAN 4 attendees as well. The main objective of this meeting was to inform the many participating countries of the EIONET National Reference Centre (NRC) network and to allow for a first exchange of views on scope and roles in the new formation for this entity. Four participants of ICAN 4 were invited to give presentations at the EEA/EIONET workshop, which allowed EEA/EIONET to explore collaboration opportunities as a result of ICAN’s emergence. The US National Science Foundation (NSF) had originally awarded support for two ICAN workshops, so there will be a 5th international workshop (aka ICAN 5), at the headquarters of the UNESCO International Oceanographic Data and Information Exchange (IODE) in Oostende, Belgium, August 31 to September 2, 2011. IODE will co-host CoastGIS 2011 in Oostende immediately following ICAN 5. Objectives of ICAN 5 will include follow-up activities that we did not have time to accomplish at ICAN 4, including:  Continued progress on our ontology and semantic interoperability work, but with an eye also toward articulating the benefits of semantic interoperability at a broader scale, to non-specialists.  Continued engagement and servicing of users of coastal web atlases, and on continued inventory, assessment, and evaluation of atlases.  Revisiting the main recommendations of the ICAN 1, especially evaluating atlas impact, and developing analysis and decision-support tools in atlases.  Forming proposal teams and submissions to the next available and appropriate NSF and other grant competitions (e.g., NSF Partnerships for International Research and Education, NSF Community-Based Data Interoperability Networks, NOAA, European Framework Program, InterReg, and ESF ).  Exchanging lessons learned in spatial data infrastructure between the US, European INSPIRE and other national and regional efforts.  Continued implementation and improvement of new governance, strategic planning, and technical working groups. Close

• 32. [Article] Breeding an open pollinated broccoli for organic production systems using participatory methods

  Organic agriculture is an important and growing sector of U.S. and world food production. Consumers are increasingly aware of and interested in the production practices and impacts associated with agriculture ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Breeding an open pollinated broccoli for organic production systems using participatory methods Author: McKenzie, Laurie R. Organic agriculture is an important and growing sector of U.S. and world food production. Consumers are increasingly aware of and interested in the production practices and impacts associated with agriculture and as such, are showing a preference for sustainably produced, raised, and harvested foods. In order to continue to meet the growing demand for organic produce, organic growers need cultivars that are optimally adapted to organic and low input conditions. Quality seed is the foundation of any functional and stable farming system. Unfortunately the lack of organically bred and produced seed is hindering the continued growth and success of organic farming. Meeting the needs of the organic sector has been a challenge for the seed industry; it is an industry that often doesn't understand the specific and unique requirements associated with the diversity of environmental and market demands of organic systems. However, organic farmers and the organic food systems they supply, require a robust organic seed system that is appropriately adapted to regional agronomic challenges and market needs, meets standards and regulations, and encompasses the social and ecological values of organic agriculture. One plausible approach to meeting the cultivar and seed needs of organic and low input production systems is through the use of participatory plant breeding (PPB). PPB is a collaborative approach for identifying and developing genetically diverse plant material and varieties involving partnerships among formal sector breeders and researchers, farmers, extension agents, educators, and end users. Participatory plant breeding fundamentally changes the way that formal breeding programs and farmers manage germplasm and plant genetic resources. Typically, formal breeding programs restrict access to germplasm and breeding materials and only supply farmers with finished varieties. In PPB, farmers are involved in the early stages of creation and evaluation of germplasm and breeding material, and stay engaged with the breeding process until new varieties are created. PPB is an excellent model for breeding specifically for organic systems because organic systems in developed countries have many similarities to low-input agricultural systems in the developing world. Some of these parallels include heterogeneous growing environments, a wide range of end uses and marketing strategies, lack of suitably adapted and/or derived varieties, lack of attention from the formal seed sector, and a reduced reliance on synthetic inputs (compared to conventional systems). Breeding for organic systems is a relatively young field and breeders in the formal sector do not have a good handle on what traits are important for robust production under organic conditions. Thus the opportunity to meld farmers' experience and knowledge with breeders' expertise is an effective way to breed for organic production systems. The purpose of this project was to investigate and explore the opportunities and challenges of organic plant breeding using participatory research methods. This research had three goals: 1) to develop an open pollinated broccoli with contemporary quality traits for organic production systems using participatory strategies; 2) to compare broccoli selections made by formally trained plant breeders and farmer breeders; and 3) to capture the stories and experiences of the formal breeders and farmer breeders involved with this broccoli material in order to contribute to the growing wealth of knowledge on collaborative and organic breeding work. The Oregon State University Vegetable Breeding Program made significant progress towards decreasing the variability of the broccoli project material through three successive years of modified half-sibling selections. Evaluations and selections were based more strongly on quality traits rather than soley on production traits such as yield. Although progress was incremental and statistically verified in only three out of the fifteen quality traits, we observed trends in the data indicating progress towards an increasingly uniform, stable, and reliable open pollinated broccoli with specific adaptation for organic production systems. There were very few differences between broccoli materials developed by formally trained plant breeders and farmer breeders. This was especially true for the three cultivars developed in the Pacific Northwest (PNW) (one in Washington and two in Oregon). The 'East Coast' population, which had been collaboratively selected by formal and farmer breeders in New York, expressed significantly distinct differences from the PNW materials. When the farmer breeder and formal breeder materials were pooled together and compared to pooled check cultivars they expressed significant differences for nearly all traits across all years. This demonstrated that all of the collaboratively developed open pollinated materials are distinctly different from the F1 hybrids currently available. Our work has demonstrated a few of the myriad of positive outcomes achievable with the use of participatory plant breeding for organic production systems. The participatory nature of this project resulted in increased confidence and feelings of empowerment for all involved. Both farmers and breeders felt their involvement was socially beneficial and widened their networking and seed community circles. The farmer-bred cultivar 'Solstice' is now available as a result of Jonathan Spero's work, and a cultivar tentatively named 'Benton' is about to be released for sale through Oregon State University. Our results agree with previous study findings that formal and farmer breeder selections are often not distinctly different; thus providing evidence for continuing to support the involvement and education of farmers in plant breeding, especially in reference to organic production systems. This study demonstrates the potential of collaboratively developed and farmer-bred cultivars to become viable and vibrant open pollinated alternatives to the current open pollinated cultivars on the market today. Title: Breeding an open pollinated broccoli for organic production systems using participatory methods Author: McKenzie, Laurie R. Organic agriculture is an important and growing sector of U.S. and world food production. Consumers are increasingly aware of and interested in the production practices and impacts associated with agriculture and as such, are showing a preference for sustainably produced, raised, and harvested foods. In order to continue to meet the growing demand for organic produce, organic growers need cultivars that are optimally adapted to organic and low input conditions. Quality seed is the foundation of any functional and stable farming system. Unfortunately the lack of organically bred and produced seed is hindering the continued growth and success of organic farming. Meeting the needs of the organic sector has been a challenge for the seed industry; it is an industry that often doesn't understand the specific and unique requirements associated with the diversity of environmental and market demands of organic systems. However, organic farmers and the organic food systems they supply, require a robust organic seed system that is appropriately adapted to regional agronomic challenges and market needs, meets standards and regulations, and encompasses the social and ecological values of organic agriculture. One plausible approach to meeting the cultivar and seed needs of organic and low input production systems is through the use of participatory plant breeding (PPB). PPB is a collaborative approach for identifying and developing genetically diverse plant material and varieties involving partnerships among formal sector breeders and researchers, farmers, extension agents, educators, and end users. Participatory plant breeding fundamentally changes the way that formal breeding programs and farmers manage germplasm and plant genetic resources. Typically, formal breeding programs restrict access to germplasm and breeding materials and only supply farmers with finished varieties. In PPB, farmers are involved in the early stages of creation and evaluation of germplasm and breeding material, and stay engaged with the breeding process until new varieties are created. PPB is an excellent model for breeding specifically for organic systems because organic systems in developed countries have many similarities to low-input agricultural systems in the developing world. Some of these parallels include heterogeneous growing environments, a wide range of end uses and marketing strategies, lack of suitably adapted and/or derived varieties, lack of attention from the formal seed sector, and a reduced reliance on synthetic inputs (compared to conventional systems). Breeding for organic systems is a relatively young field and breeders in the formal sector do not have a good handle on what traits are important for robust production under organic conditions. Thus the opportunity to meld farmers' experience and knowledge with breeders' expertise is an effective way to breed for organic production systems. The purpose of this project was to investigate and explore the opportunities and challenges of organic plant breeding using participatory research methods. This research had three goals: 1) to develop an open pollinated broccoli with contemporary quality traits for organic production systems using participatory strategies; 2) to compare broccoli selections made by formally trained plant breeders and farmer breeders; and 3) to capture the stories and experiences of the formal breeders and farmer breeders involved with this broccoli material in order to contribute to the growing wealth of knowledge on collaborative and organic breeding work. The Oregon State University Vegetable Breeding Program made significant progress towards decreasing the variability of the broccoli project material through three successive years of modified half-sibling selections. Evaluations and selections were based more strongly on quality traits rather than soley on production traits such as yield. Although progress was incremental and statistically verified in only three out of the fifteen quality traits, we observed trends in the data indicating progress towards an increasingly uniform, stable, and reliable open pollinated broccoli with specific adaptation for organic production systems. There were very few differences between broccoli materials developed by formally trained plant breeders and farmer breeders. This was especially true for the three cultivars developed in the Pacific Northwest (PNW) (one in Washington and two in Oregon). The 'East Coast' population, which had been collaboratively selected by formal and farmer breeders in New York, expressed significantly distinct differences from the PNW materials. When the farmer breeder and formal breeder materials were pooled together and compared to pooled check cultivars they expressed significant differences for nearly all traits across all years. This demonstrated that all of the collaboratively developed open pollinated materials are distinctly different from the F1 hybrids currently available. Our work has demonstrated a few of the myriad of positive outcomes achievable with the use of participatory plant breeding for organic production systems. The participatory nature of this project resulted in increased confidence and feelings of empowerment for all involved. Both farmers and breeders felt their involvement was socially beneficial and widened their networking and seed community circles. The farmer-bred cultivar 'Solstice' is now available as a result of Jonathan Spero's work, and a cultivar tentatively named 'Benton' is about to be released for sale through Oregon State University. Our results agree with previous study findings that formal and farmer breeder selections are often not distinctly different; thus providing evidence for continuing to support the involvement and education of farmers in plant breeding, especially in reference to organic production systems. This study demonstrates the potential of collaboratively developed and farmer-bred cultivars to become viable and vibrant open pollinated alternatives to the current open pollinated cultivars on the market today. Close

• 33. [Image] Making the ESA work better: implementing the 10 point plan - and beyond

  	19p.; ill.; Cover title; "June 1997"; "Reprint September 1998"; [Washington, D.C.]: Supt. of Docs., U.S. G.P.O., 1999
  	Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Making the ESA work better: implementing the 10 point plan - and beyond Year: 1998, 2006, 2005 19p.; ill.; Cover title; "June 1997"; "Reprint September 1998"; [Washington, D.C.]: Supt. of Docs., U.S. G.P.O., 1999 Title: Making the ESA work better: implementing the 10 point plan - and beyond Year: 1998, 2006, 2005 19p.; ill.; Cover title; "June 1997"; "Reprint September 1998"; [Washington, D.C.]: Supt. of Docs., U.S. G.P.O., 1999 Close

• 34. [Image] Endangered species consultation handbook : procedures for conducting consultation and conference activities under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act

  	EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (Act) [16 U.S.C. 1531 etseq.] outlines the procedures for Federal interagency cooperation to conserve Federally listed species and designated critical ...
  	Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Endangered species consultation handbook : procedures for conducting consultation and conference activities under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act Author: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Year: 1998, 2005 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (Act) [16 U.S.C. 1531 etseq.] outlines the procedures for Federal interagency cooperation to conserve Federally listed species and designated critical habitats. Proactive Conservation Efforts by Federal Agencies Section 7(a)(l) directs the Secretary (Secretary of the Interior/Secretary of Commerce) to review other programs administered by them and utilize such programs to further the purposes of the Act. It also directs all other Federal agencies to utilize their authorities in furtherance of the purposes of the Act by carrying out programs for the conservation of species listed pursuant to the Act. This section of the Act makes it clear that all Federal agencies should participate in the conservation and recovery of listed threatened and endangered species. Under this provision, Federal agencies often enter into partnerships and Memoranda of Understanding with the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) or the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for implementing and funding conservation agreements, management plans, and recovery plans developed for listed species. Biologists for the Services should encourage the development of these types of partnerships and planning efforts to develop pro-active approaches to listed species management. Avoiding Adverse Effects of Federal Actions Section 7(a)(2) states that each Federal agency shall, in consultation with the Secretary, insure that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat. In fulfilling these requirements, each agency must use the best scientific and commercial data available. This section of the Act defines the consultation process, which is further developed in regulations promulgated at 50 CFR ?402. The Handbook This handbook was primarily developed to aid FWS and NMFS biologists implementing the section 7 consultation process. The purpose of the handbook is to provide information and guidance on the various consultation processes outlined in the regulations. Additionally, the handbook will ensure consistent implementation of consultation procedures by those biologists responsible for carrying out section 7 activities. Chapters of the handbook deal with major consultation processes, including Informal, Formal, Emergency, and Special Consultations; and Conferences. Standardized language is provided for incorporation into Biological Opinion documents to achieve consistency and to ensure that all consultation documents are complete from a regulatory standpoint. Background information and example documents are provided in Appendices. Although primarily targeted towards employees of the Services, other groups participating in the consultation process, including other Federal agencies; State, local, and tribal governments; and private individuals, consultants, and industry groups should find the handbook helpful in explaining section 7 processes and providing examples of various types of consultations. This handbook will be updated periodically as new regulations and policies are developed affecting implementation of the section 7 regulations, or as new consultation or assessment techniques evolve, and as additional examples or graphics become available. The Washington Offices of the Services have the lead for preparation of the handbook. Regional offices are encouraged to develop example documents appropriate for their geographical area and individual situations, and to coordinate with other Federal and State agencies in distributing these documents. Consultation Framework Use of Sound Science An overriding factor in carrying out consultations should always be the use of the best available scientific and commercial data to make findings regarding the status of a listed species, the effects of a proposed action on the species or critical habitat, and the determination of jeopardy/no jeopardy to listed species or destruction or adverse modification/no destruction or adverse modification to designated critical habitats. The Services have jointly published a policy on Information Standards Under the Endangered Species Act [59 FR 34271 (July 1, 1994)]. This policy calls for review of all scientific and other information used by the Services to prepare biological opinions, incidental take statements, and biological assessments, to ensure that any information used by the Services to implement the Act is reliable, credible, and represents the best scientific and commercial data available. Flexibility and Innovation The section 7 process achieves greatest flexibility when coordination between all involved agencies and non-Federal representatives, and the Services, begins early. Often, proposed actions can be modified so there is no need for formal consultation. The Services should ensure that all information needed to make an informed decision is made available. It is particularly critical when formal consultation begins that all parties are fully involved in providing information and discussing project options. Although it is the responsibility of the Services to make the determination of jeopardy or destruction/adverse modification in the biological opinion, action agencies and applicants should be fully informed and involved in the development of Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives, Reasonable and Prudent Measures, and Terms and Conditions to minimize the impacts of incidental take. Biologists should be creative in problem solving and look for ways to conserve listed species while still accommodating project goals. Coordination The Services have a policy to ensure coordination with State Agencies for gathering information in implementing the consultation program. [59 FR 34274-34275 (July 1, 1994)] The Services have a joint policy on coordination with tribal governments. Secretarial Order #32306 (June 5, 1997) entitled "American Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act" recognizes that the consultation process should include input from affected tribal governments. State and tribal government biologists often have information available that is pertinent to the description of the action area or to the species of interest in the consultation. Shortening Timeframes Recently, the Services have been implementing measures to streamline consultation processes. Examples include projects reviewed under the Northwest Forest Plan and nationwide Timber Salvage Program. These procedures have been able to effectively shorten consultation timeframes without giving up any protection for listed species/designated critical habitats or the use and review of the best available information. This has been achieved through enhanced interagency coordination, development of guidelines for implementation of a larger program (i.e. timber salvage) which can tier to an individual project (timber sale), and by providing consultation simultaneously with project analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Biologists for the Services are encouraged to review examples of these streamlined consultations and to look for ways to incorporate streamlining techniques into other consultation procedures. Title: Endangered species consultation handbook : procedures for conducting consultation and conference activities under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act Author: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Year: 1998, 2005 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (Act) [16 U.S.C. 1531 etseq.] outlines the procedures for Federal interagency cooperation to conserve Federally listed species and designated critical habitats. Proactive Conservation Efforts by Federal Agencies Section 7(a)(l) directs the Secretary (Secretary of the Interior/Secretary of Commerce) to review other programs administered by them and utilize such programs to further the purposes of the Act. It also directs all other Federal agencies to utilize their authorities in furtherance of the purposes of the Act by carrying out programs for the conservation of species listed pursuant to the Act. This section of the Act makes it clear that all Federal agencies should participate in the conservation and recovery of listed threatened and endangered species. Under this provision, Federal agencies often enter into partnerships and Memoranda of Understanding with the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) or the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for implementing and funding conservation agreements, management plans, and recovery plans developed for listed species. Biologists for the Services should encourage the development of these types of partnerships and planning efforts to develop pro-active approaches to listed species management. Avoiding Adverse Effects of Federal Actions Section 7(a)(2) states that each Federal agency shall, in consultation with the Secretary, insure that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat. In fulfilling these requirements, each agency must use the best scientific and commercial data available. This section of the Act defines the consultation process, which is further developed in regulations promulgated at 50 CFR ?402. The Handbook This handbook was primarily developed to aid FWS and NMFS biologists implementing the section 7 consultation process. The purpose of the handbook is to provide information and guidance on the various consultation processes outlined in the regulations. Additionally, the handbook will ensure consistent implementation of consultation procedures by those biologists responsible for carrying out section 7 activities. Chapters of the handbook deal with major consultation processes, including Informal, Formal, Emergency, and Special Consultations; and Conferences. Standardized language is provided for incorporation into Biological Opinion documents to achieve consistency and to ensure that all consultation documents are complete from a regulatory standpoint. Background information and example documents are provided in Appendices. Although primarily targeted towards employees of the Services, other groups participating in the consultation process, including other Federal agencies; State, local, and tribal governments; and private individuals, consultants, and industry groups should find the handbook helpful in explaining section 7 processes and providing examples of various types of consultations. This handbook will be updated periodically as new regulations and policies are developed affecting implementation of the section 7 regulations, or as new consultation or assessment techniques evolve, and as additional examples or graphics become available. The Washington Offices of the Services have the lead for preparation of the handbook. Regional offices are encouraged to develop example documents appropriate for their geographical area and individual situations, and to coordinate with other Federal and State agencies in distributing these documents. Consultation Framework Use of Sound Science An overriding factor in carrying out consultations should always be the use of the best available scientific and commercial data to make findings regarding the status of a listed species, the effects of a proposed action on the species or critical habitat, and the determination of jeopardy/no jeopardy to listed species or destruction or adverse modification/no destruction or adverse modification to designated critical habitats. The Services have jointly published a policy on Information Standards Under the Endangered Species Act [59 FR 34271 (July 1, 1994)]. This policy calls for review of all scientific and other information used by the Services to prepare biological opinions, incidental take statements, and biological assessments, to ensure that any information used by the Services to implement the Act is reliable, credible, and represents the best scientific and commercial data available. Flexibility and Innovation The section 7 process achieves greatest flexibility when coordination between all involved agencies and non-Federal representatives, and the Services, begins early. Often, proposed actions can be modified so there is no need for formal consultation. The Services should ensure that all information needed to make an informed decision is made available. It is particularly critical when formal consultation begins that all parties are fully involved in providing information and discussing project options. Although it is the responsibility of the Services to make the determination of jeopardy or destruction/adverse modification in the biological opinion, action agencies and applicants should be fully informed and involved in the development of Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives, Reasonable and Prudent Measures, and Terms and Conditions to minimize the impacts of incidental take. Biologists should be creative in problem solving and look for ways to conserve listed species while still accommodating project goals. Coordination The Services have a policy to ensure coordination with State Agencies for gathering information in implementing the consultation program. [59 FR 34274-34275 (July 1, 1994)] The Services have a joint policy on coordination with tribal governments. Secretarial Order #32306 (June 5, 1997) entitled "American Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act" recognizes that the consultation process should include input from affected tribal governments. State and tribal government biologists often have information available that is pertinent to the description of the action area or to the species of interest in the consultation. Shortening Timeframes Recently, the Services have been implementing measures to streamline consultation processes. Examples include projects reviewed under the Northwest Forest Plan and nationwide Timber Salvage Program. These procedures have been able to effectively shorten consultation timeframes without giving up any protection for listed species/designated critical habitats or the use and review of the best available information. This has been achieved through enhanced interagency coordination, development of guidelines for implementation of a larger program (i.e. timber salvage) which can tier to an individual project (timber sale), and by providing consultation simultaneously with project analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Biologists for the Services are encouraged to review examples of these streamlined consultations and to look for ways to incorporate streamlining techniques into other consultation procedures. Close

• 35. [Image] Crater Lake March 1991 peer review of research program and draft report on studies of hydrothermal processes in Crater Lake Oregon: a report of field studies conducted in 1989 for the National Park Service

  	Caption title; Includes bibliographical references
  	Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Crater Lake March 1991 peer review of research program and draft report on studies of hydrothermal processes in Crater Lake Oregon: a report of field studies conducted in 1989 for the National Park Service Author: Goldman, Charles R. Year: 1991, 2009 Caption title; Includes bibliographical references Title: Crater Lake March 1991 peer review of research program and draft report on studies of hydrothermal processes in Crater Lake Oregon: a report of field studies conducted in 1989 for the National Park Service Author: Goldman, Charles R. Year: 1991, 2009 Caption title; Includes bibliographical references Close

• 36. [Image] The Water Report - Tribal water rights update

  	Only portions of issues of The Water Report are available in the Klamath Waters Digital Library. See the full report at http://www.thewaterreport.com/.
  	Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: The Water Report - Tribal water rights update Author: Envirotech Publications Year: 2006, 2008 Only portions of issues of The Water Report are available in the Klamath Waters Digital Library. See the full report at http://www.thewaterreport.com/. Title: The Water Report - Tribal water rights update Author: Envirotech Publications Year: 2006, 2008 Only portions of issues of The Water Report are available in the Klamath Waters Digital Library. See the full report at http://www.thewaterreport.com/. Close

• 37. [Image] Past, present and future activities being conducted in the Klamath River Basin related to the protection and recovery of fish and their habitat

  	"March 2003"
  	Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Past, present and future activities being conducted in the Klamath River Basin related to the protection and recovery of fish and their habitat Author: United States. National Marine Fisheries Service Year: 2003, 2005 "March 2003" Title: Past, present and future activities being conducted in the Klamath River Basin related to the protection and recovery of fish and their habitat Author: United States. National Marine Fisheries Service Year: 2003, 2005 "March 2003" Close

• 38. [Image] Western water supply : hearing before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, One Hundred Eighth Congress, second session, to receive testimony regarding water supply issues in the arid West, March 9, 2004

  	CONTENTS STATEMENTS Page American Farm Bureau Federation 26963 Bell, Craig, Executive Director, Western States Water Council 26945 Domenici, Hon. Pete V., U.S. Senator From New Mexico 2691 Gaibler, Floyd, ...
  	Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Western water supply : hearing before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, One Hundred Eighth Congress, second session, to receive testimony regarding water supply issues in the arid West, March 9, 2004 Author: United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Year: 2004, 2005 CONTENTS STATEMENTS Page American Farm Bureau Federation 26963 Bell, Craig, Executive Director, Western States Water Council 26945 Domenici, Hon. Pete V., U.S. Senator From New Mexico 2691 Gaibler, Floyd, Deputy Undersecretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services, Department of Agriculture 26932 Grisoli, Brigadier General William T., Commander, Northwestern Division, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 26918 Hall, Tex G., President, National Congress of American Indians, and Chair man, Mandan, Hidatsa and Arikara Nation 26950 Raley, Bennett, Assistant Secretary, Department of the Interior 2695 Uccellini, Dr. Louis, Director, National Centers for Environmental Prediction, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 26926 APPENDIX Responses to additional questions 2620 67 Title: Western water supply : hearing before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, One Hundred Eighth Congress, second session, to receive testimony regarding water supply issues in the arid West, March 9, 2004 Author: United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Year: 2004, 2005 CONTENTS STATEMENTS Page American Farm Bureau Federation 26963 Bell, Craig, Executive Director, Western States Water Council 26945 Domenici, Hon. Pete V., U.S. Senator From New Mexico 2691 Gaibler, Floyd, Deputy Undersecretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services, Department of Agriculture 26932 Grisoli, Brigadier General William T., Commander, Northwestern Division, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 26918 Hall, Tex G., President, National Congress of American Indians, and Chair man, Mandan, Hidatsa and Arikara Nation 26950 Raley, Bennett, Assistant Secretary, Department of the Interior 2695 Uccellini, Dr. Louis, Director, National Centers for Environmental Prediction, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 26926 APPENDIX Responses to additional questions 2620 67 Close

• 39. [Image] Scientific disagreement regarding coho salmon status under the ESA

  	Internal memo between staff of the National Marine Fisheries Service dated September 27, 1996 which summarizes the issues of scientific disagreement related to the listing of three coho salmon as an endangered ...
  	Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Scientific disagreement regarding coho salmon status under the ESA Author: Varanasi, Usha; Tillman, Michael Year: 1996, 2005 Internal memo between staff of the National Marine Fisheries Service dated September 27, 1996 which summarizes the issues of scientific disagreement related to the listing of three coho salmon as an endangered species Title: Scientific disagreement regarding coho salmon status under the ESA Author: Varanasi, Usha; Tillman, Michael Year: 1996, 2005 Internal memo between staff of the National Marine Fisheries Service dated September 27, 1996 which summarizes the issues of scientific disagreement related to the listing of three coho salmon as an endangered species Close

• 40. [Image] Klamath River Basin Conservation Area Restoration Program: limited assurance regarding the federal funding requirements: report to congressional requesters

  	Includes bibliographical references; "GAO-05-804"
  	Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Klamath River Basin Conservation Area Restoration Program: limited assurance regarding the federal funding requirements: report to congressional requesters Author: United States. Government Accountability Office Year: 2005, 2006 Includes bibliographical references; "GAO-05-804" Title: Klamath River Basin Conservation Area Restoration Program: limited assurance regarding the federal funding requirements: report to congressional requesters Author: United States. Government Accountability Office Year: 2005, 2006 Includes bibliographical references; "GAO-05-804" Close