Transboundary Species: Potential Impact to Species (31-OCT-02,	 
GAO-03-211R).							 
                                                                 
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 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. GAO  
reviewed the FWS' preliminary conclusions and found that, in	 
compiling the information for the Department of the Interior's	 
2001 conservation report for the U.S. Trade Representative, FWS  
relied chiefly on previously published material and internal	 
agency documents, such as individual species recovery plans,	 
Federal Register listing information, other administrative	 
records, and public comments received. The report underestimates 
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. 
The report also 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.							 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-03-211R					        
    ACCNO:   A05438						        
  TITLE:     Transboundary Species: Potential Impact to Species       
     DATE:   10/31/2002 
  SUBJECT:   Endangered species 				 
	     International agreements				 
	     International trade regulation			 
	     Wildlife conservation				 
	     Canada						 
	     United States/Canada Softwood Lumber		 
	     Agreement						 
                                                                 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Product.                                                 **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-03-211R

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

GAO- 03- 211R Impact on Transboundary Species Page 2 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);

GAO- 03- 211R Impact on Transboundary Species Page 3

 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.

GAO- 03- 211R Impact on Transboundary Species Page 4 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4

Scope and Methodology (continued)

 Contacted representatives from environmental organizations and industry
associations and reviewed documents provided.

Enclosure I

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

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

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

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

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

7

Compiling the January 2001 Report

Enclosure I

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

15

U. S. and Canadian Efforts to Protect, Monitor, and Recover

Transboundary Species

Enclosure I

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

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

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

17

Special Designation of Species

Threatened Threatened b Threatened a Endangered Woodland caribou

a The 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. b Alberta does not share transboundary populations with
the United States. The provinces* populations of concern are shared with

British Columbia. Threatened (Not applicable) Threatened Threatened
Marbled murrelet

Special concern (Under review) Special concern Threatened Grizzly bear
Vulnerable Special concern (Not assessed) Threatened Bull trout

British Columbia Alberta Government of

Canada United States Species

Enclosure I

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 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

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

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

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

 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 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

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

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

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

 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

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

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

Woodland Caribou

Figure 4: Woodland Caribou*s Transboundary Range

Source: GAO.

Status Listing

United States Endangered Government of Canada Threatened a Province of
Alberta Threatened b 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

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

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

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

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

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

 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)
*** End of document. ***