Review of Activities in 2001
The Ornithological Council is pleased to provide its member societies with
an overview of our activities over the past year.
Presented below are highlights, followed by details, of our major activities
and accomplishments. This report is not intended to be comprehensive, but
rather to give you an idea of the types of things we do on behalf of ornithology
and birds, and how we do it.More complete
reports are given in our monthly activity summaries, which will resume with
the March-April 2002 report.
David E. Blockstein, Ph.D., Chairman
Ellen Paul, Executive Director
Highlights
(a summary of the year's activities;
details
follow, starting on page 4)
Services to the ornithological community
Representing ornithology to decision makers
- permit issues
•
Several U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service permit issues took priority in 2001.
Among them were: the new National Wildlife Refuge System compatibility and
appropriate use regulations and policies; the revision of the regulations
on scientific collecting; and the pending rehabilitation regulations. In
addition, we pressed for issuance of the final general conservation permit,
the development of salvage permits, for the revival of the permits reform
team and for the establishment of a federal advisory committee. (see item
1a
)
•
OC succeeded in persuading the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Bird Banding
Lab (BBL) that the BBL’s proposed changes to banding policies were in need
of serious reconsideration (see item 1b
)
•
Our efforts to persuade the USDA/APHIS to rationalize import/transport
regulations pertaining to bird specimens and tissues intensified (see item
1c
)
• The OC submitted comments to the National Association of State Departments
of Agriculture (NASDA) regarding import procedures for animal tissue and specimens;
NASDA was preparing a report on the USDA’s import procedures for the safeguarding
of animal health (see item 1d
)
Representing ornithology to decision makers - animal welfare issues
•
OC was asked by the Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC) to review CCAC’s
draft Animal Care guidelines (see item 2a
)
• The AVMA issued new euthanasia guidelines that incorporated comments submitted
by OC with regard to the use of thoracic compression (see item
2b
)
• In an ongoing effort to persuade the authors of a revision to the IACUC
(Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee) Guidebook to include accurate
information about wildlife biology and birds, OC provided a second set of
comments as well as additional information for an appendix on the regulations
pertaining to wildlife research (see item 2c
)
• As a result of OC’s outreach to the IACUCs across the country, OC has been
consulted by a number of IACUC members and organizations providing instruction
to IACUCs (see item 2d
)
Representing ornithology to decision makers - research capacity and funding
issues
• OC continues to work for improved funding for ornithological research and
for the most effective use of the available funding (see item
3a
)
• OC Chair David Blockstein has been instrumental in the effort to find funding
for completion of the Caribbean and Mexican portions of the Waterbird Conservation
Plan (see item 3b
)
• For a second year, OC has participated in the USGS Listening Session and
has used this opportunity to champion the development of an ornithological
agenda that meets the needs of conservation planning and implementation efforts
(see item 3c
)
• OC took part in the development of the Department of the Interior’s strategic
plan (see item 3d
)
•
When the OC learned that the Smithsonian planned to close the Conservation
and Research Center and the Migratory Bird Center, OC helped organize a successful
protest by scientific societies (see item 3e
)
• At the end of the year, OC was instrumental in persuading the Bush Administration
to drop its plan to transfer base funding for the Smithsonian Tropical Research
Institute and the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center to the National
Science Foundation (see item 3f
)
Information services to and communication with the ornithological community
•
Fact sheet on the potential risk of West Nile Virus to researchers is in
preparation (see item 4a
)
•
Information on radio frequency assignments for wildlife telemetry within
the US and near and across the Mexican and Canadian borders is being compiled
(see item 4b
)
•
OC disseminates information to the ornithological community via its website
- BIRDNET - on a variety of listservs, and in the ornithological newsletter
(see item 4c
)
•OC receives many inquiries and requests for assistance from individual ornithologists,
usually pertaining to problems with permits or Institutional Animal Care and
Use Committees, but also on a wide variety of subjects (see item
4d
)
• The Portuguese translation of Guidelines to the Use of Wild Birds
in Research has been completed and posted on BIRDNET; a French translation
of Guidelines to the Use of Wild Birds in Research is planned (see
item 4e
)
Workshops and symposia
• At the request of the Cooper Ornithological Society, OC convened a symposium
on “Recent legislation, regulation, and litigation affecting avian conservation
and ornithological research” for the COS 2001 annual meeting (see item
5a
)
• Partners in Flight invited OC to convene a symposium at the 2002 PIF meeting,
to focus on new opportunities in bird conservation research (see item
5b
)
• OC’s proposal to the North American Ornithological Conference for a workshop
on the effect of the new National Wildlife Refuge System regulations on ornithological
research and opportunities for ornithological research on the refuges has
been accepted (see item 5c
)
•
OC has been asked to coordinate the development of joint resolution for the
North American Ornithological Conference (see item 6a
)
• OC has facilitated the AOU and Waterbird Society conservation committees’
review of the Double-Crested Cormorant management plan (see item
6b
)
Other services to ornithologists and member societies
•
Organizing the biannual meeting of the Society for Caribbean Ornithology
was one of the major efforts of the Ornithological Council in 2001 (see
item 7a
)
•
Helping to develop the capacity of member societies and ornithology in the
Caribbean and in Central and South America - With a second grant from
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, OC will undertake a variety of small
projects to help develop the capacity of CIPAMEX and the Society of Caribbean
Ornithology to train ornithologists and to engage in avian conservation activities
(see item 7b
)
Providing scientific information about birds
To government agencies and other decision-makers
• OC coordinated the peer review process for research proposals submitted
to the Communications Tower Working Group (see item 8a
)
•
A bibliography on aircraft overflight was provided to the White House Office
of Science and Technology Policy (see item 8b
)
To conservation organizations and the general public
• OC responds to numerous requests for information on a variety of issues
(see item 8c
)
• The Bird Issue Brief on endocrine disruptors was completed and has been
posted on BIRDNET; a new bird issue brief on scientific collecting is in preparation
(see item 8d
)
• Two new Board members join OC
• New contractual arrangement made with OC Executive Director
• Changes to OC bylaws
• Annual budget, FY01-02
Services to the ornithological community
Representing ornithology to decision makers
- permit issues
1a) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service permit issues
•National Wildlife Refuge System compatibility and appropriate use regulations
- Under the 1998 National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act, the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service was required to codify its policies on the appropriate
uses of the refuges. By law, there are six priority uses, all involving wildlife-dependent
public activities such as hunting and wildlife viewing. The appropriate use
regulations, of course, would affect the ability of scientists to obtain
permission to conduct research on the refuges. Therefore, OC carefully assessed
the proposed regulations and filed comments to the USFWS, expressing concern
that the regulations would, in fact, pose an undue barrier to research on
the refuges. We suggested several changes that would remove these barriers,
and also stressed that, “The goal, in our view, should be to establish a
strong partnership between the NWRS and the research community.”
To reach this goal, OC has embarked on a project to work with USFWS Research
Coordinator Reid Goforth and the Division of Refuges to develop a partnership
between the USFWS and the academic research community. We have been working
together to develop ways to bring much-needed researchers to the wildlife
refuges. In particular, we are looking for ways to remove the very substantial
barriers that the compatibility and appropriate use regulations pose. Ideas
under consideration include a cooperative agreement between the researcher
and the refuge that would entail technical assistance and/or information transfer
to the refuge. Should the researcher enter into such an agreement, then the
research would be tantamount to research management activity (the standard
that applies to refuge?identified research conducted by government scientists)
which would then bypass the burdensome regulations. Another possibility would
entail involvement by the research community with the refuges on an ongoing
basis, or what might be called “adopt-a-refuge.” Some refuges have established
relationships with local universities, and, not surprisingly, researchers
affiliated with those universities seem to have ready access to the refuges
for their research projects. This could be in the form of occasional seminars,
a consultation process, or other outreach by researchers to refuges in their
area.
These USFWS appropriate use regulations - which have not yet been finalized
- and the partnership between the refuges and non-government researchers will
be the subject of a roundtable discussion convened by OC at the North American
Ornithological Conference in September.
• Scientific collecting permits - For years, OC has been discussing changes
to the scientific collecting permit regulations with the USFWS. Led by Dick
Banks, one of OC’s founders and esteemed advisor to the OC Board, and Executive
Director Ellen Paul, OC has provided the USFWS with information about
the value of scientific collecting and the lack of population-level effects
of this activity with USFWS permit specialists. Apparently, the only barrier
to the revision of the scientific collecting permit regulation is the staffing
shorting in the USFWS Division of Migratory Bird Management. That office
has twice listed the revision of this regulation on its regulatory agenda
for 2001, but apparently has yet to actually draft the revision.
• Rehabilitation regulations - Until now, bird rehabilitation permits were
issued under the general permit provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
regulations, with extensive permit conditions attached to each permit. In
late 2001, the USFWS issued a proposed rehabilitation permit regulation. OC
has commented on this proposed regulation, suggesting that the permit holders
be required to donate dead birds and bird parts to museums.
• General conservation permits - this regulation has been pending since 1998.
OC submitted comments on the scoping notice and on the proposed regulation.
OC has persistently urged the USFWS to finalize and implement this regulation,
which is intended to streamline the permit process for conservation and research
projects that require multiple permits.
•
Salvage regulations - the USFWS has never issued regulations governing the
salvage of dead birds. As a result, there is concern on the part of the museum
community that many dead birds are not salvaged, or are not donated to research
institutions and teaching collections. OC has urged the USFWS to promulgate
regulations for salvage. We have proposed some procedures and safeguards
that would allow for individuals without permits to salvage dead birds and
donate them to permit holders or institutions exempt from permit requirements.
The Service has an informal policy (dated 1991) to this effect, but by failing
to formalize and make public the policy, it is not effective. OC has offered
to work with the Service to develop a salvage policy that serves to protect
migratory birds against illegal collection while encouraging the lawful use
of salvaged birds for valuable research.
• Permanent, ongoing permits advisory team needed - OC also continues to press
the USFWS to establish a Federal Advisory Committee on permits, to give the
regulated community an opportunity to provide continued oversight and input
to the permitting divisions of the agency. This will be a key topic
of discussion when OC Chair David Blockstein and Executive Director Ellen
Paul meet with Thomas and other permitting officials later this month.
1b) Proposed changes in banding policies go back to the drawing board
as a result of OC’s diligence - OC succeeded in persuading the U.S. Geological
Survey and the U.S. Bird Banding Lab (BBL) that the BBL’s proposed changes
to banding policies were in need of serious reconsideration. In April, the
BBL advised us that they realized that they could have been far more effective
in the way we communicated these to banders.
They also recognized that an in-depth review of the merits of the proposed
changes was warranted. Saying that, “we are now considering a number of both
elucidatory and substantive changes in our proposals or preliminary decisions
on permitting policies and procedures,” the BBL advised us that the changes
that might be made would need internal review and review by the USFWS, and
that where necessary, the proposed changes would be made available for public
comment in accordance with legal requirements. OC also asked the BBL to establish
a Federal Advisory Committee, but the BBL declined to do so. They instead
suggested an informal system of meetings with constituent groups, which the
OC is trying to arrange with the North American Banding Council and other
intere