1. The FWS-USGS Relationship Two Bureaus – One Mission Paul R. Schmidt Assistant Director Migratory Bird Program US Fish and Wildlife Service

2. Strategic Habitat Conservation (SHC) Why SHC and Why Now? Precursors: Landscape ecology is maturing as a discipline Advances in spatial data analysis technology Stimuli: Greater recognition of the magnitude of our mandate relative to our resources (it takes a lot of habitat to sustain populations) Greater emphasis on accountability oEfficiency in how we use our own funds oEffectiveness in influencing the actions of others

3. A few effective examples illustrated the potential of SHC LMVJV HAPETs More Efficient use of Service resources +Effective outreach to other agencies +The ability to affect policy +Greater partnership effectiveness Greater Migratory Bird Population Effects and are leading to expanded capacity GCJV CVJV PLJV RWBJV

4. SHC: Bridges the research-management gulf Is a form of Adaptive Resource Management at broad spatial scales

5. SHC: Bridges the research-management gulf Is a form of Adaptive Resource Management at broad spatial scales

6. SHC: Bridges the research-management gulf Is a form of Adaptive Resource Management at broad spatial scales SHC Most SHC Concepts: Are not exclusive to habitat conservation Are open-ended and are enable the integration of wildlife, water quality, flood abatement, and other environmental functions

7. SHC concepts were developed explicitly to guide the conservation of fish and wildlife populations by resource management agencies Management of habitat and human take are simply means of managing populations, but we can’t do it alone: “As the lead government agency responsible for the conservation of Federal trust species, the Service must no longer view its role as solely a manager of habitats and populations, but as a steward and purveyor of the biological foundation for fish and wildlife conservation.”

8. The Service and USGS An Example of Functional Mutualism The Biological Resource Division (BRD) works with others to provide the scientific understanding and technologies needed to support the sound management and conservation of our Nation's biological resources. The USFWS is the principle federal agency responsible conserving, protecting and enhancing fish, wildlife and plants for the continuing benefit of the American people.

9. The Service and USGS An Example of Functional Mutualism Needs greater science capacity to fully implement the SHC framework Needs management agencies like the Service to make their science capacity relevant

10. A Stronger Service-USGS Partnership Founded on SHC Partnership: A relationship between entities who, in a spirit of cooperation, agree to carry on an enterprise, each contributing to it by combining resources, knowledge or activities and sharing its outcomes in pursuit of a common set of goals and objectives. vs Client: Provider: One who purchases a product or service from a business or merchant. Someone who provides a service or commodity, usually for a fee.

11. A Stronger Service-USGS Partnership Founded on SHC There are many “science providers” available to the Service to meet our SHC needs: Universities Consulting firms etc. USGS is poised to be a partner by virtue of its mission of providing scientific and technical assistance to Federal resource management agencies.

12. A Stronger Service-USGS Partnership Service Expectations What the Service wants: A long-term working relationship between Service and USGS staff dedicated to SHC implementation at ecoregional scales; National and regional partnerships founded on a common set of biological objectives and thus information needs. What the Service doesn’t want: 1. Short-term provider-client relationships dictated by the needs of the moment and available funding; 2. USGS to assume all of the science and technical functions necessary to implement SHC.

13. Science is a body of knowledge and a method of discovery Both USGS and the Service are science agencies Both will take a hand in biological planning, conservation design, monitoring and research in a true Service-USGS partnership.

14. A long-term working relationship between Service and USGS staff dedicated to SHC implementation at ecoregional scales; National and regional partnerships founded on a common set of biological objectives and thus information needs. This is the essence of a national Service-USGS MOU agreed to by the USGS Executive Leadership Team in Joint Session in Reston, August, 2006 and in Anchorage, July, 2007. A Stronger Service-USGS Partnership Founded on SHC

15. What changes may you and your staff experience? 1.You and your staff will be doing more work with the Service; 2.Institutional barriers that tend to promote a provider- client relationship will begin to break down in favor of Service-USGS partnerships; 3.USGS scientists will be asked to participate with ecoregionally-based SHC teams on a dedicated basis; 4.The Service will ask for more access to USGS staff and resources at the same time we are building greater Service capacity for SHC – “what’s yours is mine and what’s mine is yours”; 5.Greater emphasis may be placed on cooperation with the Service in the USGS RGE process.