Document Repository

Sommaire
Créé en réponse au déclin des populations de sauvagine, le Plan nord-américain de gestion de la sauvagine (P N A G S) est un modèle pour la conservation de la sauvagine et de l’habitat de la sauvagine à l’échelle du continent, depuis trente ans au Mexique et près de quatre décennies au Canada et aux États-Unis. Le partenariat du P N A G S a évolué et connu un succès extraordinaire au fil des ans.
Une grande partie des réalisations du P N A G S sont attribuables aux travaux menés dans le cadre de plans conjoints régionaux aux États-Unis et au Canada. Au Mexique, deux plans conjoints ont été mis en oeuvre, mais une grande partie des travaux sont effectués dans les unités de gestion pour la conservation des espèces sauvages (une carte des plans conjoints et des unités de gestion pour la conservation des espèces sauvages est présentée à l’annexe A). Le gouvernement fédéral mexicain est propriétaire de tous les plans d’eau, et il s’agit évidemment d’un élément crucial pour l’atteinte des objectifs du P N A G S.
La mise à jour du P N A G S de 2024 présente un bilan des progrès réalisés en vue de l’atteinte des objectifs établis dans la révision
de 2012, décrits dans l’addenda de 2014 (P N A G S, 2014) et mis au point dans la mise à jour de 2018. Le présent document comprend aussi des recommandations à l’intention des décideurs, qui prennent en compte les conditions changeantes et les nouvelles
possibilités de conservation prometteuses. Il s’agit là d’une occasion unique de mobiliser les partenaires du P N A G S, de même que de nouveaux partenaires éventuels, et d’intensifier les efforts afin d’atteindre les objectifs relatifs aux populations de sauvagine, à l’habitat de la sauvagine et aux gens.
Bien que le P N A G S soit un succès et que les effectifs de sauvagine soient relativement élevés actuellement, l’ampleur et le rythme de la perte d’habitat pourraient compromettre l’atteinte de l’objectif de maintien des populations continentales de sauvagine. Les terres qui soutiennent les populations de sauvagine ne sont pas statiques; ils subissent d’importants changements au fil des cycles naturels d’humidité et de sécheresse, et sont de plus en plus touchés par les perturbations humaines, comme l’intensification de l’agriculture, le développement urbain et industriel et la demande croissante d’eau. En outre, les changements climatiques ont des effets connus (p. ex. élévation du niveau de la mer) et des répercussions moins bien comprises, qui peuvent exacerber les difficultés rencontrées dans le cadre des initiatives du P N A G S visant à conserver de l’habitat pour la sauvagine, d’autres espèces d’oiseaux et l’ensemble de la biodiversité.
La perte de milieux humides demeure une menace généralisée. Une étude récente sur la situation et les tendances aux États-Unis
indique que les pertes de milieux humides subies de 2009 à 2019 ont cru de 50 % par rapport à la période de 10 ans précédente.
Environ 670 000 acres de milieux humides palustres végétalisés ont été perdues au cours de cette période, ce à quoi s’ajoutent
d’importantes pertes de milieux humides des cuvettes des prairies (Lang et coll., 2024). Au Canada, de nombreuses juridictions ne
bénéficient pas de législation compréhensive pour la protection des milieux humides et de récentes décisions juridiques aux États-
Unis pourraient affaiblir les protections en place. Dans le cadre du partenariat du P N A G S, il sera crucial de trouver des mesures
novatrices pour accroître la cadence et la portée de la conservation et de la restauration de l’habitat dans tout le continent, et il faudra le faire rapidement pour maintenir les populations de sauvagine aux niveaux souhaités.
Le nord des Grandes Plaines est probablement la région où l’enjeu de la perte d’habitat est le plus criant, car une proportion importante de la sauvagine continentale y est produite chaque année. Dans les Grandes Plaines, la perte de prairies avoisine les 70 % : 32 millions d’acres ont été perdues depuis 2012, et 1,6 million d’acres ont été perdues en 2021 (Fonds mondial pour la nature, 2023). Dans la région des Marmites torrentielles des Prairies et du plan conjoint des habitats des Prairies, il est estimé que le taux annuel de perte de prairies est de 0,23 %, ce qui est alarmant. Au cours de la prochaine décennie, la perte de prairies non perturbées devrait être de 7 à 25 fois plus rapide que la mise en oeuvre de mesures de protection (Fields et Barnes, 2019).

Executive Summary
The North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) or “the Plan”) began as a response to declining waterfowl populations and has served as the foundation for continental conservation of waterfowl and their habitats for nearly four decades in Canada and the United States, and for three decades in Mexico. The N A W M P partnership has been adaptive and extraordinarily successful in its efforts. Much of the N A W M P’s work is conducted by regional Joint Ventures (J Vs) in the United States and Canada. Two J Vs also operate in Mexico, but much of the work there is conducted in Management Units for Wildlife Conservation (U M As; see Appendix A for a map of existing J Vs and U M As). In Mexico, the federal government owns all waterbodies; naturally, these are critical for accomplishing N A W M P goals.
This 2024 N A W M P Update reviews the progress made toward achieving the goals outlined in the 2012 Revision, as detailed
in the 2014 Addendum (N A W M P 2014) and further refined in the 2018 Update. It also offers recommendations for decisionmakers within the waterfowl management community that address changing conditions and new opportunities for conservation success. The N A W M P has an unprecedented opportunity to engage current and potential new partners and ramp up its efforts to achieve goals for waterfowl populations, habitats and people.
Despite the success of the N A W M P and relatively high current population numbers, waterfowl habitat losses continue at scales and rates that challenge the N A W M P’s goal to sustain continental waterfowl populations. The landscapes that support waterfowl are not static; they change dramatically through natural wet/dry cycles and are increasingly affected by human influences, such as agricultural intensification, urban and industrial development, and increased demands for water. Additionally, climate change introduces both known (e.g., sea-level rise) and less understood impacts that may exacerbate the challenges the N A W M P faces in sustaining habitats for waterfowl, other bird species and overall biodiversity. Wetland loss remains a pervasive threat. A recent study of the status and trends in the United States reported a 50% increase in loss from 2009 to 2019 compared to the previous 10-year period. Approximately 670,000 acres of palustrine vegetated wetlands were lost during the period, including substantial losses of prairie pothole wetlands (Lang et al. 2024). In Canada, many jurisdictions lack comprehensive legislation for wetland protection, and recent judicial rulings in the United States will likely weaken protections there. The N A W M P partnership must seek innovative means to increase the rate and scale of habitat conservation and restoration across the continent, and it must do so rapidly to sustain waterfowl populations at desired levels.
Perhaps nowhere is the challenge of habitat loss more acute than in the Northern Great Plains, where a significant proportion of continental waterfowl are produced annually. Across the Great Plains, grassland loss approaches 70%, with 32 million acres lost since 2012, and 1.6 million acres lost in 2021 alone (World Wildlife Fund 2023). Loss of grasslands in the Prairie Pothole and Prairie Habitat Joint Ventures has been estimated to occur at an alarming rate of 0.23% annually. Over the next decade, undisturbed grassland is projected to be lost at a rate 7 to 25 times faster than rates of protection (Fields and Barnes 2019).

Read the full document via the link below.

Joseph D. Lancaster
Gulf Coast Joint Venture, Ducks Unlimited Inc.
Barry C. Wilson
Gulf Coast Joint Venture, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

ABSTRACT

Fleming et al. (2019) developed autumn and winter nonbreeding abundance objectives for 23 duck species or species groups at Joint Venture scales. Abundance objectives and guidance on their temporal application relative to migration chronology from Lancaster et al. (2024) has furthered Joint Ventures’ ability to calculate regional duck use day estimates for conservation planning. However, choosing between Fleming et al. autumn or winter regional abundance objectives has remained a subjective decision for Joint Ventures. Instinctively, extreme northern and southern Joint Ventures are likely to select autumn and winter objectives, respectively due to regional duck distributions and harvest within those periods. However, differential timing of species-specific migrations makes it difficult to identify the appropriate period objective among other Joint Ventures, especially those at mid-latitudes. We developed a visualization of regional daily harvest and eBird relative abundance information across the nonbreeding period to allow planners to make informed species-specific decisions to use Fleming et al. (2019) autumn or winter regional abundance objectives. Further, we make recommendations for 23 duck species or species groups for which Fleming et al. (2019) developed abundance objectives. Recommendations were based on three criteria; 1) cumulative daily harvest across the autumn or winter period; 2) cumulative eBird relative abundance across the autumn or winter period; and 3) the eBird relative abundance at the suggested autumn and winter anchor point date. In most cases (79%), recommendations were unanimous across data types, but in some cases additional scrutiny is necessary. We suggest regional planners use our visualizations and recommendations to help inform decisions establishing nonbreeding objectives using either the autumn or winter abundance objectives in Fleming et al. (2019).

Purpose 

Three working groups were assembled in early 2023 to update the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP). These working groups were arranged to focus on fundamental NAWMP goals around (1) waterfowl populations, (2) habitats, and (3) people. This report synthesizes the findings and recommendations of the three working groups. It provides details and context beyond what could be included in the more public-facing Update document. Our hope is that this will prove to be a useful reference for waterfowl practitioners and, especially, for teams assigned to future updates. To read the full document, please access the link below.

2024 North American Waterfowl Management Plan Update 

Expanding the Partnership through Multiple Waterfowl Habitat Conservation Benefits

ABSTRACT
Migratory Bird Habitat Joint Ventures (JVs) of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) are tasked with quantifying regional waterfowl habitat objectives that support continental waterfowl populations at objectives outlined in the NAWMP. Fleming et al. (2019) developed a framework to derive non-breeding duck population objectives to inform JV habitat conservation planning in North America. The JV-level population objectives alone do not account for temporal variation in duck abundance and require additional migration chronology data to compute objectives across the non-breeding period. An important consideration to integrate population objectives and chronological abundance is selecting the appropriate “anchor point” date to which objectives are assigned. Fleming et al. (2019) suggested anchoring objectives at midpoints of the planning periods but acknowledged a need for more defensible guidance. The Gulf Coast Joint Venture Waterfowl Working Group recently developed a method to calculate species-specific anchor points applicable across Joint Ventures within autumn and winter periods. Our method calculates species-specific daily harvest distribution within each JV and identifies the individual date on which daily harvest distribution across JVs most closely matches the mean distribution of harvest across the entire period. As the latter was used by Fleming et al. (2019) as a proxy for abundance to proportionally allocate JV-level population objectives among JVs, this method offers an empirical approach to achieving coherence between independent planning parameters (i.e., population objectives and anchor points) in bioenergetic models. The result is a set of species-specific anchor points for the autumn and winter periods for potential use by all JVs. Application of anchor points and Fleming et al. (2019) step-down objectives across JVs allow calculation of JV-level population objectives across the non-breeding period that efficiently and consistently account for continental duck populations.

North American Waterfowl Professional Plan (NAWPEP) Progress Summary

Reporting period: October 1, 2022 – September 30, 2023
Prepared by Diane Eggeman, NAWPEP Coordinator

The Steering Committee of NAWPEP works to advance recommendation #7 of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) 2018 Update: “Bolster training programs for future waterfowl management professionals.” The goal of NAWPEP is to: Engage and assist universities, colleges, and all NAWMP partners with establishing, sustaining, and enhancing academic and experiential programs in waterfowl science and management, in order that sufficient numbers of professionals representing human diversity from across North America are supported, available, and employed to sustain professional capacity and excellence of future waterfowl science and management. Specific objectives of NAWPEP and the current membership of the steering committee are presented in the NAWPEP Strategic Plan.

The following summarizes actions of the steering committee related to its planning and operation:
• Steering Committee met by Zoom on 11 November 2022, 10 March 2023, and 25 July 2023
• Implemented NAWPEP Strategic Plan and work plan
• Reviewed Steering Committee membership and term expirations

For a full listing of progress items, check out the document below.

A 2023 Survey of Organizations in Support of the

2024 Update of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan

FINAL REPORT

Update Steering Committee

July 13, 2023

As part of the assessment of the NAWMP 2024 Update, a qualitative survey was sent to waterfowl and wetland conservation stakeholders in North America. This summary is intended to inform discussions of the Update Steering Committee.

The Organizational survey was an open-ended, qualitative survey, designed and conducted in the same manner as the 2017 organizational survey. Requests were sent to representatives of 102 organizations. These organizations included state and federal agencies and conservation not-for-profits across North America. A total of 20 responded to the survey, though respondents did not always answer all questions. Due to the qualitative nature of the survey and the response rate, it is important to not treat the information as quantitative data. Rather, here we provide a summary of the responses to each of the questions posed to reveal important information about the direction and concerns of NAWMP related organizations that responded to this survey request.

Results

Respondents included representatives from JVs, organizations, and agencies. The survey and email invitation to participate can be found in the appendix of this document. Summaries of responses are provided below for each of the qualitative questions asked.

A 2023 Survey of Waterfowl Professionals: Insights in Support of the 2024 Update of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan

FINAL REPORT
Update Steering Committee
July 13, 2023

Executive Summary
We administered an online survey to waterfowl professionals in April of 2023 to gather input to support the 2024 update of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP). The questionnaire replicated several questions previously asked in 2017. Overall, we received a low response rate resulting in a small sample which limited the ability to: 1) compare results to look for trends; and 2) perform many crosstabulations to segment the audience based on respondents’ individual characteristics. Still, the results provide some clear direction and guidance for the 2024 plan update.

• Most of the respondents (82%) were from the United States. Many of the responses came from biologists/scientists (43%), providing context for the results, which tend to prioritize habitat and population assessment over other strategies (e.g., relationship building, policy, etc.) as observed in response to several survey questions.
• Two-thirds of respondents were very or somewhat familiar with NAWMP. Early career professionals and those working for state agencies were less familiar than others and represent a target audience for information and ways to become more engaged with NAWMP.
• A strong majority endorsed all three of the plan’s goals as important to continue forward, and generally assigned some improvement in progress towards the seven attributes evaluated under each goal, though few people thought significant progress has been on any goal in any area.
• Seven of the eight recommendations from the 2018 NAWMP Update were also endorsed as important to include in the 2024 update.
• While survey respondents expressed general support for the plans’ goals and recommendations on Likert scale ratings of importance, the survey comments suggest a more nuanced assessment among professionals. Numerous comments pointed out that the current wording of goals and recommendations is:
  • Vague
  • Imprecise
  • Double-barreled (and in some cases conflicting)
  • Lacking prioritization or actionable steps
• Most of the survey respondents rated the performance of the Flyway system and Joint Ventures as “Excellent” or “Good”, yet three-quarters (75%) also said improvements were needed in coordination of the two bodies. Some survey comments elaborate on this theme.
• A majority rated the performance of Waterfowl Monitoring, the Adaptive Harvest Management system, and collaborations between the U.S. and Canada as “Good” or “Excellent”. When asked to rate collaborations between Canada and Mexico or Mexico and the U.S., a majority of respondents selected “Don’t Know.”
• Habitat management and technical support were two areas where respondents saw the most progress in the implementation of NAWMP, yet when asked, they also wanted greater emphasis placed on these areas.
  • Habitat management was the most highly ranked strategy among a list of 16 for greater emphasis going forward.
  • Survey comments suggest there remains a need to monitor and evaluate the connection between habitat work and waterfowl population response at multiple spatial scales.
• Survey respondents identified collaborations with stakeholders as the biggest area in need of change to advance waterfowl management. Half of the respondents said a moderate amount of change was needed in collaborations with stakeholders. Yet when asked to rank which priorities needed more emphasis in the 2024 Update, various stakeholder strategies ranked near the bottom.
• From survey comments, it appears there is a lack of conceptual understanding and agreement about what Human Dimensions or Social Science can and should do with respect to plan implementation.
  • Most seem to think they need it but are not sure for what.
  • Others expressed lack of capacity or expertise on how to pursue it.
  • Still other comments reflect an assumption that meaningful behavioral change at individual or societal levels will occur if people are presented more information about the value of wetlands.
• The respondents to this survey were less engaged with service on waterfowl and bird conservation committees than in the 2017 survey. It is hard to say whether this represents a real trend, a difference in audience composition compared with 2017, or an anomaly, but it should be monitored.

Since its inception in 1986, the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) has grown into one of the world’s most successful conservation initiatives by:
● developing what is today a series of independent, locally-directed, public/private migratory bird conservation partnerships spanning the continent;
● recognizing the inextricable link between healthy economies, healthy wildlife, and wetland resources;
● adopting a relentless quest to improve the science and drive innovation in voluntary, incentive-based conservation actions; and
● embracing collaboration.

Yet, there are serious concerns about the status of wetland habitats, waterfowl, and other wildlife that depend on them for survival. In 2020, the NAWMP Plan Committee endorsed a NAWMP Communication Strategy that identified four key issues:
1. decreased financial support for Joint Ventures and NAWMP infrastructure;
2. concerns expressed in relevant reports regarding insufficient communications about NAWMP;
3. political challenges resulting from lack of understanding about NAWMP that exists at all levels—from government leaders to duck hunters; and
4. the looming declines in waterfowl populations.

On January 25, 2022, DJ Case & Associates (DJ Case) was contracted by the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (AFWA) to conduct a Marketing Assets Identification project to be used as a foundation for building out and implementing the Communication Strategy. The project will result in two key deliverables from DJ Case:
● A comprehensive electronic inventory of existing marketing assets for the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) such as print materials, social media content, website content, research, data, schematics, flow charts, notes, text, graphics, video, editorial content, and the like used in connection with past or proposed marketing and communication
campaigns.
● Product requirement definitions, prototype specifications (brand guide), and recommendations for development of new marketing assets.

This document represents the final project deliverables from DJ Case.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The waterfowl management community has long been committed to restoring waterfowl populations, using periodic updates to the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP or the Plan) to identify and communicate changing priorities. The current document builds upon previous iterations of NAWMP by considering several important aspects of the Plan and including contemporary data. The North American Waterfowl Management Plan was developed as a strategy to restore waterfowl populations and through several updates the Plan’s focus has remained waterfowl conservation, but the number of waterfowl species and populations (>70) requires strategic thinking in prioritizing management efforts. In 2004, the Plan prioritized waterfowl species in terms of perceived management need given habitat conditions and importance in harvest (NAWMP 2004). Additional biological and social data are now available along with updated goals of the Plan. In particular, the 2012 Plan Update added social values associated with waterfowl as important objectives of the Plan.

The three primary Plan goals were used to identify classification criteria and prioritize species within all ducks and geese and swans combined. The classification criteria are presented in Table 1 and the results of the above methods are presented in tables 3 and 4. High priority was assigned for 12 of 38 duck species (40 populations). For geese/swans, 11 of 35 populations were classified as High priority.

The waterfowl species prioritization was updated to account for a wider range of social values, accommodate additional current data, and achieve Plan goals. This update relies heavily on the Avian Conservation Assessment Database (ACAD) created by Partners in Flight (2021). The primary source for many ACAD criteria included expert opinion of waterfowl managers, including the NAWMP Science Support Team and associated Joint Ventures. For ducks, the waterfowl population objective of the Plan was scored using population trend information from ACAD and the habitat objective was scored using ACAD threats to breeding and non-breeding habitats. To address the human dimensions objectives, two criteria were used for ducks, total harvest from federal harvest surveys and observations by bird watchers using eBird. For geese/swan populations, the population objective used the most recent 10-year trend in relation to population abundance. The ACAD habitat threats scores were used to classify populations for the habitat objectives of the Plan. For the human dimensions objectives of goose/swan prioritization, population objectives defined in flyway management plans were assumed to represent societal goals for management, and scores were based on the qualitative difference between management plan objectives and current population abundance. For each group the scores of the three categories were averaged so the objectives of the Plan were equally weighted. The range of final scores among populations were subdivided approximately equally to obtain 3 levels of prioritization (high, medium, or low) for ducks and geese/swans.

This report focuses solely on the continental scale. Upon completion of this report, work will commence towards updating regional level scores at the appropriate scale. The continental and regional prioritization will then be updated as needed and as additional information is obtained. The NAWMP Science Support Team (NSST) will work directly with ACAD to prioritize updating expert opinion and trend data at time intervals that are relevant to strategic planning and management decisions.

FROM: Co-Chairs, North American Waterfowl Management Plan Committee

Date: December 15, 2022

SUBJECT: North American Waterfowl Management Plan Metrics

This memo serves to advise you of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) metrics which have been approved for implementation by the NAWMP Committee.

These metrics were developed with the support of three NAWMP sub-committees: the Science Support Team for population and habitat objectives; the Human Dimensions Public Engagement Team for people objectives; and the Integration Steering Committee for integration objectives. Integration metrics will be used internally by the NAWMP Committee for program evaluation.

Metrics are an important tool to measure the success of NAWMP in the future, and to demonstrate public accountability for this important program. We expect that these metrics will be adaptive; they will change as new science and information becomes available, and to reflect NAWMP updates.

In addition to the metrics presented here, Mexico has provided some specific metrics of importance in their country and we encourage their implementation. We anticipate that all three countries will work to increase engagement with Indigenous peoples in future NAWMP development and implementation.

We request that you incorporate these metrics into your future implementation plans and reports to enable us to roll-up this information. We also encourage your feedback and suggestions on how we can improve upon these metrics.

Thank you, in advance, for your assistance in implementing these metrics.

STATUS OF INTEGRATING HUMAN DIMENSIONS INTO JOINT VENTURE BIRD CONSERVATION PLANNING AND HABITAT DELIVERY

Unified Science Team and North American Waterfowl Management Plan Science Support Team, Technical Report No. 2022–2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Conservation social sciences—the human dimensions (HD) of conservation—encompass a variety of issues and disciplines related to how people think about natural resources and the factors influencing related human behaviors. Recent revisions of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) and Partners in Flight (PIF) landbird conservation plan include an explicit emphasis on people. Traditionally focused on regional biological planning and habitat delivery, migratory bird Joint Ventures (JVs) are at various stages of using HD in their work to further the goals of continental bird plans and to increase the effectiveness of JV conservation work. The intent of this assessment was to document status and approaches to HD integration among JVs and to provide experiential insights to the bird conservation community regarding this new challenge. Specifically, we wanted to determine the extent to which JVs are engaged in HD and are integrating people-related goals and objectives into bird conservation planning and bird habitat delivery. Further, we explored HD assumptions made by JVs, as well as challenges, barriers, and needs for expanded HD integration.

During early 2021, we contacted JV coordinators regarding a 2-phased study approach to determine application and integration of HD in their regional bird habitat planning and conservation delivery. All JV coordinators responded positively to the invitation, including 22 habitat JVs and two species-focused partnerships. The first phase of the assessment was an online survey with questions related to available HD expertise, past HD use, current HD interest and barriers to use, common people-related assumptions, and the value placed on HD in JV planning efforts. The second phase of the assessment included semi-structured interviews of the JV coordinator and, in some cases, additional JV staff invited by the coordinator to participate. These 2-hour discussions covered many of the topic areas included in the online survey, allowing JV representatives the opportunity to elaborate on their HD experiences.

Our results revealed that the JV community is keenly aware of the social and environmental change occurring in North America and the importance of using social science expertise to understand humans within the landscapes where they work. Joint Ventures largely recognized that future conservation focus must include birds, habitats, and people. However, respondents cited JV traditions and culture, partnership composition, regional landscape characteristics, and especially JV staff capacity as major factors limiting their ability to manage HD integration. The level of HD engagement by JVs generally fell into one of three groups: 1) no work yet, 2) used available data and literature to better target conservation, develop models, or learn about landowner decision-making, and 3) collected HD data with existing staff or through support from outside researchers and used results in conservation decisions. JVs were at various stages of conservation planning, and some implementation plans lacked HD emphasis simply because they were outdated. Although one JV had established an explicit HD objective for waterfowl hunter abundance, most JVs viewed conservation social science primarily as a means to serve a biological goal. The idea that quantifiable HD objectives would be established alongside quantifiable bird or habitat objectives was largely absent from JV responses. Although focus on people objectives is highlighted in the 2012 and 2018 NAWMP, JVs at this point are using HD science primarily to help achieve biological goals.

Adding social science expertise may be the highest near-term priority for many JVs. This proficiency can help identify how various regional stakeholders perceive the bird conservation community while also evaluating barriers and motivations to conservation activities, all of which are important for enhancing JV programs and communications. We found that seven JVs have staff members with at least some formal training in conservation social science, with one JV recently adding a second HD specialist to their staff. Another JV, lacking HD expertise within their staff, recently recruited a social scientist to their JV Technical Committee. The 2-phased approach used for this assessment was time-consuming to develop and manage, but we believe information reported here provides valuable HD guidance and an important baseline against which to measure progress. Examples and prospects for expanding HD in JV conservation programs are provided.

Estimated capacity and future need for trained and educated professionals in waterfowl management and conservation

Prepared by the North American Waterfowl Professional Education Plan Committee: Michael G. Brasher, Joel Brice, Eduardo Carrera, John Eadie, Diane Eggeman, Justyn Foth, Adam Janke, Richard M. Kaminski, Shaun Oldenburger, Kevin M. Ringelman, Christian Roy, Lisa Webb. Includes important contributions from Lauren Hernandez-Rubio Senn of Clemson University.

May 2022

Abstract
We report on capacity and needs for professionals in the field of waterfowl science, management, and conservation in Canada, Mexico, and the United States. This effort stemmed from a concern over a documented decline in waterfowl-centric university programs (Kaminski 2002, 2013; Wildlife Society Bulletin and The Wildlife Professional). We estimated employment needs, the number of graduates required to fill these needs, and the historical and contemporary training capacity of university faculty to produce them. We used a survey of former and current faculty who mentored graduate students to determine the number of students who obtained a career associated with waterfowl and wetlands from 1980–2020 and a survey of public- and private-sector employers to assess current and future (by 2025) personnel needs. These results allowed us to compare needs to capacities for training and employment. Since 2000, about 10 waterfowl-wetlands post-graduate students acquired employment per year in the profession. Individual waterfowl professors graduated about 0.62 M.S. or Ph.D. students on average per year over the 1980–2020 period. Based on current numbers of waterfowl-focused faculty, we might expect 142 graduates to enter waterfowl or wetlands careers during 2022-2025. However, this may be an over-prediction considering (1) some portion of the 142 graduates would likely enter careers unrelated to waterfowl conservation and (2) the looming retirements of many of the current waterfowl professors with their replacement being uncertain. Sixty-five percent of employers indicated they were likely to hire graduates with specific training or experience in waterfowl science, management, or conservation by the end of 2025. Employers reported a current workforce of 949 waterfowl-specific employees, of which 346 (36%) hold positions where a graduate degree is either required or preferred. Employers expected more than 350 employees across the 3 countries would be needed to fill waterfowl-related positions by the end of 2025, and 34% (or 118) would require a graduate degree. We conclude that there remains a valid concern about a potential shortage of graduate-degree level persons for expected employment demand.

See the full report in the document link below.

North American Waterfowl Management Professional Education Plan

Steering Committee

Terms of Reference

Revised May 2, 2022

Waterfowl and wetland management as guided by the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) across this continent arguably is one of the greatest conservation achievements during the 20th and 21st centuries. The NAWMP’s history of continued success stems in part from regular updates and revisions, so its implementation remains contemporary and relevant. From the 2018 NAWMP Update, “Effective waterfowl and wetland habitat conservation is driven by the close relationship between management and applied research. The academic programs and institutions producing waterfowl and wetland management professionals have been key to this relationship (Williams and Castelli 2012).”

In the early 2000s, published research revealed that university-based waterfowl and wetlands programs were declining in North America. By 2013, > 40% of these programs were lost after faculty retired or passed, and their positions were not filled with experts in waterfowl and wetlands because of funding limitations or transition toward conservation of biodiversity rather than foci on game species (Kaminski 2013; The Wildlife Professional). In 2020, about 30 programs remained across the United States and Canada but none yet in Mexico.  Accordingly, the waterfowl community questioned who would educate and produce skilled waterfowl and wetlands scientists and stewards for future generations. To assuage the decline of these university programs, generous conservation philanthropists have endowed eight waterfowl-centric programs in perpetuity across the United States and Canada.

The 2018 NAWMP Update identified a critical need to maintain and expand educational capacity to ensure existence of an appropriately skilled workforce to meet NAWMP conservation goals. . The Update’s Recommendation 7 reads, “Bolster training programs for future waterfowl management professionals.” Thus, the waterfowl management community promoted efforts on this front, and, in February 2020, the NAWMP Committee endorsed a new initiative termed the North American Waterfowl Professional Education Plan (NAWPEP).

Here we describe the composition and function of the NAWPEP Steering Committee to support the mission of the 2018 NAWMP Update and NAWPEP. This document describes the committee’s administrative structure, roles, membership, and responsibilities.

For more details see the full document in the links.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Conservation social sciences—the human dimensions (HD) of conservation—encompass a variety of issues and disciplines related to how people think about natural resources and the factors influencing related human behaviors. Recent revisions of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) and Partners in Flight (PIF) landbird conservation plan include an explicit emphasis on people. Traditionally focused on regional biological planning and habitat delivery, migratory bird Joint Ventures (JVs) are at various stages of using HD in their work to further the goals of continental bird plans and to increase the effectiveness of JV conservation work. The intent of this assessment was to document status and approaches to HD integration among JVs and to provide experiential insights to the bird conservation community regarding this new challenge. Specifically, we wanted to determine the extent to which JVs are engaged in HD and are integrating people-related goals and objectives into bird conservation planning and bird habitat delivery. Further, we explored HD assumptions made by JVs, as well as challenges, barriers, and needs for expanded HD integration.

During early 2021, we contacted JV coordinators regarding a 2-phased study approach to determine application and integration of HD in their regional bird habitat planning and conservation delivery. All JV coordinators responded positively to the invitation, including 22 habitat JVs and two species-focused partnerships. The first phase of the assessment was an online survey with questions related to available HD expertise, past HD use, current HD interest and barriers to use, common people-related assumptions, and the value placed on HD in JV planning efforts. The second phase of the assessment included semi-structured interviews of the JV coordinator and, in some cases, additional JV staff invited by the coordinator to participate. These 2-hour discussions covered many of the topic areas included in the online survey, allowing JV representatives the opportunity to elaborate on their HD experiences.

Our results revealed that the JV community is keenly aware of the social and environmental change occurring in North America and the importance of using social science expertise to understand humans within the landscapes where they work. Joint Ventures largely recognized that future conservation focus must include birds, habitats, and people. However, respondents cited JV traditions and culture, partnership composition, regional landscape characteristics, and especially JV staff capacity as major factors limiting their ability to manage HD integration. The level of HD engagement by JVs generally fell into one of three groups: 1) no work yet, 2) used available data and literature to better target conservation, develop models, or learn about landowner decision-making, and 3) collected HD data with existing staff or through support from outside researchers and used results in conservation decisions. JVs were at various stages of conservation planning, and some implementation plans lacked HD emphasis simply because they were outdated. Although one JV had established an explicit HD objective for waterfowl hunter abundance, most JVs viewed conservation social science primarily as a means to serve a biological goal. The idea that quantifiable HD objectives would be established alongside quantifiable bird or habitat objectives was largely absent from JV responses. Although focus on people objectives is highlighted in the 2012 and 2018 NAWMP, JVs at this point are using HD science primarily to help achieve biological goals.

Adding social science expertise may be the highest near-term priority for many JVs. This proficiency can help identify how various regional stakeholders perceive the bird conservation community while also evaluating barriers and motivations to conservation activities, all of which are important for enhancing JV programs and communications. We found that seven JVs have staff members with at least some formal training in conservation social science, with one JV recently adding a second HD specialist to their staff. Another JV, lacking HD expertise within their staff, recently recruited a social scientist to their JV Technical Committee. The 2-phased approach used for this assessment was time-consuming to develop and manage, but we believe information reported here provides valuable HD guidance and an important baseline against which to measure progress. Examples and prospects for expanding HD in JV conservation programs are provided.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Habitat Joint Ventures (JVs) originally formed under the auspices of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan have assumed responsibility for the conservation of multiple bird groups including waterfowl, landbirds, shorebirds, and waterbirds. Using a variety of methods, JVs are identifying the conservation needs for each bird group, which are typically described in JV Implementation Plans. As JVs continue to make progress in establishing conservation objectives for each bird group, there is growing interest in determining how objectives might be integrated across bird groups to increase the efficacy of all-bird conservation. As a result, we assessed and reported integration techniques used by JVs. This effort included developing a set of questions used to interview staff members from all 22 North American habitat JVs and document the current state of bird-taxa integration by the JV community. Joint Venture regional partnerships have unique geographies and distinct political, cultural, historical, and biological features affecting their operations. Our intent was to capture the full range of bird-group integration experiences within JVs.

Joint Venture representatives participating in this assessment indicated appreciation for the opportunity to contribute. Most (59%) JVs responded that their conservation work included consideration of more than one bird group using “common habitats” within planning units, but only three (14%) indicated their planning documents explicitly integrated (combined) habitat conservation objectives for multiple bird taxa. Joint Ventures more advanced in multiple bird-group planning had a strong science foundation linked to species-habitat models and landscape prioritization and often designated focal species or umbrella species as habitat representatives. The waterfowl bird group had the strongest science foundation in the highest proportion (82%) of JVs. Nearly half (45%) of JVs used BCRs as their primary planning units, but many also specified that they “step-down” large BCRs into smaller sub-regions for planning or habitat implementation. Planning for designated focus areas, typically dominated by a primary bird habitat category within a BCR(s), was also common (27% of JVs).

The potential to increase efficiencies related to multiple bird-group planning and habitat delivery was recognized at various scales, ranging from individual projects to planning landscapes to entire JV regions. Most (82%) JVs indicated existing government-funded conservation programs were broadly suitable for delivering JV-established objectives for at least some bird groups. In general, JVs identified the USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service Farm Bill programs as most suitable for implementation, followed closely by projects supported by the North American Wetlands Conservation Act (NAWCA). Two categories — data/knowledge needs (35%) and capacity/resource needs (30%) — were identified by JVs as the most important barriers to increasing integrated conservation across bird taxa. Predictably, the top (65%) solution identified by JVs to eliminate barriers was to increase capacity for science and implementation. The majority of JVs indicated meeting a mission for all-bird conservation required integration of bird-group conservation in some manner.

Regarding measuring effectiveness, no JV identified a dedicated program in place to evaluate their all-bird conservation outcomes beyond site-scale monitoring efforts. Many JVs assume conservation actions targeted at focal species also benefit other birds in specific habitat guilds or occurring in common areas. The most frequently identified opportunities to move integration forward were associated with JV habitat-focus areas for wetland birds (32%) or wetland-grassland-pollinator complexes in cropped landscapes (18%).

Highly variable approaches to integrating multiple bird-taxa objectives and inconsistent spatial planning units among JVs may hamper ability to integrate work across regions sharing common bird cohorts during the full annual cycle. Furthermore, inequity in the knowledge base of various bird groups remains a barrier for achieving integrated conservation of all birds (i.e., science weakness in ≥ 1 taxa area leads to weakness in integration). Although various direct and indirect bird-conservation integration is already taking place, expanded capacity for JVs and their collaboration networks was considered critical to leverage more resources, especially related to expanding and complementary environmental initiatives (e.g., addressing climate change). Moreover, if land cover changes due to development, intensive agriculture, and climate factors continue at current rates, traditional JV decision-support models will become less meaningful. Predicting future bird response to habitat management may be even more uncertain due to accelerated environmental change. Consequently, the focus on customary products (e.g., bird species/guild abundance and distribution) familiar to previous generations of wildlife managers may need to become more pliable as we plan and work in increasingly altered and changing systems. Continued networking among bird scientists, land managers, and other relevant experts will be important to better leverage knowledge and resources to most benefit birds and people.

North American Waterfowl Professional Plan (NAWPEP) Progress Summary
Reporting period: July 1, 2020 – September 30, 2021

Prepared by Diane Eggeman, NAWPEP Coordinator

The Steering Committee of NAWPEP works to advance recommendation #7 of North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) 2018 Update: “Bolster training programs for future waterfowl management professionals.” The goal of NAWPEP is to: Engage and assist universities, colleges, and all NAWMP partners with establishing, sustaining, and enhancing academic and experiential programs in waterfowl science and management, in order that sufficient numbers of professionals representing human diversity from across North America are supported, available, and employed to sustain professional capacity and excellence of future waterfowl science and management. Specific objectives of NAWPEP and the current membership of the steering committee are presented in the NAWPEP Strategic Plan.

The following summarizes actions of the steering committee related to its planning and operation:
• Steering Committee met quarterly by Zoom, 9 July 2020, 23 October 2020, 4 February 2021, 27 April 2021, 27 July 2021; and held a special meeting on 8 June 2021
• Developed NAWPEP Strategic Plan
      o Solicited, received, and incorporated input from stakeholders and partners
     o Presented final draft to NAWMP Committee
     o Plan Committee endorsed strategic plan
     o Distributed final strategic plan and made available online: NAWPEP Strategic Plan
     o Developed work plan and priorities
• Developed Terms of Reference for Steering Committee, which described member responsibilities and elements of committee operation
• Sent survey to university waterfowl faculty to get feedback on strategic plan and suggestions for how NAWPEP can help them

To read the full report, check out the link below.

Waterfowl habitats like wetlands and grasslands are among North America’s
most important ecosystems. They are key to clean water, clean air and abundant
 healthy wildlife.

For 32 years, the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) has been the most powerful and effective mechanism to safeguard these habitats. As environmental issues of the 21st century challenge conservation efforts in new ways, continuing to deepen the legacy and impact of the NAWMP is critical.

Developing a communication strategy that celebrates the accomplishments, emphasizes the need and showcases the wide-ranging benefits of NAWMP is an important step in securing its future—and the future of millions of migratory birds that depend on it.   

------------------

Background

While NAWMP is a highly successful international conservation program, there is a perception that it has “lost its luster” over the decades. A recent report from the Max McGraw Wildlife Foundation also highlighted a lack of understanding of NAWMP investments and their impacts on waterfowl habitats. 

The NAWMP Communications Committee was established to develop and guide the implementation of a broad communications strategy that will promote the continued—and enhanced—support of NAWMP. This plan is designed to identify key audiences and messages to help ensure that NAWMP remains relevant in the future. Its tactics will showcase the importance of conserving waterfowl and wetland ecosystems and the benefits hunters, bird watchers, all wildlife enthusiasts and the public derive from these conservation activities.

Key challenges/threats to the continued success of NAWMP include:

• Decreased financial support for Joint Ventures and NAWMP infrastructure
  • Decreased relevancy of migratory bird programs.
  • Viewed as “well established” (victim of our own success).
  • Political churn of individuals in higher levels of governments (impedes the ability to build strong relationships with “champions” who can advocate on behalf of NAWMP).
  • Lack of understanding of NAWMP and related enterprises by both U.S. and Canadian federal administrations.
• Concerns pointed out in McGraw Foundation report
  • Lack of awareness of NAWMP
  • Need for better information sharing amongst partners and key audiences about NAWMP and why it is important.
     
• Political challenges resulting from lack of understanding about NAWMP that exists at all levels—from government leaders to duck hunters.  
  • NAWMP is seen as diametrically opposed to the objectives of the agricultural industry, in some jurisdictions.
  • The environment is increasingly seen as a partisan issue in an increasingly divisive political system.

• The looming waterfowl crisis
  • While ducks and wetlands are not currently in a state of crisis as compared to other species and issues, we continue to lose wetlands and the benefits associated with them.

Climate variation and its potential impact for shorter/warmer winters could reduce runoff to wetlands (despite increased precipitation) and cause droughts to be longer or more frequent. Because of this, it is more important than ever to continue the success of NAWMP and protect our wetlands.

Download the PDF for the full Plan below.

Waterfowl Professional Credentials

The information below was selected from results of a survey of waterfowl professionals attending the 6th, 7th, and 8th North American Duck Symposia and responding to a survey administered by Ph.D. candidate, Lauren Senn, of Clemson University. Response rate to survey was 52% of 690 delivered surveys. Information reported here are highlights from the Senn dissertation (in preparation).

Download the full document below.

Estimates of Waterfowl and Wetland Professionals

Trained in University Waterfowl Programs 1980–2020

Prepared by the North American Waterfowl Professional Education Plan Committee: Kevin M. Ringelman, Michael G. Brasher, Eduardo Carrera, John Eadie, Diane Eggeman, David Howerter, Richard M. Kaminski, J. Drew Lanham, Tom Moorman, and Frank Rohwer

The North American Waterfowl Professional Education Plan (NAWPEP), conceived and implemented under the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP), outlines a strategic vision for securing and enhancing the capacity of university programs to train waterfowl and wetlands professionals (NAWPEP Strategic Plan 2020).  The NAWPEP’s goal is to engage and assist universities/colleges and NAWMP partners with establishing, sustaining, and enhancing academic and experiential programs in waterfowl and wetlands science and management, in order that sufficient numbers of inclusively diverse professionals from across North America are available to sustain the excellence of future waterfowl science and management.  The genesis of this initiative was stimulated in part through publications by Kaminski (2002, 2013; Wildlife Society Bulletin and The Wildlife Professional), which documented that university waterfowl-centric programs declined ~40% from ~55 in the 1970s–1990s to ~33 in 2013.  In 2020, ~30 programs persist, eight of which are endowed in perpetuity (i.e., seven in the USA, one in Canada).

To the extent that the workforce currently carrying out the mission of NAWMP largely graduated from these vanishing programs, the waterfowl and wetlands community may face a future shortage of such professionals.  Accordingly, the NAWPEP committee recognized the necessity of estimating the number of graduates required to fill anticipated employment needs and the historical and contemporary training capacity of university faculty to produce them.  Here, we report on a survey of former and current faculty who mentored graduate students to determine the number of students who obtained a career associated with waterfowl and wetlands from 1980–2020.

We developed a list of 64 known living university faculty in the United States and Canada who led or now lead waterfowl-centric programs from 1980–2020 and could be contacted via email.  Thus, survey recipients were not randomly selected and did not encompass the entire training capacity for professionals who work to advance the mission of NAWMP.  Our goal was not to identify all faculty engaged with wildlife, wetlands, public policy, conservation, etc. across North America.  Rather, because faculty who led or currently lead waterfowl-centric programs may be especially likely to produce graduates who obtain careers in waterfowl and wetlands, they were of particular interest to survey. We note that many leaders in the field who have produced cadres of excellent waterfowl and wetland graduates in the 1970s and 1980s have retired, passed, or were unavailable for contact, so our sample misses several important cohorts.

Download the full report below.

North American Waterfowl Management Professional Education Plan
Steering Committee
Terms of Reference
DRAFT December 31, 2020

Waterfowl and wetland management as guided by the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) across this continent arguably is one of the greatest conservation achievements during the 20th and 21st centuries. The NAWMP’s history of continued success stems in part from regular updates and revisions, so its implementation remains contemporary and relevant. From the 2018 NAWMP Update, “Effective waterfowl and wetland habitat conservation is driven by the close relationship between management and applied research. The academic programs and institutions producing waterfowl and wetland management professionals have been key to this relationship (Williams and Castelli 2012).”

In the early 2000s, published research revealed that university-based waterfowl and wetlands programs were declining in North America. By 2013, > 40% of these programs were lost after faculty retired or passed, and their positions were not filled with experts in waterfowl and wetlands because of funding limitations or transition toward conservation of biodiversity rather than foci on game species (Kaminski 2013; The Wildlife Professional). In 2020, about 30 programs remained across the United States and Canada but none yet in Mexico.  Accordingly, the waterfowl community questioned who would educate and produce skilled waterfowl and wetlands scientists and stewards for future generations. To assuage the decline of these university programs, generous conservation philanthropists have endowed eight waterfowl-centric programs in perpetuity across the United States and Canada.
 
The 2018 NAWMP Update identified a critical need to maintain and expand educational capacity to ensure existence of an appropriately skilled workforce to meet NAWMP conservation goals. . The Update’s Recommendation 7 reads, “Bolster training programs for future waterfowl management professionals.” Thus, the waterfowl management community promoted efforts on this front, and, in February 2020, the NAWMP Committee endorsed a new initiative termed the North American Waterfowl Professional Education Plan (NAWPEP).

Here we describe the composition and function of the NAWPEP Steering Committee to support the mission of the 2018 NAWMP Update and NAWPEP. This document describes the committee’s administrative structure, roles, membership, and responsibilities.

Download the full document below.

The North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) was implemented in 1986 with the goal of maintaining abundant and resilient waterfowl populations in North America and sufficient wetlands and related habitats to sustain those populations (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Canadian Wildlife Service 1986). In 2012 the planning committee, in consultation with stakeholders, decided to revise the NAWMP with additional goals to plan for changing times. The 2012 NAWMP Revision provides a new vision of waterfowl management that emphasizes a growing and supportive core of waterfowl hunters and an engaged conservation community inspired by waterfowl and wetlands.

To achieve this goal, NAWMP partners must engage both the traditional waterfowl hunting community and broader stakeholder groups who are interested in waterfowl and the conservation of waterfowl and wetlands. To facilitate this engagement, the National Flyway Council (NFC) – in cooperation with the four Flyway Councils, the NAWMP Committee, and nongovernmental agencies – initiated the formation of a Human Dimensions Working Group (HDWG). This working group is tasked with obtaining the incorporating human dimensions information and approaches into migratory bird conservation programs, policies, and practices.

In particular, the NFC’s HDWG and other NAWMP partners developed a research proposal for North American stakeholder and general public surveys that will inform: 1) NAWMP objectives; 2) harvest objectives and strategies; 3) habitat management; and 4) public engagement strategies. Three surveys – a waterfowl hunter survey, a birdwatcher survey, and a general public survey – were administered in the United States. Similar birdwatcher and hunter surveys occurred concurrently in Canada. Separate summary reports are available for the U.S. general public, birdwatcher surveys, as well as the Canadian surveys (U.S. Geological Survey 2017; Harshaw 2018a,b, Patton 2021a). This report presents results from the U.S. National Survey of Waterfowl Hunters (NSWH).

The North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) was implemented in 1986 with the goal of maintaining abundant and resilient waterfowl populations in North America and sufficient wetlands and related habitats to sustain those populations (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Canadian Wildlife Service 1986). In 2012 the planning committee, in consultation with stakeholders, decided to revise the NAWMP with additional goals to plan for changing times. The 2012 NAWMP Revision provides a new vision of waterfowl management that emphasizes a growing and supportive core of waterfowl hunters and an engaged conservation community inspired by waterfowl and wetlands.

To achieve this goal, NAWMP partners must engage both the traditional and waterfowl hunting community and broader stakeholder groups who are interested in waterfowl and the conservation of waterfowl and wetlands. To facilitate this engagement, the National Flyway Council (NFC) – in cooperation with the four Flyway Councils, the NAWMP planning committee, and non-governmental agencies – initiated the formation of a Human Dimensions Working Group (HDWG). This working group is tasked with obtaining and incorporating human dimensions information and approaches into migratory bird conservation programs, policies, and practices. To inform this task, three surveys – a waterfowl hunter survey, a birdwatcher survey, and a public survey – were administered in the United States. Similar birdwatcher and hunter surveys occurred concurrently in Canada. Separate summary reports are available for the U.S. general public, waterfowl hunter surveys, as well as the Canadian surveys (U.S. Geological Survey 2017; Patton 2021b; Harshaw 2018a, 2018b). This report presents results from the U.S. birdwatcher survey, and throughout the rest of this report refers to it as the National Birdwatching Survey (NBS).

En la recomendación de la Actualización 2018 del Plan de Manejo de Aves Acuáticas de Norteamérica (NAWMP o “el Plan”) para “definir claramente las funciones y responsabilidades del Comité del Plan (Plan Committee, PC) y la manera en la cual se estructura a sí mismo y sus funciones…” se dio la instrucción de revisar y actualizar la declaración de 2004 sobre las funciones y responsabilidades del Comité del Plan.

Para lograr esto, el Comité del Plan inició un esfuerzo de planificación estratégica en el verano de 2018 reunión en Ottawa, Canadá, misma que se centró en identificar acciones para ayudar a lograr las metas y los objetivos de la actualización 2018. Los resultados de este esfuerzo se resumen en el documento titulado "Acciones y prioridades estratégicas del Comité NAWMP". En este, se identificaron varias responsabilidades principales que fueron priorizadas para el Comité del Plan, así como algunos ajustes a su estructura. La discusión de apoyo en el informe, proporciona los detalles adicionales y la claridad sobre los roles y responsabilidades claves del PC, sus funciones, y sus prioridades estratégicas y acciones.

Este Anexo de la Actualización del NAWMP de 2018, reemplaza el Apéndice C: Autoridades Instituciones, legales y administrativos, funciones y arreglos institucionales, en el marco de la implementación de la actualización de 2004 del NAWMP.

La recommandation dans la mise à jour 2018 du Plan nord-américain de gestion de la sauvagine (PNAGS ou Plan) de «définir clairement les rôles et les responsabilités du comité du plan (PC) et la façon dont ce dernier et ses fonctions sont stratégiquement articulés …» fourni des directives pour la révision et la mise à jour de l'énoncé de 2004 des rôles, responsabilités et fonctions du Comité du plan.

Pour ce faire, le comité du plan a lancé un effort de planification stratégique lors de la réunion de l'été 2018 à Ottawa, au Canada, axé sur l'identification des actions pour aider à atteindre les buts et objectifs de la mise à jour 2018. Les résultats de cet effort sont résumés dans un document intitulé «Priorités et actions stratégiques du comité du PNAGS». Les responsabilités principales du Comité du plan sont identifiées et ordonnées et certains ajustements à la structure du comité sont également identifiés. Le texte du rapport comporte des détails supplémentaires qui apporte une plus grande clarté sur les rôles et responsabilités clés du CP, ses fonctions, ses priorités stratégiques et ses actions.

Cet addendum à la mise à jour du PNAGS de 2018 remplace l'annexe C: Autorités, fonctions et dispositions institutionnelles, juridiques et administratives dans le cadre de mise en oeuvre de la
mise à jour du PNAGS de 2004.

The recommendation in the 2018 Update to the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP or Plan) to “Clearly define the roles and responsibilities of the Plan Committee (PC) and how it strategically structures itself and its functions…” provided direction to review and update the 2004 statement of Plan Committee roles, responsibilities and functions.

To accomplish this, the Plan Committee initiated a strategic planning effort at the Summer 2018 meeting in Ottawa, Canada focused on identifying actions to help achieve the goals and objectives of the 2018 Update. The results of this effort are summarized in a document entitled “NAWMP Committee Strategic Priorities and Actions.” A number of ranked, primary responsibilities for the Plan Committee were identified as well as some adjustments to its structure. Supporting discussion in the report provides additional detail and clarity around key roles and responsibilities of the PC, its functions, strategic priorities and actions.

This Addendum to the 2018 NAWMP Update replaces Appendix C: Institutional, Legal, and Administrative Authorities, Functions, and Arrangements in the Implementation Framework of the 2004 NAWMP Update.

Comité du PNAGS Priorités et mesures stratégiques de la période de mise à jour 2018

Le Comité du Plan nord-américain de gestion de la sauvagine (PNAGS) a tenu une séance de planification stratégique en juillet 2018 pour donner suite aux éléments suivants :
1) le rapport nommé « Review of the Plan Committee – Achieving NAWMP Objectives1 », préparé par le Sous-comité des institutions;
2) la recommandation 8 de la mise à jour de 2018 du PNAGS (« Définir clairement les rôles et les responsabilités du Comité du Plan et la façon dont ce dernier et ses
fonctions sont stratégiquement articulés pour faciliter l’intégration au sein de plusieurs groupes de travail. »)

Le présent rapport résume les résultats de cette session et énonce les mesures prioritaires pour le Comité du Plan (CP) au cours de la période initiale de mise en oeuvre de la mise à jour 2018 du PNAGS (2019-2021). Le rapport détermine les principales responsabilités que le CP doit assumer et traite ultimement des recommandations structurelles pour le CP, en plus des décisions qu’il a prises le 10 avril 2019.

Le CP a mis l’accent sur les mesures qu’il pourrait mettre en oeuvre pour aider à atteindre les buts et les objectifs du PNAGS, bien qu’il existe de nombreuses autres mesures que la communauté de la sauvagine dans son ensemble pourrait entreprendre. Le CP s’est appuyé sur les efforts du Sous-comité des institutions pour cerner les questions prioritaires et a chargé un petit groupe de rédiger un rapport clarifiant les rôles et responsabilités clés du CP, ses fonctions, ses priorités stratégiques et ses actions. Une fois ces éléments établis et les liens essentiels avec les groupes de travail mis en place, le CP déterminera quels changements, s’il y a lieu, devront être apportés aux structures et aux processus institutionnels du PNAGS pour implanter avec succès les priorités stratégiques.

The North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) Plan Committee (PC) held a strategic planning session in July 2018 in response to:
1) The report entitled “Review of the Plan Committee – Achieving NAWMP Objectives1” prepared by the Institutions Subcommittee, and
2) Recommendation #8 of the 2018 NAWMP Update (“Clearly define the roles and responsibilities of the Plan Committee and how it strategically structures itself and
its functions to facilitate integration among the various technical work groups.”)

This report provides a summary of the outcomes of that session and articulates the priority actions for the PC over the initial period of implementing the 2018 NAWMP Update (2019-2021). This report identifies a number of primary responsibilities to be accomplished by the Committee and will ultimately address structural recommendations for the PC, in addition to
decisions taken by the PC on April 10, 2019.

The PC focused on actions they could implement to help achieve the goals and objectives of NAWMP, although there are many other actions the waterfowl community as a whole could undertake. The PC built on efforts of the Institutions Sub-Committee, identifying priority issues, and tasked a small group to write a report adding clarity around key roles and responsibilities of the PC, its functions, strategic priorities and actions. Once these are identified and essential linkages with working groups are in place, the PC will determine what, if any, changes in the institutional structures and processes of NAWMP will be necessary to successfully implement the strategic priorities.

ABSTRACT
During the early 2000s, a methodology was developed to derive regional non-breeding population abundance objectives from continental abundance estimates (M. Koneff, USFWS, unpublished data). This information was foundational to North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) Joint Venture (JV) habitat conservation planning and implementation for non-breeding waterfowl, especially wintering ducks. The 2012 NAWMP Revision and its amended population objectives motivated JVs to begin updating their waterfowl implementation plans. Fleming et al. (2017) revisited the initial work to derive non-breeding abundance objectives and developed an updated approach. Although Fleming et al. (2017) made use of the least biased and most geographically consistent datasets, they identified outstanding issues to be resolved before the derivation technique could be effectively applied across all regions of North America. We updated the work of Fleming et al. (2017) by addressing 3 of those issues. Specifically, we incorporated Canadian harvest data and calculated autumn–winter population objectives at degree block and JV-regional scales in Canada, updated and calculated winter population objectives for Mexico at degree block and JV-regional scales, and expanded the list of species for which objectives were calculated. Updated JV regional population abundance objectives for the non-breeding period are provided for 23 waterfowl species and species groups across North America.

La mise à jour du Plan nord-américain de gestion de la sauvagine (PNAGS) de 2018 — Relier les gens, la sauvagine et les milieux humides — poursuit un héritage d’innovation et de collaboration qui s’appuie sur 32 années de réussites en conservation de la sauvagine et des milieux humides sur l’ensemble du continent. Depuis sa création en 1986, le Plan a mobilisé les gouvernements, les organismes de conservation, les propriétaires fonciers et les citoyens du Canada, du Mexique et des États-Unis en tirant parti d’un modèle de partenariat pour la gestion de la sauvagine qui a été largement salué.

La révision du Plan faite en 2012 a permis de présenter une nouvelle orientation stratégique qui a mis la communauté de la sauvagine au défi d’augmenter le soutien de nos chasseurs et des autres citoyens et citoyennes afin d’atteindre des objectifs interdépendants pour les gens, les populations de sauvagine et la conservation des milieux humides. Cette mise à jour du Plan de 2018 présente des exemples de progrès réalisés dans les trois pays en cause dans l’atteinte des objectifs énoncés lors de la révision de 2012. Elle permet en outre d’établir des bases importantes pour intégrer la relation qui existe entre les gens et la nature dans notre initiative de conservation de la sauvagine en Amérique du Nord.

Les citoyens et citoyennes de nos nations accordent beaucoup de valeur aux bénéfices naturels que proposent les habitats qui font l’objet de mesures de conservation dans le cadre du PNAGS. La mise à jour du Plan de 2018 insiste sur l’importance de bien comprendre les préférences et les points de vue des gens; il s’agit là d’un élément essentiel pour répondre aux besoins de la population, mais aussi pour obtenir leur soutien aux mesures de conservation. Nous devons modifier notre approche de conservation de la sauvagine pour nous adapter à un paysage socioécologique qui est en changement et qui transforme le lien existant entre les gens et la nature. Le maintien de ces liens passe par un travail dynamique et continu pour amener nos citoyens et citoyennes, nos communautés et nos pays respectifs à déployer des efforts de conservation vis-à-vis la sauvagine et les milieux humides à fin de protéger les bénéfices naturels qu’ils nous procurent.

Nous reconnaissons la contribution historique apportée par les chasseurs et les autres amateurs de loisirs de plein air dans les efforts de conservation déployés à l’échelle du continent – plus particulièrement les efforts déployés par la communauté de la conservation de la sauvagine et des milieux humides. Nous demeurons résolus à appuyer ce modèle nord-américain de conservation de la faune et nous reconnaissons la valeur des partenariats public-privé pour la conservation de la sauvagine et des milieux humides sur lesquels se fonde le PNAGS.

Nous croyons que, dans le futur, la nature aura une importance de plus en plus grande pour la santé et le bien-être de nos citoyens et citoyennes. Ce plan permet de faire progresser l’ensemble des acquis générés par la coopération internationale afin de s’assurer que la diversité et l’abondance étonnantes de la sauvagine nord-américaine soient protégées pour les générations actuelles et futures. Nous démontrons ainsi notre détermination à promouvoir les liens naturels qui existent entre les gens, la sauvagine et les milieux humides : ces relations assureront un avenir durable pour tous nos citoyens et citoyennes.

La Actualización del Plan de Manejo de las Aves Acuáticas de Norteamérica (PMAAN) de 2018 – Conectando a la Gente, las Aves Acuáticas y los Humedales, prosigue con una tradición de innovación y colaboración, que se basa en 32 años de conservación exitosa de los humedales y de las aves acuáticas en todo el continente. Desde su creación en 1986, el plan ha contado con la participación de los gobiernos, organizaciones dedicadas a la conservación, propietarios de tierras y ciudadanos de Canadá, México y Estados Unidos, mediante un modelo de alianza ampliamente reconocido en la conservación y el manejo de las aves acuáticas.

La revisión del plan de 2012 presentó una nueva dirección estratégica que propicia un desafío a la comunidad en torno a las aves acuáticas, para ampliar el apoyo de los usuarios de la vida silvestre y otros ciudadanos para lograr objetivos interrelacionados con las personas, las poblaciones de aves acuáticas y la conservación de los humedales. Esta actualización del Plan de 2018 presenta ejemplos de los avances combinados de nuestros países para alcanzar los objetivos de la actualización del año 2012. También establece una base importante para incorporar una interpretación de la relación de las personas con la naturaleza en la tarea de la conservación de las aves acuáticas de Norteamérica.

Los ciudadanos de nuestros países reconocen y valoran los servicios ambientales que proporcionan los humedales conservados bajo el PMAAN. La actualización del Plan de 2018 pone énfasis en comprender las preferencias y las perspectivas de la gente, tanto para responder a sus necesidades como para conseguir su apoyo para la conservación.  Debemos volver a imaginar nuestro trabajo de conservación de las aves acuáticas en un contexto socio-ecológico en evolución, que está transformando la relación de las personas con el entorno natural. Para mantener estos vínculos debemos continuar trabajando diligentemente para que nuestros ciudadanos, comunidades y países participen en la conservación de las aves acuáticas y los humedales, y disfruten de los servicios ambientales que les brindan.

Reconocemos la contribución histórica que los usuarios de la vida silvestre y otras personas que participan en actividades recreativas al aire libre, han hecho a los esfuerzos de conservación en todo el continente, especialmente los socios que integran la comunidad dedicada a la conservación de los humedales y las aves acuáticas. Seguimos firmes en nuestro apoyo a este modelo norteamericano de conservación de la vida silvestre y reconocemos el valor de las alianzas públicas y privadas dirigidas a la conservación de los humedales y las aves acuáticas que constituyen la base del PMAAN.

De cara al futuro, la importancia del entorno natural para la salud y el bienestar de nuestros ciudadanos nunca ha sido tan grande. Este Plan permite avanzar en el legado de la cooperación internacional para proteger la gran diversidad y abundancia de aves acuáticas de Norteamérica, para las generaciones presentes y futuras. De esta manera, seguimos comprometidos en promover las conexiones naturales que existen entre la gente, las aves acuáticas y los humedales, relaciones que garantizarán un futuro sustentable para todos nuestros ciudadanos.

The 2018 North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) Update—Connecting People, Waterfowl, and Wetlands—continues a legacy of innovation and collaboration that is grounded in 32 years of successful waterfowl and wetlands conservation across the continent. Since its inception in 1986, the Plan has engaged governments, conservation organizations, landowners, and citizens throughout Canada, Mexico, and the United States using a widely acclaimed partnership model of waterfowl management.

The 2012 Plan Revision presented a new strategic direction that challenged the waterfowl community to expand support from our hunters and other citizens to achieve interrelated goals for people, waterfowl populations, and wetland conservation.  This 2018 Plan Update presents examples of our countries’ combined progress toward achieving the goals of the 2012 Revision. It also establishes important groundwork for incorporating an understanding of people’s relationship with nature into the North American waterfowl conservation enterprise.

The people of our nations appreciate and value the natural benefits provided by the habitats conserved under the NAWMP. The 2018 Plan Update emphasizes that understanding people’s preferences and perspectives is critical both to meeting their needs and gaining their support for conservation. We must reimagine our waterfowl conservation work in the context of a changing social-ecological landscape that is transforming the connection of people to the natural world. To maintain these links, we must continue to work diligently to engage our citizens, our communities, and our countries in conserving waterfowl, wetlands, and the natural benefits they provide.

We recognize the historic contribution that hunters and other outdoor recreationists have made to conservation efforts continent‑wide—most notably those in the waterfowl and wetland conservation community. We remain steadfast in support of this North American model of wildlife conservation and recognize the value of the public-private partnerships for waterfowl and wetlands conservation that form the foundation of the NAWMP.

As we look to the future, the importance of the natural world to the health and welfare of our citizens has never been more important. This Plan continues to advance the legacy of international cooperation toward securing the astonishing diversity and abundance of North American waterfowl for current and future generations. In doing so, we remain committed to promoting the natural connections that exist among people, waterfowl, and wetlands—relationships that will ensure a sustainable future for all our citizens.

This study is part of a larger North American initiative to examine people’s interactions with waterfowl and wetlands in order to understand the dynamics of these interactions, and how the motivations for these interactions appear to have shifted from consumption to appreciation. This research investigated the characteristics that influence waterfowl hunting participation in Canada, and permit a broader examination of waterfowl conservation in a North American context. This effort represents the first continental effort to actively engage the broad range of stakeholders in the process of developing objectives for waterfowl and wetlands management. Six objectives framed the development of this study:

1. Assess what waterfowl hunters and other waterfowl conservationists (i.e., bird watchers/birders) most desire from their natural resource-based management and social settings to inform NAWMP objectives and select habitat and population management alternatives.
2. Establish baseline measures that can be repeated to inform the development of a Public Engagement Strategy and monitor trends in achieving the NAWMP goal of growing numbers of waterfowl hunters, other conservationists, and citizens who enjoy and actively support waterfowl and wetlands conservation.”
3. Assess waterfowl hunters’ and conservationists’ knowledge, preferences, levels of use and support for waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
4. Assess the general publics’ participation in waterfowl‐associated recreation and how much they support waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
5. Assess the general publics’ awareness and their perceptions regarding the importance of the benefits and values (i.e., Ecological Goods and Services — EGS) provided by waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
6. Assess waterfowl professionals’ perspectives on the levels of waterfowl populations and habitats needed to support hunter and viewer use opportunities.

This study is part of a larger North American initiative to examine people’s interactions with waterfowl and wetlands in order to understand the dynamics of these interactions, and how the motivations for these interactions appear to have shifted from consumption to appreciation. This research investigated the characteristics that influence waterfowl hunting participation in Canada, and permit a broader examination of waterfowl conservation in a North American context. This effort represents the first continental effort to actively engage the broad range of stakeholders in the process of developing objectives for waterfowl and wetlands management. Six objectives framed the development of this study:

1. Assess what waterfowl hunters and other waterfowl conservationists (i.e., bird watchers/birders) most desire from their natural resource-based management and social settings to inform NAWMP objectives and select habitat and population management alternatives.
2. Establish baseline measures that can be repeated to inform the development of a Public Engagement Strategy and monitor trends in achieving the NAWMP goal of growing numbers of waterfowl hunters, other conservationists, and citizens who enjoy and actively support waterfowl and wetlands conservation.”
3. Assess waterfowl hunters’ and conservationists’ knowledge, preferences, levels of use and support for waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
4. Assess the general publics’ participation in waterfowl‐associated recreation and how much they support waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
5. Assess the general publics’ awareness and their perceptions regarding the importance of the benefits and values (i.e., Ecological Goods and Services — EGS) provided by waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
6. Assess waterfowl professionals’ perspectives on the levels of waterfowl populations and habitats needed to support hunter and viewer use opportunities.

This study is part of a larger North American initiative to examine people’s interactions with waterfowl and wetlands in order to understand the dynamics of these interactions, and how the motivations for these interactions appear to have shifted from consumption to appreciation. This research investigated the characteristics that influence waterfowl hunting participation in Canada, and permit a broader examination of waterfowl conservation in a North American context. This effort represents the first continental effort to actively engage the broad range of stakeholders in the process of developing objectives for waterfowl and wetlands management. Six objectives framed the development of this study:

1. Assess what waterfowl hunters and other waterfowl conservationists (i.e., bird watchers/birders) most desire from their natural resource-based management and social settings to inform NAWMP objectives and select habitat and population management alternatives.
2. Establish baseline measures that can be repeated to inform the development of a Public Engagement Strategy and monitor trends in achieving the NAWMP goal of growing numbers of waterfowl hunters, other conservationists, and citizens who enjoy and actively support waterfowl and wetlands conservation.”
3. Assess waterfowl hunters’ and conservationists’ knowledge, preferences, levels of use and support for waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
4. Assess the general publics’ participation in waterfowl‐associated recreation and how much they support waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
5. Assess the general publics’ awareness and their perceptions regarding the importance of the benefits and values (i.e., Ecological Goods and Services — EGS) provided by waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
6. Assess waterfowl professionals’ perspectives on the levels of waterfowl populations and habitats needed to support hunter and viewer use opportunities.

This study is part of a larger North American initiative to examine people’s interactions with waterfowl and wetlands in order to understand the dynamics of these interactions, and how the motivations for these interactions appear to have shifted from consumption to appreciation. This research investigated the characteristics that influence waterfowl hunting participation in Canada, and permit a broader examination of waterfowl conservation in a North American context. This effort represents the first continental effort to actively engage the broad range of stakeholders in the process of developing objectives for waterfowl and wetlands management. Six objectives framed the development of this study:

1. Assess what waterfowl hunters and other waterfowl conservationists (i.e., bird watchers/birders) most desire from their natural resource-based management and social settings to inform NAWMP objectives and select habitat and population management alternatives.
2. Establish baseline measures that can be repeated to inform the development of a Public Engagement Strategy and monitor trends in achieving the NAWMP goal of growing numbers of waterfowl hunters, other conservationists, and citizens who enjoy and actively support waterfowl and wetlands conservation.”
3. Assess waterfowl hunters’ and conservationists’ knowledge, preferences, levels of use and support for waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
4. Assess the general publics’ participation in waterfowl‐associated recreation and how much they support waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
5. Assess the general publics’ awareness and their perceptions regarding the importance of the benefits and values (i.e., Ecological Goods and Services — EGS) provided by waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
6. Assess waterfowl professionals’ perspectives on the levels of waterfowl populations and habitats needed to support hunter and viewer use opportunities.

This study is part of a larger North American initiative to examine people’s interactions with waterfowl and wetlands in order to understand the dynamics of these interactions, and how the motivations for these interactions appear to have shifted from consumption to appreciation. This research investigated the characteristics that influence waterfowl hunting participation in Canada, and permit a broader examination of waterfowl conservation in a North American context. This effort represents the first continental effort to actively engage the broad range of stakeholders in the process of developing objectives for waterfowl and wetlands management. Six objectives framed the development of this study:

1. Assess what waterfowl hunters and other waterfowl conservationists (i.e., bird watchers/birders) most desire from their natural resource-based management and social settings to inform NAWMP objectives and select habitat and population management alternatives.
2. Establish baseline measures that can be repeated to inform the development of a Public Engagement Strategy and monitor trends in achieving the NAWMP goal of growing numbers of waterfowl hunters, other conservationists, and citizens who enjoy and actively support waterfowl and wetlands conservation.”
3. Assess waterfowl hunters’ and conservationists’ knowledge, preferences, levels of use and support for waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
4. Assess the general publics’ participation in waterfowl‐associated recreation and how much they support waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
5. Assess the general publics’ awareness and their perceptions regarding the importance of the benefits and values (i.e., Ecological Goods and Services — EGS) provided by waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
6. Assess waterfowl professionals’ perspectives on the levels of waterfowl populations and habitats needed to support hunter and viewer use opportunities.

This study is part of a larger North American initiative to examine people’s interactions with waterfowl and wetlands in order to understand the dynamics of these interactions, and how the motivations for these interactions appear to have shifted from consumption to appreciation. This research investigated the characteristics that influence birdwatching and waterfowl hunting participation in Canada, and permit a broader examination of waterfowl conservation in a North American context. This effort represents the first continental effort to actively engage the broad range of stakeholders and management professionals in the process of developing objectives for waterfowl and wetlands management. Six objectives framed the development of this study:

1. Assess what hunters and other waterfowl conservationists (i.e., bird watchers/birders) most desire from their natural resource-based management and social settings to inform NAWMP objectives andselect habitat and population management alternatives.
2. Establish baseline measures that can be repeated to inform the development of a Public Engagement Strategy and monitor trends in achieving the NAWMP goal of “growing numbers of waterfowl hunters, other conservationists, and citizens who enjoy and actively support waterfowl and wetlands conservation.”
3. Assess waterfowl hunters’ and conservationists’ knowledge, preferences, levels of use and support for waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
4. Assess the general publics’ participation in waterfowl‐associated recreation and how much they support waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
5. Assess the general publics’ awareness and their perceptions regarding the importance of the benefits and values (i.e., ecological goods and services — EGS) provided by waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
6. Assess waterfowl professionals’ perspectives on the levels of waterfowl populations and habitats needed to support hunter and viewer use opportunities.

This study is part of a larger North American initiative to examine people’s interactions with waterfowl and wetlands in order to understand the dynamics of these interactions, and how the motivations for these interactions appear to have shifted from consumption to appreciation. This research investigated the characteristics that influence birdwatching and waterfowl hunting participation in Canada, and permit a broader examination of waterfowl conservation in a North American context. This effort represents the first continental effort to actively engage the broad range of stakeholders and management professionals in the process of developing objectives for waterfowl and wetlands management. Six objectives framed the development of this study:

1. Assess what hunters and other waterfowl conservationists (i.e., bird watchers/birders) most desire from their natural resource-based management and social settings to inform NAWMP objectives andselect habitat and population management alternatives.
2. Establish baseline measures that can be repeated to inform the development of a Public Engagement Strategy and monitor trends in achieving the NAWMP goal of “growing numbers of waterfowl hunters, other conservationists, and citizens who enjoy and actively support waterfowl and wetlands conservation.”
3. Assess waterfowl hunters’ and conservationists’ knowledge, preferences, levels of use and support for waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
4. Assess the general publics’ participation in waterfowl‐associated recreation and how much they support waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
5. Assess the general publics’ awareness and their perceptions regarding the importance of the benefits and values (i.e., ecological goods and services — EGS) provided by waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
6. Assess waterfowl professionals’ perspectives on the levels of waterfowl populations and habitats needed to support hunter and viewer use opportunities.

This study is part of a larger North American initiative to examine people’s interactions with waterfowl and wetlands in order to understand the dynamics of these interactions, and how the motivations for these interactions appear to have shifted from consumption to appreciation. This research investigated the characteristics that influence birdwatching and waterfowl hunting participation in Canada, and permit a broader examination of waterfowl conservation in a North American context. This effort represents the first continental effort to actively engage the broad range of stakeholders and management professionals in the process of developing objectives for waterfowl and wetlands management. Six objectives framed the development of this study:

1. Assess what hunters and other waterfowl conservationists (i.e., bird watchers/birders) most desire from their natural resource-based management and social settings to inform NAWMP objectives andselect habitat and population management alternatives.
2. Establish baseline measures that can be repeated to inform the development of a Public Engagement Strategy and monitor trends in achieving the NAWMP goal of “growing numbers of waterfowl hunters, other conservationists, and citizens who enjoy and actively support waterfowl and wetlands conservation.”
3. Assess waterfowl hunters’ and conservationists’ knowledge, preferences, levels of use and support for waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
4. Assess the general publics’ participation in waterfowl‐associated recreation and how much they support waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
5. Assess the general publics’ awareness and their perceptions regarding the importance of the benefits and values (i.e., ecological goods and services — EGS) provided by waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
6. Assess waterfowl professionals’ perspectives on the levels of waterfowl populations and habitats needed to support hunter and viewer use opportunities.

This study is part of a larger North American initiative to examine people’s interactions with waterfowl and wetlands in order to understand the dynamics of these interactions, and how the motivations for these interactions appear to have shifted from consumption to appreciation. This research investigated the characteristics that influence birdwatching and waterfowl hunting participation in Canada, and permit a broader examination of waterfowl conservation in a North American context. This effort represents the first continental effort to actively engage the broad range of stakeholders and management professionals in the process of developing objectives for waterfowl and wetlands management. Six objectives framed the development of this study:

1. Assess what hunters and other waterfowl conservationists (i.e., bird watchers/birders) most desire from their natural resource-based management and social settings to inform NAWMP objectives andselect habitat and population management alternatives.
2. Establish baseline measures that can be repeated to inform the development of a Public Engagement Strategy and monitor trends in achieving the NAWMP goal of “growing numbers of waterfowl hunters, other conservationists, and citizens who enjoy and actively support waterfowl and wetlands conservation.”
3. Assess waterfowl hunters’ and conservationists’ knowledge, preferences, levels of use and support for waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
4. Assess the general publics’ participation in waterfowl‐associated recreation and how much they support waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
5. Assess the general publics’ awareness and their perceptions regarding the importance of the benefits and values (i.e., ecological goods and services — EGS) provided by waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
6. Assess waterfowl professionals’ perspectives on the levels of waterfowl populations and habitats needed to support hunter and viewer use opportunities.

This study is part of a larger North American initiative to examine people’s interactions with waterfowl and wetlands in order to understand the dynamics of these interactions, and how the motivations for these interactions appear to have shifted from consumption to appreciation. This research investigated the characteristics that influence birdwatching and waterfowl hunting participation in Canada, and permit a broader examination of waterfowl conservation in a North American context. This effort represents the first continental effort to actively engage the broad range of stakeholders and management professionals in the process of developing objectives for waterfowl and wetlands management. Six objectives framed the development of this study:

1. Assess what hunters and other waterfowl conservationists (i.e., bird watchers/birders) most desire from their natural resource-based management and social settings to inform NAWMP objectives andselect habitat and population management alternatives.
2. Establish baseline measures that can be repeated to inform the development of a Public Engagement Strategy and monitor trends in achieving the NAWMP goal of “growing numbers of waterfowl hunters, other conservationists, and citizens who enjoy and actively support waterfowl and wetlands conservation.”
3. Assess waterfowl hunters’ and conservationists’ knowledge, preferences, levels of use and support for waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
4. Assess the general publics’ participation in waterfowl‐associated recreation and how much they support waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
5. Assess the general publics’ awareness and their perceptions regarding the importance of the benefits and values (i.e., ecological goods and services — EGS) provided by waterfowl and wetlands conservation.
6. Assess waterfowl professionals’ perspectives on the levels of waterfowl populations and habitats needed to support hunter and viewer use opportunities.

The North American Waterfowl Management Plan, with its 31-year successful history, remains the standard bearer for all continental–scale conservation initiatives. The Plan’s success results in part from a continued commitment to periodic review and renewal. A major revision of the Plan was completed in 2012, expanding the scope of the Plan to include not only waterfowl populations and the habitats needed to sustain them, but also to engage the people who value and support waterfowl and wetland conservation. After 5 years, the Plan Committee recognized that it is time to review the technical and governance-level structures, processes, responsibilities and accomplishments of the parties involved in implementation of the Plan and assess whether adjustments are needed to remain efficient, contemporary, and well-positioned to deliver waterfowl conservation. An overall recommendation calls for a focused and strategic effort to identify and refine a small number of primary responsibilities to be accomplished by the PC over the period covered by the 2018 Update.  Ultimately, the structure, composition, and processes of the PC also would be revisited. Additionally, a specific and near-term recommendation is proposed to retain the function of the Interim Integration Committee (IIC) through advisory membership on the PC from waterfowl working groups and active liaison by PC members.

The 2012 NAWMP Revision Vision Statement provides a new vision of waterfowl management that emphasizes a growing and supportive core of waterfowl hunters and an engaged conservation community inspired by waterfowl and wetlands. The goal is to have a public supportive of waterfowl and wetlands conservation that have strong emotional and pragmatic ties to waterfowl and wetlands.

To facilitate engagement of both the traditional waterfowl hunting community and other nontraditional stakeholder groups who are interested in waterfowl and the conservation of waterfowl and wetlands, the NFC’s Human Dimensions Working Group and other NAWMP partners conducted a research study using both stakeholder and general public surveys of North Americans that can inform: 1) NAWMP objectives; 2) harvest objectives and strategies; 3) habitat management; and 4) public engagement strategies.

This report constitutes the first release of the full results of the birdwatcher study, organized by flyway.

The 2012 NAWMP Revision Vision Statement provides a new vision of waterfowl management that emphasizes a growing and supportive core of waterfowl hunters and an engaged conservation community inspired by waterfowl and wetlands. The goal is to have a public supportive of waterfowl and wetlands conservation that have strong emotional and pragmatic ties to waterfowl and wetlands.

To facilitate engagement of both the traditional waterfowl hunting community and other nontraditional stakeholder groups who are interested in waterfowl and the conservation of waterfowl and wetlands, the NFC’s Human Dimensions Working Group and other NAWMP partners conducted a research study using both stakeholder and general public surveys of North Americans that can inform: 1) NAWMP objectives; 2) harvest objectives and strategies; 3) habitat management; and 4) public engagement strategies.

This report constitutes the first release of the full results of the birdwatcher study, organized by flyway.

The 2012 NAWMP Revision Vision Statement provides a new vision of waterfowl management that emphasizes a growing and supportive core of waterfowl hunters and an engaged conservation community inspired by waterfowl and wetlands. The goal is to have a public supportive of waterfowl and wetlands conservation that have strong emotional and pragmatic ties to waterfowl and wetlands.

To facilitate engagement of both the traditional waterfowl hunting community and other nontraditional stakeholder groups who are interested in waterfowl and the conservation of waterfowl and wetlands, the NFC’s Human Dimensions Working Group and other NAWMP partners conducted a research study using both stakeholder and general public surveys of North Americans that can inform: 1) NAWMP objectives; 2) harvest objectives and strategies; 3) habitat management; and 4) public engagement strategies.

This report constitutes the first release of the full results of the birdwatcher study, organized by flyway.

The 2012 NAWMP Revision Vision Statement provides a new vision of waterfowl management that emphasizes a growing and supportive core of waterfowl hunters and an engaged conservation community inspired by waterfowl and wetlands. The goal is to have a public supportive of waterfowl and wetlands conservation that have strong emotional and pragmatic ties to waterfowl and wetlands.

To facilitate engagement of both the traditional waterfowl hunting community and other nontraditional stakeholder groups who are interested in waterfowl and the conservation of waterfowl and wetlands, the NFC’s Human Dimensions Working Group and other NAWMP partners conducted a research study using both stakeholder and general public surveys of North Americans that can inform: 1) NAWMP objectives; 2) harvest objectives and strategies; 3) habitat management; and 4) public engagement strategies.

This report constitutes the first release of the full results of the birdwatcher study, organized by flyway.

To facilitate engagement of both the traditional waterfowl hunting community and other nontraditional stakeholder groups who are interested in waterfowl and
the conservation of waterfowl and wetlands , the NFC’s Human Dimensions Working Group and other NAWMP partners conducted a research study using both stakeholder and general public surveys of North Americans that can inform: 1) NAWMP objectives; 2) harvest objectives and strategies; 3) habitat management; and 4) public engagement strategies.

This report constitutes the first release of the full results of the waterfowl hunter study, organized by flyway.

To facilitate engagement of both the traditional waterfowl hunting community and other nontraditional stakeholder groups who are interested in waterfowl and
the conservation of waterfowl and wetlands , the NFC’s Human Dimensions Working Group and other NAWMP partners conducted a research study using both stakeholder and general public surveys of North Americans that can inform: 1) NAWMP objectives; 2) harvest objectives and strategies; 3) habitat management; and 4) public engagement strategies.

This report constitutes the first release of the full results of the waterfowl hunter study, organized by flyway.

To facilitate engagement of both the traditional waterfowl hunting community and other nontraditional stakeholder groups who are interested in waterfowl and
the conservation of waterfowl and wetlands , the NFC’s Human Dimensions Working Group and other NAWMP partners conducted a research study using both stakeholder and general public surveys of North Americans that can inform: 1) NAWMP objectives; 2) harvest objectives and strategies; 3) habitat management; and 4) public engagement strategies.

This report constitutes the first release of the full results of the waterfowl hunter study, organized by flyway.

To facilitate engagement of both the traditional waterfowl hunting community and other nontraditional stakeholder groups who are interested in waterfowl and
the conservation of waterfowl and wetlands , the NFC’s Human Dimensions Working Group and other NAWMP partners conducted a research study using both stakeholder and general public surveys of North Americans that can inform: 1) NAWMP objectives; 2) harvest objectives and strategies; 3) habitat management; and 4) public engagement strategies.

This report constitutes the first release of the full results of the waterfowl hunter study, organized by flyway.

The Future of Waterfowl II Workshop, held at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Conservation Training Center in Shepherdstown, West Virginia on September 26 and 27, 2017, was a gathering of wildlife and land management professionals to help chart a path forward for waterfowl and wetland conservation in North America.

This is the final report of the workshop, outlining the full details of everything presented and discussed.

This stand-alone synthesis section forms a major product arising from the Future of Waterfowl Workshop II Report. The objective of this synthesis is to summarize dominant ideas and key messages emerging from the workshop presentations and discussions. Much of the information contained here was obtained from workshop participants during facilitated break-out sessions that focused on the issues of “Awareness and Public Engagement” and “Institutions and Integration”. During those sessions, participants identified the strengths and weaknesses of their organizations, then identified opportunities and threats associated with “Awareness and Public Engagement” and “Institutions and Integration”, and finally, generated ideas about how to use our strengths and overcome our weaknesses to take advantage of opportunities and ward off threats. Additional information was generated from comments provided by individuals who responded to the post-workshop survey of participants.

Combined with other sources, this information will be used to help guide the development of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) 2018 Update and is expected to provide ideas for conservation initiatives over the next 3-5 years.

Public Views of Wetlands and Waterfowl Conservation in the United States—Results of a Survey to Inform the 2018 Update of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan

This report provides information from a general public survey conducted in early 2017 to help inform the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) 2018 update. This report is intended for use by the NAWMP advisory committees and anyone interested in the human dimensions of wetlands and waterfowl management. A mail-out survey was sent to 5,000 addresses in the United States, which were selected randomly in proportion to the population of each State. A total of 1,030 completed surveys representing 49 States were returned, resulting in a 23 percent overall response rate.

More information:  https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/ofr20171148

The following presentations were given at the Future of Waterfowl Workshop 2 and can be reviewed or shared with others.

The purpose of the NAWMP Birdwatcher survey included: 1) identifying the key attributes important to birding experiences; 2) assessing the knowledge, preferences, levels of use and support for waterfowl and wetlands conservation; 3) assessing importance of ecological goods and services provided by wetlands; 4) assessing decisions to participate in birdwatching and level of identity as birdwatcher, hunter and conservationist; and 5) examining the social, political, economic and human capital capacity for conserving waterfowl and wetlands.

The purpose of the NAWMP hunter survey included: 1) identifying the key attributes important to hunting experiences; 2) assessing the knowledge, preferences, levels of use and support for waterfowl and wetlands conservation; 3) assessing importance of ecological goods and services provided by wetlands; 4) assessing decisions to participate in hunting and level of identity with waterfowl hunting and conservation; and 5) examining the social, political, economic and human capital capacity for conserving waterfowl and wetlands.

Twenty-nine organizations (Flyways, Joint Ventures, Government, Non-government) identified actions they’d undertaken to implement 7 recommendations from the 2012 NAWMP Revision (“Revision”). Ascertained, too, were stakeholders and outputs/outcomes of actions. 

The general public survey focuses on attitudes and preferences concerning conservation and natural resource management that will be functional for NAWMP decision making. The survey explores participation in and attitudes toward waterfowl and wetlands-based activities, engagement in conservation behaviors, preferred communication channels and sources, knowledge and awareness of wetlands, and importance of wetlands ecological goods and services

Primary objectives for the survey included:

• Provide opportunity for the management community (those responsible for providing waterfowl hunting and viewing opportunities and conserving important habitats) to provide general feedback on implementation of the 2012 NAWMP Revision.
• Obtain an evaluation from survey participants on:
  • Progress on the recommendations from the 2012 NAWMP Revision Action Plan (listed later in the survey)
  • How well these recommendations capture needs over the next 5-10 years.
  • The priorities for focusing the community’s work over the next 5-10 years.

Progress towards 2012 NAWMP goals was reported during a special session at the seventh North American Duck Symposium. Our purpose was to update the waterfowl management community (primarily a technical audience) but also to continue meaningful steps towards Plan goals. 

Symposium results were later published in the Journal of Wildlife Management.

The waterfowl management community has implemented efforts to advance recommendations outlined in the 2012 NAWMP Revision and the subsequent Action Plan. Next steps take the form of desired outcomes, that can be introduced during the FoW2 and possibly included in the Update. 

As part of the assessment of the 2012 NAWMP Revision, a survey was sent to key waterfowl and wetland conservation organizations in North America—29 responses were received (Table 1). This DRAFT summary is intended to inform discussions of the Update Steering Committee during their June 21-23, 2017 meeting. 

As part of the assessment of the 2012 NAWMP Revision, a survey was sent to key waterfowl and wetland conservation organizations in North America—29 responses were received. This DRAFT summary is intended to inform discussions of the Update Steering Committee during their June 21-23, 2017 meeting and at the Future of Waterfowl Workshop 2.

A survey of waterfowl professionals (n=597) was conducted as an opportunity for the management community to provide general feedback on implementation of the 2012 NAWMP Revision. The survey provides an evaluation from 367 survey respondents (61%) about progress on the recommendations from the 2012 NAWMP Revision and priorities for the community’s work over the next 5-10 years. 

The fundamental revision of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP or Plan) in 2012 added an explicit goal for waterfowl conservation supporters, complementing existing goals for sustainable populations and sufficient habitat. Adding goals and objectives for supporters increased potential relevance of the Plan; however, it also presented a level of complexity that was not entirely anticipated. Simultaneous consideration of multiple objectives, although implicit before, now is a specific focus for habitat and harvest management affecting hunters and other users of the waterfowl resource. The waterfowl management community has implemented several efforts to advance seven recommendations outlined in the 2012 NAWMP Revision and the subsequent Action Plan. Progress, briefly summarized below, has focused on clarified objectives, some key integration challenges, a commitment to informed management decisions, and possible amendments to the institutions and processes of waterfowl management. The challenge to waterfowl managers is to continue progress in these areas while also considering next steps that will be emphasized in a 2018 update of the Plan. 

Introduction: 

Initially, we considered reviewing a variety of habitat types (wetlands and coastal habitats, forest, and grassland and scrub-shrub) to assess net landscape change assessment information needs. For some of these habitat groupings it appeared that alternate sources of data allowed for cost-effective, alternative approaches to assessing changes in landscape composition. Eventually, we gravitated to a set of key habitat elements viewed as showing the greatest need for such information. Those elements resulted in the following identified needs: 

1. Fulfill agency mandates to update NWI 
2. Improve classification and quality assessment of grassland and shrubland habitats 
3. Increase communication with NRCS NRI regarding data needs and accessibility 
4. Increase opportunities to update NLCD 

Our objective for this whitepaper was to focus efforts to pursue data where alternate sources do not provide the requisite information to assess landscape composition change. Each section presents a brief description of limitations of existing data, what data is needed and at what resolution, the importance and value the desired data holds for JV conservation planning with examples showing how JVs intend to use the data in their net landscape change assessments and ultimately its value in habitat allocation decision making. To the extent possible, this will be supplemented with cost estimates.

In each section, we provide recommendations for the US NABCI committee to consider in their efforts to interact with agency leaders to address the paucity of information limiting more transparent and effective habitat conservation delivery. Those ten recommendations are summarized immediately below

ABSTRACT
During the early 2000s, M. Koneff (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) developed a methodology to derive regional non-breeding waterfowl population abundance objectives from continental abundance estimates. This information has been foundational to Joint Venture (JV) planning and implementation of habitat conservation for non-breeding waterfowl, especially wintering ducks. The 2012 NAWMP Revision and its amended population objectives motivated many JVs to begin updating their waterfowl implementation plans. Accordingly, interest grew in revisiting Koneff’s analysis to calculate JV regional non-breeding population abundance objectives consistent with the revised NAWMP breeding objectives, while also seeking process refinement and repeatability using persistent datasets. We describe the data, equations, and caveats of the original derivation technique and compare results of alternative approaches using updated population and harvest information. Of the four methods compared, the superior approach (fewest number of short-comings) employed harvest data partitioned into separate autumn and mid-winter time periods, thus enabling finer temporal characterization of duck distribution and resulting population objective across individual JV regions. This approach
made use of the least biased and most geographically consistent datasets, collected over an extended time frame, and likely to be collected in a similar manner into the future. JV regional population abundance objectives are provided for the 17 most commonly harvested duck species. Recommendations for applying results along with uncertainties, assumptions, and limitations which will guide future revisions are provided.

This report captures results of discussions by the Interim Integration Committee and the Update Steering Committee in Minneapolis during 13-14 July 2016 and later at the Plan Committee meeting in August. Included is a general synthesis providing context, a brief update of work in progress, and desired outcomes for the Future of Waterfowl Management Workshop II and the 2018 Update.

Based on the 2012 Value Proposition flyer, a revised (and shorter) promotion on the need and value of becoming a NAWMP Partner:

What is the North American Waterfowl Management Plan?

The North American Waterfowl Management Plan is an international strategy for conserving migratory waterfowl and their habitats throughout
the continent. It is one of the most successful wildlife conservation initiatives in the world.
Since 1986, the Plan has been a catalyst for sustaining abundant waterfowl populations by conserving landscapes through public-private partnerships
guided by sound science.
Plan programs and projects are international in scope. Twenty-five Migratory Bird Joint Venture partnerships implement these efforts at regional and local levels. This work contributes to the conservation of wetlands habitat and wildlife species across the North American landscape.

Responding to a Critical Need
In 1985, North American waterfowl populations had plummeted to record lows. Recognizing the need for international cooperation to help recover these shared resources, the U.S. and Canadian governments developed a strategy to restore waterfowl populations through habitat protection, restoration, and enhancement.
The U.S. and Canada signed the Plan in 1986 and Mexico in 1994. Because it is an evolving document that is updated periodically with engagement of the waterfowl conservation community, the Plan remains a leading model for other international conservation initiatives.

Dynamic Partnership
The North American Waterfowl Plan has pioneered a successful collaborative approach, forging strong alliances to achieve healthy and sustainable landscapes.
It relies on conservation organizations joining forces with federal, provincial, and state governments, industry, private companies, individuals, and private landowners.

Why Become a Partner with the Plan?
The Plan articulates a clear vision to move forward with a comprehensive, science-driven approach to waterfowl conservation that coordinates and integrates efforts across North America.
By participating in the Plan, you work with a dynamic group of government agencies, world-renowned conservation organizations, and thousands of individuals across North America to implement high priority conservation projects accruing perpetual benefits to waterfowl, wetlands, and society. Opportunities to participate are many and include helping to conceive and implement habitat restoration and protection projects, becoming involved in strategic planning and landscape design efforts, and investing conservation dollars in support of the work of plan partners.
One of the Plan’s greatest strengths is the ability of its partners to quickly pool and leverage conservation funding from a variety of sources. This expands the Plan’s conservation reach and supports strategically targeted local, regional, and international habitat conservation projects.

To learn more about NAWMP and becoming a partner, check out the full document below.

In February 2015, the NAWMP Science Support Team (NSST) and Interim Integration Committee (IIC) met jointly in Memphis, TN, and began to explore ways of integrating objectives for waterfowl habitat and people, the latter including hunters, other conservation supporters and the general public.

Participants were exposed to approaches and efforts attempting to integrate habitat-human objectives and monitor responses and progress toward integration, and were actively engaged in generating and summarizing ideas.

Defining the “problem set”, i.e., explicitly specifying the linked habitat-people objectives and associated management decisions, was challenging. Yet, all groups managed to make progress, and identify trade-offs associated with decisions that could most benefit birds, people or both target groups.

As a result of considerable effort put forth by the waterfowl management community over the last year, one of seven recommendations outlined in the 2012 NAWMP Revision has been formally completed. This document outlines revised objectives for waterfowl populations, waterfowl habitat, and those who enjoy and actively support waterfowl and wetlands conservation. Although much work remains, these objectives represent an important step toward ensuring that management programs are aligned and work in a complementary fashion. Efforts to formally integrate management actions, assess stakeholder values, evaluate harvest management strategies, and engage waterfowl conservation supporters remain as near-term challenges to the waterfowl conservation community.

Over the past several months, the Interim Integration Committee has accomplished the task set out last fall by the NAWMP Committee to oversee the review and development of contemporary and coherent objectives for waterfowl populations, people, and habitat. With input from the waterfowl management community that task has been advanced, and the revised "working objectives" follow in the attached document.

A collection of documents with feedback on the work plan. Although comments on the plan have reflected diverse views, the collective input has been very helpful in identifying the emerging themes that will need to be addressed.

The adaptive management of waterfowl harvests in the United States has endured as an institution for 8 almost 20 years. This is an overview of adaptive harvest management and goals it tries to accomplish and what can be expected in the future. 

A communique to the waterfowl management community from the co-chairs of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan Committee. 

==================

An Interim Integration Committee (IIC), prescribed in the Action Plan, has been charged with facilitating the integration of waterfowl management and advancing many of the specific recommendations identified in the Revision and Action Plan. You will have received a DRAFT WORK PLAN from the IIC in mid-July, and we discussed this at length last week at our Plan Committee meeting in Winnipeg.

In addition we heard reports from the nascent Human Dimensions Working Group (HDWG), the NSST, the NAWMP Joint Ventures, and the Plan Committee’s new Public Engagement Team (PET). Collectively the work of these groups, in partnership with all of you is advancing the recommendations of the 2012 Revision on many fronts. As Co-Chairs of the international Plan Committee we are committed to implementing the 2012 Plan and updating you from time to time on the progress of this important work.

The NAWMP Plan Committee met August 21-22, 2013 in Winnipeg, Manitoba. This is a progress update from the Plan Committee co-chairs regarding implementation of the 2012 NAWMP Revision.

A letter from the 2012 Revision of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) discussing the adoption of 3 goals.

• Abundant and resilient waterfowl populations to support hunting and other uses without imperiling habitat.
• Wetlands and related habitats sufficient to sustain waterfowl populations at desired levels, while providing places to recreate and ecological services that benefit society.
• Growing numbers of waterfowl hunters, other conservationists and citizens who enjoy and actively support waterfowl and wetlands conservation.

Implementing the 2012 North American Waterfowl Management Plan: people conserving waterfowl and wetlands

Abstract

The North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) is a continental ecosystems model for wildlife conservation planning with worldwide implications.
Since established in 1986, NAWMP has undergone continual evolution as challenges to waterfowl conservation have emerged and information available to support  conservation decisions has become available. In the 2012 revision, the waterfowl management community revisited the fundamental basis for the Plan and placed greater emphasis on sustaining the Plan’s conservation work and on integration across disciplines of harvest and habitat management. Most notably, traditional and  nontraditional users (i.e. hunters and wildlife viewers) of the resource and other conservation supporters are integrated into waterfowl conservation planning.

Challenges ahead for the waterfowl management enterprise include addressing trade-offs that emerge when habitat for waterfowl populations versus habitat for humans are explicitly considered, how these objectives and decision problems can be linked at various spatial and temporal scales, and most fundamentally how to sustain NAWMP conservation work in the face of multi-faceted ecological and social change.

The 2012 North American Waterfowl Management Plan – People Conserving Waterfowl and Wetlands presents a bold renewed vision for the future, grounded in 25 years of implementation of the 1986 North American Waterfowl Management Plan. Since its creation, the Plan has achieved wetlands and waterfowl conservation successes by adopting a partner­-based model that has been broadly acclaimed and widely emulated.

Building on a remarkable legacy of coordinated public-­private strategies for managing waterfowl, our three countries have embarked on an ambitious journey to achieve a new conservation vision.  Extensive public consultations have confirmed that we need to pursue abundant and resilient waterfowl populations and sustainable landscapes, through management decisions based on strong biological foundations. This Plan focuses more than ever on expanding an engaged community of users and supporters. This includes hunters and a non-­hunting public, both committed to conservation and valuing waterfowl and their habitat as essential characteristics of the North American landscape. Citizens of our three countries ascribe increasing value to the broad suite of ecological values associated with wetlands and other important waterfowl habitats. They place their trust in science-­based management that ensures sustainable populations of waterfowl. This Plan responds to the changing needs of our evolving societies while respecting and recommitting to the rich traditions that have been ours since before the founding of our nations.

The NAWMP Action Plan is a companion document to the 2012 NAWMP. It provides initial guidance and strategic ideas for implementing the 2012 NAWMP. As its title implies, the Action Plan is a call to action. In addition to identifying key actions for each of the seven recommendations in the 2012 NAWMP, it contains technical details and ideas to advance creation of an integrated waterfowl management enterprise.

What is NAWMP?
The North American Waterfowl Management Plan (“NAWMP” or “the Plan”) is an international action strategy for conserving migratory waterfowl throughout the continent.
The purpose of the Plan is to sustain abundant waterfowl populations while preserving the traditions of wildfowling and achieving broad benefits to
biodiversity, ecosystem processes and the people of North America. Plan goals will be accomplished by partnerships that conserve habitats and sustain
populations, guided by science.
The Plan is a partnership of federal, provincial/state and municipal governments, non-government organizations (NGOs), private companies and many
individuals, all working towards preserving wetlands to benefit waterfowl and other wildlife -- as well as people. The Plan's unique combination of science,
conservation and partnerships comprise its exemplary conservation legacy. Plan programs and projects are international in scope, but implemented at regional and local levels. Together they contribute to the protection of habitat and wildlife species across the North American landscape. In fact, the North American Waterfowl Management Plan is considered one of the most successful conservation initiatives in the world.
Governments, communities, industries, NGOs, and public and private organizations operating in today's environment and business climate may realize significant benefits by becoming a NAWMP partner.

Why Conserve Wetlands?
Wetlands are vital to the life cycle and conservation of all waterfowl species.
Wetlands are also nature’s “kidneys.” They have the amazing ability to remove up to 99 percent of bacteria, up to 94 percent of phosphorous and up to 87 percent of nitrates from the waters that flow into our rivers and lakes. Conserving wetlands means helping to keep our drinking water safe and clean.
Given the value to society as a whole of conserving wetlands, NAWMP’s world recognition as a leader in wetland conservation is the key element in our appeal to new partners.

To learn more about NAWMP and how get involved or become a Partner, check out the full document below.

ABSTRACT
Improved spatial analysis tools and waterfowl population data for many regions of North America prompted refinement of the 2004 NAWMP map depicting areas most significant to waterfowl at the continental scale. The NSST established an 11-member committee to coordinate map revision via Joint Ventures (JVs) and their conservation partners. The committee was not able to develop universal criteria for area inclusion on the NAWMP map, but JVs were required to support proposals with the best quantitative information available. A total of 41 adjustments proposed by 15 habitat and 2 species JVs were approved by the map committee, but quality and reliability of available population data varied considerably among regions and proposals. Despite data limitations, the revised NAWMP map represented material improvements in depicting areas of continental significance to waterfowl. However, given the subjectivity in its development and refinement, the NAWMP map has limited ability to inform conservation decisions. The committee advocates a succeeding effort to develop products for guiding conservation at appropriate scales and addressing the 3 fundamental goals of the 2012 NAWMP Revision. Key decision frameworks must be established to assure resulting maps and decision-support tools are rooted in a clearly defined and accepted context.

ABSTRACT
In 2009, the NSST Alternative Performance Metrics (APM) Committee identified a limited number of alternative performance metrics to be adopted and implemented by the NAWMP Committee and Joint Ventures (NSST Technical Report 2009-1). The APM Committee developed guidance for advancing beyond financially and area-based objectives and accomplishment metrics to those more meaningful for assessing biological impacts of conservation actions.

Although development of these recommendations represented a significant accomplishment, tangible advancements in measuring biological effectiveness of conservation actions will occur only if the recommendations are adopted by the NAWMP community. The NSST identified as a priority item in its 2012 – 2016 Work Plan the need to continue shepherding these recommendations and to facilitate their implementation. Thus, the NSST Demographic Objectives Committee was established in 2010 with the primary goal of developing methods for setting demographic objectives (i.e., vital rates) at BCR/JV-scales for focal waterfowl species.

The NAWMP Science Support Team’s (NSST) Demographic Objectives Committee convened a workshop on 14-15 June 2011 in Corpus Christi, Texas to solicit input from Joint Venture representatives on their efforts to establish regional-scale demographic objectives, logistical and technical challenges to doing so, and opportunities and strategies to expedite the surmounting of those challenges. To catalyze workshop discussions, each attending JV representative was asked to deliver a presentation describing the biological models used to establish waterfowl habitat objectives within their region and the extent to which their models were linked to vital rate objectives. Primary objectives of the workshop were to: 1) provide peer review of current JV biological modeling approaches; 2) establish a commitment from JVs to begin developing demographic objectives within the next 5 years where they do not already exist; and 3) develop a clear understanding of the most appropriate strategies for measuring habitat conservation impacts on key vital rates.

Workshop recommendations for establishing objectives and measuring accomplishment in terms of demographic rates are included in this report and are summarized as follows: promote completion of pintail, scaup, and black duck annual cycle models; develop an annual cycle model for a generic dabbling duck, perhaps based on mallard demographics; and develop strategies to communicate the value and utility of integrated annual cycle models and demographic objectives.

The North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) Committee sought public comment on the Draft Revised Plan (Draft) from August 25, to September 26, 2011. Comments were submitted one of four ways:

• Email to info@nawmprevision.org
• A web form located at www.nawmprevision.org
• Comment document uploaded to www.nawmprevision.org
• Or mailed to the USFWS Division of Bird Habitat Conservation, 4401 North Fairfax Drive MS4075, Arlington, VA 22203, Attn: NAWMP Revision Comments.

Written comments on the draft NAWMP revision document were received from more than 50 individuals and organizations in the United States, Canada and Mexico. These have been compiled into one PDF document. The comments are not arranged in any particular order in the document.

The first NAWMP Revision Webinar which was held July 27, 2011

The report of results from Round 1 and 2 stakeholder input workshops. The report is divided into several files: main report and several appendices files.

Additional input provided during the Round 2 comment period from the Central Flyway Council. 

Seven Round 2 consultation workshops were held between September 2010 and February 2011. The first was held in conjunction with the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies annual meeting. Feedback from that workshop helped to modify the agenda and process for the remaining workshops. Those workshops - held in New Orleans, Denver (Dec. 7), Portland OR, Denver (Feb. 3), Edmonton, and Ottawa - followed a different agenda than the Grand Rapids Workshop. The agenda and powerpoint presentations used for those six workshops are attached below. (Grand Rapids results are further below.) Results from each of the four US and the two Canadian (but not Grand Rapids) include the TurningPoint slides, the compiled valuing exercise average, and the table discussion notes. The table discussion notes include suggestions for clarification of the fundamental objectives as well as suggested measurable attributes.

Workshop results from round 2 in Edmonton. 

Workshops results from round 2 in Ottawa. 

Workshop results from round 2 in Denver. 

Workshop results from Portland, Oregon from the workshop held January 10-11, 2011. 

ABSTRACT
Joint Venture (JV) scientists use regional population abundance objectives for waterfowl to quantify habitat objectives and frame conservation delivery strategies. Inconsistent or unreliable approaches for deriving population objectives among JVs will, by extension, produce inconsistent or unreliable habitat objectives across JVs. Furthermore, a 2007 North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) Continental Progress Assessment identified several JVs whose waterfowl population abundance objectives lacked a clear relationship to NAWMP continental goals, reenforcing a need for guidelines to establish population objectives at the JV regional scale. Consequently, a NAWMP Science Support Team (NSST) Committee was formed to review existing approaches and provide recommendations to formulate regional waterfowl population abundance objectives explicitly and consistently linked to NAWMP continental population goals. This effort included a workshop in February 2009 to facilitate review of existing approaches and to seek input from the NAWMP community on recommendations for improvement. Methods for establishing population abundance objectives and their use in JV conservation planning logically differ among periods of the waterfowl annual cycle (i.e., breeding, wintering, and migration). However, our workshop revealed even among JV regions focused on the same annual cycle period, establishment of population objectives varied and were often not linked to NAWMP goals. For example, the primary breeding regions in North America, encompassing the Prairie Habitat Joint Venture (PHJV) in Canada and the Prairie Pothole Joint Venture (PPJV) in the U.S., used different reference years for population objective setting. The PHJV retained NAWMP’s original reference period (i.e., based on 1970s abundances) whereas the PPJV revised their population objectives upward based on duck abundances during a recent time period (1994‐2004). Although no longer explicitly linked to current NAWMP population goals, the PPJV (and other breeding JVs) justified establishment of higher population objectives to reflect long‐term increases in breeding duck carrying capacity. JV waterfowl population abundance objectives for wintering and migration regions were generated using various combinations of population and harvest data, research on marked birds, and often expert opinion. Although none of the techniques we assessed for apportioning continental goals to wintering and migration regions were considered ideal, superior approaches were identified and recommendations for consistency were developed. Underlying discussions of change in landscape carrying capacity for breeding ducks and the importance of viable non‐breeding period distribution surveys was the explicit need to better coordinate among JVs. Using information we provide, the NAWMP community can move toward a more uniform and integrated approach for establishing regional population abundance objectives and ultimately more effective waterfowl habitat conservation at the continental scale.

Results from the December 7, 2010 workshop in Denver. 

Results from the workshop in New Orleans on December 1, 2010. 

Round 1 workshop input  from several flyways. 

The first Round 2 workshop was held in Grand Rapids on September 30, 2010 in conjunction with the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies' annual meeting. Input from this workshop was used to modify the agenda for the remaining workshops.

The NAWMP Revision Steering Committee and Technical Team are working on evaluating the data from Round 1 workshops. The attached Communique 2 provides a brief update. 

Results of the workshop held in Milwaukee on March 22, 2010.

Results from the workshop held in Sacramento CA, February 25-26, 2010.

Results from the NAWMP Workshop held in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada February 16-17, 2010.

Results from the NAWMP Revision Workshop held in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, February 1-2, 2010.

The Memphis workshop was held in conjunction with the NSST meeting the last week of January 2010.

Results from the NAWMP Workshop held in conjunction with the Adaptive Harvest Management Working Group in Portland, Oregon December 2-3, 2009

ABSTRACT
The NAWMP Science Support Team’s (NSST) Alternative Performance Metrics Subcommittee hosted a 2-day workshop on 5-6 August 2008 at Patuxent National Wildlife Research Center - Laurel, MD to explore alternative metrics for measuring progress in achieving NAWMP goals by linking habitat actions to vital rates regionally. This workshop resulted from a recommendation introduced in the NSST’s Technical Report No. 2008‐1 entitled “Continental Progress Assessment Report Recommendation A.1 – NSST Scoping Document: A Report to the Plan Committee from the NSST.” The workshop goal was to measure our collective influence on waterfowl across spatial scales. The objectives of the workshop were to: I. Understand the biological and administrative need for new alternative metrics that apply across Joint Ventures; II. Identify candidate metrics; III. Develop an objective process to evaluate and select preferred metrics; and IV. Achieve consensus around a limited number (1–3) of preferred alternative metrics for implementation under the NAWMP.

A small group of invited Joint Venture Science Coordinators and representatives from the Flyway Councils and Federal Agencies were selected to participate and provide broad representation, skills, and backgrounds from the waterfowl community. Results and recommendations from the workshop are submitted in this report.

Workshop participants reached consensus on a general monitoring framework. In the short-term, workshop participants agreed to the following:
i. JVs should frame their accomplishments in terms of changes in demographic parameters (i.e., season specific vital rates).
ii. All JVs should adopt the annual life cycle model (Fig. 1) as the basis of their monitoring program. This framework explicitly links ecologically similar JVs (i.e., breeding JVs or wintering JVs), thus facilitating decisions about appropriate levels of resource redundancy required to meet the life cycle needs of waterfowl among JV’s, and links JVs temporally throughout the year.
iii. Individual JVs should develop conceptual or empirical models to explicitly describe how habitat management actions influence vital rate(s) and JVs should develop monitoring programs to track the direct influence of their management actions on the quality and quantity of refuge areas and food resources. Resulting estimates then provide information on local impacts of JV actions and can be rolled up across JVs to estimate cumulative impacts on waterfowl population dynamics and carrying capacity at the continental scale.
iv. At the JV scale this framework should be used to complement traditional metrics including number of acres protected, enhanced, or restored, dollars spent, and dollars leveraged.
v. At the continental scale, this framework will complement the current metric of comparing continental population size to the population goal.
vi. In the long-term, JVs should incorporate the influence of both their management actions and population size (Fig. 3) on vital rates. This next step will allow managers and researchers to understand the impact of density-dependence on management actions and vital rates.

The Future of Waterfowl Management Workshop was held in Minneapolis, Minnesota on August 26-28, 2008. The workshop was an important step in the evolution of waterfowl management in North America. Throughout its history, the waterfowl management community has shown great capacity for innovative thinking and action in the interest of improving waterfowl management according to specific objectives, as witnessed by creation of the Flyway Councils, the North American Waterfowl Management Plan, Adaptive Harvest Management, and the National Duck Hunter Survey. The Workshop marks yet another key point in the continuing development of a scientifically-based and socially-responsive management framework.

ABSTRACT
At their meeting at Savannah, GA during January 9-11, 2007 the North American Waterfowl Management Plan Committee identified top priorities distilled form the Continental Progress Assessment Report which included Recommendation A.1: The Plan Committee should ensure development of a clearer and more robust accountability framework for the achievement of NAWMP biological objectives involving all organizational levels in the Plan Community.

Subsequently, the Plan Committee developed management responses to the Assessment including a response to Recommendation A.1 as follows:
The Plan Committee will work with the JVs and the NSST to develop and maintain an accountability framework for the achievement of Plan goals. Necessary components will include coherent objectives at continental, national, regional (JV), and sub-regional scales and regular reporting among the committees and organizations responsible for Plan implementation.
Estimates of regional habitat gains (including NAWMP accomplishments) and losses are essential for estimating net conservation progress. Combined with improved understanding of how landscape conditions affect waterfowl vital rates, plan partners will be better able to set adequate habitat objectives and assess biological progress.

The Plan Committee expects the NAWMP Science Support Team to develop and report recommendations for Plan Committee endorsement. This scoping document was developed in response to the Plan Committee’s request for NAWMP Science Support Team recommendations to address the charges within Recommendation A.1 and will contribute to the development of NAWMP Science Support Team efforts to address priorities.
The NAWMP Science Support Team provided a summary review of the issues associated with each sub-element of recommendation A.1, discussed pros and cons for each sub-element, and developed NAWMP Science Support Team recommendations addressing each sub-element of recommendation A.1 to present to the Plan Committee.
Logical sequencing of NAWMP Science Support Team recommendations addressing each of the sub-elements reflected the NAWMP Science Support Team perspective for urgency and need.

This report addresses one of the most fundamental debates in waterfowl policy and management -- the relative roles of habitat conservation and harvest regulation. The original framers of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (Plan) recognized the inherent linkages among harvest, habitat, and hunters. The Plan set the stage for the next two decades of waterfowl conservation, during which managers demonstrated a capacity to deliver habitat initiatives through joint ventures, developed a technical framework for harvest management, and became increasingly aware of the role of stakeholders, especially hunters. To date, however, the waterfowl management community has not explicitly integrated these elements under a cohesive framework.  This integration will require identification of meaningful, measurable goals that integrate habitat conservation, harvest management, and stakeholder support.

...Considerable technical work will be required to integrate uncertainties about habitat and harvest management. Pursuit of a unified framework for waterfowl management at the continental scale must include additional elements, particularly the incorporation of stakeholder desires, clarification of key ecological uncertainties such as the functional form of density dependence, and models that link local habitat management with continental waterfowl demography

In 2005 we were asked by the Plan Committee of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP or Plan) to form an Assessment Steering Committee (ASC) and to conduct the first continental biological assessment of the Plan in its 20 year history. This report summarizes our findings from that effort.

In 2005 we were asked by the Plan Committee of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP or Plan) to form an Assessment Steering Committee (ASC) and to conduct the first continental biological assessment of the Plan in its 20 year history. This report summarizes our findings from that effort.

Our quest has been challenging, informative, and rewarding. Through our interviews, we learned that the Plan Community throughout the continent is very active on many fronts tackling important issues and conserving habitats in many key waterfowl areas for breeding, wintering, and migrating needs. While these efforts have cumulatively affected millions of acres since l986, much work remains to be done before Plan goals for waterfowl populations will be realized.

Our report contains several recommendations which we believe will move the entire Plan effort closer to attaining its continental waterfowl population goals. We strongly urge the Plan Committee to take these recommendations under advisement and to act on them prudently yet promptly. We were very impressed with the professionalism, expertise, and dedication of the many Plan partners. They are truly the backbone of the Plan and we are confident that they represent a highly competent force that is more than capable of acting upon the Plan Committee’s leadership and guidance to implement their recommendations.

ABSTRACT
We present the mission, objectives and roles of the NSST, chart a course for developing a NSST vision, goals and objectives based on a comprehensive analysis of the NSST Charter (mission and objectives) and NSST Roles (task assignments and charges) identified in historical documents. We elucidate the primary impending challenges ahead for the NSST. 

Among the most pressing issues discussed are: 1.) Addressing the coherence of harvest and habitat management under the realization that harvest and habitat management are inextricably linked, and the objectives of both harvest management and the NAWMP should explicitly reflect that linkage; 2.) Coalescing regional habitat objectives and linking them to continental population objectives so that they “add up”, while being partitioned amongst the Joint Ventures (JV), to a cogent continental assessment to assess NAWMP progress while accounting for uncontrolled environmental variation; and 3.) Developing creative, efficient approaches to waterfowl and habitat conservation, given limited resources and globalization of stewardship initiatives, that reaffirm our commitment to those resources in the context of “All Bird” management.

The beginning of the 21st Century marks the conclusion of the first 15-year cycle of the 1986 North American
Waterfowl Management Plan—a public-private approach to managing waterfowl in Canada, Mexico, and the
United States. This approach launched a new era in wildlife conservation as it set out a blueprint for developing
partnerships to conserve shared natural resources, one that is still vital today.

With this document, 2004 North American Waterfowl Management Plan - Strengthening the Biological Foundation, the
three countries will set forth another 15-year cycle. They envision sustainable landscapes, consultation and
cooperation with partners, and strong biological foundations, to secure the conservation of waterfowl and their
habitats for future generations.

This Plan continues to expand on the last 15 years of success to meet the challenges for a new century. The
parties recognize that the conservation of North American waterfowl should be pursued through cooperative
planning and coordinated management, based on the best scientific knowledge available.

To most effectively convey goals, priorities, and strategies, the 2004 Plan is presented in two separate
documents. This document, Implementation Framework, provides detailed discussion of the Plan’s
themes and includes much supporting technical information for use by biologists and land managers.
The companion document, Strategic Guidance, is comparable in length and scope to the 1986 Plan and
the updates of 1994 and 1998. It is directed to all Plan partners, agency administrators, and policy
makers who set the direction and priorities for conservation in our three countries.We hope that the
thousands of partners involved in the conservation of our natural resources will find these documents
useful for continuing their vital work.

The 1986 North American Waterfowl Management Plan launched a new era in wildlife conservation, setting out a blueprint for developing public–private partnerships to conserve natural resources. Today, thousands of partners in our three nations have established a continental conservation legacy, one that is based on sound science and a landscape approach. Building on this foundation, the 1998 Update, Expanding the Vision, envisions a North America where the needs of waterfowl—and indeed all wild species— are considered, as citizens participate in making decisions about the use of landscapes. We enthusiastically endorse this concept and encourage leadership by Plan partners in implementing this vision well into the next century.

This document affirms the vision of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan to recover waterfowl populations by restoring and managing wetland ecosystems, to conserve biological diversity in the western hemisphere to integrate wildlife conservation with sustainable economic development, and to promote partnerships of public and private
agencies,organizations and individuals for conservation.

With this accord, Canada, the United States and Mexico renew their commitment in this continental effort to restore North America's waterfowl and wetland resources.

Losses of breeding, migration and wintering habitats have resulted in alarming declines in some waterfowl species.

To cope with this, current programs are in critical need of expansion, and new initiatives should be devised and carried out.

This Plan presents what wildlife managers in the two countries believe to e appropriate waterfowl population goals to meet public demand, and actions needed to achieve these goals. It has been reviewed by public and private conservation organizations, and the general public; and many of their comments have been incorporated in the text.  It provides information for those who enjoy and value waterfowl and describes the actions and the size of the task necessary to achieve the goals.