Many U.S. Wildlife Refuges Ignored and Neglected, Managers Claim
12/16/99
*******************************
RELAYED TEXT STARTS HERE:
Title: U.S. Wildlife Refuges Ignored, Neglected, Managers Claim
Source: Environment News Service
Status: Copyright 1999, contact source for permission to reprint
Date: December 16, 1999
Byline: Cat Lazaroff
WASHINGTON, DC, December 16, 1999 (ENS) - The National Wildlife
Refuge System is suffering from structural problems, poor
departmental leadership and diversion of resources away from needed
conservation work, according to results of a survey of refuge
managers released today by Public Employees for Environmental
Responsibility (PEER). More than 200 refuge managers say the system
requires a new leadership structure, and may need to be removed from
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
The National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS) is made up of 521
sanctuaries and is managed within the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
(USFWS). The refuges provide critical habitat for endangered species,
a haven for migrating water fowl and irreplaceable laboratories for
the study of wildlife.
The PEER survey consists of questions composed by refuge managers
themselves and sent to all 380 refuge managers. There are fewer
managers than refuges, as some units are combined. Three out of five
managers - 61 percent - completed the survey.
More than 95 percent of survey respondents called for structural
changes to give more autonomy to the National Wildlife Refuge System.
More than half voted for a separate refuge chain of command while
another third preferred that the National Wildlife Refuge System
become a separate agency entirely removed from the USFWS, a proposal
advanced last month by the National Audubon Society.
Only one percent of responding managers endorsed a proposal by USFWS
director Jamie Rappaport Clark to elevate the NWRS in the agency's
Washington Office by removing other burdens from Dan Ashe, the USFWS
official who supervises the refuge system. Ashe is currently also
responsible for overseeing migratory bird conservation programs, a
task that Clark would reassign to allow Ashe to focus more fully on
the refuge system.
Ashe said he is disappointed in the survey results. "The refuge
system is going through one of its best periods ever right now," he
said.
Yet strong majorities of refuge managers cite disadvantages to
refuges from the current structure:
* Nearly nine out of ten managers believe the current structure means
that refuges cannot "successfully compete for funding and staff
positions" within USFWS.
* Four out of five feel that USFWS leadership regards refuges "as
subordinate to agency goals rather than ends in themselves."
* More than three out of five do not believe that USFWS leadership
"listens to the opinions of refuge managers."
"The survey results suggest that the refuge system is clearly moving
in the wrong direction," stated Gene Hocutt, a 29 year USFWS veteran
who has managed refuges across the country, and who oversaw the
survey for PEER.
"There is a widespread perception that the parent Fish & Wildlife
Service has lost touch with the concerns and needs of refuge field
personnel."
But not all of the managers agreed that the refuge management should
be taken away from the USFWS. "While a separate Bureau may be good
for Refuges in the short term, will it be good for wildlife
nationwide in the long term?" asked one manager, kept anonymous by
PEER. "If Refuges pulls out of FWS what happens to Ecological
Services and the ESA? Refuges are my life. I hope we will support
what is good for wildlife, not just Refuges."
Yet other managers accused the Fish & Wildlife Service of using
refuges as "tools to achieve agency wide objectives. Refuges are more
than that, and deserving of at least equal treatment within the
agency," said one manager.
"There seems to be a trend towards elevating our Ecological Services
Division's issues and influence while NWRS influence within the
agency is lessening."
In fact, most of the managers were highly critical of current refuge
management practices:
* Nearly two out of three responding managers believe that the NWRS
is not "moving in the right direction."
* More than nine out of ten managers feel their refuge is not
"adequately staffed to meet its core conservation mission."
* Nearly four out of five agree with the statement that,
"Increasingly, decisions affecting my refuge are made by persons
without adequate training or background in refuge management."
"There is no substitute for field experience," commented one manager.
"It is appalling that so many GARDs [Geographic Assistant Regional
Directors], PARDs [Programmatic Assistant Regional Directors], and
Refuge Supervisors have no field experience. People like Dan Ashe and
down don't have a clue about the challenges faced by Refuge Managers,
yet make decisions that affect us every day."
In each of the past two years, FWS has reorganized its Regional
Offices to foster something it calls the "Ecosystem Approach." Survey
respondents were not happy with these moves:
* Nearly four out of five respondents feel that the recent
reorganization has not "improved communication" as promised, while
more than two out of three say they do not "understand the objectives
that [FWS] is trying to achieve with the Ecosystem Approach."
* More than four out of five think the reorganization has resulted in
"too many layers of decision-makers in the Regional Office," while
nearly three out of five are convinced that the reorganization has
drained resources from the field and caused staff positions to go
"unfilled" on their refuges.
"Organizational structure is definitely a problem, but the NWRS badly
needs additional funds for land acquisition - why is so much of the
revenue siphoned off by Congress for other purposes?" commented one
manager.
But Ashe said the operations and maintenance budget for refuges has
grown considerably in recent years, from $161 million in 1995 to more
than $280 million this year.
The PEER survey also invited refuge managers to submit essays about
how the NWRS could best be improved. PEER released those essays -
with identifying information removed - and full survey results
Wednesday to all refuge managers as well as top USFWS officials.
The survey and essays are available online at:
http://www.peer.org/refuge/survey.html