Northern Rockies Ecosystem Protection Act

By Lance Olsen, New West Unfiltered 12-20-07

When the Northern Rockies Ecosystem Protection Act (NREPA) was first introduced, U.S. Senator Max Baucus had two things to say about it. First, it was dead on arrival. Second, it had forever changed how things were done.

I'd argue that his assessment was a nod to NREPA's leadership, despite the strength of its opponents. But, for me, it has always been NREPA's importance to wildlife that mattered most, no matter what it's critics say about it.

And the key feature of NREPA is that it will, when eventually passed, protect key opportunties for wildlife to move across important landscapes. And promiment scientists supported it for that reason leading up to its first introduction to Congress.

The importance of movement to survival has been confirmed time and again. For instance, when the distinguished journal Science published a "special section" on species disperal and migration, it prepared an introduction that said movement is essential to success in life.

But the support from the science community hasn't ended there. Here are two more-recent reports repeating the same core truth for all species, including the species who will get some relief when NREPA is passed.

THOMAS B. SMITH, LOUIS BERNATCHEZ (2008)
Evolutionary change in human-altered environments
Molecular Ecology 17 (1), 1-8, January 2008

Excerpt:
"Vonholdt et al. (2008) examine these issues in reintroduced populations of grey wolf in Yellowstone National Park. They show levels of genetic variation similar to that of a population managed for high variation and low inbreeding, and greater than that expected for random breeding. Nevertheless, their projections suggest
significant inbreeding depression will occur without connectivity and migratory exchange with other populations."

Full article at:



Evolutionary biology and practical conservation: bridging a widening gap
GEORGINA M. MACE, ANDY PURVIS (2008)
Molecular Ecology, Volume 17 Issue 1 Page 9-19, January 2008
doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2007.03455.x

Excerpts:

"Habitat conversion continues in most parts of the world, especially in areas of high species richness, and novel threats, especially climate change, will pose new challenges."

"Not all populations or species are equally likely to become extinct. Vulnerability to local extinction is commonly associated with low abundance, high habitat specificity, large body size and slow reproductive rates. In cases where both body size and life history have been studied, life history has been shown to be more important in
carnivores (Cardillo et al. 2004; Purvis et al. 2000b) and,
interestingly, in the extinction of large mammals in the late
Quaternary (Johnson 2002). .... Top predators also appear to be especially threatened in mammals (Purvis et al. 2000a; Cardillo et al. 2004). "

" Similarly, among the mammalian carnivores high threat rates are found in species that inhabit areas of high human population density (Cardillo et al. 2004). .... For example, large body size is often associated with present-day vulnerability, but is only patchily linked with extinction rates in the prehuman past (Purvis et al. 2003)"

"Developing species recovery plans

"This is the most obvious point at which evolutionary processes could and should be prioritized (Ashley et al. 2003). Opportunities for continued evolution and adaptive change can be encouraged by relatively simple mechanisms. For example, ensuring adequate genetic
diversity by maintaining connectedness of related populations, starting with high levels of genetic diversity, avoiding inbreeding, and preserving the species across the range of habitats in which it is found, as well as at significant boundaries such as ecotones. These simple mechanisms will increase the adaptive nature of the landscape, and the potential for evolutionary change in response to it.

"One obstacle is the potential for over-emphasizing the differences between population subunits and attempting to conserve as separate units any population subunit for which evidence of reproductive isolation or genetic distinctiveness can be found. With the increasing precision and rigour of molecular genetic tools it is rare, given sufficient time and effort, for some genetic distinctiveness not to be found, albeit a result of recent genetic drift or random founder
effects and having little consequence for adaptive distinctiveness. While the incorporation of molecular methods into the assessment of conservation units (such as ESUs; Moritz 1995) provided welcome rigour and clarity, uncritical application of these methods can be detrimental to the broader goal of preserving adaptive diversity."

Full article online at :
[End of article]