Home || What is PIF? || Que es Compañeros en Vuelo? || Bird Conservation Planning || PIF Resources
PIF Meetings and Events || Bird Conservation Directory || Contact Us

Partners in Flight
Management Steering Committee

Minutes
Gardiner, Montana
September 15-16, 2002

Action Items---brought forward from the meeting.

Items presented to the JSC:

Information Item: Funding for Regional Coordinators will end in May 2003 and the option of continued funding by a private foundation is being pursued.  The larger issue that needs to be addressed is how Partners in Flight could fill gaps potentially created and move forward in the absence of Regional Coordinators

Action Item: The PIF Continental Plan is moving toward completion.  The primary goal of the plan is to provide a biological core for planning at a continental level and guide national level conservation decisions.  The MSC requests Chairs of member committees to take drafts of work completed to date to their respective committees for review and provide comment.  It is expected that portions of the plan will be released for broad review beginning in December 2002.  Endorsement: discussion within each member committee has begun to determine the process of attaining endorsement signatures.

Items discussed but not presented to JSC:

Talking point: possibility of charging states, federal agencies, and NGO organizations in PIF dues to cover operational expenses; potential dues structure.

Talking point: change the name of the Joint Steering Committee to Partners in Flight Council and name of MSC to Partners In Flight Steering Committee. 

Action for members:

Working Groups:  members need to become fully engaged in respective working groups.

Strategic Retreat: Terry, Laurel, Rick and Bruce will begin planning for a strategic planning retreat.  This action was discussed at length during the JSC and endorsed by the JSC.

Draft a Letter:  George Fenwick will draft a letter to Steve Williams encouraging the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act to focus on upland birds and reduction of the match.

Research Needs Database: Janet will develop a survey to identify how much use the research needs database website is receiving. All members will promote use of this site.

Web Site: Chris will develop an organizational chart for the web site and will not be available to continue working on the website after December 2002.

Bird Population Responses to Forest Thinning:  Skip Kowalski agreed to provide a USFS standard list of forest types by which we can organize information on bird responses to forest thinning; this information also will be presented by BCR; Terry has lead.

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

Introductions

The meeting began at 8:30 with 28 people in attendance; see attendance list at end of these minutes.  Merrie Morrison graciously agreed to take minutes for the meeting.

Vice-Chair Elections

Mila Plavsic has left the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to pursue a graduate degree at the University of Cambridge, thus leaving the Vice Chair position vacant.  Prior to the meeting, Laurel Moore distributed an email to the entire MSC soliciting nominations (including self-nominations) and Chris Eberly has expressed an in interest in the position.  Laurel nominated Chris, a brief discussion by the group occurred, and he was elected by acclimation.

Status of Yellowstone National Park Birds, Terry McEneaney

Terry, the ornithologist for Yellowstone National Park, gave a presentation outlining the history of Yellowstone National Park (YNP) and the status of its bird species.  The boundary of YNP passes through three states making management even more difficult.    Three hundred fifteen species of birds have been recorded in the Park.  Trumpeter Swans are the most imperiled bird.  There are only 17 adults in the Park – although there were once as many as 70.  The decline is a result of human intervention outside of the Park.  About 45% of the Park burned during the 1988 fires.  Management issues are also difficult due to the human impact of visitors.  There are three million visitors each year and this number continues to climb.   There are three Breeding Bird Survey routes in the Park.  

Addressing Management and Research Needs with BBIRD, Ron Bassar, University of Montana

Most sources of information for managers monitor changes in population size and annual survival; however, reduction in nesting success is often cited as a major cause of bird population declines.  Thus, an integrated approach to bird conservation includes information on populations, annual survival, breeding success, and environmental factors.  Predictive models must be developed and access to managers is required.  The BBIRD (Breeding Biology Research & Monitoring Database) is a national data-sharing database that uses standardized methodologies and independent contributors to collect data on nesting success and environmental factors that influence bird population dynamics.  The database contains about 45,000 nest records of 160 nongame bird species from 42 sites located throughout the United States.                

They are developing an interactive web site:  http://pica.wru.umt.edu/BBIRD/. 

Terry Rich advised that this is an issue that the Research Working Group should be discussing; specifically, how to deliver science on a practical level. 

What do we bring forward to the Joint Steering Committee (JSC)?

We need to focus our discussions in the next two days on what action items need to be brought forward to JSC.  For instance, the National Plan – does this need to be presented as information or an action item. 

Optics for the Tropics, Joni Ellis

Joni explained to MSC members that Optics for the Tropics would be holding a membership raffle at the North American Ornithologists Congress in New Orleans and asked everyone to help support this effort.  Optics for the Tropics is a new partnership between the Southeast Working Group and Eagle Optics, with support from the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. Optics for the Tropics works to get optic equipment to partners in the Caribbean and Latin America.  For more information, http://www.opticsforthetropics.org/

PARC, Rosemary Forrest, Savannah River Ecology Laboratory

Representatives from the Partners in Amphibian and Reptile Conservation (PARC) were in attendance to observe the workings of the Committee.  PARC is basically modeled after PIF and they are trying to hire a National Coordinator.  Terry and Laurel are planning to attend their meeting during the International and they encouraged everyone else to attend on Tuesday at 9:00 in the Lamar Room.  

Regional Coordinator Updates

West, Carol Beardmore

All plans in the West are finished and all but one are on the website (Utah).   At this time some states are working on updates and additions. 

Colorado All Bird Workshop was held before the North American Conference in March 2002 and the Texas workshop has also been conducted.  Carol tried to influence them to have international BCRs/JVs and her ideas seemed to have met with success.  Last week the Arizona All Bird Workshop was conducted and one issue discussed was major funding sources.  All of the workshops have had good participation.  Two more all bird workshops are in the planning stages – Don Paul would like to hold one for the Great Basin BCR and Dan Casey is thinking about one for Montana.  Rick Kearney advised that Bob McDowell has sent a memo to state directors to announce that funding is going to be available for workshops in 2003 and early 2004.  For more information contact Rick.

Carol has been helping with the National Plan and species assessment database.  She is also thinking about developing land manager guides for the different habitat types within the West.  Estimate $75k for two years (which includes a “roving workshop”). 

Bruce McCloskey announced that Colorado DNR is going to hire an All-Bird Coordinator and they should have the position filled within the next two months.

Carol has been working with the Intermountain West JV and Sonoran JV’s.  Carol is co-chair of the Technical Committee for the Sonoran JV. 

Carol is also working on the next regional meeting scheduled to occur in Whitehorse, Yukon.  They are expecting 90 people to participate including four or five individuals representing Mexico. 

Carol is part of the Steering Committee for the West-wide All-bird Monitoring and Assessment Program (WAMAP), which originated a few years ago from the PIF Western Working Group.  WAMAP is hosting a workshop to advance coordinated, all-bird monitoring in western North America.  The meeting will be held January 21-23, 2003 at the BLM training center (NTC) in Phoenix, AZ.

Midwest, Greg Butcher

Greg reported on the recent All Bird Workshops in the Midwest.  The meeting in Indiana had good participation including representation by the game bird arena.  The first day focused on introducing each initiative and discussing species in the BCR 22 – Eastern Tall Grass Prairie.  The second day focused on discussions of habitat types and identification of priority sites for conservation.  The group also discussed funding mechanisms (e.g., NAWCCA, NMBA) and had presentations on the top projects in three states. 

Greg also attended Jane Fitzgerald’s workshop in Kentucky for the Central Hardwoods BCR.  Greg noted that the success of each all-bird workshop depends on good GIS systems to back them up.  Greg is a member of the Management Board for the Upper Mississippi/Great Lakes JV, which continues to demonstrate their commitment to all bird conservation.  Greg has been reviewing NAWCCA proposals. Greg also reported on the Wisconsin Bird Conservation Initiative (WBCI), which is planning a retreat similar to the all-bird workshops.  WBCI has hired Andy Paulios as a BCR/State Coordinator.  Greg reported that he still expects the Boreal Hardwood Transition plan to be completed in about two months.  The Central/Mixed Grass plan is also progressing towards completion.

Southeast, Dean Demarest

Regional Planning – some plans remain to be finished.  Edwards Plateau, West Gulf Coastal Plain, and others in Texas are still being developed.  He is trying to help initiate two new JVs in Texas. 

Continental Planning – working on species assessment scores, etc. as the National Plan is being written. 

Plan Implementation – all-bird planning in Texas, establishing scoping committees to determine how to establish JVs.  East Gulf Coastal Plain is lacking in implementation so Dean has been working with TNC to identify priority sites.  Dean is working with South Carolina DNR, Georgia DNR, and Alabama DNR to develop lists of priority species for each state; how to utilize the Farm Bill allocations especially in connection with the Southeastern Quail Initiative; and species-specific working groups and with the Forest Service on Forest Plan revisions within the Southeast. 

Yucatan Bird Festival – planning to attend representing the Southeast in November 2002.  Objectives of the festival are to help the region build the capacity for birding partnerships enjoyed in the U.S., AICAs and how they relate to priority sites in the region. 

Northeast, Ken Rosenberg

Planning – twelve physiographic plans cover the Northeast region and they are mostly complete.  Ken is working with Randy Dettmers (USFWS) to put all 12 plans into a standardized format.

Implementation – moving along with all bird workshops with the Atlantic Coast Joint Venture.  A recent meeting occurred at Cape May that was a combined PIF regional and shorebird meeting in preparation for an all-bird workshop in planned for the near future in New Jersey.  The same process is being planned for the Atlantic Northern Forest.

A joint Northeast and Southeast meeting is being planned for March 2003.  The Appalachians will be the primary focus of the meeting.   For more information, http://fwie.fw.vt.edu/www/military/PIF_Blacksburg.htm.

Funding Issues, Terry Rich

Terry began this topic noting that not only are the Regional Coordinators doing the work just reported on, they were also involved in planning the Asilomar conference, and are working on developing the Continental Plan.  The work and time involved with the Plan has been tremendous.  None of these accomplishments would have been completed without the diligence and efforts of the Regional Coordinators.

The funding for Regional Coordinators will end in May 2003.  The MSC decided last year that we wanted to continue with the Coordinators at least for a couple of more years, but have not been able to come up with the funds to do so.  Various options were identified and a great deal of discussion ensued. 

The NABCI Committee is working on securing funding for eight positions that are currently under- or un-funded: four PIF Coordinators, U.S. National Coordinator, Waterbird Coordinator, Monitoring Coordinator (shorebird), and Database Manager (RMBO).  David Pashley reported that several options have been pursed, several NGO’s have agreed to a joint proposal ($1.2 million), but no concrete source of funding has been identified.  One remaining option is to approach a foundation for the majority of these funds and use the same proposal when approaching other foundations.  The probability of receiving funding by May 2003 is low.

No other funding options are available at this time and we need to face the reality that there may not be regional coordinators after May, but remember to first think about the PIF Initiative.  We need to work on a strategy focused on what the immediate work needs are and items that will not be accomplished without coordinators and convey that picture to the active partners. 

One option would be for states to contribute to a common “pot” to fund coordinators. The view in the west is that states are the lead implementers, and some western states may not contribute to funding regional coordinators as they are focused on funding state coordinators.

Another option may be to integrate some duties into USFWS bird conservation positions with the understanding that each region is different. 

Another option may be to integrate with Joint Ventures with the understanding that wall-to-wall Joint Ventures are not present at this time. 

Another option may be having the working groups pick up the work of regional coordinators but the consensus was that this was not likely for the entire nation.

Action: Terry asked to meet with Bruce McCloskey, Rick Kearney, and David to develop a strategy to bring forward to the JSC.

Information Item presented to the JSC: Funding for Regional Coordinators will end in May 2003 and the option of continued funding by a private foundation is being pursued.  The larger issue that needs to be addressed is how Partners in Flight could fill gaps potentially created and moves forward in the absence of Regional Coordinators. 

PIF Continental Plan, Terry and Ken

Terry and Ken gave a presentation on the development of the PIF Continental Plan from which a new Partners In Flight North American Watch List will originate.   The Partners In Flight Technical Committee is completing this task and includes the following:  Terry, Ken, Dean, Carol, Greg, David Pashley, Arvind Panjabi, Peter Blancher (Canada), Erica Dunn (Canada), Chuck Hunter, Humberto Berlanga (Mexico), and Eduardo Inigo-Elias (Mexico) 

Plan Objectives: to synthesize landbird species and habitat priorities at a continental scale, to inform U.S. and Canada of national level priorities and objectives, to provide geographic level perspective on continental bird priorities.  Produce biological core for planning (Global Scores Database, PIF Watch List, population size estimates and objectives), synthesize species and habitats at a national scale, etc.

Target Audience for the Plan – High-level agency staff looking for tools to help prioritize funding and other actions (US) as well as other funding sources that need an overview.  Two additional documents will be written for other audiences.

Scope – all migratory and resident landbirds breeding in North America.  The Continental Plan does not replace BCP-level priorities and objectives.

Super Regions – Refine and update PIF species assessment database; derive updated PIF Watch List. Combine BCRs into avifaunal “super-regions” to encompass habitat-species suites and develop numerical pop targets for Watch List.

Population Size (PS) – Replaces Relative Abundance (RA)  PS better reflects vulnerability due to global abundance; fits in with all-bird species assessment. 

Discussion: Ken explained the methodology for estimating population size from BBS data, including a way to correct for time of day on the route.  Now have population estimates for all landbirds in the US. 

Bruce asked if game species would be included on the Watch List.  David Pashley said this information will be presented at the IAFWA meetings and if the state directors don’t want those species on the list they will be taken off.  [Editor’s note – The Resident Game Bird Working group later approved of leaving all resident game birds in the Partners In Flight database.]

Ken wants this to be a five-year List.  Hopefully this will help dovetail other lists including Birds of Conservation Concern; Carol wants to make sure the federal agency MOUs reference not only BCC but also the PIF Continental Watch List.  The goal of the list is to develop a synthesis of this information and develop conservation action plans; Progress to date includes refinement of population estimates, development of the process for setting population estimates, and portions of written text.

Next Steps:

Refine population estimates

Complete process for setting population targets

Provide first review copy by 1 December

Produce final by North American in March.  [Editor’s note:  The target date was subsequently revised so as to produce a final for IAFWA in September 2003.]

John Cecil reported that National Audubon is releasing the Audubon Watch List on a new web site in mid-October.  The List is the PIF List with shorebird and waterbird scores from BirdLife. 

Rick said he felt there was a sense of urgency for this Plan.  The Neotrop proposal window opens next month.  The NGO Community is going to Congress next summer for the Neotrop Reauthorization, and having the Plan completed is essential to the sales pitch.

Action Item presented to the JSC

The MSC requests Chairs of member committees to take drafts of work completed to date to their respective committees for review and provide comment.  It is expected that portions of the plan will be released for broad review beginning in November 2002; Endorsement: discussion within each member committee has begun to determine the process of attaining endorsement signatures.

PIF Database Status, Terry

U.S. Forest Service, The Nature Conservancy, Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, Department of Defense, Bureau of Land Management and other sources have recently provided funding that will keep the database going for a while. 

Bird Responses to Forest Thinning, Terry

Terry handed out a draft white paper entitled, Birds Potentially Benefited and Harmed by Thinning Coniferous Forests of the Western U.S.  In late August, the Secretary of the Interior requested this information and Terry believes PIF should be prepared to provide sound scientific information on this subject at the local, state, and BCR level.  Information should answer the question, what species will benefit or not benefit from thinning and burning for each major forest type. 

Publications, Terry

There are currently several PIF publication needs.

Asilomar Proceedings – Terry handed out the proposed itemized budget for publication of the proceedings as estimated by CJ Ralph. The range for publication was $63,572.50 to $100,447.50; currently $40,000 is available to cover publication costs.  Originally, it was expected that the Proceedings be published as a Forest Service general technical report.  Terry will ask CJ what can be done for $40,000 and will check on promises made to authors and participants regarding publication.

Printing the Continental Plan – we need funding for this.  Currently, we are estimating that the costs will be $25,000 to $30,000 for 10,000 copies.  Ken suggested approaching CEC with a proposal.

Stopover Ecology and Nearctic-Neotropical Landbird Migrants:  Habitat Relations and Conservation Implications in Studies in Avian Biology – This is a reprinting and $1,000 would be enough to complete this request.  [Editor’s note: no one offered any funding but the Cooper Ornithological Society is going to reprint this publication at its own expense.]

Day 2—September 16, 2002

Federal Agency Updates

National Park Service, Carol Beidleman

Carol continues to work with the Park Flight Migratory Bird Program in establishing programs in all national parks in addition to six Latin American programs.  In the last month, several ornithologists traveled from Latin America to work on projects.  Seven NPS folks have gone to Mexico and Central America in exchange. 

Carol is developing a workshop on monitoring scheduled for November in Latin America.  Several PIF representatives will be involved including CJ Ralph, Geoff Geupel, Ron Rohrbaugh, and others. 

Carol continues to build a constituency within the Park Service.  She has been working to secure funding for PIF projects including IMBD, Asilomar, Bird Conservation, and her position.  Carol is also working on meeting commitments to NABCI.  She will be the new Chair of the Federal Committee.  In addition, Carol is working on the Executive Order MOU and on developing NPS ornithology positions.  Park Flight received an award from the NPS Director for its work with partnerships and Park Flight was highlighted at the World Summit in Johannesburg this summer.

Department of Defense, Chris Eberly 

The DOD PIF Strategic Plan is complete and available.  The Plan outlines DOD PIF priorities for the next five years.  One priority is grasslands and early successional habitats.  Chris is currently working on an inventory of DOD grasslands and what management programs are in place and trying to coordinate with other organizations to help.  He is working on an article scheduled for publication in Birding for October to raise awareness and let people know about opportunities available. 

Don’t Let Your Cats Go AWOL--- The Navy brochure published for distribution at military installations provides ”guidance” to not abandon cats, what could happen if they are abandon and impacts to wildlife.  This issue may be worked into a DOD memorandum. 

The new IBA map shows 25 military installations.  Chris is working with Audubon state directors for state IBAs and has received lots of positive feedback from the installations.  Bird conservation database is almost ready to roll out where installations can provide data.

Bureau of Land Management, Eric Lawton

Eric is currently working on the MOU.  Eric is also going to send out technical notes on Birds of Conservation Concern.  BLM is considering holding a bird conservation workshop similar to the all bird workshops and try to support the PJ Monitoring Guidelines.  Challenge Cost Share Agreements are resulting in more money becoming available.  BLM is currently advertising two biologist positions. 

 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Tom Will

Tom reported that the Park Service MOU should be the model for all agencies. 

Migratory Bird Management participation in BCR planning – Tom commented that some of the all-bird workshops where circles are being placed on maps really range from excellent to not so good.  He asked the group to think about these meetings in terms of integrating all initiatives and bring scientific information into the process.  He also encourages the use of GIS in each workshop. 

Refuges – The Comprehensive Conservation Planning (CCP) process is ongoing.  Tom has been working on getting bird objectives into the goals of these plans.  If you want to find out about CCPs in your area, contact your Regional Refuge.  Refuges wrote a strategic plan entitled “Promises” and they are trying to step down national wildlife goals to the individual refuges.  PIF physiographic plans are the beginning source documents for setting bird population objectives.  There is a real need for BCR planning meetings to intersect with what Refuges are doing.  There are three budget packages that have been submitted, with three funding scenarios - $500K, $1 million, $2 million.  The higher budgets contain funding for a DC Coordinator and seven regional coordinators that would be assigned to step down plans at the regional level. Members of the MSC noted that this should be explored further.

GIS Working Group was formed to identify GIS needs specifically how to find one place to go to for GIS information.  The ad-hoc working group membership includes: Chris, David, Eric, Rick, Tom, and Janet.

 U.S. Geological Service, Janet Ruth

Janet organized an internal USGS workshop (2000) entitled ICEBIRG that focused on avian research science.  Janet developed a white paper on the recommendations of the participants during the workshop.  The workshop tried to recommend research projects USGS should focus on.  The paper is now going to be published in the Auk in January 2003 in the Comments Section:  Ruth, J. M., D. R. Petit, J. R. Sauer, M. D. Samuel, F. A. Johnson, M. D. Fornwall, C. E. Korschgen, and J. P. Bennett. IN PRESS. Science for avian conservation: priorities for the new millennium. The Auk.  For more information and to find the white paper:  www.fort.usgs.gov/products/pubs/20001/20001.asp

Natural Resources Conservation Service, Rick Kearney

NRCS was not in attendance at this meeting; but, given that NRCS is responsible for implementing the 2002 Farm Bill and the availability of funds to conduct wildlife habitat work, Rick suggested getting them more involved in PIF at all levels.

Committee Reports

Awards, Chris Eberly

Rich Fisher is the new chair.  An awards poster has been developed and the request for 2002 nominations will go out in early to mid-October.  The Committee will try to increase the distribution of the call for nominations and they recognize a need to expand the Committee to include more international presence.  Many people have commented that the carvings as an award were a big hit. 

Communications, Merrie Morrison

A NABCI Communications Summit has been schedules for February to discuss communication issues that are central to all of the initiatives. 

Merrie encouraged MSC participants to send in story ideas for Bird Conservation Magazine.  The next issue will feature the IBA map and the following issue will focus on BCRs and the role of NABCI.  Carol Beidleman suggested considering publishing at least one issue a year in Spanish.

There was discussion about the need for a PIF national brochure.  There seemed to be general consensus that a brochure would be helpful.

Education, Joni Ellis 

Joni was welcomed as the new Chair of the Education Working Group.

Joni handed out a report of activities and program success on IMBD developed by Jennifer Wheeler and Sue Bonfield.  The report reflects the growth of IMBD over the past few years, especially in relation to distributing materials.  For instance, all posters – more than 75,000 – were distributed before the May 11 event date.  Also the number of contacts increased by 60%.

Joni also handed out the Education Update provided by Sue Bonfield.  The update highlighted such developments as the IMBD 2003 theme (Birds:  Catalysts for Conservation) and Flyway Newsletter.  Flyway is a bimonthly education newsletter produced by NFWF with funding from Phillips Petroleum.  Ken suggested that PIF should try to coordinate with the World Series of Birding in New Jersey, which raises hundreds of thousands of dollars. 

Joni requested direction from the MSC on how to move the Education Working Group forward.  One project she is considering is to go through the physiographic plans and pull out the educational components to look for overall themes and recommendations.  Ken suggested sending education objectives to plan developers.  David noted the importance of the Education Working Group and Communications Working Group working closely together.

Joni mentioned other education projects that are ongoing including trying have the Golden-cheeked Warbler book published and disseminated in Guatemala.  She also noted that Mark Johns in North Carolina is very active in education projects.

Please direct any other comments or ideas to Joni (joni@wild-florida.com)

International, George Fenwick

George noted first that Megan Hill had sent her report.

Administrative – AID funds have gone away.  As a result, Megan’s position may be eliminated.  George Wallace, ABC’s new Director of International Programs, may take George Fenwick’s place as Co-Chair.

NABCI – There is now a list of tri-national projects to demonstrate integration among the initiatives and the governments.  Six sites chosen that are important sites in Mexico that link with important sites in US and Canada.  There will be a meeting in the Yucatan in November.  The tri-national charter is being finalized. 

Pan-American Roundtable has been scheduled for December.  Two themes are how to work with eco-tourism and conservation and Alliance for Zero Extinction – partners working to identify sites that need conservation attention to save species from extinction.  For more information contact Mike Parr (mparr@abcbirds.org)

Charter – George developed a work plan for the International Working Group some time ago. 

La Tangara – continues to go well.  Website coming along soon.

Monitoring, Carol Beardmore

The Monitoring Working Group has been very active.  Carol advised the MSC to attend the Regional Coordinator’s Update to receive a lot of information on the Monitoring Working Group.  Carol has developed an e-mail and conference call list.  If you would like to be on one of these lists, contact Carol (CBeardmore@gf.state.az.us) or Jon Bart (jbart@eagle.boisestate.edu)

NGO, George Fenwick

Administrative – the working group continues to building partnerships, outreach, etc. 

Support – supporting other committees and groups and funding.  Becoming integrated with NABCI.  NABCI Committee is establishing a funding workshop in January to look mostly at federal agency support.  Need to make sure PIF needs are being met – especially the coordinator positions.

Conservation – PIF conservation, NABCI conservation, etc.  Populating BCRs with coordinators – 9.  Big part of their job is to make sure PIF objectives are inserted into those plans.  Reaching out to less traditional partners – for example, American Forest Foundation – tree farmers.  Trying to get bird conservation objectives into their management plans and planning workshops to get this information to the farmers.  Working with The Conservation Fund to work on conservation in the lower Chesapeake Bay – proposal to Duke with TNC, CBF, etc.  David is working with the Wildlife Habitat Council, which works with corporations holding tracts of land and trying to interject PIF objectives into their management plans.  George sits on the review panel of AF&PA – trying to insert bird conservation priorities into their sustainable forestry initiative programs.

John Cecil recommended that other NGOs should report during this part of the meeting.  Laurel will add to the March MSC.

Research, Janet Ruth

Janet reported that she has been thinking about the research needs database.  She is concerned that it has become static and is unsure of how much it is being used.  Janet would like to put a survey on the website to find out:  who is using the database, how are they going to use the information, etc. http://www.partnersinflight.org/pifneeds/searchform.cfm>

After much discussion, it was resolved that the MSC would advertise the database more broadly and track activity.  Janet asked that this be reviewed in the near future.

Terry is in discussions with the Ornithological Council about taking over the lead for the RWG; they have ideas for obtaining grants to better coordinate research activities; a good link with the OSNA societies is one possible result.

Web Site, Chris Eberly

Chris informed the MSC that the web site has become more work than he can handle and he has to end his involvement by the end of this year.  There are many needs for the PIF web site and it is difficult for anyone to maintain it and an irregular basis.  On the positive side, a copy of the PIF Newsletter is now also on the Cornell web site and Eric Lawton continues to work on maintaining physiographic plans on the PIF web site.

Ken asked that Chris work on an organizational chart for the web site so the MSC could better identify solutions.  Terry noted that this topic should be an integral part of the Communications Summit in February with NABCI.

Neotrop Act Update, Terry 

Terry gave a presentation on the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act proposal and review process:

Funding Available – FY 2002 - $3 million appropriated

Types of Projects – Population management, habitat management, research, outreach, etc.

Update: 290 proposals from 33 countries, 31 US States; $25 million in requests and more than $100 million in match; about 200 of these were from Latin America – 65 from US and 21 US/Latin partner projects:  Multi-country proposals received;

Advisory Group has not been appointed (NAWCA had originally said they would do this as well, but this has been tabled.);

On-line proposal review by FWS Teams

32 projects were recommended – 18 projects in Latin America, 5 projects in the US and 9 multi-national projects

Members of the MSC expressed their concern that the match requirements were too high and that the focus should be on upland birds.

George Fenwick said he would draft a letter to Steve Williams encouraging them to focus on upland birds.  He also said he would propose that the NABCI NGO Committee ask the match be lowered to 1:1, Canada projects be included, that the ratio be dropped to 50% to Latin America, and administrative costs be increased.  Audubon is making this proposal to the Policy Council.  The state agency committee will also be asked to endorse that proposal.

State Wildlife Grants, Rick Kearney

Rick presented information pertaining to several different sources of funding that are currently available. 

New Roles and Responsibilities for the State Agency Committee have been drafted and are to be discussed and reviewed at the IAFWA meetings.

Wildlife Conservation and Restoration Program---established in FY 2001 CJS appropriations; closely follows CARA language.  States would get $50 million – amount based on area and population.  Requires 25% non-federal match; Sept 2003 deadline to obligate funds. As of July 46 states have received 208 WCRP grants.  More than 70 projects benefit birds.  Examples include:  birding trails, monitoring surveys, etc.

State Wildlife Grants Program, 2002---DOI appropriation in FY 2001.  $25 million awarded via competitive grants.  FY 2002 - $80 million apportioned based on area/population.  25% state match for planning, 50% for implementation.  Priority will be given to species with the greatest conservation need.  Recreation projects are ineligible.  Education projects very limited.  29 projects were selected – all have bird conservation benefits. FY 2002 implementation guidance finalized in May.  States have proposed 17 projects as of July, and six include bird conservation components.

State Wildlife Grant Program, 2003 – House voted to increase to $100 million – Senate proposed funding at $60 million – back to committee.

Landowner Incentive Program – managed by USFWS – provides money to states to establish new or supplement existing private landowner technical assistance programs; protect and restore habitats on private lands; implement projects to benefit “species at risk.”  Funded at $40 million this year and $50 million requested for next year.  Detailed program rules to be issued shortly.  Requires 25% nonfederal match; projects compete but no state gets more than 5%.  Two sets of projects (tiers) compete independently – Funding for state staff and admin support and implementation of habitat projects.

PIF Committees

Laurel reminded the group of the Outline of what is needed from PIF working groups and committees distributed prior to this meeting.  Partners In Flight has moved landbird conservation into the fore in the last decade and is poised to do even more with the completion of detailed Bird Conservation Plans.  Working groups and committees have sometimes struggled to identify a unifying purpose and have lost the active participation of some early participants as the partner community awaited the completion of plans that could better guide their actions.  Therefore we now have an opportunity to re-examine the crucial role of these committees as the interface between PIF, as embodied in the Bird Conservation Plans, and various and sometimes overlapping constituencies – educators, scientists, land managers, conservation organizations, policy makers, and others. PIF needs all of its partners to dissect the BCPs and determine what actions they as partners can take to help meet the goals of the plans.  Committees and working groups are not an end unto themselves but rather a means of networking practitioners to disseminate the central recommendations of PIF to the people who can put them into effect on the land, in the classroom, through the state legislature, with the media etc.

Working Group chairs were requested to draft roles and responsibilities for this discussion and the group discussed each committee separately.

Industry Steering Committee – No update here.  Carol Beardmore suggested using the Wildlife Habitat Council as the Industry Steering Committee; Terry will follow up with the WHC on this idea. 

Research Working Group – Terry has written a letter asking the Ornithological Council to take the lead in re-establishing and coordinating the group. 

Federal Committee – Carol and Chris – have drafted roles and responsibilities for the Committee, which were handed out.

Strategic Plan Committee – Ken suggested a group get together to discuss drafting the Partners In Flight Strategic Plan, which would specify short- and long-term functions necessary to advance Partners In Flight over the next 10 years.  There was much discussion. Suggestions were made to have a retreat and a facilitator to do this.  Ken suggested having the highest level of involvement.  Rick, Bruce and Terry will work on the retreat idea.  (Note: see JSC minutes for progress on this issue).

NGO Committee -- George noted that the NGO Committee for PIF and NABCI are very similar in structure and organization and perhaps they should be the same.  George remarked that he thought the primary role of the Committee is fund raising so it seems to make sense to make them the same. Members raised some concerns about this proposal in regards to how the NGO Committee would be directed by the MSC if it were a NABCI Committee. 

During this discussion several other ideas came to the table:  Potential Action to JSC: change the name of the MSC to the Partners In Flight Steering Committee change the name of the JSC to the Partners in Flight Council. 

Important Birding Areas, George Fenwick

ABC’s IBA Map is complete and available, and the book also complete but has not been published.  ABC is de-emphasizing the listing and designation portion.  ABC will start an intensive conservation program on the ground.  Eric Lawton asked about getting the map layers and George will talk with National Geographic about this.

Important Birding Areas, Dan Niven, National Audubon Society (NAS)

Dan reported on Audubon’s IBA Program.  Audubon is promoting state IBA programs and encouraging coordinators to work more with PIF.  Dan is working to get coordinators to all bird meetings.  The National Technical Committee is identifying continental sites at the BCR level to cover PIF priority species.

46 State programs have been initiated and 1,500 IBAs have been identified.  The goal is 5,000.  6,000 people are involved in the program.

NAS is working on developing 1,000 nature centers.  Trying to make IBAs a focal point at the centers through education and trying to get state chapters to take on stewardship of the IBAs. 

California and Florida have completed draft IBA books.  These states have invested two million annually in the IBA program.  They hope to finish identification of sites in the next couple of years.

Chris Eberly requested to be the conduit for interaction with DOD sites.  He asked that they be sensitive in regards to this issue.

John Cecil announced that the third IBA conference would be next year in April on the coast of Texas.  He also mentioned the Bird Conservation Annual Report is available. 

PIF Endorsement of Programs, Chris Eberly

Chris highlighted that the MSC should be aware that the PIF logo is beginning to appear on different publications and events.  This may not be a problem, but the Committee may have to address appropriate use of the logo in the future.

MOA and MOU

Terry Rich distributed copies of the MOA among federal agencies to Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Committee and the MOU between NGOs and federal agencies.  The MOU was signed by was signed by NGOs but not by the federal agencies.  The group decided that any changes to the MOA and/or MOU should be tabled until after strategic planning was complete.

Other Business

Ken Rosenberg noted two new conservation challenges: mountain top removal mining and offshore wind farms.  Ken explained that these are emerging issues that could potentially have devastating impacts to landbirds.

The North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference will be in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, 26-30 March 2003 (http://www.wildlifemanagementinstitute.org). The MSC will be held on the two days prior.

Attendee List:

Home || What is PIF? || Que es Compañeros en Vuelo? || Bird Conservation Planning || PIF Resources
PIF Meetings and Events || Bird Conservation Directory || Contact Us