Laserfiche WebLink
<br />OG2<i90 <br /> <br />it is clear that federal agencies must be concerned with the nonnative issue, It is <br />possible that Federal funding, including that provided by the Federal Aid in Sport Fish <br />Restoration Act, may be reviewed for problems where intentional introductions of <br />nonnative species may be impacting native species, especially endangered species <br />and their ecosystems. Additional emphasis could be placed on using these funds to <br />aid in the nonnative fish control problem. <br /> <br />Executive Order 11987 restricts federal agencies from using funds for nonnative <br />species introductions unless it has been determined that the introduction will not have <br />an adverse impact of natural ecosystems. The ANSTF (1994) defined intentional <br />introductions as species that are knowingly brought into an ecosystem beyond its <br />historic range. In recent cases, federal funding for nonnative introductions have not <br />been approved without an Environmental Impact Statement, and it is anticipated that <br />Section 7 consultations under the Endangered Species Act may also be required. The <br />Task Force also discussed accidental escapes of nonnative species, which in some <br />cases also were classified as intentional introductions, and cautioned that "even when <br />the purpose of such import or transport is not direct introduction into an open <br />ecosystem [, the] eventual introduction into open waters as the result of escapement, <br />accidental release, improper disposal. . . or similar releases are the inevitable <br />consequence of the original import or transport, not an unintentional introduction" <br />(ANSTF 1994). <br /> <br />One of the major conflicts that has constrained efforts to control of nonnative <br />fishes has been the potential loss of recreational sportfish opportunities in affected <br />areas. There is widespread concern that increasing federal powers would limit <br />recreational sport fishing, because many of the species of concern are game fish that <br />have been introduced outside of their natural ranges (ANSTF 1994). President Clinton <br />signed Executive Order 12962 on June 6,1995 in response to this conflict, and <br />pledged the support of U.S. agencies in cooperative agreements with states and tribes <br />in furthering recreational fishing opportunities. In addition, recreational interests (i.e., <br />the Sport Fishing and Boating Partnership Council) have met with the Fish and Wildlife <br />Service and National Marine Fisheries Service and jointly developed a proposed policy <br />statement recognizing the importance of endangered species, but striving to balance <br />endangered species needs with the need for mitigating losses to recreational fishing. <br />The policy statement recognizes: <br /> <br />"1) the irreplaceable intrinsic and ecological value of all indigenous species; 2) <br />States have primary management responsibility for non-listed and candidate <br />aquatic species; 3) the preeminence of the ESA in issues effecting conservation <br />and recovery of listed or proposed species; 4) the nationally important societal <br />and economic value of recreational fisheries programs; and 5) the necessity of <br />effective partnerships between stakeholders to achieve mutual goals." (SFBPC <br />1995). <br /> <br />16 <br />