American Bison - Buffalo Field Campaign

Significant challenges lie ahead for the formulation of laws and
policies about ecosystem services (Ruhl 2009). Some critical
steps suggested by Ruhl (2009) include better definition of
property rights, policies that prime the markets for ecosystem
services, designing better governance institutions and
instruments for these markets, and creative research to meet
policy needs. Some governments are already engaged in this
type of work, so interested readers are encouraged investigate
programme and policy initiatives in their region (Freese et al.
2009). Furthermore, conservation organizations are encouraged
to coordinate their activities with evolving government initiatives
to more efficiently advance ecosystem-based conservation.
8.5.3 Coordination of agency missions, goals,
regulations, and policies affecting bison
conservation and restoration
There may be a need for new governance systems that will
allow local communities, tribes, and governments to co-manage
grassland reserves large enough to sustain bison. Political
boundaries, agency policy, and legal jurisdictions need to be
creatively blended to create a cooperative atmosphere for
the successful establishment and co-management of new or
expanded bison populations in the future. Accomplishing the
coordination necessary to conduct effective conservation and
ecological restoration will be formidable. However, the rewards for
such effective coordination will go beyond the benefit of placing
bison on the land, and could encourage much more opportunity
to conserve other species associated with these landscapes.
It is likely that some type of standing co-management council
or committee may be necessary to coordinate management of
large landscapes with complex land ownership and affected
local communities and economies. This committee should be
structured and function to facilitate and maintain partnerships
among the various government agencies, NGOs, landowners,
and sportsmen or conservation groups that have interest in
the project area. A co-management committee can encourage
efficiencies in funding and coordinate restoration activities of the
various stakeholders. A committee should include representatives
from local stakeholders who are affected by the coordinated
management effort. A recent announcement by the U.S.
Department of the Interior (USDOI) of a new Bison Management
Framework established a USDOI Bison Working Group to help
coordinate bison management among the agencies. The working
group provides an initial effort to coordinate many of the key
federal agencies involved in bison conservation, but does not
include non-government partners. This working group could
become a new model for managing bison on multiple small-scale
reserves as though it were one larger-scale population, creating
an effective population of sufficient size to protect genetic and
ecological integrity. In Montana (Northern Yellowstone Ecosystem)
and Wyoming (Southern Yellowstone Ecosystem) interagency
80 American Bison: Status Survey and Conservation Guidelines 2010
bison or bison/elk management plans were created that defined
a co-management strategy transcending state and federal
jurisdictional boundaries (See chapter 5). Public participation in
these processes was achieved through numerous public meetings
where stakeholders were provided opportunities to comment
on and influence a proposed co-management design. Through
this process, information was provided to the stakeholders,
and some degree of acceptance for proposed decisions was
negotiated. The establishment of the Sturgeon River Plains Bison
Council in Saskatchewan is another co-management example
developed by local stakeholders affected by bison management
on neighbouring federal lands. These examples represent
contrasting models of top down versus bottom up approaches
to bison conservation. By combining local (bottom-up) and
national (top-down) approaches, better forms of governance can
evolve, natural resources may be more effectively managed, and
livelihoods can be improved (Fraser et al. 2008).
Detailed project-specific planning for ecological restoration
(see Chapter 10 of this document) should be completed by
agencies, NGOs and private partners involved in the project
area prior to implementing any bison conservation project.
The successful completion of the environmental evaluations
required under national, state or provincial environmental law
will be critical to the advancement of any bison restoration
project involving public land. These environmental evaluations
will require a public involvement process and should gather
input from all affected stakeholders in a meaningful process.
In addition to public involvement significant public education
and outreach should be developed and implemented during all
phases of a restoration project.
Technical support from science groups, such as the IUCN Bison
Specialist Group, can provide the necessary technical guidance
for science based conservation strategies at the local, state/
province and continental scale. Guidance from this technical
group can identify best management practices, and recommend
policy and legislative changes necessary to support sound
conservation and restoration initiatives. Additional guidance for
ecosystem restoration efforts can be found through other IUCN
publications (Clewell et al. 2005; IUCN 1998; Chapter 10).
8.5.4 Recommendations
Some fundamental legal and policy changes recommended to
enhance bison restoration include:
1) Where social acceptance for wild bison can be attained,
establish the legal status of bison as a native wildlife
species through working with state/provincial/federal
jurisdictions.
2) Modify current policies that prevent partnerships and co-
management among agencies, private sector, and tribes.