Invasive Species: Major Laws and the Role of Selected Federal Agencies

Congressional Research Service (CRS) | January 17th, 2017

In the United States, numerous federal and interagency efforts share responsibilities regarding invasive species. Among the federal agencies involved are the Departments

In the United States, numerous federal and interagency efforts share responsibilities regarding invasive species. Among the federal agencies involved are the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Homeland Security, Interior, Transportation, and others, including the Environmental Protection Agency and the Executive Office of the President. Of these, three Departments—Agriculture, Commerce, and Interior—play a major role by co-chairing the National Invasive Species Council (NISC). Created by Executive Order 13112 in 1999, NISC provides high-level interdepartmental coordination of federal invasive species actions and works with other federal and nonfederal groups to address invasive species issues at the national level. In FY2016, the U.S. government spent an estimated $2.3 billion across a range of federal agencies and activities in an effort to prevent, control, and eradicate invasive species domestically. Activities at the Department of Agriculture accounted for the bulk of available federal funding, nearly $1.2 billion (53% of total available funds). Activities at the Department of Homeland Security, comprised of mostly border protection and security activities, accounted for about $0.8 billion (33% of total funding). The remainder of federal funding, about $0.3 billion (about 14% of total funding) covers activities across a range of agencies at the Departments of Interior, Commerce, and Defense, and other independent agencies. Despite efforts to achieve high-level interdepartmental coordination, comprehensive legislation on the treatment of invasive species has never been enacted, and no single law provides coordination among federal agencies. Instead, the current legal framework is largely governed by a patchwork of laws, regulations, policies, and programs. Some laws are tailored to individual species or narrowly focused on what is affected by the species. Other laws have a broader intended purpose and may only peripherally address invasive species. Some laws, although they do not directly address invasive species control or prevention, may limit such introductions.

Investigating Factors Contributing to Phytoplankton Biomass Declines in the Lower Sacramento River

University of California, Davis (UC Davis) | March 23rd, 2023

Inyo County: Monitoring Groundwater Dependent Vegetation to Inform Groundwater Management

Nature Conservancy | August 1st, 1989

Inyo County and the City of Los Angeles have shown innovative and progressive leadership in the protection of groundwater dependent ecosystems in Owens Valley,

Inyo County and the City of Los Angeles have shown innovative and progressive leadership in the protection of groundwater dependent ecosystems in Owens Valley, and thanks to a landmark agreement between Inyo County and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP), the outlook for groundwater dependent ecosystems (GDEs) in this area is promising. In 1991, the Inyo/Los Angeles Long-Term Water Agreement (Agreement) established an elaborate system to manage groundwater pumping by LADWP to avoid substantial declines in groundwater dependent vegetation in the Owens Valley. Implemented to settle the County’s 1971 CEQA challenge of LADWP’s proposed method to fill its second aqueduct, the Agreement resolved years of litigation between the County and LADWP.

Irrigation in the Earth system

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | June 20th, 2023

Is there an urban pesticide signature? Urban streams in five U.S. regions share common dissolved-phase pesticides but differ in predicted aquatic toxicity

Science of the Total Environment (Elsevier) | June 15th, 2021

Pesticides occur in urban streams globally, but the relation of occurrence to urbanization can be obscured by regional differences. In studies of five regions of the Unit

Pesticides occur in urban streams globally, but the relation of occurrence to urbanization can be obscured by regional differences. In studies of five regions of the United States, we investigated the effect of region and urbanization on the occurrence and potential toxicity of dissolved pesticide mixtures. We analyzed 225 pesticide compounds in weekly discrete water samples collected during 6–12 weeks from 271 wadable streams; development in these basins ranged from undeveloped to highly urbanized. Sixteen pesticides were consistently detected in 16 urban centers across the five regions—we propose that these pesticides comprise a suite of urban signature pesticides (USP) that are all common in small U.S. urban streams. These USPs accounted for the majority of summed maximum pesticide concentrations at urban sites within each urban center. USP concentrations, mixture complexity, and potential toxicity increased with the degree of urbanization in the basin. Basin urbanization explained the most variability in multivariate distance-based models of pesticide profiles, with region always secondary in importance. The USPs accounted for 83% of pesticides in the 20 most frequently occurring 2-compound unique mixtures at urban sites, with carbendazim+prometon the most common. Although USPs were consistently detected in all regions, detection frequencies and concentrations varied by region, conferring differences in potential aquatic toxicity. Potential toxicity was highest for invertebrates (benchmarks exceeded in 51% of urban streams), due most often to the neonicotinoid insecticideimidacloprid and secondarily to organophosphate insecticides and fipronil. Benchmarks were rarely exceeded in urban streams for plants (at 3% of sites) or fish (<1%). We propose that the USPs identified here would make logical core (nonexclusive) constituents for monitoring dissolved pesticides in U.S. urban streams, and that unique mixtures containing imidacloprid, fipronil, and carbendazim are priority candidates for mixtures toxicity testing.

Issue Paper for the San Joaquin River spring-run Chinook experimental population – Delta impacts

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) | July 23rd, 2013

Joshua Tree National Park: A History of Preserving the Desert

National Park Service (NPS) | March 16th, 2015

Juvenile Production Estimate (JPE) Calculation and Use/Application of Survival Data from Acoustically-tagged Chinook Salmon Releases Report

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | February 21st, 2014

Each year, NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) estimates the number of juvenile winter-run Chinook salmon expected to enter the Delta. NMFS’ June 4, 2009

Each year, NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) estimates the number of juvenile winter-run Chinook salmon expected to enter the Delta. NMFS’ June 4, 2009, biological and conference opinion on the long-term operation of the Central Valley Project and State Water Project provides an incidental take limit on natural juvenile winter-run based on the juvenile production estimate.

Juvenile salmonids traverse coastal meta-nurseries that connect rivers via the sea

Ecological Society of America (ESA) | April 30th, 2025

Conventionally, juvenile salmonids are thought to migrate unidirectionally from freshwater systems to marine systems and therefore only inhabit natal drainages. Although

Conventionally, juvenile salmonids are thought to migrate unidirectionally from freshwater systems to marine systems and therefore only inhabit natal drainages. Although scattered evidence suggests juveniles can move bidirectionally between freshwater rivers and the ocean, including into non-natal drainages, such movements have never been documented with high replication. Here, we detected hundreds of movements of juvenile salmonids between drainages that involved 0–22% of cohort emigrants in Washington State and California. Individuals moved up to nine times and between drainages up to 70 km apart. These findings reveal a life-history type of salmonids whose remarkably complex migrations have gone unnoticed. Implicitly, juveniles may use any coastal freshwater habitat accessible from the sea and may not descend from spawning populations of drainages they inhabit. Consequently, typical conservation focused on natal drainages may overlook freshwater habitat elsewhere. A concept of coastal areas as meta-nurseries formed by multiple watersheds connected by the sea may accurately describe anadromous species’ habitat options and better inform management.

Keeping up with the status of freshwater fishes: A California (USA) perspective

Conservation Science and Practice (Wiley) | May 29th, 2021