• What do the animals require (species-habitat relationships)? 



• How much habitat is available and what is its value? 



• Where is the habitat located? 



• How do the animals respond to alternative land uses and management 

 practices? 



• What management practices will produce the desired population response? 



Secondly, the institutional complexity offish and wildlife resources influence the 

 design of species data bases. For example: 



• The states own resident fish and wildlife and are legally responsible for their 

 animals. 



• The states define "wildlife" differently. 



• The federal government is legally responsible for the protection and manage- 

 ment of migratory, threatened, or endangered species, and for species involved 

 in international treaties. 



• The habitat of wild animals is owned and managed by individuals, cooper- 

 atives, local, state, and federal agencies. 



Thirdly, the design of fish and wildlife species data bases is influenced by the 

 complexity of the resource. For example: 



• The fish and wildlife resource is comprised of over 4,000 species of vertebrate 

 wild animals and tens of thousands of species of invertebrate animals within 

 the United States. 



• These species occupy a complex variety of aquatic and terrestrial habitats 

 including the surface and near surface environments of the entire United 

 States. 



Fourthly, the design of fish and wildlife species data bases is influenced by the 

 availability, format, and completeness of information about a species or group of 

 animals. 



• Much of the available information is historical and scattered throughout many 

 files, reports, books, and unpublished notes. 



In order to consider the above four factors in the design of a fish and wildlife 

 species data base, an interagency team or steering committee approach is recom- 

 mended (Figure 2). For example, it is impossible to identify an individual or agency 

 who is expert on all taxa of fish and wildlife inhabiting the United States, or one who 

 knows all of the institutional ramifications and information needs of managers, 

 planners, and administrators. 



This approach (Figure 2) has merit because the steering committee: (1) addresses 

 complex institutional questions concerning legal responsibility, funding, data base 

 management and other maintenance needs, (2) identifies and coordinates principal 

 user needs, (3) provides for uniform, consistent data expressions, and (4) provides a 

 framework for tracking data dissemination. These are just a few of the advantages of 

 the steering committee approach to species data base implementation. 



COMPUTERIZED FISH AND WILDLIFE SPECIES DATA BASE 



DEVELOPMENTS IN THE 1970s 



U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 



The EPA started building a national species data base, called BIO-STORET, in 

 the mid-1970s to meet some of the information needs of the Federal Water Pollution 



39 



