Author(s)

Joanna Burger, Michael Gochfeld, Charles W. Powers, James H. Clarke, Kevin Brown, David Kosson, Lawrence Niles, Amanda Dey, Christian Jeitner, Taryn Pittfield

1Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, USA; 2Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and CRESP, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, USA;.
1Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, USA;2Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and CRESP, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, USA;.
1Division of Life Sciences, Rutgers University, Piscataway, USA; 2Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute, Rutgers University, Piscataway, USA; 3Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, USA;.
1Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute, Rutgers University, Piscataway, USA; 2Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, USA; 3Environmental and Occupational Medicine, Rutgers-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Piscataway, USA;.
Conserve Wildlife Foundation of New Jersey, Greenwich, USA;.
Endangered and Nongame Species Program, Department of Environmental Protection, Trenton, USA..

Environmental assessment of impacts, management, and policy are important aspects of protection of human health and the environment. Assessing the impacts of human activities requires selection of bioindicator species that can be used to assess, manage, and develop public policies that ensure ecosystem integrity, and therefore sustainability of social, cultural, and economic systems. With the use of Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), Pacific Cod (Gadusmacrocephalus), Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), and Red Knot (Calidris canutus rufa), we explore assessment and measurement endpoints, and their relationship to management and development of public policy. This combination of fish and birds provides a diversity of life histories, ecosystem roles, human values, and resource use to explore their use as bioindicators and endpoints. It also allows examination of 1) conservation and protection of species and biodiversity, 2) protection of ecosystems, 3) provision of goods and services, and 4) societal well-being.

Assessment; Bioindicators; Contaminants; Endpoints Management; Public Policy; Fish; Birds

Burger, J. , Gochfeld, M. , Powers, C. , Clarke, J. , Brown, K. , Kosson, D. , Niles, L. , Dey, A. , Jeitner, C. and Pittfield, T. (2013) Determining Environmental Impacts for Sensitive Species: Using Iconic Species as Bioindicators for Management and Policy. Journal of Environmental Protection, 4, 87-95. doi: 10.4236/jep.2013.48A2011.