1 / 37

What is Strategic Habitat Conservation?

Where we Are. Where we Want to Be (Objective). What is Strategic Habitat Conservation?. A structured way to critically thinking about what we do and why we do it; or

christen-dixon
Download Presentation

What is Strategic Habitat Conservation?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Where we Are Where we Want to Be (Objective) What is Strategic Habitat Conservation? • A structured way to critically thinking about what we do and why we do it; or • 2. Setting explicit objectives for populations and then systematically figuring out how to achieve them mostefficiently using our own resources and by working with partners.

  2. Opportunistic Conservation Efficiency Highest 312,850 acres Efficiency Lowest 2,020,000 acres 37,000 acres 7,115 recruits 113,000 acres 2,153 recruits WMD Goal 32,000 Recruits

  3. Setting clear objectives and then systematically figuring out how to achieve them mostefficiently using our own resources and by working with partners. Can we all agree that this is a good thing? Everything else is just details

  4. Why did I start by mentioning populations? The Service was created to conserve species that regularly traverse political/jurisdictional boundaries, are covered by international treaties, and/or or require a multi-state or international approach to conservation. This remains our mandate although we do many essential things like habitat management, education and outreach, law enforcement, etc. as actions to help us fulfill our mandate. Can we all agree to these statements? Thus our mandate is the conservation of populations. Habitat management is an essential tool in conserving populations of many species.

  5. What about species that aren’t limited by habitat or for which there is no habitat solution? Give me an example ……… The basic tenets of strategically (efficiently) conserving these species’ populations are the same as those in SHC. Try to think about these examples as we talk about each element of SHC and see if it doesn’t fit.

  6. Partnerships are often a way to get more done and increase efficiency. While they can be very useful, they are not an objective under SHC! Our objective is the conservation of populations. Habitat management (often through partnerships) is an essential tool in conserving populations of many species.

  7. Setting explicit objectives for populations and then systematically figuring out how to achieve them mostefficiently using our own resources and by working with partners. We’ll call these mission-oriented objectives

  8. Whereas traditional (activity-based) objectives……… Protect and restore 20,000 acres of bottomland hardwoods in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley. We’ll call these mission-oriented objectives ………………….. Reestablish and maintain three viable sub-populations of LA Black Bear in the Tensas Basin, Red River Backwater, and Atchafalaya Basin of Louisiana. How do they differ, and what are the advantages/disadvantages of each?

  9. Reestablish and maintain three viable sub-populations of LA Black Bear in the Tensas Basin, Red River Backwater, and Atchafalaya Basin of Louisiana. Protect and restore 20,000 acres of bottomland hardwoods in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley. • Requires biological info to measure progress • Requires predictions of population response to habitat to decide where to protect and restore (where we deliver habitat determines how much is required). • An objective foundation for deciding how much habitat we need (and therefore $$$ needed) • Outcomes relative to our mission are clear, as are consequences of success versus failure. • Promotes mission-oriented accountability • Easily measured (tracked) • Doesn’t matter where the acres are protected and restored • No predicted consequences of success versus failure, therefore no justification for increased program resources. • No clear ending point (when have you done enough and move on to another conservation issue?) • Doesn’t promote mission-oriented accountability Do we agree that, conceptually, mission-based objectives are preferable to activity-based objectives?

  10. Learn Plan Do We’ll talk about the attributes of mission-oriented objectives more in a little while. For now, try to think of one relevant to your job. Everything else is just details Remember, the purpose of this iterative process is simply to help us attain out objectives as efficiently as possible. In other words, help us conserve landscapes capable of sustaining species at desired levels with the limited resources we can muster.

  11. The Basic SHC Framework is an Iterative, 5-Element Adaptive Process • Priority Species • Population Objectives • Synthesis of science (models) Build the scientific foundation for Management Program Accomplishments Net progress toward Population objectives Biological Planning Assumption-based Research Outcome-based Monitoring Conservation Design Spatially-Explicit Models Habitat Objectives Program Priority Areas Population Impacts Conservation Delivery

  12. Compile and Apply Models Describing Population-Habitat Relationships Identify Limiting Factors Select Focal Species Formulate Population Objectives Develop Species Habitat Decision Support Tools Assess Current State of Focal Species Populations Identify Priority Species Revise Models Accordingly Feedback Loop: Target Research at Key Assumptions Feedback Loop: Assess Net Progress Toward Population Objectives Feedback Loop: Assess Program Accomplish- ments Combine Appropriate Species Decision Support Tools Biological Planning Designate Program PriorityAreas Formulate Habitat Objectives Conservation Design Revise Models Accordingly Monitoring And Research Monitor Site-scale Effects Of Management Actions On Populations Delivery of Conservation Actions Delivery of Conservation Actions If you’re really into details ………………………… No single office or even program is expected to perform all of these functions. SHC is not applied office by office. It is a Service-wide approach to conservation.

  13. Strategic habitat conservation – Benefits Communication Transparency and Credibility Efficiency Attributes of any Successful Corporation (or Gov’t Agency) Greater Reach, Capacity and Leadership Accountability Strategic Research And Monitoring (Quality Assurance and R&D)

  14. Strategic Habitat Conservation What it is, What it is not In other words, don’t expect any change in Service organization, or in what you do in your day-to-day job. Do expect to have new tools to help you be more effective. SHC is…focused on functional change. SHC is not…directed at organizational change.

  15. Let’s think about models Think of some examples that you already use about how populations relate to habitat. Where you bring together what you know, suspect, and/or believe about how a species relates to it’s habitat and express it (write it down, etc.) in measurable terms Models force us to be explicit about these relationships and therefore force us to confront our uncertainties.

  16. Let’s think about models • A simplified description of reality that aids in decision making. • No model makes perfect predictions but they can still be useful if we understand their limitations. • Every parameter in a model must be measurable – what do I mean? • Relate the population to the limiting factor. • Can be based on data (empirical models) or experience (conceptual or experienced-based models)

  17. Empirical models can be based on existing data sets (if the data is appropriate) or new data sets.

  18. Collecting New Data for Models

  19. REGRESSION (NB) ON LANDSSCAPE ONLY: Grasshopper Sparrow Negative binomial regression Number of obs = 952 LR chi2(2) = 86.85 Dispersion = mean Prob > chi2 = 0.0000 Log likelihood = -1143.2436 Pseudo R2 = 0.0366 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ true_dens | Coef. Std. Err. z P>|z| [95% Conf.Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- grass4b | .0177522 .0020034 8.86 0.000 .0138257 .0216787 trees4b | -.0280443 .011417 -2.46 0.014 -.0504212 -.0056674 _cons | -.8051343 .0956861 -8.41 0.000 -.9926756 -.617593 -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- /lnalpha | .4074185 .1116098 .1886673 .6261697 -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- alpha | 1.502933 .1677421 1.207639 1.870433 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Likelihood-ratio test of alpha=0: chibar2(01) = 300.73 Prob>=chibar2 = 0.000

  20. Modeling with Existing Data Sets • Presence/absence of booming grounds with at least 2 males • ¼ section (not QQ) • consecutive years counts as 1 point • Data from MPCS/MNDNR 1996-2004 • Compared with random, non-b.g. locations • 624 booming grounds • 715 random ¼ sections

  21. Final Model + 0.0461 * %(grass+hay) 1 mile - 0.0699 * % trees ¼ mile - 0.0359 * % crop 2 miles - 0.00123 * distance (m) to grass + 0.00033 * distance (m) to trees - 0.1906 * # woody patches 1 mile - 0.00002 * X UTM

  22. Predicted Habitat Suitability for Marbled Godwits • Patch size - > 320 acres • < ¼ mile wide = poor • ¼ - ½ mile wide = good • > ½ mile wide = best • Percent grass within 2 miles • <10% = poor • 10-30% = good • >30% = best • Topography – coefficent of variation within 90 ha • CV > 1 = poor • CV < 1 = good • Trees – must be > 100 m from trees • Wetlands – must have 4 acres temporary • &/or seasonal wetlands within 320 acre patch Experienced-based models

  23. A Working Hypothesis Experienced-based models 10 + (0.25 * Percent) 10 + (-1.0 * Percent) 1.5 + (0.665 * Percent) Nest Success Percent Grass in a 2 mile Radius

  24. 10 + (-1.0 * Percent) 10 + (0.25 * Percent) 1.5 + (0.665 * Percent) Nest Success A Working Hypothesis Percent Grass in a 2 mile Radius Once we apply an empirical or experience-based model to spatial data we call the result a spatially-explicit model (SEM). This is where GIS comes in.

  25. Predicted Habitat Suitability for Marbled Godwits • Patch size - > 320 acres • < ¼ mile wide = poor • ¼ - ½ mile wide = good • > ½ mile wide = best • Percent grass within 2 miles • <10% = poor • 10-30% = good • >30% = best • Topography – coefficent of variation within 90 ha • CV > 1 = poor • CV < 1 = good • Trees – must be > 100 m from trees • Wetlands – must have 4 acres temporary • &/or seasonal wetlands within 320 acre patch

  26. Godwit locations from the Minnesota Natural Heritage Information System @ Minnesota DNR

  27. FINAL MODEL + 0.0461 * %(grass+hay) 1 mile - 0.0699 * % trees ¼ mile - 0.0359 * % crop 2 miles - 0.00123 * distance (m) to grass + 0.00033 * distance (m) to trees - 0.1906 * # woody patches 1 mile - 0.00002 * X UTM

  28. Grasshopper Sparrow Range: 0 – 0.83 birds/ha REGRESSION (NB) ON LANDSSCAPE ONLY: Grasshopper Sparrow Negative binomial regression Number of obs = 952 LR chi2(2) = 86.85 Dispersion = mean Prob > chi2 = 0.0000 Log likelihood = -1143.2436 Pseudo R2 = 0.0366 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ true_dens | Coef. Std. Err. z P>|z| [95% Conf.Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- grass4b | .0177522 .0020034 8.86 0.000 .0138257 .0216787 trees4b | -.0280443 .011417 -2.46 0.014 -.0504212 -.0056674 _cons | -.8051343 .0956861 -8.41 0.000 -.9926756 -.617593 -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- /lnalpha | .4074185 .1116098 .1886673 .6261697 -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- alpha | 1.502933 .1677421 1.207639 1.870433 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Likelihood-ratio test of alpha=0: chibar2(01) = 300.73 Prob>=chibar2 = 0.000

  29. Predicting Mallard Pairs on Wetlands Pairs = 2.718[-0.63+0.55(lnsize)+a]

  30. On the Issue of Conservation Efficiency SHC is predicated on the idea that different landscapes have different potentials to affect populations and that managers are willing and able to prioritize their actions. Breeding duck pair density, Grant County, MN 2 pair/mi2 40 pair/mi2 40 pairs / 2 pairs = a 20 fold increase in management efficiency if management costs at the two sites are equal.

  31. 2.1 1 mi 6.1 1.6 0.2 9.2 0.1 0.3 2.0 1.1 1.5 0.4 Outcome-based Monitoring: Assessing Program Accomplishments Total Pairs Restored =25.7 Pairs = 2.718[y+ β(lnsize)+a]

  32. Pheasants- Wetlands A portfolio of SEMs provides a rapid response capability to programmatic information (strategic targeting) needs Black Terns Migrant Shorebirds

  33. CRP Wildlife Benefits USDA - Farm Service Agency USDA - Natural Resource Conservation Service U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources Ducks Unlimited Pheasants Forever

  34. Species A Species B Species C Wildlife Habitat Function Priorities Water Quality Function Priorities Other Function Priorities Number of Points4 Classes 5 10 15 20 WRP Priority Enrollment Areas The Service’s Leadership Responsibility for Trust Species

More Related