Heartland Network Natural Resource Monitoring Program

1. Heartland Network Natural Resource Monitoring Program

2. Cultural and Natural Significance of Heartland Network Parks Protecting the Habitat of Our Heritage • Free Flowing Rivers and Streams • Presidents • Deciduous Forests • Civil War battlefields • Prairies and Savannas • Native Americans • Wetlands • Westward Expansion

3. History of Natural Resource Management in NPS • 1930’s. Amidst an agency dominated by landscape architects and engineers, George Wright uses his private fortune to conduct the first faunal inventories of NPS units. (Note: the first national parks had been in existence nearly 60 years at this time). • 1940’s. War times conditions stress national resources reducing NPS natural resource staff from it’s peak during Wright’s and New Deal levels. • 1956 – 66. Mission 66 initiative concentrates NPS resources and attention on development of visitor services to accommodate record visitation. • 1970’s - present. NPS takes greater responsibility for managing ecosystems, not just charismatic species, driven the by growth of ecological thinking. • ~1993. Most NPS science staff transferred to the newly created National Biological Survey, which would later become the Biological Resources Division of USGS.

4. History of Natural Resource Management in NPSState of the Parks Report (circa 2000) • 80 (1/3) of the “natural resource parks” had no professional natural resource manager. • Another 84 parks had only 1 or 2 natural resource professionals. • Almost all projects/studies were short-term; staff mostly deals with the “crisis of the day”. • Science/data and management are not tightly connected. • Parks unable to provide “desired future resource condition” or natural resource goals.

5. Natural Resource Challenge Revitalize and expand the natural resource program within the park service and improve park management through greater reliance on scientific knowledge

6. NPS Natural Resource Challenge • Accelerate Inventories • Design/Implement Vital Signs Monitoring • Collaboration with scientists and others • Improve Resource Planning • Enhance Parks for Science • Assure Fully Professional Staff • Control Non-native species • Protect Native and Endangered Species • Enhance Environmental Stewardship • Expand Air Quality efforts • Protect and restore Water Resources • Establish Research Learning Centers

7. Purpose of Monitoring • Determine the status/trends in the condition of park resources: • Assess the efficacy of management and restoration efforts • Provide early warning of impending threats • Provide a basis for understanding and identifying meaningful change in natural systems characterized by complexity, variability, and surprises – improves decision-making.

8. Vital Signs Monitoring To track a subset of physical, chemical, and biological parameters that represent the overall health of the parks.

9. Overview of Vital Signs Monitored Landscapes Land use / land cover Terrestrial Ecosystems Community Monitoring Plant communities Grassland birds Population Monitoring Invasive, exotic plant species Missouri bladderpod Western prairie fringed orchid Black tailed prairiedog Deer Environmental Monitoring Air quality Climate Aquatic Ecosystems Community Monitoring Aquatic invertebrates Fish communities Population Monitoring Topeka shiner Environmental Monitoring Water chemistry Discharge

10. Vital Signs Monitoring – 3 Characteristics • Long-term, ecological monitoring perspective • Core staff and dedicated funding • Rigorous planning and documentation standards • Focus on long-term trends, e.g. decadal sampling intervals in some cases

11. Vital Signs Monitoring – 3 Characteristics • Integration and coordination among parks, programs and agencies

12. Vital Signs Monitoring – 3 Characteristics • Emphasis on Information Management • 1/3 staff time spent managing and analyzing data • Database systems and processes to insure data integrity • Making information available to managers through analysis and interpretation

13. NPS Monitoring Program Development and Organization – Prototype Programs

14. NPS Monitoring Program Development and Organization – I&M Networks

15. Heartland NetworkEstablished 2001

16. The Network Strategy • Groups of parks working together collaboratively under a Network Charter • Administrative tool for greater efficiency • Core professional staff augmenting work done by park staff • Board of Directors overseeing activities • Technical Committee representing each park.

17. Network Structure • Board of Directors • Superintendents assigned to the BOD on a rotating basis • Technical Committee • One representative from each member park

18. Heartland Network Staff

19. Why is monitoring important to Park Managers? Inventory and monitoring are critical for cost effective, accountable resource management informed by scientific information.

20. Management Needs for Monitoring Information Natural and Cultural Landscape Restoration

21. Management Needs for Monitoring Information Recreation, Health and Safety

22. Management Needs for Monitoring Information Effects of Prescribed Fire

23. Management Needs for Monitoring Information Grazing and Bison Management

24. Management Needs for Monitoring Information Invasive Exotic Plant Management