1 / 45

Conservation Design for Sustainable Avian Populations in the Eastern United States

Conservation Design for Sustainable Avian Populations in the Eastern United States. Cooperators/Participants. Atlantic Coast Joint Venture Regional coordination NC and AL Cooperative Fish & Wildlife Research Units Participants in state and regional GAP datasets

jacoba
Download Presentation

Conservation Design for Sustainable Avian Populations in the Eastern United States

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. Conservation Design for Sustainable Avian Populations in the Eastern United States

  2. Cooperators/Participants Atlantic Coast Joint Venture Regional coordination NC and AL Cooperative Fish & Wildlife Research Units Participants in state and regional GAP datasets Patuxent Wildlife Research Center Funding • Multistate Conservation Grant Program administered through the Association for Fish and Wildlife Agencies

  3. The overall goal of this proposal is to develop a consistent methodology and to enhance the capacity of states, joint ventures and other partners to formulate conservation design schemes at landscape levels to sustain bird populations and other wildlife in the eastern United States. Project Goal

  4. DSL Project Objectives • Assess the current capability of habitats in ecoregions in the eastern United States to support sustainable bird populations • Predict the impacts of landscape-level changes (e.g., from urban growth, conservation programs, climate change) on the future capability of these habitats to support bird populations • Target conservation programs to effectively and efficiently achieve objectives in State Wildlife Action Plans and bird conservation plans and evaluate progress under these plans • Enhance coordination among partners during the planning, implementation and evaluation of habitat conservation through conservation design

  5. Project Extent • Pilot Area: South Atlantic Migratory Bird Initiative • Future Expansion to Eastern US • SE-GAP data set serves as the base dataset • NE-GAP data set currently underway

  6. Modeling Landscape Change Existing Landscape Conditions Succession & Disturbance Models Range of Future Landscape Conditions (+25, +50, +75, +100 yrs) Global Climate Models Urban Growth Models

  7. Sea Level Rise Model • SLAMM • Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model • Sea level rise output from GCMs • Use elevation, slope, aspect and • modified NWI landcover • Improves on “bathtub” model by • modeling inundation, erosion, • overwash, saturation, and • accretion

  8. Landscape Changefor Next 100 yrs. Lake Moultrie 2001 +10 years +20 years +30 years +40 years +50 years Incorporates:sealevel riseurban growthsuccession +60 years +70 years +80 years Charleston +90 years +100 years

  9. List of potential species benchmark – South Atlantic Conservation Plan (SAMBI) Conducted a series of workshops with regional biologists to finalize the list of species/habitat “suites” through Structured Decision Making Process Ecological context (Threats and limiting factors) Select surrogate bird species that best represents the important habitat attributes (SDM) Initial Workshops

  10. Avian Modeling Expert Opinion/Knowledge Driven Models Review and refine existing GAP models to include habitat suitability indices based on literature and expert opinion

  11. Brown-headed Nuthatchpotential habitat (t00)

  12. Avian Modeling Data-Driven Models Occupancy probability and patch dynamics Changes in extinction/colonization rates in response to changes in habitat: much stronger inferences than from static habitat-occurrence patterns Useful to validate knowledge-driven models Provide important response variable – persistence Links alternatives (actions) to fundamental objectives Limited applicability to full range of habitats/species

  13. BHNU Route Occupancy + Spatial Context • Optimal Habitat [+] • loblolly-shortleaf & longleaf-slash pine associations • Size*Distance [-] • Latitude 32°- 34° [+] 4.73 km 1.47 km • no. of patches (~20) [+] • Median Distance - 2.5 km • Median Patch Size - 14 ha

  14. Range Dynamics of NA Landbirds

  15. Range Dynamics and climate indicators • North - Increase Colonization • Reduction No. Freezing Days? • Extended Breeding Season? • South – Increase Extinction • Increased Drought? • Frequency of catastrophic events?

  16. Application of the Longleaf Pine DSTto a Dynamic Landscape • Prioritizing for a single focal species - BHNU • Priority on a static landscape • Suitability • Potential to use fire • Conservation estate • Potential (existing) habitat • Source populations • Priority for a dynamic landscape – 50 year horizon • Urban growth • Climate change • Vegetative succession • Sea level rise • Prioritizing for multiple focal species in dynamic landscapes • BHNU, NOBO, BACS, RCWO • Applying and evaluating conservation policies

  17. Suitability (t00)

  18. Fire potential(t00)

  19. Conservation Lands(t00)

  20. Brown-headed Nuthatchpotential habitat (t00)

  21. Brown-headed Nuthatchsource populations at (t00)

  22. Priority model Combine densities to map priority for each species Limiting factors (*) Suitable longleaf sites (S) Potential to use fire (F) Compensatory factors (+) Putative source populations (P)1 Public lands (L) Distance to potential habitat (H)11Species specific data Priority = S*F*(P+L+H)

  23. Priority for Brown-headednuthatch for t00 Priority = suitability * burnability * (potential habitat + conservation lands + source populations)

  24. Priority for Brown-headednuthatch for t10 Priority = suitability * burnability * (potential habitat + conservation lands + source populations)

  25. Priority for Brown-headednuthatch for t20 Priority = suitability * burnability * (potential habitat + conservation lands + source populations)

  26. Priority for Brown-headednuthatch for t30 Priority = suitability * burnability * (potential habitat + conservation lands + source populations)

  27. Priority for Brown-headednuthatch for t40 Priority = suitability * burnability * (potential habitat + conservation lands + source populations)

  28. Priority for Brown-headednuthatch for t50 Priority = suitability * burnability * (potential habitat + conservation lands + source populations)

  29. Combined across years forBrown-headed Nuthatch

  30. Combined across years forBachman’s Sparrow

  31. Combined across years forRed-cockaded Woodpecker

  32. Combined across years forNorthern Bobwhite

  33. Final Decision Support Layer for Longleaf Conservation (all species, all years)

  34. Conservation Policies • Comparison to No CRP • Current CRP quota (~69,110 ac over 10 yrs) • Applied each year from t0 – t10 (~6,911 ac/yr) • Double CRP quota (138,200 ac over 10 yrs) • Select highest priority patches of row crop • Convert to Longleaf • Re-project LULC (not done yet) • Calculate priority ranking of potential habitat • Over time • Each species

  35. Cropland in study area

  36. Highest priority patchesunder 10 yrs CP 36

  37. Highest priority patchesunder 2x CP 36 quotas

  38. Based on workshop results Finalize the focal species list for each habitat Develop the landscape configuration objectives Identify policies for analysis Develop models for conflict resolution Next steps

  39. Multiple habitats Complex, dynamic landscape Urban growth Climate change Succession Product(s) Map of highest priority areas for each habitat type in each scenario (GCM model, conservation action) Vision for Final Product(s)

  40. Thanks

  41. Habitat Dynamics…and climate… 1973 Landcover 1980 Landcover 1990 Landcover 2000 Landcover    1973 Psi 1980 Psi 1990 Psi 2000 Occupancy conditioned (given) on what the habitat does

  42. Questions • What will the future landscape look like? • What are the trade-offs of a given conservation action? • What impact will conservation actions taken now have on that landscape?

  43. Avian Modeling Data-Driven Models Occupancy probability and patch dynamics Changes in extinction/colonization rates in response to changes in habitat: much stronger inferences than from static habitat-occurrence patterns Useful to validate knowledge-driven models Provide important response variable – persistence Links alternatives (actions) to fundamental objectives Limited applicability to full range of habitats/species

  44. Conservation reserve guidelines • Large reserves are better than smaller ones; • One larger reserve is better than several small ones; • Reserves that are close together are better; • Individual reserves should be equidistant • Reserves connected by corridors are better than isolated ones; • Circular reserves are better than elongated ones. Diamond, J.A.  1975.  The island dilemma: lessons of modern biogeographic studies for the design of natural reserves.  Biological Conservation 7: 129-146.

  45. Avian Annual Cycle and Climate Indicators SBr Snon-br SBr Breeding Productivity Breeding Productivity Fall Winter Pre-Bre Post-Fled Post-Fled Growing Degree Days (1° productivity index) Growing Degree Days (1° productivity index) Freq-Hurricanes Below Freezing days Short and Long-term Drought Indices

More Related