Planning to use Volunteer Data: Have we put the cart before the horse?

1. Planning to use Volunteer Data: Have we put the cart before the horse? Bev Clark Ontario Ministry of the Environment Dorset Environmental Science Centre

2. It is easy to imagine a multitude of parameters that would be worthwhile monitoring: phosphorus………………(we’re worried about eutrophication) frogs………………………(we’re worried about them disappearing) bacteria…………………..(we’re worried about getting sick) benthic invertebrates…(we know they reflect ecosystem health) These are REASONS why we think it’s a good idea to monitor But – unless we begin with a clearly defined question (hypothesis) We may be putting the cart before the horse

3. In order to get the cart behind the horse: The Question: Is the trophic status of the lake changing?............... phosphorus Are amphibians on the decline? ………………frogs Is the WQ in this lake/stream impacted?…….benthic invertebrates These questions will drive the sample collections strategies and shape the scientific design of the monitoring program from the start

4. The first step in determining WHAT to monitor is deciding WHY you want to monitor.

5. Lake Partner Program example: We should measure phosphorus (TP) because it controls algal growth. Program initiated to improve awareness, foster stewardship etc. Bonus would be: - characterize trophic status of lakes - develop long-term means for TP in Ontario Lakes ([TP] = +/- 6 -10ug/L) BUT The ONLY thing that the 800 volunteers were interested in doing was tracking between year changes in the TP concentrations in their lakes. However, the data were not precise enough to do this, and there was an emerging need for precise data for input to models. So…the program needed to be significantly modified to make the data more useful. ([TP] = +/- 0.7 ug/L) We should have started with: Is the trophic status changing in Ontario lakes?

6. Perception - The Lake Partner Program collects ONLY TP and Secchi data - surely this is not enough. people often ask: “What other thing can we measure?” or “What’s the next thing we should be looking at?” or “We have some money – what should we measure?” The best answer to these questions is, What is your question?

7. Several Types of Monitoring Programs • Do something/anything to increase awareness and foster stewardship. • (no big deal if the data is never used) • Monitor to establish base conditions and observe trends through time. • (some day we’ll use this data) • Collect information that will be “used” as input to models or to answer specific questions. • (we need the data yesterday) • Data mining or metadata/collaboration projects • (other peoples data is always cheaper)

8. A single type of monitoring program would be more useful • Do something/anything to increase awareness and foster stewardship • (we can still use this data) • Monitor to establish base conditions and observe trends through time • (we know what we will use it for) • Collect information that will be “used” as input to models or to answer specific questions. • Data mining or collaboration projects • (consultation process to survey users)

9. We should be able to say: “We are assembling these data to answer this question”

10. Overview of community-based, monitoring programs in eastern Canada

15. Newfoundland

16. Subset of programs that are lake based:

17. The actual number of programs remaining that have clearly defined goals becomes very small.

18. Examples of well thought out monitoring programs • Ontario Benthic Monitoring Network • Halifax Soil and water conservation Society • EMAN nature watch programs

19. Automated Ontario Benthic Biomonitoring Network Beginning with the question: Is this site impacted? • Input test site record (location, habitat, taxa abundance) • Run predictive model in OBBN database to predict test site to reference group • Run reference site query (searches database for records of reference sites in the test site’s predicted group) • Run index calculator (calculates custom list of summary indices for test and reference sites and defines “normal range”, usually reference site mean +/- 2 SD) • Run Hypothesis Tester (assesses if test site is within normal range of reference sites using multivariate t test) • Generate report

20. Ontario Benthos Biomonitoring Network: Automatic Report Output Reference Site Clear Lake Inflow Longitude: -74.76912083° Latitude: 45.00890889° 22-May-2005 Sampled by: Jones & Craig Test Site Hwy. 75 Clear Lk. N UNIMPAIRED Ontario Benthos Biomonitoring Network

21. Summary • If you have the general ability to interpret water quality data, then you have the capacity to help community based volunteer groups to set up useful monitoring programs • Governments can help • NALMS can help • If you have volunteers collecting data first and bringing it to you later for interpretation, then you may haveproblems.