Melissa Booker, SCI Wildlife Biologist, Naval Base Coronado, NAVFAC SW

1. San Clemente Island Proactive And Reactive Wildlife Management: An Island And A Program In Transition Melissa Booker, SCI Wildlife Biologist, Naval Base Coronado, NAVFAC SW

2. San Clemente Island Location and Area Southernmost California Channel Island Located 68 nautical miles (~78 statute mi. or 125.5 km) west of San Diego 37,200 acres (56 mi2 or ~15,054 ha) plus 54 acres of off-shore islands and rocks Just under 21 miles (33.8 km) long, 1.5-4+ miles (2.4-6.4 km) wide Habitat in a state of recovery following feral herbivore removal

3. San Clemente Island Mission San Clemente Island (SCI) is part of the southern California Range Complex, the most heavily used military range complex in the eastern Pacific The only remaining range in the U.S. that supports live fire ship to shore, air to ground, and ground troop training

4. San Clemente Island Mission SCI supports training in Primary Mission Areas (PMARs): Anti-Air Warfare, Amphibious Warfare, Anti-Surface Warfare, Anti-Submarine Warfare, Mine Warfare, Strike Warfare, Electronic Combat, and Naval Special Warfare (NSW) Primary theater for Naval Special Warfare Training, including the 3rd Phase of BUD/S

5. San Clemente Island Natural Resources ESA listed taxa: 6 plant species, 2 abalone, 1 lizard, 2 resident bird species, 1 wintering (and recently breeding) bird species, and a candidate conservation mammal Cause of decline for all SCI ESA listed species included habitat degradation due to feral grazers Very comprehensive program due to island ecosystem and range value Annual NR budget of $4-$6 million (CPF)

6. SCI An Island In Transition Feral herbivore removal completed early 1990s No widespread vegetative restoration efforts, but dramatic recovery of sage scrub and shrubland communities

7. Reactive vs. Proactive Management Proactive Management: Planned options Stated goals and milestones Considers risk analysis Driven by what not to do Work from results and choices Provides greater level of control Improved results/product Reactive Management: Can’t plan ahead Reacting to needs Crisis driven/rushed decisions Driven by what to do (not what not to do) Work from assumptions and rules Typically poor results for investment

8. SC Shrike Reactive to Proactive Program • San Clemente loggerhead shrike was considered “possibly the most endangered bird in North America” in 1997 • Recovery the responsibility of the U.S. Navy (SCI endemic subsp.) • No USFWS taxa-specific Recovery Plan, but USFWS-Navy Shrike Recovery Working Group • Wild population number dropped to 14 in 1998 • Emergency situation because of population status, lawsuit threat, and loss of operational capacity and flexibility • Reactive management implemented

9. Shrike Recovery Program Reactive Approach • SWG did not followed long-term planned approach • Captive Breeding: • 1991-1996 could breed birds, but no released birds survived • Changed captive cage layout, hand rearing to parent rearing, diet, added pre-release foraging and flight practice/preparation • Releases: • Hard releases poorly timed, questionable locations • Developed new (soft) release techniques in 1998-2000, including supplemental feeding • Predator Control: • Late 90’s: 49 American kestrels, 27 red-tailed hawks, and 9 barn owls lethally removed and 32 San Clemente island foxes lethally removed or transferred • 2000-2008: 1 American kestrel and 1 red-tailed hawk with 2 young lethally removed, but cat control continued and rat control increased • 2008-2013: 3 common ravens lethally removed in 2010, focus on cat and rat control • Monitoring: • Population census and nest monitoring continued • Habitat: • Outplanting for shrikes began in 2001 and continued until recently

10. Results of Reactive Management-The Good • Reactive management precluded a lawsuit • Learned lessons about what not to do • Huge population gains; avert extinction • Increased operational flexibility (2008) • Decreased reactive management over time • All occurring in concert with vegetative recovery

11. Results of Reactive Management-The Bad • Reactive management is habitual; it creates a standard where reacting is always essential/expected (e.g., BO standard) • Transitioning to proactive management is a slow learning process; have to switch SWG mindsets from managing individual birds to population management • Costly=~$35 million • Doesn’t allow for true critical thinking, treating symptoms and not cause

12. Transition to Proactive Management • Increases in long-term planning, but fewer meetings because not always reacting to latest situation, annual planning meetings recap prior year and set plan for coming year • Reductions in program 2008-2013 = increased efficiency and flexibility • Developing Shrike Recovery/Population Management Plan: • Based on analysis of existing program data • Identifies specific recovery objectives • Delineates aspects of the program necessary to meet objectives and timeline or trigger for continuation

13. SC Sage Sparrow, Avoiding Reactive Management 2006 PVA had poor prognosis for subspecies But subspecies range appeared to be expanding on SCI with vegetative recovery PVA was based on a population estimate and apparent survival estimates that were both biased low because limited sampling area Low cost proactive measure was a volunteer survey Results lead to monitoring redesign Island-wide stratified (double) sampling design lead to…

14. 3000 2800 2600 2400 2200 2000 t l 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Year SC Sage Sparrow, Avoiding Reactive Management In 2013, SAGS associated with territories ~5,060 (confidence limits 3,645 and 6,475 ) More than triple previous population estimates Next create a population management plan with recovery goals and measurable milestone for progress

15. San Clemente Island Fox Management Population decline detected 2001 (~387 individuals) Candidate Conservation Species, Framework Monitoring Plan Developed 2006 Research, more intensive population monitoring, and increased management implemented 2007 onward Population rebound 2007-2012; each year had λ >1

16. San Clemente Island Fox Proactive Management Results based management (e. g., roadside mowing) Population increase Less intensive population monitoring (tested and implemented) Risk Analysis Epidemic Response Plan, sentinel monitoring, vaccination (rabies and CDV), and serological monitoring Adaptive Management- revising Epidemic Response Plan based on results of sentinel monitoring

17. Additional Proactive Projects • Seabirds- Guadalupe and Scripps’s murrelets and ashy storm-petrel • Earthworms-Assessment to determine threat and future management • Argentine ants-Eradication • Rodenticide effects-Investigation of cholecalciferol effects on foxes, test alternative rat control methods • Biosecurity-Develop plan to detect and avoid new invasives • Long-term botanical program planning effort

18. Summary • Reactive management can be essential, but should not become the standard • It takes a while to move from reactive to proactive management so start early • Ask yourself: Are you reacting to needs or making progress toward goals according to a plan? • While proactive management requires funding, make the argument that it saves money in the long run and supports the mission • Well written, defensible EPRs are critical; POM should be your time to think critically and really argue for your projects

19. Acknowledgements: NAVFAC training & travel support, CPF and CNIC project funding, all the SCI NR amazing contractors, & my predecesssor