cmq teams – report to steering committee december 19, 2013
TRANSCRIPT
CMQ Teams – Report to Steering CommitteeDecember 19, 2013
In 2012, the DLCC Science Working Group (SWG) developed a Comprehensive Science Needs Assessment with Priority Science Needs
In late 2012, managers submitted questions of immediate relevance to on the ground management related to our Priority Science Needs
In early 2013, DLCC selected 6 Critical Management Questions to focus on
Critical Management Questions
Desert LCC CMQ goals
Identify Critical Management Questions with broad relevance across the Desert LCC geography and amongst many conservation partners
Assess current knowledge and whether it is available to managers
Develop relationships, processes, systems, and capacity to deliver science and decision support tools
Directly inform conservation design and delivery linked to measurable outcomes
Critical Management Questions
Applied science think tanks working together to have a collective impact in solving problems that are too big to solve alone.
Critical Management Question Teams
This map depicts the general path each CMQ team is developing.
Activities are listed as examples. Each team is customizing the map to include some of these and other activities needed to address the CMQ.
CMQ Teams in 2013
Teams began forming in March Each team has a one-hour call per month
What we’re learning Many of the CMQs overlap The importance of face-to-face meetings
We’ve accomplished ~6 months of work in 2 days! The importance of continuous communication and
team support Our colleagues in Mexico have a lot to contribute We are getting very positive responses to our
webinars! http://www.youtube.com/user/DesertLCC/videos
Critical Management Question 1
How are climate change, water management, and their interaction affecting the physical processes that support springs, aquatic and riparian habitats, species, and human cultures? What are viable management options to mitigate these effects and support ecosystem functions? How can climate change, hydrological, ecological, and/or biological models be used to better understand the potential future effects of climate change, inform adaptive management, develop beneficial management practices, and create related decision support tools?
Team Leaders: Aimee Roberson, FWS; Ken Nowak, BOR
Steering Committee Sponsors: David Palumbo, BOR; Bob Davis, USFS
Team is focusing on the following aspects of CMQ 1 (approved by Steering Committee, July 2013):
What are successful strategies and methodologies for evaluating and implementing recommendations for the management of environmental flows and associated surface-water and groundwater levels? How can managers effectively integrate information about hydrologic responses to climate change and the influence of this on ecosystems and species? What are viable management options to increase resiliency of ecosystems and species and help them adapt to climate change?
CMQ 1: Water Management and Climate Change
CMQ 1: Water Management and Climate Change
Approach:
Conduct a literature review and related webinars to assess the state of information
Review related past and current efforts and case studies Evaluate needs and challenges and offer recommendations
for addressing them Future?: Pair case studies with pilot projects to facilitate
science, knowledge, and technology transfer.
CMQ 1: Water Management and Climate Change
Expected outcomes and management implications:
Critical information is more readily available to managers via webinars, workshops, meta-databases, interactive websites, and
Real tools managers can use to make more informed decisions, for example:
Methodologies guidebooks summarizing case studies and including decision support tools
Cross-organizational coordination of inventory and monitoring or assessment of aquatic resources, promoting consistent methodologies
Meta-databases that bring information together in new ways
Dialogue: Roundtable discussions to engage managers and researchers in formulating collaborative science agendas
CMQ 1 Team 2014 Accomplishments
Initiated and developed CMQ 1 team Initiated literature reviewCase study methodologies reviewInitiated review of case studies Webinars
BOR’s Colorado River Basin Water Supply and Demand Study Innovative approach to integrating climate change projections
into water management scenarios University of Arizona’s Water Resources Research Center
Database of flow requirements of riparian and aquatic species that have been evaluated in Arizona
Arizona Water Needs Methodology Guidebook for developing environmental flow recommendations
CMQ 1: How do we break it down?
Systems River Groundwater Springs Watershed Ephemeral streams Saline environments
Management options Direct manipulation of flows Protection of groundwater Holistic watershed approaches
CMQ 1 2014 Science Needs
Tools for developing environmental flow recommendations for rivers and streams: Desert LCC-wide Water Needs Methodology Guidebook
Summarize case studies, consider climate change, and include decision support tools
Include how to quantify subsistence and base flows and levels for groundwater-dependent river systems
Include report identifying gaps
Desert LCC-wide environmental flows database Cover the entire Desert LCC geography and consider climate change.
What methodologies are being used to restore springs in the Desert LCC geography and what are the results? Develop state-specific methodology guidebooks for spring restoration
based on successful methods Include recommendations regarding which methodologies are best for
adapting to climate change.
CMQ 1: Future Science Needs
Find gaps from 2014 database/methodologies guidebook, support studies in unstudied systems
Build on Desert-LCC funded projects Spring Stewardship Institute’s springs database – currently,
focused on geographic location Add inventory and qualitative assessment
Sky Island Alliance Continue promoting consistent methodologies.
This information will help managers know what actions are needed to conserve springs
Look at other types of aquatic systems
CMQ 1: Team Activities in 2014
Recruit team members from Mexico
Work with GIS/Data WG Map reaches of perennial streams in Desert LCC
(based on available data) – and other spatial info Modest analysis of spatial data
Explore examples of innovative collaborations where people have implemented environmental flows (TNC, etc.)
Webinars and literature review: Adaptive management groups – lessons learned on
collaborative process Improve our understanding of and information needs related to
international and inter-state water management, laws, and policy
Economic valuation of environmental flows
Explore ways to communicate about CMQ 1 related issues to more general audiences (i.e., water users) Atlas of water resources in DLCC (National Geographic type
map?) Video about water-based ecosystem services Topic-specific syntheses, summaries, fact sheets (TBD)
CMQ 1 Team Activities in 2014
CMQ 1: 2014 Needs
CMQ Team NeedsFacilitation and documentation GIS and data management support Coordination of webinars Literature reviewsLogistical and financial support for roundtable
discussion Perhaps join watershed workshop hosted by Forest Service?
Support for technical staff to participate in annual in person meeting, workshops, and roundtable discussions
Technological and translational capacity to effectively interact with partners in Mexico
Social science/ human dimensions expertise E.g., valuation of ecosystem services
Questions?
Suggestions?
Let us know where there is overlap with and relevance to your organization’s planning cycles, initiatives, and information needs.
CMQ 1: What do you think?
Critical Management Question 2
What species and ecological processes are sensitive to climate change and other large scale stressors and/or threats (e.g., water management, invasive species, altered fire regime, wind erosion) and can be effectively monitored to understand the overall effects of these stressors on ecosystems, habitats, and species, thus helping managers detect, understand, and respond to these changes?
What are the best monitoring designs and protocols to detect changes to these processes and species at temporal and geographic scales suitable for providing adequate and reliable metrics?
CMQ 2: End Result
Have agreement about the information that is needed to begin (or continue) monitoring program(s) that will detect changes in ecological indicators that will lead to conservation actions that will mitigate these changes and conserve our resources.
CMQ 2 Team
Team Leaders: Carol Beardmore, FWS; Esther Rubin, AGFD
Team Members: FWS, USGS, Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum, BoR, BLM
Steering Committee Sponsors: Armand Gonzales, CFWD; Dana Roth, FWS
CMQ 2: General Approach
1. Select threats to focus on; Threats should drive selection of species or ecological processes for long-term monitoring
-Focus on threats exacerbated by climate change
2. Develop process for determining candidate species and ecological processes list 3. Develop criteria and review process for identifying a final suite final species and ecological processes for long-term monitoring (TBD)4. Develop monitoring designs and protocols to detect changes (TBD)
2013 Accomplishments
Tasks accomplished:
Formed CMQ 2 Team. Developed work plan.
Decided to focus on threats and stressors that are related to climate change.
Reviewed the Salafsky et al. article. Developed criteria and process to score threats and stressors related to climate change.
Scored Salafsky Level 2 threats and stressors. Listed top scoring threats.
Developed process for determining candidate species and ecological processes to monitor.
Decisions: Approval of the prioritized first 2 Threats/Stressors from Steering Committee to start work on.
Selection of Threats
A. Used the standard lexicon of threats (Salafsky et al 2008)
B. Created 9 criteria to score Salafsky Level 2 threats.
C. Scored Threats and developed Top Ten List.
Selection of Threats: Top Ten Selected
Fires and fire suppression (rank 1)**Habitat shifting and alteration (rank 2)**Drought Indirect ecosystem effects (fragmentation and
isolation Temperature extremes Invasive, nonnative/alien species Dams and water management/use Renewable energy Storms and flooding Livestock, farming and ranching
Threat x Geographic area/Land cover Matrix
Threat 2
Habitat shifting and alteration…..
Grassland - in xxx geography; could have sub geographies/habitats
Shrubland – in xxx
Other habitats….
Sub-threat 2.1 What to monitor?
species, guild, ecosystem service, process, condition
Sub-threat 2.2
Sub-threat 2.3
CMQ 2 Activities for 2014
Fill out Matrices for first 2 Threats.Critique process.Adjust and Fill out the remaining Matrices.Conduct relevant Webinars.Conduct roundtables/workshops to review
MatricesCoordinate with Mexico.Work with GIS/Data WG: on vegetation/land
cover classification and GIS data.
1. Continued facilitation and team reporting support.2. SWG/CMQ2 Staff time and travel to assist with
development of matrices, literature review, and compiling information.
2. Investigate and decide on Landcover/vegetation classification that is binational. Acquire GIS land cover data.
3. Logistical and financial support roundtable/workshops for reviewing the matrix.
4. Webinar support.5. Financial and logistical support for interaction
with Mexico.
CMQ 2: 2014 Team Needs
CMQ 2: What do you think?
Questions?
Suggestions?
Let us know where there is overlap with and relevance to your organization’s planning cycles, initiatives, and information needs.
Critical Management Question 3
What and where are the greatest threats to native desert grassland and shrubland conservation targets (e.g., endangered species, migratory birds, other species of concern)? Where are desert grassland and shrubland habitats resilient and where are priority areas with high potential for restoration? What are the most appropriate management and restoration techniques for desert grassland and shrubland habitats for conservation targets, site-specific conditions (e.g., soil type, precipitation, elevation, slope, invasive species), and socio-economic constraints?
Team Leaders: Duane Pool, RMBO; Co-Lead ? Steering Committee Sponsors: Robert Mesta, Sonoran Joint
Venture; Mary Gustafson, Rio Grande Joint Venture
CMQ 3: Grassland & shrubland management
Approach: Inventory on-going efforts and existing science, information, and tools related to
threats, restoration/rehabilitation, and sustainable management of grasslands and shrublands. Identify appropriate channels of communication (e.g., websites) to make this
information more accessible to managers. Identify information gaps and prioritize needs, including social science and human
dimensions, as well as opportunities to collaborate on grassland science and conservation.
Develop roundtable discussions and science projects to: Improve understanding of the definition and locations of grasslands that are
resilient or have high potential for restoration;
Develop robust, accurate data related to the geography, conditions, management and monitoring of Mexico and U.S. grasslands;
Create decision support tools or other products that integrate data in new ways that are useful to managers; and
Contribute to and strengthen the network of conservation professionals working on arid grassland and shrubland conservation.
CMQ 3: Grassland & shrubland management
Expected Outcomes:
Webinars on CMQ-related on-going efforts and related resources and topics.
Inventory of existing science, assessments, tools and programs related to CMQ 3.
Improved information and data.
Decision support tools or frameworks.
Strengthened regional grassland conservation network and capacity.
2013 Accomplishments
Initiated literature review and assessment of ongoing efforts, existing science, information, and tools...
Webinars NRCS Ecological Site Descriptions BLM’s Restore New Mexico Program
CMQ 3 project funded by Desert LCC (FWS) Remote sensing to more accurately segregate grass
and shrub mixed habitats in Janos Grassland Priority Conservation Area.
Greatest Threats to Grasslands
UrbanizationRangeland, farmland, agriculture practice
Land conversion Management practices Aquifer impacts (also impacts urban water supply and cost)
Invasive species (shrub encroachment, exotic grasses)
Energy development (wind, solar, oil) Fragmentation
Changing wildfire regimes: more mega-fires (hotter, more extensive)(CMQ5)
Drought
Develop a Process to Identify Shared Conservation Targets and Indicators
WHY? As a mechanism for identifying and targeting habitat conservation and as a metric for success; as a mechanism for communications to link the explicit values of landowners to intrinsic values of ecosystems
WHAT? Find out what managers and landowners are already actively managing or have identified as priority concerns
Examples of Potential Targets and Indicators Ecological processes and/or services (pollinators, aquifer recharge, water quality,
biodiversity, soil retention and air quality, forage production, habitat) endangered species (e.g., Aplomado falcon) migratory grassland birds prairie dogs pronghorn other species of concern (Herps – CMQ2) Cultural resources
Possibly stratified by geography?
CMQ 3 Team Activities in 2014+
Recruit shrubland experts and managers
Continue assessment of CMQ 3 with literature reviews, gathering assessments, webinars
Baseline information Habitat loss (Where and at what rate?) Vulnerability
BMPs for restoration
PIF-V Central grassland conservation business plan (Sprague’s pipit as surrogate)
Seeks ways to engage industry partners (e.g., energy development, Wildlife Habitat Council – national and
international)
Landowner workshops (extension) CONANP, RMBO, USFWS, ABC, USFS, CEC, and Private
Corporate: BMP-Grazing Management, Valles Centrales, Chihuahua, Mexico this year
Define ecosystem services valued by landowners Repeat similar workshops in US in 2015 ? Start
developing in 2014
Roundtable discussions What are on-going efforts? CEC NAGA collaboration? ...as part of identifying Conservation Targets?
CMQ 3 Team Activities in 2014+
CMQ 3: 2014 Needs
GIS/Data WG request: To better understand threats, conservation efforts, and
assessments across the landscape Conservation activities map Check out extant relevant data repositories: Conservation Registry
Science needs: Spatial analysis of:
Where are threats (assessments, vulnerability and map them)? Threat vs Vulnerability (DST)
Syntheses: peer-reviewed state of the knowledge reports (could also be workshop topic) Monitoring – efficacy specific to conservation actions, habitat and
species,
Facilitation and documentation GIS and data management support Coordination of webinars Logistical support for workshops or roundtablesSupport for technical staff to participate in annual
in person meeting, workshops, and roundtable discussions
Technological and translational capacity to effectively interact with partners in Mexico
Social science/ human dimensions expertise
CMQ 3: 2014 Needs
So What? What to conserve. Where to conserve. When to conserve it. How to conserve it. Who else is working on it. Did we conserve it?
Questions?Suggestions?Intersections with your organization?
CMQ 3: Grassland & shrubland management
CMQ #4
What species will be impacted by physiological stress due to climate change (e.g., temperature and moisture) and to what extent? What adaptation strategies might be applied to lessen the impact?
Team: Teresa Lewis* and Carol Beardmore*, Blair Wolf-UNM, John Arnett-DOD, et al.
Steering Committee member: Mary Gustafson
Results
Communicate the importance of considering this emerging science to managers and other scientists.
Develop management strategies to ameliorate the impacts of physiological stress.
CMQ 4 - General Approach
1. Host webinars to increase the team’s knowledge of this topic.
2. Conduct roundtables to further the team’s knowledge and develop research needs.
3. Develop management strategies to apply.
CMQ 4 - Accomplishments
Formed Team. Reached out to experts.
Developed work plan.
Set the format of the webinar series. Discussed audience, questions to ask, etc.
Presented first webinar (on the DLCC Youtube channel)
Loaded PS journal articles on DLCC website.
Specific Approach
From the literature and expert opinion determine which species/species groups will be impacted by physiological stress. (literature synthesis, webinars/workshops, etc.)
Develop and perform a vulnerability analysis on these species/species groups to determine which of these species will be most vulnerable.
Group vulnerable species by ecosystem/geography. Some species may be considered individually.
Work with managers and physiology experts to develop management strategies in a workshop.
CMQ 4 – 2014 Tasks
Continue Webinar series (Jan. 22)
Work with assistant/student to compile an annotated “state of the art” synthesis. Integrate this person into the Team. ***
Develop list of impacted species/species groups.
Begin steps toward developing vulnerability assessment.
1. Continued facilitation and team reporting support.2. SWG/CMQ4 Staff time to assist with literature
review and compiling information. And travel for in-person meetings.
2. Development of a synthesis of the state of knowledge. *** (We have a detailed statement of work for the project.)
3. Webinar support.4. Logistical and financial support
roundtables/workshops for developing the vulnerability assessment.
5. Financial and logistical support for interaction with Mexico.
CMQ 4: 2014 Team Needs
CMQ 4: What do you think?
Questions?
Suggestions?
Let us know where there is overlap with and relevance to your organization’s planning cycles, initiatives, and information needs.
“These biotic communities have an importance to wildlife and outdoor recreation greatly disproportionate to their limited linear acreage.”
Brown et al. 1977
Critical Management Question 5
How do changes in wildfires events (e.g., frequency, size, seasonality, and severity) driven by altered hydro-ecologies, exotic species and climate change influence riparian ecosystem function and services?
What land stewardship practices (e.g., Wildfire Preparedness, Planning, Hazardous Fuel Treatments, Riparian Restoration) can be used to reduce future wildfire impacts to riparian ecosystem resources?
Team Leaders: Mark Kaib, FWS, Mark Briggs WWF Steering Committee Sponsors: Louise Misztal, SIA; Julie Decker,
BLM
CMQ 5: Changing wildfire regimesand riparian ecosystem management
Science Gaps were Developed from CMQ Literature Review and Pending DLCC and JFSP Funded Science
Evaluation of these past and present research projects were used to frame up CMQ5 primary science needs
CMQ 5: Changing wildfire regimesand riparian ecosystem management
Draft Science Needs - CMQ 5.0 Quantification of the magnitude and scale of potential impacts from changing fire regimes?
CMQ 5.1 What are the trends in wildfire events (e.g. ., frequency, size, seasonality, and severity) over the past 30-40 years for Southwest Riparian River Systems (e.g., Rivers of Interest include the Lower Colorado, Gila, San Pedro, Middle Rio Grande extending to Rio Conchos confluence, Pecos, Rio Sonora, Rio Yaqui)
Matt Brooks CMQ5 team member USGS will contribute to 1st Order Assessment
CMQ 5: Changing wildfire regimesand riparian ecosystem management
Let’s say hypothetically the magnitude and scale of wildfires is increasing, with high potential for significant impacts to Riparian Ecosystem Services.
So what? - Why should we Care? Feedback Please!
CMQ 5: Changing wildfire regimesand riparian ecosystem management
Draft Science Application Needs
CMQ 5.2 What land stewardship practices can be used to reduce future wildfire impacts to riparian ecosystem resources?
The challenging marriage between science and managementRequires a more thoughtful approach;
CMQ 5: Changing wildfire regimesand riparian ecosystem management
Demonstration Sites – To Demo best management practices to mitigate fire impacts or to improve ecosystem function or ecosystem services
Criteria for selection of Demo sites
Representative of larger areas – similar FDC’s
Existing science-management collaborative efforts
Potential for Innovative Partnerships
Existing Success Stores Sustainability of work Existing funding Existing baseline Data Recent Large Wildfire Monitoring
e.g., Lower Colorado River, Big Bend, San Pedro TNC Preserve
CMQ 5: Changing wildfire regimesand riparian ecosystem management
Interactive Internet Tool – To connect managers and researchers – clearing house for networking and dissemination of information
Geospatially Organized On DLCC Watershed/Rivers Map Demonstration Sites Projects leaders/contacts Best Management Practices Science PDFs Inventory and Monitoring Reports Success Stories Enhance Mexico Involvement Burning Man Festival
CMQ 5: Changing wildfire regimesand riparian ecosystem management
Expected Outcomes within 2 Years
New Science that demonstrates magnitude of threat
Best Management Practices to mitigate threats
Map of most threatened River System Reaches with acres by agency ownership for better accountability.
Geospatial Interactive Internet Tool
Establish Manager-Researcher Community to help solve future issues.
Standardized protocol for riparian monitoring
CMQ 5: Changing wildfire regimesand riparian ecosystem management
CMQ5 - Work/Assistance/Needs:
New Science Funding (need for longer term 3-5 years)
Establish Monitoring Partnership Initiative
Demonstration Sites /BMP Treatments
Geospatial Interactive Internet Tool design and management
Enhanced Mexico Collaboration
Leverage partnerships/funding (NGO’s, NRCS, State, Private)
Wildfire Threats to Riparian Conference – ca. 5 years
The goal of these CMQ5 complimentary efforts will be to
enhance more strategic and sustainable habitat conservation.
Questions? Suggestions?
CMQ 5: Changing wildfire regimesand riparian ecosystem management
Critical Management Question 6
Which species of amphibians and reptiles are currently not considered vulnerable but are likely to experience negative changes in their population sizes and/or extents of distribution due to future changes in climate, fire regime and water availability in the deserts?
Where are important habitats, linkages, and unusual assemblages to conserve for amphibians and reptiles?
Team Leaders: Esther Rubin, AGFD; Jim Weigand, BLM Steering Committee Sponsors: Rick Kearney, FWS; Benjamin
Tuggle, FWS
CMQ6: Significance for Management
Indicators of Function for Desert Wetlands and Uplands
Low-cost Information Acquisition
Public Fascination with Reptiles and Amphibians
Avoidance of Further ESA Listings
Using Analysis of Existing and New Data for Decision Support to Manage Changing Habitats with Diverse Resources
Envisioning Outcomes of Climate Change through Modeling
Guidance for Management Responses and Monitoring
CMQ6: Approaches
Communication - Outreach for expert teams to address information needs and to assess impacts of climate change and other threats; a citizen science network and research agenda; and supporting information for managers
Initial Focal Areas - Species and their habitats: unique species assemblages, riparian and aquatic ecosystems, desert grasslands, sky islands
Geography – 1. US States; 2. Mexican Border States; 3. Mexican Non-Border States
Two Step Approach for Species AssessmentSensitivity (life history) Vulnerability (exposure to threats)
CMQ6: Accomplishments in 2013
Team Formation for optimal collaboration
Work Plan: Definition and scope
Compilation of species and systems for consideration
Identification of threats and stressors
Networking: Outreach to herpetologists for information
Researching managers’ information needs
Collaboration with other CMQ teams
CMQ6: Actions for 2014
Products: CMQ6 Fact Sheets on specific threats to desert species; identification of data gaps in species distributions; sensitivity and vulnerability analyses of focal species
Expected Outcome: Inform managers’ decisions for reptile and amphibian conservation by characterizing and communicating potential climate change impacts and responsive management alternatives
Major Decision Points: Feb: CMQ6 Team Fact Sheet – IntroductionMarch: Concerted Outreach to Mexican ColleaguesApril: Finalized List of U.S. Species for AssessmentMay: Researcher(s) on Board to Manage Sensitivity
AssessmentDec: Completion of Species Sensitivity AssessmentAll Year: Additional Fact Sheets on Threats and
Management Options; CMQ6 Team Expansion
CMQ6: Team Needs
Communications DLCC template for CMQ fact sheets
Communications coordinator to support development of fact sheets, webpages, and outreach
Expanding DLCC coordination and communications infrastructure for Mexican collaborators
Translation needs for citizen science outreach, fact sheets, etc. in Mexico
Public CMQ webpages about what we’re doing and information synthesized
Participation in and potential travel support for the DLCC Mexico outreach meeting
CMQ6: Team Needs
Data Grad student to mine and digitize data from citizen science
networks and other sources (CESU)
Library of GIS data coverages essential to CMQ6 work
New GIS data for threats/stressor maps (per CMQ 2)
Research Postdoc/grad student to assist assessment process (CESU)
Researcher to work with CMQ6 team to oversee species and habitat assessments based on focal priorities (CESU)
DLCC Coordination Ongoing support for CMQ6 from DLCC staff and partners
Cross-cutting communication among CMQ teams
CMQ 6: What do you think?
Questions?
Suggestions?
Let us know where there is overlap with and relevance to your organization’s planning cycles, initiatives, and information needs.
Thank you for your support!
Questions?