Transcript Making a Summary Determination

SUMMARY
Summary Instructions
After the checklist is filled out and rationale
documented, the ID Team discusses the
responses, reads the category definitions and
makes a functionality determination – the
rationale for the rating is completed at this
time
Establish photo points where possible to
document noteworthy attributes on the site –
make photos demonstrate rationale!
Summary Instructions
Indicate apparent trend (one time observation)
for Functional at Risk ratings. The intent here
is that FAR down reaches will cause
management to red flag as the highest priority.
Unless there are clear indicators of apparent
trend – indicate not apparent
Standard Checklist (lotic)
Summary Determination
Functional Rating
Relative condition in
functioning-at-risk
Proper Functioning Condition
Functional-at-Risk
Nonfunctional
Unknown
High
Trend for Functional--At Risk
Upward __________
Downward __________
Not Apparent __________
Remarks:
Low
Making a Summary Determination
(Functional Rating)
Are there any questions answered “no?”
If here are “no” answers, is the attribute or process
important to function?

Usually a “no” answer results in a finding of functional at risk.
Are all or most questions answered “no”?

If all or most questions, particularly those that are critical to
function, the finding is “nonfunctional.”
Is there an apparent upward trend?

By definitions, an upward apparent trend results in a finding
of “functional-at-risk.”
Making a Summary Determination
(Apparent Trend)
Apparent Trend: A gross estimate of the direction of
change in resource attributes based on a one-point in
time observation of field indicators
Making a Summary Determination
(Apparent Trend)
Are woody species regenerating?
Are herbaceous species reproducing?
Are plants vigorous?
Is the channel degrading?
Is the channel aggrading?
Are streambanks actively eroding?
Standard Checklist (lotic)
Are factors contributing to unacceptable conditions
outside the manager’s control?
Yes _____ No _____ If yes, what are those factors?
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
Flow Regulation
Upstream channel conditions
Road encroachment
Recreational Activities
Other (specify)
Remarks:
_____
_____
_____
_____
Mining Activities
Channelization
Augmentation Flows
Agricultual Activities
Riparian Vegetation Recovery
PNC
PFC
Decision Space
Water Quality Standards
Aquatic Habitat
Livestock Forage
Bare
Ground
Vulnerable
Wildlife Habitat
Sustainable
Values/
Time
Resource Status and Values
PNC
Water Quality Standard
Decision Space
Bare Ground
Nonfunctional
Time
Functional-at-Risk
Vegetation
Aquatic Habitat
Livestock Forage
Channel Stability
Proper Functioning Condition
PFC early seral
PFC mid seral &
closer to DFC
PFC Applications
Useful to help prioritize of Planning, Monitoring, &
Restoration Activities:
 Triage: “ The determination of priorities for action in
an emergency.”
 Allows monitoring to be focused on addressing
issues/”no” answers.
 Makes efficient use of time and dollars.
 Should focus restoration activities on “at-risk”
reaches.
PFC Applications
Provides a common, consistent,
easily understood communication
tool regarding the basic condition of
riparian-wetland areas
Avoids riparian resource
management “Tower of Babel”
Riparian Management Process
Step 1: Inventory/assess current & potential condition
Step 2: Define/stratify complexes
Step 3: Inventory/General Assessments (PFC)
Step 4: Select DMAs (Designated Monitoring Areas)
Step 5: Establish Site Spec. Desired Conditions,
Objectives, & Indicators (MIM)
Step 6: Develop/adapt grazing strategy & implement
Step 7: Monitor annual indicators each year and
condition indicators every 3-6 years (MIM)
Step 8: Adapt grazing strategy, annual indicators &/or
criteria as needed to meet desired conditions
Stratify Reaches/Complexes/Sites (Experienced Professionals)
Professional Assessment
Non-Professional Assessment
Inventory
Inventory
Proper Functioning Condition (PFC) Assessment
Integrated Rip. Evaluation Guide Level II (R4 FS)
General Condition & Value Inventory (ID process))
Stream Visual Assessment Protocol - SVAP (NRCS)
Skill Level
Skill Level
Experienced Professionals w/ assistance from Field
Technicians
Trained Field Technicians w/ assistance from
Professionals
ID Issues, Objectives & Prioritize Reaches/Complexes/Sites for Mgt, Restor., and/or Monitoring
(Experienced Professionals)
Select Designated Monitoring Areas (DMAs) for Sites Requiring
Additional Information
Monitor to track achievement of objectives (Experienced Professionals)
Monitor DMAs
Use observational procedures (e.g. photos) for gross changes & simple issues (Experienced Professionals)
Use quantitative/measured protocols to detect finer changes/trends (Trained Field Technicians)
Analyze/Evaluate Data
Complete (PFC) using trend monitoring data & implement Adaptive Management
(Experienced Professionals)
Repeat
monitoring
to evaluate
management
Monitoring Data & PFC
Monitoring data can go far in supporting a
PFC assessment -- where monitoring data
is collected, PFC should be validated
Interagency Technical Bulletin
Version 2.0 / July 2006
Ervin R. Cowley
Timothy A. Burton
Steven J. Smith
Idaho State Office, BLM and Intermountain Region, US Forest Service
Monitoring Streambanks
and Riparian VegetationMultiple Indicators
Multiple Indicator Monitoring Metrics
Annual Use Metrics (Short-Term Monitoring)
 Median & Mean Stubble Height
 % Streambank Alteration
 % Woody Use
 Mean Stubble Height for Dominant Key Species
Condition Metrics (Long-Term Monitoring)
 % Stable Streambanks
 % Covered Streambanks
 % Saplings and Young Woody Vegetation
 % Mature Woody Vegetation (and dead)
 Vegetation Erosion Resistance Rating (Greenline Stability Rating)
 % Hydric Vegetation
 % Hydric Herbaceous
 Mean Greenline-Greenline Width (GGW)
 Ecological Status
 Wetland Rating
 Mean Width & Depth, Substrate Composition
There is no silver bullet and frankly you
probably don’t need one. It is far more
important to be able to find the right kind of
gun, be able to load the gun … and perhaps
most importantly, be able to figure out where
the werewolf is.
Matthew Oliphant, Useability Works, 03-22-2006