Transcript Grassland Bird Monitoring

Grassland Bird Conservation and
Monitoring in the Upper
Midwest
28 February 2011
Given the way grassland birds use landscapes (in terms of space and time),
it’s advantageous to take a (regional) collaborative approach
Challenges for Grassland Bird Conservation
1. They occur mostly on private land.
2. Ag-ecosystems are in a constant state of flux
3. Research indicates the need for grassy landscapes (how big?)
with a variety of habitat types
4. Mapping grasslands (and successive models) is really difficult,
bordering on worthless at local scales, and makes all of this even
more challenging.
5. There is a high risk that any one manager can be
implementing habitat that isn't "working" to create source
populations. This is a scary premise given the amount of money
we have to work on these birds and the rapid rate at which
these landscapes are moving in an ever-increasing hostile
direction.
Roadmap for Grassland Bird Conservation
Grassland bird biological planning and
conservation design
• HAPET Office (PPJV)
– Thunderstorm maps (Quamen 2007)
– http://www.ppjv.org/thunderstorm_maps.htm
• UMRGLR JV Science Office
– JV Implementation Plan (2007)
– Currently working on GBCA modeling for JV region
• CHJV Science Office
– Conservation design tools online
(http://www.chjv.org/CHJV_Conservation_Planning.html)
• National Bobwhite Conservation Initiative
– Quail focus areas (counties);
• GOAL = density
estimates for
grassland birds are
actually tied to
management
practices
• According to
preliminary modeling
exercises, important
areas for grassland
birds occur in IL, MO
and KS (species
richness maps based
on focal species (HESP,
USPA, EAME))
Central Hardwoods
Conservation Design requires:
1. An assessment of current habitat conditions and potential threats to
habitat, including an estimate of how conditions compare with a landscape’s
ecological potential. Our landscape assessments are framed within a
hierarchy of ecologically similar units.
2. An evaluation of bird-habitat relationships and current bird distributions in
relation to land use and land cover. (Grass-Shrubland Bird Assessment)
3. A determination of where on the landscape sufficient amounts of habitat
of the required types can be protected or restored to support bird population
objectives. (Northern Bobwhite Conservation | Ecological Potential Model)
4. An assessment of ownership patterns and trends in land use to determine
where conservation actions can be implemented with the greatest
probability of success. ( Map of ownership)
5. Monitoring and evaluation to determine whether populations are
responding to conservation efforts as assumed during the planning process. (
Assessment of Savanna-Woodland Restorations)
National Bobwhite Conservation Initiative
Quail Focus Areas (min and max acres for CY 2010):
• Indiana (5,184 to 346,706)
• Missouri (736 to 239,983)
Website: http://bringbackbobwhites.org
95% of the grasslands in USFWS Region 3 are in private
ownership (strong tie to Farm Bill Policy)
Incorporates economics into conservation models
National Bobwhite Conservation Initiative
How do you package grassland bird conservation?
Lessons from NBCI:
• Clear objectives
• Clear metric of success
• Maps, by county, of where we should work (gives
direction to practitioners)
Goals and Objectives
Joint Venture
State
Focal Landscape
“If we want to be successful for grassland birds,
then ____ is what we need to build.”
Focal Landscape Goals (WI)
1. Increase in the
number of EAME
over a ten year
period. (+ other
species)
(This will require some
level of monitoring
across that project area.)
2. Number of BCAs
(habitat goal)
Grassland Bird Conservation Areas
• Open country matrix
• Large core grassland
block
• Scattered
surrounding
grassland blocks
• Not mutually
exclusive of CRP
patches
We need a replicated, experimental monitoring program on
BCAs throughout the Upper Midwest!
How Grassland Bird Conservation Area (GBCA)
models are being used throughout the Midwest
• Number of GBCAs already designated:
– Illinois = 8
– Iowa = 8 (1 overlaps with a Quail Focus Area)
http://www.iowadnr.com/wildlife/files/BCA_index.html
–
–
–
–
–
Indiana = working with CHJV and IBAs on this
Minnesota = HAPET GBCA approach
Missouri = working with NBCI
Wisconsin = none yet (goal of 10)
NBCI = Many (varies by state)
How Grassland Bird Conservation Area (GBCA)
models are being used throughout the Midwest
• Overall Size of Matrix:
–
–
–
–
Illinois = 10,000 – 15,000 acres
Iowa = 10,000 + acres
Wisconsin = 10,000 acres
NBCI = varies from several hundred to 300,000
How Grassland Bird Conservation Area (GBCA)
models are being used throughout the Midwest
• Size of the BGCA Core:
– Illinois = 320 – 5,000 acres
– Iowa = 20% of overall (at least 2,000 acres)
– Wisconsin = 2,000 acres (some areas have a lot of
grass, whereas others have no protected core)
– NBCI = to be determined in August 2011
How Grassland Bird Conservation Area (GBCA)
models are being used throughout the Midwest
• Landscape Context (% openland):
– Illinois goal of >40% grassland and <10% wooded
or developed (reality is more variable)
– Iowa = minimum of 25% grassland
– Wisconsin = 40-60% grass with less than 20%
trees/hostile habitat
– NBCI = 75%
How Grassland Bird Conservation Area (GBCA)
models are being used throughout the Midwest
• Metric for success
– Illinois = Acreages (protected, restored/recreated, enhanced), bird abundance/trends
– Iowa = Presence of SGCN and nesting success;
would like to use population estimates in the
future (that are tiered to regional goals)
– Wisconsin = bird population estimates
– NBCI = quail per unit area (incorporates detection
probability)
How will we monitor our efforts?
Statewide:
• Change in focal species populations
(index) = Federal BBS
Landscape:
• Change in focal species populations
(index) = Road-based BBS routes with
habitat monitoring
BCA:
• Habitat – based focal species
monitoring. Change in
abundances/densities over time +
changes in habitat.
Evaluating our Assumptions
• Does the BCA concept lead to
source populations of focal
species?
• This research question will be
addressed regionally through the
Midwest Coordinated Bird
Monitoring Partnership
• Initial meta-analysis of
demographic data currently
underway at U of IL.
What grassland bird monitoring is
presently taking place?
• Illinois: Annual grassland breeding bird surveys (point counts),
focal area roadside surveys, spring lek surveys for greater
prairie-chicken, winter raptor surveys (NOHA, SEOW)
• Indiana: Systemmatic surveys at Goose Pond, TNC monitoring
• Iowa: Conduct annual prairie chicken survey; at least 4 bird
(graduate student) research projects have been done in BCAs
(primarily looking at nesting/habitat mgt. relationships),
annual surveys at Neal Smith NWR
What grassland bird monitoring is
presently taking place?
• MN and IA (Prairie Pothole portions): Developing a proposal
to conduct a baseline inventory of birds on managed and
unmanaged grasslands
• NPS Heartland I & M Network (MO, IA, NE, MN, IN, OH, AR,
KS): variable circular point counts to survey birds and their
habitat; points are located on systematic grids across each of
our survey area (National Park Service Unit).
What grassland bird monitoring is
presently taking place?
• Central Hardwoods Grassland Bird Monitoring (Buehler et al.)
–
–
–
–
–
Cost = $75,000 / year for entire BCR (24)
Track population trends at meaningful scales
Evaluate the effects of management
Document habitat conditions
Answer key questions:
1. How much conservation and at what scale do we need to positively affect
populations of target species?
2. What are the thresholds for response?
3. What is the magnitude of the response?
4. Answer questions relative to adaptive management
5. Be statistically rigorous, extensive in nature, cost effective, and
implementable by JV/BCR partners
6. Match protocol to the scale of questions
INHS grassland bird
demography synthesis
• Looking at Patch Size and Relative Survival in terms of:
Geographic variation
Landscape Context
Structure
Association with Treeless Horizons
Species-specific differences
Predation (spatial and temporal changes in nest predators)
Comparison with winter trends
# CRP contracts in a given area
Site fidelity (survival estimates)
• The ultimate goal will be to support decisions on the ground.
Midwest Grassland Bird Technical Subcommittee
– Promote grassland bird conservation and serve Grassland
Bird Science Needs (of JVs, states, NBCI, etc.)
– Provide technical advice to volunteer groups, states, etc.
on management, monitoring and restoration of grassland
birds
– Develop consistency in monitoring and encourage data
sharing (via MWADC) to compare results across states
– Regional approach to developing targeted Farm Bill
practices with incentives for participation
– Leverage $$ and volunteers to help with monitoring!
– Undertake demographic work
– Online workspace at:
http://midwestbirdmonitoring.ning.com/group/midwest
_grasslandbird
Eastern Grassland Bird Technical Committee
•
Need to link with NBCI Tech Committee and be
embedded within it
•
We can’t sell grassland bird conservation in terms of
grassland birds; need to market it in other terms
(consider Pat Keyser and his work with grazing
community)
•
UMRGLR JV, CHJV, BCR 11 (MN & IA), 12, 22, 23, 24 +
Southeast individuals
•
May also incorporate members from USFWS Region 6
(shortgrass prairie)
Midwest Grassland Bird Technical Subcommittee
– Where do we need to go from here?
» Multi-regional framework for different efforts to fit
into
» WI proposal to pilot test a monitoring approach to
evaluate GBCA success
» ??
– How do we engage missing partners?
– What is the next most important step?