Monitoring and Adaptive Management

Monitoring and Adaptive Management Associated Maps Terrestrial Systems………………………….1 River Basins……………………………… 12 Bays and Estuaries………………………….29 Introduction Monitoring is an important part of the management of habitat, flora, and fauna Without a monitoring component to each management plan or strategic planning effort, the goals of that document can not be met Monitoring allows for adaptive management, a principle in which management objectives and goals are maintained or amended based on information delivered through monitoring efforts Monitoring allows managers to know whether changes are occurring on the landscape or within a population Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) monitors several different species and habitats in an effort to manage wildlife and adapt new strategies for habitat conservation and management Many of these monitoring process are outlined below, however it is important that TPWD and its partners work together to spread a limited number of resources over more issues of concern Evaluation and modification of current monitoring efforts in Texas are outside the scope of this strategy This strategy will deliver a monitoring package targeted to address the Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy (CWCS) conservation priorities The monitoring package shall be comprehensive enough to meet the needs of the strategy and still be easily evaluated and modified as needed Prior to engaging in a comprehensive terrestrial monitoring effort, the statewide mapping and inventory efforts (Section) must be conducted to determine the state of species and habitats throughout Texas The statewide biological survey will allow TPWD and its partners to collect data from consistent locations maintained indefinitely to provide information on species and habitat It is important to understand that specific principles must be outlined to ensure that the monitoring package meets the needs of the CWCS and the general goals of consistent, statistically sound management in Texas The following principles must be applied to future monitoring efforts in order for them to be cohesive with this strategy and the needs created by the inventory process These principles were developed primarily by the United States Forest Service (USFS), Defenders of Wildlife, and the United State Geological Survey (USGS) According to the USFS there are three types of monitoring efforts that should be used in order to truly determine the state of habitats or species (2004)  Targeted Monitoring: “Monitoring the condition and response to management of species and habitats that are identified as being of concern or interest.”  Context Monitoring: “Monitoring a broad array of ecosystem components at multiple scales without specific reference to influences of ongoing management.”  Cause and Effect Monitoring: “Investigates the mechanisms that underlie habitat and species response to management and other forms of disturbance.” It is both strategically and operationally difficult to maintain a monitoring effort that meets the needs of all species and habitats It must be noted that a strong program would include the use and interaction of all three of these methods, within the financial and personnel limitations existing in each wildlife agency It is impossible to monitor every Species of Concern in the state of Texas based on financial constraints and personnel limitation, therefore the species list and hierarchy established in this strategy must be followed barring changes in priority based on imminent threat (Section) All data collected during these monitoring efforts must be based on sound research design and appropriate statistical methodology regardless of who or what organization is collecting data This will allow TPWD to use monitoring data to populate the Natural Diversity Database (NDD) TPWD can then share those data without fear of providing an inferior or ineffective product to partners The USFS Recommendations on Monitoring Terrestrial Animal Species and Their Habitats (2004) was used to determine what elements should be incorporated into this document With some slight modifications, these components should address the needs of TPWD and its partners Critical Elements for Successful Monitoring in Texas  Make a commitment to improve monitoring of terrestrial animals and their habitats  Ensure that all monitoring contributes to adaptive management by exploring the causes for trends and alternative scenarios that could reverse unfavorable trends  Ensure that all monitoring protocols are sound and data collected are statistically useful in order to guarantee their appropriateness to be included in the Natural Diversity Database  Implement monitoring strategies that integrate habitat and population monitoring Monitoring habitat alone will rarely be sufficient for adaptive management because habitat relationships are not well understood and may not be predictable  Recognize that monitoring will exist at different scales Coordinate across ecological and administrative scales, with emphasis on the role of the Regions Because TPWD would be working with partners, it would be beneficial to all groups if ecological regions were used for both communications and coordination  Establish appropriate roles and coordination for other agencies, organizations and private landowners  Provide adequate staffing, skills and funding structures to accomplish monitoring objectives  Adopt and integrate three types of monitoring (context, targeted, and cause-andeffect)  Use sound ecological principles and risk assessment to prioritize and design monitoring activities  Use partnerships and interagency coordination to accomplish monitoring objectives  Ensure that individuals and teams responsible for monitoring development and oversight have appropriate skills TPWD should work with partners to implement monitoring strategies based on the above components While TPWD already has monitoring efforts underway, those efforts should be evaluated to determine whether they meet the above elements They should also be evaluated to determine whether data collected from these monitoring efforts can be incorporated into the NDD Purpose of Monitoring in Texas Texas is a large state with many species and habitats in need of monitoring; however, several issues need to be taken into account prior to continuing this process TPWD has historically monitored several species using several different techniques that have been outlined by biologists working for the Department In addition to terrestrial species and habitat, Texas is tasked with monitoring bays, estuaries and all of the inland reservoirs, rivers and many spring-fed catchments The sheer size and need is difficult to measure, but a significant portion of the TPWD budget is dedicated to monitoring species and habitats In Texas, there are over 1,000 species of terrestrial vertebrates, 29,000 species of terrestrial invertebrates and greater than 4,000 species of vascular plants that potentially need monitoring Monitoring efforts in Texas should include the continuation of some current monitoring efforts and combining other efforts into more habitat or species/guild monitoring efforts In addition to animal species, several plant species are also being monitored yearly to ensure the viability of their populations in different areas of the state Knowledge of the vegetation of the state will enhance our overall ecological knowledge and allow us to refine the monitoring efforts of our faunal species Current Monitoring Efforts The main monitoring document used by TPWD was developed to coordinate efforts on TPWD lands in 1996 The Baseline Inventory and Monitoring Procedures on Texas Parks and Wildlife Lands outlines the methods TPWD employees use to monitor or evaluate vegetation, herptiles, birds, and mammals At the time of its development, this document met several of the needs of TPWD and its land managers Procedures should now be updated based on new technology as well as refined field techniques and data collection forms An effort should be made to review this document and update it as needed to best accomplish the goals of this dynamic strategy A special emphasis should be put on new technology such as GPS units and GIS software These items were not widely used by TPWD in 1996 but are in frequent use by all field staff today Information and education on the use of this newer technology should also be outlined in an updated version of this document Species and Habitat Monitoring Group Birds Organization Fort Hood - United States Army Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Current Monitoring Efforts Black-capped vireo monitoring Partners The Nature Conservancy of Texas, Various universities The Nature Conservancy of Texas, Various universities None Time Frame Annual Volunteers, United State Geological Survey Annual Spring call counts (quail) Matador & Gene Howe Wildlife Management Areas Black-capped vireo surveys at Kerr Wildlife Management Area Breeding Bird Survey None Annual None Annually in May Annual Chachalaca surveys (TPWD Wildlife Division - Region 1) Christmas Bird Count Colonial Waterbird Inventory None Annual Coordinated by the National Audubon Society U.S Fish & Wildlife Service, Texas General Land Office, National Audubon Society, The Nature Conservancy, Center for Coastal Studies TAMUCC, Coastal Bend Bays & Estuaries Program Annual Annual Dove reward banding study Fall Covey Counts (quail) Matador & Gene Howe Wildlife Management Areas United State Fish and Wildlife Service None Annual Annual Golden-cheeked warbler monitoring Turkey hen-poult count and survey Bald Eagle surveys 100+ Volunteers from around the state; coordinated nationally by the U.S Geological Survey Annual Annual Mammals Fort Hood - United States Army Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Lesser prairie chicken distribution survey Lesser prairie chicken harvest survey Lesser prairie chicken lek survey Mourning Dove (TPWD Wildlife Division - Region 1) Mourning Dove call count survey Red-cockaded woodpecker surveys Roadside observation surveys (quail, pheasant) Texas Hummingbird Roundup Turkey hen-poult count and survey Urban bird point counts None Annual None None None Annual, Until 2005 Annual Annual United State Fish and Wildlife Service None Annual Annual Audubon Texas Annual Volunteers None Waterfowl surveys (goose, midwinter waterfowl) United State Fish and Wildlife Service Year round Annual, Until 2005 2005-2007, monthly December and January of each year Whitewing Dove production survey Predator surveys None None Ongoing White-tailed deer surveys Black Bear - when trapped or collared (TPWD Wildlife Division - Region 1) Chronic Wasting Disease survey Desert bighorn sheep population surveys Furbearers surveys None None Annual Periodic United State Fish and Wildlife Service Foundation of North American Wild Sheep, Texas Bighorn Society None Annual Annual Texas State University Annual Herptiles Terrestrial Invertebrates Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Balconian Naturalists' Group Javelina (TPWD Wildlife Division - Region 1) Mountain Lion (TPWD Wildlife Division - Region 1) Mule deer (TPWD Wildlife Division - Region 1) Pronghorn (TPWD Wildlife Division - Region 1) Pronghorn population surveys River otter survey White-tailed and mule deer age/weight/antler development surveys White-tailed and mule deer population surveys White-tailed deer age, weight, antler harvest surveys White-tailed deer browse utilization surveys White-tailed deer surveys Alligator surveys (spotlight and nest - aerial) None Annual None Annual None Annual None Annual None None None Annual Every years Annual None Annual None Annual None Annual None None Annual Box turtles Houston Toad Texas Amphibian Watch Texas horned lizard - Matador Wildlife Management Area Texas Horned Lizard Watch Austin 10 county area butterfly fauna None Volunteers, Texas State University Volunteers None Ongoing Annual Ongoing Annual Volunteers, C J Durden, P.I Ongoing Since 1968: weekly to monthly Central Texas Melittological Institute Fort Hood - United States Army Illinois Natural History Survey Zara Environmental LLC Terrestrial Habitats National Parks Service Bees of Texas survey None Annual Bees of the Brackenridge Field Lab (Austin Texas) Cave crickets None Annual University of Illinois Ongoing Status assessment 19 endemic obligate cave invertebrates Phylogeography of cave crickets in Central Texas (molecular study) Plethodon sp in cave and spring at Fort Hood, Texas Stable isotopes of cave crickets in central Texas (feeding urban vs rural) Camp Bullis biomonitoring The Nature Conservancy of Texas Ongoing Zara Environmental, Buda Texas Into 2007 Zara Environmental, Fort Hood Natural Resources Branch Zara Environmental, Buda Texas Into 2006 James Reddell, Texas Memorial Museum and George Veni and Associates times per year Lakeline Mall Habitat Conservation Plan Fire and fuel dynamics None Forest health None Landscape dynamics None Non-native vegetation/early detection Terrestrial vegetation communities None times per year To be determined To be determined To be determined To be determined To be determined None None Into 2007 Orion Research and Management Services Inland Aquatic Species and Habitats National Parks Service Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Feral hog management - Protect Endangered Species habitat and sensitive riparian systems in the Bandera Canyonlands Water quality Environmental Defense, The Nature Conservancy of Texas, Private landowners Ongoing United State Geological Survey, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality To be determined Aquatic vegetation control studies United States Army Corps of Engineers Project specific Comanche Springs pupfish Devils River minnow Fish kill/pollution complaint investigations Golden Alga Survey None United State Fish and Wildlife Service None Periodic Annual Event specific Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, River Authorities None None Volunteers One time sampling Annual Periodic Annual Biological: 2/year Hydrological:3-4/year 31 springs sampled from October 2003 to May 2004 and 40 springs sampled from March 2005 to May 2005 Project specific Weekly during bloom Guadalupe bass Headwater catfish Heart of the Hills freshwater mussel survey information Hydrological and biological assessment of selected Edwards Plateau springs: River basins: Nueces, Guadalupe, Colorado In-stream flow evaluations Lake Whitney golden alga bloom monitoring Texas Water Development Board, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality BRA, TIAER, Texas State University Mexican stoneroller Natural resource trustee natural resource damage assessments Pecos pupfish Recreational fisheries contaminant study Reservoir recreational creel surveys Reservoir recreational fisheries monitoring Coastal Aquatic Species and Habitats National Parks Service reservoir sportfishes Rio Grande fish community San Felipe gambusia State Wildlife Grant freshwater mussel survey Texas Mussel Watch Coastal dynamics None Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Texas General Land Office, United State Fish and Wildlife Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration None Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, DSHS None Periodic Event specific None Annual with reservoirs on a year rotation Annual Periodic Annual FY2005/ FY2006 Ongoing Periodic None None None Stephan F Austin State University, LCC Volunteers United State Geological Survey, TXBEG Marine and estuarine SAV Sea turtle nesting and stranding Water Quality Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Bag Seines (Juvenile finfish/Juvenile Crustaceans) Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service United State Geological Survey, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality None Periodic year study Periodic To be determined Annual To be determined Monthly Plants Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Bay Trawls (Crustaceans/juvenile finfish) Gill Nets (Juvenile/Sub adult finfish/crabs) Gulf Trawls (Crustaceans/juvenile finfish) Oyster DredgeMarket/submarket size oysters Sportfish Harvest Surveys None Monthly None None Seasonally (Spring/Fall) Monthly None Monthly None Sportfish Harvest Surveys None Beech-White Oak-Maple ravines (Southern ladies slipper orchid) TPWD State Parks Divisions, United States Forest Service, Temple Inland Timber Corp., and The Nature Conservancy of Texas The Nature Conservancy of Texas and private landowners Texas State University, Plateau Integrated Land and Wildlife Management High Use May 15 - Nov 15 Low Use Nov 16 - May 14 Annual Bigtooth maple canyons (Carrs rattelsnake root) Effects of white-tailed Deer management on recruitment of Quercus buckleyi Longleaf pine xeric sandhills (Texas trailing phlox and white firewheel) Neches River rose mallow Pitcher plant bogs (Chapmans yellow eyed grass, bog coneflower, and tiny bog buttons) Saline barrens (earthfruit) The Nature Conservancy of Texas, Big Thicket National Park, and Temple Inland Timber Corporation United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Stephen F Austin State University, USFS, Texas Department of Transportation TPWD Wildlife Management Areas, United States Forest Service, Temple Inland Timber Corporation, and private landowners Temple Inland Timber Corp and Arkansas Natural Heritage Program Annual Ongoing Annual Annual Annual Annual Star cactus None Annual Texas poppy-mallow Texas Department of Transportation Annual Texas snowbells The Nature Conservancy of Texas, volunteers Annual Texas wild-rice Volunteers, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Texas Department of Transportation Texas Department of Transportation, TPWD State Parks Division United States Fish and Wildlife Service, The Nature Conservancy of Texas, Temple Inland Timber Corporporation and private landowners None Annual Tobusch fishhook cactus Weches glades (white bladderpod and Texas golden gladecress) Woody and herbaceous vegetation transects - Matador and Gene Howe Wildlife Management Areas Annual Annual Annual Additional Monitoring Efforts in Texas Coastal bays and estuaries are monitored monthly (depending on need) and trend data is used to determine whether there are any critical needs within these areas The methods that are currently employed have been successful and not need to be amended at this time State reservoirs are also being monitored, with much of the effort focused on sportfish However, additional data are collected that provide information on aquatic plant life, nongame species, and exotic species that may affect native flora or fauna Additional monitoring data are also collected on selected streams and rivers It is important that aquatic nongame species receive and utilize additional monitoring efforts and that TPWD put an emphasis on particular waterways and species that are of immediate interest The major nongame bird monitoring in Texas occurs as part of Breeding Bird Surveys (BBS, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center), Christmas Bird Counts (CBC, National Audubon Society) and the Colonial Waterbird Surveys (Texas Parks and Wildlife Dept., U.S Fish & Wildlife Service, Texas General Land Office and Texas Colonial Waterbird Society) There are several other species-specific monitoring efforts underway in the state as well as several game surveys While bird species are well represented in monitoring efforts, upgrades to the current monitoring systems should be adopted to increase the usefulness of the data The first alteration would be that all bird monitoring data be stored in a centralized database hosted by the United States Geological Survey in Patuxent, Maryland TPWD currently collects data through the above mentioned surveys as well as point counts conducted on TPWD-owned Wildlife Management Areas All of this information must be used at the national level to determine trends in bird populations Two additional needs must also be met for bird monitoring: additional points need to be added to the current breeding bird surveys and those points need to be staffed by trained personnel or volunteers The Texas nongame avian biologists should decide on how many additional points are needed and appropriate locations of those points Mammal and herptile populations are currently under-represented in Texas monitoring efforts Once the Texas biological survey (Section) is underway, wildlife biologists will begin to understand these populations better Using the biological survey points, both mammals and herptiles can be monitored to determine population health Current invertebrate monitoring efforts in Texas generally focus on cave-dwelling species TPWD needs to create opportunities for better understanding of all invertebrates in Texas and should start with those high priority species listed in this strategy It is impossible to gain knowledge quickly in terms of terrestrial invertebrates because of the sheer volume of species that exist TPWD must use the biological survey as an opportunity to establish a base of knowledge of invertebrate taxonomy, populations and life history Critical Components to Monitoring Texas has not had a complete biological inventory since 1905, when Vernon Bailey and his fellow surveyors scoured the state collecting data on animals and plants for the United State Bureau of Biological Survey The resulting publication is the Biological Survey of Texas and was published 100 years ago this year It is important to establish this document as the precursor to an updated monitoring program Without a continuation of the inventory it will be impossible to monitor temporal fluctuations of populations and attempt to correlate those fluctuations with variables Continuation of a Texas biological survey will allow for better adaptive management efforts of Texas’ wildlife and habitats We have made tremendous biological and technological strides since the completion of the 1905 Texas Biological Survey and many more tools are at the disposal of Texas biological agencies and organizations Each of these groups is using this new technology for the betterment of Texas conservation and it is imperative that we work together to avoid duplication of efforts Surveying and monitoring species of plants and animals is a way that TPWD can partner with other organizations to ensure quality data, cover more of the landscape, and spread already limited resources over a greater part of the state Prior to conducting survey efforts, it is important that available technology, in the form of database and spatial analyses and mapping software, are used to generate vegetative cover maps of the state This priority was also analyzed in the priority conservation actions (Section) with a high priority being put on the ground truthing of those data and maps that are developed Once map data from habitats and ecoregions have been ground-truthed, the new biological inventory can begin The inventory will be imperative to determining the priorities for Texas’ future species conservation efforts Currently, we are limited in our ability to prioritize The survey methodology we are employing is useful based on our current level of knowledge but will be less adequate once new inventory and survey data are available TPWD must take this into consideration and update established survey methods once the inventory results are analyzed Current Priority Habitats The 2005 Land and Water Resources Conservation and Recreation Plan (Land and Water Conservation Plan) established priority ecoregions within Texas as the scale at which would be most appropriate for the making future decisions (Chapter) In order to begin looking at a finer scale for on-the-ground management it is imperative that TPWD create priorities within these Tiered ecoregions High priority ecoregions or Tier ecoregions consist of the Blackland Prairies, Gulf Coast Prairies and Marshes, and South Texas Plains Within the Blackland Prairies the most important issue is the rate of conversion of native grasslands into crops or urban development There are approximately 5,000 acres of remnant prairies left in this ecoregion All other habitats in this region are also in decline, making the entire ecoregion a high priority for management and monitoring Restoration is critical for the survival of this ecoregion The Gulf Coast Prairies and Marshes ecoregion has many conservation efforts underway with the coastal marshes and barrier islands being relatively well conserved However, it is the inland prairies and coastal woodlands that are of greater concern As in the Blackland Prairies, the coastal prairies are heavily converted for use as agricultural land and development to commercial or residential building Population growth along the coast is high creating greatly fragmented lands and causing increased pressure on the coastal prairies Both the High Plains (Tier II) and the Rolling Plains (Tier III) have lost and are losing native grasslands to cropland conversion and other agricultural use Much of the land has been converted for use as cropland with some of that land now being enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) Of all of the habitat types associated with the ecoregions of Texas, native prairie and grassland habitats were listed as one of two high priority habitats within the Land and Water Conservation Plan Relatively little native habitat still remains here However, there is still some potential for recovering a percentage of these areas and monitoring these areas for success in the future The terrestrial inventory process that TPWD employs will be based on priorities that have been laid out in the Land and Water Conservation Plan The broad, ecoregion-based variables used to derive these priorities are useful and will assist in decision making until such time as new data are available Based on habitat information found within the Conservation Status, Threats, Rare Plants and Communities, and Rare Animals sections (under the Priority Ecoregions for Conservation Efforts section of the Land and Water Conservation Plan), priority habitats were extracted and will be used for making decisions on future inventory and monitoring programs Citizen Science in Monitoring (Defenders of Wildlife/Illahee) The role of citizen science in habitat monitoring is evolving Properly trained citizens not only reduce the cost of data collection and ground-truthing, but they can also become engaged supporters of fish and wildlife conservation As the eminent ecologist Gordon Orians has observed, many citizen scientists may have more detailed and intimate knowledge of a particular landscape than professional biologists who may not spend as much time in the field On the other hand, citizen scientists can present a challenging variable for the resource manager because they fall outside of the usual withinorganization structure, may not be well-versed in established survey techniques, and must be trained and potentially tested to ensure that they provide reliable information (http://www.birds.cornell.edu/LabPrograms/CitSci/) Despite these challenges, some of the most successful monitoring programs, such as the Christmas Bird Counts, are carried out by citizen scientists Texas Parks and Wildlife Department must use citizen science in order to meet the goals of this strategy Currently, the Education and Outreach branch of the Science, Research and Diversity Program in the Wildlife Division are utilizing Texans’ observations to collect data on many different species A major source of volunteers is the Master Naturalist program Developed originally by Urban Biologists in San Antonio, the program has now expanded to every corner of Texas and is continuing to grow as a national organization The Texas Master Naturalists™ offers interested citizens intense training on a variety of wildlife and habitat topics and asks for volunteer service in return Through specialized training courses, the Master Naturalists take data on certain animal or plant species and provide those data to TPWD for analysis, distribution, and storage TPWD must take advantage of this resource and continue to incorporate these Texans into our monitoring programs They are valuable and trainable and can provide a large volume of data that could then be incorporated into the Natural Diversity Database It will be at the discretion of the wildlife biologist in the state to decide which projects are most in need of this support and the onus is then on those biologists to sufficiently train and introduce quality control measures to ensure the validity of those data For more information on the Texas Master Naturalist program, see http://masternaturalist.tamu.edu/ Working closely with the Texas Master Naturalists, the Texas Nature Tracker program (Texas Parks and Wildlife Department) is a citizen science monitoring effort designed to involve volunteers of all ages and interest levels in gathering scientific data on species of concern in Texas through experiential learning The goal of the program is to enable long-term conservation of these species and appreciation among Texas citizens The Texas Nature Tracker program enables citizens to participate in gathering data on a variety of species and habitats, including box turtles, monarch butterflies, hummingbirds, prairie birds, monarch butterfly habitat, freshwater mussels, amphibians, horned lizards, and Swallow-tailed Kites For more information on the Texas Nature Tracker program, see http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/nature/education/tracker/  ... monitoring objectives  Adopt and integrate three types of monitoring (context, targeted, and cause-andeffect)  Use sound ecological principles and risk assessment to prioritize and design monitoring. .. ongoing management. ”  Cause and Effect Monitoring: “Investigates the mechanisms that underlie habitat and species response to management and other forms of disturbance.” It is both strategically and. .. (2004)  Targeted Monitoring: ? ?Monitoring the condition and response to management of species and habitats that are identified as being of concern or interest.”  Context Monitoring: ? ?Monitoring a