cmq teams – report to steering committee december 19, 2013

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

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


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.


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?


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


Questions?

Suggestions?



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.


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 #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


Questions?

Suggestions?


“These biotic communities have an importance to wildlife and outdoor recreation greatly disproportionate to their limited linear acreage.”

Brown et al. 1977


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


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


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!


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;


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


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


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


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?



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


Questions?

Suggestions?


Thank you for your support!

Questions?

cmq teams – report to steering committee december 19, 2013

Documents

water management

adaptive management

ground management

viable management options

cmq teams report

team leaders

usfs team

marcheach team