Upload File

jaymee marty the nature conservancy...change in native richness positive in grazed pools negative in...

  • Home
  • Documents
  • Jaymee Marty The Nature Conservancy...Change in native richness positive in grazed pools negative in ungrazed pools (Marty 2005)-2.50-2.00-1.50-1.00-0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
19
Using Big Science to Manage Vernal Pool Grasslands Jaymee Marty The Nature Conservancy

Upload: others

Post on 22-Aug-2020

3 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

Report

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Jaymee Marty The Nature Conservancy...Change in native richness positive in grazed pools negative in ungrazed pools (Marty 2005)-2.50-2.00-1.50-1.00-0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50

Using Big Science to Manage Vernal Pool Grasslands

Jaymee MartyThe Nature Conservancy

Page 2: Jaymee Marty The Nature Conservancy...Change in native richness positive in grazed pools negative in ungrazed pools (Marty 2005)-2.50-2.00-1.50-1.00-0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50

Cosumnes River

Page 3: Jaymee Marty The Nature Conservancy...Change in native richness positive in grazed pools negative in ungrazed pools (Marty 2005)-2.50-2.00-1.50-1.00-0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
Page 4: Jaymee Marty The Nature Conservancy...Change in native richness positive in grazed pools negative in ungrazed pools (Marty 2005)-2.50-2.00-1.50-1.00-0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50

We own it, now what?

• Change Current Management – Seasonal Grazing (Oct – June): change to no

grazing in wet season• Rotational grazing MUST be better• Political reasons

– Add fire to control weeds• Science based?

– No replicated studies on either subject– Keep guessing or set up robust monitoring

Page 5: Jaymee Marty The Nature Conservancy...Change in native richness positive in grazed pools negative in ungrazed pools (Marty 2005)-2.50-2.00-1.50-1.00-0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50

Valley SpringsFormation

LagunaFormation

Page 6: Jaymee Marty The Nature Conservancy...Change in native richness positive in grazed pools negative in ungrazed pools (Marty 2005)-2.50-2.00-1.50-1.00-0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50

Grazing Treatment Layout

Ungrazed

Dry season grazed

Continuously grazed

Wet season grazed

Page 7: Jaymee Marty The Nature Conservancy...Change in native richness positive in grazed pools negative in ungrazed pools (Marty 2005)-2.50-2.00-1.50-1.00-0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
Page 8: Jaymee Marty The Nature Conservancy...Change in native richness positive in grazed pools negative in ungrazed pools (Marty 2005)-2.50-2.00-1.50-1.00-0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50

Native species richness in ungrazedpools: doing fine?

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Pool Edge Upland

Nat

ive

s 2001

2002

2003

Page 9: Jaymee Marty The Nature Conservancy...Change in native richness positive in grazed pools negative in ungrazed pools (Marty 2005)-2.50-2.00-1.50-1.00-0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50

Change in native richness positive in grazed poolsnegative in ungrazed pools

(Marty 2005)

-2.50

-2.00

-1.50

-1.00

-0.50

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

pool edge upland

Cha

nge

in s

(03

- 01)

CG

DG

UG

WG

n.s. ***

n.s., not significant; * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001

Page 10: Jaymee Marty The Nature Conservancy...Change in native richness positive in grazed pools negative in ungrazed pools (Marty 2005)-2.50-2.00-1.50-1.00-0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50

7665

78

115

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

cg dg ug wg

Max

imum

pon

ding

per

iod

(# d

ays)

Average maximum ponding period 50 days less in ungrazed poolsvs. continuously grazed pools

a

b bb

Page 11: Jaymee Marty The Nature Conservancy...Change in native richness positive in grazed pools negative in ungrazed pools (Marty 2005)-2.50-2.00-1.50-1.00-0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50

HYPOTHESIS: Fire occurred historically in the system,

so it must be good

Page 12: Jaymee Marty The Nature Conservancy...Change in native richness positive in grazed pools negative in ungrazed pools (Marty 2005)-2.50-2.00-1.50-1.00-0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50

Valensin Ranch (Riverbank)

Jepson Prairie Preserve(Northern Claypan)

Vina Plains Preserve (Tuscan)

Howard Ranch (Valley Springs)

Page 13: Jaymee Marty The Nature Conservancy...Change in native richness positive in grazed pools negative in ungrazed pools (Marty 2005)-2.50-2.00-1.50-1.00-0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50

5 pools

5 pools

5 pools

5 pools

Page 14: Jaymee Marty The Nature Conservancy...Change in native richness positive in grazed pools negative in ungrazed pools (Marty 2005)-2.50-2.00-1.50-1.00-0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50

One year post burn results

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

edge pool upland

% c

over

exo

tic a

nnua

l gra

sses

burnedunburned

n.s

*

**

Exotic annual GRASS cover declines in burned plots at 2003 burned sites

Page 15: Jaymee Marty The Nature Conservancy...Change in native richness positive in grazed pools negative in ungrazed pools (Marty 2005)-2.50-2.00-1.50-1.00-0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50

Exotic annual FORB cover increases in burned plots at 2003 burned s

05

101520253035404550

edge pool upland

% c

over

exo

tic a

nnua

l for

bs

burnedunburned

n.s

n.s

***

Page 16: Jaymee Marty The Nature Conservancy...Change in native richness positive in grazed pools negative in ungrazed pools (Marty 2005)-2.50-2.00-1.50-1.00-0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

edge pool upland

% c

over

nat

ives

burnedunburned

Burning increases native cover and richness at Jepson Prairie(and Valensin Ranch)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

edge pool upland

Nat

ive

spec

ies

rich

ness

burnedunburned

+

**

***

n.s.

**

***

Page 17: Jaymee Marty The Nature Conservancy...Change in native richness positive in grazed pools negative in ungrazed pools (Marty 2005)-2.50-2.00-1.50-1.00-0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50

No effect of burning on native diversity at Vina and Cosumnes Foothills sites

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

edge pool upland

Nat

ive

s

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

edge pool uplandN

ativ

e s

burned

unburned

n.s.

n.s. n.s.

n.s. n.s.

n.s.

Page 18: Jaymee Marty The Nature Conservancy...Change in native richness positive in grazed pools negative in ungrazed pools (Marty 2005)-2.50-2.00-1.50-1.00-0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50

• Don’t change management regime unless you have a very

compelling science-based reason to do so

• Sometimes politics get in the way

• When you do make a change, MONITOR

• ALWAYS include a control

• Know why you’re monitoring and keep it simple

• Stats heads may know numbers, but may not

understand biology or monitoring efficiency

• Analyze your data!

What have we learned?

Page 19: Jaymee Marty The Nature Conservancy...Change in native richness positive in grazed pools negative in ungrazed pools (Marty 2005)-2.50-2.00-1.50-1.00-0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50

HelpersCRP Interns and staffVolunteer naturalistsCRP Hard Corp crewSac Co. Sheriff work crewsCDF

Generous funding support:Osher foundationAnderson Grassland Research fundThe McCammantsPartnership FoundationThe Bechtel Foundation


Página de inicio - LETRAS · 2017. 5. 5. · (por proyecto) njeros (por cada uno) ribe documentos nversación) 2.50 2.50 0.50 3.00 . .. ... 3 R vis as de inv * Primario ori inal

Asphalt Binders and D’Angelo Consulting Aging 20Hr or 40Hr PAV€¦ · 2 20hr PAV vs 40hr PAV -3.00-2.50-2.00-1.50-1.00-0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 PG 64-22, Source 1 PG 58-34,

Three-Year Average Prices & Quantities at Kentucky Produce … · 2017. 8. 24. · Beets, Weekly Average Prices & Quantities (2014-2016) $0.00 $0.50 $1.00 $1.50 $2.00 $2.50 0 100

the Global Cosmetics Industry Operabhhall/papers/HarhoffHall02 IP Cosmetics slides.pdfSelected Toiletries/Cosmetics Firms 0.00% 0.50% 1.00% 1.50% 2.00% 2.50% 3.00% 3.50% 4.00% 4.50%

Economies of Scale Chapter 13 completion. The Shape of Cost Curves Quantity of Output Costs $3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 04268141210 MC ATC AVC AFC

Invent the GEM STAR - UXC Specific/GEMSTAR... · Invent the Future 1 GEM ... 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 ... Transmutation Demonstration Industrial‐Scale Transmutation Power

CAFFE MONA LA BISTRO Brunch Menu...Nutella hot chocolate $4 Sparkling water $2.50 Homemade iced tea $3 Can soda $2.50 Water $0.50 "Consuming raw or undercooked meats, poultry, seafood,

Pizzas - WordPress.com · Pizzas PIZZA PRICE TOPPINGS PRICE Large Plain $11.25 Whole $2.50 Small Plain $10.25 Half Topping $1.85 Slice Plain $1.85 Slice Topping $0.50 Gluten Free

David&Lalman,&OklahomaState&University& June16,2016 · David&Lalman,&OklahomaState&University& June16,2016 BIF&2016&General&Session&II 5 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 1974 1976 1978

 · Br own Rice 2.25 4.25 Moo Shu Pancake (5) 2.50 Crispy Noodles 0.50 Home Made Duck Sauce or Mustar d 0.50 Soda (can) 1.25 LO MEIN Pork or Chicken or V eggies 6.75 10.95 Beef or

Imagine 2040: Hillsborough Long range Transportation plan · 2040-Parte 2, y utiliza las fuentes de financiación existentes ... Planificación $0.50 $1.00 $2.50 $2.50 $5.00 $11.00

“I saw an angel in the marble carved until I set it free - Mount Barker … · 2019-09-25 · $ 3.50 $ 4.00 $ 4.00 $ 2.50 $ 2.50 $ 3.00 $ 2.00 $ 1.50 $ 0.50 $ 0.50 $ 0.50 $ 2.50

R15 - Página Inicialippul.londrina.pr.gov.br/.../geometrico/av_tiradentes_geometrico.pdf · 09/14 08/14 07/14 06/14 05/14 04/14 03/14 02/14 01/14 2.50 2.50 0.34 0.30 1.00 1.50 0.50

Importance of C&D Waste Recycling for Municipalities...Building Construction & Demolition Material Waste Recycling in India 15.00 4.00 3.00 2.50 1.00 2.00 0.50 Metro City Demolition

CRITERIOS PARA DICTAMINACION DE SECCIONES DE VIALIDAD …€¦ · vialidad principal (vp) av.universidad 0.60 2.50 3.30 3.30 variable 11.50 variable banq. carril carril 0.50 eje del

presentation Yogyakarta TWG 1x - Casindo › fileadmin › casindo › TWGI › 5_Yogyakarta_… · Final Energy Consumption per Energy (2005-2008) 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00

Research Article Community Structure and Distribution Pattern of … · 2019. 7. 31. · Mollusca Echinodermata Dwarka 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 Mangrol Post-monsoon Monsoon

Pala Casino Resort and Spa...Croissant Chocolate Danish Eclairs Macaroons Muffins Popover Scone Strudel-Cheese Sugar Free Pies Tart-Fruit Turnover $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50

US Competiveness in an Age of Austerity · Source: Bloomberg, UBS CIO WMR Current Economic Conditions-0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 2013 2016 2019 2022 2025 2028 2031

RICE MAINS MAIN COURSES · FRIED RICE £2.00 NOODLES £2.50 PEANUT SAUCE £1.00 SWEET & SOUR SAUCE £1.00 CURRY SAUCE £2.50 CHOP FRESH CHILLI & SOY £1.50 DRY CHILLI £0.50 0113

Precio de un helado P (S/.) Cantidad demandada de helados Q 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 12 h 10 h 8 h 6 h 4 h 2 h 0 h 0 0.50 1 2345678 9 101112

Epson stylus Pro 3.00 2.50 2.0 1.50 0.50 0.00 0.08h 0.25h ... 9908.pdf · 1.50 0.50 0.00 0.08h 0.25h 0.5h Film Piezo, x 240N-á'WELCD VM LUT VM 1/6 LLk K Max Y Max M Max C Max R Max

c758759.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com...Deep Fried Mars Bar Deep Fried Ice Cream Battered Banana Battered Pineapple $2.80 $5.50 $1.50 $1.50 Tomato Sauce $0.50 or can $2.50 Tartare Sauce $0.50

sadrapol.irsadrapol.ir/Testing/TestingFiles/JahadZirBanaei.pdf · EN1337 . 450 350 300 250 200 ISO too 0.00 Elastomeric curve 95012512 2.50 0.50 1.00 1.50 Deflection (mm) 2.00 . S

No Slide Title · Ambiente Institucional: Cualidad de Politicas Publicas 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 Índice de Políticas Eficiencia Public Regardness Implementación

0 1 32 54jina/Proceedings/Cowan/cowantalk.pdf · 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 MASS NUMBER −1.50 −1.00 −0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 log ε Solar System Abundances

sa04c6dbaa013e929.jimcontent.com · 2020. 8. 7. · mazurka ché — tango 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.70 050 050 0.50 0.50 0.60 0.50 0-60 0-80 0.50 0.50 0.50 . El Portehito La

4007 / 1434 25 / 2013$1.4 06 09) 5 06 06 0.50 a-so 0.50 0.50 0.50 … · 2019. 3. 17. · 4007 / 1434 25 / 2013$1.4 06 09) "...5 06 06 0.50 a-so 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.25 0.25 0.25

First National Battery | South Africa's Battery Manufacturer · Acid (kg) 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.68 0 68 0.60 0.51 0.51 0.51

02/15 07/15 08/15 2TGHGKVWTC FQ /WPKEsRKQ FG ......2.002.003.94 R0.30 2.00 1.20 1.20 0.50 0.50 4.25 R10.00 2.50 2.50 01/15 02/15 03/15 06/15 04/15 05/15 07/15 08/15 09/15 10/15 2TGHGKVWTC

Eficiência da Rede Hospitalar Brasileira · 2016 1.80 2.00 2.30 2.70 2.50 2.20 3 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 os Hab. Leitos per 1,000 hab. Media Brasil OMS 308 976 509

Legende: Bestand - grafschaft-bentheim.de · 0.50 % 0.50 % 0.50 % 0.50 % 0.50 % 0.51 % 0.51 % 0.50 % 0.50 % se se se se 2.5% 2.5% 2.00 4.00 0.50 1.00 % 4.00 0.50 2.00 6.50 42.73 42.89

01 GUÍA TIF BOVINO optimizado web2OPUNAM SENASICA 348 0.00 0.50 2.50 m 1 m 1 a 2 3 0.50 2.80 3.15 2.85 1.50 0.50 PLANTA C2’ a E.1 C1-C1´ C2-C2´ E.2.3 CONTADOR ^ ˇ interior con

Research Article Community Structure and …downloads.hindawi.com/archive/2014/547395.pdfMollusca Echinodermata Dwarka 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 Mangrol Post-monsoon Monsoon

ALCANT. 2.50 x 2.50