1. U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Integrated Landscape Monitoring Great Basin Pilot Carol Schuler Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center June 2007

2. 2 To inform about the Great Basin Integrated Landscape Monitoring Project (GBILM) To gain understanding of NPS landscape monitoring activities and needs in the Great Basin To discuss how to make GBILM useful for the NPS - Project approach and direction - Ecosystem drivers - Management and monitoring questions - Example projects - Complement ongoing NPS activities Purpose and Desired Outcomes

3. 3 USGS Science Thrust Pilot new concepts or promote new program areas Integrated landscape monitoring - Reconcile site-specific actions/events with landscape-scale processes and functions 4 pilots - Lower Mississippi Valley - Prairie Potholes - Puget Sound - Great Basin

4. 4 Integrated Landscape Monitoring Goal: - Reconcile site-specific actions/events with landscape-scale processes and functions - Address priority natural resource management and policy issues at the landscape scale Integrated: among government agencies, stakeholders, scientific disciplines; and across political and jurisdictional boundaries Landscape: spatial and temporal scales Monitoring: collection and analysis of repeated observations to evaluate change

5. 5 Great Basin ILM Goal Develop and test integrated landscape-level monitoring that addresses priority management issues and provides capabilities to detect and predict landscape change. − Understand cumulative effects of local actions/events − Understand change at landscape scale − Develop predictive capability of landscape change − Develop or refine monitoring strategies − Prioritize actions such as mitigation and restoration

6. 6 The Great Basin Over 111 million acres Five western states 78% public lands N-S Mountain ranges Varied elevational gradients Water drains inland Blue boundary – GB boundary Orange boundary – GB with 50 m buffer

7. 7 Why Focus on The Great Basin? Species of concern (e.g., sage- grouse, pygmy rabbit, Brewer’s sparrow, Virgin River chub) 54% of remaining sagebrush Diverse & accelerating stressors - Urban expansion - Limited water supply - Spread of invasive species - Altered fire cycle

8. 8 Test approach to understanding change at the landscape scale Established interdisciplinary team − USGS, NPS (Marie Denn, Angie Evenden, Debra Hughson), BLM, FWS, and EPA Develop project scope – Limited resources – Mine, evaluate, and analyze existing data Website (myUSGS.gov) GBILM - Phased Approach

9. 9 Phased Approach Develop conceptual models Identify and prioritize ecosystem drivers Develop and prioritize management questions Develop pilot projects to address management questions Mine, compile, and analyze existing data Develop tools to analyze data at multiple scales Identify data gaps Predict and monitor changes

10. 10 Integration & Application Network Conceptual Models: Tools for Understanding Describes key ecological components and relationships between them Used for planning, communicating, and prioritizing GBILM Models: − Characterize landscape function − Identify ecological processes − Develop/prioritize management issues − Inform monitoring strategy development − Identify gaps in understanding of ecosystem function

11. 11 Framework Model SystemsModel: Dry System Systems Model: Dry System Control Model: Sagebrush steppe Stressor Model: Fire/Invasives Interactions Historic Invasives: Introduced annuals and Rabbitbrush Invasives: Introduced annuals and Rabbitbrush

12. 12 Ecosystem Drivers “Ecosystem drivers are any natural or human- induced factor that directly or indirectly causes a change in an ecosystem.” Carpenter et al., 2006 Invasive species Agriculture Altered Flow Regime Erosion

13. 13 Drivers of Change

14. 14 Three Priority Drivers Water Extraction (Wet System) Fire and Invasive Species Interaction (Dry System) Land Treatments (Dry System)

15. 15 Management Questions Why develop management questions? Why develop management questions? - Foundation for landscape monitoring program - Reflect real-life needs of management partners - Bring focus and relevance to our work - Provide basis for evaluating interactions among management actions, environmental factors, and landscape change

16. 16 Project Development Develop focused projects to address questions Data mining and evaluation Identify data gaps Data analysis to assess status and trends, and predict change Identify and communicate how results can inform management Identify research needs Develop or refine monitoring strategies

17. 17 Example 1: Water Extraction Project Management Questions How will increased water extraction impact phreatophytes? Can phreatophytic communities act as indicators of impacted groundwater systems? Pilot Project Identify locations of phreatophytic communities and correlate with aquifer flow system conditions. Identify areas at risk from increased water withdrawals.

18. 18 Water Extraction Project Pilot Project Tasks 1.Map phreatophytic land cover by categorizing evapotranspiration as a function of critical characteristics:  Geomorphology, vegetation species composition, elevation, hydrology 2.Map groundwater change over time 3.Evaluate change over time to phreatophytic land cover Applicability to Management Questions Provides assessment of status and trends of groundwater Establishes dataset of phreatophyte coverage across Great Basin Identifies environmental areas of concern or sensitivity Addresses utility of phreatophytes as indicators of impacts to groundwater system Develop tools that help to predict and manage for the effects of groundwater extraction across the Great Basin

19. 19 Potential Phreatophytic Land Cover Potential phreatophytic land cover Waterbodies Agricultural land cover Map scale is 1:1,500,000

20. 20 Example 2: Fire and Invasive Species Management Questions How should managers prioritize efforts to manage fire cycles with the goal of retaining and restoring desired plant communities? Pilot Project Use spatial patterns of fire and landscape characteristics to evaluate how invasive plants have altered fire regimes Create models and a sampling design to monitor and assess changes in fire regimes and vegetation over time

21. 21 Fire and Invasive Species Pilot Project Tasks 1.Create maps of fire distributions over time in the Great Basin 2.Evaluate hypotheses on how invasive plants have altered fire regimes and how these relationships may change in the future 3.Create models and a sampling design to monitor and assess changes in fire regimes and vegetation over time Applicability to Management Questions Develop tools to monitor and predict fire regimes among major vegetation types Evaluates and predicts trends for altered fire regimes among major vegetation types Assesses vegetation types at risk to altered fire regimes due to invasive species, landscape characteristics, and climate change scenarios Prioritizes major vegetation types for suppression and mitigation actions designed to prevent the establishment of grass/fire cycles

22. 22 Fire and Invasive Species

23. 23 Example 3: Land Treatments Management Questions How are different land treatments influencing vegetation and wildlife habitats? How and where can land managers use land treatments to achieve multiple objectives, including maintaining and restoring wildlife habitat? Pilot Project Synthesis of monitoring efforts in the Great Basin Assess and predict effects of land treatments at various scales on wildlife habitat Initial focus on areas in Utah and the tri-states targeted for HLI funding Eventually expand to rest of Great Basin

24. 24 Pilot Project Tasks 1.Create relational database of treatment information (1950 to present)  Treatment description, monitoring information, spatial data, reference photos, etc. 2.Develop predictive models on effects of treatments on wildlife habitats 3.Evaluate which land treatments can be used to improve habitat connectivity and where they can be placed (in a landscape context) Management Application Establishes a common database and maps of land treatments across Great Basin Provides predictive models that estimate effectsof land treatments on wildlife habitats, particularly sage grouse and other high profile species Provides information on treatment effectiveness Land Treatments

25. 25 Land Treatments Database Source: Five Mile Mountain Sagebrush Restoration Project EA

26. 26 Krissy Bush Long-term Value Builds understanding of ecosystem processes Identifies priority management issues and ensures research is relevant Can address additional management questions and drivers Fill data gaps and identify new research needs Informs management issues and practices at landscape scales Develops or refines long-term monitoring strategies Ultimately, provides a predictive capability of landscape change

27. 27 What are the collaboration opportunities between NPS and USGS? Focusing on most appropriate management questions? Addressing high priority monitoring needs? Making results more accessible and useful? Who should we communicate with to build buy-in and obtain input? Discussion Topics – Seeking Your Advice

28. 28 Amy Mathie amthie@usgs.gov; 775-887-7670 Water Extraction Project Matt Brooks mlbrooks@usgs.gov; 702-564-4615 Fire-Invasives Project David Pilliod dpilliod@usgs.gov; 208-426-520 2 Land Treatment Project Tom Owens tom_owens@usgs.gov; 303-202-4071 Motorized Vehicle Access Project Carol Schuler carol_schuler@usgs.gov; (541) 750-1030 Kate Kitchell kate_kitchell@usgs.gov; (541) 750-1033 Great Basin ILM Project Contacts