Making Landscape Assessments More Useable for Local Aquatic Resource - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Making Landscape Assessments More Useable for Local Aquatic Resource Management

Oct 13, 2016

Brian Laub Wally Macfarlane Justin Jimenez Scott Miller Jeremy Jarnecke Ken Bradshaw Kevin Miller Phaedra Budy Joe Wheaton

ERWP Meeting:

Setting the Stage

• The goal of this project is to make landscape

products more usable to resources managers

• Your involvement is critical for us to achieve

this goal

• We need your insights and feedback!

Project Timeline

I. Early Fall - Kickoff Meeting II. Winter - REA/AIM/Other landscape analyses III. Early Spring I. Meetings to summarize landscape analyses II. Feedback from BLM/Partnership IV. Spring/Early Summer I. Incorporate feedback II. Compare/contrast landscape analyses III. Develop conceptual models/useable products V. Early Summer - Presentation of preliminary final recommendations I. Feedback from BLM/Partnership VI. Late Summer/Early Fall – Final Reports and Presentations

Presentation Outline

I. Aquatic resources management challenges & threats II. The BLM’s landscape approach & landscape products

I. COPL Rapid Ecoregion Assessment (REA) II. COPL REA aquatic intactness model & step-down analysis at sub-watershed scale III. Assessment, Inventory, and Monitoring (AIM) framework

• III. Our proposed project approach

I. Additional analyses to improve the accessibility and usability of landscape level products

• IV. Discussion

Management Challenges

• Public lands are

increasingly threatened by environmental & socioeconomic challenges that transcend management boundaries.

Threats to Aquatic/Riparian Resources

• Climate change, invasive species, livestock

grazing, energy development and so on…

From Rehydrating Nevada presentation, Carol Evans

2050 Predicted Water Supply Impacts

Roy et al. (2010) Tetra Tech http://www.global-warming-forecasts.com/water-supply-shortage-water-scarcity-climate.php

BLM’s Landscape Approach

• To address these management challenges & to

ensure the sustainability of their multiple use mandate, the BLM has adopted a Landscape Approach.

BLM’s Landscape Approach

Data, Information, Science

Basis for understanding the status and condition of public lands, resources, and other values. Assess problem

Set Ecoregional Direction

Create an Operational LU Plan Implement the Plan

Monitor (AIM) Evaluate Adjust

• Uses broad ecological

assessments to discern ecological values, patterns

• f environmental change,

and management

• pportunities that may not

be evident when managing smaller land areas.

• Uses this information to

inform and plan long-term conservation, restoration, and development efforts. IB 2012-058

BLM’s Landscape Approach

Data, Information, Science

Basis for understanding the status and condition of public lands, resources, and other values. Assess problem

Set Ecoregional Direction

Create an Operational LU Plan Implement the Plan

Monitor (AIM) Evaluate Adjust

• “REAs will aid in developing

broad-level management strategies of an ecoregion’s public lands.”

• “At the local level, REAs will

enhance the quality of land-use planning and analysis … and will strengthen analyses of potential and cumulative effects of climate change and other disturbances on ecological values.”

Resource Condition and Threats

• Multiple spatial data sources were assessed to

evaluate landscape intactness (terrestrial and aquatic).

– Areas of high and low resource integrity

• Also looked at “change agents” – threats to

intactness

– E.g., climate change, wildland fire, oil and gas development

• Used conservation elements to identify potentially

important areas for conservation/restoration

– E.g., sensitive species such as sage grouse and flannelmouth sucker

Example REA Output

Example REA Output

Example REA Output

COPL REA Timeline

• Initiated 2010
• Completed 2012

– Aquatic intactness model unsatisfactory and at coarse scale (5th level HUC)

• 2015

– Revised aquatic intactness model and step-down analysis at sub-watershed scale – COPL and state of Utah – Data available through BLM

• http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/more/Landscape_Approach/

dataportal.html

Aquatic Intactness Model

https://databasin.org/maps

Aquatic Intactness: Escalante

Very High High Moderately High Moderately Low Low Very Low

https://databasin.org/maps

COPL REA Intactness Model

COPL REA Intactness Model

COPL REA Intactness Model

Project Approach

Very High High Moderately High Moderately Low Low Very Low

https://databasin.org/maps

• Perform detailed analysis of Escalante watershed aquatic

intactness model

• Why did mapped sub-watersheds appear as low vs.

high intactness?

• What stressors were causing low intactness?
• Were similar stressors acting across the watershed or

were stressors unique between sub-watersheds?

• Understand uncertainty in intactness rankings

BLM’s Landscape Approach

Data, Information, Science

Basis for understanding the status and condition of public lands, resources, and other values. Assess problem

Set Ecoregional Direction

Create an Operational LU Plan Implement the Plan

Monitor (AIM) Evaluate Adjust

• Uses broad ecological

assessments to discern ecological values, patterns of environmental change, and management

• pportunities that may

not be evident when managing smaller land areas

• Uses this information to

inform and plan long- term conservation, restoration, and development efforts. IB 2012-058

A national strategy designed to:

• Promote integrated, cross-program

resource inventory, assessment and monitoring at multiple scales of management

• Collecting consistent, comparable and

quantitative monitoring data to understand renewable resource condition and trend and inform adaptive management

AIM Strategy Overview

AIM National Aquatic Monitoring Framework: Introducing the Framework and Indicators for Lotic Systems Technical Reference 1735-1

AIM Methods: What is measured?

Chemical Total Nitrogen Total Phosphorous Conductivity pH Physical Temperature Substrate Pool dimensions/freq. Bankfull width/depth Incision depth Bank angle/stability Biological Macroinvertebrates % Shade LWD Riparian veg. complexity

20 x BFW

AIM Results: Priority Stressors by District

Percentage of stream km Percentage of stream km

AIM Results

Presentation Outline

I. Aquatic resources management challenges & threats II. The BLM’s landscape approach & landscape products

I. COPL Rapid Ecoregion Assessment (REA) II. COPL REA aquatic intactness model & step-down analysis at sub-watershed scale III. Assessment, Inventory, and Monitoring (AIM) framework

• III. Our proposed project approach

I. Additional analyses to improve the accessibility and usability of landscape level products

• IV. Discussion

Project Approach: REA - AIM

• Compare/contrast REA & AIM results
• Are conditions and stressors consistent?
• If not, what are the discrepancies and why?
• Understand limitations of REA step-down

products

Compare/contrast REA analyses with:

• Riparian Condition Assessment Tools

(RCAT)

• Others (Trout Unlimited, Forest Service

watershed rankings, local data – others we are missing?)

• Are conditions and stressors consistent?

Project Approach: Compare & Contrast

Project Approach: Compare with RVD

• RVD is a stream network model that assesses riparian

vegetation condition & is one of the R-CAT tools

• How does the Riparian Vegetation Departure (RVD)

model compare?

Project Approach: Compare RVD

–

Graphical Abstract:

RVD Inputs: LANDFIRE Existing Vegetation

RVD Inputs: LANDFIRE BpS

The Scale of RVD Data…

• Riparian vegetation

departure calculated for every 30 m pixel within valley bottom

• Then… summed up by

reaches… for display at broader scales…

1

Note: The model can be run with higher resolution inputs

Utah-wide Riparian Vegetation Departure (RVD)

From: Macfarlane et al. (Revisions in Review) – Journal of Environmental Management

But what is the cause of departure?

Riparian Vegetation Conversion Type (RVCT)

Utah-wide Riparian Vegetation Conversion Type

R-CAT Development & Data

• The R-CAT tools are automated and available as

ArcGIS toolboxes (see https://bitbucket.org/jtgilbert/riparian-condition- assessment-tools)

• Utah-wide data is available at:

http://etal.joewheaton.org/rcat

R-CAT Publications

Project Approach: Can these be integrated?

Sub-Watershed Intactness:

This map provides a sub-watershed level summary of condition but lacks the resolution needed for stream segment level management.

AIM Site Data: Network Summary:

Can these assessment products be integrated or are the different scales of measurement incompatible?

It might help if we could transform…

Site Data: Network Summary:

This could be done with AIM data because of the probability-based (GRTS) design.

Argument for Network Extent & Segment Scale

• ‘A continuous view of the river is

needed to understand how processes interacting among scales set the context for stream fishes and their habitat’ – Fausch et al. (2002)

• Network level assessments

resolved to the segment scale may be the most useful for local-level aquatic resource management.

THE SCALE CRUX…

Site Level - Predictions:

1 2

Network Summary:

?

How can we better predict site level summary from network level output?

Use higher resolution data where available…

Run Assessments with Higher Resolution Data

Run Assessments with Higher Resolution Data

Related Publication

Does high resolution vegetation data exist for the Escalante watershed?

For example:

• Permit renewals
• RMP effectiveness
• State-wide reporting
• Ecoregional assessments
• Bureau-wide

Can we develop a flowchart/GIS-based tool that analyses appropriate datasets at different scales?

Scale

Provide data at scale(s) most appropriate to the issue

Take Away

• The overall goal of this project is to increase the usability
• f landscape level assessment products.
• Coordination with and feedback from local resource

specialists will be crucial to achieving this goal.

• Combining BLM landscape products with other aquatic

condition assessments will make these products more useable to local resource managers.

• If more information is gathered & distributed about the

utility & limitations of these products managers will be more willing to use them.

Discussion: ERWP Database

Discussion: ERWP Database

Within your database what data do you have that might be useful for this project? Are you interested in helping cross validate our landscape products with data that you have collected and compiled? Are you interested in helping field validate our landscape products?

http://brat.joewheaton.org

Data you might want…

BLM Data Portal…

This is worth checking out?

Acknowledgements

• Nick Bouwes (ELR/USU)
• Michael Pollock (NOAA)
• Jordan Gilbert (USU/ETAL)
• Chris Jordan (NOAA)
• Carol Volk (SFR)
• Nick Weber (ELR)
• Chalese Hafen (USU/ETAL
• Josh Gilbert (USU/ETAL)
• Nate Hough-Snee (USU/ETAL)
• Martha Jensen (USU/ETAL)
• Kenny DeMeurichy (USU/ETAL)
• Ian Tottenahm (ODFW)
• Brett Roper (USFS/USU)
• John Shivik (USFS/UDWR)
• Kent Sorenson (UDWR)
• Chris Smith (USU/ETAL)
• And many others…

Countless collaborators