Brian Gratwicke USFWS

Biological PlanningAn Overview of the Context and

Processes

Northeast Region Biologist’s Conference

Baltimore, Maryland15 February 2011

1940 1990 2030

New York

DC

Pittsburgh

Portland

Rochester

Roanoke

USFWS

Incomplete Look At Loss of Wildlife Habitat Over Time

Biological PlanningAn Overview of the Context and

Processes

• Biological Planning – In Context of SHC

• Biological Planning Session Orientation – Parts, Pieces, and Speakers

• Biological Objectives – Why and HowPopulation

…a conservation approach that sees the Service, as a core function to fulfilling its Mission, collaboratively defining, designing, and delivering landscapes that sustain socio-viable populations of fish and wildlife and the ecological processes on which they depend.

Biological Planning In SHCFoundational

Underpinnings

Biological Planning In SHCFoundational

Underpinnings

BiologicalPlanning

Con

servationD

esign

Conservation Delivery

Ou

tcom

e- b

ased

M

onit

orin

g

Assumption-driven

ResearchARM

Assumption-DrivenResearch

Monitoring & Inventory

Assumption- Driven

Research

Monitoring &

Inventory

Biological Planning

Conservation Design

Conservation Actions

Foundational ConceptsUnderpinnings of SHC

As a body of knowledge and as a method of discoveryScience:

BiologicalPlanning

Con

servationD

esign

Conservation Delivery

Ou

tcom

e- b

ased

M

onit

orin

g

Assumption-driven

ResearchARM

Assumption-DrivenResearch

Monitoring & Inventory

Assumption- Driven

Research

Monitoring &

Inventory

Biological Planning

Conservation Design

Conservation Actions

Foundational ConceptsUnderpinnings of SHC

As a body of knowledge and as a method of discoveryScience:

Assumption-DrivenResearch

Monitoring & Inventory

Assumption- Driven

Research

Monitoring &

Inventory

Biological Planning

Conservation Design

Conservation Actions

Resource Management

• Enhances its Ability to Operate Effectively In The Face Of Increasing Uncertainties

• Learning Is An Explicit Objective of Our Management Decisions.

Foundational ConceptsUnderpinnings of SHC

Goals and objectives of sustainable landscapes for fish and wildlife exceed the operational reach of individual programs, agencies, and organizations

Land management occurs at the site scale; yet ecological outcomes are system dependent, operating on processes manifested at broader spatial and temporal scales.

Landscapes that can sustain socio-viable populations of trust fish and wildlife resources

Interdependence:

Landscape:

Conservation Target:As a body of knowledge and as a method of discoveryScience:

2030

New York

DCPittsburgh

Portland

Rochester

Roanoke

Assumption-DrivenResearch

Monitoring & Inventory

Assumption- Driven

Research

Monitoring &

Inventory

Biological Planning

Conservation Design

Conservation Actions

– Biological Planning Unit

– Priority Species

– Population Objectives

– Species-Habitat Models

– Limiting Factors

Biological Planning In SHCLandscapes that can sustain

socio-viable populations of trust fish and wildlife resources

Conservation Target:

Structured Decision Making: An Integral Process In An SHC Approach to Sustaining Fish and Wildlife

Assumption-DrivenResearch

Monitoring & Inventory

Assumption- Driven

Research

Monitoring &

Inventory

Biological Planning

Conservation

Design

Conservation Actions

– Biological Planning Unit

– Priority Species

– Population Objectives

– Species-Habitat Models

– Limiting Factors

– Landscape/Habitat Assessment– Assessment of Conservation Estate

– Decision Support Tools

– Integrate Multiple Species Objectives

– Conservation Objectives

– Program Objectives

– Conservation Delivery Mechanisms

– Communication & Education Delivery Mechanisms

– Conservation Tracking System

– Habitat Inventory and Monitoring Program

– Population Monitoring Program

– Species/Habitat Model Assumptions

– Conservation Treatment Assumptions

– Key Factor/Sensitivity Analyses

– Spatial Data Analyses

Assumption- Driven

Research

Monitoring &

Inventory

Conservation

Design

Conservation Actions

– Priority Species

– Population Objectives

– Species-Habitat Models

Structured Decision Making:

Biological Objectives: Population & Habitat

• What are population objectives?

• Why do we need population objectives?

• Challenges in establishing objectives?

• Where do we get population objectives?

• An example of stepping-down objectives

• “Measurable expression of a desired biological outcome”

• Conservation Target

Landscapes capable of sustaining priority species at prescribed levels range-wide

– Vital Rates

What are Population Objectives?

Defined

– Abundance

– Trend

– Population index

Ex: 7,400 kites

Ex: 10% annual increase

Ex: 2 fledglings/pair/year

Ex: 62 active territories Swallow-tailed Kite

Why Do We Need Population Objectives?

Advantages and Benefits

• Maintains a focus on a biological outcome specific to trust resource fish and wildlife populations• Provides a common currency across geographies and habitats• Increases scientific credibility, transparency, and accountability

Why Do We Need Population Objectives?

National Wildlife Refuges

National Forests

State Wildlife Mgt Areas

Wetland Reserve Program

Public Lands Reforested

Hydrology Restoration – Public

Hydrology Restoration – Private

Conservation Reserve Program

739,518

61,199

1,147,285

318,845

66,887

161,078

210,328

203,146

Conservation Estate

TOTAL -2,908,286

Target:

Landscapes capable of sustaining populations of

Trust species range-wide at prescribed levels.

What

Where

When

How Much

How Much More

Why Do We Need Population Objectives?

Conservation Estate

Protect and restore 200,000 acres of bottomland hardwoods in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley.

Reestablish and maintain three viable sub-populations of the Threatened LA Black Bear in the Tensas Basin, Red River Backwater, and Atchafalaya Basin of Louisiana.

How Are Population Objectives Used?

• Species-habitat models– Identify limiting

factors• Conservation design

– How much habitat is needed?

– What kind of habitat?

– Where?

Establishing Population Objectives?Challenges

Institutional:

• Conjures Images of Single Species Management (SvHvE)

Cultural:

Technical:

single species management

e.g.,DensityProductivity

PopulationResponse = Landscape Quality

FunctionSite Quality

Function

Mainly forested

Mainly forested

Mainly forested

Deciduousforest

Deciduousforest

Deciduousforest

1° and 2° streams

Large rivers

Mesic edges

Open understory

Emergent canopy

Dense understory

LandscapeComposition

Landscape Structure

ForestComposition

Forest Structure

Establishing Population Objectives?Challenges

Institutional:

• Conjures Images of Single Species Management (SvHvE)

Cultural:

Technical:

• Traditionally A Regulatory Process

Establishing Population Objectives?Challenges

Institutional:

• Conjures Images of Single Species Management (SvHvE)

Cultural:

• Populations Span Spatial Jurisdictions

• Need to Sustain F & W Spans Political Boundaries

Technical:

• Value-based: How to Get Society Involved?

• Traditionally A Regulatory Process

84,000 warblers

Swainson’s warbler © Hilton Pond Center

Establishing Population Objectives?Challenges

Institutional:

Cultural:

• Populations Span Spatial Jurisdictions

• Need to Sustain F & W Spans Political Boundaries

Technical:• The Science (e.g., Life History, Limiting Factor,

“Seeing”)

• Life Cycle

• Partitioning Populations Across Systems and Constituents

• Value-based: How to Get Society Involved?

• Conjures Images of Single Species Management (SvHvE)• Traditionally A Regulatory Process

Establishing Population Objectives?Considerations

California Condor

– Indicator

• Benchmarks– Minimum viable population

size– Sustainable populations– Harvest

– Historic baseline

– Deep time (>200 ybp) – Historical (50-200 ybp) – Recent past (0-50 ybp) – Future conditions

• Value-based exercise

Where Do We Get Population Objectives?

Documented Resources

• Continental Plans– Waterfowl (1986, 2004)

– Shorebirds (2000)

– Waterbirds (2002)

– Landbirds (2004)• Regional Plans

– SE Waterbird Plan (2006)

– AC Joint Venture• Recovery Plans• State Wildlife Action

Plans

Harvey Nelson

North American Waterfowl Management Plan

North American Waterfowl Management Plan

Prioritized The Continent

Called for“joint ventures”

Established Population Objectives

62 Million Breeding

Ducks

PublicPrivate

Partnerships

North American Waterfowl Management Plan

Prioritized The Continent

Called for“joint ventures”

Established Population Objectives

62 Million Breeding

Ducks

Mississippi

Tennessee

KentuckyMissouri

Arkansas

Louisiana

• How do we explicitly link regional (JV) goals to the continental (NAWMP) goal?

• How many ducks is the LMVJV responsible for returning to the breeding grounds to ensure the 62 million duck objective is achieved?

Waterfowl Population Objectives

Step-down Process• Reinecke and Loesch

(1996)– Simple and efficient– Premise

• Proportion of continental population utilizing MAV is constant for all N

http://www.lmvjv.org/library/WWG_literature

Mid-Winter Inventory Data

January 1970-79

STEP 1 Winter Distribution of Ducks Among States

Harvest DataJanuary 1970-79

STEP 2

Winter Distribution of Ducks Within States

PSTATE =

species = 1

5 or 7

year = 1

10

Nyear,species

species = 1

5 or 7

state = 1

48

Nstate,year,speciesyear = 1

10

Mid-Winter Inventory DataJanuary 1970-79

Winter Distribution of Ducks Among StatesStep 1

Establish Population Targets

ArkansasIllinoisKentuckyLouisianaMississippiMissouriTennessee

Total

322,29010,8906,710

395,860179,23026,02035,500

976,500

78,4010

194332,96544,4143,664

15,066

474,703

1,474,1893,005

12,662637,907435,15165,817

236,884

2,865,615

1,874,88013,89519,566

1,366,732658,79695,501

287,450

4,316,818

StateDabbling

DucksDivingDucks

WoodDucks Total

Targetstate = Pstate * PMAVstate * Goalcontinential

Establish Population Targets

Assumption-DrivenResearch

Monitoring & Inventory

Assumption- Driven

Research

Monitoring &

Inventory

Biological Planning

Conservation

Design

Conservation Actions

– Biological Planning Unit

– Priority Species

– Population Objectives

– Species-Habitat Models

– Limiting Factors

Structured Decision Making: An Integral Process In An SHC Approach to Conserving Fish and Wildlife

– Landscape/Habitat Assessment– Assessment of Conservation Estate

– Decision Support Tools

– Integrate Multiple Species Objectives

– Conservation Objectives

– Program Objectives

– Conservation Delivery Mechanisms

– Communication & Education Delivery Mechanisms

– Conservation Tracking System

– Habitat Inventory and Monitoring Program

– Population Monitoring Program

– Species/Habitat Model Assumptions

– Conservation Treatment Assumptions

– Key factor/Sensitivity Analyses

– Spatial Data Analyses

Assumption- Driven

Research

Monitoring &

Inventory

Conservation

Design

Conservation Actions

Discern Limiting Factors

Factors Limiting Carrying Capacity

Disease

Predation

Environmental Contaminants

Disturbance

HabitatForaging

Non-foraging

3.7 kcal/gram

Relating Food Requirements to Foraging Habitat :

292 kcal/day

Harvested Croplands Rice

SoybeansMiloCorn

752121849970

HabitatDuck-Use Days per Acre

Moist-soil Area

Forested Wetlands 50% red oaks

1,386

32180 kg/acre

Establish Objectives to Counter Limiting Factor

ArkansasIllinoisKentuckyLouisianaMississippiMissouriTennessee

Total

40,7701,378

84950,07622,673

3,2924,491

123,527

9,9180

2542,120

5,168463

1,906

60,050

186,485380

1,60280,69555,047

8,32629,966

362,500

237,1721,7582,475

172,89283,33812,08136,362

546,078

StateDabbling

DucksDivingDucks

WoodDucks Total

Habitat Objectives = 110*Survival

winter daysTarget state

0.85

Habitat Objectives in Duck-Use Days (x1000)

Establish Objectives to Counter Limiting Factor

Natural Flooding Public Managed Private Managed

Cropland

Moist-soil

BottomlandHardwood

Natural Flooding Public Managed Private Managed

Cropland

Moist-soil

BottomlandHardwood

DEDPrivate = f(status, extent, reliability, disturbance, habitat)

DEDPublic= f(extent, performance, disturbance, habitat)

DEDNatural Flood = f(extent, frequency, duration, depth, habitat)

Explain Biological Planning Process Used to SetPopulation Targets and Habitat Objectives.

Apportion Habitat Objectives

Habitat Stepdown Meetings Within States

Apportion State Level Habitat Objectives AmongResource “Categories” by:

1. Identifying Site Specific Habitat Capabilities. 2.Targeting Objectives to Address Habitat Deficits.

Grand Cote National Wildlife Refuge, LA

0954

1,015253

2,222

Bottomland ForestMoist SoilHarvested Crop*Unharvested Crop* Total

Catahoula NWRObjective = 629 ac

Dewey Wills WMAObjective = 0 ac

Lake Ophelia NWRObjective = 1,550 ac

Grand Cote NWRObjective = 2,222 ac

Red River WMAObjective = 558 ac

Three Rivers WMAObjective = 153 ac

Grassy Lake WMAObjective = 0 ac

Pomme de Terre WMAObjective = 2,406 ac

Spring Bayou WMAObjective = 3,200 ac

Bayou Cocodrie NWRObjective = 358 ac

Private LandsObjective = 140,000 ac

Louisiana Waterfowl Habitat Objectives

WMA Mgt

NWR Mgt Private Mgt Natural Flood

400,000 acres121,000 acres

100,000 acres

247,000 acres

PublicManaged Lands

PrivateManaged Lands

NaturallyFlooded Lands

Sum of Foraging HabitatsMeets Needs of Wintering

Duck Populations

Return “Our Share” ofMid-Continent WinteringPopulation to Breeding

Grounds

North American WaterfowlManagement Plan Breeding

Population Objectives

Grand Cote NWR

Conservation ProgramsConnected Through Ecological Pathways

Assumption-DrivenResearch

Monitoring & Inventory

Assumption- Driven

Research

Monitoring &

Inventory

Biological Planning

Conservation Design

Conservation Actions

– Biological Planning Unit

– Priority Species (Curt)

– Population Objectives

– Species-Habitat Models

– Limiting Factors

Biological Planning In SHCLandscapes that can sustain

socio-viable populations of trust fish and wildlife resources

Conservation Target:

19401950196019701980199020002010202020302030

New York

DC

Pittsburgh

Portland

Rochester

Roanoke

What

Where

When

How Much

How Much More