The INRMP is the master document that integrates all projects, programs, activities and compliance commitments related to natural resources management on the installation. Partnership agreements and other commitments with entities outside the installation would also be captured and referenced therein. The INRMP must follow all applicable federal and state laws, regulations and policies, and should strive to meet the spirit of those documents as well. An excellent foundation for INRMP best management practices is presented in Gibb (2005a). However, considerations related to policies and legal aspects, on-the-ground environmental conditions, changing military missions, new ecosystem stressors, and new or innovative management approaches and tools continue to evolve over time.
The concepts and guidance within every chapter in this manual have bearing on the INRMP. The overriding themes of ecosystem management and its relationship to adaptive management and monitoring, support for training sustainability, conservation of imperiled species and their habitat at multiple scales, and the role of science-based management that recur and overlap throughout this guide must come together fully and in a cohesive way in the INRMP.
Successful INRMP implementation requires creativity and perseverance, with special attention to the following key elements:
Mission support—The INRMP should support and sustain military missions and strive to avoid any net loss to training capacity (i.e., what, when, where, and how often). By searching out and identifying win-win solutions for conservation and military training, the INRMP truly succeeds and by tying such projects and activities to training, funding chances are optimized.
Ecosystem management components (all)—The INRMP should explicitly incorporate and carry out the facets of ecosystem management, thereby paying attention to ecosystem health as well as the more charismatic INRMP components (see Chapters 1, 2, 8): 1) Develop a vision for the installation; 2) Identify and articulate goals and objectives (i.e., general and specific targets) for installation resources. These objectives should be specific, measurable, attainable, realistic/relevant and timely; 3) Conduct formal monitoring to measure progress toward goals and objectives; and 4) conduct adaptive management as needed to help refine management activities and redefine objectives/targets.
Multi-scale, proactive species management—Manage species, their habitats and the larger ecological systems and natural processes they depend on at multiple and nested scales over long-time horizons (see Chapters 1, 2, 8, 9). At-risk species must be identified and addressed more consistently and comprehensively to help avoid future ESA listings and associated compliance burdens on installations (see Chapters 1, 9 and DoD Species at Risk section this chapter).
Improving chances for funding—As pointed out by Gibb (2005a), because many (and for a few installations, the vast majority of) individual INRMP actions and projects are not considered “must fund,” they may fail to be funded if they are only presented as individual, noncompliance-related activities. To overcome this, the INRMP must clearly demonstrate the need for these individual actions and projects and must show how they are integral to successful INRMP implementation and their contribution to or necessity for sustaining the military mission support (see Chapter 7).
Improved linkages between actions/projects and goals and objectives based on desired condition of the training environments and biodiversity components can be introduced during INRMP updates and revisions. For example, excessive mechanized maneuver training in a particular location may result in sedimentation of aquatic systems, triggering a compliance problem with water quality, aquatic food webs, or TES, and ultimately restricting training activities. Without well-crafted resource objectives, the monitoring and adaptive management pieces are dysfunctional and inefficient.
Science-based management—Integrate the best available science from DoD and other state and federal agencies. Implement monitoring and research activities to support management. Develop and use a state and transition framework to facilitate management decisions, monitoring, and adaptive management with respect to prescriptions. The framework can help managers understand how ecological communities respond to drivers and disturbance, ecological thresholds of disturbance, and inform management objectives, and help design monitoring projects and interpret results. Military training disturbance can be integrated as a driver of change (see Chapter 2).
Go the extra mile—Strive for improvement over time. For example, even if your installation does not currently have critical habitat, review the criteria that determine if an INRMP provides adequate special management or protection to obviate the need for critical habitat designation (see section above on INRMPS and Critical Habitat Designation). This guidance, driven by the 2004 ESA amendment, sets a high bar for resource management and provides a framework to discuss this topic.
Next Page: Unresolved issues related to INRMPS
Author
David S. Jones, RA IV, Ecologist/Project Manager
Center for Environmental Management of Military Lands
Warner College of Natural Resources
Colorado State University
Monitoring INRMP implementation and effectiveness
Monitoring INRMP implementation and effectiveness