A common failing of monitoring programs is to blindly follow some standard sampling protocol. Most often, such standard protocols have been developed with the goal of providing a common dataset across many sites. Because there is typically no common question among these installations, the protocol designers try to design sampling to capture the maximum amount of data possible, in the hope that when a question arises, there will be data available. Experience has shown that this hope is rarely, if ever, fulfilled. When a question does arise, invariably it turns out the data were collected in the wrong places, the wrong variable was measured, or the sampling protocol provided such low statistical power as to be worthless.
The keys to designing a monitoring program that is efficient, effective, and empowers adaptive management are simple: First, you need to know what you need to know. What is the question that needs to be answered? If there is no clearly defined question, the likelihood the data collected will provide value is nil. Some questions are easily articulated: Is the number of breeding pairs of x above our stated threshold? Has the spatial extent of prairie declined by more than 5 percent over the past decade? Has the habitat suitability index for grassland birds increased by 10 percent, on average, across the installation since 1990?
Monitoring questions about natural communities, or ecosystems, are more difficult to articulate so that they adequately address the conservation need. The common ecosystem descriptors (species composition, physiognomic structure, and function) rarely provide the information needed for management decisions. Documenting that arthropod species richness has declined by a few species, for example, doesn’t lead to obvious management actions.
Earlier, key ecological attributes were identified as those characteristics that must be maintained to ensure the integrity or viability of a conservation target. Threats to the targets manifest themselves as stresses on these attributes, and conservation actions should be focused on abating these threats. Effective monitoring should address changes in these threats, and the response in the key attributes.
That is obviously not a simple task and achieving success requires a deep understanding of the ecosystems of concern. As has been pointed out earlier, one way to achieve the necessary contextual understanding to accomplish useful and effective monitoring is through participation in an ecoregional study. In Colorado, Fort Carson’s participation in the Central Shortgrass Ecoregional Assessment is an excellent example of where participation in an ecoregional study helped the installation focus its monitoring efforts of natural communities or ecosystems to make useful management decisions. Through that collaborative initiative, Fort Carson obtained ecological analyses, suggestions for priority areas, a monitoring framework, and ideas to help it address conservation management decisions.15
See subsection 8.5 in Chapter 8 for additional practical guidance on monitoring ecosystems and landscapes.
Next Page: Conclusion
Author
Bob Unnasch, Ph.D.
Sound Science LLC
Monitoring biodiversity
Confusing monitoring with inventory
Confusing monitoring with research