For State Wildlife Action Plans
Additional Regional Actions Identified
Download 3.75 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- The Monitoring and Performance Reporting Framework
Additional Regional Actions IdentifiedMembers of NEAFWA’s NEFWDTC reviewed the list of actions addressed in RCN projects and identified any gaps or key types of actions that were not included in the list. These additional committee efforts identified the following actions:
The NEFWDTC recognizes that the RCN Grant Program focused more on regional planning and assessment projects in its early years rather than on habitat or species conservation implementation projects. There is a clear consensus that both are needed, but by applying the Northeast Conservation Planning Framework these implementation projects are often generated and guided by early regional planning, and are then implemented by states to improve the status of species and their habitat more locally. Many projects that were funded by the RCN Grant Program represent the initial steps required to lay the foundation for future on-the-ground activities that will benefit SGCN and their habitats. For example, the New England cottontail conservation strategy lists 64 discrete actions that could be taken to conserve the species (Fuller and Tur 2012). Listing these conservation actions and then establishing priorities among them are the first steps towards identifying the precise combination of on-the-ground actions needed to prevent further declines in the species and accelerate its process of restoration. These future actions will likely include manipulations of key habitat elements or individual cottontails, or both. These on-the-ground activities will hopefully prevent the species’ listing under the federal Endangered Species Act. Chapter 5—Monitoring of RSGCN Species and Key Habitats in the Northeast and Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Conservation ActionsThis chapter describes regional efforts to monitor status and trends of Regional Species of Greatest Conservation Need (RSGCN) and their habitats and to evaluate the effectiveness of conservation actions in the Northeast states. Planning efforts by the Northeast Fish and Wildlife Diversity Technical Committee (NEFWDTC) have led to several key monitoring projects funded by the Regional Conservation Needs (RCN) Grant Program. Examples include the Northeast Regional Monitoring and Performance Reporting Framework collaboratively funded by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NWF, see (NEAFWA 2008) and its successors, the State Wildlife Grants Effectiveness Measures Project (AFWA 2012) (funded by the Doris Duke Foundation), the Northeast Lexicon Project (Crisfield and NEFWDTC 2013), and the national Wildlife TRACS (Tracking and Reporting Actions for the Conservation of Species ) database (funded by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS]). Many of these approaches have used results chains or similar tools such as logic models to articulate theories of change and identify status measures and effectiveness indicators. Several examples of results chains are provided here; more samples of results chains developed for monitoring projects in the Northeast can be downloaded from the RCN website in the report and appendices for the Northeastern Regional Monitoring and Performance Measures Framework. At the Albany I workshop, the NEFWDTC identified the development of a regional monitoring and performance measurement project as a high priority. Although Northeast states had developed their own monitoring programs to track the status and condition of wildlife species and habitats, the Committee recognized the importance of coordinating monitoring and evaluation activities across the entire Northeast region. Several key factors cited by the Committee in supporting the development of regional monitoring activities include the large number of shared priority species and habitats, the relatively limited funding available in any one state for monitoring and evaluation activities, and the presence of many regional experts who have knowledge of particular taxa or ecosystems throughout the Northeast. The examples in this chapter are intended to show the breadth and diversity of regionally coordinated monitoring activities in the Northeast, especially those activities funded through the RCN Grant Program. The list of examples is by no means comprehensive or exhaustive. Additional monitoring activities and programs are described in more detail in the Wildlife Action Plans developed by the individual Northeast states. The Monitoring and Performance Reporting FrameworkThe NEAFWA (Northeast Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies) Monitoring and Performance Reporting Framework (NEAFWA 2008) is intended to help each Northeast state meet the expectations set by Congress and the USFWS for the Wildlife Action Plans and the State Wildlife Grants (SWG) programs. The goal of this framework is to assess the status and trends of Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) and their habitats across the Northeast states, and to evaluate the effectiveness of activities intended to conserve species and habitats across the Northeast. For more information and to review project reports, please visit: http://rcngrants.org/content/regional-monitoring-and-performance-framework. The monitoring framework identified eight conservation targets (defined as species, landscape features, or vegetation communities important to fish and wildlife): forests, freshwater streams and river systems, freshwater wetlands, highly migratory species, lakes and ponds, managed grasslands and shrublands, regionally significant SGCN, and unique habitats in the Northeast. Each of these targets is discussed above under the appropriate chapter for species and habitats. For each target, key threats were identified, along with conservation actions that could help alleviate or eliminate the effects of that particular stressor. Indicators were proposed for tracking status and trends of each of the targets, and data sources were identified for each of the indicators (NEAFWA 2008). Table 5.1 from NEAFWA (2008) lists the indicators and threats that were selected by workshop participants for each of the eight conservation targets. Table 5.1. List of Conservation Targets and Proposed Indicators. Source: NEAFWA 2008.
The developers of the framework also recommended a results-chain approach for identifying performance measures and other management-relevant indicators. Results chains are a powerful tool that has recently been adopted by many conservation organizations to help them understand and visualize the linkages between conservation activities and results. As shown in the following illustration (Figure 5.1) results chains link an action to a conservation target through one or more intermediate objectives. Indicators can be selected at each step of the way to measure the progress towards the project’s goals and objectives (NEAFWA 2008). 
Figure 5.1. Results Chain General Schematic. Source: NEAFWA 2008. Sample results chains were provided in the Appendices to the framework project report (NEAFWA 2008). These included results chains focused on species, such as the following example from NEAFWA (2008) (Figure 5.2) which illustrates how protection of nesting sites benefits nesting success in piping plovers.
Figure 5.2. Results Chain for the Piping Plover. Source: NEAFWA 2008. The examples also included results chains focused on species habitats, such as the following (Figure 5.3), which shows how technical assistance to municipalities could eventually lead to wetland conservation activities that would benefit many RSGCN such as the Blanding’s and wood turtles.
Figure 5.3. Results Chain for Wetland Protection. Source: NEAFWA 2008. Results chains can also be used to illustrate the pathways by which basic research contributes towards habitat and species improvement. The following generalized results chain (Figure 5.4) from NEAFWA (2008) shows one logical progression between baseline research, decision-making, threat reduction, and species and habitat benefits.
Figure 5.4. Results Chain for Basic Research Project. Source: NEAFWA 2008. The conservation targets identified in the monitoring framework put to practical use in the recent Conservation Status Assessment for Wildlife Species and Habitats in the Northeastern United States (Anderson and Olivero Sheldon 2011) discussed in more detail below. This report provided updated status information on key indicators used to measure the condition of Species of Greatest Conservation Need and their habitats. Directory: sites -> default -> files -> final reports files -> Northern England’s set-jetting locations files -> Nstructions for Acquiring Excess Equipment online, through the 1033 Program files -> Occupational health and safety files -> The Black Panther Party’s Ten Point Program files -> International programs roel profile files -> Fermi Questions a guide for Teachers, Students, and Event Supervisors Lloyd Abrams, Ph. D. DuPont Company, cr&D/ccas experimental Station Wilmington, de 19880 files -> Personal Information Name: Maha Al-Ammari Nationality: Saudi Relationship Status final reports -> Northeast Regional Wildlife Conservation Project Summaries Download 3.75 Mb. Share with your friends:
|
