Exploring Commonalities Among SWAPs [State Wildlife Action Plans] and

GNLCC/USFWS Priority Species and Their Habitats As a First Step Towards

Integrating Landscape Efforts

Some Underlying Assumptions/Observations:

1. State Wildlife Grants that funded the SWAPs did not consider most hunted species, but these may be a priority to many.

2. Game species added by the Advisory Team reflect additional ideas, especially of the states and the Intermountain West Joint Venture.

1. Colorado, Utah, Provincial, Canadian Wildlife Service, Federal Agencies outside USFWS, Tribal, First Nations, or NGO established lists are not yet considered.

1. GNLCC/FWS species (from our GNLCC Draft Operations Plan) were based on Strategic Habitat Conservation and FWS trust responsibilities.

1. Identifying species commonalities are a first step and not a final step. These are part of a foundation for discussing the future evaluation of our success at landscape conservation.

Ecological Integrity…species composition, diversity, and functional organization

Landscape Ecological Processes

Habitats of Greatest

Need

SGCN & Other

Important Species

land use climate invasives

populations genetic diversity

acres connectivity condition

Socioeconomic Processes

agr policy lumber economics housing recreation trends

Steps Used in the GNLCC Initial Priority Species and Habitat Analysis:

1. Merged 5 SWAP species lists and identified common species(SGCN: Species of Greatest Conservation Need)

2. Added all GNLCC species to list3. Added species identified at Advisory Team meeting4. Added species suggested by Intermountain West Joint Venture staff

5. Overlay-mapped SWAP species ranges6. Extracted and merged habitats associated with identified SWAP species

Key Habitats for 27 Priority Species[obligate/facultative] 27/9:

Wetland/Riparian – 10/2 Cool/Cold Streams – 5/2 Grassland/Sage/Steppe – 6/2 Montane Forest – 3/1 Alpine – 2/1 Open Forest – 1/1

30%

38%

48%

46%

32%

44%

Of those areas with that number of species in greatest conservation need (Y-axis), what percentage of the area is in the habitat type indicated (X-axis)?

[percentage of the U.S. portion of the GNLCC]

1.2%

1.1%

51%

36%

10 % [8% agriculture]

0.8%

As s es s P r oblem & Alter na tives

S et Obj ectivesMa k e Adj us tm ents

Monitor R es pons e

E va lua te Us ing Models

I m plem ent Ma na gem ent

T he Ada ptive Ma na gem ent P r oces s

From a science perspective, there are 3 areas on which to focus Adaptive Management thought

regarding initial priorities:

ensuring the complete suite of management alternatives is identified and then selecting those to evaluate [to reduce uncertainties in decision making]

developing [conceptual] models to be used for empirical evaluation

developing the monitoring effort to be used for evaluation of whether objectives have been achieved

…and linking back to ecological processes on large landscapes. Like:

fire hydrologic change wildlife population demography grazing climate change etc.

…so an important value of initial priorities in terms of species and habitats is for evaluating our success in fostering landscape conservation

How does management of an area or species fit into conservation of the larger landscape?

final thought…