Summary Monitoring for Chippewa Prairie

1. Summary Monitoring for Chippewa Prairie Daren Carlson – MN DNR 14 April 2010

2. Overview • Prairie monitoring • Change analysis • Status/trend monitoring • Grassland adaptive management collaborative • Adaptive management planning process and database for DNR Scientific and Natural Areas (SNAs) • A few other bits

3. Prairie monitoring - Objectives • Amount of Native Prairie • Change analysis • Status and trends in plant and animal community composition • Drivers of change: landscape context and climate change • Adaptive management • Vegetation • Structure • Composition

4. Prairie monitoring – Status/trends • High quality, native prairie plant and animal communities • How is their condition changing over time in response to key drivers of change? • Drivers of change: • Climate change – stratify by geography • Landscape context – stratify by “large sites w/in a grassland matrix” vs. “small, isolated sites”

6. Grassland Adaptive Management Collaborative • US Fish and Wildlife Service • Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (Fish & Wildlife, Parks, Eco Resources) • The Nature Conservancy • US Geological Survey • Concordia College

7. Grassland Adaptive Management Collaborative Overlapping Management Objectives • Vegetation • Maintain or increase the % cover of native prairie vegetation • Minimize % cover of non-native vegetation • Structure - Maintain structural diversity (height, litter) • Community - Maintain diverse plant and animal communities

8. Grassland Adaptive Management Collaborative Hierarchical protocols Basic Level – Option A Plant groups, indicator spp. Intermediate Level – Option B Basic + more extensive spp. indicator checklist Deluxe Model – Option C Intermediate + plant composition, more indicator species, animals

9. Methods • Belt transect – 25m long by 10 cm wide with 50, half-meter quadrats along transect • Indicator checklist 1.5 m on each side of main transect 25m 3 m 0.1m

10. Methods – cont. • At each of the ½ m by 0.1 m plots record (plant group score): • Relative amount of invasive vs. native plants • > 75 % invasive, 50-75% invasive, 50-75% native, > 75% native • Relative amount of herbaceous vs. woody vegetation • Herbaceous > 50% • Low shrub (less than 1 m. tall) > 50% • Tall shrub (more than 1 m. tall) >50% • Relative amount of grasses vs. forbs • Grass > 75% • Grass-forb 25-75% • Forb > 75%

11. Methods – cont. • Invasive species:

12. Methods – cont. • Quality indicators:

13. Methods – cont. • Species composition:

14. Chippewa Prairie monitoring • 130 transects total (100 in 2008, 30 in 2009) • 25 Bird point counts (18 in 2008, 14 in 2009)

15. Monitoring data summary • 130 transects total (100 in 2008, 30 in 2009) • 25 Bird point counts (18 in 2008, 14 in 2009)

16. Grassland Adaptive Management Collaborative Pooled dataset

17. Adaptive Management Planning and Database CONSERVATION FEATURES 1) N. Hardwood Forest (MHn47) 2) Forest salamanders (FS) EVALUATE! Measure indicators 1)% of plots with IS 2a) Presence of moss hummocks 2b) % of plots occupied by FS FACTORS 1)Landing sites 2)Vernal pool disturbance CONDITION 1)Invasive spp (IS) 2)FS Presence OBJECTIVES 1)Maintain IS presence at <10% 2)Maintain FS population at current levels ACTIONS 1)Limit transport from invaded sites 2)Avoid pools

19. Other/next steps • Manitou Adaptive Management Collaborative • Prairie insects • Data analysis, including sensitivity analysis of vegetation data • Develop the long-term network

20. Comments?