WBCI Grassland Implementation Plan

1. WBCI Grassland Implementation Plan Part One: Introduction/Rationale

2. Grassland Strategic Plan • Sets measurable population goals for focal species. • Relates those goals to habitat goals and an effective landscape design. • Focuses work into focal landscapes that will produce productive populations of grassland focal species. • Builds an outcome-based evaluation plan that will allow us to determine what impacts we are having at multiple scales and generates an adaptive response to changing conditions.

3. Plan Purpose This plan Does: • Strategically guide grassland bird conservation delivery efforts for the next 15 years (2011-2026) by providing spatially explicit, measurable population and habitat goals. • “Step-down” the grassland bird population and habitat goals into Wisconsin. • Generate an evaluation plan that allow for adaptive management throughout the life of this plan. It Does Not: • Replace existing plans (WBCI All-bird Plan, PIF plan, JV Plan, Sample and Mossman) but rather compliments them. • Focus on habitat BMPs; however it will highlight key strategies based on opportunities within each Focal Landscape.

4. Plan Scope Scale • Statewide – with an emphasis on BCR 23 and/or grasslands in open, agricultural landscapes. Habitat(s) • This plan focuses primarily on native and non-native grassland types within BCR 23. It does not focus on “grassy” wetland types and/or barrens types. • This plan does not cover savannas and/or shrublands; however, some landscape teams did set savanna/shrub goals within their BCAs. Birds • Utilizes JV focal species for planning (Eastern Meadowlark, Upland Sandpiper, Greater Prairie-Chicken, Grasshopper Sparrow, Henslow’s Sparrow) • Assumes that these birds will cover a broader range of species (Bobolink, etc.) • This plan probably doesn’t fully address the needs of barrens/sedge meadow birds (LeConte’s Sparrow, Nelson’s Sparrow, Yellow Rail, Am. Bittern, Lark Sparrow, Sharp-tailed Grouse, etc.) • This plan isn’t meant to replace the WM – Pheasant Plan or address the grassland nesting cover needs of waterfowl.

5. Why are we concerned? • As a breeding guild, grassland and grass-shrub species are declining faster than any other breeding guild in the U.S. * USGS BBS Data from 1966-2007 (Mean Trend of all species within the guild)

6. 40 years + of Change: “The Losers” • Western Meadowlark -9.8%/year • Henslow’s Sparrow -9.0%/year • Grasshopper Sparrow -7.9%/year • Dickcissel -6.5%/year • Vesper Sparrow -4.6%/year • Upland Sandpiper -4.3%/year • Eastern Meadowlark -3.1%/year • Field Sparrow -3.0%/year • Savannah Sparrow -2.5%/year • Brown Thrasher -2.2%/year • Bobolink -2.0%/year • Eastern Kingbird -2.0%/year • Clay-colored Sparrow -1.4%/year • Red-winged Blackbird -0.9%/year

7. Highest Priority for WI • Greater Prairie-Chicken • State Threatened • Genetic decline • Small populations • Requires large grassland landscapes • Henslow’s Sparrow: • State Threatened – USFWS Priority • Small population (80,000) • WI has 5-10% of global pop. • Idle grasslands (tall-grass prairie)

8. Grassland/Agricultural Land Use in Wisconsin, 1830-2000

9. How much potential habitat do we have in WI? Private Land (approx. 3.5 million – low idle grass %) Cropland (includes hay/alfalfa rotationally cultivated pastures): • 10 million acres or 4.05 million ha (2007) • includes 1.9 million acres of non-cultivated cropland (hay, etc.) (07) (50%?? hay) • 430,000 acres of alfalfa (USDA 2010) • 240,000 acres of wheat (USDA 2010) Pastureland (all types) • 3.16 million acres or 1.28 million ha total with assumed 70% or 2.2 million acres in active pasture. CRP • (2007) 541,000 acres or 219,105 ha (30% on prime ag) • (2011) 400,000 acres and dropping • ** Assume 10% or more are trees Public Land – (150-200,000 acres of upland grass: Similar amount of lowland grass – high idle grass %) • 120,000 acres of perm. grass on public land in blocks of >100 acres (Sample and Mossman 1997) + 120,000 acres of small blocks • WISFIRS DNR lands (2011): 111,364 acres of upland grass on DNR lands. 77,000 acres of lowland “grass” Public 10% - Private 90% * Data obtained from NRCS – NRI program (2007), USDA and FSA website

10. What have we been doing about the problem? • The State of WI owns/manages 111,000 acres of upland grass. • Turkey Stamp: $0.5 - 1 million annually • Pheasant Stamp: $500K annually • WM Partners: • USFWS Private Lands • WPAs – federal refuges • CRP: Max 700,000 acres Min: 400,000? • Pheasants Forever: 41,000 acres Why isn’t our collective work resulting in population gains?

11. Importance of Landscape Context • Not all sites or patches of habitat are created equally! • Densities of target species and nesting success are influenced by the landscape context in which the site/patch is located.

12. Landscape Patch Site Meadowlark Realtors, Inc. LOCATION – LOCATION – LOCATION!

13. The Upshot...... • Research has shown us that we need to “scale up” our grassland efforts. • Conservation delivery efforts should focus on rallying grassland teams around the BCA concept. • Where can we build/maintain them? How many? • If we are successful, what portion of our JV goal will we be achieving? • Will it work? We need a plan for this!!!!

14. Role of smaller grasslands • WBCI partners can’t meet JV goal by working solely in BCAs and focal landscapes. • Important to remember that the BCA concept is untested and is based on assumptions centered around GPCH as well as extensive research from WI and the Upper Midwest on issues of scale. A smaller BCA may be valuable. • Small grasslands inside focal landscapes but outside of BCAs may be very valuable. Focus on private lands here and save acquisition $$ for BCA cores. • WBCI partners working outside of focal landscapes for grassland birds should work to increase patch size where possible. Patch size is likely more important when not in a grassy landscape (e.g. Bong). • Agencies and/or WBCI partners should be wary of “sinking” large investments into grassland bird efforts away from focal landscapes. • Evaluation efforts in WI and across the Midwest Coordinated Bird Monitoring Partnership will help to evaluate these assumptions.

15. Part II. Objectives Joint Venture Wisconsin Focal Landscape GBCA #2 GBCA #1

16. Statewide Goal • JV Plan adopts the PIF goal of doubling our Eastern Meadowlark population. This means creating habitat for an additional 140,000 EAME. This is in addition to protecting the existing population (140,000). • JV used a density estimate of 0.8 EAME/ha to generate a habitat goal of 191, 418 ha of new habitat or 473,005 acres. • WBCI Strategy – build/maintain habitat in high density EAME areas even while losing total grassland acres across the state. • It’s assumed that the EAME goal will “pull” in the objectives for Henslow’s Sparrow and other priority birds • Monitoring Tool – Federal BBS. • Statewide Goal/Objective: Stable 15 year EAME population (7.0 EAME/route +- 1) • Previous 15 years (94-09) = -4.3%/year!!

17. Part II. Objectives Joint Venture Wisconsin Focal Landscape GBCA #2 GBCA #1

18. Where should we work in WI? Considerations: • Areas that have high % of grass within a larger landscape. • Areas that historically were grassland and are now still very open with moderate amounts of grassland or public lands that could be managed for grass. • Where we are already working......public land, applicable Farm Bill programs, etc. • Where there is positive momentum on the right scale? Goal = Productive Landscapes! High bird densities = more nest attempts = more chicks fledged

19. Priority Landscapes • Tier 1 (multiple BCAs) • Southwest Grasslands (4 BCA) • Western Prairie (2 BCA) • Central WI Grasslands (2.5 BCA) • Tier 2 (1 BCA) • Scuppernong (1 BCA) • Calumet County (1.5 BCA) • White River Marsh (1 BCA – public) • Glacial HRA (1 BCA) • Others + Smaller BCAs • Badger Ammo? • Ashland Grasslands • Smaller IBAs... • Plan will add these iteratively based on partner group recommendations/commitment and results of regional research.

20. Focal Landscape Goals Landscape Goal: • Population Goal for EAME (indicator of broad change) • Sub-goals for key focal species • Number of BCAs (habitat goal) • Monitoring will occur along roadside across the FL to assess goals and habitat change.

21. Southwest Grasslands Focal Species • EAME, HESP, UPSA, GRSP • RHWO, BRTH, BEVI, FISP Population Targets • Stable population (15yrs) of EAME • Increasing pops. HESP/GRSP • Increasing occupancy UPSA Habitat Goals • 4 BCAs (Perry/Primrose, Garrison Creek, Barreltown, Military Ridge) Key Strategies • Acquisition of core grasslands • Expand upon grass-based agricultural opps. • Implement Farm Bill programs on private lands. • Develop greater levels of outreach/landowner contact through partners.

23. SWGSCA BCA Goals • SWGSCA is primarily a protection/maintenance landscape • Goal would increase grasslands by 1438 ha and result in an • additional 791 EAME or .56% of JV goal!

24. Additional BCA Goals • Each BCA is mapped by habitat type (pasture, hay, idle grasses, etc.). While EAME respond to total % grass, other focal species respond to habitat type. • Some BCAs will radically change their HESP and GRSP populations through habitat improvement (prairie restoration or increases in idle grassland) • Example: Densities of GRSP on prairie remnants are 3x that of pastures. In the Military Ridge BCA we currently have as many GRSP on remnants (160 ha) as pasture (600 ha). 15 year goal for this BCA is to add 365 ha of prairie which will almost double the GRSP population in this BCA! • SWGSCA and WPHRA teams also set goals for birds using savanna/shrublands as those were management issues within the BCAs. • Many BCAs either don’t currently have bird density info for different habitats or that information is lacking for certain focal species (shrub/savanna). Initial evaluation efforts will need to generate these estimates to help revise/create goals for this plan.

25. Central Wisconsin Grassland Conservation Area Focal Species • EAME, HESP, UPSA, GRSP, GPCH, BOBO? Population Targets • Stable population (15yrs) of EAME • Increasing GPCH population (see GPCH plan) • Increasing pops. HESP/GRSP • Increasing occupancy UPSA Habitat Goals • 2.5 BCAs (Buena Vista, Paul Olson, Leola (small)) Key Strategies • Acquisition of core grasslands in Paul Olson • Expand upon grass-based agricultural opportunities (GRP). • Strategic increase in agriculture to facilitate GPCH dispersal. • Build upon GPCH outreach efforts.

26. CWGCA BCA Goals • CWGCA is primarily a protection/maintenance landscape AND the cores • are largely intact except for Paul Olson. • Goal would increase grasslands by 900 ha and result in an • additional 500 EAME or .35% of JV goal! • Ultimately this area will be measured by success of GPCH efforts and • increased levels of connectivity between these BCAs. • The GPCH plan calls for additional grassland acreages but not within a • BCA design. These goals can be assessed at the CWGCA level.

27. Western Prairie HRA Focal Species • EAME, HESP, UPSA, GRSP, RNPH, BWTE/MALL • RHWO, BRTH, BEVI, FISP Population Targets • Stable population (15yrs) of EAME • Increasing pops. HESP/GRSP • Increasing occupancy UPSA Habitat Goals • 2 BCAs (Star Prairie, Erin Prairie) • Potential for more? Key Strategies • Acquisition of core grasslands • Expand upon grass-based agricultural opps. • Implement Farm Bill programs on private lands.

28. WPHRA BCA Goals • WPHRA is a restoration landscape. Erin Prairie = 384 acres/year over 15 years • Erin Prairie = 284 acres/year over 15 years. • At $4,000/acres (low) that would require $2.7 million/year over 15 years to buy • enough land to meet BCA goals. • Success within these BCAs will be largely driven by effective landowner outreach • and subsequent participation in CRP/SAFE.

29. Part III. Evaluation and Adaptation Statewide: • Change in focal species populations (index) = Federal BBS Landscape: • Change in focal species populations (index) = Road-based BBS routes with habitat monitoring BCA: • Habitat – based focal species monitoring. Change in abundances/densities over time + changes in habitat.

30. Evaluating our Assumptions Focal Landscape Scale: • At what % (and config) of grassland (and other landscape variables) do we see higher densities of target species? • What role does program development play in terms of habitat and bird abundance? (over time?) BCA Scale: • At what % (and config) of grassland (and other landscape variables) do we see higher densities of target species? How big does a BCA need to be? • What role does program development play in terms of habitat and bird abundance? (over time?) • Assumption: Configuration of grasslands within matrix will make no difference. • Assumption: The size of the core is not important for (EAME, HESP, GRSP, UPSA) but may be important for socio-economic reasons. HRA-BCA Scale Interaction: • What role does habitat across the HRA matrix have on BCA bird populations?

31. Evaluation Plan and Timeline Spring – Summer 2011: • WBCI Grass Science Team drafts monitoring plan and funding proposals to USFWS. • Western Prairie team pilots BCA monitoring plan using volunteers and USFWS interns. Fall 2011: • DNR staff finishes mapping Tier II BCAs and updates Tier I BCAs • Data from SAFE monitoring and WPHRA pilot analyzed and experiences of monitors used to tweek protocols. • UW/USGS hires post-doc (pending funding) to finish evaluation plan development and begins working on sampling frameworks. Spring – Summer 2012: • Sampling undertaken in all three Tier I Landscapes and in each BCA.

32. Grassland Plan – Next Steps • Endorsement/Approval from key WBCI partners. • Outreach to WBCI partnership and key agencies/regional partners, etc. • website, handouts, webinar, talks, meetings with stakeholder groups. • Move forward on evaluation plan • Schedule annual “check-ins” and meetings as needed with Tier 1 and Tier 2 landscapes to ensure plan implementation and address challenges/concerns.