SARP, the GCPO, and SE-LCCs John Tirpak SARP Steering Committee Science Coordinator Nashville, TN Gulf Coastal Plains & Ozarks LCC 23 May 2012
Objectives • Report on some LCC activities with relevance to SARP • Frame the ensuing conversation about the relationship between SARP and the SE LCCs • Scott Robinson to LCC Community – “It’s time to take it to the next level”
Outline • Basics of LCCs • Current roles – SARP in LCCs – LCCs in SARP • Where do we want to go – LCC perspective • How do we get there – Options
Just the Facts • Self-directed, non-regulatory partnership – 180 M acres • 12 states • 3 FHPs • Function – Design “sustainable landscapes” • Integrate across resource priorities • Account for future change • Form – Steering Committee – Conservation Science Staff – Working Groups
GCPOLCC Webcommunity • http://gcpolcc.org
Current Roles SARP in SE-LCCs • Scott has been busy – Steering Committees • Appalachian LCC • Gulf Coast Prairie LCC – Partnership Advisory Councils • Gulf Coastal Plains & Ozarks LCC • South Atlantic LCC – Science Teams/Strike Teams • Appalachian LCC • Peninsular Florida LCC • Gulf Coast Prairie LCC • South Atlantic LCC
Adaptation Science Management Team Fish Herps Birds Mammals Aquatic Plants Culture Water Inverts East Gulf Coastal Plain/ X X * o o X X South Atlantic- Gulf, Tennessee X = confirmed * = verbal Interior Highlands/ Upper Mississippi X X X o o X o = likely Missouri, Ohio, Fed State Mississippi Alluvial X X * * o X NGO/Private Valley/ Lower Partnership Mississippi Manager West Gulf Coastal Red-White, TX-Gulf X o * X X X Scientist Plain/ Arkansas- About 50-50 Gulf Coast/TX-Gulf X X X o X X X X
Current Roles SE-LCCs in SARP • Southern Instream Flow Network (SIFN) – South Atlantic LCC – recently completed – Gulf Coast Prairie LCC – getting started – Appalachian LCC – current RFP – Gulf Coastal Plains & Ozarks – exploring options
Current Roles SE-LCCs in SARP • Conservation Design – South Atlantic LCC • Conservation Blueprint
From current to future landscape • Future landscape predictions complete for every NHD+ catchment in the South Atlantic Coastal Plain* • Animation on right shows from 2009-2050. Urban is red and water is blue. • Includes: – Urban growth – Sea level rise – Climate change *Work from Grand, Terando, Costanzo , and others…
Aquatic modeling in progress • Work is now underway to connect the future landscape to potential conservation actions (e.g., improving connectivity, restoring hydrology)
Aquatic modeling in progress • Work is now underway to connect the future landscape to potential conservation actions (e.g., improving connectivity, restoring hydrology) Aquatic connectivity Aquatic Current/future Instream flow ecosystem landscape response Hydrologic restoration
Current Roles SE-LCCs in SARP • Conservation Design – South Atlantic LCC • Conservation Blueprint – Gulf Coastal Plains & Ozarks LCC • Alligator Gar • Louisiana Pearlshell Mussel
Alligator Gar Priority Model • Alligator gar is a priority species – Representative of intact floodplains of large river systems – Community of practice – Charismatic megafauna • Strategic conservation – How much? – How much more? – Where?
Alligator Gar Priority Model • What does a sustainable ? landscape look like for alligator gar? • How does that integrate with the vision for birds and bears? ?
A Strategic Vision for Gator Gar • Held a meeting in Vicksburg on 7 December 2010 – Yvonne Allen, Army Corps of Engineers (ERDC) – Ricky Campbell, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (PJANFH) – Glenn Constant, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (BRFCO) – Jan Dean, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (NNFH) – Lee Holt, Arkansas Game and Fish Commission – John Tirpak, Gulf Coastal Plains and Ozarks LCC – Nick Wirwa, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (SCCNWR)
Objectives for Model • To identify relative habitat quality for alligator gar across the entire Lower Mississippi River Basin – Identify habitats similar to the “hotspot” at St. Catherine Creek NWR – Analyze data at St. Catherine Creek NWR to explain gar usage of that area – Identify missing elements of “ideal” gar habitat to direct management – Identify highly suitable places to stock gar – Identify factors to measure to characterize gar habitat at multiple scales
Modeling Considerations • Spatial – Hierarchical scales • Site: St. Catherine’s Creek NWR • Region: Lower Mississippi River basin • Temporal – Consider seasonal use patterns • Staging (1 February – 14 April) • Spawning/Nursery (15 April – 14 June) • Summer (15 June – 31 October) • Winter (1 November – 31 January)
Framing the Conceptual Model • Identifying factors that define gar habitat – Water presence – Water class (e.g., lake, river, etc.) – Flooding frequency – Water depth – Water temperature – Vegetation type – Connectivity to river – Flood duration
Towards an Empirical Model Staging Spawning Summer Winter Water presence X X X X Water class Lake = optimal Temporarily flooded area Any open River = optimal River = suitable water Lake = suitable Flood frequency Permanent Annual = optimal Permanent Permanent 1/7 years = minimum Water depth 4’ - 16’ 1’ - 4’ N/A >10’ 65-72°F Water >50°F N/A N/A temperature Vegetation type N/A Herb.wetlands, ag, and N/A N/A moist-soil = optimal shrub-scrub = suitable Connectivity X X N/A N/A Flood duration N/A 60 days = optimal N/A N/A 10 days = minimal
Towards an Empirical Model Data Source Spawning Water presence NHD+ X Water class NHD+ Temporarily flooded area Flood frequency Landsat imagery Annual = optimal River gauges 1/7 years = minimum Water depth LiDAR 1’ - 4’ 65-72°F Water Landsat thermal temperature band? Vegetation type NASS CDL Herb.wetlands, ag, and moist-soil = optimal shrub-scrub = suitable Connectivity NHD+ X Flood duration Landsat imagery 60 days = optimal River gauges 10 days = minimal
Flood Inundation Frequency • Identifying inundation extent for Atchafalaya
Filling in Data Gaps Data Source Spawning Water presence NHD+ X Water class NHD+ Temporarily flooded area Flood frequency Landsat imagery Annual = optimal River gauges 1/7 years = minimum Water depth LiDAR 1’ - 4’ 65-72°F Water Landsat thermal temperature band? Vegetation type NASS CDL Herb.wetlands, ag, and moist-soil = optimal shrub-scrub = suitable Connectivity NHD+ X Flood duration Landsat imagery 60 days = optimal River gauges 10 days = minimal
Alligator Gar Priority Model • Progress to date – Newsletter article • Oct/Nov 2011 – SDAFS Meeting • January 2012 • Basin-wide gar plan – Stocking/restoration – Habitat management – Population monitoring • Conservation targets – Population size – Age class distribution – Harvest – Occupancy
Louisiana Pearlshell Mussel • Can we come up with a similar strategic vision for LPM conservation? – Held a meeting in Vicksburg on 14 December 2010 • Tony Brady, Natchitoches National Fish Hatchery • Steve Shivley, Kistachie National Forest • John Tirpak, Gulf Coastal Plains and Ozarks LCC • Blair Tirpak, The Nature Conservancy – Mississippi • Amy Keister, Lower Mississippi Valley Joint Venture
Objectives for Model • Provide model-based estimates of suitable LPM habitat in Grant and Rapides Parishes • Prioritize “new” areas to search in other parishes • Identify potential areas for stocking mussels – Areas identified as suitable but unoccupied • Serve as a model for other freshwater mussels – Alabama Pearshell Mussel? Others?
Model Considerations • Scope – All parishes along Red River from Texas to Mississippi – Potential range of LPM – Pilot in current range of LPM • Scale – Temporal • Seasonal dynamics of habitat are not important – Spatial • Individual 100 m stream reaches as base unit of analysis • Response variable – Relative habitat quality is sufficient – No need for quantitative occupancy probabilities or strict estimates of individuals
Framing an LPM Conceptual Model • Identifying factors that define LPM habitat – Host fish presence – Perennial stream – Adequate flow – Gravel substrates – Water temperature – Water depth – pH
Towards an Empirical Model • Estimating factors that define LPM habitat – Host fish presence – Perennial stream – Adequate flow – Gravel substrates – Water temperature – Water depth – pH
Towards an Empirical Model • Estimating factors that define LPM habitat – Host fish presence • This is the key factor in mussel occurrence • Currently unknown
Towards an Empirical Model • Estimating factors that define LPM habitat – Host fish presence – Perennial stream • NHDPlus stream network • Perennial stream status
Towards an Empirical Model • Estimating factors that define LPM habitat – Host fish presence – Perennial stream – Adequate flow • Stream order • Gradient (slope) along reach
Recommend
More recommend
