Transcript National Park Service Natural Resource Challenge

National Park Service
Natural Resource Challenge
Revitalize and expand the natural resource program
within the park service and improve park management
through greater reliance on scientific knowledge
National Park Service
Natural Resource Challenge
Revitalize and expand the natural resource program
within the park service and improve park management
through greater reliance on scientific knowledge
State of the Parks Report (circa 2000)
• 80 (1/3) of the “natural resource parks” had no
professional natural resource manager
• Another 84 parks had only 1 or 2 natural resource
professionals.
• Almost all projects/studies were short-term; staff
mostly deals with the “crisis of the day”.
• Few parks are able to identify the ‘desired future
condition’ of resources, or current status & trend.
No Time
No Money
No Clue
NPS Natural Resource Challenge
• Provides funding and new
positions for natural resource
stewardship to add to NPS
visitor services capability
• Learn what is in parks
(inventories), and monitor the
vital signs of natural systems
• Engage the scientific
community and the public,
and facilitate their inquiries
• Share the information widely
NPS Natural Resource Challenge
Revitalize and expand the natural resource program within the NPS &
improve park management through greater reliance on scientific knowledge
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Accelerate Inventories
Design/Implement Vital Signs Monitoring
Collaboration with scientists and others
Improve Resource Planning
Enhance Parks for Science
Assure Fully Professional Staff
Control Non-native Species
Protect Native and Endangered Species
Enhance Environmental Stewardship
Expand Air Quality efforts
Protect and restore Water Resources
Establish Research Learning Centers
Vision Statement of the Board of Directors,
North Coast and Cascades Network
•
The 7 parks will “work collaboratively to
design and implement a Network Monitoring
Program” … that will provide “timely and
relevant, scientifically credible information to
Park managers and the public.”
•
“Through these efforts we will be better able
to understand, and explain to others, the
status and trends in key components and
indicators of Park ecosystems, and how they
have and will respond over time to natural
and human induced changes both from within
and outside of Park boundaries.”
•
“This comprehensive, integrated long-term
ecological monitoring program provides for
better protection, restoration and
maintenance of the natural ecosystems under
NPS management.”
The Law:
NATIONAL PARKS OMNIBUS MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1998
“The Secretary shall undertake a program of inventory and
monitoring of National Park System resources to establish
baseline information and to provide information on the longterm trends in the condition of National Park System
resources. The monitoring program shall be developed in
cooperation with other Federal monitoring and information
collection efforts to ensure a cost-effective approach.”
“The Secretary shall … assure the full and proper
utilization of the results of scientific studies for park
management decisions.
Message from Congress:
“This involves a serious commitment from the leadership of
the National Park Service to insist that the superintendents
carry out a systematic, consistent, professional inventory and
monitoring program, along with other scientific activities, that
is regularly updated to ensure that the Service makes sound
resource decisions based on sound scientific data”.
(FY2000 Appropriations Language)
NPS Advisory Board Report:
“A sophisticated knowledge of resources and their
condition is essential. The Service must gain this
knowledge through extensive collaboration with other
agencies and academia, and its findings must be
communicated to the public. For it is the broader public
that will decide the fate of these resources.”
Source: Rethinking the National Parks for the 21st Century. A
Report of the National Park System Advisory Board, July 2001
The Burning Question
Who will use the monitoring results and
what will they do with them?
Who are the intended audiences and what is the most
effective way to get the information to them?
Issues and Tasks involved in Managing the
Natural Resources of a Park
“Know, Protect, Restore, Connect”
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Inventory, Monitoring, Research studies
Invasive species (e.g., weeds, insect pests,
diseases)
Threatened & endangered species
Restoration
Planning – GMPs,Resource Stewardship Plans
Compliance – NEPA, Permits
Performance management – GPRA goals
Interpretation – connect with visitors
Maintenance (e.g., trails, mowing, vegetation
control)
Law enforcement & visitor safety
Acquire funding to make things happen
Deal with politics & people dynamics – local,
WASO, DOI, OMB
Information is the common currency among
all of these park stewardship activities
•
•
•
Overall Purpose of Vital Signs Monitoring:
Determine status/trends in the condition of park resources:
•Assess the efficacy of management and restoration efforts;
•Provide early warning of impending threats;
•Provide a basis for understanding and identifying meaningful
change in natural systems characterized by complexity, variability,
and surprises – improves decision-making.
The intent of park vital signs monitoring is to track a subset of
physical, chemical, and biological elements and processes of
park ecosystems that are selected to represent the overall health
or condition of park resources, known or hypothesized effects
of stressors, or elements that have important human values.
Goals of Vital Signs Monitoring
• Determine status and trends in selected indicators of the condition
of park ecosystems to allow managers to make better-informed
decisions and to work more effectively with other agencies and
individuals for the benefit of park resources.
• Provide early warning of abnormal conditions of selected resources
to help develop effective mitigation measures and reduce costs of
management.
• Provide data to better understand the dynamic nature and condition
of park ecosystems and to provide reference points for comparisons
with other, altered environments.
• Provide data to meet certain legal and Congressional mandates
related to natural resource protection and visitor enjoyment.
• Provide a means of measuring progress towards performance
goals. (You can’t have performance management without monitoring)
Monitoring Strategy is based on initial
Funding Realities
Funding level (avg. $100,000 per park) would allow
each park to hire one professional position (GS-9 or 11)
plus about $30-40 K operating $$
Conclusions & Resulting Strategy:
• Without integration and cost-sharing, parks could only
monitor a few things; too few to adequately track the
condition of a park’s resources;
• Park buy-in and cost-leveraging through partnerships
are critical; must be relevant to park managers and
flexible to allow integration and partnerships;
• Establish 32 “monitoring networks” that share funding
and staffing among parks to gain efficiencies and
consistency.
Start with a modest program
Vital Signs Monitoring
• Strategic, national program to allow 270+ parks to identify most critical
data needs and initiate long-term monitoring now; start with “bare
bones” program
• Primary audience: park managers, but results will also be used for park
planning, interpretation, and performance management.
• Parks share permanent professional staff and funding to focus on longterm monitoring of condition of selected resources; emphasizes
integration among components (synthesis, modeling) and programs
(air, water, interpretation, fire program, T&E, invasive species, learning
centers)
• Flexibility allows parks to “maximize the use and relevance of the data”
for managing parks and to gain efficiencies through partnerships
• Emphasis on making information more available and usable; integration
with other park operations; building institutional knowledge
Park Management Informed by Scientific Information –
Integration with other Park Operations
Understand,
protect,
restore park
resources
• View monitoring as an
information system
• Integrate natural resource
information with other park
operations
• Make information more
useful and available for
managers at local level
• Make data available to
others for research,
education; modeling, more
sophistical analyses
>33% of resources dedicated to data
management, analysis, reporting
(Adapted from National Water Quality Monitoring Council)
Prairie Cluster Prototype Monitoring Program
A Network Success Story
Uses of Plant Community Monitoring Data
Prairie Cluster Monitoring Program
• GMP planning meetings at Pipestone and Wilson’s Creek
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Cultural landscape report at Wilson’s Creek NB
Trail expansion planning at Effigy Mounds
Prairie restoration seed mix at Scott’s Bluff
Adjust timing of prescribed fires at several parks
Trailside interpretive signs at Pipestone
Vegetation Mapping at Effigy Mounds
“Road show” meetings with managers and interpreters