Exhibit 2h SAMPLE AIM Monitoring Manual Vol.2.pdf

Monitoring Manual for Grassland, Shrubland and Savanna Ecosystems

Vo lu m e

II: by

Jeffrey E. Herrick, Justin W. Van Zee, Kris M. Havstad, Laura M. Burkett and Walter G. Whitford with contributions from

Brandon T. Bestelmeyer, Ericha M. Courtright, Alicia Melgoza C., Mike Pellant, David A. Pyke, Marta D. Remmenga, Patrick L. Shaver, Amrita G. de Soyza, Arlene J. Tugel and Robert S. Unnasch

D es ig n, s up pl em en ta ry m et ho ds a nd in te rp re ta tio n

Reprinted 2009

Monitoring Manual for Grassland, Shrubland and Savanna Ecosystems Volume II: Design, supplementary methods and interpretation by Jeffrey E. Herrick, Justin W. Van Zee, Kris M. Havstad, Laura M. Burkett and Walter G. Whitford with contributions from Brandon T. Bestelmeyer, Ericha M. Courtright, Alicia Melgoza C., Mike Pellant, David A. Pyke, Marta D. Remmenga, Patrick L. Shaver, Amrita G. de Soyza, Arlene J. Tugel and Robert S. Unnasch

USDA - ARS Jornada Experimental Range Las Cruces, New Mexico ii

Printed 2009

Publisher:

USDA-ARS Jornada Experimental Range

P.O. Box 30003, MSC 3JER, NMSU Las Cruces, New Mexico 88003-8003 http://usda-ars.nmsu.edu

ISBN 0-9755552-0-0

Distributed by:

The University of Arizona Press

Tucson, Arizona, USA 800-426-3797 www.uapress.arizona.edu

Cover:

RB Design & Printing

Las Cruces, New Mexico 88001

Cover illustration:

Collecting Line-point intercept data in a south-central New Mexico desert grassland.

iii

Table of contents Introduction

Section I: Monitoring program development in six easy steps Chapter 1 Step 1: Define management and monitoring objectives Chapter 2 Step 2: Stratify land into monitoring units Chapter 3 Step 3: Assess current status Chapter 4 Step 4: Select indicators and number of measurements Chapter 5 Step 5: Select monitoring plot locations Chapter 6 Step 6: Establish monitoring plots

Section II: Supplementary methods Chapter 7 Compaction test Chapter 8 Single-ring infiltrometer Chapter 9 Plant production Chapter 10 Plant species richness Chapter 11 Vegetation structure Chapter 12 Tree density Chapter 13 Riparian channel vegetation survey Chapter 14 Riparian channel and gully profile Chapter 15 Density, frequency and Line-point intercept alternative methods

Section III: Indicator calculation and interpretation Chapter 16 Calculate indicators Chapter 17 Interpret results

Section IV: Special Topics Chapter 18 Riparian Chapter 19 Livestock production Chapter 20 Wildlife habitat Chapter 21 Off-road vehicle use and other recreational land uses Chapter 22 Fire Chapter 23 Invasive species Chapter 24 State and transition models: an introduction Chapter 25 Remote sensing Chapter 26 Soil carbon

Appendices Appendix A Monitoring tools Appendix B Conversion factors Appendix C How many measurements?

Appendix D Soil Quality Information Sheets Appendix E Soil texture chart iv

Glossary References and Additional Resources Authors and Contributors

Data forms Monitoring Program Design Checklist Monitoring Program Design Form I Monitoring Program Design Form II Monitoring Plot Description Form ....................................................................... 35-36 Soil Compaction – Impact Penetrometer Data Form Infiltration Data Form Plant Production Data Form Plant Species Richness Data Form Vegetation Structure Data Form Tree Density and Size Data Form Riparian Channel Vegetation Survey Data Form Riparian Channel Profile Data Form Line-point Intercept with Height Data Form

T he Monitoring Manual for Grassland, Shrubland and Savanna Ecosystems is divided into two volumes: Quick Start (Vol. I) and

Volume II. This two-volume document is intended to assist a wide range of users, including technicians (data collectors), field crew leaders, ranchers and landowners, land managers, rangeland professionals, and researchers.

Quick Start (Vol. I) includes basic methods and instructions for establishing photo points and completing four basic measurements. Volume II provides more detailed guidance on monitoring program design, data analysis and interpretation.

It also includes a number of supplementary methods.

Section I describes how to design a monitoring program in six steps.

Section II includes eight supplementary monitoring methods and alternatives to the Line-point intercept method.

Section III describes how to organize, analyze and interpret monitoring data.

Section IV provides specific recommendations for designing monitoring programs to address the following issues:

- Riparian

- Livestock production

- Wildlife habitat

- Off-road vehicle use and other recreational land uses

- Fire

- Invasive species

- State and transition models

- Remote sensing

- Soil carbon

Section IV also explains how state and transition models can help you design monitoring programs that are more sensitive to significant changes, including thresholds. It also describes how to improve monitoring, using remote sensing.

Finally, it discusses the relationship between soil carbon and monitoring.

Do I have to read the whole thing?

No. Begin by completing the checklist on the first page of Quick Start (Vol. I). This will help identify the chapters that are relevant to you. In many cases, you will not need to read Volume II at all.

However, we do recommend that you familiarize yourself with Section I (to improve the quality of the monitoring program design) and Section III (to help with interpretation) of this volume.

Are these manuals all I need?

Possibly. Depending on your background, experience and monitoring objectives, Volumes I and II may provide enough guidance to design and implement a monitoring program. However, we strongly recommend consulting with other information sources and local experts to design a monitoring program that best suits your needs. A number of excellent references are included in the “References and Additional Resources” section at the end of this volume.

Electronic data forms Additional information and electronic data forms can be downloaded from the following website:

http://usda-ars.nmsu.edu. We are committed to continuously improving this document and will periodically provide online updates.

Monitoring for management Monitoring is part of a broader process in which we use data to test and refine management decisions. Monitoring data allow the collective knowledge of scientists and land managers to be applied to improve resource management.

Monitoring is designed to support a diverse set of goals required by various societal interests (the upper triangle in Fig. Intro.1). The monitoring procedures described in this manual provide data on three key attributes of landscape and ecosystem sustainability: soil and site stability, hydrologic function and biotic integrity. These data provide the foundation for assessing and evaluating the degree to which societal goals and/or values are being met by current landscape management.

They also provide the basis for management options that meet specific goals (Fig. Intro.1).

Introduction to Volume II

Adaptive management: management by hypothesis or prediction. Every time we change management or decide to continue with the same management, we are making a prediction.

Sometimes these predictions are explicit.

Predictions are more likely to be explicit when management requires a significant financial investment (e.g., fencing) or is believed to increase risk (e.g., fire). Frequently the predictions are implicit, because most management decisions are assumed to lead to improvements in the status of the land, the quantity and quality of goods and services provided by the land, or both.

These predictions are identical to scientific hypotheses, and monitoring data allow us to explicitly test our prediction(s). While we may not be able to collect as much data as a researcher would, the data are likely to be more useful for adjusting management because they reflect the unique characteristics of the land we are managing. For example, we may decide to maintain a stocking strategy because we suspect that it does no harm to grass and soils. Our hypothesis, then, is that basal cover and soil stability will not deteriorate. We can test this hypothesis using monitoring data.

In order to accurately test our predictions, we need to carefully select both the types of indicators and the monitoring locations. To do so, we also must take into account the effects of other influences on rangelands, such as climate and soil variations. An informed selection of monitoring sites and sufficient replication are essential to producing useful data.

Additional tools Three types of tools are extremely helpful in designing monitoring programs, interpreting the results and applying them to management.

Ecological sites are used to stratify landscapes into similar units so that we can extrapolate our results.

State and transition models are used to help evaluate the current status of an area relative to its potential, to identify areas that are at risk of crossing a relatively irreversible threshold, and to understand the factors that may contribute to the degradation or recovery of an area. Qualitative indicators are used together with state and transition models to evaluate current status and identify critical processes.

Landscapes and ecological sites. The landscapes that we manage are often highly variable. This is because managed areas encompass differences in geology, topography, soils and climate at several spatial scales. Site characteristics that define the potential of part of the landscape to support different types and amounts of vegetation, and therefore its potential response to management, are used to stratify the area to be monitored into monitoring units. Site characteristics in many parts of the United States are described in Ecological Site Descriptions (available from National Resource Conservation Service, NRCS) (Ch. 2). Ecological sites (landscape units) occur together as a mosaic in landscapes. The units can be further stratified, based on current status (Ch. 3) and management.

State and transition models. In many countries, conceptual models of how vegetation and soils change due to different kinds of drivers (such as drought or grazing) are being developed for each ecological site or similar landscape unit. These state and transition models describe changes in community composition that are easy to reverse, as well as those that are not (i.e., transitions to new states) (Ch. 24). State and transition models can help to indicate the potential risk of difficult-to-reverse transitions and the potential effectiveness of different management options.

Foundation Soil & Site Stability

Hydrologic Function

Biotic Integrity

• Air quality

• Recreation

• Wildlife habitat

• Minerals, oil & gas

• Livestock production

• Military testing & training

• Aesthetic, open space & wilderness values

• Invasive, threatened & endangered species

Figure Intro.1. Monitoring the three key attributes (primary monitoring objective) serves as the foundation for sustaining the potential to support diverse management objectives.

Within a given ecological site, use vegetation and soil surface properties to identify the ecological state in the state and transition model. Identifying the ecological state helps define both future degradation risks and recovery options. Projections in each model are based on the collective observations of experienced managers, research data, monitoring data and simulation models.

Qualitative indicators. Qualitative indicators (Ch. 3) are important tools for matching patterns observed on the ground to those described in the state and transition models. Properties and processes that cannot be easily measured quantitatively can often be evaluated qualitatively.

This is particularly true for patterns occurring at coarser scales, such as assessing the spatial extent of runoff and run-on areas, and the relationship of these areas to soils and current vegetation. Other examples of qualitative indicators include platy structure and horizontal root growth as indicators of compaction in soils that do not normally exhibit platy structure, and pedestalling of rocks and plants as soil erosion indicators.

It is important to recognize that snapshot observations do not provide absolute certainty about how rangelands may change in the future.

By their nature, qualitative indicators can help direct your attention to several ecological processes across a broad area (with or without monitoring). They are thus well suited for snapshot inventories that indicate problems, potential causes and potential management remedies.

Making it work In the long term, the data collected and interpreted on each type of monitoring unit or ecological site can help to refine ecological models and how rangelands are managed. But it is of limited value to learn only that a particular management strategy resulted in persistent loss of grass or soil. Both short-term and long-term monitoring data should be used, together with qualitative observations, to evaluate hypotheses frequently—especially as environmental conditions (such as rainfall) vary. If it begins to look like a management strategy does not conform to expectations, the strategy can be adjusted.

Successful feedback between monitoring and management helps make land use more sustainable.

Section I: Monitoring program development in six easy steps

T his section describes how to design and implement a long-term ecosystem-based monitoring program at the landscape level

(an area > 400 ha or 1000 acres; Fig. 0.1). It is based on the assumption that one of the primary objectives of the monitoring program will be to detect long-term changes in the status of three basic attributes of grassland, shrubland and savanna ecosystems: soil and site stability, hydrologic function and biotic integrity (Fig. Intro.1).

The six steps Each of the first six steps illustrated in the flow chart (Fig. 0.2) and listed in the Monitoring Program Design Checklist (found at the end of this Introduction to Section I) is described in its own chapter (Chs. 1-6). The steps are listed in the order they are normally completed. Because there is no “single” way to design a monitoring program, revisiting earlier steps is often helpful. For example, the assessments completed in Step 3 often reveal issues that lead to new management and monitoring objectives (Step 1). State and transition models can be helpful here by focusing attention on areas that are at risk, or have a high potential for recovery. It is also helpful to redefine management and monitoring objectives (Step 1) for specific monitoring units identified in Step 2.

Use the Monitoring Program Design Forms I (Ch. 1) and II (Ch. 4) to organize information about your monitoring program.

Use the Monitoring Program

Design Checklist to ensure that you have completed each step. The system allows maximum flexibility to address objectives and long-term changes, including monitoring for adaptive management, additional objectives, short-term monitoring, and monitoring threats and drivers.

Figure 0.1. Landscape-scale monitoring programs should be responsive to the most important drivers, and sensitive to interactions among landscape units.

by Rob Wu

Figure 0.2. Monitoring program design and implementation (Steps 1-6) and integration with management (Steps 7-10).

Monitoring for adaptive management and management by hypothesis In addition to long-term monitoring data, adaptive management requires three types of information:

short-term monitoring data, knowledge of potential threats or drivers, and clearly defined hypotheses (predictions) of management effects (Steps 1, 3 and 7 of the checklist). State and transition models (Ch.

24) can be used to integrate assessment and monitoring data with current knowledge about potential management effects (based on management experience, scientific studies and simulation models) to generate these predictions.

Monitoring for additional objectives Monitoring for the three basic attributes can serve as the foundation for use-specific monitoring, as illustrated in Figure Intro.1.

The basic measurements (described in Quick Start) were selected in part because they also can be used to generate indicators related to specific uses. For example, the Line-point intercept generates vegetation cover and composition indicators that are related to the quantity and quality of forage production. These indicators, together with spatial structure indicators from the Gap intercept method, can be used to assess and monitor wildlife habitat quality, as well as plant community changes in response to fire.

The value of the basic measurements can often be increased at a relatively low cost through slight modifications (see Section IV). For example, vertical vegetation structure can be measured by adding plant height measurements to the Line-point intercept protocol (Ch. 15), or by adding the Vegetation structure method (Ch. 11). In some cases, such as riparian monitoring, supplementary measurements (Section II) may be required.

Section IV also provides recommendations for addressing specific monitoring objectives.

Short-term monitoring (Annual Use Records) Short-term monitoring data (listed at the end of Quick Start) are used to make short-term management changes (Steps 7 and 8). For example, information on residual cover or biomass is often used to decide when to move livestock to a new pasture. This information is also used to interpret long-term monitoring data.

Monitoring threats and drivers Information on potential threats and drivers, such as development of new roads or a change in fire frequency, is used to help identify areas where a change in management and/or monitoring will be required. Threats and drivers are identified in Step 3.

What if I don’t have enough time?

Nearly any monitoring is better than no monitoring.

Using management and monitoring objectives to guide monitoring program design can reduce monitoring costs. A few days of careful planning often can reduce monitoring costs by 50 percent or more and result in much more useful data.

• Use photo points where few changes are expected (see description of state and transition models in Ch. 24) or where you require only a qualitative record.

• Select measurements that are sensitive to changes defined in the management and monitoring objectives.

• Select measurements that generate indicators that are relevant to multiple objectives. The measurements included in Quick Start were selected in part because they are sensitive to changes in the three key attributes, while generating numerous indicators that are relevant to many other objectives.

• Match monitoring frequency to expected rates of change based on minimum detectable change. If the smallest change in basal cover you can detect is five percent (Ch. 4) and it takes at least five years for this change to occur, it’s a waste of time to repeat measurements more frequently.

Using State and Transition Models for Monitoring Design State and transition (S&T) models (Chapter 24) are conceptual models that describe the soil and vegetation dynamics for a particular type of land with similar soils and climate. Applying S&T models to monitoring program design helps a) define ecological potential, benchmarks, or reference conditions and b) specify predictions about the possible future change of different land units in a landscape. This approach allows monitoring site selection to be based on objectives and the ecological processes involved in land change. Designing a monitoring program within a state and transition model framework helps specify the ecosystem attributes to be monitored and other details that may vary among states and ecological sites.

Applying S&T conceptual models to monitor-ing site selection minimizes monitoring expendi-tures in highly degraded states where all available evidence suggests they will not change; and focuses monitoring efforts in ‘at risk’ states and plant communities where management has the potential to limit degradation or promote recovery. With this logic in place, monitoring can be treated as a series of tests matched to specific parts of a landscape.

Key components of this test are the steps used to apply S&T models to a monitoring program design.

Steps for S&T Monitoring Design First, stratify the landscape (Chapter 2) into eco-logical sites or potential-based land classes. This is done using soil surveys, landform maps, digital elevation models and knowledge of key soil gradi-ents. Next, stratify each ecological site into states based on S&T models using aerial photography, remote sensing and/or field surveys. Finally, select monitoring methods that detect changes in focal patterns and processes within each specific ecologi-cal site and state.

Monitoring Program Design Checklist Step* Task Completed?

Develop monitoring program 1 Define management and monitoring objectives

Define management objectives ..................................................................................... ________________ Define monitoring objectives .......................................................................................... ________________

2 Stratify land into monitoring units (areas with similar characteristics) Assemble background information (maps, photos, management history) .................... ________________ Define stratification criteria (e.g., soils, vegetation, management units) ....................... ________________ Complete stratification and list monitoring units on Monitoring Program

Design Forms I and II (Chs. 1 & 4). ........................................................................ ________________ 3 For each monitoring unit, assess current status; identify threats and drivers; refine long-term management and monitoring objectives; and develop/modify management strategy Select assessment system (e.g., Pellant et al. 2005) .................................................... ________________ Verify that personnel have relevant qualifications ......................................................... ________________ Complete assessments .................................................................................................. ________________ Identify and record threats, drivers and opportunities ................................................... ________________ Refine long-term management and monitoring objectives ............................................ ________________ Develop/modify management strategy .......................................................................... ________________

4 Select monitoring indicators, number of monitoring plots, number of measurements, and measurement frequency based on objectives and resource availability

Select monitoring indicators ........................................................................................... ________________ Define number of monitoring plots ................................................................................. ________________ Define measurement frequency ..................................................................................... ________________ Estimate time requirements ........................................................................................... ________________

5 Select monitoring plot locations Choose and apply site selection approach .................................................................... ________________ Select “rejection criteria” and use to eliminate unsuitable locations .............................. ________________

6 Establish and describe monitoring plots, and record long-term monitoring data (baseline) Establish and permanently mark monitoring plots ......................................................... ________________ Describe monitoring plots and record GPS locations, including coordinate system, datum and zone......................................................................................... ________________ Record long-term data ................................................................................................... ________________ Error-check and copy data and keep copies in different locations ................................ ________________

Short-term monitoring (all years) 7 Record short-term monitoring data (at least 1x/year) (Quick Start) ..................................... ________________

8 Adjust management, if necessary (Quick Start) ..................................................................... ________________

Repeat long-term monitoring (every 1-5 years) 9 Repeat long-term monitoring measurements (Ch. 6), compare data with Year 1 and interpret changes (Ch. 17) Repeat long-term monitoring measurements ................................................................ ________________ Copy data and keep copies in different buildings .......................................................... ________________ Calculate indicators ........................................................................................................ ________________ Compare with Year 1 (or previous years) ...................................................................... ________________ Interpret changes using short-term monitoring data and Section III .............................. ________________

10 Refine management strategy, if necessary ............................................................................. ________________

*Steps 1-6 correspond to Chapters 1-6, except where noted.

Why monitor?

Monitoring data are used to:

• evaluate the effects of past management;

• confirm effective management practices;

• identify trends that can be used to predict future changes so management can be adapted accordingly;

• learn more about how different factors (drought, fire, management) affect the land.

The most useful monitoring programs help managers achieve long-term management objectives by generating relevant data.

Consequently, it is essential to clearly define both management and monitoring objectives before designing a monitoring program.

Use the Monitoring Program Design Form I (end of Ch. 1) to record your objectives as you develop them. You may find it easier to complete the stratification process (Ch. 2) before defining specific short- and long-term objectives.

Step 1.1. Define management objectives

(a) List the general long-term management objective(s) for the area to be monitored on the first line in Monitoring Program Design Form I.

What do you want the land to look like? What goods and services do you want it to be able to provide now and 100 years from now?

(b) List specific long-term management objectives for each monitoring unit or type of land in the fifth column of the Monitoring Program Design Form I (see Ch. 2 for a discussion of monitoring units). The long-term monitoring program will be designed to measure progress towards meeting these objectives. For example, Chapter 1

Step 1: Define management and monitoring objectives Checklist

1.1. Define management objectives ................................................................... ___________

1.2. Define monitoring objectives ...................................................................... ___________ the specific objectives may include maintaining or increasing the production of particular products (e.g., forage for livestock) or services (e.g., filtering water before it reaches streams). State and transition models (Ch. 24) can be used to help define what types of changes are possible in different areas.

(c) List short-term management objectives that are necessary to achieve each of the long-term objectives for each type of monitoring unit in the same (fifth) column of the Monitoring Program Design Form I. Use of short-term monitoring indicators helps ensure the short-term objectives are being met, and helps interpret long-term monitoring data.

Examples of management objectives are listed in Table 1.1.

Step 1.2. Define monitoring objectives Monitoring objectives follow directly from the management objectives. Additional monitoring objectives may result from plot assessments (Ch. 3).

Where possible, the monitoring objectives should be quantitative. Use Appendix C to help decide if monitoring objectives are realistic.

(a) List the general long-term monitoring objectives for the area to be monitored in the second row of the Monitoring Program Design Form I. These should be based on the general long-term management objectives. There are three general types of monitoring objectives: (i) change in average status, (ii) change in the status of areas with a high degradation risk, and

(iii) change in the status of areas that have a high recovery potential. Monitoring programs lareneG :tnemeganaM dnaleziminiM.snoitpoesudnalforebmunehtdnaytivitcudorpdnalesaercnironiatniaM

.ksirnoitadarged :gnirotinoM otredronilaitnetopyrevocerro/dnaksirnoitadargedhgihahtiwsaeranognirotinomsucoF

.elbissopsanoitamrofnitnaveler-tnemeganamhcumsaedivorp foepyT tinugnirotinom sevitcejbomret-gnoL sevitcejbomret-trohS ylhgih,peetS -htuoselbidore sepolsgnicaf

:tnemeganaM .noisorelioseziminiM)1(

.efildliwrofytisrevidtatibahesaercnI)2( :gnirotinoM yllaicepse,revocdnuorgnisegnahctceteD tceteD.revocrailofburhsdnalasabssarg gnidulcni,seicepsevisavnifoecneserpeht

.ssargtaehc

:tnemeganaM tneiciffusniatniamotgnizarglortnoC)1(

.noisoreeziminimdnarevocdnuorg ssarglainnerepetomorpotgnizargemiT)2( elihwtnemhsilbatsednanoitcudorper rofrevochsurbegastneiciffusgniniatniam

.tatibahefildliw :gnirotinoM dnagnirudrevocdnuorgnisegnahctceteD ehtdroceR.doirepgnizargehtfodneehtta gnizarghcaefoetaddnednagninnigeb .doirep nairapiR :tnemeganaM .revoceertesaercnI)1(

.ytilibatsknabesaercnI)2( :gnirotinoM gnolarevoceertni%01>fosegnahctceteD .aeranairapirehttuohguorhtdnamaertseht forevocehtni%5>fosegnahctceteD .maertsehtgnolaseicepsgnizilibats-knab

:tnemeganaM litnuseertfoesunosaes-gniworgtimiL)1(

.enilesworbnahtrellaterayeht sseccalanoitaercerdnakcotseviltimiL)2( noitcapmoc/noisoreotsgnissorcdna .levargekil,setartsbustnatsiser

-knabfohtworgetomorpotgnizargemiT)3( .seicepsgnizilibats

:gnirotinoM dnaetadnoitelpmoctnemucoD noitubirtsidlaminawenfossenevitceffe denedrah,gnicnef,.g.e(serutcurtslortnoc yltcerid,elbissoperehW.)sgnissorc htiw,.g.e(noitubirtsidkcotseviltnemucod dnagninnigebehtdroceR.)stnuoctapgnud .doirepgnizarghcaefodne

Table 1.1. Examples of management and monitoring objectives for a mid-elevation ranch in an area dominated by sagebrush and perennial bunchgrasses. Similar objectives can be generated for areas in which recreation, mining and/or biodiversity conservation are the primary land uses.

Objectives designed to primarily address the first objective are usually the least cost-effective because a lot of effort is devoted to monitoring areas with a low probability of change.

Selecting one or both of objective types (ii) and (iii) allows resources to be focused on areas where management is most likely to have an effect. See Chapter 5 for more information on site selection.

(b) List the specific long-term monitoring objectives for each type of monitoring unit in the sixth column of the Monitoring Program Design Form I. The potential for degradation and recovery varies both within and among monitoring units. State and transition models (Ch. 24) can be used to help select appropriate monitoring objectives for each type of monitoring unit.

Objectives

(c) List the short-term monitoring objectives necessary to ensure the management plan is being followed and to document management changes. Record objectives in the same sixth column of Monitoring Program Design Form I.

Figure 1.1. Tallgrass prairie functioning at its highest potential, Kansas, USA. Arrow reflects lack of significant change over time. Long-term management objective(s): Maintain biodiversity and productivity. Long-term monitoring objective(s): Detect changes in plant cover and production by plant functional group; detect changes in plant species richness.

Figure 1.2. Overgrazed rangeland on left side of fence (b), and appropriately grazed rangeland on right side of fence (c), and conversion to rain fed agriculture (a), Zacatecas, Mexico. Arrows reflect desirable and undesirable changes from a long-term ecological sustainability perspective. Long-term management objectives: (1) Increase grass cover for livestock forage production. (2) Avoid cultivation, which leads to a relatively irreversible threshold due to increased soil degradation and erosion. Long-term monitoring objectives: (1) Detect changes in plant cover and production by plant functional group and vegetation spatial distribution. (2) Collect sufficient data to detect 5% change in bare ground.

X a b c

Examples of monitoring objectives are listed in Table 1.1. Figures 1.1 and 1.2 show two additional examples, where arrows indicate desirable changes.

I mr o F n gise

D mar g or

P g nir oti n o

M

.tinufo epyt hcae rof sevitcejbo gnirotino m dnatne megana m dna stinu gnirotino mfo sepyttnereffidtsiL mrof sihtfo kcab eht no seton droce R

:)s(evitcej b o t ne me ga na mlare ne

G

:)s(evitcej b o g nir oti n o mlare ne

G g nir oti n o M

*e ma

N ti n U

)2.

h

C(

/li o

S e pacs d nal n oitis o p

)2.

h

C( t na ni m o D n oitate gev )2.

h C( t nerr u C s utats

)3.

h

C(

)1.

h

C( sevitcej b o t ne me ga na M mret-g n o

L mret-tr o h S

)1.

h

C( sevitcej b o g nir oti n o M mret-g n o

L mret-tr o h S aeralat o

T f o sti n ulla(

)e ma n si ht level g nir oti n o

M )4.

h C(

)4.h

C(II

mro F ngise D margor P gnirotino Mfo n muloctsrif eht ot eseht ypo

C* .n wonkfi,tnelaviuqe ro etislacigoloce r

O**

Chapter 2

Step 2: Stratify land into monitoring units Checklist

2.1. Assemble background information (maps, photos, management history) ___________

2.2. Define stratification criteria (e.g., soils, vegetation, management units) .. ___________

2.3. Complete Stratification ............................................................................... ___________

2.4. Complete Monitoring Program Design Forms I (Ch. 1) and II (Ch. 4) ...... ___________

T his chapter describes how to stratify the area into monitoring units and decide which units to monitor. Data from individual monitoring plots can be more reliably extrapolated to represent larger areas if the area of interest is stratified.

Because rangelands are among the most diverse ecosystems in the world, it is impossible to design a monitoring system that perfectly reflects changes in all landscape units. However, the accuracy and precision of any monitoring system can be improved by carefully dividing the area into relatively uniform monitoring units.

Monitoring units are areas located in a particular part of the landscape (e.g., flood basin or hill summit), within which vegetation, soil type, management and current status are relatively similar. All sections within a given monitoring unit are expected to respond similarly to changes in management and to catastrophic disturbances, such as a combination of drought and fire.

Monitoring units may range in size from less than an acre to several square miles or more.

Multiple monitoring units of the same type (e.g., hill backslope in Fig. 2.1) often repeat across the landscape, geographically separated from one another by other monitoring units. Figure 2.1 shows how a landscape unit (floodplain) was divided into two types of monitoring units based on management (grazed vs. ungrazed).

Not all monitoring units will necessarily be monitored (Fig. 2.1). For example, highly stable types of monitoring units (such as bedrock) might not be included in a monitoring program if the primary objective is to monitor for degradation risk or recovery (see Ch. 1). Use Monitoring Program Design Forms I (Ch. 1) and II (Ch. 4) to keep track of potential monitoring units.

Figure 2.1. Example of how monitoring units are defined using landscape, soil, vegetation and management criteria. In this example, three monitoring plots, shown here as three sets of three transects (spokes), were located in the summer-grazed floodplain monitoring unit, which has a high potential for both degradation and recovery. No monitoring plots were located on monitoring units on the adjacent slopes because they did not meet the selection criteria, which included livestock use.

Stratification: How to do it Landscape stratification is a three-step process:

2.1 Collect background information, maps and

photographs.

2.2 Define stratification criteria.

2.3 Divide the area into monitoring units:

(a) divide the area into soil-landscape units;

(b) subdivide the soil-landscape units into soil-landscape-vegetation units (if necessary);

(c) subdivide the soil-landscape-vegetation units into monitoring units based on type of management.

Record each type of monitoring unit from 2.3 in Monitoring Program Design Forms I and II.

Step 2.1. Collect background information The following resources are helpful in stratifying the landscape into monitoring units and selecting the units to monitor. See Table 2.1 for sources of background information (regularly check http:// usda-ars.nmsu.edu for the most up-to-date list). In some instances, there is a fee for these resources, but many of them can be downloaded free from the Internet. New sources are constantly becoming available.

Aerial photographs. One of the easiest ways to organize information is on a map or recent aerial photograph of the area, or through a Geographic Information System (GIS). Ideally, use one or more aerial photographs with fences and roads marked on them.

If you want to be able to locate yourself on the aerial photo using GIS and a GPS (Global Positioning System) unit, you will need a digital image that has been modified so that the distances on the photo correspond directly to distances on the ground (orthorectified). The most widely available photographs of this type are the USGS Digitial Orthophoto Quarter Quadrangles, or DOQQs. Each of these images covers one quarter of a 7.5 minute USGS topographic map.

Satellite imagery. High resolution satellite imagery can be used for stratification. See Chapter 25 for more information on the use of remote sensing in monitoring.

Written and oral histories. Information on historic changes can help predict which parts of the landscape are most likely to change in the future. Sources of information on historic changes include old monitoring records (often stored in the local Bureau of Land Management [BLM] or United States Forest Service [USFS] offices), old aerial photographs and survey records. Interviews with current and previous land managers are among the most valuable sources of information.

Property maps. Conservation plan maps (available from NRCS offices) locating current and historic homesteads, fence lines, corrals, roads, watering holes, supplemental feeding locations, and areas seeded, herbicided or where vegetation was removed are valuable when stratifying the landscape into monitoring units. All of these have the potential to affect the way land will respond to future management.

Species lists. Lists of plant species commonly found in the area are helpful. Vegetation measurements are usually recorded to the species level. At a minimum, lists of potential invasives and exotics should be acquired for all monitoring programs.

Ecological Sites and Site Descriptions (ESDs).

Each ecological site includes several similar soils.

Each ESD includes partial species lists and basic soils information and state and transition models that can be used to help plan and interpret monitoring (see end of Introduction).

Soil maps. Soil maps are commonly available in the form of county soil surveys. Soil maps are often drawn on aerial photos. In addition to maps, soil surveys have a wealth of information on soil properties and the suitability of soils for different uses. GIS layers of soil surveys can be obtained for most counties from the local NRCS office.

Soil maps of pastures and rangelands rarely include map units named with a single soil series due to the complexity of most rangeland landscapes (a soil series is like a plant species).

Instead, individual areas are mapped as “complexes” or “associations” of two or more soil map unit components. Soil map unit components are phases of soil series. Phases of soil series are usually identified based on features important for management, such as slope, soil surface texture, surface rockiness and salinity. A soil map unit component is like a plant subspecies. The soil survey (or a professional soil scientist) can help you decide if the components in a particular map unit are sufficiently similar to be treated uniformly for monitoring purposes.

Soil series are distinguished based on soil profile characteristics. These characteristics are usually, but not always, directly related to soil function. Soil series allow us to access reference information included in Ecological Site Descriptions and other databases.

Land stratification

.1.2elbaT ,91rebmetpeSfosadilaveraesehT.egnahcnetfoskniltenretnI.secruosernoitacifitartsepacsdnaL .8002 secruoseR secruoS

*sotohplaireA taSGSU rerolpxEhtraE/vog.sgsu.rc.71snscde//:ptth tasotohpSGSUgnillesseinapmoC lmth.enilnoweiv/oig/vog.pamlanoitan//:ptth slis/vog.sgsu.ksa//:ptth _ lmth.xedni , lmth.secruos/vog.sgsu.ksa//:ptth llacro, yhpargotohPlaireAlanoitaNehtmorfdeniatboebnac6991nahtrewensegamI.SGSU-KSA-888-1 rerolpxEhtraEnoelbahcraeseradna,)PAHN(yhpargotohPedutitlAhgiHlanoitaNdna)PPAN(margorP ta rerolpxEhtraE/vog.sgsu.rc.71snscde//:ptth

)108(ro,0202-91148,TU,ytiCekaLtlaS,htuoS0032tseW2222,OFPAASFADSU,hcnarBselaSADSU ro,0092-448 gnidnal=cipot&gnidnal=tcejbus&emohofpa=aera?ppaofpa/ASF/vog.adsu.asf.www:ptth latigiD:sotohplaireA retrauQotohpohtrO

*)QQOD(elgnardauQ ehtllatignivig,deifitceroegdna)retupmocaotnidennacs(dezitigidneebsahtahthpargotohplaireanA .sepacsdnalyfitartsotygolonhcetSIGgnisunehwlufpleherasQQOD.pamafoseitreporp tasrentrapssenisubstiroSGSU lmth.xedni/vog.sgsu.sore//:ptth taSCRNADSU lmth.xedni/stesatad/stcudorp/vog.adsu.scrn.cgcn.www//:ptth spamcihpargopoT spamcihpargopotSGSUetunim5.7 vog.sgsu.spamopot//:ptth tasrentrapssenisubstiroSGSUmorfDCroypocdrahaivdesahcrupebnacspamcihpargopotrehtO

//:ptth lmth.xedni/vog.sgsu.sore cihparGretsaRlatigiD

)GRD(

,deifitceroegdna)retupmocaotnidennacs(dezitigidneebsahtahtpamcihpargopotSGSUdennacsA .snoitacilppaSIGrofydaer

:tasrentrapssenisubstiroSGSU grd/vog.sgsu.spamopot//:ptth syevruslioS *spamdna

ADSU,erutlucirgAfotnemtrapeD,tnemnrevoGsetatSdetinUrednukool(eciffoSCRNlacolehttisiV SCRNehtkcehcro,)koobenohpehtfosegapeulbehtniecivreSnoitavresnoCsecruoseRlarutaN

(etisbew yevrus/vog.adsu.slios//:ptth .tseretnifoytnuocehtrofyevrusliosafoypocaniatboot) .saeratsomrofelbaliavasi)000,052:1(egarevocpam)esabataDcihpargoeGlioSetatS(OGSTATS lacolhguorhtelbaliavaeraseipocdraH.dezitigidgniebfossecorpehtnieraspam)000,42:1(OGRUSS .seciffoSCRN seciffoemoS.tseretnifoaeraehtrofyevruSmetsysocElairtserreTaniatbooteciffoSFSUlacolehttisiV .mroflatigidnielbaliavaatadsihtevahyam yrotnevnInoitategeV *ataD noitategevdetcelloc-dleiffospameraesehT.spam)MIVS(dohteMyrotnevnInoitategeVlioS:dnalMLB .mrofSIGnielbaliavaatadsihtevahyamseciffoemoS.atadyrotnevni

:tadnuoferaatadyrotnevnIecruoseRlarutaNdnaspamsutatsSCRN:dnaletavirP secruoseratad/lacinhcet/vog.adsu.scrn.www spamlareneG

• dnaLfouaeruB,roiretnIfo.tpeD,tnemnrevoGsetatSdetinUrednukool(spamsutatsdnalMLB

.)koobenohpehtnisegapeulbehtnitnemeganaM stsilseicepS

.)sdrocergnirotinomdloyllaicepse(seciffoSCRNdnaMLB,SFSU :stnalpfostsilSCRN secruoseratad/lacinhcet/vog.adsu.scrn.www

.woleb)SCRN(snoitpircseDetiSlacigolocEeeS (tayteicoStnalPevitaNehtforetpahclacolruoypukooL gro.spnan.www )

(esabatadlanoitanSTNALP vog.adsu.stnalp//:ptth )

)egnaR(lacigolocE *snoitpircseDetiS otogro,ediuGlacinhceTeciffOdleiFehtnidetsilsasnoitpircsedrofksa(eciffoSCRNlacoL vog.adsu.voge.cs.sise//:ptth )

.bewehtnoebteytonyamsnoitpircseddesiveremoS spaMcigoloeG • taspaMcigoloeGSGSU vog.sgsu.bdmgn//:ptth stsiLseicepSevisavnI • SCRN revirDsuoixon/avaj/vog.adsu.stnalp//:ptth

.SCRNdnatcirtsidnoitavresnoclacolehthguorhtdepolevednalPnoitavresnoCnworiehtotreferoslanacsrenwodnaL*

Step 2.2. Define stratification criteria There is virtually an infinite number of strategies for stratifying the landscape into functionally similar monitoring units. Three criteria useful for a wide variety of ecosystems are: soil-landscape, current vegetation and management.

Soil-landscape criteria include topography, landscape position and soils. These criteria determine the potential of the unit to support different plant communities. Incorporating soil-landscape criteria is a very important step, especially in areas where the same plant community currently dominates much of the land. In these areas, knowledge of the underlying soils can help identify locations where there is a high recovery potential.

In most systems, historic differences in management and disturbance have generated variability in current vegetation within soil-landscape units. Historic management and disturbance can be used as stratification criteria, as can current and planned future management.

While stratification may sound complex, in reality it is relatively simple.

Step 2.3. Complete stratification:

divide the area into monitoring units This step is often broken into separate parts, based on the number of stratification criteria. In the following example, three criteria were used.

Remember that a single type of monitoring unit may include many individual units scattered across a landscape.

Step 2.3(a) Divide the area into soil-landscape units (NRCS ecological sites or functionally similar units such as the unit used in the USFS Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey). Landscape units are areas that are relatively homogeneous with respect to slope, aspect and parent material (material from which the soil was formed). As a result, they generally have similar soil series, or similar soil components. Where soil series or soil components in a landscape unit are functionally similar, they are included in the same soil-landscape unit.

Functionally similar soils have relatively equivalent potentials to produce a particular type and amount of vegetation under the same climate.

Soil-landscape units generally correspond to NRCS “ecological sites” (previously referred to as “range sites”). These are also similar to the units used in the USFS Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey system and to soil-landscape-based land classification systems developed in New Zealand, Australia and other countries, although some of these systems also use current vegetation (see Step 2.3b). The grouping of functionally similar soils into ecological sites has already been completed in most areas of the United States, although the specific criteria used to create unique ecological sites varies somewhat among different states.

Soil-landscape units repeat across the landscape (Fig. 2.2). For example, multiple areas on south-facing 10-15% slopes, with 30-50 cm (12-20 in) of soil over granitic bedrock, would be classified as the same soil-landscape unit.

Step 2.3(b) Subdivide the soil-landscape units into soil-landscape-vegetation units (if necessary). Vegetation is generally correlated with landscape position and soil type, but historic differences in land use can lead to the development of different plant communities on the same soil-landscape unit (Fig. 2.3; see also Ch. 24). Vegetation subdivisions are normally based on the current dominant plant species that define the community. They can also be based on the presence of critical species, such as exotic or invasive plants, or by habitat type for a particular animal. Keep in mind that while soil-landscape units are relatively persistent and use-independent, soil-landscape-vegetation units can and do change rapidly.

Step 2.3(c) Subdivide the soil-landscape-vegetation units into monitoring units based on management (soil-landscape-vegetation-management units). A monitoring unit is the largest contiguous area with the same soil type and plant community that is expected to respond similarly to management changes. Pasture borders, distance from water, prescribed fire, woody vegetation removal and recreational use can be

Figure 2.3. Example of the subdivision of landscape units (box in Fig. 2.2) into landscape-vegetation units.

Here one of the Hills landscape units was subdivided into landscape-vegetation units.

Figure 2.2. Example of landscape unit stratification.

This type of stratification can only be done with aerial photos. Subdivision into soil-landscape units was not possible due to lack of soil survey information. The use of Soil Survey Maps can make this process easier and more accurate.

Figure 2.4. Example of the subdivision of landscape-vegetation units into different types of monitoring units (1-4) based on management. In this case, one of the Hills-Pinyon-Juniper Savanna units was subdivided based on the presence or absence of prescribed fire; and the Hills-Blue grama Grassland unit was subdivided based on whether or not woodcutting is planned.

used to delineate monitoring units. Similar monitoring units (same type) often repeat across the landscape (Figs. 2.1 and 2.4). Figure 2.4 shows four types of monitoring units.

Step 2.4. Record each type of monitoring unit in the Monitoring Program Design Forms I and II (Chs. 1 and 4) Each type of monitoring unit is recorded only once, even if it repeats across the landscape. Leave extra rows on Monitoring Program Design Form II below monitoring units in which you expect to include more than one monitoring plot.

Hills Monitoring Units 1 = Pinyon-Juniper Savanna

No prescribed fire 2 = Pinyon-Juniper Savanna

Prescribed fire 3 = Blue grama Grassland

No woody removal 4 = Blue grama Grassland

Woody removal

Chapter 3

Step 3: Assess current status Checklist

3.1. Select assessment system ............................................................................. _________

3.2. Verify that personnel have relevant qualifications ..................................... _________

3.3. Complete assessments ................................................................................. _________

3.4. Identify and record drivers, threats and opportunities .............................. _________

3.5. Refine long-term management and monitoring objectives ....................... _________

3.6.