Terrestrial Biotic Monitoring: Status and Long-term Approach Part I: B

Barbara E. Ralston, GCMRC, USGS

2000 PEP Recommendations (Urquhart and others 2000) associated with Goal 6.•Expand vegetation sampling. •Integrate across terrestrial resources.•Develop GIS vegetation map.Completed Projects•Developed probabilistic sampling approach (vegetation transects, Kearsley, 2006).•Collected multi-taxa data at single sites (Kearsley and others, 2006).•Completed GIS vegetation map (2002 imagery, Ralston and others, 2008).

AntsSpidersFliesBeetlesBugs

Yellow Warbler

Ash Throated Flycatcher

Lucy’s Warbler

Bell’s Vireo

Blue-gray Gnatcatcher

Bewick’s Wren

AntsSpidersHoppersFliesBugsCaterpillars

NHWZ Arthropods OHWZ Arthropods

Plant Arthropods and 

Breeding Birds

AntsSpidersFliesBeetlesBugs

Yellow Warbler

Ash Throated Flycatcher

Lucy’s Warbler

Bell’s Vireo

Blue-gray Gnatcatcher

Bewick’s Wren

AntsSpidersHoppersFliesBugsCaterpillars

NHWZ Arthropods OHWZ Arthropods

Plant Arthropods and 

Breeding Birds Bird/arthropod interactions

•Significant non-parametric correlations between plantdwelling arthropods and individual bird species. (Solid lines 

indicate positive correlations, dashed lines show negative)

Products:•Kearsley, M.J., Cobb, N.S., Yard, H.K., Lightfoot, D.C., monitoring of terrestrial riparian resources in the Colorareport to Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research CenteRalston, B.E., Davis, P.A., Weber, R.M., and Rundall, Jfrom Glen Canyon Dam to the western boundary of GraReport 2008-1216, 37 p. [http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1GIS Vegetation Coverage on IMS (http://www.gcmrc.g

Vegetation Transects•Yearly operations and local weather affect vegetation up to the 35k cfs surface elevations.•Local weather has a greater effect on vegetation above the 35k cfs surface elevation than annual operations from Glen Canyon Dam.•Over the three years of collecting data (2001-2003), cover declined across all years but the degree of decline varied between years and zones. •Richness (number of species encountered) was generally greatest at the 25k cfs surface elevation and showed declines over time at elevations above 35k cfs, likely due to drought conditions.

Methods

Vegetation TransectsPurpose: track local annual change of annual/perennial herbs and forbs (CMIN 6.1.1, 6.5.1.)

Background Results

Single Taxon and Integrated Biotic Data Collection

Vegetation Mapping.

Percent cover and species richness in five stage zones in 2001 and 2002, and changes between years. Vertical bars represent +/- 1 s.e.

Arthropods•Composition between fluctuating, new high water and old high water zones differed among ground-dwelling, plant-dwelling and flying taxa.•Indicator species existed within each zone among taxa encountered.•Ground-dwelling species affected by soil texture and moisture which is linked to sediment supply and Glen Canyon Dam operations in FLZ and NHWZ.

Small mammals•Available area was most important predictor of abundance within zones.•OHWZ was had greatest abundance vs. FLZ were abundance was lowest.

Reptiles/amphibians•Available open area was most important predictor of abundance/encounters.•Richness varied seasonally, but all species encountered in each zone.

•7 classes identified (see map on right)•Final mapping accuracy > 80%.•Sparse shrub, arrowweed and saltcedar had greatest cover values.•Vegetated area generally increased downstream.

Study Recomm

Vegetation Transects•Probabilistic sampling provides in cover after 7-15 years. •Changes of 5% per year would schange takes longer.•Rotating panel design reduces 

Single Taxon and Integrated Biotic Data CollectionPurpose: Determine benefit of single site sampling across taxa and evaluate sampling methods.

•Annually rotated plots.•60 sites/year; 140 sites sampled by end of year 3.•Surface elevation of 15, 25, 35, 45, and 60k cfs associated with each site w/four 1m2 plots/surface elevation/site.

•One site/geomorphic reach rotated each year. 12 sites/year with three zones/site (Fluctuating zone [FLZ], new high water zone [NHWZ] and old high water zone [OHWZ]).•Vegetation, bird abundance, small mammals, reptiles/amphibians and arthropods sampled.•Multiple sampling approaches used depending on taxon (e.g., walking survey (birds, herps), live traps (mice), pitfall traps (beetles, ants).

Vegetation MappingPurpose: A system wide vegetation map for randomized sampling and large-scale woody vegetation area change monitoring (CMIN 6.1.2, 6.1.2)•Automated supervised classification using image processing software.•Ground-truthing in field to identify vegetation classes initially and map accuracies afterward.

Pitfall trap

Transect design

Vegetation Mapping

Single Taxon and Integ

Arthropods•Focus monitoring on spring/early su•Identify taxa to order (e.g., flies, beet•Monitoring ground-dwelling arthropo•Monitor midges and identify to famil•Consider monitoring plant-dwelling groups (e.g., caterpillars, grasshoppeSmall mammals/Reptiles/Amphib•Spend multiple days at a single site •Use timed sampling in addition to ar•Specific information needs would nesmall mammals and herpetofauna.

•Consider using multispectral imager•Decrease resolution from 44 cm to 1m•Use additional environmental data to elevation).•Use alternative multivariate statistics •Explore object-oriented software to i

Overall recommendations•Use randomly selected sites associat•Focus monitoring on vegetation, bree•Sampling arthropods would need to b

Darkling beetle Mala
A Vegetation Database for the Colorado River Ecosystem 

B.E. Ralston1, P.A. Davis1, R.M. Weber2 and J.M. Rundall3 

U.S. Geological Survey, 1GCMRC, 2Pinnacle Mapping Technologies, Inc., 3Northern Arizona Univer

2000 - Urquhart and others recommend vegetation base map for random sampling and large-scale change detection and monitoring2002 - 4-band color infrared orthorectified digital imagery acquired over 10 days in May/June or CRE. Imagery used for vegetation databaseJanuary 2003 - vegetation database project initiated

Products: GIS Vegetation Coverage o

(http://www.gcmrc.gov/website/vegm

Ralston, B.E., Davis, P.A., Weber, R.MColorado River ecosystem from the GleCanyon National Park, Arizona. Open-f

Methods

2002 Color infrared imagery with GCMRC river mile and sample locations for vegetation classification relevé plots.

Combination of field and lab work

Field work –

•Identify training* areas for preliminary vegetation classes.

•30m2 relevé plots plots used to estimate species cover and presence to identify vegetation classes and community associations. •Randomly sampled points to verify preliminary classifier accuracies.•Ground-truth revised vegetation classification accuracy.

Lab work –

•Evaluated imagery for utility of automated classification•Built masks to exclude non-vegetative areas to reduce processing time and improve classification accuracy.•Used training areas* to determine reflectance values for each vegetation class

•Used TWINSPAN (two-way indicator species analysis) to separate/identify vegetation classes used in classification•Considered imagery capabilities and vegetation classification results to refine vegetation classes.•Ran automated classification routine to process imagery and provide classification

*(sites on imagery that are homogenous areas of a single vegetation type and that provide a uniform 

reflectance value for the vegetation type.)

Results

Seven Vegetation ClassesWetland - Phragmites/Scirpus, combined with Typha domingensis/Carex aquatilis (common reed/cattails/sedges)Baccharis emoryi/Salix exigua - (seepwillow/coyote willow)Tamarix ramosissima/Aster spinosa (saltcedar)Pluchea sericea (arrowweed)Prosopis glandulosa/Acacia greggii/Baccharis sarothroides (mesquite/catclaw acacia/desert broom)Sparse Shrubs (desert shrubs, bunch grasses)Non-vegetated (rocks, sand)

Classification AccuracyInitial accuracies varied with each class from 49-100%. Accuracies affected by similar reflectance values of classes, sparse density of vegetationAccuracies improved to >80% among all classes with application of fuzzy logic**(alternative assessment approach that allows for degrees of membership to particular classes. Accuracies are assessed in categories of agreement such that a class might be mostly correct instead of simply correct or incorrect.)

Applications

Large-Scale Change Detecti6.2.1)

Comparison of total vegetation chanby 6 hectares in 10 years between RK 

Terrestrial-Aquatic Link

Estimate up to 566 vegetatioshoreline2008). Annual sy3.46 x 108 

•1,207 gA•13.80 gA

(Kennedy an

Terrestrial Community Inte

Land CoverSparse shrub, arrowweed and saltcedar had greatest cover values.Vegetated area generally increased downstream.

Background

Literature CitedMortenson, S.G., Weisberg, P.J., and Ralston, B.E. Grand Canyon riparian zone? Wetlands. Urquhart, N.S., Auble, G.T., Blake, J.G., Bolger, D.TReport of a peer review panel on terrestrial aspects Research Center. Report to GCMRC, U.S. GeologicAcknowledgments: Funding for this woManagement Program. Cooperative agreUniversity (99HQAG0175 cooperative proPinnacle Mapping Technologies, Inc (Agrdata collection and image processing. 

Map of Study Area.

AMWG GOAL 6: Protect or improve the biotic riparian and spring communities, including threatened and endangered species and their critical habitat.PROJECT GOAL: Develop a GIS vegetation basemap for Core Monitoring (large-scale vegetation area change monitoring [CMIN 6.1.1, 6.2.1]) and for random sampling points for other terrestrial resources (e.g., birds) linked to vegetation.
Terrestrial Biotic Monitoring: Status and Long-term Approach Part II: 2008 PEP Recom

Next Steps 

Barbara E. Ralston, GCMRC, USGS

August, 2007 Protocol Evaluation Panel Convened to Review: •Goal 6 Management Objectives and Core Monitoring Information Needs•Vegetation transects•Vegetation mapping•Inventory and monitoring of terrestrial organisms

Core Monitoring Information Needs and MRe-evaluationRe-evaluation is role of the Technical Working Group and AGroup. Technical Work Group recommendations/response to the Preformulating Management Objectives and associated InforTerrestrial Vegetation Monitoring – Local CMIN 6.5.1 Determine and track the abundance native species in the Colorado River as measuappropriate intervals...FY09 - Research toward monitoring – Vegetatio

provide good local information about cover and abundance small shrub/grass species (e.g., brome grasses, exotic musfrom aerial photography.

FY09 Activities•Release an RFP in Fall 2008 for cooperative agtransect sampling in September 2009•Approach will use established points (Kearsley and othersper sampling point and ask cooperator to determine how to areas (2001-2005 data) into trends analysis. Report in FY10.•Identify appropriate sampling interval to meet information nnative species distribution and abundance.Terrestrial Vegetation Monitoring – Large CMIN 6.2.1: Determine and track patch numbercomposition and area of NHWZ community as other appropriate intervals... (6.1.1 and 6.3.1 sFY09 – Research toward monitoring – Vegetati

may be reformulated, mapping approaches can still provide area change thought time.

FY09 Activities•Complete Second Vegetation Map using 2005 imagechange analysis comparing 2002/2005 imagery•Ground-truth 2005 map during May 2009 over flight mapping effort.Overall Terrestrial Monitoring Program Str•Develop a long-term strategy and schedule for monterrestrial resources that compliments strategic plan research plans.

2008 PEP Recommendations

Management Objectives and Core Monitoring Information Needs•CMINs need re-evaluation some are not pertinent, others might be reformulated relative to restoration. •Spring communities not directly influenced by dam operations.•Clarification of “community” that is maintained (e.g., Tamarisk is undesirable but existed in 1984 community.)•Focus on vegetation restoration - tamarisk and other vegetation removal.Terrestrial Biological Resources•Continue and develop research approach to monitoring.

•Develop an ecosystem model comparable to aquatic system model – identified in 2000 PEP.•Utilize arthropod/vegetation/bird sampling for integrative monitoring. 

Vegetation Monitoring (Transects & Mapping)•Use both local scale (transects) and large scale (mapping) monitoring approaches to meet Core Monitoring Information Needs•Incorporate geomorphic features (debris fans, pools, riffles) 

into transect sampling variables•Expand area measured for transect (>4m2 per sample point)•Evaluate other scale factors besides narrow and wide reaches wrt composition (e.g., gradient, light availability, elevation).•Use alternative analysis approaches to identify community types in mapping

Background Implementation Strategy For PEP Recommendation