The purpose of this Biological Monitoring Program section is to describe the framework for the approach to monitoring, the preliminary information needed, the steps that will be taken, and how the anticipated results of the initial inventory and assessment phase will direct implementation of the long-term Monitoring Program. This section is not intended to describe a detailed plan for monitoring because it is impossible to determine in advance the number of plots, transects, sampling protocols, or sampling frequencies needed without a scientific basis for establishing the monitoring strategy. The first 5 years of the Monitoring Program are devoted to gathering objective data on species distribution and relative abundances that will be used to determine the long-term monitoring strategy.

As discussed in Section 6.6.6 of this document, the CDFG shall be responsible for developing the long-term monitoring strategy and for implementing the Monitoring Program for at least the first 8 years of the Permits. The CDFG's Resource Assessment Program has developed long-term collaborative relationship with the University of California, Riverside Center for Conservation Biology to assist with developing monitoring strategies that will be used consistently throughout the MSHCP Plan Area and in other NCCP areas. The involvement of the CDFG's Resource Assessment Program will ensure that data is collected in a consistent manner throughout the State and that data collected is stored and accessed through a centralized database.

5.3.1 Introduction

The purpose of the Biological Monitoring Program section is to describe the framework for the approach to monitoring, the preliminary information needed, the steps that will be taken, and how the anticipated results of the initial inventory and assessment phase will direct implementation of the long-term Monitoring Program. Designing a Biological Monitoring Program that has scientific and biological integrity is a complicated task. It is made more difficult because the MSHCP Conservation Area is comprised of numerous Habitats that will be acquired over a 20 to 30 year period and are influenced by varying human impacts, which further adds to the complexity of the task and confounds interpretation of data. Such efforts at large-scale monitoring represent a new approach to managing ecological systems.

At the outset, it is important that inventory and monitoring activities under the MSHCP occur at sufficient levels of commitment, and that the MSHCP Parties support that the determination of those levels may be estimated, but not completely determined at the beginning of the program. In part, this is because a priori predictions of how much sampling effort will be needed to address the biological questions with adequate statistical rigor cannot entirely be made. There is a frequent desire to “front-load" monitoring programs with ambitious levels of monitoring to the extent that they risk collapsing (and at least endure controversy) under the anticipated high commitment and consequent high cost to implement. Some level of preliminary data and understanding of its power to measure (accurately as well as precisely) actual status is needed to determine the appropriate level of sampling effort. Data of low variance and environments that are homogeneous may lead to a reduced level of effort while achieving an acceptable level of statistical power. In this Biological Monitoring Program, use of thoughtfully constructed species and Vegetation Community/Habitat objectives, a commitment to use an adaptive approach to monitoring, and an evolving rather than fixed monitoring program is intended to assure that an appropriate level of monitoring will occur.

Monitoring of the MSHCP Conservation Area requires consideration of both spatial and temporal scales. In the MSHCP Conservation Area, the spatial scale is influenced by land ownership patterns that affect access for species and habitat surveys. Therefore, this Biological Monitoring Program endorses an adaptive approach that allows the flexibility to include new areas as they are incorporated. The MSHCP Parties must recognize that this will result in data that is unique to the areas monitored and may limit inferences about the status of species that occur outside of the MSHCP Conservation Area. The temporal scale in the Biological Monitoring Program is important for emphasizing the long-term approach necessary for detecting and understanding changes to Habitats and species, and for dealing with the time-dependent addition of new, previously un-monitored land to the MSHCP Conservation Area.

This Biological Monitoring Program emphasizes the importance of a framework, an initial inventory and assessment phase, and the adaptive work plan. Inventories of Habitats, species distribution, and relative abundance must be made to identify the most appropriate strata for partitioning sampling and to facilitate the development of appropriate survey, sampling, and monitoring protocols. The initial phase of the Biological Monitoring Program focuses on assembling existing data, mapping Vegetation Communities/wildlife Habitat, and inventorying Covered Species. These steps are critical to understanding the bio-geography of the area and determining the distinctiveness of habitat types and species distributions. The inventory of Covered Species and consideration of their multi-dimensional relationships to other species as part of a larger ecological system is fundamental to this Biological Monitoring Program.

The initial phase establishes the baseline condition of the area for the next step, which is to establish survey strategies for species and species-groups for long-term monitoring. It is important to consider monitoring as evolutionary, rather than static and to use data to drive the Biological Monitoring Program to maintain a good foundation in science. To manage costs effectively and reduce redundancies, survey and monitoring strategies will seek to maximize the number of species and attributes that can be measured under any one set of protocols (i.e., work to reduce the number of teams, trips, efforts made by integrating among the different disciplines to the extent possible). This will require creativity and understanding of inter-species relationships and habitat relationships, so that identification and monitoring of species and habitat attributes/conditions can be implemented to improve monitoring efficiency.

In establishing the long-term Biological Monitoring Program, careful attention will be given to how sampling protocols can provide feedback to the objectives of the MSHCP that are designed to ensure the long-term survival of Covered Species in the MSHCP Conservation Area. The MSHCP uses Adaptive Management prescriptions that should be treated as working hypotheses. The information collected by the Biological Monitoring Program will assist Reserve Managers in adapting management activities to meet species and Vegetation Community/Habitat objectives and to determine appropriate management actions.

5.3.2 Monitoring Goals and Objectives

The goals of the Biological Monitoring Program are to fulfill the strategically required inventory and monitoring of plant and animal species and Vegetation Community/Habitat in support of the MSHCP and to provide data upon which management decisions will be made. To meet the goals, the Biological Monitoring Program must provide sufficient, scientifically reliable data for Reserve Managers to assess the MSHCP's effectiveness at meeting resource objectives and achieving or maintaining a healthy MSHCP Conservation Area in perpetuity. The inventory and monitoring aspects of the program will range from simple short-term efforts, such as field verifying existing species occurrence records, to long-term monitoring of population status and trend. The Monitoring Program will seek to accommodate as many diverse life history strategies of species as possible that could be affected over the long-term by implementation of the MSHCP. Where Feasible, the intent is to monitor groups or suites of similar species in a community context that includes gathering data on habitat attributes, vegetative composition, and structure.

A critical relationship exists among three key sections of the MSHCP: the species objectives, the Biological Monitoring Program, and the Adaptive Management strategy. It is necessary that the commitment to the Biological Monitoring Program be substantial enough from a scientific basis to assess whether species objectives are being met. In turn, the Adaptive Management strategy relies on the presence of an appropriate level of monitoring to drive management decisions if departure from objectives occurs. The MSHCP has developed species-specific objectives (summarized in Section 9.0 of this document, and detailed in Section B of the Reference Document - Volume II of the MSHCP), intended to provide for the long-term Conservation of the Covered Species. These objectives will influence the type and intensity of monitoring that needs to be implemented to address biological questions on species and Habitats. Representative questions to be addressed through inventory and monitoring activities include:

• What is the status (e.g., presence/absence, number of populations, relative abundance, reproductive activity, etc.) and distribution of the Covered Species?
• What Habitats and substrates do the Covered Species rely on?
• How is the status of the Covered Species changing over time?
• How many acres of each Vegetation Community are there in the MSHCP Conservation Area?
• How is each Vegetation Community distributed?
• How is the abundance and distribution of each Vegetation Community changing over time?
• What is the condition (e.g., percentage cover exotic versus native vegetation, disturbance and fire history, etc.) of each Vegetation Community, and how is it changing over time?
• In addition to the implementation of monitoring activities to meet species and Vegetation Community/Habitat objectives, the Biological Monitoring Program will implement several thematic objectives including the following:
• Seek creativity and efficiency in monitoring protocols;
• Use multi-species or community-level efforts when possible;
• Ensure technically and logistically Feasible implementation;
• Recognize the need for adaptability in monitoring strategies based on data and feedback mechanisms; and
• Develop products that are scientifically reliable and responsive to the management needs.

5.3.3 Monitoring Program Implementation Sequence

The Biological Monitoring Program will be implemented in phases, and phases may overlap in time to increase flexibility and opportunity during implementation. This approach recognizes the uncertainty involved in achieving milestones (such as completing an inventory of species “X") in a discrete period of time, and thus is forgiving enough to allow milestones to be developed or achieved over a range of time rather than by a specific date. For example, inventory on some species groups may be completed in four years, whereas on others, the inventory may be completed in one or two years. The phased strategy allows full implementation of monitoring to begin as soon as a first inventory cycle for any suite of species (e.g., amphibians) has been completed rather than waiting for inventory to be completed on all suites of species. There is an initial phase of species, community, and habitat inventory and assessment, for the development of monitoring strategies, and for testing of methodologies and protocols. This initial period will be followed by full implementation of the long-term Biological Monitoring Program.

The implementation sequence proposes to:

1. Stagger the initial monitoring of Covered Species (Table 5-8) over years, in particular, for the species identified for monitoring at 8-year intervals;
2. Enable a long-term monitoring effort to begin early on for species for which adequate knowledge exists to frame a sampling strategy;
3. Enable identification of potential indicator species and primary stressors by Year 2 based on existing knowledge;
4. Have completed the base GIS cover of vegetation community/wildlife habitat distribution throughout the Plan Area by Year 2 (this effort was initiated in Spring 2002);
5. Provide feedback mechanisms so that the frequency of monitoring of species can be increased/decreased if appropriate; and
6. Establish a system and process to manage the monitoring tasks in an orderly fashion.

The phased implementation sequence is as follows:

Initial Inventory and Assessment Phase

Years 1-5

• Surveys to Develop Baseline Vegetation Communities and Wildlife Habitats GIS Layer for Plan Area
• Assess Vegetation Communities/Habitats and Environmental Conditions
• Conduct Baseline Inventory Field Surveys on Plant and Animal Species Distribution and Abundance [stagger the surveys for species during years 1-5 so that the workload is not overwhelming in any one year]
• Monitor Covered Species Per Interval Identified in Table 5-8 (based on Species-Specific Objectives)
• Identify Key, Potential Stressors that need to be Monitored through this Monitoring Program
• Develop Monitoring Tracking System for Managing Surveys
• Identify Species as Potential Indicators of System Condition
• Identify Other Biotic/Abiotic Attributes for Monitoring or as Potential Indicators
• Develop Long-Term Monitoring Strategies for Species/Stressors (protocols, schedules, time intervals for monitoring, multi-species approaches)
• Initiate Monitoring on Selected Suites or Categories of Covered Species and Stressors
• Evaluation and Feedback on Data for MSHCP Adaptive Management Strategy
• Evaluation and Feedback for Potential Modification of Monitoring Strategies

Long-Term Monitoring Phase

Years 6 +

• Monitor Covered Species Per Interval Identified in Table 5-8
• Update Vegetation Communities and Wildlife Habitats GIS Layer and Map

Every 8th Year

• Change Detection for Vegetation Communities and Wildlife Habitats
• Evaluation and Feedback on Data for MSHCP Adaptive Management Strategy
• Evaluation and Feedback for Potential Modification of Monitoring Strategies

To establish an effective Biological Monitoring Program, there must be a thorough baseline inventory on which to build the long-term Monitoring Program. Therefore, the initial inventory will be the emphasis of the Biological Monitoring Program for the first few years of the MSHCP. The initial inventory and assessment phase will consist of (a) mapping the Vegetation Communities and assessing habitat quality; (b) baseline inventory field surveys of all Covered Species; and (c) updating and field verifying existing recorded species occurrences. Specific long-term monitoring sampling locations, methods, and survey intensity will be fully developed after analyses of the Habitat and species inventories.

5.3.4 Inventory, Monitoring, and Sampling Considerations

➤ Extent of MSHCP Conservation Area to Inventory and Monitor

Because the MSHCP Conservation Area will be assembled over time, there must be a process for including new lands into the inventory and sampling strategy for monitoring. The MSHCP Plan Area comprises the following categories of land (approx. acres):

Initially, inventory and monitoring will occur on category “d" lands and will focus on those Covered Species and Vegetation Communities considered the most underrepresented and/or most at risk in the MSHCP Conservation Area. For example, Covered Species that require additional demonstration of Conservation to be considered Covered Species Adequately Conserved and those Vegetation Communities that are most affected by environmental conditions (e.g., coastal sage scrub, vernal pools) or with fewer acres included (e.g., grassland) will be inventoried and assessed first. Sampling stations for long-term monitoring will be established on category “d" lands first, and the remaining stations added as lands are incorporated into the MSHCP Conservation Area.

The initial inventory and assessment of Additional Reserve Lands incorporated into the MSHCP Conservation Area (category “e") will occur within two years of conveyance of such lands. These lands would then be available for long-term monitoring under the Biological Monitoring Program. The entity to whom the lands are conveyed would be the responsible party for the assessment. The data to be collected are described in Section 5.2 of this document under “General Management Measures."

The presence and condition of Habitats (whether they occur inside or outside the MSHCP Conservation Area) will influence animal species distributions and population trends in the MSHCP Conservation Area. Consequently, as part of a comprehensive strategy that will aid the understanding of animal species trends over time, at least a general representation of the distribution and abundance of Vegetation Communities and Habitats in all of category “b" lands is important. The coarse-scale evaluation of Habitats on lands outside of the MSHCP Conservation Area would only occur through aerial and/or satellite imagery analysis and predictive modeling efforts.

➤ Development of Inventory and Monitoring Protocols

There are several existing inventory and monitoring accepted protocols suitable for adopting essentially “as is" in the Biological Monitoring Program. For example, there are accepted protocols for typing Vegetation Communities and wildlife Habitats, as well as accepted protocols for assessing aquatic species and certain suites of birds, small mammals, reptiles, and some amphibians. Other accepted protocols, such as telemetry monitoring of large mammals and birds have been conducted for decades, and there are straightforward methods for collecting, analyzing, and interpreting the data. There are peer-reviewed and published protocols for some species, such as the southwestern willow flycatcher (Sogge, et al. 1997). Specific accepted protocols that may be used are live-trapping, vocalizations/recordings, mist-netting, observation scans, search transects/ plots, remote camera-stations, and track monitoring.

In 2002, the CDFG Resource Assessment Program entered into an agreement with the Center for Conservation Biology at UC Riverside, to develop additional inventory and monitoring strategies/protocols and to initiate implementation of some aspects of the Biological Monitoring Program for the MSHCP. Other universities and agencies such as the USFWS, USFS, and USGS Biological Resources Division are developing, or have developed, scientifically reliable monitoring approaches that could be used in the Monitoring Program. Collaboration and peer-review among these entities will be sought in order to ensure that the best approaches are used. The Biological Monitoring Program will seek to develop protocols that take a multi-species, landscape approach.

➤ Sampling Design Considerations

A goal in designing sampling strategies is to minimize the variance of estimators and to optimize monitoring efforts. Designing a long-term monitoring program requires compiling existing information, particularly species distribution. Robust estimators will be sensitive to changes in species status, will detect change (or trend), and will provide information meaningful to Reserve Managers for Adaptive Management. The types of data collected will be a mixture of estimators and index level information.

Assessing presence and “failure to detect" for individual species are dependent in part on sampling intensity and probability of detection. Because of the patchy distribution of Public/Quasi-Public Lands, Vegetation Communities/Habitats, and rare Habitats and species, the sampling design needs to ensure species occupying rare Vegetation Communities/Habitats are adequately inventoried and monitored. Some level of stratification to deal with unequal probabilities of selection, most optimally on landscape strata unlikely to change over time (e.g., geologic features, elevation, aspect, soil properties), will be needed. Despite the potential for structural vegetation changes over time, stratification by Vegetation Communities/Habitats may be used to sample rare Habitats (e.g., riparian, alluvial fan sage scrub, vernal pool). Otherwise, species dependent on these rare, but critical components of the system could be inadequately monitored in any objective sampling scheme.

Data pooled and summarized at the entire MSHCP Conservation Area level, at the individual Management Unit level, and at an individual reserve level will be used for assessing species status and Vegetation Community trends. Heterogeneity among sites, as well as a diversity of human-induced impacts among sites, however, will affect among-site variability and inferential capability to pool results among sites. The scientific inferences that can be made with respect to the status of a species may be limited to the MSHCP Conservation Area and will not necessarily reflect the status of species in other areas or of the population at a regional or range-wide level outside of the Plan Area.

➤ Establishment of Long-term Monitoring Sampling Stations

The information collected from the initial inventory and assessment phase will be used as supporting information to determine the number and placement of sampling stations for the long-term Monitoring Program. Points, plots, transects, arrays, and other sampling systems will be recorded using GPS receivers for repeatability over time. Additionally, opportunistic observations of species occurrences need to be recorded, and a simple, standardized data format for capturing such information will be developed that includes GPS locations of observations.

The establishment of sampling stations may vary between those used for the initial inventory phase versus those later chosen for longer-term monitoring. During the initial inventory phase, sampling for plant and animal species will be coordinated with the permanent stations established for the vegetation mapping effort (see “Vegetation and Wildlife Community Inventory and Monitoring" section below). The emphasis of this initial sampling strategy will be to establish preliminary field inventories of species distribution and abundance, develop species and Vegetation/Habitat Community associations, and refine Vegetation/Habitat Community boundaries and definitions.

For longer term monitoring efforts, the establishment of sampling stations will be based upon the analysis of initial inventories, subsequent final delineation of habitat types, and boundaries of accessible areas. Sampling designs and specific protocols will depend on species suites (i.e., amphibian, reptile, avian, etc.) and will incorporate scientifically credible and published methodologies.

The establishment of sampling stations (plots/transects) will incorporate the stratified random sampling approach. The basis of this approach is to partition the suites of species, and populations, in such a way that the units within a stratum are as similar as possible. In those areas that are accessible, the primary stratification will be established by utilizing general Vegetation Communities/Habitats and the associated initial measures of species abundance/ distribution. The number of sampling units (transects/plots) within each stratum will be determined using an optimal allocation of sampling effort model for stratified random sampling. This model can incorporate both the proportional and probabilistic aspects of stratum size and relative species distribution/abundance to minimize the overall variance of measures of species status. The distribution and establishment of sampling stations will be done randomly to ensure that the measures are representative.

Replication of surveying the sampling units is important for measuring the variance of any point estimate (e.g., species abundance) and for further ensuring that the measurements at the sampling stations are representative. This replication will occur within a particular season or year and depend on the species monitoring goals. Replication will be critical for having the appropriate statistical power to detect any change in species status.

The establishment of sampling stations must consider the problem of inaccessible areas of the MSHCP Conservation Area, either because land has not yet been incorporated or because of natural or human-made obstructions. As such, the MSHCP Conservation Area will be divided as follows: (1) areas that will never be accessible; (2) areas that may later become accessible; and (3) areas that are available to be monitored. Therefore, long-term monitoring estimates will formally measure species status in the accessible areas, and the incorporation of less formal estimates from the other areas may be the only means of deriving total estimates of the MSHCP Conservation Area. Monitoring stations may be randomly chosen ahead of time, by Vegetation Community/Habitat, in areas that may later become available to be monitored to facilitate their potential future incorporation.

The distribution and establishment of sampling stations will also consider other sampling methods (e.g., cluster sampling). Other sampling strategies may be needed for some Covered Species, particularly endemic species, which are not adequately monitored using the stratified approach. Sampling stations will be distributed within each Management Unit in a manner that will allow for results to be analyzed at the individual reserve, Management Unit, and overall MSHCP Conservation Area scales.

The following Sections 5.3.5 and 5.3.6 describe the methodologies for collecting and analyzing vegetation and species data. Data collecting through this Monitoring Program will be provided to the Reserve Management Oversight Committee (RMOC; see Section 6.6.4 of this document for description) for evaluation and feedback to the management activities described in Section 5.2. The chart on the following page depicts some of the ways in which monitoring data and management activities will be integrated.

5.3.5 Vegetation Community/Wildlife Habitat Inventory and Monitoring

An initial task of the Biological Monitoring Program will be to conduct an inventory of the distribution and abundance of Vegetation Communities and wildlife Habitats to create a baseline Vegetation Community GIS layer and map. The existing map of Vegetation Communities relies on 10 year old data (see Section 2.1.1 of this document) and development conditions have changed since the map was produced. In addition to having value as baseline information, a current GIS vegetation and wildlife habitat layer and map for the Plan Area will be an important tool used to help develop the sampling locations and strategies for Covered Species because predicted species distributions can be modeled to some extent based on the underlying distribution of Habitats.

Emphases for the Vegetation Community and Wildlife Habitat inventory and monitoring are to:

a) Collect current and more detailed information on the distribution (i.e., location) and abundance (i.e., acreage) of Vegetation Communities and Wildlife Habitats within Public/Quasi-Public Lands within the MSHCP Conservation Area, and collect coarser resolution information on undisturbed/undeveloped lands outside of the MSHCP Conservation Area but within the Plan Area;

b) Monitor changes in those Vegetation Communities/Habitats over the long-term to assess whether the vegetation and wildlife habitat goals and objectives specified in the MSHCP are being met; and

c) Provide information to assist in deciding which lands should be incorporated into the MSHCP Conservation Area.

➤ Vegetation and Wildlife Community Inventory and Mapping

The Vegetation and Wildlife Community inventory and mapping will be accomplished through a quantitative mapping effort that identifies stands, or polygons, of vegetation using aerial photographs and/or satellite images and then involves collecting the environmental, biological, and vegetative attributes or measures of the stand. The vegetation inventory will use the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) “Vegetation Rapid Assessment Protocol" (CNPS 2002) and “Releve Protocol" (CNPS 1998). Rapid assessment plots will be permanently located within the stand polygons using GPS coordinates on Public/Quasi-Public Lands and on additional lands as they are incorporated into the MSHCP Conservation Area over time. Use of this methodology to map vegetation types will enable a broad-based and standardized approach that extends beyond the MSHCP area to all of California and contributes to the desired large-scale and coordinated approach to inventory and monitoring. Environmental information, such as soil type and texture, fire history, flooding, erosion, grazing intensity, and other natural or human-made disturbances will also be collected, mapped, and used to assess condition of Vegetation Communities/Habitats.

With measured vegetation attributes, the stand polygons can be revised as needed to enhance their accuracy. Vegetation associations will be based on “A Manual of California Vegetation" (Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf 1995). These associations will be subject to further refinement and identification of more specific plant associations if they occur. Some representation of the distribution and composition of Vegetation Communities and Habitats throughout the MSHCP Plan Area is important. Hence, a more general interpretation and modeling of Vegetation Communities in areas that are outside of the MSHCP Conservation Area will be necessary. This part of the assessment will be based largely on geographic imagery analyses and without the on-the-ground assessment except in areas where access is permitted. Landsat thematic mapping imagery, other high resolution satellite products, and/or digital orthophoto quad's (DOQ's) are additional geographic imagery products that would be used to support the inventory effort. When complete, the new baseline Vegetation Community map will be crosswalked to the older vegetation map that was used as a basis for this MSHCP to make evaluation of habitat Conservation using either map possible.

Wildlife Community Rapid Assessment Protocol Surveys

Concurrent with the vegetation rapid assessment surveys, an analogous wildlife community rapid assessment survey protocol (this will be termed a “Community Classification Index") will be developed and implemented to help understand wildlife species community associations. Surveys using this accepted protocol will be used to improve and augment existing information on the presence of both common and Covered Species, and potential threats to the system. Biological information, such as presence of burrows, scat, food resources, nest sites, threats (e.g., bullfrogs, brown-headed cowbirds, invasive exotic plant species, argentine ants, imported fire ants, etc.), and disturbances will be gathered to assess the suitability and potential use of the Vegetation Community by wildlife species. This coarse resolution information is most amenable to the more common and visible wildlife species so it is considered one of many tools to use in the Biological Monitoring Program.

Identifying Wildlife Habitat Types

A component part of the vegetation and wildlife community mapping is to refine existing Vegetation Community/Habitats descriptions and/or delineations and to identify wildlife Habitat for suites of species. The proposed methodology enables aggregation of the vegetation community classification to a more general California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) classification of wildlife Habitats (Mayer and Laudenslayer 1988). The CWHR system of habitat classification by age class and canopy cover class will be used to the extent possible in designating wildlife habitat types. CWHR makes predictions about a Habitat's value to wildlife in terms of its capacity to fulfill reproduction, foraging, and cover needs of wildlife. The CWHR system then enables wildlife professionals to model and predict habitat quality and potential distribution for nearly 700 amphibian, reptile, bird, and mammal species in California.

Existing wildlife species habitat relationship information and the results of the rapid assessment surveys will be used to establish a correlation between wildlife species and Habitats. This correlation of wildlife species with habitat types will contribute to predicting species distributions in the MSHCP Conservation Area where there is an absence of inventory data. Habitat designations already exist and are referenced in the MSHCP. This analysis is not intended to eliminate or replace the existing definitions, only to consider more potentially meaningful boundaries for stratifying the area for implementation of the long-term sampling protocols.

➤ Long-Term Vegetation Monitoring and Habitat Condition Assessment Monitoring

Upon completion of the basic inventory, changes in the distribution, acreage, and condition of Vegetation Communities (as determined by presence of invasive exotics, disturbance, grazing intensity, fire history, etc.) and wildlife Habitats will be monitored at a minimum of once every 8 years. As additional lands are added to the MSHCP Conservation Area over time, validation of Vegetation and Wildlife Community classification will be conducted in those areas at the 8-year interval (i.e., existing and newly incorporated lands will be surveyed).

The information on Vegetation Community and wildlife habitat coverage (acreage) and condition will be used to create GIS layers to be used in determining whether Vegetation Community and wildlife habitat goals and objectives are being met. Changes to the quantity or quality of habitat types determined through the rapid assessment surveys will provide feedback to managers. This will allow managers to evaluate the effectiveness of the MSHCP and to adapt management as appropriate to ensure that the species and vegetation/habitat objectives are met. The Vegetation Community and wildlife habitat GIS layer and map will also be provided to the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority for use in deciding which additional lands should be incorporated into the MSHCP Conservation Area.

➤ Adaptive Strategy

Comprehensive repeat inventory of Vegetation Communities and Wildlife Habitats is proposed to occur at 8-year intervals, a reasonable time period, to detect broad-scale change. Because the time required to initiate, conduct, and report on such inventories may take two or more years, a more frequent interval might result in a short useful life of any such inventory. On the other hand, a longer interval may miss changes to Vegetation Communities and Wildlife Habitats that occur more frequently. Potentially problematic in this schedule is the uncertainty of factors such as extreme drought conditions that would greatly influence plant species. Should this occur, Plan managers and outside experts will be consulted to determine whether to proceed with, or delay, all or part of a Vegetation Community re-sample.

Some subjective flexibility for monitoring is needed in addition to the fixed 8-year interval strategy. Geographic areas considered highest potentially affected (such as areas nearest to the urban influence or Habitats at high risk to fire) may need to be monitored on a more frequent basis (perhaps every 2-3 years) than those areas less anticipated to be affected. The scheduling of vegetation and habitat monitoring must be flexible enough to adapt to unanticipated events or opportunities. If and when large acreages (5,000 or more acres), rare Habitats (e.g., vernal pools), or key Linkages are added to the MSHCP Conservation Area, then rapid assessment of these areas would be implemented the following field season. Similarly, events such as wildfire, flood, or rapid species invasions would also prompt re-consideration of the monitoring schedule.

The rate of change in Vegetation Communities/Habitats will vary based on numerous natural and human-induced factors. If, during the initial years of the MSHCP, indications suggest that an 8-year time interval between sampling periods for vegetation and habitat distribution and abundance may be too long or too short, then a more or less frequent sampling interval will be considered for the entire area, or for the particular Vegetation Communities/Habitats undergoing rapid change. As a start, any change in acreage or distribution of a Vegetation Community/Habitat greater than 10 percent that occurs in an eight-year period, will be evaluated to assess whether the next round of assessment needs to be more frequent for that type, or for the entire Plan Area.

5.3.6 Covered Species Inventory and Monitoring

➤ Baseline Inventory

The most important element of the Covered Species inventory and monitoring effort will be the baseline inventory field surveys for the 146 Covered Species. The intent of the Monitoring Program is to move toward use of surrogate species as indicators of overall ecosystem health and function within the MSHCP Conservation Area. The Parties agree that this is an appropriate and cost-effective approach to monitoring. Although some historic and current information exists on species occurrences within the Plan Area, there has not been a comprehensive field survey of the distribution and status of Covered Species within the MSHCP Conservation Area. Additionally, comprehensive baseline field surveys are needed to demonstrate the Conservation of 16 of the 146 Covered Species. These 16 Covered Species will be considered to be Covered Species Adequately Conserved when certain conservation requirements are met as identified in the species-specific conservation objectives for those species (species-specific conservation objectives for the 146 Covered Species are presented in Section 9.0 of this document). Survey requirements for other species associated with the MSHCP are documented in Sections 6.1.2, 6.1.3 and 6.3.2 (a complete summary of MSHCP species survey requirements is provided in Appendix E of this document). Results of the baseline inventory field surveys will be used to develop the long-term monitoring strategy.

An important step in the inventory effort is the continued gathering and verifying of relevant existing information on the distribution of Covered Species in the MSHCP Plan Area. A large amount of information has been amassed in the UCR database for the MSHCP (over 12,800 records) and additional information from museum collections, local biologists' field notes, Master's theses, and published and gray literature continues to be found. This information will be gathered and used to verify existing species occurrences. Field reconnaissance will be used to relocate covered plant and animal species occurrences to determine whether the species still exists at the recorded location and the current status of the species (e.g., abundance, breeding, etc.). Since animals are mobile and because records of wildlife are not always indicative of importance of an area (for example, turkey vulture records may represent flyover sightings only), animal species records will be verified on a case-by-case basis.

Baseline inventory field surveys will also be conducted to locate new species occurrences. To determine the most appropriate areas to focus the baseline inventory field surveys, predictive modeling will be conducted. Information from the vegetation and wildlife community inventory and mapping effort, the database records for each Covered Species, the CWHR wildlife habitat relationships classification, multi-spectral imagery (i.e., Landsat ETM+), and GIS data layers of abiotic attributes will be examined to determine if there is a correlation. For example, soil type, slope, Vegetation Community, elevation, and distance from open water may be correlated with species occurrences and can be used to predict other potentially occupied areas. Once these potential areas have been identified, field surveys will be conducted to determine whether the species exists at the predicted locations. Documenting presence as well as inferring absence of Covered Species along with measuring attributes of Habitats will be important in developing an understanding of predicted and potential Habitats for designing the long-term Monitoring Program.

Inventory field surveys for Covered Species will be conducted on available Public/Quasi-Public Lands every year during the initial inventory and assessment phase. The protocols for the baseline inventory field surveys will follow guidelines established by the Wildlife Agencies and will be circulated to the Reserve Management Oversight Committee (RMOC; see Section 6.6.4 of this document) for review prior to each year's survey efforts.

➤ Development of Long-Term Covered Species Monitoring Strategies

As there are 146 Covered Species with many different life history strategies to be conserved within the MSHCP Conservation Area, it is not Feasible (economically or logistically) to develop intensive monitoring strategies for all, and it is acknowledged that no single transect, plot or survey method can accommodate all species. It is important however, to ensure that monitoring efforts represent the variety of life history strategies that exist within the area. The initial phase of monitoring will include developing protocols that are species specific and robust enough to detect change (or trend) and species status.

Using a variety of quantitative estimators and qualitative variables to express species trend and change is important. Simply using conventional estimators for monitoring species (i.e. absolute population estimation with variance) is not always optimal. Multiple survey data methods will be considered if index level data is used. The ultimate monitoring protocols will have a mixture of high and low level monitoring efforts. High monitoring efforts will possess both representative (i.e., commonly found in a particular Habitat) and rare (or at risk) species.

It is important to link principles of conservation biology, particularly meta-population theory, to the monitoring of species. In so doing, monitoring methodologies will be developed to detect species geographic distribution, population substructure (i.e., demes), and population classification. Population size class estimates will be used as snapshots to changes in species through time. Developing actual population size estimates through time will be conducted where required as determined by species objectives.

The measurement of the distribution of populations and approximation of population size over time will facilitate the analysis of population trajectory and the modeling of population viability. Population trend and viability are very important analyses for select species, but are problematic in that refined population parameters (i.e., adult survivorship, fecundity) must be estimated in addition to understanding natural species population variation and sampling error. This may require substantial resources expended for each species, so robust estimators such as population size class and careful selection of monitoring protocols will be important. Both population trend and viability provide important feedback to monitoring in that they help forecast and determine significant population changes and help identify populations or sub-populations at risk relative to each other. Species monitoring should be capable of detecting changes in geographic distribution, as well as population trend, and identify those populations needing higher resolution data.

➤ Long-Term Monitoring of Covered Species

To facilitate the monitoring of Covered Species, a multi-species, community approach will be used to the extent possible for the long-term Monitoring Program, including monitoring of surrogate species where biologically appropriate and Feasible. Where Feasible, species will be grouped into categories for ease in collecting data per individual species. This approach would result in greater monitoring efficiency in that data on several species can be collected simultaneously, or nearly so. Initial groupings will consist of species found together in wildlife habitat communities and species that occur at high elevations. Sampling stations will consist of multiple transects/plots that will enable the collection of data on the different suites of species. For example, a sampling station may contain point counts for sampling bird species, an array for sampling reptile species, and a live-trapping grid for sampling small mammal species.

Species that cannot be grouped together or be sampled at a common sampling station because of rarity of occurrence, activity patterns, seasonality, geographic location, or other restriction may require a stand-alone monitoring strategy that will be developed as needed (if there is no accepted protocol already in existence) on a case-by-case basis. Specific sampling protocols, monitoring strategies, and placement of sampling stations will be determined during the initial phases of the Monitoring Program.

The initial groupings of Covered Species are presented below. Further refinement of the groupings will occur once the initial Vegetation Community and wildlife habitat inventory and mapping, and baseline species inventory surveys, have been conducted. The intent of the groupings is to make the complicated task of monitoring the wide variety of Covered Species as efficient and logistically Feasible as possible. Realistically, some Covered Species could be placed in one or more of the categories, which is acceptable as long as they are included in the monitoring strategy.

• Coastal Sage Scrub/Chaparral/Desert Scrub

• Grassland (and Open Fields)

• Riparian/Aquatic Habitats

• Wetland/Marsh/Lake

• Vernal Pool and Alkali Playa

• Species that Occur Primarily at High Elevation (Generally Forest Service Lands)

• Species that May Require a Different Sampling Strategy Due to Rarity of Occurrence, Seasonality, Geographic Location, or Other Restriction

➤ Monitoring of Covered Species as per Species Objectives

In addition to the baseline inventory field surveys and the long-term monitoring strategy for Covered Species, monitoring of select Covered Species as per the species objectives will be conducted at intervals identified in Table 5-8. The additional information to be collected ranges from determining reproductive success to evaluating use of corridors. These specific species objectives were developed as part of the Conservation Strategy and are intended to provide measurable criteria for evaluating conservation success. Table 5-8 summarizes the survey needs of each Covered Species based on the species-specific objectives (detailed in Section B of the Reference Document - Volume II of the MSHCP). Species identified as “Demonstrate Conservation" are the 16 species that will be considered as “Covered Species Adequately Conserved" when certain conservation requirements are met as identified in the species-specific conservation objectives for those species (species-specific conservation objectives for the 146 Covered Species are presented in Section 9.0 of this document). The “Minimum Level of Occupation of Known Locations" was taken from the species objectives and from the “General Management Measures" identified in Section 5.2 of this document.

* Taxa A=Amphibian; B=Bird; F=Fish; I=Invertebrate; M=Mammal; P=Plant; R=Reptile

** Surveys conducted every year for first 5 years and then as determined by Reserve Management Oversight Committee

The information collected during the initial inventory and long-term monitoring phases will be used to determine whether Covered Species goals and objectives are being met. Changes to the status and distribution of Covered Species will provide feedback to managers. This will allow managers to evaluate the effectiveness of the MSHCP and to adapt management as appropriate to ensure that the species and vegetation/habitat objectives are met.

➤ Evaluating Linkages and Roadway Crossings (e.g., culverts, underpasses)

Maintaining the effectiveness of Linkages and roadway crossings is an important component of the MSHCP. The species objectives (Section 9.0 of this document and Volume II, Section B, MSHCP Reference Document) have identified specific roadway crossings in key areas that will need to be evaluated for their adequacy to convey bobcats, mountain lions, and coyotes. The intent is to ensure that the movement of species between habitat blocks is maintained. Monitoring of wide-ranging, land-based species such as the mountain lion, bobcat, and coyote will provide information on the distribution and “active" use of Linkages and roadway crossings between otherwise fragmented blocks of wildlife habitat in the MSHCP Conservation Area. An efficient method of investigating the use of Linkages by mountain lions is to use GPS radio-collar transmitters. The transmitters can record several locations per day for at least a year; they can then be removed remotely from the animals and picked up so the data can be downloaded. Animals can be monitored periodically (2-4 times a month from the air or ground) to track their general locations.

Conventional and/or GPS radio-collar transmitters will be used to monitor use of Linkages and roadway crossings by coyote and bobcat. Capture, collaring, and monitoring of these species movement patterns, seasonal ranges, and use of Habitats will be a focused process study within the overall Biological Monitoring Program to examine the suitability of the Plan Area for meeting the requirements of larger mammals.

Additional methods that will be used as needed to inventory and monitor use and effectiveness of Linkages include track surveys, remote camera stations, reported depredation/damage to livestock and pets, and road-kill reports. In addition to determining the active use of Linkages and roadway crossings by wide-ranging animals, the more passive use of linked patches of Habitat by animal species and by plant species will be assessed through the long-term monitoring of species distribution changes and proximity to Linkages.

➤ Species Used to Provide Information about Condition or Health of Vegetation Communities/Wildlife Habitats

Where data from the initial inventory and monitoring phases indicate it is appropriate, additional data will be collected on selected species, including threat species (e.g., bullfrog, brown-headed cowbird, argentine ant, etc.) to provide information about the condition or health of Vegetation Communities/ Wildlife Habitats. Monitoring of some species as an indicator, flagship, umbrella, surrogate, focal, or representative species is proposed; however, in the absence of adequate a priori data and analyses it is difficult to predict whether the species will adequately serve the intended role. The monitoring strategy will work to identify species that could fulfill these roles using the initial years of species data collection and linking of that data to biotic/abiotic factors being simultaneously measured/ monitored under the auspices of the Plan or by other agencies (as examples, such data could be changes in invasive species, fire data, or water flow/quality data). Consequently, developing information to identify species that will serve as surrogates or indicators will occur during the initial five years of the MSHCP's implementation. This selected list of species will include a combination of representative and at-risk Covered Species, and threat species for which the following assumptions are made:

1. The presence of a species provides information about the health or condition of the ecosystem;
2. Information on some species is highly correlated with other species, and therefore, intensively monitoring of all species provides little additional information about the system;
3. By intensively monitoring an appropriate subset of species, impacts that may present a risk to species not being intensively monitored can be assessed;
4. Impacts that do not affect the intensively monitored species similarly do not impact other Covered Species; and
5. Species are feasible to monitor and will demonstrate change or trend.

The above assumptions recognize association among species at a wildlife community level. Covered Species will be selected from the wildlife habitat community groupings established for long-term monitoring. Representative species not on the Covered Species list, but are more common and easy to survey for, and species that are considered threats to the Covered Species (e.g., brown-headed cowbird, European starling, bullfrog) may be selected if they are found to be good indicators of the health or condition of the ecosystem.

➤ Adaptive Strategy

Monitoring of the status and distribution of Covered Species is proposed to occur at a minimum of every 8 years. Monitoring of select species may occur every year depending on the types of information needed and on the survey requirements stated in the species objectives. Likewise, in years of low annual rainfall, monitoring of some species may not be possible (e.g., fairy shrimp, annual plants). The scheduling of species monitoring must be flexible enough to adapt to unanticipated events or opportunities. If and when large acreages (5,000 or more acres), rare Habitats (e.g., vernal pools), or key Linkages are added to the MSHCP Conservation Area, then Covered Species inventory of these areas would be implemented the following field season. Similarly, events such as wildfire, flood, or apparently rapid species invasions would also prompt re-consideration of the monitoring schedule.

The trend in species populations will vary based on numerous natural and human-induced factors. If, during the initial years of the MSHCP, indications suggest that time intervals between sampling periods for species distribution and abundance may be too short or long, then a more or less frequent sampling interval will be considered for the entire area, or for the particular vegetation/habitat types undergoing rapid change. Indicators for this modification would include a greater than 10 percent change in species distribution and/or abundance.

5.3.7 Responsibilities, Coordination, and Reporting

There are a variety of entities currently responsible for governing land in the MSHCP Conservation Area. The success of the Biological Monitoring Program will depend on effective coordination and oversight to ensure that the program's elements are implemented consistently. As described in detail in Section 6.6.6 of this document, the implementation of the long-term monitoring strategy is the responsibility of the Monitoring Program Administrator. For at least the first 8 years of the Permits, the California Department of Fish and Game shall be the Monitoring Program Administrator and will take the lead in developing, administering, and implementing the Biological Monitoring Program.

To ensure consistency across land ownership boundaries, the Monitoring Program Administrator will develop annual work plans for monitoring the entire MSHCP Conservation Area and will be responsible for coordinating the monitoring efforts. Annual work plans will be submitted to the RMOC by the Biological Monitoring Program Administrator in the last quarter of each year and will include, for the following year, a description of proposed monitoring efforts, survey protocols, schedule for field work, and an estimated budget that details personnel and equipment needs and other expenses. The estimated budget will include the identification of in-lieu or contracted services to implement the Monitoring Program. To facilitate early cost planning, the Program Administrator will also provide to the RMOC on an annual basis a 3-5 year projected schedule and estimate of cost for implementing the Monitoring Program.

The results of each year's monitoring efforts will be summarized in an Annual Report and submitted by the program administrator to the RMOC. The Biological Monitoring Report will include, at a minimum, the following:

• Objectives for the Biological Monitoring Program;
• Effects on Covered Species and Vegetation Communities/Habitats;
• Location of sampling sites;
• Methods for data collection and variables measured;
• Frequency, timing, and duration of sampling for the variables;
• Description of the data analysis and who conducted the analyses;
• Evaluation of progress toward achieving measurable biological goals and objectives
• Suggested changes/feedback for Adaptive Management; and
• Cause-and-effect relationships

5.3.8 Data Management

Overall, the data management strategy must take into consideration the long duration of the MSHCP. Protecting data becomes a paramount issue because new opportunities for data loss or corruption will arise each year. Additionally, because technology is quickly changing, the software and hardware used today will likely be obsolete in the near future. Consequently, the MSHCP Parties should not rely on current technology to manage the data in perpetuity. What can be relied on are the general roles and responsibilities that the MSHCP Parties will have now and in the future. Therefore, greater emphasis is placed on roles, responsibilities, and practices rather than specifying hardware and software to be used to manage the data.

➤ Monitoring Program Database

The data from the Monitoring Program will be entered into the CDFG's centralized data management system (referred to as “BIOS"). BIOS is specifically designed to house "field observations" that are gathered by biologists and others working in the field. There are two major pieces to BIOS. The first is the computer system used to house field observation data, and the second is a set of data standards and guidelines that make it easier to store data from a variety of sources together. In terms of data protection, the system has many safeguards built in, including a highly redundant architecture, fully managed backup with off site storage, a secure and environmentally controlled location where the computer equipment is housed, and around-the-clock data management and maintenance by CDFG.

➤ Archival Roles and Responsibilities

The MSHCP Parties will be responsible for storing the official record associated with MSHCP compliance. The CDFG will take the initial lead in compiling the data generated from the Monitoring Program and will provide copies (“mirroring") of the dataset to the MSHCP Parties for their official records. “Mirroring," which goes back to the 1970s, is a low-level technology for maintaining identical copies of entire file systems on computer servers located in far ranging locations. While the technology behind this technique will change, the fundamental idea (identical copies of the data kept in many locations) will not change. The mirrored files systems will create redundancy and will place the entire dataset closer to those who will use it the most. The redundancy protects against catastrophic loss or damage by making it possible to restore the entire dataset from another mirrored site.

➤ Data Handling Practices

The practices used to handle data have a significant impact on data value over time. Inconsistent data collection methods, and mishandling of data while being processed, are perhaps the two biggest problems faced in data handling. Unfortunately, decades may pass before such errors are discovered. To protect against these problems, the following practices will be observed throughout the life of this project.

1. At the beginning of each year, all MSHCP data collectors (i.e., reserve monitors, Reserve Managers) will meet to discuss data collection methodologies. Particular attention will be paid to consistency through time and scientific validity. Moreover, the field data forms that will be used by the various crews will be compared and made consistent.
2. As data is processed, all versions of a particular piece of data will be archived from its raw state to its fully checked and verified form. Metadata will distinguish the versions from each other and will also describe the methods and steps used to process the data. The primary purpose of this practice is to make it possible to recover from data mishandling during manipulation of original source data. It also makes it possible to verify data processing methodologies at a later date should that become necessary.
3. Metadata will accompany all data generated by this project. The current standard is the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) Metadata Standard. Any future standard must be agreed upon by the RMOC.

➤ Data Availability

There are concerns over how to make this data available to the public. Some of the information may be proprietary; other data may be collected on land where landowners insist on non-disclosure agreements. Additionally, raw source data along with error corrected data will be archived. These concerns require careful consideration as to what data is made available to the public. With this in mind, the following practices will be followed:

1. No data from the Biological Monitoring Program may be distributed to outside parties or institutions without prior approval from the MSHCP Parties. This means all who are in possession of a dataset mirror may not distribute that data for others to use without the necessary approvals.
2. The County will be the designated single point of contact for publicly available data.
3. Metadata will accompany all datasets that are made public.

➤ Data Compilation and Analysis

The Monitoring Program Administrator will be responsible for compiling the data collected through the Biological Monitoring Program. Field crews will be responsible for entering the data collected during each field season into the Biological Monitoring Program database and for double-checking the integrity of the data. The Monitoring Program Administrator will forward the data to the data management personnel for organization, storage, and producing and distributing mirror copies. Data analysis will also be the responsibility of the Monitoring Program Administrator.

5.3.9 Anticipated Levels of Effort and Estimated Costs

The anticipated levels of effort and estimated cost to implement the Biological Monitoring Program are summarized in Tables 5-9 and 5-10. The anticipated levels of effort and estimated cost are based on Personnel-Years (PYs), which are defined as 1,770 work hours per year. A 10% contingency fund has been added to the estimated cost to cover any additional, unforeseen monitoring efforts. The total estimated cost provided is anticipated to be the maximum cost (in 2002 dollars) to implement the Biological Monitoring Program in a given year. A budget will be submitted annually to the RMOC which will contain an outline of costs for the following year's monitoring efforts and any unforeseen events that may require contingency funding.

The estimate of PYs assumes implementation of the Monitoring Program over the entire MSHCP Conservation Area as it is assembled. The initial inventory and assessment phase is expected to require fewer personnel-years than during the long-term monitoring phase due to the anticipated lag time of program start-up and the initial reduced number of acres available for surveys. It is anticipated that Year 9 and every 8^th year thereafter will require the maximum number of PYs (32.5) because of the added staff needed to conduct the vegetation and wildlife rapid assessment surveys. The estimate of PYs and position levels is intended to provide the appropriate level of oversight of seasonal aides by Associate level staff. If seasonal aides are determined to need less oversight, the option for trading associate level staff for more seasonal aides will be considered. In addition, if a higher level of effort is required for some species in certain years (e.g., annual plants after a high rainfall year) then PYs may be “borrowed" from other surveys or the use of the 10% contingency fund may be considered to support the additional field crews. With the exception of program administration, data management, and GIS support, monitoring activities will largely be conducted by temporary employees.

The following assumptions have been made with regards to levels of effort:

Administration. Two permanent, full-time, senior-level positions (2 PY's) will be required for developing annual implementation/work plans and field protocols, submitting budgets, coordinating with the County, RMOC, and Wildlife Agencies, overseeing field crews, overseeing data management and GIS support personnel, managing contracts, analyzing data, writing annual reports, and presenting results. These positions will be provided by Wildlife Agencies for at least the first 8 years of the Permits and will be responsible for developing the long-term Monitoring Program.

Data Retrieval, Storage, and Management. One permanent, part-time, associate-level position (0.5 PY's) will be required for updating the species occurrences database, gathering environmental data from other agencies (e.g., CDF, RWQCB), storing and managing data received from field crews into a query-able database, and creating standard field forms for field crews.

GIS Support. One permanent, full-time, associate-level position (1 PY's) and one permanent, full-time, entry-level position (1 PY's) (beginning in Year 7) will be required for creating and managing GIS layers, obtaining and managing aerial and/or satellite imagery, and assisting with the predictive modeling effort. Every 8 years, a new environmental conditions map will need to be produced and compared against previous maps for changes in vegetation coverage and condition, fire history, invasive exotic spread, etc.

Vegetation and Wildlife Rapid Assessment Protocol Surveys. The Rapid Assessment Protocol surveys will be conducted at a minimum of every 8 years to assess the coverage and condition of vegetation and wildlife habitat in the MSHCP Conservation Area. Because the initial vegetation rapid assessment mapping effort was already begun by CDFG in Spring 2002, this task has only been budgeted for one year of effort. The remapping effort in Year 9 is anticipated to be less intense than the initial effort because the task will only require updating changes to the GIS layer and map. Additionally, the wildlife rapid assessment surveys are being developed such that they only require one field season of data collection.

One permanent, full-time, associate-level botanist (1 PY's) will be required to analyze aerial photography and/or satellite imagery during the latter portion of the year prior to surveys to determine survey needs, assist GIS personnel with updating the environmental conditions map, and oversee field crews the following year. Because this position will also be responsible for the covered plant species surveys conducted at some level every year (see below), the PY for the associate-level botanist has been included under “Associate Biologist" in the Covered Species Surveys.

Three temporary entry-level positions (1.5 PY's) and three temporary seasonal positions (1.5 PY's) (three 2-person crews) will be required for conducting the vegetation and wildlife Rapid Assessment Protocol surveys, entering field data collected into a specified database, and will be required to assist GIS personnel with updating the environmental conditions map.

Covered Species Surveys. It is anticipated that Covered Species surveys will be conducted at some level every year. However, the current plan is to stagger the surveys for species so that the workload is not overwhelming in any one year. It is assumed that fewer personnel will be required during the first five years due to fewer number of acres available for surveys and because the initial inventory and assessment phase is anticipated to be less field intensive than the long-term monitoring phase. Due to overlapping survey periods and differences in field expertise, separate field crews will be required to conduct surveys for the different suites of species. Field crews will be expected to enter field data collected into a specified database. Associate-level positions will be responsible for checking field forms and databases for errors before forwarding the information to database management personnel.

The following field crews will be required (except where noted, positions are filled only during the appropriate field season period lasting no more than 6 months): [Note: The PYs for the Covered Species Surveys have been included under the title of “Biologist" in Tables 5-9 and 5-10 rather than separating them as “Botanist," “Mammalogist," “Herpetologist," etc.]

Initial Inventory and Assessment Phase

Fish and Amphibian Surveys

• 1 temporary full-time associate-level biologist position (0.5 PYs)
• 2 temporary full-time entry-level biologist positions (1 PYs)
• 4 Seasonal Aids (2 PYs)

Reptile Surveys

• 1 temporary full-time associate-level biologist position (0.5 PYs)
• 1 temporary full-time entry-level biologist position (0.5 PYs)
• 2 Seasonal Aids (1 PYs)

Bird Surveys

• 1 temporary full-time associate-level biologist position (0.5 PYs)
• 3 temporary full-time entry-level biologist positions (1.5 PYs)
• 2 Seasonal Aids (1 PYs)

Large Mammal Surveys

• 1 temporary full-time associate-level biologist position (0.5 PYs)
• 1 Seasonal Aid (0.5 PYs)

Small Mammals Surveys

• 1 temporary full-time associate-level biologist position (0.5 PYs)
• 1 temporary full-time entry-level biologist position (0.5 PYs)
• 2 Seasonal Aids (1 PYs)

Crustacean (Fairy Shrimp) Surveys

• 1 temporary full-time associate-level biologist position (0.5 PYs)
• 1 Seasonal Aid (0.5 PYs)

Insect (Delhi Fly and Quino) Surveys

• 1 temporary full-time associate-level biologist position, year-round (1 PYs)
• 3 temporary full-time entry-level biologist positions (1.5 PYs)

Plant Surveys

• 1 permanent, full-time associate-level botanist position, year-round (1 PYs)
• 3 temporary full-time entry-level botanist positions (1.5 PYs)

Long-Term Monitoring Phase

Fish and Amphibian Surveys

• 1 temporary full-time associate-level biologist position (0.5 PYs)
• 2 temporary full-time entry-level positions (1 PYs)
• 6 Seasonal Aids (3 PYs)

Reptile Surveys

• 1 temporary full-time associate-level biologist position (0.5 PYs)
• 2 temporary full-time entry-level biologist positions (1 PYs)
• 3 Seasonal Aids (1.5 PYs)

Bird Surveys:

• 1 temporary full-time associate-level biologist position (0.5 PYs)
• 5 temporary full-time entry-level biologist positions (2.5 PYs)
• 3 Seasonal Aids (1.5 PYs)

Large Mammal Surveys:

• 1 temporary full-time associate-level biologist position (0.5 PYs)
• 1 temporary full-time entry-level biologist position (0.5 PYs)
• 2 Seasonal Aids (1 PYs)

Small Mammal Surveys:

• 1 temporary full-time associate-level biologist position (0.5 PYs)
• 2 temporary full-time entry-level biologist positions (1 PYs)
• 3 Seasonal Aids (1.5 PYs)

Crustacean (Fairy Shrimp) Surveys:

• 1 temporary full-time associate-level biologist position (0.5 PYs)
• 1 Seasonal Aid (0.5 PYs)

Insect (Delhi Fly and Quino) Surveys:

• 1 temporary full-time associate-level biologist position, year-round (1 PYs)
• 5 temporary full-time entry-level biologist positions (2.5 PYs)

Plant Surveys:

• 1 permanent full-time associate-level botanist position, year-round (1 PYs)
• 5 temporary full-time entry-level botanist positions (2.5 PYs)