Geology topics

Lara Niell

Publications and source records attributed to Lara Niell.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2016

Spatially explicit modeling of annual and seasonal habitat for greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ) in Nevada and Northeastern California—An updated decision-support tool for management

Successful adaptive management hinges largely upon integrating new and improved sources of information as they become available. As a timely example of this tenet, we updated a management decision support tool that was previously developed for greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus , hereinafter referred to as “sage-grouse”) populations in Nevada and California. Specifically, recently developed spatially explicit habitat maps derived from empirical data played a key role in the conservation of this species facing listing under the Endangered Species Act. This report provides an updated process for mapping relative habitat suitability and management categories for sage-grouse in Nevada and northeastern California (Coates and others, 2014, 2016). These updates include: (1) adding radio and GPS telemetry locations from sage-grouse monitored at multiple sites during 2014 to the original location dataset beginning in 1998; (2) integrating output from high resolution maps (1–2 m 2 ) of sagebrush and pinyon-juniper cover as covariates in resource selection models; (3) modifying the spatial extent of the analyses to match newly available vegetation layers; (4) explicit modeling of relative habitat suitability during three seasons (spring, summer, winter) that corresponded to critical life history periods for sage-grouse (breeding, brood-rearing, over-wintering); (5) accounting for differences in habitat availability between more mesic sagebrush steppe communities in the northern part of the study area and drier Great Basin sagebrush in more southerly regions by categorizing continuous region-wide surfaces of habitat suitability index (HSI) with independent locations falling within two hydrological zones; (6) integrating the three seasonal maps into a composite map of annual relative habitat suitability; (7) deriving updated land management categories based on previously determined cut-points for intersections of habitat suitability and an updated index of sage-grouse abundance and space-use (AUI); and (8) masking urban footprints and major roadways out of the final map products. Seasonal habitat maps were generated based on model-averaged resource selection functions (RSF) derived for 10 project areas (813 sage-grouse; 14,085 locations) during the spring season, 10 during the summer season (591 sage-grouse, 11,743 locations), and 7 during the winter season (288 sage-grouse, 4,862 locations). RSF surfaces were transformed to HSIs and averaged in a GIS framework for every pixel for each season. Validation analyses of categorized HSI surfaces using a suite of independent datasets resulted in an agreement of 93–97 percent for habitat versus non-habitat on an annual basis. Spring and summer maps validated similarly well at 94–97 percent, while winter maps validated slightly less accurately at 87–93 percent. We then provide an updated example of how space use models can be integrated with habitat models to help inform conservation planning. We used updated lek count data to calculate a composite abundance and space use index (AUI) that comprised the combination of probabilistic breeding density with a non-linear probability of occurrence relative to distance to nearest lek. The AUI was then classified into two categories of use (high and low-to-no) and intersected with the HSI categories to create potential management prioritization scenarios based on information about sage-grouse occupancy coupled with habitat suitability. Compared to Coates and others (2014, 2016), the amount of area classified as habitat across the region increased by 6.5 percent (approximately 1,700,000 acres). For management categories, core increased by 7.2 percent (approximately 865,000 acres), priority increased by 9.6 percent (approximately 855,000 acres), and general increased by 9.2 percent (approximately 768,000 acres), while non-habitat decreased (that is, classified non-habitat occurring outside of areas of concentrated use) by 11.9 percent (approximately 2,500,000 acres). Importantly, seasonal and annual maps represent habitat for all age and sex classes of sage-grouse (that is, sample sizes of marked grouse were insufficient to only construct models for reproductive females). This revised sage-grouse habitat mapping product helps improve adaptive application of conservation planning tools based on intersections of spatially explicit habitat suitability, abundance, and space use indices.

California, Nevada↗

USGS2014

Spatially explicit modeling of greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ) habitat in Nevada and northeastern California: a decision-support tool for management

Greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus , hereafter referred to as “sage-grouse”) populations are declining throughout the sagebrush ( Artemisia spp.) ecosystem, including millions of acres of potential habitat across the West. Habitat maps derived from empirical data are needed given impending listing decisions that will affect both sage-grouse population dynamics and human land-use restrictions. This report presents the process for developing spatially explicit maps describing relative habitat suitability for sage-grouse in Nevada and northeastern California. Maps depicting habitat suitability indices (HSI) values were generated based on model-averaged resource selection functions informed by more than 31,000 independent telemetry locations from more than 1,500 radio-marked sage-grouse across 12 project areas in Nevada and northeastern California collected during a 15-year period (1998–2013). Modeled habitat covariates included land cover composition, water resources, habitat configuration, elevation, and topography, each at multiple spatial scales that were relevant to empirically observed sage-grouse movement patterns. We then present an example of how the HSI can be delineated into categories. Specifically, we demonstrate that the deviation from the mean can be used to classify habitat suitability into three categories of habitat quality (high, moderate, and low) and one non-habitat category. The classification resulted in an agreement of 93–97 percent for habitat versus non-habitat across a suite of independent validation datasets. Lastly, we provide an example of how space use models can be integrated with habitat models to help inform conservation planning. In this example, we combined probabilistic breeding density with a non-linear probability of occurrence relative to distance to nearest lek (traditional breeding ground) using count data to calculate a composite space use index (SUI). The SUI was then classified into two categories of use (high and low-to-no) and intersected with the HSI categories to create potential management prioritization scenarios based oninformation about sage-grouse occupancy coupled with habitat suitability. This provided an example of a conservation planning application that uses the intersection of the spatially-explicit HSI and empirically-based SUI to identify potential spatially explicit strategies for sage-grouse management. Importantly, the reported categories for the HSI and SUI can be reclassified relatively easily to employ alternative conservation thresholds that may be identified through decision-making processes with stake-holders, managers, and biologists. Moreover, the HSI/SUI interface map can be updated readily as new data become available.

California;Nevada↗

USGS2013

Wildfire and invasive species in the west: challenges that hinder current and future management and protection of the sagebrush-steppe ecosystem: a Gap Report

The Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (WAFWA) to satisfy the 45-day report requirement identified in Cooperative Agreement (F13AC00353) between WAFWA and the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) submit this “Gap Report”. This report summarizes the policy, fiscal and science challenges that land managers encounter related to the control and reduction of the invasive plant/fire complex, especially as it relates to the threaten or endangered species listing status of the Greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ). While this Gap Report identifies 22 technical, policy, planning and funding gaps, it should be considered a “work in-progress”. To address this effort a Wildfire/Invasive Initiative Work Group (WG) was formed. The WG consist of nationally recognized experts in fire ecology, Sage-grouse ecology and management, range management and plant ecology. The WG developed this Gap Report and will be developing the final report for this Cooperative Agreement. Thus, as the WG evaluates the wildfire/invasive issue and makes recommendation to address scientific and management shortcomings, additional gaps will be identified and included in the final report. Within this report, the WG has suggested the top 5 gaps. However, the actual priority of what should be addressed first will depend on the significance and sequence of the limiting factor, available funding, current work, roles and responsibilities of the specific agencies, etc. The WG will continue to meet on a regular basis to further develop and expand this list of gaps. Additionally, the WG will offer specific options to address the identified gaps. However, the WG recommends that the FWS, possibly through the State/Federal (Western Governors Association) Sage Grouse Task Force or the National Sage-grouse Executive Oversight Committee, establish a Subcommittee to specifically review this Gap Report and develop a multi-agency approach on how to address each gap. The WG will continue to endeavor to establish a priority list and identify the “low hanging fruit” that can be addressed in the short-term to affect the listing decision. Additionally, the WG will propose a longer-term strategy. However, to successfully establish such a strategy it will take buy-in and commitment at the highest levels in federal and state governments. In an effort to provide managers an opportunity to address the most important issues this coming fiscal year, we offer the following top 5 gaps. Beyond these top 5, the WG has identified 17 additional gaps that should be evaluated by both federal and state agencies as a means to help better manage the wildfire/invasive threat in the west.

Report↗