A White Paper Discussing Management Indicator Species (MIS)
A White Paper Discussing Management Indicator Species (MIS)
A White Paper Discussing Management Indicator Species (MIS)
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
1. Monitoring programs often depend on a small number of indicators and, as a<br />
consequence, fail to consider the full complexity of the ecological system,<br />
2. Choice of ecological indicators is often confounded in management programs that<br />
have vague long-term goal and objectives,<br />
3. <strong>Management</strong> and monitoring programs often lack scientific rigor because of their<br />
failure to use a defined protocol for identifying ecological indicators.<br />
“The Plan’s monitoring and evaluation is not rigorous scientific research, nor was it<br />
intended to be. The level of research is not necessary for evaluating Plan<br />
implementation.” 8<br />
It would be worthwhile to involve the Research Unit nearby to assist us in developing<br />
some protocols, if not national protocols for maintaining and evaluating monitoring data<br />
for species and ecological communities we might choose are not readily available<br />
elsewhere.<br />
The Case For and Against Monitoring Programs<br />
Table 1. Pros and Cons of Monitoring Programs<br />
Pros 9 Cons 10<br />
Monitoring programs provide a basis for Monitoring programs are prohibitively<br />
learning and understanding<br />
Monitoring program data can resolve<br />
complicated resources issues.<br />
Monitoring programs can provide new and<br />
novel approaches to management<br />
Monitoring programs can help us<br />
understand the loss of ecological resilience.<br />
Monitoring can provide insights into<br />
cause-and-effect relations between<br />
environmental stressors and anticipated<br />
ecosystem responses.<br />
expensive to implement<br />
Relationships between indicator species<br />
and habitat characteristics are often not<br />
known<br />
Changes in the population that are<br />
detected could be due to habitat<br />
changes beyond management control<br />
Monitoring of indicator species may be<br />
impractical because the large numbers<br />
of skilled staff required may not be<br />
available during the critical time<br />
periods.<br />
Selection of species is sometimes based<br />
on factors other than their biological or<br />
ecological representatives<br />
Court Rulings Including Recent Sierra Club Settlement Agreement<br />
8<br />
National Forests and Grasslands in Texas. 1999. The NFGT 1997-1999 Monitoring and Evaluation<br />
Report. Lufkin, Texas.<br />
9<br />
Busch, D. and J. Trexler. 2002. Monitoring Ecosystems. Island Press. 384 pp.<br />
10<br />
General Accounting Office (GAO). 1991. Wildlife <strong>Management</strong>: Problems Being Experienced with<br />
Current Monitoring Approach. Washington, D.C.