1B. Viability Assessment and Goals

1B. Viability Assessment and Goals
Conservation Coaches Network Workshop Presentation 1B. Viability Assessment and Goals

Adaptive Management Workshop Presentations
1A-1B. Team, Scope, Vision 1B. Conservation Targets 1B. Viability Assessment 2A-1. Strategy Selection 2A-2. Results Chains 2A-3. Goals and Objectives 1C. Threat Rating 1D. Conceptual Models 2B. Monitoring Plan

Conceptualize Viability Assessment

This Presentation Viability Assessment What is viability assessment?
How to do viability assessment Additional examples of viability assessment Advice for doing viability assessment

Viability Assessment What is it?
Step 3 - Viability Analysis Viability Assessment What is it? 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Viability (ecological integrity) of a conservation target is the measure to which the target is……. resistant to change in its structure and composition in the face of external stresses and resilient – able to recover upon experiencing occasional severe stress TNC & Foundations of Success 6

Viability Assessment What is it?
Step 3 - Viability Analysis Viability Assessment What is it? 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Viability assessment helps teams answer important questions: Bog frog What key characteristics define a healthy target? How do we physically measure those characteristics? (indicators) How is our target doing now? What do we want to achieve? (ultimate, measurable goals) TNC & Foundations of Success 7

Our Example – Swan Coastal Plain Wetlands
Viability Assessment Throughout our presentations, we use example outputs from the Wetland Watch project from WWF Australia that we have modified slightly to reflect the structure and products of the CMP Open Standards. The intent is to give a real-world example of how the Standards have been applied. Adapted from WWF Australia’s WeltlandsWatch Project

Swan Coastal Plain Conservation Targets
Viability Assessment Seasonally flooded wetlands Eucalyptus-Melaleuca woodlands Fringing shrublands Permanent lakes Blue-billed ducks This region supports significant breeding numbers of the near threatened Blue-billed Duck.

The Basics Viability Assessment
Step 3 - Viability Analysis The Basics 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Define key characteristics (“key ecological attributes” or KEAs) of your target. Identify indicator(s) for each KEA Describe what would constitute “good” status Define the current status and desired future status for your target Complete the rating scale for each indicator, using the categories of Very Good, Good, Fair, or Poor. TNC & Foundations of Success 11

The Details Viability Assessment
Step 3 - Viability Analysis The Details 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Define “key ecological attributes” (KEAs) of your target. KEA: Aspects of a target’s biology or ecology that - If present, define a healthy target - If missing or altered, would lead to the loss or extreme degradation of that target over time. Examples: Tropical hardwood forest target: size, connectivity among systems, presence of key species Migratory fish target: population status, access to spawning habitat, quality of spawning habitat TNC & Foundations of Success 12

Step 3 - Viability Analysis The Details 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment 1) Define “key ecological attributes” of your target. Consider the following categories: Size: Geographic extent (ecosystem or habitat) Abundance &/or demographics of the population/community (species) Condition: Composition, structure, & biotic interactions Landscape Context: Landscape-scale ecological processes, connectivity TNC & Foundations of Success 13

# adult birds of reproductive age
Step 3 - Viability Analysis The Details 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment 1) Define “key ecological attributes” of your target. Target Category KEA Indicator Blue billed ducks Size Population size # adult birds of reproductive age TNC & Foundations of Success 14

Step 3 - Viability Analysis The Details 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Identify an indicator(s) for your KEA Target Category KEA Indicator Blue billed ducks Size Population size # adult birds of reproductive age TNC & Foundations of Success 15

Indicators are what you measure
Viability Assessment Indicators are measurable aspects of the Key Ecological Attribute that inform us of its status or “health” Key Attribute: Circulatory system Indicator: Blood pressure Indicators are what you measure

Step 3 - Viability Analysis The Details 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Describe what would constitute “good” status of the indicator. Indicator Ratings Target Category KEA Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good Blue billed ducks Size Population size # adult birds of reproductive age TNC & Foundations of Success 17

The Details Viability Assessment Fair:
Step 3 - Viability Analysis The Details 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Fair: Outside acceptable range of variation; Requires human intervention Good: Indicator w/in acceptable range of variation; Some intervention required for maintenance Indicator Ratings Target Category KEA Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good Blue billed ducks Size Population size # adult birds of reproductive age Threshold line TNC & Foundations of Success 18

Step 3 - Viability Analysis The Details 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment What is an “acceptable range of variation?” MENTION IT’S CHALLENGING TO FIGURE OUT THE BOUNDS OF NATURAL RANGE OF VARIATION, TAKE YOUR BEST GUESS, REFINE OVER TIME TNC & Foundations of Success 19

The Details Viability Assessment Poor:
Step 3 - Viability Analysis The Details 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Poor: Restoration increasingly difficult; May result in extirpation Fair: Outside acceptable range of variation; Requires human intervention Good: Indicator w/in acceptable range of variation; Some intervention required for maintenance Very Good: Ecologically desirable status; Requires little intervention for maintenance Indicator Ratings Target Category KEA Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good Blue billed ducks Size Population size # adult birds of reproductive age Threshold line TNC & Foundations of Success 20

Step 3 - Viability Analysis The Details 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Poor: Restoration increasingly difficult; May result in extirpation Fair: Outside acceptable range of variation; Requires human intervention Good: Indicator w/in acceptable range of variation; Some intervention required for maintenance Very Good: Ecologically desirable status; Requires little intervention for maintenance Indicator Ratings Target Category KEA Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good Blue billed ducks Size Population size # adult birds of reproductive age 1000 or more Threshold line TNC & Foundations of Success 21

Step 3 - Viability Analysis The Details 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Poor: Restoration increasingly difficult; May result in extirpation Fair: Outside acceptable range of variation; Requires human intervention Good: Indicator w/in acceptable range of variation; Some intervention required for maintenance Very Good: Ecologically desirable status; Requires little intervention for maintenance Indicator Ratings Target Category KEA Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good Blue billed ducks Size Population size # adult birds of reproductive age <1000 1000 or more Threshold line TNC & Foundations of Success 22

Step 3 - Viability Analysis The Details 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment 4) Define the current state and desired future state for your target Indicator Ratings Target Category KEA Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good Blue billed ducks Size Population size # adult birds of reproductive age <1000 1000 or more Current Status <1000 (~900) Desired Future Status >1000 TNC & Foundations of Success 23

Step 3 - Viability Analysis The Details 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment 5) Complete the rating scale for each indicator, using the categories of Very Good, Good, Fair, or Poor. This is usually done after the workshop. Indicator Ratings Target Category KEA Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good Blue billed ducks Size Population size # adult birds of reproductive age 700 – 999 1,000 – 2,000 Threshold line TNC & Foundations of Success 24

Step 3 - Viability Analysis The Details 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment 5) Complete the rating scale for each indicator, using the categories of Very Good, Good, Fair, or Poor. This is usually done after the workshop. Indicator Ratings Target Category KEA Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good Blue billed ducks Size Population size # adult birds of reproductive age < 700 700 – 999 1,000 – 2,000 > 2,000 Threshold line TNC & Foundations of Success 25

Viability in Miradi Viability Assessment Step 3 - Viability Analysis
26 April 2019 Viability Assessment TNC & Foundations of Success 26

Preview of Goals Viability Assessment Goal: By ~2025, there are at least 1,500 adult blue-billed ducks of reproductive age in the Swan Coastal Plain From the Viability Assessment… Indicator Ratings Target Category Character- istic Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good Blue billed ducks Size Population size # adult birds of reproductive age 700 – 999 1,000 – 2,000 > 2,000 Current Status 900 Desired Future Status 1,500 Mention: Opportunities Showing uncertainty in relationships (with a ?)

Another Example Viability Assessment Poor:
Step 3 - Viability Analysis Another Example 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Poor: Restoration increasingly difficult; May result in extirpation Fair: Outside acceptable range of variation; Requires human intervention Good: Indicator w/in acceptable range of variation; Some intervention required for maintenance Very Good: Ecologically desirable status; Requires little intervention for maintenance Target Category KEA Seasonally flooded wetlands Condition Community architecture MIRADI OR TABLE? TNC & Foundations of Success 28

Step 3 - Viability Analysis Another Example 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Poor: Restoration increasingly difficult; May result in extirpation Fair: Outside acceptable range of variation; Requires human intervention Good: Indicator w/in acceptable range of variation; Some intervention required for maintenance Very Good: Ecologically desirable status; Requires little intervention for maintenance Target Category KEA Indicator Seasonally flooded wetlands Condition Community architecture Native plant species richness MIRADI OR TABLE? TNC & Foundations of Success 29

Step 3 - Viability Analysis Another Example 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Poor: Restoration increasingly difficult; May result in extirpation Fair: Outside acceptable range of variation; Requires human intervention Good: Indicator w/in acceptable range of variation; Some intervention required for maintenance Very Good: Ecologically desirable status; Requires little intervention for maintenance Indicator Ratings Target Category KEA Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good Seasonally flooded wetlands Condition Community architecture Native plant species richness Mostly native vegetat- ion Native vegetat- ion only MIRADI OR TABLE? TNC & Foundations of Success 30

Step 3 - Viability Analysis Another Example 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Poor: Restoration increasingly difficult; May result in extirpation Fair: Outside acceptable range of variation; Requires human intervention Good: Indicator w/in acceptable range of variation; Some intervention required for maintenance Very Good: Ecologically desirable status; Requires little intervention for maintenance Indicator Ratings Target Category KEA Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good Seasonally flooded wetlands Condition Community architecture Native plant species richness Predom- inantly invasive exotics Some invasives Mostly native vegetat- ion Native vegetat- ion only MIRADI OR TABLE? TNC & Foundations of Success 31

Step 3 - Viability Analysis Another Example 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Poor: Restoration increasingly difficult; May result in extirpation Fair: Outside acceptable range of variation; Requires human intervention Good: Indicator w/in acceptable range of variation; Some intervention required for maintenance Very Good: Ecologically desirable status; Requires little intervention for maintenance Indicator Ratings Target Category KEA Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good Seasonally flooded wetlands Condition Community architecture Native plant species richness Predom- inantly invasive exotics Some invasives Mostly native vegetat- ion Native vegetat- ion only Current Status Desired Future Status Mostly native MIRADI OR TABLE? TNC & Foundations of Success 32

Another Example Viability Assessment
Step 3 - Viability Analysis Another Example 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment By ~2030, the seasonally flooded wetlands of the Swan Coastal Plain are composed of at least 95% native species. Poor: Restoration increasingly difficult; May result in extirpation Fair: Outside acceptable range of variation; Requires human intervention Good: Indicator w/in acceptable range of variation; Some intervention required for maintenance Very Good: Ecologically desirable status; Requires little intervention for maintenance Indicator Ratings Target Category KEA Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good Seasonally flooded wetlands Condition Community architecture Native plant species richness Predom- inantly invasive exotics Some invasives Mostly native vegetat- ion Native vegetat- ion only Current Status Desired Future Status Mostly native MIRADI OR TABLE? TNC & Foundations of Success 33

KEA for Mangrove Forest
Step 3 - Viability Analysis KEA for Mangrove Forest 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Focal Target Category Key Attribute Mangrove Forest Size Habitat Size TNC & Foundations of Success 35

Indicator for Mangrove Forest
Step 3 - Viability Analysis Indicator for Mangrove Forest 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Focal Target Category Key Attribute Indicator Mangrove Forest Size Habitat Size % of original forest TNC & Foundations of Success 36

Viability Ratings for Mangrove Forest
Step 3 - Viability Analysis Viability Ratings for Mangrove Forest 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Indicator Ratings Bold=Current Italics=Desired Focal Target Category Key Attribute Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good Mangrove Forest Size Habitat Size % of original forest 51-75 TNC & Foundations of Success 37

Viability Ratings for Mangrove Forest
Step 3 - Viability Analysis Viability Ratings for Mangrove Forest 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Indicator Ratings Bold=Current Italics=Desired Focal Target Category Key Attribute Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good Mangrove Forest Size Habitat Size % of original forest < 25 25-50 51-75 > 75 TNC & Foundations of Success 38

Viability Ratings for Coral Reef
Step 3 - Viability Analysis Viability Ratings for Coral Reef 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Focal Target Category Key Attribute Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good Coral Reef Condition Species Composition TNC & Foundations of Success 39

Step 3 - Viability Analysis Viability Ratings for Coral Reef 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Note that in this case the indicator is a threat to the target. That is OK, but always state the KEA is positive terms – as an attribute of the target. Focal Target Category Key Attribute Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good Coral Reef Condition Species Composition # of Crown of thorns per transect TNC & Foundations of Success 40

Step 3 - Viability Analysis Viability Ratings for Coral Reef 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Indicator Ratings Focal Target Category Key Attribute Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good Coral Reef Condition Species Composition # of Crown of thorns per transect Some None TNC & Foundations of Success 41

Step 3 - Viability Analysis Viability Ratings for Coral Reef 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Indicator Ratings Focal Target Category Key Attribute Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good Coral Reef Condition Species Composition # of Crown of thorns per transect Some None Current Status Desired Future Status TNC & Foundations of Success 42

Step 3 - Viability Analysis Viability Ratings for Coral Reef 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment Indicator Ratings Focal Target Category Key Attribute Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good Coral Reef Condition Species Composition # of Crown of thorns per transect 4+ 1-3 Current Status 2 Desired Future Status TNC & Foundations of Success 43

From Viability Assessment in Indonesian Village
Indicator Ratings Bold=Current Italics=Desired Focal Target Category Key Attribute Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good Catches from the Sea Population size Fish catch per day X Size Catches from the Sea identified as a focal target for fish caught for local consumption and sale Key attribute & indicator selected Fisherman observe that catch is much less than they remember in recent times Current status considered not viable (Fair)

From Viability Assessment in Indonesian Village
Indicator Ratings Bold=Current Italics=Desired Focal Target Category Key Attribute Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good Catches from the Sea 11-30 strings of fish strings of fish > 100 strings of fish Population size Fish catch per day (# of strings of fish over min size) <10 strings of fish Size Interviews indicate current harvest < 30 strings of fish over minimum catch size Ten years ago, harvest yielded up to 200 strings of fish over minimum catch size > 100 considered Very Good considered Good

Overall “Picture” of Project Viability
Viability Assessment CONDITION SIZE LANDSCAPE CONTEXT CONDITION SIZE LANDSCAPE CONTEXT When you look at the viability all your targets together – what you have is an overall estimate of the viability of your project Target A Viability Target B Viability Target C Viability Target D Viability Biodiversity Health or Landscape Functionality

Key Words for This Process
Step 3 - Viability Analysis Key Words for This Process 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment “Representative & Encompass” Indicators → Key Attributes → Conservation Targets → Biodiversity at Site TNC & Foundations of Success 48

Tips for Selecting KEAs
Viability Assessment Pick factors that are critical for long-term viability – characteristics that, if degraded, would seriously jeopardize the target’s ability to persist for 100+ years When in doubt, pick characteristics that are likely to be affected by human activities Look for a few really key ecological attributes… versus many desirable or descriptive characteristics Key ecological attributes are what’s important…

Tips for Selecting Indicators
Viability Assessment Look for indicators that: Strongly relate to the status of the key ecological attribute Are efficient & affordable to measure Can reasonably define what constitutes “Good” Desirable indicators ... Might provide an early warning to serious stresses Might assess two or more key ecological attributes e.g. Presence of young cypress in a floodplain forest as an indicator for both hydrological regime & reproduction of dominant species

Be Prepared to Accept Uncertainty!!
Step 3 - Viability Analysis Be Prepared to Accept Uncertainty!! 26 April 2019 Viability Assessment The main purpose of viability assessment is capturing the current state of knowledge Don’t worry about information gaps Don’t focus on filling out all indicator ratings! Viability assessment is an iterative process with successive approximations. You can return during later planning stages to add more detail (if necessary) This next series of slides provides some general guidance to avoid getting mired in the viability assessment procedure. TNC & Foundations of Success 51

Viability Assessment 1st Pass Table Target Category KEA Indicator grassland - Type X Landscape Context fire regime fire frequency This may be all that is known at Time A Grassland target identified Fire regime = Key Attribute (Landscape Context) Fire frequency = Indicator Dense woody cover suggests not enough fire

Viability Assessment 1st Pass Table Indicator Ratings Target Category KEA Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good grassland - Type X Landscape Context fire regime fire frequency not enough fire Grassland focal target identified Fire regime = Key Attribute (Landscape Context) Fire frequency = Indicator Dense woody cover suggests not enough fire Current status deemed not viable - assigned “Fair” This is simply the information from the previous table captured within the Indicator Rating table format of the Excel workbook tool.

Viability Assessment 2nd Pass Table Indicator Ratings Target Category KEA Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good grassland - Type X Landscape Context fire regime fire frequency not enough fire > 10 years 5-10 years This represents a refinement of the “not enough fire” description. Phone call to local grassland expert indicates natural fire frequency of 5-10 years

Viability Assessment 3rd Pass Table Indicator Ratings Target Category KEA Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good grassland - Type X Landscape Context fire regime fire frequency not enough fire > 10 years 5-10 years % grassland w/ 5-10 yr fire return <25% 25-50% 51-75% >75% As the team considered the importance of fires at a frequency of 5-10 years, they also realized that regular fires that burned only a small area of the grassland would not meet the ecological needs of the grassland community. They changed the indicator to reflect the proportion of the grassland with the desirable fire frequency. % area burned at acceptable frequency is key

Incomplete is OK! Viability Assessment
Indicator Ratings Bold=Current Italics=Desired Focal Target Category Key Attribute Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good grassland - Type X Size Size/extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems aerial extent in acres > 100,000 acres How important is it to fill out all ratings in this case where Current & Desired status is Very Good? Probably Not Important! Unless grassland area is threatened by large-scale habitat destruction. In this case, determining the Fair rating might guide efforts to determine how much to save

Where to get more info… Viability Assessment
Examples: TNC Conpro database (TNC) -

Key Points Viability Key Ecological Attributes – important characteristics of targets Indicators – what you actually measure “Reduce, reuse, recycle” KEAs if one will work for more than one target Rating is important (especially Good versus Fair) Viability assessment is iterative - if in doubt, just try it... Identify as few as possible, look for KEA’s that may relate to more than one target where possible (fresh water flows – might be important for the river, the flood plain, reproduction of cypress tress, spawning, etc.) Teams shouldn’t make themselves crazy filling in all the boxes – finding values for all the ranking levels. Think about that threshold between “fair” and “good” as the point where a target is showing signs of trouble and may need some restoration (fair) and “good” where you have reasonable confidence with only some maintenance types of management intervention the target will persist. Understanding this cusp is useful as it helps to illuminate importance and expediency of intervention. Remember “poor” means – almost at “death’s door”

1B. Viability Assessment and Goals

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "1B. Viability Assessment and Goals"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

1B. Viability Assessment and Goals

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "1B. Viability Assessment and Goals"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback