1. Donovan Craig R.A., UNLV Scott Abella, P.I. UNLV; Sara McPherson G.A., UNLV; Jean Pan, MOJN Ecologist; Bob Truitt, MOJN Data Manager; Jennifer Burke, MOJN Protocol Data Manager; Dana Robinson, MOJN GIS; Laura Steadman, MOJN GIS; Wendy Trowbridge, Springs Vegetation PD; Burt Pendleton, Integrated Upland PD; Geoff Moret, Water- related PD; Penny Latham, PWR Coordinator; and Nita Tallent-Halsell, MOJN Coordinator 1

2.  >40 million hectares infested (~4% of US); annual increases of 8-20% (FICMNEW- Federal Interagency Committee on Management of Noxious and Exotic Weeds) ◦ ~ 3-4% of NPS lands  Next to habitat loss, invasive species are a primary threat to global biodiversity (Scott and Wilcove 1988).  Parks have mission to maintain natural resources “unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.” 2

3. 3 Species-Area relationships

4.  Where are incipient populations of targeted (high- priority species of greatest management concern) invasive plants located in MOJN parks? ◦ Detect incipient populations and new occurrences of targeted invasive plants before they become established in prioritized search areas (vector corridors and areas of high management significance) in MOJN parks.  ED vs. S&T (distinct components) 4

5. 5 Roadsides, Trails, (VECTOR CORRIDORS) Moist areas with disturbance

6. ParkAreas of early detection management priority DEVASprings, dunes, (rare plant areas) vector corridors GRBARiparian meadows and trailheads (vector corridors) JOTRPalm oases, vector corridors LAKEHabitats that currently or historically support rare/sensitive plant species (sandy and gypsum soils); desert springs; vector corridors (e.g. roads, trails, riparian/washes) MANZCultural resources (most of park can be inventoried) MOJAKelso Dunes, Piute wash, desert springs, and vector corridors (road, rail, trail) PARASprings, vector corridors 6

7.  What is the trend in abundance and frequency of established target invasive plants in MOJN parks? ◦ Estimate the status and trend of established target invasive plants frequency and abundance in shrub and riparian communities and other priority management sites identified by the prioritization process.  S&T 7

8. 8 SpeciesCommon nameWhat it doesLocation/Trends Brassica tournefortii Sahara mustardDisplaces native annuals, increase fuel loads Occurs in lower desert, washes, stable sands, (but many soil types) Bromus spp. (rubens and tectorum) Red brome and cheatgrass Fuel large and frequent fires (alteration of ecosystem processes). Occurs in mid elevation desert shrublands (e.g. Red Rock, Great Basin Desert) Erodium cicutariumRedstem filareeDisplaces native annuals Very widespread, may dominate after fires. Schismus spp. (arabicus and barbatus) Mediterranean grass Displaces native annuals, increase fuel loads Occurs in lower desert with few limitations Tamarix spp.Tamarisk, saltcedar Riparian vegetation displacement Will occur in any consistently moist area.

9. 9 High bars mostly Bromus spp.

10.  What is the relationship between exotic plant management practices and target IEPs, secondary invasive plant species and non-target native species?  Estimate the trend of established target invasive plants abundance, secondary invasive plant abundance and native plant abundance following pest management practices in MOJN parks.  Simply a before and after measurable trend- not a controlled study. 10

11.  S&T for those parks/sites covered by Springs and IU protocols.  All parks need early detection efforts.  Threats of certain exotic species similar for many parks, but many differing degrees of threats (Early Detection vs. Status and Trends) ◦ For example: Brassica tournefortii at LAKE vs. DEVA  So question is: Which species and why?  Plus: Which areas within parks and why? 11

12. 12

13.  Status and Trends monitoring integrated with other vegetation protocols. ◦ Focusing on established species of high ecological concerns (some beyond management feasibility).  Early Detection methods following the “Weed Sentry” program model (with adjustments). ◦ Focusing most on incipient invasions. ◦ Should not exclude certain exotics based on management feasibility. ◦ Some level of measure for all (P/A). 13

14. 14

15. 15

16. 16  Roads, trails, shorelines/riparian corridors, and other high disturbance areas (e.g. developments)  Due to slower rate of travel (when driving), generally exclude major heavily travelled roads (safety issue). ◦ These get plenty of observation as is.  Depending on park resources and length/type of routes, prioritize routes.

17. 17  Lessons learned from WS program: ◦ Do not exclude exotic plants from data  (at minimum P/A) ◦ If time, include targeted “off-road” searches  Perpendicular transects ◦ Better repeatability of measurement data  %cover vs. coarse abundance categories

18.  Presence/Absence for all exotics at a minimum along ED routes.  Measures of abundance for target incipient invasive exotics. ◦ Depends on species for type of measure (% cover, density, census) ◦ Patches of herbaceous weeds (% infested area of gross area). ◦ Measure standard plot for repeatability (10x10m) 18

19.  Based on climate and elevation gradients  Based on plant life forms and phenology  Exotic winter annuals in lower MOJN: can start in late winter/early spring (varies with annual moisture, more time constraint).  Perennials most often associated with higher moisture regimes (springs, riparian; less time constraint).  GRBA shorter growing season (summer park) 19

20.  Parks will be responsible for Early Detection staff (volunteers??). ◦ LAKE has “Resource Steward” program ◦ Great citizen-science opportunities ◦ NCC, ACE work crews  I&M crews for Integrated Upland and Springs/Riparian Vegetation will cover Status and Trends monitoring. 20

21. 10/15/1011/15/101/15/112/15/114/1/115/30/116/1/11 Background and Objectives Sampling Design Field Methods Data Management Have ED field testing complete Operational requirements Submit for park review SOPs Analysis and reporting Personnel and Training 21 Early Detection Protocol Narrative and SOPs 7/1/1110/1/1112/1/111/30/12 Sent to PWR (External Review) Comments back Revisions done End of 60-day wrap up. Protocol finished

22.  Ideas still in development.  Ideally, we would want to have a centralized database (easily accessible to all, web interface).  Some crossover of ED with S&T ◦ I&M (S&T) crews (Springs Veg, IU) would report incidental observations for Early Detection (“trip report”). 22

23. 23

24.  For Status & Trends, this will fall under other vegetation protocols.  For Early Detection, parks are responsible. 24

25.  Adequate training of observers and field guides should improve quality of data.  Photos and/or voucher specimens taken for “unknown” plants.  Centralized Database??- would need strict QA/QC measures. 25

26.  Major network-wide inventory of known exotic species and threats. ◦ Much information about each species (biology, distributions, habits) ◦ Broken down to individual park inventories  Wrapping up prioritization of species (first draft).  ED narrative (early sections) coming along.  Field guide for crews and training purposes 26

27. 27

28. 28

29. Donovan Craig: donovan.craig@unlv.edu donovan.craig@unlv.edu 29 Scott Abella: scott.abella@unlv.edu scott.abella@unlv.edu (702) 895-5163