HOUSEKEEPING Notes Upcoming meetings related to connectivity: FTP site? Zotero NJ Land Conservation Rally March 9, 2013; NJIT in Newark, NJ One-day educational conference about preserving New Jersey s open space and farmland http://www.njconservation.org/conservationrally.htm New Jersey Chapter of The Wildlife Society TOPIC: Human infrastructure in the way: impacts of roads, towers, aircraft et al. on wildlife and studies to mitigate their effect April 10, 2013; 9:30-3:30 at Assunpink Conservation Center ICOET: http://www.icoet.net/icoet_2013/ June 23-27, 2013 in Scottsdale, Arizona, USA. ICCB: http://www.conbio.org/mini-sites/iccb-2013 Connecting Systems, Disciplines and Stakeholders July 21-25, 2013 in Baltimore, MD, USA
ZOTERO www.zotero.org
AGENDA Recap of other core team meetings Review and finalize draft of NJ mapping goals/objectives Mapping starting point View foundation layers on NJ s landscape Hands-on corridor mapping exercise Discuss next steps Species data availability Tasks Finalize goals/objectives of NJ Habitat Connectivity Map Review of habitat connectivity mapping across the U.S. report TBD
RECAP Communication Core Team Meeting Two January 24th, 10 am noon Assunpink Wildlife Management Area, Main Office Meeting attendees: Gretchen Fowles, MacKenzie Hall, Andrea Kornbluh, Bill Pitts, Brian Zarate, Kelly Triece Researched materials developed by other states to support connectivity projects Discussed team goals/objectives Brainstormed task ideas Tasks: Populate annotated bibliography of materials Draft team goals/objectives Organize and prioritize task list Review working group website
RECAP Guidance Document Core Team Meeting Two January 24th, 1-3 pm Assunpink Wildlife Management Area, Main Building Meeting attendees: Joe Bilinski, Emile DeVito, Gretchen Fowles, Steve Jandoli, Paula Scelsi, Lisa Stern, Joe Sweger, Kelly Triece, Nellie Tsipoura, Charu Vaidya, Brian Zarate Reviewed goals/objectives of connectivity projects in 4 western states Reviewed corridor narratives from those same states and discussed elements that we should include in the NJ Guidance Doc template Reviewed complimentary NJ projects: culvert inventory, road crossing survey, road mitigation BMPs Tasks: Contact states with a questionnaire about their respective guidance docs Draft goals/objectives of Guidance Doc
RECAP Mapping Core Team Meeting Two January 25th, 10 am - noon Assunpink Wildlife Management Area, Main Office Meeting attendees: Patrick Carr, Margaret Conroy, Karl Figueiredo, Gretchen Fowles, Gylla MacGregor, Amy Miller, Kristin Munafo, Nick Procopio, Ron Smith, Lisa Stern, Dane Ward, Brian Zarate Reviewed general steps/decisions necessary for connectivity map development Reviewed goals and approaches taken by other states with connectivity mapping Discussed approach for NJ Discussed goals/objectives of NJ Connectivity Mapping Tasks: Draft goals/objectives of NJ Connectivity Mapping Gather relevant GIS data to review at February meeting
MAPPING GOALS/OBJECTIVES Identify terrestrial wildlife corridors critical for the long term maintenance of metapopulations, community structure, and landscape-level interactions. or Identify habitat corridors that are critical for the long-term viability of terrestrial wildlife populations. or Identify habitat corridors for terrestrial wildlife that facilitate movement of species, populations, and genes among resource patches, from ecological to evolutionary time scales (Taylor et al. 1993) The identified corridors are ones that: Provide live-in and move-through habitat [Serve to reconnect existing protected areas] Enable species to meet basic daily and seasonal biological requirements (e.g. finding food, mates, cover) Provide for dispersal and recolonization of populations Enable redistribution of populations in response to climatic, environmental, and population level changes Restore or retain genetic exchange among populations Consider connectivity across the state border
MAPPING STEPS Toward Best Practices (Beier et al. 2011) Goal of the map Establish collaborations Define the region Delineate natural landscape blocks Expert opinion Areas of high ecological integrity Protected areas Site-optimization algorithms Existing maps of conservation priority Habitat cores for a species or suite of species Linear barriers or block boundaries Determine which pairs of blocks would benefit from connectivity Depict connectivity areas Sticks Hand-drawn polygons Modeled polygons Resistance surface Species specific Naturalness Topographic-soil land facets Least-cost modeling Graph theory Provide guidance to end users
FOUNDATION LAYERS LULC 2007 Urban Forest Wetlands Agriculture Hydrology Riparian Waterbodies Streams Roads Network Traffic volume Categorized by impact DEMs Topographic position
FOUNDATION LAYERS Open Space - PAD US GAP status 1 - An area having permanent protection from conversion of natural land cover and a mandated management plan in operation to maintain a natural state within which disturbance events (of natural type, frequency, intensity, and legacy) are allowed to proceed without interference or are mimicked through management. 2 - An area having permanent protection from conversion of natural land cover and a mandated management plan in operation to maintain a primarily natural state, but which may receive uses or management practices that degrade the quality of existing natural communities, including suppression of natural disturbance. 3 - An area having permanent protection from conversion of natural land cover for the majority of the area, but subject to extractive uses of either a broad, lowintensity type (e.g., logging, OHV recreation) or localized intense type (e.g., mining). It also confers protection to federally listed endangered and threatened species throughout the area. 4 - There are no known public or private institutional mandates or legally recognized easements or deed restrictions held by the managing entity to prevent conversion of natural habitat types to anthropogenic habitat types. The area generally allows conversion to unnatural land cover throughout or management intent is unknown.
SPECIES DATA FIELD DESCRIPTION DATA TYPE Common Name Scientific Name SGCN Status Is it a Species of Greatest Conservation Need? yes/no Telemetry data yes/no Telemetry # individuals If yes, fill out Telemetry Data Details numeric Locational data yes/no Number of locations numeric Best data source Data age % of locations newer than 2005? numeric Data extent Do the locations accurately reflects statewide distribution of species? yes/no Telemetry Data Details FIELD DESCRIPTION DATA TYPE Common Name Scientific Name Individual_ID Telemetry data range Telemetry fix interval Best data source
SPECIES DATA Document process Which taxonomic groups/species to include? Review what other states have done. Focal species criteria: Review process used by other states high sensitivity to loss of connectivity move over broad spatial scales negative response to roads/traffic habitat associations prevalence on preserved lands Other non-species specific datasets like amphibian crossings?