1. and Lexicon
for Northeast
State Wildlife Action Plan
Revisions
Northeast Regional Synthesis

2. Synthesis of What?
 30+ Regionally prioritized projects by states
totaling $2 million + match
 Since 2007, 13 States + DC agreed to pool 4% of their
State Wildlife Grant funding for Regional Conservation
 Annual process administered by WMI and involves
NEAFWA administrators, Directors, and technical
committees - $500k/ year + match

3. 2 Regional Data Sharing Projects to
inform State Plan Revisions
1- NE Synthesis- roll down
 Compile 30+ Regional projects for
states
 Organize by Plan Element
different terms and scales
for
each project
2- State Action Plan
Database= roll up
 Compile 14 State Action Plans
 Organize by Plan Elements
different terms and processes
for each state
Needed to find and agree on common terminology and
processes for both projects to be meaningful and effective

4. Spatial Data Library 14 State Action Plans
Regional Plans
Data SourcesNE SYNTHESIS and
DATABASE PROJECTs
for Plan REVISIONS
STATE
PLAN

5. Lexicon Approach Prerequisites:
 Adapt and Rename : State Action Plan DATABASE and
re-phase:
 1- Common planning framework/ lexicon, 2- database
 Find a balance between
state autonomy regional consensus
 Challenge of finding and agreeing on a least common
denominator (LCD) for each Element

6. Approach to Develop Lexicon
(1) State Survey
 What might we each agree
to for each Plan Element?
 Provided a basis for
meetings and discussion

7. Approach to Develop Lexicon
(2) Literature Search for commonly used Terms and
Criteria for describing/ranking each element
Systems Variables Used by Different Systems
NatureServe
April 2012
Scope Severity Timing
(immediacy)
Impact
Magnitude
IUCN 2012 Scope Severity Impact
TNC CAP 2007 Scope Severity Contribution Irreversibility
TNC’s SE Division 2003 Extent (%
targets)
Severity
TNC 5-S (precursor to CAP)
2000
Scope
(spatial)
Severity Contribution Irreversibility
CMP. 2007. Open
Standards
Scope Severity Permanence/
Irreversibility
Urgency
WWF Project &
Programme Standards
2007
Scope Severity Irreversibility
Permanence
WWF RAPPAM 2002 Extent Permanence Probability Impact & Trend
WWF Root Causes Scope Permanence Impact
Ecoregional Assessments:
Standard 10. 2006
Scope Severity Time
WCS Living Landscapes Proportion Severity Recovery Time Probability Urgency
Salafsky et al. 2003 Scope Severity Contribution Reversibility Likelihood Timing Magnitude (Scope
and Severity)
Bunnell et al.2009 Immediacy Magnitude
Salafsky & Margoluis 1999 Area Intensity Urgency
Wisdom et al. 2003 Spatial
Extent
Timeframe
required
Case Study: Caribbean Persistence
Florida WAP Scope Severity Irreversibility Degree to which
they contribute
Draft NE Lexicon Spatial
Extent
Intensity Reversibility Likelihood of
Impact and
Occurrence
Cumulative and
Compounding
Immediacy Duration Persistence

8. Approach to Develop Lexicon
(1) State Survey
 What might we each agree to for each Plan Element?
(2) Literature Search
 Commonly used Terms and Criteria for describing each Element
(3) Meetings- ID preferred terms and processes-in review
(4) Report-In process of summarizing and writing
recommended set of common terms and criteria for
states review- to use in 2015 but not required

9. Lexicon Summary
 Lexicon agreement points:
 Element 1- Use our RSGCN list and process
 Element 2- Use NE terrestrial and aquatic habitat classifications
 Element 3- Use simple ranking threats, IUCN (or TRACS) coding
 Element 4-8-TRACS- Use simple scoring for consistency
 Element 5- Use our NE Monitoring and Performance Measures
 Need progress – on language for actions, strategies, goals objectives, desired
outcome, i.e. population goals for species
 Lexicon should provide enough detail to allow the development of a regional
plan and recommendations for above
 Partnership with NALCC in co-developing these important planning frameworks

10. Lessons Learned
 Order and Process matter!
 Adaptive management- re-phase database to
common planning framework/lexicon
 Consensus involved LCD that allow state autonomy
and flexibility to go beyond at the local scale
 Link to the NE conservation planning framework
 Regional process of setting regional priorities
reminds states it was their highest priority

11. Consensus built from the unique
process for setting regional priorities
Numbers in the box refer to the conservation
action as listed in the list of 73 actions at
Albany 2006 meeting. However, only the top
41 actions are included in the flow chart.
Bold and underlined numbers refer to the top
eleven priority conservation actions.
GIS Data Analyses and
Mapping for NE SGCN
#4, 12, 18, 19, 40, 60, 63
RCN 4
RCN 5
Design and Implement
Conservation Strategies for
NE SGCN
#15, 21, 26, 27, 29, 31, 32, 33,
38, 43, 44, 49, 57, 67, 68
RCN 6
Design and implement
Monitoring Programs for NE
SGCN
#2, 13, 46, 54, 64, 73
Develop NE Base
Maps
#47, 56, 71
ID High Priority NE SGCN
#3, 8, 20, 28
ID NE SGCN Data Gaps, Design
Data Collection Protocols, and
Collect Data
#6, 10, 45, 46, 50, 54, 59, 64, 66
RCN 1 RCN 2 RCN 3
Identify and Address Emerging Threats
Contributing to the Regional Declines
of NE SGCN
Climate change, White Nose Syndrome,
etc.
RCN 7

12. Northeast Conservation Framework

13. Northeast Regional Synthesis
Regional Synthesis for
Northeast State
Wildlife Action
Planning
Status and Progress

14. How can the Regional Projects be used to
Inform 2015 Plan Revisions ?
Roll down of regional 30+ projects = the Synthesis
 provide the regional context- plans, projects and
frameworks to inform State Wildlife Action Planning (and
beyond – partner use, etc.)
 compiled and user-friendly so states can cut and paste all
for the regional context of their State Wildlife Action Plan
or pull into each Plan Element

15. Regional collaboration
30 + funded RCN
projects
Regional species
conservation plans
Products from regional
meetings and workshops
Organize by
PLAN Element
Species
Habitats
Threats
Actions
Monitoring, etc.
Extract and
standardize
relevant data
for each
Element
Analyze and
summarize
extracted data
Regional
Synthesis
Document
Conservation
planning
PLAN updates
Northeast Regional Synthesis

16. Northeast Regional Synthesis
Approach Prerequisites:

17. Regional Project Compilation and
Coding: RCN Project Summary Example
 #6: Identifying Relationships between Invasive Species and SGCN in the
Northeast (RCN2007-03) Status: Completed (January 2012)
 Principal Investigator: Scott D. Klopfer and Glen N. Stevens, Ph.D. Title: Director and Research Scientist Organization: Conservation Management Institute, College
of Natural Resources and Environment, Virginia Tech Email: glsteven@vt.edusklopfer@vt.edu and glsteven@vt.edu Address: 1900 Kraft Drive, Suite 250 MS0534,
Blacksburg, VA 24061 Phone: 540-231-7348
 Link: http://rcngrants.org/content/identifying-relationships-between-invasive-species-and-species-greatest-conservation-need Citation: Klopfer, S. 2012. Final
Report: Identifying Relationships between Invasive Species and SGCN in the Northeast. Conservation Management Institute. 18 pp.
 Summary: This project provides a series of data tables and the methodology necessary for assessing the impact of invasive species on SGCN. The process
is open-ended and flexible to allow users to modify the criteria for customized results within each state. The metrics range from simply the number of SGCNs
impacted by each invasive species to more complex analysis incorporating invasive characteristics, impacts, or weighting values. The project report provides
background information on how the data tables of SGCN and invasive species were developed and how they should be interpreted for prioritizing and ranking
invasive species threats to SGCNs. A detailed example of an assessment for Pennsylvania SGCN is provided. This file contains a document that walks the user
through the process.
 RCN Topic: ID Invasive Species Related Projects: None
 States - ME, NH, VT, MA, CT, RI, NY, NJ, PA, DE, MD, DC, WV, VA
 Species- PLAN Element 1-SGCN
 Habitats- PLAN Element 2-All


18. RCN Project Summary Example
Threats- PLAN Element 3 Threat: Impact of invasive species on SGCN
TRACS Threats Level 2: Invasive and other problematic species and genes (1.5)
TRACS Threats: Invasive non-native/alien species (1.5.1)
IUCN Threats Level 1: Invasive and Other Problematic Species, Genes and Diseases (8)
IUCN Threats: Invasive Non-Native/Alien Species/Diseases (8.1.2)
Information: threat severity
Actions-PLAN Element 4
Recommendation for Regional PLAN revision: Whenever feasible, use these methods o assess the threat of invasive species on state SGCN.
TRACS Actions Level 1: Planning (9) TRACS Actions: State Wildlife Action Planning (9.4)
IUCN Actions Level 1: None IUCN Actions: None
Responsibility: states
Monitoring-SWAP Element 5-None
 Regional Review and Coordination (Elements 6-8)-None
Project Tools Tool: Tables and tools to assess threats to SGCN wildlife from invasive species
Description: This tool consists of a set of Excel tables that can be used to assess the impact of invasive species on SCGN wildlife. Several different metrics for doing
such an assessment were compiled to provide users with customized ranking criteria to meet specific needs. A detailed example of an assessment for Pennsylvania
SGCN is provided. The example files contain a word document that walks the user through the process. File Type: Excel Workbook
Potential Uses: Species Status Assessment, Species Threat Assessment
Primary Users: Biologists

19. TOC and Quick Reference Table by
State and PLAN Element
 Organized 3x by Project, Year and Element
 Each project’s PLAN elements captured using
“Common Lexicon” terms
 Meetings/workshops- states added fields like
tools, users, responsibility, related projects
 Links to each project if they need details asap
 Reviewed by committee-= States and PIs
 Placed as an Appendix in the document and woven
into the text by topic- “cliff notes”

20. Synthesis Report
 Organized by the 8 required Elements
 Provides regional context, priority needs and processes
Makes data useful at various scales and formats
 Provides states with assistance with conservation adoption
 Intended audience/use
 Plan coordinators and all implementing partners

21. Northeast Conservation Planning Framework,
Strategic Habitat Conservation & the 8 Elements
Element 2:
Habitat status assessment
Element 4:
Prescribe actions
Element 3:
Evaluate problems &
solutions
Elements 7&8: Coordinate implementation
Element 5:
Manage data to:
-detect changes
Elements 5 and 6:
-assess effectiveness
-adapt management
Element 1:
Species status
assessment
Element 4:
Prioritize actionsElement 5:
Monitor species,
habitats, outcome of
actions

22. Northeast Regional Synthesis
CHAPTER I. Priority RGCN Species
 Regional Summary of SGCN Species and Condition
 Regional lists, assessment and prioritization of SGCNs by taxa
 Vulnerability assessments
CHAPTER 2. Habitats
 Regional Summary of Habitats and Condition
 Terrestrial & Aquatic Habitat Maps
 Guide to Habitat Classifications
 Composite Habitat Condition
 Vulnerability/ecological integrity index – UMASS and TNC

23. Northeast Regional Synthesis
CHAPTER 3. Threats
 Compilation of regional threats from RCN projects (IUCN/TRACS)
 Assessments of landscape change-UMASS
 Climate change and vulnerability assessments- NWF
CHAPTER 4. Regional Actions
 Compilation of regional actions from regional plans- TRACS
 Northeast Conservation Framework and Components
 Albany II and other priority regional needs
 Tying regional information to actions by partners
 NFWF keystone initiatives, NRCS focal species

24. Northeast Regional Synthesis
Chapter 5. Monitoring and Evaluation
 Northeast Performance Monitoring Framework
 7 key habitats & key SGCN
 SWG Effectiveness Measures
 Applies the Conservation Framework and Assessment with
results chains (linkages) and highlight specific regional plans
 Taxa-specific Surveys (e.g., bird and frog shrubland monitoring)
 Protocols and databases from RCN projects

25. Northeast Regional Synthesis
Chapter 6. Regional Coordination and Partnerships
 RCN, LCC
 Regional I&M
 Competitive SWG
 Highlights the web of groups involved
at the regional scale in the RCN program

26. Northeast Regional Synthesis
Lessons Learned
• Consistency in coding PLAN elements at different
scales- hierarchically rollup Actions in meaningful
way
i.e. species plans, research vs. frameworks
• Need to link to the broader NE processes context
(CPF and MPMF)
• Allowed us to ID gaps and tell larger story and to
set stage for regional plan

27. Time for Reflection
 Look at our progress in the last 10+ yrs
 Evolution in terms and processes and how we do
things
 Agencies
 Divisions
 We and these Action Plans are broadening the
breath and depth of conservation and engaging a
broader audience
 Present the NE attempt to share data and set
priorities and conservation as a region

28.  NEFWDTC- 13 States and DC reps
 NEAFWA and Directors, WMI
 TCI TEAM
 Partners for RCN projects
 NWF and conference sponsors
PROGRESS and Perseverance
Acknowledgements:

29. Need Filter of
a Common
Lexicon and
Database