FY (Fiscal Year) 2003 Provincial Project Review

PART 2. Narrative

Project ID: 35010

Title: An Interactive Biodiversity Information System for the Columbia River Basin

Section 9 of 10. Project description a. Abstract

The Northwest Habitat Institute (NHI) proposes the continued development of the Interactive Biodiversity Information System (IBIS) spatial databases and its interactive Internet interface at http://www.nwhi.org/ibis. IBIS contains extensive information about Pacific Northwest fish, wildlife, and their habitats. More importantly IBIS permits users to discover and analyze the relationships among these species and their habitats. IBIS is a unique resource because it contains peer-reviewed spatial biodiversity information that traverses political and administrative boundaries while maintaining consistent terminologies and classification systems.

Our objectives for fiscal years 2002 thru 2005 are: 1) Incorporate all existing IBIS data into an improved database management system (DBMS) and interactive Internet application, 2) Expand IBIS to include other spatial and non-spatial data, specifically resident and marine fish-habitat data, and incorporate these into interactive Internet applications, 3) Develop advanced query capabilities and decision support tools including an interactive mapping application, 4) Keep the IBIS DBMS and GIS layers updated with the help of an online peer-review system, 5) Operate and maintain IBIS including Internet access, user technical support, and systematic server and DBMS backups 6) Monitor the use and efficiency of IBIS.

b. Technical and/or scientific background

Overview and Purpose The Northwest Habitat Institute (NHI) and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), with the cooperation and support of 34 project partners, spent over six years developing a series of peer-reviewed biological data sets consisting of seven data matrices that focus on the interactions of wildlife, salmon and their habitats. The data collected in that effort contains extensive information on over 600 Oregon and Washington wildlife species, their ecological functions, the habitats they inhabit, and the impact of various management activities on their existence (See Appendix B for matrices data types). Additionally, current and historic Oregon and Washington wildlife-habitat geographic information system (GIS) maps, augmenting the linkage of these biological data to real-world locations, were developed by NHI to enhance the data’s usefulness for spatial modeling. That project culminated in the 2001 publication of the 736-page book and CD-ROM Wildlife-Habitat Relations in Oregon and Washington (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). Since the completion of the Wildlife-Habitat Relationships in Oregon and Washington (WHROW) project, the NHI, with financial support and cooperation from the Northwest Power Planning Council (NPPC) and other sources, has continued collecting and revising these data sets and expanding coverage of its wildlife-habitat mapping efforts throughout most of the Pacific Northwest.

In addition to Oregon and Washington, coverage now includes all of Idaho, and the parts of Nevada, Montana, Wyoming and Utah within the Columbia River Basin. Additionally, the data sets have also been expanded to now address fish-habitat relationships and fish and wildlife interactions. Hence, data for over 300 fish species have been collected that can be linked to the existing wildlife species data sets. The combined fish and wildlife data sets currently exceed 150,000 records.

Upon completion of the book and CD-Rom, the NHI solicited an independent review of the then current data structure with an emphasis on assessing its utility. The purpose was to develop a future direction for these (and other) data sets that would allow quick and efficient Internet applications with a desire to increase their utility and accessibility. In 2001 Patricia Berger, (a Ph.D. candidate at Oregon State University, Department of Bioresource Engineering) conducted this evaluation. Jointly with Ms. Berger, the NHI developed a response to her independent review of the Wildlife-Habitat Relationships data matrices, and we present it in Appendix A since it guides our development of the Interactive Biodiversity Information System.

Essentially, the report outlines the challenges faced to present these extensive biodiversity databases to the public in the most useable formats via the Internet. A project plan is formulated to surmount these challenges and includes the following implementation strategies:

Develop conceptual models of typical ecosystem constructs for fish and wildlife.

Implement a relational, spatial biodiversity database using more capable DBMS.

Develop a publicly accessible, maintained web site that provides interactive querying of the spatial biodiversity database.

Examples of the types of information that will be available on the IBIS Internet site include:

Wildlife species list with federal and state listed or candidate sensitive species, both aquatic and terrestrial identified

Present status (and trends) of wildlife populations

Wildlife-habitat occurrences

Wildlife-habitat relationships

Resident fish and wildlife species range maps in the Columbia River Basin developed at the watershed level

Wildlife associated with riparian, wetland, and rivers/stream habitats

Salmon-wildlife relationships

Fish-Habitat Relationships matrices for marine and freshwater fish

Wildlife-habitat maps and GIS data for Columbia River Basin’s 62 sub-basins

On-line interactive query capability of the entire fish and wildlife habitat relationships information data sets

Incorporate spatial digital data catalog by subbasin - includes 7.5 minute quads, orthophotos, aerial photos, and Landsat imagery

On-line digitizing to locate and track projects

Please see Appendix A and the IBIS prototype web site at http://www.nwhi.org/ibis for more details about future plans for IBIS.

c. Rationale and significance to Regional Programs

The Pacific Northwest Electric Power and Planning and Conservation Act addresses the inclusion of fish and wildlife into the planning for the region. Specifically, it calls for: 1) coordination of fish and wildlife management and research and development [839b(h)(2)(c)], and 2) base and support programs with the best available scientific knowledge [839b(h)(6)(a)]. The Act also calls for the development and implementation of a fish and wildlife program and to take into account at each relevant stage of decision-making processes the program adopted by the Council [839b(h)(d)(i) and 839b(h)(11)(a)(ii)]. The Council has developed and adopted a plan called, 2000 Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program – A Multi-Species Approach for Decision-making.

In this program plan, there are several statements that directly support IBIS as proposed, specifically:

one of the underpinnings of the program is that it is habitat based – IBIS is all about habitat in that it has already collected, complied and is synthesizing the latest scientific thinking on fish and wildlife as it relates to their habitats.

(B) achieving a vision for multi-species during a time of multi-objectives requires coordination of information and actions, which calls for an appropriate structure to be in place from which to plan and coordinate – regarding information systems about fish and wildlife habitat relationships, there is no current system that addresses the entire Columbia River Basin. IBIS addresses this need.

making information readily available is a specific strategy of the program plan – it states (p. 46, paragraph 3), “ Dissemination of data via the Internet: The Council will initiate a process for establishing an Internet-based system for the efficient dissemination of data for the Columbia Basin. This system will be based on a network of data sets, such as Streamnet, Northwest Habitat Institute, Fish Passage Center…. the function of each data site, or module will be clearly articulated and defined.” IBIS addresses this need along with defining its purpose. (D) implementing subbasin plans is a principal portion of the program plan – subbasin planning brings together multiple agencies, objectives, plans and ideas with the hope of developing a collective vision that incorporates joint biological objectives and strategies. Currently, IBIS makes information available to subbasin planners (see ‘relationships to other projects’ section).

Our data sets have been collaboratively developed; peer reviewed, and has the terminology defined. The foremost purpose for developing these data sets is to build a common understanding of fish and wildlife resources for better management.

Implementation of our proposal would support the following Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPA). RPA Action 152 – IBIS supports a coordinated effort to evaluate and assess offsite habitat enhancement by using and building on an existing data management structures, so all agencies are able to share habitat data, databases, data management and quality assurance information. RPA Action 154 – IBIS supports the development and updating of subbasin assessments and plans by supplying consistent technical and scientific information to subbasin planners. RPA Action 180 – IBIS would develop and implement a basinwide hierarchical spatial, text, and tabular data designs and decision support tools to support monitoring programs and allow ground-truthing of regional databases. RPA Action 181 – IBIS would develop the spatial delivery system once the digital aerial and satellite imagery of the entire Columbia River Basin has been acquired to allow all organizations access to these spatial data sets. RPA Action 198 – IBIS continues to expand upon a common data management system for fish and wildlife and their habitats that has taken over six years to build.

In reviewing the summary for Data Management in Support of the Fish and Wildlife Program (Schmidt et al. 2002) there are several need statements that our proposal would fulfill. For examples, under Future Needs there is an immediate program recommendation that states, “The ecosystem management concept emphasizes a need to understand and address the relationships between and among all natural resources within the basin. To this end, increased support is needed to expand and/or develop information management systems that address habitat plus wildlife and non-game species.” The report also states several technical needs like developing and managing information management tools to support subbasin planning in 2002 and beyond, and provide information management services to local subbasin planning groups. Finally, under Needed Future Action, “A primary future need is development of a more comprehensive approach to data management basin wide, as called for in RPA Action 198. Similar needs were identified for the regional database management project under the Council’s Fish and Wildlife Program by the Independent Scientific Review Panel (Coutant et al. 2000).”

Developing IBIS as outlined in the proposal would fulfill these needs. IBIS will allow all Internet users to quickly and efficiently peruse, query, and download fish and wildlife information pertinent to their individual questions. Further, it allows consistent peer-reviewed information to be distributed across the states. The results of this proposal will give resource managers, educators, scientists, conservationists, and the interested public a means to quickly access high-quality scientific data in a uniform, yet interactive, format. There are no other data sets like IBIS currently on the Internet or within state or federal agencies. These data are highly sought after because they depict our current understanding about how fish and wildlife species associate with their habitat(s) across a state and within a region. Finally, making these data available to a wide audience will help build a common understanding for management of the Pacific Northwest’s fish, wildlife and their habitats.

d. Relationships to other projects

IBIS contains extensive information about Pacific Northwest fish, wildlife, and their habitats, but more noteworthy, IBIS attempts to reveal and analyze the relationships among these species and their habitats. IBIS is a unique resource because it contains peer-reviewed, spatial biodiversity information that traverses political and administrative boundaries while maintaining consistent terminologies and classification systems. Consequently, many projects have and can utilize its information. Most recently, IBIS helped developed the report, A Multi-Species Framework Approach for the Columbia River Basin – Integrating Fish, Wildlife, and Ecological Functions supported by the Northwest Power Planning Council (Marcot et al 2002). Additionally, IBIS currently supports the subbasin planning effort that is currently underway. NHI’s current website shows over 16,000 unique visits to date that have perused and/or acquired data. The breakdown by organization acquiring information shows: federal/state/local – 29%, education – 26%, private – 18%, general public – 11%, non-profit – 10%, and tribes – 6%. To see our website, please go to www.nwhi.org/. Please note, when reporting visits to our website we mean one session where one person visiting the website to either peruse or download the information. Other groups that report visits often give the number of page hits as their number of visits, thus skewing the number of actual visits because one visit (or session) typically includes multiple page hits at a website. Finally, IBIS also compliments the Ecosystem Diagnosis and Treatment (EDT) Model that has been developed by the Council and the Streamnet project.

Lastly, other external projects that IBIS is associated with are: Lewis and Clark Bicentennial Project – this program is interested in the historic and current wildlife-habitat types maps and we are working to make them interactive on the web to be accessed by schools; and the National Geographic Educational Outreach Program -- this program has identified their educational theme for 2003 to be Habitat and we will be working with them to make our information accessible to their program.

e. Project history (for ongoing projects)

N/A

f. Proposal objectives, tasks and methods

Objectives:

Incorporate all existing IBIS data into an improved database management system (DBMS) and interactive Internet application,

Expand IBIS to include other spatial and non-spatial data, specifically resident and marine fish-habitat data, and incorporate these into interactive Internet applications,

Develop advanced query capabilities and decision support tools including an interactive mapping application,

Keep the IBIS DBMS and GIS layers updated with the help of an online peer-review system,

Operate and maintain IBIS including Internet access, user technical support, and systematic server and DBMS backups, and

Monitor the use and efficiency of IBIS.

Objective 1 - Incorporate all existing IBIS data into an improved database management system (DBMS) and interactive Internet application

Task A – Restructure existing wildlife-habitat information designing new relationships and improved integration with spatial data sets

Convert the current IBIS data sets to a more robust relational database management system (DBMS), such as Microsoft SQL Server 2000, in preparation for more dynamic query capabilities and integration with other organizations’ data sets. When the original Oregon and Washington data sets were developed, multiple databases were created (Figure 3) in Microsoft Access with data structures emphasizing data collection, not data integration. Currently for the wildlife species there are 637 fields of information. As a result, linking the databases and querying the data is a slower than desirable process prone to errors if great care is not taken. Additionally, the current IBIS Internet interface is driven by Access databases developed from queries of these core databases. While this implementation is currently working, it is not optimal. Access will generate errors to a user’s Internet browser if 2 or more concurrent users make simultaneous database queries, and updates made to the core IBIS databases are not currently reflected on the IBIS Internet site.

Figure 3. Fish and wildlife species relationships to the 7 data matrices.

Restructuring the database and updating the DBMS software will allow for more complex queries of the IBIS data, fix the concurrent user problem on the Internet site, allow updates to the database to be immediately reflected on the IBIS Internet site, facilitate integration with GIS data layers, and prepare the IBIS data for easier expansion and integration with other organizations’ data sets. Several overall steps that will be taken while restructuring the data sets will include:

Obtain requirements definition from the data originators and users. Data modeling requires precise definitions and a clear understanding of the uses to which the resulting information system will be put. To obtain this information will require a series of meetings throughout the initial and development phases of the project to standardize nomenclature, analyze data requirements, and determine the nature of reports and displays required by users.

Construct appropriate conceptual models of the major entities (e.g. species, habitats) and their relationships with each other. Unlike many databases currently in existence, IBIS will focus not only on cataloging the species and habitats of a region, but also on the interrelationships between the components in the ecosystem. These structures are challenging due to the hierarchical nature of the data and the complexities of the interactions.

Implement the logical model in a database management system. Once a conceptual model is created, it is transformed into a logical model that can be implemented in a database management system. Besides creation of tables to store entities and attributes, the DBMS is responsible for tracking changes in the database and enforcing constraints on data entry, helping to ensure the database integrity.

Task B –Define formats and create wildlife species range maps

We will develop GIS-based distribution maps for historic and current distribution for about 300 wildlife species. The strategy for mapping the ranges of the wildlife species in the Columbia River Basin (CRB) is to use the 5th Order HUC as the analysis unit. The process involves: 1) Compiling county-level species occurrence data; 2) Creating 5th Order HUC/wildlife-habitat (current and historic) GIS data layers for the CRB; 3) Query the relational database created in Task A and create a GIS script to develop draft species/HUC relationships GIS coverages; 4) Expert review/edit GIS coverages; and 5) Create final maps.

The first step has been completed and involved collecting and adding species/county occurrence records for Idaho and the CRB counties in Wyoming, Montana, Utah, and Nevada to IBIS. These records were collected from GAP, ICBEMP, and from each state. These records were in a variety of formats, some requiring extensive conversion procedures to add to the Oregon and Washington database. For example, several of the states' GAP data only had species tied to vegetation polygons in an Arc/Info coverage. An Arc/Info AML (Advanced Macro Language) program had to be developed by NHI to convert these data to county occurrence records. Also, a significant amount of time has been spent sorting out species which names varied by state and incorporating a standard species coding system. Additionally, several new species, not occurring in Oregon or Washington had to be added to the database.

Step 2 develops a 5th Order HUC GIS coverage, spanning the entire Columbia River Basin, and ties it to the NHI Current and Historic Wildlife-Habitat Types Arc/Info Grids. NHI decided to use 5th Order HUCs as an analysis unit because they provide a more natural and higher resolution boundary than county boundaries and the level of resolution is comparable with the mapping scales. Sixth Order HUCs were considered, but NHI determined that these were too detailed given the 1:100,000 and 1:1,000,000 scales of the wildlife-habitat data. The idea behind using HUCs as the analysis unit is to produce maps with more natural appearing boundaries that are easily edited during the expert review process using ArcView (Step 4). Once the HUC occurrences of a species are determined, a species range can be mapped by HUC for small-scale regional maps. For more detailed large-scale maps, the HUCs can be combined, using an AML, with the wildlife-habitat grids to produce a grid for each species' range where only habitats associated with a species within HUCs associated with that species are displayed.

Step 3 is the query of the IBIS database, which will produce the input for our AML that creates draft species range GIS coverages. When this step is completed draft GIS coverages are developed. An example of a wildlife range map is:

In Step 4, maps will either be sent out to species experts for comment and corrections or be reviewed against existing (published) State Atlases or breeding bird surveys by a person who did not create the map. The final step is to produce the final range map.

Task C – Optimize Internet interfaces and develop the necessary programming and scripts to query the data sets

This task will develop IBIS’s Internet interface to integrate more of IBIS’s existing information so that the public will have easy access to more of this significant biodiversity information. We will continue developing applications for the IBIS Internet site to improve access to the core IBIS data sets. As the core IBIS databases are restructured into the new DBMS (objective 1), the IBIS Internet applications will be modified to link to the restructured DBMS. Thus, there will be a phase-in of the restructured data onto the IBIS Internet site. Additionally, the restructuring of the DBMS will allow NHI to add more dynamic query capabilities to the existing and future IBIS Internet applications. The IBIS Internet site and DBMS will be hosted on NHI’s Microsoft Windows 2000 Server using Microsoft Internet Information Services, and programming will include Microsoft Active Server Pages (ASP), ASP.NET, HTML and XML technologies.

Task D – Evaluate integrity of interfaces and programming through iterative testing

NHI staff and its project partners will perform a series of tests checking the utility of the programming and scripts to interface with and display IBIS data using a variety browsers, including Microsoft Explorer and Netscape, and other common Internet applications.

Task E – Revise DBMS as needed based on Tasks B-D

As IBIS development progresses, the DBMS developed in Task A will likely need modifications to increase performance of unplanned queries and to achieve Objectives 2-4. This task will identify additional fields that may require indexing and establish relational, b-tree or other relational ties as needed. Other potential revisions include: editing fields or tables, modifying queries to perform using the newly indexed fields and testing the integrity of the indexing to store and retrieve information.

Task F – Establish interfaces and interactive modes

Institute the findings and changes identified in Task C and Task D above. This also includes establishing and updating keywords with search engines and prominent portals.

Task G – Create and update metadata

Create the necessary metadata following the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) standard. This is for all databases and spatial data.

Objective 2 - Expand IBIS to include other spatial and non-spatial data, specifically resident and marine fish-habitat data, and incorporate these into interactive Internet applications

Tasks A-E correspond to Objective 1- Tasks A-E but focus on integrating resident and marine fish-habitat data with IBIS’s existing wildlife-habitat information. Other differences from Objective 1 tasks are noted below:

Task A – Design relationships for and integrate existing resident and marine fish-habitat information and spatial data sets

Methodology follows the same approach as outline in Objective 1- Task A, except the resident and marine fish-habitat information and spatial data sets are emphasized. Currently for the fish species, there are 108 fields of information with 79 of those fields linked to wildlife.

Task B –Define formats and create fish species range maps

As stated in Objective 1 – Task B, the development of the fish distribution maps would undergo a similar process for about 125 species. The time and effort to develop the fish distribution maps will be similar to the wildlife effort because there are no current atlases or sources that compile this information. Hence, the data will have to be obtained and evaluated through agency contacts and peer review. An example of a fish range map is:

**********Would not allow copying of this map (must visit the URL to view – may perhaps even have to ‘refresh’ the page a time or two)

Task C – Optimize Internet interfaces and develop the necessary programming and scripts to query the data sets

See Objective 1 – Task C for description.

Task D – Evaluate integrity of interfaces and programming through iterative testing

See Objective 1 – Task D for description.

Task E – Revise DBMS as needed based on Tasks B-D

See Objective 1 – Task E for description.

Task F – Establish interfaces and interactive modes

See Objective 1 – Task F for description.

Task G – Create and update metadata

See Objective 1 – Task G for description.

Objective 3 - Develop advanced query capabilities and decision support tools including an interactive mapping application

Task A – Define common query patterns and common project tracking and decision needs

This task will be accomplished through a two-step approach. The first is a simple survey of public agencies and institutions in the region that will request the types of questions that they would expect to answer with these types of information and to identify what types of tracking information they would need on projects to help make decisions. The second is once these questions and decision information have been compiled, then we will identify (with the help from an Advisory Team) and call representatives from various private, public, tribal and non-governmental organizations to help guide the design.

In addition to advanced database queries yielding tabular reports, this task will design an interactive Internet mapping application that will allow spatial queries producing maps, tabular data and charts. For every data source used in a query, a reference to the source will be embedded in the report, and a link to the metadata available from the source will be included. One small part of this proposal is to create Federal Geographic Data Committee compliant metadata for some of the data sources (Wildlife-Habitat Maps, and other spatial GIS datasets).

Task B – Develop scripts, programs and interfaces

This task will implement the advanced query capabilities identified in Task A, and it will allow public Internet users to combine and take full advantage of the IBIS DBMS and GIS layers created in previous objectives. Users will be able to create maps, data tables and charts to display the results of their user-defined queries. These queries will permit the analysis of fish-wildlife-habitat interactions at user-selected locations in the Pacific Northwest. ASP, ASP.NET, HTML, and XML are the main programming technologies that will be used to develop the advanced query capabilities. ESRI’s (Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc.) ArcIMS, MapObjects and other developer tools will be added to these technologies to develop the Internet mapping application.

Task C – Evaluate integrity of queries and tools through iterative testing

NHI staff and its project partners will perform a series of tests checking the utility of the advanced query programming and scripts and the interactive mapping application using a variety browsers, including Microsoft Explorer and Netscape, and other common Internet applications.

Task D – Make presentations and conduct workshops to obtain feedback

NHI will arrange and conduct a series of training workshops throughout the Columbia River Basin. These workshops will help promote the use of IBIS on the Internet, ensure that users are aware of and can successfully its advanced features, and allow NHI staff to obtain user feedback to improve IBIS, especially its user interface.

Task E – Finalize queries and tools

This task updates the IBIS Internet applications developed in Task A and B using the information gathered in Tasks C and D.

Task F – Conduct interval testing of queries and tools

The Internet applications developed in this and other objectives will be continually monitored, tested, updated and expanded as necessary.

Task G - Write descriptions and “how to use manual”

Based on the experiences of the other tasks in this objective, NHI will create online documentation in HTML and downloadable Adobe PDF formats to help end-users successfully use IBIS.

Objective 4 - Keep the IBIS DBMS and GIS layers updated with the help of an online peer-review system

Task A – Actively seek and acquire new data sets (including monitoring data) and update information on resident fish and wildlife from all 4 Northwestern states

NHI will actively seek fish and wildlife datasets developed by other organizations to incorporate into IBIS. Incorporating these data may require NHI to acquire, reformat the data and host it in-house, or more preferably; NHI will create partnerships to jointly develop web services that allow each partner to host and update their own data while sharing it with other project partners for explicit uses. Web services can be created and implemented using ASP.NET or other technologies and allow organizations using dissimilar server operating systems and/or applications to easily share disparate data formats.

NHI will also develop an online peer-review system to help update the IBIS DBMS. This system will allow select project partners and associates to modify parts of the database based on their areas of expertise. Changes made through the online peer-review system will be recorded and backed up in a separate database so that data changes can be subsequently reviewed and entry errors can be corrected.

Task B – Actively seek and acquire or create new spatial data sets, such as digital aerial photography and satellite imagery, and developing the methodology and process to serve these data

NHI will continue to update and expand the GIS data layers available on IBIS. Such data layers could range from administrative boundaries commonly used by a specific organization to localized vegetation data to raw satellite imagery and digital aerial photography to USGS topographic maps. The methodologies used to incorporate these data will vary but will include in-house hosting and web service development. For example, NHI could integrate into IBIS USGS topographic maps and aerial photographs hosted on Microsoft’s TerraServer using ASP.NET to request data from its recently developed TerraService. This Microsoft web service expose terabytes of spatial data to Internet developers who can incorporate it into their applications while allowing Microsoft to host and maintain the data. Similar, web services could be easily developed by NHI and its project partners to exchange GIS data while allowing the data creators to maintain and control distribution of their data.

Objective 5 - Operate and maintain IBIS including Internet access, user technical support, and systematic server and DBMS backups

Task A – Maintain Internet access

NHI will host and maintain the IBIS DBMS and web server. NHI currently maintains a mid-level Windows 2000 Server with Internet Information Server 5.0 installed which hosts the NHI (http://www.nwhi.org) and IBIS prototype (http://www.nwhi.org/ibis) web sites behind hardware and software firewalls via a DSL connection to the Internet. SQL Server 2000 DBMS software has recently been installed on this server in anticipation of restructuring the IBIS DBMS. Additional web and application servers will be added if and as necessary in the future. Also, NHI will increase its DSL service speed or connect directly to a T1 or faster line in the future as necessary. NHI has a good working relationship with its Internet Service Provider (ISP), and its ISP typically responds to problems immediately.

Task B – Provide Technical Support to users

NHI currently provides technical support to its Internet users and will continue to provide this support for IBIS users. Online email contact forms are already available on IBIS. Additionally, phone and fax support is available to users.

Task C – Provide for system and information backups and redundancies

NHI’s server currently has RAID 0+1 hard drives providing increased performance and duplication of data should one of its four 60-gigabyte hard drives fail. This setup also allows the server to keep operating in the event of a drive failure and for the bad drive to be replaced without shutting down the server. A tape backup system is also in place on the server. NHI will maintain this structure and improve it as necessary as IBIS grows. For example, additional backup servers may be added as well as a larger tape autoloader if warranted.

Objective 6 - Monitor the use and efficiency of IBIS

Task A – Evaluate use of queries, tools, pages, and formats

The ultimate success of IBIS will be directly related to its ability to quickly integrate and deliver on the fly high-interest ecological datasets to the public. We will monitor the effectiveness of the system in two ways. First we have developed and will continue to improve ASP/database programs to automatically monitor IBIS visitors. These programs run transparent to the user, not only recording how many people are using IBIS, but also capturing to a separate database additional information including: 1) who is visiting (through IP addresses and user logins); 2) if the user was transferred from another web site and which site; 3) which datasets the user views or downloads; and 4) how often a user visits IBIS. Routine analysis of these collected data will help NHI determine which datasets to add to IBIS, which web sites to establish hyperlinks to and/or from, and what areas of the site need to be restructured to increase performance and improve the users visit.

Second, we have created and encourage visitors to sign a guest book and use feedback forms on the IBIS and NHI web sites. These courtesy registration and feedback forms provide a means for people to voluntarily register their email address and critique IBIS. Additionally, we will occasionally choose a random pool of potential survey respondents from these registrants and survey them for feedback on the system in the future.

Task B – Determine efficiencies of relationships to data versus delivery time to user (includes evaluating other computer programs and delivery software)

NHI staff will continuously monitor the performance of the IBIS DBMS and IBIS Internet applications. Discovered inefficiencies will be corrected through reprogramming, and alternative development software will be considered and evaluated if and when necessary.

Task C – Write reports documenting progress, use and findings

Quarterly reports will be written and submitted to depict the amount of progress being made and highlighting any significant issues. These reports will also be posted on the IBIS web site in Adobe PDF format. NHI is an educational and scientific non-profit institute dedicated to developing and disseminating high-quality verifiable data. Therefore, all products developed by the NHI, including those developed through this proposal, will be posted free of charge on the Northwest Habitat Institute or its IBIS web site whenever possible. Additional dissemination methods may include books, journal articles, CD-ROMs, maps, or other publications facilitating the evaluation and conservation of biodiversity.

g. Facilities and equipment

NHI is a non-profit organization that rents a portion of a building at: 355 NW 7th in Corvallis, Oregon. Our computer equipment that would be available to conduct this proposal is (at a minimum): 1 Windows 2000 Server, 2 Windows 2000 Workstation, 3 PC computers, 2 laptop computers, HP 755 CM Plotter, 2 printers (laser and large-format color inkjet) scanner, and tape backup system. Available software that is specific to the grant needs is Windows 2000 Server, SQL Server 2000, Adobe Photoshop and Acrobat, ESRI 's ARC/INFO and ArcIMS, and ERDAS's Imagine.

h. References

Reference Submitted w/form (y/n)

Berger, Patricia. 2001. An Independent Review of the Wildlife-Habitat Relationships Data Matrices. Oregon State University, Dept. of Bioresource Engineering. April, pp.7 N

Coutant, C., D. Goodman, S. Hanna, N. Huntly, D. Lettenmaier, L. McDonald, B. Ridell, W. Smoker, R. Whitney, R. Williams, S. Urquhart. 2000. Review of Databases Funded through the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. Northwest Power Planning Council Document ISRP 2000-3. N

Johnson, D.J. and O'Neil, T, Managing Directors. 2001. Wildlife-Habitat Relationships in Oregon and Washington. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. pp 736. N

Marcot B.G., W.E. McConnaha, P.H. Whitney, T.A. O'Neil, P.J. Paquet, L.E. Mobrand, G.R. Blair, L.C. Lestelle, K.M. Malone, and K.I. Jenkins. 2002. A Multi-Species Framework Approach for the Columbia River Basin – Integrating Fish, Wildlife, and Ecological Functions. Northwest Power Planning Council. Portland, OR.

http://www.edthome.org/framework/TOC_020212.htm N

Northwest Habitat Institute – www.nwhi.org/ibis N

Schmidt, B., J. Anderson, B. Butterfield, C. Cooney, and P. Roger. 2002. Draft- Data Management in Support of the Fish and Wildlife Program Summary. Northwest Power Planning Council. Portland, OR. pp.38

Section 10 of 10. Key personnel

The staff members that would work on this project are: Thomas O’Neil – project manager, web and database design; Charley Barrett – web development, computer programming, and GIS; Kelly Bettinger – compilation of data, database development; and Pat Berger – database query structure and modeling. Their resumes follow:

Charley Barrett

P.O Box 855

Corvallis, OR 97339

Ph:(541)753-2199 Fax:(541)753-2440

charley@nwhi.org

Education

MS Geography, 1998. Major: Geographic Techniques, Minor: Resource Geography. Oregon State University, Department of Geosciences, Corvallis, OR.

BS Liberal Arts, magna cum laude, 1994. Major: Geography, Economics. Department's Credential of Proficiency in Planning. Towson University, Department of Geography and Environmental Planning, Towson, MD.

Current Employment

I am currently the Information Systems Director for the Northwest Habitat Institute (NHI). I specialize in geographic information systems (GIS) emphasizing, regional, statewide and local-scale wildlife-habitat research projects. My recent accomplishments include GIS and cartography support for the Willamette Valley Land Use / Land Cover map, the second statewide Oregon GAP Vegetation map, the Columbia River Basin Wildlife-Habitat Types maps, and the Wildlife-Habitat Relationships in Oregon and Washington book and CD-ROM (Johnson, D. H. and Thomas A. O'Neil. OSU Press. 2001.). My current GIS projects include providing cartography and GIS analysis support to the Northwest Power Planning Council's Fish and Wildlife 2000 program and to other NHI mapping projects. My other responsibilities at NHI include network/system administration and applications programming. I recently designed and programmed the Wildlife-Habitat Relationships in Oregon and Washington CD-ROM, the NHI web site (http://www.nwhi.org), and the Interactive Biodiversity Information System prototype web site (http://www.nwhi.org/ibis).

Employment History

Information Systems Director. Northwest Habitat Institute, Corvallis, OR. June 1997 - present.

Research Assistant. Oregon State University, Department of Geosciences, Corvallis, OR. April 1996 - June 1997.

Teaching Assistant. Oregon State University, Department of Geosciences, Corvallis, OR. September 1994 - April 1996.

GIS Intern. Baltimore County Dept. of Environmental Protection and Resource Management, Towson, MD. June - December 1993.

Relevant Experience

Unix and Windows NT ArcInfo, ArcView GIS, Erdas Imagine, TNT-MIPS, Idrisi, AutoCAD, MAPINFO, Surfer, Terra-Mar, Adobe PhotoShop and Illustrator.

Programming in ArcInfo AML, Visual Basic, HTML, _JavaScript, _VBScript, ASP, ASP.NET, Basic, Pascal, and C.

Network and system administration of computers with Sun Solaris Unix and Microsoft Windows operating systems.

Patricia A. Berger

116 Gilmore Hall

Corvallis, OR 97331

bergerp@engr.orst.edu

Education

Ph.D. candidate, Bioresource Engineering, est. completion date: May 2001. GPA 3.98/4.0. Minor: Geography. Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR. Advisor: Dr. John Bolte.

MS Applied Mathematics, 1992. GPA 3.71/4.0. Concentration: Computational Fluid Dynamics, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA.

BS Applied Mathematical Sciences, cum laude, 1988. Texas A&M University, College Station, TX.

Honor/Professional Societies

Phi Kappa Phi, National Honorary

Pi Mu Epsilon, National Mathematics Honorary

ACM/SIGKDD Special Interest Group in Knowledge Discovery in Databases

Professional Skills

Database Development and Analysis

Currently investigating the application of IBM DB2 data warehouse and analysis software for environmental data mining through a software grant by IBM DB2 Scholars Program.

Developed spatial datasets and thematic databases for the Willamette Valley, Oregon using ArcInfo GIS and MS Access.

Applied rough set data mining techniques to a regional soils database to extract classification rules for crop productivity.

Application Development

Developed a methodology for the assessment of agricultural impacts on a regional ecosystem.

Implemented a C++ simulation model of landscape dynamics based on multiple attribute decision-making.

Implemented a cellular automata model for landscape interactions.

Computer Experience

ArcInfo GIS, Visual C++, Visual Basic, ArcInfo AML, Fortran, Access, SQL, DB2, HTML, PhotoShop, Illustrator. Windows NT and Unix operating systems.

Work Experience

Graduate Research Assistant, Bioresource Engineering, Oregon State University, 9/1995-present.

Photo-Interpreter, Department of Geosciences, 6/1995 to 9/1995.

Graduate Teaching Assistant (Instructor), Department of Geosciences, Oregon State University, 1994-1995.

Geographic Data Analyst, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife / EMAP-EPA, 1994-1995.

Mathematics Tutor, Corvallis, OR, 1993-1994.

Graduate Research Assistant, Department of Applied Mathematics, University of Virginia, 1989-1992.

Kelly A. Bettinger

3115 NW Orchard Ave or P.O. Box 902, Corvallis, OR 97330

1-541-752-8831 (H) 1-541-753-2199 (W)

e-mail: phoebe@peak.org

EDUCATION

M.S., Wildlife Science, Oregon State University, March 1996

B.S., Wildlife Biology/Management, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, May 1989

EXPERIENCE RELATED TO FIELD

Wildlife Biologist/Information Specialist, Northwest Habitat Institute, P.O. Box 855, Corvallis, OR 97330. 1/00 – present. Supervisor: Tom O’Neil, Wildlife Biologist (541) 753-2199.

Conducted pre- and post restoration monitoring of bird communities using sites on privately owned and BLM land in the Willamette Valley being restored to native grassland, oak woodland, and wetland habitats.

Principle investigator for western Oregon snag-nesting purple martin survey project with 16 cooperators; developed survey protocol for surveying snag-nesting purple martins in upland habitats.

Principle investigator for a project on timber industry land comparing avian communities in harvested units with and without scattered leave trees and snags.

Developed a working bibliography on coastal cutthroat trout in ProCite.

Reviewed range maps of wildlife species associated with salmon in the Interior Columbia Basin.

Responsible for grant and proposal writing to fund new avian monitoring/research.

Provide expertise in the area of avian ecology for other NHI projects as needed.

Wildlife Biologist, Bettinger & Bettinger, P.O. Box 902, Corvallis, OR 97330. 5/96 – present (not full time).

Classroom & field instructor at weeklong annual Partners in Flight bird survey training sessions covering both survey techniques and bird identification in Oregon and Washington; also conducted a custom training session for the U.S. Forest Service.

Spent 3 breeding seasons conducting point count bird surveys, nest searches, and vegetation surveys for a salvage logging study in eastern Oregon.

Identified birds from experimental tape-recorded bird surveys.

Habitat Biologist, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Habitat Management Program, 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, WA 98501. 12/96 - 1/00. Supervisor: David H. Johnson, Habitat Biologist (360) 902-2603

Responsible for the acquisition and preparation of scientific literature under a project entitled “Wildlife-Habitat Relationships in Oregon and Washington”. Conducted a literature search on approximately 600 wildlife species using CD-ROM databases and compiled the citations in ProCite.

Established contacts with researchers and regional experts to acquire information from ongoing studies and to bring them together for a series of expert panels on species-habitat relationships.

Participated in all aspects of the overall design and development of the project as well as in scientific review of species-habitat relationship models, the development of matrixes on species life history information, and the editing, review, and writing of chapters for the project’s book.

Wildlife Biologist GS-9, U.S. Forest Service, Supervisor’s Office, Willamette National Forest, 211 East 7th Ave, Eugene, OR 97440. 7/95 - 12/96. Supervisor: Ken Byford, Forest Wildlife Biologist (541) 465-6645

Coordinated with other federal and state agencies as well as private companies to plan and implement wildlife monitoring projects.

Prepared reports and maps on planned activities that might affect threatened, endangered, and sensitive species for consultation with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and actively participated in the consultation process.

Provided support to 7 district biologists through helping to interpret and implement the Forest Plan and active technology and information transfer.

Participated as an interdisciplinary team member preparing an environmental assessment for a project analysis area.

Coordinated the forest’s neotropical migratory bird activities, including participation in Neotropical Migratory Bird Week and developing “A Checklist of Birds of the Willamette National Forest”.

Wildlife Biologist GS-9, U.S. Forest Service, Silver Lake Ranger District, Fremont National Forest, POB 129 Silver Lake, OR 97638. 4/94 - 7/94 & 5/95 - 7/95. Supervisor: Mike Jackson, District Wildlife Biologist (541) 576-2107

This was a temporary detail to the Fremont NF to set up and conduct a long-term riparian bird monitoring program as part of a larger monitoring effort being conducted throughout Oregon and Washington.

Conducted point count surveys for songbirds along 16 streams and rivers.

Trained two people to continue the surveys on the Fremont NF and held a training session on setting up a riparian bird monitoring project for the Crescent Ranger District of the Deschutes National Forest.

Gained experience using GPS equipment.

Wildlife Biologist GS-7, U.S. Forest Service, Detroit Ranger District, Willamette National Forest, HC 73 Box 320, Mill City, OR 97360. 6/92 - 12/92, 3/93 - 9/93 & 7/94 - 9/94. Supervisor: Rick Breckel, District Wildlife Biologist (503) 854-3366

Planned and carried out a study titled, “Bird Communities in 5- to 35-Year-old Douglas-fir Plantations on the Willamette National Forest, Oregon” as part of my Master’s degree program.

Coordinated the forest’s participation in Project Tanager, a national study sponsored by Cornell University.

Compiled and reviewed literature on snags and cavity nesters.

Participated as an interdisciplinary team member preparing an environmental assessment for a project analysis area.

Worked in other departments such as silviculture and timber to gain an understanding of how wildlife and other resource goals could more effectively work together.

Wildlife Technician GS-5, U.S. Forest Service, Alsea Ranger District, Siuslaw National Forest, 18591 Alsea Hwy, Alsea, OR 97324. 6/91 - 12/91 & 3/92 - 6/92. Supervisor: Martha Jensen, District Wildlife Biologist (541) 487-5811

Surveyed for spotted owls at night by voice and tape in proposed timber sale and other project areas.

Carried out daytime follow-up visits to locate and “mouse” owls to determine their reproductive status.

Planned and conducted marbled murrelet and bald eagle surveys on the district.

Responsible for coordinating the effort to compile and analyze the 1991 season data and write the final report.

Helped with a variety of other projects including snag surveys, wildlife tree marking, anchoring fish habitat structures in streams and staffing the reception desk.

Research Assistant & Data Handler, Florida Natural Areas Inventory, The Nature Conservancy, 1018 Thomasville Road, Suite 200-C, Tallahassee, FL 32303. 10/89 - 5/91. Supervisor: Jim Muller, Coordinator (904) 224-8207

Mapped the locations of rare, threatened, and endangered plants, animals, and natural communities in Florida and prepared raw data from scientific and casual surveys for entry into a database.

Assisted in responding to requests for information from environmental consultants, land owners, and others.

Conducted field surveys of barrier island plant communities for an NOAA grant project called “An Assessment of Florida’s Remaining Coastal Upland Natural Communities”; as well as surveys for specific rare plants.

Gained experience with aerial photo interpretation and writing field reports.

Volunteer Field Assistant to John Kappes, M.S. candidate (Wildlife Biology) at the University of Florida. U.S. Forest Service, Route 6, Box 7860, Crawfordville, FL 32327. 2/90 - 5/91, 6 hrs/wk. (904) 926-3561

Observed colonies of red-cockaded woodpeckers in the Apalachicola National Forest to collect data on inter-

and intraspecies competition, breeding, and feeding behavior.

Climbed cavity trees to determine cavity use, clutch sizes, nest predation etc.

Captured and banded birds.

Field Assistant, Sea Turtle Breeding Study, Wabasso Beach, FL. Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences, VPI & SU. 5/89 - 8/89. Supervisors: Michael Vaughan, Associate Professor of Wildlife, and Michael Horton, Graduate Student (703) 231-5046.

Surveyed 5-mile beach study area daily and identified new nests and tracks of sea turtles.

Marked and inspected nests for signs of predator disturbances and hatching.

Measured and tagged nesting female loggerhead and green sea turtles at night.

Gained experience with all-terrain vehicles, compass, calipers, and data compilation for reports.

CO-OP Employee, Biological Technician, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Environmental Contaminants Branch, Laurel, MD 20708. 3/86 - 8/86 and 6/87 - 11/87. Supervisor: Stanley N. Wiemeyer, Biologist (301) 498-0263.

Responsible for the care and welfare of captive screech owl and starling colonies, assisted with care of ducks.

Helped set up environmental contaminant studies and gathered physiological and behavioral data on avian subjects.

Supervised 1-4 Youth Conservation Corps employees.

Performed basic carpentry work, research in library, and office duties as necessary.

Volunteer Live-in Intern, Chesapeake Wildlife Sanctuary, 17308 Queen Anne Bridge Road, Bowie, MD 20716. 6/87 - 11/87, 20 hrs/wk. Supervisor: Dianne Pearce, Director (301) 390-7010.

Performed initial exams and emergency treatments on injured and orphaned wild birds and mammals, administered medications, blood and fecal tests, exercised recovering raptors, cleaned cages, and fed animals.

Informed visitors about the Sanctuary, helped train new volunteers.

CO-OP Volunteer, Marine Biology Research Assistant, Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Box 2072, Balboa, Republic of Panama. 8/83 - 6/84, 15 hrs/wk. Supervisor: Ira Rubinoff, Director.

Assisted with research on the diving biology of yellow-bellied sea snakes using biotelemetry.

Responsible for care and maintenance of captive sea snakes.

Set up reprint filing system and organized lab after moving to a new location.

ACTIVITIES/SPECIAL SKILLS

Honors:

Gamma Sigma Delta, 1989 - Present Xi Sigma Pi, 1988 – Present

(The Honor Society of Agriculture) (The National Forestry Honor Society)

Membership in Professional Societies:

The Wildlife Society, 1984 - present American Ornithologist’s Union, 1995 – present

Oregon Field Ornithologists, 1991 - present Cooper Ornithological Society, 1995 – present

Society of American Foresters, 1992 - present Association of Field Ornithologists, 1996 – present

Wilson Ornithological Society, 1995 - present Washington Society of Ornithologists, 1997 - present

Current Involvement in Other Organizations:

OR/WA Partners in Flight Steering Committee OR/WA Partners in Flight Monitoring Committee

(Meeting note keeper, 1997-present; Co-chair, 1998-2000) (Co-chair, 1997-1999)

Oregon Chapter TWS/Society of American Foresters Oregon Breeding Bird Atlas Steering Committee

(Liaison, 2000-present)

Regularly Participate(d) in:

Audubon Society Christmas Bird Counts U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Breeding Bird Surveys

Migration Day Counts Oregon Breeding Bird Atlas effort

Cornell University’s Feederwatch Program

Current & Past Volunteer Work:

McChord AFB/Ft. Lewis MAPS banding stations Corvallis Audubon Society Bluebird Trail

Finley National Wildlife Refuge Wood Duck Corvallis Habitat for Humanity

Box Program St. Mark’s National Wildlife Refuge Visitor’s

Corvallis Gleaners Center

Publications

Bettinger, K.A. in prep. Species accounts for Cassin’s finch and merlin in D. Marshall, M. Hunter, and A. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon – A General Reference. OSU Press, Corvallis, OR.

Bettinger, K.A., and K. Ross. 2001. Relationships between breeding season and fall bird communities and wildlife trees and snags in recently harvested stands, Oregon Cascades. Final report to Willamette Industries, Albany, OR.

Iten, C., T.A. O'Neil, K.A. Bettinger, and D.H. Johnson. 2001. Extirpated species of Oregon and Washington. Pages 452-473 in: Wildlife-habitat relationships in Oregon and Washington. David H. Johnson and Tom A. O’Neil, Managing Directors. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon.

O’Neil, T.A., K.A. Bettinger, M. Vander Heyden, B.G. Marcot, T.K. Mellen, W. M. Vander Haegen, D.H. Johnson, P.J. Doran, L. Wunder, and C. Barrett. 2001. Structural conditions and habitat elements of Oregon and Washington. Pages 115-139 in: Wildlife-habitat relationships in Oregon and Washington. David H. Johnson and Tom A. O’Neil, Managing Directors. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon.

O'Neil, T.A., D.H. Johnson, C. Barrett, M. Trevithick, K.A. Bettinger, C. Kiilsgaard, M. Vander Heyden, E.L. Greda, B.G. Marcot, P.J. Doran, L. Wunder, and S. Tank. 2000. CD-ROM: Seven Wildlife-Habitat Relationship Matrixes for Oregon and Washington. In: Wildlife-Habitat Relationships in Oregon and Washington. David H. Johnson and Tom A. O’Neil, Managing Directors. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon.

Bettinger, K.A., and R. Milner. 2000. Sandhill Crane (Grus canadensis). In E. M. Larsen and N. Nordstrom, editors. Management Recommendations for Washington's Priority Species, Volume IV: Birds [Online]. Available http://www.wa.gov/wdfw/hab/phs/vol4/sndhlcrn.htm

Huff, M.H., K.A. Bettinger, H.L. Ferguson, M.J. Brown, and B. Altman. 2000. A habitat-based point-count protocol for terrestrial birds, emphasizing Washington and Oregon. U.S. Forest Service General Technical Report, PNW-GTR-501. Portland, OR.

Arnett, E.B., B. Altman, W.P. Erickson, and K.A. Bettinger. 2001. Relationships between salvage logging and forest avifauna in lodgepole pine forests of the Central Oregon Pumice Zone. Final report to cooperators.

Bettinger, P., K.A. Bettinger, and K. Boston. 1998. Correlation among spatial and non-spatial variables describing a cut-to-length thinning site in the Pacific Northwest, USA. Forest Ecology and Management. 104:139-149.

Bettinger, K.A. 1995. Riparian neotropical and resident bird species monitoring summary report, Fremont and Winema National Forests 1994-1995. Report to Fremont and Winema National Forests.

Johnson, A.F., J.W. Muller, and K.A. Bettinger. 1992. An assessment of Florida’s remaining coastal upland natural communities: Panhandle. Report to Florida Natural Areas Inventory, Tallahassee.

Johnson, A.F., J.W. Muller, and K.A. Bettinger. 1990. An assessment of Florida’s remaining coastal upland natural communities: Southeast Florida. Report to Florida Natural Areas Inventory, Tallahassee.

Thomas A. O’Neil

P.O. Box 855

Corvallis, Oregon 97339-0855

1-541-929-5296 (H) 1-541-753-2199 (W)

Email: habitat@nwhi.org

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE:

Current and past responsibilities have included the supervision of a staff of professionals actively involved in the analysis of biotic resources; the design and implementation of vegetation/wildlife ecology field studies; design, development, and maintenance of a computer information system- Oregon Species Information System; utilizing geographic information and mapping with remote sensing systems.

SPECIFIC EXPERIENCE:

*Investigation of Oregon's biodiversity: co-leader of the Oregon Gap Analysis; Multi-scale Biodiversity Conservation: A Prototype Process for Oregon projects; and Wildlife-Habitat Relationships in Oregon and Washington;

* Design, implement, and analyze of birds of prey, waterfowl, furbearer, big game, and aquatic and terrestrial vegetative studies; recently designed wildlife-habitat studies for black bear and American marten;

* Design, develop, and maintained the Oregon Species Information System, Interactive Biodiversity Information System and related computer programs and data sets using GIS and mapping with remote sensing systems;

* Development of cumulative effects methodology and habitat evaluation procedures;

WORK HISTORY:

1999-Present Northwest Habitat Institute, Corvallis, OR.; Director/Wildlife Ecologist

1989-1999 Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife - Ecological Analysis Center

Corvallis, OR.; Wildlife Research Ecologist, Program Leader

(1995-1997) Wildlife Investigation Laboratory, Program Leader

1985-1989 Argonne National Laboratory, University of Chicago, Portland, OR.; Wildlife Ecologist and Associated Professor

1982-1985 Montana Power Company, Butte, MT.; Senior Wildlife Biologist

1971, 1972, & 1973 Yellowstone National Park

EDUCATION:

M.S. Wildlife Biology, University of Montana, 1981

B.S. Wildlife Biology, University of Montana, 1978

B.A. Political Science, University of Toledo, 1974

PUBLICATIONS

BOOKS

Johnson, D.H., T.A. O'Neil. 2001. Wildlife-Habitat Relationships in Oregon and Washington.

Oregon State University Press. Corvallis, OR. 736 pp.

Csuti, B., T. A. O’Neil, M.M. Shaughnessy, E. Gaines, and J. Hak. (2001). Atlas of Oregon Wildlife (Second Edition, Revised and Expanded). Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 525 pp.

Csuti, B., J. Kimmerling, T. A. O’Neil, M.M. Shaughnessy, E. Gaines, and M. Huso. 1997. Atlas of Oregon Wildlife. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 492 pp.

BOOK CHAPTER

O’Neil, T.A., and D.H. Johnson. 2001. Oregon’s and Washington’s wildlife species and their habitats. in: Wildlife-Habitat Relationships in Oregon and Washington. Johnson, D.H. and T. A. O’Neil (managing directors). Oregon State University Press. Corvallis, OR. 736 pp.

O’Neil, T.A., K.A. Bettinger, M. Vander Heyden, B.G. Marcot, T.K. Mellen, W. M. Vander Haegen, D.H. Johnson, P.J. Doran, L. Wunder, and C. Barrett. 2001. Structural conditions and habitat elements of Oregon and Washington. in: Wildlife-Habitat Relationships in Oregon and Washington. Johnson, D.H. and T. A. O’Neil (managing directors). Oregon State University Press. Corvallis, OR. 736 pp.

O'Neil, T.A. et. al. 1994. Ecosystem-Based Management Strategy, Draft Report. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, OR. 102 pp.

O'Neil, T.A., and G.W. Witmer. 1991. Assessing Cumulative Impacts to Elk and Mule Deer in the Salmon River Basin, Idaho. In Ungulate Behavior and Management. Elsevier, New York. pp. 225-238.

SELECTIVE ARTICLES

O'Neil, T.A., R.J. Steidl, W.D. Edge, and B. Csuti. 1995. Using Wildlife Communities to Improve Vegetation Classification for Conserving Biodiversity. In Conservation Biology, 9(6):1482-1491.

*O'Neil, T.A., and G.W. Witmer. 1988. An Approach to Mitigating Hydroelectric Impacts on Shoreline Ecology. National Wetlands Symposium: Mitigation of Impacts and Losses. Edited by Kusler et al. New Orleans, LA. pp. 188-191.

O'Neil, T.A. 1988. Effects of Removal and Replacement of Brood-Rearing Habitat on a Canada Goose Flock. The Murrelet 69:41-45.

O'Neil, T.A. 1988. Controlled Pool Elevation and Its Effect on Canada Goose Productivity and Nest Location. The Condor 90:228-232.

O'Neil, T.A. 1988. An Analysis of Bird Electrocution in Montana. J. of Raptor Research 22(1):27-28.

O’Neil,T.A. 1980. Pine marten maternal den observations. Murrelet 4:102-103.

CD-ROM

O'Neil, Thomas A., David H. Johnson, Charley Barrett, Marla Trevithick, Kelly A. Bettinger, Chris Kiilsgaard, Madeleine Vander Heyden, Eva L. Greda, Derek Stinson, Bruce G. Marcot, Patrick J. Doran, Susan Tank, and Laurie Wunder. 2001. Matrixes for Wildlife-Habitat Relationship in Oregon and Washington. Northwest Habitat Institute. Corvallis, OR.

HONORS and AWARDS

Special Achievement Award, Washington Chapter of The Wildlife Society.

For the book, Wildlife-Habitat Relationships in Oregon and Washington.

1995 President of the Organization of Fish and Wildlife Information Managers

1993-1994 Vice President of the Oregon Chapter of the Wildlife Society

1993 Letter of Appreciation. US Forest Service. Jack Ward Thomas. For involvement in preparation of Viability Assessments and Management Considerations for Species Associated with Late-Successional and Old-Growth Forests of the Pacific Northwest - Report of the Scientific Analysis Team.

1985 Work (above publication with *) was featured in Montana Geographic Series

Author or coauthor of 30 other documents including U.S. Fish and Wildlife Federal Aid documents, Environmental Assessment and Impact Statements, and Licensing and Siting Applications.

Appendix A – Response to an Independent Review of the Oregon and Washington Wildlife-Habitat Relationships Data Matrices Problem NHI biologists and other analysts have been hampered in their use of these data sets due to the lack of a well-structured database management system (DBMS) for storage and manipulation of these complex data. The lack of a DBMS makes querying the data difficult, as complex relationships between data sets have to be created manually, often requiring days of effort for all but the simplest queries. This inefficiency is further compounded by the static nature of the query results; any subsequent editing or updating of the data requires the manual re-working of a previously derived query. Problems with data consistency have also surfaced, as different versions of the data sets are created for specific applications, and updates do not always get carried across to all of the versions.

To exemplify the extent of the problem, suppose a user wants to generate a wildlife species occurrence list for each of the 62 sub-basins in the Columbia River Basin based on currently mapped wildlife-habitats. Given the existing structure of the data, a multiple step process involving two software applications is necessary. ArcInfo geographic information software (GIS) must be used to generate combinatory lists of sub-basins/mapped habitats (763 records) and sub-basins/counties (396 recs.). The results must then be imported into the Microsoft Access species database. Next, the appropriate relationships between these imported tables and the existing species/county occurrence (40,780 recs.), and species/habitats (5,746 recs.) tables must be established. Queries are then executed to develop intermediate tables depicting species occurrence in sub-basins based on county records (22,458 recs.) and species occurrence in sub-basins based on species-habitat occurrence (30,081 recs.). These intermediate tables must then be related and queried to yield the final list of sub-basin/species combinations (21,174 recs.). In the existing data structure, if an item such as species ID or county occurrence record is changed or updated, each table would have to be updated individually and the entire query process rerun. If a different query is desired, most of the relationships have to be reanalyzed and re-implemented for the specific query purpose.

Hence, there is a critical need to develop a database management system backed by a high-quality data model. Such a system would provide efficient and accurate responses to user queries, while providing for data input, update, and maintenance. The data model will capture the real-world relationships between and among fish and wildlife species, their function in the environment, the implications of these functions for management, and the effect of management changes on habitat and habitat elements that support different species. Once developed, the DBMS will allow innovative modeling techniques to be applied to the data, further extending our knowledge of species-habitat relationships. Without such a system, the full value of these unique biologic data will never be realized, and over time, the inevitable data corruption will degrade the information content, severely reducing the data set’s usefulness.

Proposed Solution To address these problems, NHI has begun the development of the Interactive Biodiversity Information System (IBIS: http://www.nwhi.org/ibis). IBIS will consist of a coherently structured relational spatial database system, together with an interactive Internet interface that will facilitate database queries and reports. Figure 1 below illustrates the components of the IBIS and their association with data sources and users.

Figure 1. Diagram of the IBIS components and their relationship to different user groups.

The utility derived from the development and construction of IBIS is manifold. The explicit documentation of habitat and species characteristics will provide a useful guideline for other data collection efforts and facilitate the inclusion of new data. For example, the Canadian Ministries of Forestry and Environment have adopted the same wildlife-habitat classification co-developed in the NHI–WDFW project, have mapped these habitats and are developing species data for the Columbia River Basin portion of British Columbia. The addition of new species-habitat data such as these could be easily incorporated into IBIS, creating an international biodiversity database that covers the majority of the Pacific Northwest. Web-enabled querying of the database will increase public access of the data, heightening awareness of biodiversity issues in ones own 'backyard'. Incorporation of the management practices matrices will broaden the scope of the information system to include decision support, providing people a tool to help evaluate the impact of current or planned practices on the ecosystem. Additionally, the database structure itself will afford more rapid response to complex queries requested by local, state, regional and national organizations. It is important that these groups receive accurate and timely accounts of biodiversity data so that management policies can be developed using the best available information. Finally, organization of the database management system is the first step towards the application of knowledge discovery tools to extract new species-habitat information. For example, data mining activities may uncover relationships here-to-fore unknown, or reveal correlation's that suggest new avenues of research.

To manage this project, we have selected the incremental, iterative development methodology. By employing this methodology, we can provide an efficient means to create and implement the database, develop a workable interface, and deploy the information system as efficiently as possible. The first increment of the project will focus on constructing the important Species, Habitat Type, and Basin entities. The rationale for this is that the majority of users currently focus on species-habitat combinations, with the basin or sub-basin as the fundamental analysis unit. Implementing this portion of the database will allow us to serve the near-term requirements of our users, and receive feedback on the web interface that will support the database. Developing this phase also demonstrates proof-of-concept, and this increment will be completed in fiscal year 2002.

The remaining three increments all require the restructuring and design of the data sets into a DBMS to capitalize on the efficiencies for storage and manipulation of these complex data. That is, the second increment will delve into the complex hierarchical modeling of the habitat types, sub-types, and habitat elements. The third DBMS increment will model the relationship between species, habitat types and habitat elements in relation to the key ecological functions that the species provide. The fourth and last increment will relate various management actives to the species-habitat database completed in increments one, two, and three. This last increment is a particular challenge, as management activities act at various levels in the habitat hierarchy and can have positive and/or negative impacts on a given species, hence outputs can serve as inputs to other modeling efforts (Figure 2). This challenge is balanced against the information content that the resulting database will yield.

Figure 2. Types and relations of fish and wildlife analyses where management activity outputs could serve as inputs to other modeling efforts.

The goal of NHI is to have all existing data and updates restructured into IBIS sometime during the early part of the third project year or sooner. At that time, the IBIS program’s efforts will be shifted towards: 1) developing an interactive Internet mapping interface, using technologies such as ArcIMS, to allow for more dynamic spatial querying; 2) incorporating other organizations’ relevant biologic data sets into the IBIS; and 3) investigating the implementation of knowledge discovery techniques. Currently, our plan is to migrate from an Access platform to a well-structured DBMS using Microsoft SQL Server 2000.

Resulting Products

NHI will expand and improve this site to provide public access to more of IBIS’s extensive datasets. The initial products anticipated by this effort include: Conceptual models of typical ecosystem constructs for fish and wildlife.

A relational, spatial biodiversity database.

A publicly accessible, maintained web site that provides interactive querying of the spatial biodiversity database.

Wildlife species list with federal and state listed or candidate sensitive species, both aquatic and terrestrial identified

Present status (and trends) of wildlife populations

Wildlife-habitat occurrences

Wildlife-habitat relationships

Resident fish and wildlife species range maps in the Columbia River Basin developed at the watershed level

Wildlife associated with riparian, wetland, and rivers/stream habitats

Salmon-wildlife relationships

Fish-Habitat Relationships matrices for marine and freshwater fish

Wildlife-habitat maps and GIS data for Columbia River Basin’s 62 sub-basins

On-line interactive query capability of the entire fish and wildlife habitat relationships information data sets

Incorporate spatial digital data catalog by subbasin - includes 7.5 minute quads, orthophotos, aerial photos, and Landsat imagery

On-line digitizing to locate and track projects

Appendix B –Current Data Fields for Fish and Wildlife-Habitat Relationships

Matrix 1: Wildlife Habitats

The Species-Habitat Project has identified 32 broad scale wildlife habitats in Oregon and Washington. Species are listed under each habitat with codes describing their activity (feed, reproduce, both, other); association (closely associated, associated, present); and confidence level of expert panelists (1-3). The habitats are as follows:

1

Westside Lowlands Conifer-Deciduous Forest

2

Westside Oak and Dry Douglas-fir Forest and Woodlands

3

Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Deciduous Forest

4

Montane Mixed Conifer Forest

5

Eastside (Interior) Mixed Conifer Forest

6

Lodgepole Pine Forest and Woodlands

7

Ponderosa Pine and Eastside Oak Forests and Woodlands

8

Upland Aspen Forest

9

Subalpine Parkland

10

Alpine Grasslands and Shrublands

11

Westside Grasslands

12

Ceonothus-Manzanita Shrublands

13

Western Juniper and Mountain Mahogany Woodlands

14

Eastside (Interior) Canyon Shrublands

15

Eastside (Interior) Grasslands

16

Shrub-steppe

17

Dwarf shrub-steppe

18

Desert Playa and Salt Scrub Shrublands

19

Agriculture and Pastures

20

Urban

21

Lakes, Ponds, Reservoirs, and Rivers

22

Herbaceous Wetlands

23

Westside Riparian-Wetlands

24

Montane Coniferous Wetlands

25

Eastside (Interior) Riparian-Wetlands

26

Coastal Dunes and Beaches

27

Coastal Headlands and Islets

28

Bays and Estuaries

29

Inland Marine Deeper Waters

30

Marine Nearshore

31

Marine Shelf

32

Oceanic

Matrix 2: Structural Conditions

The Species-Habitat Project has developed structural condition or land cover/land use classification systems for the following wildlife habitats: 1) forests; 2) non-forest shrublands and grasslands; 3) urban habitat; and 4) agriculture. Species are listed under each structural condition with codes describing their activity (feed, reproduce, both, other); association (closely associated, associated, present); confidence level of expert panelists (1-3), and a notation in some cases if they need a specific habitat element in order to breed in that structural condition. The classification systems are as follows:

Forest/Woodland

Grass/Forb - Open

Grass/Forb - Closed

Shrub/Seedling - Open

Shrub/Seedling - Closed

Sapling/Pole - Open

Sapling/Pole - Moderate

Sapling/Pole - Closed

Small Tree - Single Story - Open

Small Tree - Single Story - Moderate

Small Tree - Single Story - Closed

Medium Tree - Single Story - Open

Medium Tree - Single Story - Moderate

Medium Tree - Single Story - Closed

Large Tree - Single Story - Open

Large Tree - Single Story - Moderate

Large Tree - Single Story - Closed

Small Tree - Multi-story - Open

Small Tree - Multi-story - Moderate

SmallTree - Multi-story - Closed

Medium Tree - Multi-story -Open

Medium Tree - Multi-story -Moderate

Medium Tree - Multi-story -Closed

Large Tree - Multi-story - Open

Large Tree - Multi-story - Moderate

Large Tree - Multi-story - Closed

Giant Tree - Multi-story

Urban

High Density

Medium Density

Low Density

Non-forest Shrublands and Grasslands

Grass/Forb- Open

Grass/Forb- Closed

Low Shrub - Open Shrub Overstory - Seedling/Young

Low Shrub - Open Shrub Overstory - Mature

Low Shrub - Open Shrub Overstory - Old

Low Shrub - Closed Shrub Overstory- Seedling/Young

Low Shrub - Closed Shrub Overstory- Mature

Low Shrub - Closed Shrub Overstory - Old

Medium Shrub - Open Shrub Overstory- Seedling/Young

Medium Shrub - Open Shrub Overstory- Mature

Medium Shrub - Open Shrub Overstory- Old

Medium Shrub - Closed Shrub Overstory -Seedling/Young

Medium Shrub - Closed Shrub Overstory - Mature

Medium Shrub - Closed Shrub Overstory- Old

Tall Shrub - Open Shrub Overstory - Seedling/Young

Tall Shrub - Open Shrub Overstory - Mature

Tall Shrub - Open Shrub Overstory - Old

Tall Shrub - Closed Shrub Overstory - Seedling/Young

Tall Shrub - Closed Shrub Overstory- Mature

Tall Shrub - Closed Shrub Overstory- Old

Agriculture

Cultivated Cropland

Improved Pasture

Unimproved Pasture

Modified Grasslands

Orchards/Vineyards/Nurseries

Matrix 3: Habitat Elements

Species are listed under various habitat elements as appropriate but without codes on activity, association etc. It is implied that the association is high if an element is tied to a species.

Habitat Elements (positive relationships only)

Forest/woodland Vegetative Elements or Substrates

Down Wood (Includes Coarse Woody Debris, rootwads)

Decay Class

Hard

Moderate

Soft

Down Wood in Riparian Areas

Down Wood in Upland Areas

Litter

Duff

Shrub Layer

Shrub Size

Shrub Canopy Closure

Shrub Canopy Layers

Moss

Flowers

Lichens

Forbs (Grass)

Cactus

Fungi

Roots, Tubers, Underground Plant Parts

Ferns

Herbaceous Layer

Trees

Snags (Entire Tree Dead)

Decay Class

Hard

Moderate

Soft

Snag Size

Seedling <1” Dbh

Sapling/pole 1-9” Dbh

Small Tree 10-14” Dbh

Medium Tree 15-19 Dbh

Large Tree 20-29 Dbh

Giant Tree >= 30” Dbh

Tree Size

Seedling <1” Dbh

Sapling/pole 1-9” Dbh

Small Tree 10-14” Dbh

Medium Tree 15-19 Dbh

Large Tree 20-29 Dbh

Giant Tree >= 30” Dbh

Mistletoe Brooms/Witches’ Brooms/Broomed Trees

Dead Parts of Live Tree

Hollow Living Trees

Tree Cavities (Far Smaller than Hollow Trees)

Bark (Includes Crevices/fissures); Loose Exfoliating Bark

Live Remnant/legacy Trees

Large Live Tree Branches

Tree Canopy Layer

Sub-canopy

Above canopy

Tree bole

Canopy

Fruits/seeds/nuts

Edges

Shrubland/grassland Vegetative Elements or Substrates

Herbaceous Layer

Fruits/seeds

Moss

Cactus

Flowers

Shrubs

Shrub Size (height)

Small

Medium

Large

Percent Shrub canopy layer

Shrub Canopy Layers

sub canopy

above canopy

Fungi

Forbs

Bulbs/tubers

Grasses

Cryptogrammic Crusts

Trees (located in a shrubland/grassland context)

Snags

Decay class

Hard

Moderate

Soft

Snag size

Shrub/seedling

Sapling/pole

Small tree

Medium tree

Large tree

Giant tree

Tree Size

Shrub/seedling

Sapling/pole

Small tree

Medium tree

Large tree

Giant tree

Edges

Ecological Elements

Exotic Species (specify whether negative or positive relationship in comments)

Plants

Animals

predation

direct displacement

habitat structure change

other

Insect Population Irruptions (specify whether negative or positive relationship in comments)

Mountain Pine Beetle

Spruce Budworm

Gypsy Moth

Beaver/muskrat Lodges/ponds/dams (positive only)

Burrows (positive only)

Non-vegetative Terrestrial Substrates (positive with a few exceptions as noted)

Rocks

Gravel

Talus

Talus-like Habitats (Includes Boulders)

Soils (specify whether negative or positive relationship in comments)

Soil Depth

Soil Temperature

Soil Moisture

Soil Organic Matter

Soil Texture

Rock Substrates

Avalanche Chute

Cliffs (Includes Lava Tubes)

Caves

Rocky Outcrops and Ridges

Rock Crevices

Barren Ground (includes mineral licks)

Playa (Alkaline, Saline)

Snow

Snow Depth (specify whether negative or positive relationship in comments)

Glaciers, Snow Field (Permanent Snow/ice)

Freshwater Riparian and Aquatic Bodies (positive with a few exceptions as noted)

Water Characteristics (specify whether negative or positive relationship in comments)

Dissolved Oxygen

Water Depth

Dissolved Solids

Water Ph

Water Temperature

Water Velocity

Water Turbidity

Free Water

Salinity and alkalinity

Rivers & Streams

Oxbows

Order and Class

Intermittent

Upper Perennial

Lower Perennial

Zone

Open Water

Submerged/benthic

Shoreline

In-stream Substrate

Rocks

Cobble/gravel

Sand/mud

Vegetation

Submergent vegetation

Emergent vegetation

Floating mats

Coarse woody debris in streams and rivers

Pools

Riffles

Runs/glides

Overhanging vegetation

Waterfalls

Banks

Seeps or Springs

Ephemeral pools

Sand bars

Gravel bars

Lakes/ponds/reservoirs

Zone

Open Waters

Submerged/benthic

Splash Zone/periodically Flooded

In-water Substrate

Rock

Cobble/gravel

Sand/mud

Vegetation

Submergent Vegetation

Emergent Vegetation

Floating Mats

Size

Ponds (<2ha)

Lakes (>=2ha)

Wetlands/marshes/wet Meadows/bogs and Swamps

Riverine Wetlands

Context

Forest

Non-forest

Size

Marshes

Wet meadows

Islands

Vernal or Seasonal Flooding

Marine Systems (positive with a few exceptions as noted)

Zone

Supratidal

Intertidal

Nearshore Subtidal

Pelagic/shelf

Substrates

Bedrock

Boulders

Hardpan

Cobble

Mixed-coarse

Gravel

Sand

Mixed-fine

Mud

Organic

Energy

Protected

Semi-protected

Partially exposed

Exposed

Vegetation

Mixed macro algae

Kelp

Eelgrass

Water Depth

Surface Layer

Tide Rips

Surface Microlayer (Neuston)

Euphotic

Disphotic

Demersal/benthic

Water Temperature

Salinity

Forms

Beach

Off-shore Islands/rocks/sea stacks

Marine cliffs (mainland)

Delta

Dune

Lagoon

Salt Marsh

Reef

Tidal flat

Water Clarity

Topographic or Physiographic Elements (positive relationships only)

Elevation (Included as a field in Life History matrix instead)

Slope

Aspect

Fire as a habitat element

Anthropogenic Disturbances & Elements (specify whether negative or positive relationship in comments)

Campgrounds/picnic Areas

Roads

Buildings

Bridges

Diseases Transmitted by Domestic Animals

Animal Harvest or Persecution (Includes poaching, legal harvest, pest control, incidental take in gillnets, etc.)

Fences/corrals

Supplemental Food

Refuse (includes landfills)

Supplemental Boxes, Structures and Platforms

Guzzlers and Waterholes

Toxic Chemical Use (indicate only documented effects)

Herbicides/fungicides

Insecticides

Pesticides

Fertilizers

Hedgerows/windbreaks

Sewage Treatment Ponds

Repellents

Chemical (Taste, Smell, Tactile)

Disturbance (by noise or visual displays)

Culverts

Irrigation Ditches/Canals

Powerlines/corridors

Pollution

Chemical

Sewage

Water

Piers

Mooring piles, dolphins, buoys

Bulkheads, Seawalls, Revetment

Jetties, Groins, Breakwaters

Water Diversion Structures (Dams, Dikes, Levies)

Log Boom

Boats and ships

Dredge spoil islands

Hatchery fish and facilities

Matrix 4: Wildlife Species Life History and Occurrence

Taxonomic Field Headings

Project species ID number

Kingdom

Phylum

Class

Order

Family

Scientific name (1)

Scientific name (2)

Common name (1)

Common name (2)

Subspecies name(s)

Taxonomic references

General Status and Occurrence

Breeding status

Occurrence status – Oregon

County occurrence – Oregon

Occurrence status – Washington

County occurrence – Washington

Population status

Occurrence references

Seasonal Activity and Movements

Occurrence by month

Breeding period by month

Type of seasonal inactivity

Seasonal inactivity by month

Type of migration/seasonal movements

Migration/seasonal movements by month

Migration/seasonal movements by distance class

Forms aggregations (includes type of aggregation in comments)

Distance between natal area and first breeding site (natal philopatry)

Age at cessation of parental care

Seasonal activity and movements references

Reproduction and Population Data

Average Number of offspring per litter or eggs per clutch

Number of litters/clutches per year

Average age at first breeding for females

Average life span in the wild

Maximum life span in the wild

Mating system

Den/nest/pupping/calving location (includes nest/den site fidelity in comments)

Reproductive/population references

Spatial and Landscape Data

Home range size class

Site fidelity to summer range

Site fidelity to winter range

Geographic range

Population distribution

Landscape use

Elevation range

Known constraints to movements

Spatial/landscape/population references

Diet Information

Diet

Foraging location

Diet references

Body Size Data

Mass

Mass references

Matrix 5: Key Ecological Functions

Trophic relationships

heterotrophic consumer

primary consumer (herbivore) (also see below under Herbivory)

foliovore (leaf-eater)

1.1.1.2 spermivore (seed-eater)

1.1.1.3 browser

1.1.1.4 grazer

1.1.1.5 frugivore (fruit-eater)

1.1.1.6 sap feeder

1.1.1.7 root feeders

1.1.1.8 nectar feeder

1.1.1.9 fungus feeder

1.1.1.10 flower/bud/catkin feeder

1.1.1.11 aquatic herbivore

1.1.1.12 feeds in water on decomposing benthic substrate

1.1.1.13 bark/cambium/bole feeder

1.1.2 secondary consumer (primary predator or primary carnivore)

1.1.2.1 invertebrate eater

1.1.2.1.1 terrestrial invertebrates

1.1.2.1.2 aquatic macroinvertebrates

1.1.2.1.3 freshwater or marine zooplankton

1.1.2.2 vertebrate eater (consumer or predator of herbivorous vertebrates)

1.1.2.2.1 piscivorous

1.1.2.3 ovivorous

1.1.3 tertiary consumer (secondary predator or secondary carnivore)

1.1.4 carrion feeder

1.1.5 cannibalistic

1.1.6 coprophagous (feeds on fecal material)

1.1.7 feeds on human garbage/refuse

1.1.7.1 aquatic (e.g. offal and bycatch of fishing boats)

1.1.7.2 terrestrial (e.g. landfills)

1.2 prey relationships

1.2.1 prey for secondary or tertiary consumer (primary or secondary predator)

2 Aids in physical transfer of substances for nutrient cycling (C,N,P, etc.)

3 Organismal relationships

3.1 controls or depresses insect population peaks

3.2 controls terrestrial vertebrate populations (through predation or displacement)

3.3 pollination vector

3.4 transportation of viable seeds, spores, plants or animals

3.4.1 disperses fungi

3.4.2 disperses lichens

3.4.3 disperses bryophtes, including mosses

3.4.4 disperses insects and other invertebrates

3.4.5 disperses seeds/fruits (through ingestion or caching)

3.4.6 disperses vascular plants

3.5 creates feeding, roosting, denning, or nesting opportunities for other organisms

3.5.1 creates feeding opportunities (other than direct prey relations)

3.5.1.1 creates sapwells in trees

3.5.2 creates roosting, denning, or nesting opportunities

3.6 primary creation of structures (possibly used by other organisms)

3.6.1 aerial structures

3.6.2 ground structures

3.6.3 aquatic structures

3.7 user of structures created by other species

3.7.1 aerial structures

3.7.2 ground structures

3.7.3 aquatic structures

3.8 nest parasite

3.8.1 interspecies parasite

3.8.2 common interspecific host

3.9 primary cavity excavator in snags or live trees

3.10 secondary cavity user

3.11 primary burrow excavator (fossorial or underground burrows)

3.11.1 creates large burrows (rabbit-sized or larger)

3.11.2 creates small burrows (less than rabbit-sized)

3.12 uses burrows dug by other species (secondary burrow user)

3.13 creates runways (possibly used by other species)

3.14 uses runways created by other species)

3.15 pirates food from other species

3.16 interspecific hybridization

4 Carrier, transmitter, or reservoir of vertebrate diseases

4.1 diseases that affect humans

4.2 diseases that affect domestic animals

4.3 diseases that affect other wildlife species

5 Soil relationships

5.1 physically affects (improves) soil structure, aeration (typically by digging)

5.2 physically affects (degrades) soil structure, aeration (typically by trampling)

6 Wood structure relationships (either living or dead wood)

6.1 physically fragments down wood

6.2 physically fragments standing wood

7 Water relationships

7.1 impounds water by creating diversions or dams

7.2 creates ponds or wetlands through wallowing

8 Vegetation structure and composition relationships

8.1 creates standing dead trees (snags)

8.2 herbivory on trees or shrubs that may alter vegetation structure and composition (browsers)

8.3 herbivory on grasses or forbs that may alter vegetation structure and composition (grazers)

Matrix 6: LAND USE and MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES Under each activity is a list of habitat elements that may be affected either positively or negatively by the activity. Habitat elements are then tied to species.

I. FIRE MANAGEMENT

Suppressing wildfire

Low to moderate intensity burns

High intensity burns

Fire (in general)

FRESHWATER WETLAND, RIPARIAN, AND AQUATIC RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

Creating and maintaining impoundments

Controlling water levels (reservoirs < 1000 acres)

Creating/maintaining islands or rafts within impoundments

Draining wetlands, marshes, ponds, lakes

Increasing water supply (flow augmentation)

Decreasing water supply (flow withdrawal)

Burning wetlands to maintain successional stages (see prescribed fire)

Restoration of wetlands

Wetland management techniques

Flooding fields and wetlands

Removing riparian vegetation

Livestock grazing of riparian areas (see livestock management)

Adding coarse woody debris and boulders to streams and rivers

Removing coarse woody debris from streams and rivers

Restoring/maintaining beaver populations

Retaining riparian buffer strips

Armoring banks for erosion control (gabion matting, riprap)

Controlling sedimentation by revegetation of banks with grass-sedge-forb mixtures

Controlling water pollution

Disposing/assimilating wastewater

Dredging

Locating/constructing stream crossings (see roads section)

Controlling aquatic plants

Channelization

ROAD MANAGEMENT

Road construction and obliteration

Operational aspects of road maintenance and use

Road closures

Bridges

Roads (in general)

AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES

Applying fertilizers

Applying pesticides

Applying herbicides

Applying fungicides

Haying/mowing

Maintaining grasses and forbs within orchards, Christmas tree farms, vineyards etc.

Providing/maintaining vegetation along field and ditch margins (hedgerows, fencerows, corridors, and shelterbelts)

Retaining crop residue (over winter)

Implementing farmland conservation programs (conservation reserve programs)

Irrigating

Altering drainage (ditching, tiling)

Decreasing water supply - flow withdrawal (see aquatic resources)

No-till farming/minimum till farming

Clean farming (includes burning, nothing left in fields or along edges)

Strip intercropping

Conversion of native habitats

Control of vertebrates considered to be agricultural pests (includes use of repellents)

Providing artificial nesting sites (see forest management)

Agriculture (in general)

SHRUBLAND and GRASSLAND MANAGEMENT

Mechanical vegetation management (includes chaining)

Burning (see prescribed burning)

Using herbicides

Restoration

Conversion of shrubland to native or non-native grassland

Livestock grazing (see livestock management)

Shrubland management (in general)

Grassland management (in general)

LIVESTOCK MANAGEMENT

Livestock grazing (all activities)

Conversion of shrubland to native or non-native grassland (see shrubland/grassland management)

Creating or providing stockponds (or other water sources)

Excluding livestock from riparian areas (see aquatic resources)

FENCING

Fencing to control or direct wildlife access (predator exclusion, ungulate damage control, controlling wildlife access to highways)

Fencing for protection/restoration of habitat (other than riparian)

Fencing to exclude livestock from riparian areas (see aquatic resources)

MINING ACTIVITIES

Site reclamation (replanting vegetation, water quality management)

Surface/strip mining and processing

Underground mining and processing

Maintaining access to abandoned subsurface mines and tunnels

Placer prospecting and mining

Mineral exploration

Sand/gravel and peat mining

Mining (in general)

Mining activities involving blasting (no HE's tied to this activity)

Oil and gas extraction

FOREST MANAGEMENT

Harvest Operation Activities:

clearcutting

shelterwood cuts

seed tree cuts

group selection

selective harvest across all tree sizes

selective harvest of specific sizes or conditions or species (varied prescriptions)

Silvicultural/Stand Improvement Activities:

pre-commercial thinning

thinning (to enhance dominant or co-dominant trees, e g., release cutting, forest health, stocking densities)

pruning

simplifying species composition and/or structure (genetically selecting trees, favoring one or few commercially desired species)

type conversion (e.g., changing grassland to trees, or oaks to conifers)

prescribed burning for forest health and site prep (see fire management)

applying insecticides

forest management (in general)

Site prep/Tree Establishment Activities

applying herbicides

fertilizing plantations

removing slash (includes piling and burning or hauling off for chipping; all slash is removed from site)

planting or seeding for reforestation (includes vexar tubing, shade cards, plastic sheeting)

tilling prior to planting

Habitat Management Activities

maintaining mature/old growth

grazing livestock

retaining medium-sized green trees (11-19" dbh)

retaining large green trees (20"+ dbh)

retaining trees with defects (cavities, broken tops, heart rot, conks, multiple tops)

creating/maintaining edges

maintaining mast trees

developing/maintaining forest openings (natural meadows, preventing tree encroachment)

developing/maintaining brush/slash piles

retaining/providing dead/down wood

retaining/creating snags

retaining riparian buffer strips (see aquatic activities)

providing artificial nest sites

creating/maintaining corridors

Incidental Activities:

introducing exotic vegetation (elk forage mixes)

creating water sources (digging pumper ponds or wildlife ponds)

removing hazard trees (OSHA, campgrounds, roadsides)

building skid trails and landings

controlling vertebrates considered to be forest pests

Special Forest Products:

firewood cutting

harvesting mushrooms

bough collection

special forest products (in general)

X. MARINE ACTIVITIES

Marine dredging and filling

Harbor, marina, ferry terminal development

Residential docks in marine and freshwater

Toxic spills (oil or other chemicals)

Armoring shorelines (bulkheads/jetties)

Developing off-shore (underwater) structures

Marine fisheries (food depletion, gear impacts)

Aquaculture

XI. URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Paving

Building houses and businesses (loss of habitat)

Owning domestic animals (cats or dogs, not livestock)

Urban aquatic habitat management (includes development and maintenance of golf course ponds, channeling/ditching waterways etc.)

Landscaping and vegetation management

Water quality and stormwater management

Establishing/maintaining greenways/greenbelts

XII. RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES

Trail use and camping (includes using pack animals, mountain biking, hiking etc.)

Snowshoeing/snow skiing/sledding

Mountain/rock climbing

Motorized boating (includes water skiing, jet skiing)

Non-motorized boating (includes wind surfing)

Swimming

Off-road driving (all types of vehicles except snow mobiles)

Snowmobiling

Aircraft use (includes helicopters) (No HE's tied to this activity)

Recreational developments (building campgrounds, marinas, trails, cottages)

Fish stocking

XIII. RIGHT-of-WAY MANAGEMENT

Utility corridors (power transmission lines, oil/gas pipelines)

Matrix 7: Salmon-Wildlife Relationships

For each species, relationships with particular salmon life stages are noted.

Relationships:

0 = Unknown if relationship occurs

1 = Strong, consistent relationship

2 = Occasional relationship

3 = Indirect relationship

4 = No relationship

5 = Rare relationship

Salmon stages:

0 = Not known

1= Incubation - eggs and alevin

2 = Freshwater rearing - fry, fingerling, and parr

3 = Saltwater - smolts, immature adults, adults

4 = Spawning – freshwater

5 = Carcasses

http://www.cbfwa.org/files/province/systemwide/projects/35010n.doc

Under ‘Overview and Purpose’ on page 13 of the above report, the following URL is given:

http://www.edthome.org/framework/toc_020212.htm

This looks like a very important report to print, read and study. The implications are immense.

A Multi-Species Framework Approach for the Columbia River Basin

Integrating Fish, Wildlife, and Ecological Functions

Version: February 2002

Bruce G. Marcot, Willis E. McConnaha, Paul H. Whitney, Thomas A. O'Neil, Peter J. Paquet, Lars E. Mobrand, Gregory R. Blair, Lawrence C. Lestelle, Kevin M. Malone, Kristina I. Jenkins

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Summary

Overview

Results of Fish Assessments

Results of Wildlife Assessments

Results of Integrated Fish-Wildlife Assessments

Findings Related to Scientific Uncertainty and Potential Management Risk

Recommendations on a Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation Program

II. Introduction

History and Background

Objectives

Toward Integrated Assessment and Management

Sections of this Report

III. Methods

Fish Species

Introduction

Development of Current Potential and Historic Potential Landscapes

Analysis Method

Uncertainty and World View Assumptions

Wildlife Species

Introduction

Overview of Information Used

Major Assumptions

Validation Steps

Ecological Integration

Integrating Assessments of Fish and Wildlife Populations and Ecological Functions

Influence of Habitats on Populations and Functions

Influence of Populations on Themselves

Influence of Populations on Other Populations

Influence of Populations on Habitats and KECs

Influence of Planning Alternatives and Management Activities on Habitats

Changes Through Space and Time

Addressing Uncertainty

Uncertainty and Use of a Scientific Approach

Uncertainty as Handled in this Report

Worldviews

IV. Results and Discussion

Fish

Framework

EDT Model Results Validation

Historic Potential

Current Potential

Alternative 2

Alternative 5

Alternative 6

Wildlife

Habitat Performance

Biological Performance

Fish and Wildlife Integration

Integrated Assessments of Fish and Wildlife Populations and Ecological Functions

Influence of Habitats on Populations and Functions

Influence of Populations on Themselves

Influence of Populations on Other Populations

Influence of Populations on Habitats and KECs

Implications of Findings

V. Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation

Conceptual Overview with Example

Three Levels of Monitoring

Role of Independent Science Advisory Board

Discussion and Elaboration on the Use of Biological Objectives

VI. References

VII. Glossary

VIII. Appendices

Appendix A - EDT Method (.pdf)

Appendix B - Rules for Translating

B-1 Guidelines to Biorules (.pdf)

B-2 Rules for Translating Level 2 Environmental Attribute Values To Level 3 Biometrics for Chinook Salmon (.pdf)

B-3 Association Matrix (.pdf)

B-4 Benchmarks (.pdf)

B-5 References (.pdf)

Appendix C - Subyear (.pdf)

Appendix D - Flow Assumptions

D-1a Flow Assumptions Part 1a (.pdf)

D-1b Flow Assumptions Part 1b (.pdf)

D-2 Flow Assumptions Part 2 (.pdf)

Appendix E - Dam Survival Assumptions

E-1 Subyearling - Hydro, Tables 1-5 (.pdf)

E-2 Yearling - Hydro, Tables 6-10 (.pdf)

Appendix F - Habitat Assessment Methods

F-1 Black Bear Habitat Assessment Method Summary (.pdf)

F-2 Bald Eagle Habitat Assessment Method Summary (.pdf)

F-3 American Beaver Habitat Assessment Method Summary (.pdf)

Appendix G - Library (.pdf)

Appendix H - Strategies Applied in Alternatives (.pdf)

Appendix I - Scientific Principles (.pdf)

Appendix J - Annotated Bibliography List (.pdf)

Appendix K - Functional Analysis

K-1 Methods Used to Analyze KEFs and Functional Redundancy of Wildlife Species (.pdf)

K-2 Figure Captions (.pdf)

K-Figure 1 Wildlife Habitat Types Historic and Current (.pdf)

K-Figure 2 Change, Historic to Current by Wildlife Habitat (.pdf)

K-Figure 3 Change, Historic to Current (.pdf)

K-Figure 4a Change in Functional Redundancy, part 1 (.pdf)

K-Figure 4b Change in Functional Redundancy, part 2 (.pdf)

K-Figure 5 Upper Grande Ronde HUC, Blue Mountains (.pdf)

K-Figure 6 Percent Change in Functional Redundancy for Physically Affects (Improves) Soil Structure, Aeration (Typically by Digging), Historic to Current (.pdf)

K-Table 1 Acres of historic and current wildlife habitat in the example subwatershed (.pdf)

K-Table 2 Number of wildlife species (functional redundancy) by categories of key ecological functions (KEFs), found in wildlife habitats occurring within the example subwatershed (.pdf)

Appendix L - Screening Procedure for Estimating the Wildlife-Habitat Types

VII. Amendments

(Back to Main Title Page)

Another website that is mentioned is:

The Interactive Biodiversity Information System (IBIS) prototype website homepage (a vast minefield of ‘information’):

http://www.nwhi.org/ibis/home/ibis.asp

The NHI Mission Statement: The Northwest Habitat Institute (NHI) is a non-profit scientific and educational organization. Our mission is to promote and facilitate the conservation of Pacific Northwest native species and habitats through:

Development and dissemination of data-rich and verifiable information, maps, and tools; and Restoration and enhancement of native habitats. Specific objectives of the institute include developing products and tools that assist landowners and land managers conserve native species and habitats, developing and implementing inventorying and monitoring programs, and coordinating and facilitating activities (e.g., habitat restoration, land-use planning and management objectives) that promote the conservation and management of our natural resources.

Examples of work the NHI has conducted include: Developing and coordinating projects that increase the state of our knowledge about: the interactions and associations between our wildlife species and habitats, and the effects of land-use and management practices on our native species and habi