Lower Grand River Conservation Opportunity Seminar

1. Lower Grand River Conservation Opportunity Seminar Updating Wetland Plan Revising the Missouri Wetland Plan

2. Setting the Stage for Planning North Mid-Latitude South Remaining Wetlands as Percent of Historic Total

3. A Highly Altered Landscape Levees Dams Roads Railroad track Reservoirs Impoundment Land use changes and the list goes on…..

4. Consequences of Alteration Incised river channels Streams disconnected from floodplain Flooding patterns have changed Existing wetlands overwhelmed by system processes

5. Deposition

6. Scouring

7. Connected Scour

8. Audubon of Missouri: Important Bird Areas 1. Mingo Basin (Duck Creek) 3. Otter Slough Conservation Area 8. Lower Grand River Wetlands (Fountain Grove) 16. Manitou Floodplain (Eagle Bluffs) 24. Nodaway Valley Conservation Area 26. Bob Brown Conservation Area 28. West-central Missouri River Bends (Grand Pass) 31. Ted Shanks Alluvial Complex 32. Lincoln Alluvial Complex (B.K. Leach) 35. Great Rivers Confluence (Marais Temps Clair, Columbia Bottoms) 36. Osage River Bottoms (Schell Osage, Four Rivers) 40. Southeast Missouri Bottomlands (Ten Mile Pond)

10. Wetlands for Critters and People Grand Pass CA 4,000 hunters spent 22,000 hours hunting 600 anglers spent 1,500 hours fishing 4,000 non-consumptive users spent 5,500 hours on the area

11. How do we meet the life history needs of wetland dependent species on the 13% of wetlands that remain in a highly altered system?

12. Lower Grand

14. Local How do we plan across scales with multiple partners? Continental Among Regions Within Regions

15. Planning from The Bottom Up Lower Grand River COA Goals and Objectives Statewide Goals and Objectives Upper Mississippi River and Great Lakes Joint Venture North American Waterfowl Management Plan and other NABCI Plans

16. A Living Document Conceptual Models Assessment Wetland reviews Objectives Strategies Competing Alternatives Based on Models Monitoring

17. Plan Outline Introduction Shared framework of understanding (models) Assessment of past, present, and desired conditions of Missouri’s wetlands Goals and objectives Strategies Monitoring, evaluation, and research Living Document

18. A Shared Framework of Understanding • HGM: Linking Ecosystem structure and processes to desired habitat conditions • Providing habitat for wetland dependent species life history needs • Public user participation model: Linking habitat management to the social landscape

19. A Shared Framework of Understanding • Hydro-geomorphic model to define landscape setting and system processes

20. Wetlands on the Move Through Time and Space • Oxbows • Point Bars • Ephemeral Pools • Terraces • Bluffs • Abandoned Channels • Backswamp • Active Channel

21. What is the new desired state: A Comparison of Historical vs. Current Conditions Can the site/region be restored to historical communities and distribution? If not, can historic habitats be restored in “new” locations? What processes must be restored to sustain the community?

22. A Shared Framework of Understanding • HGM: Linking Ecosystem structure and processes to desired habitat conditions • Providing habitat for wetland dependent species to meet life history needs • Public user participation model: Linking habitat management to the social landscape

23. A Shared Framework of Understanding • HGM: Linking Ecosystem structure and processes to desired habitat conditions • Providing habitat for wetland dependent species to meet life history needs • Public user participation model: Linking habitat management to the social landscape

24. Modeling habitat needs for wetland dependent species to meet life history needs • What are assumptions our assumptions about the role the Lower Grand COA plays in meeting life history needs of wetland dependent species?

25. Wintering Migration Breeding Migration Open WaterRiver or Ditch Marsh Moist Soil Unit Wet Meadow, Open BLH Managed BLH

26. Pairing Success + - - Foraging Time Required Recruitment Non-foraging Time Timing of Breeding - + + - + + Breeding Propensity + Habitat Quality (Food kg/acre) + + + Surplus Energy - Body Condition Starvation - + + - + Predation - + - Survival + + - + Harvest + + Movement Disease - - - - +/- +/- + - - - Population Density Population Density Links to vital rates (non-breeding) Recruitment Habitat Quality (Food kg/acre) Body Condition Survival - Movement

27. Linking Habitat and Populations(Meeting Life History Needs) • Truemet Model • Other species models?

28. Decision about Habitat Distribution • How much habitat do I need to achieve a certain waterfowl population objective ? • Given the habitat on my area, what should my waterfowl population objective be ?

29. Population Energy Demand Population Objective Bird Energy Needs Population Energy Supply Habitat Acres Food Densities Deficit Enough Surplus

30. Energy Demand Vs. Energy Supply Supply Kcal x 106 Demand

31. Winter Pre-Spawn Spawning (spring, summer) Post Spawn Open Water River or Ditch Marsh Moist Soil Unit Wet Meadow, Open BLH Managed BLH

32. On-going Work to Develop Models Mallard satellite telemetry project to assess resource utilization Marsh bird project testing assumptions about the links between landscape setting, management, and presence Fish and amphibian project to develop rapid assessment methods

33. Habitat Proposed Hunter Participation Model Decisions to Hunt Identity Formation Capacity to Hunt Hunters Pop. Recruitment Retention Turnover Attrition

34. Capacity Building Identity Production Hunter Participation Model Individual Society Decision to Hunt Temporal Scale

35. Public Use in the Lower Grand COA • What is the appropriate amount of refuge? • Can managed hunt reservation systems influence participation? • How does hunting fit into Swan Lake objectives? • How can this region connect people to the outdoors through a variety of activities?

36. Assessment/Populating the Models • HGM Assessment • Assessing landscape conditions past, present, and future • Energetic Assessment/Meeting Life History Needs • Assessing food abundance and availability • Apply species specific energetic requirements • Public Use Assessment • Analysis of POS data • Green card data • Other public use data sets

37. Continental Among Regions Within Regions Local I. Local Objectives More Less Either

38. Identifying Tradeoffs Restoring system processes Emulating system processes Providing resources for wetland dependent species Providing public use opportunities

39. Plan Outline Introduction Shared framework of understanding (models) Assessment of past, present, and desired conditions of Missouri’s wetlands Goals and objectives Strategies Monitoring, evaluation, and research Living Document

40. Plan Outline Identify goals, objectives, and strategies that enhance coordination among wetland management units within 6 regions with major wetland complexes. Develop goals, objective, and monitoring systems that can be rolled up to state and broader scales.

41. Wetland Plan Coordination Team Composition (16 members) 4 Wildlife 5 Resource Science 2 Fisheries 1 Private Lands 1 Forestry 1 Outreach & Education 2 Wetland Consultants

42. Potential Subcommittees 1. HGM model/assessment 2. Truemet model/life history needs assessment 3. Public use model/assessment 4. Regional Teams 5. Monitoring, evaluation, and Research 6. Education 7. Wetland Reviews

43. Schedule

44. Partner Involvement September 29, 2009 Partner Meeting - 6 National Wildlife Refuges - 3 Joint Ventures - 2 Integrated Waterbird Management and Monitoring - 4 NRCS - 1 MODOT - 6 NGOs - 3 DNR - 3 USGS - 4 COE - 1 Kansas Biological Survey

45. Partner Involvement - Do we develop a state wetland plan or an MDC wetland plan with partner input? • How do we get partner input at the local, regional, and state levels? • - How do we connect a wetland plan with plans with others dealing with adjoining ecological communities? • - How do we coordinate MDC planning and management activities with other agency plans and actions?