To develop an effective management plan requires an initial assessment of the status of biodiversity, to set the priorities and objectives for management, and then ongoing monitoring, to establish whether or not management actions are achieving their objectives.
Monitoring
- The collection and analysis of repeated observation or measurements to evaluate changes in condition and progress toward meeting a management objective.
- Monitoring is carried out to determine if biodiversity conservation, livelihood enhancement and other objectives are being met, such as the maintenance of the existing area of particular habitat or a specified number of a particular species, or development of a community woodlot to reduce impact on natural forests.
- Monitoring should not attempt to describe the general ecology of a site or measure things that may merely be of interest. Unfortunately, monitoring schemes often resort to measuring a wide variety of variables, which may or may not related to the protected area objectives and management questions that need to be addressed. As a result, time and money may be spent collection unnecessary data. Even worse, it be found that key management questions cannot be answered with the information obtained.
Participatory Approach
- Participatory monitoring is a powerful approach that can improve the effectiveness of information gathering and help people understand the reasons for certain management decisions. It is therefore increasingly being used to support biodiversity conservation and management. Local people are valuable participants in assessing and monitoring biodiversity, because they may have knowledge about wildlife, plants and resources derived from generation of use. For example, knowledge of medicinal properties of some plants may be undocumented and known only to the local communities.
- Most monitoring systems within protected areas focus on protected species of wildlife and plants. Monitoring local resource use is neglected but crucial dimension in planning sustainable harvesting by local people.
- It is internationally acknowledged that involving local people in the planning and management of biodiversity and resources can increase their awareness and motivation for conservation.
- The involvement of local people in the gathering and analysis of biodiversity data will enable local communities to understand why certain decision is made.
- Communication among stakeholders is often limited. Interactive participation by various partners, including nearby communities and protected area staff can improve relation and resolve conflict.
- In developing countries, resources for biodiversity assessment are limited – human capacity, money and time are all scarce. Biodiversity monitoring and management systems should therefore be based on locally available capacity and resources to be sustainable.
Pressure – State – Response Framework
It is useful to develop a simple framework of the interrelations between important biodiversity features and their influencing factors and management action.
State The current state or condition of biodiversity features in the area.
Pressure. Potentially impact on the biodiversity feature that influences its state eg. Deforestation for firewood and timber, pollution, or hunting.
Response. Policies, laws, practices, etc. alleviate or regulate the pressure on it. Others: tree planting programs, awareness activities and hunting regulations.
Location and boundaries: It is vital to clearly define the geographical area or species population that you which to monitor and draw conclusion on. We may only be interested in monitoring part of the population within the protected area. The population that we are interested in called the target population and the area in which it is found is the target area. The area over which samples may be drawn then defines the sample area and sample population.
If the target population is very large and difficult o sample, then it may be necessary to restrict sampling to a few selected key areas. For example, it is not practical to attempt sampling of snow Leopard occurrence over it entire target population. Although the species is probably widespread, in many parts of its range within ACA it may only occur irregularly and at very low densities. It is therefore only practical to identify and monitor a few key areas where Snow Leopard is known to occur. Samples are then taken within each key area.
Resources and Budget. Minimize cost of monitoring. Monitoring will be of no value it cannot be repeated. Cost-effective method that provides an adequate assessment should be used.
Frequency: The frequency at which monitoring is carried out is a key factor affecting the cost of monitoring. One should avoid monitoring more frequently than is necessary. It may be appropriate to visit forest at five – year intervals because major changes in such habitats are normally very slow in the absence of disturbance. But bird population may considerably from year to year, so survey may need to be carried out annually if resources allow.
Socio-economical and Environmental Friendly Methods
Do not use destructive sampling methods unless absolutely necessary.
Ensure that important wildlife, natural resources, livestock and crops are not damaged during field surveys (e.g. by trampling).
Minimize disturbance to sensitive species.
Do not use vehicles on sensitive habitats unless impacts can be avoided.
Position fixed sampling locations sensitively and avoids or minimized damage during their establishment.
Ensure any fixed or temporary structures that are left unattended do not pose a risk to wildlife, livestock or local people.
Avoid excessive re-visting of sites and sampling locations.
Time and Weather The time of year when survey is carried out can affect the result. Weather may affect the activity of animals and therefore their detectability. Bad weather can reduce an observer’s ability to see and hear (e.g.it is difficult to hear singing birds in windy weather). Most breeding bird monitoring is best carried out early in the breeding season when singing is at its greatest, whilst Snow Leopard surveys are best carried from January to April when they are mating and marking their home ranges most intensively. Pheasants generally only call for a short period around dawn, and therefore surveys carried out an hour or later will be in effective. In contrast, survey of soaring vulture must be carried out later in the day when the sun is up and thermals have been created.
Permanent Plots Permanent sampling will be most advantageous for monitoring when there is high degree of correlation between sampling-unit values between two periods. Marking and relocation permanent sample locations can be difficult and time consuming. Repeatedly surveying the same location may alter or damage the attribute being monitored or it surrounding, e.g. by trampling.
Examples: Snow leopard (Uncia uncia)
Reason for monitoring: Endangered species and legally protected by the National Parks and Wildlife Conservation (NPWC) Act 2029. Listed in Appendix 1 of Convention on international Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and as Endangered in IUCN Red Data Book.
Indicator species and top level predator of alpine ecosystem within ACA. Population is declining last few years due to unknown reason. Flag species (considerable international interest).
Monitoring Population/ area and sub units: Sangta, Bhena (Mustang, the Nar and Pho valleys and Khangsar (Manang). Below 5000m.
Frequency: Five year cycle.
Method: Sample survey- Multistage. Direct observation – calls, signs (scent, faeces, pugmarks, prey kills and snow leopard remains.
Timing of observations: February, March or April, and stat at sunrise.
Personnel responsible: ACAP Monitoring Manager, with sample locations identified by GIS team.
Training is given to all staff undertaking the surveys.
Equipments: GPS, maps ( 1: 10,000, or 1:20,000 scale), Snow Leopard Manual Book, Binoculars, camera, small tape measures, field safety kits, c.
Examples: ACAP Birds
Reasoning for monitoring: Conservation importance and some threatened. Forest and ecological indicator of the area.
Monitoring area: Annapurna Southern Sector -Ghandruk, Sikles, lower Mustang, Mixed broad forest in Manang.
Frequency of surveillance: Annual
Monitoring Method: Direct observation (call/ songs,) etc. Sampling method.
Timing: March/April, (7 am – 11am).
Personnel responsible: ornithologists.
Equipment: Binoculars (8x or 10x, magnification), maps GPS, field note books, safety kits, etc.
