Monitoring & Evaluation Guidebook 20XX
WILDLIFE TERRESTRIAL HABITAT: TES
17. Is current management providing for sufficient habitat of federally listed
threatened and endangered species and Alaska Region sensitive species?
Goals and Objectives
Maintain the abundance and distribution of habitats, especially old-growth forests, to
sustain viable populations in the planning area (USDA Forest Service 2008, p. 2-9).
Maintain habitat capability sufficient to produce wildlife populations that support the use
of wildlife resources for sport, subsistence, and recreational activities (USDA Forest
Service 2008, p. 2-9).
Provide sufficient habitat to preclude the need for listing species under the Endangered
Species Act, or from becoming listed as Sensitive due to National Forest habitat
conditions (USDA Forest Service 2008, p. 2-4).
Sampling / Reporting Period
Annual / 5 year
Evaluation Criteria
Changes in the threatened, endangered, or sensitive (TES) species list.


New listings/delistings
Modifications to the Alaska Region Sensitive Species List
Changes in important habitats and population trends for TES species (WILD1.II.B,
REC2.II.C).



Changes in the quantity, quality, and/or distribution of habitats for TES species
Changes in permitted recreational uses, access, or shoreline development in the
vicinity of important habitats for Steller sea lions, Aleutian terns, Kittlitz’s
murrelets, and black oystercatchers
Changes in the populations of TES species
Table 1 presents the list of TES species that use terrestrial habitats and are addressed
through monitoring.
1
Monitoring & Evaluation Guidebook 20XX
Table 1. TES species that use terrestrial habitats and are addressed through
monitoring.
Steller sea
lion
FT
Aleutian tern
FSS Nest in coastal colonies in a
variety of habitats including
islands, shrub-tundra, grass
or sedge meadows, and
freshwater coastal marshes
FSS Rocky shorelines along the
outer coast of southeast
Alaska; forages in sheltered
areas where low-sloping
gravel or rock beaches with
abundant prey occur
FSS Nest near tidewater glaciers
and remnant high-elevation
glaciers
FSS Productive old-growth (POG)
forest
Black oyster
catcher
Kittlitz’s
murrelet
Queen
Charlotte
goshawk
Marine habitats and terrestrial
haul outs and rookery sites
Disturbance
in the vicinity
of haulout or
rookery sites
Disturbance
near nest
sites (e.g.,
access
allowed
through
special use
permits)
Steller sea lion S&Gs
Habitat loss;
disturbance
at nest sites
Goshawk S&Gs, Reserve
System
Protection of small
islands; Beach and
Estuary Fringe S&Gs;
Recreation S&Gs
Precision and Reliability
The precision of GIS-based evaluation criteria is high. However, reliability is tempered
by mapping errors and time lags in incorporating changes in forest resources due to
natural causes (e.g., windthrow) into the GIS database. These sources of error should
be improved during the life of the Forest Plan.
The precision and reliability of evaluation criteria based on reviews of recent literature or
ongoing monitoring and research depend on the methods of data collection and level of
peer review.
Power analyses will be conducted based on results of the first 3 years of monitoring for
Aleutian terns and black oystercatchers to determine optimal sampling intensity.
Data Sources
Tongass National Forest GIS databases; project-level environmental documentation;
ongoing monitoring and research conducted by the Alaska Department of Fish and
Game (ADF&G), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), and other entities as available; and the latest published and grey
literature. Field data will also be collected for the black oystercatcher and Aleutian tern.
Ongoing monitoring and research programs which may provide information on the
status of TES species’ habitats or population trends include, but are not limited to:
2
Monitoring & Evaluation Guidebook 20XX

NMFS Alaska Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Mammal Laboratory
(http://www.afsc.noaa.gov/nmml/index.php) – includes data from ongoing Steller
sea lion surveys (adult and pup counts at rookeries and haul-out sites) and
updates on collaborative research.

Southeast Alaska Inventory and Monitoring Network ; The Kittlitz's Murrelet
Cooperative Study in Southeast Alaska, led by the USFWS Juneau Field Office

The USGS Forest & Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center – leading a largescale collaborative research effort to asses black oystercatcher habitat use and
movements among breeding and nonbreeding sites
(http://fresc.usgs.gov/products/blackoystercatcher/index.html)

North Pacific Pelagic Seabird Database
(http://alaska.usgs.gov/science/biology/nppsd/) – a repository of geospatial
pelagic seabird data collected in Russia, Alaska, and Canada between 1972 and
2003, managed by the USGS Alaska Science Center and USFWS; includes
incidental observations of black oystercatchers, representing the only data on
black oystercatchers in many areas.

ShoreZone (www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/shorezone/) – a coastal habitat
mapping and classification system that uses low-altitude aerial imagery to
produce an inventory of the biological, geomorphic, and sedimentary features of
the intertidal and nearshore zones. Imagery and mapped data are available for
nearly all of southeast Alaska.
Monitoring Methods
The following describes data collection, reporting, and analysis for TES species. Details
outlined in this protocol may be modified over time based on the results of monitoring
and as new information is gained on species ecology and monitoring techniques.
General
Data Collection: The following tasks will be completed annually to identify changes in
the list of TES species to be considered for monitoring and new information related to
the habitat requirements, distributions, and population trends of TES species.

Review the NMFS and USFWS web sites for changes in listing status, critical
habitat designations, and other new information for threatened and endangered
species. Review the Alaska Region Sensitive Species List for any updates.

Review recent literature and the results of ongoing research projects to confirm
that habitat requirements for TES species, as described above, are appropriate.
3
Monitoring & Evaluation Guidebook 20XX

Review the progress and results of recent research projects, and coordinate with
Forest Service, ADFG, USGS, NMFS, and USFWS biologists to identify new
information related to TES species distributions and population status.

Identify changes to the Forest Plan conservation strategy (see Biodiversity 9
Protocol). Also, review project-level effects determinations as defined in
biological evaluations and assessments for the fiscal year. Summarize the
project name, type of project, location (by value comparison unit), and
determination for projects that are identified as having an effect or impact to a
threatened, endangered or sensitive species.
Results: The progress or results of pertinent research projects will be reported annually.
Changes to the definitions of important habitat for TES species will be identified.
Analysis: Annually, information needs will be recommended. The sensitive species list
will be reviewed to assess if and what changes should be made. The efficacy of survey
protocols will be discussed and areas where modifications or refinements may be
necessary will be identified.
Steller Sea Lion
Scale of Analysis: Major haul-out and rookery sites along or adjacent to the shorelines
of the Tongass NF.
Approach: The NMFS Alaska Fisheries Science Center National Marine Mammal
Laboratory maintains a Steller sea lion database with pup and non-pup (adult and
juvenile) counts from rookery and haul-out sites. This database will be used to provide
information on the status of major rookery and haul out sites near the Tongass NF.
Data Collection: Annually, data will be collected from existing databases on the location
and status of major haul-out and rookery sites on or adjacent to the shorelines of the
Tongass NF. Project documents will be reviewed to identify projects with the potential to
adversely affect these sites.
Results: Annually, adult and pup counts will be reported for major rookery and haul-out
sites. Projects with the potential to affect major rookery and/or haul-out sites will be
identified in the annual report.
Analysis: No additional analysis is needed because it is assumed that Forest Plan
S&Gs adequately avoid and minimize direct effects to sea lions and indirect effects to
sea lion habitat quality. The monitoring report will document that these measures have
been incorporated into relevant projects and plans.
Kittlitz’s Murrelet
Scale of Analysis: Breeding season core population centers adjacent to the Tongass
(Icy Bay, Malaspina Forelands, Yakutat Bay; Kissling et al. 2011).
4
Monitoring & Evaluation Guidebook 20XX
Approach: The Kittlitz’s murrelet nests in rugged mountains near glaciers, or in
previously glaciated areas, sometimes up to 45 miles inland ( USFWS 2006). During
summer, Kittlitz’s murrelets forage near tidewater glaciers and outflows of glacial
streams. It is unlikely that Forest Service activities will affect the quantity or quality of
habitats used by the Kittlitz’s murrelet. Therefore, baseline annual monitoring will
consist of a review to identify new projects and permitted uses within nesting or foraging
habitats near breeding season core population centers. If projects or permitted uses
are identified as having the potential to adversely affect Kittlitz’s murrelet habitat, the
Forest Service will collaborate with the USFWS, ADF&G, NPS or other organizations to
determine the extent of the potential effects and the likelihood that potential effects are
tied to overall population trends. Data from long-term Kittlitz’s murrelet monitoring under
the Southeast Alaska Inventory and Monitoring project (Moynahan et al. 2008) will be
considered as context for regional population trends.
Data Collection: A list of projects and special use permits with the potential to affect
Kittlitz’s murrelet foraging or breeding habitats will be obtained by reviewing project
documents and coordinating with Forest Service planners and permitting specialists.
Results: Projects or permits with the potential to affect Kittlitz’s murrelet habitat will be
identified in the annual report.
Analysis: Where projects or permits have the potential to adversely affect Kittlitz’s
murrelet habitat, the extent and nature of the effects will be described in the annual
report. If more than 10 percent of Kittlitz’s murrelet habitat on the Tongass is
cumulatively affected, the Forest Service will collaborate with the USFWS, ADF&G,
NPS or other organizations to determine the need for additional monitoring and/or
recommended adjustments to the Standards and Guidelines.
Aleutian Tern
Scale of Analysis: The Black Sand Spit, Yakutat Ranger District.
Approach: Aleutian terns breed in several areas around Yakutat, primarily in mixed
Arctic and Aleutian Tern colonies. One of the largest Aleutian tern breeding colonies in
the world occurs on the Black Sand Spit on the Yakutat Ranger District. The Black
Sand Spit is relatively accessible, and access is managed by the Forest Service.
Therefore, monitoring of the breeding colonies at the Black Sand Spit provides a means
for assessing Aleutian tern population trends in relation to Forest Service management
activities as a measure of habitat quality.
The Forest Service will collaborate with the USFWS, ADF&G, and other entities to
implement monitoring. Data from other agencies (e.g., National Park Service) will be
used as available to provide context in the interpretation of results.
Data Collection: Aleutian tern abundance data will be collected annually at the Black
Sand Spit during the breeding season (May-August). Data will be collected following a
nest-based transect survey protocol for Aleutian terns developed by Pyare et al. (2010;
Attachment 1). This protocol, which currently exists in interim form, was designed
based on monitoring conducted at the mixed Arctic and Aleutian tern colony at the Black
Sand Spit; therefore, field verification of its efficacy is not necessary.
5
Monitoring & Evaluation Guidebook 20XX
The methodology consists of distance sampling along transects through the breeding
colony to estimate density of breeding terns, with four fine scale measurements taken at
each nest to allow differentiation between tern species. Surveys will be conducted three
times during the breeding season, at approximately 10-day intervals. As breeding
colonies shift between years, the protocol also includes methods for breeding colony
identification and delineation and sampling transect establishment. Additional detail on
sampling and a list of survey equipment and a data form are included in Attachment 1.
Following 3 to 5 years of monitoring data collection, a power analysis will be conducted
to inform potential revisions to sampling intensity and frequency.
Results: Aleutian tern survey results, including colony area (displayed using maps) and
the number of nests documented for each species (to generate species ratio) will be
presented in the annual report.
Analysis: Aleutian tern breeding density will be calculated using a program such as
DISTANCE (Buckland et al. 2001). If data are adequate, population estimates may be
derived by extrapolating occupied nest density along the monitoring transect to the
whole colony area, and then applying a species ratio (see Attachment 1). Each nest is
equated with two breeding terns.
Every 5 years, population trends will be analyzed based on changes in Aleutian tern
breeding density. If a consistent downward trend averaging at least 2 percent annually
is noted over a period of 5 or more years, a secondary evaluation will be initiated to
examine potential management- or habitat-related factors (along with other drivers) that
may be contributing to the pattern. If a downward trend of 25 percent is detected over
any temporal period in any monitoring location, a secondary evaluation will be initiated.
These thresholds may be modified as understanding of the species improves.
Black Oystercatcher
Scale of Analysis: Suitable shoreline breeding habitat along the marine coastlines of the
Tongass.
Approach: The Tongass NF does not support any known, large concentrations of black
oystercatchers; however, black oystercatchers are known to nest along its shorelines.
Historically, they have been documented in Sitka Sound/Necker Islands, the Myriad
Islands, the outer coast of Baranof Island, and the Forrester Island group but breeding
birds are generally sparsely distributed (Tessler et al. 2007). Although shorelines are
protected by Forest Plan standards and guidelines, many are permitted for recreational
uses (e.g., camping) which may be a source of disturbance to nesting birds.
The approach involves tracking projects and other activities within suitable shoreline
breeding areas and periodic monitoring efforts at known breeding sites. Breeding site
monitoring will focus on the number of black oystercatchers and nest territories at a
given site, and as budget allows, may also include follow-up visits to document nest
productivity. Information from National Park Service monitoring in Glacier
Bay/Beardslee Islands, where the largest known concentration of black oystercatchers
in southeast Alaska occurs, will be incorporated to provide context for regional
population trends.
6
Monitoring & Evaluation Guidebook 20XX
Data Collection: Potential shoreline breeding areas will be identified by using the
ShoreZone GIS database in combination with existing data from black oystercatcher
surveys conducted by the Forest Service, ADF&G, USFWS, and other entities as
appropriate. Annually, use levels (e.g., number of campsites, permits, etc.) will be
documented within each area. This information will be useful for tracking future changes
in use levels.
Pilot Study: Currently, no comprehensive survey for black oystercatchers has been
conducted on the Tongass NF. Therefore, historic black oystercatcher breeding sites
will be visited to confirm nesting activity and determine suitability for long-term
monitoring. Additional areas of suitable habitat based on ShoreZone mapping or where
breeding is suspected may also be visited. Locations of known or suspected breeding
sites may be derived from the NPPSD and input from Forest Service, ADF&G, and
USFWS biologists; project documents; and other sources. During the pilot study, the
efficacy of the monitoring protocol will also be assessed (using the methods described
below).
Sampling: Sampling at known breeding areas will be conducted annually for the first 3
years, then every five years thereafter, but may be less frequent thereafter depending
on the initial monitoring results. Monitoring will be based on the protocol developed by
the National Park Service’s Southwest Alaska Inventory and Monitoring Network
(Bodkin 2011; Attachment 2). Black oystercatcher nest density and occupancy data will
be collected annually along 20-km-long transects centered on randomly-selected
shoreline nesting areas. Surveys will be conducted between the last week of May
through the first two weeks of June, at which time detection of nest territories is
assumed to be highest, and prior to or at least 5 days following the seasons highest tide
(Andres 1998). This interval is intended to capture the peak of the breeding season and
to avoid the period of territorial ambiguity associated with high-tide flooding.
A pool of potential sampling units will be established by centering 20-km-long transects
on known black oystercatcher territories (identified during the pilot study). From this
pool, a subset of 10 sample transects will be selected using a stratified random design
(the method for stratification will be determined based on known territory locations but
may include geographical [e.g., biogeographic province], human activity [e.g.,
presence/absence or activity level], or abundance-related criteria [e.g., habitat quality]).
Black oystercatchers are long-lived (more than 15 years) and establish territories with
nest sites that can persist over many years; therefore, it is assumed that that surveys
conducted over multiple years along different shoreline segments likely encounter
different (i.e., independent) breeding pairs.
Black oystercatcher nest sites will be documented along each sample transect to
estimate nest density (pairs per kilometer of shoreline) and, if revisited, nest site
productivity (number of chicks or eggs per nest). Transects will be sampled by two
observers traveling slowly and methodically in small skiffs suitable for landing on rocky
shorelines (Bodkin 2011; Attachment 2). A list of survey equipment and a data form are
also included in Attachment 1.
7
Monitoring & Evaluation Guidebook 20XX
After the first 3 years of monitoring, a power analysis will be conducted to inform
potential revisions to sampling intensity and frequency necessary to detect a designated
change in population size over a number of years. If the sampling design does not yield
adequate nest sample sizes, additional transects may be added.
Results: Annually, shoreline use levels will be documented in the annual report. After
each breeding area monitoring year, counts of black oystercatchers and nest territories
(active, abandoned, new, and failed) by sample transect will be reported. Average
number of nests, and eggs or chicks per nest (if these data are available), per transect
will be reported.
Analysis: Where projects or permits have the potential to adversely impact black
oystercatcher habitat, the extent and nature of the effects will be described in the annual
report. If more than 10 percent of black oystercatcher habitat on the Tongass is
impacted (cumulatively), the Forest Service will collaborate with the USFWS, ADF&G,
NPS or other organizations to determine the need for additional monitoring and/or
recommended adjustments to the Standards and Guidelines.
The mean (and standard error) number of active, abandoned, new, and failed nests
among all sample transects will be calculated (see Attachment 2). The average number
of eggs and chicks per nest for each transect and for all transects collectively will be
calculated. If a consistent downward trend averaging at least 2 percent annually is
noted over a period of 5 or more years, a secondary evaluation will be initiated to
examine potential management- or habitat-related factors (along with other drivers) that
may be contributing to the pattern. If a downward trend of 25 percent is detected over
any temporal period in any monitoring location, a secondary evaluation will be initiated.
These thresholds may be modified as understanding of the species improves.
Queen Charlotte Goshawk
Scale of Analysis: Tongass National Forest.
Approach: Goshawks are inherently difficult to census due to the scale and remoteness
of the Forest, thus monitoring will be based on changes in modeled habitat. Suring
(2012; Attachment 3) provides a framework for modeling goshawk habitat use based on
land cover classes described by the Size Density (SD) model (i.e., it describes patterns
of goshawk habitat selection, based on known nest sites, in terms of SD model
categories).
Suring (2012) developed a Bayesian Belief Network consisting of four variables, which
collectively produce an index of habitat quality for goshawks, allowing the ranking of a
location on the landscape from very low to very high (the Habitat Index). This BBN took
into account habitat selection at four scales including the nest site, nest area, postfledging family area (PFA), and use area. The variable incorporating selectivity indices
for land cover class at the nest site provided a probability of nesting at a specific
location. Variables based on the weighted mean selectivity indices for the nest area,
the PFA, and the use area were combined to describe the landscape condition in
proximity to a site being evaluated. The probability of nesting and the landscape
condition associated with a given area were then combined to produce an index of
8
Monitoring & Evaluation Guidebook 20XX
overall goshawk habitat quality. Figure 1 illustrates the relationship between the
variables and the habitat selectivity index. Suring (2012) describes model development
in more detail.
Thus, the habitat selectivity index can be applied to each polygon on a map of land
cover class to evaluate goshawk habitat quality across the landscape. This enables an
evaluation of how the composition of the landscape changes in terms of its likelihood of
being used by breeding goshawks (i.e., how much of the landscape has very high, high,
moderate, and low likelihood of being used).
Nest Site SDM class
Nest Area Index
Post-fledging Family Area Index
Use Area Index
Probability of Nesting
Habitat Selectivity Index
Landscape Condition
Figure 1. Variables incorporated in the Bayesian Belief Network for goshawk habitat
selection in southeast Alaska.
Although there is no direct link between this type of habitat-based analysis and goshawk
population viability, it does enable management of habitat to ensure occupancy (e.g.,
maintaining high quality habitat). Thus in the absence of goshawk demographic
information, it may be used to evaluate current management strategies. It should be
noted that the authors identify several limitations of the model and areas where
additional evaluation is needed. Therefore, this protocol may be modified over time to
incorporate the best available information related to goshawk habitat selection.
Sampling: The conditional probability tables provided in Suring (2012) will be used to
calculate the habitat selectivity index across the Forest. Project-level survey data will
be reviewed for new locations of goshawk nest sites.
Results: The acres (and percent) of each goshawk habitat selectivity index category
(very low, low, moderate, high, and very high) will be reported by biogeographic
province and for the Forest as a whole. Newly identified goshawk nest sites will be
incorporated into the Forest-wide database.
Analysis: Annually, changes in the acres of habitat selectivity index categories from the
previous year will be. Every five years, the distribution of high and moderate quality
goshawk habitats across the Forest will be evaluated, as well as the distribution of
projects identified as having an impact to goshawks (i.e., are they distributed across the
Forest or concentrated in specific areas [e.g., biogeographic provinces, islands]).
Feedback Mechanism
If monitoring results indicate significant effects, then evaluate permitted uses and/or
projects and plans, and change if needed.
9
Monitoring & Evaluation Guidebook 20XX
References Cited
Andres, B. A. 1998. Black Oystercatcher Haematopus bachmani. Restoration Notebook,
Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council, Anchorage AK 8pp.
Bodkin, J. L. 2011. SOP for monitoring black oystercatchers - Version 1.1: Southwest
Alaska Inventory and Monitoring Network. Natural Resource Report
NPS/SWAN/NRR—2011/391. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado.
Buckland, S. T. A., D.R. Burnham, K.P. Laake, J.L. Borchers, D. L. Thomas, L. 2001.
Introduction to Distance Sampling . New York, NY: Oxford University Press
Kissling M.L., P.M. Lukacs, S.B. Lewis, S.M. Gende, K.J. Kuletz, N.R. Hatch, S.K.
Schoen, and S. Oehlers. 2011. Distribution and abundance of the Kittlitz’s Murrelet in
selected areas of southeastern Alaska. Marine Ornithology 39: 3–11.
Pyare, Sanjay, Mike Goldstein, Nate Catterson, an Susan Oehlers. 2010. Evaluating
methods to census breeding Aleutian tern s at a colony in Yakutat, Alaska. Interim
Scientific Report, ADFG Grant T-9-1-3.0 FY10.
Suring, L. H. 2012. Modeling the Habitat Relationships of Species of Conservation
Concern in Old Forests of Southeast Alaska, USA. Northern Ecologic L.L.C.
Technical Bulletin 2012–1.
Tessler, D.F., J.A. Johnson, B.A. Andres, and S. Thomas. 2007. Black Oystercatcher
(Haematopus bachmani) conservation action plan [Unpub. report]. Anchorage, AK:
Alaska Department of Fish and Game & US Fish and Wildlife Service. 115 pp.
USDA Forest Service. 2008. Tongass National Forest Land and Resource
Management Plan. USDA Forest Service R10-MB-603b.
10