Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Monitoring the condition of natural resources in US national parks

  • Published:
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The National Park Service has developed a long-term ecological monitoring program for 32 ecoregional networks containing more than 270 parks with significant natural resources. The monitoring program assists park managers in developing a broad-based understanding of the status and trends of park resources as a basis for making decisions and working with other agencies and the public for the long-term protection of park ecosystems. We found that the basic steps involved in planning and designing a long-term ecological monitoring program were the same for a range of ecological systems including coral reefs, deserts, arctic tundra, prairie grasslands, caves, and tropical rainforests. These steps involve (1) clearly defining goals and objectives, (2) compiling and summarizing existing information, (3) developing conceptual models, (4) prioritizing and selecting indicators, (5) developing an overall sampling design, (6) developing monitoring protocols, and (7) establishing data management, analysis, and reporting procedures. The broad-based, scientifically sound information obtained through this systems-based monitoring program will have multiple applications for management decision-making, research, education, and promoting public understanding of park resources. When combined with an effective education program, monitoring results can contribute not only to park issues, but also to larger quality-of-life issues that affect surrounding communities and can contribute significantly to the environmental health of the nation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bailey, R. G. (1998). Ecoregions map of North America: Explanatory note. USDA Forest Service, Washington, DC. Miscellaneous Publication 1548.

  • Bennett, A. J., Thompson, W. L., & Mortenson, D. C. (2006). Vital signs monitoring plan, Southwest Alaska Network. National Park Service. Retrieved 21 Jan 2008 from http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/monitor/monitoringplans.cfm.

  • Bestelmeyer, B. T. (2003). Development and use of state-and-transition models for rangelands. Journal of Range Management, 56, 114–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busch, E. D., & Trexler, J. C. (2003). The importance of monitoring in regional ecosystem initiatives. In E. D. Busch, & J. C. Trexler (Eds.) Monitoring ecosystems: interdisciplinary approaches for evaluating ecoregional initiatives (pp. 1–23). Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapin, F. S., Torn, M. S., & Tateno, M. (1996). Principles of ecosystem sustainability. American Naturalist, 148, 1016–1037.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cloern, J. E. (2001). Our evolving conceptual model of the coastal eutrophication problem. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 210, 223–253.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, G. E. (1989). Design of a long-term ecological monitoring programme for Channel Islands National Park. Natural Areas Journal, 9, 80–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, G. E. (2005). National Park stewardship and ‘vital signs’ monitoring: a case study from Channel Islands National Park, California. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 15, 71–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dennison, W. C., Lookingbill, T. R., Carruthers, T. J. B., Hawkey, J. M., & Carter, S. L. (2007). An eye-opening approach to developing and communicating integrated environmental assessments. Frontiers in Ecology & the Environment, 5, 307–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EEA (2003). EUNIS web application. Retrieved 21 Jan 2008 from http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/index.jsp.

  • EPA (2002). A Framework for Assessing and Reporting on Ecological Condition: an SAB Report. Environmental Protection Agency, Science Advisory Board. Washington, DC. EPA-SAB-EPEC-02-009.

  • Garrett, L. K., Rodhouse, T. J., Dicus, G. H., Caudill, C. C. & Shardlow, M. R. (2007). Upper Columbia Basin Network vital signs monitoring plan. National Park Service, Moscow, ID. Natural Resource Report NPS/UCBN/NRR-2007/002.

  • Grossman D. H., Faber-Langendoen, D., Weakley, A. S., Anderson, M., Bourgeron, P., Crawford, R., et al. (1998). International classification of ecological communities: terrestrial vegetation of the United States, vol. I, The national vegetation classification system: Development, status, and applications. Arlington, VA: The Nature Conservancy.

  • Hansen, M. H., Madow, W. G., & Tepping, B. J. (1983). An evaluation of model dependent and probability sampling inferences in sample surveys. Journal of American Statistical Association, 78, 776–793.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harwell, M. A., Myers, V., Young, T., Bartuska, A., Gassman, N., Gentile, J. H., et al. (1999). A framework for an ecosystem integrity report card. BioScience, 49, 543–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurtz, J. C., Jackson, L. E., & Fisher, W. S. (2001). Strategies for evaluating indicators based on guidelines from the Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Research and Development. Ecological Indicators, 1, 49–60.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, T. L. (2003). Review of environmental monitoring methods: survey designs. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 85, 277–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, M. E. (2005). The structure and functioning of dryland ecosystems – Conceptual models to inform long-term ecological monitoring. US Geological Survey, Moab, UT. Scientific Investigations Report 2005-5197.

  • National Park System Advisory Board (2001). Rethinking the national parks for the 21st century. National Park Service, Washington, DC. Retrieved 21 Jan 2008 from http://www.nps.gov/policy/report.htm.

  • Noss, R. F. (1990). Indicators for monitoring biodiversity. A hierarchical approach. Conservation Biology, 4, 355–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NPS (2006). Management policies 2006. Retrieved 21 Jan 2008 from http://www.nps.gov/policy.

  • NPS (2007). Vital signs monitoring. Retrieved 21 Jan 2008 from http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/monitor.

  • NPS (2008). Southern Plains Network vital signs monitoring plan. Natural Resource Report NPS/SOPN/NRR-2008/028. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado.

  • NRMP (2007). Natural Resource Monitoring Partnership. Retrieved 21 Jan 2008 from http://nrmp.nbii.gov.

  • Oakley, K. L., Thomas, L. P., & Fancy, S. G. (2003). Guidelines for long-term monitoring protocols. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 31, 1000–1003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogden, J. D., Davis, S. M., Jacobs, K. J., Barnes, T., & Fling, H. E. (2005). The use of conceptual ecological models to guide ecosystem restoration in South Florida. Wetlands, 25, 795–809.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, A. R., Sedransk, J., Edwards, D., Gotway, C. A., Liggett, W., Rathburn, S. L., et al. (1999). Statistical issues for monitoring ecological and natural resources in the United States. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 54, 1–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roman, C. T., & Barrett, N. E. (1999). Conceptual framework for the development of long-term monitoring protocols at Cape Cod National Seashore. US Geological Survey, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Cooperative National Parks Studies Unit, Narragansett, RI.

  • Schreuder, H. T., Ernst, R., & Ramirez-Maldonado, H. (2004). Statistical techniques for sampling and monitoring natural resources. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. RMRS-GTR-126.

  • Soukup, M. (2007). Integrating science and management: becoming who we thought we were. George Wright Forum, 24, 26–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens Jr, D. L., & Olsen, A. R. (2003). Variance estimation for spatially balanced samples of environmental resources. Environmetrics, 14, 593–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens Jr, D. L., & Olsen, A. R. (2004). Spatially balanced sampling of natural resources. Journal of American Statistical Association, 99, 262–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaughan, H., Brydges, T., Fenech, A., & Lumb, A. (2001). Monitoring long-term ecological changes through the Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network: science-based and policy relevant. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 67, 3–28.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Westoby, M., Walker, B., & Noy-Meir, I. (1989). Opportunistic management for rangelands not at equilibrium. Journal of Range Management, 42, 266–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodley, S. J. (1993). Monitoring and measuring ecological integrity in Canadian National Parks. In S. J. Woodley, J. Kay, & G. Francis (Eds.)Ecosystem integrity and the management of ecosystems (pp. 155–176). Delray Beach, FL: St. Lucie.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Natural Resource Program Center, Office of Inventory, Monitoring, and Evaluation, National Park Service, 1201 Oak Ridge Dr., Suite 150, Fort Collins, CO, 80525, USA

    S. G. Fancy & J. E. Gross

  2. National Capital Region, Center for Urban Ecology, National Park Service, 4598 MacArthur Blvd. NW, Washington, DC, 20007, USA

    S. L. Carter

Authors
  1. S. G. Fancy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. E. Gross
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. S. L. Carter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. G. Fancy.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fancy, S.G., Gross, J.E. & Carter, S.L. Monitoring the condition of natural resources in US national parks. Environ Monit Assess 151, 161–174 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-008-0257-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-008-0257-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation