Use of hierarchical cluster analysis to assess the representativeness of a baseline groundwater quality monitoring network: comparison of New Zealand’s national and regional groundwater monitoring programs

Baseline monitoring of groundwater quality aims to characterize the ambient condition of the resource and identify spatial or temporal trends. Sites comprising any baseline monitoring network must be selected to provide a representative perspective of groundwater quality across the aquifer(s) of interest. Hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA) has been used as a means of assessing the representativeness of a groundwater quality monitoring network, using example datasets from New Zealand. HCA allows New Zealand's national and regional monitoring networks to be compared in terms of the number of water-quality categories identified in each network, the hydrochemistry at the centroids of these water-quality categories, the proportions of monitoring sites assigned to each water-quality category, and the range of concentrations for each analyte within each water-quality category. Through the HCA approach, the National Groundwater Monitoring Programme (117 sites) is shown to provide a highly representative perspective of groundwater quality across New Zealand, relative to the amalgamated regional monitoring networks operated by 15 different regional authorities (680 sites have sufficient data for inclusion in HCA). This methodology can be applied to evaluate the representativeness of any subset of monitoring sites taken from a larger network.

Quality assurance of aerial applications of larvicides for mosquito control : effects of granule and catch tray size on field monitoring programs

Aerial applications of granular insecticides are preferable because they can effectively penetrate vegetation, there is less drift, and no loss of product due to evaporation. We aimed to 1) assess the field efficacy ofVectoBac G to control Aedes vigilax (Skuse) in saltmarsh pools, 2) develop a stochastic-modeling procedure to monitor application quality, and 3) assess the distribution of VectoBac G after an aerial application. Because ground-based studies with Ae. vigilax immatures found that VectoBac G provided effective control below the recommended label rate of 7 kg/ha, we trialed a nominated aerial rate of 5 kg/ha as a case study. Our distribution pattern modeling method indicated that the variability in the number of VectoBac G particles captured in catch-trays was greater than expected for 5 kg/ha and that the widely accepted contour mapping approach to visualize the deposition pattern provided spurious results and therefore was not statistically appropriate. Based on the results of distribution pattern modeling, we calculated the catch tray size required to analyze the distribution of aerially applied granular formulations. The minimum catch tray size for products with large granules was 4 m2 for Altosid pellets and 2 m2 for VectoBac G. In contrast, the minimum catch-tray size for Altosid XRG, Aquabac G, and Altosand, with smaller granule sizes, was 1 m2. Little gain in precision would be made by increasing the catch-tray size further, when the increased workload and infrastructure is considered. Our improved methods for monitoring the distribution pattern of aerially applied granular insecticides can be adapted for use by both public health and agricultural contractors.

Environmental indicator frameworks to design and assess environmental monitoring programs

Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, vol. 22, n.1, March 2004, p. 47–62

Ecological and toxicological responses in a multistressor scenario: are monitoring programs showing the stressors or just showing stress? A case study in Brazil

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

Assessment of citizen group court monitoring programs. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

Assessing programs for monitoring threatened species – a tale of three honeyeaters (Meliphagidae)

We critically evaluated population-monitoring programs for three endangered species of Australian honeyeater: the helmeted honeyeater, Lichenostomus melanops cassidix, the black-eared miner, Manorina melanotis, and the regent honeyeater, Xanthomyza phrygia (Meliphagidae). Our results challenge the common assumption that meaningful monitoring is possible in all species within the five-year lifetime of recovery plans. We found that the precision achievable from monitoring programs not only depends on the monitoring technique applied but also on the species' biology. Relevant life-history attributes include a species' pattern of movement, its home-range size and its distribution. How well understood and predictable these attributes are will also influence monitoring precision. Our results highlight the large degree of variability in precision among monitoring programs and the value of applying power analysis before continuing longer-term studies. They also suggest that managers and funding agencies should be mindful that more easily monitored species should not receive preferential treatment over species that prove more difficult to monitor.

Why evolutionary biologists should get seriously involved in ecological monitoring and applied biodiversity assessment programs

While ecological monitoring and biodiversity assessment programs are widely implemented and relatively well developed to survey and monitor the structure and dynamics of populations and communities in many ecosystems, quantitative assessment and monitoring of genetic and phenotypic diversity that is important to understand evolutionary dynamics is only rarely integrated. As a consequence, monitoring programs often fail to detect changes in these key components of biodiversity until after major loss of diversity has occurred. The extensive efforts in ecological monitoring have generated large data sets of unique value to macro-scale and long-term ecological research, but the insights gained from such data sets could be multiplied by the inclusion of evolutionary biological approaches. We argue that the lack of process-based evolutionary thinking in ecological monitoring means a significant loss of opportunity for research and conservation. Assessment of genetic and phenotypic variation within and between species needs to be fully integrated to safeguard biodiversity and the ecological and evolutionary dynamics in natural ecosystems. We illustrate our case with examples from fishes and conclude with examples of ongoing monitoring programs and provide suggestions on how to improve future quantitative diversity surveys.

Integrating a mobile accessible electronic system into dockside monitoring: How can small-scale fisheries data collection programs transition from paper-based to digital data collection?

Thesis (Master's)--University of Washington, 2016-06

Report of the PICES-STA Workshop on Monitoring Subarctic North Pacific Variability

The PICES Science Board and the Science and Technology Agency of Japan held a Workshop on Monitoring Subarctic North Pacific Vaiability,October 22-23,1994, in Nemuro,Hokkaido,Japan,in conjunction with the PICES Third Annual Meeting. The Workshop was not intended to discuss process studies or to review the science of the subaractic Pacific,but rather to focus on the longterm monitoring programs required for assessment of the physical and ecological responses to long-term forcing,both natural and man-made. (PDF contains 90 pages)

Underwater Passive Acoustic Monitoring for Remote Regions, Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology, Coconut Island, Hawaii, February 7-9, 2007: workshop proceedings

The Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) convened a workshop, sponsored by the Hawaii-Pacific and Alaska Regional Partners, entitled Underwater Passive Acoustic Monitoring for Remote Regions at the Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology from February 7-9, 2007. The workshop was designed to summarize existing passive acoustic technologies and their uses, as well as to make strategic recommendations for future development and collaborative programs that use passive acoustic tools for scientific investigation and resource management. The workshop was attended by 29 people representing three sectors: research scientists, resource managers, and technology developers. The majority of passive acoustic tools are being developed by individual scientists for specific applications and few tools are available commercially. Most scientists are developing hydrophone-based systems to listen for species-specific information on fish or cetaceans; a few scientists are listening for biological indicators of ecosystem health. Resource managers are interested in passive acoustics primarily for vessel detection in remote protected areas and secondarily to obtain biological and ecological information. The military has been monitoring with hydrophones for decades;however, data and signal processing software has not been readily available to the scientific community, and future collaboration is greatly needed. The challenges that impede future development of passive acoustics are surmountable with greater collaboration. Hardware exists and is accessible; the limits are in the software and in the interpretation of sounds and their correlation with ecological events. Collaboration with the military and the private companies it contracts will assist scientists and managers with obtaining and developing software and data analysis tools. Collaborative proposals among scientists to receive larger pools of money for exploratory acoustic science will further develop the ability to correlate noise with ecological activities. The existing technologies and data analysis are adequate to meet resource managers' needs for vessel detection. However, collaboration is needed among resource managers to prepare large-scale programs that include centralized processing in an effort to address the lack of local capacity within management agencies to analyze and interpret the data. Workshop participants suggested that ACT might facilitate such collaborations through its website and by providing recommendations to key agencies and programs, such as DOD, NOAA, and I00s. There is a need to standardize data formats and archive acoustic environmental data at the national and international levels. Specifically, there is a need for local training and primers for public education, as well as by pilot demonstration projects, perhaps in conjunction with National Marine Sanctuaries. Passive acoustic technologies should be implemented immediately to address vessel monitoring needs. Ecological and health monitoring applications should be developed as vessel monitoring programs provide additional data and opportunities for more exploratory research. Passive acoustic monitoring should also be correlated with water quality monitoring to ease integration into long-term monitoring programs, such as the ocean observing systems. [PDF contains 52 pages]

Synthesis of marine ecosystem monitoring activities for the United States Virgin Islands: 1990-2009

The ecological integrity of coral reef ecosystems in the U.S. Caribbean is widely considered to have deteriorated in the last three decades due to a range of threats and stressors from both human and non-human processes Rothenberger 2008, Wilkinson 2008). In response to the threats to Caribbean coral reef ecosystems and other regions around the world, the United States Government authorized the Coral Reef Conservation Act of 2000 to: (1) preserve, sustain, and restore the condition of coral reef ecosystems; (2) promote the wise management and sustainable use of coral reef ecosystems to benefit local communities and the Nation; and (3) develop sound scientific information on the condition of coral reef ecosystems and the threats to such ecosystems. The Act also resulted in the formation of a National Coral Reef Action Strategy and a Coral Reef Conservation Program. The Action Strategy (Goal 2 of Action Theme 1) outlined the importance of monitoring and assessing coral reef health as a mechanism toward reducing many threats to these ecosystems. Monitoring was considered of high importance in addressing impacts from climate change; disease; overfishing; destructive fishing practices; habitat destruction; invasive species; coastal development; coastal pollution; sedimentation/runoff and overuse from tourism. The strategy states that successful coral reef ecosystem conservation requires adaptive management that responds quickly to changing environmental conditions. This, in turn, depends on monitoring programs that track trends in coral reef ecosystem health and reveal patterns in their condition before irreparable harm occurs. As such, monitoring plays a vital role in guiding and supporting the establishment of complex or potentially controversial management strategies such as no-take ecological reserves, fishing gear restrictions, or habitat restoration, by documenting the impacts of gaps in existing management schemes and illustrating the effectiveness of new measures over time. Long-term monitoring is also required to determine the effectiveness of various management strategies to conserve and enhance coral reef ecosystems.

Community-based monitoring of Victoria´s marine national parks and marine sanctuaries

This study investigated community-based monitoring in Victoria’s Marine National Parks (MNPs) and Sanctuaries (MSs) from January to May 2004. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the potential for community-based monitoring projects to assist in the collection of data for the management of Victoria’s MNPs and MSs. The pilot habitats that were assessed included subtidal reefs at the Merri MS, intertidal reefs at Ricketts Point MS and seagrass beds at Corner Inlet MNP. The three main objectives for this study were to:
 - Develop a template for the monitoring of marine habitats by community groups.
 - Assess the quality and integrity of data collected by community volunteers.
 - Determine a sustainable model for community monitoring of marine habitats.
Three standard operating procedures (SOPs) in the form of a “how to” manual, were developed for each habitat type. The SOPs were adapted from scientifically robust studies and developed in consultation with community volunteer groups by means of field trials. Volunteer feedback assisted in the final SOP design. The SOP will allow Parks Victoria Rangers to develop community-based programs within the parks. The SOPs are accessible as Parks Victoria Technical Series Numbers 16, 17 and 18. Data collected by volunteers across the three habitat sites were assessed and compared to that collected by scientists. It was found that data quality collected by volunteers was dependent on habitat type and the type of measurement the volunteer was required to assess. Volunteer estimation measurements were highly variable across all three habitat sites, compared to quantitative data collection. Subtidal monitoring had the greatest potential for inconsistency in data collection. Intertidal monitoring is the most sustainable of the three habitat monitoring procedures. Sustainability of community-based monitoring programs is dependent on continued support and training by the management authority of Victoria’s MNPs and MSs. For the expansion of the monitoring programs to other MNPs and MSs, the management authority could expand strong relationships with the community volunteer groups.

The value of community-based monitoring in marine protected areas

There is an increasing realisation of the importance of community or volunteer collected data for management programs that are otherwise limited by the availability of funds or resources. However, there are concerns regarding the reliability of scientific data collected by inexperienced people. We investigated the potential for community-based monitoring in Victoria’s newly established system of Marine Protected Areas. The main objectives for the study were to 1) develop a template for the scientific monitoring of marine habitats suitable for community groups, 2) assess data quality and data integrity collected by community volunteers and 3) determine a sustainable model for ongoing community participation in monitoring marine habitats. Three different habitats (subtidal, intertidal, and seagrass) were investigated and data collected by volunteers across these habitats was compared to that collected by scientists. Reliability of data collected by volunteers was dependent on habitat type and the type of measurement the volunteers were required to make. Qualitative estimates made by volunteers were highly variable across all three habitat sites, compared to quantitative data collection. Subtidal monitoring had the greatest inaccuracy for data collection, whereas intertidal reef monitoring was most reliable. Sustainability of community-based monitoring programs is dependent on adequate training for volunteers and the development of partnerships to foster greater community engagement.