United States
 Environmental Protection
 Agency
Environmental Monitoring
Systems Laboratory
Las Vegas NV 89193
 Research and Development
EPA/600/S4-91/018  October 1992
 Project Summary
 Arid  Ecosystems Strategic
 Monitoring Plan,1991,
 Environmental  Monitoring and
 Assessment  Program  (EMAP)
Bill Kepner, Bruce Jones, Susan Franson, Carl Fox, Chris Elvidge,
Virginia Enos, Janet Jackson, Michael Meyer, David Mouat, Martin Rose,
Carol Thompson, Bob Breckinridge, John Baker, and John Flueck
  The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) at the recommendation
of their Science Advisory Board initi-
ated in 1988 the Environmental Moni-
toring  and Assessment Program
(EMAP). This program was initiated as
part of the EPA Office of Research and
Development (ORD) to monitor the sta-
tus and assess trends in the condition
of the nation's  ecological resources.
Information obtained from EMAP will
assist in evaluating current environmen-
tal policies and identify emerging envi-
ronmental problems  before they
become widespread or irreversible.
  EMAP is organized into four major
elements: resource  monitoring, integra-
tion, coordination,  and developmental
research. Resource monitoring focuses
on the collection and interpretation of
field  data on the ecological condition
of 8 resource categories: agroecosys-
tems, arid ecosystems, forests, estuar-
ies, great lakes, coastal waters, surface
waters, and wetlands. Integration ac-
tivities are designed to facilitate the
acquisition, management, and interpre-
tation of monitoring data. Coordination
involves ecological  indicator selection,
testing, and evaluation; monitoring net-
work design and statistical analysis;
logistics; and quality assurance. De-
velopmental research focuses on im-
proving  scientific  understanding
through research programs including
environmental statistics, ecological in-
dicators, landscape ecology, and eco-
logical risk characterization.
  This document describes a strategy
lor establishing an  integrated environ-
mental monitoring and assessment pro-
gram for arid ecosystems in the United
States.  The EMAP Arid Ecosystems
(EMAP-Arid) Strategic Plan is designed
as a "living" document responsive to
changes in the state of knowledge con-
cerning arid ecosystems. The strategy
is being developed in cooperation with
all elements of EMAP as well as with
key natural resource management agen-
cies and institutions with responsibili-
ties or expertise in arid ecosystems.
The success of EMAP-Arid will depend
on  the  integration and coordination
among these arid ecosystem groups.
   This Project Summary was devel-
oped by EPA's Environmental Monitor-
ing Systems Laboratory, Las Vegas, NV,
to announce key findings of the research
project that is fully documented in a
separate report of the same title (see
Project Report ordering information at
back).

EMAP-Arid Strategic Plan
  Successful development of an environ-
mental monitoring and assessment pro-
gram strategy requires a clear definition of
the resources and issues of concern, es-
tablishment of goals and  objectives, and
formulation of a conceptual approach. This
Strategic Plan addresses these three ele-
ments in order to move toward full imple-
mentation of EMAP in arid ecosystems.

Arid Ecosystems—Definition
  The EMAP-Arid resource group  is re-
sponsible for perhaps the widest diversity
of ecological resources within EMAP. Arid
ecosystems are defined in EMAP as:

-------
       Terrestrial systems character-
     ized by a climatic regime where
     potential  evaporation  exceeds
     precipitation, annual precipitation
     ranges from < 5 cm to 60 cm,
     and daily  and seasonal tempera-
     tures range from -40 °C to 50 °C.
     The vegetation  in  arid ecosys-
     tems is dominated by woody pe-
     rennials or graminoids with a low
     form  physiognomy including
     drought resistant trees  in open
     canopies. Arid ecosystems also
     include associated riparian areas
     occurring  with the arid zone. Irri-
     gated  lands are  not considered
     part of EMAP arid  ecosystems
     even though  they  occur  in  the
     same climatic region.
   This  definition is designed  to include
the arid and semi-arid ecosystem resource
classes considered important to EMAP. It
also attempts to take into account bound-
aries (ecotones) between resource classes
that may be important in monitoring envi-
ronmental change.

Arid Ecosystems—Issues
   Arid and semi-arid ecosystems (referred
to simply as arid ecosystems in this docu-
ment)  occur on  most continents of the
earth and comprise about one  third of the
land surface area. In the United States,
arid ecosystems as defined by EMAP com-
prise nearly 40  percent of the land sur-
face area  and are important  centers of
commerce and human populations. Major
environmental  issues facing  arid ecosys-
tems include: grazing, biodiversity, deser-
tification, water resources, air quality, and
global change.  Much of  the concern over
these issues stems from the tremendous
increase in man's activity in arid regions
of the United States over the last 40 years.
While  historically arid  lands  have  been
used by relatively small numbers of people,
recent  population explosions in conjunc-
tion with development practices have pre-
cipitated  a rapid degradation  in the
resources of arid ecosystems. Observed
deterioration in air quality, increasing de-
mands  and subsequent shortages  of
readily available  water,  and the  loss  of
critical  wildlife  habitat can  be linked  to
recent  increases in human  populations.
With the prospect of global climate change,
the recognized  sensitivity of  arid ecosys-
tems to climate, and  increasing evidence
that arid ecosystems are intricately linked
to and affect all  other ecosystems, arid
ecosystems can no longer be considered
remote places of little value.
 Goals and Objectives
   The EMAP-Arid resource group has de-
 veloped an overall goal in concert with the
 goals and objectives of  EMAP. The over-
 all EMAP-Arid goal is to "Provide an unbi-
 ased estimate  with known confidence  of
 the  current and  changing conditions  of
 ecological  resources in arid  ecosystems
 at the regional and  national  level." Spe-
 cific objectives EMAP-Arid must  meet  to
 achieve this goal  are to:
   •  Measure the status, evaluate trends,
     and estimate the extent  of arid eco-
     systems using synoptic, retrospective,
     and sample-based methodologies.
   •  Determine the  spatial and temporal
     correlation between stressor(s) (e.g.,
     pollutants) and  ecological condition
     and trends.
   •  Provide  information to decision and
     policy makers and management, and
     regulatory and research agencies and
     institutes that can be utilized for com-
     prehensive regional planning.
   •  Develop a regional  interagency com-
     munication and data transfer network.
    The EMAP-Arid  resource  group has
 also established  5-  and  10-year goals.
 The 5-year  goal  is  to establish  baseline
 conditions, develop a management struc-
 ture and procedures, secure  interagency
 commitments, and assess the ability  of
 EMAP-Arid to integrate information to de-
 termine regional ecological condition. The
 10 year goal is to determine regional trends
 in  the condition  and extent  of  selected
 arid ecosystem resources and develop test
 scenarios to determine causes of regional
 alteration, degradation,  or enhancement.
 Achieving these goals will depend on the
 success of pilot and  demonstration stud-
 ies,  development of interagency agree-
 ments,  program integration,  and  the
 availability of funding for monitoring  and
 research activities.

 Conceptual Approach
   EMAP-Arid is taking a holistic, ecologi-
 cal approach in the development of a strat-
 egy  for  monitoring  and  assessing  the
 condition of arid ecosystems.  Major com-
 ponents of the  approach include the de-
 velopment  of  an  overall  strategy,
 formulation of a network design,  identifi-
 cation of candidate indicators, and initia-
 tion  of  other EMAP coordination and
 integration activities.

 Overall Strategy
  The  overall EMAP-Arid strategy is to
 identify environmental issues and ecologi-
cal endpoints, measure and integrate indi-
cators of ecological condition, and evaluate
 spatial  and temporal variablity to deter-
 mine the status and evaluate trends in the
 condition  of  arid ecosystems. An impor-
 tant concept behind  the  strategy is the
 integration of synoptic (complete landscape
 coverage), sample-based, and retrospec-
 tive indicator data with stressor informa-
 tion  (e.g.,  climate and  air quality).
 Combining these four indicator types pro-
 vides a mechanism for characterizing arid
 ecosystem health, condition, and vigor over
 ecologically appropriate spatial and tem-
 poral scales. This approach  also provides
 the ability to evaluate correlative relation-
 ships between stressor and ecological con-
 dition and enhance the identification of
 existing and potential environmental prob-
 lems.

 Network Design
   Three classes or "population" types have
 been identified for arid ecosystems  and
 form  the  basis  for  the development of
 monitoring network designs  for arid eco-
 systems.  These  design classes  include
 (1) discrete resources; (2) elongated re-
 sources; and (3) extensive resources. Dis-
 crete resources are well defined and often
 are rare populations that  require  special
 attention because of their social and eco-
 logical  value. For  these  resources the
 monitoring design  would include either a
 systematic sample from a list frame or a
 probability-based sample from the EMAP
 base  grid  (12,600  points systematically
 placed  across  the  U.S.).  Elongated re-
 sources occur spatially in linear form (e.g.,
 riparian  communities along streams). Spe-
 cial care  must be  exercised to capture
 these resources in order to estimate their
 extent, distribution, and condition with the
 desired  precision. Map frames, list frames,
 or  conditional  population frames con-
 structed from prior information are likely to
 be  used for elongated or linear resource
 monitoring. Extensive resources occur over
 broad areas  (e.g., grassland,  scrubland,
 and desertscrub formations). The resource
 map developed  by Brown  and Lowe will
 be  used to define these  resources and
 the EMAP point  grid will be overlayed on
 the resource map to produce a probabil-
 ity-based sample. Approximately 50 to 100
 units  (e.g., 40-km2  hexagons)  will be
 sampled over a complete field cycle. Other
 designs  will be considered as resources
 are identified and the availability and ap-
 propriateness of existing data evaluated.
 EMAP-Arid will integrate, to the extent pos-
 sible,  with other  monitoring networks and
 research sites in order to scientifically and
cost-effectively develop a comprehensive
environmental monitoring and assessment
program for arid ecosystems.

-------
Indicators
  Identification and development of indi-
cators for EMAP-Arid is based on linking
environmental issues, ecological endpoints
(i.e., sustainability, biodiversity,  and aes-
thetics), and conceptual models. The indi-
cators  identified  fall  into  three  main
groups—synoptic, sample-based, and ret-
rospective. Candidate indicators currently
considered have been further grouped and
address vegetation biomass, water bal-
ance, landscape pattern, fire, retrospec-
tive  analyses,  wildlife  habitat,  or  very
specific issues (i.e., "canary sites"). These
indicators  generally measure primary pro-
ductivity, nutrient  cycling,  species  diver-
sity, system  stability,  prevalence  of
disease, structure,  and  the occurrence of
contaminants. The  current, relatively long
list of indicators will be reduced after be-
ing  evaluated in pilot and demonstration
studies. A  list of "core indicators" will evolve
and ecological indices  (i.e., combined  in-
dicators) developed prior to full implemen-
tation of the program.

Other Coordination  and
Integration Activities
  Other coordination and integration ac-
tivities will be a critical part of EMAP-Arid.
These  include (1) assessment of existing
data, (2) logistics, (3) analytical consider-
ations and measurement techniques, (4)
quality  assurance,  (5)  information  man-
agement,  (6) data analysis, (7)  integra-
tion,  and (8) development of EMAP-Arid
outputs. Many of  these activities will be
similar to those developed and imple-
mented in other EMAP documents  (i.e.,
quality  assurance, information  manage-
ment, program outputs). Others  (i.e., lo-
gistics,  analytical  considerations,  data
analysis) are somewhat premature  rela-
tive  to  their specific  development for
EMAP-Arid.  However, assessment of ex-
isting data and integration are particularly
important to the EMAP-Arid strategic plan.
Evaluation of Existing Data
  Maximizing  the  use of existing data,
monitoring networks, and research sites is
extremely important to the development
of EMAP-Arid. A preliminary evaluation of
existing information reveals that data which
may be important to monitoring arid eco-
systems  are  available from nearly every
Federal agency (i.e., EPA, BLM,  USGS,
NOAA, USFWS, NPS, USFS, NASA, DOE,
DOD, SCS, NSF) that interacts with natu-
ral resources. While these data bases have
been identified, the challenge for  EMAP-
Arid lies in evaluating the appropriateness
and integrating the information into  the
monitoring and assessment program.

Integration
  Perhaps  the greatest challenge facing
EMAP-Arid is  integration. Three levels of
integration  have been  identified—policy,
program, and technical. Policy integration
is the process of evaluating and  coordi-
nating the needs of EMAP-Arid clients and
constituencies and  ensuring  that those
collective  needs are  addressed  by  the
EMAP-Arid components.  Identification of
users,  development of appropriate con-
tacts, inclusion of constituent groups in all
steps of program development are part of
the   EMAP-Arid strategic  plan.  Program
integration refers to the initiation and imple-
mentation of an efficient national monitor-
ing  program.  Coordination of  EMAP-Arid
with ongoing  monitoring programs (e.g.,
BLM) will avoid duplication, improve effi-
ciency, and enhance the  significance of
the   information collected  in  monitoring.
Memoranda of understanding and coop-
erative agreements  will be likely vehicles
to help  achieve  this type  of  integration.
Technical  integration  involves selecting,
analyzing, and evaluating data in order to
transmit the information  into an environ-
mental policy framework. Determining as-
sociations  between  stressors  and
ecological condition  on a regional and  na-
tional scale is  an important component of
environmental monitoring and  protection.
The potential for integration in EMAP is
almost endless. The EMAP-Arid resource
group considers this task absolutely criti-
cal to its success and will devote consid-
erable  time and  effort to  achieving
maximum integration at all three levels.

EMAP-Arid Implementation
   Implementation of EMAP-Arid will fol-
low an  extensive review of the strategic
plan and completion of  exploratory stud-
ies (pilot and demonstration projects) in
each major resource formation  (i.e., ripar-
ian,  grassland,  desertscrub,  woodland,
scrubland, and tundra). Several important
design, indicator, and logistical issues need
to be evaluated, field tested, and resolved
before a regional sampling  design(s) is
selected and full implementation begins.
Evaluation of the ability of EMAP-Arid stud-
ies to detect change will be critical to the
implementation  schedule.  EMAP-Arid
implementation  and the steps  leading to
full implementation  are  viewed as a dy-
namic process which is sensitive and flex-
ible to advances  in our  understanding of
monitoring and assessing arid  ecosystem
condition.
   The  information in this document  has
been funded wholly or in part by the United
States Environmental  Protection Agency
under Cooperative Agreement CR-816385-
01-0 with the Desert Research  Institute of
the University of Nevada Systems, Reno,
NV; Interagency Agreement DW 89934398
with the U.S. Department of Energy, Idaho
Operations Office,  Idaho National Engi-
neering Laboratory; Contract 68-CO-0049
to Lockheed Engineering  & Sciences Com-
pany; and  Cooperative  Agreement CR-
814701  with the  Environmental Research
Center of the University of Nevada,  Las
Vegas.  It  has  been  subjected  to  the
Agency's peer and administrative review,
and it has been  approved for publication
as an EPA document.
   Mention of trade names or commercial
productrs does not constitute endorsement
or recommendation for use.
                                                                                     •U.S. Government Printing Office: 1992— 648-080/60145

-------
  The EPA authors, Bill Kepner, Bruce Jones, and Susan Franson are with the
    Environmental Mentoring Systems Laboratory, Las Vegas, NV89193-3478. Carl
    Fox, Chris Elvidge, Virginia Enos, Janet Jackson, Michael Meyer, David Mouat,
    Martin Rose, and Carol Thompson are with the Desert Research Institute, Reno,
    NV 89506. Bob Breckinridge is with the Idaho National Engineering Lab, Idaho
    Falls, ID 83415-2213. John Baker is with Lockheed Engineering and Sciences
    Company, Las Vegas, NV89119. John Flu&ckis with the University of Nevada,
    Las Vegas, NV 89154.
  William G. Kepner  is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
  The complete report, entitled "Arid Ecosystems Strategic Monitoring Plan, 1991,
    Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP),"   (Order No.
    PB92-93-100139/AS; Cost: $35.00; subject to change)  will be available only
    from:
          National Technical Information Service
          5285 Port Royal Road
          Springfield, VA 22161
          Telephone: 703-487-4650
  The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
          Environmental Montoring Systems Laboratory
          U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
          Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
Center for Environmental Research Information
Cincinnati, OH 45268

Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
      BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
         EPA
   PERMIT No. G-35
EPA/600/S4-91/018

-------