Project Summary (from Proposal)

Transcription

1 Easygrants ID: National Fish and Wildlife Foundation NFWF/Legacy Grant Project ID: LI Sound Futures Fund Planning, Design, Etc. - Submit Final Programmatic Report (Activities) Grantee Organization: University of Connecticut Project Title: Habitat Management Planning for 3 LISS Stewardship Areas (CT) Project Period 12/01/ /01/2011 Award Amount $32, Matching Contributions $4, Project Location Description (from Proposal) Waterford(Goshen Cove Stewardship Area),Essex (Lower CT River Stewardship Area)and Madison (Hammonasset Beach Stewardship Area) Middlesex and New London counties, CT Project Summary (from Proposal) Summary of Accomplishments Lessons Learned Develop habitat management plans for three Long Island Sound Study Stewardship areas to protect the diverse plants and animals that make their home in or near the estuary. Three habitat based management plans were written with partners for specific tracts of land so as to benefit the long term conservation and health of three LISS Stewardship Areas. The tracts of land are associated with the following LISS Stewardship Areas: Goshen Cove, Waterford, CT; Lower Connecticut River, Essex, CT; Hammonasett Beach, Madison, CT. Partners included The West Farms Land Trust, the Essex Land Trust, the Town of Madison, Anne Penniman and Associates Landscape Design Firm, Audubon Connecticut, and Yale University. Two graduate students interns from Yale developed the management plan for the Essex Land Trust property and provided feedback on the management plan outline. Web-based modules for coastal forests and shrublands, coastal grasslands, and beach/dune/backdune habitats were developed with information on vegetation, habitat conditions, and common management issues. Standardized invasive plant management methodology was developed for different coastal habitat types and is available on the web. All information was reviewed by the Connecticut and New York LISS Habitat Restoration Specialists. Many land trusts are composed of volunteers who have a great deal of knowledge but often are unsure where to start when it comes to actually writing a management plan. Writing a plan from scratch can be a daunting prospect. It was critical to get people from each partner organization out on the land participating in site visits to discuss issues and realistic solutions. This makes everyone a part of the process. I am hopeful that the management plan outline and examples of completed management plans will provide land trust and other conservation groups with the information needed (they can copy text) to move forward with their own plans. I worked with Harry Yamalis (CT DEEP) and Heather Young (NYDEC) to determine the best approach and needs for monitoring management projects. It was challenging to come up with a monitoring scheme that a land trust steward could easily manage, considering that finding funding to hire a consultant to do the monitoring would be unlikely. For example, the steward can t be expected to know all the plant species, so the monitoring scheme focuses on invasive plants, which can be easily learned, if not known already. Native plants are lumped together in the monitoring scheme and individual species do not have to be recognized. Conservation Activities Value at Grant Completion See Narrative - Not Required Other Activity Metric Not Required Page 1 of 9

2 Conservation Activities Habitat based management plan development for conservation lands near 3 LISS Stewardship Areas # of management plans created Value at Grant Completion 3 Conservation Activities Research and Develop modules on LISS priority habitat types (Coastal Forest, Coastal Grassland, Coastal Beach/Dune Habitat Other Activity Metric (Number of Terrestrial Habitat Modules) Value at Grant Completion 3 Conservation Activities Research and Develop monitoring protocols for three LISS priority habitat types with emphasis on invasive species control Other Activity Metric (# monitoring protocols) Value at Grant Completion 3 Conservation Activities Develop a NEMO coastal habitat website Other Activity Metric (# of hits to website) Value at Grant Completion 0 Page 2 of 9

3 Page 3 of 9

4 Page 4 of 9

5 Page 5 of 9

6 Page 6 of 9

7 Final Programmatic Report Narrative Instructions: Save this document on your computer and complete the narrative in the format provided. The final narrative should not exceed ten (10) pages; do not delete the text provided below. Once complete, upload this document into the on-line final programmatic report task as instructed. 1. Summary of Accomplishments In four to five sentences, provide a brief summary of the project s key accomplishments and outcomes that were observed or measured. Working with partners, we wrote three management plans for land trust or municipal properties associated with LISS Stewardship areas. These Stewardship areas are: Goshen Cove Waterford, CT, Lower Connecticut River, Essex, CT, and Hammonasett Beach Madison, CT. Each management plan focuses on a different high priority LISS habitat including coastal beach/dune, coastal grassland, and coastal forest. Web-based modules were developed on coastal habitats including common vegetation, management issues associated with each habitat type, and information on invasive species management. Standardized vegetation monitoring procedures were developed for coastal forest, coastal grassland and beach/backdune areas with an emphasis on invasive plant management monitoring. 2. Project Activities & Outcomes Activities Describe and quantify (using the approved metrics referenced in your grant agreement) the primary activities conducted during this grant. Briefly explain discrepancies between the activities conducted during the grant and the activities agreed upon in your grant agreement. Outcomes Describe and quantify progress towards achieving the project outcomes described in your grant agreement. (Quantify using the approved metrics referenced in your grant agreement or by using more relevant metrics not included in the application.) Briefly explain discrepancies between what actually happened compared to what was anticipated to happen. Provide any further information (such as unexpected outcomes) important for understanding project activities and outcome results. Activity 1 and Outcome. Habitat based management plan development for conservation lands within 3 LISS Stewardship Areas. Three management plans were developed in cooperation with partners. These sites include: 1. The Powers Tracts owned by the West Farms Land Trust in Waterford, CT. This site includes coastal grassland and beach/dune/back dune habitat. The site borders Goshen Cove, a LISS Stewardship Area. Members of the land trust including the site steward participated in site visits, discussion of issues and in writing the plan. 2. Heron Pond Preserved owned by the Essex Land Trust in Essex, CT. This site is within the Lower Connecticut River Stewardship Area and includes coastal forest. Members of the land trust, a UConn Cooperative Extension Forester and two Yale University graduate students participated in site visits and in discussions of issues. The two graduate students took the lead in writing the plan as part of a university course. 3. Griswold Airport owned by the town of Madison, CT. This site is adjacent to the Hammonasset Beach Stewardship Area and includes coastal grassland, coastal forest, tidal marsh and a small amount of shrubland. Town officials, Ken Metzler (retired Ecologist CT DEEP), Anne Penniman (from Anne Page 7 of 9

8 Penniman Associates, Inc. a landscape design firm), and NRCS Ecologist participated in site visits and in discussions of issues. Metzler and Barrett wrote the management plan. Activity 2 and Outcome. Research and develop modules on LISS priority habitat types. Three modules containing descriptions and common management concerns were developed for coastal forests, coastal grasslands, and beach/dune/backdune habitats such that these habitat types can be easily recognized. The most common management issue for these habitat types is invasive species. Common invasive plants found in each of these habitats are listed. Activity 3 and Outcome. Research and develop monitoring protocols for three LISS priority habitat types (coastal forest, coastal grassland, coastal beach/dune habitat) with emphasis on invasive species control. Monitoring protocols were developed for these three habitat types emphasizing invasive species management. Input was provided by the Connecticut and New York LISS Habitat Restoration Specialists (Harry Yamalis and Heather Young, respectively). Protocols included setting up permanent photo stations (for dune sites) to more detailed permanent plots in which information on percent cover is gathered before and after management activities. Activity 4 and Outcome. Develop a NEMO coastal habitat website to include habitat modules with management plans as tools and monitoring protocols for three habitat types. The habitat modules, management plans, and monitoring protocols will be available on the University of Connecticut NEMO website: 3. Lessons Learned Describe the key lessons learned from this project, such as the least and most effective conservation practices or notable aspects of the project s methods, monitoring, or results. How could other conservation organizations adapt their projects to build upon some of these key lessons about what worked best and what did not? Many land trusts are composed of volunteers who have a great deal of knowledge but often are unsure where to start when it comes to actually writing a management plan. Writing a plan from scratch can be a daunting prospect. It was critical to get people from each partner organization out on the land participating in site visits to discuss issues and realistic solutions. This makes everyone a part of the process. I am hopeful that the management plan outline and examples of completed management plans will provide land trust and other conservation groups with the information needed (they can copy text) to move forward with their own plans. I worked with Harry Yamalis (CT DEEP) and Heather Young (NYDEC) to determine the best approach and needs for monitoring management projects. It was challenging to come up with a monitoring scheme that a land trust steward could easily manage, considering that finding funding to hire a consultant to do the monitoring would be unlikely. For example, the steward can t be expected to know all the plant species, so the monitoring scheme focuses on invasive plants, which can be easily learned, if not known already. Native plants are lumped together in the monitoring scheme and individual species do not have to be recognized. 4. Dissemination Briefly identify any dissemination of lessons learned or other project results to external audiences, such as the public or other conservation organizations. We will have to see how useful the website is in terms of how many hits it receives. It could be that the website, in combination with a webinar, presentations, or site visits, will be the most useful way to disseminate the information and management plan examples. 5. Project Documents Include in your final programmatic report, via the Uploads section of this task, the following: 2-10 representative photos from the project. Photos need to have a minimum resolution of 300 dpi; report publications, GIS data, brochures, videos, outreach tools, press releases, media coverage; any project deliverables per the terms of your grant agreement. POSTING OF FINAL REPORT: This report and attached project documents may be shared by the Foundation and any Funding Source for the Project via their respective websites. In the event that the Recipient intends to claim that its final Page 8 of 9

9 report or project documents contains material that does not have to be posted on such websites because it is protected from disclosure by statutory or regulatory provisions, the Recipient shall clearly mark all such potentially protected materials as PROTECTED and provide an explanation and complete citation to the statutory or regulatory source for such protection. Page 9 of 9