{"id":116,"date":"2018-05-10T16:15:22","date_gmt":"2018-05-10T16:15:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/?page_id=116"},"modified":"2022-09-29T21:32:02","modified_gmt":"2022-09-29T21:32:02","slug":"ecological","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/condition\/ecological\/","title":{"rendered":"Ecological Condition"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n\t<p><a name=\"top\"><\/a><\/p>\n<h1>Ecological Condition Assessment Methods<\/h1>\n\t<p>Ecological condition assessment methods measure overall wetland condition with an emphasis on ecological integrity or the ability of an ecosystem to support and maintain the species composition, diversity, and function comparable to similar systems in an undisturbed state. CHNP has developed protocols for assessing and monitoring ecological condition at all three levels within the <a href=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/condition\/overview\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><strong>Level 1-2-3 Framework<\/strong><\/a>. In particular, we have used the <a href=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/condition\/ecological\/#Level2Assessment\" rel=\"noopener\"><strong>Ecological Integrity Assessment\u00a0(EIA)<\/strong><\/a> and <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/condition\/ecological\/#Level3Assessment\">Floristic Quality Assessment<\/a><\/strong> methods to assess the condition of Colorado&#8217;s wetlands through a series of <strong><a href=\"\/cwic\/condition\/assessments\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">wetland assessment projects<\/a><\/strong>. All methods listed here have been developed with funding from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 8 and Colorado Parks and Wildlife.\u00a0In addition to protocols developed by CNHP, several other wetland and riparian protocols are used by various Colorado agencies and partners.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>   Click a link below for details.<\/p>\n<ul>\n            <li><a href=\"#Level1Assessment\">Level 1 Assessment (NWI, LDI)<\/a><\/li>\n            <li><a href=\"#Level2Assessment\">Level 2 Assessment (EIA)<\/a><\/li>\n            <li><a href=\"#Level3Assessment\">Level 3 Assessment (FQA, VIBI)<\/a><\/li>\n            <li><a href=\"#NonCNHPAssessment\">Non-CNHP Methods<\/a><\/li>\n          \t<\/ul>\n\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2018\/07\/2016-06_cnhp_nps-24.jpg\" alt=\"CNHP technicians monitor wetlands at Great Sand Dunes National Park\" height=\"800\" width=\"1200\" title=\"Wetland monitoring\" \/>\n\t<a name=\"Level1Assessment\" id=\"Level1Assessment\"><\/a>\n<h2>\n   Level 1 Assessment <\/h2>\n    <p><a href=\"#top\">Back to top <\/a><\/p>\n\t<p><b>Digital National Wetland Inventory (NWI<\/b>) mapping provides the most basic Level 1 assessment by quantifying the acres, types, and distribution of wetlands across a given landscape. This information is often the foundation of more intensive assessment, including serving as the sample frame needed to randomly select wetlands for the field-based Level 2 and 3 assessments.\u00a0For more information, see the interactive <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/tools\/mapper\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Wetlands Mapper<\/a><\/strong> or see the <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/tools\/summaries\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Landscape Summaries<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0for an accounting of wetland acres by river basin, subbasin, and county.<\/p>\n<p><b>Landscape Integrity Model (LIM) for Wetlands<\/b>\u00a0is a statewide Level 1 GIS-based model of threats and stressors that affect wetland health. The model was built using available GIS data for specific anthropogenic stressors that affect wetlands. The impact of each stressor was weighted and scored based on best professional judgment of the stressor&#8217;s relative importance. Individual scores were then combined to create a cumulative, continuous surface of relative impact. High values equate to high stress and low landscape integrity while low scores equate to low stress and high landscape integrity. From more information, see Section 2.2 of the report <em><strong><a href=\"http:\/\/www.cnhp.colostate.edu\/download\/documents\/2011\/Statewide_Wetland_Strategies_Report_-_FINAL.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Statewide\u00a0Strategies for Wetlands<\/a><\/strong><\/em>.<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2018\/11\/WetlandLIM_2011_07_21_2.png\" alt=\"Wetland Landscape Integrity Model. CNHP 2011.\" height=\"1360\" width=\"1760\" title=\"Wetland Landscape Integrity Model\" \/>\n\t<a name=\"Level2Assessment\" id=\"Level2Assessment\"><\/a>\n<h2>\n   Level 2 Assessment <\/h2>\n    <p><a href=\"#top\">Back to top <\/a><\/p>\n\t<p><strong>Ecological Integrity Assessment (EIA)<\/strong> framework forms the basis of CNHP&#8217;s Level 2 Rapid Assessment protocol. The EIA Framework was developed by NatureServe and ecologist from several Natural Heritage Programs across the country. Colorado-specific EIA protocols have been developed and refined by CNHP with funding from EPA Region 8 and Colorado Parks and Wildlife. The EIA method is an ecologically based condition assessment method that focuses on the biological response to disturbance\u00a0but also evaluates underlying processes.<\/p>\n<p>The EIA framework evaluates wetland condition using on a multi-metric index based on three major factors. Each factor has associated metrics, which are scored based on quantitative or qualitative criteria.<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t<a href=\"http:\/\/www.cnhp.colostate.edu\/download\/documents\/2016\/2016_Colorado_EIA_Field_Manual_Version_2.1.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">\n\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2018\/11\/2016-Colorado-EIA-Field-Manual_Version-2.1-Cover-Page.jpg\" alt=\"Colorado Ecological Integrity Assessment Field Manual, Version 2.1\" height=\"2200\" width=\"1700\" title=\"2016 Colorado EIA Field Manual_Version 2.1 - Cover Page\" \/>\n\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t<ul>\n<li>Landscape Context (landscape, buffer)<\/li>\n<li>Condition (vegetation, hydrology, soil, water quality)<\/li>\n<li>Size<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The EIA method has been used in a series of <strong><a href=\"\/cwic\/condition\/assessments\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">wetland assessment projects<\/a><\/strong> to evaluate wetland condition in several major Colorado river\u00a0basins.<\/p>\n\nDownload the EIA field manual and associated data sheets.\n \n<ul>\n    <li><a href=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/library\/manuals\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Ecological Integrity Assessment (EIA) for Colorado Wetlands Field Manual, v. 2.1 (2016)<\/a><\/li>\n\t\t\t\t<\/ul>\n\nRead background reports on the Ecological Integrity Assessment (EIA) Framework\n \n<ul>\n    <li><a href=\"\/download\/documents\/2009\/EIA_Field_Testing_Report.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Field Testing of the Subalpine-Montane Riparian Shrubland EIA (2009)<\/a><\/li>\n    <li><a href=\"\/download\/documents\/2005\/ecological_integrity\/EIA_Wetlands_Mar15EPAFinalReport.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Ecological Integrity Assessment and Performance Measures for Wetland Mitigation (2006)<\/a><\/li>\n\t\t\t\t<\/ul>\n\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2018\/11\/20160824_161159.jpg\" alt=\"Assessing fen vegetation in the San Juan Mountains. CNHP Staff.\" height=\"2988\" width=\"5312\" title=\"20160824_161159\" \/>\n\t<a name=\"Level3Assessment\" id=\"Level3Assessment\"><\/a>\n<h2>\n   Level 3 Assessment <\/h2>\n    <p><a href=\"#top\">Back to top <\/a><\/p>\n\t<p><strong>Floristic Quality Assessment (FQA)<\/strong> is a vegetation-based assessment tool that evaluates an area&#8217;s ecological integrity based on its plant species composition. The method is built on the concept of species conservatism, which refers to a species&#8217; tolerance or intolerance to disturbance. The FQA method uses &#8220;coefficients of conservatism&#8221; or &#8220;C-values&#8221; assigned to all species in a region or state. C-values range from 0 to 10 and represent an estimated probability that a plant is likely to occur in a landscape relatively unaltered from pre-European settlement conditions (see table below). High C-values are assigned to species that are obligate to high-quality natural areas and cannot tolerate habitat degradation, while low C-values are assigned to species with wide tolerance to human disturbance. C-values of 0 are reserved for non-native species.<\/p>\n<table>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td><strong>C-Values<\/strong><\/td>\n<td><strong>Interpretation<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>0<\/td>\n<td>Non-native species. Very prevalent in new ground or non-natural areas.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>1-3<\/td>\n<td>Commonly found in non-natural areas.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>4-6<\/td>\n<td>Equally found in natural and non-natural areas.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>7-9<\/td>\n<td>Obligate to natural areas but can sustain some habitat degradation.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>10<\/td>\n<td>Obligate to high-quality natural areas (relatively unaltered from pre-European settlement).<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n\t<p>The proportion of conservative plants in a community provides a powerful and relatively easy assessment of a site&#8217;s ecological integrity that moves beyond simple measures of species richness and abundance. <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/download\/documents\/cwic_docs\/FQA_calculations.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Several numeric indices<\/a><\/strong> can be calculated from a site species list and associated C-values. The most basic FQA index is a simple average of C-values for a given site, called the Mean C. More complex indices can be calculated by incorporating species richness, using only native species, or weighting by abundance. The most common indices include:<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2018\/11\/Site025i.jpg\" alt=\"Buckbean (Menyanthes trifoliata ) in a floating mat fen species with a C-Value of 9. Joanna Lemly, CNHP.\" height=\"1704\" width=\"2272\" title=\"Site025i\" \/>\n\t<ul>\n<li><strong>Total Mean C:\u00a0<\/strong>Mean coefficient of conservatism value of all species present.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Native Mean C:<\/strong> Mean coefficient of conservatism value of native species present. If total and native mean C differ significantly, vegetation in the site contains numerous non-native species.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Floristic Quality Index (FQI):<\/strong> Incorporates species richness and indicates overall vegetative quality of the site. Generally, 1-19 is low quality, 20-35 is high quality, and above 35 is exceptional.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\t<p><strong>How to use the Floristic Quality Assessment<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Anyone can use the FQA method. The method is more commonly used in wetland environments, but it is equally applicable across all ecosystems. C-values for Colorado species were assigned by a panel of botanical experts in 2006 and updated in 2020. CNHP has developed an FQA Calculator that can be used to calculate FQA indices from any plant list. See links below to read the FQA reports, download the Colorado FQA database, or use the <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/tools\/calculator\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Colorado FQA Calculator<\/a><\/strong>. The Colorado FQA database is also available on the <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/universalfqa.org\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Universal FQA Calculator<\/a><\/strong>, an open-source web tool that includes FQA databases from across the United States.<\/p>\n\nRead the Colorado FQA Reports and access the Colorado FQA Database \n \n<ul>\n    <li><a href=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/download\/documents\/2020\/CO_FQA_2020_Final_Report.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Revision of Colorado&#8217;s Floristic Quality Assessment Indices (2020)<\/a><\/li>\n    <li><a href=\"\/download\/documents\/2007\/FQAFinalReport.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Floristic Quality Assessment Indices for Colorado Plant Communities (2007)<\/a><\/li>\n     <li><a href=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/download\/documents\/cwic_docs\/FQA_calculations.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Description and calculation of Floristic Quality Assessment indices<\/a><\/li>   \n     <li><a href=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2022\/06\/ColoradoFQASpeciesList_2020_Final.xlsx\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Download the Colorado FQA Database<\/a><\/li> \n    <li><a href=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/tools\/calculator\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Access the Colorado FQA Calculator<\/a><\/li> \n\t\t\t\t<\/ul>\n\t<p><strong>Vegetation Index of Biotic Integrity (VIBI)<\/strong>. Biotic integrity is defined as the ability of an ecosystem to &#8220;support and maintain a balanced adaptive community of organisms having a species composition, diversity, and functional organization comparable to that of natural habitats within a region.&#8221; An index of biotic integrity (IBI) is a cost-effective and direct way to evaluate the biotic integrity of a wetland by measuring attributes of the biological community known to respond to human disturbance.<\/p>\n<p>CNHP developed vegetation indices of biotic integrity (VIBI) for three selected headwater wetland types within the Southern Rocky Mountains of Colorado:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Subalpine-Montane Riparian Shrublands<\/li>\n<li>Subalpine-Montane Fens<\/li>\n<li>Alpine-Montane Wet Meadows<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Colorado&#8217;s VIBIs are a valuable tool that can be used by land managers to monitor and evaluate: (1) the performance of wetland restoration, enhancement, and creation projects; (2) the success of preserving ecological integrity via wetland protection projects; and (3) the effectiveness of on-going management practices.<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2018\/11\/VIBIvsHDI.png\" alt=\"Three VIBI models vs. a Human Disturbance Index\" height=\"377\" width=\"612\" title=\"VIBIvsHDI\" \/>\n\nRead the Vegetation Index of Biotic Integrity (VIBI) Reports\n \n<ul>\n    <li><a href=\"\/download\/documents\/2007\/AssessingEcologicalConditionOfHeadwaterWetlandsInTheSouthernRockyMountainsUsingAVegIBI_Final_V1.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">\n        Assessing Ecological Condition of Headwater Wetlands in the Southern Rocky Mountains Using a Vegetation Index of Biotic Integrity, Version 1.0<\/a><\/li>\n     <li><a href=\"\/download\/documents\/2009\/VIBI_Phase3_Report.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">\n        Vegetation Index of Biotic Integrity (VIBI) for Headwater Wetlands in the Southern Rocky Mountains, Version 2.0: Calibration of Selected VIBI Models<\/a><\/li>\n\t\t\t\t<\/ul>\n\t<a name=\"NonCNHPAssessment\" id=\"NonCNHPAssessment\"><\/a>\n<h2>\n   Non-CNHP Assessment Methods <\/h2>\n    <p><a href=\"#top\">Back to top <\/a><\/p>\n\t<p>Besides the methods developed by CNHP, additional assessment methods are frequently used in Colorado by specific agencies or for specific purposes.<\/p>\n\t<p><strong>Functional Assessment of Colorado Wetlands (FACWet)\u00a0<\/strong>was developed by Dr. Brad Johnson with funding from the Colorado Department of Transportation. FACWet is a functionally based condition assessment method that focuses on physical drivers of wetland processes in an effort to highlight the causes of degradation. The FACWet method has been endorsed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) and is now required to accompany all Section 404 permits for wetland impacts or mitigation plans.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>From a comparison of the EIA and FACWet methods, see Section 5.0 of the report <em><strong><a href=\"http:\/\/www.cnhp.colostate.edu\/download\/documents\/2013\/ColoradoWatershedApproach_FINAL.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Setting Mitigation in the Watershed Context<\/a><\/strong><\/em>.<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t<img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/wp-content\/plugins\/bb-plugin\/img\/pixel.png\" alt=\"\" \/>\n\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2018\/11\/IMG_4652-e1541800400324.jpg\" alt=\"Brad Johnson examines degraded wetland soil. Joanna Lemly, CNHP.\" height=\"3264\" width=\"2448\" title=\"IMG_4652\" \/>\n\t<p>The <strong>U.S. Environmental Protection Agency&#8217;s <a href=\"https:\/\/www.epa.gov\/national-aquatic-resource-surveys\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">National Aquatic Resource\u00a0Survey (NARS)<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>Program has developed rigorous quantitative assessment methods for wetlands, lakes, and rivers and streams. The NARS Program surveys the health of the nation&#8217;s waters on a rotating five-year cycle, focusing on one resource type at a time. CNHP has been very involved in the<strong> <a href=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/condition-assessment\/\">National Wetland Condition Assessment<\/a>,<\/strong> which has taken place three times in 2011, 2016, and 2021.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>The <a href=\"https:\/\/www.blm.gov\/programs\/natural-resources\/wetlands-and-riparian-health\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><strong>Bureau of Land Management<\/strong> <\/a>has developed three methods for\u00a0assessing the physical functioning of riparian and wetland areas.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong><a href=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/condition\/blm_aim\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Assessment Inventory and Monitoring (AIM)<\/a><\/strong> is a standardized monitoring program for BLM public lands. CNHP works closely with the BLM to monitor wetlands, riparian areas, and streams in multiple western states through the AIM program.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Proper Functioning Condition (PFC)\u00a0<\/strong>is a qualitative rapid assessment method often carried out by a multi-disciplinary team. The term PFC is used to describe both the assessment process and a defined, on-the-ground condition of a riparian-wetland area. There are two technical references for PFC, one for<strong> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.blm.gov\/documents\/national-office\/blm-library\/technical-reference\/riparian-area-management\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">stream channels<\/a><\/strong> and one for <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/www.blm.gov\/noc\/blm-library\/technical-reference\/proper-functioning-condition-assessment-lentic-areas\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">vegetated wetlands<\/a><\/strong>.\u00a0<\/li>\n<li><strong><a href=\"https:\/\/www.blm.gov\/documents\/national-office\/blm-library\/technical-reference\/multiple-indicator-monitoring-mim-stream\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Multiple Indicator Monitoring (MIM)<\/a><\/strong> of Stream Channels and Streamside Vegetation is a more quantitative rapid assessment method that monitors both\u00a0short-term, livestock grazing use indicators as well as long-term indicators of\u00a0resource condition.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2018\/11\/Big-Meadows-crew.jpg\" alt=\"Testing wetland monitoirng protocols for the BLM. Renee Rondeau, CNHP.\" height=\"3000\" width=\"4000\" title=\"Big Meadows crew\" \/>\n\t\t\t\t\t\tTesting wetland monitoirng protocols for the BLM. Renee Rondeau, CNHP.\n\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2018\/11\/IMG_4422.jpg\" alt=\"Wetland monitoiring plot, Lake County, CO. Sarah Marshll, CNHP.\" height=\"1536\" width=\"2048\" title=\"OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA\" \/>\n\t\t\t\t\t\tWetland monitoiring plot, Lake County, CO. Sarah Marshll, CNHP.\n\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2018\/11\/2016-06_cnhp_nps-13.jpg\" alt=\"Augering a ground water monitoiring well, Great Sand Dunes National Park. Phyllis Bovin, NPS.\" height=\"800\" width=\"1200\" title=\"2016-06_cnhp_nps-13\" \/>\n\t\t\t\t\t\tAugering a ground water  monitoiring well, Great Sand Dunes National Park. Phyllis Bovin, NPS.\n\t<p>The <b>U.S. Forest Service&#8217;s <a href=\"https:\/\/www.fs.usda.gov\/biology\/nsaec\/index.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">National Stream &amp; Aquatic Ecology Center<\/a>\u00a0<\/b>has developed a core monitoring protocol for riparian areas on National Forests.\u00a0The purpose of the <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/www.fs.usda.gov\/rm\/pubs_series\/rmrs\/gtr\/rmrs_gtr367.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">National Riparian Protocol (NRPC)<\/a> <\/strong>is to provide guidance on sampling riparian vegetation and physical characteristics along wadeable stream channels and their associated floodplains and valley bottoms.\u00a0This NRCP is a basic protocol designed for sampling ecologically important characteristics of riparian areas at the reach scale, including: (1) species composition, (2) vertical structure of vegetation, (3) size-class structure of trees, and (4) physical channel characteristics.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>The <strong>National Park Service&#8217;s <a href=\"https:\/\/www.nps.gov\/im\/romn\/index.htm\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Rocky Mountain Inventory &amp; Monitoring Network <\/a><\/strong>has developed <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nps.gov\/im\/romn\/wetland-ecological-integrity.htm\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Wetland Ecological Integrity<\/a><\/strong> monitoring protocols for use in all National Park units within the network, including Rocky Mountain NP, Great Sand Dunes NP, and Glacier NP. Objective&#8217;s\u00a0of the NPS wetland monitoring\u00a0program include determining long-term status and trend in the spatial extent of wetland by key type within each park and monitoring the status and trend in vegetation assemblages at the park scale using multimetric indices.\u00a0CNHP has been working with NPS to monitoring\u00a0wetlands in Great Sand Dunes NP since 2016 to inform the Park&#8217;s future ungulate management plan.<\/p>\nFor information, contact \n<a href=\"mailto:joanna.lemly@ColoState.EDU?subject=Wetland Condition Assessment Methods\">\nJoanna Lemly<\/a>. \n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Ecological Condition Assessment Methods Ecological condition assessment methods measure overall wetland condition with an emphasis on ecological integrity [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"parent":25,"menu_order":1,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":"","footnotes":""},"class_list":{"0":"post-116","1":"page","2":"type-page","3":"status-publish","5":"entry","6":"override"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/116","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=116"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/116\/revisions"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/25"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cnhp.colostate.edu\/cwic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=116"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}