1 / 11

Mojave Desert I & M Network 3-Year Start-up Reviews

Mojave Desert I & M Network 3-Year Start-up Reviews. Logistics. May 30 – 31, 2012 Water Safety Center, LAKE Blocks of hotel rooms in Boulder City Work with Ron Budde – travel Pre-review guidance / survey coming from Steve Fancy . Objectives. Within 3 years of Monitoring Plan

elvis
Télécharger la présentation

Mojave Desert I & M Network 3-Year Start-up Reviews

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Mojave Desert I & M Network 3-Year Start-up Reviews

  2. Logistics • May 30 – 31, 2012 • Water Safety Center, LAKE • Blocks of hotel rooms in Boulder City • Work with Ron Budde – travel • Pre-review guidance / survey coming from Steve Fancy

  3. Objectives • Within 3 years of Monitoring Plan • Alice C-M 2008 Monitoring Plan • Operational and administrative aspects • NOT technical review • Is the network set up to succeed?

  4. Objectives • Review / evaluate network and parks initial progress • Opportunity to make adjustments • Relatively informal • Review Panel: Steve Fancy, 2 reviewers, Regional I&M Program Manager

  5. Review Panel Assess • Is the network on track to measure trends in the condition of selected park resources and to provide useful information to park managers, planners, and interpreters? • Which protocols have been implemented, and do protocols still in development have a reasonable timetable for completion? • What are the strengths and weaknesses of the current staffing structure?

  6. Are the roles and responsibilities of key groups and individuals such as the Board of Directors, Steering Committee (if established), Technical Committee, and Program Manager adequately defined, and are good communication mechanisms in place? • Which network activities are well aligned with the objectives and schedule set forth in the guidance documents, including the Monitoring Plan and Program guidance?

  7. Are protocol review guidelines followed? • What processes are in place to ensure data are summarized and reported? • Is the network generating preliminary reports, and are adequate procedures in place for making monitoring results available to park managers and planners? • Has the network developed a parallel series of internet and intranet websites to use as a clearinghouse and communication tool for delivering monitoring results?

  8. What are some examples of strong and productive relationships among key partners, including scientific collaborators, park and network staff? • Are there efficiencies that might realistically be incorporated, either through integration at the network level, or by using developments or products from other networks or monitoring programs?

  9. Preparation for Review • 2 week prior uploaded to internet • Sections of Monitoring Plan • Recent AAR and WP • Budget summary pages last 3 AAR • Website • Protocol Summary Table • Resource Briefs & other products

More Related