LANDSCAPE-SCALE COOPERATION Landscape–scale collaboration on conservation issues can:

1. A Landscape Scale Framework for Cooperative Grassland Bird ConservationResults from a Structured Decision Making Workshop METHODS The team developed a predictive model to determine how policies affect decisions made by different types of landowners, thus changing landuse and impacting birds. The model incorporates landscape (e.g., area, configuration, edge) and annual cycle considerations and was used to explore a few theoretical species and policies. INTRODUCTION Grassland birds are among the fastest and most consistently declining birds in North America. Many reasons for declines have been suggested including loss of perennial grassland habitats. But the nature of this conservation challenge is complex. A team of 11 individuals representing state and federal agencies, universities, and non-governmental organizations convened at the National Conservation Training Center in September 2011 to explore this issue using the Structured Decision Making process. RESULTS Landowner decisions affected the population growth of grassland birds. Decisions of Profit-maximizing Producers often resulted in decreasing populations while Conservationist decisions generally favored grassland birds (Figure 4). However, certain policies, such as providing ecosystem services or incentive payments, yielded higher productivity for birds with all types of landowners. Fundamental Objective: Sustain and restore viable populations of grassland birds that breed east of the Rocky Mountains, including Canada, at multiple scales and in a way that integrates events across the annual cycle. Figure 4. Results of the model incorporating landowner decision impacts on landscape configuration and thus grassland birds; numbers represent population growth rates. Figure 2. Influence diagram depicting relationships among birds, survivorship, habitat, and landowner decisions. • NEXT STEPS • Recruit others to assist in refinement of proposed framework for integrated grassland bird conservation. • Secure resources for full-time grassland bird conservation coordinator. • Develop a coordinated network for grassland bird conservation and monitoring. • Develop an implementation plan. In Figure 2, birds enter the breeding season and go through life history stages. Productivity and survival depend on the amount and condition of grassland habitat, which are influenced by landowners and their decisions. In the first prototype, we generated landscapes (Figure 3) for each landowner type under each policy/action scenario, yielding 27 owner-policy combinations. Figure 1. Due to the complex annual cycle and broad geographic ranges, the conservation of migratory birds faces many challenges. The Southeastern US, for example, provides wintering and breeding habitat for Henslow’s and Grasshopper Sparrows and stopover habitat for Bobolinks. • LANDSCAPE-SCALE COOPERATION • Landscape–scale collaboration on conservation issues can: • Assist managers and decisions-makers in integrating management and social issues and creating delivery opportunities at local, regional and national scales. • Transcend boundaries to learn faster about where grassland birds are limited. • Determine the most effective conservation actions. • Determine where actions elicit the best bird response. Example Landscapes from one policy: Conservation Design Grassland Forest Agriculture Volunteers learn about grassland bird monitoring techniques. Coordinated monitoring and adaptive management will be critical to ensuring viable populations of grassland birds (Photo: Andy Paulios) PARTICIPANTS Authors: Katie Koch*1, Soch Lor2 Eric Lonsdorf3, Evan Grant4, Marissa Ahlering 5, Laurel Barnhill6, Tom Dailey7, Ryan Drum8, Melinda Knutson9, Connie Mueller10, David Pavlacky11, Christine Ribic12, Catherine Rideout#13, David Sample14, Donna C. Brewer15, Mike Runge16 1USFWS and Midwest Coordinated Bird Monitoring Partnership, 3090 Wright St., Marquette, MI 49855 2 USFWS, P.O. Box 25486, Denver Federal Center, Denver, CO 80225-0486 3 Chicago Botanic Garden, 1000 Lake Cook Rd., Glencoe, IL 60022 4 USGS, 12100 Beech Forest Rd., Laurel, MD 20708 5 The Nature Conservancy, University of North Dakota, Biology Department, Grand Forks, ND 58202 6 USFWS, 160 Phoenix Rd, Room 103, Athens, GA 30602 7 National Bobwhite Conservation Initiative, Univ of TN, Knoxville, TN 37996-4563 8 USFWS, 5600 American Blvd. West, Suite 990, Bloomington, MN 55437-1458 9 USFWS, Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center, 2630 Fanta Reed Rd, La Crosse, WI 54603 10 8315 Highway 8, Kenmare, ND 58746 11 Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory, P. O. Box 1232, Brighton, CO 80601 12 USGS, 204 Russell Labs, 1630 Linden Drive, Madison, WI  53706-1598  13 East Gulf Coastal Plain Joint Venture and USFWS, Auburn University, AL 36849 14 Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2801 Progress Rd. Madison, WI 53716 15 National Conservation Training Center, Shepherdstown, WV, 25443 16 USGS, Patuxent Research Center, Laurel, MD, 20708 • Figure 3. “Conservation design” includes using biological planning and decision support tools to identify priority areas for conservation. Implementing this approach with conservationists yields larger blocks of grassland habitats and higher nest potential than with profit maximizing producers. We also developed an output for ‘small landowners’ but show these two as examples.