Karen Murphy (WAK LCC Coordinator) & Session Moderator
Western Alaska LCC
Plains and Prairie Potholes LCC
Appalachian LCC
LCC Scope: from Identify Science Needs,
to Address Immediate Needs, to Invest in Meeting our Future Needs.
Three Cases Studies on the Process & Evolution
1. Decision-Making - Structure / Governance
2. History - Partnership (Relationships) / Trust
3. Capacity - both in terms of Science and Management
LCCs - Self-Directed, Science-Management Partnerships
…each is unique
4. Threats – many are similar, vary in terms of relative proportion / degree of impact, some shared regionally,
…some more unique
5. Landownership – % Public v. Private Ownership / Cultural or Historic Lands / Resources
6. Energy / Infrastructure / Commercial & Extractive Industries
Decision-Making / Oversight
Staff to Coord / Implement LCC operations
(Technical) Groups established to address specific topics or issues
Partners with some expected input to LCC processes or products
Coordinator
Broader societal representation (LCC report out to this broad representation and solicit feedback).
Partnership at large -level
Staff /Team level
Committee level
Exec. level
Stakeholder level
TechGroup level
Exec. subComm
Sub-committee of the main Committee with expedited decision making authority
N/A: This level refers to existing Governmental bodies - limited to the Pacific Islands and Arctic LCCs
System or Issue -based Adv Group
Taxonomic Advisory
Group
Managers Researchers
Science Coordinator
Communications;GIS / Data Mgmt;Socio / Cultural;
Ecologist / Biologist;
Decision-Makers – Staff - Partners - Stakeholders
LCC Profile snapshot WAK PPP AppNumber of US StatesNumber of US States 1 6 15
International (# Provinces)
-- 3 --
Steering Comm: TotalFederal
StateTribalNGO
Regional PartnershipsOther (Univ, Industry, CAN govmt)
12F = 12 S = 1T = 3
30F = 11S = 6
N = 5P = 4
O = 4 (CAN)
33F = 15S = 11T = 1N = 3P = 3
Primary & Secondary EcoregionsTaiga & Tundra
PP & Sage Steppe
Forest & Agriculture
Landownership75% Public21% Tribal2% Private
90+% Private 12% Federal;
Large % Forest Public (S/F)
Critical / Imperiled System(s)Tundra, Sea Ice, Coastal,
AlpinePrairie
Aquatic; Cave/Karst
10 Landscape ChallengeClimate Change
AgricultureEnergy
Development
Science Needs --- Immediate Needs --- Future Needs
Jean Brennan PhD Coordinator
Bridgett CostanzoScience Coordinator
Partnership at large -level
Staff /Team level
Committee level
Stakeholder level
TechGroup level
Stakeholders
Partners
Management Research
Executive Executive
Technical Technical
Technical Technical
Technical Technical
WAKWAK
PPPPPPApp
App
Identify Science Needs – Workshop Participants
…Who do you engage and Why?
….( what’s the historic relationships / partnerships? )
WAK PPP App
Planning / Planning / Facilitation Facilitation
Contractor w/ Staff
Contractor w/ Staff
Vol. Trained Facilitators & WPTeam (partner org)
Meeting Meeting Facilitation / Facilitation / Note takersNote takers
Contractor & Vol. ‘Reporting Group Leads’
* Webinars for RGLsContractor
Vol. Trained Facilitators & Technical Note takers
*Webinars for F+NT
Participant Background Materials /
Input
*at Resource Notebook (CC projects / maps)
*Webinars*Bckgrd Reading Materials
* Extensive [Science Portfolio – Prep]
* Webcasts(Resources)
Site Visits / Field Trip
No Yes No
Outputs / Reports
* 100pg Report + 100pg Append
*Sythesis Rept (40 wk)
* Synthesis Rept (1 wk)* Full Portfolio (staff)
Process Goal150 - 1/3 Decision –
Makers + 1/3 Research + 1/3 Field Specialist
21 Technical Comm.
151 - Build Technical Community / Buy-in
Identify Science Needs – Workshop Participants
Workshop Planning Team Repr. = 5 State / 6 Federal / 6 Other (NGOs, University, Partnerships)
62% forest62% forest
Fed. Listed ( 170) Candidate ( 35 )
Proposed ( 3 )
15 States ( NY-AL; IL-VA)
Federally listed species
mussel-
clam
31%
flowering
plants 29%
fish
16%
14 NFs 9 NP Areas
6 NWRs
Major Threats
1.Energy: NG / Hydro- “fracking”
2.Energy: Mt Top Mining
3.Water Stress / Extreme Events
4.Urban Expansion
1.1.
2.2.
3.
4.4.
crops 8
pasture 18
26% Ag Lands
Pho
to S
ourc
e: B
. Sm
ith
Expertise /Profession North SouthAq-ManagerAq-Manager 11 15
Aq-ResearcherAq-Researcher 11 7Terr-ManagerTerr-Manager 13 10
Terr-ResearcherTerr-Researcher 8 11CC-ManagerCC-Manager 3 3
CC-ResearcherCC-Researcher 4 4Human Dim-ManagerHuman Dim-Manager 7 5
Human Dim-ResearcherHuman Dim-Researcher 10 3IT-InfoMgmt-ManagerIT-InfoMgmt-Manager 3 2
IT-InfoMgmt-ResearcherIT-InfoMgmt-Researcher 4 5TOTALS 74 65
Profession 139 Managers 72 Researchers 67
Sector % Federal 43% State (+Coop +CESU) 28% Other (=NGO, Univ, Copr.) 28%
Goals of the Workshop: 1. Survey Science Capacity => Directory of Expertise
(COP)
187
Aquatics:Aquatics: Ecological flows, Ecological flows, species-habitat relationships species-habitat relationships at multiple scales & effects at multiple scales & effects of alterations of alterations
Human Dom. / Economic Human Dom. / Economic Lands: Lands: Resource extraction Resource extraction & demands for energy & demands for energy
Terrestrial:Terrestrial: Species / habitat Species / habitat distribution trends distribution trends (incl. all (incl. all terrestrial habitats – forest, terrestrial habitats – forest, grasslands, wetlands) grasslands, wetlands)
Climate Change & Drivers: Climate Change & Drivers: Vulnerability assessments Vulnerability assessments (climate + non-climate (climate + non-climate stressors)stressors)
Terr x2
HumanDim.
Climate Change
DAY 1- Thematic (Expertise) Groups
Northern
Southern
Northern
Southern
• -------• -------• -------
DAY 2- Interdisciplinary(x6)
Northern
Southern
Northern
Southern
• -------• -------• -------
• -------• -------• -------
}x6
DAY 3 – Synthesis / Writing
Team
Goals of the Workshop:
2. Full Portfolio3. Top-Ranked (Immediate FY$)
=> a transparent and defensible way of selecting science needs / support
Rick Nelson PhD Coordinator
Mike OlsonScience Coordinator
Science Needs --- Immediate Needs --- Future Needs
Accomplishments - first 18 months Funded 27 projects (over 5 rounds of
funding) Formed Steering & Technical Committees
(more than 2 dozen active members) Draft Charter - soon to be finalized Conducted Science Needs Workshop Sci Webinars, Website, Initial Op’s Plan Working to develop a seamless national
network
Our Initial List of Urgent Needs / Issues•Agriculture•Energy•Climate Change•Regional Understanding of Habitat Condition (spatial analysis)•Land and Water Management Planning•Water
Plains and Prairie Potholes
We are ….“a work in progress”
Our Fundamental Objective: Increase conservation delivery by reducing scientific uncertainty associated with landscape level stressors which are important to our partnership
From early beginnings => Immediate needs (2nd yr) => preview of “coming attractions”
PPPLCC WALCC AppLCC
DA/Science Needs Workshop
Two Workshops Science Needs Workshop
Early RFP’s Broad Early RFP Broad RFA’s (contracts)
Later RFP’s slightly more specific
Early RFP’s addressed fundamental information
6 themes (priorities)
Early RFP’s address immediate needs and
long-term issues
TEK, Tools/Training for resource managers, data gaps
Ecological flows, Aq. & Terr. Habitat Classification, CC Vul., T&E Rare species,
Energy ‘Footprint’Technical Team
review/rank proposalsSteering Committee review/rank
SC Sub-committee, Annon. reviewers
Scientific rigor, link to needs, unique
Add to conservation / adaptation decision making
Supports adaptive management approach
Scalability /transport - short term
Add to building of partnership Enhances risk management
Management tie, leverages resources
Leverages resourcesFoundational & Tests
promising proof of concept
“Connections” workshop upcoming
SC focused pilot program impacts of coastal storms on
coastal resources
Ongoing examination of portfolio into all planning
activities
Refining/Improving Planning – year 2
Decision analysis workshop
Main focus of workshop
Where we left things
Continue to quantifying relationships between decisions, needs and outcomes
Example scenarios
Terrific idea “borrowed” from UMGLLCC…
Moving from individual projects to an even more comprehensive view of the landscape – Will discuss targets, objectives, gaps.
Oriented on 4 themes (potholes, rivers, sage-steppe, human dimensions)
Bringing PI’s, Technical and Executive committee members together for the first time.
PPP-LCC “Connections” Workshop
Lessons Learned
1. LCC’s must embrace principles of adaptive management – We’re a process of constant improvement
2. Need for well understood review criteria3. Identify those willing to do some of the “heavy lifting” -
sub-group approach was helpful4. Time management vs. embracing a sense of urgency5. Science needs must drive the RFP process not the other
way around. PPP-LCC 6. Integration of fun and opportunity to be creative is
important to the success of the group.7. Collaboration across LCC network important to the
landscape approach…
1. LCC’s must embrace principles of adaptive management – We’re a process of constant improvement
2. Need for well understood review criteria3. Identify those willing to do some of the “heavy lifting” -
sub-group approach was helpful4. Time management vs. embracing a sense of urgency5. Science needs must drive the RFP process not the other
way around. PPP-LCC 6. Integration of fun and opportunity to be creative is
important to the success of the group.7. Collaboration across LCC network important to the
landscape approach…