@article {JRN55206, title = {Evaluation of the automated reference toolset as a method to select reference plots for oil and gas reclamation on Colorado Plateau rangelands}, journal = {Journal of Environmental Management}, volume = {265}, year = {2020}, month = {04/2020}, chapter = {110578}, abstract = {Rangelands are typically characterized by low precipitation and low biomass which makes them susceptible to disturbance and difficult to reclaim. These characteristics become a management issue when considering the widespread and significant impact of oil and gas development on rangelands. Reclamation from this land use involves the complexities of dealing with multiple state and federal agencies, private landowners, and their sometimes conflicting rules. Reference plots (e.g., nearby undisturbed sites) can help with these issues by providing an objective context for reclamation planning. They are selected to provide a comparison that is similar to a reclamation site in most aspects except for the disturbance activity. This allows for the relative condition of the reclamation site to be determined. Because selection of reference plots is normally expert-driven on a site-by-site basis, it can be time consuming and thus ineffective in helping to meet reclamation goals over large landscapes. The Automated Reference Tool (ART) was developed to improve the efficiency and efficacy of reference plot selection. The ART improves reference plot selection through remote sensing and indicators of land potential by selecting reference plots of similar land potential to the reclamation site based on soil texture, topography, and geology. We evaluated the ART in the context of well-pad reclamation to determine if ART selected plots were appropriate to use as reference when compared to an existing reference plot network. We applied the ART to reclamation sites managed by the Bureau of Land Management{\textquoteright}s (BLM) White River Field Office, Colorado which had existing expert-selected reference plots. We found that the ART-selected reference plots and their matching expert-selected reference plot had similar large-scale vegetative cover characteristics (total foliar: R2 {\textonequarter} 0.34, p-value {\textonequarter} 0.0012) and dissimilar finer-scale cover characteristics (plant diversity: R2 {\textonequarter} 0.079, p-value {\textonequarter} 0.15). In addition, we detected similarities in their soil water content (R2 {\textonequarter} 0.43, p-value<0.001), depth to restricting layer (RMSD {\textonequarter} 21.90), and rock fragment (RMSD {\textonequarter} 19.99). These results demonstrate that ART could be a useful tool for managers to help meet their reclamation goals over large landscapes, but it is not a complete automation of the reference selection process.}, keywords = {Land potential, Model verification, monitoring, oil and gas, reclamation, Reference plot selection}, doi = {10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110578}, url = {files/bibliography/20-012.pdf}, author = {Sean F. Di Stefano and Jason W. Karl and C. Donovan Bailey and Hale, Steven} } @article {JRN55135, title = {Comparison of 2 vegetation height methods for assessing greater sage-grouse seasonal habitat}, journal = {Wildlife Society Bulletin}, volume = {42}, year = {2018}, month = {05/2018}, pages = {213-224}, chapter = {213}, abstract = {

The 2015 Sage-Grouse Habitat Assessment Framework (HAF) was developed to evaluate habitat quality for sage-grouse (Centrocercus spp.), with the greater sage-grouse (C. urophasianus) as the primary focus of HAF evaluations and basis of the indicators in the HAF. Site-scale assessments of sage-grouse habitat can be completed using either data collection methods described in the HAF or core methods adopted by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management{\textquoteright}s Assessment, Inventory, and Monitoring (AIM) program. However, there is a discrepancy in how vegetation height is measured between HAF and AIM
methods, which has led to confusion as to which protocol should be used and if the AIM height method is compatible with the HAF for habitat assessments. Our objective was to use simulations and data from multiple study areas to determine how often differences between the 2 methods would result in a different determination of quality for the vegetation-height habitat indicator. We confirmed that the AIM method generally yields lower estimates of height than the HAF method because it estimates mean vegetation height whereas the HAF method estimates mean maximum height (d {\textonequarter} 0.031). However, differences between methods at the plot level most often were not substantial enough to lead to a different conclusion about the HAF vegetation-height indicator for habitat quality. There is value in implementing the AIM method because it is widely used for other monitoring purposes, and slight modifications to the AIM technique (i.e., increasing measurement frequency, adding measurements for both grasses and forbs) could improve usefulness for sage-grouse habitat assessments.

}, keywords = {Centrocercus urophasianus, greater sage-grouse, habitat assessment, indicator, monitoring, Vegetation height}, doi = {doi.org/10.1002/wsb.877}, url = {files/bibliography/18-026.pdf}, author = {Sean F. Di Stefano and Jason W. Karl and Sarah McCord and Nelson Stauffer and Makela, Paul and Mary Manning} } @proceedings {JRN54857, title = {Evaluation of the automated reference toolset for oil and gas reclamation on Colorado rangelands}, volume = {January 28-February 2, 2018}, year = {2018}, month = {01/28/2018}, publisher = {Society for Range Management Meeting Procedings}, address = {Reno, NV}, abstract = {

Rangelands are characterized by low precipitation and low biomass, making them susceptible to disturbance and difficult to reclaim. Considering the widespread and significant impact of oil and gas development on rangelands, effective reclamation is vital. Thus, it is important that land managers understand the ecological context of a reclamation site so that management outcomes can be correctly interpreted. This is often accomplished through comparison of reclamation areas to reference sites which are selected by their similarity to the reclamation area{\textquoteright}s pre-disturbance condition, so that the relative condition of a reclamation site can be determined. Reference site selection is normally expert driven on a site-by-site basis, and thus can be inconsistently applied and ineffective in helping to meet reclamation goals over large landscapes. The Automated Reference Tool (ART) was developed to improve the efficiency and efficacy of reference site selection by selecting reference sites of similar land potential to the reclamation area based on soil texture, topography, and geology. However, ART has not been previously evaluated in a management context. Our objectives were to evaluate ART within this context and determine if existing reference sites are appropriate reference sites for well-pads. We applied the ART to oil \& gas reclamation sites managed by the Bureau of Land Management{\textquoteright}s (BLM) White River Field Office, Colorado, to their reference sites and to nearby sites from the BLM{\textquoteright}s Assessment, Inventory, and Monitoring (AIM) program. Both existing reference sites and nearby AIM sites varied in their similarity to reclamation sites according to ART and in terms of vegetation composition from field sampling. Based on these results, ART can complement expert-driven reference site selection, making reference site selection quicker, more quantitative, and defensible, helping land managers better meet their reclamation needs.

}, author = {Sean F. Di Stefano and Colby Brungard and Jason W. Karl and Nelson Stauffer and Jonathan Maynard} } @conference {JRN54934, title = {Evaluation of the automated reference toolset for oil and gas reclamation on Colorado rangelands}, booktitle = {Society for Range Management Meeting Proceedings}, year = {2018}, month = {01/2018}, address = {Sparks, Nevada }, abstract = {

Rangelands are characterized by low precipitation and low biomass, making them susceptible to disturbance and difficult to reclaim. Considering the widespread and significant impact of oil and gas development on rangelands, effective reclamation is vital. Thus, it is important that land managers understand the ecological context of a reclamation site so that management outcomes can be correctly interpreted. This is often accomplished through comparison of reclamation areas to reference sites which are selected by their similarity to the reclamation area{\textquoteright}s pre-disturbance condition, so that the relative condition of a reclamation site can be determined. Reference site selection is normally expert driven on a site-by-site basis, and thus can be inconsistently applied and ineffective in helping to meet reclamation goals over large landscapes. The Automated Reference Tool (ART) was developed to improve the efficiency and efficacy of reference site selection by selecting reference sites of similar land potential to the reclamation area based on soil texture, topography, and geology. However, ART has not been previously evaluated in a management context. Our objectives were to evaluate ART within this context and determine if existing reference sites are appropriate reference sites for well-pads. We applied the ART to oil \& gas reclamation sites managed by the Bureau of Land Management{\textquoteright}s (BLM) White River Field Office, Colorado, to their reference sites and to nearby sites from the BLM{\textquoteright}s Assessment, Inventory, and Monitoring (AIM) program. Both existing reference sites and nearby AIM sites varied in their similarity to reclamation sites according to ART and in terms of vegetation composition from field sampling. Based on these results, ART can complement expert-driven reference site selection, making reference site selection quicker, more quantitative, and defensible, helping land managers better meet their reclamation needs.

}, author = {Sean F. Di Stefano and Colby Brungard and Jason W. Karl and Nelson Stauffer and Sarah McCord} } @proceedings {JRN54678, title = {A comparison of two vegetation height measurement methods for applications to sage grouse habitat evaluations}, volume = {Jan 29 - Feb 02, 2017}, year = {2017}, month = {01/2017}, address = {Saint George, Utah}, abstract = {

The conservation of Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) habitat has become a serious management issue for U.S. federal land agencies given competing land uses and ecological change across the American West. This drives a need for data collection in Sage-Grouse habitat to assess habitat condition in a consistent manner. The 2015 Sage-Grouse Habitat Assessment Framework (HAF), describes site-scale habitat suitability for Sage-grouse seasonal habitats, in part, by height of sagebrush and perennial grasses and forbs. The height method described in the HAF (average of maximum plant heights) is different from the core vegetation height method (average of maximum plant heights within a series of fixed-radius cylinders) adopted by the BLM{\textquoteright}s Assessment, Inventory, and Monitoring (AIM) program and the NRCS{\textquoteright}s National Resources Inventory. Given the widespread implementation of the core methods, there may be benefits to using these data to complete habitat suitability assessments for Sage-Grouse. We compared the HAF and core height methods for shrubs, forbs, and grasses to evaluate if the core height method could be used to characterize Sage-Grouse habitat, using data from sites across the western U.S. where both methods were applied at each survey plot. We found a positive correlation between herbaceous and woody heights at the plot level. Individual within-plot measurements had a weaker correlation due largely to differences in which plants were measured with each method. We observed that the core method underestimated height compared to HAF as expected based on measured plant component. Simulations of the two height methods confirmed that, although they measure different indicators, the two indicators are strongly correlated. We therefore conclude that core vegetation height data are compatible with HAF habitat suitability evaluation. Where core data are already being gathered, we recommend using the core vegetation height method to satisfy HAF habitat suitability evaluations instead of collecting additional height measurements.

}, author = {Sean F. Di Stefano and Nelson Stauffer and Jason W. Karl and Sarah McCord} }