B Sparrow Keynote at 19th Biennial Rangelands conference, Port Augusta, 25-28th September 2017

1. TERN is supported by the Australian Government through the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy.
Monitoring in the Australian
Rangelands
Where we have come from and where we should be headed.
Presentation by Associate Professor Ben Sparrow

2. Why Monitor?
So that we can manage land well
Different land uses have different management
aims.
Most of those aims have
similar information needs

3. So how do we manage well?
We make good decisions based on good
information.
https://www.i-scoop.eu/big-data-action-value-context/dikw-model/

4. So what information do we need?
Where is the resource?
• How is it spatially
arranged? How does that
change through time?
• Can’t manage something if
you don’t know where it is!

5. What is the resource?
• How much of it is there?
• What is its composition?
• How is it changing
through time?
• Measure it!

6. Photo by Bobby Tamayo
Sandy inland mouse, Ps.
hermannsburgensis, 12 g
1990 2000 2007
Dry
Photo by Bobby Tamayo
Sandy inland mouse, Ps.
hermannsburgensis, 12 g
Threats and
Drivers…
What
process is
involved?
What is causing the change in the resource?
Slide courtesy of Prof Glenda Wardle - USYD

7. Getting that Information is a challenge

8. TERN is supported by the Australian Government through the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy.
• Two types of monitoring
program
• Pastoral land
monitoring
• Biodiversity/ ecological
monitoring
• + Other more localised
monitoring
• For a specified purpose
• … or just informal

9. Currently have disparate systems
• Pastoral monitoring is a state based
responsibility and hence state based programs
• State based biodiversity inventory programs
• Many local or regional monitoring programs
• Different scales for different types of
monitoring

11. Problems
• Unable to easily and routinely report at the national
scale, or compare regional monitoring with that
conducted in another jurisdiction
• Some duplication of effort between pastoral
monitoring programs and biodiversity monitoring/
inventory programs
• All under resourced

12. So how do we fix these problems?
Before we can determine how to fix the problem
we first need to determine what we really want /
need.
To do that we need to understand a little about the
types of monitoring that can be conducted and
their purpose.

14. After Eyre et. al. 2011
Population Ecology
Community
Ecology
Biogeography/
Landscape Ecology

15. Monitoring
There is ongoing tension between different types of monitoring regarding their relative
merits.
Often a monitoring program is judged on what would define a successful monitoring
program for a different type of monitoring.
Each type of monitoring needs to be judged against its aims and objectives.

16. Generalisations to follow!!!

17. Targeted Monitoring
• Few species and interactions between them
• Great at answering the question that they were designed to answer,
but unlikely to be suitable to other questions.
• Aim to measure and quantify drivers (processes)
• Narrower stakeholder base (specific to question)
• Detect and quantify change that we know about and are expecting
• Method specific to project/ Question
• Good at quantifying impacts of drivers
• Question Driven (Popper’s Scientific method.)
• Monitor short and long term

18. Surveillance Monitoring
• Looks at entire communities
• Useful for many purposes
• Drivers unknown (May provide some insight, but that is not the
focus of design)
• Broad stakeholder base
• Detect and quantify change that we don’t know about and weren’t
anticipating
• Some hope of method standardisation – If method broad in scope
• More likely to be able to adapt to emerging issues
• Has focus areas for data collection that inform many questions
• Aims to detect and quantify environmental change across large
geographical areas.
• Less likely for the same sites to be regularly revisited – Longer re-
visit time. (Duration of many years)

19. Landscape Monitoring
• Commonly whole landscape analysis
• Lower information content
• Versatile and reusable
• Drivers unknown- Aims to detect change
• Broad stakeholder base
• Has a higher temporal ability than other monitoring methods BUT
• Fundamentally a correlation between reflectance / texture etc and
your environmental variable of interest
• Necessary to build up this correlation from field data and widely
validate.
• Provides a useful, robust way to generalise outcomes for the whole
landscape.
Courtesy TERN Auscover

20. Which is better?
They all have their Place!
All are needed to provide a holistic solution to monitoring.
The most important parts are
actually the arrows!

21. Where is the resource?
• How is it spatially
arranged? How does that
change through time?
• Can’t manage something if
you don’t know where it is!
Landscape Monitoring

22. • What is the resource?
• How much of it is
there?
• What is its
composition?
• How is it changing
through time?
Surveillance Monitoring

23. Photo by Bobby Tamayo
Sandy inland mouse, Ps.
hermannsburgensis, 12 g
1990 2000 2007
Dry
Photo by Bobby Tamayo
Sandy inland mouse, Ps.
hermannsburgensis, 12 g
Processes?
Slide courtesy of Prof Glenda Wardle - USYD
Targeted Monitoring

24. So what could our future look like?
(Unlikely to get a massive increase in funding)

25. Which of the following Photos are from a Pastoral Land
Assessment program and which are
from a biodiversity monitoring program??

26. Need to work together
Are efficiencies gained by combining
government based pastoral land monitoring and
biodiversity monitoring?
Pastoral monitoring and Biodiversity monitoring
are not entirely incompatible! – Both sample
Cover, Species, Presence of Ferals etc.
Similar information needs

27. Need to conduct monitoring at all
scales

28. Build on what already exists
• ACRIS
• TERN
• State
programs

29. Socialise/collaborate but consensus

30. Radiographer Surgeon
Registrar
GP
Theatre Nurse
Anestesiologist
Nurse
Administrator
Radiologist
Multi-
disciplinary…..
Because no-one
has all of the
answers!!

31. Objective data collection
• Avoid subjectivity
• Measure where possible
• Don’t use classes in the field – they can be
added later
• Maximises re-use

32. • Standardise
data
collection
where
possible

33. Automate data collection
Reduces Time
(Field and Office)
Rapid data
publication
Reduces Errors

34. Embrace new technologies

35. Open Data
• Collect once
use many
• Maximise
public benefit
from publicly
funded
programs.

36. Published Friday 12th May 2017.
Get
everything
else right
and
impact will
take care
of itself.

37. Better Future

38. More info
Thank You
Ben Sparrow
E. Ben.sparrow@Adelaide.edu.au
p. 08 8313 1201
W. www.tern.org.au
W. www.ausplots.org.au
W. www.aekos.org.au