San Clemente Island Proactive And Reactive Wildlife Management:

An Island And A Program In Transition

Melissa Booker, SCI Wildlife Biologist,Naval Base Coronado, NAVFAC SW

Southernmost California Channel Island

Located 68 nautical miles (~78 statute mi. or 125.5 km) west of San Diego

37,200 acres (56 mi2 or ~15,054 ha) plus 54 acres of off-shore islands and rocks

Just under 21 miles (33.8 km) long, 1.5-4+ miles (2.4-6.4 km) wide

Habitat in a state of recovery following feral herbivore removal

San Clemente Island Location and Area

San Clemente Island (SCI) is part of the southern California Range Complex, the most heavily used military range complex in the eastern Pacific

The only remaining range in the U.S. that supports live fire ship to shore, air to ground, and ground troop training

San Clemente Island Mission

SCI supports training in Primary Mission Areas (PMARs): Anti-Air Warfare, Amphibious Warfare, Anti-Surface Warfare, Anti-Submarine Warfare, Mine Warfare, Strike Warfare, Electronic Combat, and Naval Special Warfare (NSW)

Primary theater for Naval Special Warfare Training, including the 3rd Phase of BUD/S

San Clemente Island Mission

ESA listed taxa: 6 plant species, 2 abalone, 1 lizard, 2 resident bird species, 1 wintering (and recently breeding) bird species, and a candidate conservation mammal

Cause of decline for all SCI ESA listed species included habitat degradation due to feral grazers

Very comprehensive program due to island ecosystem and range value

Annual NR budget of $4-$6 million (CPF)

San Clemente Island Natural Resources

Feral herbivore removal completed early 1990s

No widespread vegetative restoration efforts, but dramatic recovery of sage scrub and shrubland communities

SCI An Island In Transition

Reactive Management:

Can’t plan ahead

Reacting to needs

Crisis driven/rushed decisions

Driven by what to do (not what not to do)

Work from assumptions and rules

Typically poor results for investment

Reactive vs. Proactive ManagementProactive Management:

Planned options

Stated goals and milestones

Considers risk analysis

Driven by what not to do

Work from results and choices

Provides greater level of control

Improved results/product

• San Clemente loggerhead shrike was considered “possibly the most endangered bird in North America” in 1997

• Recovery the responsibility of the U.S. Navy (SCI endemic subsp.)

• No USFWS taxa-specific Recovery Plan, but USFWS-Navy Shrike Recovery Working Group

• Wild population number dropped to 14 in 1998

• Emergency situation because of population status, lawsuit threat, and loss of operational capacity and flexibility

• Reactive management implemented

SC Shrike Reactive to Proactive Program

Shrike Recovery Program Reactive ApproachSWG did not followed long-term planned approach

Captive Breeding:• 1991-1996 could breed birds, but no released birds survived• Changed captive cage layout, hand rearing to parent rearing, diet, added

pre-release foraging and flight practice/preparationReleases: • Hard releases poorly timed, questionable locations

• Developed new (soft) release techniques in 1998-2000, including supplemental feeding

Predator Control:• Late 90’s: 49 American kestrels, 27 red-tailed hawks, and 9 barn owls

lethally removed and 32 San Clemente island foxes lethally removed or transferred

• 2000-2008: 1 American kestrel and 1 red-tailed hawk with 2 young lethally removed, but cat control continued and rat control increased

• 2008-2013: 3 common ravens lethally removed in 2010, focus on cat and rat control

Monitoring:• Population census and nest monitoring continued

Habitat:• Outplanting for shrikes began in 2001 and continued until recently

Results of Reactive Management-The Good• Reactive management precluded a lawsuit • Learned lessons about what not to do• Huge population gains; avert extinction• Increased operational flexibility (2008)• Decreased reactive management over time• All occurring in concert with vegetative recovery

Results of Reactive Management-The Bad

• Reactive management is habitual; it creates a standard where reacting is always essential/expected (e.g., BO standard)

• Transitioning to proactive management is a slow learning process; have to switch SWG mindsets from managing individual birds to population management

• Costly=~$35 million

• Doesn’t allow for true critical thinking, treating symptoms and not cause

Transition to Proactive Management• Increases in long-term planning, but fewer meetings

because not always reacting to latest situation, annual planning meetings recap prior year and set plan for coming year

• Reductions in program 2008-2013 = increased efficiency and flexibility

• Developing Shrike Recovery/Population Management Plan:

Based on analysis of existing program data Identifies specific recovery objectives Delineates aspects of the program necessary to meet

objectives and timeline or trigger for continuation

2006 PVA had poor prognosis for subspecies But subspecies range appeared to be expanding on SCI

with vegetative recoveryPVA was based on a population estimate and apparent

survival estimates that were both biased low because limited sampling area

Low cost proactive measure was a volunteer surveyResults lead to monitoring redesignIsland-wide stratified (double) sampling design lead to…

SC Sage Sparrow, Avoiding Reactive Management

In 2013, SAGS associated with territories ~5,060 (confidence limits 3,645 and 6,475 )

More than triple previous population estimatesNext create a population management plan with recovery

goals and measurable milestone for progress

SC Sage Sparrow, Avoiding Reactive Management

Population decline detected 2001 (~387 individuals)

Candidate Conservation Species, Framework Monitoring Plan Developed 2006

Research, more intensive population monitoring, and increased management implemented 2007 onward

Population rebound 2007-2012; each year had λ >1

San Clemente Island Fox Management

Results based management (e. g., roadside mowing)Population increase Less intensive population monitoring (tested and

implemented)Risk Analysis Epidemic Response Plan, sentinel monitoring, vaccination

(rabies and CDV), and serological monitoringAdaptive Management- revising Epidemic Response Plan based on results of sentinel

monitoring

San Clemente Island Fox Proactive Management

Additional Proactive Projects

• Seabirds- Guadalupe and Scripps’s murrelets and ashy storm-petrel

• Earthworms-Assessment to determine threat and future management

• Argentine ants-Eradication

• Rodenticide effects-Investigation of cholecalciferol effects on foxes, test alternative rat control methods

• Biosecurity-Develop plan to detect and avoid new invasives

• Long-term botanical program planning effort

Summary• Reactive management can be essential, but should not

become the standard• It takes a while to move from reactive to proactive

management so start early• Ask yourself: Are you reacting to needs or making progress

toward goals according to a plan?• While proactive management requires funding, make the

argument that it saves money in the long run and supports the mission

• Well written, defensible EPRs are critical; POM should be your time to think critically and really argue for your projects

Acknowledgements: NAVFAC training & travel support, CPF and CNIC project

funding, all the SCI NR amazing contractors, & my predecesssor