To measure progress, success and failure of conservation actions, managers must have understanding of a variety of biological factors, such as baseline status and changes through time, and a concept of how natural systems function. Monitoring and research are critical assessment tools for obtaining this knowledge. For the purposes of this action plan, research and surveys refer to studies designed to test specific hypotheses regarding the status or cause(s) of particular observed ecological phenomena (Elzinga et al. 2001), and monitoring is defined as the collection and analysis of repeated observations or measurements of indicators to examine trends, evaluate changes in condition, or assess progress of conservation actions (Elzinga et al. 2001). Well-designed monitoring often functions as research when hypotheses are tested, and long-term research and survey projects may double as monitoring; both components, however, are requisites for effective conservation.

When done well, monitoring can improve a conservation program's success and value over time, by helping increase accuracy and efficiency. An effective monitoring program can help (from Noon 2003):

• determine whether resources are affected by a stressor;
  
  
• evaluate and contrast conservation actions;
  
  
• develop hypotheses regarding changes in the status of indicators;
  
  
• determine when and how management strategies should be altered; and
  
  
• warn of environmental decline.

Unfortunately, monitoring and research efforts are often inadequately designed or implemented to evaluate the effectiveness of conservation programs (Salafsky and Margoluis 1999, Parrish et al. 2003). Furthermore, research and monitoring are often poorly coordinated among agencies, organizations and academic institutions.

The overall approach of this action plan is to define threats and landscape features important to Michigan's wildlife, identify and quantify the many complex relationships between landscape features and SGCN, and recommend conservation actions that will abate threats to landscape features and SGCN. By extension, this action plan will also assist in conserving all wildlife species (by definition, both aquatic and terrestrial) in Michigan. Within this approach, the following activities must be completed at multiple scales.

• Identify and conduct specific research and surveys that will address gaps in knowledge related to threats, landscape features and species, and the relationships between them
  
  
• Assess the overall success of the program
  
  
• Monitor threats
  
  
• Monitor the spatial extent and condition of landscape features
  
  
• Monitor the status of rare, declining and indicator species
  
  
• Assess responses to specific conservation actions and use results to re-evaluate current conservation actions and recommend new ones (i.e., adaptive management)

Many questions must be considered prior to embarking upon a new monitoring or research project, regardless of whether the intent of the project is to address program effectiveness or ask questions about wildlife and its habitats. How will the data be used? What is the desired outcome? What is the desired accuracy? What level of accuracy would be acceptable? What scale must be considered? What level of funding is available? There are direct relationships between scale, accuracy and cost. A project that focuses on a small area will cost less than one that collects similar data at an ecoregion or statewide scale. A study based on qualitative (categorical) data will cost less than a more intensive one that collects quantitative data, but the quantitative study will produce results with greater power and accuracy. An effective monitoring or research project defines parameters such as scale, accuracy, cost and desired outcomes and incorporates them into the overall project design.