Many monitoring and research efforts within the State and Great Lakes region already assess the status and condition of Michigan's ecosystems, natural communities and wildlife populations. Whenever possible, these efforts should be used to address the needs identified in this action plan. For example, the DNR, often in partnership with other agencies and organizations, already:
- conducts surveys, research and monitoring on the status and distribution of threatened, endangered and otherwise imperiled species;
- assesses the status and trends of aquatic communities in Great Lakes, inland lakes, and rivers;
- assesses land habitat coverage at multiple scales;
- assesses changes in forest health; and
- conducts aquatic and terrestrial GAP assessments.
A set of recommended environmental indicators for Michigan, the majority of which are already monitored, was developed as part of a recent statewide review (Premo et al. 2001; Appendix I). The DNR is currently developing monitoring guidelines at a statewide level for Forest Certification. Regionally, interdivisional Eco-Teams are identifying comprehensive lists of ecological indicators (see Appendix J for draft Eastern Upper Peninsula ecological indicators). In addition, statewide indicators and metrics for rivers and lakes are currently being developed by the DNR Fisheries Division.
Many conservation partners also collect valuable information on the status and trends of natural resources within the State. These partners include academic institutions, other public agencies, NGOs and private entities. For example, the MDEQ collects information on water quality and aquatic macroinvertebrate community composition in streams across the State. The USGS collects data on stream flows, water quality and groundwater. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration collects information on physical, ecological and biological conditions in the Great Lakes, including the spread of aquatic invasive species. Other long-term monitoring data are available for breeding bird distributions and abundance, contaminant levels in fish and Bald Eagles, and wetland community conditions.
One of the most important factors in implementing a useful and cost-effective monitoring program is to ensure that monitoring efforts are coordinated. Without coordination, efforts may be duplicated, data may not be comparable, and priority needs may remain unaddressed. The monitoring efforts recommended by the WAP integrate and reflect, to the extent possible, the research, monitoring and programs currently ongoing throughout the state and Great Lakes region.