The success of this framework depends upon a partnership between INHS professional and EcoWatch citizen scientists. Protocols for these sister organizations are complementary. Professionals conduct detailed surveys at a relatively few randomly selected sites in each ecosystem (Table 1). This permits inference of the condition of the ecosystems across the whole state. Volunteers conduct a subset of the professionals' procedures, but with less taxonomic resolution at random and nonrandom locations. These random locations help to put the results of the nonrandom sites into a statewide and regional context.
Random Locations: Protocols determined structurally and functionally representative locations for forests, wetlands, grasslands, and streams. An on-site assessment of the suitability of each location ensured that sites met basic criteria. For example, forests grazed so heavily as to be devoid of shrub and ground layers were unacceptable, and the search continued for an acceptable location. Most professional monitoring took place on privately owned land, which necessitated contact with landowners and negotiation for access to their property. It has been a great way to meet the citizens of the state and tell them of the goals of the program. Figure 1 represents all the townships planned for monitoring by professionals, while RiverWatch and ForestWatch volunteer sites visited through 1999 are in Figure 2.
Choice of What to Measure: While it was difficult to know exactly what information might be important to gather from these four ecosystems, CTAP professionals knew they could not measure everything. Careful deliberation resulted in the choice of several plant and animal assemblages, chemical and physical parameters, and habitat features that could yield ecological indicators capable of assessing site conditions (Table 2).
The choice of assemblages reflected the strengths of professionals at the INHS and the guidance of available scientific literature. More than one assemblage per habitat is necessary because environmental challenges are varied and not all assemblages respond the same to them. CTAP used several ecological indicators, abstractions of information derived from the contents of samples, to assess condition. A multiple indicator approach generally provides a more accurate assessment of conditions than does a single measure.
CTAP professionals have been sampling since 1997, having collected baseline data in four years of a five-year cycle. In 2002, professionals resample these locations. This report contains preliminary analyses of up to three years of professional data, five years of RiverWatch, and two years of ForestWatch.
Please report any problems with or suggestions about this page to:
inhspubs@mail.inhs.uiuc.edu