Project Details

The need for this project remains the same as the previous fiscal year. However, the project planning, development strategy, and engagement of community scientists has occurred, and an additional year of funding is needed to begin implementation. Addressing data gaps is a priority for the 2015 Utah Wildlife Action Plan (UWAP), and "crucial data gaps" are those gaps in knowledge or understanding that severely impede our ability to detect, diagnose, and abate threats to species and habitats (UWAP, p163). Crucial data gaps related to the inadequate understanding of distribution or range are one of the most pressing issues for reptiles and amphibians (herpetofauna) identified as species of greatest conservation need (SGCN). The purpose of the SGCN list is to identify native wildlife species that do, or plausibly could, present the possibility of an Endangered Species Act listing (UWAP, p234).

Under the 2015 UWAP there are 8 amphibians and 12 reptile SGCNs and each of these species is considered to have a relatively high conservation priority (state rank of 3 or lower). While under national rankings (NatureServe) 7 of the amphibians and 11 of the reptiles have relatively low conservation priorities.

The relatively low priority National Ranks, and the relatively high priority State ranks, for UWAP SGCNs together point to a misalignment in the conservation priorities for herpetofauna in Utah versus the national level. Part of this misalignment is that much of Utah's SGCN herpetofauna have broad distributions across North America, but in Utah these same species occur at the fringe of this broad distribution. Additionally, many of the SGCN herps are notoriously difficult to observe, due to their cryptic nature and/or because they are only surface-active for short seasonal windows, or under fleeting weather conditions. Finally, the state is not currently using all of the available species observation data to update herpetofauna S-Ranks. There are numerous relatively new resources that can provide UDWR and UNHP with herpetofauna species observations that will help us re-calculate S-Ranks more accurately, and ultimately to define a smaller, better-prioritized set of SGCNs.

Data sources include but are not limited to online databases such as VertNet (www.vertnet.org) Arctos (https://arctos.database.museum), and Consortium of Small Vertebrate Collections (https://search.dataone. org/data), iNatralist (https://www.inaturalist.org/), academic and amateur herpetofauna Facebook and Instagram group pages.

Currently, UDWR and UNHP do not routinely use the resources above to update our Natural Heritage Database and to recalculate S-Ranks. In August of 2019 NatureServe announced that they will be creating an Observation Data Standard that includes citizen science observations from resources like iNat and more well-known social media platforms to calculate N-ranks and S-ranks. In consideration of all of this, it is an ideal time to establish partnerships that will aid UDWR and UNHP to update and revise S-ranks for Utah's herpetofauna. The UWAP offers excellent guidance for this effort, and specifically mentions the following:

"strengths and capacities vary among partners, and the fullest understanding of actual needs and priorities will come from maximum collaboration. In any scheme for filling data gaps, there is an implicit "order of operations" for many steps in the information needed to effectively conserve UWAP targets."

We will use community science to strategically locate important species observations via a variety of
 
resources available on the internet. In addition, we will prepare and present a map that guides the future efforts of amateur naturalists and community scientists so that new species observations are not redundant and are truly value added.

Sageland Collaborative (previously Wild Utah Project) has a long-standing history of engaging dedicated community scientists from diverse backgrounds and interests, by providing training opportunities where volunteers gain skills in ecological field methodologies and desktop analyses. This conservation science-focused non-profit leverages the power of community science to support state and federal wildlife and habitat management agencies in filling crucial data gaps to inform conservation planning and monitoring efforts. Sageland Collaborative will support DWR in developing standardized protocols and methodologies to fill crucial data gaps identified in Utah's Wildlife Action Plan (UWAP). These methodologies will be standardized to ensure the utility of data outputs for managers as well as the ease and clarity for training a diverse group of community scientist participants to support data-gathering efforts.

In 2022, the second phase of this project, we have continued to formalize our partnership and long-term relationship with Brigham Young University's Monte L. Bean Life Science Museum (the Bean), specifically the reptile and amphibian collection. The Bean currently curates more than 40,000 specimens of reptiles and amphibians, and this includes both whole animal specimens, tissues, and photo-vouchers. Additionally, the Bean is a partner institution with VertNet (which hosts 21,556,080 records); specimens cataloged at the Bean are easily searchable via this database collaboration. Finally, since circa 2006 the Bean has informally hosted a social gathering of professional and amateur herpetologists colloquially called "the Pickle Party".
This gathering has helped develop a network of community scientists, amateur naturalists, academics, and agency biologists who contribute valuable SGCN observations to a formal and scientifically robust
repository. To date, the Pickle Party has helped catalogue about 1150 specimens at The Bean, this averages to around 100-150 specimens per year. UDWR has been an informal participant of the Pickle Party since 2009. Beginning in 2019 UDWR will be a formal partner and participant with the Bean and the Pickle Party.
The Bean and the Pickle Party are an ideal annual forum where Sageland Collaborative, UDWR, and the Bean can strategically direct the efforts of a remarkable network of amateur and professional herpetologists.

Through the partnership with the Bean and Sageland Collaborative, UDWR has begun to acquire a robust and well-vetted data set of SGCN herpetofauna observations. Additionally, via Sageland Collaborative, UDWR will gain a well-trained group of community scientists who have direction, resources, and official encouragement about what species to look for, where to look for them, and how to properly document observations of those species. These trained community scientists will help contribute new and value-added observations into the foreseeable future. Most importantly, this effort will help UDWR achieve the UWAP objective of updating S-Ranks every 3-5 years, and achieve the shortest, most-accurate list of herpetofauna SGCNs possible.

Provide evidence about the nature of the problem and the need to address it. Identify the significance of the problem using a variety of data sources. For example, if a habitat restoration project is being proposed to benefit greater sage-grouse, describe the existing plant community characteristics that limit habitat value for greater sage-grouse and identify the changes needed for habitat improvement.

Goal -- The goal of this project is to acquire a robust and well-vetted data set of SGCN herpetofauna observations. Additionally, through a partnership with Sageland Collaborative (Sageland Collaborative and Brigham Young University's Monte L. Bean Life Science Museum (the Bean), UDWR will engage and validate the efforts of a well-trained group of community scientist who have direction, resources, and official confirmation and encouragement from state biologists about what species to look for, where to look for them, and how to properly document observations of those species from new online resources. These trained community scientists will help contribute to new and value-added observations into the foreseeable future.
Objective 1 -- Implementation of a database of currently available herp observation and museum records Task 1 -- Continue to update and harvest existing UNHP data: please see a description of each task in the methods section.
Task 2 --Continue storing incoming data and avoid data silos.
Objective 2 -- Continue execution of data digitization and data discovery (online databases and social media) protocols and community science programming
Task 1 -- Implement internal data digitization protocol. Task 2 -- Implement data mining/data discovery protocol.
Objective 3 -- Implementation of and online access to community science program materials, community scientist recruitment, and execution of virtual community science training events with in-person events when possible.
Task 1 -- Implement community science training protocols, materials, and online resources. Task 2 -- Continue to Recruit, engage, and update community scientists lists and communications.
Task 3 -- Plan and host virtual (and in-person when possible) community science engagement events. Objective 4 --Implement recent re-evaluation of SGCN species, prioritize habitat areas and species for future survey efforts, and target areas of missing data based on UWAP needs
Task 1 -- Outline remaining data gaps for each herpetofauna SGCN and develop map visualizing gaps on the landscape based on updated data.

Provide an overall goal for the project and then provide clear, specific and measurable objectives (outcomes) to be accomplished by the proposed actions. If possible, tie to one or more of the public benefits UWRI is providing.

LOCATION: Justify the proposed location of this project over other areas, include publicly scrutinized planning/recovery documents that list this area as a priority, remote sensing modeling that show this area is a good candidate for restoration, wildlife migration information and other data that help justify this project's location.

TIMING: Justify why this project should be implemented at this time. For example, Is the project area at risk of crossing an ecological or other threshold wherein future restoration would become more difficult, cost prohibitive, or even impossible.

Under the 2015 Utah Wildlife Action Plan there are 20 herpetofauna SGCNs and each of these species is considered to have a relatively high conservation priority (state rank of 3 or lower). While under national rankings (NatureServe) 7 of the amphibians and 11 of the reptiles have relatively low conservation priorities. The relatively low priority National Ranks, and the relatively high priority State ranks, for UWAP SGCNs together point to a misalignment in the conservation priorities for herpetofauna in Utah versus the national level. Part of this misalignment is that much of Utah's SGCN herpetofauna have broad distributions across North America, but in Utah these same species occur at the fringe of this broad distribution.
Additionally, many of the SGCN herps are notoriously difficult to observe, due to their cryptic nature and/or because they are only surface-active for short seasonal windows, or under fleeting weather conditions.
Finally, the state is not currently using all the available species observation data to update herpetofauna S- Ranks. There are numerous relatively new resources that can provide UDWR and UNHP with herpetofauna species observations that will help us re-calculate S-Ranks more accurately, and ultimately to define a smaller, better-prioritized set of SGCNs. This proposal identifies strategic partners and objectives that will address data gaps associated with the threats analyses resulting SGCN designation in the UWAP and help alleviate the following issues that are directly related to data gaps:

>obscuring the true abundance and/or distribution of SGCNs 
>obscuring the true location and/or condition of key habitats 
>obscuring the true scope and/or severity (thus impact) of threats
>obscuring the actual need for, and/or the effectiveness of, conservation actions

List management plans where this project will address an objective or strategy in the plan. Describe how the project area overlaps the objective or strategy in the plan and the relevance of the project to the successful implementation of those plans. It is best to provide this information in a list format with the description immediately following the plan objective or strategy.

If applicable, detail how the proposed project will significantly reduce the risk of fuel loading and/or continuity of hazardous fuels including the use of fire-wise species in re-seeding operations. Describe the value of any features being protected by reducing the risk of fire. Values may include; communities at risk, permanent infrastructure, municipal watersheds, campgrounds, critical wildlife habitat, etc. Include the size of the area where fuels are being reduced and the distance from the feature(s) at risk.

Describe how the project has the potential to improve water quality and/or increase water quantity, both over the short and long term. Address run-off, erosion, soil infiltration, and flooding, if applicable.

Description of efforts, both completed and planned, to bring the proposed action into compliance with any and all cultural resource, NEPA, ESA, etc. requirements. If compliance is not required enter "not applicable" and explain why not it is not required.

Objective 1 -- Implementation of a database of currently available herp observation and museum records Task 1 -- Continue to incorporate existing occurrence data into the UNHP database: A computer scientist or technician will write a program to harvest data and deposit it in a combined database. Additionally, the programming for searching, sorting, and visualizing data will be developed to allow for visualization of distribution by species, by observation type over time. This program will be made available to the project partners and eventually to the wider public at spatial scales that do not reveal site specific or sensitive species locations.
Additionally, a template for the programming for searching, sorting, and visualizing data has been developed for one example species (Northern leopard frog) to allow for visualization of distribution by species, by observation type over time. This program will be made available to the project partners and eventually to the wider public at spatial scales that do not reveal site specific or sensitive species locations. D.E. Dittmer has been coordinating the data vetting and QA/QC efforts across Sageland Collaborative, USU, NHMU, and BYU and updating UDWR's UNHP staff at weekly meetings. In 2021 and 2022 the UNHP staff and D.E. Dittmer has begun using the project management platform Trello to document their progress across this effort. This coordination will continue with the support of Mary Pendergast, Sageland Collaborative and Liz Moore, UNHP and support staff into 2022 and 2023.

Task 2 --Continue store incoming data and avoid data silos: The 2020 and 2021 Pandemic prevented us from responsibly using funds to host a data digitization training workshop to be given by VertNet. Instead we repurposed funds to support a University of Utah Graduate student of the Womack Lab, Megan Kepas. Kepas's work is helping develop standardized protocols for quality control and assurance of data from HerpMapper. We plan to continue to coordinate the Womack Lab to maintain data digitization support.

Objective 2 -- Continue execution of data digitization and data discovery (online databases and social media) protocols and community science programming
Task 1 -- Implement internal data digitization protocol: The workflow developed in 2021 will continue to be implemented where UDWRs historical records and reports are digitized and added to a searchable database (modification of existing platforms like BYU, NHMU, VertNet) that also ensures new herpetofauna observation can be contributed to the database in a streamlined fashion for the partner data stewards. Relevant historical reports and datasets can be documented with voucher specimens (both fluid preserved and/or photo vouchers) using Arctos as the digital data aggregation tool.

Task 2 -- Implement data mining/data discovery protocol: the protocol developed in 2021 with UDWR, Sageland Collaborative, and BYU is being implemented for mining data from existing online data sources (including but not limited to VertNet, Arctos, and Consortium of Small Vertebrate Collections, iNatralist, Herpmapper, and academic and amateur herpetofauna Facebook and Instagram group pages. These protocols will be developed with the intention of translating the data mining methods into a community science training program. Additional work is being done to digitize and enter old hard copy specimen data through BYU's Life Sciences Museum.

Objective 3 -- Implementation and online access to community science program materials, community scientist recruitment, and execution of virtual community science training events with in-person events when possible.
Task 1 -- Implement community science training protocols, materials, and online resources: Protocols and presentation materials are being formalized among partners in advance of virtual (and in- person when possible) community science trainings, online resources for community scientists to reference will be made available.
Task 2 -- Continue to Recruit, engage, and update community scientist lists and communications: Recruitment of community scientists will continue to take place through various channels including but not limited to: current Sageland Collaborative community science participant listserv, annual BYU pickle party participants (expert and amateur herpetologists), local academic institutions, and social media posts in relevant groups (for example Utah Frogs and Toads, Utah FrogWatch). Sageland Collaborative continues to coordinate formal communications via community scientist email invitations, RSVPs, and level-participation survey tracking using sophisticated relation databases (Little Green Light and MailChimp).
Task 3 -- Plan and host virtual (and in-person when possible) community science engagement events: A recruitment event will continue to be implemented in coordination with the annual herpetological specimen pickling party (aka Pickle Party). Community scientists are given a brief presentation from the project partners and receive some preliminary information regarding the data mining support they can provide. Participants at virtual (and in-person when possible) community science events will be asked to complete a survey regarding their level of interest/engagement preferences for data mining existing online database and social media platforms when it suits their personal schedules as well as interest in future field efforts. Additional new herpetofauna community science training events will be developed and implemented for data mining participation using social media and public databases like iNaturalist.
Objective 4 -- Implement recent re-evaluation of SGCN species, prioritize habitat areas and species for future survey efforts, and target areas of missing data.
Task 1 -- Outline remaining data gaps for each herpetofauna SGCN and develop map visualizing gaps on the landscape based on updated data
Data gaps regarding inadequate understanding of distribution and range or unknown population or occurrence information (current SGCN Threats outlined in the UWAP) have been identified. This will allow the partners to list any outlying records that can be further investigated by checking museum records and verifying observations. Additionally, a visual representation of data gaps on the landscape has been developed for a single species (Northern leopard frog as a pilot species). By mapping the current herpetofauna SGCN species occurrence information will be replicated for other SGCNs in advance of the 2022 and 2023 formal community science training events.

Describe the actions, activities, tasks to be implemented as part of the proposed project; how these activities will be carried out, equipment to be used, when, and by whom.

Describe plans to monitor for project success and achievement of stated objectives. Include details on type of monitoring (vegetation, wildlife, etc.), schedule, assignments and how the results of these monitoring efforts will be reported and/or uploaded to this project page. If needed, upload detailed plans in the "attachments" section.

Utah Division of Natural Resources, Native Aquatics Coordinator, Drew E. Dittmer
Dr. Drew Dittmer will coordinate the work of Dr Pendergast and Dr. Whiting. Drew is a Herpetologist and Wildlife Biologist with 15+ years of experience. Dr. Dittmer's MSc research involved partnering with and using the resources of several different natural history museums/collections, and through this process he learned the immeasurable value of these institutions. Since being hired by UDWR Dr. Dittmer has increased the collaboration with BYU to achieve both better data for management of Utah's Reptiles and Amphibians, but also to improve UDWR's relationship with its under-appreciated community of Reptile and Amphibian enthusiasts. Dr. Dittmer will commit 25% of his time to the effort described in this project. He will oversee the agreement with Dr. Pendergast of Sageland Collaborative. Also, in 2019 Dr. Dittmer assumed the role of maintaining and managing the contact list for the "Pickle Party" at BYU. In late 2021 Dr. Dittmer will coordinate the planning of and invitations to the Pickle Party with Dr. Whiting (BYU). Dr. Dittmer will also continue and increase his effort to use iNaturalist to engage with Utah's amateur naturalist community.

Sageland Collaborative (, Ecologist, Mary E. Pendergast
Dr. Mary Pendergast will be the primary point of contact for Sageland Collaborative's role in this project. Mary is an ecologist with more than 15 years of experience working in the Intermountain West with non-profit, state and federal agencies, and academic partners. In the last 6 years of work with Sageland Collaborative ( she has directed and executed 3 or more community science projects on an annual basis. Each of these efforts have assisted in filling habitat and wildlife data gaps to support state and federal agencies tasked with conservation planning and decision-making processes.

Brigham Young University's Monte L. Bean Life Science Museum (the Bean), Curator of	Herpetology, Alison Whiting
Dr. Alison Whiting is the curator of the reptile and amphibian collection at BYU. Dr. Whiting's primary role will be to continue to coordinate with D.E. Dittmer to plan and host the annual "Pickle Party" that was detailed in our response to question 5. Additionally, BYU will help curate and store the data that are generated via the pickle party. The data curation and storage will require no additional costs or time.
Planning the Pickle Party will require two 8 hour work days plus 8 hours for the day of the actual event.

List any and all partners (agencies, organizations, NGO's, private landowners) that support the proposal and/or have been contacted and included in the planning and design of the proposed project. Describe efforts to gather input and include these agencies, landowners, permitees, sportsman groups, researchers, etc. that may be interested/affected by the proposed project. Partners do not have to provide funding or in-kind services to a project to be listed.

The effort above will implement the protocols and workflows established in 2020 and 2021 that will improve UDWR's ability to regularly update s-ranks and achieve UWAP implementation. Additionally, the protocols and workflows will improve our collaboration with community scientists. An outcome of this effort will be the implementation of a formal training event in coordination with the annual herpetological specimen pickling party (aka Pickle Party). Community scientists will be given a training presentation from the project
partners and receive training materials, information, and a practice data mining case study/scenario/simulation opportunity. Participants in the community science training will be empowered to glean data from existing online database and social media platforms when it suits their personal schedules. A follow-up 'Thank You' event will be scheduled where the partners will have the opportunity to get feedback from community scientists in order to hone specific data mining strategies within the scope of the project. Finally, this effort will be a highly proactive approach to preventing ESA listing for Utah's reptiles and amphibians. Through the engagement of Natural History Collections and Community Scientists we will fill data gaps and demonstrate that Utah's list of reptile and amphibian species of greatest conservation need is quite short and can be adequately managed with available resources.

We recommend continuing to advance the non-profit and agency coordination required to utilize community scientists in work relating to herpetofauna SGCN species in the Utah Wildlife Action Plan. Community science programing has the potential to assist UDWR in efforts including habitat improvement work directed by the UDWR, continual monitoring on known populations. 
A meeting with native species biologists across regions to determine priority data collection for the next season, will ensure the partners and community scientists are gathering data that will be used by the DWR biologists and for SGCN prioritization and UWAP planning. 
We recommend and plan to support instituting a common data structure across regions and strategy for logging annual herpetofauna field data gathered on physical forms into a centralized statewide database for ease of inclusion into planning processes and Utah Natural Heritage Program.
The protocols and workflows will improve our collaboration with community scientists. A recommended outcome of this effort will be the implementation of continued engagement of Natural History Collections and Community Scientists where UDWR can fill data gaps with our partners and demonstrating that Utah's list of reptile and amphibian species of greatest conservation need is quite short and can be adequately managed with available resources.

We hope to build on this effort in 2022 and 2033 by potentially expanding our partnership with BYU to the University of Utah and the Natural History Museum of Utah as well. This will build the states capacity to access updated SGCN distribution and habitat prioritization methods as need in future efforts in a more streamlined and automated fashion without increased burden internally. Additionally, each year the community science data-gathering efforts and training events take place the more engagement we expect to garner and the better our understanding of how to winnow-down and reprioritize SGNs. We expect future tasks and costs to evolve but be similar to this year's proposal.

Detail future methods or techniques (including administrative actions) that will be implemented to help in accomplishing the stated objectives and to insure the long term success/stability of the proposed project. This may include: post-treatment grazing rest and/or management plans/changes, wildlife herd/species management plan changes, ranch plans, conservation easements or other permanent protection plans, resource management plans, forest plans, etc.

Potential for the proposed action to improve quality or quantity of sustainable uses such as grazing, timber harvest, biomass utilization, recreation, etc. Grazing improvements may include actions to improve forage availability and/or distribution of livestock.