Project Details

This community science supported effort to collect location information for species of conservation need (and information need) listed in the Utah Wildlife Action plan, is currently the only effort in Utah dedicated to preparing distribution data for herpetofauna (reptiles and amphibians) species status assessments for ESA listing decisions in the near future.For example the Northern leopard frog (NLF) has experienced massive declines across the West and Utah's neighboring states are already using NLFs collected in Utah for their reintroductions. Utah's distribution of NLF is unknown but in California and Arizona NLFs have S1 rankings indicating that the species could be petitioned for listing under ESA.

The Columbia spotted frog (CSF) is another example of unknown species distribution in Utah. With the development and human population growth Utah is experiencing, especially along the Wasatch Front, frog populations are experiencing more habitat threats and stresses to their population viability.  Both in the case of NLF and CSF if these species populations decline and we are unaware of where crucial populations currently are that can be sustained with prior planning Utah could face species status assessments and listing petitions where we do not have enough information to or ability to showcase how we are already conservation planning for our native species and how we plan to keep them off the ESA list.

Due to the limited distribution and occurrence information for herpetofuana in the Utah Natural Heritage database there are currently 20 SGCNs in the UWAP despite having relatively low conservation priority at a national level. In the previous years of this project we have developed a standardized protocol for vetting and updating species location information and gathering useful species data through existing online resources (e.g., iNaturalist) as well as engaging and training community scientists to support filling these data gaps. These data will allow us to prioritize a smaller set of SGCNs in the Utah Wildlife Action Plan and prepare Utah to contribute data to species listing decisions.

This project has already gathered significant distribution information for herpetofauna in general across the state and now proposes to gather more 'species of conservation need' targeted data that Utah needs to prepare for species rankings and status assessments at little cost to the State relative to the conservation partner in-kind support and community science volunteer hours that have been and will be contributed.

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.

This community science supported effort to collect location information for species of conservation need (and information need) listed in the Utah Wildlife Action plan, is currently the only effort in Utah dedicated to preparing distribution data for herpetofauna (reptiles and amphibians) species status assessments for ESA listing decisions in the near future. For example the Northern leopard frog (NLF) has experienced massive declines across the West and Utah's neighboring states are already using NLFs collected in Utah for their reintroductions. Directed surveys for NLF have not been conducted in Utah since 2006 requiring a need to assess the distribution again to ensure there has not been a substantial decline throughout the states other than Utah (Colorado, Nebraska, New Mexico, and Wyoming) have a rank of S3  indicating that the western populations of NLF are vulnerable to being petitioned for listing under ESA.

The Columbia spotted frog (CSF) is another example of unknown species distribution in Utah. With the development and human population growth Utah is experiencing, especially along the Wasatch Front, frog populations are experiencing more habitat threats and stresses to their population viability.  It is important to know where NLF and CSF populations are located within the state to be able to assess and address threats that are causing their declines. Without the understanding of the status of NLF and CSF populations it can be difficult to anticipate efforts needed during conservation planning. It is the goal of Utah to prevent ESA listings and these data can help provide information needed for species status assessments during the ESA listing petition process.

In 2024 the community science data gathering effort and manuscript effort (see attachments to this proposal) with academic partner Megen Kepas, Utah Tech University Biology Professor, include the following summary statistics:

The number of SGCN herpetofauna records from iNaturalist database alone by land management type include 911 on federal lands, 141 on state lands, and 499 on other land jurisdictions. HerpMapper SGCN records by land management type include 327 on federal land, 121 on state land, and 327 on other land jurisdictions. These are all locations for species listed under the Wildlife Action plan as experiencing threats or declines that warrant more information in advance of potential future listing petitions to keep these species off the ESA list.

Prioritizing UWAP Goals through SGCN Herp species in Utah and associated habitats by collecting distribution and condition information: Implemented recent re-evaluation of SGCN species, prioritize habitat areas and species of future survey efforts and target areas of missing data based on UWAP needs (e.g. Threats assessments in UWAP re habitat related threats: springs and seeps and updates to S-ranking process with information and more species detections). 
Outline Focal Areas in Utah: Through UWAP and PARCAs meetings we can refine our focus areas for species at risk for listing decisions (e.g. CSF and NLF) 
Update Community Science Project Page to reflect a "Choose Your Own Adventure" HerpSearch map indicating areas where DWR would like to encourage the public to post images and/or call of CSF and NLF through the Herps of Utah iNat project as well as species listed as SGINs (species of greatest information need) where the biggest threats relate to unknown distribution, habitat condition, and population trends. 
Increasing the efficacy of data acquisition through the use of the iNaturalist Application Programming Interface (API) to allow continuous and specific updating of iNaturalist records to the UNHP. 
Community Science Program 
Task 1: Update Data Gathering Training Materials for SGCN species and habitats where the State is missing information needed for UWAP threats assessment and species rankings. All amphibian and reptile species observation will be added to the same iNaturalist Project Page, Herps of Utah, which will allow the State to track invasive species as well as current SGCNs and SGINs in the Utah Wildlife Action. 
Task 2: Create and Employ Volunteer Recruitment and Communication Materials.
Task 3: Host volunteer Training Event(s) in late winter (February 22nd) and early spring (March 20th, World Frog Day) in preparation for when herpetofauna will be active and when we can engage community groups
Task 4 : Maintain and update Utah HerpSearch Project Page and email lists, blog, and newsletters engaging the participants in Herp data collection and interest/education.
Example: Support data gathering efforts through cultivating a diverse network of partners and grassroots groups that engage regularly in independent and/or group data gathering events (socials, emails, diversity and inclusion event)
Task 5: Evaluate validated occurrence data and focal areas of the "Choose your Own Adventure" HerpSearch map for overlap to ensure the efficiency of the project and improve the Community Science Program where needed.
SGCN data Validation by a student researcher in the field of Herpetology 
Task 1: Ensure that the occurrence data for SGCNs are accurate by validating photo vouchers submitted to the applications HerpMapper and iNaturalist. 
Task 2: Screen SGCN species location for feasibility and denote occurrence records outside of the known species range. 
Investigation of invasive species movement and occurrences with community science data. 	
Task 1: Validate invasive species photo vouchers
Task 2: Document the range and extent of invasives
Task 3: Locate co-occurrence of invasive amphibian competitors and/or predators with SGCN amphibians
Task 4: Assess temporal and spatial dynamics between SGCN amphibians and invasive and/or predatory amphibians (bullfrogs and tiger salamanders).

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.

Relation to Management Plans
 Under the 2015 Revised Utah Wildlife Action Plan there are 9 Herpetological SGCNs. Each of the listed species is considered to have a relatively high conservation priority (state rank of 3 or lower). While under national rankings (NatureServe) 5 amphibians and 3 reptiles have relatively low conservation priorities. With data provided by the first cycle of this project, we were able to acquire additional occurrence data that contributed to the new S-rank calculation for the midget faded rattlesnake (Crotalus concolor). Following this new S-rank calculation, C. concolor will no longer be included on the State SGCN list. The records incorporated originated from the [smaller] HerpMmapper dataset. Data from iNat [a much larger data set] has yet to be incorporated into the UNHP. This demonstrates the value of continuing to use community science data to inform the wildlife action plan, and highlights the importance of integrating new records. Previously, relatively low priority National Ranks, and the relatively high priority State ranks, for UWAP SGCNs together pointed 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 analyzes resulting in 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.

---Outline specific actions taken under each objective from above section ----
Prioritizing UWAP Goals through SGCN Herp species in Utah and associated habitats by collecting distribution and condition information: Implemented recent re-evaluation of SGCN species, prioritize habitat areas and species of future survey efforts and target areas of missing data based on UWAP needs (e.g. Threats assessments in UWAP re habitat related threats: springs and seeps and updates to S-ranking process with information and more species detections). 
Outline Focal Areas in Utah: Through UWAP and PARCAs meetings we can refine our focus areas for species at risk for listing decisions (e.g. CSF and NLF) 
Update Community Science Project Page to reflect a "Choose Your Own Adventure" HerpSearch map indicating areas where DWR would like to encourage the public to post images and/or call of CSF and NLF through the Herps of Utah iNat project as well as species listed as SGINs (species of greatest information need) where the biggest threats relate to unknown distribution, habitat condition, and population trends. 
Increasing the efficacy of data acquisition through the use of the iNaturalist Application Programming Interface (API) to allow continuous and specific updating of iNaturalist records to the UNHP. 
Summarize seven plus year amphibian habitat assessment data to establish indicators for habitat suitability in advance of repatriation and habitat restoration planning. 
Community Science Program 
Task 1: Update Data Gathering Training Materials for SGCN species and habitats where the State is missing information needed for UWAP threats assessment and species rankings. All amphibian and reptile species observation will be added to the same iNaturalist Project Page, Herps of Utah, which will allow the State to track invasive species as well as current SGCNs and SGINs in the Utah Wildlife Action. 
Task 2: Create and Employ Volunteer Recruitment and Communication Materials.
Task 3: Host volunteer Training Event(s) in late winter (February 22nd) and early spring (March 20th, World Frog Day) in preparation for when herpetofauna will be active and when we can engage community groups
Task 4 : Maintain and update Utah HerpSearch Project Page and email lists, blog, and newsletters engaging the participants in Herp data collection and interest/education.
Example: Support data gathering efforts through cultivating a diverse network of partners and grassroots groups that engage regularly in independent and/or group data gathering events (socials, emails, diversity and inclusion event)
Task 5: Evaluate validated occurrence data and focal areas of the "Choose your Own Adventure" HerpSearch map for overlap to ensure the efficiency of the project and improve the Community Science Program where needed.
SGCN data Validation by a student researcher in the field of Herpetology 
Task 1: Ensure that the occurrence data for SGCNs are accurate by validating photo vouchers submitted to the applications HerpMapper and iNaturalist. 
Task 2: Screen SGCN species location for feasibility and denote occurrence records outside of the known species range. 
Investigation of invasive species movement and occurrences with community science data. 	
Task 1: Validate invasive species photo vouchers
Task 2: Document the range and extent of invasives
Task 3: Locate co-occurrence of invasive amphibian competitors and/or predators with SGCN amphibians
Task 4: Assess temporal and spatial dynamics between SGCN amphibians and invasive and/or predatory amphibians (bullfrogs and tiger salamanders).

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 Herpetology Coordinator, Alyssa A. Hoekstra
Alyssa Hoekstra will coordinate the work of Dr. Pendergast, Dr. Kepas, and Dr. Whiting. Alyssa is a Herpetologist and Conservation Biologist with 15+ years of experience. Hoekstra's MSc work included collaborating with state agencies, universities, and federal agencies on a multi-state grant to monitor a novel disease impacting snakes and studied their ecophysiology. Since graduating with her master's degree, Hoekstra has worked for state agencies in Wisconsin and Florida on habitat restoration activities, species reintroductions, species monitoring surveys, policy changes, creating and updating species conservation plans, developing survey and data management protocols, and mentoring interns and other biologists involving reptile and amphibian conservation projects. Hoekstra will commit 25% of her time to the effort described in this project. Hoekstra will continue to use iNaturalist to engage with community scientists using the "Herps of Utah" project and maintain the project page.

Utah Tech University, Assistant Professor, Megen Kepas.
Dr. Megen Kepas will supervise photo voucher validation, data analysis, and reformatting of data for integration into the Utah Natural Heritage Database.  Megen is a Herpetologist and Ecologist with ecophysiology and organism specific conservation experience. Kepas's PhD experience included work with UDWR and Sageland Collaborative on the HerpSearch project. This collaboration resulted in the development and implementation of protocols for data scraping and species validation. Kepas will commit 10% of her time to the effort described in this project, and train student research assistants to screen reptile and amphibian records from iNat for accuracy. Kepas will continue to vet data from the "Herps of Utah" iNat group and Herpmapper app and will supervise undergraduate students in Beta testing the HerpSearch map tool. 
 
Sageland Collaborative, Ecologist, Mary E. Pendergast
Dr. Mary Pendergast will be the primary point of contact for Sageland Collaborative's (SC) 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 9 years of work with Sageland 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 A.A. Hoekstra to plan and host the annual "Pickle Party" (where volunteer/community herpetologists come to the museum to help preserve hundreds of herpetofauna specimens) 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.

Future Management
 Detail future methods or techniques that may be implemented to help in accomplishing the stated objectives and to ensure the long term success/stability of the proposed project.

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 needed 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.