USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · ofr20111013

Monitoring plan for vegetation responses to elk management in Rocky Mountain National Park

Abstract

Rocky Mountain National Park (RMNP) in north-central Colorado supports numerous species of wildlife, including several large ungulate species among which Rocky Mountain elk (Cervus elaphus) are the most abundant. Elk are native to RMNP but were extirpated from the area by the late 1800s. They were reintroduced to the area in 1913-1914, and the elk herd grew to the point that it was actively managed from 1944 until 1968. In 1969, the active control of elk was discontinued and since then the herd has increased to a high point ranging from 2,800 to 3,500 between 1997 and 2001. In recent years, there has been growing concern over the condition of vegetation in the park and conflicts between elk and humans, both inside and outside the park. In response to these concerns, RMNP implemented an Elk and Vegetation Management Plan (EVMP) in 2009 to guide management actions in the park over a 20-year time period with the goal of reducing the impacts of elk on vegetation and restoring the natural range of variability in the elk population and affected plant and animal communities. The EVMP outlines the desired future condition for three vegetation communities where the majority of elk herbivory impacts are being observed: aspen, montane riparian willow, and upland herbaceous communities. The EVMP incorporates the principle of adaptive management whereby the effectiveness of management actions is assessed and adjusted as needed to successfully achieve objectives. Determination of whether vegetation objectives are being achieved requires monitoring and evaluation of target vegetation communities. The current report describes the design and implementation of a vegetation-monitoring program to help RMNP managers assess the effectiveness of their management actions and determine when and where to alter actions to achieve the EVMP's vegetation objectives. This monitoring plan details the process of selecting variables to be monitored, overall sampling design and structure, site selection, data collection methods, and statistical analyses to be used to conduct this monitoring program in conjunction with the EVMP. We report the baseline conditions observed at the time of the establishment of monitoring sites. We include detailed field protocols for site establishment and data collection, as well as timetables for sampling, so that RMNP staff will be able to continue monitoring the sites established during this implementation stage, and continue to add new sites when necessary, as the execution of the EVMP proceeds over the next 20 years.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 40.15° to 40.55° latitude; -105.91° to -105.49° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Linda Zeigenfuss, Therese L. Johnson, Zachary Wiebe. 2011. Monitoring plan for vegetation responses to elk management in Rocky Mountain National Park. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20111013

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona