collection begins. Sampling, processing and analytical methods should be documented for all 

 measurements that comprise the indicator The logistics and costs associated with training, travel, 

 equipment and field and laboratory work should be evaluated and plans for information management and 

 quality assurance developed. 



Note: Need For a Pilot Study 



If an indicator demonstrates conceptual relevance to the environmental issue(s) of concern, tests of 

 measurement practicality and reliability will be required before recommending the indicator for use. In 

 all likelihood, existing literature will provide a basis for estimating the feasibility of implementation (Phase 

 2) and response variability (Phase 3). Nonetheless, both new and previously-developed indicators 

 should undergo some degree of performance evaluation in the context of the program for which they are 

 being proposed. 



A pilot study is recommended in a subset of the region designated for monitoring. To the extent possible, 

 pilot study sites should represent the range of elevations, biogeographic provinces, water temperatures, 

 or other features of the monitoring region that are suspected or known to affect the indicator(s) under 

 evaluation. Practical issues of data collection, such as time and equipment requirements, may be 

 evaluated at any site. However, tests of response variability require a priori knowledge of a site's 

 baseline ecological condition. 



Pilot study sites should be selected to represent a gradient of ecological condition from best attainable 

 to severely degraded. With this design, it is possible to document an indicator's behavior underthe range 

 of potential conditions that will be encountered during routine monitoring. Combining attributes of the 

 planned survey design with an experimental design may best estimate the variance components. The 

 pilot study will identify benchmarks of response for sensitive indicators so that routine monitoring sites 

 can be classified on the condition gradient. The pilot study will also identify indicators that are insensitive 

 to variations in ecological condition and therefore may not be recommended for use. 



Clearly, determining the ecological condition of potential pilot study sites should be accomplished without 

 the use of any of the indicators under evaluation. Preferably, sites should be located where intensive 

 studies have already documented ecological status. Professional judgement may be required to select 

 additional sites for more complete representation of the region or condition gradient. 



Guideline 3: Data Collection Methods 



Methods for collecting all indicator nneasurements should be described. Standard, well-documented 

 methods are preferred. Novel methods should be defended with evidence of effective performance and, if 

 applicable, with comparisons to standard methods. If multiple methods are necessary to accommodate 

 diverse circumstances at different sites, the effects on data comparability across sites must be addressed. 

 Expected sources of error should be evaluated. 



Methods should be compatible with the monitoring design of the program for which the indicator is intended. 

 Plot design and measurements should be appropriate for the spatial scale of analysis. Needs for specialized 

 equipment and expertise should be identified. 



1-2 



