Skip to main content

Survey, Surveillance, Monitoring & Recording

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Management Planning for Nature Conservation
  • 2008 Accesses

Abstract

Monitoring, surveillance and recording are all activities concerned with the collection and management of information. They are an indispensable and ­integral component of management planning: without information there can be no planning. ‘Survey’ is simply making a single observation to measure and record something. ‘Surveillance’ is repeating standardised surveys in order that change can be detected. This is quite different to, but often confused with, monitoring. Surveillance is used to detect change but does not differentiate between acceptable and unacceptable change. ‘Monitoring’ is surveillance undertaken to ensure that formulated standards are being maintained. Monitoring should be an essential and integral component of management planning: there can be no planning without monitoring and no monitoring without planning. There should be a direct relationship between the accuracy of the conditions that management can deliver and the level of accuracy that a monitoring project is designed to measure. The development of any monitoring strategy should be based on the availability of resources and on a risk assessment. ‘Recording’ is concerned with making a permanent and accessible record of significant activities (including management), events and anything else that has relevance to the site. Recording management activities must be given the highest priority: if something is worth doing it must be worth recording. Recording is an expensive activity, and it must be planned with exactly the same rigour as all other aspects of reserve management.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    An objective is, or should be, the description of something that we want to achieve. These are the outcomes of management. Wildlife outcomes are habitats, communities or populations at a favourable status.

  2. 2.

    An attribute is a characteristic of a feature that can be monitored to provide evidence about the condition of the feature.

  3. 3.

    A factor is anything that has the potential to influence or change a feature, or to affect the way in which a feature is managed. These influences may exist, or have existed, at any time in the past, present or future.

References

  • Alexander, M. (1996). A Guide to the Production of Management Plans for Nature Conservation and Protected Areas. Countryside Council for Wales, Bangor, Wales.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagles, P. F. J., McCool, S. F. and Haynes, C. D. A. (2002). Sustainable Tourism in Protected Areas: Guidelines for Planning and Management. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Eurosite (1999). Toolkit for Management Planning. Eurosite, Tilburg, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eurosite (2003). Ecological Monitoring of Protected Natural Areas – Providing Guidance and Best Practice. Eurosite, Tilburg, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrell, T. A. and Marion, J. L. (2002). The Protected Area Visitor Impact Management (PAVIM) Framework: A Simplified Process for Making Management Decisions. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 10(1). Portland Press Ltd. London, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graefe, A., Kuss, F. R., Vaske, J. J. (1990). Visitor Impact Management: The Planning Framework. National Parks and Conservation Association. Washington, DC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hockings, M., Stolton, S. and Dudley, N. (2000). A Framework for Assessing the Management of Protected Areas. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurford, C. and Schneider, M. (eds.). (2006). Monitoring Nature Conservation in Cultural Habitats. Springer, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • JNCC (1998). A Statement on Common Standards Monitoring. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, G. (1999). Guidelines for Marine Protected Areas. IUCN Gland, Switzerland.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Manning, R. E., Lime, D. W., Hof, M. and Freimund, W. A. (1995). The Visitor Experience and Resource Protection (VERP) Process. The George Wright Forum 12(3).

    Google Scholar 

  • Margoluis, R. and Salafsky, N. (1998). Measures of Success: Designing, Managing, and Monitoring Conservation and Development Projects. Island Press, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCool, S. F. (1996). A Framework for Managing National Protected Areas: Experiences from the United States. Maritime Institute of Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCool, S. F. and Cole, D. N. (1998). Proceedings – Limits of Acceptable Change and Related Planning Processes: Progress And Future Directions; 1997 Missoula, MT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-371. Ogden, UT, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • NCC (1983). A Handbook for the Preparation of Management Plans. Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • NCC (1988). Site Management Plans for Nature Conservation, A Working Guide. Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noss, R. F., O’Connell, M. A. and Murphy, D. D. (1997). The Science of Conservation Planning, Habitat Conservation Under the Endangered Species Act. Island press, Washington, DC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • PONT (2007). Grazing animals constraints report. Unpublished internal document, PONT, Brecon Wales, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratti, T. R. and Garton, E. O. (1994). Research and Experimental Design – contribution 565, University of Idaho Forestry, Wildlife and Range Experiment Station, Idaho, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, P. and McLean, I. (2003). The Future Role of JNCC in Biological Surveillance and Monitoring. JNCC, Peterborough, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stankey, G. H., McCool, S. F. and Stokes, G. L. (1984). Limits of Acceptable Change: A new framework for managing the Bob Marshall Wilderness. Western Wildlands, 10(3), 33–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, L. and Middleton, J. (2003). Guidelines for Management Planning of Protected Areas. IUCN Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mike Alexander .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Alexander, M. (2013). Survey, Surveillance, Monitoring & Recording. In: Management Planning for Nature Conservation. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5116-3_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics