Table 3.

Criteria for evaluating potential indicators, datasets and methods to quantify landscape-level patterns of ecological resources to inform agency management decisions

Criteria	Description
Landscape relevance	1. Indicator quantifies the amount or spatial pattern of an ecological resource.
Policy relevance	2. Indicators can be used to assess compliance with foundational laws and policies relevant to agency management.
Spatial relevance	3. Indicator is relevant and can be quantified using available datasets, across lands managed by the agency and its partners.
Interpretability and usability	4. Indicator is responsive to disturbances or management actions on time scales relevant to major management decisions (e.g., 5–15 years).
	5. Indicators can be used by managers to identify goals and set quantitative objectives in land use plans and other decision documents.
	6. Quantitative reference or desired conditions for the indicator are feasible to identify.
Scientific foundation	7. Indicator is well documented in the peer-reviewed scientific literature as useful for landscape-level assessment, inventory, and monitoring.
Compatibility	8. Indicator, analysis methods, and source datasets are consistent with, compatible with, or informed by those currently used by the agency and its management partners.
Response variability	9. Environmental factors controlling the natural temporal and spatial variability of the indicator are well understood.
Data quality and feasibility of implementation	10. Indicators can be quantified using widely accepted and used datasets with complete coverage across the western US (including Alaska) that are of consistent quality and are regularly updated.
	11. Indicators can be quantified using well-accepted and documented analysis methods in a minimal number of steps.
	12. Indicator results are likely to be of sufficient quality (i.e., within acceptable error/uncertainty tolerances) to be scientifically credible and useful for management.
	13. Indicators can be quantified using existing datasets with acceptable accuracy and precision.
	14. Time and cost needed to quantify the indicator across spatial extents relevant to agency planning and management actions are reasonable.