Using data calibration to reconcile outputs from different survey methods in long-term or large-scale studies

Understanding the impact of management interventions on the environment over decadal and longer timeframes is urgently required. Longitudinal or large-scale studies with consistent methods are best practice, but more commonly, small datasets with differing methods are used to achieve larger coverage. Changes in methods and interpretation affect our ability to understand data trends through time or across space, so an ability to understand and adjust for such discrepancies between datasets is important for applied ecologists. Calibration or double sampling is the key to unlocking the value from disparate datasets, allowing us to account for the differences between datasets while acknowledging the uncertainties. We use a case study of livestock grazing impacts on riparian vegetation in southeastern Australia to develop a flexible and powerful approach to this problem. Using double sampling, we estimated changes in vegetation attributes over a 12-year period using a pseudo-quantitative visual method as the starting point, and the same technique plus point-intercept survey for the second round. The disparate nature of the datasets produced uncertain estimates of change over time, but accounting for this uncertainty explicitly is precisely the objective and highlights the need to look more closely at this very common problem in environmental management, as well as the potential benefits of the double sampling approach.