climate change atlas: new england and northern new york
TRANSCRIPT
CLIMATE CHANGE ATLAS NEW ENGLAND AND NORTHERN NEW YORK
Maria Janowiak New England Climate Change
Response Framework
Louis Iverson Climate Change Tree Atlas
Steve Matthews Climate Change Bird Atlas
How do we get from this? Climate change information is overwhelming!
www.forestadaptation.org/NESAF2015 To this…
Desired Conditions Natural Forest
Dynamics
Wildlife Habitat
Past Management
History
Invasives Timber Sale Revenue
Disturbance: Past + Future
Recreation
Forest Health
And more!! Climate Change
Plan & Project Requirements
Vulnerability Assessment (in prep) Synthesize findings of state/regional assessments and
scientific literature • Identify common areas of agreement regarding ecosystems
and species most likely to be at risk • Describe state-of-knowledge for anticipated changes in climate and response of forest ecosystems
Incorporate results of the Climate Change Tree Atlas and LANDIS for three sub-regions
Climate Change Impacts Several high-quality regional and state assessments exist in New England 1) Longer Growing Season 2) Shorter Winters 3) Potential for Summer Drought 4) CO2 Fertilization 5) Changes in Suitable Habitat 6) Extreme Events 7) Wildfire Risk 8) Forest Pests and Diseases 9) Invasive Plants
Future Climate Change Variability among Projections
Future Climate Change Variability among Projections
Climate Scenarios Used Two scenarios show the range of possible change
• PCM B1: Low emissions scenario + less sensitive GCM
• GFDL A1FI: High emissions + more sensitive GCM
Projections are consistent with other data sets
Think of them like bookends:
Least Projected Change
Most Projected Change
PCM Low emissions (B1)
GFDL High emissions (A1FI)
PCM B1 GFDL A1FI
Annual Average Temperature 2070 to 2099
Future Climate Change Change in 30-year average (°F)
2070-2099 vs. 1971-2000
Emission scenarios developed
and used as inputs
Models projections are
run using GCMs
GCM projections
are downscaled to a smaller
grid scale
Downscaled GCM data and
other info is used as inputs
into impact models
B1 PCM ~3 ° 1/8°
Tree Atlas
General Process
Our Assessments
A1F1 GFDL LANDIS
Future Forest Change
• Tree abundance • Bird abundance • Climate • Environment • Forest density • Species traits
Data
DISTRIB model
Species habitat prediction
Tree and Bird
Atlases
ModFacs • Biological factors • Disturbance factors • Model uncertainty
SHIFT model
Species colonization probabilities
Potential migration by 2100
Possible modified interpretation of
model results
• Management guidelines • Implications and tools
Current and future species management
Potential habitat changes at 2040, 2070,
2100
Iverson et al. 2011 Ecosystems
Modeling Potential Changes in Tree Species Habitats: Multi-stage Modeling
Trees: Forest Inventory -> Importance Value (IV) -> measure of abundance Birds: Breeding Bird Survey -> Incidence -> measure of abundance
Modeled responses
Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA)
• Eastern US extent (37 states) • 134 tree taxa • > 100,000 plots • ~ 3 million tree records
Importance value (IV) for 134 tree species
(Range: 0-100)
Breeding Bird Survey (BBS)
• Eastern US extent (37 states) • 147 bird species • ~ 1000 BBS routes
Incidences
for 147 bird species (Range of incidences: 0-1)
Rate each species model for reliability
Iverson et al. 2011 Ecosystems
Atlas ingredients (DISTRIB model)
www.nrs.fs.fed.us/atlas
Modifying Factors (ModFacs) We rate biological and disturbance characteristics for positive or negative impacts We also quantify some aspects of uncertainty Goal was to evaluate more realistic outcomes at regional and local levels
Matthews et al. 2011, For. Ecol. Manage.
Time
Climate change pressure and disturbance intensity increases thus altering habitat suitability of species
Current stand Major Resulting forest stand
Minor
Time
Modification Factors (ModFacs) help interpretation of potential futures
Biological traits (n=9) • Competitive capacity • Edaphic specificity
Disturbances (n=12) • Insects • Disease • Fire • Drought • Flood • Wind • Invasives • Browse
Some of the ModFacs:
Red Maple
? Low
High Key ModFacs
White Ash
? Low
High
Positive Traits Negative Traits
None Insect pest (EAB) Competition – light Fire - topkill
Key ModFacs
Red Maple: • Projected habitat
declines • Characteristics suggest
high adaptability Black Oak: • Projected habitat
increases • Positive ModFac profile
suggests it may be able to persist in harsh areas
White Ash: • Projected habitat
declines • Negative ModFac • Metrics suggest it will
likely face severe limits in eastern US
Matthews et al. 2011, For. Ecol. Manag.; Iverson et al. 2011 Ecosystems
12 Disturbance Factors and 9 Biological Factors considered
Modification Factors
Low Adaptability
High Adaptability
www.fs.fed.us/nrs/atlas/products/#ra
www.fs.fed.us/nrs/atlas/products/#ra
New England Analysis
“Northern Forest”
1: Southern/Coastal New England 2: Eastern Maine 3: Northern Forest
Species and Model Reliability–the reliability of the model – green=good; orange=fair; red=poor. It represents the ‘trust’ you can put in the model results (“all models are wrong; some are useful“).
Northern Forest
Species Importance – FIA IV is the importance value as reported from FIA; Current Modeled is our model to replicate FIA based on 38 environmental
variables . These are area-weighted numbers, meaning it is the sum of the average IV for each of the 20x20 km pixels in the study area.
Northern Forest
Modeled IV – Estimates of future area-weighted IV for three time periods: 2010-2039, 2040-2069, and 2070-2099 (compare to current IV, previous columns).
PCM B1 is a mild scenario GFDL A1FI is a harsh scenario
The idea is to create ‘bookends’ on what may happen to tree species habitats.
Remember: this represents modeled potential for changes in suitable habitat by 2039, 2069, 2099; not what the composition will necessarily look like by those times. Trees live a long time; migration takes a long time unassisted.
Northern Forest
Future:Current– Ratio of future estimate of habitat to current estimate of habitat (not where the species will be!), for three time periods in future.
A ratio of ~ 1 = no change; a ratio < 1 = decrease; a ratio >1 = increase in future..
Northern Forest
Change Class – our interpretation of potential habitat changes by 2100. This is based on a set of rules for the ratios . Color scheme are greens (increase), yellow
(no change), reds (decrease), purple (new habitat)
Northern Forest
Modifying Factors –additional information about the potential of the species to thrive under climate change.
Positive (or Negative) Traits – traits that scored highly in favor (or not) of the species (see chart for translation of abbreviations, you can also download this ModFac Codes file).
Northern Forest
DistFact – average score of 12 disturbance factors and the capacity of the species to withstand them, scaled -3 to +3. See Matthews et al (2011) publication
(Publications on the website) for full explanation of Modifying Factors.
Northern Forest
BioFact – average score of 9 biological factors and the capacity of the species to withstand them, scaled -3 to +3. See Matthews et al (2011) publication (Publications on the website) for full explanation of Modifying Factors.
Northern Forest
Adapt – index of biological and disturbance factors, range 1.7-8.5. Low values < 3.3 (red) – species likely to do worse than DISTRIB projects; Medium values (orange) 3.3-5.2 – species may do roughly as modeled;
High values (green) > 5.2 – species likely to do better than DISTRIB projects
Declines under Both Scenarios Balsam fir (–) Balsam poplar Black ash (–) Black spruce Mountain maple (+) Northern white-cedar Paper birch Red spruce (–) White spruce Declines under High Emissions American beech Chokecherry Pin cherry Quaking aspen Striped maple Sugar maple (+) Yellow birch American mountain-ash (–) Based on end of century models
(–) ModFacs reduce species adaptability (+) ModFacs increase species adaptability
No Change under Both Scenarios American chestnut Atlantic white-cedar (–) Bear oak/Scrub oak Bigtooth aspen Eastern hemlock (–) Eastern white pine Gray birch Pitch pine Red maple (+) White ash (–)
Increases under Both Scenarios Black oak Black willow (–) Blackgum (+) Chestnut oak (+) Eastern cottonwood Eastern redbud Eastern redcedar Flowering dogwood Northern red oak (+) Pignut hickory Pin oak (–) Scarlet oak Serviceberry Shagbark hickory Silver maple (+) Slippery elm Sweet birch (–) White oak (+) Yellow-poplar (+)
Increases under High Emissions American basswood American elm American hornbeam Bitternut hickory (+) Black cherry (–) Black locust Black walnut Boxelder (+) Bur oak (+) Eastern hophornbeam (+) Green ash Honeylocust (+) Mockernut hickory (+) Northern pin oak** (+) Ohio buckeye Red pine Sassafras Swamp white oak Sycamore
Mixed Results Tamarack (native) (–) Butternut (–) Jack pine
New Suitable Habitat – Both Hackberry** (+) Red mulberry**
New Suitable Habitat – High American holly Black hickory Blackjack oak (+) Chinkapin oak** Common persimmon (+) Loblolly pine Osage-orange (+) Pawpaw** Post oak (+) Rock elm (–) Shellbark hickory Shingle oak Shortleaf pine Southern red oak (+) Sugarberry Sweetgum Virginia pine Wild plum Winged elm
Regional climate change vulnerability assessment must evaluate more than just vegetation changes. How might climate change impact wildlife distributions?
??
Trees: Forest Inventory -> Importance Value (IV) -> measure of abundance Birds: Breeding Bird Survey -> Incidence -> measure of abundance
Modeled responses
Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA)
• Eastern US extent (37 states) • 134 tree taxa • > 100,000 plots • ~ 3 million tree records
Importance value (IV) for 134 tree species
(Range: 0-100)
Breeding Bird Survey (BBS)
• Eastern US extent (37 states) • 147 bird species • ~ 1000 BBS routes
Incidences
for 147 bird species (Range of incidences: 0-1)
Rate each species model for reliability
Iverson et al. 2011 Ecosystems
Atlas ingredients (DISTRIB model)
Climate plays a very important role in shaping species distributions
Limits resource availability: seasonal pulses of food Energetic constraints: limited by metabolic processes
What about birds and forests? A natural ecological link to the importance
of floristic composition • Robertson and Holmes one example from
HB direct link at fine scales over long time intervals about the importance of floristic composition capturing food resource etc..
• Not only represents important plant animal interactions but bird communities change over time as tree composition changed in a maturing forest
Do the models really benefit when trees are used as a predictors? (Matthews et al. 2011)
Black-throated blue warbler
Climate/elevation only Climate, elevation and trees
- 93% - 55%
(Abundance index)
Climate/elevation only – greater loss and gains
Ecologically less of a link to key habitat features with only climate
Comparison of models when tree species are not used as predictors
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
More change No change Less change Divergent
Num
ber o
f spe
cies
Projected to decline in habitat and across models is placed in the small declining category with a range of 0.75 to 0.38 for Vermont depending on scenario.
Further model shows strong association with 3 softwoods depending on position of range (hemlock, white pine, balsam fir) as well as climate determinants
Current Modeled Pcm-low GFDL-High
July temp < 20c
Blue-headed Vireo
Understanding how the models work provides insights to understanding habitat associations and how those habitats are projected to change Let’s walk through an example
Increasing habitat
July temp < 20c Balsam Fir (IV>2) & Eastern White Pine (IV>5)
Blue-headed Vireo
Increasing habitat
July temp < 20c Balsam Fir (IV>2) & Eastern White Pine (IV>5)
South – Eastern Hemlock IV > 1 & IV > 4
North – Striped Maple IV > 1 & IV > 2
Blue-headed Vireo
Increasing habitat
Balsam Fir Projected large decrease in habitat Eastern white pine Small decrease in habitat In addition to the models we also id key traits that may influence tree species.
Interplay between tree and bird responses: projecting forward
Current Modeled Pcm-low GFDL-High
Towards New England Assessment: Vermont example looking across all species and evaluating state specific summary table for birds and trees Following similar approach to other assessments and summarize 33 different variables for each species to assess variability across different scenarios as well as other metrics to help inform decisions
Vermont results: looking across all species and evaluating state specific summary table
Trees # of
species Current
% IV Extirpated 2 1 Lg. Dec. 11 21 Sm. Dec 9 41 No Change 6 28 Sm. Inc. 4 4 Lg. Inc. 20 5 New-Both 14 0 New-High 18 0 Total 84
Birds # of species
Extirpated 0 Lg. Dec. 18 Sm. Dec 25 No Change 32 Sm. Inc. 14 Lg. Inc. 21 New-Both 9 New-High 16 Total 135
Focus on birders dozen from Vermont
SppCN ModRely Low emission High emission Change class Black-throated Blue Warbler High 0.81 0.51 Sm. Dec
Black-throated Green Warbler Medium 0.76 0.39 Sm. Dec
Blue-headed Vireo Medium 0.75 0.38 Sm. Dec
Canada Warbler Medium 0.69 0.35 Lg. Dec. Eastern Wood-Pewee Low 1.3 1.6 Sm. Inc.
Veery High 0.88 0.33 Sm. Dec White-throated Sparrow High 0.75 0.36 Sm. Dec
Wood Thrush High 1.0 0.76 No Change Yellow-bellied Sapsucker High 0.77 0.3 Sm. Dec
Mourning Warbler Medium 0.57 0.27 Lg. Dec.
Nashville Warbler High 0.54 0.27 Lg. Dec.
Projected to decline in habitat and across models is placed in the small declining category with a range of 0.81 to 0.51 for Vermont depending on scenario.
Further model shows strong association with mixed woods (black spruce, yellow birch, striped maple) as well as climate determinants
Current Modeled Pcm-low GFDL-High
Projected to decline in habitat and across models is placed in the small declining category with a range of 0.68 to 0.35 for Vermont depending on scenario.
Further model shows association with balsam fir, hemlock, and summer temperatures
Current Modeled Pcm-low GFDL-High
QUESTIONS?
Slides posted at www.forestadaptation.org/NE-Atlas Atlas web site: www.nrs.fs.fed.us/atlas