A Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment for Shorebird Habitat

February 17, 2011

Dorie Stolley, Rhode Island NWR ComplexDavid Brownlie, Monomoy NWRKevin Holcomb, Chincoteague NWR

Edwin B. Forsythe NWR

Monomoy NWR

Chincoteague NWR

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge

Context

“Rookie” Mgr. (01/2010) after leadership turnover

Draft CCP in progress (2010-2011)

Some Honeymoon?

WHSRN Vulnerability Assessment 2010 team approach essential for the Rookie

Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge

Monomoy NWR

Mashpee NWR

Massasoit NWR

Assabet River NWR

Oxbow NWR Great Meadows NWR

Nomans Land Island NWR

Nantucket NWR

ConnecticutRiver Watershed

Eastern Massachusetts NWR Complex

WHSRN Assessment TeamFacilitator – Dorie StolleyProj. Ldr. – Libby HerlandSupv. Biol. – Steph KochRef. Mgr – The RookieOther Consultants

WHShorebirdRN

Monomoy NWR Shorebird Renown:• 30± shorebird spp. –

• Red Knot SB Dowitcher Hudsonian Godwit• Ruddy Turnstone Whimbrel Dunlin• Sanderling BB Plover Semipalmated plover• G/L Yellowlegs Least sandpiperSemipalmated sandpiper

(NO, this fire retread still can’t ID them all correctly)

• Fall migration, concentrates > 30K• Food (fuel) & Rest stop – a rarity• Many spring migrants stop-over• Some stay and nest

• ≥10% of MA’s PIPL nesting• American oystercatcher & Willet

SAND & WAVE ENERGY @ Center• Landmass – migrating, persistence?

• SLAMM• Geise, et al (2010)

• Energy Reserves• Fuel (food) – intertidal

infauna• Rest (disturbance) –

People, Pets & Predators

Assessment Preparations -- Waves Always Win!

Ocean and Estuarine Beach

Tidal Flat

Salt & Brackish Marsh

Undev. Dry Land

Habitat Vulnerability/Value Chart

Vulnerability

Hab

itat

Valu

e

High

Very High

Medium

Very Low

Low Medium High

Low

Year 2050Monomoy NWR

U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Habitat Vulnerability Score

Habitat Value (62)

(Y-axis)

Explanation

(Tidal) Marsh 15.00 45 Coastal Storm Vulnerability 6.00BCR major marsh area decline trend (=3 pts) weighting (6X) despite local area increase expected

Beach 8.50 46 Precip + Temp Vulnerabilities (8 & 9), But, Coastal Storm Vulnerability 0.00

Dry Upland 8.50 41 Precip + Temp Vulnerabilities (8 & 9), But, Coastal Storm Vulnerability 0.00

Tidal Flat 0.00 40 BCR tidal flat area increase trend (=0 pts) weighting (6X), “trumped” highest relative importance value (8/8) weighting (4X)

Note: Results relatively insensitive to Ecosystem Goods/Services Value Scores

Monomoy Draft CCP/EIS 3 Alternatives (± 90-95% complete) 6 Main Goals w/ SMART Objectives & Strategies Monitoring Elements

Key GCC/SLR Strategies Adaptation -- resilience Mitigation – reduce carbon footprint Engagement -- partners

(Draft)Preferred Alternative – Strategies for Shorebirds & GCC/SLR

• 13 Adaptation (Resilience) Strategies • ? Mitigation Strategies • 5 Engagement Strategies

Monomoy Draft CCP/EIS

The Best is Yet to Come – Work in Progress• Internal Service Review• Public Review/Comment• Final CCP

Devil is in the details, CCP only a beginning: Step-Down Plans – More specific/detailed

• Habitat Mgt. Plan & Annual Habitat Work Plan• Wilderness Stewardship Plan• Inventory & Monitoring Plan

Monomoy Draft CCP/EIS

Conclusions:

The WHSRN Shorebird Vulnerability Assessment process and team approach:• Substantially shortened a Rookie Manager’s “learning curve”

• Allowed a more rapid and effective engaging with FWS staff & partners during the CCP Alternative formulation phase

• Positioned for Conservation Delivery addressing GCC/SLR impacts on shorebirds when Monomoy CCP process is complete

• Guidance for Step-Down plans and future Inventory & Monitoring

• One model for climate change vulnerability assessment, potentially adaptable to other FWS resources of conservation concern

Recommendations:

• Be considerate of those who follow!

• Leave successors a roadmap… route and turns where your “team” applied professional judgment to the best available science

• This WHSRN Assessment roadmap for Monomoy NWR warrants periodic revisiting

• Consider adapting the WHSRN Assessment model to other refuge resources of conservation concern

Edwin B. Forsythe National Wildlife Refuge

• Held a two workshops with partners– Site Assessment Tool– Climate Change

• Engaged partners to collect thought and information to complete the climate change module

• Used workshop to explain what the refuge is doing, find out what the partners are working on and identify potential participants for various sections of the assessment

The Site Assessment Tool (SAT)

• Review the state of conservation• Identify the critical threats at the sites and the

conservation actions in need. • Assess the effectiveness of site management

and conservation efforts. • Identify priorities for action, information gaps,

monitoring and research needs, outcomes of management and conservation actions.

Atlantic Audubon Society

Partnerships

Outcomes of the Assessment Workshops

• Engaged partners in Refuge shorebird management – Strengthened existing relationships– Created new partnerships and friendships– Outlined management strategies– Clarified misconceptions (rumors)– Promoted “transparency”– Identified research needs

Feedback from Refuges

• Looking forward to SLAMM 6 runs and more accurate elevation data(LiDAR)

• Appreciated the input of coastal geomorphologists• Need more information on the effects of climate change on

invertebrate food base of many shorebirds• Request modeling on future shorebird range shifts and what

importance their refuge will have in the flyway in the future for different species

Used the workshop format as a way to engage partners and pave the way for future collaborations.

Public Education and Engagement

• Incorporated into many of the adaptation options

• Climate change education is already finding its way into displays, brochures and programs now, and will lead to a better-educated public and better local partners

• Forsythe is designing new exhibits for visitor center to illustrate climate change research

Thank you

Dorie Stolley, Rhode Island NWR ComplexDavid Brownlie, Monomoy NWRKevin Holcomb, Chincoteague NWR