U.S. Department of InteriorU.S. Geological Survey
Climate Change and Native Species Responses in Riverine Ecosystems of the Pacific Northwest
Jason Dunham USGS Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center
Two topics (active and proposed research):
Prospective analysis of bull trout
Retrospective multi-species analysis
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
Coauthors/collaborators
Prospective analysis of bull trout
John Buffington, Christopher Cuhaciyan, Dan Isaak, Gordon Grant, Charlie Luce, USFS; Christina Tague, USCB; Jim O’Connor, USGS
Retrospective multi-species analysis
Bryan Black, OSU; Sarah Shafer, USGS
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
Thermal Thermal ““riverscaperiverscape””for bull troutfor bull trout
SpawningSpawningand rearingand rearing(suitable year(suitable year--round)round)
MigratoryMigratory(seasonal use)(seasonal use)
UnsuitableUnsuitable
RefugiumRefugium
Bull trout habitat requirements
Climate change and bull trout
Bull trout sensitive to loss of cold water
Water temperature data are limitedElevation and air temperature data are not• Can these variables predict effects of
climate change?
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
Juvenile Bull Trout Lower Elevation Limit (R2 = 0.74)Y = 18693 - 191(lat) + 73.6(long)
1° lat = -191 m; 1° long = 73.6 m
Mean Annual Air Temperature (R2 = 0.89)Y = 67 – 0.86(lat) + 0.12(long) - 0.0062(ele)
1° lat = -138 m; 1° long = 88 m (Rieman et al. 2007; images courtesy Dan Isaak, USFS)
Elevation, air temperatures, bull trout
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
41 43 45 47 49Latitude
Elev
atio
n (m
)
113-114 115-116 117-118 >119
Projections based onbull trout – elevation
elevation – air (Rieman et al. 2007; images courtesy Dan
Isaak, USFS)
Currently Suitable
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
Projections based onbull trout – elevation
elevation – air(Rieman et al. 2007; images courtesy Dan Isaak,
USFS)
Currently Suitable
~ 1.6 °C Increase
-70%-37%Idaho
-60%-40%Rangewide
# Patches>5000 ha
Areal Extent
Habitat Reduction
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
Projections based onbull trout – elevation
elevation – air(Rieman et al. 2007; images courtesy Dan
Isaak, USFS)
Currently Suitable
~ 1.6 °C Increase
-70%-37%Idaho
-60%-40%Rangewide
# Patches>5000 ha
Areal Extent
Habitat Reduction
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
~ 5.0 °C Increase
-100%-94%Idaho
-99%-92%Rangewide
# Patches>5000 ha
Areal Extent
Habitat Reduction
PRISM air vs. water temperature in PNW dataset
Mean PRISM August air temp
12 14 16 18 20 22
Mea
n Au
gust
str
eam
tem
pera
ture
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
b[0]=-1.92b[1]=0.81r ²=0.23
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
Air temperatures ≠ water temperatures in the PNW
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
Water temperature vs elevation in Washington State
R2=0.13Temperature = elevation
R 2 = 0.13
Elevation (feet)0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Max
imum
sum
mer
tem
pera
ture
(C)
810121416182022242628
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
Temperature = stream + elevation + stream*elevationR 2 = 0.94
Elevation (feet)0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Max
imum
sum
mer
tem
pera
ture
(C)
810121416182022242628
Localized “stream effects” and elevation predictions
Paradoxes: bull trout and climate
• Contemporary bull trout distributions tied to elevation and air temperature gradients at broad scales
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
Paradoxes: bull trout and climate
• Contemporary bull trout distributions tied to elevation and air temperature gradients at broad scales
• Bull trout also tied to water temperatures
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
Paradoxes: bull trout and climate
• Contemporary bull trout distributions tied to elevation and air temperature gradients at broad scales
• Bull trout also tied to water temperatures• Water temperatures weakly related to
elevation or air temperature • What’s missing?
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
Paradoxes: bull trout and climate
What’s missing? –
The FutureLinks to physical process
What processes actually influence water temperatures?
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
What’s missing?
• Prediction and understanding of how streams heat
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
*Modified from Johnson and Jones CJFAS 2000
What will change?
• Elevations and long-lat won’t change
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
What will change?
• Elevations and long-lat won’t change• Air temps will increase
– But air doesn’t heat water efficiently
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
What will change?
• Elevations and long-lat won’t change• Air temps will increase
– But air doesn’t heat water• The sun (and short wave radiation) will still
be here– But riparian zones could change
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
What will change?
• Elevations and long-lat won’t change• Air temps will increase
– But air doesn’t heat water• The sun will still be here
– But riparian zones could change• Stream hydrology will change
– indirect influences of timing, amount, type of precipitation and routing of water
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
Bull trout and climate
Climate-drivenchanges in flow regimes
Downstream truncationwarming water temperatures
Persistence of bull trout????
Other constraints
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
Bull trout and climate
Climate-drivenchanges in flow regimes
Downstream truncationwarming water temperatures
Upstream truncationof low-flow network
Persistence of bull trout????
Other constraints
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
Bull trout and climate
Climate-drivenchanges in flow regimes
Downstream truncationwarming water temperatures
Upstream truncationof low-flow network
Stream bed scourCatastrophic disturbance
Persistence of bull trout????
Other constraints
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
Bottom lines for bull trout
•Temperature is critical•But the future is highly uncertain
•Other influences may be critical•Stream bed scour, disturbance
•Surprises likely from interacting factors•Invasive species•Climate impacts on other factors (e.g., wildfire)•Other changing human influences
•For more details, see AFS special session website:
www.fs.fed.us/rm/boise
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
Larger lessons: how we do science•Biologists are good at biology•Physical scientists are good at what they do•“Interdisciplinarity” complex problem ≠ simple solution
•Collaboration•Integration•Scale•Relevance
Retrospective multi-species analysis
• Bryan Black, Oregon State University• Sarah Shafer, USGS
How have species respondedto climate change in marine,terrestrial, and riverineecosystems?
Tools for reconstructing the pastGeochronology Dendrochronology-Sediment cores -Tree rings-Debris fans
Many animals live a long time-e.g., bivalves, fish
Can we apply dendro methods to learn abouthow different species and ecosystems respondto climate change?
Dendrochronology applied to animals
Bryan Black, preliminary information 2008
- opaque zone: fast growth, low protein- translucent zone: slow growth, high protein
1933: year ofbirth
1989: year ofcapture
direction of growth
Rockfish otolith increments
Bryan Black, preliminary information 2008
valid: 36 to 40 degrees latitude
Negative exponential detrending
Splitnose chronology: 48 otoliths
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1.1
1.2
1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000year
ring
wid
th in
dex
Bryan Black, preliminary information 2008
February SST
Bryan Black, preliminary information 2008
150 yrs old
Pacific Geoduck
Bryan Black, preliminary information 2008
Rockfish and geoduck chronologies
Bryan Black, preliminary information 2008
Rockfish and geoduck chronologies
Principal componentsPC1: 53% variance
Bryan Black, preliminary information 2008
-4
-2
0
2
4
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000year
stan
dard
ized
inde
x
strong growth in the north
strong growth in the southFeb and Mar MEImarine chronology PC1
Leading principal component
Bryan Black, preliminary information 2008
Geoduck and tree-rings
Bryan Black, preliminary information 2008
SST reconstruction – back to the 19th century
SST PC1 reconstruction
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000year
PC
1 va
lues
Tree rings alone: 49.9% varianceGeoduck alone: 49.5% variance
instrumental recordreconstruction
Geoduck and trees: 63.9% variance
Bryan Black, preliminary information 2008
Western Pearshell Mussel Margaritifera falcataSessile and long-lived Widely distributed
•50-100 years
Bryan Black, preliminary information 2008
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Master chronologies Margaritifera falcata
Middle Fork Willamette River (blue)Bryant Park (pink)
Stan
dard
ized
incr
emen
t
Bryan Black, preliminary information 2008
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000
Combined r = -0.68Bryant Park r = -0.57
MF Willamette r = -0.57
Stream discharge (CFS)Bryan Black, preliminary information 2008
Ring increments and local discharge
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
prW
INTE
R
prS
PR
ING
prS
UM
ME
R
prFA
LL
WIN
TER
SP
RIN
G
SU
MM
ER
FALL
corr
elat
ion
coef
ficie
nt
temperatureprecipitationPDSI
Bryan Black, preliminary information 2008
Ring increments and seasonal climate
Bryan Black, preliminary information 2008
Mussels vs. trees
Analyze patterns of spatial and temporal synchronyClimate vs. local drivers of response to change in rivers
Brett Blundon, MS, OSUBryan Black, preliminary information 2008
Ring increments in rivers across the PNW
foreststree rings
riversmussel rings
nearshoreclam rings
continental shelffish ringsfish rings
Bio-chronologies and climate change
Opening a new toolbox
• How do species in different ecosystems actually respond to climate change?
Opening a new toolbox
• How do species in different ecosystems actually respond to climate change?
• What influences appear to be the most important in driving responses?– Local, regional, seasonal?
Opening a new toolbox
• How do species in different ecosystems actually respond to climate change?
• What influences appear to be the most important in driving responses?
• Can we use biological chronologies to reconstruct environmental histories?
Opening a new toolbox
• How do species in different ecosystems actually respond to climate change?
• What influences appear to be the most important in driving responses?
• Can we use biological chronologies to reconstruct environmental histories?
• Can we use bio-chronologies to look even deeper into history???– Middens, museum collections
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
Climate Change and Native Species Responses in Riverine Ecosystems of the Pacific Northwest
Main themes•Prospective and retrospective views•Biology + physical process “interdisciplinarity”•Cross-ecosystem responses•Local and regional variability – space + time
Dunham 2008 presentation of preliminary information
Climate Change and Native Species Responses in Riverine Ecosystems of the Pacific Northwest
Main themes•Prospective and retrospective views•Biology + physical process “interdisciplinarity”•Cross-ecosystem responses•Local and regional variability – space + time
•Climate change has changed science•Δ science α science support