D. Todd [email protected]
Thomas W. [email protected]
NCER 21 April 2016
Replace this box with key image to introduce talk’s scope, importance, or background
How Much Restoration & Where?Using structured decision making to turn landscape priorities into efficient adaptation strategies in the Ozarks
Steering Committee
State Wildlife Agencies– AL DCNR, AGFC, FFWCC,
KDFWR, LDWF, MDWFP, MDC, ODWC, TWRA, TPWD
Federal Agencies– NOAA, NPS, USACE, USFWS,
USFS, USGSNGOs
– DU, NBCI, TNC (ABC, TCF)Universities
– MS State, (Auburn)
The GCPO aims to define, design & deliver landscapes capable of sustaining desired natural and cultural resources
Science
Science
Delivery
Elements of the Problem
Large Region– Restoration on private lands
Complexity– Cumulative impacts/responses– Conflicting objectives
Uncertainty– Present & Future changes
Ambiguity– Sustainable, landscapes, etc.
Discontinuity– Data doesn’t match objectives
Solutions to the Problem
Clear Objectives– What & How much
Transparent Assumptions– Species-habitat relationships– Current conditions– Expected changes
Strategic Framework– Learn by doing
Structured Decision Making & Scenario Modeling
What is Structured Decision Making?
“A formalization of common sense for decision problems which are too
complex for informal use of common sense.”
-Ralph Keeney, 1982
PrOACT
Modeling Toolkit
Problem
Uncertainty:Climate Change?
Land use Change?Funding?
Trigger
Strategies & Scenarios
Objectives
Alternatives
Consequences
Tradeoffs & Optimization
Decide & Take Action
SDM Analysis Toolkit
Multiple Species
Moving towards Proactive ConservationFor complex decisions with substantial uncertainty, scenario modeling provides a way to evaluate alternative sets of actions
Portfolio 1 Portfolio 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Portfolio n
Species 1 7 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Species 2 1 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Species n 2 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Time 11 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Cost 3 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
ALTERNATIVES
OBJ
ECTI
VES
Moving towards Proactive ConservationStrategy Framework for dynamic decision making (OZHI pilot project)• DFCs & CHJV Habitat Objectives for forest habitat systems
Moving towards Proactive ConservationStrategy Framework for dynamic decision making (OZHI pilot project)• DFCs & CHJV Habitat Objectives for forest habitat systems• Landscape Prioritization
Ozark Highlands CCS pilot project used a Rule Set
Rule 6: Is the catchment a high priority?
Repeat for 9 Forested Habitat Types & Inform with CHJV Habitat Objectives
Moving towards Proactive ConservationStrategy Framework for dynamic decision making (OZHI pilot project)• DFCs & CHJV Habitat Objectives for forest habitat systems• Landscape Prioritization• Species Models & Future Projections
Landscape-based Regional Population Models
1. Regional growth depends on processes occurring across all scales!• 900 m2 >100,000’s km2
2. Planner’s Paradox• Translating regional goals into
local actions requires understanding the effects of local actions on regional growth
Productivity
Dispersal• Cell-level movements• Habitat Dependent• Distance Dependent
Carrying Capacity and Abundance
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
Abu
ndan
ce
-0.03 %
-0.5 %
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
Abun
danc
eBBS
BBS
BBS
1.5%
01234567
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Abu
ndan
ce (M
Illio
ns)
Year
Conservation ScenariosHabitat Restoration
Random
Protected Areas
NPS/Todd Edgar
North Central Region Forest Management Guide
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100Year
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
PR
AW A
bund
ance
Year
Conservation Needs to be Strategic
Habitat Restoration AfforestationProtected
Random
Strategic
Random
Moving towards Proactive ConservationStrategy Framework for dynamic decision making (OZHI pilot project)• DFCs & CHJV Habitat Objectives for forest habitat systems• Landscape Prioritization• Species Models & Future Projections
Process-based Approaches
• We have projections of climate • We know how forests grow • Species habitat• Factors that affect reproduction and survival• Movements and dispersal
Climate Model Simulated Landscapes Population Growth
Landscapes & Forest Processes
Ecosystem Model•Location•Tree vital rates•Climate•Soil characteristics
Landscape Model•Tree establishment, growth •Seed dispersal•Vegetative reproduction•Longevity•Shade tolerance•Fire tolerance•Disturbance regime•Management regime
Climate Model•Temperature•Precipitation•Solar radiation
Landscapes & Forests under climate change
Sugar maple
White oak
ExtinctionColonizationPersistence
0102030405060708090
100
Short term Midterm Longterm
% V
ARIA
TIO
N
Succession HarvestClimate Climate*Harvest
0200,000400,000600,000800,000
1,000,0001,200,0001,400,0001,600,0001,800,0002,000,000
2010 2030 2050 2070 2090 2110Year
Abu
ndan
ce (f
emal
es)
Distribution
Population Size
Juan Zamora
Climate change impacts on Wood Thrush
CGCM.T47 (Moderate)
Current
GFDL.A1FI (Extreme)
Climate Scenario
Distribution
Population Size
Climate change impacts on Prairie Warblers
Moving towards Proactive ConservationStrategy Framework for dynamic decision making (OZHI pilot project)• DFCs & CHJV Habitat Objectives for forest habitat systems• Landscape Prioritization• Species Models & Future Projections• Adaptation Strategies evaluated in terms of sustainable wildlife populations
2010 2030 2050 2070 2090Year
Protected and Private Areas
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
3,500,000
4,000,000
4,500,000
2010 2030 2050 2070 2090
Acres
Year
Protected Areas Only
Comprehensive Conservation StrategyCHJV Acreage Targets (≈3 million ac)
2020 2040 2060
2080 2100
Managed lands - Public
Developed lands
Likely Developed lands
Managed lands - Private
Comprehensive Conservation Strategy
Protected Only Private and ProtectedManaged lands - Public
Developed lands
Likely Developed lands
Managed lands - Private
Managed lands in 2100
Prairie Warbler without CCS
CGCM3.T47 (Moderate)
Current
GFDL.A1FI (Extreme)
Climate Scenario
Prairie Warbler with CCSunder Extreme Climate Change
Private and Protected-Full
Base
Private and Protected-Half
Conservation Scenario
Protected - Full
Protected - Half
Wood Thrush without CCS
CGCM3.T47 (Moderate)
Current
GFDL.A1FI (Extreme)
Climate Scenario
Wood Thrush with CCSunder Extreme Climate Change
Private and Protected-Full
Base
Private and Protected-Half
Conservation Scenario
Protected - Full
Protected - Half
Multiple species and Multiple Climates….
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Base Full Half Full Half
Private and Protected Protected
Risk
Risk of population declining by half through 2100
Wood ThrushPrairie Warbler
Moving towards Proactive ConservationStrategy Framework for dynamic decision making (OZHI pilot project)• DFCs & CHJV Habitat Objectives for forest habitat systems• Landscape Prioritization• Species Models & Future Projections• Adaptation Strategies evaluated in terms of sustainable wildlife populations• Tradeoffs within & among habitat systems
