Sustainable Uplands End of Project presentation given at Moffat House Hotel, May 2010

4/20/2010

1

reluRural Economy andLand Use Programme

SAGES Scottish Alliance for Geoscience Environment & Society


Sustainable UplandsLearning to manage future change


Sustainable Uplands Project

Working with people in uplands to better anticipate, monitor and respond to future change

– Protecting livelihoods and ecosystem services (the benefits society gets from nature)

– Facilitating knowledge exchange between local stakeholders, policy-makers and social and natural scientists


• 5 years (ending 2010)• Sites in Peak District, Yorkshire Dales and Galloway (Cairnsmore

of Fleet and the Luce, Bladnoch, Cree, Dee and Ken catchments)

• 27 researchers: Universities of Leeds, Aberdeen, Durham, Sheffield & others with Moors for the Future & Heather Trust

• £800K from RELU plus £100K from ESRC• Plus additional funding for 16 projects using findings e.g.

Yorkshire Water, Natural England, DEFRA, Premier Waste, United Utilities, Scottish Government, Commission for Rural Communities, Government Office for Science, International Union for the Conservation of Nature

Sustainable Uplands Project


The Sustainable Uplands team:University of Aberdeen:Dr Mark Reed

University of Leeds:Prof Joe HoldenDr Klaus HubacekDr Nesha Beharry-BorgMs Jan BirchMs Sarah BuckmasterDr Dan ChapmanDr Pippa ChapmanDr Stephen CornellDr Andy DougillDr Evan FraserDr Jenny HodgsonDr Nanlin JinDr Brian IrvineProf Mike KirkbyDr Bill KuninMr Oliver MooreDr Claire Quinn

University of Leeds (continued):Dr Brad ParrishDr Lindsay StringerDr Mette Termansen

University of Durham:Prof Tim BurtDr Fred WorrallDr Rob Dunford

University of Sheffield: Dr Christina Prell

Wirtschafts University, Austria:Dr Sigrid Stagl

International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Austria: Jan Sendzimir

Moors for the Future partnershipThe Heather Trust (Simon Thorp)


Plan

1. Why are uplands so important?2. How can we prepare for the future?3. What might the future hold?4. What would this mean for the ecosystem services we

depend upon?5. What can we do?


1. Why are the uplands so important?


Why are uplands so important?


2. How can we prepare for the future?


Scenarios

“The best way to predict the future is to invent it” Alan Kay“The future belongs to those who prepare for it today” Malcolm X

Hannah Benchetrit: http://api.ning.com/files/hb2M0V1FUUQZ-wN8BpHgc*TP10HBgRkggLJkBN4PJwcGm0aNNb8CGSerP2KwNQmKUdSj7j91-kYcbwbqCd849BCd2lFWZAXH/thinking.jpg


A new approach to scenarios


3. What might the future hold?


Why manage the uplands?


Intensification Scenario


Further afforestation of available land with predominantly Sitka Spruce on commercial forestry rotations

What might this mean for Galloway?


• Just looking at soil, afforestation on peat soils is bad for carbon• Map showing current carbon dynamics of Water of Cree peats• Peat soils under conifers are losing carbon (red)• Peat soils not under conifers are absorbing carbon (green)• Galloway soils = net carbon source 17 ktonnes CO2 equivalents

• Light blue areas are non-peat soils• Green = absorbing carbon• Red = losing carbon• 1 km2 grid• 400 km2 area mapped

Effects on soil carbon alone


• Carbon absorbed by trees more than makes up for soil C loss (assuming 80 year rotation), even on peat soils

• We can’t generalise, but in Water of Cree, commercial forestry on peats results in net carbon storage, though even better for carbon if you plant on non-peat soils

Effects on soils and forest combined

• Map showing combined current carbon dynamics of peat soils and trees

• When you include trees and soil, the Water of Cree becomes a net carbon sink of -327 ktonnes CO2 equivalents


• Potential negative consequences for fish populations via streamwater acidification

• Link between afforestation and acidification is contested: • Does it only apply where there is already atmospheric pollution? • Can re-planting help reduce acidification?• Could climate change be to blame for acidification?

• To what extent is there evidence for the “forest effect” on fish data in Galloway?

• Are the effects seen in the 1980s still there?

• If so, what’s causing it now there is less pollution?

Effects on fish


• Building on previous work (Dunford) we investigated the relationship between fish and forestry in 300 sites across Galloway, controlling for factors such as altitude, rainfall, nutrient deposition and geology…

• Focussed on Salmon (commercially important)

Effects on fish


Fish densities become lower with increasing levels of proportional cover of large trees (>8m) within watershed area (note log scale: salmon start at around 15 fry per sample site)

Shading shows data points: darker = more points (total 600 points, many overlap)


Shading shows data points: darker = more points (total 600 points, many overlap)

• Fish populations are also significantly affected by clear felling• But also affected (statistically) significantly by: altitude,

substrate, site dimensions, flow type, bedrock and climatic conditions


Extensification Scenario


• Further reductions in hill sheep farming, driven in part by declining agricultural payments

• Possible diversification to exploit expanding tourism, consolidation of holdings and redevelopment of farm dwellings for tourism and to accommodate increasing numbers of retirees

• Natural regeneration of forest in drier moorlands over long-term

• Not all forests managed on commercial rotations – trees left to mature > 80 years

What might this mean for Galloway?


• Removing sheep and managed burning from remaining Galloway moorlands would lead to a net increase in carbon storage (see film)

• It would also lead to scrub/natural regeneration on drier moors, which in time would lead to a net carbon benefit

• Other forms of extensification: peatland restoration - in purely carbon terms, it is better to maintain commercial forestry rotations than to clear and restore to blanket bog

• But there might be ecological benefits e.g. for fish...

Moorland management


• If we allow trees to grow > 80 yr, soil carbon losses start to exceed the amount of carbon absorbed by trees, and the system becomes a net source of carbon

• In Water of Cree, if we stopped all felling today, it would become a net source of carbon by 2050

• More forest gaps (especially next to rivers) = more habitat potential for fish

Conservation Forestry



4. What would this mean for the ecosystem services we depend

upon?


Future benefits?

• Carbon management via peatland restoration (as opposed to renewable energy developments) under the extensification scenario may bring a number of co-benefits:• Less brown water• Reduced fire risk• Protection of moorland/bog species

important for conservation• Limit scrub/forest encroachment• Supplement incomes in remote areas via

carbon markets?


But prepare for major trade-offs• Carbon management via afforestation may come at a price for

fish and moorland biodiversity in some areas• Other forms of intensification prioritise provisioning services

at the expense of most other ecosystem services• Extensive management will benefit biodiversity in over-grazed

moorlands and carbon, but compromise provisioning services such as game and sheep production, and in drier locations where scrub/forest encroaches, lead to a loss of moorland species and current recreational benefits

• Both scenarios are likely to compromise upland biodiversity in many locations

Golden Plover


5. What can we do?


• To tackle existing conflicts between different stakeholder groups

• Reduce likelihood of exacerbating conflicts under future scenarios

• Prioritise communication/trust between land owners and managers and those interested in conservation and

water

1. Foster communication & trust


• Build partnerships between researchers, the policy community and practitioners

• Share good practice and innovation within and between regions, based on local and scientific knowledge

• Plan for the long-term• Manage increased recreation

to reduce wildfire risk whilst maximising income via diversification

• Restore damaged peats

2. Build adaptive capacity


• Anticipate and prepare for the widest possible range of futures...

• ...In a funding framework that can facilitate adaptive management e.g. shifting priorities as climate changes

• Rewarding land owners and managers for the provision of public goods

• Better value for money if we target funding towards land managers and locations that can most efficiently deliver the services we need?

• Not easy...

3. Future-proof land use policy


1. Determine potential of land to provide different ecosystem services under different forms of management

2. Determine relative value to society of ecosystem services provided under different forms of management

3. Differentiate payments so higher rates are available to support management for priority ecosystem services in the locations (and at the scales) that can provide them

4. Negotiate management plans with land owners and managers


1. Determine potential of land to provide different ecosystem services under different forms of management

Based on a combination of:i) Outputs from process-based models

showing how different forms of management influence the provision of ecosystem services in different locations

ii) Expert-based assessments of relationships not yet covered by models (Fazey)

• Spot checks of ecosystem service provision to calibrate/validate “self-learning” models


• Multi-functional landscapes lead to ES trade-offs• Difficult choices, in which land owners, managers – and the

public? – should be involved• Methods to facilitate deliberation between these groups over

the relative value they place on different ES

2. Determine relative value to society of ecosystem services provided under different forms of management


• ES values differ between regions, habitats & stakeholders• Spatially explicit information about the value people put on

different ES from different locations could inform decisions re: which ES to prioritise where

• This could inform differentiation of payments to incentivise management options most likely to deliver priority services

3. Differentiate payments so higher rates are available to support management for priority ecosystem services in the locations (and at the scales) that can provide them


• Inputs to negotiation with incentives to manage for priority services in relevant locations and at relevant scales

• Keep pace with climate change through dynamic priorities e.g. restoration now while net carbon and biodiversity gain but revising boundaries/locations of designated areas in future?

• Provide incentives for farmers to group together where interventions need to be carried out at larger scales

4. Negotiate management plans with land owners and managers

• Build on success of initiatives like EA’s Common Ground initiative & Land Care – something we need to do anyway?


• Demand and supply: UK based credits with multiple benefits that can be used for CSR and team building

• CSR pilot scheme• Working towards VCS accreditation but need to

overcome methane and legislative barriers• New 5 year project to investigate methane emissions but

we should have data for VCS within 18 months• Targeting companies who want to benefit climate,

biodiversity and water quality without the need for carbon credits e.g. Water companies

Future upland restoration scheme


Conclusion• Ideas for discussion – we don’t have all the answers yet• Start of longer-term conversation that can inform future work• IUCN policy review by our team with Philip Lowe, Andrew

Moxey, Clunie Keenleyside and others• Publication for land owners and managers in collaboration

with Moorland Forum, Heather Trust and RICS

Please take one:• RELU Policy & Practice Notes


Workshop

1. Write your reactions to the ideas we’ve collected so far, and add your own new ideas:

• What are the strengths or weaknesses of this idea?• How could this idea be further developed to make it work

more effectively in practice?

2. Put sticky dots next to the ideas you like best


Contact

www.see.leeds.ac.uk/sustainableuplands

Follow us on:

www.twitter.com/reluuplands

Email: [email protected]

Call or text on: 0797 428 6778

Date post:	20-Oct-2014
Category:	Education
View:	1,224 times
Download:	0 times

Sustainable Uplands End of Project presentation given at Moffat House Hotel, May 2010

Education