Results of a questionnaire on Climate Change Impacts (WG 1)

Transcription

1 Results of a questionnaire on Climate Change Impacts (WG 1) Peter Spathelf University for Sustainable Development Eberswalde Ernst van der Maaten University of Freiburg, Institute for Forest Growth

2 Outline Objectives and content of the questionnaire Feedback Results Conclusions

3 Objectives of the questionnaire Identifying relevant climatic events and the most vulnerable forest sites, structures and tree species composition ( hot spots of CC) Revealing differences and similarities between (European) regions Deriving adaptation strategies Q. focuses on observed and expected changes Scientific and expert knowledge used

4 Questions (1/3) Q1: Which observed and expected changes in climate are of major importance in your country, considering impact(s) on forest ecosystems? Q2: Describe the associated (obs. & exp.) impact(s) on forests

5 Questions (2/3) Q3: Indicate the impacted tree species/provenances, and describe the most severely affected site conditions, forest structures and species compositions Q4: Identify and localize on the map, if possible, hotspots of climate change induced forest vulnerability in your country

6 Questions (3/3) Q5: Has forest management changed at the described hot spot(s), OR: does forest management need to be changed? If yes: how?

7 Countries involved and feedback Feedback: > 80 %

8 Quality of responses E.g., Q5: Has forest management changed at the described hot spot(s), OR: does forest management need to be changed? If yes: how? - Significant percentage of answers: no change yet - Most answers very differentiated - Some answers: future change more towards SFM or CNFM, thus not very specified

9 Q1: Observed CC impact factors Responses in % (summer) drought air temp increase forest fire wind / storm pests (bark beetle pressure) precipitation regime change extreme weather events (temp) flooding N=24

10 Q1: Expected CC impact factors Responses in % (summer) drought wind / storm flooding pests (bark beetle pressure) precipitation regime change air temp increase extreme weather events (temp) forest fire N=24 0

11 Q2: Description of impacts Example Germany Questions Impacts on productivity Impacts on phenology 2. Describe the associated (a) observed and (b) expected impact(s) on forests! E.g. impacts on productivity, phenology, vitality & mortality, migrations/shifts. (a) Temperature increases resulted in prolongation of growing seasons for major tree species (see: impacts on phenology) with positive impacts on productivity of German forests. The 2003 summer drought negatively influenced forest productivity and vitality over several years, although this could not be substantiated for all species and in all studies. Wood formation in beech ceased for example, but, according to dendroecological studies, recovered quickly after the drought. Increased Carbon sequestration is reported for the last decades, which was induced by environmental changes. (a) Historical phenological observations on bud burst and bud set (e.g ) reveal a pattern of increasing growing season lengths with 8 to 12 days for major tree species. Impacts on vitality& mortality (a) The devastating storm events like Lothar (1999) and Kyrill (2007) have caused an increased loss of standing wood volume in the last twenty years. It should be remarked that these storm damages were fuelled by historically high standing stocks (increasing the potential), and can therefore not be attributed to climatic changes only. The 2003 summer drought was locally accompanied or directly followed by biotic disturbance regimes like pest outbreaks. Massive outbreaks of spruce bark beetle were observed. Increasing trends are observed for gypsy moth and oak processionary.

12 Q3: Impact tree species N=24 Responses in % Norway spruce European ash European beech Pedunculate oak Scots pine Birch Black pine (and others) Sessile oak (and others) Silver fir Cedrus ssp. Sitka spruce Castanea sativa Eucalyptus Other mediterranean species 0

13 Q3: Most severely affected sites Example Finland: Growth of major tree species is expected to increase, but High risk of Norway spruce decline, especially on sandy mineral soils with poor water holding capacity in southern Finland

14 Q3: Most severely affected sites Example Belgium: Norway spruce, European beech and pedunculate oak all have a reduced vitality due to a.o. the dry summer of 2003 Most severely affected are trees on shallow and dry soils, particularly on south exposed sites

15 Q3: Most severely affected sites Example Slovenia: There is oak decline and dieback of European ash Uneven-aged stands are found more stable against disturbances The artificially widespread Norway spruce will be most vulnerable to insect outbreaks on sites with a high mineral content and sites outside its natural range

16 Q4: Hotspots UK Sitka spruce wind damage Sitka spruce drought damage Dothistroma septosporum on pine Phytophthora ramorum Beech decline

17 Q4: Hotspots Romania drought

18 Vulnerability scenario Bulgaria Present ( ) 2020 (realistic) 2050 (realistic) 2080 (optimistic) 2080 (realistic) 2080 (pessimistic) Zone А very high vulnerability level, Zone Б high vulnerability level, Zone В average vulnerability level, Zone Г low vulnerability level and Zone Д very low vulnerability level

19 Responses in % Q5: Management to be changed (1/3) Preference of drought-resistant species Tending Different management intensities Improved soil/nutrient management Improve tree species site matching Increasing species diversity Inclusion of risk management in FM New suitable genotypes for Norway spruce Tree breeding Preference of natural regeneration Change forest structure into uneven-aged N=24 0

20 Q5: Management to be changed (2/3) N= No change Responses in % Forest conversion (CNFM/SFM) Increase tree species diversity Uneven-aged forest structure 5 0

21 Q5: Management to be changed (3/3) 80 N= Already changed? Responses [%] tree species selection preference tending / forest structure change soil mgmt change inclusion of risk mgmt no change forest conversion (CNFM, SFM) increase tree species diversity uneven-aged forest structure

22 Conclusions Drought and temperature increase / precipitation regime change are the most important CC IF Increasing growth expectation in some countries, but likely compensation by higher hazard and pest risk Norway spruce = most severely affected tree species (> 60 %); less evidence with broadleaves (oak, beech, )

23 Conclusions Sites with soil moisture restrictions or other extreme traits most severely affected Tree species selection and the resp. preferences and tending changes is seen to be the most important field of future management changes in the face of CC Different intensity of hotspots identification