Climate-Smart Landscape Conservation Planning & Design

Transcription

1 Climate-Smart Landscape Conservation Planning & Design

2 Resource managers at many levels have successfully responded to major challenges in the past.

3 But there s increasing complexity in interactions between resources, uses and climate.

4 and increasing jurisdictional complexity

5 ... and increasing expert complexity Dave Mehlman, The Nature Conservancy

6 The Result? Silos of experts, agencies, managers, scientists, etc. o Internal Stove Piping : budgets, status quo, mine vs. yours o External Stove Piping: science (social, physical, and ecological) is not integrated and connected to management needs o Too much to do when you work on your own (reactive management) o Information not communicated to efficiently target conservation resources o Lost opportunities to leverage work and $$ Fundamentally, this affects the environmental systems that people depend on.

7 2009: Secretarial Order 3289 Addressing the Impacts of Climate Change on America's Water, Land, and Other Natural and Cultural Resources (9/14/09) DOI Climate Science Centers Landscape Conservation Cooperatives Interior bureaus and agencies must work together, and with other federal, state, tribal and local governments, and private landowner partners, to develop landscape-level strategies for understanding and responding to climate change impacts.

8 LCC Geographies A Seamless Network

9 What do Landscape Conservation Cooperatives DO? Link science and conservation delivery (inform management) Integrate priority needs & goals across species groups & large landscapes Identify most effective conservation approaches to achieve common goals Identify gaps in science Augment and draw upon existing capacities of partners Avoid duplication through improved conservation planning and design Connect efforts

10 Working across jurisdictional boundaries on a large geographic scale Non-regulatory, partner driven

11 Partnership Community Entities with resource management interests in the Desert LCC Communicate interests and needs to the LCC Contribute resources (staff) for LCC Management Questions Steering Committee Provides direction Science Working Groups Staff Coordinator (BOR) Science Coordinator (FWS) Data Coordinator (USGS) Provide support & coordination Local Governments Use LCC products in decision-making Share information & resources Information & Products Data & GIS Tribal Communications Administrative Mexico 6 Critical Management Question Teams Interdisciplinary Partnership - different expertise, backgrounds, agencies, organizations, interests

12 Steering Committee

13 Create new opportunities for interaction among diverse groups

14 Goals Support, facilitate, promote and add value to landscape scale conservation to build resource resilience in the face of climate change and other ecosystem stressors through the following: Science Development and Delivery Collaboration and Communication Monitoring and Evaluation Outreach and Education

15 Landscape Conservation Planning & Design Integrated & collaborative process to identify common goals and objectives for managing resources across jurisdictional boundaries Results in a science-based, spatially explicit products Assesses current and projected landscape patterns and processes Identifies a desired future condition, conservation/development trade offs, and implementation strategies

16 Timeline Pilot nominations (Round 1: July 10 th ) Workshop 1, Tucson AZ (August 4-6th) Workshop 2, Aguascalientes, MX (October 6-8 th ) Pilot area selection (November 2015) Nominees will be part of Landscape Design Working Group Identify adaptation strategies, critical conservation actions, and opportunities for collaboration ( ) Conduct peer review of process (2018) Revise and finalize design (2018) Monitor progress (2019+)

17 Pilot area nomination questions (brief) o Brief description o Why is this area important? o What are the primary management questions or concerns? o Who are the major partners & what are they doing? o Describe the social, cultural, and economic vulnerabilities relative to projected climate change scenarios. o Describe why people in the pilot area value or are concerned about grasslands, streams, springs/seeps, and riparian resources. o How could the Desert LCC assist?

18 Landscape Design: Pilot Areas

19 Identifying common goals & objectives Priority Ecosystems: Streams/Springs + riparian resources Understand, maintain, and enhance function of aquatic and riparian ecosystems in streams and springs, including reducing stressors, sustaining function, biodiversity, and human use. Grasslands & Shrublands A desert landscape that sustains highfunctioning grasslands that provide ecosystem services to support human cultures, native species, and ecological processes. Common Goals Common Objectives Common Measures of Success

20 Mapping resources & gathering information Partners Plans and Assessments BLM REAs State Wildlife Action Plans Regional Vulnerability Assessments (Agencies, TNC, WWF,..) Joint Venture Implementation Plans Partner-funded science Desert LCC funded science

21 Developing a Geodatabase and Tools to Support Springs and Springs-dependent Species Management Provides managers with comprehensive, current information regarding springs distribution and springs-dependent species in a secure and user-friendly format that provides foundational information to analyze springs ecosystem vulnerability to land management practices and climate change Partners: Springs Stewardship Institute, Sky Island Alliance, Arizona Game & Fish, Kaibab National Forest, Hualapai Tribe, NPS

22 Desert LCC Environmental Flows Database Desert LCC-wide geo-spatial database of environmental water needs for riparian and aquatic species that will identify critical data gaps and result in a user-friendly, one-stopshop for managers on existing data on flow needs and responses in the Desert LCC. Builds upon the existing Arizona Environmental Water Demands Database created by the Water Resources Research Center. Partners: University of Arizona Streams with Quantified Flows/Environmental Demands and Surface Water Resources in Arizona

23 Assessing impacts & vulnerabilities Apply models to assess current state of ecosystems

24 Fire-smart riparian landscape management and restoration and the impacts of Tamarisk Beetles Develop maps to inform restoration priorities for Southwestern Willow Flycatcher, Western Yellow-billed Cuckoo, and the northern Mexican gartersnake to mitigate potential habitat loss due to fire risk, tamarisk invasion, and tamarisk beetle activity. Partners: Texas A&M, Saint Francis University, Northern Arizona University, Bureau of Land Management, Tonto National Forest, Bureau of Reclamation, Texas Parks & Wildlife, Graham County Cooperative Extension,

25 Determine desired future conditions & scenarios Agree on a desired future condition (collaborative process) Create scenarios to assess relationship of pressures to ecosystems Assess the difference between the current condition and the desired future condition (modeling) Determine what missing science, data or information is needed to inform actions Determine what actions partners could take that could move landscape towards desired future condition Find common indicators to measure progress

26 Scenario Planning agreeing on a future path

27 Build capacity & tools to share information across jurisdictions common data platform Map baseline condition assessments or inventories Map on-going or completed conservation actions: who is doing what where? Understand where conservation actions are most needed Understand where the greatest opportunities for collaboration are

28 Identifying actions to achieve common objectives (2016) General Adaptation Strategies Reduce non-climate stressors Protect key ecosystem features Ensure connectivity Restore structure and function Support evolutionary potential Protect refugia Relocate organisms Ensure redundancy

29 Design (2017) Evaluate and select a suite of implementation strategies that meet partner mission and goals Develop implementation agreements Document information and products generated during the design process for peer review

30 Desert LCC Funding Sources, $252,500 $75,000 $2,200,450 $4,357,498 $4,571,271 Partners (matching) BOR FWS USGS BLM TOTAL Funds = $11,456,719 Science Projects:

31 Genevieve Johnson, Coordinator Aimee Roberson, Science Coordinator Sally Holl, Data Coordinator Thank you!