Impacts of Climate Change, Urbanization, and Water Management on Habitats and Ecology of Waterfowl & Other Waterbirds Joseph Fleskes & Elliott Matchett USGS-Western Ecological Research Center Collaborators: David Purkey & Charles Young (SEI), Mark Petrie (DU), John Eadie, Matt Miller, & Kevin Ringelman (UCD), Matt Reiter (Pt Blue)
CENTRAL VALLEY One of the most important waterfowl regions in the world especially during winter 10-12 million waterfowl of 25+ species winter or migrate through the Central Valley Also important to >60 other waterbird species Mid Aug-Mid Mar wintering period 360 million waterfowl use days
Central Valley Joint Venture: Coalition of 21 federal, state, private groups started in 1988 to restore, enhance, and protect habitat to support goal populations of waterfowl and other birds.
Central Valley Joint Venture Habitat Conservation Planning 9 Hydrologic Basins Bioenergetics model used to calculate habitat necessary to provide enough food energy to support goal wintering pop in each basin Rice fields in Sacramento Valley basins Wetlands throughout Central Valley
Research Program Goal: Provide information to guide implementation of the Central Valley Joint Venture and other resource management programs. Central Valley Project Improvement Act 12 10 8 NAWMP Goal BPOP May Ponds NAWMP Goal Millions 6 4 2 BAY-DELTA CONSERVATION PROGRAM 0 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 Year YOLO COUNTY HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN "'Coequal goals' means the two goals of providing a more reliable water supply for California and protecting, restoring, and enhancing the Delta ecosystem.
WETLAND AND AGRICULTURAL HABITATS BOTH IMPORTANT
California Central Valley Intensively Managed-Interconnected-Plumbed System Hanek et al. 2011. Managing Cal. Water: From conflict to reconciliation. Public Policy Institute of Cal. http://www.yamasun.net/images/cariversrevlabled.jpg
Water FOWL 2% 10% FARMS 41% Based on data from: Calf. Dept. of Water Resources. California Water Plan Update 2013. FISH & FLOWS 47%
California Water Transfers Hanak & Stryjewski. 2012. Califronia Water Market, By the numbers. Public Policy Inst. of Calf. http://www.ppic.org/content/p ubs/report/r_1112ehr.pdf
Scenario Modeling MODEL 1- Water Evaluation and Planning (WEAP) Model to project future water supplies, demands, and allocation Post-process model 1 output MODEL 2- Avian bioenergetics model Projected Avian Food Supplies = Food-coma zzzzzz. No food, what an awefowl party. I m leaving! Out of fuel crashlanding look-out! Adequate food Food deficit
MODEL 1 Water Evaluation and Planning (WEAP) Model Climate Models GFDL-A2, PCM1-B1, Recent Historic Urbanization Projections Expansive, Strategic, No growth Water Mgmt Proposals IFR, Rice Idling, Current, Other H 2 O Supply Evapotranspiration Land use H 2 O Demand H 2 O Use Prioritization Water Evaluation and Planning (WEAP) Model (Surface groundwater linkage, diversions-discharges, delivery system limits, priorities) Amount, timing, and distribution of water supplies Amount, timing, & distribution of habitats supported by water supplies Model 2- Avian Bioenergetics
Adapted WEAP Model Representation of Water Supplies, Demands, and Delivery Connectivity in Butte Basin Oroville Reservoir node Feather River link Link joining groundwater to Demand Site Link joining Feather R. to Demand Site Revised Butte Creek flow requirement for fisheries
Continuing Progress in WEAP Model Adaptation WEAP adaptation- 7 of 9 CVJV basins done (yellow) Adaptation completed and scenarios evaluated by Nov. 2015
Continuing Progress in WEAP Model Adaptation WEAP adaptation- 7 of 9 CVJV basins done (yellow) Adaptation completed and scenarios evaluated by Nov. 2015
Expansive Urbanization Resulting in Cumulative Habitat Decline 1.00 Proportion of Existing Habitat 0.95 0.90 0.85 Historical climate, no urban growth PCM1-B1 climate + Expansive urbanization GFDL-A2 climate + Expansive urbanization + Butte Creek instream flow requirement GFDL-A2 climate + Expansive urbanization 0.80 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 2046 2051 2056 2061 Projection Year Expansive urban growth resulted in a cumulative decline in total wintering habitat.
Drought Impacts Were More Frequent and Severe in GFDL-A2 Scenarios 1.00 Proportion of Existing Habitat 0.95 0.90 0.85 Historical climate, no urban growth PCM1-B1 climate + Expansive urbanization GFDL-A2 climate + Expansive urbanization + Butte Creek instream flow requirement GFDL-A2 climate + Expansive urbanization 0.80 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 2046 2051 2056 2061 Projection Year Drought that substantially reduced habitat was most frequent in GFDL-A2 scenarios.
Revised Butte Creek Flow Requirement Causing Little Impact on Habitat 1.00 Proportion of Existing Habitat 0.95 0.90 0.85 GFDL-A2 climate + Expansive urbanization + Butte Creek instream flow requirement GFDL-A2 climate + Expansive urbanization 0.80 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 2046 2051 2056 2061 Projection Year An Oct-June instream flow requirement (IFR) of 40 cfs on Lower Butte Creek had little impact on habitat.
Idling Rice Land to Transfer Water to West San Joaquin Agriculture Caused Greatest Impacts on Habitat 1.0 0.9 Proportion of Existing Habitat 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 Historical climate, no urban growth PCM1-B1 climate + Expansive urbanization GFDL-A2 climate + Expansive urbanization + Butte Creek instream flow requirement 0.1 GFDL-A2 climate + Expansive urbanization Sac. Valley-wide rice-idling Butte Basin-only rice-idling 0.0 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 2046 2051 2056 2061 Projection Year GFDL-A2 climate + Expansive urbaniz. + Butte Basin rice-idling (max. 20% area)/south-of-delta transfer GFDL-A2 climate + Expansive urbanization + Unlimited Butte Basin rice-idling/south-of-delta transfer -26% -76% Note: Rice-idling scenarios did not include groundwater substitution, which would reduce the need to fallow available rice habitat.
Model 2- Avian Bioenenergetics Climate Models GFDL-A2, PCM1-B1, Recent Historic Urbanization Projections Expansive, Strategic, No growth Water Mgmt Proposals IFR, Rice Idling, Current, Other H 2 O Supply Evapotranspiration Land use H 2 O Demand H 2 O Use Prioritization Water Evaluation and Planning (WEAP) Model (Surface groundwater linkage, diversions-discharges, delivery system limits, priorities) Amount, timing, and distribution of water supplies Amount, timing, & distribution of habitats supported by water supplies TRUEMET Food supply vs. demand Agent-Based Model Resource distribution & density vs. foraging rules Habitat-Productivity Models Wintering Waterbirds Breeding Waterbirds
TRUEMET RESULTS for BUTTE BASIN Comparing food demand vs projected food supply for ducks GFDL-A2 climate + Expansive urban. + Butte-only rice-idling/transfer GFDL-A2 climate + Expansive urban. + Sac. Valley-wide rice-idling/transfer Energy Period of Food Deficit Energy GFDL-A2 climate + Expansive urbanization Historical climate + no urban growth Energy Energy Adding major water management change (rice idling) = food deficit for ducks. Agent-based Model may project food deficits to occur earlier and more frequently.
*Projected frequency of critically dry water years in San Joaquin Valley (yellow) and Sacramento Valley (orange) WEAP modeling for the San Joaquin Valley and later years will likely show greater impact of climate change on habitats *From Our Changing Climate 2012 available at: http://uc-ciee.org/downloads/our%20changing%20climate%202012.pdf
Matchett, E.L., Fleskes, J.P., Young, C.A., and Purkey, D.R., 2015, A framework for modeling anthropogenic impacts on waterbird habitats Addressing future uncertainty in conservation planning: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2015-1017, 40 p., http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/ofr20151017. http://www.werc.usgs.gov/climatewaterbirds Acknowledgements: Funded by CA LCC, Delta Waterfowl Foundation, CV Joint Venture, USFWS, CDFW. SCOTT FINK