Adapting to Climate Change: an Introduction to a New ...Adapting to Climate Change: an Introduction...
Transcript of Adapting to Climate Change: an Introduction to a New ...Adapting to Climate Change: an Introduction...
Adapting to Climate Change: an Introduction
to a New Initiative in British Columbia
Stewart J. Cohen
Environment Canada and University of British Columbia,
Vancouver, British Columbia
January 27, 2010
Outline
• Why is climate change an urgent challenge for
regional planning?
• Regional Adaptation Collaborative—RAC
Source: US NSIDC (2007) and Cohen (1997)
Observed changes in
Arctic sea ice, 1979-
2008 and permafrost
thaw and landslide near
Tuktoyaltuk
September 1979
September 2007
The Mountain Pine Beetle—British Columbia(photo of 2009 Kelly Creek fire (Prince George region) from
http://bcwildfire.ca)
Mountain Pine Beetle (dentroctonus ponderosae Hopkins)
Outbreak (suitability maps from Carroll et al., 2004)
• worst outbreak in history (2008: 13.5 million ha)
– linked to climate change (warming
winters) & management practices (fire
suppression, age )
• current response:
– Rapid harvest long term
maladaptation?
• future projection? Implications for hydrology?
Additional info
from BCMOF,
and Walker &
Sydneysmith,
2007
10
BC Winters became less cold
Winters in the interior warmed by 2.5-3.5C
Winters on the coast warmed by 1.0-2.0C
11
Historic summer temperature trends vary by location in BC.
Summers in southern BC warmed by1.0-2.5oC
Summers on the coast cooled by up to 1.5C
Scenario A1B scenario changes over North America.
Top row: Temperature change (oC) between 1980–1999 and 2080–2099, averaged
over 21 models. Bottom row: same for change in precipitation (%) (IPCC 2007, WGII—CH. 15, slide from Linda Mortsch).
15
2A01A - Canoe River - Apr 1st SWE
910 m, 1941-2006
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
1C01 - Brookmere - April 1st Snow Water Equivalent(Elevation = 980 metres)
1945 - 2006
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005
Sno
w W
ater
Equ
ival
ent (
mm
)
1D08 - Stave Lake - April 1st Snow Water Equivalent
(Elevation = 1210 metres)
1968 - 2006
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
2200
2400
2600
2800
3000
1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Year
Sno
w W
ater
Equ
ival
ent
(mm
)
1C08 - Nazko - Apr 1st Snow Water Equivalent
1070 m, 1957-2006
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005
-44% since 1945
- 73% since 1957 - 53% since 1951
-19% since 1968
Nazko (Fraser Plateau)
Brookmere (Nicola) Stave Lake (lower Fraser)
Canoe River (Upper Fraser)
Spring Snowpack Declined Across
B.C.,1940s/50s – 2006(slide from Jenny Fraser)
CC Impacts—Changes in Statistics
• Small changes in mean or extremes can yield large changes in risk
• Damages (fire, wind, flood) likely to increase exponentially
• Infrastructure sensitive to
– Rate of climate change
– Changes in mean climate (weathering)
– Changes in extremes (thresholds/failure)
– Adaptive capacity (ability to plan, respond, design, maintain)
• Balance between safety, reliability and cost of design
• Changes in health/disease risk?
– Heat waves
– Flooding/sewer overflow/boil orders
– Vectors/West Nile, etc.(source: Karl et al., 2008)
6 key messages – BC Chapter (Walker &
Sydneysmith) of National Assessment (2007)
1. Costs of CC impacts & extreme events are increasing and will continue
2. Summer water shortages increasingly frequent & severe
3. BC’s critical infrastructure faces immediate threats & long-term costs
4. BC’s natural resource sectors & dependent communities are vulnerable to increasing risks
5. Vulnerabilities & adaptive capacity vary widely across BC’s regions & economic sectors
6. Integrating CC adaptation into decision-making is an opportunity to long-term impacts & costs
http://adaptation.nrcan.gc.ca/2007
Outline
• Why is climate change an urgent challenge for
regional planning?
• Regional Adaptation Collaborative—RAC
Building the science-policy bridge…
• Dialogue with researchers
and local
experts/practitioners as
part of climate change
adaptation assessment
• This is 2-way knowledge
exchange, not a 1-way
outreach process
• Experts become
extension agents for local
adaptation (and enable
mitigation…)
Okanagan climate change study team visit
to Penticton Dam, June 2002 (Cohen et
al., 2004; Cohen and Neale, 2006)
Regional Adaptation Collaborative (RAC)
• Facilitate collaboration to enable planning for adapting
to climate change
– Shared learning: researchers, local practitioners/planners and
decision makers
• Funding from Natural Resources Canada
– RAC programs throughout the country
– Funding for 2-year projects, 2010-2012
• BC program organized by BC MOE; coordinated by
Fraser Basin Council
– Focus on water resources, forestry, community planning
RAC-BC Projects
• Water allocation and use
– Okanagan water supply and demand, Okanagan irrigation,
Vancouver Island water management planning
• Forest and land management
– Protecting fisheries, forest management planning
• Floodplain management
– Floodplain management tools, floodplain planning in Delta
• Community adaptation
– 6 case studies
Conclusion
• Climate change is creating challenges (and maybe
opportunities) for forestry in British Columbia
• The RAC program offers support for shared learning
between researchers and local practitioners and
decision makers
• This is complementary to other British Columbia
initiatives in adaptation
– BCMOF--Future Forest Ecosystem Science Council (FFESC)
projects
– Columbia Basin Trust: Communities Adapting to Climate
Change (www.cbt.org)
for further information…
• Environment Canada climate change website:
http://www.ec.gc.ca/climatechange
• Natural Resources Canada—RAC website:
http://adaptation.nrcan.gc.ca/collab/
• BC Future Forest Ecosystem Science Council:
http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hts/future_forests/council
• Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium (PCIC):
http://www.pacificclimate.org
HARRY NELSONU N I V E R S I T Y O F B R I T I S H C O L U M B I A
W I L L I A M S L A K E , B R I T I S H C O L U M B I A
C I T Y H A L L , C O M M I T T E E R O O M N O . 1
2 7 J A N U A R Y , 2 0 1 0
Harry Nelson 27 January, 2010RAC San Jose Watershed
Regional Adaptation CollaborativeSan Jose Watershed
Overview
Harry Nelson 27 January, 2010RAC San Jose Watershed
Introduction-why are we here? Project team Why we’re looking at the San Jose watershed Project details Expected outcomes How can we work
together?
Introduction
Harry Nelson 27 January, 2010RAC San Jose Watershed
This process started back in May of 2008
Involved a competitive process with successful ones combined into one proposal
Original emphasis was on water issues-we saw an opportunity to bring forests From the January 25, 2010 press release
The forest and watershed management initiative will develop tools and improve existing regulations to help developers and resource managers maintain aquatic values of fisheries sensitive watersheds and streams in forested and urban watersheds affected by climate change.
http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/media/newcom/2010/201004a-eng.php
Project team
Harry Nelson 27 January, 2010RAC San Jose Watershed
Harry Nelson UBC, Forest Resources Management
Ken Day UBC, Alex Fraser Research Forest
Stewart Cohen UBC, Environment Canada
Anne-Hélène Mathey UBC, Forest Resources Management
Craig Nitschke UBC, University of Melbourne
Dan Moore UBC, FRM/Geography
Adam Wei UBC, Okanagan
John Innes UBC, Forest Resources Management
Phil Grace Graduate Student, UBC
The San Jose Watershed
Harry Nelson 27 January, 2010RAC San Jose Watershed
Water supply is a key concern
City of Williams Lake aquifer
Challenges identified in previous studies
(Case and Holmes)
Flow levels (low summer, high winter)
Water temperature variations
Fish species concerns
Mountain Pine Beetle impact
Biological interventions
Management interventions
Lack of disturbances
Issues that could aggravate CC impacts (1)
Harry Nelson 27 January, 2010
Three interacting phenomena are taking place that
may have cumulative impacts on the water supply: First, mountain pine bark beetle has killed a significant component
of the trees over fairly large areas in the upper reaches of the San
Jose Watershed. Reduction in interception and transpiration losses,
coupled with salvage impacts on water retention and run-off, will
have potentially positive impacts on surface run-off and recruitment
to ground water.
Issues that could aggravate CC impacts (2)
Harry Nelson 27 January, 2010
Second, Dry Douglas-fir forests that cover the lower reaches of the
watershed have had little disturbance over the past 40 years, and the
canopy of those forests is closed, leading to over-dense forests,
increased interception of precipitation, and increasing forest health
problems. These influences may cause negative pressure on surface
run-off and recruitment to ground water.
Third, climate change is expected to impact forest dynamics and
water flow.
Project Goals
Harry Nelson 27 January, 2010RAC San Jose Watershed
Concern as to how climate change might impact flow of
services and values we expect from local forest resources
Through a collaborative process quantitatively assess these
impacts and the effect of different forest management
activities on the watershed
Use this to enable planning within a long-term sustainability
strategy
End up with an idea of how future forest management
strategies could address water concerns
Project Approach
Harry Nelson 27 January, 2010RAC San Jose Watershed
We want to emphasize that this is a shared learning process
We can bring tools and scientific expertise
However, to be effective this has to be combined with local knowledge, experience, and expertise
The goal is to develop new inputs that assist local planners and other resource managers and decision-makers
Project Details
Harry Nelson 27 January, 2010RAC San Jose Watershed
Over the course of two years, we plan to come up with a model of the San Jose watershed and key relationships
We will need to identify key objectives, to make assumptions, understand what impacts have been observed, recognize operational issues all with the help of local actors
Several models will be used TACA Stand-level forest modelling MIKE SHE Groundwater hydrological modelling YAM Surface water hydrological modelling DYNA-PLAN Landscape-level forest modelling
Modelling Framework
Harry Nelson 27 January, 2010RAC San Jose Watershed
Landscape dynamics
Stand dynamics
Satisfying outcomes?
Ending Landscape (Forest Inventory)
Growth and Yield
Regeneration
Climate Scenarios
1. Disturbances
Policy Scenarios
•Water Management
•Adaptation
•Sustainability
START: Initial Landscape (Forest Inventory)
2. Forest Growth
Human processesNatural Processes
Management & Harvesting
MPB
END
Hydrology models1. Surface water model2. Groundwater model
Mortality
TACA- (Nitschke)
Harry Nelson 27 January, 2010RAC San Jose Watershed
Identify tree species sensitivity and vulnerability to changes in climate
Determines probability of tree species establishment in :
• Past climate scenarios
• Present climate scenarios
• Future climate scenarios
Model is currently being used in the Kamloops Future Forest Strategy II (K2)
MIKE SHE – (Wei)
Harry Nelson 27 January, 2010RAC San Jose Watershed
Integrated water model
Forecasts future groundwater availability under different management and climate scenarios
Model currently being used to assess water
availability in the Okanagan basin (Okanagan Basin
Water Board and Ministry of Environment)
YAM – (Moore)
Harry Nelson 27 January, 2010RAC San Jose Watershed
Surface hydrology model
Landscape-level model that predicts water levels and water flow
Based on land cover type (including forest age and species) and climactic variables along with stream flow data
Initial model testing using field work in Cotton Creek, Cranbrook, with additional testing to take place in Fish Trap Creek
DYNA-PLAN – (Mathey)
Harry Nelson 27 January, 2010RAC San Jose Watershed
Scenario-based landscape level modelling
Generate spatially explicit future forest conditionso Outputs include timber supply and economic variables
Used in Ontario to examine economic cost of maintaining even flow arrangements
Used to identify suitable strategies to cope with mountain pine beetle attacks in Alberta
Being used in the Kamloops Future Forest Strategy II (K2)
Modelling Framework
Harry Nelson 27 January, 2010RAC San Jose Watershed
Landscape dynamics
Satisfying outcomes?
Ending Landscape (Forest Inventory)
Growth and Yield
Regeneration
Climate Scenarios
1. Disturbances
Policy Scenarios
•Water Management
•Adaptation
•Sustainability
START: Initial Landscape (Forest Inventory)
2. Forest Growth
Human processesNatural Processes
Management & Harvesting
MPB
END
Hydrology models1. Surface water model
2. Groundwater model
TACA
DYNA-PLAN
YAM
MIKE SHE
Stand dynamics
Mortality
Expected Outcomes
Harry Nelson 27 January, 2010RAC San Jose Watershed
Not come up with a plan, but an outline of a plan
Hand off to those with the responsibility to implement
Not a prescriptive output, but one that is relevant to decision making
Consistent with overall RACobjectives
Communication
Harry Nelson 27 January, 2010RAC San Jose Watershed
This is a key challenge within the project
For it to be effective we need to ensure that we can communicate among ourselves
Researchers/theoretical models versus having to make decisions in the real world
Bringing together different groups that have typically not worked together (administrative boundaries, jurisdictional responsibilities)
Outreach
Harry Nelson 27 January, 2010RAC San Jose Watershed
Want to make sure results are applicable and useful
Want to look for ways in which the research can add
to local planning capacity:
o Inputs from research
o Factor into other
planning processes
o Other ways it might be useful
Moving Forward
Harry Nelson 27 January, 2010RAC San Jose Watershed
Forming an Advisory group
Influential local stakeholders &decision makers
Identifying key issues
Effectively engage
Helping formulate policy responses
Think about how knowledge generated can be used (existing processes and long-term)
Workshop in March 2010