REGIONAL IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON FORESTS AND BIRD COMMUNITIES

Stephen Matthews1,2, Louis Iverson2,Anantha Prasad2, Matthew Peters2

1School of Environment and Natural Resources

Ohio State University2USFS Northern Research Station

Today's topic

Climate is changing and species are responding

Conservation and management strategies that ignore these change will likely fail (Lawler et al. 2009)

How can we begin to integrate climate change impacts into complicated realm of conservation

Must address in stages and build our understanding Building broad-scale models is a logical

start Working with managers to translate results

to “on the ground realities”

Eleven indicators that the climate is changing

State of the climate 2009, NOAA

Land temp

Sea temp

Sea level

Snow cover

Vertebrates: phenological responses to a changing climate

• Amphibians • Calling 10 -13 days

earlier for half of species from ~1912 to 1990 Gibbs and Breisch 2001

• Birds• Early arrival Beaumont et al. 2006

• Hatching earlier Both and Visser 2005, GCB, Fig 4

Such shifts can lead to mismatches in timing• Reviewed in Root et al. 2005

Wood frog = 13 days

Wildlife distribution shifts linked to climate change

Distributional shifts Mammals:

Southern species increase and northern species decline, southern flying squirrel N 225 km since 1880 (Myers et al. 2009, GCB, Fig 3)

Birds: winter range northern

boundary shift 1.48 km/yrSorte and Thompson 2007

breeding range also show northward trend 2.35 km/yr

Hitch and Leberg, 2006

Future effects: Highly tied to the level of CO2 emissions

??

Rising Temperatures in NE. US (annual average)

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

1900 1950 2000 2050 2100

tem

pe

ratu

re c

ha

ng

e (

o F)

observationshigher emissionslower emissions

Higher: 6.5-12.5oF

Lower:3.5-6.5oFLower:3.5-6.5oF

Large difference between High and Low emissions!

Expected growing season changes(for northern Wisconsin)

Growing season temperature higher and not much change in precipitation = more physiological stress on biota

PCM Lo +2 C

HAD Hi +8 C (14F)

Challenges of modeling species impacts of climate change

Future climate uncertainty GCM variations Human-produced levels of CO2 uncertain

Species likely to respond individually Biology not that well-known for many species

Model validation far into future not possible

Bottom line: we need to incorporate different approaches to quantify and “whittle away” at uncertainties to develop ecologically informed projections – modeling is a key tool to do this

• Tree abundance

• Bird abundance

• Climate•

Environment

• Forest density

• Species traits

Data

DISTRIB model

Species habitat prediction

Tree &Bird

Atlases

ModFacs• Biological

factors• Disturbance

factors• Model

uncertainty

SHIFT modelSpecies

colonization probabilities

Potential migrationby 2100

DISTRIB +

SHIFT

Scoring systemfor tree species

DECISIONSUPPORTFRAMEWO

RK

• Management guidelines

• Implications & tools

Current and future

species manageme

nt

Multi-stage modelling schemeIverson et al. 2011, Ecosystems

The role of climate in shaping vertebrate distributions

Root 1988 Currie 1991

But there is also a strong habitat

component for most species

Therefore we use climate and individual tree species to build our 147 bird models

Important to note when interpreting these models!

The models are predicting potential suitable habitat by year 2100 – not where the species will be.

The DISTRIB model does not account for biotic interactions, other human or natural disturbances.

Climate ChangeTree & Bird Atlas

http://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/atlas

Prothonotary Warbler

Examples of species with projected habitat increases

Brown-headed Nuthatch

http://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/atlas

Emissions scenariosLow High

?

Black-throated Blue Warbler

Black-capped Chickadee

Emissions scenariosLow High

?

Examples of species with projected habitat decreases

http://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/atlas

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

PC

Mlo

AV

Glo

AV

Ghi

Hadhi

Spe

cies

> 2

1.2 - 2

0.9 - 1.1

0.5 - 0.9

< 0.5

Incidence change (Ratio)

General trends of all 147 species across the eastern US

Km (sd)

PCMlo 109 (64.3)

Avglo 142 (88.9)

Avghi 210 (139.5)

Hadhi 212 (149.9)

Mean Center Potential Movement

Matthews et al. 2011 Ecography

The Chicago ecosystem assessment provides one example of these data being summarized regionally to focus the results (Hellmann et al. 2010, J. Great Lakes Res.)

Habitat Changes:Under high emissions • 130 species

changes >=10%• With 76 declining• With 54 increasing

Under low emission• 116 species

changes >= 10%• 64 declining• 52 increasing

Summer tanager

Are these data being used??

The Goal: Identify strategies and approaches to climate change adaptation and mitigationBridge the gap between

scales of prediction management activities on National Forests interactions with the greater community

Swanston et al. 2011

Sugar Maple

?Low

High

Modifying factors Many other factors (biological and disturbance)

come in to play to determine more likely outcomes We rate biological (n=9) and disturbance (n=12)

characteristics for positive or negative impacts Goal was to evaluate more realistic outcomes at

regional and local levels The results from the multi-criteria framework can

be applied to the results present today

Red Maple: • Projected habitat

declines • Characteristics suggest

high adaptability

Black Oak:• Projected habitat

increases• Positive ModFac profile

suggests it may be able to persist in harsh areas

Balsam Fir: • Projected habitat

declines• Negative ModFac• All metrics suggest it

will likely face severe limits in eastern US

Increasin

g Adaptability t

o Clim

ate Change?

Matthews et al. 2011, For. Ecol. Manag.

Potential Changes for Tree Species The “Model Forest” Project

Evaluated 73 species from the region Put in to 8 classes of impacts

Class 1: extirpated (1 species) Class 2: large decrease (12 species) Class 3: small decrease (6 species) Class 4: no change (6 species) Class 5: small increase (4 species) Class 6: large increase (17 species) Class 7: new entry-high and low emissions (11 species) Class 8: new entry-high emissions (16 species)

Score each species for modification factors to help managers interpret potential impacts and suggest adaptation strategies

(Losers)

Class 1 Class 2 Class 3

(Stayers)

Class 4

(Gainers)

Class 5

Class 6

Class 7

Class 8

(New Migrants)

Large Decreasers (Cl. 2)

Better

Worse

species habitat totalPCMlo(mild)

Hadhi(harsh)

balsam fir 4.8 -3.6 -4.4aspen 16.8 -8.2 -14.3paper birch 6 -3.3 -5.4jack pine 3.1 -0.8 -1.5white and red pine 4.7 0 -2.9all oak 10.5 6.8 11.3northern hardwood 17 -3.1 -10

Overall habitat change for the 7 major species groups in N Wisconsin by GCM/emission

% Change in Habitat

CurrentHabitat

Ecosystem Vulnerabilities

The potential changes in species composition may thus lead to a number of ecosystem vulnerabilities:

Lowland hardwood forests (presently dominated by black ash) will be disrupted from drying and especially the emerald ash borer, and probably converted to red maple

Lowland conifer forests (e.g., balsam fir), may be stressed more by dry late summers, disrupting that entire ecosystem

Several ecosystems with species that have been recently declining (e.g., hemlock, paper birch, white spruce) will likely continue to decline

Vegetation changes will have significant effects on wildlife

Swanston et al. 2011

A few final thoughts… Modeling potential responses of 134 tree and 147 birds species

using multi-stage methodology Continues to provide new knowledge of species distributions and

potential for change Carry the research results forward to ensure that it is

management relevant and assumptions are communicated What species may be players: lists of species to evaluate? How might species get there? Do the species life history characteristics compliment or contradict

the habitat changes? Must enter into an adaptive management framework moving

forward: this includes monitoring to provide feedback loops.

We are confronted with the challenge of understanding the response of ecological systems to changing landscapes. More than ever we need to consider how local management decisions fit into the distributions of target species.

Thank you! Web site for most data

presented today: Climate change atlases Species-environment

data for 147 birds and 134 trees

Pdfs of related papers www.nrs.fs.fed.us/atlas

Acknowledgements• Thanks to USDA FS Northern Global Change Program for support• US Forest Service Northern Research Station• Ohio State University