preparing oregon’s fish, wildlife, and habitats for future ...preparing oregon’s fish, wildlife,...

Preparing Oregon’s Fish,Wildlife, and Habitats for Future

Climate Change:A Guide for State Adaptation Efforts

Subcommittee on Fish, Wildlife, and Habitat AdaptationOregon Global Warming Commission

Prepared by:Defenders of WildlifeOregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

Photographs by:Bruce Taylor, Defenders of WildlifePage 7, Mule deer by Tupper Ansel Blake, courtesy of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.Page 12, beaver by Ron Dunnington, Creative Commons, courtesy of the NationalForest Restoration Collaborative.

For more information:

Holly MichaelConservation Strategy & Special Projects CoordinatorOregon Department of Fish and Wildlife3406 Cherry Avenue N.E.Salem, Oregon 97303503-947-6000

Sara O’BrienPrivate Lands Conservation AssociateDefenders of Wildlife1880 Willamette Falls Drive #200West Linn, Oregon 97068503-697-3222

© 2008All rights reserved.

Climate change is the primary long-termchallenge facing Oregon’s people, ecosystems, and economies. Immediate

action is needed to prepare for and proactivelyadapt to the consequences of climate change.State-level preparedness will be critical in copingwith projected changes such as increased temperatures, rising sea levels and increased stormsurges, declining snowpack, more frequent ex-treme precipitation events, and an increased riskof drought and heat waves. These changes havealready created a broad array of secondary effectsin Oregon’s ecosystems.

As the effects of a changing climate becomeincreasingly apparent, Oregon needs a strategy forpreparing for, managing, and responding to cli-mate change impacts. This document, prepared bythe Oregon Global Warming Commission’s Fishand Wildlife Adaptation Subcommittee, outlines aplan for preparing for climate change in naturalsystems, with a specific focus on management offish and wildlife populations and their habitats.

In light of the pressing need for techniquesand strategies for adapting to climate change, themembers of this subcommittee have outlined a setof basic guiding principles for managing fish,wildlife, and habitats in a changing climate:

1. Maintain and restore key ecosystem processes;

2. Establish an interconnected network of lands and waters that support fish and wildlifeadaptation;

3. Acknowledge, evaluate, and weigh the risks involved with proposed management actions inthe context of anticipated climate conditions;

4. Coordinate across political and jurisdictionalboundaries.

Each of these guiding principles carries signif-icant policy implications. In the short term, gettingneeded resources to agencies should be a high pri-ority in any adaptation strategy. In the long term,however, more significant policy changes will beneeded to help agencies manage the effects of cli-mate change. Adaptation efforts should capitalizeon existing policies and strategies whenever possi-ble, but many existing plans and policies will needto be updated to account for climate change im-pacts. The subcommittee offers the following rec-ommendations for developing policy to supportfish and wildlife adaptation.

Address key adaptation funding needs.• Invest in implementation of the Oregon

Conservation Strategy.• Designate a full-time staff lead on climate

change in relevant state agencies.• Use revenue from future cap-and-trade or

carbon tax policies to help fund state adaptation efforts.

• Invest in agencies’ adaptation needs.

1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Preparing Oregon’s Fish, Wildlife, and Habitats for Future Climate Change: A Guide for State Adaptation Efforts

Review, revise, and add policies to prioritizeadaptation.

• Direct and enable state agencies to addressclimate change adaptation.

• Review existing policies in the context ofclimate change.

• Develop a state policy supporting provisionof ecosystem services.

• Authorize and encourage agencies to manageadaptively.

Develop new institutions for collaboration andintegration.

• Create a state-wide monitoring framework.• Highlight public education and outreach.• Implement the relevant recommendations of

the Western Governor’s Association.

• Plan and prepare for long-term governancechanges.

The guidelines and policy recommendationsdescribed here depend on the continual improve-ment of research and monitoring on climatechange and its effects on fish, wildlife, and habi-tats. The subcommittee identified the following re-search priorities in this arena:

• Climate change vulnerability assessments;• Monitoring and evaluation of management

actions;• Long-term research on climate trends and

ecosystem responses;• Regional downscaling of climate models.

2

Climate change is the primary long-termchallenge facing Oregon’s people, ecosys-tems, and economies. With increasing

concern about global climate change, efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions are gaining momentum. But even if these mitigation effortsare swift and effective, there will be an inevitablelag between when we reduce emissions and whenwe see the effects in the climate system and in thenatural world. While reducing emissions is critical,some additional warming is unavoidable.

The impacts of climate change will be significant and far-reaching. Oregonians can expect to see increased temperatures, rising sealevels, declining snowpack, more frequent extremestorms, and an increased risk of drought and heat waves. Ecological systems are likely to behardest hit, but damage to these systems will alsohave serious social and economic consequences. Achanging climate will threaten the provision ofecosystem services that all residents and economicsectors depend on, and wildlife-related industriessuch as commercial fishing and wildlife-basedrecreation will be especially hard-hit.

Immediate action is needed to cope with the changing climate. Oregon should develop a comprehensive plan for climate change adaptation, to plan for and proactively manage the effects of climate change. The term climatechange adaptation describes efforts to reducethe impacts of climate change on social, eco-nomic, and ecological systems and to manage therisk associated with a changing climate.

This document, prepared by the OregonGlobal Warming Commission’s Fish and WildlifeAdaptation Subcommittee, outlines a plan for climate change adaptation in the context of managing fish and wildlife populations and theirhabitats. It was developed for use by the fullGlobal Warming Commission, the Oregon Fishand Wildlife Commission, other natural resourceagencies and their commissions and boards, theGovernor’s office, members of the state legislature, and the general public. This documentreflects the consensus of the Fish and WildlifeAdaptation Subcommittee and is not intended to represent the views of any other agency orcommission. Appendix A lists subcommitteemembers and other contributors.

While further research is required to providethe details of what Oregon can expect from globalclimate change, the need for action is pressing and immediate. Our current body of knowledge issufficient to begin making meaningful decisionsabout adaptation. State agencies and others are already dealing with affected fish and wildlife populations; they urgently need a strategy for coping with present and future impacts that willprovide sufficient guidance but also allow for flexibility in the face of changing information anda changing environment. This document reviewsthe state of our knowledge about climate changeas it relates to fish and wildlife populations andprovides policy recommendations and researchpriorities for building a state fish and wildlifeadaptation strategy.1

3

PREPARING OREGON’S FISH, WILDLIFE, AND HABITATS

FOR FUTURE CLIMATE CHANGE:A GUIDE FOR STATE ADAPTATION EFFORTS


SECTION I. PROBLEM STATEMENT

Climate change is already occurring, and itsimpacts are being felt in ecosystems andcommunities around the world. However,

changes are expected to accelerate through at leastthe next century. The Pacific Northwest region isexpected to experience an additional 1-5°F ofwarming by 2050.2 Temperature predictions be-yond 2050 are less certain because they dependlargely on future trends in emissions. Precipitationprojections are also somewhat less certain, butmost researchers expect a modest increase in win-ter precipitation and a modest decrease in summerprecipitation, with overall annual precipitation ex-pected to remain within the range of natural vari-ability.3 In Oregon, the physical impacts of theseclimate trends are expected to include majorchanges to water cycles: reduced snowpack, earliersnow melt, increased and earlier peak streamflows, and reduced summer stream flows. Modelsalso anticipate increases in the frequency, size, andintensity of wildfires in some ecosystems, as wellas rising sea levels in at least some locations on theOregon coast.4

These changes have already created a broadarray of secondary effects in Oregon’s ecosystems.Current and anticipated ecological effects include:5

Effects of rising temperatures: • Longer, more intense fire seasons and in-

creased fire damage in many ecosystems;• Increased evaporation and decreased soil

moisture; • Decline, extirpation, or extinction of many na-

tive fish and wildlife species and populations,especially those dependent on high-elevation,coldwater, or wetland habitats and populationsat the southern extent of the species’ range;

• Shifts in species’ range, especially to northernareas or higher elevations;

• Earlier arrival of spring conditions and associ-ated changes in the timing of ecological eventssuch as migration, reproduction, and flower-ing, all leading to a mismatch in life cycles ofinterdependent species;

• Exposure to new or increased levels of pestsand pathogens, including increased insectdamage in some forest ecosystems;

• Conditions favoring the introduction, spread,and dominance of non-native invasive plantand animal species.

Effects of changing precipitation patterns: • Decreased water availability and quality in

freshwater systems, including increased watertemperature and sediment levels in streams;

• Degradation or destruction of habitat for na-tive fish and other aquatic species;

• Increased flood and streambed scouringevents in winter;

• Drying of wetlands and headwater streams.

Effects of sea-level rise and increased stormsurges:

• Increased coastal erosion; • Sediment deposition in estuaries; • Coastal and river-mouth flooding; • Saltwater intrusion into freshwater wetlands

and water tables; • Loss of tidal, coastal wetland, and estuary

habitats.

In many cases, a given ecosystem response ac-tually results from a complex interaction of cli-mate change and other factors. For example,changes to fire regimes can be linked not only torising temperatures but also to increased plantproductivity, hydrologic stress to plants, invasivespecies, and damage by pests and diseases (see

4

sidebars).6 The effects of climate change interactwith and exacerbate existing human-causedstresses to natural systems, such as habitat loss dueto land use change, over-allocation of water andother natural resources, spread of invasive species,altered disturbance regimes, landscape fragmenta-tion, and declines in air and water quality.

Because of the many complex, interrelatedchanges associated with climate change, 21st century fish and wildlife managers will need toadapt their management techniques and strategies.They will need to learn to cope better with uncertainty, incomplete information, and a rapidlychanging environment, and they will need to findbetter ways to tap into existing information on climate change and its impacts. Failure to do sowill lead to the permanent loss of species andecosystems, disruptions to ecosystem servicessuch as clean air and water and flood control, andsignificant declines in resource-dependent indus-tries such as fisheries, timber, agriculture, andtourism and recreation.

Preparing Oregon’s Fish, Wildlife, and Habitats for Future Climate Change: A Guide for State Adaptation Efforts 5

Changing Forests -- Climate, Land Use, and Fire

Recent evidence shows a clear link between climate

change and larger and more frequent forest fires in the western

United States. Researchers have found a clear increase in large

wildfire activity that begins in the mid-1980s and is strongly

tied to climate patterns. This increase is evident even in areas

where land use changes have been minimal.

Earlier spring snow melt, longer fire seasons, and higher

spring and summer temperatures associated with global climate

change are believed to exacerbate fire activity in many, though

probably not all, forests. Other climate-related mechanisms

may also contribute to the problem. Increased wind speeds can

fuel larger and more intense fires, and in many systems the

spread of invasive species can play a similar role. In many

forests, past fire suppression and changes in land use will fur-

ther exacerbate changing fire regimes.

Fire plays an important role in nearly all North American

forests, and preventing all fire is not a beneficial or practical

goal. However, changing fire regimes will likely affect fish and

wildlife species, air quality, and watersheds in new and unpre-

dictable ways. They will require land managers, policy makers,

and the general public to make difficult decisions about fuel

management, fire suppression, and development in fire-prone

forests.


SECTION II. GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR FISH

AND WILDLIFE ADAPTATION

In light of the need for techniques and strategies for climate change adaptation, themembers of this subcommittee have outlined

a set of basic guiding principles for managing fish,wildlife, and habitats in a changing climate. Theseprinciples highlight both the challenges fish andwildlife managers will likely face and the strategiesthat can help them meet these challenges. TheGlobal Warming Commission, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, the state Fishand Wildlife Commission, other natural resourceagencies (including the Departments of Forestry,Water Resources, State Lands, EnvironmentalQuality, and Parks and Recreation) and their commissions and boards, the Governor’s Office,the state legislature, and others can consider these guidelines as they establish new policies, institutions, and strategies to promote climatechange adaptation.

1. Maintain and restore key ecosystemprocesses.

Basic ecosystem processes such as fire andflood cycles play a critical role in maintaining di-verse landscapes. Maintaining and restoring theseprocesses will help build resilient ecosystems thatwill help buffer humans, fish, and wildlife fromthe effects of climate change. For example, nearlyall of Oregon’s ecosystems evolved with fire, anormal process that is essential to species diversityand nutrient cycling. Today, however, the fre-quency and intensity of fires have changed insome systems, leaving them more susceptible tothe effects of climate change described in SectionI. Similarly, hydrological cycles are important tomaintaining the resilience of ecosystems, and

6

Complex Climate Responses in Eastern Oregon

Grass- and Shrublands

The level of CO2 in today’s atmosphere is about 34%

greater than in preindustrial times. Increasing atmospheric CO2

is a major cause of global climate change, but it is also directly

affects how plants grow, function, and compete for water and

other resources. Generally, higher concentrations of CO2 are

associated with greater plant productivity and more efficient

water use. This may seem like good news, but it also appears to

be changing competition between species, resulting in shifts in

species composition, increasing fires, and the invasion of

woody plants and annual grasses into other ecosystems.

In eastern Oregon, mid-elevation grasslands and shrub-

lands are deteriorating due to several interrelated factors. Ju-

niper are expanding at middle elevations and non-native annuals

such as cheatgrass are expanding at lower elevations, squeezing

out the native grass and shrub species, and associated wildlife,

in between. Increased levels of atmospheric CO2 help the in-

vading species outcompete native shrubs and perennial grasses.

Increased productivity and changes in temperature and precipi-

tation appear to be driving more frequent and larger fires, which

in turn favors annual grasses. Annual grasses produce more bio-

mass, which also tends to accelerate fire regimes. Paradoxically,

the spread of juniper at middle elevations decreases fire fre-

quency. As a result, a given area may experience both increased

and decreased fire frequency at different locations, creating a

new set of challenges for managers.

These changes combine with human development and

land use change to create a very real threat to eastern Oregon’s

grassland and shrubland systems and their associated wildlife,

which include a high diversity of grassland-dependent raptors,

songbirds, and small mammals, as well as the well-known

Greater sage-grouse. Future management decisions should ac-

knowledge and address the important roles climate change, fire,

and invasive species play in shaping Eastern Oregon landscapes.

maintaining dynamic streams and rivers will helpminimize the effects of climate change on manyfish and wildlife species (see sidebar).

Climate change will affect ecosystem processeswithin a context of pre-existing human-causedstresses. Land-use change, landscape fragmenta-tion, habitat destruction, pollution and otherthreats to water quality and quantity, introductionof invasive species, and other anthropogenicprocesses have already endangered many speciesand driven some to extinction. For species andsystems already at risk, climate change may proveto be one stress too many. Dealing with existingstressors on ecosystem processes may be amongthe most valuable and least risky strategies available for climate change adaptation, in part because we have more knowledge about causes,effects, and solutions.

Managing ecosystems to maintain and restorethese key processes will help to keep future management options open and greatly increaseour capacity to deal with uncertainty and change.Existing policy and planning frameworks that acknowledge and address the importance ofecosystem processes can provide a useful startingpoint for addressing climate adaptation needs. For example, the Oregon Conservation Strategycontains little direct information on climatechange adaptation, but it does provide an important framework for maintaining and restoring ecosystem processes and building resiliency.


Flooding as a Key Ecological Process

Oregon’s streams and rivers have been substantially af-

fected by human activities. Development in floodplains, over-

allocation, damming, runoff, and disturbances to riparian areas

have all degraded water resources. In many streams and rivers

flooding is now controlled, channels have been simplified,

native vegetation has been removed, dams alter flow and block

fish passage, and water quality and quantity have declined.

Climate change is adding another layer of human influence, and

all of these pre-existing stresses on water resources make the

state’s ecological, social, and economic systems more vulnerable

to the effects of climate change.

Degraded streams and rivers affect a wide variety of fish

and wildlife species. The changes described above are combin-

ing with climate change to create streams and rivers that are too

warm to sustain healthy populations of some coldwater species,

including Oregon’s many species of salmon, steelhead and

trout. Rivers with simplified channels also lack the small patches

of coldwater habitat – alcoves and gravel bars – of more

complex natural channels. Coldwater fish are left without their

needed habitat, and warmwater invasive species begin to take

over.

The following actions can help make streams and rivers

more resilient to climate change and other human im-

pacts:

• Maintain natural flow regimes by minimizing withdrawals

for municipal, agricultural, and industrial uses;

• Protect and restore native plant communities in riparian

areas. Riparian vegetation helps buffer streams and rivers

against unnatural upslope disturbances and flood events,

provides shading to prevent river water warming, and

provides habitat for many aquatic species;

• Protect and restore channel complexity to provide habitat

for aquatic species, create a natural buffer for flood events,

and restore groundwater recharge. Reconnect river

channels and their flood plains;

• Maintain dynamic streams and rivers, allowing for both

peak flow events and seasonal low flow.

Continued on next page


2. Establish an interconnected network oflands and waters that support fish and wildlifeadaptation.

Effectively managing fish, wildlife, and habi-tats in the context of climate change will requirean ambitious approach that includes both coreconservation areas, which are managed primarilyfor conservation values, and areas that are man-aged for multiple values while providing habitatfor fish and wildlife species. Core conservationareas include both public lands and private landsmanaged by land trusts, conservation organiza-tions, or individuals for conservation purposes.However, other private landowners often managelands for production as well as conservation val-ues. Incentive programs and other mechanismscan help encourage these landowners to createbuffer zones around core areas or provide enoughhabitat connectivity for fish and wildlife to moveamong core areas.

Climate change makes the need for strategicconservation efforts on both public and privatelands ever more pressing. Past conservation deci-sions did not always take into account the need for habitat connectivity, which will prove to be especially important under changing climate conditions. Mobile species can move to more suitable habitat, but they will do so in unpre-dictable and chaotic ways, and narrowly-defined“wildlife corridors” will not be sufficient. Man-agers should avoid creating any new barriers todispersal, and some existing barriers will need tobe removed.

Habitat connectivity at the scale needed forclimate change adaptation will require land-man-agement agencies, land conservation groups, andincentive programs to plan their conservation in-terventions strategically, collaboratively define pri-ority lands and strategy, invest in these prioritiesfirst. Although the habitats and species found in agiven area may change over time, managing landsto sustain ecological processes will help make thelarger surrounding landscapes more resilient to theeffects of climate change. Careful managementcan help ensure that these places continue to pro-vide needed ecosystem services support healthypopulations of plants and animals.

Past accomplishments in conserving fish,wildlife, and their habitats are important and willhelp provide the foundations for this network.However, a lack of coordination among diversestakeholders has made it difficult to act strategi-cally. Decisions about what land needs to be managed primarily or partially for conservationpurposes should be coordinated at least at thestate level. The Oregon Conservation Strategyprovides a useful starting point for this process,but much work remains to be done (see sidebarpage 12).

8

Flooding as a Key Ecological Process,

continued from page 7

• Limit introduction and spread of invasive species,

especially warm water invasive species;

• Manage watersheds to maintain and restore habitat

“stepping stones” so that aquatic species can disperse

through river networks and move to their best available

habitat.

Maintaining and restoring key hydrological processes will

require the state to limit new development in floodplains and

create incentives to rebuild outside the floodplain. Healthy river

ecosystems are always changing and are built by flood events

interacting with the landscape. Focusing on protecting intact

ecosystems and limiting inappropriate development can

significantly improve the quantity and quality of our water

resources while limiting political and economic costs.

3. Acknowledge, evaluate, and weigh the risks involved with proposed management actions in the context of anticipated climateconditions.

Every management action carries some risk,and some actions are inherently riskier than others. The risk may be to an individual, a species,or the functioning of an entire watershed orecosystem, and it may be due primarily to uncertainties about future climates or to otherecological factors (see figure below).

Some conservation actions, especially thosethat simply prevent future threats to relatively in-tact ecosystems, are likely to benefit species nomatter what future climates look like. These areoften referred to as “no-regrets” strategies. For ex-ample, increasing habitat connectivity or control-ling non-native invasive species will likely benefitnative fish and wildlife species and their habitatsregardless of future climate conditions. In manycases, good conservation actions will prove to begood adaptation actions. In other words, much ofour existing knowledge about how to conserve


Risk Associated with Management Activities

From Lawler, JJ, TH Tear, C. Pyke, R. Shaw, P. Gonzalez, P. Kareiva, L. Hansen, L. Hannah, K. Klausmeyer, A. Aldous, C. Bienz, and S. Pearsall. In press. Resource management in a changing and uncertain environment. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment.


species, systems, and processes will continue to be relevant and useful under future climate conditions.

However, the success of some conservationactions will depend on the validity of climate pre-dictions. Because of the uncertainty inherent inthese predictions, such actions may be among theriskiest. Aggressive management techniques, suchas transporting a species to its potential futurerange, creating new habitat based on projectionsof future range, or introducing new species into achanging habitat carry a great deal of risk andshould not be undertaken lightly.

The most effective management strategies willlikely include some combination of high- and low-risk approaches. Climate change may force man-agers and policymakers to raise the level of riskthat is acceptable, in order to cope with the dan-gers of inaction. In many cases, a decision to takeno action may carry the greatest risk of all.

4. Coordinate across political and jurisdictional boundaries.

Because climate change will affect all ecosys-tems, adaptation will require significant collabora-tion and coordination among federal, tribal, state,and local governments and agencies, privatelandowners, nongovernmental organizations, andothers. In many cases, failing to coordinate adap-tation strategies will result in unnecessary duplica-tion of efforts and inefficient resource allocation.This coordination will be difficult, in part becauseit must take place at many levels simultaneously.Entities must work together within regions, states,and watersheds, and doing so effectively may re-quire the creation of new institutions.

Integration among state agencies is particularlyimportant, because many state agencies will nothave sufficient resources to meet their own needsfor climate change research, education, and exten-

sion. An interagency strategy is needed to identifyresearch needs, coordinate data collection, and ensure data collected across jurisdictions are available and accessible to others.

SECTION III. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

There is an immediate need to increase the resources available to manage climate im-pacts on fish and wildlife and their habi-

tats. Fish and wildlife managers are alreadyexperiencing the effects of climate change, andcurrent funding and staffing levels within stateagencies are insufficient to cope with either cur-rent or future changes. Getting needed resourcesto agencies should be a high priority in any adap-tation strategy.

In the long term, however, more significantpolicy changes will be needed for agencies to man-age the impacts of climate change on species,habitats, and ecosystems. Adaptation effortsshould capitalize on existing policies and struc-tures whenever possible, but many existing plansand policies will need to be updated to account forclimate change impacts. Adapting to future climatechanges will also require new policy solutions, in-stitutions, and governance structures. Climate con-ditions that are rapidly changing, more variable,and less predictable will eventually require someagencies to expand or adjust their mandate, mis-sion, organization, and management tools. Agen-cies, managers, and decision-makers may feeloverwhelmed by the scale and uncertainty in-volved with dealing with climate change.

Governments and agencies that acknowledgethe situation and begin adapting as soon as possi-ble will be ahead of the curve in dealing with cli-mate-induced changes. They will be betterprepared for surprises, more able to avoid cata-strophic effects, and more successful in coping

10

with unavoidable changes. The Fish, Wildlife, andHabitat Adaptation Subcommittee of the OregonGlobal Warming Commission offers the followingrecommendations for developing policy to support fish and wildlife adaptation.

Address key adaptation funding needs

• Invest in implementation of the Oregon ConservationStrategy.

Fish and wildlife adaptation to the adverseeffects of climate change will depend greatly onour ability to manage for resilient ecosystems. TheOregon Conservation Strategy is a key tool in thiscontext, and its implementation should take a highpriority in state adaptation efforts (see sidebar onp. 12). The strategy was developed to provide anoverarching framework for state conservation ef-forts, and it covers the diversity of species andecosystems throughout the state. It provides guid-ance to agencies and others in prioritizing conser-vation actions and should not be duplicated orreplaced by development of a stand-alone fish andwildlife adaptation strategy. Instead, climatechange adaptation should be integrated into theexisting strategy. All resource agencies shouldwork to integrate adaptation into their existingplans and ongoing activities; increased funding willbe needed to more fully implement the strategies.

As part of its upcoming revision process, thestrategy should explicitly identify priority ecosys-tems and lands and key ecosystem processes underfuture anticipated climate conditions, and it shouldassess the connectivity of priority lands and thevulnerability of ecoregions, habitats, and speciesto anticipated climate changes.

• Designate a staff lead on climate change in relevantagencies.

The State of Oregon should designate at leastone full-time staff lead on climate change adapta-tion for each state natural resource agency. Thisstaff position should be responsible for incorpo-rating climate change adaptation into the agency’sregular portfolio and collaborating with other


Policy Recommendations for Fish and Wildlife

Adaptation

Address key adaptation funding needs:

• Invest in implementation of the Oregon Conserva-tion Strategy.

• Designate a staff lead on climate change in relevantstate agencies.

• Use revenue from future cap-and-trade or carbon taxpolicies to help fund state adaptation efforts.

• Invest in building agencies’ capacity for adaptation.

Review, revise, and add policies to prioritize

adaptation:

• Direct and enable state agencies to address climatechange adaptation.

• Review existing policies in the context of climatechange.

• Authorize and encourage agencies to manage adap-tively.

• Develop a state policy supporting provision ofecosystem services.

Develop new institutions for collaboration and

integration:

• Create a state-wide monitoring framework.• Highlight public education and outreach.• Implement the relevant suggestions of the Western

Governor’s Association Wildlife Initiative.• Plan and prepare for long-term governance changes.


agencies and organizations as needed. As a firststep, the state should direct the staff lead to conduct a review of existing policies and proce-dures in the context of climate change adaptation.In the future, many more similar positions will beneeded, and coping with climate change will play akey role in most ongoing agency activities. In theshort term, agencies may need to re-evaluate theirpriorities and redirect staff resources to addressthe challenges ahead, rather than the priorities ofthe past.

Because of the scope of current and futureadaptation needs and limited options for funding,agencies will also need support from other institu-tions, including research universities, federal agen-cies, and non-profit organizations. They may wishto create an advisory body on climate changeadaptation to provide information and guidance tostaff, commission members, and the interestedpublic.

• Use revenue from future cap-and-trade or carbon taxpolicies to help fund state adaptation efforts.

Existing funding for state wildlife agencies hashistorically been heavily dependent on sales ofhunting, fishing, and trapping licenses and tags.Given the rapidly expanding need for fish andwildlife management in a changing climate, anddeclining revenues in license sales, state wildlifeagencies are facing a critical shortfall in funding.7

Without permanent, dedicated funding in place itwill be impossible for any agency to approach themonumental tasks associated with adaptation.

Revenue from future mitigation efforts will beone appropriate source for such funding. Anystate, regional, or national cap-and-trade or carbontax system established should set aside a signifi-cant portion of auction or tax revenue for fish andwildlife and other forms of climate change adap-tation. Similarly, emissions offset programs on

forests and agricultural lands should, wheneverpossible, be used to stimulate improvements inmanagement that support provision of ecosystemservices and fish and wildlife adaptation. Giventhe scale of climate change and its effects, it iscrucial that state and local efforts be supported inpart with federal funds.

12

The Oregon Conservation Strategy

The Oregon Conservation Strategy, developed as thestate’s first overarching strategy for conservation actions,will provide a useful framework for prioritizing fish andwildlife adaptation needs. It represents a statewide effortat setting conservation priorities and is linked to a con-gressionally-mandated national effort. The strategy cov-ers diverse species and spatial scales, and it is designed tobe adaptive and flexible in order to deal with emergingconservation issues. Furthermore, it already emphasizesmany of the elements of climate change adaptation, in-cluding maximizing connectivity, managing for biodiver-sity, and limiting non-climate stresses.

As climate change makes complex systems evenmore difficult to manage, fish and wildlife agencies willhave to go through an open and unambiguous process todetermine where scarce resources predicted climatechanges on species and habitats. The Oregon Conserva-tion Strategy outlines human activities that affect keyecosystem processes, identifies priority habitats andspecies, and then uses this information to identify andmap Conservation Opportunity Areas where these pri-orities can best be addressed through voluntary conserva-tion efforts. While these elements should be reviewedand revised to more directly address climate change, theOregon Conservation Strategy provides an importanttool for contextualizing and managing these issues andfor reaching consensus on statewide conservation priori-ties. With sufficient funding and an inter-agency commit-ment to implementation, the Oregon ConservationStrategy could form a key first step in developing astatewide adaptation strategy.

• Invest in building agencies’ capacity for adaptation.

Climate change adaptation needs are too important and too comprehensive to be addressedon an ad hoc basis or as an unfunded mandate.The State of Oregon should establish a source of funding specifically dedicated to supportingagencies’ climate change adaptation efforts. Thegovernor and the legislature should allocate thesefunds as needed to support adaptation needs identified by the Global Warming Commission,the interagency coordinating committee describedabove, the agencies’ commissions, and the agencies themselves.

Review, revise, and add policies to prioritizeadaptation.

• Direct and enable state agencies to address climatechange adaptation.

The state of Oregon should direct and enableagencies to incorporate climate change considera-tions and adaptation planning into normal activi-ties and planning processes. Decisions made at alllevels and in all sectors of government can posi-tively or negatively affect fish and wildlife adapta-tion to climate change, but climate projections andecosystem responses to climate are rarely explicitlyconsidered in these processes. A clear mandate isneeded that climate considerations, including im-pacts on fish, wildlife, and habitats, should be inte-grated into future agency activities. As notedabove, this mandate will require significant invest-ment to build agencies’ capacity to meet adapta-tion needs.

• Review existing policies in the context of climatechange.

While existing policies can be useful in guidingfish and wildlife adaptation efforts, they also oftencontain assumptions that are no longer valid in thecontext of a highly variable and rapidly changingclimate. Most of these policies fail to consider climate change and its effects on species and systems in identifying and prioritizing manage-ment actions. Some aim to reconstruct past conditions on the landscape or promote othergoals which may be unreasonable or impossibleunder current and future climate patterns.Changes will likely be needed to ensure that climate impacts are addressed in policy and thatexisting policies do not conflict with the realitiesof managing fish and wildlife in a changing climate. The first step toward developing climate-responsive policies is to conduct a formal reviewof relevant policies in the context of ongoing and anticipated climate changes. Conducting thisreview within the state university system wouldcapitalize on existing resources.

• Authorize and encourage agencies to manage adaptively.

Adaptive management is a method for makingnatural resource management decisions in a context of incomplete information, uncertainty,risk, and change. It is a way of gradually accruingthe information needed for decision-making without indefinitely postponing needed actions.Management decisions are designed to providedata and feedback, which are in turn used to inform future decisions or policies. At its mostbasic level, adaptive management consists of coupling management actions with monitoringand evaluation of results. In order to succeed atany form of adaptive management, managers



must create scientifically sound alternative man-agement plans that anticipate future results andthen monitor the actual results closely and be pre-pared to change future actions as indicated. Publictrust and the policy environment will play a majorrole in determining the success of these efforts.

The first step toward enabling adaptive man-agement is to specifically authorize it through leg-islation. State agencies currently lack statutoryauthority to manage adaptively. Agencies shouldbe both authorized and encouraged to incorporateadaptive management into their existing programs.Ultimately, broader policy changes may also beneeded to enable and support agencies in usingadaptive management practices. Future environ-mental and natural resource policies may need toincorporate greater flexibility to allow managers touse adaptive management strategies. Such changesare likely to be controversial and will depend onbuilding trust among policymakers, agencies, andthe public. As a first step, barriers to adaptivemanagement should be removed and policiesshould be enacted to create a coordinated, intera-gency monitoring system to support managementdecisions.

• Develop a state policy supporting provision of ecosystem services.

Ecosystem services are the benefits that humans enjoy as a result of natural systems andkey ecological processes, including fish andwildlife habitat, water quantity, filtration of air andwater pollution, pollination, control of pests anddiseases, control of invasive plants and animals,maintenance of soil productivity, and avoidance or offset of greenhouse gas emissions. Theseservices form the backbone of all of the state’ssocial, ecological, and economic systems. Policiesthat address the provision of ecosystem servicesoffer a unique opportunity to address the

guidelines described in Section II by identifying aset of values for conservation that cuts acrossecosystems, species, land ownerships and uses, andjurisdictions. Maintaining, restoring, and enhanc-ing ecosystem services is a low-risk strategy in thatit supports the benefits humans derive from natu-ral systems regardless of future climate conditions.It will also direct conservation actions toward theresources that help buffer both human and naturalcommunities from the effects of climate change asecosystems and landscapes shift in unexpectedways. Oregon should develop a policy or set ofpolicies to explicitly address the provision ofecosystem services under changing climate condi-tions.

Develop new institutions for collaboration andintegration

• Create a state-wide monitoring framework.

Monitoring will play a vital role in fish andwildlife adaptation and in prioritizing future con-servation needs. This role is especially significantin the context of rapidly changing ecosystems anduncertainty about future climate conditions. Agen-cies will need to expand their monitoring effortsto address climate change without jeopardizinglong-term monitoring programs that remain rele-vant and useful regardless of climate impacts.

To make the most efficient use of availablefunding, monitoring efforts should be coordinatedand shared among all relevant agencies. Monitor-ing across boundaries and jurisdictions will formthe basis for decision-making in a variable andrapidly changing environment. A single agency orgroup should be assigned responsibility for devel-oping an overarching, state-wide monitoringframework for natural resources. This kind offramework is urgently needed to guide the genera-tion of data needed for adaptive management, as

14

well as to collect and make available existing data.Basing this monitoring effort in one of the state’suniversities would help promote collaboration andcapitalize on existing resources, but the effort willrequire the mutual cooperation of agencies andresearch institutions to ensure that both new andexisting monitoring needs are addressed. Existinglong-term monitoring sites are especially useful fortracking climate impacts over time and should notbe disrupted (see Section IV).

The responsible agency or group should buildon previous work by the Biodiversity MonitoringWorkgroup, the Western Governors’ Association,state and federal agencies, conservation groups,and others to identify monitoring needs, coordi-nate data collection, and make sure data collectedacross jurisdictions are available and accessible toothers. Monitoring should be conducted to sup-port specific decision-making needs, and datashould be stored and made available through a sin-gle clearinghouse. Permanent dedicated fundingand the engagement of agency leadership will beneeded to ensure the viability of the monitoringframework over time.

• Highlight public education and outreach.

The success of fish and wildlife adaptation efforts will depend greatly on the support and participation of private citizens. In order to buildconsensus on the need for both mitigation andadaptation, the state should conduct a major public education campaign that highlights the real-ity of climate change, the anticipated impacts onnatural resources and resource-dependent indus-tries, and the public’s role in adaptation and miti-gation efforts. The Global Warming Commissionhas established a Communication and OutreachCommittee to help address these needs.

• Implement the relevant recommendations of the Western Governors’ Association Wildlife Initiative.

The Climate Change Working Group associ-ated with this initiative has outlined a number ofbarriers to identifying and maintaining crucialhabitats and functioning wildlife corridors in theface of climate change, as well as recommenda-tions for overcoming these barriers. Their recom-mendations include establishment of a WildlifeAdaptation Advisory Council to facilitate climate-impact assessments and address other researchneeds, development of new revenue streams tosupport wildlife adaptation to climate change, anddirecting other state agencies to work with statewildlife agencies to support viable wildlife popula-tions under a changing climate.8

• Plan and prepare for long-term governance changes.

In the long term, climate change is likely tofundamentally change the way governments andother institutions function. The challenges nowfacing these institutions are unlike any previousecological or social problems. Coping effectivelywith these challenges may require significant structural changes in governance. As the effectsof climate change build and accelerate, the statemust work to build its capacity to adapt. In stategovernment, a commission or lead agency will beneeded to coordinate and direct adaptation efforts.In order to accommodate the immediate need foradaptation activities, this group must have the support of the legislature, state boards and commissions, and the governor’s office in direct-ing agencies to address adaptation needs. Similarefforts will be needed at the local, regional, national, and international levels to build signifi-cant adaptation efforts as climate change and itsimpacts accelerate.



SECTION IV RESEARCH AND MONITORING

NEEDS

The guidelines and policy recommendationsdescribed here depend on the continualimprovement of research and monitoring

on climate change and its effects on fish, wildlife,and habitats. The Global Warming Commissiontasked its Science and Technology Committeewith helping to determine climate change researchpriorities for the state. These priorities should include research relevant to fish and wildlife adaptation. The Fish, Wildlife, and Habitats Subcommittee identified the following researchpriorities in this arena:

Climate change vulnerability assessments:State- or regional-scale assessments of climatechange vulnerability are needed to help supportagencies’ prioritization and management decisions.These assessments should be aimed at determin-ing which species and ecosystems will likely bemost affected, and they should help guide deci-sions about how to best manage the most nega-tively affected species and systems.9 The OregonConservation Strategy provides a useful frame-work for conducting these studies.

Monitoring and evaluation of manage-ment actions: There is an urgent need to tie ex-isting and proposed management techniques withon-the-ground results. Evaluating management ac-tions will be critical to coping with future climateuncertainties, and there is a particular need for re-search that shows how climate change affectsmanagement results. For example, without muchmore information on the ecological effects ofspecies translocation, no definitive analysis can bemade of the costs and benefits involved. Integra-

tion of research and project monitoring will helpguide adaptation efforts and maximize the effec-tiveness of funds spent, and it will also help mini-mize the risks inherent to managing in a changingclimate.

Long-term research on climate trends andecosystem responses: To provide needed infor-mation on climate impacts on ecosystems andspecies, research and monitoring efforts will needto be conducted over longer time periods than arecurrently common. Long-term funding and insti-tutional support will be needed to encourage long-term research. Existing long-term ecologicalresearch such as OSU’s Andrews Long-term Eco-logical Research site, Forest Service ExperimentalForests, and the Oregon Department of Fish andWildlife’s Lifecycle Monitoring Sites can be a cor-nerstone of such efforts.

Regional downscaling of climate models:Global or even continental-scale models are toocoarse to effectively guide more localized adapta-tion strategies. Agencies and policymakers need asmuch information as possible on anticipated cli-mate changes at the regional and finer scales. Atthe regional scale, however, climate is significantlyaffected by processes other than global green-house gas emissions, and much more research isneeded into regionally-relevant climate processesand feedbacks at a range of scales. The creationof a set of regional-scale climate scenarios for usein adaptation planning would be particularly help-ful for use in decision-making at the state level.

Finally, for research and monitoring to effec-tively guide fish and wildlife adaptation efforts, anexplicit connection must be drawn between cli-mate research and decision-making, including notonly policymakers but also agencies, managers,and landowners. Ultimately, a new institution maybe required to fill this role, and several researchers

16

have suggested the development of a NationalClimate Service.10 Similarly, the Western Governor’s Association has suggested the development of a regional clearinghouse forwildlife adaptation information.11 Oregon shouldsupport the development of such new institutionsto the extent that they will meet key research andinformation needs related to climate change adaptation. In some cases, however, expanding themandate of existing institutions and providingthem with needed resources may be more efficientthan creating new ones.

CONCLUSION

Three salient themes seem to recur withinmost discussions of fish and wildlifeadaptation to climate change. First, al-

though human-induced climate change is a newphenomenon, and the scale of current and ex-pected change is unique over at least several hun-dreds of thousands of years, many of the specificproblems and solutions involved are familiar.While presenting new and unexpected challenges,climate change is also exacerbating old ones. Interms of fish and wildlife adaptation, these in-clude land-use change, landscape fragmentation,pollution, invasive species, changes to disturbanceregimes, and many others. Fortunately, this meansthat many of the old tools for conserving wildlifeand habitat remain relevant and continue to gainimportance. Unfortunately, it also means that wemust now deal with these ongoing problemswithin the context of climate uncertainty and ahost of new threats that are uniquely caused bythe changing climate. In this context, it is impor-tant to acknowledge both the usefulness of oldideas and tools and the need for new ones.

The need to develop methods for coping withuncertainty is another major theme throughoutdiscussions of climate change adaptation. Adap-

tive management represents one such method, butother approaches are needed. One other approachis to focus on provision of ecosystem services orprotection of key ecosystem processes as a frame-work for conservation. Another is to reduce un-certainty as much as possible through improvedmodeling and ongoing scientific research. How-ever, researchers agree that some degree of uncer-tainty will always be inherent in our understandingof natural and biological systems. This uncertaintyis a basic trait of thinking about and planning forthe future and should not be confused with a sim-ple lack of information. Ultimately, coping withuncertainty may require fundamental changes toour ways of thinking, planning, and managing ourenvironment.

Finally, nearly every element of fish andwildlife adaptation to climate change highlights theneed to prioritize conservation actions. There is animmediate need to increase the resources availableto manage climate impacts on fish and wildlife andtheir habitats. However, the challenges involvedare so vast that virtually no level of time or fund-ing will allow for all of them to be meaningfullyaddressed. Thus, an explicit statement of conser-vation priorities is needed to ensure that adapta-tion efforts are as strategic, coordinated, andeffective as possible. This prioritization should notbe confused with a triage situation, in which emer-gency decisions are made that often create newlong-term problems even as they solve short-termones. Instead, managers, policy-makers, and thegeneral public will need to agree on a set of long-term goals that help target conservation actionsand guide decisions relevant to fish and wildlifemanagement. This document aims to provide afirst attempt at outlining what those goals mightlook like, but several iterations of this process willlikely be needed before consensus can be built onthe details of prioritization and implementation.



APPENDIX A

Members of the Oregon Global Warming

Commission’s Fish, Wildlife, and Habitat Adaptation

Subcommittee

Allison Aldous Director of Research and Monitoring, The Nature Conservancy in Oregon

Bob Altman Northern Pacific Rainforest Bird Conservation Region Coordinator, Partners in FlightAmerican Bird Conservancy

Paula BurgessDirector of North America Programs, Wild Salmon Center

Alan Christensen Project Manager, Western Rivers Conservancy

Char CorkranNorthwest Ecological Research Institute

Cindy Deacon-WilliamsDirector of Aquatic Science and Education Programs, National Center for Conservation Science and Policy

Dan EdgeProfessor of Wildlife Ecology, Oregon State University Department of Fisheries and Wildlife

Roy Elicker (Co-Chair)Director, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

Stan GregoryProfessor of Fisheries, Oregon State University Departmentof Fisheries and Wildllife

Lori HenningsSenior Natural Resource Scientist, Metro

David HulseProfessor of Landscape Architecture, University of Oregon

Eric LemelsonManaging Owner, Lemelson Vineyards

Roy LoweManager, Oregon Coast National Wildlife Refuge Complex,US Fish and Wildlife Service

Peter PaquetFish and Wildlife Division Manager, Northwest Power Planning Council

Mark PetrieWaterfowl Science Team Leader, Ducks Unlimited

Tom SpiesResearch Ecologist, USDA Forest Service, Pacific NorthwestResearch Station

Tony SvejcarRangeland Scientist/Research Leader, USDA AgriculturalResearch Service

Sara Vickerman (Co-Chair)Senior Director, Biodiversity Partnerships, Defenders ofWildlife

Steve ZackConservation Scientist/Coordinator, Pacific West ProgramWildlife Conservation Society

Other Contributors

Bob DavisonSenior Scientist, Endangered Species and Wildlife Conservation, Defenders of Wildlife

18

Joshua LawlerAssistant Professor, College of Forest Resources, Universityof Washington

Holly MichaelConservation Strategy and Special Projects Coordinator, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

Michael PopeOregon Conservation Strategy Implementation Coordinator,Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

Sara O’BrienPrivate Lands Conservation Associate, Defenders ofWildlife

NOTES

1 Previous documents discuss the changes anticipated in thePacific Northwest, potential effects on fish and wildlife, andgeneral concepts to guide management, so we will provideonly a brief overview of these topics in the first section ofthis strategy document. Among others: Climate LeadershipInitiative, Institute for a Sustainable Environment. 2008.Preparing the Pacific Northwest for Climate Change: AFramework for Integrative Preparation Planning for Natural,Human, Built, and Economic Systems. University of Ore-gon; Lawler, J.J., M. Mathias, A.E. Yahnke, and E.H. Girvetz.2008. Oregon’s Biodiversity in a Changing Climate. Reportprepared for the Climate Leadership Initiative, University ofOregon. Information and recommendations contained hereare based on a formal literature review, speakers at a work-shop of the Oregon Global Warming Commission’s NaturalResources Committee conducted on August 5, 2008, andinput from members of the Oregon Global Warming Com-mission’s Fish and Wildlife Adaptation Subcommittee.

2 This regional projection by Mote et al. (2005) is based onthe projections of the Intergovernmental Panel on climatechange, which focuses on changes at the global scale.

3 Mote, P.W., E. Salathé, and C. Peacock. 2005. Scenarios offuture climate for the Pacific Northwest. Report preparedfor King County, WA by the Climate Impacts Group, Uni-versity of Washington, Seattle, WA..

4 Lawler, J.J., M. Mathias, A.E. Yahnke, and E.H. Girvetz.2008. Oregon’s Biodiversity in a Changing Climate. Reportprepared for the Climate Leadership Initiative, University ofOregon.

5 Brennan, EJ. 2008. Reducing the Impact of Global Warm-ing on Wildlife: The Science, Management, and Policy Chal-lenges Ahead. Defenders of Wildlife. Washington, D.C.;Climate Leadership Initiative, Institute for a Sustainable En-vironment 2008. Preparing the Pacific Northwest for Cli-mate Change: A Framework for Integrative Preparation andPlanning for Natural, Human, Built, and Economic Systems.University of Oregon; Independent Scientific AdvisoryBoard. 2007. Climate Change Impacts on Columbia RiverBasin Fish and Wildlife. Independent Scientific AdvisoryBoard for the Northwest Power and Conservation Council,Columbia River Basin Indian Tribes, and National MarineFisheries Service; Lawler, J.J., M. Mathias, A.E. Yahnke, andE.H. Girvetz. 2008. Oregon’s Biodiversity in a Changing Cli-mate. Report prepared for the Climate Leadership Initiative,University of Oregon; Pyke, CR, R Thomas, RD Porter, JLHellmann, JS Dukes, DM Lodge, and G Chavarria. 2008.Current practices and future opportunities for policy on cli-mate change and invasive species. Conservation Biology22(3): 585-592; Saunders, S, C Montgomery, T Easley, TSpencer. 2008. Hotter and Drier: The West’s Changed Cli-mate. Rocky Mountain Climate Organization and NaturalResources Defense Council; Sheikh, PA, ML Corn, JALeggett, and P Folger. 2007. Global Climate Change andWildlife. Congressional Research Service Report #RS22597;US Climate Change Science Program and the Subcommitteeon Global Change Research. 2008. Preliminary Review ofAdaptation Options for Climate-Sensitive Ecosystems andResources. Final Report, Synthesis, and Assessment Product4.4.



6 Brooks, ML, CM D’Antonio, DM Richardson, JB Grace,JE Keeley, JM DiTomaso, RJ Hobbs, M Pellant, and D Pyke.2004. Effects of invasive alien plants on fire regimes. Bio-science 54 (7):677-688; Fried, JS, MS Torn, and E Mills.2004. The impact of climate change on wildfire severity: Aregional forecast for northern California. Climatic Change64 (1-2):169-191; Westerling, AL, HG Hidalgo, DR Cayan,and TW Swetnam. 2006. Warming and earlier spring increasewestern US forest wildfire activity. Science 313 (5789):940-943.

7 Western Governors’ Association. 2008. Wildlife CorridorsInitiative (Climate Change Committee). Available at:http://www.westgov.org/wga/publicat/wildlife08.pdf.


9 Lawler, J.J., M. Mathias, A.E. Yahnke, and E.H. Girvetz.2008. Oregon’s Biodiversity in a Changing Climate. Reportprepared for the Climate Leadership Initiative, University ofOregon.

10 E. L. Miles, A. K. Snover, L. C. Whitely Binder, E. S.Sarachik, P. W. Mote, and N. Mantua. 2006. An approach todesigning a national climate service. Proceedings of the Na-tional Academy of Sciences 103 (52): 19616-19623.


20

preparing oregon’s fish, wildlife, and habitats for future ...preparing oregon’s fish, wildlife,...

Documents