assessing climate change impacts, vulnerability …...forestry and peatlands management branch...
TRANSCRIPT
Forestry and Peatlands Management BranchWinnipeg, Manitoba, 2015
Assessing Climate Change Impacts, Vulnerability and Adaptation:
Case Study of the Pineland Forest Section in Southeastern Manitoba
I
Table of Contents
List of Acronyms/ Abbreviations ..................................................................................... III
List of Figures ................................................................................................................. IV
List of Tables ................................................................................................................... V
List of Appendices ........................................................................................................... V
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................... VI
Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................... VIII
Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1
I. Approach ...................................................................................................................... 4
II. Results ...................................................................................................................... 10
2.1. Contemporary landscape of the Pineland Forest Section ................................... 10
2.1.1 Geographic location ....................................................................................... 10
2.1.2 Geology, landform and soil types ................................................................... 11
2.1.3 Climate........................................................................................................... 11
2.1.4 Land use and land cover types ...................................................................... 15
2. 1.5 Forest types .................................................................................................. 17
2.1.6 Wildlife ........................................................................................................... 21
2.1.7 Socio-economic conditions ............................................................................ 21
2.1.8 Forest disturbances and extreme events ....................................................... 22
2.2 Climate change in the Pineland Forest Section ................................................... 26
2.2.1 Observed climate trends ................................................................................ 26
2.2.2 Future climate trends ..................................................................................... 31
3.2 Impacts and vulnerability to climate change......................................................... 41
3.3.1 Key drivers, stressors and impacts factor ...................................................... 41
3.2.2 Potential impact on forest ecosystems .......................................................... 43
II
3.2.3 Potential impacts on sustainable forest management objectives ................... 44
3.2.4 Adaptive capacity ........................................................................................... 47
IV. Discussion ............................................................................................................... 49
4.1 Stressors and vulnerability vactors ...................................................................... 49
4.1.1 Drought stress ............................................................................................... 49
4.1.2 Forest fires ..................................................................................................... 49
4.1.3 Windstorms .................................................................................................... 50
4.1.4 Pests and pathogens ..................................................................................... 50
4.1.5 Flooding events ............................................................................................. 51
4.1.6 Carbon dioxide fertilization ............................................................................. 51
4.2 Impacts on forests ecosystems ............................................................................ 52
4.2.1 Tree species composition .............................................................................. 52
4.2.2 Forest productivity and wood supply .............................................................. 52
4.2.3 Regeneration success ................................................................................... 53
4.2.4 Wildlife habitat ............................................................................................... 53
4.2.5 Winter road conditions/ access ...................................................................... 53
4.2.6 Non-woody forest products ............................................................................ 54
4.2.7 Recreational opportunities ............................................................................. 54
4.3 Management implications and adaptation approaches ..................................... 55
4.4 Data gaps and lessons learned ............................................................................ 57
List of references ........................................................................................................... 59
Appendices ................................................................................................................... 64
III
List of Acronyms/ Abbreviations
AAC Annual Allowable Cut
ADAPTool Adaptive Policy Analysis Tool
AR5 Fifth Assessment Report
CANESM Second Generation Canadian Earth System Model
CCFM Canadian Council of Forest Ministers
CCTF Climate Change Task Force
CFS Canada Forest Service
CWS Manitoba Conservation and Water Stewardship
FACoP Forest Adaptation Community of Practice
FMP Forest Management Plan
FMU Forest Management Unit
FPMB Forestry and Peatland Management Branch
GCM Global Circulation model
GHG Greenhouse Gas
GIS Geographic Information System
HADGEM Hadley Centre Global Environmental Model version
IISD International Institute for Sustainable Development
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
MIROC-ESM Japanese Model for Interdisciplinary Research on Climate
NCARCESM National Center for Atmospheric Research–Community Earth System Model
PFS Pineland Forest Section
RCP Representative Concentration Pathway
SFM Sustainable Forest Management
SRC Saskatchewan Research Council
VA Vulnerability Assessment
IV
List of Figures
Figure 1 Components of vulnerability (source: edwards et al. 2015) .................................... 4
Figure 2 Stages and components of adaptation to climate change in the context of sustainable forest management (source: edwards et al. 2015)........................................................... 5
Figure 3 Ranking systems used to assess sensitivity of (a) forests and (b) sustainable forest management objectives to climate change (source: edwards et al 2015) ........................ 9
Figure 4 Geographic location of the pineland forest section in manitoba ..................................... 10
Figure 5 Landscape of the assessment area ..................................................................... 11
Figure 6 Average monthly precipitation (rainfall and snowfall) and average monthly temperature at sprague and pinawa ............................................................................................................... 12
Figure 7 (a) Probability of frost-free period and late spring, (b) probability of late spring and early fall frosts at sprague and pinawa ................................................................................................ 14
Figure 8 Land use - land cover types in the pineland forest section ............................................... 15
Figure 9 An upland black spruce stand in the pineland forest section ........................................... 19
Figure 10 (A) Black bear and (b) moose in the assessment area ...................................... 21
Figure 11 Area burned by eco-zone, from 1975 to 2011, in the pineland forest section ...... 22
Figure 12 Blow-down of jack pine stands (2012) in the pineland forest section ....................... 25
Figure 13 Mean annual and decadal temperatures (2016-2010) at sprague and pinawa .... 27
Figure 14 Mean annual and seasonal minimum, mean and maximum temperature changes (1916-2010) at sprague and pinawa ........................................................................................... 28
Figure 15 Annual and decadal mean precipitation (1916-2010) at sprague and pinawa ..... 29
Figure 16 Mean annual and seasonal precipitation (1916-2010) at sprague and pinawa .... 30
Figure 17 Observed and simulated average monthly temperature (minimum and maximum) and monthly precipitation at sprague and pinawa. ........................................................... 31
Figure 18 Historical (1951-2010) and projected trends (2006-2100) in annual mean
monthly maximum temperature ........................................................................................................................ 32
Figure 19 Historical (1951-2005) and projected trends (2010-2100) in annual mean monthly minimum temperature ........................................................................................................................ 33
Figure 20 Historical (1951-2010) and projected trends (2006-2100) in seasonal mean maximum temperatures ........................................................................................................................................ 35
V
Figure 21 Historical (1951-2005) and projected trends (2010-2100) in seasonal mean minimum temperatures ......................................................................................................................................... 36
Figure 22 Historical (1951-2005) and projected trends (2006-2100) in annual precipitation ................................................................................................................................................................ 37
Figure 23 Historical (1951-2005) and projected trends (2006-2100) in seasonal precipitation ................................................................................................................................................................ 38
Figure 24 Scatter plots and regression line showing the relationship between annual minimum temperature change and annual precipitation change ...................................................... 39
Figure 25 Scatter plots and regression line showing the relationship between temperature and precipitation changes ......................................................................................................... 40
List of Tables
Table 1 provincial forests and their size (ha) in the pineland forest section ................................ 16
Table 2 Ecological reserves and parks and their size (ha) within the assessment area ....... 16
Table 3 Area and percentage cover of different forest-type groups in the assessment area (source: mcws, 2013) .................................................................................................................................. 17
Table 4 Forest habitat, stands, and characteristics in the pineland forest section ................... 20
Table 5 Annual harvested timber volume from 2012 to 2015 in the assessment area .......... 26
Table 6 Summary of projected climatic (temperature and precipitation) changes ................... 34
Table 7 Forest ecosystem condition impact ranking for rcp 8.5 scenario .................................... 43
Table 8 Priority forest management objective vulnerabilities to current and future climate for rcp 8.5 scenario ................................................................................................................................................. 46
Appendices
Appendix 1 Current and potential future impacts of climate change on the pineland forest management objectives ........................................................................................... 65
Appendix 2 Current and potential future climate change impacts, adaptive capacity and vulnerability of the pineland forest management objectives ............................................................... 68
Appendix 3 List of possible adaptation options and strategies for each of the ccfm sfm criteria and for the overall sfm system of interest gathered from the literature (ex: ogden and innes 2007 and 2008) ................................................................................................................................... 70
VI
Executive Summary
Climate change is a current global issue that threatens to overwhelm the natural ability of many forest tree species and ecosystems to adapt to it. Recognizing the need to minimize the negative impacts of climate change on Canada’s forests and forest sector and take advantage of any opportunities associated with it, the Canadian Council of Forest Ministers (CCFM), in 2008, urged members of the forest sector to start acting now to incorporate of climate change considerations in all aspects of sustainable forest management (SFM).
A Climate Change Task Force (CCTF) was created by CCFM with a mission of providing forest professionals with tools, approaches and state-of-knowledge that will enable them to adapt SFM to climate change. One of CCMF-CCTF products is a framework and guidebook approach for assessing vulnerability and mainstreaming adaptation into decision making. The Forestry and Peatland Management Branch (FPMB) of Manitoba Conservation and Water Stewardship (FPMB-CWS) applied this framework approach to a case study of vulnerability assessment (VA) in the Pineland Forest Section (PFS) in southeastern Manitoba. The goal of the assessment was to analyze expected climate change impacts, risks and the adaptive capacity of the PFS and identify and propose adaption strategies to address the impacts.
The vulnerability of PFS to climate changes was assessed in terms of its sensitivity, exposure and adaptive capacity based on the available quantitative and qualitative data for the PFS. In order to assess sensitivity, we gathered different types of information on the forests from various sources including literature reviews of past research reports, forest inventory and survey data, and forest management documents (ex: wood supply analysis, draft forest management plan). For assessing exposure, we collected and examined current and past (back to 1916) climate data from two Environment Canada meteorological weather stations, located at Sprague and Pinawa. We also obtained and analyzed downscaled future climate (up to 2100) scenarios data for PFS obtained from the Canadian Forest Service (CFS). The Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) scenarios recently adopted by Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its fifth Assessment Report (AR5) were used to model the future climate of the PFS.
Finally, a series of meetings and two workshops were organized, to gather expert opinions and use the CCFM-CCTF multi-criteria analysis worksheets to assess climate change impacts and adaptive capacity, and to select the most appropriate adaptation options for the PFS. Results suggest that PFS is currently 1.5°C warmer than it was in the early 1900s and is projected to become 3.5 to 8.5°C warmer than it is now by the end of the 21st century. Mean annual precipitation has increased by about 20 per cent over the past century and is expected to further increase by 12 to 20 per cent over the next 100 years. On the other hand, summer precipitation is projected to decrease (≈ 10 per cent) by 2100. The combined effect of summer warming and drying will likely exacerbate soil moisture stress during the growing seasons in the entire PFS.
VII
The widespread upland areas of the PFS, characterized by coarse-structured soils with low water holding capacity, were found to be the most vulnerable. Given the assessment area is at the southern fringe of the boreal biome, most boreal tree species (ex: spruces and pines) are likely to decline in abundance, while deciduous species (ex: aspen and poplar) may become more dominant. Overall, the assessment results showed that FPMB currently has moderate to high adaptive capacity to manage for the impacts of climate change. However, more human and financial resources will be required to enhance the branch adaptive capacity to effectively implement the adaptation options as the forests become increasingly more vulnerable to climate change.
VIII
Acknowledgements
This vulnerability assessment was conducted by the Forestry and Peatlands Management Branch of Manitoba Conservation and Water Stewardship through funding fully provided by the Manitoba government and with in-kind support from partners.
Special thanks go to the following partners:
Dr. David Price, Jason Edwards and Timothy Boland all from CFS in Edmonton for their valuable contributions to this work; Jason Edwards provided valuable guidance to the assessment team on how to use the CCFM-CCTF guidebook for assessing vulnerability and mainstreaming adaptation into decision making and reviewed early drafts of the report; while Dr. David Price and his research technician Tim Boland supplied the downscaled historical and future climate projection data of the assessment area, which were used for the study.
The branch also expresses its gratitude to Dr. Mark Johnston from the Saskatchewan Research Council (SRC) for conducting the model simulation study of climate change impacts on the PFS, and to Dr. Dimple Roy and Daniella Echeverria from the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) in Winnipeg, Manitoba for their assistance using the adaptive policy analysis tool (ADAPTool) to evaluate the ability of some forestry policies and program areas to support climate change adaptation needs.
Finally, sincere appreciations go to Manitoba Conservation and Water Stewardship staff, who gave their time and efforts to conduct this study.
1
Introduction
Global warming, causing climate change, is becoming a serious issue of concern due to its potential adverse effects on human and natural systems. At the global scale, the average temperature of the earth surface is reported to have increased by 0.8°C over the period 1880-2012 with the great deal of the warming occurring since the 1970s (IPCC 2014). The most recent decade was reported to be the warmest on record (IPCC 2014). This observed warming trend has closely been linked to an increase in anthropogenic greenhouse emissions, particularly carbon dioxide (CO2) mainly released from fossil fuel consumption.
Global Circulation Modeled (GCMs) data suggested that these warming trends will continue for decades or centuries to come. In the fifth Assessment Report (AR5) of IPCC, it is predicted that global surface temperature change of the earth will likely exceed 1.5°C (relative to pre-industrial levels) by the end of the 21st century. The report also expressed a high level of confidence that a 1.5 to 2.5°C increase in global mean temperature above pre-industrial levels may pose significant risks to many human and natural systems.
Natural ecosystems, including forests, may particularly be sensitive to a warmer climate. Changes in temperature, precipitation and moisture availability may directly affect basic ecosystem conditions and processes, and consequently, alter forest tree survival, growth and productivity (Kirilenko and Sedjo, 2007). Climate change may also indirectly lead to a modification of the frequency and intensity of forest disturbances (ex: forest wildfires, outbreaks of insects and pathogens, and extreme events such as high winds and storms) and induce significant losses to timber and non-timber forest products.
Canada’s forests have been reported to be already affected by climate change and are likely to continue to be affected this century by an unprecedented combination of climate change and associated changes in forest disturbance regimes (Williamson et al., 2009). The potential impacts of climate change on forests result from exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity (IPCC, 2007). Forests are exposed to different factors of climate change variability as well as other disturbances and drivers that may exacerbate the impacts of climate. Johnston and Williamson (2007) defined sensitivity as the degree to which a forest will be affected by a change in climate, either positively or negatively, such as through changes in tree level processes, species distribution or disturbance regimes. The vulnerability of forests to climatic stressors also depends on its adaptive capacity and there is a general concern that the current natural capacity of forests may not be sufficient enough to enable them to adapt to the projected unprecedented rates of climate changes (Gitay et al. 2002).
Recognizing that climate change may both pose challenges (in terms of meeting sustainable forest management (SFM) goals) and in some cases bring opportunities (through enhance forest productivity) to Canada’s forestry sector (Johnston et al. 2009), the Canadian Council of Forest Ministers (CCFM) has recommended that consideration of climate change and future climatic variability be incorporated in all aspects of SFM in
2
Canada (CCFM, 2008). Following this recommendation, the Climate Change Task Force (CCTF) was created with a mission to gather relevant information and develop tools to help forest resource managers and professionals across the country to identify how best to include climate change considerations into SFM plans, practices and policies. Some keys products developed by the task force include an adaptation framework (Williamson et al., 2012), a vulnerability assessment guidebook (Edwards et al., 2015) and other user-friendly technical reports that support the framework and guidebook. (Note: a draft version of Edwards et al. 2015 was used in this assessment)
This case study was carried out in response to the CCFM recommendations to integrate climate change considerations in all aspects of SFM. It was also conducted as part of Manitoba‘s climate change adaptation strategy, outlined in “TomorrowNow, Manitoba’s Green Plan”. The study evaluated keys impacts, vulnerabilities and adaptation of forest ecosystems in the Pineland Forest Section (PFS) in southeastern Manitoba, across a range of future climate change scenarios. The PFS was selected for this pilot study because it is considered to be one of the forests most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change in Manitoba. The assessment area is situated in a transitional zone between the prairie grasslands to the south-west and the boreal forest to the north. There is a concern that, as the climate gets warmer, the grassland domain will slowly expand to current suitable boreal forest habitat by pushing it farther north.
Additionally, the landscape of the PFS is dominated by upland areas (Sandilands) consisting of widespread coarse parent materials like sands and gravels, with very low water-holding capacity. In such soils, trees may experience severe water stress after only a short period of drought, which may become more common in a warmer future climate.
Finally, with the projected warmer climate, a significant portion of the forest landscape could be subjected to conditions which favour insect and disease outbreaks, as well as large, rapidly moving crown fires and severe weather event behaviors. In fact, during the past few decades, an increase in the frequency and severity of climate change induced forest disturbances such as snow/wind storms, and insects/disease outbreaks has already been observed.
The primary goal of this assessment was to improve our understanding of forest ecosystems and tree species vulnerability to climate change and suggest potential forest management activities to address these vulnerabilities. The specific objectives were to:
Gather information about the past and current landscapes and climate of the study area.
Summarize potential changes to forest ecosystems within the study area under a range of future climates.
3
Identify ecosystems, ecological processes and forest management objectives most likely to be impacted by projected changes in climate over the next 100 years.
Build an understanding of why these areas are vulnerable and identify where the most pressing issues will occur.
Assess the effectiveness of previous coping strategies in the context of historic and current changes in climate and identify potential adaptation measures for the areas of greatest vulnerability.
Prioritize short to long-term policy considerations and knowledge requirements (research, modelling, monitoring) for adaptation to a changing climate.
4
I. Approach
This vulnerability assessment (VA) was prepared by a team composed of FPMB’s staff, assisted by two researchers, Jason Edwards from CFS and Dr. Mark Johnston
from SRC. The VA is based on a draft CCFM-CCTF adaptation guidebook approach by Edwards et al. (2015).
In this VA, a forest system vulnerability to climate change was considered as the degree to which the system is susceptible to or unable to cope with adverse effects of climate change. This includes climate variability and extremes, resulting in challenges to achieve sustainable forest management objectives.
Following the guidebook approach, measures of vulnerability has three components. As shown in figure 1, the first two components are exposure to climate change and sensitivity to its effects. These components are collectively used to describe the potential impacts (ex: on forest ecosystems conditions/processes and on the ability to achieve sustainable forest management objectives) that climate change can have on a sustainable forest management system. The third component is a system adaptive capacity to cope with the effects associated with climate change. The adaptive capacity is the ability of the human elements of a system to adjust to climate change to moderate potential effects, to take advantage of opportunities or to cope with the consequences.
Figure 1 Components of vulnerability (source: Edwards et al. 2015)
The guidebook approach provides a framework for identifying sources of vulnerability to climate change that are important to forest sustainability and developing
5
adaptation options to reduce these vulnerabilities. Figure 2 summarises the general guidebook framework approach for assessing vulnerability. The approach identifies four stages, each consisting of one or multiple steps or components of adaptation to climate change in the context of sustainable forest management.
Figure 2 Stages and components of adaptation to climate change in the context of sustainable forest management (Source: Edwards et al. 2015)
The initial stage for this VA consisted of exploring the readiness of FPMB to undertake the VA. In conducting a VA, organisational readiness, sometime referred as adaptive capacity, can broadly be defined as the ability of a system (ex: FPMB) to adjust, limit, ns cope with potential impacts due to climate change. As recommended in the guidebook, the organizational readiness analysis followed a conceptual framework
6
proposed by Gray et al. (2012). The framework defines organizational readiness as a unique combination of determinants such as institutional structure and function, financial resources, acquisition and use of information, know-how and adaptive decision making. The following determinants were used to evaluate FPMB readiness to carry out the VA:
The level of awareness of the issue, perception of urgency of climate change and support from senior management officials was an important determinant, as was the personal knowledge of forestry staff (ex: climate change, education and awareness), their respective expertise and skills that can contribute to successfully conduct the VA.
The existence of collaborative arrangements or partnerships to maximize the assessment team capacity was essential to successfully conducting the VA. The team collaborated with researchers from various research institutions (ex: CFS, SRC and IISD) during the VA process for guidance and the additional technical skill sets necessary for the assessment.
Because lack of data can significantly affect the quality of a VA results and the identification of sound adaptation options and decision making process, the availability of baseline data (ex: climate, forest resources, socio-economic,) was considered as an important deciding factor.
The adaptability of forestry policy and program areas in relation to climate change was in part assessed using the adaptive analysis Policy Tool (ADAPTool) developed by IISD (the results of this analysis are provided in a separate report).
Note that the information collected during this stage and the ADAPTool results were also used in stage 3 to assess FPMB adaptive capacity or ability to implement climate change adaptation options.
The second stage of the VA consisted of conducting a pre-vulnerability assessment. The first step of this stage consisted of setting the context of the VA and defining and describing reasons for undertaking the assessment. To do so, we gathered secondary data and information on the biophysical and socio-economic aspects of the Pineland Forest Section from various sources including published papers, forest inventory data, wood supply analysis, and other pertinent information. This information was used to understand the local and regional context of climate change, the forest management system of interest and the need to address climate change impacts.
The second step of stage two consisted of describing past and current climate trends and forest conditions. This was achieved through collecting and reviewing climatic data like precipitation (rainfall and snowfall), temperature and extreme weather events that occurred in the assessment area. The climatic data within the assessment areas were obtained from the two Environment Canada weather stations located at Sprague and Pinawa. The two weather stations had weather data going back to 1916. Climate data from these weather stations were used to develop long-term trends in annual and seasonal (spring, summer, fall and winter).
7
These observed changes and trends in climatic variables and the information collected in the previous step on the current forest conditions were used to assess current vulnerability of the Pineland forests. The assessment of current vulnerability also provided an opportunity to explore and learn from adaptive responses in the past (how recent climate trends and the resulting changes in forest conditions have led to changes in current forest management practices), both failures and successes.
Step three of stage two consisted of describing future climate and forest impact scenarios. To describe future climate change, long-term trends and future annual and seasonal climate data (temperature and precipitation) of the assessment area were analyzed using downscaled climate projection data provided by the Canadian Forest Service (CFS).
The future climate data were available in the form of gridded maps with a spatial resolution of 10×10 km. The future climate scenario data covered years 2010 to 2100. Three (of the four) new Representative Atmospheric CO2 Concentration Pathways (RCPs) scenarios were used to model the future projected climate variables (ex: minimum and maximum temperature and precipitation) values for the years from 2010 to 2100.
The three climate change scenario used were the RCP 8.5 (a high end or business as usual-type scenario in which emissions continue to grow drastically throughout the 21st century), RCP 4.5 (mid-range scenario in terms of radiative forcing, but with very different land-use change), and RCP 2.6 (a mitigation or low-end climate change scenario in which global warming is set not to exceed 2°C by the end of the 21st century).
The following four General Circulation Models (GCMs) were used for generating the climate change scenario data: the Canadian Earth System Model (Canesm2), the Hadley Centre Global Environmental Model version 2 (Hadgem2), the Japanese Model for Interdisciplinary Research on Climate (Miroc-Esm) and the National Center for Atmospheric Research–Community Earth System Model version 1 (Ncarcesm1). For the model simulations, averages of the climate variables for the period 1961 to 1990 were used as baselines.
For the development of future forest impact scenarios, the assessment team elected to consider only the impacts resulting from the business-as-usual scenario (RCP 8.5). The reason for using only the RCP8.5 was that, by planning for the warmer climate scenario, we become better prepared to manage climate change impacts resulting from both severe and milder climate change scenarios. Three time horizons – 2010 to 2039, 2040 to 2069 and 2070 to 2099 – were selected for the assessment to provide a short-, mid-, and long-term scenario in each case. Then, projections were made for annual and seasonal temperature and precipitation patterns. These projected changes in climate factors formed the basis for evaluating what might be the responses (impacts) of forests and forest ecosystems.
8
Phase 3 consisted of conducting a detailed VA. The goal of this phase was to identify the extent to which the high-end climate change scenario (RCP 8.5) might impact the Pineland forest conditions and processes as well our ability to achieve forest management objectives. To conduct this detailed assessment, the assessment team held a second two-day workshop in March 2014, in Winnipeg during which the management team (forestry staff and researchers from CFS and SRC) met to conduct the analysis. Similar to the first workshop, approximately 20 people attended the meeting, including resource managers from Manitoba Conservation and Water Stewardship (Forestry Branch, Climate Change Branch and Park and Protected Spaces’ staff) and scientists from CFS and SRC. During this workshop, the assessment team reviewed and discussed some existing preliminary results of the assessment and completing the assessment process.
Figure 3A shows the ranking system used to evaluate the short-, medium- and long-term sensitivity of forest ecosystem conditions and processes (expected changes) to future climate change (exposure). A similar ranking system (Figure 3B) was also used to evaluate the short-, medium- and long-term impacts forest impacts of climate and climate change on the FPMB staff ability to achieve sustainable forest management objectives. Both the forest impact and SFM impact rankings were determined by the assessment team using the best available information and expert judgement. More detailed descriptions of the methods used for the assessment are documented in the CCFM-CCTF guidebook and in Johnston (2014) report.
9
Figure 3 Ranking systems used to assess sensitivity of (A) forests and (B) SFM objectives to climate change (Source: Edwards et al 2015)
10
II. Results
2.1. Contemporary landscape of the Pineland Forest Section
2.1.1 Geographic location
Located in the southeastern corner of Manitoba (Figure 4) the PFS comprises an area of 1.2 million hectares. The area is bounded by the US-Canada border in the south (49oN) and Ontario-Manitoba border in the east. The area extends northwards from the US-Canada border to Lake Winnipeg, right below 51oN latitude. It is at the southern fringe of the boreal forest biome and is bordered by the prairie grassland biome in the west and south-west.
Figure 4 Geographic location of the Pineland Forest Section in Manitoba
11
2.1.2 Geology, landform and soil types
The study area underlying bedrock consists mainly of Precambrian igneous and metamorphic bedrocks that form broad sloping uplands known as Belair Upland and Agassis-Sandilands Uplands and lowland areas called Whitemouth (Figure 5).
The Belair – Agassiz-Sandilands and Uplands form a discontinuous north-south chain of highlands and represent the highest topography with elevations typically ranging between 335 and 390 m. The surface deposits of these upland areas are sands with minor amount of till. The soils are mainly characterized by their poor nutrient retention and low water-holding capacity, due to their coarse fragments and coarse surface texture (Smith et al., 1964).
The Whitemouth lowland is a broad, relatively flat region of lacustrine clay and silt, extensively covered by peatlands characterized by poorly drained organic mesisols. In addition to the poor natural drainage of these organic soils, they are very slow to warm, severely reducing their usefulness to agriculture.
2.1.3 Climate
The assessment area is situated in the middle of the North American continent, a great distance away from the oceans and their moderating effect on temperatures. Consequently, summer temperatures are generally high while winter temperatures are low. The area is characterised by a sub-humid climate and has a distinct summer maximum of precipitation. The mean monthly precipitation and temperatures were recorded at the Environment Canada meteorological stations located at Sprague (southern fringe) and Pinawa (central-northern part). These weather stations have been operational since 1916.
2.1.3.1 Precipitation
The study area has the moistest climate in Manitoba with an average annual precipitation of 615 mm, but precipitation varied greatly from year to year. Typical of boreal-continental climates, the area has high summer and low winter precipitation. On average, about 20 per cent of the annual precipitation falls as snow during the five winter months (November to March) when mean temperature is less than 0°C and about 80 per cent as rain during the period of April to October (Figure 6). More than half of the annual precipitation is normally expected to fall from May through September. June is the wettest month of the year in the southern limit (Sprague) of the assessment
Figure 5 Landscape of the assessment area
12
area with an average rainfall of 109 mm; whereas July is the wettest month in the Pinawa with an average of 93 mm.
Pinawa
Rain
fall/ S
no
wfa
ll (
mm
)
0
20
40
60
80
100
Tem
pera
ture
(o
C)
-20
-10
0
10
20
Sprague
Month
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Rain
fall/ S
no
wfa
ll (
mm
)
0
20
40
60
80
100
Tem
pera
ture
(o
C)
-20
-10
0
10
20Rainfall
Snowfall
Max. Temp.
Ave. Temp.
Mini.Temp.
Figure 6 Average monthly precipitation (rainfall and snowfall) and average monthly temperature at Sprague and Pinawa
13
Most of the precipitation, both in the summer and winter, is frontal in origin accompanying numerous successions of slow moving cyclonic storms or areas of “low pressure.” This is characterized by thunderstorms in June, July and August and by “blizzards” (snow plus high winds) in the winter months. These cyclonic storms are usually followed in succession by areas of “high pressure”, bringing in clear, cold, dry conditions in winter and periods of cool pleasant weather in summer. From June to August, 15 to 20 such thunderstorms will occur on the average in South-Eastern Manitoba. The greater the contrast between the hot humid air from the south and cool arctic air to the north, the more violent the storm.
Daily rainfalls greater than 100 mm have been recorded, usually on days in June or July associated with large thunderstorm events. More than 150 mm of rain on a single day has also been recorded. For instance, on June 14, 1973, a rainfall of 168 mm was recorded in Pinawa. Impressive daily snowfall totals have also been recorded in the past. For example, on March 4, 1966, the infamous blizzard occurred in that zone, including Winnipeg. An exceptionally heavy snowfall was also recorded in Pinawa (48 cm) in April 1997. Extended dry and wet spells lasting for many days or weeks are also a common feature of the study area climate.
2.1.3.2 Temperature
The area is characterized by short, warm summers and long, cold winters. The mean annual air temperature is 2.0°C. On average, the warmest month of the year is July, when the mean daily maximum temperature is about 26°C (Figure 6). The daily minimum temperatures in July are usually about 12°C or 13°C lower than the daily maximum temperatures. January is usually the coldest month of the year with daily maximum temperature averaging -12°C. The average minimum temperature in the winter is -21°C.
The large difference between the average July daily maximum temperatures and the average January daily minimum temperatures clearly indicates that a significant range of temperatures is already experienced in the area. According to records obtained from the meteorological station in Sprague, the coldest days on record occurred in January 30, 1950 and February 19, 1966 when temperature plummeted to -48.3°C and -47.9°C, respectively. The warmest days fell in July 12, 1936 and June 17, 1995 at Pinawa, when the temperature rose up to 38.9°C and 38.0°C, respectively.
2.1.3.3 Frost free periods
The average length of frost-free period is estimated to be 113 days and 97 days at Sprague and Pinawa, respectively (Figure 7A). The frost-free period determines the time available for tree growth. The average dates (50 per cent chance of occurrence) of the last spring frosts are May 27 and June 2 at Sprague and Pinawa, respectively, while the earliest average first fall frost dates are September 7 and 19 at Pinawa and Sprague, respectively (Figure 7B). However, it is the potential for late spring frosts and early fall frosts that can damage vegetative tissues (ex: flowers, leaves, and growth points) and may result in reduced tree growth. Climate change may increase the
14
incidence of late spring frosts and early fall frosts in the assessment area and represent an increasing pressure on some species. If the vulnerability and damage vary among tree species, it has the potential to influence forest community composition (Meiners and Presley, 2015).
Frost-free period (days)
40 60 80 100 120 140
Pro
bab
ilit
y (
%)
0
20
40
60
80
100
Pinawa
Sprague
Pro
bab
ilit
y (
%)
0
20
40
60
80
100
Pinawa
Sprague
18-May 25-May 1-Jun 8-Jun 15-Jun 22-Jun 29-Jun 17-Aug 24-Aug 31-Aug 7-Sep 14-Sep 21-Sep 28-Sep
Figure 7 (A) Probability of frost-free period and late spring, (B) probability of late spring and early fall frosts at Sprague and Pinawa
Late spring frosts and early fall frosts (date of the year)
A
B
15
2.1.4 Land use and land cover types
The position of the study area at the intersection between the prairie grassland biome to the south and the boreal forest biome to the north creates a various set of land use types. This includes forested lands representing 70 per cent of the land base, agricultural area covering 30 per cent of the land base, lakes and rivers (nine per cent) and settlements (Figures 8). Eight provincial forests covering a total of about 673, 000 ha of the land base are located within the assessment area (Table 1).
Figure 8 Land use - land cover types in the Pineland Forest Section
16
Table 1 Provincial forests and their size (ha) in the Pineland Forest Section
Provincial Forests Total area (ha)
Sandilands Provincial Forest 277,438.9 Northwest Angle Provincial Forest 215,812.4 Agassiz Provincial Forest 79,515.7 Whiteshell Provincial Forest 64,189.0 Belair Provincial Forest 20,301.4 Brightstone Sand Hills Provincial Forest 13,166.3 Cat Hills Provincial Forest 1,615.3 Wampum Provincial Forest 811.4
Total 672,850.5
Ecological reserves, including wildlife management areas and provincial parks in the assessment area, account for more than 17,000 hectares and have full restrictions on any forest industry operations (Table 2). Numerous lakes are also found in the area and the major ones including Lake Winnipeg, Lake of the Woods, Lac du Bonnet, Shoal Lake and the Whitemouth Lake. Eight major rivers are found within the PFS (Winnipeg River, Whitemouth River, Birch River, Boggy River, Falcon River, Sand River, Lee River and the Red River), with several smaller rivers, streams and creeks.
Table 2 Ecological reserves and parks and their size (ha) within the assessment area
Place Name Area (ha)
Whitemouth Bog Ecological Reserve 5,021 Whitemouth Bog Wildlife Management Area 3,006 Watson P. Davidson Wildlife Management Area 2,895 Grand Beach Provincial Park 1,387
Elk Island Provincial Park 1,056
Spur Woods Wildlife Management Area 725 Thalberg Bush Wildlife Management Area 725
Whitemouth Island Ecological Reserve 587 Lewis Bog Ecological Reserve 573 Brokenhead Wetland Ecological Reserve 563
Whitemouth Falls Provincial Park 356 Lee River Wildlife Management Area 335 Pocock Lake Ecological Reserve 165 Whitemouth River Ecological Reserve 132
Pinawa Dam Provincial Park 112
Total Area: 17,119
17
2. 1.5 Forest types
Two major forest eco-zones are found in the assessment area, including a boreal shield covering about 1.1 million ha (92 per cent) and a boreal plain with approximately 92,000 ha (eight per cent). These forest eco-zones are areas where three of the four typical boreal conifers (jack pine [Pinus banksiana], white spruce [Picea glauca] and tamarack [Larix laricina]) along with trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides) are dominant (Smith et al, 1998). Beside these three typical boreal tree species, this transitional region between the prairie grassland and the boreal biomes allows two important conifers (white pine and red pine) to join typical boreal communities. Their presence in the southeastern corner of the province indicates that forest cover here is transitioning to one more characteristic of boreal-broadleaf eco-tone, which separate boreal forest in general from the oak-beech-maple dominated temperate mix-boreal/deciduous forests in which the following tree species are present: Bur oak (Quercus macrocarpa), red (green) ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), white birch (Betula papyrifera), eastern white cedar (Thuja occidentalis), black ash (Fraxinus nigra) and white elm (Ulmus Americana).
The forest inventory data and wood supply analysis of the study area were used to organize forest land within the productive forest into broad forest- yield strata - to facilitate comparison among similar species (Table 3). The most common group throughout the assessment area first group is softwood strata covering about 61 per cent of the productive forest land. Within this group, jack pine, black spruce and tamarack are the most dominant stands.
Table 3 Area and percentage cover of different forest-type groups in the assessment area (Source: MCWS, 2013)
Yield Strata Area (ha) %
Group Stratum
Softwood
Tamarack, black spruce, tamarack leading 80,584 15 Lowland black spruce 69,839 13 Pure jack pine 64,467 12 Black spruce/ tamarack, black spruce leading 48,350 9 Other softwood 26,861 5 Softwood mix 21,489 4 Upland black spruce 10,744 2 Pure red pine 5,372 1 Pure balsam fir/ white spruce 537 <0
Hard-wood Pure aspen, balsam poplar or white birch 123,562 23 Other hardwood 10,207 2
Mixed-wood Hardwood leading 42,978 8 Softwood leading 32,233 6
Total 537,224 100
18
The second most important group is the hardwood type group, which represents 25 per cent of the productive forest land. This group includes pure hardwood forest stands (aspen, balsam poplar or white birch) and other hardwood forest stands such as white birch, green and black ash, Manitoba maple and American elm). The third group is mixed-wood yield strata composed with two distinct stands: the first type being hardwood species leading stands (eight per cent) and the second softwood species leading stands (six per cent).
The forest stands in the assessment area greatly vary with topography, soil drainage, texture and moisture conditions. In general, forest stands can also be grouped into the following habitat types (Mueller-Dombois, 1963; Table 4):
Upland habitat, characteristically affected by drought during the growing season. This habitat type includes very dry (arid) and dry sites. The arid sites exclusively occur on high dunes or dune blending into high sandy recessional moraines. Forest productivity in the arid sites is generally very low. They support only jack pine that can reproduce itself under its own crown canopy, a process favored by scattered windfall. Jack pine constitutes the edaphic climax tree species. Red pine is sometime present, but with extreme rarity. The dry sites occur on less severely dry sites, rather than the arid sites and are often found on low dunes or on crests of recessional moraines, glacial out-wash, and knolls or crests of beach sand deposits. This type is geographically very dominant and the vegetation aspect is characterised by an abundance of low ericaceous and taller shrubs, mosses and some herbs and grass species. These sites have historically been subject to repeated or severe ground fires. Forest production is generally found to be rather low in these drier sites, which are dominated by jack pine. Red pine is also found, but is extremely rare, and where it occurs it seems to have a height growth inferior to that of jack pine. Natural jack pine regeneration under mature stands is always present in fair abundance, a situation which may be a reflection of ground fires found to be more frequently associated the very dry and dry habitat sites than with wetter sites. Jack pine is mixed with black spruce (Figure 9) and aspen in some areas.
Habitat in transitional zones between upland and lowland areas, characterized by favorable soil moisture conditions. This group covers a range of sites that vary in soil moisture condition from fresh to very moist and are generally located in the transitional zones between upland and bottom lands. Medium to fine textured soils occur mostly on sandy recessional and ground moraines, glacial outwash and sandy beach deposits. These soils support various mixtures of jack pine, red pine, black spruce, balsam fir, trembling aspen, white birch with alder, willow and other shrubs. Ground cover varies from mosses to grasses and forbs. Jack pine and black spruce growth and productivity are generally good to excellent on these soils, but hardwood species (ex: aspen) growth is generally limited by the frequent severe forest fire and drought conditions of the sites.
19
Figure 9 An upland black spruce stand in the Pineland Forest Section
Low land habitat type characterized with excessive soil moisture situated in the bottom land or lowland. This type is generally characterized by poorly to very poorly drained sites, especially areas of deep peat with a tree cover dominated by black spruce and tamarack, and associated ericaceous shrubs such as Labrador tea, bog rosemary and sphagnum mosses. Good stands of white spruce, aspen and balsam poplar, sometimes in mixtures with balsam fir and white birch, occur on the better-drained alluvial strips bordering rivers and creeks. Also present locally are elm, green ash, Manitoba maple and eastern white cedar.
20
Table 4 Forest habitat, stands, and characteristics in the Pineland Forest Section
Habitat Moisture conditions
Forest stands/ dominant tree species Habitat characteristics
1
Very dry (arid) with shallow soils
Pure jack pine
Jack pine with extreme rarity of red pine
Very low productivity
Very frequent droughts/ moisture deficit
Jack pine regeneration in fair abundance
High frequency of forest fires
Affected by drought during growing season
Potential for budworm and dwarf mistletoe disease to spread
Dry, with mod-deep soils or shallow soils
Poor sandy soils/ surface dryness
Pure jack pine
Pure red pine
Pure Upland black spruce
Softwood mix ( jack pine/upland black spruce; jack pine/red pine )
Mixed-wood, softwood leading (jack pine/black spruce mixed with aspen)
Good productivity to excellent for both jack pine and black spruce; poor productivity for aspen
Prone to forest fires
Greater aggressiveness of jack pine after fire limiting red pine growth
Vigorous black spruce regeneration in some areas
Potential for budworm and dwarf mistletoes diseases
2 Moist with moderately deep soil
Pure black spruce
Pure jack pine
Mixed-wood, hardwood leading (aspen, balsam poplar, white birch; occasionally white spruce, cedar and green ash)
Pure balsam fir/ white spruce
Balsam fir/ white spruce mixed with cedar)
Jack pine mixed with white birch and aspen)
Pure hardwood (aspen, balsam poplar, white birch, green and black ash, Manitoba maple, American elm)
Good to excellent productivity for spruces and balsam fir; poor productivity for hardwood species (cedar)
Prone to forest fires
Good productivity for jack pine; excellent for white & red pines
Invasive shrub
Potential budworm and dwarf mistletoes, forest tent caterpillar defoliations (leading to reduced growth of the hardwood species), and emerald ash borer
Frequently flooded
Natural regeneration trend goes to green ash, elms and maple
3
Wet (excessive moisture) with deep organic soils
Pure lowland black spruce
Pure tamarack
Mixed-wood, hardwood leading (tamarack mixed with black spruce, aspen and sometimes cedar)
Mixed black spruce/tamarack, black spruce leading
Mixed tamarack / black spruce, tamarack leading
Hardwood: aspen, cedar, birch, elm, ash, maple
Productivity fair to good for aspen; good for tamarack, black spruce, and white cedar; however, growth is somewhat handicapped because of seasonal water logging or extremely wet situation resulting from poor root aeration
Waterlogged (swamp) conditions of flooding are common in spring and during rainy periods particularly on finer-textured soils
Potential budworm and dwarf mistletoes
Potential for forest tent caterpillar defoliations leading to reduced growth of the hardwood species
21
2.1.6 Wildlife
The PFS is home to many common boreal animal species (Figure 10). Typical wildlife of the southeastern boreal forests are mammals such as black bears, wolves, snowshoe hares, coyotes, fishers, lynxes, red foxes, weasels, timber wolves, white tailed deer and many other animals that rely on the boreal forest and the resources it provides for survival. Moose, beaver, mink, and muskrat populations are more common along rivers and marshes or moister lowlands. Common birds in the region include ruffed grouse, hooded merganser, pileated woodpecker, bald eagle, turkey vulture and herring gull, as well as many waterfowl and songbird species.
2.1.7 Socio-economic conditions
The PFS contains a considerable number of communities. The town of Lac du Bonnet and the village of Powerview are the largest, followed by forty-one other communities within the five rural municipalities (Lac du Bonnet, Piney, Reynolds, Victoria Beach and Whitemouth) that make up the PFS. Eleven First Nations Reserves are also contained within the study area and occupy slightly more than 16,000 hectares of land base. Within FMU 24 there are no major processing facilities, but small “Quota Holders” harvest timber and produce some lumber, with the majority of volume shipped as roundwood or chips to mills outside the assessment area.
The average annual timber volume harvested from crown land in FMU 24, consisting mainly of pulp, sawtimber and fuelwood, is approximately 266,000 m3. Softwoods, mainly spruce, jack pine and fir, make up more than 90 per cent of the harvest. Major hardwood lumber species are poplar, birch and white ash. Fuelwood harvest consists mainly of poplar and other hardwoods. Spruce and jack pine represent a small part of the annual wood harvested for firewood. A study by Cowan and Rounds (1995) suggested that the forest industry in eastern Manitoba and the Interlake was creating nearly 500 forestry related jobs and generating revenues worth $65 million per year in the 1990’s.
Figure 10 (A) Black bear and (B) moose in the assessment area
22
2.1.8 Forest disturbances and extreme events
Natural disturbances are an integral part of the forest environment. They help shape forest ecosystems by influencing their composition, structure, and functional processes (Dale et al. 2001; Sedjo 2010). In the PFS, disturbances causing the greatest impacts on the forest ecosystems include forest fires, insect and pathogen outbreaks, and extreme weather events such as wind and ice storms. Each of these disturbances affects the forests differently. Some cause large scale tree mortality, while others influence community structure and organization, without causing massive mortality. Although disturbances are part of the forest environment, climate change is believed to alter the timing and severity of these disturbances. Indeed, climate-induced changes in disturbances regimes appear to be occurring already in the assessment area.
2.1.8.1 Forest fires
Forest fires are an important factor for the natural succession of forests, particularly in the boreal zone. However, when they become widespread, they can result in the devastating loss of forest habitats, property, and lives. On average in the PFS, approximately 3000 ha of forests were burned every year between 1975 and 2011. It is estimated that 85 per cent of the area burned every year occurs in the boreal shield and 15 per cent in the boreal plain. As shown in Figure 8a, the largest fires occurred in 1976 with 15,700 ha of forest burned, 1981 and 1984 with 12,000 ha of forest burned each, and 2011 with about 10,000 ha of forest burned. These forest fires can potentially affect the Pineland forest value for wildlife habitat, timber quantity and quality, recreation and human health through smoke.
Figure 11 Area burned by eco-zone, from 1975 to 2011, in the Pineland Forest Section
23
2.1.8.2 Pests and diseases
A number of pests and disease issues have been recorded in the Pineland forests, including jack pine and spruce budworm, dwarf mistletoe and the eastern larch beetle. Major pest and disease issues in the PFS are associated with jack pine and spruce budworm, dwarf mistletoe, and the eastern larch beetle. This may impact the growth and survival of some species in the assessment area. The jack pine budworm, a destructive insect that preferably attacks jack pine but may also attack red pine and black spruce if they are growing nearby, is the most common in the PFS. Damage to the host trees can range from partial foliage loss within the top portion of the tree to complete foliage loss, usually within two to three years after infestation and generally resulting in the death of the tree (Voley 1988). Budworm population outbreak is believed to happen periodically (every 6 to 12 years) and usually results in the defoliation of its host trees and when it occurs, it can last for two to four years. The outbreak usually ends through human intervention (application of appropriate insecticide) or naturally when the insect food sources become unavailable. The FPMB has been actively monitoring jack pine budworm outbreak through the province, including the PFS. A recent study, Gutleea (2014) showed that during the periods 1985 to 1995 and 2007 to 2013, some jack pine stands in the PFS experienced moderate to high levels of defoliation with considerable egg mass count obtained in some years. Results of the study also suggest that climate influences the survival and spread of the insect and the susceptibility of forests. For instance, cold winter followed by warm spring were found to be determinant factors in the survival and emergence of larvae from their hibernacula period.
Dwarf mistletoe, an important parasitic plant that infects coniferous, generally found on black spruce, white spruce, tamarack jack pine, is widespread throughout the eastern forests of North America, including the PFS in southeastern Manitoba (Epp and Tardif 2004). The effect on trees includes altered tree form, suppressed growth and reduced volume and overall quality of its hosts. To date, little quantitative information is available on this parasitic plant’s distribution, its abundance and the amount of damage caused to forests in Manitoba, particularly in the study area. However, previous studies reported a slow rate of spread of this parasitic plant suggesting that the current distributions may be similar to those a few decades ago (Dahms and Geils 1997, Conklin and Fairweather 2010). A study by Baker et al. (1992) in Manitoba suggests that up to 70 per cent of the total volume of jack pine could be lost within infested stands. Epp (2002) used logistic growth models to examine the effect of the parasitic plant on the productivity of jack pine trees in Belair provincial forest (within the PFS) and predicted significant reductions in maximum basal area (57 per cent), height (29 per cent) and volume (84 per cent). The parasitic plant removes nutrients and water from its host trees, essentially starving them to death. Consequently, trees infected with dwarf mistletoe may exhibit greater sensitivity and vulnerability to future climate variation and changes, relative to uninfected trees (Stanton 2007).
The eastern larch beetle is typically a secondary pest, burrowing into the bark of tamarack trees that are already weakened by other factors such as age, defoliation, drought, fire or flood. It is also uncommon that during an infestation, the insect also
24
affects healthy trees. An infected tree generally dies within one to two years post-infestation, as the beetles gets into the middle of the tree and deprive it of water (MCW, 2014). Outbreaks of eastern larch beetle have been observed in Manitoba, particularly throughout the range of tamarack (including the assessment area), which is the major host tree species of this pest. Successive winter temperatures above normal are believed to contributing to increased larval and pupal survival. This factor, combined with other climate change related stresses to trees are contributing to the widespread outbreak of this pest.
2.1.8.3 Wind and snow damages (blow-downs)
Wind and snow storms are disturbances that can cause heavy mortality, canopy disruption, and reduce tree density and size structure. They can also change local environmental conditions, and therefore create very patches of damage to forest ecosystems. These types of disturbances often require extensive clean up procedures to bring the area back to full productivity. This is often achieved through salvage harvesting. In recent year, the PFS has experienced major wind and snow storms. For instance, major storms hit the area in 2005, 2007 and 2012. The most recent one (October 2012) was a combination of heavy snow and strong winds that damaged approximately 800 ha of land in the assessment area with an estimate 110,000 m3 of mainly jack pine timber. This compared to current softwood Annual Allowable Cut (AAC) for the entire PFS of 125,000 m3. A salvage harvesting plan was instituted, incorporating management practices to clean up the effected trees and forest renewal activities such as natural regeneration and tree planting. The 2012 storm damage at the PFS is illustrated in the image below (Figure 9). Over the course of the summer of 2013, hundreds of white spruces and jack pine seedlings were planted in the most seriously affected areas.
Climate change may likely increase the frequency and severity of wind and ice storms in Manitoba, most notably in the south and southeastern parts of the province. The results of a recent study suggest that thunderstorm conditions that contribute to tornado formation have increased under projected climate change (Etkin, 1995). Also, monthly tornado frequency has been found to be positively correlated to mean monthly temperature in Western Canada, suggesting increased tornado frequency under a warmer climate scenario (Etkin, 1995; Etkin et al. 2001).
25
Figure 12 Blow-down of jack pine stands (2012) in the Pineland Forest Section
2.1.8.3 Harvesting
Harvesting, a human-induced forest disturbance, is also a major factor that determines the transition of the forest stands in the assessment area. Like any other forest sections in the province, Manitoba Conservation and Water Stewardship, through the FPMB, regulates the amount of timber harvested to ensure that it does not exceed sustainable levels of approved AAC.
Currently, there is no industry in the assessment area, so timber quota and therefore, harvest permits are only assigned to small quota holders or individuals. Ainsworth, Domtar, SWL and Tolko are the main quota holders that are allocated the right to harvest timber in the PFS. The timber harvested for the past three years from the assessment area is summarized in the following table 5.
26
Table 5 Annual harvested timber volume from 2012 to 2015 in the assessment area
Fiscal Year
Quota/ Permit Holder
Volume (m3) Revenue ($)
SW1 HW
2 Total Dues FPC
3 FRC
4 Total
2014-15
Ainsworth EDT 12,763 13,159 25,922
23,770 2,923 37,552 64,244
Domtar EDT 75,471 0 75,471
54,064 3,019 108,679 165,761
SWL EDT 437 0 437
656 74 2,514 3,244
Timber Returns 51,036 66,506 117,542
142,093 15,603 148,979 306,675
Timber Permits 5,556 5,074 10,630 13,751 1,581 13,422 28,754
Total 145,263 84,739 230,003 234,333 23,200 311,146 568,678
2013-14
Ainsworth EDT 31,538 18,160 49,698
51,494 4,381 55,578 111,453
Domtar EDT 0 0 0
0
Tolko EDT 3,244 0 3,244
1,362 130 4,671 6,163
Timber Returns 34,739 45,451 80,190
92,602 10,525 89,166 192,293
Timber Permits 3,493 871 4,364 4,954 617 5,063 10,634
Total 73,013 64,482 137,495 150,412 15,654 154,477 320,543
2012-13
Ainsworth EDT 9,510 18,543 28,053
52,965 4,442 53,122 110,530
Domtar EDT 0 0 0
0
Tolko EDT 957 0 957
1,321 163 5,503 6,986
Timber Returns 43,795 59,952 103,747
191,001 17,114 227,518 435,633
Timber Permits 1,096 2,539 3,635 15,530 15,530
Total 55,358 81,034 136,392 260,817 21,719 286,143 568,679 1 Softwood,
2 Hardwood,
3 Fire Protection Charge,
4 Forest Renewal Charge
2.2 Climate Change in the Pineland Forest Section
The first part of this section presents the current climatic profile of the assessment area while the second part presents projected climate change using four GCM scenarios. Historical climate data were obtained from Environment Canada meteorological weather stations located at Sprague and Pinawa, where weather records date back to 1916.
One of the major challenges in climate change impacts assessment is obtaining downscale GCM projections in a small area like a forest management section or unit. Most available GCM projections from recognized climate data archives are on a scale of hundreds of kilometres, making them too coarse for local impact assessments. Dr. David Price, from CFS Edmonton, generated high resolution (10 km grids) climate scenarios for the PFS.
2.2.1 Observed climate trends
The past and current climate in the PFS can be characterized by examining temperature and precipitation normals (30-year averages). The average weather data for the 1916 to 1945 were used as a baseline to compare changes of the subsequent period.
27
2.2.1.1 Trends in observed temperature
The results of the analysis of annual minimum, maximum and mean temperatures of the period between 1916 and 2010 at Sprague and Pinawa, showed annual temperatures fluctuated from year to year by several degrees. The long-term averages followed similar trends of increase over time. Annual maximum temperatures were almost consistently highest in Sprague in the southern limit of the study area, compared to Pinawa, situated further north.
Pinawa
Ave
rage a
nnual t
em
pera
ture
(oC
)
0
1
2
3
4
5
Sprague
1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Ave
rage a
nnual t
em
pera
ture
(oC
)
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5Annual
Decadal
Figure 13 Mean annual and decadal temperatures (2016-2010) at Sprague and Pinawa
Results also indicate that much higher increases in annual maximum temperatures have occurred in Pinawa than in Sprague since 1916. For instance, annual maximum temperatures have warmed by about 0.8 oC in Sprague, while in Pinawa, the increase was as much as 1.0 °C since 1916 (Figure 10). Annual minimum temperature increase was much higher than that of annual maximum temperature. At both sites, the lowest annual average temperature change occurred during the period 1946 to 1975.
28
Maximum
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
Mean
Tem
per
atu
re C
han
ge
(oC
)
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
Sprague
Pinawa
Minimum
Winter Spring Summer Fall Annual
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
Figure 14 Mean annual and seasonal minimum, mean and maximum temperature changes (1916-2010) at Sprague and Pinawa
Unlike annual maximum temperatures, annual minimum temperatures were lowest in Sprague, as compared to Pinawa. Annual minimum temperatures showed an increase of 2.2oC in both Pinawa and Sprague. Overall, annual mean temperature of the assessment area has increased by 1.5°C since early 1900s. At both sites, changes in temperature varied from season to season (Figure 11), with more noticeable changes (increases) in minimum temperatures than maximum temperatures. For instance, maximum temperature change was the highest in the spring (1.3oC at Sprague and 1.8oC at Pinawa) whereas for minimum temperature, the greatest increase was recorded in the winter with changes as great as 2.3oC and 2.5oC in Sprague and Pinawa, respectively. Overall, average temperature changes appeared to be relatively low for summer and fall and high for winter and spring seasons. The most recent temperature period (1976 to 2005) was the hottest on record at both weather stations.
29
2.2.1.2 Trends in observed precipitation
As shown in Figure 12, overall annual precipitation increased by about 21 per cent in comparison with the 1916 to 1945 average precipitation at Sprague. Rainfall increased by 29 per cent, while snowfall decreased by about seven per cent from the period between 1916 and 2010. The seasonal precipitation data (Figure 13) show the precipitation increased in winter (10 per cent), spring (10 per cent), summer (28 per cent), and fall (18 per cent). Snow increased winter and fall by about six to seven per cent, but decreased in the spring by 34 per cent, relative to the 1916 to 945 mean.
Pinawa
Pre
cip
itatio
n(m
m)
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
Annual
Decadal
Sprague
1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Pre
cip
itatio
n(m
m)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
Figure 15 Annual and decadal mean precipitation (1916-2010) at Sprague and Pinawa
30
Pre
cip
itati
on
ch
an
ge (
mm
)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Rain
fall c
han
ge (
mm
)
0
20
40
60
80
100Sprague
Pinawa
Winter Spring Summer Fall Annual
Sn
ow
fall c
han
ge (
mm
)
-14
-12
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
Figure 16 Mean annual and seasonal precipitation (1916-2010) at Sprague and Pinawa
31
2.2.2 Future climate trends
2.2.2.1 Model data validation
An important step in demonstrating some of the model biases, or how good the model simulations are, is to compare the model simulations against observations. To do so, we used monthly temperature (minimum and maximum) and precipitation data measured at Pinawa from 2006 to 2010 based on RCP 2.6 scenario. The four model runs (Canesm2, Hadgem2, Miroc-Esm, and Ncarcesm1) for the same locality (ex: using Pinawa geographic coordinates, latitude and longitude) and for the same five years were used to produce the corresponding items. The model results for 2006 to 2010 were used to compare with the observations to check the behavior of the models. This can provide information on areas where the model performs well or badly in the simulation process, and guide the interpretation of the future projections.
As shown in Figure 13, these models simulated reasonably well the maximum and minimum temperatures in the area. Most of the models also captured well the precipitation anomalies for winter and spring
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Min
imum
Tem
pera
ture
(o C)
-30
-20
-10
0
10
Max
imum
Tem
pera
ture
(o C)
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
Canesm2
Hadgem
Miroc
Ncarcesm
Observed
Pre
cipi
tatio
n (m
m)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Figure 17 Observed and simulated average monthly temperature (minimum and maximum) and monthly precipitation at Sprague and Pinawa.
32
2.2.2.2 Future temperature trends
Generally, downscaled temperature for the assessment area is projected to increase during the 21st century relative to the normals (1964 to 1993). Average yearly maximum temperature for the assessment area is projected to increase over the 1964 to 1993 observed values by 3.4 °C for the low emission scenario, by 5.5 °C for the medium emission scenario and by 8.6 °C for the high emission scenario (Figure 14; Table 6). For average yearly minimum temperature, warming increases are estimated to be 3.5°C, 5.3°C and 8.9 °C for the low, medium and high emission scenarios (Figure 15; Table 6). Winter temperatures (both minimum and maximum) were expected to increase the most (Figures 16 and 17; Table 6). On the other hand, of all the four seasons, summer temperatures were projected to have the least increase by 2100. For instance, across all three scenarios, winter minimum temperatures were projected to increase in the range of 4.5 °C to 11.3°C and 3.8 °C to 9.6 °C for maximum temperature by the end of 21st century.
Annual
1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
Maxim
um
Tem
pera
ture
(o
C)
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Figure 18 Historical (1951-2010) and projected trends (2006-2100) in annual mean monthly maximum temperature (ºC)
33
Annual
1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
Min
imu
m T
em
pera
ture
(o
C)
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
Figure 19 Historical (1951-2005) and projected trends (2010-2100) in annual mean monthly minimum temperature (ºC)
34
Table 6 Summary of projected climatic (temperature and precipitation) changes
Climate variable RCP2.6 RCP4.5 RCP8.5
Projection period Win Spr Sum Fall Yr Win Spr Sum Fall Yr Win Spr Sum Fall Yr
Maximum temperature (°C) 2010-2039 2.7 2.7 2.5 2.7 2.7 2.6 2.7 2.2 2.4 2.5 2.8 2.3 2.5 2.4 2.5 2040-2069 3.7 3.6 3.0 3.2 3.4 5.5 4.9 3.7 4.0 4.5 5.6 4.8 4.8 4.6 5.0 2070-2099 3.8 3.3 3.1 3. 3 3.4 6.4 5.9 4.8 5.1 5.5 9.6 8.5 8.0 8.3 8.6
Minimum temperature (°C) 2010-2039 3.1 2.5 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.9 2.5 1.9 2.2 2.4 3.2 2.3 2.1 2.3 2.6 2040-2069 4.2 3.4 2.7 3.0 3.3 6.0 4.5 3.1 3.5 4.3 6.6 4.9 4.4 4.5 5.2 2070-2099 period 4.5 3.3 2.9 3.2 3.5 7.0 5.5 4.1 4.5 5.3 11.3 8.8 7.4 7.9 8.9
Precipitation (mm) 2010-2039 12 12 -17 5 38 6 18 -11 14 52 8 10 -10 27 59 2040-2069 9 23 -4 16 69 9 29 -18 15 61 16 29 -26 24 84 2070-2099 10 15 4 25 72 14 27 -22 11 69 21 46 -30 24 114
35
Fall
1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
WinterM
axi
mu
m T
em
pe
ratu
re (
oC
)
-16
-14
-12
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2 Spring
Ma
xim
um
Te
mpe
ratu
re (
oC
)
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Summer
1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
Figure 20 Historical (1951-2010) and projected trends (2006-2100) in seasonal mean maximum temperatures
36
WinterM
inim
um
Tem
pera
ture
(oC
)
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
Spring
Min
imum
Tem
pera
ture
(oC
)
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Summer
1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20Fall
1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
Figure 21 Historical (1951-2005) and projected trends (2010-2100) in seasonal mean minimum temperatures
37
2.2.2.3 Future precipitation trends
Similar to temperature, the yearly total precipitation amount is expected to increase during the 21st century. However, there is a wider standard deviation and thus a lower confidence associated with precipitation prediction as compared to temperature projections. For the low emission scenario, an increase of 38 mm, 69 mm and 79 mm are projected by 2040, 2070 and 2100. Precipitation increases of similar ranges are also expected for the other two climate change scenarios (Figure 18; Table 6). For all three climate change scenarios, precipitation is expected to increase in winter, spring and fall. However, summer rainfall is projected to decrease across all periods and for all climate scenarios (Figure 19).
Annual
1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
Pre
cip
itati
on
(m
m)
400
500
600
700
800
900
Figure 22 Historical (1951-2005) and projected trends (2006-2100) in annual precipitation
38
WinterP
reci
pita
tion (
mm
)
40
60
80
100
120Spring
Pre
cipita
tion (
mm
)
40
80
120
160
200
240
280
Summer
1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
100
150
200
250
300
350
Fall
1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
50
100
150
200
250
Figure 23 Historical (1951-2005) and projected trends (2006-2100) in seasonal precipitation
39
2.2.2.4 Relationships between future temperature and precipitation changes
The scatter plot with regression line (Figure 20) shows the relationship between mean annual precipitation and mean temperature increase. The graph clearly shows that there is a strong positive relationship (r2=0.86) between increased annual temperature and enhanced precipitation, suggesting that further warming is likely to be associated with increased annual precipitation in the assessment area. Strong positive relationship (r2=0.92) was also found between the two variables for spring time (Figure 21). In contrast, the strong negative relationship exists for summer time, suggesting that any increase in temperature would lead to decreased precipitation during that period. For fall, there is also a positive relationship between the two variables; however, the relationship is much weaker than it is for spring and the annual.
Annual
Temperature increase (oC)
0 2 4 6 8 10
Pre
cip
itation
Ch
an
ge
(m
m)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
y=12.13x+14.25
R2=0.86
Figure 24 Scatter plots and regression line showing the relationship between annual minimum temperature change and annual precipitation change
40
Winter
0 2 4 6 8 10
Pre
cip
itatio
n C
han
ge (
mm
)
0
5
10
15
20
25Spring
0 2 4 6 8 10
Pre
cip
itatio
n C
han
ge (
mm
)
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
Summer
Temperature increase (oC)
-2 0 2 4 6 8
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
Fall
Temperature increase (oC)
-2 0 2 4 6 8 10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25y=-3.96x-1.81
R2=0.81
y=2.38x+7.051.81
R2=0.43
y=5.65x-0.31
R2
=0.92
y=1.98x+1.68
R2
=0.86
Figure 25 Scatter plots and regression line showing the relationship between temperature and precipitation changes
41
3.2 Impacts and vulnerability to climate change
In this section, the potential impacts of climate change in the PFS are presented, as well as an assessment of vulnerabilities of forest ecosystems and processes. A combination of approaches to impacts and vulnerability assessment were used including extensive literature review, CCTF adaptation framework and model simulations.
3.3.1 Key drivers, stressors and impacts factor
Climate change may affect forest ecosystems in two ways, either directly through changing atmospheric CO2 levels, temperature and precipitation, or indirectly through altered stressors or disturbances (ex: wild fires, pests and diseases, windstorms, droughts, floods). Some of the impacts may be positive or beneficial to the forests, while some may be negative. In this section, based on literature review and expert knowledge (assessment team), potential climate impact factors relevant to the PFS were identified and discussed.
Atmospheric CO2 concentration will likely increase: Increase in atmospheric CO2 level is one of the main drivers of climate change. There is a large amount of evidence from across the globe showing that atmospheric CO2 levels have been increasing and will likely continue to increase due to human activities. Because atmospheric CO2 is a substrate for plant photosynthesis, rising CO2 in the atmosphere is thought to act as a fertilizer to increase photosynthesis rate, provided soil moisture and nitrogen availability are not limiting.
Temperatures will likely increase: There is robust evidence that global earth temperatures have been increasing and will continue to increase with continued increases in atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Temperatures across the assessment area have already exhibited significant increases and continued temperature rise are projected in future, even under the most conservative climate scenario (RCP2.6). The effects of increased temperature on forests can be either positive or negative. Positive effects generally come from the fact that higher temperatures may extend the growing seasons, leading to increase productivity. On the other hand, increases in temperature could lead to more droughts, which may have negative effects on plant productivity.
Winter processes will change: Climate projections for the assessment area predict that winter temperatures will increase more than the other (spring, summer and fall) seasons. This may consequently lead to changes in snowfall, soil frost, and other winter processes. Moreover, higher winter temperatures may lead to shorter periods with frozen soils and snow cover, which could affect forest management operations by limiting the accessibility of winter roads.
Precipitation will likely increase: Precipitation records for the assessment area show that mean annual precipitation has been increasing over the past century and is likely to continue to increase over the next century, although downscaled climate projection data predicts a precipitation decrease for summer. Decreased summer
42
precipitation, coupled with warmer temperature, may increase evapo-transpiration, leading to drought, especially in the upland sites of the assessment area. Extended droughts and hot spells may have drastic consequences on tree growth and survival. Wang et al. (2014) studied past and projected future changes in moisture conditions in the Canadian boreal forest and concluded that extreme drought events are likely to become more frequent in most parts of the managed boreal forest of western and central Canada.
Growing season will likely get longer: There is evidence at both the global and local scales indicating that the growing seasons have been getting longer. In the assessment area, it is estimated that the growing season has increased by about two weeks since 1916 and this trend is projected to become even more pronounced over the next century. Longer growing seasons are expected to enhance growth and productivity of forests, but the potential increases in the frequency and magnitude of climate change disturbances (ex: drought, flood, wildfire, wind blow down, pest and pathogens) may all contribute to reduce any enhanced growth associated with longer growing seasons.
Droughts will likely increase in duration and extent: The assessment area is already experiencing frequent dry spells, particularly in the upland areas. Globally, model simulation results suggest that drought may increase in length and extent. The climate moisture index maps generated for the study area indicate that climate change will affect moisture regime over the 21st century. Moisture regime across the entire study area will be deficient to support forest growth by the end of the century. Since water is a major requirement for photosynthesis, increased water deficit in the assessment area can be decisive for future forest growth, primary productivity and tree regeneration success. Drought stress of trees is also likely to predispose the forests to infestation by forest pests and diseases as well as forest fires.
Wind storms will likely increase: Changes in climate is expected to be associated with wind storms of high intensity, which are already occurring in the assessment area. High storms can damage (break and uproot) trees and cause increased costs as a result of unscheduled salvage and other associated problems in forest management activity planning.
The number of wildfires, area burned and intensity of wildfires will likely change by the end of this century: Forest fires are already the main threat in the boreal forest, particularly in southeastern Manitoba (where the assessment area is located) and they are expected to increase in the short-, medium- and long-term horizons as the future climate will be characterized by hotter and drier summers and therefore longer fire seasons. The likely prolonged droughts and hot spells, wind and other disturbance damages may further aggravate the risks of forest fires. Tree species (like jack pine) that were perfectly adapted to the area in a former time may decrease in vitality and even increase in mortality due to frequent and longer drought periods. As vegetation dries, it becomes combustible and thus fuel for fires.
43
Flooding events will increase: Heavy precipitations leading to extreme flooding events have been increasing in number and severity in the Prairie region in general and in Manitoba in particular. This trend is likely to intensify over the coming decades of the 21st century. Higher amounts of precipitation are projected for the assessment area, especially during winter and spring months, considerably increasing the risk of flooding. Flooding can be more harmful to trees and forest stands if it occurs during the growing season, as it can cause root injury, germination failure and tree mortality.
Forest pests and diseases will increase or become more damaging: Evidence indicates that an increase in temperature and greater moisture stress may lead to increases in these threats. It is unclear how climate will impacts pests and pathogens in the assessment area. However, current literature suggests that climate change will impact frequencies of pest and disease outbreaks (native pests).
3.2.2 Potential impact on forest ecosystems
Shift in the above mentioned drivers and stressors are expected to result in different impacts on the forest ecosystems within the assessment area during the 21st century. The assessment team identified a number of forest ecosystem conditions and processes listed on Table 7 that could be susceptible to the impacts of changes in climate under the RCP8.5 scenario and ranked the current, short-term (2010 to 2039), medium (2040 to 2069) and long- (2070 to 2099) -term impacts.
Table 7 Forest ecosystem condition impact ranking for RCP 8.5 scenario
Forest ecosystem condition
Impacts on Forest
Current 2010-2039 2040-2069 2070-2099
Species composition
Growth and productivity
Natural regeneration success
Non-timber forest products
Wildlife habitat
Winter road access
Recreational activities
Overall forest impact
44
In general, it is estimated that currently, climate change has a relatively low impact on most forest ecosystem conditions. With the exception of wildlife habitat for which current impact was rated low to moderate, all the other identified forest conditions and processes were given a low impact rating. However, for the period 2010 to 2039, the impact is projected to become more manifest for some forest ecosystem conditions and processes, including regeneration success, non-timber forest products, wildlife habitat and winter road access. All forest ecosystem conditions and processes are projected to be moderately impacted by climate change by mid-century and the impact is rated high by the end of the century.
3.2.3 Potential impacts on SFM objectives
As mentioned earlier, the Forestry and Peatlands Management Branch has begun developing a 20-year Forest Management Plan (FMP) for the assessment area. As part of this FMP, forest management objectives have been drafted. Table 8 provides the list of forest management objectives and an expert opinion of vulnerability to current and future climate. Overall, the impact of current climate on the management objectives was rated low. Over 80 per cent of the objectives received a low while the remaining objectives (less than 20 per cent) were rated moderate impact. The impact of climate change on the majority of forest management objectives are projected to be low to moderate by 2039, moderate by 2069 and high by the end of the century.
When considering the objective individually, the assessment team estimated that the objective of maintaining a similar (within 10 per cent) range of strata to current conditions may still doable with the current program by mid-century. However, forest managers will need to identify more vulnerable soil types and prescribe different forest management strategies and operations in order to achieve this management objective. Another stated management objective consists of managing the forest landscape pattern that will supply the current and future habitat for American marten, an animal that has long been recognized to be associated with softwood dominated stands. The assessment area is located at the southerly limit of the marten’s range in Canada, and there is a concern that this suitable habitat may be lost with a changing climate. Indeed, the climate projections for the area suggest that by the end of the 21st century, forest communities in the study area may shift from softwood dominated stands to hardwood dominated stands. The marten population may decline as a result of loss of the preferred forest types. Therefore, achieving this objective will be moderately challenging for the period 2040 to 2069 and very difficult towards the end of the 21st century.
Maintaining healthy forest stands through minimizing the impacts of both native and invasive forest pest and diseases is an important objective stated in the FMP. Although it was difficult to know precisely to which extent the impact of future climate on the assessment area would be, the assessment team estimated that in general, forests may become more vulnerable to both native (ex: larch beetle) and invasive (ex: mountain pine beetle, emerald ash borer, gypsy moth) forest pests and diseases, given expected changes in temperature and patterns of precipitation. Projected multiple drought years will make trees and forest stands more vulnerable, as greater effort will be required to contain the likely increases in outbreaks and epidemics of larch beetle. It
45
is also likely that by mid-century, secondary native insects may surface and pose a severe threat to the forest stands, especially in the dry upland areas. Though it is currently unknown in the assessment area, the emerald ash borer, an invasive insect that has come to North America from Asia and is currently present in southern Ontario and the eastern United States (including Minnesota) may arrive in the assessment area with warmer climate. Recent mountain pine beetle outbreaks in British Columbia and Alberta have posed severe damage to millions of hectares of pine forests in these neighboring provinces. While this insect is considered exotic to PFS, the possibility it could establish in jack pine forests is unknown, and epidemics of the insect could become a cause for concern with the changing climate.
46
Table 8 Priority forest management objective vulnerabilities to current and future climate for RCP 8.5 scenario
Sustainable Forest Management Objectives Vulnerability
Current 2010-2039 2040-2069 2070-2099
Biological diversity
Maintain a similar range of strata (species/age class) to current conditions
Develop patch size targets for harvest areas to emulate natural disturbance patterns
Manage forest landscape to supply current and future habitat for American Marten
Minimize impact of the forest management activities on the mottled duskywing
Ecosystem condition and productivity
Minimize loss of functional forest ecosystem area
Minimize the impact invasive forest pests and disease
Minimize the impact by native forest pests and disease
Minimize the impact of forest fires
Maximize the area of successful regeneration
Soil and water
Conduct operations to minimize negative impacts water quality and quantity
Role in global ecological cycles
Model the impacts of forest management activities on the flow of carbon
Economic and social benefits
Maintain/ enhance fibre supply to ensure a sustainable forest industry/communities
Increase fibre utilization and the opportunity for value added products from the forest
Maintain or enhance the availability of Non-Forest Timber Products
Maintain existing level of road access to the forest
Society’s responsibility
Identify and implement ways to increased forest benefit for aboriginal communities
Utilize strategies to assist communities to reduce fire risk
47
Forest regeneration offers a direct and immediate opportunity to select tree species or provenances that are believed to be better adapted or adaptable to the changing climatic conditions. Until now, both natural and artificial regeneration, achieved through selection of seed source and stock types and through applying the most appropriate silvicultural ground rules, have been well implemented together in the assessment area and will continue to be a management practice/objective in the assessment area. However, maximizing the area of successful regeneration will become increasing challenging under a changing climate, as warmer climate is likely to reduce moisture availability and increase the risks of immediate drought impacts on seedlings and may in the long run decrease regeneration success, particularly in the upland sites. Maximum root growth of most tree seedlings is known to occur in early summer and seedlings of some softwood(ex: pines) on the upland area may not have enough time to get their root systems established deep enough before potential summer drought conditions occur. This may require planting and aggressive site preparation to facilitate root growth and establishment to access deeper soil moisture.
Forest fires are known to be the most important disturbance factor of the boreal forests, and therefore, minimizing the impact of forest fires was perceived as an imperative forest management objective to achieve. Climate change, with its associated increasing temperature, decreasing moisture and lengthening of the growing and fire seasons (which affects vegetation growth, fuel structure and combustibility) will likely contribute to increase the intensity and severity of forest fires. This objective can be achieved in the short-term through utilizing strategies to assist community to reduce fire risks, minimize the impacts of forest fires and undertaking salvage harvest. However, in the medium- to long-term, climate change could give rise to serious fire risks factors, thus making it more challenging to achieve this objective.
3.2.4 Adaptive capacity
Based on the results of the assessment of, overall, the FPMB staff perceived the Branch to have a high adaptive capacity to manage for climate change impacts in the PFS in most of the selected adaptive capacity characteristics or organizational readiness determinants (Appendix 2). This high rating of was in part due to the strong support and commitments of Manitoba government (and its senior management officials) to address climate change effects in all functional areas of CWS including forestry. In 2012, the Manitoba government released its eight-year strategic plan “TomorrowNow – Manitoba’s Green Plan”, which sets priorities needed for protecting the environment, addressing climate change and achieving adaptive management of the province natural resources. A new Climate Change Plan is under development (expected to be release by the end of 2015) and there is a strong desire to use this as an opportunity to undertake a province wide vulnerability and risk assessment. Within CWS, the Climate Change Branch has been mandated to co-ordinate mitigation and adaptation efforts. The fact that there is a general awareness among senior management officials and forestry staff of the problem of climate change is an opportunity to formulate a response to address its effects.
48
The high adaptive capacity in term of human resources reflect the fact that FPMB has numerous staff and well experienced in their various disciplines (ex: GIS, forest management, modeling, climate change, forest inventory, forest health and renewal, etc). This makes it possible for FPMB staff to provide a range of professional services that can be useful as the branch works to manage for the effects of climate change. The Branch (FPMB) as a whole maintains a strong capacity for multi-stakeholder consultation and engagement, knowledge dissemination through promoting and sharing of best practices and lessons learned. Moreover, based on the ADAPTool analysis, most forestry policy and programs have fairly high autonomous and planned adaptability. This is believed to be due to the flexibility of most forestry policies and program areas in light of uncertainty and the existence of some mechanisms which allow them to be responsive to anticipated and unanticipated climate change.
Partnership is a key activity that FPMB uses to meet its mandate and participate in decision-making at a variety of scales in the PFS and other forest sections across the province. Given the importance of collaboration, FPMB has been participating at the national and provincial levels in collaborative networks and data/ information exchange working groups (ex: CCTF, FACoP, Forest Adaptation Working Group, CWS-Resilience Working Group, etc). FPMB is also collaborating with some partners (forest stakeholders, CFS, SRC, the University of Winnipeg, and IISD) to increase its current organizational preparedness to address the challenges of rapid climate change.
The capacity of FPMB to achieve the forest management objectives in a changing climate was also generally rated high. FPMB achieve forest management objectives was rated high for about 80 per cent of SFM while 20 per cent received a low to medium adaptive capacity rating. While FPMB adaptive capacity was perceived to be high overall, there are number of challenges that could limit the Branch capacity to adapt climate change. For instance, the assessment team felt that the increasing lack of financial and human capacity due to continued budget cuts could in the long run weaken FPMB adaptive capacity. In recent months, a number of forestry staff from the southeastern region have left their positions or have retired and the Branch has not been able to replace them. Another challenge is related to the fact that current forestry policies, regulations and programs were designed at a time when climate change was not considered as an issue. Although they have some level of flexibility, they were not sufficiently designed to specifically address climate change effectively. Based on SFM principle, FPMB staff recognizes the importance of measuring key ecological and social values (SFM criteria and indicators) to inform decision–making. While there is capacity and system in place to monitor and report on the status of some ecological values, monitoring and reporting on social values still need to be put in place or some improvement. With the rate of climate change, additional expertise and tools will be required to monitor changes in some aspects of ecological functions.
49
IV. Discussion
4.1 Stressors and vulnerability factors
4.1.1 Drought stress
The assessment area is located at the southern edge of the boreal forest and corresponds closely with the wettest area in Manitoba. Climate change is expected to increase the average precipitation across the area. Despite this increase, conditions are expected to become substantially drier in summers because of projected decrease in rainfall and increases in evapo-transpiration (Laprise et al 2003). These summer drought conditions could be a major source of vulnerability for the trees and forest ecosystems in the study area. The predicted increases in precipitation in the area are likely to be offset by the potential increases in evapo-transpiration cause by higher temperatures and a longer growing season, therefore increasing the likelihood of the frequency and duration of drought periods in the area. Extended droughts may have much more drastic consequences on tree growth, primary productivity and survival. The drought stress of tree will also predispose forests to infestation by insect herbivores and fungal diseases (Allen et al. 2010; Kolstrom et al. 2011). The assessment area could become exposed to drier climate conditions, similar to that of the present adjacent aspen parkland zone and therefore result in permanent losses of forest cover following disturbances and important reductions in forest productivity.
4.1.2 Forest fires
Wildfires are a natural part of the life cycle of the boreal forests. However, forest fires could become an increasing source of disturbance particularly if they continue to shift over this century due to a warmer climate. The weather and climate of an area can directly affect fire behavior, particularly the frequency, intensity/ severity and magnitude. Climate also can indirectly affect fire regimes through its influence on vegetation vigor, structure, and composition (Sommers et al. 2011). Days with extremes temperatures (above 35 °C) are projected to increase in the assessment. The model projections also suggest that the summer or fall could be drier than they were in the past. Prolonged droughts and hot spells will likely further aggravate the risks of forest fires. A greater frequency of high-temperature days, in combination with the projected dry late summer conditions could lead to an increase in draughtiness and mortality of some trees, potentially increasing the incidence of downed and dead wood. This condition could contribute to increase forest fuel loads and the potential for more intense, severe wildfires, and therefore, causing more damage to trees and forest ecosystems, as well as endangering the communities leaving within the area. High-intensity wildfires can result in species mortality, increases in invasive species, changes in soil dynamics (ex: compaction, altered nutrient cycling, sterilization), or altered hydrology (ex: increased runoff or erosion).
Fire suppression activities have been successful in the Pineland area, as indicated by the relative reduction trend of area burned in recent years. However, greater fire severity and intensity are expected in the area with the projected warmer
50
climate. This could consequently reduce the effectiveness of any existing fire suppression activities or could mean more investments in fire suppression and preparedness would be required to deal with or minimize fire impacts to the forest ecosystems in the assessment area. Under intense fire weather conditions, large-scale fires could become a hazard and safety risk and more resources may be needed to reduce fuel loads to prevent catastrophic wildfires, fight them when they do occur, and restore ecosystems after a fire event. Although some forest stands may potentially be negatively affected by wildfire, wildfires could on the other hand be beneficial to other tree species. Increased fire potential may lead to a shift in species or community composition from softwood to hardwood dominated stands. A recent study by Lenihan et al (2008) who used a dynamic vegetation model to examine potential changes in vegetation classes at the end the 21st century due to climate change (under high emission scenarios) found that southern boreal forests (including the Pineland Forest Management Section) could be lost, and be replaced by grasslands or temperate deciduous forests. Ravenscroft et al (2010) who used LANDIS model, across a large region in northern Minnesota projected declines in boreal species under both high and low emissions scenarios. In general, simulated forest ecosystems across the landscape under both scenarios became more homogenous maple stands (Acer spp) with decreasing proportions of pine (pinus spp). The fire modeling completed in the Pineland for the low emission scenario projected a slight increase in number of fires and area burned (Johnston, 2014).
4.1.3 Windstorms
The assessment area is already experiencing, to some extent, the impacts of snow and windstorms and some climate models predict that wind storms of higher intensity in the region will become even more frequent. Projected increase in blow downs may cause increased costs as a result of unscheduled cuttings (salvage logging operations) and problems in forestry planning. Younger stands in the assessment area will be particularly vulnerable to wind effects as the risk of stem breakage in all the tree species has been reported to be greater at young stages, as the taper of stems increases with age and the stem become more stable (Peltola 2000). However, mature (old) trees may also be affected as the risk of uprooting has been also shown to increase with tree height and for shallow rooted tree species. Additionally, blow-downs may lead to more wildfires if climate change results in more frequent extreme fire weather in the assessment area.
4.1.4 Pests and pathogens
Although much more work is required to project with some confidence changes in pests under a changing climate, it is well known that the occurrence of forest pests and diseases are strongly influenced by altered environmental conditions. Under a high emission scenario, scientists predict more insect pest damage due to increased metabolic activity in active periods and increased winter survival (Dukes et al. 2009). Climate change is believed to impact the frequency of pest outbreaks and spore formation and colonization success of fungal pathogens.
51
4.1.5 Flooding events
Extreme flooding events are expected to occur more frequently in the assessment area as a consequence of climate change. Although our downscaled climate simulation data did not include extreme weather events, information derived from global circulation model study predict that heavy precipitation, especially during the winters and springs, (as snow or rain) will be associated with climate change. Excess spring moisture from earlier and heavier snowmelt could considerably increase the risk of flooding, particularly in the lowland sites of the study area. Climate change is projected to result in a decrease of the number of rainy days and an increase in the number of days with heavy rain or snow fall events. This change may lead to more summer droughts as well as more extreme flooding events during the summer (Kramer et al. 2008). Trees are more vulnerable to the effects of flooding when it occurs during the growing season, particularly in late spring just after the first flush of growth than if it occurs at a time when trees are still dormant (Glenz et al. 2006). Flooding during the growing season can cause tree injury, inhibition of seed germination, promotion of early senescence and mortality.
4.1.6 Carbon dioxide fertilization
Increase in atmospheric CO2 level is one of the main drivers of climate change. In addition to its effect on climate, CO2 as a substrate for photosynthesis can affect plant growth and productivity. Therefore, rising concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere is believed to act as a fertilizer to increase photosynthesis rate and enhance growth and water use efficiency of some species, potentially offsetting the moisture deficiency during the growing season (Beedlow et al 2004; Ainsworth and Rogers 2007; Norby and Zak 2011). The results of some studies suggest that CO2 fertilization may result in increased tree or forest growth (Cole et al 2010, McMahon et al 2010), however, growth response varied with the plant nitrogen status and tree species and it also remains unclear if increased growth can be sustained over time (Norby et al 1999; Ainsworth and Long, 2005). A more recent study by Girardin et al. (2015) evaluated the impacts of climate warming and drying, as well as increase atmospheric CO2 level on aboveground productivity of black spruce forests across Canada south of 60°N for the period 1971 to 2100. They found soil water availability and autotrophic respiration to be significant drivers of the species interannual variability in productivity; however, that projected warming over the next century soil water availability and autotrophic respiration are key limiting factor of the species interannual variability in productivity, however, other factors such as carbon dioxide fertilization and respiration acclimation to high temperature may contribute to reduce these limitations.
The potential for water-use efficiency gains to alleviate moisture deficits could particularly be important for forests in the upland sites of the assessment area, given the potential for drought stress during the growing season. But it is difficult to draw a conclusion about the effects of CO2 fertilization as several factors, including ozone pollution, tree age and size, as well as tree species all may play a role in the ability of trees to take advantage of on the CO2 fertilization (Ainsworth and Long, 2005). Because of the potential impact of CO2 fertilization on forests, rising atmospheric CO2 level was
52
taking into consideration in modeling the impact of climate change on forest ecosystems of in the assessment area.
4.2 Impacts on forests ecosystems
4.2.1 Tree Species Composition
Across the northern hemisphere, it is generally expected that species located near the northern end of their range will benefit more from a warmer climate that those at southern extent (Parmesan and Yohe 2003). Therefore, most typical boreal tree species in the assessment area (located at the southern limit of boreal biome), particularly coniferous (softwood) trees such as jack pine, tamarack, aspen, and spruces that are better adapted to cold conditions are very likely to face increasing stress from warmer climate. In fact, results from our climate impact model simulations and other studies conducted in similar environment (ex: Northern Minnesota and Northern Wisconsin) suggest a decline of landscape-level habitat suitability and biomass for these species (Swanston et al. 2011; Handler et al. 2014). On the other hand, as the assessment area gets warmer, more southerly broadleaf species (hardwood tree species) such white birch, ash and oak trees may be favoured allowing them to outcompete the conifers. Indeed, the results of the impact models used in this study suggest that hardwood species may experience gains in biomass productivity across the assessment area, particularly in the lowland sites. However, despite the potential increase in habitat suitability for these southerly species there is a concern that the heavily fragmented nature of the assessment area may hinder their northward migration, unless an effective implementation of assisted migration is undertaken to help overcome this constraint. Northern species may be able to persist in the assessment area with favorable soils (lowland sites) or if competitor species (hardwood species) fail to colonize these areas (Iverson et al 2008). The implementation of forest management practices or adaptation options that increase the resilience of the northern species may enable them to thrive in the assessment area.
4.2.2 Forest productivity and wood supply
Diverse supply of wood products is derived from the assessment area. Any other factors put aside (ex: forest fires, pests and diseases, drought, blow downs, etc), the projected gradual increase in temperature and precipitation associated with elevated atmospheric CO2 level is likely to enhance tree growth and timber yield. The model simulation results show support for general increases in productivity in all four eco-sites of the assessment area associated with CO2 fertilization for both the low and high emission scenarios. Warmer temperatures are expected to speed up nutrient cycling and increase photosynthetic rates for most tree species in the assessment area. Beside, the projected longer growing seasons could lead to greater growth and productivity of trees if nutrient and moisture are not limiting factors. However, the net impact of climate change on forest productivity timber supply in the assessment area will depend on the extent to which climate change and climate variability would affect a number of interrelated factors such as tree growth rate, regeneration success, species composition, climate related forest disturbance patterns (ex: fires, wind events,
53
droughts, and pest outbreaks), management inputs, and many more factors. In the PFS, it is possible that the net effect of climate change to the forest products will gradually tend to be positive for hardwood timber supply and negative for softwood as models projections suggest a large potential shift in commercial species availability, from softwood dominated to hardwood dominated species by the end of the 21st century. Besides the ecological responses of the forest to climate change, socio-economic factors such as changes in global markets, national and regional economic policies, demand for wood products, and competing values for forestland would undoubtedly also have an impacts on the forest products industry over the coming century (Irland et al 2001).
4.2.3 Regeneration success
Droughts and less favorable growing conditions will make it difficult for some tree species to naturally regenerate, particularly trees that need favorable climate to produce seeds or to germinate. Young seedlings will also be more sensitive to drought stress.
4.2.4 Wildlife habitat
Climate and weather influence fish and wildlife species in many ways, both directly and indirectly. As temperatures warm and precipitation patterns change, some wildlife species may experience a shift in breeding and migration dates (Strode 2003). Besides direct climate effects on the behavior and reproduction of species, temperature and precipitation also influence the distribution of habitats upon which wildlife depend, which may be altered as climate shifts (Matthews et al. 2011). Certain wildlife species may benefit if their habitats expand in the future, but species that rely on highly vulnerable habitats could be negatively affected. Lowland / wetland habitats that represent about 30% of the land base in the Pineland may decline or disappear with this rising temperatures and altered precipitation, limiting or shifting already scarce habitat (Johnson et al. 2010). Remaining wetland habitat in the area may become more important for overwintering as temperatures warm. Negative impacts on tree species and forest communities could have positive impacts on some wildlife, but negative impacts on some others. Softwood and mixed wood dependent wildlife will be negatively impacted in the short to medium terms and highly impacted by the end of the century.
4.2.5 Winter road conditions/ access
Climate change and extreme weather events may have an impact on infrastructure or access within the PFS. Much of the timber harvest activities in the study area are conducted in the winter time when the ground is frozen or when packed/compacted snow cover on land surfaces allow for harvest activities to be conducted in areas that cannot be accessible in the wet seasons of the year. Warmer winters, excess spring moisture from early and heavier snowmelt, and waterlogged conditions in operating areas can become more common with a changing climate. This may limit access to sensitive sites. The warming climate, could significantly delay freeze-up in the fall and contribute to thinner ice and an early spring melt, resulting in a
54
shorter winter harvesting and hauling season. Specialized equipment and/or techniques may be required. Besides, climate change may have other hydrologic effects including more precipitation falling as rain rather than snow, increased winter precipitation and runoff, increased storm intensity, increased flood frequency and magnitude, all of which will likely affect road physical conditions. Poor winter and all-year round road conditions may also affects load weight limits and cause the cost of transporting and delivering timber to be higher.
4.2.6 Non-woody forest products
The PFS is a source of non-woody forest products for local communities living within and around the area. Although the contribution of non-timber forest products such wet orchids, berries, and mushrooms, to the local economy and people’s livelihood are still not well documented, we do know that these products are important sources of food supplements and incomes for these local communities. However, climate change, through shifting the timing of the seasons, is likely to affect plants phenology (ex: timing of flowering and fructification) and consequently the yields of some non-timber forest products. Our assessment results suggest that climate change is currently having a low or minimal impact on some these focal species, but the impact is projected to become moderate by the mid-century and moderately high to high by the end of the century through decline or life-cycle alteration of these species.
4.2.7 Recreational opportunities
The PFS has always been an important area for recreation including hunting, fishing, camping, skiing, snowmobile/ATV use and naturalist pursuits. The vulnerability associated with climate change in forest ecosystems will likely result in shifted timing or participation opportunities for these forest-based recreation opportunities. This is because forest-based recreations are strongly seasonal. Observations support the idea that seasons have shifted measurably over the previous 100 years, and projections indicate that seasonal shifts will continue towards shorter, milder winters and longer, hotter summers (Andersen al 2012, Winkler, Arritt and Pryor 2012).
Although scientific literature assessing the impacts of these changes on forest-based recreation is lacking, the little available literature suggest that milder winters associated with climate change may tend to reduce opportunities for winter recreation while warm-weather types of nature-based recreation may benefit from the longer and hotter summer environment. For example, Dawson and Scott (2010) found that opportunities for winter-based recreation activities such as skiing, snowmobiling and ice fishing to be reduced due to shorter winter snowfall season and decreasing periods of lake ice. On the other hand, the results of their study suggest that warm-weather recreation activities such as hunting and fishing may benefit from extended summer season.
The more immediate impacts of climate change, such as projected ecosystem disruption and loss of wildlife or fish populations, could to some extent lead to some a reduction of recreational activities in the PFS. But it is difficult to project the impacts of
55
climate change on recreational opportunities in the study area as the thresholds for change in environmental condition that will limit or reduce enjoyment of a given activity is unclear.
4.3 Management Implications and Adaptation Approaches
In the previous section, we described the observed and anticipated climate trends, the potential climate impact to forests, and the climate-related vulnerabilities of forests in the assessment area. Based on an initial literature review, a list of potential adaption options was developed (see Appendix 3 for this list). During the workshops, this list was reviewed by the assessment team, which narrowed it down to some key adaption strategies and options that are relevant to address the main impacts and vulnerabilities of the PFS. Here, we briefly discuss the main implications of the projected climate change impacts and vulnerabilities and the suggested recommendation of management strategies/actions that could be undertaken (along with the forest management objectives) to ensure ecosystem conditions and services provided by the forests are maintained.
Assisting the migration of tree provenances and species. As discussed earlier, with the projected shifts in temperature and precipitation, the assessment area may become unsuitable forest habitat for some existing tree species (particularly boreal species in the southern end of their range) but favorable sites for some other new species. Tree species will have to migrate in and out of the assessment area. Because, climate change may occur faster than the natural ability of tree species to migrate, human intervention to assist or facilitate this migration process may be required. A forest assisted migration experiment is already being initiated in the assessment area, with the aim of broadening the genetic resilience of jack pine forest types to climate change by introducing southerly (Ontario, Minnesota and Wisconsin) seed sources. The VA described here supports the need for such studies.
Enhancing species capacity for successful regeneration. Climate change is projected to alter precipitation patterns across the assessment area, particularly during the growing season. Drought events may become more frequent and severe. The regeneration requirements of several tree species may no longer be met due to shifts in the timing or amount of precipitation. Therefore, appropriate regeneration methods should be envisioned (depending on the soil/habitat types) to ensure successful regeneration of these species. Along with appropriate regeneration techniques, the possibility of conducting site/habitat amelioration (ex: fertilization, swamp drainage, scarification) may be worth considering. It may also become necessary to increase stand renewal through planting of seedlings instead of relying on natural regeneration, which may become difficult to achieve. The results of the ADAPTool analysis suggested that current forestry policies, regulations and program areas are flexible enough to implement these changes. There is a strong recognition within Manitoba government of the increased risk of regeneration failure and strategies are currently being developed to deal with these events.
56
Reducing fragmentation and maintaining connectedness. The PFS is one of the most fragmented forests in Manitoba, due to settlement, agricultural expansions and other developments that have reduced the current forest patch sizes. Fragmentation and habitat loss are believed to be the primary reasons that, in the future, tree species may not be able to naturally migrate and colonize new suitable habitats quickly enough to keep pace with the rate of climate change. Therefore, minimizing further fragmentation in the PFS and establishing migration corridors in this already fragmented landscape could be a means of aiding the migration of plant and wildlife species responding to the changing climatic conditions.
Reducing the impacts of forest disturbances. Climate change is projected to increase the frequency and severity of forest disturbances such as wind and snow damages, as well as pests and disease outbreak. Adaption measures to enhance fire protection or to reduce risks of fire may include removing standing dead trees and coarse woody debris on the forest floor, changing species composition by introducing more hardwood species and developing fire-smart forest landscapes. Wind damage can be prevented through applying shorter rotation length while snow damage could be avoided by identifying and thinning high-risk tree species.
Maintaining forest productivity and timber supply. In the assessment area, changes in forest productivity associated with climate change will very much depend on the tree species and forest stand types. The results of the model simulations indicate that productivity is likely to decrease for some species (mostly softwood), while for some others (hardwoods) there will be productivity gain. Although a shift to hardwood and increased hardwood biomass may be predicted, the merchantability of these future hardwood stands remains unclear as they may not develop on ideal sites for hardwood timber production. This may have impacts on timber supply as well. Forest productivity decline can be addressed through modification of tending and thinning practices, regarding the frequency and intensity of these operations. Selective tending and thinning operations can help reduce the susceptibility of stands to climate stressors and forest disturbances, such as droughts and pest and disease attacks.
Incorporating climate change effects in yield curve projections. Current yield curves have been developed with no climate change impact built in to them. It would be highly recommended to incorporate climate change effects into yield curves and use these new yield curves to predict changes in productivity associated with climate change. Then, use new yield curves and predicted productivity to determine timber removal rates that will be appropriate for the forests, while maintaining all other ecosystem services.
Developing new harvesting techniques. The projected warmer temperatures and longer growing seasons will likely negatively affect winter road access and
57
sensitive site/soils access. To adapt to these new conditions, new harvesting/hauling equipment techniques will have to be implemented or developed that better suit the new conditions.
Reducing the rotation age of managed stands as the wood products shift from saw logs to chips. The shorter rotation will allow for changing seed source to best meet the climate in shorter rotation time periods.
Developing new policies for forest adaptation and improving existing policies. Existing forestry guidelines and procedures have been designed for a stable climate regime (no climate change consideration built into them). The ability to adapt Manitoba’s forest to climate change will depend largely on the existence of adequate policies specifically tailored to support climate change adaptation. In June 2012, Manitoba released its adaptation strategies or adaptation pathway outlined in “TomorrowNow – Manitoba’s Green Plan”. Although this government wide adaptation strategy includes forestry, specific action plans/policies for forestry have yet to be written.
4.4 Data gaps and lessons learned
Assessing the vulnerability of the Pineland forest to climate change was not an easy task. At each step of the assessment process, we encountered data gaps and uncertainty. For instance, the lack of data and information on the assessment area made it quite difficult to describe the contemporary landscape of the study area and establish the relationship between past climate and the current forest conditions. We also encountered some issues of missing data when dealing with the observed/historical data obtained from Environment Canada weather station at Sprague and Pinawa. Whereas a lack of data should not be used as a reason for not conducting an assessment, insufficient data might have limited our ability to conduct the assessment with a higher level of confidence and precision. Despite these difficulties, we were able to apply the available information and complete the PFS vulnerability assessment.
Obtaining and analyzing downscaled climate data and developing climate scenarios from them also were not straightforward tasks. As we proceeded in the analysis process, we became familiar with available historical climate data and climate projection and analysis. Sorting through this information and learning how to use it was an important step in the process.
This pilot study demonstrated that a vulnerability assessment could be completed by FPMB staff using existing information and tools and with minimum financial resources. Despite existing workloads and priorities, all members of the assessment team were able to participate in the assessment and provide beneficial input into the analysis.
The collaboration among FPMB staff and experienced scientists (ex: from SRC, CFS and IISD) provided a more detailed analysis and constituted one of the reasons for the successful completion of this assessment. Through collaborating with these
58
scientists, we were able to easily familiarize ourselves with the CCFM-CCTF vulnerability assessment approach and also obtain high quality downscaled climate change projection and scenario data and model simulations of climate impacts of the forest. Prior to starting the assessment, the partnership between the FPMB staff and IISD analysts also allowed us to evaluate autonomous and anticipated adaptability of some of forestry policies and program areas in relation to climate change stressors.
In addition, it is clear that the existence of the CCFM-CCTF products, particularly the adaptation framework and the vulnerability assessment guidebook, was of great value to the successful completion of this study. The basic approach outlined in the guidebook provided a consistent framework for the assessment team to apply.
As with most endeavours, the resulting products were strongly influenced by the experience and expertise of the people who participated in this assessment. The assessment team was knowledgeable about the forest resources of the area as a whole, which made the assessment quite productive. Using the same assessment team or having them train or facilitate similar assessments in the future would make the process more efficient and focus our efforts.
Finally, the last advice to bear in mind is that it is impossible to know precisely and accurately the future climate and its effects. However, this should not be a requirement or barrier to embarking on a vulnerability assessment. Utilizing the latest data and models (knowing their limitations) in an adaptive management process with continuous improvement will provide better results than not acting.
59
List of References Ainsworth E.A and Rogers A. 2007. The response of photosynthesis and stomatal conductance to rising [CO2]: mechanisms and environmental interactions Plant, Cell Environ, 30:258–70
Ainsworth E.A., and Long S.P. 2005. What have we learned from 15 years of free-air CO2 enrichment (FACE)? A meta-analytic review of the responses of photosynthesis, canopy properties and plant production to rising CO2. New Phytol., 165: 351–372.
Allen C.D., Macalady A.K., Chenchouni H., Bachelet D., McDowell N., Vennetier M., Kitzberger T., Rigling A., Breshears D.D., Hogg E.H., Gonzales P., Fensham R., Zhang Z., Castro J., Demindova N., Lim J.-H., Allard G., Running S.W., Semerci A., Cobb N.S. 2010. A global overview of drought and heat-inducted tree mortality reveals emerging climate change risks for forests. Forest Ecology and Management 259: 660-684.
Baker F. A., Slivitsky M., and Knowles K. 1992. Impact of dwarf mistletoe on jack pine forests in Manitoba. Plant Disease 76: 1256-1259.
Beedlow P.A., Tingey D.T., Phillips D.L., Hogsett W.E., Olszyk D.M. 2004. Rising atmospheric CO2 and carbon sequestration in forests. Front.Ecol. Environ., 2(6): 315–322.
Brandt J.P., Brett R.D., Knowles K.R., and Sproule. A. 1998. Distribution of severe dwarf mistletoe damage in west-central Canada. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forestry Service, Northern Forestry Centre, Edmonton, Alberta. Special Report 13.
Canadian Council of Forest Ministers (CCFM). 2008. A vision for Canada’s forests: 2008 and beyond. Ottawa, ON. <http://www.ccfm.org/pdf/Vision_EN.pdf>. Accessed 28 June 2014
Cole C.T., Anderson J.E., Lindroth R.L., Waller D.M. 2010. Rising concentrations of atmospheric CO2 have increased growth in natural stands of quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides), Global Change Biol., 16: 2186–2197
Conklin D.A., Fairweather M.L. 2010. Dwarf mistletoes and their management in the Southwest. USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region, R3-FH-10-01. 23p. http://www.fs.fed.us/r3/resources/health
Cowan W.F, Rounds R. C. 1995. Economic benefit of forestry in Eastern Manitoba and the Interlake. Report Series 1995-1. The Rural Development Institute. Brandon University.
Dahms C.W.; Geils B.W., tech. eds. 1997. An assessment of forest ecosystem health in the Southwest. USDA Forest Service, RM-GTR-295. 97 p.
Dawson J., Scott D. 2010. Climate Change and Tourism in the Great Lakes Region: A Summary of Risks and Opportunities. Tourism in Marine Environments. 6(2-3):119-132
60
Dukes J.S., Pontius J., Orwig D. and others. 2009. Responses of insect pests, pathogens and invasive plant species to climate change in the forests of northeastern North America: what can we predict? Canadian Journal of Forest Research 39:231-248
Edwards J.E., Pearce C., Ogden A.E., and Williamson T.B. 2015. Climate change and sustainable forest management in Canada: a guidebook for assessing vulnerability and mainstreaming adaptation into decision making. Can. Counc. For. Minist., Ottawa, ON.
Epp B. and Tardif J.C. 2004. Effects of Lodgepole Pine Dwarf Mistletoe, Arceuthobium americanum, on Jack Pine, Pinus banksiana, growth in Manitoba. Canadian Field-Naturalist 118(4): 595-601.
Etkin D, Brun S.E., Shabbara A., Paul Joe P. 2001. Tornado climatology of Canada revisited: tornado activity during different phases of enso. International Journal of Climatology. 21: 915–938
Etkin D. 1995. Beyond the year 2000, more tornadoes in western Canada? Implications from the historical record. Journal of Natural Hazards 12: 19-27.
Girardin M.P., Hogg E.H., Bernier P.Y., Kurz W.A., Guo X.J., Cyr G. 2015. Negative impacts of high temperatures on growth of black spruce forests intensify with the anticipated climate warming. Glob. Chang. Biol. doi: 10.1111/gcb.13072
Gitay H., Suarez A., Watson, R.T. 2002. Climate change and biodiversity. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Geneva
Glenz C, Schlaepfer R.X., Iorgulescu I., Kienast F. 2006. Flooding tolerance of Central European tree and shrub species. Forest Ecology and Management 235(1-3): 1-13
Handler S., Duveneck J.M., I Iverson L., Peters E., Scheller M.R., Wythers K.R. et al. 2014. Minnesota forest ecosystem vulnerability assessment and synthesis: a report from the northwoods climate change response framework project. USDA Forest Service. Newtown Square, PA. 240p
IPCC. 2007. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. [Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R.K and Reisinger, A.(eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 104 pp
IPCC. 2014. Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field, C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. White (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 1-32
61
Irland L.C., Adams D., Alig R., Betz C.J., Chen C.C., Hutchins M., McCarl B.A., Skog B., Sohngen B.L. 2001. Assessing socioeconomic impacts of climate change on US forests, wood-product markets, and forest recreation. BioScience, 51(9): 753–764.
Iverson L.R., Prasad A.M., Matthews S.N., Peters M. 2008. Estimating potential habitat for 134 eastern US tree species under six climate scenarios. Forest Ecology and Management, 254: 390–406.
Johnson W.C., Werner B., Guntenspergen G.R., Voldseth R.A.,Millett B., Naugle D.E., Tulbure M., Carroll R.W.H., Tracy J., Olawsky C. 2010. Prairie wetland complexes as landscape functional units in a changing climate. BioScience, 60:128–140.
Johnston M. 2014. Climate change vulnerability of the pineland forest management unit, southeastern Manitoba. SRC Publication No. 13435-1E14
Johnston M. and Williamson T. 2007. A framework for assessing climate change vulnerability of the Canadian forest sector. The Forestry Chronicle 83(3): 358–361
Johnston M.H., Campagna M., Gray, P., Kope H. , Loo J., Ogden A., O’Neil G.A., Price D., Williamson T.B. 2009. Vulnerability of Canada’s tree species to climate change and management options for adaptation: an overview for policy makers and practitioners. Canadian Council of Forest Ministers
Kirilenko A.P. and. Sedjo R.A. 2007. Climate change impacts on forestry. Proc Natl Acad Sci 104(50) 19697–19702
Kolstrom M., Vilen T., Lindner M. 2011. Climate change impacts and adaptation in European Forests. European Forest Institute
Kramer K., Vreudenhil S.J. van der Werf D.C. 2008. Effects of flooding on recruitment, damage and mortality of riparian tree species: A field and simulation study on Rhine floodplain, Forest Ecology and Management, 255:3893-3903.
Laprise R., Caya D., Frigon A., Paquin D. 2003. Current and perturbed climate as simulated by the second-generation Canadian Regional Climate Model (CRCM-II) over northwestern North America. Clim. Dynamics, 21:405-421.
Lenihan J.M., Bachelet D., Neilson,R.P., Drapek R. 2008. Simulated response of conterminous United States ecosystems to climate change at different levels of fire suppression, CO2 emission rate, and growth response to CO2. Global and Planetary Change. 64(1-2):16-25
Matthews S.N., Iverson L.R., Prasad A.M., MPeters M.P., Rodewald P.G. 2011. Modifying climate change habitat models using tree species-specific assessments of model uncertainty and life history-factors. Forest Ecology and Management, 262:1460-1472.
62
McMahon S.M., Parker G.G., Miller D.R. 2010. Evidence for a recent increase in forest growth, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA, 107: 3611–3615.
MCW, 2014. Forest pest management guidelines. Available online: www.manitoba.ca/conservation/forestry/pdf/practices/forest_pest_mgnt_guidelines_sept2014.pdf
Meiners S.J., Presley G.N. (2015). Differential damage of a late frost to Ozark tree species. J. Torrey Bot. Soc., 142 (1): 12–17.
Norby R.J., Wullschleger S.D., Gunderson C.A., Johnson D.W., Ceulemans R. 1999. Tree responses to rising CO2 in field experiments: implications for the future forest. Plant, Cell and Environment, 22: 683-714.
Norby R.J., Zak D.R. 2011. Ecological lessons from free-air CO2 enrichment (FACE) experiments. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 42: 181-203
Päätalo M.L. 2000. Risk of snow damage in unmanaged and managed stands of Scots pine, Norway spruce and birch. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research 15: 530–541
Parmesan C., Yohe G. 2003. A globally coherent fingerprint of climate change impacts across natural systems. Nature, 42: 37–42.
Peltola H., Kellomaki S., Hassinen A., Granander M. 2000. Mechanical stability of Scots pine, Norway spruce and birch: an analysis of tree-pulling experiments in Finland. Forest Ecology and Management 135: 143-153
Ravenscroft C., Scheller R.M., Mladenoff D.J., White M.A. 2010. Simulating forest restoration in a mixed ownership landscape under climate change. Ecological Applications 20(2): 327-346.
Sedjo R.A. 2010. Adaptation of Forests to Climate Change: Some estimates. Discussion paper. RFF DP 10-06.
Smith R.E., Ehrlich W.A., Jameson J.S., Cayford J.F. 1964. Report of the soil survey of the south-eastern map sheet. Manitoba soil survey. Manitoba Department of Agriculture and Conservation Map. 110 p.
Sommers W.T., Coloff S.G. Conard S.G. 2011. Synthesis of Knowledge: Fire History and Climate Change. Joint fire science program (JFSP). Report 09-2-01-09, Fairfax, 215p + 6 appendices
Stanton S. 2007. Effects of dwarf mistletoe on climate response of mature ponderosa pine trees. Tree-ring Res. 63:69–80.
Strode P.K. 2003. Implications of climate change for North America wood warblers (Parulidae). Global Change Biology. 9: 1137-1144.
63
Swanston C., Janowiak M., Iverson L., Parker L., Mladenoff D., Brandt L., Butler P., Pierre M.S., Prasad A., Matthews S., Peters M., Higgins D., and Dorland A. 2011. Ecosystem vulnerability Assessment and Synthesis: A report from the climate change response framework project in northern Wisconsin. USDA Forest Service. Newtown Square, PA. 151p
van Vuuren D.P., Edmonds J., Kainuma M., Riahi K. Thomson A., Hibbard, K. Hurtt G. C., Kram T., Krey V., Lamarque J.F., Masui T., Meinshausen M., Nakicenovic N., Smith N.S.J., Rose S. K. 2011. The representative concentration pathways: an overview, Climatic Change, 109:5-31, 2011
Wang Y., Hogg E.H., Price T.D., Edwards J., Williamson T. 2014 Past and projected future changes in moisture conditions in the Canadian boreal forest. The Forest Chronicle. 90(5): 678-691
Wang, Y., Hogg, E.H., Price, T.D., Edwards, J., Williamson, T. 2014 Past and projected future changes in moisture conditions in the Canadian boreal forest. The Forest Chronicle. 90(5): 678-691
Williamson T.B., Campagna M.A. Ogden A.E. 2012. Adapting sustainable forest management to climate change: a framework for assessing vulnerability and mainstreaming adaptation into decision making. Can. Counc. For. Minist., Ottawa, ON.
Williamson T.B., Colombo S.J., Duinker P.N., Gray P.A., Hennessey R.J., Houle D., Johnston M.H., Ogden A.E., Spittlehouse D.L. 2009. Climate change and Canada’s forests: from impacts to adaptation. Sustainable Forest Management Network and Canadian Forest Service, Northern Forestry Centre, Edmonton, AB, 104 pp
Winkler J.A., Arritt, R., Pryor S. 2012. Climate projections for the Midwest: Availability, interpretation and synthesis. In: U.S. National Climate Assessment Midwest Technical Input Report. J. Winkler, J. Andresen, J. Hatfield, D. Bidwell, and D. Brown, coordinators. Available from the Great Lakes Integrated Sciences and Assessment (GLISA) Center, http://glisa.umich.edu/docs/NCA/MTIT_Forestry.pdf. Accessed 14 August 2014.
64
Appendices
65
Appendix 1 Current and potential future impacts of climate change on the Pineland forest management objectives SFM management objectives Current 2010-2039 2040-2069 2070-2099
Description Impact Description Impact Description Impact Description Impact
CCFM Criterion 1: Biological Diversity
Maintain a similar (within 10%) range of strata (species/age class) to current conditions (life of the plan)
Low Can achieve with current program
Low Determine vulnerable soil types for appropriate measures
Moderate Challenged to succeed
High
Develop patch size targets for harvest areas that emulate natural disturbance patterns
Not Natural Range Variation, Pre-industrial condition
Low Low Low Low
Manage the forest landscape pattern that will supply the current and future habitat for American marten
Can do pattern
Low Low More hardwood
Moderate More HW less SW/mixed Wood
High
Minimize impact of the forest management activities on the mottled duskywing
Low Impacted - If need to spray for other pests
Low Low Low
CCFM Criterion 2: Ecosystem condition and productivity
Minimize loss of functional forest ecosystem area
Low Low Moderate High
Minimize the impact by native forest pests and disease
Cycles haven’t changed, larch beetle unknown, Hypoxylon
Low Marginal areas, multiple drought years –vulnerable, more outbreak years
Low-mod Secondary insects may surface
Moderate More stress High
Minimize the impact by invasive forest pests and disease
Pine beetle, EAB colder, 2 yr life cycle, gypsy moth
Low EAB, MPB will arrive here
Moderate High High
Minimize the impact of forest fires
Minimize through
Low Low Moderate Moderate
66
SFM management objectives Current 2010-2039 2040-2069 2070-2099
Description Impact Description Impact Description Impact Description Impact
suppression, salvage harvest
Maximize the area of successful regeneration
Selection of seed source and stock type, apply the most appropriate silviculture ground rule
Low Seasons, variability of precipitation, planting contract issues
Moderate Different standards
Moderate To achieve we will need to different
High
CCFM Criterion 3: Soil and water
Conduct operations to minimize negative impacts water quality and quantity
Low Low Low Low
CCFM Criterion 4: Role in global ecological cycles, etc.
Model the impacts of forest management activities on the flow of carbon through the forested ecosystems
Low low low low
CCFM Criterion 5: Economic and Social Benefits
Maintain or enhance fibre supply to ensure a sustainable forest industry and communities
Low SWHW
Low SW/HW
SW Challenged Hw feasible
Moderate SW
High - SW
Increase fibre utilization and the opportunity for value added products from the forest
Red pine Low Hog fuel? Low Hog fuel? Moderate Moderate
Maintain or enhance the availability of non-forest timber products
Social - blue berries, Christmas tree growers
Low Low Low Low
Maintain existing level of road access to the forest
Not flooding, or winter roads
Low Low Low Low
CCFM Criterion 6: Society’s Responsibility
Assist aboriginal Economic Low What benefits Low What Low What Low
67
SFM management objectives Current 2010-2039 2040-2069 2070-2099
Description Impact Description Impact Description Impact Description Impact
communities to identify and implement ways to realize increased benefit from the forest
will change as the forest changes
benefits will change as the forest changes
benefits will change as the forest changes
Assist communities to reduce fire risk
Very important
Low Moderate Moderate High
68
Appendix 2 Current and potential future climate change impacts, adaptive capacity and vulnerability of the Pineland forest management objectives SFM Objectives Current 2010-2039 2040-2069 2070-2099
Impact Adaptive capacity
Vulnerability Impact Vulnerability Impact Vulnerability
Impact Vulnerability
Biological diversity
Maintain a similar (within 10%) range of strata (species/age class) to current conditions (possibly change)
Low
High (use current AC through-out)
Low Low Low Moderate Moderate High
Moderate- High (lost of forests to grasslands, SW to HW
Develop patch size for harvest areas that emulate current natural disturbance patterns
Low High Low Low Low Low Low Low
Low (salvaging the new norm)
Manage the forest landscape pattern that will supply the current and future habitat for American marten
Low High Low Low Low Moderate
Moderate (size possible, but species comp not ideal)
High Moderate
Minimize impact of the forest management activities on the mottled duskywing
Low High Low Low Low low Low-Moderate
Low Low-Moderate
Ecosystem condition and productivity
Minimize loss of functional forest ecosystem area
Low High Low Low
Moderate (greater non-climatic pressures)
Moderate Moderate High High
Minimize the impact by native forest pests and disease Low High Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate High High
Minimize invasive forest pests and disease impacts
Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate High High High High
Minimize fire impacts Low High Low Low Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate
Maximize the area of successful regeneration
Low High Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate High High
Soil and water
Conduct operations to minimize negative impacts water quality and quantity
Low High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low
Role in global ecological cycles
69
Model the impacts of forest management activities on the flow of carbon through the forested ecosystems
Low High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low
Economic and social benefits
Maintain or enhance fibre supply to ensure a sustainable forest industry and communities
Low High Low Low Low Moderate SW
Moderate High SW High
Increase fibre utilization and the opportunity for value added forest products
Low Low- Moderate
Low Low Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate
Maintain or enhance the availability of non-forest timber products
Low Low-Mod (flexibility)
Moderate Low moderate Low Moderate Low Moderate
Maintain existing level of road access to the forest
Low High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low
Society’s responsibility
Work with aboriginal communities to identify and implement ways to increase benefit from the forest
Low High Low Low Low Low Low Moderate Moderate
Utilize strategies to assist communities to reduce fire
Low Mod Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate High High
70
Appendix 3 List of possible adaptation options and strategies for each of the CCFM SFM criteria and for the overall SFM system of interest gathered from the literature (ex: Ogden and Innes 2007 and 2008) Conservation of Biological Diversity Climate Change Impact
SFM Planning Level
Adaptation Options
Alteration of plant and animal distribution
Strategic
Minimize fragmentation of habitat and maintain connectivity
Maintain representative forest types across environmental gradients in reserves
Maintain primary (undisturbed by human activities) forests
Protect climate refugia at multiple scales
Identify and protect functional groups and keystone species
Provide buffer zones for adjustment of reserves
Protect most highly threaten ex-situ
Develop a gene management program to maintain diverse gene pools
Create artificial reserves or arboreta to preserve rare species
Operational
Practice low intensity forestry and prevent conversion to plantation
Assist changes in the distribution of species by introducing them to new areas
Increased frequency and severity of forest disturbance
Strategic Maintain natural fire regimes
Operational Allow forests to regenerate naturally following disturbance: prefer natural regeneration wherever appropriate
Habitat invasion by non-native species
Strategic Maintain integrity of ecosystems by avoiding their disruption by non-native species
Operational Control invasive species
Maintenance of the Productive Capacity of Forest Ecosystems Climate Change Impact
SFM Planning Level
Adaptation Options
Increased frequency and severity of forest disturbance
Strategic Allocate forest land-base to identify areas that may be managed for timber production where high intensity plantation forestry may be practiced
Operational
Assist in tree regeneration
Apply silvicultural techniques that maintain a diversity of age stands and mix of species
Actively manage forest pests
Decreased forest growth
Strategic Adapt silvicultural rules and practices to ensure the growth rates of trees is maintained or enhanced
Operational
Practice high intensity forestry in areas managed for the timber production to promote growth of commercial tree species and where the forested land base is allocated
Include climate variables in growth and yield models in order to have more specific predictions on the future development of forests
Enhance forest growth through forest fertilization
Employ vegetation control techniques to offset drought
Pre-commercial thinning or selectively remove suppressed, damaged or poor quality individuals to increase resource availability to remaining trees
Plant genetically modified species and identify more suitable genotypes
71
Species are no longer suited to site conditions
Strategic Adapt silvicultural rules and practices to maintain optimum species-site relationships
Operational
Under-plant with other species or genotypes where the current advanced regeneration is unacceptable as a source for the future
Design and establish a long-term multi species/seed-lot trial to test improved genotypes across a diverse array of climatic and latitudinal environments
Reduce the rotation age followed by planting to speed the establishment of better adapted forest types
Relax rules governing the movement of seed stocks from one area to another: examine options for modifying seed transfer limits and systems
Invasion by non-native species
Strategic Adopt policies to ensure the disruption of ecosystems by non-native species is avoided
Operational Control those undesirable plant species that will become more competitive in a changed climate
Maintenance of Forest Ecosystem Health and Vitality Climate Change Impact
SFM Planning Level
Adaptation Options
Increased frequency and severity of insect and disease disturbance
Strategic Adjust harvest schedules to harvest stands most vulnerable to insects
Operational
Plant genotypes that are tolerant to drought, insects and disease
Reduce disease losses through sanitation cuts that remove infected trees
Breed for pest resistance and for a wider tolerance to a range of climate stresses and extremes in specific genotypes
Use prescribed burning to reduce fire risk and reduce forest vulnerability to insect outbreaks
Employ silvicultural techniques to promote forest productivity and increase stand vigor (ex: partial cutting or thinning) to lower the susceptibility to insect attacks
Shorten the rotation length to decrease the period of stand vulnerability to damaging insects and diseases and to facilitate change to more suitable species
Decreased health and vitality of forest ecosystems due to cumulative impacts of multiple stressors
Strategic Reduce non-climatic stresses to enhance ability of ecosystems to respond to climate change by managing tourism, recreation and grazing impacts
Reduce non-climatic stresses to enhance ability of ecosystems to respond to climate change by regulating atmospheric pollutants
Reduce non-climatic stresses to enhance ability of ecosystems to respond to climate change by restoring degraded areas to maintain genetic diversity and promote ecosystem health
Operational
Work with others to ensure that stressors outside the control of the forest management (ex: atmospheric pollution) are minimized
Adopt a holistic management approach that balances timber and non-timber goods and services
Maximize forest area by quickly regenerating any degraded areas
72
Conservation and Maintenance of Soil and Water Resources Climate Change Impact
SFM Planning Level
Adaptation Options
Increased soil erosion due to increased precipitation and melting of permafrost
Strategic
Adopt practices that minimize the risk of sediment generation associated with roads and harvesting activities
Operational
Maintain, decommission and rehabilitate roads to minimize sediment runoff due to increased precipitation and melting of permafrost
Minimize soil disturbance through low harvesting activities
Minimize density of permanent road network and decommission and rehabilitate roads to maximize productive forest area
Limit harvesting operations to the winter to minimize road construction and soil disturbance
Increased terrain instability due to extreme precip events or melting of permafrost
Strategic Re-assess terrain stability maps in light of changing ground conditions associated with climate change
Operational Avoid constructing roads in landslide prone terrain where increased precipitation and melting of permafrost may increase hazard of slope failure
More/ earlier snow melt resulting in the timing of peak flow and volume in streams
Strategic Re-assess river and stream peak flows and link to bridge and road design standards
Operational
Examining the suitability of current road construction standards and stream crossing to ensure they adequately mitigate the potential impacts on infrastructure. Fish and potable water of changes in timing and volume of peak flows
Maintenance of Forest Contribution to Global Carbon Cycles CC Impact SFM Level Adaptation Options
Decrease in forest sinks and increased CO2 emissions from northern forested ecosystems due to declining forest growth and productivity
Strategic Minimize risk of the forest ecosystem becoming a net source of carbon
Operational
Enhance forest growth and carbon sequestration through forest fertilization
Modify thinning practices (timing, intensity) and rotation length to increase growth and turnover of carbon
Minimize density of permanent road network to maximize forest sinks
Decommission and rehabilitate roads to maximize forest sinks
Decrease in forest sinks and increased CO2 emissions from northern forested ecosystems due to increased frequency and severity of forest disturbance
Strategic
Identify forested areas that can be managed to enhance carbon uptake
Identify areas that may be suitable for afforestation
Identify areas where forests have been degraded and can be rehabilitated
Identify areas where deforestation may be avoided
Operational
Reduce forest degradation and avoid deforestation
Decrease impact of natural disturbances on carbon stocks by managing fire and forest pests
Minimize soil disturbance through low impact harvesting activities
Enhance forest recovery after disturbance
Increase the use of forests for biomass energy
Practice low intensity forestry and prevent conversion to plantations
73
Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-Term Multiple Socio-Economic Benefits Climate Change Impact
SFM Planning Level
Adaptation Options
Decreased socio-economic resilience
Strategic
Anticipate variability and change and conduct vulnerability assessments at a regional scale
Diversify forest economy (ex: dead wood product markets, value added products, non-timber forest products
Diversify regional economy (non-forest based)
Enhance capacity to undertake integrated assessment of system vulnerabilities at various scales
Establish objectives for the future forest under climate change
Review forest policies, forest planning, forest management approaches and institutions to assess our ability to achieve social objectives under climate change (ex: conservation objectives)
Operational
Foster learning and innovation and conduct research to determine when and where to implement adaptive responses
Encourage societal adaptation (ex: encourage changes in
expectations)
Develop technology to use altered wood quality and tree species composition, modify wood processing technology
Make choice about the preferred tree species composition for the future
Enhance dialogue amongst stakeholder groups to establish priorities for action on climate change adaptation to the forest sector
Increased frequency and severity of forest disturbance
Strategic
Include risk management in management rules and forest plans and develop an enhanced capacity for risk assessment
Conduct an assessment of greenhouse emissions produced by internal operations
Operational
Increase awareness about the potential impact of climate change on the fire regime and encourage proactive actions in regards to fuels management and community protection
Protect higher value areas from fire through fire smart techniques
Increase amount of timber from salvage logging of fire or insect disturbed stands
74
Legal, institutional and economic framework for forest conservation and sustainable
management
Climate Change Impact
SFM Planning Level
Adaptation Options
Forest management plans and policies lack the flexibility that is required to respond to climate change
Strategic
Provide long term tenures to encourage long term considerations within short term decision
Evaluate the adequacy of existing environmental and biological monitoring networks for tracking the impacts of climate change on forest ecosystems, identify inadequacies and gaps in these networks and identify options to address them
Practice adaptive management. Adaptive management rigorously combines management, research, monitoring and means of changing practices so that credible information is gained and management activities are modified by experience
Relax rules governing the movement of seed stocks from one area to another
Development of flexible forest management plans and policies that are capable of responding to climate change
Operational Measure, monitor and report on indicators of climate change and sustainable forest management to determine the state of the forest and identify when critical thresholds are reached
Forest management plans and policies reduce the vulnerability of forests and forest dependent communities to climate change
Strategic
Development of forest management plans that reduce vulnerability of forest and forest dependent communities to climate change
Support research on climate change, climate impacts, and climate change adaptations and increase resources for basis climate change impacts and adaptation science
Support knowledge exchange, technology transfer, capacity building and information sharing on climate change, maintain or improve capacity for communications and networking
Operational
Incorporate new technology about future climate and forest vulnerability into forest management plans and policies
Involve the public in an assessment of forest management adaptation options
Forest management policies and incentives do not encourage adaptation to climate change
Strategic
Remove barriers and develop incentives to adapt to climate change
Provide incentives and remove barriers to enhancing carbon sinks and reducing greenhouse gas emissions
Operational Provide opportunities for forest management activities to be included in carbon trading system (ex: as outlined in Article 3.4. of the Kyoto Protocol)