Download Assessing Climate Change Impacts, Vulnerability and Adaptation:

Assessing Climate Change Impacts,
Vulnerability and Adaptation:
Case Study of the Pineland Forest Section
in Southeastern Manitoba
Forestry and Peatlands Management Branch
Winnipeg, Manitoba, 2015
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
I
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
II
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
III
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
IV
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
V
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.
VI
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.
VII
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.
VIII
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
1
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.
2

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.
3
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
4
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
5
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).
6
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 21 st
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.
7
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.
8
Figure 3 Ranking systems used to assess sensitivity of (A) forests and (B) SFM
objectives to climate change (Source: Edwards et al 2015)
9
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
10
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).
Figure 5 Landscape of the assessment
area
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
11
area with an average rainfall of 109 mm; whereas July is the wettest month in the
Pinawa with an average of 93 mm.
100
20
80
10
60
0
40
-10
Temperature (oC)
Rainfall/ Snowfall (mm)
Pinawa
20
-20
100
80
Sprague
Rainfall
Snowfall
Max. Temp.
Ave. Temp.
Mini.Temp.
20
10
60
0
40
-10
Temperature (oC)
Rainfall/ Snowfall (mm)
0
20
-20
0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month
Figure 6 Average monthly precipitation (rainfall and snowfall) and average monthly
temperature at Sprague and Pinawa
12
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
13
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).
100
A
Pinawa
Sprague
Probability (%)
80
60
40
20
0
40
60
80
100
120
140
Frost-free period (days)
100
Pinawa
Sprague
Probability (%)
80
B
60
40
20
0
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
Late spring frosts and early fall frosts (date of the year)
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
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
15
Table 1 Provincial forests and their size (ha) in the Pineland Forest Section
Provincial Forests
Sandilands Provincial Forest
Northwest Angle Provincial Forest
Agassiz Provincial Forest
Whiteshell Provincial Forest
Belair Provincial Forest
Brightstone Sand Hills Provincial Forest
Cat Hills Provincial Forest
Wampum Provincial Forest
Total
Total area (ha)
277,438.9
215,812.4
79,515.7
64,189.0
20,301.4
13,166.3
1,615.3
811.4
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
Whitemouth Bog Ecological Reserve
Whitemouth Bog Wildlife Management Area
Watson P. Davidson Wildlife Management Area
Grand Beach Provincial Park
Elk Island Provincial Park
Spur Woods Wildlife Management Area
Thalberg Bush Wildlife Management Area
Whitemouth Island Ecological Reserve
Lewis Bog Ecological Reserve
Brokenhead Wetland Ecological Reserve
Whitemouth Falls Provincial Park
Lee River Wildlife Management Area
Pocock Lake Ecological Reserve
Whitemouth River Ecological Reserve
Pinawa Dam Provincial Park
Total Area:
16
Area (ha)
5,021
3,006
2,895
1,387
1,056
725
725
587
573
563
356
335
165
132
112
17,119
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 mixboreal/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
Group
Softwood
Hard-wood
Mixed-wood
Stratum
Tamarack, black spruce, tamarack leading
Lowland black spruce
Pure jack pine
Black spruce/ tamarack, black spruce leading
Other softwood
Softwood mix
Upland black spruce
Pure red pine
Pure balsam fir/ white spruce
Pure aspen, balsam poplar or white birch
Other hardwood
Hardwood leading
Softwood leading
Total
17
Area (ha)
%
80,584
69,839
64,467
48,350
26,861
21,489
10,744
5,372
537
123,562
10,207
42,978
32,233
537,224
15
13
12
9
5
4
2
1
<0
23
2
8
6
100
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.
18
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.
19
Table 4 Forest habitat, stands, and characteristics in the Pineland Forest Section
Habitat
Moisture
conditions
Very dry
(arid) with
shallow soils
1
Dry, with
mod-deep
soils or
shallow soils
Poor sandy
soils/ surface
dryness
Forest stands/ dominant tree species
Habitat characteristics
 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
 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
 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
2
Moist with
moderately
deep soil
3
 Pure lowland black spruce
Wet
 Pure tamarack
(excessive
 Mixed-wood, hardwood leading (tamarack mixed
moisture) with with black spruce, aspen and sometimes cedar)
deep organic  Mixed black spruce/tamarack, black spruce
soils
leading
 Mixed tamarack / black spruce, tamarack leading
 Hardwood: aspen, cedar, birch, elm, ash, maple
20
 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
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
Figure 10 (A) Black bear and (B) moose
Powerview are the largest, followed by
in the assessment area
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.
21
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
22
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
23
affects healthy trees. An infected tree generally dies within one to two years postinfestation, 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).
24
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.
25
Table 5 Annual harvested timber volume from 2012 to 2015 in the assessment area
2014-15
Ainsworth EDT
Domtar EDT
SWL EDT
Timber Returns
Timber Permits
Total
Volume (m3)
1
2
SW
HW
12,763
13,159
75,471
0
437
0
51,036
66,506
5,556
5,074
145,263 84,739
Total
25,922
75,471
437
117,542
10,630
230,003
2013-14
Ainsworth EDT
Domtar EDT
Tolko EDT
Timber Returns
Timber Permits
Total
31,538
0
3,244
34,739
3,493
73,013
49,698
0
3,244
80,190
4,364
137,495
Fiscal
Year
Quota/ Permit
Holder
18,160
0
0
45,451
871
64,482
Revenue ($)
3
Dues
FPC
23,770
2,923
54,064
3,019
656
74
142,093 15,603
13,751
1,581
234,333 23,200
FRC
37,552
108,679
2,514
148,979
13,422
311,146
Total
64,244
165,761
3,244
306,675
28,754
568,678
51,494
4,381
55,578
1,362
92,602
4,954
150,412
130
10,525
617
15,654
4,671
89,166
5,063
154,477
111,453
0
6,163
192,293
10,634
320,543
4,442
53,122
163
17,114
5,503
227,518
21,719
286,143
Ainsworth EDT
9,510
18,543 28,053
52,965
0
Domtar EDT
0
0
957
Tolko EDT
957
0
1,321
2012-13
Timber Returns
43,795
59,952 103,747
191,001
3,635
Timber Permits
1,096
2,539
15,530
Total
55,358
81,034 136,392
260,817
1
2
3
4
Softwood, Hardwood, Fire Protection Charge, Forest Renewal Charge
4
110,530
0
6,986
435,633
15,530
568,679
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.
26
2.2.1.1 Trends in observed temperature
Average annual temperature (oC) Average annual temperature (oC)
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
5
4
3
2
1
0
Sprague
Annual
Decadal
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
1910
1920
1930
1940
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
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.
27
2.0
Maximum
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
Temperature Change (oC)
-0.5
Mean
Sprague
Pinawa
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
Minimum
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Annual
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 (1.3 oC 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.
28
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.
900
Pinawa
800
Precipitation(mm)
700
600
500
400
300
200
Annual
Decadal
100
900
Sprague
Precipitation(mm)
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
1910
1920
1930
1940
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
Figure 15 Annual and decadal mean precipitation (1916-2010) at Sprague and Pinawa
29
Precipitation change (mm)
120
100
80
60
40
20
Rainfall change (mm)
0
Sprague
Pinawa
100
80
60
40
20
Snowfall change (mm)
0
4
2
0
-2
-4
-6
-8
-10
-12
-14
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Annual
Figure 16 Mean annual and seasonal precipitation (1916-2010) at Sprague and Pinawa
30
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
160
Precipitation (mm)
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
Minimum Temperature (oC) Maximum Temperature (oC)
0
30
20
10
Canesm2
Hadgem
Miroc
Ncarcesm
Observed
0
-10
-20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Figure 17 Observed and simulated average monthly temperature (minimum and
maximum) and monthly precipitation at Sprague and Pinawa.
31
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.
Maximum Temperature ( oC)
20
Annual
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
1940
1960
1980
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
Figure 18 Historical (1951-2010) and projected trends (2006-2100) in annual mean
monthly maximum temperature (ºC)
32
10
Minimum Temperature ( oC)
Annual
8
6
4
2
0
-2
-4
-6
1940
1960
1980
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
Figure 19 Historical (1951-2005) and projected trends (2010-2100) in annual mean
monthly minimum temperature (ºC)
33
Table 6 Summary of projected climatic (temperature and precipitation) changes
Climate variable
RCP2.6
Projection period Win Spr
Sum Fall
Maximum temperature (°C)
2010-2039
2.7
2.7
2.5
2.7
2040-2069
3.7
3.6
3.0
3.2
2070-2099
3.8
3.3
3.1
3. 3
Minimum temperature (°C)
2010-2039
3.1
2.5
2.2
2.4
2040-2069
4.2
3.4
2.7
3.0
2070-2099 period
4.5
3.3
2.9
3.2
Precipitation (mm)
2010-2039
12
12
-17
5
2040-2069
9
23
-4
16
2070-2099
10
15
4
25
RCP4.5
Sum Fall
Yr
Win
Spr
2.7
3.4
3.4
2.6
5.5
6.4
2.7
4.9
5.9
2.2
3.7
4.8
2.6
3.3
3.5
2.9
6.0
7.0
2.5
4.5
5.5
38
69
72
6
9
14
18
29
27
34
RCP8.5
Sum Fall
Yr
Win
Spr
Yr
2.4
4.0
5.1
2.5
4.5
5.5
2.8
5.6
9.6
2.3
4.8
8.5
2.5
4.8
8.0
2.4
4.6
8.3
2.5
5.0
8.6
1.9
3.1
4.1
2.2
3.5
4.5
2.4
4.3
5.3
3.2
6.6
11.3
2.3
4.9
8.8
2.1
4.4
7.4
2.3
4.5
7.9
2.6
5.2
8.9
-11
-18
-22
14
15
11
52
61
69
8
16
21
10
29
46
-10
-26
-30
27
24
24
59
84
114
Winter
Spring
0
18
-2
16
-4
14
-6
Maximum Temperature (oC)
20
12
-8
10
-10
-12
8
-14
6
-16
4
Summer
Fall
34
20
18
32
16
30
14
28
Maximum Temperature (oC)
2
12
26
10
24
8
22
6
20
4
1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
Figure 20 Historical (1951-2010) and projected trends (2006-2100) in seasonal mean maximum temperatures
35
0
12
Winter
Spring
10
-5
8
6
-10
2
Minimum Temperature (oC)
0
-20
-2
-4
-25
-6
-30
20
-8
Summer
Fall
10
8
18
6
16
4
14
2
12
Minimum Temperature (oC)
4
-15
0
10
-2
8
-4
6
-6
1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
Figure 21 Historical (1951-2005) and projected trends (2010-2100) in seasonal mean minimum temperatures
36
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).
900
Precipitation (mm)
Annual
800
700
600
500
400
1940
1960
1980
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
Figure 22 Historical (1951-2005) and projected trends (2006-2100) in annual
precipitation
37
2100
120
Spring
Winter
280
240
100
200
160
120
60
80
40
40
Fall
Summer
250
350
200
300
250
150
200
100
150
100
50
1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
Figure 23 Historical (1951-2005) and projected trends (2006-2100) in seasonal precipitation
38
Precipitation (mm)
Precipitation (mm)
80
2.2.2.4 Relationships between future temperature and precipitation changes
Precipitation Change (mm)
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.
120
Annual
100
y=12.13x+14.25
R2=0.86
80
60
40
20
0
0
2
4
6
8
10
Temperature increase (oC)
Figure 24 Scatter plots and regression line showing the relationship between annual
minimum temperature change and annual precipitation change
39
25
y=1.98x+1.68
2
R =0.86
20
50
Spring
Winter
y=5.65x-0.31
2
R =0.92
40
30
20
10
10
5
0
-10
0
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
Summer
y=-3.96x-1.81
2
R =0.81
0
4
6
8
10
Fall
25
y=2.38x+7.051.81
2
R =0.43
20
-10
15
Precipitation Change (mm)
Precipitation Change (mm)
15
10
-20
5
-30
0
-5
-40
-2
0
2
4
6
8
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
Temperature increase (oC)
Temperature increase (oC)
Figure 25 Scatter plots and regression line showing the relationship between temperature and precipitation changes
40
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
41
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.
42
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
Current
Impacts on Forest
2010-2039
2040-2069
Species composition
Growth and productivity
Natural regeneration
success
Non-timber forest products
Wildlife habitat
Winter road access
Recreational activities
Overall forest impact
43
2070-2099
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
44
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.
45
Table 8 Priority forest management objective vulnerabilities to current and future climate for RCP 8.5 scenario
Vulnerability
Current
2010-2039
Sustainable Forest Management Objectives
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
46
2040-2069 2070-2099
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.
47
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.
48
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
49
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.
50
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
51
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,
52
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 21 st 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
53
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 forestbased 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
54
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.
55

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
56


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
57
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.
58
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
59
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 FieldNaturalist 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
60
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.
61
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.
62
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.
63
Appendices
64
Appendix 1 Current and potential future impacts of climate change on the Pineland forest management objectives
SFM management
objectives
Current
Description
2010-2039
2040-2069
2070-2099
Impact
Description
Impact
Description
Impact
Description
Impact
Low
Can achieve
with current
program
Low
Determine
vulnerable
soil types for
appropriate
measures
Moderate
Challenged
to succeed
High
CCFM Criterion 1: Biological Diversity
Maintain a similar (within
10%) range of strata
(species/age class) to
current conditions (life of the
plan)
Develop patch size targets
for harvest areas that
emulate natural disturbance
patterns
Not Natural
Range
Variation,
Preindustrial
condition
Can do
pattern
Low
Manage the forest
Low
landscape pattern that will
supply the current and future
habitat for American marten
Minimize impact of the forest
Low
management activities on
the mottled duskywing
CCFM Criterion 2: Ecosystem condition and productivity
Minimize loss of functional
Low
forest ecosystem area
Minimize the impact by
Cycles
Low
native forest pests and
haven’t
disease
changed,
larch beetle
unknown,
Hypoxylon
Minimize the impact by
invasive forest pests and
disease
Minimize the impact of forest
fires
Pine beetle,
EAB colder,
2 yr life
cycle, gypsy
moth
Minimize
through
Low
Low
Low
Impacted - If
need to spray
for other pests
Marginal
areas,
multiple
drought years
–vulnerable,
more outbreak
years
EAB, MPB will
arrive here
Low
65
Low
More
hardwood
Moderate
Low
More HW
less
SW/mixed
Wood
High
Low
Low
Low
Low
Moderate
High
Low-mod
Secondary
insects may
surface
Moderate
More stress
High
Moderate
High
High
Low
Moderate
Moderate
SFM management
objectives
Current
Description
2010-2039
Impact
suppression,
salvage
harvest
Maximize the area of
Selection of
Low
successful regeneration
seed source
and stock
type, apply
the most
appropriate
silviculture
ground rule
CCFM Criterion 3: Soil and water
Conduct operations to
Low
minimize negative impacts
water quality and quantity
CCFM Criterion 4: Role in global ecological cycles, etc.
Model the impacts of forest
Low
management activities on
the flow of carbon through
the forested ecosystems
CCFM Criterion 5: Economic and Social Benefits
Maintain or enhance fibre
Low
supply to ensure a
SWHW
sustainable forest industry
and communities
Increase fibre utilization and
Red pine
Low
the opportunity for value
added products from the
forest
Maintain or enhance the
Social - blue
Low
availability of non-forest
berries,
timber products
Christmas
tree growers
Maintain existing level of
Not flooding, Low
road access to the forest
or winter
roads
CCFM Criterion 6: Society’s Responsibility
Assist aboriginal
Economic
Low
2040-2069
2070-2099
Description
Impact
Description
Impact
Description
Impact
Seasons,
variability of
precipitation,
planting
contract
issues
Moderate
Different
standards
Moderate
To achieve
we will need
to different
High
Hog fuel?
What benefits
66
Low
Low
Low
low
low
low
Low
SW/HW
SW
Challenged
Hw feasible
Moderate
SW
High SW
Low
Hog fuel?
Moderate
Moderate
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
What
Low
What
Low
SFM management
objectives
Current
Description
communities to identify and
implement ways to realize
increased benefit from the
forest
Assist communities to
reduce fire risk
2010-2039
Impact
2040-2069
Description
Impact
will change as
the forest
changes
Very
important
Low
Impact
benefits will
change as
the forest
changes
Moderate
67
Description
2070-2099
Description
Impact
benefits will
change as
the forest
changes
Moderate
High
Appendix 2 Current and potential future climate change impacts, adaptive capacity and vulnerability of the Pineland
forest management objectives
SFM Objectives
Biological diversity
Maintain a similar (within
10%) range of strata
(species/age class) to current
conditions (possibly change)
Develop patch size for
harvest areas that emulate
current natural disturbance
patterns
Manage the forest landscape
pattern that will supply the
current and future habitat for
American marten
Minimize impact of the forest
management activities on the
mottled duskywing
2010-2039
Current
2040-2069
2070-2099
Impact
Adaptive
capacity
Low
High (use
current AC
throughout)
Low
Low
Low
Moderate
Moderate
High
Low
High
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
High
Moderate
Vulnerability
Impact
Vulnerability
Impact
Vulnerabilit
y
Impact
Vulnerability
ModerateHigh (lost of
forests to
grasslands,
SW to HW
Low
(salvaging
the new
norm)
Low
High
Low
Low
Low
Moderate
Moderate
(size
possible, but
species
comp not
ideal)
Low
High
Low
Low
Low
low
LowModerate
Low
LowModerate
Moderate
Moderate
High
High
Ecosystem condition and productivity
Minimize loss of functional
forest ecosystem area
Low
Minimize the impact by native
Low
forest pests and disease
Minimize invasive forest pests
Low
and disease impacts
Minimize fire impacts
Low
Maximize the area of
Low
successful regeneration
Soil and water
Conduct operations to
minimize negative impacts
Low
water quality and quantity
Role in global ecological cycles
High
Low
Low
Moderate
(greater nonclimatic
pressures)
High
Low
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
High
High
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
High
High
High
High
High
Low
Low
Low
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
High
Low
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
High
High
Low
Low
Low
Low
High
Low
68
Low
Low
Model the impacts of forest
management activities on the
Low
flow of carbon through the
forested ecosystems
Economic and social benefits
High
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
High
Low
Low
Low
Moderate
SW
Moderate
High SW
High
Low
LowModerate
Low
Low
Low
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Low
Low-Mod
(flexibility)
Moderate
Low
moderate
Low
Moderate
Low
Moderate
Low
High
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
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
Maintain or enhance fibre
supply to ensure a
sustainable forest industry
and communities
Increase fibre utilization and
the opportunity for value
added forest products
Maintain or enhance the
availability of non-forest
timber products
Maintain existing level of road
access to the forest
Society’s responsibility
69
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
Alteration of plant
and animal
distribution
SFM Planning
Level
Strategic
Operational
Increased
frequency and
severity of forest
disturbance
Habitat invasion
by non-native
species
Strategic
Operational
Strategic
Operational
Adaptation Options
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
Practice low intensity forestry and prevent conversion to plantation
Assist changes in the distribution of species by introducing them to
new areas
Maintain natural fire regimes
Allow forests to regenerate naturally following disturbance: prefer
natural regeneration wherever appropriate
Maintain integrity of ecosystems by avoiding their disruption by
non-native species
Control invasive species
Maintenance of the Productive Capacity of Forest Ecosystems
Climate Change
Impact
Increased
frequency and
severity of forest
disturbance
SFM Planning
Level
Strategic
Operational
Strategic
Decreased forest
growth
Operational
Adaptation Options
Allocate forest land-base to identify areas that may be managed
for timber production where high intensity plantation forestry may
be practiced
Assist in tree regeneration
Apply silvicultural techniques that maintain a diversity of age
stands and mix of species
Actively manage forest pests
Adapt silvicultural rules and practices to ensure the growth rates of
trees is maintained or enhanced
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
70
Strategic
Species are no
longer suited to
site conditions
Invasion by nonnative species
Operational
Strategic
Operational
Adapt silvicultural rules and practices to maintain optimum
species-site relationships
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
Adopt policies to ensure the disruption of ecosystems by nonnative species is avoided
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
Strategic
Increased
frequency and
severity of insect
and disease
disturbance
Operational
Strategic
Decreased health
and vitality of
forest
ecosystems due
to cumulative
impacts of
multiple stressors
Operational
Adaptation Options
Adjust harvest schedules to harvest stands most vulnerable to
insects
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
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
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
71
Conservation and Maintenance of Soil and Water Resources
Climate Change
Impact
SFM Planning
Level
Strategic
Increased soil
erosion due to
increased
precipitation and
melting of
permafrost
Increased terrain
instability due to
extreme precip
events or melting
of permafrost
More/ earlier snow
melt resulting in the
timing of peak flow
and volume in
streams
Operational
Strategic
Operational
Strategic
Operational
Adaptation Options
Adopt practices that minimize the risk of sediment generation
associated with roads and harvesting activities
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
Re-assess terrain stability maps in light of changing ground
conditions associated with climate change
Avoid constructing roads in landslide prone terrain where
increased precipitation and melting of permafrost may increase
hazard of slope failure
Re-assess river and stream peak flows and link to bridge and
road design standards
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
Decrease in forest
sinks and
increased CO2
emissions from
northern forested
ecosystems due to
declining forest
growth and
productivity
Decrease in forest
sinks and
increased CO2
emissions from
northern forested
ecosystems due to
increased
frequency and
severity of forest
disturbance
SFM Level
Strategic
Operational
Strategic
Operational
Adaptation Options
Minimize risk of the forest ecosystem becoming a net source of
carbon
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
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
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
72
Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-Term Multiple Socio-Economic Benefits
Climate Change
Impact
SFM Planning
Level
Strategic
Decreased socioeconomic
resilience
Operational
Strategic
Increased
frequency and
severity of forest
disturbance
Operational
Adaptation Options
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)
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
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
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
73
Legal, institutional and economic framework for forest conservation and sustainable
management
Climate Change
Impact
Forest
management plans
and policies lack
the flexibility that is
required to respond
to climate change
SFM Planning
Level
Strategic
Operational
Forest
management plans
and policies reduce
the vulnerability of
forests and forest
dependent
communities to
climate change
Strategic
Operational
Forest
management
policies and
incentives do not
encourage
adaptation to
climate change
Strategic
Operational
Adaptation Options
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
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
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
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
Remove barriers and develop incentives to adapt to climate
change
Provide incentives and remove barriers to enhancing carbon
sinks and reducing greenhouse gas emissions
Provide opportunities for forest management activities to be
included in carbon trading system (ex: as outlined in Article 3.4.
of the Kyoto Protocol)
74