Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
North Slope Rapid Ecoregional Assessment A Bureau of Land Management Project North Slope Borough Planning Commission Barrow October 30, 2014 Contents of this presentation • A quick review of the project • Various players in the project • Your role • Progress so far – examples of products • Our future plan BLM’s Landscape Approach Rapid & Other Ecoregional Assessments Project-level Monitoring for Adaptive Management Landscapescale & other Inventories Science Integration Field Implementation AIMMonitoring at multiple scales Ecoregional Direction Local-scale assessment, inventory, and monitoring What is an REA? REAs : • Identify things of value in the environment and how they are changing over time, and what may be causing that change • Focus on large areas and look at the really big picture instead of a particular lake or river What does an REA provide? REAs do not make decisions or allocate resources They provide information and tools for land managers • • • • Current status of things of value in the environment Future status (25, 50 years out) Identify data gaps and science needs Suggestions for land managers on how they might use this information North Slope Ecoregion Assessment Area Roles and responsibilities Project Team A team of scientists and researchers from UA • Alaska Natural Heritage Program (AKNHP), • Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER), and • Scenarios Network for Alaska and Arctic Planning (SNAP) Facilitator from Margaret J. King and Associates. Assessment Management Team (AMT) A team of land managers and experts in land management from various federal and state agencies that guide the project Technical Team (Tech Team) Experts in various relevant science fields that evaluate and advise on the technical aspects Assessment Components Management Questions (MQs) Conservation Elements (CEs) Change Agents (CAs) Conservation elements (CEs) These are the things of value in the environment . They can be: On land In water Environment and associated conditions Land cover (Ex: coastal Aquatic cover (Ex: plain) shallow connected lakes) Individual species Ex: Caribou Ex: Arctic grayling Change agents They change the status of the conservation elements Five primary agents of change: • • • • • Human uses Climate change Fire Permafrost Invasive species How it all works REAs collect and compile data, and estimate these impacts Change Agent Conservation Element Management Question Land managers, at all levels, can use this information in their decisions Process Overview Phase I Initiation Completed Establish Assessment Management Team and technical team Preliminary management questions Assessment Work Plan Statements of work Task 1 – 3 Months Conceptual Ecoregional Model Management questions (MQs) Conservation elements (CEs) Change agents (CAs) Task 2 – 2 Months II Task 5 – 3 Months Compile and Generate “Source” Datasets Recommend Potential Datasets Task 3 – 3 Months Recommend Methods, Models, and Tools Task 4 – 2 Months Establish Contracts and Agreements Phase Rapid Ecoregional Assessment Work Plan (REAWP) Task 6 – 5 Months Conduct Analyses Generate Findings Task 7 – 18 Mo. Total Prepare REA Documents Discovering and compiling data Multi-step process of identifying, evaluating, and compiling useful data to answer the MQs. Compiled data from 20-30 different sources: • Research organizations and individual researchers • Government agencies at all levels Data Sources for Terrestrial Fine-Filter CEs Data Provider Data Type Species NatureServe Range maps - spatial All terrestrial species AK Gap Analysis Project Distribution Models and occurrence records - spatial All terrestrial species USFWS, Migratory Bird Management Avian Survey Data - spatial Willow Ptarmigan, Greater White-fronted Goose, raptors National Park Service Range maps and occurrence records - spatial Caribou, Lapland Longspur University of Alaska Museum Occurrence records - spatial All terrestrial species Toolik Lake Field Station Occurrence records - spatial Passerines ABR Inc. Occurrence records - spatial Artic fox, caribou North Slope Borough Wildlife Department Occurrence records and reports – spatial Arctic fox, caribou BLM Range maps and occurrence records - spatial Raptors, caribou Alaska Department of Fish and Game Distribution models - spatial Caribou Raptor concentration in riparian areas Seasonal use of habitat – Teshekpuk caribou herd Source: ADF&G, NSB, BLM, CPAI, and ABR in NPRA EIS 2013 Density map for Greater white-fronted Goose Data Source: Platte, B. 2014. unpubl. data. Migratory Bird Management, USFWS. Distribution model for Lapland Longspur Data sources for Climate as a change agent Scenarios Network for Alaska and Arctic Planning Modeled historical datasets: • Historical Decadal Averages of Annual Total Precipitation 771 m CRU TS 3.0 1910-1999 • Historical Decadal Averages of Seasonal Total Precipitation 771 m CRU TS 3.0 1910-1999 • Historical Decadal Averages of Monthly Mean Temperatures 771 m CRU TS 3.0 / 3.1 • Historical Decadal Averages of Annual Mean Temperatures 771 m CRU TS 3.0 / 3.1 • Historical Decadal Averages of Seasonal Mean Temperatures 771 m CRU TS 3.0 / 3.1 Scenarios Network for Alaska and Arctic Planning Modeled projected datasets: • Alaska Projected Decadal Averages of Monthly Snow-day Fraction 771 m CMIP3/AR4 • Projected Decadal Averages of Annual Total Precipitation 771m AR4 2001-2100 • Projected Decadal Averages of Seasonal Total Precipitation 771m AR4 2001-2100 • Projected Decadal Averages of Monthly Mean Temperatures 771 AR4 • Projected Decadal Averages of Annual Mean Temperatures 771m AR4 • Projected Decadal Averages of Seasonal Mean Temperatures 771m AR4 • Projected Day of Freeze 771 m AR4 • Projected Day of Thaw 771 m AR4 • Projected Length of Growing Season 771 m AR4 Geophysical Institute Permafrost Lab/SNAP Projected permafrost variables (2006-2100) AR5, 5 top models, 5 model average • Mean Annual Ground Temperature (MAGT) • Active Layer Thickness (ALT) Projected (2006-2100) ALFRESCO outputs • Fire return interval • Vegetation shifts Projected Alaska Climate-Biome Shift 2 KM (2001-2099) • Cliome shifts Variability assessments • A2 2km 5 Model Decadal Standard Deviation Temperature • A2 2km 5 Model Decadal Standard Deviation Precipitation Other data • Water temperature and snow depth data (IMIQ) Climate as a change agent - Warm season length Warm season length is the number of days between the estimated day when the average temperature crosses the freezing point in the spring, and the day when it crossed that point in the fall. Most species of plants and animals are highly sensitive to the length of the growing season. Warm season length by community 180 160 140 120 2010s 100 80 2020s 2060s 60 Values are averaged across watersheds (5th level HUCs) surrounding communities. Error bars represent maximum and minimum values (for 771m pixels) within those watersheds. Note that variability across watersheds is much greater in mountainous areas. Data sources for human activities US Army Corps of Engineers Bureau of Economic Analysis Erosion UA Census Bureau National Center for Education Statistics Population Federal Employment Alaska Department of Labor State Local/Regional Alaska Bureau of Vital Statistics Linear features Alaska Department of Education Block features Energy Income Language Alaska Housing Finance Commission Vital Statistics North Slope Borough Planning Department Education Institute of Social and Economic Research Location Human footprint: Communities, Camps and Cabins in the North Slope Federal (NPS, USFWS, BLM): 180,000 sq. km. State (selected, patent): 53,000 sq. km. Native (selected and patent): 25,000 sq. km. Management Questions: TF3; AF2 What are the measurable and perceived impacts of development on subsistence harvest of caribou? (Fish)? Oil and gas infrastructures shape files and tabular data Map identifying location of oil and gas infrastructures Conten t Analysi s Subsistence Advisory Panel (Meeting minutes, Issues and recommendations) Themes (Areas of concerns used as key terms) Targeted search Literature (Reports, Peer-reviewed articles, ADF&G, NSB, MMS/BOEM) Summary report identifying perceived impacts of development on subsistence harvest of caribou Review and assessment Perceived impacts of development on subsistence harvest of caribou Work definitions of subsistence and development Extract Literature Measurable dimensions of ‘development’ that impact ‘subsistence’ harvests of caribou Source Dataset Final Result Intermediate Results Operator Acronyms: NOS: North Slope Extract Relationships between variables and total harvest Clip Data Discovery for variables (ADF&G, AKDOL, BEA, AEDG) Model identifying the measurable dimensions of development that impact subsistence harvests of caribou What’s next… Phase I Initiation Completed Establish Assessment Management Team and technical team Preliminary management questions Assessment Work Plan Statements of work Task 1 – 3 Months Conceptual Ecoregional Model Management questions (MQs) Conservation elements (CEs) Change agents (CAs) Task 2 – 2 Months II Task 5 – 3 Months Compile and Generate “Source” Datasets Recommend Potential Datasets Task 3 – 3 Months Recommend Methods, Models, and Tools Task 4 – 2 Months Establish Contracts and Agreements Phase Rapid Ecoregional Assessment Work Plan (REAWP) Task 6 – 5 Months Conduct Analyses Generate Findings Task 7 – 18 Mo. Total Prepare REA Documents Identify Focal Areas Identify Risks & Opportunities What we request from you Encourage dialogue in your communities Follow our newsletters and keep yourself informed Feel free to contact us with your ideas Encourage others to contact us with their ideas We will come back around completion. Review Questions? Observations? Comments?