Linda Joyce Rocky Mountain Research Station USDA Forest Service R&D Interpreting the Update to the 2010 RPA Assessment for Land Management: A Case Study for the Northern and Southwestern Regions Linda Joyce Rocky Mountain Research Station USDA Forest Service R&D Travis Warziniack Rocky Mountain Research Station USDA Forest Service R&D

The RPA Assessment The Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 mandates a national report (RPA Assessment) on the conditions and trends of renewable resources on all forest and rangelands every ten years. The RPA Assessment provides a snapshot of current U.S. forest and rangeland conditions and trends; identifies drivers of change; and projects 50 years into the future (2010-2060).

Scenarios in the RPA Update Nine Scenario-Climate Futures Three RPA scenarios linked with IPCC scenarios, but updated and nationally focused RPA A1B: high economic growth, moderate population growth, mid-to high emissions RPA A2: moderate economic growth, high population growth, highest emissions RPA B2: moderate economic growth, low population growth, lowest emissions Each RPA scenario is paired with three climate projections

Resources Evaluated www.fs.fed.us/research/rpa Land Resources The RPA Assessment includes analyses of the following resources, as well as the potential effects of climate change: Land Resources Forest Resources Urban Forests Forest Products Wood Pellet Export Markets Forest Carbon Rangeland Resources Water Resources Wildlife, Fish, and Biodiversity Outdoor Recreation

RPA Assessment Regions and NFS Regions

Focus on the USFS Northern Region and the Southwestern Region www.fs.fed.us/research/rpa

Contrasting Regions and Challenging Futures Population trends and future projection Future land development, current trends Interconnections between natural resources, energy policy. Impacts of climate change on range resources, water availability, and wildlife

Regions and Influence Areas 2010 RPA Assessment Technical Briefing (2/22/12)

National Forest Lands in Counties Northern Region Southwestern Region NFS percent of county land – varies overall from 0 percent to 94 percent, with more counties in Region 1 having a larger share of county land than Region 3 Population growth between 2000 and 2010 – Overall, where NFS lands occur, population density is lower. However the greatest growth in population occurred in counties that had the highest population densities in both regions. Increasing densities in counties that have only a small percentage of NFS lands will increase use on those lands as well as increase stress within the NF. NFS percent of county land

Population Growth since 1990 1990-2000 2000-2010 Population change is percent of 1990 and of 2000

NFS lands and Population Density Northern Region Northern Region Over 50% of the NF land in the Northern Region is found in counties with the lowest populations densities. Southwestern Region Greater than 20% of the NF lands are found in the counties with the highest population densities. Southwestern Region Population change between 2000 and 2010; population density is number of people per square mile

NFS lands amid Population Growth Northern Region In both regions Lower densities, less growth In both regions Higher densities, more growth Southwestern Region Over 20% of NFS land is in high density counties where population growth was greater than 20%. Southwestern Region NFS percent of county land – varies overall from 0 percent to 94 percent, with more counties in Region 1 having a larger share of county land than Region 3 Population growth between 2000 and 2010 – Overall, where NFS lands occur, population density is lower. However the greatest growth in population occurred in counties that had the highest population densities in both regions. Increasing densities in counties that have only a small percentage of NFS lands will increase use on those lands as well as increase stress within the NF. Population change between 2000 and 2010; population density is number of people per square mile

Future Populations Densities Population density (people per square mile) in 2013 Population density change (people per square mile) Change in population density (people per square mile) between 2010 and 2060 Population density (people per square mile) in 2013

Developed land projection Percent developed area, by county, 2060

Developed land and Urban Areas Increasing Developed land and urban areas are increasing, at the expense of forests and rangelands. Nationally, urban area expanded 45% between 1990 and 2010. RPA Rocky Mountain Region exceeded national average urban area growth. Percent change in urban land by county between 1990 and 2010 for the conterminous United States.

Wildlife Relative housing growth (1940-2000) within 50-km (31 miles) of the outer boundary of NFS and NPS lands. Housing near protected areas can affect bird communities outside and inside protected areas… …significantly reducing the abundance of bird species of greatest conservation need. Continued exurban development is likely to diminish the conservation benefits of protected areas.

Northern Region – economic importance of natural resource sectors Timber Oil and Gas Ranching Recreation Maps are relative to the US Note the Ranching scale goes up to 109. Location Quotients where the base is the entire US Upper limit varies by sector: ranching 109, oil and gas 35, recreation, 36.2

Rural complexity and development

Rangeland, agriculture, and energy are increasingly interconnected in both regions through agricultural markets, new technology for oil and gas extraction and federal policy Ranching Oil and Gas

Land Uses over time Cropland area in States in the Northern-influence area –1945-2007

Northern-influence area Change in Conservation Reserve Program acres – 2007-2014   Change in CRP area 2007—2014a Change relative to 2007 Northern-influence area acres percent Montana -1,725,887 50% North Dakota -1,769,236 52% Idaho -220,038 27% South Dakota -626.777 40% Wyoming -87,406 31%

Expansion of Energy Development Federal land area covered by producing oil and gases leases

Population change - 2000-2013 Energy development on all lands

Future developed land, current T&E species Percent developed area, by county, 2060 Current geographic distributions of federal listed or endangered species

Future developed land and imperiled species Percent developed area, by county, 2060 Critically imperiled species not currently listed or under the settlement agreement Geographic distribution of species critically imperiled an imperiled that are not currently listed as E or T or being considered under the settlement agreement.

Land use and succession planning Average age of farmers Opportunities on private lands will be influenced by near-term decisions made about land use and succession planning

Outdoor Recreation in Region 1 and 3 Population size likely influences National Forest visitor numbers: Region 1 -- 9,921 thousand Region 3 – 17,747 thousand Local Visitors rated quality of the natural environment very positive in both regions. In Region 3, visitors perceived increased crowding.

Changes in climate by end of 21st Century The Southwestern region will see greater stress related to changes in temperature and precipitation. Range resources will be highly vulnerable under climate change in the Southwestern Region A2

Wildlife Terrestrial Climate Stress Index (RPA RM Region) Stress index: shifts in climate regime, area effects associated with vegetation type changes, changes in overall system productivity Terrestrial Climate Stress Index Low stress to wildlife habitat: • Southern portions of the region • Great Plains Steppe & Northern Rocky Mountains High stress to wildlife habitat: • Grassland systems are highly stressed (Great Plains Steppe) • Dispersed and fragmented among semi-desert systems

Water Vulnerability in 2060 The Southwestern Region is also more vulnerable to future water shortage than is the Northern Region Minimum water supply vulnerability Maximum water supply vulnerability

Exploring National Forest Regions with 2010 RPA Assessment information and data Major conclusions Information/data from the 2010 RPA were used to identify drivers of change in these National Forest System regions. Greater population, projected growth, relatively smaller NF footprint in each county, effects of climate change, coupled with the existing greater numbers of federally listed T&E species suggest that maintaining ecosystem resilience may be challenging in the Southwestern Region. While the future may at first seem less challenging for the Northern Region, the natural resource opportunities and the nature of natural resource amenities will draw increasing numbers of people and economic development, spurring land use change as the climate is changing.

Focus on the USFS Northern Region and the Southwestern Region www.fs.fed.us/research/rpa

RPA Scientists Linda Joyce, Rocky Mountain Research Station J.M. Bowker (Recreation), Southern Research Station Tom Brown (Water) Rocky Mountain Research Station Curt Flather (Wildlife, Fish, Biodiversity) Rocky Mountain Research Station Dave Nowak (Urban Forests) Northern Research Station Matt Reeves (Range) Rocky Mountain Research Station Kurt Riitters (Landscape Pattern) Southern Research Station Linda Joyce, Rocky Mountain Research Station ljoyce@fs.fed.us Travis Warziniack, Rocky Mountain Research Station twwarziniack@fs.fed.us