1. Optimal conservation strategies for dynamic landscapes Incorporating climate change and urban growth in conservation planning James B. Grand, USGS, Alabama Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit Max Post van der Burg, USGS, Northern Prairies Wildlife Research Center

2. Southeast Regional Assessment Project (SERAP) 1. Downscaled climate change projections 2. Sea level rise in Mississippi and Alabama 3. Impacts of climate change on bird habitats 4. Projected impacts of climate change and urban growth on habitats of priorities 5. Avian range dynamics in response to land use and climatic change 6. Multi-resolution assessment of potential climate change effects on biological resources: Aquatic and hydrologic dynamics 7. Optimal conservation strategies for dynamic landscapes Funded by: USGS, National Climate Change & Wildlife Science Center USFWS, Multi-state grants South Atlantic LCC

3. Southeast Regional Assessment Project (SERAP) 1. Climate change projections (SE US) 2. Sea level rise (MS and AL) 3. Historic impacts on bird habitat (SAMBI) 4. Change in priorities species habitats (SAMBI) 5. Avian patch and range dynamics (SAMBI) 6. Aquatic species and hydrologic dynamics (ACF) 7. Optimal conservation strategies to cope with climate change (SE US, SA LCC  GCPO?)

4. A short history … LMV JV - Bottomland hardwood restoration Objectives: birds, single habitat, simple landscape EGCP JV - Longleaf Pine Restoration Objectives: birds, single habitat, complex landscape AC JV - Designing Sustainable Landscapes Objectives: birds Multiple habitats, dynamic landscape Dynamic landscapes – climate change, urbanization Optimal Conservation Strategies Multiple objectives: cultural and natural resources Multiple habitats (systems) Dynamic environments – climate change, urbanization

5. Project Scope and Spatial Extent Spatial Extent: South Atlantic LCC Scope: Conservation-related decisions by partners in SA LCC

6. Relationship to SA LCC The purpose of this project is to develop a framework to help guide strategic decisions for conservation delivery across the South Atlantic Landscape Conservation Cooperative (SA LCC). Strategic decisions as those that maximize the LCC partners’ ability to meet large-scale, long-term objectives for complex systems. Strategies are targeted collections of actions by SA LCC partners to implement conservation.

7. Objectives Based on input from LCC: 1. Identify focal species 2. Assess the state of focal species 3. Determine population and habitat objectives 4. Develop habitat relationship models 5. Predict the effects of conservation on focal species

8. Objectives 6. Determine optimal conservation strategies Where conservation is needed What actions should work best When action should be taken 7. Identify key elements for monitoring Learn more about direction and effects of climate Measure progress towards objectives

9. Structured Decision Making Pr oblem – Solve the right problem O bjectives – Describe the desired outcomes A lternatives – Any reasonable approach to meet objectives C onsequences – Predict how well alternatives meet objectives T radeoffs – Incorporate values, optimal solutions U ncertainty – implementation, response, system… R isk – Gravity of the decision L inked decisions – Interactive effects in space & time

10. Why should we do this? Complicated problems… Ends and means can become confused Ends determine how we measure success Think about conserving habitat… Do we measure success in terms of acres or populations? Means set the stage for strategies Which strategies to best achieve means to meet our ends Requires predictions of consequences Rewards, uncertainty, and risk influence decision

11. My naïve conceptual model …is this really the problem?

12. Working group National Park Service U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Defense Fund U.S.D.A. Forest Service U.S.D.A. Natural Resources Conservation Service Georgia Department of Natural Resources The Nature Conservancy National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Council on Air and Stream Improvement

13. Stakeholder concerns Maintain Wildlife Populations Conserve cultural resources Socioeconomics Natural Areas Maintain Terrestrial Spp. Maintain Aquatic Spp. Protect Archaeological Sites Air Quality Protect Historical Sites Soil erosion Runoff Water Quality Beach Erosion Fire Water Quantity Tools Monitoring Maps of priority areas Education What’s Important (ends) How we get there (means) Habitat

14. 3-day workshop in Auburn, AL Attendees Rua Mordecai (SALCC) Laurel Barnhill (USFWS) Cat Berns (TNC) Joe DeVivo (NPS) Rick Durbrow (EPA) Ken McDermond (SALCC) Steve Musser (NRCS) Ben Wigley (NCASI) Facilitators: Max Post van der Burg Barry Grand Assistance Conor McGowan Amy Silvano Tyler Kreps

15. What are the decisions? List decision makers for ALL conservation partners Decisions they make Types of actions Grouped decision makers by decision type 1. Resource managers 2. Resource regulators 3. Project funders 4. Advocates Not mutually exclusive: EPA – manages, regulates, and funds conservation projects TNC – manages and advocates

16. Objectives network Includes fundamental and means objectives Objectives: object of value (e.g. populations, human health) preference for the direction of change (e.g. maximize, minimize). Fundamental objectives - ends in themselves. E.g., Maximizing human health Means objectives - things that we want to achieve in order to meet our fundamental objectives. E.g., Maximizing water quality helps us meet our fundamental objectives of maximizing human and wildlife health Linkages among objectives – causal relationships

17. Influence diagram  decision model (Prototype 0.3.2) What’s ImportantHow we get there

18. Generalized model (Prototype 0.0) What’s ImportantHow we get there Cultural resources Sites Objects Native American Resources Biotic Cultural Resources Socio-economics Recreational Human health Economic Ecological systems (natural resources) Beaches and Dunes Caves-Karst Springs Estuarine and Marine Forested Wetlands (mineral soils) Forested Wetlands (organic soils) Freshwater aquatic Freshwater marshes Grassland - Prairie - Savannah Southern Pine Scrub-shrub Upland Hardwood Xeric and Maritime Scrub Row crop High value species

19. Problem statement The LCC should serve as the umbrella group under which all of the partners come together to make decisions regarding the conservation of natural and cultural resources. With that in mind, our problem has two parts: 1) Help partners choose strategies that are based on a shared scientific understanding about the landscape of the Southeast. 2) Help partners solve shared problems with similar objectives.

20. What do LCC partners want to know? 1. Where they should take action to contribute most to LCC objectives. 2. How will those actions contribute to their agencies’ objectives.

21. Next steps Means objectives – prediction of consequences Need to be more explicit about desired conditions and expected results (relationships) Identifying data needs and potential sources Where will we get the data and models? SERAP LCC Partners Develop decisions or strategies explicitly

22. How do we predict consequences? SERAP data & models Downscaled climate projections Sea level rise (part) Land cover change Responses of birds But for many objectives… LCC partners – EPA, NPS, SARP, PARC, ACJV, USFS, USGS Facilitated by SA LCC Science Coordinator In-house Expert opinion LCC funded research Surrogates

23. Developing strategies Action – something done to benefit conservation e.g., plant longleaf on agricultural lands Portfolios – collections of actions e.g., restore all-aged forest by eliminating pasture grasses, plant longleaf, thin, burn, and select cut e.g., achieve hardwood DFCs on forested lands

24. Developing strategies Strategies – portfolios optimally implemented in time and space to maximize their value to the LCC. 1. Achieve DHCs (all habitats?) in areas that will enlarge existing reserve networks on public lands to mitigate for anticipated changes in sea level rise and precipitation patterns on fish and wildlife habitat. 2. Achieve DFCs in areas that will enhance corridors between existing habitat patches based on current climatic conditions 3. Optimal – maximum value. Decision – choose strategy that maximizes utility

25. Tradeoffs Value – Degree to which fundamental objectives are achieved Rewards – Number of cultural sites protected Value – Proportion of all cultures represented Tradeoffs – Incorporated as relative value (weights) of performance on each objective How much are you will to compromise? Utility – Total value of the strategy Discounted by uncertainty and risk Values and weights determined by partners

26. What did we need? Small working group Refine objectives Structure decision (prioritization) models Identify data needs & priorities Iteratively review and refine tools Establish tradeoffs LCC Leadership identifies membership Decision makers Resource experts Land managers SERAP PIs

27. How did we approach this? LCC established a small working group (8-10) 2 webinars to establish context & frame problem 1 multi-day workshop (3-day session) Prototype model – decision network Identify needs & resources Follow up workshops (3 1-day sessions) Develop strategies Refine & develop means objectives Review assumptions & results Steering committee Reviews objective values Establishes & agrees on tradeoffs Decision to implement

28. Time line DateNext Steps By end of May Identification of technical needs/resources Engagement of SERAP partners By early June Inclusion of additional working group webinars June 16 Update to LCC steering committee June – July Data development/modeling/analysis August 6 Presentation at ESA August/September Presentation/engagement of technical staff for decision makers December Final report on prototype. Identification of next steps for model refinement.

29. What are the products? Comparison of strategies Utility value of each strategy Predicted outcome for each objective Time- and value-ordered list of places for actions GIS depictions of same

30. Assess Problem Design Assess Problem Implement Assess Problem Design What are the products? Process for adapting to change Recommendations for monitoring and adjusting to unexpected outcomes Assess Problem DesignImplementMonitorEvaluateAdjust