Linh Hoang, USDA Forest Service Region 1 Climate Change Coordinator, presents the 2012 Planning Rule and how practical applications are needed to translate climate information into climate-informed management, at the Adaptive Silviculture for Climate Change (ASCC) Workshop for the Northern Rockies.

1. USDA FOREST SERVICE
LINH HOANG
JUNE, 2016

2. 2012 Planning
Rule Framework
• Create responsive planning
process
• Allows for adaption to
changing conditions, including
climate change
• Improve management based
on new information and
monitoring
2

3. SYSTEM DRIVER
§ 219.6 Assessment.
(b) Content of the assessment for plan development or revision. In
the assessment for plan development or revision, the responsible
official shall identify and evaluate existing information relevant to
the plan area for the following:
(3) System drivers, including dominant ecological processes,
disturbance regimes, and stressors, such as natural succession,
wildland fire, invasive species, and climate change; and the ability of
terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems on the plan area to adapt to
change;
3

4. SYSTEM DRIVER
Plan Components
§ 219.8 Sustainability.
Ecosystem Integrity. The plan must include plan components, including
standards or guidelines, to maintain or restore the ecological integrity of
terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems and watersheds in the plan area, including
plan components to maintain or restore structure, function, composition, and
connectivity, taking into account:
(iv) System drivers, including dominant ecological processes, disturbance
regimes, and stressors, such as natural succession, wildland fire, invasive
species, and climate change; and the ability of terrestrial and aquatic
ecosystems on the plan area to adapt to change.
4

5. SYSTEM DRIVER
Plan Components - § 219.10 Multiple use.
(a) When developing plan components for integrated resource
management, to the extent relevant to the plan area and the public
participation process and the requirements of § 219.7, 219.8, 219.9,
and 219.11, the responsible official shall consider:
(8) System drivers, including dominant ecological processes,
disturbance regimes, and stressors, such as natural succession,
wildland fire, invasive species, and climate change; and the ability of
the terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems on the plan area to adapt to
change (§ 219.8);
5

6. Vulnerabilities from Climate Chante
1) Evaluate climate change as a system driver of
change
2) Take in to account the ability of our
terrestrial/aquatic ecosystems and multiple use
resources to adapt to those changes
6

7. SYSTEM DRIVER
§ 219.12 Monitoring.
(a)(5) Each plan monitoring program must contain one or
more monitoring questions and associated indicators
addressing each of the following:
(vi) Measurable changes on the plan area related to climate
change and other stressors that may be affecting the plan
area.
7

8. Connectivity
§ 219.19 Definitions.
Connectivity. Ecological conditions that exist at several
spatial and temporal scales that provide landscape linkages
that permit the exchange of flow, sediments, and nutrients;
the daily and seasonal movements of animals within home
ranges; the dispersal and genetic interchange between
populations; and the long distance range shifts of species,
such as in response to climate change.
8

9. Carbon in the Planning Rule
§ 219.6 Assessment.
(b) Content of the assessment for plan development or revision. In the
assessment for plan development or revision, the responsible official
shall identify and evaluate existing information relevant to the plan
area for the following:
(4) Baseline assessment of carbon stocks
§ 219.19 Definitions.
Ecosystem services. Benefits people obtain from ecosystems, including:
(2) Regulating services, such as long term storage of carbon; climate
regulation; water filtration, purification, and storage; soil stabilization;
flood control; and disease regulation;
9

10. Considerations for planning
1. Influences of climate change should be integrated with your
resource discussions (not separately)
2. Identify if climate change (as a system driver of change) is
important or not for each resource in the Assessment
3. Identify resources’ climate change vulnerabilities in Assessment
4. Consider those vulnerabilities and restoration potential when
developing in plan component
5. Consider uncertainties or lack of information on vulnerabilities for
the monitoring program
10

11. Northern Rockies Adaptation Partnership
(NRAP)
U.S. Forest Service Northern Region, Intermountain Region, Rocky Mountain Research Station,
Pacific Northwest Research Station, and Climate Change Advisor’s Office
National Park Service Intermountain Region and Climate Change Office
U.S. Geological Survey Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center, Northern Rocky Mountain
Science Center, North Central Climate Science Center, and Western Geographic Science Center
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Great Northern Landscape Conservation Cooperative and Plains and
Prairie Potholes Landscape Conservation Cooperative
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Greater Yellowstone Coordinating Committee
Oregon State University Climate Impacts Research Consortium
EcoAdapt
Headwaters Economics
11

12. Northern Rockies Adaptation Partnership
(NRAP)
Provide the framework and tools for agency and non-agency resource
managers to incorporate the best available science in management operations
e.g. landscape/planning assessments, FS land management and NPS general management
planning components, broad scale monitoring efforts, project level design, NEPA analysis,
conservations strategies, and State Wildlife Action Plan updates.
Provide a synthesis of best available scientific information to assess climate
change vulnerability and develop adaption options
Agency climate change scorecard requirements
12

13. Northern Rockies Adaptation Partnership
(NRAP)
Vulnerability assessment Vegetation Chapter
All conifer tree species in the Northern Rockies
Two hardwoods (green ash, cottonwood)
Four vegetation types
Dry Ponderosa Pine and Douglas Fir forest
Western Larch mixed conifer forest
Lodgepole pine and aspen mixed conifer forest
Whitebark Pine – Spruce-fir forest
13

14. Vulnerability Assessment
Best available science
synthesis of existing
condition and projected
trends
Adaptation Strategy/Tactics
Menu of recommendations
Actions based on
vulnerabilities
NRAP Products
Exposure
(climatic and non-climatic)
Sensitivity
(Environmental tolerance)
Potential Impact
(Stressor)
Vulnerability
Adaptive
Capacity
(plasticity)
Risk Assessment
(magnitude and
likelihood of effects)
Climate Smart Options for
actions to manage
vulnerabilities
14

15. Vulnerability Assessment
Best available science
synthesis of existing
condition and projected
trends
Management Operations
•Forest planning
•Landscape Assessments
•Resource Program
Strategies
•Project NEPA analysis
•Project design/implementation
•Monitoring plans
Adaptation Strategy/Tactics
Menu of recommendations
Actions based on
vulnerabilities
NRAP Products
How can NRAP
Products be
applied to these
operations?
15

16. Vulnerability Assessment:
Sensitivity to climatic variability and change:
 High temperatures impact regeneration establishment on
southern slopes
 Drought on dry sites exacerbate competition with shade
tolerant trees
 Range expansion to northern slopes
 Large fires facilitate regeneration
• Forest Planning Assessment
Adaption Strategy / Approach:
 Promote western larch on moist sites (focus in currently
dom. LP or DF sites)
• Forest plan - Desired Condition
Tactics:
 Thin to favor disturbance –resilient species on sites likely to
be affected by wildfire
 Remove shade tolerant species
 Plant disturbance resilient trees esp. in north slopes
 Prioritize management with the least moisture deficit
• Forest Plan – Objectives or Other
Plan Content (Management
Approaches)
Resource/Ecosystem Component: Western Larch
• Existing Condition NEPA
analysis
• Project Purpose and Need or
Project Objectives
• Project Objectives or Design
Features
16

17. Other resources
Vulnerabilities and Management Recommendations
By:
R1 Westside Forests
R1 Central Montana Forests
R1 Eastside Forests
By: Habitat Type Groups (based on Region 1 Existing and
Potential Vegetation Groupings used for Broad-level Analysis
and Monitoring)
17

18. Contemporary
Description:
Subalpine fir-
Clintonia and
Menziesia types
These types are characterized by cool and moist site conditions. Species diversity can be high with
western larch, Douglas-fir, white pine, Engelmann spruce, lodgepole pine, subalpine fir and grand
fir. Other sites are dominated by lodgepole pine after stand replacement burns. These sites are
probably too cool for western hemlock and western redcedar to play a dominant role. On the other
hand, these sites are not cold enough that whitebark pine is competitive and it usually does not
play a major successional role (although it may sometimes be present in minor amounts).
Fire history information is scarce. Fire intervals are estimated at greater than 120 years for most
sites (Fischer 1987).
Vulnerabilities These sites will be affected by a shorter duration of snowpack, will dry out sooner in the spring, and
be drier in the fall. Preferred sites for a mix of species (Douglas-fir, lodgepole pine, white pine,
western larch, spruce, subalpine fir) will be dependent on topography and extent of disturbance,
likely resulting in a more discrete species mosaic. Lodgepole pine is expected to be dominant after
stand replacing fires with good natural regeneration. The cooler aspects and higher elevations may
be dominated by spruce and subalpine fir with lodgepole pine regenerating after disturbance.
Management
Considerations
for Reforestation
Even under more arid conditions, western larch and white pine will be present but planting should
be avoided on the southerly aspects and on soils with poor water holding capacity. Mature white
pine with poor vigor may indicate poor site conditions for planting white pine. White pine can
compete with lodgepole pine in managed conditions but it is limited by the competition from
other tolerant species. Lodgepole pine, spruce, and subalpine fir are preferred over most of the
area. Douglas-fir may be suitable on drier sites where growing season frosts are not likely.
HTG 7: COOL and MOIST
18

19. NRAP Implementation Tools
Summary data sheets
Developing process to lay out the options for where adaptation strategies (resilience,
resistance, or transition) for each site/situation/scenario could be applied.
ALL IN PROGRESS AND DRAFT
19

20. Critical Questions & Management Strategies
(NRAP product)
Vulnerability /
Sensitivity
(and Climate Trend
influencing this)
(NRAP product)
Climate Adaptation
Strategy and Tactics
(Desired Conditions,
Objectives,
Standards,
Guidelines)
Critical Questions
• Landscape scale
questions (Forest,
Watershed, other
relevant to resource,
etc.)
• Site specific questions
(in relation to the
landscape)
Landscape
Scale
Management
Strategies
(Desired
Conditions or
Objectives)
20

21. Wait and see strategy – (Little to no intervention) - observe, allow resources to self-organize as
conditions change, and manage other existing stressors (e.g., nonnative species) without
intentionally directing the system towards a specific desired state. Accommodate change and
allow ecosystems to adaptively respond to changing and new conditions.
Persistence strategy – (Moderate intervention) - retain certain species/condition/integrity/use
which may trigger increased management intervention (depending on projected vulnerability).
Under persistence strategies, as the climate continues to warm, management intensity needed to
retain some historical species/condition may increase
Directed Change Strategy – (Higher management intensity) - resist projected changes - a goal of
a specific desired new future or new condition
Others?
Management Strategies
(that considers climate vulnerabilities)
21

22. 1. Vulnerabilities
Assess the general regional and
subregional factors that contribute
to climate vulnerabilities
(use various Vulnerability
Assessments)
2. Downscale
List additional climatic and non-
climatic factors that could be
considered for ranking
vulnerabilities that are important for
this area of interest
3. Scenario Determination
Select primary factors (from Steps 1
and 2) that could be used to group
varying sites. (Describe site
situations/conditions)
4.Create Matrix
Determine where each site fits in the
matrix boxes
(each box represents various
scenarios or situations on the
ground)
5. Adaptation Strategy Options
For each scenario fill out climate
change adaptation actions that
correspond with resistance,
resilience, or transition strategy for
the site.
6. Context
Consider the spatial distribution and
quantities of each Scenario
(map spatially if possible)
7. Management Approach
For each matrix box, determine
which adaptation strategy
(resistance, resilience, or transition)
is preferred action (proposed action)
and which adaptation strategy are
alternative actions or contingency
actions
8. Implement and Monitor
Following implementation of
climate adaptation strategies and
tactics - track changes in site
conditions and assess if the site now
fits into a different box in the matrix
22

23. Western larch example
1. Summary tables from NRAP
2. Key climatic and non-climatic factors
3. Matrix of key factors to help
determine management approaches
(resistance, resilience, or transition) for
your location and the adaptation
strategies and tactics that are
appropriate for that approach.
Key climatic factors Key non climatic factors
Warm temperatures - Increase fires and fire size +
Spring frost - High energy south slopes -
Cap soils +
Potential connectivity +
High forest density -
- Negative impacts + Positive impacts
23

24. Xeric sites Strategy and Tactics
Stand
Density
Ash cap soils
High High Resilience
High Low Transition
Low High Resilience or Transition or Resistance
Low Low Transition
Mesic sites Strategy and Tactics
Stand
Density
Ash cap soils
High High Maintenance, resilience
High Low Transition
Low High Maintenance, resilience
Low Low Transition
24

25. Highly suitable sites
Moderately suitable
sites
Low suitable sites
Future Climatic Suitability
25

26. Highly suitable sites
Moderately suitable
sites
Low suitable sites
Future Climatic Suitability
26

27. Highly suitable sites
Moderately suitable
sites
Low suitable sites
Future Climatic Suitability
27

28. Highly suitable sites
Moderately suitable
sites
Low suitable sites
Future Climatic Suitability
28

29. Thank you!
-
Linh Hoang (lhoang@fs.fed.us)
Northern Rockies Adaptation Partnership
Preparing for climate change through science-management
collaboration
http://adaptationpartners.org/nrap/
29