Generalization and evaluation of the process-based forest ecosystem model PnET-CN for other biomes

Terrestrial ecosystems play an important role in carbon, water, and nitrogen cycling. Process-based ecosystem models, including PnET-CN, have been widely used to simulate ecosystem processes during the last two decades. PnET-CN is a forest ecosystem model, originally designed to predict ecosystem carbon, water, and nitrogen dynamics of temperate forests under a variety of circumstances. Among terrestrial ecosystem models, PnET-CN offers unique benefits, including simplicity and transparency of its structure, reliance on data-driven parameterization rather than calibration, and use of generalizeable relationships that provide explicit linkages among carbon, water and nitrogen cycles. The objective of our study was to apply PnET-CN to non-forest biomes: grasslands, shrublands, and savannas. We determined parameter values for grasslands and shrublands using the literature and ecophysiological databases. To assess the usefulness of PnET-CN in these ecosystems, we simulated carbon and water fluxes for six AmeriFlux sites: two grassland sites (Konza Prairie and Fermi Prairie), two open shrubland sites (Heritage Land Conservancy Pinyon Juniper Woodland and Sevilleta Desert Shrubland), and two woody savanna sites (Freeman Ranch and Tonzi Ranch). Grasslands and shrublands were simulated using the biome-specific parameters, and savannas were simulated as mixtures of grasslands and forests. For each site, we used flux observations to evaluate modeled carbon and water fluxes: gross primary productivity (GPP), ecosystem respiration (ER), net ecosystem productivity (NEP), evapotranspiration (ET), and water yield. We also evaluated simulated water use efficiency (WUE). PnET-CN generally captured the magnitude, seasonality, and interannual variability of carbon and water fluxes as well as WUE for grasslands, shrublands, and savannas. Overall, our results show that PnET-CN is a promising tool for modeling ecosystem carbon and water fluxes for non-forest biomes (grasslands, shrublands, and savannas), and especially for modeling GPP in mature biomes. Limitations in model performance included an overestimation of seasonal variability in GPP and ET for the two shrubland sites and overestimation of early season ER for the two shrubland sites and Freeman Ranch. Future modifications of PnET-CN for non-forest biomes should focus on belowground processes, including water storage in dry shrubland soils, root growth and respiration in grasslands, and soil carbon fluxes for all biomes

Southern Utah Support Area Fire Management Plan Environmental Assessment

This Environmental Assessment (EA) documents results of an analysis of proposed changes to the current management of wildland fire and hazardous fuels for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Southern Utah Support Area (SUSA) planning area. Proposed revisions of the SUSA Fire Management Plan (FMP) serve as the Proposed Action for this EA. The revised FMP incorporates current planning requirements associated with fire management on public lands, including wildland fire suppression and fuel treatments. The EA analysis is designed to ensure compliance with National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). It allows determinations to be made as to whether any “significant” impacts, as defined by the President’s Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) in Regulation 40 CFR 1508.27, could result from the analyzed actions

Assessing the Climate Change Vulnerability of Ecosystem Types of the Southwestern U.S.

Climate change is challenging scientists and decision-makers to understand the complexities of climate change and to predict the related effects at scales relevant to environmental policy and the management of ecosystem services. Extraordinary change in climate, and the ensuing impacts to ecosystem services, are widely anticipated for the southwestern United States. Predicting the vulnerability of Southwest ecosystems and their components has been a priority of natural resource organizations over the past decade. Supplementing vulnerability assessments in the region with geospatial inputs of high thematic and spatial detail has become vital for supporting local analyses, planning, and decisions. In this context has come the opportunity to build upon a framework of major ecosystem types of the Southwest and to assess vulnerability to climate change for each type. Herein are presented three studies that set the backdrop for vulnerability assessment, detail a novel correlative modeling procedure to predict the location and the magnitude of vulnerability to familiar vegetation patterns, and then explore applications of the resulting geospatial vulnerability surface: 1) considerations for evaluating or designing a vulnerability assessment; 2) an overview of the vegetation and climate of major ecosystem types, and 3) a climate change vulnerability assessment for all major ecosystem types of the Southwest. This work has resulted in a regionwide vulnerability surface of greater extent and higher spatial and thematic resolution than previous modeling efforts, giving local managers information on the location and degree of climate risk to vegetation resources

State of Colorado's biodiversity 2011, The

December 2011.Includes bibliographical references.In order to assist the Colorado office of The Nature Conservancy with their Measures of Success program, and to provide biodiversity status information to other organizations in Colorado, the Colorado Natural Heritage Program has developed a prototype analysis of the status of Colorado's biodiversity, using a scorecard approach. Following the three-part model of effective conservation developed by The Nature Conservancy, our scorecard evaluated the status of ecological systems, animals, and rare plants under three broad categories: 1) Biodiversity status - including size, quality; and landscape integrity 2) Threat status - focused on both current and potential future impacts; and 3) Protection status. Plants, animals, and ecological systems can only be considered effectively conserved when their biodiversity status is viable, threats have been abated, and land management/protection is sufficient to ensure the long-term persistence of the element

Improving ungulate habitat in a region undergoing rapid energy development: consequences for songbirds and small mammals

2014 Summer.Includes bibliographical references.Habitat manipulation intended to mitigate the impact of energy development on game animals is well underway in the western U.S. Yet, the consequences of these actions for other species are not well understood. A habitat manipulation experiment was established in the Piceance Basin, a region of Colorado undergoing rapid energy development, to evaluate alternative methods (i.e. chaining, hydro-axe, and roller-chop treatments) for reducing pinyon-juniper woodlands to promote mule deer habitat. I use this experimental design to additionally test the initial effects of these treatments on birds and small mammals, and to evaluate selection of habitat components in treatments by birds and small mammals. I found lower bird species occupancy in all treatment plots compared to control plots; however the strength of this response varied by bird guild. I found a positive relationship between bird species occupancy and percent tree cover and a negative relationship between bird species occupancy and percent grass and forb cover. I found no evidence of differences in small mammal species occupancy or density between controls and treatments. I found a positive relationship between small mammal species occupancy and percent grass and forb cover. Species richness did not significantly differ between control and treatment plots for birds or small mammals. My approach and research findings can be used to inform habitat management and multiple-species conservation objectives in pinyon-juniper and sage-steppe ecosystems undergoing energy development. Specifically, I have identified that recently developed roller-chop and hydro-axe treatments have similar impacts to woodland bird guilds as traditional chaining treatments. I have also identified species that are sensitive to habitat mitigation treatments, and thus should be monitored if woodland reduction continues to be used as a habitat mitigation strategy. Since all bird guilds were positively associated with tree cover, woodland reduction strategies that promote landscape heterogeneity by leaving standing trees to provide structure for birds may have fewer impacts than those that clear large contiguous patches of woodland. This approach has the potential to increase the conservation value of habitat mitigation treatments for pinyon-juniper obligates as well as shrubland and grassland species

Guide to the ecological systems of Colorado

Includes bibliographical references

Social Ecological Climate Resilience Project - 2016

Prepared for: North Central Climate Science Center, Fort Collins, Colorado.February 2017.Includes bibliographical references.Climate change is already having impacts on nature, ecosystem services and people in southwestern Colorado and is likely to further alter our natural landscapes in the coming decades. Understanding the potential changes and developing adaptation strategies can help ensure that natural landscapes and human communities remain healthy in the face of a changing climate. An interdisciplinary team consisting of social, ecological and climate scientists developed an innovative climate planning framework and worked with the Social‐Ecological Climate Resilience Project (SECR) and other stakeholders in Colorado’s San Juan River watershed to develop adaptation strategies for two significant landscapes, pinyon juniper woodlands and seeps, springs, and wetland resources under three climate scenarios between 2035 and 2050. This report summarizes the planning framework and results for the pinyon‐juniper landscape (the seeps, springs and wetlands results will be provided separately). This framework can be utilized to develop strategies for other landscapes at local, state, and national scales. Diagrams, narrative scenarios, and maps that depict climate scenarios and the social‐ecological responses help us portray the climate impact in the face of an uncertain future. Interviews and focus group workshops with agency staff and stakeholders who are users of public lands identified several important opportunities to improve the adaptation planning process for developing strategies that meet both social and ecological needs. Planning techniques that include or directly relate to specific resources, such as water and forage, or to activities, such as recreation or grazing, provide avenues for engaging diverse stakeholders into the process. Utilizing the scenarios to understand the impacts to our social and ecological landscapes, three overarching landscape‐scale adaptation strategies were developed. Each of these strategies has a suite of potential actions required to reach a desired future condition. The three key strategies are: 1) identify and protect persistent ecosystems as refugia, 2) proactively manage for resilience, and 3) accept, assist, and allow for transformation in non‐climate refugia sites. If the framework and strategies from this project are adopted by the local community, including land managers, owners, and users, the climate change impacts can be reduced, allowing for a more sustainable human and natural landscape

Colorado wildlife action plan enhancement: climate change vulnerability assessment

December 2014.Includes bibliographical references (pages 128-129).During the revision of Colorado's current SWAP, the Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP), Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW), North Central Climate Science Center and U.S. Geological Service Fort Collins Research Center collaborated to produce climate change vulnerability assessments for high priority wildlife habitats in the state. Our objectives were to: 1. Evaluate exposure and sensitivity of priority habitats by identifying the degree of climate change expected between current and future conditions for climate factors believed to influence the distribution of the habitat. 2. Evaluate adaptive capacity of each habitat by assessing factors that affect the resilience of the habitat to change in landscape condition, invasive or problematic native species presence, dynamic process alteration between past and current conditions, and the characteristic bioclimatic envelope of the habitat. 3. Produce summary vulnerability ratings for priority habitats