1 / 14

Manitoba PRAC Terrestrial Theme Update and 2011/12 Workplan

Manitoba PRAC Terrestrial Theme Update and 2011/12 Workplan. PRAC Terrestrial Forum SRC, Saskatoon, SK March 15, 2011. MB PRAC Terrestrial Theme . Objective:

lorie
Download Presentation

Manitoba PRAC Terrestrial Theme Update and 2011/12 Workplan

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Manitoba PRAC Terrestrial Theme Update and 2011/12 Workplan PRAC Terrestrial Forum SRC, Saskatoon, SK March 15, 2011

  2. MB PRAC Terrestrial Theme • Objective: • Enhance the capacity of key stakeholders to integrate climate change adaptation into terrestrial (forest and grassland) ecosystem management planning and decision-making • With total funding of $117,300 from NRCan matched with $60,964 cash and in-kind contributions from MB Government

  3. Expected MB Terrestrial Theme Outputs and Outcomes

  4. Expected MB Terrestrial Theme Outputs and Outcomes

  5. Current Status of Work

  6. Highlights of Adaptation Workshop • Objectives: • Assess climate impacts and vulnerabilities to MB agriculture and forestry sectors; and • Demonstrate practical application of AB SRD adaptation framework to MB grassland and forest ecosystems/ sectors; • Develop practical adaptation options and identify possible gaps, barriers and opportunities for integrating adaptation into existing decision-making; • Generate interest and commitment readiness and resilience within the targeted areas of Conservation and MAFRI

  7. Highlights of Adaptation Workshop (2) • Key Outputs: • List of current climate change adaptation related initiatives of MAFRI and CON-Forestry • High-level vulnerability and risk assessment of MB grasslands and forest ecosystems; • List of adaptation options for the two sectors • List of possible gaps, potential barriers and opportunities for addressing risks

  8. Highlights of Adaptation Workshop (3) • Vulnerability and Risk Assessment Highlights- Breakout groups • Overall medium vulnerability ranking for MB Parkland region resulting from shifting vegetation patterns starting 2020s • High vulnerability and risk ratings for water regulation and wetlands • Low risk rating for cattle operations

  9. Objectives for FY 2011/12 • Refine and finalize methodological framework and risk and vulnerability assessment results for grassland ecosystems in southern MB and forest ecosystems (case study area yet to be identified) ; • Identify adaptation options and strategies as well as possible gaps, barriers and opportunities for integrating these into existing MAFRI’s policies on rangeland management and conservation planning, and MB Forestry policies; • Further engage key local decision-makers and other stakeholders to enhance their awareness and capacity in adaptation planning; and • Document, synthesize and disseminate key lessons learned and best practices from risk assessment and adaptation planning for grassland/ rangeland and forest ecosystems in case study areas.

  10. Grasslands Workplan for 2011/12

  11. Forestry Workplan for 2011/12

  12. MB PRAC Terrestrial Theme Planning Team and Partners • Manitoba Conservation • Climate Branch: Randall Shymko and Ramon Sales • Forestry Branch: Ryan Klos • MAFRI • Jenelle Hamblin and Tony Szumigalski (on-leave) Other MB Institutional Partners: Saskatchewan Research Council (SRC), International Institute of Sustainable, Development (IISD), University of Winnipeg and Deloitte and Touche

  13. Key Implementation Issues • Lack of sufficient resources in light of many competing priorities • Dedicated staff and expertise • Staff turnover • Funding for research • Lack of examples of “start to finish“ projects to use as success stories

  14. Thank You!

More Related