210 likes | 346 Views
Building a Climate-Adaptive Portfolio for the Alaska/Yukon Arctic Coast Ecoregion. TNC Global Climate Change Initiative March 4, 2005. Building a Climate-Adaptive Portfolio for the Alaska/Yukon Arctic Coast Ecoregion. Outline conservation targets current environmental gradients
E N D
Building a Climate-Adaptive Portfolio for the Alaska/Yukon Arctic Coast Ecoregion TNC Global Climate Change Initiative March 4, 2005
Building a Climate-Adaptive Portfolio for the Alaska/Yukon Arctic Coast Ecoregion Outline • conservation targets • current environmental gradients • portfolio based on current costs and conditions • portfolio based on current and future conditions • portfolio based on current conditions and potential refugia • comparison among portfolios
Conservation Targets: EcologicalLand Units [Heiner & Jorgensen]
Capturing Current Environmental Gradients: 9 Ecoregion Sections [TNC-AK] 9 Ecoregion Sections [TNC-AK] (schematic)
Current Cost of LandGiven CompetingTenure & Use [TNC-AK] Capturing Current Cost of LandGiven CompetingTenure & Use [TNC-AK] greatest cost greatest cost least cost least cost
Best Portfolio Using Current Costs &Gradients [SPOT software] Out In
Hex CellIrreplaceability Using Current Costs &Gradients [SPOT software] 1 20 25 Frequency of Occurrence in 25 Solutions
1 20 25 In Out Frequency of Occurrence in 25 Solutions Best Portfolio Best Portfolio & Hex CellIrreplaceability Using Current Costs &Gradients [SPOT software]
Capturing Future Change Gradient Under Climate ChangeScenario A2 and HadCM3 Model (7 Classes) [Saxon, et. al, 2005] greatest change least change
Best Portfolio Using Current Costs & Gradients and Future Change Gradient [SPOT software] Out In
Hex CellIrreplaceability Using Current Costs & Gradients and Future Change Gradient [SPOT software] 1 20 25 Frequency of Occurrence in 25 Solutions
1 20 25 In Out Frequency of Occurrence in 25 Solutions Best Portfolio Best Portfolio & Hex CellIrreplaceability Using Current Costs & Gradients and Future Change Gradient [SPOT software]
Current Cost of LandGiven CompetingTenure & Use [TNC-AK] Capturing Current Cost of LandGiven CompetingTenure & Use [TNC-AK] greatest cost greatest cost least cost least cost
Current Cost of LandGiven CompetingTenure & Use [TNC-AK] Capturing EnvironmentalChange Under Climate ChangeScenario A2 and HadCM3 Model [Saxon, et. al, 2005] least change greatest change
Current Cost of LandGiven CompetingTenure & Use [TNC-AK] Aggregate of Current Cost and EnvironmentalChange Under Climate ChangeScenario A2 and HadCM3 Model [Saxon, et. al, 2005] least cost greatest cost
Best Portfolio Using Current Costs & Gradients and Areas with Least Change(Potential Refugia) [SPOT software] Out In
Hex CellIrreplaceability Using Current Costs & Gradients and Areas with Least Change (Potential Refugia) [SPOT software] 1 20 25 Frequency of Occurrence in 25 Solutions
1 20 25 In Out Frequency of Occurrence in 25 Solutions Best Portfolio Best Portfolio & Hex CellIrreplaceability Using Current Costs & Gradients and Areas with Least Change (Potential Refugia) [SPOT software]
Best Portfolio Using Current Costs & Gradients Best Portfolio Using Current Costs & Gradients and Future Change Gradient Best Portfolio Using Current Costs & Gradients and Areas with Least Change(Potential Refugia)
Overlap AmongBest PortfoliosRepresenting Current ConditionsFuture Conditionsand PotentialRefugia represents current conditions and potential refugia represents current and future conditions represents current conditions only
Conclusions: 1. The best portfolio for current conditions will not represent current biodiversity across future environmental conditions 2. Planners must choose between a portfolio that represents the range of future conditions or one favoring potential refugia 3. There are some, but not many, “no regrets” sites [black].