watervulnerability

watervulnerability watervulnerability

18.01.2013 Views

Sawtooth National Forest Watershed Vulnerability Assessment, Intermountain Region (R4) management activities that cumulatively impact habitat annually. This assumption is supported by studies that found that populations in complex habitats are more stable than populations in simple ones because they have greater capacity to buffer the effects of environmental change (Schlosser 1982; Saunders et al. 1990; Sedell et al. 1990; Schlosser 1991; Pearson et al. 1992). Neville et al. (2006) also showed that small, isolated populations were at increased risk of extinction because of demographic and genetic factors associated with their reduced population sizes and loss of interpopulation connectivity. There are, however, limitations with this approach, as follows 1. Bull trout may persist in streams that commonly exceed their perceived thermal limits (Zoellick 1999) because of increased availability of food, lack of competition with other species, or adaptations that better exploit thermal refugia or shift timing of life history transitions (Crozier and others 2008; Jonsson and Jonsson 2009). 2. Baselines and management threats were assumed to remain at present levels. In reality, some threats will diminish due to restoration or changed management approaches, some will persist due to a lack of political/social will to change, and new unexpected threats will emerge. As a result, baseline conditions will also not stay constant. 3. It was assumed that species and populations will continue to use and respond to the environment as they have in the recent past. In some instances, biological adaptation to changing environments could mitigate some of the challenges organisms face. 4. Finally, there are many complex interactions between physical changes brought on by climate change and species’ responses to these changes. While the model is a good start, it oversimplifies these interactions and may inaccurately project future persistence. Figure 15. Bayesian belief network for determining bull trout population persistence Currently there are 14 patches in the Upper Salmon on the Sawtooth RNA that have reproducing bull trout populations. Bull trout in three of these patches are “functioning at unacceptable risk”, six patches are “functioning at risk,” and six are “functioning appropriately.” Populations in unacceptable or at-risk conditions are due to low population sizes, competition/hybridization risks with brook trout, poor habitat conditions, and/or moderate/high management risks. Bull trout populations in a better condition are characterized by relatively good habitat, larger populations, low to moderate management risks, and/or no brook trout present. 174 Assessing the Vulnerability of Watersheds to Climate Change

Sawtooth National Forest Watershed Vulnerability Assessment, Intermountain Region (R4) Current Low Risk Populations - By 2040, three bull trout populations are still at low risk, nine populations are at moderate, and two are at high risk of extinction (Table 5 and Figure 16). Two populations at low extinction risk (Germania and Upper Warm Spring Creeks) have low risk from climate change (i.e., frequency of winter peak flows averaging 1.4 days, summer baseflows averaging a 7% decrease, and summer water temperatures changing very little). The other low extinction risk population (Swimm- Martin) is projected to have moderate climate-change risks (i.e., frequency of winter peak flows averaging 2.4 days, summer baseflows averaging a 9% decrease, and summer water temperatures changing very little), but has good watershed that should give the population enough resiliency to withstand the predicted changes. By 2080, all of these populations are predicted to be subjected to a greater frequency of winter peak flows (avg. 3.4), lower summer baseflows (avg. 28% decrease), and water temperatures outside optimal conditions for bull trout in lower portions of each patch. However, only the Germania population goes to a moderate risk of extinction from increasing effects of system roads in the headwaters and water diversions lower in the drainage, due to climate change. Current Moderate Risk Populations - Four populations (Big Boulder, Little Boulder, West Pass, and Fourth of July Creeks) are at moderate risk more from current and historic management impacts and moderate watershed conditions, than from climate change. This does not imply that there are no climate change impacts predicted by 2040 within these populations. There are still moderate increases in winter peak flows (avg. 0.9 days), and small changes to summer baseflows (avg. 8% decrease to 15% increase) and minor water temperature increases. However, these changes are not enough to increase extinction risks. The remaining five bull trout populations (Alturas Lake, Fishhook, Prospect-Robinson Bar, Upper EF Salmon, and Wickiup-Sheep) are projected to see a greater frequency of winter peak flow events (avg. 1.6 days), less baseflow (avg. 19% decrease) and slightly warmer water temperatures that may limit the use of habitat Figure 17. Predicted bull trout persistence in 2080. Red subwatersheds are at high extinction risk; yellow are at moderate risk, and green are at low risk. 175 Assessing the Vulnerability of Watersheds to Climate Change Figure 16. Predicted bull trout persistence in 2040. Red subwatersheds are at high extinction risk; yellow are at moderate risk, and green are at low risk. during portions of the summer. By 2080 extinction risks increase to most of the above bull trout populations as the frequency winter peak flows and summer water temperatures increase and summer baseflows continue to decrease (Figure 17). One additional local bull trout population (Wickiup-Sheep) is projected to be at high risk; nine are predicted to be at moderate risk, and two are predicted to be at low risk of extinction (Table 5).

Sawtooth National Forest Watershed Vulnerability Assessment, Intermountain Region (R4)<br />

Current Low Risk Populations - By 2040,<br />

three bull trout populations are still at low<br />

risk, nine populations are at moderate, and<br />

two are at high risk of extinction (Table 5<br />

and Figure 16). Two populations at low<br />

extinction risk (Germania and Upper Warm<br />

Spring Creeks) have low risk from climate<br />

change (i.e., frequency of winter peak flows<br />

averaging 1.4 days, summer baseflows<br />

averaging a 7% decrease, and summer water<br />

temperatures changing very little). The other<br />

low extinction risk population (Swimm-<br />

Martin) is projected to have moderate<br />

climate-change risks (i.e., frequency of<br />

winter peak flows averaging 2.4 days,<br />

summer baseflows averaging a 9% decrease,<br />

and summer water temperatures changing<br />

very little), but has good watershed that<br />

should give the population enough resiliency<br />

to withstand the predicted changes. By 2080,<br />

all of these populations are predicted to be subjected to a greater frequency of winter peak flows (avg.<br />

3.4), lower summer baseflows (avg. 28% decrease), and water temperatures outside optimal conditions<br />

for bull trout in lower portions of each patch. However, only the Germania population goes to a moderate<br />

risk of extinction from increasing effects of system roads in the headwaters and water diversions lower in<br />

the drainage, due to climate change.<br />

Current Moderate Risk Populations - Four populations (Big Boulder, Little Boulder, West Pass, and<br />

Fourth of July Creeks) are at moderate risk more from current and historic management impacts and<br />

moderate watershed conditions, than from climate change. This does not imply that there are no climate<br />

change impacts predicted by 2040 within<br />

these populations. There are still moderate<br />

increases in winter peak flows (avg. 0.9 days),<br />

and small changes to summer baseflows (avg.<br />

8% decrease to 15% increase) and minor<br />

water temperature increases. However, these<br />

changes are not enough to increase extinction<br />

risks. The remaining five bull trout<br />

populations (Alturas Lake, Fishhook,<br />

Prospect-Robinson Bar, Upper EF Salmon,<br />

and Wickiup-Sheep) are projected to see a<br />

greater frequency of winter peak flow events<br />

(avg. 1.6 days), less baseflow (avg. 19%<br />

decrease) and slightly warmer water<br />

temperatures that may limit the use of habitat<br />

Figure 17. Predicted bull trout persistence in 2080. Red<br />

subwatersheds are at high extinction risk; yellow are at<br />

moderate risk, and green are at low risk.<br />

175 Assessing the Vulnerability of Watersheds to Climate Change<br />

Figure 16. Predicted bull trout persistence in 2040. Red<br />

subwatersheds are at high extinction risk; yellow are at moderate<br />

risk, and green are at low risk.<br />

during portions of the summer. By 2080<br />

extinction risks increase to most of the above<br />

bull trout populations as the frequency winter<br />

peak flows and summer water temperatures<br />

increase and summer baseflows continue to decrease (Figure 17). One additional local bull trout<br />

population (Wickiup-Sheep) is projected to be at high risk; nine are predicted to be at moderate risk, and<br />

two are predicted to be at low risk of extinction (Table 5).

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!