Incorporating Climate Resiliency in Watershed Plans Kendra Smith | NOWC-OACD Conference | 11.2015 Oregon’S Diverse Landscape and Unique Habitats

Incorporating Climate Resiliency In Watershed Plans Kendra Smith | NOWC-OACD Conference | 11.2015 Oregon’s diverse landscape And Unique Habitats

780 million people lack access to Clean Water Climate change is predicted to alter hydrologic processes across the globe (UN, 2013)

Rivers, streams, riparian corridors, wetlands, floodplains, and forests can deliver clean water when appropriately managed

Tribes! Non Government Organizations!

Watershed Councils!

Rogue Basin ! Partnership! Local, State and Federal Agencies!

Land Trusts! Soil & Water Service Conservation Districts! Districts!

Databasin.org – Conservation Biology Institute

Stream Flow: Mean Summer Changes as Percent of Historic (Historic - 2040)/ Historic -0.2% - 0%: increased flow 0.1% - 4% 4.1% - 8.5% 8.6% - 10.1% 10.2% - 11.8% 11.9% - 13.6% 13.7% - 15.6% 15.7% - 19.2% 19.3% - 24.5% 24.6% - 50%: decreased flow

Data Source: StreamMetric Dataset

* Mainstem rivers not modeled in some instances Sources: Esri, DeLorme, USGS, NPS, Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA

Miles Map 3: Predicted Changes in Mean Summer Flows by 2040 0 5 10 20 ± NorWeST Predicted Temperature August Mean Temp 2040 D - Degrees C 5.1 - 8.9 9.0 - 10.6 10.7 - 12.1 12.2 - 13.4 13.5 - 14.6 14.7 - 15.7 15.8 - 16.8 16.9 - 18.0 18.1 - 19.7 19.8 - 22.3

Sources: Esri, DeLorme, USGS, NPS, Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA

Map 8: Predicted August Mean Temperature 2040 Miles 0 5 10 20 ± Aquatic Results Value 1: Low 2: Medium Low 3: Medium 4: Medium High 5: High

Sources: Esri, DeLorme, USGS, NPS, Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA

Miles Map 24a: Aquatic Results 0 5 10 20 ± Results: Aquatic + Riparian + Water Uplands Results ODFW Terr + Goodness + Resil Den + Avian Value Value 1: Low 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5: High 5

Miles

0 5 10 20 Sources: Esri, DeLorme, USGS, NPS, Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA

Map 25: Results of River/Stream Corridor and Terrestrial Habitat Scoring Combined ± Protected Areas Total Habitat Quality & Resiliency Score By HUC SumPixelValues/PixelCount Rogue Umpqua Divide Wilderness 1.30 - 1.85 1.86 - 2.31 2.32 - 2.85

2.86 - 3.65 Upper Rogue 3.66 - 4.53

Bobby Creek Grassy Know Wilderness Wild Rogue Wilderness k

e Copper Salmon Wilderness S W r Rogue t C k a . e Baker Cypress i l r F i e r S C King Mountain Rock Garden a o Wild Rogue Wilderness o r C r u k e r T e G k t e ra k l h e k ve Cr r eek E E F C o v B r k r ee a ig k e Cr t ta n B s os R C k s u b sta ree tt o ha e C e g o S ff Jo Cr C L mpo u Ju re e e Rogue River k R e k Poverty Flat i Indigo Creek e v k r e ee North Fork Silver Creek r k r C Sky Lakes Wilderness e C s Round Top Butte e er r ilv n C S a n v Table Rocks L k o Il e E it s lino e tl w is R r e a iver C B L s u Illinois g tte ig Rogue River K r Cr l B e o e n k d i k e L o Hole-In-The-Rock Chetco C Crooks Creek s r k t e D Iron Creek e B C e eer C e r Kalmiopsis Wilderness k reek r e e C a e r Lost Lake k s C m r a Moon Prairie k i e e l e e Brewer Spruce l k r i Hoxie Creek C W e in h Holton Creek p e Alth s ou Lit o se C tle Sterling Mine Ditch J E r eek Grayback Glades r A

a p e p r s v le e t i ga v t i F e R French Flat R R o i is e v Smith o r t er in k a Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument l Il I g l k l e r i l o n p F o t p Soda Mountain Wilderness s i e s A W R Scotch Creek i

e Red Buttes Wilderness

Siskiyou Wilderness

Sources: Esri, DeLorme, USGS, NPS, Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA

Miles Map 26: Total Habitat Quality and Resiliency Score by HUC 6 0 5 10 20 ± ODFW Priority Barriers Bradbury Salmon Streams Loca lPriority Results Rank Total Score: Number of plans & Species TotalPriorityScore .! Low: -2 - 48 Low: 1 5 - 7: Low .! MedLow: 49 - 83 2 8 - 9: MedLow .! Med: 84 - 120 Med: 3 10: Med .! MedHigh: 121 - 175 4 11 - 12: MedHigh .! High: 176 - 295 High: 5 13 - 15 High

e S W r t C k a . e i l r .! F i e .! r S C a o o r C r u k e r T e e G k t rav k l h e k e Cr .! r eek E E F C o v B r k r ee a ig k e Cr t ta n B s os R C k s u b .! sta ree tt o ha e C e g o .! S ff Jo Cr C L .! mpo u Ju .! re e k e e k R i Indigo Creek .!e .! v k r .! e ee r k r C e r C s e ve r Sil n C a .! n v L k o Il e E .! it .! s lino e tl .!.! w is R r e .! .! a iver C B .!.! L s .! u g tte .! ig Rogue River .! Cr K r .! l B e o .! e n k d .! i .! .! .! k .!.! e L o C s r .! k t e D e B C e eer C e.! r k reek r e e C a e .! r k s .! C m r a .! .! e k i ! e l .!.! e e l .! k r i C W .! e .! .! in .! h .! p .!.!.! e Alth ! s .!ou . Lit .! o se C tle J E r ! Sum of Local Priorities: eek r A.! a .! p ! e p s . .! r .! v le .! e t .! i ga v t ODA i F e R R R o i is.! e v o r t er WSC/TNC in k a l Il I g l k l e SOLC r .! i l o .! n p F o t p s i Local Priority e s A W R

i KS Wild v e ODFW Crucial r OWRD USFS Sources: Esri, DeLorme, USGS, NPS, Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA

Miles Map 27: Previous Plans Prioritization Results 0 5 10 20 ± Priority Watersheds Watershed Target Condition Priority Corridors Confluence Concentration Areas 1: Low Primary See Elk Creek Primary 2: Medium Low Secondary Restoration Action Plan Secondary 3: Medium Protected Areas ! Confluences 4: Medium High Conservation Connections 5: High

e S W r t C k a . i l e r F i e r S C a o o r C r u k e r T e e Gr k t k ave k l h e Cr r ee E F ! k E ! C ! o v B r k ! r e a i e re g k t C ta n B R s os C s u b ta eek t o as Cr te o Sh oe C g ff J C u L po Jum r re e e ! k k R e i Indigo Creek e v k r e ee ! r k r C e r C s e ve ! r Sil n C a n v L k o I e E it s llin e tl w ois r e a Riv ! B er C ! ! L s ! u g tte ig Rogue River K r C l B re o e n k d i k e L o C s r k t e e B C e Deer e Cr r r k eek ! e e a e See Rogue Estuary C r k s C Strategic Plan m ! r a k i e e l e l k re i C W e ! in h ! p ! e Alt s hou Li o se C ttle J E ! re ek r A

a p e p

s l r v e e t i ga v t i F e R R R s o iv

r e oi te r n k li a l I g I l k l e r i l o n p t F o s i p e s A

W R

See Ashland Forest Resiliency Project

Miles Map 28: Priority Watersheds, Corridors, and Confluences 0 5 10 20 ± Terrestrial Resiliency Rank 1: Least Resilient 2 3 4 5: Most Resilient

Data sources include: The Nature Conservancy, ODFW Crucial Habitat Data, and the Avian Knowledge Network

0 12.5 25 50 75 100 Oregon Climate Change Resiliency: Terrestrial Miles ± Riparian Climate Resiliency Rank 1: Least Resilient 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Most Resilient Data sources include: Theobold, et. al, Climate Adaptation Potential and Riparian Arease & National Landcover Datatabase Copyright: ©2012 Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ

0 1 2 4 6 8 Oregon Climate Change Resiliency: Riparian Miles ±

Thoughtful plans consider implementation first Funding strategies, partner relations, and niches

A few thoughts on scaling up implementation….

Anchor and connect at appropriate scale

Motivate performance with targets and accountability

Provide regional scaffolding for organizations

Support learning feedback loops

Anchor by focusing and concentrating efforts 66+ Miles of Riparian 700 Acres of Riparian Revegetaon Revegetaon 25.00 300.00 19.74 18.24 251.97 20.00 17.61 189.32 15.00 200.00 162.70 10.00 5.80 2.81 100.00 5.00 2.15 53.59 24.75 17.38 0.00 0.00 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Motivate performance with targets, accountability. Build scaffolding to support the system Data systems, bottleneck relief, consistent funding, technical assistance Create a culture of learning among practitioners

Half century timeframes Alter the trajectory of change Champions lead and deliver

where to find us:

Kendra Smith, Bonneville Environmental Foundation [email protected]

Todd Reeve, Bonneville Environmental Foundation [email protected]