University of Alberta Conservation planning for forests, tree species, and their genetic populations under climate change: a case study for western North America by Erin Jolene Russell A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a dual degree of Master of Forestry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta and Master of Science in Conservation and Land Management, Bangor University, Wales © Erin Jolene Russell Fall 2014 Edmonton, Alberta The author reserves all other publication and other rights in association with the copyright in the thesis and, except as herein before provided, neither the thesis nor any substantial portion thereof may be printed or otherwise reproduced in any material form whatsoever without the author's prior written permission. Abstract Approximately 34% of the 8.4 million km² landbase of western North America is covered by forests, which provide critical habitat for the majority of the flora and fauna. About 18% (or 1.5 million km²) of this landbase is set aside as protected areas to ensure the in situ conservation of biodiversity, but this mandate is shared by 17 states and provinces that have a variety of conservation policies and objectives. This study provides an overview of how different jurisdictions protect forests, tree species, and their genetic populations. I also assess the vulnerability of populations, species, and the protected area systems of different jurisdictions to climate change. The analysis relies on the statistical species distribution maps generated from 250m resolution remote sensing data in conjunction with species frequency estimates from 50,000 forest inventory plots. The vulnerability of tree populations to climate change is assessed by means of a required migration distance to matching climate habitat in the future, using a multivariate climate change velocity approach. Rather than evaluating the protected area status of species as a whole, I evaluate putative genetic population within major ecological zones. The results indicate, that forests are generally well represented, with only four jurisdictions protecting less than 10% of their forested land base (OR, SK, YT, NT). Jurisdictions differ markedly in their responsibility for protecting forest genetic resources. By far the highest combination of species and ecological zones occur in BC, followed by CA, OR, WA, and AB. From a total of 54 tree species, I identified populations of Western white pine, Whitebark pine, and Limber pine as least protected in situ. Under climate change, the protected area status decreases most for interior and boreal tree species. In this case study, I show how conservation efforts can be prioritized across multiple jurisdictions and provide data for resource managers that pinpoint the least protected tree populations as well as their relative vulnerability to climate change. Acknowledgements This project would not have been possible without the support of many people. I would like to express my appreciation and sincere gratitude to the following people. Firstly, I would like to thank Andreas Hamann who has been an inspiring mentor and supervisor. Without his constant support and guidance this project would not have become a reality. Andreas has taught me many valuable lessons that I will carry with me. Very special thanks to Laura Gray for all her help, patience, and encouragement throughout this process. Laura was always there with insightful comments, suggestions and answers to my many queries. I would also like to acknowledge Laura’s as well as David Roberts’ contributions to the final layout of figures and tables. I would also like to thank Christine Cahalan for making my experience at Bangor a fantastic and unforgettable one. I am very grateful for her encouragement and guidance. I am grateful to Alex Drummond, who helped to put me on this path and has encouraged me every step of the way. The people who inspired me and gave me the tools and encouragement to take this path in the first place, Tom Naughten, Rob Zakaluk, Joni and Chris Storie. Thank you to my fellow labmates and friends, Sarah, Quinn, Kat, Nicola, and Vlad for your support and providing laughs throughout all the craziness. Last but definitely not least, I am extremely grateful to my family who have stood behind me in every decision I’ve made. The inspiration for everything I do, my husband Ben and my son Myles. This study builds on data I obtained from previous work on predicitive modeling of western North American tree species distributions (Gray and Hamann 2013), and also uses velocity of climate change data from Hamann et al (2014). A version of this thesis has been submitted to a peer reviewed journal: Russell, E.J., Gray, L.K., Roberts, D.R. and Hamann, A. 2014. Conservation planning for forests, tree species, and their genetic population under climate change: a case study for western North America. iii Table of Contents 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Protected areas, conservation of forests and gap analysis ............................. 1 1.2 Impact of climate change on species and populations ................................... 3 1.3 Velocity of climate change ............................................................................ 5 1.4 Purpose of study ............................................................................................ 7 2. Methods ................................................................................................................ 8 2.1 Study area and GIS data ................................................................................ 8 2.2 Statistical species distribution modeling ..................................................... 10 2.3 Defining tree species populations ................................................................ 12 2.4 Gap analysis ................................................................................................ 12 2.5 Climate change exposure analysis ............................................................... 14 3. Results ................................................................................................................. 15 3.1 Evaluation of the current protected area network ........................................ 15 3.2 Identifying current conservation gaps by jurisdiction ................................. 16 3.3 Identifying current conservation gaps by species ........................................ 17 3.3 Identifying future conservation gaps ........................................................... 20 4. Discussion ........................................................................................................... 25 4.1 The need for more effective protection of species and populations ............ 25 4.2 The Need for cross-border conservation strategies ..................................... 26 4.3 Implications of climate change for conservation management and planning……………….. ............................................................................. 27 5. Conclusions and Recommendations ................................................................... 29 6. References ........................................................................................................... 31 List of Tables Table 1. Top 25 population conservation priorities, ranked by population size (ha), all populations have no protected areas meeting the 10ha requirement for a safe reserve ........................................................................................................................ 19 Table 2. Population protection by species under current and future climate change conditions ................................................................................................................... 22 Table 3. Population protection by jurisdiction under current and future climate change conditions ....................................................................................................... 24 List of Figures Figure 1. Study area showing forests and protected areas in the 17 states and provinces that were evaluated in this case study .......................................................... 9 Figure 2. Protected land area (a) and protected forest area (b) by US state or Canadian province in western North America ........................................................... 16 Figure 3. The number of tree species populations that are protected versus those that require additional protection by US state or Canadian province. Species populations were defined by major ecosystem delineations. The number of species and ecosystems in each jurisdiction is given in parenthesis, and the size of the circles is proportional to the number of species populations in ecosystems. Criteria for sufficient protection were at least three reserves with a population size of 10ha cumulative cover each. Corresponding conservation priorities are shown in Table 1 and Appendix I ........................................................................................................... 17 Figure 4. The number of tree species populations that are protected versus those that require additional protection. The size of the symbols is proportional to the species abundance measured in cumulative hectares of canopy cover. Species populations were defined by major ecosystem delineations, and criteria for sufficient protection were at least three reserves with a population size of 10ha cumulative cover each.