Cushman et al. – 1 Cushman et al. – 2 U.S. FOREST SERVICE ROCKY MOUNTAIN RESEARCH STATION Climate Change and Connectivity: Assessing Landscape and Species Vulnerability Phase 1 Samuel A. Cushman, U.S. Forest Service Erin L. Landguth, University of Montana Curtis H. Flather, U.S. Forest Service 12/21/2010 Cushman et al. – 3 Contents INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 8 METHODS ..................................................................................................................................... 9 Study Area and Focal Species..................................................................................................... 9 Experimental Design ................................................................................................................. 10 Connectivity Modeling Approaches .......................................................................................... 11 Details of the Resistant Kernel Connectivity Modeling Approach ........................................... 12 Analysis of Kernel Connectivity Maps ...................................................................................... 12 Analyzing Extent and Connectivity of Core Habitat ................................................................. 13 Identifying Barriers and Fracture Zones .................................................................................. 14 Details of the UNICOR Corridor Modeling Approach............................................................. 15 Analysis of UNICOR Connectivity Maps .................................................................................. 16 RESULTS ..................................................................................................................................... 16 Connected habitat ..................................................................................................................... 16 Lesser prairie-chicken – ....................................................................................................... 16 Swift fox – .............................................................................................................................. 17 Massasauga –........................................................................................................................ 18 Grassland associated species – ............................................................................................ 19 Forestland associated species –............................................................................................ 20 Corridor .................................................................................................................................... 20 Lesser prairie chicken – ........................................................................................................ 20 Swift fox – .............................................................................................................................. 21 Massasauga –........................................................................................................................ 21 Grassland associated species – ............................................................................................ 21 Forestland associated species –............................................................................................ 21 Multiple-species Patterns.......................................................................................................... 22 Multiple-species Core – ........................................................................................................ 22 Multiple-species Fracture – .................................................................................................. 22 DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................................... 23 Quantifying Current Habitat Area, Fragmentation, and Corridor Connectivity for Focal Species....................................................................................................................................... 24 Lesser prairie-chicken: key locations for maintaining connectivity – .................................. 24 Swift fox: key locations for maintaining connectivity – ........................................................ 25 Massasauga: key locations for maintaining connectivity – .................................................. 27 Cushman et al. – 4 Spatially Explicit Strategies for Maintaining Connectivity for Multiple Species ..................... 28 Quantifying Current Habitat Area, Fragmentation, and Corridor Connectivity for Species Groups....................................................................................................................................... 28 Grassland-associated species: key locations for maintaining connectivity – ...................... 28 Forestland-associated species: key locations for maintaining connectivity – ...................... 29 Scientific Decision Support for Measurable Outcomes in Fragmented Systems ...................... 30 Area Sensitivity and the GPLCC–......................................................................................... 31 Fragmentation Sensitivity and the GPLCC– ........................................................................ 32 Scope and Limitations ............................................................................................................... 34 Validating Predicted Corridors – ......................................................................................... 34 Uncertainty in Landscape Resistance – ................................................................................ 34 Uncertainty in Dispersal Ability – ........................................................................................ 35 Uncertainty in Critical Fragmentation Thresholds – ........................................................... 36 FUTURE ANALYSIS (PHASE II) .............................................................................................. 37 Future Landscape Change Driven by Climate and Landuse Change ...................................... 37 LITERATURE CITED ................................................................................................................. 39 TABLES ....................................................................................................................................... 46 Table 1. Classification of resistance values in each of the 12 resistance maps used in our analysis. ..................................................................................................................................... 47 Table 2. Range of dispersal distances for three focal species used to examine connectivity in the GPLCC. ............................................................................................................................... 49 Table 3. FRAGSTATS results for percentage of landscape in connected habitat (PLAND), largest patch of connected habitat percentage of study area (LPI), correlation length of connected habitat (CL), and number of individual patches of connected habitat (NP) across factorial combination of three levels of relative landscape resistance (Low, Med, High) and three levels of dispersal ability (20,000; 40,000; 80,000) for the lesser prairie-chicken. ......... 50 Table 4. FRAGSTATS results for percentage of landscape in core habitat, largest patch of core habitat percentage of study area, correlation length of core habitat, and number of individual patches of core habitat across factorial combination of three levels of relative landscape resistance (Low, Med, High) and three levels of dispersal ability (20,000; 40,000; 80,000) for the lesser prairie-chicken. ......................................................................................................... 51 Table 5. Relative effect size of landscape resistance and dispersal ability on FRAGSTATS results for percentage of landscape in connected habitat, largest patch of connected habitat percentage of study area, correlation length of connected habitat, and number of individual patches for the three focal species and two species groups. ..................................................... 52 Table 6. FRAGSTATS results for percentage of landscape in connected habitat, largest patch of connected habitat percentage of study area, correlation length of connected habitat, and number of individual patches of connected habitat across factorial combination of three levels Cushman et al. – 5 of relative landscape resistance (Low, Med, High) and three levels of dispersal ability (10,000; 30,000; 60,000) for the swift fox. ............................................................................................. 53 Table 7. FRAGSTATS results for percentage of landscape in core habitat, largest patch of core habitat percentage of study area, correlation length of core habitat, and number of individual patches of core habitat across factorial combination of three levels of relative landscape resistance (Low, Med, High) and three levels of dispersal ability (10,000; 30,000; 60,000) for the swift fox. ............................................................................................................................. 54 Table 8. FRAGSTATS results for percentage of landscape in connected habitat, largest patch of