Minnesota Science Team: Updates and next steps

1. Minnesota Science Team: Updates and next steps MN Science Team September 26, 2012

2. Ecosystem Vulnerability Assessment and Synthesis New version in progress for MN: Contents The Contemporary Landscape Climate Change Primer Observed Climate Change Future Climate Change Impacts on Forests Forest Ecosystem Vulnerability Implications for Forest Management Laurentian Forest Province in MN

3. Forest Systems Addressed: Native Plant Community Systems: • Fire Dependent Forests • Mesic Hardwood Forests • Wet Forests • Floodplan Forests • Forested Rich Peatlands • Acid Peatlands Managed Forest Systems • Aspen • Red Pine

4. Information Session • Past climate • Projected climate • Tree Atlas results • PnET results • LANDIS results • NPC System descriptions

5. Fire-Dependent Forest Key Drivers: Coarse soils or shallow soils over bedrock Drought-prone Severe stand-replacing and mild surface fires Threats: Fire suppression WP blister rust, RP shoot blight, armillaria Spruce budworm, jp budworm, tent caterpillar, wp tip weevil Deer herbivory Hazel Dominant Species:

6. Fire-Dependent Forest Vulnerability Confidence High High High Agreement Limited Evidence Low Agreement Limited Evidence Medium Agreement Limited Evidence Low Agreement Medium Evidence High Agreement Medium Evidence High Agreement Robust Evidence Medium Agreement Robust Evidence Low Agreement Robust Evidence Low Vulnerability Moderate Vulnerability Agreement Among Information High Vulnerability Medium Agreement Medium Evidence Adaptive Capacity of Ecosystems Low Low Limited Evidence Robust Positive Potential Impacts Negative

7. Mesic Hardwood Forest Threats: Deer herbivory Exotic species Insect pests Earthworms Drought Root frost Key Drivers: Mesic soils – consistent water and nutrients Small canopy gaps – wind, disease, etc Large-scale windthrow or fire uncommon Constrained by cold temperatures Dominant Species:

8. Mesic Hardwood Forest Vulnerability Confidence High High Low Agreement Limited Evidence High Agreement Limited Evidence Medium Agreement Limited Evidence Low Agreement Medium Evidence Medium Agreement Medium Evidence High Agreement Medium Evidence Medium Agreement Robust Evidence High Agreement Robust Evidence Low Agreement Robust Evidence Low Vulnerability Moderate Vulnerability Agreement Among Information High Vulnerability Adaptive Capacity of Ecosystems Low Low Limited Evidence Robust Positive Potential Impacts Negative

9. Floodplain Forest Threats: Invasive species Flood regime changes Deer herbivory Erosion/ sedimentation changes Key Drivers: Terraces or floodplains of rivers and streams Silt or sand alluvium Occasional or annual flooding, ice damage, erosion Dominant Species:

10. Floodplain Forest Vulnerability Confidence High High High Agreement Limited Evidence Medium Agreement Limited Evidence Low Agreement Limited Evidence Low Agreement Medium Evidence High Agreement Medium Evidence Low Agreement Robust Evidence Medium Agreement Robust Evidence High Agreement Robust Evidence Low Vulnerability Moderate Vulnerability Agreement Among Information High Vulnerability Medium Agreement Medium Evidence Adaptive Capacity of Ecosystems Low Low Limited Evidence Robust Positive Potential Impacts Negative

11. Wet Forest Key Drivers: Wet mineral soils, nutrient rich Saturated seasonally, flooding Dry periods for establishment Deeper soil layers saturated & anaerobic Threats: Black ash decline Invasive plants Excessive drought or waterlogging Insect pests (spruce budworm, EAB and gypsy moth) Dominant Species:

12. Wet Forest Vulnerability Confidence High High Low Agreement Limited Evidence High Agreement Limited Evidence Medium Agreement Limited Evidence Low Agreement Medium Evidence Medium Agreement Medium Evidence High Agreement Medium Evidence High Agreement Robust Evidence Medium Agreement Robust Evidence Low Agreement Robust Evidence Low Vulnerability Moderate Vulnerability Agreement Among Information Adaptive Capacity of Ecosystems Low Low Limited Evidence Robust Positive Potential Impacts Negative High Vulnerability

13. Forested Rich Peatland Key Drivers: Deep, actively forming peat Saturated, anaerobic soils Lower water table than open peatlands Moisture through groundwater and precip Threats: Changes to flood regime – timing and water level Road building/draining Mistletoe Tamarack sawfly Winter burn Dominant Species:

14. Forested Rich Peatland Vulnerability Confidence High High High Agreement Limited Evidence Medium Agreement Limited Evidence Low Agreement Limited Evidence Low Agreement Medium Evidence High Agreement Medium Evidence Low Agreement Robust Evidence Medium Agreement Robust Evidence High Agreement Robust Evidence Low Vulnerability Moderate Vulnerability Agreement Among Information Medium Agreement Medium Evidence Adaptive Capacity of Ecosystems Low Low Limited Evidence Robust Positive Potential Impacts Negative High Vulnerability

15. Acid Peatland Key Drivers: Deep, actively forming peat Saturated, anaerobic soils Lower water table than open peatlands Moisture through precip only More acidic and FRP Smaller and more isolated, but more common than FRP Dominant Species: Threats: Changes to flood regime – timing and water level Road building/draining Mistletoe Tamarack sawfly Winter burn

16. Acid Peatland Vulnerability Confidence High High Low Agreement Limited Evidence Medium Agreement Limited Evidence High Agreement Limited Evidence Low Agreement Medium Evidence High Agreement Medium Evidence Low Agreement Robust Evidence High Agreement Robust Evidence Medium Agreement Robust Evidence Low Vulnerability Moderate Vulnerability Agreement Among Information High Vulnerability Medium Agreement Medium Evidence Adaptive Capacity of Ecosystems Low Low Limited Evidence Robust Positive Potential Impacts Negative

17. Next steps • Red pine & Aspen discussion • Summarize information • Fill knowledge gaps and lingering questions • Implications • Author review • Opportunity for wider review