Geology topics

Caitlin E. Littlefield

Publications and source records attributed to Caitlin E. Littlefield.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2026

Alternative future vegetation pathways reveal potential transformations of western US ecosystems

Managing ecosystems in an era of rapid change is inherently challenging not only because of uncertainty in future climate but also due to diverse responses of ecosystems to climate. Projections of ecological transformation alongside information about plausible vegetation trajectories can help land managers explore divergent scenarios and consider how modeled outcomes match their observations. Climate-analog impact models (AIMs) compare environmental information (e.g., vegetation types) between sets of climatically similar locations to infer change and can be used to identify multiple outcomes. We used AIMs to project changes in vegetation across the western United States under a mid-21st century climate scenario, characterize ecological transformation vulnerability based on projection divergence, and demonstrate how AIMs can inform decision-making. We projected high or very high vulnerability to ecological transformation across 29% of the western US, nearly 1 M km 2 . Vulnerability varied among vegetation groups; 75% of alpine vegetation had high or very high vulnerability vs. 6% of desert scrub. We estimate that 9% of the study area faces a high likelihood of transformation based on combined measures of vulnerability and projection agreement. Transformation at the vegetation type ( n = 50) level is projected for 40% (1.4 M km 2 ) of the study area, based on primary projections. As vegetation shifts towards types supported by a more arid climate, forested area is expected to contract by 9% and subalpine forests specifically by 54%. Elsewhere, vulnerability is low or trajectories are uncertain, implying opportunities for managers to intervene. Dry forests, for example, could be stabilized through vegetation management and intentional fire use. Our findings suggest likely ecological transformations with significant downstream consequences for ecosystem services and natural resources. They are best used within decision-making frameworks that draw on multiple lines of evidence including local expertise and complementary knowledge systems.

Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nev↗

USGS2024

Closing the conservation gap in the sagebrush biome: Spatial targeting and coordination are needed for conservation to keep pace with sagebrush losses

Core sagebrush areas (CSAs), patches of high sagebrush ecological integrity, continue to decline despite significant conservation and restoration investments across the sagebrush biome. Historically, conservation decisions in the biome have been driven by wildlife species-specific demands, but increasing recognition of the scale of threats and the pace of ecosystem degradation has compelled a shift towards threat-based ecosystem management. Therefore, there is a need to evaluate the scale of conservation implementation relative to the rate of degradation or loss from specific threats to the biome to assess whether a conservation deficit exists. To this end, we: 1) quantified and compared the average hectares of conservation practices implemented annually relative to the hectares of CSA loss attributed to each threat; 2) evaluated the relative amount of conservation actions in core sagebrush areas, growth opportunity areas, and other rangeland areas; and 3) assessed how much additional conservation may be needed to stop CSA declines. We then quantified how better spatial targeting and enhanced coordination might reduce the total additional amount of future conservation needed, and evaluated how an influx of resources can close the conservation gap, or the deficit between the conservation needed to offset annual loss and degradation and the capacity for conservation implementation. We found that current rates of conservation (e.g., hectares treated annually) are markedly lower than rates of CSA loss (∼10% of average annual loss). Furthermore, most conservation actions, ∼90% for some treatment types, occurred outside of CSAs likely reducing the efficacy of these conservation actions at retaining and restoring intact sagebrush rangelands. Additionally, we found that conservation efforts will need to increase by more than an order of magnitude (at least 10x) annually to halt CSA declines. However, through better spatial targeting of conservation actions, the increase in conservation needed to stop CSA loss could be reduced by 70% or more. This analysis demonstrates the divergent futures that may await the sagebrush biome pending key decisions regarding conservation targeting, stakeholder cooperation, and the strategic addition of resources.

Rangeland Ecology and Management↗

USGS2022

A sagebrush conservation design to proactively restore America’s sagebrush biome

A working group of experts with diverse professional backgrounds and disciplinary expertise was assembled to conceptualize a spatially explicit conservation design to support and inform the Sagebrush Conservation Strategy Part 2. The goal was to leverage recent advancements in remotely sensed landcover products to develop spatially and temporally explicit maps of sagebrush rangeland condition and landscape threats. In addition, the group sought to provide a common basis for understanding the state of sagebrush rangelands through time. First, the study team developed a spatially explicit model to assess geographic patterns in sagebrush ecological integrity and used this model to identify core sagebrush areas (CSAs), growth opportunity areas (GOAs), and other rangeland areas (ORAs) across the biome. Among the identified rangelands, 33.4 million acres were classified as CSAs; 84.3 million acres as GOAs; and 127.2 million acres as ORAs as of 2020. Second, the team sought to demonstrate the ecological relevance of the identified CSAs and GOAs by comparing these data with independent datasets for sagebrush obligate species of conservation concern. Geographical patterns in sagebrush ecological integrity were strongly associated with the occurrence of high-priority species and also displayed clear links to population performance for greater sage-grouse. Third, the team parsed out the type, location, and acres of primary threats within the different categories (CSAs, GOAs, and ORAs) to help focus active management by identifying places where multiagency and organization efforts can protect CSAs and GOAs that have higher levels of integrity with lower cumulative threats. The assessment of the condition of the sagebrush biome (that is, the location, amount, and conservation status) indicated that complex ecosystem function problems are driving ~73 percent of the demonstrated threats within the CSAs and GOAs (rather than point-source problems, such as human development). Fourth, the team developed trend estimates for the identified CSAs and GOAs and three selected primary threats (invasive annual grasses, conifer encroachment, and human modification) to the sagebrush biome from 2001 to 2020. Results showed that an average of 1.3 million acres per year have transitioned to ORAs at an annual rate of −1.34 percent. Fifth, the team developed an approach to integrate climate change effects into the threat-based landscape conservation design and conducted an initial assessment on the magnitude of near-term climate effects in the context of observed historical trends. The team’s analysis suggests that climate change alone is unlikely to be the dominant threat to sagebrush ecological integrity in the next few decades, although interactions of climate with wildfire and invasive annual grasses may be an important threat, especially in the longer term. A spatial overlap analysis was performed and highlighted 45.8 million acres of shared priorities among existing conservation frameworks to help anchor and guide collaborative landscape-scale conservation of areas that still have no to low threats. This information is critical to provide context for decisions about the volume and nature of conservation actions and funding requirements.

western United States↗

USGS2020

Topographic, soil, and climate drivers of drought sensitivity in forests and shrublands of the Pacific Northwest, USA

Climate change is anticipated to increase the frequency and intensity of droughts, with major impacts to ecosystems globally. Broad-scale assessments of vegetation responses to drought are needed to anticipate, manage, and potentially mitigate climate-change effects on ecosystems. We quantified the drought sensitivity of vegetation in the Pacific Northwest, USA, as the percent reduction in vegetation greenness under droughts relative to baseline moisture conditions. At a regional scale, shrub-steppe ecosystems—with drier climates and lower biomass—showed greater drought sensitivity than conifer forests. However, variability in drought sensitivity was considerable within biomes and within ecosystems and was mediated by landscape topography, climate, and soil characteristics. Drought sensitivity was generally greater in areas with higher elevation, drier climate, and greater soil bulk density. Ecosystems with high drought sensitivity included dry forests along ecotones to shrublands, Rocky Mountain subalpine forests, and cold upland sagebrush communities. In forests, valley bottoms and areas with low soil bulk density and high soil available water capacity showed reduced drought sensitivity, suggesting their potential as drought refugia. These regional-scale drought-sensitivity patterns discerned from remote sensing can complement plot-scale studies of plant physiological responses to drought to help inform climate-adaptation planning as drought conditions intensify.

Washington, Oregon, Idaho↗

USGS2020

Wildfire-driven forest conversion in western North American landscapes

Changing disturbance regimes and climate can overcome forest ecosystem resilience. Following high-severity fire, forest recovery may be compromised by lack of tree seed sources, warmer and drier postfire climate, or short-interval reburning. A potential outcome of the loss of resilience is the conversion of the prefire forest to a different forest type or nonforest vegetation. Conversion implies major, extensive, and enduring changes in dominant species, life forms, or functions, with impacts on ecosystem services. In the present article, we synthesize a growing body of evidence of fire-driven conversion and our understanding of its causes across western North America. We assess our capacity to predict conversion and highlight important uncertainties. Increasing forest vulnerability to changing fire activity and climate compels shifts in management approaches, and we propose key themes for applied research coproduced by scientists and managers to support decision-making in an era when the prefire forest may not return.

Alaska, Alberta, Arizona, British Columbia, Califo↗

USGS2020

A guidebook to spatial datasets for conservation planning under climate change in the Pacific Northwest

This guidebook provides user-friendly overviews of a variety of spatial datasets relevant to conservation and management of natural resources in the face of climate change in the Pacific Northwest, United States. Each guidebook chapter was created using a standardized template to summarize a spatial dataset or a group of closely related datasets. Datasets were selected according to standardized criteria based on input through a collaborative process involving researchers and natural-resource managers throughout the Pacific Northwest region. In each chapter, basic spatial and temporal information is provided for the dataset, along with a conceptual overview, glossary of key terms, links to download data and supporting documentation, a brief methods summary describing how the dataset was created, guidelines for dataset interpretation, assessment of uncertainties along with evaluation of caveats and simplifying assumptions, and information about potential and actual conservation applications of the dataset. Collectively, this information provides natural-resource managers with “snapshots” of a variety of datasets representing diverse processes and conditions, including climate projections, changes in hydrologic conditions, vegetation and fire-regime shifts, animal habitat changes, species movements, and topographic and soil conditions relevant to climate change. Along with other types of data and site-specific information, the datasets described in this guidebook have the potential to inform management of valued natural resources throughout the Pacific Northwest region in the context of adaptation to changing climate conditions.

Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington↗