Conservation of Biodiversity in Changing Climates: Conserving the Stage, Not the Actors

1

Conservation of Biodiversity in Changing

Climates:

Conserving the Stage, Not the Actors

Kevin Ruddock

The Nature Conservancy

Collaborators:

Dr. Peter August, URI NRS

Christopher Damon, URI EDC

Pam Rubinoff, URI CRC

2

Our Challenge: What can we protect now to

ensure

diverse and viable natural systems in the future?

Will our portfolio of protected

lands preserve biodiversity?

The future is uncertain and

change is unavoidable.

What can we protect now to

ensure biodiversity in the

future?

3

Protect Rare Species

Protect Unique Ecosystems

Expand or Connect

Existing Reserves

How do we prioritize land protection for

biodiversity?

4

Challenge: Changing climate and incomplete

knowledge

The landscape has changed

and will continue to do so.

We are not interested in

creating ‘museums of the

past’.

Climate change will accelerate changes, shift species

ranges and

alter community composition.

0

20

40

60

80

100

1650 1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 2000

Year

Perc

en

t

Maine

Vermont

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

Rhode Island

Connecticut

New England

population, % of 1990

pop'n.

Forest Cover and Population Trends in New EnglandForest Cover and Population Trends in New England

5

Arenas for Evolution, not Museums of the Past

Species may change but the geologic patterns of

topography and soil will not change significantly in the same

time scale.

Species Based

Pitch Pine / Scrub Oak

Barren

Geology Based

Excessively drained loamy

sand on flat hilltop

6

Ecological Land Units (ELUs) Areas of unique soil drainage, soil texture, & landform

7

Ecological Land Units (ELUs)

8

Mapping ELU Variety to Capture

Biodiversity

For every location in the state a ‘quality’ score is calculated

based on the number of unique types of ELU within 1,500

feet.

9

‘Quality’: A measure of biodiversity as ELU variety

10

‘Quality’: A measure of biodiversity as ELU variety

‘good’ quality and

not connected

‘poor’ quality and

not connected

‘good’ quality

and connected

11

Conclusions

• ELU variety correlated with increased biodiversity at many

scales

• ELUs can be one of many criteria used to evaluate lands for

local conservation. Others include:

Public access

Ability to deliver ecosystem services (water protection, aesthetics)

Cultural/social values

• ELUs provide insight into future biodiversity

Disturbance regimes and invasive species might overwhelm positive

effects

12

Web Access to Maps and Data

www.edc.uri.edu/elu