United States Department of Agriculture

Forest 

Service

Northern 

Research Station

General Technical 

Report NRS-87-2 

Major Revision

September 2016

Forest Adaptation Resources: 

Climate Change Tools and Approaches 

for Land Managers, 2nd edition
ABSTRACT

Forests across the United States are expected to undergo numerous changes in 

response to the changing climate. This second edition of the Forest Adaptation 

Resources provides a collection of resources designed to help forest managers 

incorporate climate change considerations into management and devise adaptation 

tactics. It was developed as part of the Climate Change Response Framework and 

reflects the expertise, creativity, and feedback of dozens of direct contributors and 

hundreds of users of the first edition over the last several years. Six interrelated chapters 

include: (1) a description of the overarching Climate Change Response Framework, 

which generated these resources; (2) a brief guide to help forest managers judge or 

initiate vulnerability assessments; (3) a “menu” of adaptation strategies and approaches 

that are directly relevant to forests of the Northeast and upper Midwest; (4) a second 

menu of adaptation strategies and approaches oriented to urban forests; (5) a workbook 

process with step-by-step instructions to assist land managers in developing on-theground climate adaptation tactics that address their management objectives; and 

(6) five real-world examples of how these resources have been used to develop

adaptation tactics. The ideas, tools, and resources presented in the different chapters

are intended to inform and support existing decisionmaking processes of multiple

organizations with diverse management goals.

Quality Assurance

This publication conforms to the Northern Research Station’s Quality Assurance 

Implementation Plan which requires technical and policy review for all scientific 

publications produced or funded by the Station. The process included a blind technical 

review by at least two reviewers, who were selected by the Assistant Director for 

Research and unknown to the author. This review policy promotes the Forest Service 

guiding principles of using the best scientific knowledge, striving for quality and 

excellence, maintaining high ethical and professional standards, and being responsible 

and accountable for what we do.

Cover Photo

A forest containing red pine and northern red oak trees. Photo by Maria Janowiak, 

U.S. Forest Service and Northern Institute of Applied Climate Science.

The use of trade or firm names in this publication is for reader information and does 

not imply endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture of any product or service.

Published by: For additional copies, contact:

USDA FOREST SERVICE USDA Forest Service

11 CAMPUS BLVD., SUITE 200 Publications Distribution

NEWTOWN SQUARE, PA 19073-3294 359 Main Road

Delaware, OH 43015-8640

September 2016 Fax: 740-368-0152

Manuscript received for publication January 2016

Visit our homepage at: http://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/
Forest Adaptation Resources: 

Climate Change Tools and Approaches 

for Land Managers, 2nd edition

Christopher W. Swanston, Maria K. Janowiak, Leslie A. Brandt, 

Patricia R. Butler, Stephen D. Handler, P. Danielle Shannon, 

Abigail Derby Lewis, Kimberly Hall, Robert T. Fahey, Lydia Scott, 

Angela Kerber, Jason W. Miesbauer, and Lindsay Darling
Authors

Christopher w. Swanston is the 

the Northern Institute of Applied Climate Science

U.S. Forest Service, 410 MacInnes Drive, Houghton,

MI 49931, cswanston@fs.fed.us

Maria K. Janowiak is the deputy director 

Northern Institute of Applied Climate Science, U.S

Forest Service, 410 MacInnes Drive, Houghton, 

49931, mjanowiak02@fs.fed.us.

Leslie A. Brandt is a climate change speci

with the Northern Institute of Applied Climat

Science, U.S. Forest Service, 1992 Folwell Avenue, 

St. Paul, MN 55108, lbrandt@fs.fed.us

Patricia R. Butler is a climate change 

specialist with the Northern Institute of Applie

Climate Science, Michigan Technological University, 

School of Forest Resources and Environmental

Science, 1400 Townsend Drive, Houghton, M

49931, prbutler@mtu.edu.

Stephen D. Handler is a climate 

specialist with the Northern Institute of Applie

Climate Science, U.S. Forest Service, 410 MacInnes

Drive, Houghton, MI 49931, sdhandler@fs.fed.us

P. Danielle Shannon is the coordinator of

USDA Northern Forests Climate Hub, Norther

Institute of Applied Climate Science, Michigan

Technological University, School of Forest 

Resources and Environmental Science,

1400 Townsend Drive, Houghton, MI 49931,

dshannon@mtu.edu.

Abigail Derby Lewis is a senior conser

ecologist in the Keller Science Action Center 

at the Field Museum of Natural History,

1400 S. Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, IL 60605,

aderby@fieldmuseum.org. 

Kimberly Hall is a climate change eco

with The Nature Conservancy, and an adjunct

faculty member at Michigan State University, 

Department of Forestry, Natural Resources Building,

480 Wilson Road, Room 126, East Lansing, 

48824-1222, kimberly.hall@tnc.org.

Robert T. Fahey is an assistant professor at

University of Connecticut, Department of Natural

Resources and the Environment, and the Center for

Environmental Sciences and Engineering

1376 Storrs Road, Storrs, CT 06269, 

robert.fahey@uconn.edu.

Lydia Scott is director of the Chicago Re

Trees Initiative, located at the Morton Arboretum,

4100 Illinois Route 53, Lisle, IL 60532

lscott@mortonarb.org.

Angela Kerber is a wetland specialist

certified arborist with the Stormwater Department 

of DuPage County, 421 N. County Farm Road,

Wheaton, IL 60187, angela.levernier@dupageco.org

Jason W. Miesbauer is an arboriculture sci

with the Morton Arboretum, 4100 Illinois Route 53,

Lisle, IL 60532, jmiesbauer@mortonarb.org

Lindsay Darling is a geographic inform

systems analyst with the Morton Arboretum, 

4100 Illinois Route 53, Lisle, IL 60532

ldarling@mortonarb.org.
Contents

Introduction 

Chapter 1. Adapting to a Changing Climate: 

 Overview of the Climate Change Response Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Chapter 2. Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments: 

 a Brief Guide for Forest Managers .

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approaches . 

Chapter 4. Urban Forest Strategies and Approaches . 

Chapter 5. Adaptation Workbook . 

Chapter 6. Adaptation Demonstrations . 

Acknowledgments . .

Literature Cited . .

Appendix 1. Synthesis of Adaptation Strategies and Approaches . .

Appendix 2. List of Common and Scientific Names of Species

 Mentioned in this Document . .

Appendix 3. Lead Authors and Other Contributors to Chapter 4 . 

Appendix 4. Adaptation Workbook: Short Version . .

Appendix 5. Adaptation Workbook: Blank Worksheets . .

Appendix 6. Adaptation Workbook: Example Worksheets . 
Page intentionally left blank


Introducti

The second edition of Forest Adaptation Resources: 

Climate Change Tools and Approaches for Land 

Managers, like its predecessor, is intended to 

provide perspective, information, and tools to 

land managers considering how to adapt forest 

ecosystems to a changing climate. Broadly, 

adaptation includes all adjustments, both planned 

and spontaneous, in natural and human systems 

in response to climatic changes and subsequent 

effects (Parry et al. 2007). In this document, 

however, we focus on planned, ecosystem-based 

adaptation activities that use a range of strategies 

and approaches for sustainable management, 

conservation, and restoration of forests in order 

to maintain ecosystem integrity and provide 

environmental benefits to people. 

In this document we present a set of interrelated 

chapters, each of which serves as a resource to help 

managers incorporate climate change considerations 

into management and devise adaptation tactics that 

can be used to respond to climate change (Fig. 1).

These resources are designed to be used across a 

wide diversity of ecosystems, scales, and values. 

They do not make recommendations or set policy, 

but rather provide information, ideas, and processes 

for evaluating climate change as one component of 

management (Box 1).

Chapter 1. Adapting to a Changing Climate: 

Overview of the Climate Change Response 

Framework describes the Climate Change Response 

Framework, summarizes the project components and 

subsequent outcomes, and provides a background for 

later chapters.

Chapter 2. Climate Change Vulnerability 

Assessments: a Brief Guide for Forest Managers

is a guide for judging available vulnerability 

assessments, or even initiating a vulnerability 

assessment. Vulnerability assessments help users 

understand what ecosystem components may be at 

risk, which informs choices about adaptation. 

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approaches 

synthesizes a wide range of reports and peerreviewed publications on climate change adaptation 

and provides a “menu” of adaptation actions that are 

relevant to the upper Midwest and Northeast. Expert 

feedback was used to further refine the synthesis of 

existing literature and provide examples of specific 

adaptation actions.

Figure 1.—Components of the Forest Adaptation 

Resources. The Adaptation Strategies and Approaches 

and the Adaptation Workbook can be used together 

to develop management tactics to adapt forests to the 

anticipated effects of climate change.
Introducti

Chapter 4. Urban Forest Strategies and 

Approaches follows the same intent and format 

as Chapter 3, but is specific to the challenges and 

opportunities of managing forests in urban natural 

areas and developed sites.

Chapter 5. Adaptation Workbook outlines 

a process for incorporating climate change 

considerations into management planning and 

activities, while also complementing existing 

processes and procedures for making decisions. 

It uses a workbook approach to provide step-bystep instructions for land managers to translate the 

Adaptation Strategies and Approaches (Chapters 3 

and 4) into on-the-ground management tactics that 

help forest ecosystems adapt to climate change.

Chapter 6. Adaptation Demonstrations provides 

real-world examples of how the Adaptation 

Strategies and Approaches and the Adaptation 

Workbook can be used together to develop 

adaptation tactics (Fig. 1).

Box 1

About the Forest Adaptation Resources

The Forest Adaptation Resources can:

• Help managers incorporate climate change 

considerations into management and devise 

adaptation actions that can be used to 

respond to climate change.

• Be used by a variety of land management 

organizations, including both private and 

public entities.

• Be approached, read, and used flexibly. 

Although arranged as a single document, 

the chapters are designed to both support 

each other and be used independently of 

each other. 

• Be applied across multiple scales in different 

places, through 

- A broad framework for responding to 

climate change (Chapter 1)

- A brief guide to considering climate 

change vulnerability assessments 

(Chapter 2)

- A “menu” of many adaptation strategies 

and approaches for forest ecosystems 

(Chapters 3 and 4)

- An Adaptation Workbook, which can be 

applied to a variety of ecosystems at 

multiple scales to help land managers 

integrate climate change considerations 

into management activities (Chapter 5).

• Describe practical applications of the 

process through “adaptation demonstrations” 

of how climate change was considered in 

real-world management situations using 

the other resources within this document 

(Chapter 6).

The resources in this document do not:

• Recommend management actions or policy. 

• Replace institutional or legal processes. 

These resources are not intended to replace 

existing decisionmaking processes, but 

may augment them at an organization’s 

discretion.
Chapter 1. Adapting to a Changing Climate:

Overview of the Climate Change Response Framewo

As ecosystems continue to respond to the pressures 

of a changing climate, individuals and organizations 

tasked with managing these ecosystems will benefit 

from reexamining their priorities, objectives, and 

tactics. Some land managers may ultimately decide 

not to make any near-term changes in priorities or 

tactics, even after considering climate pressures on 

forests. Others may choose to accommodate forest 

change even as they attempt to ensure continued 

value from the ecosystem in question. In other 

words, as forests adapt naturally, organizations need 

to decide if they intend to play a role in adaptation 

through land management and how to play that role 

most effectively. This is easier said than done, of 

course, as land managers struggle to keep up with 

“traditional” challenges, not to mention the daunting 

complexities of climate change. 

The U.S. Forest Service launched a community 

effort called the Climate Change Response 

Framework (CCRF) to address the major challenges 

that land managers face when considering how to 

integrate climate change into their planning and 

management. The Forest Adaptation Resources

contains a description of the overall CCRF process 

in addition to specific tools used within the 

community. It is one of the major products of the 

CCRF, and both this edition and the first edition 

(Swanston and Janowiak 2012) have been shaped

by broad community feedback and testing. This 

chapter describes the CCRF and how it is designed 

to address four substantial challenges commonly 

identified by forest managers. 

The Climate Change

Response Framewor

The CCRF grew from the recognition that a 

focused effort was needed to compile and create 

climate impacts information relevant to resource 

management, and also to draw upon the collective 

experience of the forestry community to devise 

management responses to the changing climate. 

The Northern Institute of Applied Climate Science 

(NIACS) began this process in 2008 by providing 

climate change education, scoping activities, and 

discussion with land managers from across the upper 

Midwest and Northeast. The Chequamegon-Nicolet 

National Forest in Wisconsin was designated as a 

“test landscape” in 2009 as part of the CCRF pilot 

project (Swanston and Janowiak 2012), and its staff

provided expertise, perspective, and a wide network 

of partners in northern Wisconsin to help create the 

CCRF. Four major issues were repeatedly raised in 

regionwide scoping discussions, and the means of 

addressing these issues became the core components 

of the emerging CCRF (Table 1)

The overall CCRF process is designed to continually 

incorporate new information, ideas, and lessons 

learned into the products and activities. It was 

conceived as a model for collaborative management 

and climate change response across large and 

diverse landscapes (Butler et al. 2011). In fact, th

success of the initial pilot spurred expansion beyond 

Wisconsin to the Northwoods in 2010, the Central

Hardwoods in 2011, the Central Appalachians i
Chapter 1. Adapting to a Changing Climate: Overview of the Climate Change Response Framew

Table 1.—Major adaptation issue or challenge repeatedly identified by natural resource managers, and

corresponding component of the Climate Change Response Framework (CCR

Issue identified by managers CCRF component addressing issu

Climate change is too big and too complex Partnerships, which increase the capacity of organizations to cope with

the overwhelming nature of the problem

Climate research is not relevant enough Vulnerability assessments, which compile credible, relevant information 

about projected future climate conditions and forest responses and 

vulnerability 

One-size-fits-all answers are insufficient Forest adaptation resources, which help land managers and

landowners devise adaptation actions to meet their objectives 

There are not enough real-world examples Adaptation demonstrations, which are on-the-ground examples of 

adaptation planning and implementation 

2012, the Chicago Metropolitan Area and New

England in 2013, and the Mid-Atlantic in 2014

These six CCRF ecoregional projects are designed to 

accommodate the natural distribution of ecosystems 

across the landscape and reflect how people organize 

themselves and interact with the ecosystems (Fig. 2).

The CCRF follows a basic process of engagement 

and activity (Fig. 3). With a region in mind, a critical 

step is to reach out to the people who live, work, and 

conduct research in the regional forests. These are 

the people who will ideally use CCRF products and 

can contribute critical information and perspectives 

Figure 2.—Climate Change Response Framework ecoregional project areas.


Chapter 1. Adapting to a Changing Climate: Overview of the Climate Change Response Framew

Figure 3.—Diagram of the iterative approach used by the Climate Change Response Framework to help natural resource 

professionals integrate climate change considerations into management planning and activities, and the resulting four 

project components.

to the creation of these products. Different groups 

may take part in all, or just some, aspects of the 

CCRF, depending on their skills, interests, and 

capacity. Many of these partners will collaborate 

to define critical forest ecosystems and assess 

their vulnerability to climate change. Likewise, 

regional partners are instrumental in compiling 

and considering adaptation strategies relevant 

to the places where they work and do research. 

Finally, the CCRF connects with partners willing 

to apply this information on their lands using the 

Forest Adaptation Resources to develop adaptation 

plans, and then share their stories of planning and 

implementation as adaptation demonstrations. 

The CCRF process generates numerous products 

and activities, which are grouped into four major 

components: partnerships, vulnerability assessments, 

forest adaptation resources, and adaptation 

demonstrations. The character of each component 

can be tailored to individual regions or even 

ownerships. NIACS frequently evaluates the need 

for adjusting components based upon feedback from 

land managers in federal, state, tribal, nonprofit, and 

private organizations. In many ways, the grouping 

of products and activities into these components 

evolved in response to several issues that land 

managers consistently identified as key challenges in 

NIACS workshops and meetings. These issues—and 

the CCRF project components that address them—

are described next.


Chapter 1. Adapting to a Changing Climate: Overview of the Climate Change Response Framew

“Climate change is too big 

and too complex”

Productive partnerships increase the capacity of 

organizations to cope with the overwhelming nature 

of climate change and ensure relevance, credibility, 

and usefulness of CCRF products.

Both individuals and organizations may be reluctant 

to address climate change directly because the 

issue is so complex and pervasive. Careful land 

stewardship already draws upon an enormous 

array of information and experience, including 

how climate has historically interacted with forest 

ecology and land management. At the same time, 

the potential for interaction of a range of plausible 

future climates with forest stressors, ecology, and 

management further magnifies the complexity of 

forest planning and decisionmaking. This added 

complexity can essentially be beyond the capacity of 

some organizations to integrate into their planning 

and operations, leading to an “uncertainty paralysis” 

in responding to climate change. 

In coordinating the CCRF, NIACS reaches out to 

organizations and networks to learn about the people 

who live and work in a particular place, how they 

value and view their lands, and what skills and 

knowledge they might be willing to contribute to 

CCRF products and activities. By drawing upon 

the combined expertise, experience, and capacity 

of the broader forest sector and climate science 

communities, the CCRF can help meet climaterelated needs of organizations and landowners 

while effectively reducing the burden on any single 

organization. This cross-ownership and crossdiscipline collaboration also increases the overall 

rate of learning. Further, collaboration helps ensure 

that information generated by the communitybased CCRF meets the needs of forest stewards in 

the region. The resulting partnerships within the 

CCRF are many and varied. For example, partners 

contribute expertise to vulnerability assessments, 

develop and review place-based adaptation 

strategies, serve as hosts and instructors at climate 

adaptation workshops, and share information about 

management goals and adaptation actions.

“Climate research is 

not relevant enough”

Forest vulnerability assessments created by the 

CCRF compile credible, relevant information about 

projected future climate conditions and forest 

responses and vulnerability. 

Forest managers seeking to pursue science-based 

management often need to invest significant 

time sorting through a tremendous number of 

research publications on climate and its effects 

to find information that is credible, relevant, and 

understandable. They are frequently frustrated by the 

large spatial scales and long time frames of climate 

projections, which are typically much broader than 

those of forest planning and activities. Additionally, 

academic research uses an often bewildering 

assortment of climate scenarios, climate models, 

downscaling algorithms, time scales, and ecological 

models to project potential effects of climate change 

on forests. Many organizations simply cannot 

dedicate the time required to comprehensively 

review and synthesize this information, even if they 

have the multidisciplinary expertise. 

The CCRF addresses this information challenge by 

creating a standardized series of forest ecosystem 

vulnerability assessments written specifically for 

land managers. Each assessment in the series is 

informed at the outset by regional experts, including 

both scientists and land managers. The series spans 

several ecoregions (Box 2) and uses the same suite 

of climate scenarios and models, vegetation impact 

models, and chapter templates (contemporary 

landscape, climate primer, past climate, climate 

projections, climate impacts, ecosystem 

vulnerability, and management implications). 

These assessments are place-based, meaning that 

information in the assessment about climate and 

ecology is rooted in the region, and interpreted and 

reviewed by regional experts. The actual assessment 

of ecosystem vulnerability takes place through a 

transparent consensus-building process with a panel 

of ecologists, modelers, and practitioners that work 

in the region (Brandt et al. 2016). The result is 

highly credible product meeting the needs of many 

partners, but largely beyond the capacity of any 

single partner to create.
Chapter 1. Adapting to a Changing Climate: Overview of the Climate Change Response Framew

Box 2

Vulnerability Assessment and Synthesis Repor

NIACS has worked with the CCRF communit

to develop a series of ecosystem vulnerability 

assessments. We created a pilot assessment 

in northern Wisconsin and then applied lessons 

learned from that effort to create a standardized 

vulnerability assessment process and template. 

The objective of this assessment process is to 

determine vulnerability to climate change among 

forest community types within an ecological 

province (broad geographic areas that share 

climate, glacial history, and vegetation types). The 

assessment process uses a range of downscaled 

climate projections that are incorporated into 

dynamic and species distribution modeling to 

determine future habitat suitability of tree species. 

A comprehensive literature review provides a 

summary of the effects of climate change on 

disturbance processes, hydrology, and associated 

forest species in the area. A panel of experts then 

uses this information to assess climate change 

impacts on the drivers, stressors, and dominant 

species of forest communities in each ecoregion. 

These assessments are:

• Central Hardwoods Ecosystem Vulnerability 

Assessment and Synthesis: a Report from 

the Central Hardwoods Climate Change 

Response Framework Project (Brandt et al. 

2014) 

• Chicago Wilderness Region Urban Forest 

Vulnerability Assessment and Synthesis

(Brandt et al., in review)

• Mid-Atlantic Forest Ecosystem Vulnerability 

Assessment and Synthesis: a Report from 

the Mid-Atlantic Climate Change Response 

Framework Project (Butler et al., in 

preparation)

• Central Appalachians Forest Ecosystem 

Vulnerability Assessment and Synthesis: 

a Report from the Central Appalachians 

Climate Change Response Framework 

Project (Butler et al. 2015)

• Michigan Forest Ecosystem Vulnerability 

Assessment and Synthesis: a Report from 

the Northwoods Climate Change Response 

Framework Project (Handler et al. 2014b)

• Minnesota Forest Ecosystem Vulnerability 

Assessment and Synthesis: a Report from 

the Northwoods Climate Change Response 

Framework Project (Handler et al. 2014a)

• New England Forest Ecosystem Vulnerability 

Assessment and Synthesis: a Report from 

the New England Climate Change Response 

Framework Project (Janowiak et al., in 

review) 

• Forest Ecosystem Vulnerability Assessment 

and Synthesis for Northern Wisconsin and 

Western Upper Michigan: a Report from 

the Northwoods Climate Change Response 

Framework Project (Janowiak et al. 2014a)

• Ecosystem Vulnerability Assessment and 

Synthesis: a Report from the Climate 

Change Response Framework Project in 

Northern Wisconsin (Swanston et al. 2011) 

“One-size-fits-all answers

are insufficient”

The CCRF includes forest adaptation resources, with 

a menu of adaptation strategies and an adaptation 

workbook, to help land managers and landowners 

devise adaptation actions to meet their objectives. 

Even with relevant and clarified information about 

climate change available, finding practical ways to 

consider and apply this information within existing 

decisionmaking processes, management practices, 

and operational constraints can be a considerable 

burden. This burden is made yet heavier by the 
Chapter 1. Adapting to a Changing Climate: Overview of the Climate Change Response Framew

expectation that there is a “right” way to pursue 

climate adaptation even as fundamental questions 

persist: What exactly is adaptation and how should 

its success be judged? Should adaptation occur 

through promotion of biodiversity or structural 

diversity? Does it require transition to nonnative 

species or abandonment of restoration goals? Is it 

compatible with existing forest planning? Does it 

require adoption of new management practices or 

goals? These and similar questions can make climate 

adaptation planning seem unrelated to current 

values, objectives, experience, and constraints, 

which typically drive the choice of on-the-ground 

actions. But it is critical that managers or landowners 

consider these questions when choosing adaptation 

actions, and the CCRF approach reflects the 

importance of doing so. The fundamental goal of the 

CCRF is to help landowners and managers identify 

acceptable ways to meet their own needs.

The CCRF Adaptation Workbook (Chapter 5)

provides a structured process that draws upon broadscale vulnerability assessment. A menu of strategies 

and approaches helps identify on-the-ground 

adaptation actions that tier to forest management 

goals. The strategies and approaches are the product 

of a synthesis of academic literature and widespread 

input from the forestry community. The Adaptation 

Workbook was developed as a practical adaptation 

planning tool. Users start with their management 

objectives, step down broad assessments to local 

scales, list opportunities and barriers to meeting 

management objectives given climate change, and 

then identify adaptation actions that increase the 

likelihood of meeting objectives. The Adaptation 

Workbook integrates consideration of climate 

pressures into management plans and activities while 

fundamentally grounding users in their original 

objectives, experience with local forests, and 

willingness to accept risk. In cases where meeting 

original objectives appears impractical or too highrisk, the user may decide to reconsider the original 

objectives. The result across a wide range of users 

is a diversity of approaches to climate adaptation 

linked to equally diverse values and objectives. 

“There are not enough

real-world examples”

The CCRF shares the stories of adaptation 

demonstrations, which are real-world examples 

of how land managers have considered ecosystem 

vulnerabilities and adaptation strategies in choosing 

actions to meet their management objectives. 

The literature on climate adaptation has been 

expanding rapidly for several years, but much of it 

is still theoretical or principles-oriented in spite of a 

large demand for actual examples of on-the-ground 

forest adaptation. The interest in these adaptation 

demonstrations not only reflects the traditional 

desire of resource managers to see how a plan looks 

when implemented in an ecosystem, but also grows 

from their struggles with other climate-related 

challenges. Namely, the implementation actually 

integrates the various ways in which an organization 

or landowner dealt with all the challenges. Likewise, 

each adaptation demonstration illustrates the full 

process of the CCRF as it plays out in real-world 

examples of ecosystem management. To date, 

the CCRF has generated more than 185 on-theground examples of organizations using the men

of strategies and approaches with the Adaptation 

Workbook to plan and implement adaptation actions 

(Fig. 4). These examples represent a wide range 

of forest ecosystems and a variety of management 

goals and objectives. 

The willingness of individual organizations to share 

their stories is a key aspect of partnership within 

the CCRF. The forest sector is on a steep learning 

curve with climate adaptation; the pressure to 

learn and adapt quickly will almost certainly grow 

through time. The current diversity of approaches 

to management, and of risk-tolerance levels, 

will probably lead to a comparable diversity of 

approaches to adaptation. Pursuing a diversity of 

approaches can be an excellent strategy for rapid 

learning by generating numerous examples of 

forest response across the landscape. Although the 

approaches may not be coordinated, sharing the 

intent and results of adaptation actions with the 

wider management community will help propel the 

rate of learning.
Chapter 1. Adapting to a Changing Climate: Overview of the Climate Change Response Framew

Figure 4.—Adaptation demonstration locations representing projects where natural resource managers used the 

Adaptation Workbook to integrate climate change considerations into their management.

Summar

The CCRF is a partnership-based approach for 

responding to climate change that was developed 

to help land managers cope with the challenges of 

integrating climate change considerations into land 

management. The CCRF groups its activities and 

products into four major components: partnerships, 

vulnerability assessment, forest adaptation resources, 

and adaptation demonstrations. It has grown over 

several years to cover the major forested areas of the 

upper Midwest and Northeast with more than 

100 participating groups and many more individuals.

As it has grown, the CCRF has also evolved to 

better meet the needs of partners, as well as integrate 

their ideas and experience. The CCRF has created 

numerous major products and compiled more realworld adaptation demonstrations than virtually 

any other single effort. The CCRF will continue 

to evolve as it works with yet more groups and 

ecosystems, but will continue its focus on meeting 

landowner needs and supporting diverse approaches 

to climate adaptation. 
1

Chapter 2. Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments:

a Brief Guide for Forest Managers

What is a vulnerability assessment? In the context 

of climate change and natural resource management, 

vulnerability assessments “synthesize and integrate 

scientific information, quantitative analyses, and 

expert-derived information in order to determine the 

degree to which specific resources, ecosystems, or 

other features of interest are susceptible to the effects 

of climate change, including climate variability and 

extremes” (Joyce and Janowiak 2011). Vulnerabilit

assessments are essentially tools to help you identify 

what resources are at risk due to climate change, and 

why they are vulnerable to climate change (Glick et 

al. 2011). Vulnerability assessments can be importan

tools in adapting to a changing climate, but it is up to 

each individual decisionmaker to assess whether to 

prioritize the most at-risk resources, those at lowest 

risk, or some combination.

Vulnerability can be defined as the degree to which 

a system is susceptible to and unable to cope with 

adverse effects of climate change (Intergovernmental 

Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] 2007). Although 

many different definitions exist, most of the natural 

resource management community breaks down 

vulnerability into three main elements: exposure, 

sensitivity, and adaptive capacity (Glick et al. 2011

Stein et al. 2014). Exposure (the degree of stress

on a system) and sensitivity (the degree to which 

a resource will be affected by that stress) are often 

combined into what is called potential impacts 

(Fig. 5). Potential impacts are the direct and indirect

consequences of climate change on your resource. 

Adaptive capacity can be defined as the ability of 

a resource to accommodate or cope with potential 

climate change impacts with minimal disruption 

(IPCC 2007). Some people in the natural resource 

community focus on the biological or ecological 

aspects of adaptive capacity, whereas others broaden 

the definition to include human dimensions such as 

organizational capacity and economics (Glick et al. 

2011, Nicotra et al. 201

Figure 5.—The components of vulnerability. Modified from Glick et al. (2011)
Chapter 2. Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments: a Brief Guide for Forest Manager

Organizations are developing vulnerability 

assessments for a wide variety of purposes. The 

nature of the assessments undertaken depends 

largely on the types of management decisions they 

are intended to inform and the resource areas of 

focus. Some assessment frameworks are based 

on complex quantitative approaches that require 

specific expertise (Lexer and Seidel 2009, Nitschke 

and Innes 2008). Other frameworks use a numerical 

index approach (Comer et al. 2012, Manomet Center

for Conservation Sciences and National Wildlife 

Federation 2013). Others are more qualitative in

nature (Brandt et al. 2016)

Before undertaking a new vulnerability assessment, 

it is best to evaluate what information already 

exists and identify gaps that may need to be filled. 

Many assessments of climate change impacts and 

vulnerability have already been completed, and will 

probably cover many of your resources of interest. 

Then, you can decide whether it is worthwhile to 

undertake a new vulnerability assessment or just fill 

in a few gaps in an already prepared assessment or 

combination of documents. 

This brief guide provides one approach to help 

forest managers evaluate existing vulnerability 

assessments. It also provides some tips if you 

choose to develop a new one. We highlight key 

components that make vulnerability assessments 

effective in informing management decisions using 

the best available science (see checklist on p.28). 

Many vulnerability assessments will be missing 

some of these components, so you may still need to 

decide what is most important for your purposes. We 

provide “do it yourself” (DIY) boxes throughout the 

chapter to help you evaluate an existing assessment 

or start your own if one is not available to meet 

your needs. For each step, we also offer examples 

of how we have approached each component in 

vulnerability assessments through the Climate 

Change Response Framework (CCRF; Chapter 1).

If you are starting a vulnerability assessment from 

scratch, this guide can also be a good launching 

point, but you may need additional resources. For 

additional guidance on developing assessments, 

as well as more examples of existing assessments, 

see Scanning the Conservation Horizon: a Guide 

to Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment by the 

National Wildlife Federation (NWF) (Glick et al. 

2011). Also refer to Chapte 6 of NWF’s ClimateSmart Conservation: Putting Adaptation Principl

into Practice (Gross et al. 2014) and Chapter 2 of the

Department of the Interior (DOI) Northeast Climate 

Science Center’s Integrating Climate Change into 

the State Wildlife Action Plans (Staudinger et al. 

2015)

Scope and Geographic Sca

Scope and Scale Checkli

The assessment:

 focuses on your resource of interest

 is at a geographic scale relevant to 

management of your resource 

Why this is Important 

Vulnerability assessments are meant to help inform 

decisions. Therefore, they are most effective if their 

scope covers the resources you are managing and 

their geographic scale is relevant to those resources.

Scop

Vulnerability assessments are developed for a 

variety of reasons. They can focus on individual 

species, ecological communities, water resources, 

infrastructure, specific industries, human 

populations, or a combination of topics. No 

vulnerability assessment will cover everything, 

so it is important to identify the scope that best 

suits specific management questions of interest. If 

you are undertaking a large project with multiple 

objectives that include vegetation, water resources, 

infrastructure, and recreation, you may need to rely 

on several assessments that focus on each of these 

areas to encompass the entire scope of your project 

(Box 3). 
1

Chapter 2. Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments: a Brief Guide for Forest Manager

Geographic Scal

Once you have identified the appropriate scope, 

you will then need to figure out if the information is 

available at a scale that is appropriate for informing 

your decisions. This will partially depend on the 

scope of your issue and the questions you wish 

to answer. Several factors may limit the spatial 

resolution of vulnerability assessments, such as 

the resolution of past and projected climate data. 

Assessments that cover major regions of the 

country (e.g., the Midwest) or larger scales (e.g., 

the United States, North America) will probably 

be too broad to be useful for many on-the-ground 

forest management decisions. However, they can 

be helpful in finding relevant literature at finer 

scales and gaining a broad overview of likely 

climate change impacts. They can also be helpful 

for multi-state planning efforts, such as those led 

by Landscape Conservation Cooperatives. For most 

management and planning decisions, assessments 

that cover a state, ecoregion, or climatic zone and 

provide detailed information within that area are 

likely to be the most useful. 

Vulnerability assessments are becoming more 

common, but it can sometimes be difficult to 

track down assessments that are specific to your 

needs. Below are some vulnerability assessments 

that showcase many of the principles that are 

highlighted throughout this document:

• Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment of 

Species of Concern in West Virginia (Byers 

and Norris 2011

• A Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 

for Focal Resources of the Sierra Nevada

(EcoAdapt 2014)

• Assessing the Vulnerability of Watersheds to 

Climate Change: Results of National Forest 

Watershed Vulnerability Pilot Assessments

(Furniss et al. 2013)

• Climate Change and Massachusetts 

Fish and Wildlife—Volume 2: Habitat and 

Species Vulnerability (Manomet Center for 

Conservation Sciences and Massachusetts 

Division of Fisheries and Wildlife 2010b)

Box 3

DIY: Finding Vulnerability Assessment

• A Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 

for British Columbia’s Managed Forests

(Morgan and Daust 2013) 

• Integrating Climate Change into the State 

Wildlife Action Plans, Chapter 2: Northeast 

and Midwest Regional Species and Habitats 

at Greatest Risk and Most Vulnerable to 

Climate Impacts (Staudinger et al. 2015)

• Ecosystem Vulnerability Assessment and 

Synthesis: a Report from the Climate 

Change Response Framework Project in 

Northern Wisconsin (Swanston et al. 2011)

More examples can be found in the Related 

Resources section at forestadaptation.org, 

the Climate Registry for the Assessment of 

Vulnerability (nccwsc.usgs.gov/crave), and the 

virtual library at EcoAdapt’s Climate Adaptation

Knowledge Exchange (www.cakex.org). The

vulnerability assessment literature is constantly 

evolving, so it is best to contact a local climate 

change expert for the latest scoop on vulnerability 

assessments that are being undertaken in your 

area. 

For vulnerability assessments associated with 

the Climate Change Response Framework, we 

focused on forest ecosystems and their dominant 

tree species (Box 2). We selected the scope of 

Example: Scope and Sc

the assessment based on the needs expressed 

by the partners involved (state, federal, and 

nongovernmental organizations that focus on forest 

management) and available information. Early
1

Chapter 2. Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments: a Brief Guide for Forest Manager

Box 3 (continued)

project meetings delineated several perceived 

needs, including understanding changes in 

forest tree species, hydrology, and wildlife. Of

those needs identified, we chose to focus first on 

changes in forest ecosystems and tree species 

because this was one of the areas of greatest 

need, and there were sufficient information 

and expertise available. We expect that further 

assessments (which we or others may develop) will 

help address the other information needs identified. 

The scale of CCRF vulnerability assessments 

varied by region. In the Northwoods, we conducte

individual assessments for each of three states 

within the Laurentian Mixed Forest Province 

(Handler et al. 2014a, 2014b; Janowiak et al. 

2014a). In the Central Hardwoods (Brandt et al.

2014) and Central Appalachians (Butler et al. 

2015), we did one assessment for several states 

within a single province. Both approaches to 

assessments provided information at the same 

resolution, however. Each approach had unique

advantages. Conducting individual assessments 

for each state allowed us to tailor information 

specifically to that state and use classification 

systems that were the most familiar to people 

working within them. Combining assessment 

efforts across states was more cost-effective and 

ensured that a consistent classification system was 

used across states.

Core Assessment Team

Assessment Team Checklis

The assessment team has knowledge and 

expertise in:

 management of your resource of interest

 the social, biological, or physical science of 

your resource of interest 

 the effects of climate change on your resource 

of interest

 the interaction of the above

Why this is Important

It is important that the information in vulnerability 

assessments is unbiased and clearly reflects the best 

available science. This is especially the case when 

vulnerability information is used in decisionmaking. 

Ideally, a team of experts undertakes vulnerability 

assessments that cover a range of disciplines relevant 

to the scope of the assessment. 

Types of Expertise Nee

A vulnerability assessment team ideally consists of 

people who understand both resource management 

and the likely climate impacts on the biological, 

social, or physical drivers of a resource (Box 4). A 

well-rounded vulnerability assessment team will 

probably include several members from both the 

management and scientific communities. Managers 

from public, private, and nongovernmental 

organizations understand how decisions are made on 

the lands they manage and will be able to identify 

how climate change may affect these decisions. 

Scientists from universities, government agencies, 

and nongovernmental organizations are likely to 

have the best understanding of the latest scientific 

information that can inform the assessment. It is 

especially valuable for team members to have a good 

understanding of both science and management 

regarding your resource of interest and to be able to 

communicate those links. 

The ideal team size will vary with the scope and 

scale of the project. Assessments that cover several 

resources and a large geographic area will require 

a larger team than those focused on a particular 

resource in a narrow geographic range. A good 

assessment will include at least one scientist and 

manager, and ideally, there will be several managers 

and scientists. 
1

Chapter 2. Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments: a Brief Guide for Forest Manager

If you are starting a new vulnerability assessment,

it can be a daunting task to figure out who should 

be involved in the process. A good place to start 

is by contacting a “boundary spanner” who works 

at the intersection of science and management. 

People in these positions are often connected to 

both the science and management communities, 

and will have a broad understanding of the 

expertise available in a region. The boundary 

spanner can work with you to identify scientists 

and managers who fit your needs. A few places to 

look for boundary spanners are:

Cooperative Extension offices

DOI Climate Science Cente

DOI Landscape Conservation Cooperative

Habitat Joint Ventures 

Manomet Center for Conservation 

Joint Fire Science Consortia 

National Oceanic and Atmospheri

Administration (NOAA) Regional Integrat

Science Assessments

The Nature Conservanc

Box 4

DIY: Assembling Your Te

We assembled a small team of nine people for the 

northern Wisconsin vulnerability assessment, with 

equal representation from science, management, 

and technology transfer related to forests and 

climate change. We gradually expanded our 

teams to gain more diversity in management 

and science expertise as we moved forward 

with additional assessments, while still keeping 

assessment teams at a manageable size of about 

Example: Assessment Tea

Northern Institute of Applied Climate Scien

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Climate 

Hubs 

U.S. Forest Service threat assessment centers

Wildlife Conservation Society. 

If you are still struggling to find the right people

for your assessment team, you may need to do a 

broader search. One approach is to contact people

who are lead authors on other assessments or 

publications that are relevant to your assessment. 

You can also make use of groups and discussion

boards associated with Landscape Conservation 

Cooperatives, the directory on EcoAdapt’s CA

Web site, the community page on the Conservation 

Biology Institute’s DataBasin Climate Data Center,

Griffin Groups, and LinkedIn groups such as t

Adaptability Climate Adaptation Network

If team members need more training on how to

conduct vulnerability assessments, several courses 

are available through the National Conservation

Training Center (https://training.fws.gov).

15 to 25 people. In selecting team members, we

sought representation from multiple organizations 

(e.g., national forests, state agencies, tribes, 

conservation organizations) and disciplines (e.g., 

fire ecology, forest pathology, and hydrology). 

Another consideration was to include a mix 

of generalists and specialists. We have found 

this expertise has been extremely beneficial in 

informing assessments. 
Chapter 2. Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments: a Brief Guide for Forest Manager

Comprehensive Literature Review

Literature Review Checklis

The peer-reviewed and gray literature are 

reviewed and cited to describe: 

 current conditions of your resource

 past changes in climate in your geographic 

area

 projected changes in climate in your 

geographic area

 projected impacts of climate change on your 

resource

Why this is Important

A comprehensive review of the peer-reviewed 

and gray literature can ensure that an assessment 

reflects the best available science. You will need 

this information to develop a clear synthesis of 

existing knowledge on the resource, determine 

the vulnerability of your resource, and evaluate 

uncertainty. 

Peer-reviewed Literatur

Peer-reviewed literature that is up-to-date and 

cited throughout will enhance the credibility of the 

statements made in an assessment. A comprehensive 

vulnerability assessment will include a literature 

review on the past changes, current conditions, and 

projected changes for your resource and past and 

projected changes in climate. 

It is highly likely that other organizations have 

already developed literature reviews that address the 

impacts of climate change on your region. Some of 

these reviews will be published in scientific journals, 

and some will be in the gray literature (see next 

section). 

When reviews are unavailable, or perhaps slightly 

out of date, scientific journals that focus on the 

science and management of your resource are an 

excellent source of information on current conditions 

and impacts. Scientific journals specializing in 

atmospheric sciences and climate can provide 

needed information on past and projected climate 

change. 

If you must undertake a new literature review, 

most relevant peer-reviewed literature on these 

subjects can be found through interdisciplinary 

journal databases such as ISI Web of Knowledge 

(webofknowledge.com; requires subscription) 

or GoogleTM Scholar (scholar.google.com; free 

access). In addition, some tools have been designed 

specifically for finding peer-reviewed literature 

on climate change and forests. The Template for 

Assessing Climate Change Impacts and Management 

Options (TACCIMO; www.taccimo.sgcp.ncsu.edu) 

and the Climate Change Resource Center’s Library 

(www.fs.usda.gov/ccrc) are two great resources. 

Because climate change science is constantly 

evolving, it is also helpful to set up electronic alerts 

for the latest articles (see Box 5).

Gray Literature

The gray literature can also play an important role 

in vulnerability assessments by adding technical, 

social, and policy information and social and policy 

context that may not be of academic interest but 

are nonetheless useful. Gray literature includes 

government reports, strategy documents, doctoral 

theses, white papers, conference proceedings, and 

pre-publication manuscripts that have not gone 

through a formal review and publication process. 

Vulnerability assessments themselves are often 

considered gray literature. These documents are 

often more recent than the peer-reviewed literature 

because they can be published more quickly and 

may only be available electronically.

The gray literature can be more difficult to find 

than peer-reviewed scientific publications. A Web 

search is sometimes the most effective method to 

find documents in this category, but requires careful 

filtering of irrelevant or unreliable information. In 

addition, a number of key Web sites post relevant 

gray literature specific to forests and climate change:
Chapter 2. Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments: a Brief Guide for Forest Manager

• The Products and Related Resources sections 

on the Climate Change Response Framework 

Web site provide links to literature and 

other sources specific to midwestern and 

northeastern forests (www.forestadaptation.

org). 

• The DOI Northeast Climate Science Center’s 

library has a searchable database of both peerreviewed and gray literature for the Midwest 

and Northeast (necsc.umass.edu/library). 

• The U.S. Forest Service’s Climate Change 

Resource Center contains a library with 

links to briefings, factsheets, Web sites, 

and government reports in addition to peerreviewed literature (www.fs.usda.gov/ccrc).

• EcoAdapt’s Climate Adaptation Knowledge 

Exchange Virtual Library provides links to 

peer-reviewed and gray literature related to 

climate change adaptation and vulnerability 

across a wide variety of sectors (www.cakex.

org/virtual-library).

• The Climate Registry for the Assessment of 

Vulnerability is a community resource that 

houses information on assessments of the 

vulnerability of various natural and human 

resources to a changing climate (https://

nccwsc.usgs.gov/crave).

The scientific and gray literature is constantly 

evolving, but several key documents may be 

particularly helpful to a broad range of natural 

resource managers in the Midwest and Northeast:

• Documents associated with the National 

Climate Assessment

▪	 Climate Change Impacts in the United 

States: the Third National Climate 

Assessment (Melillo et al. 2014)

▪	 Effects of Climatic Variability and Change 

on Forest Ecosystems: a Comprehensive 

Science Synthesis for the U.S. Forest Sector

(Vose et al. 2012

▪	 Impacts of Climate Change on Biodiversity, 

Ecosystems, and Ecosystem Services: 

Technical Input to the 2013 National 

Climate Assessment (Staudinger et al. 

2012

▪	 Regional technical input reports

• Climate Change in the Midwest:

a Synthesis Report for the National 

Climate Assessment (Hatfield et al. 

2014

• Northeast (Horton et al. 2014)

• USDA Climate Hubs regional vulnerability 

assessments

▪	 Northeast and Northern Forests Regional 

Climate Hub Assessment of Climate 

Change Vulnerability and Adaptation and 

Mitigation Strategies (Tobin et al. 201

▪	 USDA Midwest and Northern Forests 

Regional Climate Hub: Assessment 

of Climate Change Vulnerability and 

Adaptation and Mitigation Strategies

(Hatfield et al. 2015
1

Chapter 2. Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments: a Brief Guide for Forest Manager

Box 5

DIY: Keeping Up with New Informat

Keeping current on a subject as broad and 

rapidly evolving as climate change can seem 

overwhelming. But there are simple things you can 

do to make your life easier.

1. Subscribe to newsletters. Several organizations 

are tracking the literature so you don’t have 

to. The Northern Institute of Applied Climat

Science and the Northeast Climate Science

Center deliver regular newsletters that are 

focused on climate change science delivery for 

land managers in the Midwest and Northeast.

Other national newsletters like ClimateWire can

also be helpful in discovering new literature. 

2. Set up email alerts. Many journal databases 

such as Web of Knowledge have a feature 

that allows you to receive an email alert when 

articles you select are cited or when new 

articles show up in a saved search. For general 

Web searches, Google Alerts performs a similar

function. For example, you could set up an 

email alert for a search on “climate change,” 

“forests,” and “Illinois.” You can easily set u

a free Google alert here: https://www.google

com/alerts.

3. Subscribe to RSS feeds on your favorite 

Web sites. RSS stands for Really Simple 

Syndication. It allows you to regularly gather

information from Web sites without actually 

visiting them by delivering the information to 

your computer as a “feed.” Web sites like the 

Climate Change Resource Center will often 

post the latest publications and tools relevant 

to forests and climate change. You can find out

what’s new by subscribing to an RSS feed. You

can learn more about RSS feeds and how to set 

them up at www.fs.fed.us/ccrc/whatis_rss.shtml. 

4. Subscribe to Twitter feeds. Twitter is rapidly 

becoming a reliable source for learning about 

the latest scientific discoveries. You can follow

scientific organizations that are doing work on 

climate change and forests. You can find out

more about Twitter at https://about.twitter.com/.

Organizations to follow include

• Government agencies that focus on climat

change, natural resources research, or both 

(U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Forest Service

Research and Development, U.S. Global

Change Research Program)

• Popular and scientific publications (Science 

Magazine, Nature, Scientific American

• Organizations specifically focused on climat

change communication (ClimateCentral, 

ClimateCommunication, Climate Reality).

Alternatively, you can search for hashtags 

related to your subjects of interest, such as 

#climatechange, #adaptation, #climate, and 

#forest. 

If you take these steps, you’re likely to be on top

of the majority of the literature relevant to your 

assessment! 

Example: Literature Revi

We reviewed a combination of peer-reviewed 

and gray literature in all of the vulnerability 

assessments undertaken for the Climate Change 

Response Framework. We started by reviewing 

relevant synthesis documents that covered 

our geographic areas, such as state forest 

assessments, regional ecological assessments, 

and regional climate change assessments. We 

also did primary literature searches using Web 

of Knowledge and Google Scholar. We searched

for keyword combinations of climate change and 

topics of interest such as fire, invasive species, 

and specific forest community types. We further 

filtered by geography using keywords such as state 

names, ecological region names, or geographic 

regions like “Midwest” or “Appalachians.” In

addition to searches specific to climate change, 

we searched for articles pertaining to the general 

ecology, management, and climate of each region 

and climate-related keywords such as temperature, 

precipitation, snow, and tornadoes. We further 

supplemented these searches with “snowball 

searches,” where we found articles that cited or 

were cited by the articles we found. This method 

turned up hundreds of articles that were topically 

and geographically relevant to the assessment. 

Members of the core assessment team and 

other contributors also recommended helpful 

references during the revision process. We then 

used a citation manager (EndNote®; Thomso

Reuters, Philadelphia, PA; www.endnote.com) to 

organize literature and links to digital versions of 

these publications and added more keywords and 

groupings for easier sorting. 
1

Chapter 2. Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments: a Brief Guide for Forest Manager

Observed Trend

and Future Projection

Why this is Important

If you do not understand past and projected climate 

changes in your area, you cannot accurately assess 

the vulnerability of your resources to climate 

change. An understanding of changes in climate 

in the recent and more distant past can help you 

understand how your resource has responded to 

previous shifts in climate. Examining a range of 

projected future changes, or an average projection 

along with a statistical confidence estimate, will 

allow you to understand where projections offer 

more or less certainty. Trends and projections are 

the most useful if they are regionally specific and 

at a resolution sufficient for informing management 

decisions. 

Trends in Climate

Although vulnerability assessments often focus on 

future projected changes, understanding past change 

provides an important historical context and can help 

you understand whether your resource may already 

be experiencing impacts from a changing climate. 

It is helpful to evaluate past changes in climate over 

multiple decades in the historical record to give the 

clearest indication of past change. Many decades of 

data (30 or more years) need to be analyzed in order 

to detect trends in temperature and precipitation 

Trends and Projections Checkli

The assessment evaluates trends in:

 the climate of your assessment area

 your resource of interest

The assessment evaluates projections of:

 the climate of your assessment area across a 

range of possible futures 

 your resource of interest across a range of 

possible futures

because climate is a long-term average. It is also 

helpful if trends are evaluated with multiple starting 

dates to avoid bias. For example, examining changes 

in temperature since the 1970s could overestimate

the rate of change in an area because the 1970s were

cooler than the long-term average across the United 

States, and starting in the 1930s could underestimate

the rate of change because that period was warmer 

than the long-term average in many parts of the 

United States. A good assessment will present the 

information in an unbiased way across the entire 

historical record, using maps and graphs to show 

spatial and temporal variation. It is important to 

note that future conditions may have no historical 

analog. Therefore, although the past is informative 

for understanding how much change has occurred 

already, the future changes may be on a different 

trajectory.

Future Climate Projection

Global climate models—mathematical 

representations of the physical, biological, and 

chemical processes that control Earth’s climate—

can help us project the future. Just as with past 

trends, it is more informative to evaluate future 

projections of climate over multiple decades. How 

far to project climate into the future will depend on 

the resources evaluated and the types of decisions 

for which the assessment will be used. For longlasting infrastructure like bridges, a 100-year time

horizon can be helpful. For short-lived organisms 

or infrastructure that needs to be replaced more 

frequently, a shorter time horizon (30–50 years) will

often be sufficient. For long-lived organisms like 

trees, it may be helpful to use projections for both 

the short and long term, to encompass both shortterm management actions and long-term growth. 

It is important that assessments include some 

estimate of the variation and uncertainty in climate 

change projections. One approach is to apply a range 

of possible futures by using multiple models and 

greenhouse gas emissions scenarios. Another is to 

calculate a probability distribution or confidence 

range around a mean. 
1

Chapter 2. Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments: a Brief Guide for Forest Manager

Global climate models operate at spatial resolutions 

that are much too coarse for most decisionmaking 

needs. Therefore, they are often downscaled to a 

geographic scale that is more useful. Experts from a 

variety of organizations have developed downscaled 

climate datasets that are available free online (see 

Box 6). Each uses slightly different techniques at

slightly different spatial and temporal scales. If you 

are unfamiliar with climate models, greenhouse 

gas emissions scenarios, and downscaling, Climate 

Projections FAQ (Daniels et al. 2012) can be a

helpful resource. It is important to keep in mind, 

however, that even though downscaled climate data 

may be helpful, the additional step in data processing 

can add biases and uncertainty to your estimates. 

Whether you intend to supplement an existing 

vulnerability assessment or start one from scratch, 

finding climate data to suit your needs can be 

challenging. When possible, it’s best to consult 

with experts in climate science, such as staff at 

DOI Climate Science Centers and the N

Regional Integrated Science and Assessments

program. Below are a few sources we have 

found useful that you can select based on your 

experience and comfort level. 

Novice: Use these sources when you have

minimal or no experience working with geographic 

information systems (GIS), you are new to climat

data, or you need a quick snapshot of projections 

and trends. These resources provide mapped 

trends and projections that you can view on the 

Web: 

• The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Nation

Climate Change Viewer includes downscaled 

historical and future climate projections from the 

most recent IPCC assessment report, the Fifth

Assessment Report (www.usgs.gov/climate_

landuse/clu_rd/nccv.asp).

• ClimateWizard, developed by The Nature

Conservancy, the University of Washington, 

and the University of Southern Mississippi, 

is a user-friendly Web-based map viewer of 

downscaled past and projected climate change 

from the IPCC Fourth Assessment (www

climatewizard.org).

Box 6

DIY: Finding and Using Climate D

• University of Wisconsin’s Center for Climatic 

Research offers statistically downscaled climate 

projections from the IPCC Fourth Assessment

for the eastern United States, which includes 

snowfall and extreme weather events (http://

nelson.wisc.edu/ccr/resources/visualizationand-tools.php). 

Expert: Use these when you have advanced skills

in GIS, statistical analysis, or processing spatia

and temporal data, or you require specific data as 

inputs into impact models: 

• The PRISM Climate Group provide

downloadable gridded historical climate data 

from 1895 to present for the continental U.S. 

(prism.oregonstate.edu).

• NOAA’s Climate Data Online provides f

access to the archive of global historical 

weather and climate data collected by the 

National Centers for Environmental Informati

(formerly the National Climatic Data Center)

(ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/).

• The USGS Geo Data Portal project provide

scientists and environmental resource 

managers access to downscaled climate 

projections and other data resources that are 

otherwise difficult to access and manipulate 

(cida.usgs.gov/gdp).
20

Chapter 2. Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments: a Brief Guide for Forest Manager

Box 6 (continued)

Example: Climate Trends and Projecti

When undertaking vulnerability assessments for 

the Climate Change Response Framework, we 

were confronted with many potential options for 

information on climate trends and projections. 

We narrowed down potential options based on 

the need for consistency across the geographic 

areas where we were working, the needs of the 

impact modelers with whom we were working, the 

need to show a range of models and emissions 

scenarios, and how easily we could access and 

use the data. For past climate trends and baseline 

data, we relied on the ClimateWizard Custom tool 

(which is no longer available; Girvetz et al. 2009).

This tool used a gridded historical dataset (PRISM;

Gibson et al. 2002) and allowed us to visualize

changes over space and time. It also provided

us with a measure of statistical confidence for 

observed trends. We examined linear trends in 

annual, seasonal, and monthly mean, maximum, 

and minimum temperature and total precipitation, 

beginning in 1901, 1951, and 1971 through 

the present. We reported the information both 

temporally and spatially, and also reported which 

trends were statistically significant. 

For future climate projections, we chose 

downscaled climate data that were made available 

on the USGS Geo Data Portal (Stoner et al. 2012)

This dataset provided a consistent source of 

future climate projections for all of our vulnerability 

assessments. This dataset operates on daily time 

steps, has a good range of climate models and 

emissions scenarios, and a long time horizon. 

However, it lacked solar radiation projections 

needed for some impact models and had a steep 

learning curve. We chose two climate model–

scenario combinations to give a range of possible 

futures that were used as inputs into all of the 

forest impact models. For a high end of the range, 

we chose a climate model that was relatively 

sensitive to greenhouse gas changes, GFDL

(Delworth et al. 2006), coupled with a scenario 

that projects a large increase in greenhouse gas 

emissions, A1FI. At the lower end of the range,

we chose a climate model that was less sensitive 

to greenhouse gas changes, PCM (Washington 

et al. 2000), coupled with a scenario that projects 

a stabilization and decline in greenhouse gas 

emissions, B1. We expressed changes in future 

annual and seasonal mean, maximum, and 

minimum temperature and total precipitation as the 

difference between a projected 30-year average 

(2010–2039, 2040–2069, and 2070–2099) and the 

average for the last 30 years of the 20th century. 

We expressed uncertainty by showing the range of 

future projections both spatially and over time.

Trends in Your Resourc

It is also helpful if an assessment examines observed 

changes in your resource of interest. Although 

these changes may not directly relate to climate, it 

can help you determine if your resource is already 

experiencing adverse impacts that may be affected 

by changes in climate. For example, if an assessment 

focuses on coldwater fish, long-term monitoring data 

on fish populations and stream temperature would be 

very helpful. Often, however, long-term monitoring 

data are patchy, unavailable, or difficult to interpret 

for trends. Therefore, trends in your resource can be 

considered an added bonus rather than an absolute 

requirement. When an assessment lacks long-term 

monitoring trends, local knowledge and expertise 

from managers or traditional ecological knowledge 

can help you fill information gaps. 

Projected Impacts on Your Resourc

When available, models that specifically address 

the impacts of climate change on your resource of 

interest can be extremely useful. Impact models 
2

Chapter 2. Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments: a Brief Guide for Forest Manager

generally come in two main categories: statistical 

models and process models. Statistical models use 

observed data to determine relationships between 

climate and other factors and the distribution or 

behavior of a resource. Researchers can then predict 

future distributions based on these relationships 

and future climate projections. Process models 

use mathematical representations of physical, 

biological, or social processes to simulate changes 

in the resource in the future. Both approaches can be 

useful. Statistical models are less computationally 

intensive, so this approach can usually be applied 

to more resources (e.g., more species or more 

habitats), more climate scenarios, or larger areas. 

Process models can provide additional information 

on migration, disturbances, management, or 

interactions among multiple factors, but are 

more computationally intensive and thus usually 

limited to smaller areas or fewer resources. Not all 

vulnerability assessments will have impact model 

projections, but when they do, projections will 

ideally be transparent about their degree of certainty. 

This can be expressed as a range of climate models 

and emissions scenarios or as an average with a 

probability distribution or other confidence measure. 

In addition, impact model projections are most 

useful when their time frames are in line with the 

planning horizon of that resource.

Example: Forest Trends and Projecti

We derived baseline data and observed trends in 

forest resources in each of our six Climate Change 

Response Framework vulnerability assessments 

from data collected by the U.S. Forest Service’s 

Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) program (U.S

Forest Service 2015). This monitoring program 

goes through strict quality control and uses a 

consistent methodology across the country, 

ensuring that comparisons can be made over 

space and time. 

Many impact models are available to project the 

impacts of climate change on forest ecosystems. 

Our approach to incorporating impact model

results into CCRF vulnerability assessments was 

to focus on models that could provide consistency 

across all five vulnerability assessments while 

examining projected changes from a variety of 

approaches. We relied upon the Climate Change 

Tree Atlas as a statistical model because it 

covered the entire eastern United States, it was 

based on FIA data, and results were already

available for more than 100 tree species (Iverson

et al. 2008, Landscape Change Research Group

2014). We used LANDIS-II (Duveneck et al. 20

Scheller et al. 2007) or LANDIS Pro (Wang et al

2013) as process models. We chose these models 

because data were available over large areas 

that lined up within our assessment areas, and 

they provided a useful contrast to the Tree Atlas in 

simulating movement and growth of species over 

time. In some assessments, we made use of the

PnET-CN (Aber et al. 1997, Peters et al. 2013) o

LINKAGES-II (Wullschleger et al. 2003) m

as additional forest process models to understand 

ecosystem responses to climate change such as 

nutrient cycling and ecosystem productivity. We 

also used results from the VIC model, a hydrologic

model, to understand how climate change may 

affect soil moisture, evapotranspiration, streamflow, 

and runoff for some assessment areas when 

data were available. All modeling teams used the 

same set of climate projections as input data. In

all cases, the main factors that we considered 

when deciding whether to use a model were the 

usefulness of the results in informing decisions, 

confidence in the quality of the information, 

availability of willing scientific collaborators, and 

spatial coverage. 
22

Chapter 2. Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments: a Brief Guide for Forest Manager

Vulnerability Determination

Vulnerability Elements Checklis

The assessment qualitatively or quantitatively 

determines vulnerability of my resource. Most 

vulnerability assessments will include these main 

components: 

 Potential impacts

• Exposu

• Sensitivity

 Adaptive capacity

Why this is Important

Many vulnerability assessments rank or prioritize 

vulnerability by using various methods (e.g., indices, 

decision trees, expert consensus, or mathematical 

models). Regardless of the method used, being 

explicit about what makes a resource vulnerable 

will help managers identify actions they can take to 

reduce vulnerability. 

Potential Impact

Good assessments will clearly delineate potential 

impacts on your resources of interest, either 

separately as exposure and sensitivity elements, or 

combined. 

Exposur

Exposure is the sum of climate and climate-related 

changes that may affect your resource. These 

changes could be a stressor for your resource, be 

beneficial to your resource, or not influence your 

resource at all. When evaluating exposure, good 

assessments will consider the suite of direct and 

indirect changes that may occur in the area where 

your resource is located. Ideally, the assessments 

will help you understand how multiple changes may 

interact or build on each other. This can include 

exacerbation of current stressors or changes in 

ecological drivers to your ecosystem. 

Below are examples of exposure factors you may 

wish to consider, ranging from more direct to more 

indirect:

• Temperature: means, seasonal patterns, 

temperature extremes, growing season length

• Precipitation: annual and seasonal totals, 

heavy rain events, type of precipitation (rain 

vs. snow)

• Drought: frequency, length, or spatial extent 

• Wind disturbance: frequency, severity, type 

• Winter conditions: snow depth, duration of 

snow cover, soil freeze/thaw

• Hydrologic changes: soil moisture, 

streamflow, flood duration and depth, runoff 

• Fire: frequency, severity, and seasonality

Sensitivit

Sensitivity is a measure of how responsive a 

resource is to changes in climate. Sensitivity 

includes how much a species, ecosystem, or built 

structure may respond to exposure to changes (such 

as the factors listed above). This response could be 

negative or positive, depending on the resource or 

the type of exposure factors considered. Negative 

sensitivity responses could occur if exposure 

exceeds a threshold where a species is no longer 

able to survive or reproduce. Positive sensitivity 

responses could result if the growth rate or number 

of reproductive cycles of a species increases with 

longer growing seasons and milder temperatures. 

Below are examples of sensitivity factors:

• Sensitivity of the phenology of plants and 

pollinators to warmer springs or falls

• The degree to which growth or reproductive 

rates of species are helped or hindered 

by increased temperature or changes in 

precipitation 

• Susceptibility of roads to erosion from heavy 

rains or buckling under extreme heat 
23

Chapter 2. Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments: a Brief Guide for Forest Manager

Putting it Togeth

Many vulnerability assessments will combine 

exposure and sensitivity into an overall estimate 

of potential impacts. When available, quantitative 

approaches using impact models can be extremely 

useful for assessing potential impacts. Impact 

models generally combine mathematical 

representations of exposure and sensitivity into a 

statistical or simulation model in order to project the 

likely changes in that resource in the future. They 

may combine elements of exposure such as changes 

in seasonal temperature, growing season length, and 

precipitation with elements of sensitivity such as a 

species’ metabolic or photosynthetic rate. 

However, no impact model can possibly include a 

comprehensive analysis of all elements of exposure 

or sensitivity. For example, most impact models 

do not account for interactions among multiple 

disturbances that are likely to affect ecosystems, 

such as insect outbreaks, wildfire, and flooding. 

Therefore, additional qualitative or semiquantitative 

analyses of impacts, such as expert judgment or 

vulnerability indices, are needed to account for 

these factors. The analysis could be something as 

simple as rating the impacts on a scale from very 

positive to very negative, or a more complex rating 

system with multiple factors. Some examples 

include NatureServe’s Climate Change Vulnerability 

Index (Young et al. 2010) or the U.S. Forest

Service System for Assessing Vulnerability of 

Species (SAVS; Bagne et al. 2011). For habitats

the NEAFWA Habitat Vulnerability Assessment 

Model (Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences 

and NWF 2013) or NatureServe’s Habitat Climate

Change Vulnerability Index (Comer et al. 2012) are

good examples. For some resources, no quantitative 

impact models will be available, and all evaluations 

of exposure and sensitivity will rely on a qualitative 

approach. 

Adaptive Capacity

Different disciplines, even within the natural 

resource management community, define adaptive 

capacity differently. In assessments that focus 

primarily on species or ecosystems, adaptive 

capacity is often characterized by biological or 

ecological characteristics that would allow a species 

or system to respond to change, such as the diversity 

of genotypes, species, or age classes, or the ability 

to tolerate large-scale disturbances (Beever et al. 

2015, Nicotra et al. 2015). However, in assessme

that focus primarily on social factors like the tourism 

industry, adaptive capacity may include things like 

wealth or organizational capacity. Organizational 

adaptive capacity can also be applied to managers’ 

ability to respond (Klausmeyer et al. 2011). Adaptiv

capacity can mean different things to different 

people, so it is helpful if the assessment provides a 

clear definition. Quantitative models that evaluate 

adaptive capacity are rare; therefore adaptive 

capacity is often evaluated by using a numerical 

score or qualitative ranking (e.g., high, medium, 

low).

Overall Vulnerabilit

Impacts and adaptive capacity are often evaluated 

separately and then combined into an overall 

assessment of vulnerability. Because most 

quantitative models do not include an assessment 

of adaptive capacity, most determinations of 

vulnerability will be index-based or qualitative, 

such as those described in Box 7. In an index-based 

assessment, for example, low sensitivity to flooding 

might receive a score of  while high sensitivity

to flooding might receive a score of 3. Similar 

scores are assigned for sensitivity to other factors, 

for exposure, and for adaptive capacity, and then 

summed or averaged. Another approach is to use 

more qualitative rankings of high, medium, or low 

impacts and adaptive capacity based on an overall 

impression of how different factors may influence 

a resource. Regardless of the method chosen, good 

assessments will describe the information that was 

considered in the final determination of vulnerability 

for that resource in a way that is transparent to the 

reader. 
24

Chapter 2. Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments: a Brief Guide for Forest Manager

Box 7

DIY: Vulnerability Determination Metho

Many researchers have developed methods for 

evaluating the components of vulnerability, so 

you don’t have to create your own method from 

scratch. Below are examples of methods being 

used by various groups to determine overall 

vulnerability.

If you are assessing the vulnerability of species

• The NatureServe Climate Change Vulnerability

Index is one of the most widely used tools for

assessing the vulnerability of plant and animal 

species (Young et al. 2010).

• The System for Assessing Vulnerability 

of Species was developed by U.S. Forest 

Service researchers to specifically address the 

vulnerability of terrestrial vertebrate species 

(Bagne et al. 2011).

• The Forest Tree Genetic Risk Assessment

System was developed by North Carolina

State University and the U.S. Forest Service 

specifically for tree species (Devine et al. 2012). 

If you are assessing the vulnerability of ecosystems

or habitats:

• The NatureServe Habitat Climate Change

Vulnerability Index is a companion to

NatureServe’s species index and was recently

applied to the desert Southwest (Comer et al. 

2012). 

• The NEAFWA (Northeastern Association of Fi

and Wildlife Agencies) Model was developed by 

the Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences 

to assess habitat vulnerability in the Northeast

(Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences 

and NWF 2013).

• The process developed for the Climate Change 

Response Framework (see the following 

example) can be applied to a variety of forest 

types and natural communities. 

Example: Vulnerability Determinati

In our recent series of vulnerability assessments

for the Climate Change Response Framework, 

we developed a consistent process for assessing 

vulnerability using a panel of experts who formed 

our assessment team (Brandt et al. 2016). For 

each assessment, we organized a panel of about 

20 scientists and managers. This group met in 

person to assess the vulnerability of forest systems 

in the assessment area to climate change over the 

next century. 

At the beginning of the meeting, the panel 

received a series of introductory presentations on 

observed and projected climate, as well as impact 

model results (Fig. 6). This helped to ensure 

that all panelists were operating with the same 

understanding of the range of potential impacts 

on forest ecosystems. The panel then assessed 

the potential impacts for individual forest systems 

based on the presented information coupled with 

their own expertise. We asked the panelists to 

consider the important drivers, dominant species, 

and stressors for each forest system. Impacts on

drivers were considered positive if they would alter 

system drivers (e.g., fire regime, soil moisture) 

in a way that would be more favorable for that 

community type, or negative if they would create 

less favorable conditions for that community type. 

Impacts on stressors were considered negative if

they increased the influence of that stressor (e.g., 

invasive species, pathogens) on the community 

type, or positive if they decreased the influence of 

that stressor on the community type. 

Panelists also assessed adaptive capacity based 

on their knowledge of the community types in 

the assessment area. The panel focused on 

these factors: whether dominant species had 

high dispersal ability; the species, functional, and 

genetic diversity of the community; and the ability 

of the community to tolerate or recover from a wide 

variety of disturbances. The panelists were directed 

to base these characteristics on the current 

condition of the system, given past and current 

management regimes, and with no consideration 

of potential management changes (adaptation) that 

could influence future adaptive capacity. 
2

Chapter 2. Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments: a Brief Guide for Forest Manager

Box 7 (continued)

Panelists were directed to mark their rating of 

each vulnerability component in two-dimensional 

space on an individual worksheet and on a group 

poster (Fig. 7). Individual ratings were discussed

to arrive at a group determination. In many cases,

the group determination was at or near the mean of 

all individual determinations. However, sometimes 

the group determination deviated from the mean 

because further discussion caused some group 

members to alter their original response.

This approach to evaluating vulnerability was 

flexible enough to be used across multiple 

community types, ecoregions, and classification 

systems and easy for panelists to learn. The 

individual determinations by each expert 

also helped gauge the level of consensus on 

the vulnerability of a system. Finally, it gave 

decisionmakers what they were looking for: a 

ranking of relative vulnerability. 

Figure 6.—Expert panel discussion of forest vulnerability.

Photo by Leslie Brandt, U.S. Forest Service.

Figure 7.—Example vulnerability determination for a forest ecosystem during a vulnerability assessment

conducted through the Climate Change Response Framework. Each expert panelist provides an individual

determination of ecosystem vulnerability (circles). The group then comes to a consensus on vulnerability through 

discussion (square).
2

Chapter 2. Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments: a Brief Guide for Forest Manager

Evaluating Uncertain

Uncertainty Checklis

The assessment qualitatively or quantitatively 

evaluates the uncertainty of: 

 projected changes in climate

 projected impacts on your resource

 the vulnerability of your resource to climate 

change

Why this is Important

If you are going to adjust management decisions 

in light of projected changes in climate, you want 

to have some confidence that change is likely to 

occur. Unfortunately, the future is never certain, 

and managers need to make decisions even when 

there is high uncertainty. Explicitly stating the 

relative level of certainty about projected impacts, 

adaptive capacity, and overall vulnerability can help 

decisionmakers identify those areas where there is 

higher confidence that an outcome is likely to occur. 

This can be useful for identifying areas of focus 

for further research and for helping decisionmakers 

gauge the level of risk they are willing to take. 

Uncertainty can be described in qualitative terms, 

quantitative terms, or a combination thereof (see 

Box 8).

Quantitative Uncertaint

Quantitative measures of uncertainty can include 

the probability of an event occurring or standard 

deviations around a mean. Sometimes, quantitative 

probabilities are translated into a verbal description 

of likelihood, such as the likelihood scale that the 

IPCC uses (Fig. 8). For assessments or components 

of assessments that rely primarily on quantitative 

information, such as observational data, statistical 

models, and simulations, it may be possible to 

convey a quantitative measure of uncertainty. 

Quantitative estimates of uncertainty can also be 

made by conducting formal surveys of experts.

Qualitative Uncertaint

Qualitative measures of uncertainty are often 

necessary for vulnerability assessments due to the 

lack of quantitative estimates of many vulnerability 

components, such as adaptive capacity. Qualitative 

estimates of uncertainty can include an evaluation of 

the extent of evidence and the amount of agreement 

among that evidence, such as the confidence scale 

that the IPCC uses (Fig. 8). Either individual experts 

or panels of experts can make qualitative estimates 

of uncertainty. 

Figure 8.—Examples of a quantitative likelihood scale (left) and a qualitative confidence scale, as used by the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. From Mastrandrea et al. (2010)
27

Chapter 2. Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments: a Brief Guide for Forest Manager

Box 8

DIY: Evaluate Uncertai

There are a number of ways that uncertainty 

can be evaluated in a vulnerability assessment. 

Many vulnerability assessments may even use a 

combination of approaches. Below are examples 

of how uncertainty can be addressed.

Qualitative

• Using text to describe disagreements in the 

scientific literature or sources of error, or when 

there is insufficient information

• Evaluating multiple scenarios for a range o

potential changes

• Assigning a qualitative ranking, such as the 

confidence determination used by the IPC

Semiquantitativ

• Giving each component of vulnerability 

numerical uncertainty score that is summed or 

averaged for an overall score of confidence or 

uncertainty 

Quantitative

• Using statistical tests or Monte Carlo 

simulations to arrive at a confidence interval or 

p-value

• Formal expert elicitation methods that arrive at 

a quantitative probability determination

Example: Evaluating Uncertai

In our vulnerability assessments developed for the

Climate Change Response Framework, a panel 

of experts qualitatively determined confidence for 

each vulnerability rating based on the framework 

developed for the IPCC (Fig. 9) (Mastrandrea et

al. 2010). Confidence determinations took place 

at the in-person meetings during the discussion 

of each individual forest system in an assessment 

area. Panelists were asked to individually 

evaluate the amount of evidence that supported 

their vulnerability determination and the level of 

agreement among that evidence. In this fashion,

evidence and agreement are two components of 

overall confidence in a vulnerability determination. 

Panelists evaluated confidence individually and 

as a group in a similar fashion to the vulnerability 

determination (Fig. 9). 

Figure 9.—Example confidence determination for a forest ecosystem during a vulnerability assessment

conducted through the Climate Change Response Framework. Each expert panelist provides an individual

determination of confidence in his or her vulnerability determination (circles). The group then comes to a 

consensus on confidence through discussion (square).
28

Chapter 2. Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments: a Brief Guide for Forest Manager

A Few Final Words

A good vulnerability assessment will be helpful in 

aiding management decisions. We have provided a 

few key factors to help you determine the quality 

and potential utility of existing assessments. 

However, managers and decisionmakers will 

ultimately determine whether the assessment is 

indeed useful for their planning or projects. If gaps 

remain, you can use the DIY boxes as a launching 

point to filling in those gaps. 

We designed this as a brief guide to capture the key 

components of vulnerability assessments. If you are 

undertaking a new vulnerability assessment for a 

resource without much existing information, it may 

be helpful to reach out to experts for assistance. 

Once you have a vulnerability assessment, what do 

you do with it? Chapters 3 and 4 offer strategies 

and approaches for climate adaptation in rural and 

urban forests. The Adaptation Workbook (Chapter 5)

included in this set of Forest Adaptation Resources 

can walk you through the process of integrating 

climate change considerations into management 

plans and activities.

The assessment’s scale and scope:

 focuses on your resource of interest

 is at a geographic scale relevant to management 

of your resource

The assessment team has knowledge and expertise 

in:

 management of your resource of interest

 the social, biological, and physical science of 

your resource of interest 

 the effects of climate change on your resource of 

interest

 the interaction of the above components

The peer-reviewed and gray literature are reviewed 

and cited to describe: 

 past changes in climate in your geographic area

 projected changes in climate in your geographic 

area

 current conditions of your resource

 projected impacts of climate change on your 

resource

The assessment evaluates trends in:

 the climate of your assessment area

 your resource of interest

The assessment evaluates future projections of:

 the climate of your assessment area across a 

range of possible futures 

 your resource of interest across a range of 

possible futures

The assessment qualitatively or quantitatively 

determines vulnerability of your resource. Most 

vulnerability assessments will include these three 

main components: 

 exposure

 sensitivity

 adaptive capacity

The assessment qualitatively or quantitatively 

evaluates the uncertainty of: 

 projected changes in climate

 projected impacts on your resource

 the vulnerability of your resource to climate 

change

Checklist for Vulnerability Assessment Evaluatio
29

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

One of the major challenges of adapting forest 

ecosystems to climate change is translating broad 

concepts into specific, tangible actions. This 

chapter addresses that challenge by providing 

a comprehensive synthesis of strategies and 

approaches, and a tiered structure that organizes 

this information. These strategies and approaches 

are designed to serve as stepping stones to enable 

natural resource managers to translate broad 

concepts into targeted and prescriptive actions 

for implementing adaptation (Box 9). Ten broad 

strategies and 36 more-specific approaches were

synthesized from dozens of scientific papers that 

discussed adaptation actions at a variety of scales 

and locations. The strategies and approaches were 

reviewed by a diverse pool of natural resource 

professionals across the Midwest and Northeast, 

and are broadly applicable across a diversity of 

forests and other ecosystems. The strategies and 

approaches are presented as a menu of adaptation 

actions, which can then be adjusted and refined into 

tactics that help to achieve a specific management 

objective in a specific location. The Adaptation 

Workbook (Chapter 5) describes a structured process

to help land managers use the menu and develop 

their own specific adaptation tactics. Example tactics 

are provided in this chapter primarily to illustrate 

a level of specificity; they are not comprehensive, 

but represent a few of the many possible tactics that 

could be used in forest ecosystems in the Midwest 

and Northeast.

Box 9

Using the Adaptation Strategies and Approach

The adaptation strategies and approaches can

provide:

• A full spectrum of possible adaptation 

actions that can help sustain healthy forest 

ecosystems and achieve management goals 

in the face of climate change

• A menu of adaptation actions from which 

managers select actions best suited to their 

specific management goals and objectives

• A platform for discussing climate changerelated topics and adaptation methods

• Examples of tactics that could potentially b

used to implement an approach, recognizing 

that specific tactics will be designed by the 

land manager. 

The adaptation strategies and approaches

do not:

• Make recommendations or set guidelines for 

management decisions. It is up to the land

manager to decide how this information is 

used.

• Express preference for any strategies o

approaches within an ecosystem type, 

location, or situation. Rather, a combination 

of location-specific factors and manager 

expertise is needed to inform the selection 

of any strategy or approach.
30

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

About the Adaptation Strategies

and Approaches

Information on how to adapt natural ecosystems to 

the anticipated effects of climate change is rapidly 

growing as increasing numbers of land managers 

and researchers engage with the topic (Cross et al. 

2012, Groves et al. 2012, Littell et al. 2012, Morel

et al. 2012, Schmitz et al. 2015, Staudinger et a

2015, Stein et al. 2014). Until recently, adaptati

literature was broad and generic, providing 

insufficient detail to enable natural resource 

managers to identify specific actions that facilitate 

adaptation while meeting management goals and 

objectives. At the same time, a flexible approach 

(rather than specific guidelines or recommendations) 

is needed to accommodate diverse management 

goals, geographic settings, local site conditions, and 

other management considerations. For these reasons, 

this set of adaptation strategies and approaches 

serves as a menu of potential adaptation actions. 

It helps natural resource managers identify their 

adaptation intention and supports them in developing 

and implementing their own specific adaptation 

actions. Managers can use this menu to choose the 

approaches that are most suitable to a particular 

management goal and ecosystem type. Although 

menu items can be applied in various combinations 

to achieve desired outcomes, not all items on the 

menu will work together. Furthermore, actions that 

work well in one ecosystem type may not work 

in another; it is up to the land manager to select 

appropriate actions for a specific project and specific 

goals.

Importantly, the adaptation strategies and approaches 

presented in this chapter are intended to build upon 

current management actions that work to sustain 

and conserve ecosystems over the long term. Many 

sustainable forest management and conservation 

activities already promote ecosystem health and 

resilience. Likewise, many adaptation actions are 

consistent with sustainable management (Innes et al. 

2009, Ogden and Innes 2008) and efforts to restore 

ecosystem function and integrity (Harris et al. 2006,

Millar and Brubaker 2006, Morelli et al. 2012, Stei

et al. 2014). A changing climate may compel some

managers to adopt new practices, but it can also 

underscore the importance of sustainable practices 

that are currently being used.

The adaptation strategies and approaches are part 

of a continuum of adaptation actions ranging 

from broad, conceptual application to practical 

implementation (Fig. 10). This continuum builds

upon the adaptation framework described by Millar 

et al. (2007). The concepts of resistance, resilience, 

and transition serve as the fundamental options for 

managers to consider when responding to climate 

change:

• Resistance actions improve the defenses of 

an ecosystem against anticipated changes 

or directly defend the ecosystem against 

disturbance in order to maintain relatively 

unchanged conditions. Resistance may be 

appropriate when there is a desire or mandate 

to maintain a resource with high economic, 

cultural, or ecological value. Although this 

option may be effective in the short term (midcentury or sooner), it is likely that supporting 

persistence of the existing ecosystem will 

require greater resources and effort over the 

long term as the climate shifts further from 

historical norms. This option may also be most 

effective in ecosystems with low sensitivity 

to climate change (see Chapter 2), or in areas 

that are buffered from severe climate change 

impacts (e.g., refugia). As an ecosystem 

persists into an unfavorable climate, the risk 

of the ecosystem undergoing irreversible 

change (such as through a severe disturbance) 

increases over time.

• Resilience actions accommodate some degree 

of change, but encourage a return to near-prior 

conditions after a disturbance, either naturally 

or through management. Resilience can be 

fostered by the effects of periodic disturbance 

on a system, and the system’s ability to persist 

after those disturbances, albeit with sometimes 

fluctuating populations (Holling 1973).

Resilience actions enhance the ability of the 

system to bounce back from disturbance and 

tolerate changing environmental conditions, 
3

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

and may be most effective in systems that can 

already tolerate a wide range of environmental 

conditions and disturbance (i.e., high 

adaptive capacity; see Chapter 2). Like the 

resistance option, this option may be most 

effective in the short term and may be subject 

to increasing risk over time. Resilience is 

effective until the degree of change exceeds 

the ability of a system to cope, resulting in 

transition to another state. 

• Transition actions (also referred to as 

“response” actions) intentionally anticipate 

and accommodate change to help ecosystems 

to adapt to changing and new conditions. 

Whereas resistance and resilience actions 

foster persistence of the current ecosystem, 

transition actions intentionally facilitate the 

transformation of the current ecosystem 

into a different ecosystem with clearly 

different characteristics. These actions may 

be considered appropriate in ecosystems 

assessed as highly vulnerable across a range 

of plausible future climates, such that the 

risk associated with resistance and resilience 

actions is judged to be too great (see Chapter 

2). Transition actions are typically designed 

for long-term effectiveness. They are often 

phased into broader management plans that 

predominantly have a shorter-term focus on 

resilience actions.

These options of resistance, resilience, and transition 

serve as the broadest level in a continuum of 

adaptation responses to climate change (Janowiak 

et al. 2011). Along this continuum, actions fo

adaptation become increasingly specific. Adaptation 

strategies are abundant in recent literature and 

illustrate more-specific ways that adaptation 

options could be employed (Fig. 11). Strategies are

Figure 10.—A continuum of adaptation actions available to address needs at appropriate scales and levels of 

management (top four boxes) and examples of each level of action (in shaded boxes).
32

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

however, still very broad and can be applied in many 

ways across a number of landscapes and ecosystems. 

The 10 adaptation strategies are generally arranged

to start with ideas that focus on the “resistance” 

adaptation option and then continue on to ideas 

that focus more on “transition,” although this 

arrangement does not indicate preference or priority. 

Adaptation approaches are even more specific, 

describing in greater detail how strategies could 

be employed. Differences in application among 

specific ecosystem types and management goals 

start to become evident. Ultimately, tactics are the 

most specific adaptation response on the continuum, 

providing prescriptive direction about what actions 

can be applied on the ground, and how, where, and 

when. Tactics can be developed only in relation 

to a species, the ecosystem type, site conditions, 

management objectives, and other factors. We have 

provided examples of tactics for each approach, 

but do not intend that they be implemented without 

due consideration of all relevant factors. The 

Adaptation Workbook (Chapter 5) is a structured

process designed to be used in conjunction with 

vulnerability assessments and adaptation strategies 

and approaches to generate site-specific adaptation 

actions that meet explicit management and 

conservation objectives under a range of potential 

future climates. The Adaptation Workbook also 

Figure 11.—Climate change adaptation strategies, which work to achieve three broad adaptation options: resistance, 

resilience, and transition. Strategies may be used under one or more options, and are generally arranged with strategies 

under resistance and resilience options first, and those under transition options last. A solid line indicates a strong 

relationship between an option and a strategy, whereas fading indicates that the strategy relates to that option under some 

circumstances. Although a strategy may work under multiple options, the implementation is likely to be achieved through 

very different approaches and tactics.
33

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

provides a method to explicitly consider the benefits 

and drawbacks of potential adaptation tactics. 

The remainder of this chapter provides a more 

detailed description of the 10 adaptation strategies

and 36 more-specific approaches (Box 10). Thi

menu was synthesized from a comprehensive 

literature review of adaptation actions at numerous 

scales and locations. Feedback from experts, 

including scientists, ecologists, and managers, 

was used to refine the adaptation strategies and 

approaches, as well as to provide examples 

of potential tactics in forests of the Midwest 

and Northeast (see Appendix  for methods).

Additionally, although these adaptation strategies 

and approaches were designed to assist land 

managers, many adaptation actions will require 

or benefit greatly from planning, education 

and outreach, research, or changes in policy or 

infrastructure (Box 11). The body of literatur

on adaptation is continually growing, so land 

managers and conservation professionals who are 

more focused on wildlife habitat, infrastructure, 

or fisheries may find similar lists of adaptation 

actions specific to their needs (Furniss et al. 2010,

Staudinger et al. 2015, Stein et al. 2014). Comm

and scientific names of all species mentioned in this 

report are given in Appendix 2.

Forest on a fall day in the Upper Peninsula, Michigan. Photo by Kailey Marcinkowski, Michigan Technological University, 

used with permission.
34

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

Box 10

Menu of Adaptation Strategies and Approache

Strategy 1: Sustain fundamental ecologica

functions.

1.1. Reduce impacts to soils and nutrient cycling.

1.2. Maintain or restore hydrology.

1.3. Maintain or restore riparian areas. 

1.4. Reduce competition for moisture, nutrients, 

and light.

1.5. Restore or maintain fire in fire-adapted 

ecosystems.

Strategy 2: Reduce the impact of biologica

stressors.

2.1. Maintain or improve the ability of forests to 

resist pests and pathogens.

2.2. Prevent the introduction and establishment 

of invasive plant species and remove existing 

invasive species. 

2.3. Manage herbivory to promote regeneration of 

desired species.

Strategy 3: Reduce the risk and long-ter

impacts of severe disturbances.

3.1. Alter forest structure or composition to reduce 

risk or severity of wildfire. 

3.2. Establish fuelbreaks to slow the spread of

catastrophic fire. 

3.3. Alter forest structure to reduce severity or 

extent of wind and ice damage. 

3.4. Promptly revegetate sites after disturbance.

Strategy 4: Maintain or create refugia.

4.1. Prioritize and maintain unique sites. 

4.2. Prioritize and maintain sensitive or at-risk 

species or communities.

4.3. Establish artificial reserves for at-risk and

displaced species. 

Strategy 5: Maintain and enhance species and

structural diversity.

5.1. Promote diverse age classes.

5.2. Maintain and restore diversity of native 

species. 

5.3. Retain biological legacies. 

5.4. Establish reserves to maintain ecosystem

diversity. 

Strategy 6: Increase ecosystem redundancy

across the landscape. 

6.1. Manage habitats over a range of sites and 

conditions. 

6.2. Expand the boundaries of reserves to increase

diversity.

Strategy 7: Promote landscape connectivity

7.1. Reduce landscape fragmentation. 

7.2. Maintain and create habitat corridors through 

reforestation or restoration.

Strategy 8: Maintain and enhance genetic

diversity.

8.1. Use seeds, germplasm, and other genetic 

material from across a greater geographic 

range. 

8.2. Favor existing genotypes that are better 

adapted to future conditions. 

Strategy 9: Facilitate community adjustments

through species transitions. 

9.1. Favor or restore native species that are 

expected to be adapted to future conditions. 

9.2. Establish or encourage new mixes of native

species.

9.3. Guide changes in species composition at early

stages of stand development.

9.4. Protect future-adapted seedlings and saplings.

9.5. Disfavor species that are distinctly 

maladapted.

9.6. Manage for species and genotypes with wide 

moisture and temperature tolerances.

9.7. Introduce species that are expected to be

adapted to future conditions.

9.8. Move at-risk species to locations that are 

expected to provide habitat. 

Strategy 10: Realign ecosystems afte

disturbance.

10.1. Promptly revegetate sites after disturbance. 

10.2. Allow for areas of natural regeneration to test 

for future-adapted species.

10.3. Realign significantly disrupted ecosystems to 

meet expected future conditions.
3

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

Box 11

Adaptation Strategies for Planning and Pol

The Adaptation Strategies and Approaches for 

land managers have been designed for natural 

resource managers to use in planning on-theground management activities. However, many 

adaptation actions will require or benefit greatly 

from planning, education and outreach, research, 

or changes in policy or infrastructure. These 

higher-level actions may be vital for effective 

climate change adaptation across large scales, but 

they are beyond the scope of this document. Some 

examples of these actions are:

Plannin

• Including risk management in forest plan

and developing enhanced capacity for risk 

management (Johnston et al. 2006, Kellomaki 

et al. 2005, Ohlson et al. 2005)

• Documenting clear plans for how to respond 

to more frequent or severe disturbances in 

advance to allow for a faster, more thoughtful, 

better-coordinated response (Joyce et al. 2009) 

• Using landscape-level planning and 

partnerships to identify and acquire high-priority 

areas for conservation or to share resources, 

expertise, and actions across jurisdictional 

boundaries (Anderson et al. 2012, D’Antonio et 

al. 2004, Mawdsley et al. 2009)

• Incorporating predicted climate change impact

into species and land management plans, 

programs, and activities (Mawdsley et al. 2009, 

Peterson et al. 2011, Swanston and Janowiak 

2012)

• Increasing flexibility of planning goals an

objectives to address dynamic processes, 

unexpected occurrences, and uncertainty 

(Millar et al 2008, Ogden and Innes 2007

Spies et al. 2010)

• Realigning management of significantly 

altered ecosystems to meet expected future 

environmental conditions (Groves et al.

2012, Millar et al. 2008, Morelli et al. 2012, 

Spittlehouse 2005)

• Linking adaptation planning to larger regional 

and national guidance documents that outline 

emerging principles for ecosystem-based 

adaptation (Manomet Center for Conservation 

Sciences and National Wildlife Federation

2013, Peterson et al. 2011).

Polic

• Reviewing and amending laws, regulations, 

or policies to improve their ability to support 

adaptation actions (Cross et al. 2012, Johnston 

et al. 2006, Mawdsley et al. 2009, Morelli et al. 

2012, Peterson et al. 2011, Spittlehouse 2005) 

• Managing populations of native herbivores 

(e.g., deer and moose), grazers (e.g., cattle), 

or invasive animals (e.g., feral hogs) by using 

landscape-level and cross-disciplinary planning 

• Reevaluating seed zone sizes and rules 

governing the movement of seed stocks (Millar 

et al. 2007, Spittlehouse and Stewart 2003, 

Stein et al. 2013).

Infrastructure and Institutional Capacity

• Improving infrastructure and resources fo

species regeneration (e.g., nurseries) that 

focuses on providing a diversity of genetic 

material (Millar et al. 2007) 

• Developing a gene management program to 

maintain diverse gene pools (Halofsky et al. 

2011) 

• Evaluating and diversifying the forest econom

(e.g., timber sales and forest products) in 

response to changes in the market (Ogden and

Innes 2008

• Evaluating and improving road constructio

standards and stream crossings to minimize 

negative impacts on forest communities 

(Groves et al. 2012)

Researc

• Bridging the gap between academic research 

and implementation by identifying current 

science and research needs (Swanston and 

Janowiak 2012)

• Creating climate change vulnerability 

assessments for a wide range of ecosystems 

and geographies (Swanston and Janowiak 

2012)

• Developing decision-support tools that 

incorporate climate change information into 

management plans (National Fish Wildlife and

Plants Climate Adaptation Partnership 2012, 

Stein et al. 2013, Swanston and Janowiak 

2012).
3

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

Box 11 (continued)

Research (continued

• Staging management activities as experiments 

to measure the effects or success of adaptation 

actions (Hemery 2008)

• Supporting and coordinating monitoring 

programs to track impacts of climate change 

and adaptation actions on ecosystems (Brandt 

et al. 2012, Cross et al. 2012, Morelli et al. 

2012, National Fish Wildlife and Plants Climate

Adaptation Partnership 2012, Swanston and 

Janowiak 2012) 

• Including climate variables in growth-yiel

models (Kellomaki et al. 2005).

Education and Outrea

• Increasing the knowledge and experienc

of natural resource professionals, including 

decisionmakers and planners, so that they can 

better integrate climate change considerations 

into their projects and work plans (Groves et al.

2012, Morelli et al. 2012, National Fish Wildlife

and Plants Climate Adaptation Partnership 

2012, Stein et al. 2014, Swanston and Janowiak 

2012) 

• Creating training opportunities and communities 

of practice (National Fish Wildlife and Plants

Climate Adaptation Partnership 2012, Swanston 

and Janowiak 2012)

• Preparing the public for adaptation principles 

through outreach (Groves et al. 2012, Nationa

Fish Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaptation 

Partnership 2012).

Adaptation Strategies and

Approaches

Strategy 1: Sustain fundamenta

ecological functions 

Climate change will have substantial effects on a 

suite of ecosystem functions, such as carbon storage, 

nutrient cycling, habitat, or water provisioning. As a 

result, many management actions will need to work 

both directly and indirectly to maintain the integrity 

of ecosystems in the face of climate change. This 

strategy seeks to sustain fundamental ecological 

functions, especially those related to soil and 

hydrologic conditions. 

Approaches:

1.1. Reduce impacts to soils and nutrient

cycling 

Maintaining both soil quality and nutrient cycling 

are already common tenets of sustainable forest 

management (Burger et al. 2010, Oliver and

Larson 1996) and can help improve the capacity o

ecosystems to persist under new conditions. Physical 

and chemical changes can result from a variety 

of forest management and recreation activities, as 

well as from climate-related processes including 

fire, drought, and flooding. Examples of physical 

impacts to soil are compaction, mixing of soil layers, 

removal of organic layers, rutting, erosion, and 

landslides. Complex interactions among climate, 

vegetation, and landforms can result in changes in 

nutrient cycling, including the leaching or fixation 

of nutrients and changes in soil biota. Many existing 

guidelines and best management practices describe 

actions that can be used to reduce impacts to soil 

and water; many of these actions are also likely to 

be beneficial in the context of adaptation, either in 

their current form or with modifications to address 

potential climate change impacts. 
37

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

Examples of adaptation tactics are: 

• Altering the timing of forest operations to 

reduce potential impacts on water, soils, and 

residual trees, especially in areas that rely on 

particular conditions for operations that may 

be affected by a changing climate (e.g., frozen 

soil, or dry conditions)

• Modifying forest operations techniques and 

equipment (e.g., using pallets, debris mats, or 

float bridges) to minimize soil compaction, 

rutting, or other impacts on water, soils, and 

residual trees 

• Retaining coarse woody debris to maintain 

moisture, soil quality, and nutrient cycling 

• Restricting recreational access in areas that 

show signs of excessive wear on natural 

resources in order to allow for revegetation or 

soil stabilization

• Using soil amendments to restore or improve 

soil quality (e.g., using lime to increase base 

cations in the soil profile in areas affected by 

long-term acid deposition) 

• Restoring native herbaceous groundcover 

following management activities in order to 

retain soil moisture and reduce erosion. 

1.2. Maintain or restore hydrology 

Projected changes in precipitation and temperature 

are expected to alter hydrologic regimes 

through changes in streamflow, snowpack, 

evapotranspiration rates, soil moisture, surface 

runoff, infiltration, flooding, and drought 

(Jones 2011). Hydrologic changes could occu

gradually or rapidly through extreme events. 

Some ecosystems are very susceptible to stress 

from drought, which may increase in frequency, 

severity, duration, or extent as a result of changing 

precipitation patterns. Other ecosystems are 

susceptible to flooding and ponding. Maintaining 

sufficient water levels and flow patterns is critical 

to ecosystem function. Hydrology can be altered 

by infrastructure (e.g., dams, roads, and other 

impervious surfaces), excessive groundwater 

extraction, stream channelization, and even invasive 

plants (Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and 

Wildlife 2006). Existing infrastructure that diverts

water, or otherwise alters hydrology, may need to 

be reevaluated to compensate for changes in water 

levels or flows (Brandt et al. 2012, Furniss et al.

2010, Galatowitsch et al. 2009). Infrastructure will

also need to be designed to accommodate greater 

hydrologic extremes in the future. It is important 

to keep in mind that modifications to maintain 

hydrology at one site may have negative impacts on 

hydrology at another site.

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Upgrading culvert size and cleaning culverts 

regularly to accommodate changes in peak 

flow and thus reduce damage to infrastructure 

and the environment during heavy rain 

events. This example may also incorporate 

ecologically based stream crossing designs 

that allow passage for aquatic organisms.

• Reducing or eliminating agricultural drainage 

improvements near wetlands 

• Reducing groundwater withdrawals in 

recharge areas of calcareous fens

• Installing berms or dikes to divert surface 

water to a lowland area affected by decreased 

precipitation 

• Removing or modifying dams, especially as 

they become defunct, and if they have little 

hydroelectric or irrigation value 

• Decommissioning or temporarily closing roads 

to reduce erosion and sedimentation and to 

restore permeability and soil hydrology. 

1.3. Maintain or restore riparian areas 

Forests located within riparian areas serve important 

ecosystem functions, such as decreasing soil erosion, 

filtering water, and storing and recycling organic 

matter and nutrients (Barling and Moore 1994,

Brandt et al. 2012, Castelle et al. 1994). Trees i

riparian areas also provide shade, which helps to 

buffer stream temperatures. Forested riparian areas 

can serve as corridors for wildlife and plant species 

migrating across otherwise fragmented landscapes 

(Heller and Zavaleta 2009). Many of these functions 

and benefits may be degraded if riparian forests 

undergo decline or exacerbated stress from climatic 

shifts and extreme events. The use of protective 
38

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

guidelines, such as best management practices and 

riparian management zones, can be used to avoid 

damage or additional stress to riparian areas during 

management activities. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Restoring or promoting a diversity of tree 

and plant species to increase stream shading, 

provide a source of woody debris, stabilize the 

soil, and provide habitat and connectivity for 

wildlife 

• Anchoring with fabric, wire, or natural 

materials in order to stabilize eroding stream 

banks

• Creating buffers along riparian areas with 

reduced or no harvest based on the landform, 

hydrology, and vegetation of the riparian 

zone in addition to any recommended buffer 

distance

• Restoring or reforesting riparian areas adjacent 

to agricultural areas in order to reduce erosion 

and nutrient loading into adjacent water bodies

• Managing water levels to supply proper 

soil moisture to vegetation adjacent to the 

stream during critical time periods, either 

by manipulation of existing dams and water 

control structures or restoration of natural 

dynamic water fluctuations

• Reconnecting floodplains to rivers and 

restoring natural floodplain conditions and 

associated native habitats (e.g., bottomland 

forest, wetlands, and wet prairie and other 

grasslands) in order to restore fluvial 

processes.

1.4. Reduce competition for moisture,

nutrients, and light

Competition for resources between plants is 

established as one of the main mechanisms in 

plant succession and evolution (Weiner 1990).

Competition occurs aboveground as plants compete 

for light, and belowground as they compete for 

water and mineral nutrients (Casper and Jackson 

1997). Climate change is expected to affect many of

the competitive relationships in forest ecosystems. 

Productivity may increase because of the positive 

effects of carbon dioxide (CO2

) fertilization and 

longer growing seasons. But not all species will be 

able to take equal advantage of these positive effects 

(Evans and Perschel 2009). Reducing competition 

for resources can enhance the persistence of desired 

species and increase the ability of ecosystems 

to cope with the direct effects (drought stress, 

temperature increases) and indirect effects (increased 

damage from pests and disease) of climate change 

(Dwyer et al. 2010, Evans and Perschel 2009).

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Using herbicide or mechanical thinning 

to prevent the encroachment of woody 

competitors and invasive species, especially 

after disturbance

• Thinning forest stands to remove crowded, 

damaged, or stressed trees in order to reduce 

competition for light, nutrients, and water

• Using prescribed fire to maintain growing 

space for fire-tolerant species or to increase 

nutrient turnover 

• Fertilizing or amending soil to address 

nutrient deficiencies. Although the benefit is 

faster growth, there could be consequences 

from nutrient leaching, such as stream 

eutrophication. 

• Controlling beech suckers, sprouts, and brush 

with herbicides or mechanical treatment in 

areas affected by beech bark disease in order 

to reduce competition with the regeneration of 

other species.

1.5. Restore or maintain fire in fire-adapted

ecosystems 

Long-term fire suppression leads to shifts in 

ecosystem structure and composition, which 

may disproportionately favor certain species and 

reduce biodiversity (Nowacki and Abrams 2008). 

Restoring fire regimes that attempt to mimic natural 

disturbance in fire-adapted systems can enhance 

regeneration and encourage stronger competition 

by fire-dependent and fire-tolerant species (Abrams 

1992). These actions can simultaneously foster

more complex ecosystem structure and reduce the 

risk of severe wildfire. Projecting the effects of 
39

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

climate change on fire regimes in forest ecosystems 

is an area of active research. The wildfire season is 

expected to lengthen in much of the Midwest and 

Northeast, and wildfires may occur more frequently 

(Flannigan et al. 2009a, 2009b; Guyette et al. 2014;

Moritz et al. 2012; Tang et al. 2014). Helping fireadapted ecosystems tolerate these potential change

may be the focus of adaptation actions. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Using prescribed fire to reduce ladder fuels, 

invasive species, and understory competition 

• Promoting fire- and drought-adapted species 

and ecosystems in areas that are expected to 

have increased fire risk as a result of climate 

change 

• Using natural or prescribed fire to restore the 

open character of oak woodlands and glades

• Shifting prescribed burn seasons to align with 

projected seasonal precipitation changes, 

thereby reducing the risk of unintended 

wildfire conditions.

Strategy 2: Reduce the impact o

biological stressors 

Biological stressors such as insects, pathogens, 

invasive species, and herbivores can act individually 

and in concert to amplify the effects of climate 

change on ecosystems. Forest managers already 

work to maintain the ability of forests to resist 

stressors. As an adaptation strategy, these efforts 

receive added effort and focus, with an emphasis on 

anticipating and preventing increased stress before 

it occurs. Climate change has the potential to add to 

or intensify the impact of many biological stressors, 

such as forest pests and invasive plant species, which 

heightens the importance of responding to these 

issues. Dealing with these existing stressors is a 

relatively high-benefit, low-risk strategy for climate 

change adaptation, in part because of the existing 

body of knowledge about their impacts and solutions 

(Climate Change Wildlife Action Plan Work Group 

2009). 

Approaches:

2.1. Maintain or improve the ability of forests 

to resist pests and pathogens 

Even modest changes in climate may cause 

substantial increases in the distribution and 

abundance of many insect pests and pathogens, 

potentially leading to reduced forest productivity 

or increased tree stress and mortality (Ayres and 

Lombardero 2000, Dukes et al. 2009). Impacts 

may be exacerbated where site conditions, climate, 

other stressors, and interactions among these 

factors increase the vulnerability of forests to these 

agents (Spittlehouse and Stewart 2003). Actions 

to manipulate the density, structure, or species 

composition of a forest may reduce susceptibility to 

some pests and pathogens (Spies et al. 2010).

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Thinning to reduce the density of a pest’s host 

species in order to discourage infestation, 

based on the knowledge that species are 

especially susceptible to pests and pathogens 

at particular stocking levels 

• Adjusting rotation length to decrease the 

period of time that a stand is vulnerable 

to insect pests and pathogens, based on 

the knowledge that species are especially 

susceptible to pests and pathogens at particular 

ages

• Creating a diverse mix of forest or community 

types, age classes, and stand structures to 

reduce the availability of host species for pests 

and pathogens

• Using pesticides or biological control methods 

to manage pest populations (e.g., gypsy moth, 

Asian longhorned beetle, or hemlock woolly 

adelgid) in heavily infested areas 

• Restricting harvest and transportation of logs 

near stands already heavily infested with 

known pests or pathogens 

• Using impact models and monitoring data to 

anticipate the arrival of pests and pathogens 

and prioritize management actions. 
40

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

2.2. Prevent the introduction and

establishment of invasive plants and 

remove existing invasive species

Hundreds of nonnative invasive plant species are 

currently present in the Midwest and Northeast 

(Chornesky et al. 2005, Natural Resources

Conservation Service 2012). Climate change is

expected to increase habitat for many of these 

species, which may be poised to outcompete 

native species (Chornesky et al. 2005, Millar et al.

2007). Current methods for controlling nonnative 

invasive species emphasize early detection and rapid 

response to new infestations (Hellmann et al. 2008). 

Management of highly mobile nonnative invasive 

species may require increased coordination across 

property boundaries and over larger geographic 

areas, and is likely to require an increasing budget 

for eradication efforts. As a resistance or resilience 

strategy, this approach may work for a while. Over 

the long term, limitations in available resources 

may require managers to prioritize which species 

to eradicate and which species to allow to occupy 

a site.

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Increasing monitoring for known or potential 

invasive species to ensure early detection, 

especially at trailheads, along roads, and along 

other pathways known for infestation

• Eradicating existing populations or seed 

sources (e.g., upstream) of invasive plants 

through physical or chemical treatments

• Cleaning equipment prior to forest operations 

in order to prevent the spread of invasive 

plants during site preparation, harvesting, or 

other activities

• Maintaining closed-canopy conditions to 

reduce the ability of light-loving invasive 

species to enter the understory

• Educating staff and volunteers on 

identification and eradication of current and 

potential invasive species.

2.3. Manage herbivory to promote 

regeneration of desired species 

Climate change has the potential to exacerbate many 

forest stressors and alter regeneration patterns. 

Additionally, climate change will probably have 

direct and indirect effects on populations of forest 

herbivores such as moose (generally expected to 

decrease) and white-tailed deer (generally expected 

to increase). Because herbivores preferentially 

browse on particular species, it may be increasingly 

important to protect regeneration of desired species 

from deer, moose, and other herbivores. Much 

of the available information on forest herbivores 

focuses on white-tailed deer and moose, which are 

considered keystone species capable of dramatically 

altering forests across the Midwest and Northeast 

(Frerker et al. 2014, Horsley et al. 2003, Mladenoff

and Stearns 1993, Rooney and Waller 2003,

Stromayer and Warren 1997). Managing herbivory

alone may not promote desired species. Thus, this 

approach may be combined with other approaches 

that release advance regeneration or stimulate new 

regeneration.

Examples of adaptation tactics are: 

• Applying repellant or installing fences, bud 

caps, and other physical barriers to prevent 

herbivory

• Promoting abundant regeneration of multiple 

species in order to supply more browse than 

herbivores are expected to consume

• Using tree tops from forest harvest or 

plantings of nonpalatable tree species as 

locations for “hiding” desirable species from 

herbivores to reduce browse pressure

• Partnering with state wildlife agencies to 

monitor herbivore populations or reduce 

populations to appropriate levels.
4

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

Strategy 3: Reduce the risk and longterm impacts of severe disturbance

Climate change is projected to increase the potential 

for severe disturbance events, such as wildfire, 

extreme wind, and ice storms (Intergovernmental 

Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] 2012, Moritz et al.

2012, Uriarte and Papaik 2007). These disturbances

have the ability to alter community composition and 

structure over large landscapes. Disturbances can 

interact with other stressors (Papaik and Canham 

2006). For example, extreme wind events can

cause tree damage and mortality, which increase 

the risk of pest outbreaks or wildfire (Gandhi et al. 

2007, Woodall and Nagel 2007). Even as trends 

continue to emerge, management will need to adjust 

appropriately to the changes in natural disturbance 

dynamics (Heller and Zavaleta 2009). 

Approaches:

3.1. Alter forest structure or composition to 

reduce risk or severity of wildfire 

Forest structure and composition may interact with 

longer and drier growing seasons to increase the 

risk of wildfire. Mortality from climate-related 

disturbances can lead to increases in fuel loading, 

which can increase the risk or severity of fire. 

Although some forest types are tolerant of or 

dependent on fire, extremely hot fires can destroy 

seed banks, sterilize soils, induce hydrophobic soil 

conditions, or cause tree mortality (Nitschke and 

Innes 2008, Noss 2001). Management actions to

alter species composition or ecosystem structure 

may reduce susceptibility to these threats (Hulme 

2005, Spittlehouse and Stewart 2003).

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Using prescribed fire and thinning to reduce 

surface fuels, increase height to live crown, 

decrease crown closure, and create a more 

open forest structure that is expected to be less 

vulnerable to severe wildfire

• Using prescribed fire to maintain open 

conditions in ecosystems at lower elevations 

as a means of reducing fuels and the risk of 

wildfire in ecosystems at higher elevations 

• Promoting fire-resistant species, such as 

hardwoods, in buffer zones between moreflammable conifers to slow the movement of 

wildfires

• Physically removing dead or dying trees or 

other vegetation to reduce surface and ladder 

fuels, while minimizing exposure to invasive 

plants, pests, or pathogens.

3.2. Establish fuelbreaks to slow the spread

of catastrophic fire 

Projected increases in fire occurrence as a result of 

climate change are expected to increase demand on 

fire-fighting resources and may force prioritization 

of fire suppression efforts to targeted areas (Millar et 

al. 2007, Spittlehouse and Stewart 2003). Managers 

may seek to reduce the spread or intensity of fire by 

using a fuelbreak, which is a physical barrier such 

as a road, bulldozer line, or water body. Establishing 

fuelbreaks can be complementary with actions to 

reduce the fuel load of the forest itself (Agee et 

al. 2000). Fuelbreaks can be created to lessen fire 

spread and intensity in specific areas, such as the 

wildland-urban interface, but also have the potential 

to increase fragmentation. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Using prescribed fire or mechanical thinning 

to lower the volume of dense vegetation and 

reduce flammability within a buffer zone of 

appropriate size for the landscape 

• Creating fire lines (i.e., areas where all 

vegetation is removed down to mineral soil) 

between a flammable stand and the wildlandurban interface or a fire-intolerant stand

• Establishing fuelbreaks along roads, power 

lines, and other existing features in order to 

reduce the spread of wildfire while minimizing 

additional fragmentation

• Replacing vegetation with nonflammable 

materials (e.g., replacing vegetation with local 

rocks) around high-priority areas

• Removing edge vegetation and lower branches 

of perimeter trees of flammable stands (e.g., 

pine islands) to arrest the path of fire from the 

ground surface to the tree crown.
42

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

3.3. Alter forest structure to reduce severity 

or extent of wind and ice damage 

Wind disturbance is a fundamental process in 

many forest ecosystems across the Midwest and 

Northeast (Frelich 2002, Seymour et al. 2002). 

Wind events and the ensuing effects on forests are 

expected to become more frequent and severe under 

climate change (Fischlin et al. 2009, Frelich and 

Reich 2010), although there are many challenges in

predicting the size, frequency, and intensity of these 

events. Some stands may have structures poorly 

suited to withstand projected increases in storm 

intensity. Silvicultural techniques exist to alter forest 

composition and structure for increased resistance 

to blowdown or ice damage, or to avoid sudden 

exposure of retained trees to wind (Burton et al. 

2008, Everham and Brokaw 1996, Mitchell 2013

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Retaining trees at the edge of a clearcut or 

surrounding desirable residual trees to help 

protect trees that have not been previously 

exposed to wind 

• Conducting forest harvest over multiple entries 

in order to gradually increase the resistance of 

residual trees to wind

• Using directional felling, cut-to-length 

logging, and other harvest techniques that 

minimize damage to residual trees 

• Creating canopy gaps that have an orientation 

and shape informed by the prevailing winds in 

order to reduce the risk of windthrow.

3.4. Promptly revegetate sites after

disturbance 

Potential increases in the frequency, intensity, 

and extent of large and severe disturbances may 

disrupt regeneration and result in loss of forest 

cover, productivity, or function in the long term. 

Prompt revegetation of sites following disturbance 

helps reduce soil loss and erosion, maintain water 

quality, and discourage invasive species in the 

newly exposed areas. These efforts can also provide 

an opportunity to promote natural regeneration or 

foster species that may be better adapted to future 

conditions. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Planting species expected to be adapted to 

future conditions and resistant to insect pests 

or present pathogens 

• Creating suitable physical conditions for 

natural regeneration through site preparation, 

for example by chaining after a burn to 

promote seed establishment 

• Monitoring areas of natural regeneration on a 

more frequent basis, and prioritizing planting 

or seeding where natural regeneration is slow 

to succeed

• Planting larger individuals (saplings versus 

seedlings, or containerized versus bare-root 

stock) to help increase survival in sites where 

dry conditions are expected. 

Tamarack cones in the fall in the Upper Peninsula, Michigan. Photo by Kailey Marcinkowski, Michigan Technological 

University, used with permission.
43

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

Strategy 4: Maintain or create refugia

Refugia are areas that have resisted ecological 

changes occurring elsewhere, often providing 

suitable habitat for relict populations of species 

that were previously more widespread (Keppel 

et al. 2012, Millar et al. 2007). Climate refugia

are often formed by topography (e.g., north sides 

of slopes, or sheltered ravines), proximity to 

large water bodies, or connection to groundwater 

(Ashcroft 2010, Dobrowski 2011). During previo

periods of rapid climate change, at-risk populations 

persisted in refugia that avoided extreme impacts 

(Keppel et al. 2012, Millar et al. 2007, Noss 2001)

These populations allowed species to persist until 

more favorable climatic conditions returned and 

species were able to expand into newly available 

habitats. This strategy seeks to identify and maintain 

ecosystems that: (1) are on sites that may be better

buffered against climate change and short-term 

disturbances, and (2) contain communities and 

species that are at risk across the greater landscape 

(Millar et al. 2007, Noss 2001).

Approaches:

4.1. Prioritize and maintain unique sites

Some sites host a higher diversity of species than 

adjacent sites, have many endemic species, have 

a sheltered topographic position, or have retained 

species through past periods of climate change 

(Keppel et al. 2012). These potential refugia are

formed through spatial, geophysical, and biological 

variation on the landscape and may be identified as 

unique sites that are expected to be more resistant 

to change. These sites may provide the best chance 

to retain habitat for native species under future 

climate change (Anderson et al. 2012). Species at

these sites are not necessarily sensitive or at-risk, 

although they may face increased stress under future 

climate on some landscape positions. Committing 

additional resources may be necessary to ensure that 

the characteristic site conditions are not degraded 

by invasive species, herbivory, fire, or other 

disturbances. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Identifying and managing cooler and wetter 

locations that are expected to be more 

resistant to changes in climate as refugia for 

maintaining native plant communities into the 

future

• Limiting harvest or management-related 

disturbance in areas that may be buffered 

from climate change (e.g., spring-fed stands 

sheltered in swales or valleys) 

• Identifying and protecting a network of 

sheltered mountain slopes, valleys, or forests 

with continuous shading canopy 

• Identifying areas with a high diversity of 

geology, landform, vegetation, or soils for 

increased protection or conservation

• Protecting areas that have been generally 

undisturbed by humans, such as those within 

old-growth forest, peatlands, barrens, or 

prairie, in order to preserve a reference 

condition or legacy.

4.2. Prioritize and maintain sensitive or atrisk species or communities

Many species are projected to decline as a result of 

climate change. For example, northern and boreal 

species are widespread in northern portions of the 

Midwest and Northeast, but are likely to lose habitat 

because they are already at the southern extent of 

their range (Swanston et al. 2011). Other specie

may be more vulnerable due to their dependence on 

a narrow range of site conditions. Identifying and 

maintaining sensitive or at-risk species as long as 

possible may help them persist until new long-term 

sites can be located and populated. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Using impact models and monitoring data to 

identify and prioritize management of species 

expected to decline under future conditions 

• Retaining individuals of a priority species 

across many diverse sites representing various 

environmental conditions or within differing 

forest types 
44

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

• Rerouting roads or trails away from at-risk 

communities to reduce damage from traffic or 

reduce the risk of introducing invasive species

• Minimizing harvest and other disturbances to 

species with dispersal or migration barriers, 

such as high-elevation or lowland conifer 

species, in order to protect viable populations 

where they currently occur

• Monitoring regeneration to detect migration of 

plant populations or communities to adjacent 

areas.

4.3. Establish artificial reserves

for at-risk and displaced species 

Species already exist outside their natural habitats 

in nurseries, arboretums, greenhouses, botanical 

gardens, and urban environments around the world. 

These highly controlled environments may be used 

to support individuals or genetic lineages that are 

no longer able to survive in their former location, or 

to serve as interim refugia for rare and endangered 

plant species that have specialized environmental 

requirements and low genetic diversity (Fiedler and 

Laven 1996, Havens et al. 2006, Millar 1991, Vit

al. 2010). These artificial reserves may in some cases

maintain species until they can be moved to new 

suitable habitat. Although a controlled environment 

would probably require substantial resources, this 

approach may be critical for at-risk species (Coates 

and Dixon 2007). 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Using an existing artificial reserve to cultivate 

species after suitable habitat has shifted and 

when they face considerable lag time before 

new habitat may become available 

• Collecting seeds and other genetic material 

of at-risk species to contribute to a genetic 

repository

• Planting individuals in a protected location 

expected to provide suitable habitat in a 

natural setting, such as a stand on a partner’s 

property

• Planting individuals in a controlled setting, 

such as a climate-controlled arboretum or 

botanical garden. 

Strategy 5: Maintain and enhance

species and structural diversity 

Land managers already work to increase structural 

and species diversity in many cases, and as an 

adaptation strategy this general goal receives added 

effort and focus (Mooney et al. 2009). Structural and 

species diversity may buffer a community against 

the susceptibility of its individual components 

to climate change (Peterson et al. 1998). In other

words, a community may still experience stress 

as individual components fare poorly, but the 

redundancy of particular roles and variability among 

all species’ responses contribute to the resilience 

of the community (Elmqvist et al. 2003). Although 

a forest is often defined by its dominant or most 

abundant species, even rare species can act as 

keystone species or contribute to the suppression 

of invasive exotic plants (Mooney et al. 2009). 

Approaches:

5.1. Promote diverse age classes

Species are vulnerable to stressors at different stages 

in their life cycle. Even-aged stands are often more 

vulnerable to insect pests and diseases, many of 

which are likely to increase in range and severity as 

a result of climate change. In uneven-aged systems, 

a smaller proportion of the population may be 

exposed to a particular threat at any one time, which 

can increase the resistance or resilience of a stand to 

a wider range of disturbances (O’Hara and Ramage 

2013). Maintaining a mix of ages, sizes, or canopy

positions will help buffer vulnerability to stressors 

of any single age class, as well as increase structural 

diversity within stands or across a landscape (Noss 

2001)

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Emulating aspects of disturbances through 

forest management techniques such as 

variable-density treatments or irregular 

return intervals in order to encourage the 

development of multiple age cohorts 

• Focusing salvage operations on creating 

desired residual stand structures following 

disturbance, even if less merchantable timber 

is removed as a result
4

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

• Using site scarification, planting, or other 

techniques to support adequate regeneration

• Maintaining a variety of age classes of a given 

forest type across a larger landscape.

5.2. Maintain and restore diversity 

of native species 

Diverse communities may be less vulnerable to 

climate change impacts and disturbances because 

they distribute risk among multiple species, reducing 

the likelihood that the entire system will decline 

even if one or more species suffer adverse effects. 

This may be especially important in communities 

with low diversity; even small increases in diversity 

may increase resilience without greatly altering 

species composition (Anderson and Chmura 2009, 

Cadotte et al. 2012, Wilkerson and Sartoris 2013)

Forests with higher levels of species diversity are 

also expected to be less vulnerable to declines in 

productivity due to climate change (Duveneck et al. 

2014).

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Using silvicultural treatments to promote and 

enhance diverse regeneration of native species 

• Transitioning plantations to more complex 

systems by underplanting or promoting 

regeneration of a variety of native species 

expected to do well under future conditions

• Planting desired native species within an 

area that is otherwise expected to regenerate 

naturally in order to add diversity 

• Restoring native vegetation on areas that 

have been severely altered by anthropogenic 

activities, such as abandoned agricultural areas 

or surface mines

• Planting species with diverse timing of 

phenological events (e.g., flowering, fruiting, 

leaf out, leaf drop) to provide necessary 

resources over a longer time frame to forestdependent wildlife species.

5.3. Retain biological legacies

Biological legacies are organisms, structures, or 

patterns inherited from a previous ecosystem and 

often include mature trees, snags, and down logs 

remaining after natural disturbance or harvesting 

(Society of American Foresters 2008). Biological 

legacies can enhance species and structural diversity, 

serve as a seed source, or provide nurse logs for 

seed germination (Gunn et al. 2009). Mature trees 

can often survive through periods of unfavorable 

climate, even while conditions become unsuitable 

for seedling establishment (Brubaker 1986). In 

changing climate, biological legacies may play a 

critical role in a species’ persistence or colonization 

of new habitat (Gunn et al. 2009). 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Retaining the oldest and largest trees with 

good vigor during forest management 

activities 

• Retaining survivors of pest or disease 

outbreaks, droughts, windthrow events, or 

other disturbances during salvage or sanitation 

operations 

• Retaining individual trees of a variety of 

uncommon species to maintain their presence 

on the landscape.

5.4. Establish reserves to maintain

ecosystem diversity 

Some areas with exemplary combinations of 

soil, hydrologic, and climatic variation support a 

correspondingly high degree of species diversity. 

Ecosystems in the areas may be protected through 

the establishment of reserves. Reserves are 

traditionally defined as natural areas with little to 

no harvest activity that do not exclude management 

of fire or other natural disturbance processes 

(Halpin 1997). However, the use and definition

of reserves may need to be evaluated within the 

context of changing climate and forest response. 

It may be valuable to retain explicit flexibility in 

management practices, so long as management 

directly supports the justifications and goals for 

establishing the reserve. This approach may also be 

used as a “control” for monitoring adaptation actions 

implemented in other forest stands. 
4

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Identifying areas with high diversity or other 

desirable attributes that can be set aside as a 

reserve on an existing ownership 

• Setting a minimum requirement for percentage 

of land in reserve 

• Prioritizing areas where riparian corridors 

connect core areas to other reserves and 

habitats

• Providing a large reserve based on a species’ 

known optimum conditions in order to 

preserve a species.

Strategy 6: Increase ecosystem

redundancy across the landscape 

Some losses are inevitable, whether due to 

catastrophic events or unforeseen interactions of 

management, climate change, and forest response. 

Increasing ecosystem redundancy attempts to lower 

the overall risk of losing a species or community by 

increasing the extent, number of occurrences across 

the landscape, and diversity of regeneration stages 

(Akçakaya et al. 2007). This strategy may benefit 

greatly from developing partnerships with other 

land management organizations and coordinating 

landscape-scale conservation practices. 

Approaches:

6.1. Manage habitats over a range 

of sites and conditions 

The suitable site conditions for a community or 

species may shift on the landscape as climate 

changes, resulting in new combinations of locations 

and species aggregations. This may increase 

opportunities for successful regeneration and the 

likelihood of persistence of a species or community 

(Joyce et al. 2009, Millar et al. 2007, The Nature 

Conservancy 2009). Species currently covering a 

large extent may provide many options for retaining 

redundancy across the landscape.

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Restoring or increasing a community type on 

a variety of soil types and across a range of 

topographic positions 

• Implementing a variety of forest management 

activities or silvicultural prescriptions 

across multiple stands or areas with similar 

starting conditions in order to diversify forest 

conditions and evaluate different management 

approaches

• Coordinating with partners to manage an 

at-risk species or community existing on a 

variety of suitable sites. 

Northern white-cedar trunk in the Upper Peninsula,

Michigan. Photo by Kailey Marcinkowski, Michigan 

Technological University, used with permission.
47

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

6.2. Expand the boundaries of reserves to

increase diversity 

Approaches 4.1 and 5.4 describe protecting an

maintaining climate refugia and reserves to maintain 

ecosystem diversity and legacy. Expanding existing 

reserve boundaries may buffer and replicate the 

diversity within the core of the reserve, but more 

importantly, may also increase the overall species 

diversity within the expanded reserve (Akçakaya 

et al. 2007). This approach may be more effective 

over the long term if focused on reserves that also 

encompass climate refugia. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Restoring or conserving land directly adjacent 

to established reserves

• Developing a network of reserves with 

adjacent landowners with shared conservation 

goals

• Designating buffer zones of low-intensity 

management around core reserve areas and 

between different land uses. 

Strategy 7: Promote landscap

connectivity 

Species migration is a critical factor in the 

maintenance of ecosystem function in a changing 

climate, but fragmentation of landscapes and loss 

of habitat may restrict species movement and gene 

flow (Davis and Shaw 2001, Iverson et al. 2004a).

Managing the landscape for connectivity may 

allow for easier species movement, reduce lags in 

migration, and enhance the flow of genetic material. 

The current rate of climate change coupled with 

contemporary land use, however, creates unique 

challenges to migration. Many species are not 

expected to be able to migrate at a rate sufficient to 

keep up with climate change and associated range 

shifts (Davis and Shaw 2001, Iverson et al. 2004a).

Therefore, it may be beneficial to combine the 

approaches under this strategy with efforts to create 

refugia or relocate species (i.e., assisted migration). 

But connectivity may also increase movement of 

invasive species and insect pests, thereby increasing 

the need to prevent introduction of these species.

Approaches:

7.1. Reduce landscape fragmentation

The fragmentation of contiguous forest habitats is 

a primary driver of biodiversity loss and reduced 

productivity through exposure to disturbance, 

obstruction of migration pathways, and overall 

lowered resilience (Fischer and Lindenmayer 2007). 

Protecting large areas from fragmentation will 

require a concerted effort to create partnerships, 

agreements, and other mechanisms for land 

protection and management across property 

boundaries. Strategic acquisition of high-priority 

conservation areas, conservation easements, 

certification programs, restoration projects, and 

other efforts to increase the size and connectivity 

of forest ecosystems will foster a landscape-level 

response to counter the widespread effects of climate 

change (Anderson et al. 2012, Millar et al. 2007,

Spittlehouse and Stewart 2003). This approach may 

be facilitated by approach 5.4, which focuses on

establishing new reserves. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Using geospatial information to identify new 

and existing migration corridors

• Restoring native vegetation and vegetation 

structure in degraded areas within the forested 

matrix

• Establishing partnerships and coordinating 

acquisition of conserved forest lands or 

riparian areas to achieve common management 

goals 

• Establishing or expanding reserves adjacent 

to other forest blocks to form a connective 

network of a few large reserves, many small 

reserves along a climatic gradient, or a 

combination of large and small reserves close 

to each other

• Promoting or participating in conservation 

easement programs that retain forest cover and 

achieve landscape-scale connectivity. 
48

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

7.2. Maintain and create habitat corridors 

through reforestation or restoration 

The presence of both small and large corridors on 

the landscape may help species to migrate without 

additional assistance (Heller and Zavaleta 2009). 

Corridors oriented in any direction may be useful 

to facilitate genetic mixing, but corridors arranged 

along climatic or elevational gradients may be more 

useful if the goal is to allow for species movements 

along the gradient. Reforestation or restoration 

of riparian areas may help retain species on the 

landscape longer while providing a forested corridor. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Establishing or restoring forest cover along 

rivers or ridges to build on natural linear 

features that connect larger forests

• Setting aside a connected network of 

conservation easements

• Eradicating invasive species within a corridor 

in order to minimize competition with desired 

species

• Working with partners on the landscape to 

identify high-priority sites to protect for 

landscape-scale corridors or habitat. 

Strategy 8: Maintain and enhance

genetic diversity 

Greater genetic diversity may help species adjust to 

new conditions or sites by increasing the likelihood 

that some individuals within a species will be able 

to withstand climate-induced stressors. Current 

guidelines for management of tree genes generally 

promote the conservation of local gene pools, restrict 

transfer of germplasm, and define small seed zones 

to minimize contamination between pools (Millar 

et al. 2007). A changing climate may require new 

guidelines that accommodate shifting seed zones 

and promote more options for increasing genetic 

diversity. Actions to enhance genetic diversity could 

be timed to occur after large-scale disturbances to 

take advantage of regeneration and establishment 

phases. Approaches under this strategy are best 

implemented with great caution, considering 

the uncertainties inherent in climate change, the 

sparse record of previous examples, the ecological 

and social suitability of particular locations, and 

continued uncertainties of forest response. 

Approaches:

8.1. Use seeds, germplasm,

and other genetic material 

from across a greater geographic range 

Planted seedlings typically have greater survival 

when they originate from local seed sources, but 

local seed sources may no longer produce the best 

adapted seedlings if the governing environmental 

factors change (Vitt et al. 2010). Using seed zones

that change over time and are based on regional 

analyses of climate change data may provide better 

seed sources than static seed zones (Erickson 

and Navarrete-Tindall 2004, Millar et al. 2007, 

Spittlehouse and Stewart 2003). This may entail 

importing genetic stock from locations ranging from 

nearby to substantially distant in order to introduce 

plants that are expected to be better adapted to 

current or future climatological conditions. At the 

same time, ecoregional and political boundaries may 

continue to restrict the distance from which new 

species or genotypes may be imported (McKenney 

et al. 2009, Pedlar et al. 2012). This strategy may

require communicating with policy-makers to 

reevaluate seed zone sizes and rules governing the 

movement of seed stocks. It is important to note that 

although many environmental factors may match 

seedlings to geographic areas, limitations such as 

cold tolerance may remain (Millar et al. 2007). It is 

also important to take the necessary precautions to 

avoid introducing a new invasive species (Vitt et al. 

2010)

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Using mapping programs to match seeds 

collected from a known origin to planting sites 

based on climatic information 

• Identifying and communicating needs for new 

or different genetic material to seed suppliers 

or nurseries 

• Planting seedlings germinated from seeds 

collected from various locations throughout a 

species’ native range. 
49

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

8.2. Favor existing genotypes that are better 

adapted to future conditions 

As populations experience cumulative changes in 

climate, or short-term extremes in climate, new 

selective pressures on populations may result in 

changes in phenotypic expression and genotypic 

evolution responses (Reed et al. 2011). Som

genotypes may be better adapted to future conditions 

or changing conditions because of pest resistance, 

broad physiological tolerances, short regeneration 

times, or other characteristics (Millar et al. 2007, 

Spittlehouse and Stewart 2003). Identifying and 

managing these future-adapted genotypes during 

various life stages may allow a population to 

persist where it may otherwise fail. However, the 

use of this approach may be currently limited by 

the uncertainty about precise future conditions and 

which genotypes are best suited to these conditions 

(Breed et al. 2013). It is also possible that genotypes

from other sites could interfere with the adaptation 

of local populations, if the imported resources 

are not adapted to withstand local pressures (e.g., 

frost tolerance or pathogen resistance). Availability 

of source material may also limit the use of this 

approach. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Planting stock from seeds collected from 

local trees that exhibit drought tolerance, pest 

resistance, or other desirable qualities 

• Planting stock from seeds collected from 

healthy trees in warmer or drier locations in 

the region 

• Retaining some survivors of a dieback 

event, such as drought-induced mortality 

or pathogenic blight, rather than salvage 

harvesting all trees in an affected area 

• Creating and monitoring areas of natural 

regeneration in order to identify and promote 

well-adapted phenotypes

• Planting disease-resistant chestnut in order 

to reestablish a form of this species on the 

landscape.

Strategy 9: Facilitate community

adjustments through species 

transitions 

Species composition in many forest ecosystems is 

expected to change as species adapt to a new climate 

and transition into new communities (Iverson et 

al. 2004b). This strategy seeks to maintain overall 

ecosystem function and health by gradually enabling 

and assisting adaptive transitions of species and 

communities in suitable locations. This may result 

in slightly different species assemblages than those 

present in the current community, or an altogether 

different community in future decades. This strategy 

includes aggressive actions to promote ecosystem 

change rather than an unchanging community 

or species mix. Many of the approaches in this 

strategy attempt to mimic natural processes, but may 

currently be considered unconventional management 

responses. In particular, some approaches 

incorporate assisted migration, which remains a 

challenging and contentious issue (McLachlan et 

al. 2007, Ricciardi and Simberloff 2009). It is not 

suggested that managers attempt to introduce new 

species without thoroughly investigating potential 

consequences to the native ecosystem (Ricciardi 

and Simberloff 2009). This approach is best 

implemented with great caution, incorporating due 

consideration of the uncertainties inherent in climate 

change, the sparse record of previous examples, and 

continued uncertainties of forest response. Outcomes 

from early efforts to transition communities can 

be evaluated to provide both information on future 

opportunities and specific information related to 

methods and timing. 

Approaches:

9.1. Favor or restore native species that are 

expected to be adapted to future conditions 

There are many cases where native species may 

be well adapted to the future range of climatic and 

site conditions (Landscape Change Research Group 

2014, Walk et al. 2011). Using management 

favor native species in a community or forest type 

that are expected to fare better under future climate 

change can facilitate a gradual shift in the forest 

composition. Establishing or emphasizing future-
5

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

adapted species now may create opportunities to 

fill the niche left by species that decline. Where 

communities are dominated by one or a few species, 

this approach will probably lead to conversion to a 

different community type, albeit with native species. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Underplanting a variety of native species on 

a site to increase overall species richness and 

provide more options for future management

• Favoring or establishing oak, pine, and other 

more drought- and heat-tolerant species on 

narrow ridge tops, south-facing slopes with 

shallow soils, or other sites that are expected 

to become warmer and drier 

• Seeding or planting drought-resistant 

genotypes of commercial species (e.g., 

loblolly pine) where increased drought stress 

is expected.

9.2. Establish or encourage new mixes

of native species 

Repeated periods of warming and cooling over the 

last 15,000 years have resulted in large shifts i

species composition (Davis 1983, Jacobson et al.

1987, Shuman et al. 2002). Novel combinations of

climatic and site conditions are expected to continue 

to affect individual species in different ways. 

Although some species may not occur in a forest or 

community type as currently defined, they may have 

been together previously. Novel mixing of native 

species may lead to the dissolution of traditional 

community relationships and result in conversion to 

a newly defined or redefined forest or community 

type (Davis et al. 2005, Root et al. 2003)

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Planting or seeding a mixture of native 

species currently found in the area that are not 

typically grown together but may be a suitable 

combination under future conditions 

• Underplanting with eastern white pine to 

diversify the conifer component of a stand that 

has had no eastern white pine

• Intensifying site preparation in a northern 

hardwoods stand to promote the establishment 

of oak from an adjacent stand 

• Allowing a species native to the region (e.g., 

black locust) to establish where it was not 

historically present, if it is already encroaching 

and likely to do well there under future climate 

conditions. 

9.3. Guide changes in species composition 

at early stages of stand development 

Long-term ecosystem function may be jeopardized 

if existing and newly migrated species fail to 

regenerate and establish. Active management of 

understory regeneration may help transition forests 

to new and better-adapted compositions more 

quickly by promoting desired species and reducing 

competition from undesirable, poorly adapted, or 

invasive species. Natural disturbances often initiate 

increased seedling development and genetic mixing, 

and can be used to facilitate adaptation (Joyce et al. 

2009). Silvicultural prescriptions can mimic natural 

disturbance to promote regeneration in the absence 

of natural disturbance. Under drier conditions 

and increased stress, promoting regeneration 

and discouraging competitors may require moreintensive site preparation, including prescribed fire, 

soil disturbance, and herbicide use. When forests are 

dominated by one or a few species, this approach 

may lead to conversion to a different forest type. 

Examples of adaptation tactics under this approach 

are: 

• Preventing and removing undesired species, 

including invasive nonnative or aggressive 

native species, in order to reduce competition 

for moisture, nutrients, and light

• Controlling beech suckers, sprouts, and brush 

by using herbicide or mechanical treatment in 

areas affected by beech bark disease in order 

to reduce competition with the regeneration of 

other species

• Planting or seeding sufficient stocks of desired 

species before undesirable species have the 

chance to establish or compete

• Performing timber stand improvement to favor 

and promote the growth of desirable growing 

stock. 
Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

9.4. Protect future-adapted seedlings

and saplings 

As climate change increases both direct and 

indirect stressors on forest ecosystems, it becomes 

increasingly important to ensure the adequate 

regeneration of tree species in order to maintain 

forest or woodland conditions. Seedlings and 

saplings are generally more sensitive than 

older growth stages to changes in moisture and 

temperature, physical disturbance, herbivory, and 

other stressors (Walck et al. 2011). For this reason

protecting seedlings or saplings of existing or newly 

migrated species can strongly shape the ways in 

which communities adapt (The Nature Conservancy 

2009). Further, tending regeneration by protecting it 

from herbivory, removing competition, or otherwise 

reducing damage to seedlings and saplings helps to 

promote the transition to desired future conditions 

and functions.

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Using repellent sprays, bud caps, or fencing to 

prevent browsing on species that are expected 

to be well adapted to future conditions 

• Using tree tops from forest harvest or 

plantings of nonpalatable tree species as 

locations for “hiding” desirable species from 

herbivores to reduce browse pressure

• Preventing and removing undesired species, 

including invasive nonnative or aggressive 

native species, in order to reduce competition 

for moisture, nutrients, and light

• Restricting recreation or management 

activities that may have the potential to 

damage regeneration 

• Partnering with state wildlife agencies to 

monitor herbivore populations or reduce 

populations to appropriate levels. 

9.5. Disfavor species that are

distinctly maladapted 

A species is considered maladapted when its 

environment changes at a rate beyond the species’ 

ability to adapt and accommodate those changes 

(Johnston 2009). Species at the southern or highest 

elevational extent of their geographic range are 

especially vulnerable to habitat loss, and some 

of these species are expected to decline rapidly 

as conditions change (Iverson 2002, Iverson and 

Prasad 1998). Monitoring or inventory data for some

species may already show evidence of decline at 

a particular site, although their decline may not be 

attributed to a single cause, but to a combination 

of causes that may include varying degrees of 

interaction with climate change. Models that 

incorporate climate change and species’ life history 

characteristics may identify other species that are 

likely to decline (Landscape Change Research Group 

2014, Wang et al. 2014). Species declines ma

require rapid and aggressive management responses 

to maintain forest cover and ecosystem function 

during periods of transition. In ecosystems where the 

dominant species are likely to decline substantially 

or disappear, this may mean dramatically altering the 

species assemblage through active or passive means. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Removing unhealthy individuals of a declining 

species in order to promote other species 

expected to fare better. This does not imply 

that all individuals should be removed, and 

healthy individuals of declining species can be 

retained as legacies.

• Anticipating and managing rapid decline of 

species with negative prognoses in both the 

short and long term (e.g., hemlock) by having 

adequate seed stock of a desired replacement 

species expected to do well under future 

climate conditions

• Protecting healthy legacy trees that fail 

to regenerate while deemphasizing their 

importance in the mix of species being 

promoted for regeneration.

9.6. Manage for species and genotypes with 

wide moisture and temperature tolerances 

Inherent scientific uncertainty surrounds climate 

projections at finer spatial scales (Schiermeier 2010),

making it necessary to base decisions upon a wide 

range of predictions of future climate. Managing for 

a variety of species and genotypes with a wide range 

of moisture and temperature tolerances may better 
5

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

distribute risk than attempting to select species with 

a narrow range of tolerances that are best adapted 

to a specific set of future climate conditions (The 

Nature Conservancy 2009). 

Examples of adaptation tactics are: 

• Favoring species that are currently present 

that have wide ecological amplitude and can 

persist under a wide variety of climate and site 

conditions

• Planting or otherwise promoting species 

that have a large geographic range, occupy a 

diversity of site conditions, and are projected 

to have increases in suitable habitat and 

productivity 

• Promoting long-lived conifers with wide 

ecological tolerances, such as eastern white 

pine

• Identifying and promoting species that 

currently occupy a variety of site conditions 

and landscape positions.

9.7. Introduce species that are expected to 

be adapted to future conditions

Maintaining ecosystem function or transitioning 

to a better-adapted system may involve the active 

introduction of species or genotypes to areas that 

they have not historically occupied, often described 

as assisted migration, assisted colonization, or 

managed relocation (Hoegh-Guldberg et al. 2008, 

Hunter 2007, McLachlan et al. 2007, Ricciardi and 

Simberloff 2009). One type of assisted migration, 

sometimes called forestry assisted migration, focuses 

on moving species to new locations in order to 

maintain forest productivity and health under climate 

change (Pedlar et al. 2012, Seddon 2010). Given th

uncertainty about specific climate conditions in the 

future, the likelihood of success may be increased by 

relocating species with a broad range of tolerances 

(e.g., temperature, moisture) from across a wide 

range of provenances. This approach is generally 

considered less risky than species-rescue assisted 

migration (described in the next section) because it 

moves species to new habitats within their current 

range or over relatively short distances outside their 

current range, and focuses on widespread species 

for which much is known about their life history 

traits (Pedlar et al. 2012). However, there are still

risks associated with moving any species, such as 

introducing new pests or diseases, the potential for 

hybridization with other closely related species, and 

genetic bottlenecks if the introduced seed source is 

not adequately diverse (Aubin et al. 2011)

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Planting oaks, pines, and other droughttolerant species on sites within the current 

range that are expected to become drier and 

that have not been historically occupied by 

those species 

• Planting flood-tolerant species, such as swamp 

white oak and silver maple, on sites that are 

expected to become more prone to flooding 

and that are currently not occupied by floodtolerant species

• Planting southern species, such as shortleaf 

pine, north of its current range on suitable sites 

based upon its projected range expansion 

• Planting disease-resistant cultivars of elm or 

chestnut where they are likely to have suitable 

habitat.

9.8. Move at-risk species to locations that 

are expected to provide habitat

The climate may be changing more rapidly than 

some species can migrate, and the movement of 

species may be restricted by land use or other 

impediments between areas of suitable habitat 

(Davis and Shaw 2001, Iverson et al. 2004a). This

can be particularly challenging for species that 

are already rare or threatened. Another subset of 

assisted migration, sometimes called species-rescue 

assisted migration, focuses on avoiding extinction of 

species threatened by climate change (Pedlar et al. 

2012). If current habitat occupied by those species

is expected to become (or already is) unsuitable, 

assisted migration to potential new suitable habitat 

may be the best option to ensure survival of the 

species (Vitt et al. 2010). Because such species

are often extremely rare, this type of assisted 

migration can also potentially cause declines in 

the donor populations through removal of seeds or 
5

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

individuals (Aubin et al. 2011). This approach is bes

implemented with great caution, incorporating due 

consideration of the uncertainties inherent in climate 

change, the sparse record of previous examples, and 

continued uncertainties of forest response (Ricciardi 

and Simberloff 2009).

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Planting or seeding a rare or threatened plant 

species that is at risk for extinction to a newly 

suitable habitat outside its current range 

• Assisting the migration of wildlife around 

barriers from low elevations to higher 

elevations by trapping and releasing in newly 

suitable locations 

• Moving plants or animals from a mountaintop 

to another mountaintop north of their current 

range. 

Strategy 10: Realign ecosystem

after disturbance 

Ecosystems may face significant impacts as a result 

of climate change-related alterations in disturbances, 

including fire, drought, invasive species, and severe 

weather events (Dale et al. 2001). Disturbances

are primary drivers of many ecosystems, but 

changes in the frequency, intensity, and duration 

of disturbance events may create significant 

management challenges (Lawler 2009). Although 

it is often not possible to predict a disturbance 

event, it is possible to increase overall preparedness 

for large and severe disturbances and prioritize 

rapid response. Many of the best opportunities for 

addressing disturbance-related impacts may occur 

immediately after the disturbance event; having a 

suite of preplanned options in place may facilitate 

an earlier and more flexible response and prevent 

maladaptive responses. In the future there are likely 

to be more frequent situations where a disturbance 

exceeds the resilience of an ecosystem, such that 

even intensive management may be insufficient to 

return the ecosystem to a prior condition. In these 

cases, it may be necessary to reevaluate and adjust 

management goals, which can involve realigning 

the ecosystem to better match new climate and 

environmental conditions (Millar et al. 2007). This 

strategy involves consideration of the full range of 

potential impacts and planning to respond to severe 

ecosystem disturbance and disruption. 

Approaches:

10.1. Promptly revegetate sites after

disturbance 

Potential increases in the frequency, intensity, and 

extent of large and severe disturbances may disrupt 

regeneration and result in loss of forest cover, 

productivity, or function in the long term. Changing 

conditions are expected to threaten regeneration 

processes for some species, and may result in 

failure of natural regeneration of desired species. 

Prompt revegetation of sites following disturbance 

helps reduce soil loss and erosion, maintain water 

quality, and discourage invasive species in the newly 

exposed areas. These efforts can also provide an 

intervention point for promoting species and systems 

that may be better adapted to future conditions. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Planting a variety of future-adapted species 

during revegetation efforts to ensure diverse 

regeneration and provide options for future 

management 

• Creating suitable physical conditions for 

natural regeneration through site preparation 

(e.g., chaining after a burn to promote seed 

establishment) 

• Monitoring areas of natural regeneration on a 

more frequent basis, and prioritizing planting 

or seeding where natural regeneration is slow 

to succeed 

• Coordinating with the public and other 

organizations to avoid conflicting or 

misguided responses. 

10.2. Allow for areas of natural regeneration 

to test for future-adapted species 

Although many areas may be replanted after severe 

disturbance, some areas can be set aside to allow 

for natural regeneration as a means to identify the 

well-adapted species and populations (Joyce et al. 

2009). The use and monitoring of test or “control” 
5

Chapter 3. Adaptation Strategies and Approach

areas of natural revegetation following disturbance 

may help managers identify (1) species that are well

adapted to the changing climate and environmental 

conditions and (2) potential threats in the form of 

invasive species or poor regeneration of desirable 

species. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Using modeling and remote sensing to identify 

areas at low risk for erosion, flooding, or 

other threats that could be set aside for natural 

regeneration

• Monitoring naturally revegetated areas for 

changes in species composition, productivity, 

and other factors

• Controlling competition from undesirable 

tree species and invasive species to enhance 

regeneration of desired tree species 

• Removing small-diameter residual trees to 

reduce competition, increase sunlight, and 

improve seed germination potential

• Creating conditions that will be favorable 

for regeneration of desired species, for 

example by removing the duff layer to allow 

germination and sprouting of shortleaf pine.

10.3. Realign significantly disrupted

ecosystems to meet expected future 

conditions

Some ecosystems may experience such significant 

disruption and decline that desired conditions or 

management objectives appear to be no longer 

feasible. This situation may occur if most species 

in the ecosystem are projected to decline as climate 

changes. Management of these systems may be 

adjusted to create necessary changes in species 

composition and structure to better adapt forests to 

current and anticipated environments, rather than 

to historical predisturbance conditions (Millar et al. 

2007, Spittlehouse and Stewart 2003). Developing 

clear plans that establish processes for realigning 

significantly altered ecosystems before engaging in 

active management will allow for more thoughtful 

discussion and better coordination with other 

adaptation responses. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

• Allowing a transition in forest type by planting 

future-adapted species within a stand that is 

already declining or is expected to decline 

(e.g., planting jack pine and tamarack in a 

failing white spruce stand, or underplanting 

eastern white pine in the next regeneration cut 

of quaking aspen)

• Planting species expected to be better adapted 

to future conditions, especially where natural 

regeneration in forests affected by disturbance 

is widely failing

• Allowing nonnative invasive or aggressive 

native species to remain as part of a novel 

mix of species, rather than eradicating these 

species

• Creating novel communities “from scratch” 

in areas that have been severely affected 

by natural or human disturbance as part of 

intensive remediation efforts.
Chapter 4. Urban Forest Adaptation Strategi

and Approaches

Forest management spans a continuum of forests, 

from closed-canopy forests to more open woodlands 

and savannas and barrens, and also includes the 

management of urban forests. Urban forests are an 

integral aspect of green infrastructure, which can 

be defined as “an interconnected network of green 

space that conserves natural ecosystem values and 

functions and provides associated benefits to human

populations” (Benedict and McMahon 2006: 5)

Urban forests include more developed “urban” sites 

such as street and yard trees, parks, cemeteries, 

school grounds, corporate campuses, and unmanaged 

green spaces, as well as more “natural” areas such 

as forest preserves and larger urban parks. The 

vitality and interconnectedness of these urban forests 

are critical for many landscape-scale ecological 

processes (such as migration, pollination, and carbon 

sequestration) and the long-term ecological function 

of urban landscapes (Rudnick et al. 2012). This

chapter puts the adaptation strategies, approaches, 

and tactics laid out in the previous chapter into an 

urban context by recognizing the unique pressures 

placed upon urban forests, such as pollution, 

restricted rooting conditions, and altered soils 

(Box 12).

This chapter is organized in a similar manner to 

the previous chapter, with broad strategies linked 

to more specific approaches and tactics. The 10

adaptation strategies are generally arranged to 

start with ideas that focus on resistance adaptation 

options and continue on to ideas that focus more 

on transition, although this arrangement does 

not indicate preference or priority (Chapter 3). 

Approaches are still broad enough that managers 

will need to evaluate and tailor them to meet 

individual management goals. Not all approaches 

can or should be used in every location or situation. 

Tactics are prescriptive actions with specific site 

conditions and objectives in mind. 

Input and feedback on the urban strategies and 

approaches in this chapter came from more 

than 35 members of the Chicago Wildernes

Climate Change Task Force and Trees and Green 

Infrastructure Task Force. The lead authors and other 

contributors to this chapter are listed in Appendix 3. 

Members of the task forces include professionals in 

the fields of forest ecology, climate change ecology, 

urban forestry, soil science, urban land management, 

urban ecology, wildlife management, ecological 

restoration, and hydrology. The Chicago Wilderness 

team also provided generalized examples of tactics 

to highlight some possible ways in which each 

approach may be applied in urban forests. 

The menu of tiered urban forestry adaptation 

actions (Box 12) provides practical, relevant

concepts that can be incorporated into planning 

and decisionmaking. The menu is intended to be 

used in conjunction with the Adaptation Workbook 

(Chapter 5). The example tactics that are provided

for each adaptation approach are not meant to be 

implemented directly; rather, they are meant to 

provide a sense of how managers could develop 

specific tactics for their management goals and 

site conditions. Additionally, although the urban 

adaptation strategies and approaches were designed 

to directly assist managers, many adaptation actions 

will require or benefit greatly from planning, 

education and outreach, research, or changes in 

policy or infrastructure (Box 13).

1 Chicago Wilderness is a regional alliance of more

than 300 nonprofit and Corporate Council member 

organizations that work together to restore local nature 

and improve the quality of life for all living things by 

protecting the lands and waters on which we all depend. 

Learn more at www.chicagowilderness.org.
Chapter 4. Urban Forest Adaptation Strategies and Approac

Box 12

Urban Forest Adaptation Strategies and Approache

Strategy 1. Sustain or restore fundamenta

ecological functions. 

1.1. Maintain or restore soils and nutrient cycling in 

urban areas.

1.2. Maintain or restore hydrology.

1.3. Maintain or restore riparian areas. 

1.4. Reduce competition for moisture, nutrients, 

and light.

1.5. Restore or maintain fire in fire-adapted 

ecosystems.

Strategy 2. Reduce the impact of biologica

stressors.

2.1. Maintain or improve the ability of forests to 

resist pests and pathogens.

2.2. Prevent the introduction and establishment of 

invasive plants and remove existing invasive 

species.

2.3. Manage herbivory to promote regeneration, 

growth, and form of desired species. 

Strategy 3. Reduce the risk and long-ter

impacts of severe disturbances.

3.1. Alter forest structure or composition to reduce 

risk or severity of wildfire. 

3.2. Maintain trees and remove hazards to reduce 

severity or extent of wind and ice damage. 

Strategy 4. Maintain or create refugia

4.1. Prioritize, maintain, and restore unique sites. 

4.2. Prioritize and maintain sensitive or at-risk 

species or communities.

4.3. Establish artificial reserves for at-risk and

displaced species.

Strategy 5. Maintain and enhance species and

structural diversity.

5.1. Promote diverse age structure.

5.2. Maintain and restore diversity of native 

species.

5.3. Retain biological legacies.

5.4. Establish reserves to maintain ecosystem

diversity. 

Strategy 6. Increase ecosystem redundancy

across the landscape.

6.1. Manage habitats over a range of sites and 

conditions.

6.2. Expand or buffer the boundaries of reserves to

increase diversity.

Strategy 7. Promote landscape connectivit

7.1. Reduce landscape fragmentation.

7.2. Maintain and create habitat corridors through 

reforestation or restoration.

Strategy 8. Maintain and enhance genetic

diversity.

8.1. Use seeds, germplasm, and other genetic 

material from across a greater geographic 

range.

8.2. Favor existing genotypes that are better 

adapted to future conditions.

8.3. Use new genotypes that are better adapted to 

future threats and conditions.

Strategy 9. Facilitate composition adjustments

through species transitions.

9.1. Favor or restore native species that are 

expected to be adapted to future conditions.

9.2. Establish or encourage new mixes of native

species.

9.3. Select tree species to match current and future 

site conditions. 

9.4. Protect future-adapted seedlings and saplings.

9.5. Disfavor species that are distinctly 

maladapted.

9.6. Manage for species or genotypes with wide 

moisture and temperature tolerances.

9.7. Introduce species that are expected to be

adapted to future conditions.

9.8. Move at-risk species to locations that are 

expected to provide habitat.

Strategy 10. Realign urban ecosystems afte

disturbance. 

10.1. Promptly revegetate sites after disturbance.

10.2. Prioritize remediation of remaining trees 

following disturbance. 

10.3. Realign significantly disrupted ecosystems to 

meet expected future conditions.
5

Chapter 4. Urban Forest Adaptation Strategies and Approac

Box 13

Adaptation Strategies for Planning and Pol

The Adaptation Strategies and Approaches for land 

managers have been designed for implementation 

by land managers and project planning teams. 

However, some strategies and approaches 

require (or are facilitated by) planning, education 

and outreach, research, or changes in policy 

or infrastructure. Some of the most applicable 

strategies and approaches that fall into this area 

are listed below:

• Limiting use of known invaders in horticultural 

plantings in and around natural areas through 

partnerships with homeowners, municipalities, 

and park districts

• Working with local nurseries and growers’ 

associations to draw attention to potential 

impacts and offer alternative species to those 

that may be potentially harmful or invasive

• Promoting at-risk species currently used in the 

horticultural trade and developing sources and 

markets for additional at-risk species where 

appropriate, especially southern species at the 

northern edge of their range 

• Developing cultivars of native tree species that 

are well adapted to different (or a variety of) 

urban sites, working with nurseries and retailers 

to make them readily available, and promoting 

their use in urban plantings

• Prioritizing creation of new parks, easements, 

or natural areas centered on areas that have 

high levels of biological legacies.

Urban Adaptation Strategies an

Approaches

Strategy 1: Sustain or restor

fundamental ecological functions 

The changing climate may alter the complex 

interactions among climate, vegetation, and 

landforms, resulting in changes in hydrology, 

soil quality, and nutrient cycling. Urban areas 

often involve further complications because of 

the greater likelihood that human activities have 

already significantly altered ecosystem functioning 

and will continue to do so. Urban conditions are 

often characterized by difficult growing conditions, 

including impermeable surfaces, air and water 

pollution, frequent human interaction, and small soil 

volumes. Existing guidelines and best management 

practices for forest management describe actions 

that can be used to reduce or reverse impacts to soil 

and water. Many of these actions are also likely to 

be beneficial in the context of adaptation, although 

additional effort may be required to maintain 

ecosystem function in urban areas. 

Approaches: 

1.1. Maintain or restore soils and nutrient 

cycling in urban areas

Most urban tree problems are related to poor soils 

or growing conditions (Patterson and Mader 1982),

which could exacerbate stresses induced by climate 

change. Urban soils are often highly disturbed, 

lack essential nutrients, and commonly include 

detrimental elements such as chemicals, concrete, 

asphalt, and other foreign matter that limit the 

long-term viability of a tree. Trees are dependent 

on adequate soil characteristics such as rooting 

volume, organic matter content, drainage capacity, 

and nutrient availability to achieve healthy maturity. 

Prior to planting a tree, soil and site analyses can be 

conducted to determine if the soil content, texture, 

or volume would meet the long-term needs of a 

growing healthy tree.
5

Chapter 4. Urban Forest Adaptation Strategies and Approac

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Removing invasive species that have negative 

impacts on soil processes or undesirable 

feedbacks to nutrient inputs (e.g., European 

buckthorn; Heneghan et al. 2006

• Adding organic soil amendments (e.g., mulch, 

biochar) to urban sites undergoing restoration 

or revegetation.

Developed urban sites

• Providing and developing adequate soil 

volume, texture, structure, and organic matter 

to support healthy tree growth (e.g., Watson 

and Himelick 2013

• Removing and replacing the soil if toxicity or 

chemical levels are too high 

• Amending soil with organic or structural 

material to improve drainage, pH, and rooting

• Installing a layer of mulch over the root zone 

of the tree to help retain moisture and mimic a 

natural growing environment.

1.2. Maintain or restore hydrology

Changes in climate may increase runoff during 

heavy storm events in some areas. Impermeable 

surfaces are more common in the urban setting 

and direct water into water bodies through storm 

sewers. Stormwater thus bypasses vegetation and 

other natural features that could slow water flow 

and reduce pollution. Vegetation and associated 

ecosystem features can filter, intercept, and absorb 

stormwater, reducing runoff and improving the 

quality of water reaching streams and lakes. Water 

is intercepted by the tree canopy and held by the 

root systems of herbaceous and woody plants and 

associated soil organic material. In highly developed 

areas where large areas of vegetation are not 

feasible, engineered features can also be used to 

increase permeability and help redistribute water. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Restoring natural hydrology where appropriate 

by removing drain tiles or other remnant 

hydrological modifications

• Restoring native communities and ecosystem 

components (e.g., natural groundcover, litter 

layer, coarse woody debris) in riparian areas

• Adjusting trail location and design to 

minimize erosion under more intense surface 

runoff.

Developed urban sites

• Directing runoff into natural features with 

herbaceous and woody plant cover to reduce 

runoff and nonpoint source pollution, while 

still providing outflow for excess water 

• Connecting natural features such as planting 

beds, bioswales, rain gardens, and sequential 

stormwater treatments to other natural systems

• Using permeable paving, suspended surfaces, 

or Silva Cells (Deeproot Green Infrastructure, 

San Francisco, CA) to enable runoff to collect 

and water trees. 

1.3. Maintain or restore riparian areas 

Much of the forest cover in urban regions is located 

in riparian areas. Forests located within riparian 

areas serve important ecosystem functions, such as 

decreasing soil erosion, filtering water, and storing 

and recycling organic matter and nutrients (Barling 

and Moore 1994, Brandt et al. 2012, Castelle et al

1994). Trees in riparian areas also provide shade,

which helps to buffer stream temperatures. Forested 

riparian areas can serve as corridors for wildlife and 

plant species migrating across otherwise fragmented 

landscapes (Heller and Zavaleta 2009). The use 

of protective guidelines, such as best management 

practices and riparian management zones, can 

help to prevent damage to riparian areas during 

management activities. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Restoring or promoting a diversity of tree 

and plant species in order to increase stream 

shading, provide a source of woody debris, 

stabilize the soil, and provide habitat and 

connectivity for wildlife 

• Restoring or reforesting riparian areas adjacent 

to developed areas in order to reduce erosion 

and nutrient loading into adjacent water bodies
5

Chapter 4. Urban Forest Adaptation Strategies and Approac

• Managing water levels to supply proper 

soil moisture to vegetation adjacent to the 

stream during critical time periods, either 

by manipulation of existing dams and water 

control structures or restoration of natural 

dynamic water fluctuations.

Developed urban sites

• Reclaiming developed sites and restoring or 

reforesting riparian areas in order to reduce 

erosion and nutrient loading into adjacent 

water bodies.

1.4. Reduce competition for moisture,

nutrients, and light

Climate change will alter competitive dynamics 

among species and is likely to result in changes 

in species composition and mortality patterns. 

Reducing competition for resources can enhance the 

persistence of desired species and increase the ability 

of ecosystems to cope with the direct and indirect 

effects of climate change (Dwyer et al. 2010, Evans

and Perschel 2009). 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Managing buffer areas adjoining natural 

sites to limit potential impacts from invasive 

species that could have an adverse competitive 

impact on existing species

• Selecting species that will be strong 

competitors on restored or reclaimed sites. 

Developed urban sites

• Removing mowed turf from the rooting zone 

of trees and replacing it with organic mulch 

or other plants that require lower water and 

nutrient inputs

• Removing nonnative invasive species to 

reduce competition, and to improve native 

species diversity.

1.5. Restore or maintain fire in fire-adapted

ecosystems

Fire management can be difficult in urban settings 

due to potential impacts to the built environment 

and public health. Where possible, fire can be 

an important management strategy in supporting 

ecosystem function and resilience. Where ecological 

or social constraints limit the application of 

prescribed fire, alternative management strategies 

(i.e., fire surrogates) can provide similar benefits. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas 

• Using prescribed fire to maintain fire-adapted 

ecosystems and reduce risk of fire spread into 

the wildland-urban interface

• Using prescribed fire during suitable 

conditions (periods of low air pollution, low 

winds, low temperatures) to avoid negative 

impacts and potential for unwanted spread 

• Incorporating understory thinning, mowing, or 

other fire surrogate strategies to support native 

ecosystems where fire management is not 

possible. 

Developed urban sites

• Managing fire-adapted urban trees and 

ecosystems using fire-surrogate treatments 

such as mowing, hand weeding, and applying 

herbicide. 

Strategy 2: Reduce the impact o

biological stressors

Climate change may result in increases in biological 

stressors such as pests, pathogens, and invasive 

plant species. Urban areas are especially prone to 

attacks by nonnative pests and pathogens. Pests 

that are currently limited by cold temperatures or 

growing season (e.g., hemlock woolly adelgid in 

New England) could also affect urban areas sooner 

than surrounding rural areas due to the effects of the 

urban heat island. Reducing or eliminating stressors 

that might make a tree more susceptible to new or 

existing pests or pathogens will be important to 

maintaining forests in urban areas (Urban 2008). 

Approaches: 

2.1. Maintain or improve the ability of forests 

to resist pests and pathogens

Many forest pests and pathogens are expected 

to expand or shift their ranges under climate 

change, and climate change may also increase the 

susceptibility of urban forests to damage from pests 
6

Chapter 4. Urban Forest Adaptation Strategies and Approac

and pathogens through increased stress. Avoiding 

the introduction of pests is often not possible, but 

certain tactics may increase resistance of trees and 

forests to these stressors. The tactics are similar to 

those outlined for nonurban forests. The primary 

difference is likely to be a much greater ability and 

incentive to manage individual trees in urban forests.

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Developed urban sites

• Selecting species and cultivars that are less 

susceptible to pests and pathogens 

• Treating susceptible trees with pesticides and 

fungicides when appropriate and feasible.

All urban sites

• Promoting diversity across taxonomic levels 

by reducing the concentration of any one 

genus, species, or cultivar in order to reduce 

the risk from a selective pest or pathogen 

• Increasing age diversity to help avoid large 

concentrations of declining trees that may be 

more susceptible to certain pests or pathogens

• Monitoring for new invaders so action can be 

taken before the pest or pathogen becomes 

established

• Encouraging the use of best management 

practices that limit the spread or level of 

damage caused by pests or pathogens

• Participating in a rapid response system for 

pest and pathogen detection including training 

volunteers and local organizations to assist 

with identifying pests and pathogens.

2.2. Prevent the introduction and

establishment of invasive plants and remove 

existing invasive species

Climate change is likely to increase the rate of 

spread of invasive species (Chornesky et al. 2005,

Millar et al. 2007). Early detection and rapid 

response will be very important as opportunities 

for new invaders increase. Urban areas are 

especially susceptible to introduction and spread of 

invasives because of horticultural practices, nutrient 

loading, high levels of disturbance, and moderated 

microclimate.

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Managing and monitoring natural area buffers 

to limit access of invasive plants to highquality areas

• Limiting the spread of invasive species 

introduced through recreational activities (e.g., 

boot brushes at trailheads). 

All urban sites

• Responding rapidly with stewards and 

volunteers to limit the spread of invasive 

species upon introduction

• Limiting use of known invaders in 

horticultural plantings (especially in and 

around natural areas) through partnerships 

with homeowners, municipalities, and park 

districts

• Training local land managers, landowners, 

volunteers, and organizations to recognize 

possible threats and to report them to 

appropriate agencies such as the U.S. 

Department of Agriculture or Cooperative 

Weed Management Areas 

• Working with local resources such as master 

gardener programs to educate the public about 

potential impacts and how to report them to 

the appropriate agencies.

2.3. Manage herbivory to promote 

regeneration, growth, and form of desired 

species 

Urban areas can be heavily populated with 

mammalian herbivores such as rabbits and deer. 

These herbivores can hinder regeneration and 

growth of desired plant species, and populations of 

some herbivorous species may grow in some areas 

as winters become less severe. Protecting desired 

species from herbivory has the obvious benefit of 

directly reducing grazing damage, but can also be 

important in fostering resilience to other stressors, 

which are expected to be exacerbated by climate 

change. This approach may be combined with other 

approaches that release advance regeneration or 

stimulate new regeneration.
Chapter 4. Urban Forest Adaptation Strategies and Approac

Examples of adaptation tactics are: 

All urban sites

• Applying repellant or installing fences, bud 

caps, and other physical barriers to prevent 

herbivory

• Promoting abundant regeneration of multiple 

species in order to supply more browse than 

herbivores are expected to consume.

Strategy 3: Reduce the risk and longterm impacts of severe disturbanc

Climate change may increase the likelihood and risk 

of severe disturbances, which will have significant 

effects on urban trees. Urban tree failures can cause 

severe property damage, electric outages (Simpson 

and Van Bossuyt 1996), and injuries or fatalities t

human beings. From 1995 to 2007, there were 40

tree-related human fatalities in the United States 

(Schmindlin 2009). In developed urban sites, these 

potential impacts make it essential for risk to be 

managed at the individual tree level. Factors such 

as tree form, size, condition, species, wind speed, 

pruning, and wood material properties affect tree 

resistance to storm damage (Duryea et al. 2007, 

Francis 2000, King 1986, Putz et al. 1983). Urb

foresters must balance the risk of tree failure, 

including the danger to people and property, with 

the loss of benefits when shade trees are removed. 

This is especially important for large trees, which 

provide greater benefits and take a long time to 

replace (Miller 1997). Priorities are somewhat

different in urban natural areas, where avoiding risk 

is more associated with minimizing disturbances 

that are potentially devastating to tree communities, 

especially those that could affect urban populations 

and the built environment (e.g., fires spreading from 

natural areas). 

Approaches:

3.1. Alter forest structure or composition to 

reduce risk or severity of wildfire 

Risk of wildfire is likely to increase in urban 

natural areas in much the same fashion as in 

nonurban forests. However, due to their location 

in the wildland-urban interface, these areas are of 

especially high priority in risk reduction. Developed 

landscapes in the wildland-urban interface may 

incorporate somewhat different principles of risk 

reduction through altering forest structure and 

composition, such as the Firewise methods of 

creating defensible space around structures and 

using less-combustible landscaping (see http://www.

firewise.org).

Examples of adaptation tactics are: 

Urban natural areas

• Using prescribed fire (where possible) or 

fire-surrogate treatments to manage the woody 

understory to reduce the risk of catastrophic 

wildfire

• Cooperating with and training municipal 

firefighting authorities to respond quickly and 

appropriately to fires in natural areas.

Developed urban sites

• Avoiding highly flammable species in 

plantings near natural areas

• Avoiding the use of highly flammable 

landscape materials (e.g., pine straw, shredded 

bark mulch) near buildings located near 

natural areas.

3.2. Maintain trees and remove hazards to 

reduce severity or extent of wind and ice 

damage 

Storm damage from wind and ice can be particularly 

problematic in urban areas because of the risk to life 

and property, and both could become more severe 

because of changes in climate. When an urban forest 

undergoes severe disturbances such as strong wind 

and ice storms, downed limbs and trees can result 

in loss of electric service, displacement of families 

and businesses, and blockage of emergency vehicles. 

Structural pruning can mitigate these safety and 

infrastructure issues by fostering mechanically 

strong branch structure (American National 

Standards Institute 2008). Although intensive hazard 

management is common in developed areas, it 

may also take place in urban natural areas where 

individual tree management is necessary or possible, 

such as in high-use areas or near infrastructure. 

Even when trees are maintained, however, some 

limb and tree failure can occur. Promptly removing 
6

Chapter 4. Urban Forest Adaptation Strategies and Approac

these hazards can help mitigate the severity of the 

disturbance and associated negative public reaction. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Monitoring for hazard trees near the stand 

edge and removing them if there is a target 

(e.g., a playground, hiking paths, or road) 

present

• “Softening” stand edges (i.e., reducing the 

edge influence at regenerating edges and 

minimizing abrupt transitions) to reduce 

susceptibility to wind damage. 

Developed urban sites

• Maintaining trees on a regular pruning cycle 

and using American National Standards 

Institute A300 (2008) standards and best 

management practices as guidelines for tree 

care and maintenance

• Removing hazard trees as quickly as possible.

Strategy 4: Maintain or create refugi

Refugia are areas that have resisted ecological and 

climatic changes occurring elsewhere; these areas 

often provide suitable habitat for relict populations 

of species that were previously more widespread 

(Keppel et al. 2012, Millar et al. 2007). Despite their

rarity in urban areas, refugia can still be important 

for species of conservation concern. For many 

taxa, they may offer the best chances for survival 

under climate change. Identification of refugia is an 

important first step toward their conservation under 

climate change in urban areas (Keppel et al. 2012)

Approaches:

4.1. Prioritize, maintain, and restore

unique sites 

In urban areas, many forests and natural ecosystems 

have been degraded or developed into other land 

uses. As a result, forest ecosystems are relatively 

uncommon on the landscape and may already act 

as refugia by providing habitat for species lost from 

surrounding areas due to human-caused disturbance. 

Sites may be of particular interest for one or more 

reasons. They may currently support high levels of 

biodiversity. They may contain a diverse range of 

geophysical diversity that is likely to sustain and 

promote species diversity over the long term. Or 

they may have a combination of high biological 

and geophysical diversity. Sites with several 

topographically related microclimates and local 

permeability may provide the best chance for species 

responding to climate change (Anderson et al. 2012).

Restoration or reclamation projects may be needed 

to increase the representation of these habitats on the 

landscape.

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Protecting existing habitat remnants from 

disturbance, particularly if they are in areas 

that may provide future climate refugia

• Restoring unique habitats that may be less 

susceptible to climate change or using 

reclamation efforts to create new patches of 

such habitats on suitable sites

• Identifying and protecting areas of high 

geophysical or topographic diversity with 

the expectation that these areas may provide 

a range of climatic options to species with 

diverse requirements.

Developed urban sites

• Identifying urban plantings that could serve as 

refugia.

4.2. Prioritize and maintain sensitive or atrisk species or communitie

Maintenance of sensitive and at-risk species or 

communities in situ as long as possible could 

help the species or communities persist until new 

long-term sites can be located and populated. 

Restoring and protecting historical remnant areas 

of ecologically significant species or communities 

may be helpful in some urban natural areas. More 

developed urban areas often contain engineered 

habitats for a variety of native and nonnative species, 

and can also play an important role in providing 

habitat. Artificial reserves are addressed in 

approach 4.3. 
6

Chapter 4. Urban Forest Adaptation Strategies and Approac

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Maintaining species and structural elements 

that provide habitat for at-risk species

• Increasing buffer areas to protect at-risk 

communities from disturbance and invasion

• Rerouting roads or trails away from at-risk 

communities in order to reduce damage from 

traffic or reduce the risk of invasive species 

introduction.

Developed urban sites 

• Establishing and supporting development and 

management ordinances and regulations that 

protect and reduce impacts to high-quality 

remnants and features. 

4.3. Establish artificial reserves for at-risk

and displaced species

At-risk species are often incorporated into urban 

reserves (botanical gardens, arboretums, and 

municipal parks) and urban plantings (e.g., street 

trees, backyard gardens), and could in some cases 

be included in restoration or reclamation projects 

(e.g., urban riverways). Some uncommon to rare 

tree species, such as Kentucky coffeetree, blue ash, 

and American yellowwood, are already included 

in some urban plantings. Additional at-risk species 

(or species that provide habitat for at-risk species) 

could be added to urban planting lists to increase 

their representation in the landscape. Providing new 

artificial habitat for at-risk species could help sustain 

them under climate change. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Collecting seeds and other genetic material 

of at-risk species to contribute to a genetic 

repository

• Including at-risk species (or habitat for at-risk 

species) in restoration or reclamation projects 

• Planting individuals in a protected location 

that is expected to provide suitable habitat into 

the future in a natural setting, such as a stand 

on a partner’s property.

Developed urban sites

• Using local conservatories, arboretums, 

botanical gardens, and parks to cultivate 

species after climate change makes natural 

regeneration challenging for that species 

• Including at-risk species (or species that 

provide habitat for at-risk wildlife) in urban 

park, street, or campus plantings whenever 

possible or feasible (e.g., planting endangered 

southern species in parks).

Strategy 5: Maintain and enhance

species and structural diversity

Promoting species and structural diversity is as 

important in urban forests as in nonurbanized forest 

landscapes, if not more so. Urban areas are highly 

susceptible to introduction of nonnative pests 

and pathogens and often exhibit high occurrence 

of invasive plant species (Dreistadt et al. 1990,

McKinney 2002). Urban forests have been 

decimated because of a lack of species diversity 

in the face of pest introductions (Poland and 

McCullough 2006, Santamour 2004). Widespread

acknowledgment of this problem has led to 

guidelines focused on diversification of the urban 

forest (Santamour 2004). However, urban areas 

contain difficult sites, and only a limited set of tree 

species may be able to tolerate the conditions of 

many of these sites (Whitlow and Bassuk 1987).

Species and structural diversity are especially 

important as a climate adaptation strategy because 

urban habitats (both natural areas and urban land 

uses) are likely to be stressed in the future in many 

ways, some of which will be unforeseeable (Gill 

et al. 2007, Kirshen et al. 2008). A diverse set 

of species, carefully selected to match the urban 

environment, will be more likely to maintain 

adequate forest cover and ecosystem services under 

a changing and increasingly variable climate.
6

Chapter 4. Urban Forest Adaptation Strategies and Approac

Approaches:

5.1. Promote diverse age structur

A diverse age structure can be beneficial because 

trees are most vulnerable to specific stressors at 

different ages. For example, droughts are typically 

more damaging to seedlings than to mature trees, 

whereas older individuals may be more susceptible 

to damage from wind events. In many cases, urban 

forests are dominated by trees that persisted on the 

landscape as it became urbanized, and many of these 

trees are reaching the end of their lifespan (Fahey et 

al. 2012). Active management may be necessary to

promote regeneration and development of younger 

age classes. Furthermore, in developed urban areas, 

managers often focus on individual trees, which are 

removed upon death or damage and replanted as 

soon as resources permit. Age class diversification 

may consequently be less straightforward than in 

natural forests. However, a diverse age structure 

in these locations could increase the habitat value 

of the urban forest and spread out tree losses from 

natural mortality (Clark et al. 1997, Millar et al.

2007). In developed urban sites, some planting and 

tree removal practices could help develop a more 

diverse tree age structure both within and among 

management units.

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Using group selection to promote multiaged 

forest stands 

• Restoring or creating conditions that allow 

tree seedlings to thrive by removing nonnative 

species in the shrub layer and canopy trees.

Developed urban sites

• Planting replacement trees in anticipation of 

mortality from emerald ash borer and before 

actual loss of canopy trees in order to diversify 

age structures

• Rotating planting schedules so that removal 

and replanting is dispersed geographically, 

thereby avoiding complete removal or planting 

within a single area (e.g., street or park) during 

a single year.

5.2. Maintain and restore diversity of native 

species

The reasoning and tactics for promoting native 

species diversity in urban natural areas are 

essentially the same as those for nonurban 

forests—that is, diverse communities may be less 

vulnerable to climate change impacts because risk 

is distributed among multiple species. The need for 

and difficulty of promoting native species diversity 

in urban systems may be greater, however, because 

of higher pressure from nonnative invasive species 

and more-extensive planting and promotion of 

nonnative species (McKinney 2002). Transitioning 

the urban forest to higher dominance by a diversity 

of native species would have multiple important 

positive effects on the adaptation potential of the 

urban ecosystem (Clark et al. 1997). Native species

planted in urban locations can provide important 

habitat value for wildlife species; areas such as parks 

may be able to emulate a functioning ecosystem 

to some degree and support functioning food webs 

(Marzluff et al. 2001, Nowak and Dwyer 2007).

These ecosystems may also be able to provide 

migration corridors through intensely fragmented 

urban landscapes (also see strategy 8) (Savard et al. 

2000).

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Restoring or creating conditions that allow for 

successful regeneration of a diverse mix of 

native species, such as removing older native 

and nonnative trees to open the canopy 

• Planting desired native species within an 

area that is otherwise expected to regenerate 

naturally in order to add diversity. 

Developed urban sites

• Promoting native tree species in urban tree 

planting lists, especially those with high 

habitat value for wildlife species (e.g., oaks) 

(Clark et al. 1997

• Using native plant species as groundcover or 

horticultural plantings in the rooting zone of 

urban trees
Chapter 4. Urban Forest Adaptation Strategies and Approac

• Planting species with diverse timing of 

phenological events (e.g., flowering, fruiting, 

leaf out, leaf drop) to provide necessary 

resources over a longer time frame to forestdependent wildlife species (Walther et al. 

2002).

5.3. Retain biological legacie

In urban areas, pre-urban legacy trees often provide 

much of the ecosystem services and functional value 

(e.g., carbon storage, shading, and habitat) of the 

urban forest (Fahey et al. 2012). Preservation of

these features will be essential to adapting the urban 

forest to future climates, because old trees may have 

superior genetics and they may play a valuable role 

in helping species persist on the landscape (Gunn 

2009). Tactics for urban areas may differ from those 

used in rural forests managed for timber because 

there is rarely pressure to harvest or salvage in urban 

areas. However, legacy retention is often difficult 

or impossible because of development pressure. 

Despite the challenge, the retention of legacy trees 

can be helpful to promote the habitat value that these 

features provide. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Retaining snags and downed trees whenever 

possible (i.e., those that pose no threat 

to people or infrastructure) during postdisturbance cleanup operations

• Prioritizing creation of new parks, easements, 

or natural areas centered on areas that have 

biological legacies.

Developed urban sites

• Retaining legacy trees from the pre-urban 

landscape during development or redesign of 

urban areas

• Retaining snags within parks where they are 

unlikely to pose a risk to the public in order to 

provide wildlife habitat.

5.4. Establish reserves to maintain

ecosystem diversity 

Although urban areas are highly developed, some 

natural areas may remain to serve as reserves. 

Reserves are traditionally defined as natural areas 

with little to no harvest activity that do not exclude 

management of fire or other natural disturbance 

processes (Halpin 1997). In a highly fragmented

urban area, this definition may need to be adjusted to 

reflect the realities of what is possible on small tracts 

of land surrounded by development. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Identifying areas with high diversity (species, 

topography, soils, or other factors) or other 

desirable attributes that can be set aside as a 

reserve, perhaps using easements or similar 

tools 

• Prioritizing protection of areas where riparian 

corridors connect core areas to other reserves 

and habitats.

Strategy 6: Increase ecosystem

redundancy across the landscape

Urbanized landscapes are expected to undergo 

especially intense alteration of environmental 

conditions with future climate change (McCarthy 

et al. 2010). Increasing the number, extent, and

representation across land uses and ownerships of 

a variety of ecosystem types will help to make the 

persistence of these ecosystem types more likely. 

Collaboration among an especially wide variety 

of stakeholders will be necessary to promote this 

strategy in urbanized landscapes.

Approaches:

6.1. Manage habitats over a range of sites 

and conditions 

Climate change impacts on ecosystems are likely 

to differ greatly depending on position within 

the urban-rural gradient, specific land use, and 

ownership and management type (Iakovoglou et 

al. 2001, McDonnell et al. 2008). Creating diverse

combinations of topographic position, land use, and 

ownership for each ecosystem type may provide 
Chapter 4. Urban Forest Adaptation Strategies and Approac

more opportunity for one of those locations to be 

buffered from change because of the unique site 

conditions (Colding 2007, Millar et al. 2007). 

Increasing the number of existing preserved habitats 

and ecosystems represented in urban landscapes 

is likely to be difficult (although not necessarily 

impossible) as most land in urban areas already 

has a designated land use and most undeveloped 

ecosystems are already in reserve systems. However, 

many urban areas have significant levels of land 

abandonment; restoration and reclamation efforts 

in these locations could be targeted to produce a 

diversity of ecosystems and habitats across the 

landscape (Colding 2007).

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Restoring native communities that are 

underrepresented in the landscape, taking 

advantage of a variety of different landscape 

positions, ownerships, and other site factors

• Managing for multiple ecosystems and 

communities within larger natural areas—but 

without reducing potential habitat patch size.

Developed urban sites

• Managing for underrepresented species, 

communities, and ecosystems in urban habitats 

(especially sites such as parks and institutional 

campuses) to offset potential losses elsewhere 

(e.g., small areas of wetland habitat within 

developed areas)

• Seeking and building opportunities for 

collaboration to connect species, communities, 

and ecosystems at a larger scale, such as 

intergovernmental agreements or ordinances.

6.2. Expand or buffer the boundaries of

reserves to increase diversity

Reserve expansion can help buffer forest interior 

habitats from a variety of edge effects, such as 

changing temperature and moisture conditions and 

increased exposure to disturbances (Hobbs 2002). 

Providing buffering from edge effects may be 

especially important in the harsh environment of 

the urban landscape. Buffer functions can include 

benefits such as reduced direct runoff exposure, 

reduced weed pressure (if weeds are managed in the 

buffer), and stabilization of banks next to flowing 

water. These benefits may become increasingly 

important as climate-related stresses increase on 

forest interior habitats. However, reserve expansion 

is often extremely difficult and costly in urban areas 

so buffering through management practices in urban 

habitats and creation of easements are likely to be 

necessary (Rissman et al. 2007). 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Expanding urban natural areas or developing 

easements in or adjacent to areas of 

underrepresented habitat whenever feasible to 

create buffers (e.g., create streamside buffers, 

purchase adjacent land, limit roadside damage 

to the edges of properties)

• Restoring or managing newly acquired reserve 

or easement areas to promote habitat diversity.

Developed urban sites

• Managing urban areas adjacent to natural 

areas to create buffer or transitional habitats, 

by either mimicking the natural habitat to 

whatever extent possible or mimicking a 

transitional habitat (e.g., using parks as 

“savanna-like” edge to forested natural area).

Strategy 7: Promote landscap

connectivity

Minimizing fragmentation and maximizing 

connectivity are both important as adaptation tools 

in connecting urban areas to the larger landscape. 

Species migrations and gene flow are essential 

in climate-mediated species range shifts. Urban 

areas dominate some of the most important coastal 

migration corridors in the northeastern United 

States. To maintain these areas as migration and 

dispersal corridors in the future, it will be important 

to minimize additional fragmentation, manage 

existing corridors to provide high-quality migration 

habitat, and create new corridors to connect reserves 

or fragmented habitat in urban areas. 
6

Chapter 4. Urban Forest Adaptation Strategies and Approac

Approaches: 

7.1. Reduce landscape fragmentatio

Development pressure will probably continue to 

increase the level of fragmentation on the landscape 

in most urban areas. Avoiding fragmentation of 

the few remaining large parcels will instead be the 

likely emphasis. For example, in the Chicago, IL, 

region most remaining forested parcels are less than 

100 acres in area and many of the remaining units

are privately owned or span multiple landowners 

and uses (Fahey et al. 2015). Therefore, limitin

fragmentation in urban areas like Chicago will be 

most effective with cooperation from a spectrum of 

the landowners in the region. 

Examples of adaptation tactics include:

Urban natural areas

• Establishing partnerships and coordinating 

acquisition of conserved forest lands or 

riparian areas to achieve common management 

goals 

• Acquiring property for preserves or creating 

easements on private landholdings adjacent or 

close to existing natural areas.

Developed urban sites

• Managing areas adjacent to natural areas to 

mimic the habitat and ecosystem structure 

of the natural areas to create larger areas of 

habitat that are unfragmented in some respects 

(e.g., continuous canopy cover in residential 

areas adjacent to a natural area)

• Establishing incentives or ordinances, or 

a combination, that enable collaboration 

between landowners to encourage cooperation 

in development, design, and management 

strategies that reduce fragmentation and 

extend natural areas and ecosystem services.

7.2. Maintain and create habitat corridors 

through reforestation or restoration

Corridors that connect fragmented areas will help 

build resilience in ecological communities and will 

be essential to those landscapes acting as species 

migration corridors in response to climate change. 

Their presence will also help to minimize the effects 

of climate change on species whose habitat patches 

may be damaged or destroyed. In urban areas 

these corridors are both especially valuable and 

especially vulnerable (to development, degradation, 

or fragmentation) (Bryant 2006). Management

strategies that protect existing corridors or create 

new ones through restoration or reclamation will be 

valuable in maintaining urban landscapes as regional 

migration corridors.

Examples of adaptation tactics are: 

Urban natural areas

• Using urban tree canopy and other geospatial 

data to identify new and existing migration 

corridors

• Acquiring property for preserves or creating 

easements on private landholdings to create 

corridors between existing natural areas

• Managing natural areas that act as corridors 

to promote their maximum habitat value (e.g., 

by removing invasive species) and prioritizing 

management in those locations

• Creating artificial corridors (e.g., safe road 

crossings) at key dispersal or migration 

locations for wildlife (Beier and Noss 1998)

Developed urban sites

• Managing areas that could act as corridors 

between natural areas to mimic habitat and 

ecosystem structure of the natural habitat (e.g., 

by maintaining or promoting oak canopy cover 

in a residential development between two 

oak woodland natural areas while avoiding 

the creation of ecological traps in these areas 

(Battin 2004)

• Managing riparian corridors within otherwise 

highly developed landscapes to provide habitat 

value and ecosystem services (Groffman et al. 

2003).
6

Chapter 4. Urban Forest Adaptation Strategies and Approac

Strategy 8: Maintain and enhance

genetic diversity 

Reduced gene flow of remnant native populations 

and the prevalence of genetically identical cultivars 

in urban areas contribute to a reduction in genetic 

diversity of the urban forest. Urban natural areas 

are heavily fragmented, which can cause reduced 

gene flow and lead to a decline in genetic diversity 

(Young et al. 1993). Morphological uniformity is a

priority in street and park trees. Most street and park 

trees are cultivars, or are grown from seeds that are 

sourced from a small number of parents to ensure 

that trees have predictable growth, survivorship, 

and tolerances. At the same time, morphological 

uniformity often comes at the expense of genetic 

diversity, and in changing conditions, a lack of 

genetic diversity may prove to be deleterious to 

long-term survivorship (Raupp et al. 2006). For

example, if all of the maple trees in an area are a 

single cultivar, they will probably react to climate 

change in a nearly identical manner. Increasing 

genetic diversity in the urban forest will ensure that 

some individuals are better equipped to withstand 

climate-induced stressors.

Approaches: 

8.1. Use seeds, germplasm, and other

genetic material from across a greater 

geographic range

Although seeds from local sources may be the 

best adapted for an area currently, they may be 

maladapted to the changing climate in coming 

decades (Vitt et al. 2010). Alternatively, seeds that

are native to areas with a climate similar to the 

projected climate of the target region may have 

higher survivorship than local seeds if other habitat 

factors (e.g., soils) are also suitable (Pedlar et al. 

2012). In addition, the unique climate in an urban

center may already necessitate a different set of 

genetic material than for more pristine natural 

areas. Trials can help ensure that seedlings from 

distant areas will thrive in a new environment 

before large-scale plantings are undertaken. Other 

risks associated with introducing seeds from distant 

sources include the potential for also introducing 

exotic pests and diseases, or the possibility that the 

introduced species may become invasive, hybridize 

with other local species, or cause outbreeding 

depression (Ricciardi and Simberloff 2009, Vitt et al. 

2010). These risks are reduced, but not eliminated,

when a species is moved within its native range 

(Pedlar et al. 2012

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

All urban sites

• Using climate change projections to determine 

what region currently has a climate that is 

similar to the expected future climate in the 

target area and sourcing seeds from this area

• Creating a dialogue with nurseries and 

growers to ensure that seeds are being selected 

from healthy trees in areas that have a climate 

that is similar to the target area’s expected 

climate

• Using mapping programs to track the origin 

of seed stocks and monitor their success to 

inform seed sourcing decisions from in the 

future

• Sourcing seeds from a variety of areas to 

increase overall genetic diversity

• Planting and producing individuals collected 

or propagated from a variety of sites 

(including drought- and flood-prone areas) 

because of uncertainty in future conditions.

8.2. Favor existing genotypes that are better 

adapted to future conditions

Urban trees are generally selected for their shape, 

height, pest and disease tolerance, and tolerance of 

harsh urban conditions. However, other factors such 

as tolerance of heat, drought, wind, or flooding may 

become more important under changing climate 

conditions. Some individuals in a diverse forest 

may already possess genotypes that make them 

more resistant to pests, drought, or other climaterelated changes (Millar et al. 2007). Identifying 

genotypes that will be adapted to future conditions 

will be a complex endeavor, given the range of 

different stressors that may be intensified directly 

or indirectly due to climate change. Through time, 

these individuals could be identified through 

monitoring and research and used to propagate 

future generations. 
6

Chapter 4. Urban Forest Adaptation Strategies and Approac

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

All urban sites

• Collecting and planting seeds from individuals 

that have survived dieback events (such as 

pest outbreaks or drought) as these individuals 

may have resistant genotypes

• Collecting and planting seeds from individuals 

that have survived extreme weather events 

such as droughts or floods as they may be 

more tolerant of these stressors. 

8.3. Use new genotypes that are better

adapted to future threats and conditions

It may be easier to introduce new genetic diversity 

into urban forests compared to natural forests, 

because it is already routine practice to introduce 

cultivars of a given species. With care, the 

introduction of new cultivars can be used to create a 

more resilient urban forest. In many cases, cultivars 

for a given species have already been developed 

for several different climate zones. For example, 

the sugar maple cultivar ‘Unity’ was developed for 

hardiness in Manitoba (USDA zone 3), and ‘Astis’ 

was bred to thrive in the U.S. Southwest (zone 5). As

the climate changes, cultivars that were developed 

for drier and warmer regions may be best suited for 

new locations. Using cultivars to increase genetic 

diversity may be suitable only for developed urban 

sites, however, because these individuals may not 

reproduce in natural areas or otherwise may not 

thrive in a natural ecosystem.

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Developed urban sites

• Using cultivars of species that will be better 

suited for hotter and drier climates

• Working with growers to create new genotypes 

and cultivars of currently planted species that 

will be best adapted to climate changes

• Using a variety of cultivars to increase overall 

genetic diversity

• Planting disease-resistant cultivars that had 

been previously lost due to pests or disease in 

order to reestablish a form of this species on 

the landscape, such as disease-resistant elm or 

chestnut.

Strategy 9: Facilitate composition

adjustments through species 

transitions

Urban areas already contain a broad mixture of 

species that come from outside of the area. Because 

these species evolved in different climates, they will 

probably have very different tolerances to future 

climate conditions. In the urban landscape, fostering 

species transitions is less a question of whether to 

assist migration of species from other geographies; 

this is already a common occurrence. Instead, it is 

more about deciding when and where to incorporate 

species into forests and plantings in different habitats 

and land uses. These species could be nonnative taxa 

or species that are regionally native, that is, those 

from the same region but not currently growing at 

that particular location. In addition to increasing the 

climatic resilience of the urban landscape, urban 

forests could also facilitate the migration of species 

that will be favored under future climate to new 

habitats at or beyond the edges of their current range 

(Woodall et al. 2010)

Approaches: 

9.1. Favor or restore native species that are 

expected to be adapted to future conditions

Selecting native species already present in an urban 

area that are likely to do well under a range of future 

climate conditions can be a low-risk approach for 

transitioning to future climate conditions. Native 

species can provide important ecosystem services 

such as habitat for vertebrate and invertebrate 

species, and do not carry a risk of becoming 

invasive, spreading new diseases, or leading to 

genetic mixing. However, there may be a limited set 

of native species that will be able to withstand future 

climate conditions and also be adapted to harsh 

urban environments. Therefore, this approach will 

probably need to be balanced with other approaches 

to ensure sufficient biodiversity in an area. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Planting native seedlings in restoration 

projects that are likely to do well based on 

climate model projections and information 

about climatic tolerances. 
70

Chapter 4. Urban Forest Adaptation Strategies and Approac

Developed urban sites

• Prioritizing native species that are near their 

northern range limit when promoting and 

developing native species for use in urban 

planting lists.

9.2. Establish or encourage new mixes of

native species

Future conditions in urban areas are likely to become 

especially extreme, with higher peaks in temperature 

and moisture than might be seen in nonurban 

landscapes (McCarthy et al. 2010). However,

considerable uncertainty exists in what future 

conditions will be, especially at the site level. Thus, 

encouraging new mixtures of native species and 

regionally, but not locally, native species in forest 

communities and plantings could help these systems 

adapt and maintain ecological function (Millar et 

al. 2007). This approach could also discourage 

invasion by exotic invasive species (Naeem et al. 

2000). Managers may need to prioritize diversity 

(both in terms of species as well as functional groups 

and phylogenetic lineages) over historical species 

combinations to increase community resilience.

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Planting a mixture of locally and regionally 

native species during ecosystem restoration to 

allow for uncertainty in future conditions at 

the site level, and not necessarily planting just 

those species that are best adapted to current 

site conditions or that made up the historical 

community on the site 

• Creating heterogeneous conditions in canopy 

structure, ground layer, and hydrology that 

will allow a variety of species to become 

established.

Developed urban sites

• Including a diverse mix of locally and 

regionally native species in plantings, 

especially in plantings that are near natural 

areas.

9.3. Select tree species to match current and

future site conditions 

Many trees in urban areas are individually selected 

for a particular site, allowing a high degree of 

flexibility. Species selection for a given site can also 

take likely future climate conditions into account. 

For example, flood-tolerant species may be selected 

for areas that fall into a moderate-risk flood zone 

because flooding in the area is projected to increase. 

Matching planted trees to a range of current and 

future conditions is likely to be more feasible than 

attempting to alter growing conditions to match 

a preferred tree species. Furthermore, selecting 

trees that are known to be well matched to growing 

conditions may increase the trees’ ability to reach 

maturity, contribute to a healthy forest, and provide 

environmental benefits (Nowak et al. 2006).

Examples of adaptation tactics are: 

Urban natural areas

• Planting dry-mesic species in mesic sites that 

are projected to become drier 

• Planting heat-sensitive species on north slopes 

or in cold air drainages. 

Developed urban sites

• Selecting species that can withstand poor site 

conditions near roads maintained with salt, 

sand, or other winter additives and that also 

can tolerate a range of other climate-related 

stressors 

• Selecting trees that are hardier to extreme 

storm events and less likely to break up when 

pruned correctly, especially in wind-prone 

areas

• Planting tree species that are less sensitive to 

increased flooding and ponding in low-lying 

areas expected to get wetter. 

9.4. Protect future-adapted seedlings and

saplings 

A wide variety of potentially damaging agents and 

practices are present in the urban environment, 

including many direct anthropogenic influences that 

are less of a concern in nonurban landscapes (Clark 

et al. 1997). Care should be taken to avoid damaging

those species, communities, and ecosystems that 
7

Chapter 4. Urban Forest Adaptation Strategies and Approac

are likely to be most well adapted to future climates 

during development of restoration and management 

projects. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are: 

Urban natural areas

• Protecting seedlings and saplings of desirable 

species during restoration and management 

operations by using barriers or fencing to 

discourage trampling.

Developed urban sites

• Avoiding damage to existing young trees of 

future-adapted species and cultivars during 

redevelopment projects.

9.5. Disfavor species that are distinctly

maladapted

Urban areas are expected to experience especially 

rapid changes in climatic extremes, and some 

species at the edges of their natural ranges 

may more quickly become maladapted to these 

conditions (Walther et al. 2002). In addition, urban 

environments are already extreme in many senses 

and more species may eventually become poorly 

adapted there. For example, species whose range is 

projected to encompass an urban area may not be 

able to tolerate conditions in more-extreme urban 

microclimates.

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Using information from especially extreme 

urban sites or areas with similar climatic 

extremes and fluctuations to determine which 

native species are likely to decline

• Selectively removing or not replacing species 

that are not drought-, heat-, or flood-tolerant to 

promote establishment of more-tolerant native 

or near-native species.

Developed urban sites

• Selectively removing or not replacing species 

that are not drought-, heat-, or flood-tolerant

• Protecting healthy legacy trees that fail 

to regenerate, while deemphasizing their 

importance in the mix of species being planted 

or regenerated.

9.6. Manage for species or genotypes with 

wide moisture and temperature tolerances

Urban areas often experience even greater stress 

from heat, flooding, and drought than natural areas 

due to suboptimal growing conditions and high 

amounts of impervious cover. This additional stress, 

coupled with the uncertainty inherent in future 

climate projections, means that selecting for any 

particular future scenario may have some risk. A 

focus on species with large latitudinal ranges and 

wide tolerances may allow for better resilience 

(Millar et al. 2007). 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Planting seedlings of native species from a 

wide range of source locations (including nonlocal populations) when conducting restoration 

and reclamation treatments

• Using prescribed fire to favor species that 

have very broad latitudinal ranges and 

environmental tolerances.

Developed urban sites

• Planting a variety of both cultivars and wild 

genotypes for a given species

• Encouraging the planting of species that are 

adapted to wide tolerances rather than just 

specific current conditions (e.g., a species 

that is both drought- and flood-tolerant) in 

municipal planting lists. 

9.7. Introduce species that are expected to 

be adapted to future conditions

Urban sites can act as locations for incorporation 

of regionally native species and could potentially 

help facilitate the movement of species within 

or outside of their current ranges (Woodall et al. 

2010). Southern or drought-adapted genotypes and

populations can also be incorporated into urban 

areas to help facilitate the adaptation of species 

and communities in the region to future climates 

(Millar et al. 2007). This idea is not new to urban 

forestry: Urban foresters have moved species across 

states, continents, and even oceans for centuries. 

However, the emphasis of this approach is to focus 

on those species that are most likely to align with 
72

Chapter 4. Urban Forest Adaptation Strategies and Approac

future climate conditions. This approach can include 

relatively low-risk actions, such as moving a species 

to slightly north of its current range, but could 

also include riskier actions such as introducing a 

nonnative species from another continent. Careful 

consideration of these high-risk actions is warranted, 

especially before widespread implementation. 

Smaller trials may be helpful in assessing 

invasiveness and other issues.

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Incorporating regionally, but not locally, 

native species as well as nonnative species 

into reclamation projects in degraded habitats 

to assess their viability and aggressiveness

• Encouraging southern species that become 

established in natural areas.

Developed urban sites

• Increasing the representation of or 

incorporating new regionally native or 

likely future native species in urban planting 

projects, for example, Kentucky coffeetree or 

tuliptree in upper Midwestern cities

• Planting nonnative species from analogous 

climates. 

9.8. Move at-risk species to locations that 

are expected to provide habitat

The climate may be changing more rapidly than 

some species can migrate, and the movement of 

species may be restricted by land use or other 

impediments between areas of suitable habitat 

(Davis and Shaw 2001, Iverson et al. 2004a).

Fragmentation of habitat and physical barriers in 

urban areas may make this even more challenging, 

especially for rare or threatened species. Speciesrescue assisted migration, focused on avoiding 

extinction by physically relocating climatethreatened species, may be an option to consider 

in some cases. This approach is best implemented 

with great caution, incorporating due consideration 

of the uncertainties inherent in climate change, the 

sparse record of previous examples, and continued 

uncertainties of forest response (Ricciardi and 

Simberloff 2009).

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

All urban sites

• Planting or seeding a rare or threatened plant 

species that is at risk for extinction to a newly 

suitable habitat outside its current range 

• Assisting the migration of wildlife around 

barriers by trapping and releasing in newly 

suitable locations. 

Strategy 10: Realign urba

ecosystems after disturbance 

Urban areas, in particular, may face dramatic 

impacts as a result of climate change-related 

alterations in disturbances, including pest 

outbreaks, floods, and storm events. As with natural 

ecosystems, some of the best opportunities for 

addressing disturbance-related impacts may occur 

immediately after the disturbance event; having a 

suite of preplanned options in place may facilitate 

an earlier and more flexible response. Urban areas 

faced with disasters are provided the opportunity 

to rebuild, and can use this opportunity to create an 

urban landscape that is better aligned with current 

and future climate conditions. 

Approaches: 

10.1. Promptly revegetate sites after

disturbance

Changes in climate will probably lead to increases 

in large-scale disturbances such as floods and wind 

storms. These disturbances can lead to catastrophic 

losses of trees and other vegetation in some areas. 

Quickly reestablishing vegetation on disturbed sites 

will be necessary to maintain the climate mitigation 

services associated with urban forests and could help 

reduce the impacts of invasive species. In highly 

developed areas, replanting may be the only way 

to ensure the presence of species that provide the 

desired ecosystem services such as shade, aesthetics, 

or stormwater control. In natural areas, where a 

native seedbank may remain, replanting or managing 

natural regeneration may be beneficial to ensure the 

area has a species composition and structure that are 

aligned with management goals. 
73

Chapter 4. Urban Forest Adaptation Strategies and Approac

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Managing for natural regeneration of native 

species after disturbance through such 

practices as protecting seedlings and saplings 

from herbivory

• If possible, using the disturbance as an 

opportunity to eradicate or reduce the impact 

of invasive species

• Prioritizing planting of trees into recently 

disturbed areas

• Allowing nonnative species to remain as 

part of a novel mix of species, rather than 

eradicating these species.

Developed urban sites

• Planting new trees, with an emphasis on 

increasing diversity

• Spacing out planting over several years to 

create a diverse age and size class structure in 

the urban canopy.

10.2. Prioritize remediation of remaining

trees following disturbance 

In most cases, disturbances will not lead to complete 

loss of vegetation, but the remaining trees may have 

some degree of damage. After urgent severe hazards 

are dealt with, it is important to assess the damage 

to the remaining urban forest. This is the time to 

prioritize the level of importance for removal of 

severely damaged trees. Every attempt should be 

made to retain and restore amenity trees, especially 

legacy trees. The retention of these trees can help 

provide ecosystem services while new trees and 

other vegetation are becoming established. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Retaining nonhazardous dead and damaged 

trees for wildlife habitat and other ecosystem 

services.

Developed urban sites

• Removing remaining severely damaged trees 

that were not immediately removed during 

emergency response

• Implementing appropriate tree crown 

restoration pruning strategies for less severely 

damaged trees

• If possible, standing fallen trees back up and 

using stakes or guy wires for support until 

the root system is structurally stable (usually 

newly planted trees or trees less than 4 inches 

in diameter).

10.3. Realign significantly disrupted

ecosystems to meet expected future 

conditions

Many urban areas may experience such significant 

alterations from human- and climate-induced 

disturbance that it will become difficult to 

restore systems that reflect native ecosystems of 

the past. Management of these systems may be 

realigned to create necessary changes in species 

composition and structure to better adapt forests 

to current and anticipated environments, rather 

than historical pre-disturbance conditions (Millar 

et al. 2007, Spittlehouse and Stewart 2003). In 

more developed areas, this could mean designing 

“novel ecosystems” that incorporate both natural 

and engineered elements and contain entirely 

new species compositions (Hobbs et al. 2006).

Developing clear plans that establish processes for 

realigning significantly altered ecosystems before 

undertaking these actions will allow for more 

thoughtful discussion and better coordination with 

other adaptation responses. 

Examples of adaptation tactics are:

Urban natural areas

• Allowing community transition by planting 

future-adapted species within a site that is 

already declining or is expected to decline 

(e.g., converting a mesic maple forest to an 

oak savanna)

• Allowing nonnative species to remain as 

part of a novel mix of species, rather than 

eradicating these species.

Developed urban sites

• Designing “novel ecosystems” composed of a 

carefully selected mix of native and nonnative 

species that align with projected future 

climates. 
74

Chapter 5. Adaptation Workboo

A 

D 

A 

P 

T 

A 

T 

I 

O 

N 

 

W 

O 

R 

K 

B 

O 

O 

K

Climate change is becoming an increasingly 

important consideration in land management 

planning and decisionmaking at a variety of spatial 

scales. This chapter outlines a process to help natural 

resource managers incorporate climate change 

considerations into management planning and 

activities, while complementing existing processes 

and procedures for making decisions (Box 14).

It also contains instructions for the Adaptation 

Workbook, which helps land managers work through 

this process step-by-step and identify actions that 

can help ecosystems adapt to climate change.

Incorporating Climate Change 

Considerations into Management

Land management agencies and organizations are 

under increasing pressure to integrate climate change 

considerations into planning and implementation 

activities. In recent years, a great deal of work has 

occurred to provide conceptual frameworks (e.g., 

Millar et al. 2007, Peterson et al. 2011), compil

adaptation strategies (e.g., Heinz Center 2008, Heller 

and Zavaleta 2009, Ogden and Innes 2008), and 

provide tools to support management decisions (e.g., 

Cross et al. 2012, Morelli et al. 2012, Stein et al

2014). At the same time, there remains a critical gap

between the synthesis of scientific information on 

climate change vulnerability and adaptation and the 

actual integration of these ideas into management 

plans and practices (Carlton et al. 2014)

This chapter describes a flexible approach to 

address this issue and translate largely broad-scale 

and conceptual information into tangible actions 

that can be used by forest managers and other 

Box 14

Using the Adaptation Workboo

The Adaptation Workbook can help natural

resource managers:

• View climate change as an emerging 

management consideration that can be 

incorporated into many aspects of existing 

management planning and decisionmaking

• Integrate a wide variety of adaptatio

strategies and approaches into management 

decisions based upon existing management 

goals and objectives

• Discuss climate change-related topics 

with coworkers, team members, and other 

collaborators

• Document considerations and decisions 

regarding climate change and management.

The Adaptation Workbook does not

• Make recommendations or set guidelines for 

management decisions or actions 

• Establish a plan for implementation of th

selected tactics and monitoring efforts. 

Rather, that step is reserved for managers to 

pursue after completing the workbook.
7

Chapter 5. Adaptation Workboo

A 

D 

A 

P 

T 

A 

T 

I 

O 

N 

 

W 

O 

R 

K 

B 

O 

O 

K

natural resource professionals to advance their onthe-ground work. It is designed to accommodate 

a diversity of management goals, ecosystems, 

ownership types, spatial scales (e.g., stand, large 

ownership), and levels of decisionmaking (e.g., 

planning, problem solving, implementation) 

(Janowiak et al. 2014b, Swanston and Janowiak

2012). Through this approach, managers begin with

the current management goals and objectives for 

a particular forest management project (Fig. 12).

Climate change is then incorporated as an additional 

“filter” through which to consider potential 

management responses and outcomes. Once 

adaptation actions are identified to help achieve 

management goals, monitoring is used to evaluate 

whether the goals and objectives were achieved, as 

well as to assess the role of the selected adaptation 

actions in meeting the desired outcome. This 

approach draws upon regionally specific information 

on anticipated climate change effects, such as 

vulnerability assessments, as well as the Adaptation 

Strategies and Approaches in Chapters 3 and 4 of 

this document. 

One of the strengths of this approach is the 

flexibility that is built in to account for different 

future conditions. Given the need to make decisions 

despite incomplete information and to “learn 

by doing,” adaptive management principles are 

well suited for incorporating climate change 

considerations into management (Millar et al. 2012,

Stankey et al. 2005). Several aspects of adaptive

management are evident in working through this 

approach, including explicit acknowledgment and 

consideration of uncertainty, iterative learning to 

improve understanding and reduce uncertainty, 

integration of monitoring, and a focus on continued 

improvement to achieve desired outcomes (Larson 

et al. 2013, Williams et al. 2007). In particular,

the intentional use of monitoring to evaluate the 

effectiveness of adaptation actions helps to inform 

future management decisions. Further, because the 

individual steps mirror other processes used during 

management planning, ideas generated through 

the consideration of climate change can be easily 

incorporated into management plans, silvicultural 

prescriptions, or other plans.

Figure 12.—An illustration of the adaptation process used to incorporate climate change as a management consideration 

and help ecosystems adapt to the anticipated effects of climate change. Additional resources provide information and 

tools that support the process.
7

Chapter 5. Adaptation Workboo

A

D

A

P

T

A

T

I

O

N

W

O

R

K

B

O

O

K

Another strength of this approach is that hundreds 

of natural resource managers across diverse forest 

management and conservation projects have 

tested and applied it. A variety of public, private, 

nongovernmental, and tribal natural resource 

managers are using this approach to develop 

projects that implement a diversity of adaptation 

actions while also meeting manager-identified goals 

(Janowiak et al. 2014b). More than 200 adaptation

demonstrations have been developed, ranging in 

size from stand-level silvicultural prescriptions to 

management plans covering thousands of acres. 

These demonstrations serve as examples of how 

this process has been applied in real-world natural 

resource management planning and projects. 

Examples of these projects are provided in Chapter 

and at www.forestadaptation.org/demos.

About the Adaptation Workbook

The Adaptation Workbook is intended to help natural 

resource managers consider climate change in 

resource management activities. It builds upon the 

adaptation process described earlier in this chapter 

(Fig. 12), and provides additional details and items

for consideration in each of the five steps. Rather 

than providing specific guidance or replacing other 

forms of management planning, the Adaptation 

Workbook draws upon the experience and expertise 

of natural resource professionals and complements 

existing management planning and decisionmaking 

systems.

Because the Adaptation Workbook is designed to be 

flexible and used in a wide range of applications, it 

provides a general structure that can then be adjusted 

to include more or less information as desired. Three 

different versions of the Adaptation Workbook are 

available to lead managers through the same series 

of steps and considerations; managers can select the 

version that best meets their needs (Box 15

 The Adaptation Workbook is designed to supplement 

and support existing decisionmaking processes in the 

U.S. Forest Service and other agencies or institutions, but 

does not in any way replace, supersede, or circumvent 

those processes.

For all versions of the Adaptation Workbook, 

natural resource managers are asked to draw upon 

information from a variety of resources, such as 

local and regional vulnerability assessments and the 

Adaptation Strategies and Approaches presented 

in Chapter 2 of this document. Because the 

understanding of the impacts of climate change is 

continually changing and growing, we recommend 

that users consult recent information and resources 

that are relevant to their particular location and 

management interests. Several resources are 

recommended where appropriate. We also encourage 

users to consult with scientists and others with 

expertise on climate change impacts to obtain 

relevant and up-to-date information to include in this 

process.

Getting Starte

To get an overview of the process before you begin 

using the Adaptation Workbook, it is recommended 

that you first review the directions for all five steps. 

Select a version of the workbook that meets your 

needs (Box 15). Then collect any information

including relevant maps and management plans, 

which may be needed to provide additional 

information about your project area (Table 3). 

Tables have been provided in the workbook to 

show how information is arranged, and you can use 

electronic spreadsheets for capturing your notes 

while working on the short or complete versions 

of the workbook (Appendixes 4 and 5). The online

version of the workbook is available at 

www.adaptationworkbook.org. 

The Adaptation Workbook can be used by an 

individual or by a team of specialists, and this will 

influence how the process is completed. If you are 

working individually, it is likely that you will work 

your way through each of the steps more or less in 

sequence. If you are working as part of a team, it 

may be more efficient for one or two people to pull 

together much of the needed information to create 

initial drafts of Steps  and 2 (Table 3), which the

larger group can then review and discuss. 
77

Chapter 5. Adaptation Workboo

A 

D 

A 

P 

T 

A 

T 

I 

O 

N 

 

W 

O 

R 

K 

B 

O 

O 

K

Box 15

Other Adaptation Workbook Version

The Adaptation Workbook outlines a broad, 

adaptive approach for integrating climate change 

into management while also prompting users 

to consider specific information and ideas that 

will help inform decisionmaking. Although the 

comprehensive version of the workbook featured in 

this chapter provides a starting point for those who 

are new to the process or prefer to view it all in one 

document, other versions of the workbook may be 

more appropriate for other applications (Table 2). 

• The online version of the workbook 

(www.adaptationworkbook.org) follows from 

the workbook presented in this chapter, but 

includes additional capabilities for integrating 

regional climate change impacts from 

multiple vulnerability assessments. 

• A short version of the workbook is included 

in Appendix 4 of this document. It leads

users step-by-step through the “big 

questions” of the overarching adaptation 

process. Because of this condensed 

approach, it is more suitable for use by 

individuals who have previously used the 

comprehensive or online version of the 

workbook and for less complex projects.

Table 2.―Explanation of the different versions of the Adaptation Workbook

Version Contains Most suitable for users who are:

Comprehensive 

(worksheets follow 

p. 145 in Appendix 5)

A complete set of climate 

change considerations 

and detailed step-by-step 

instructions for using the 

adaptation process

First-time users of the workbook 

Less familiar with the information on 

projected climate change impacts 

Working in situations where the 

consideration of climate change in 

management needs to be documented

Short (worksheets 

follow p. 138 in 

Appendix 4)

A streamlined set of 

considerations that uses the 

overarching adaptation process

Familiar with the adaptation process or 

have used the comprehensive workbook 

before 

Familiar with projected climate change 

impacts 

Working in situations that do not need 

detailed documentation

Online (www

adaptationworkbook.

org)

A comprehensive set of 

climate change considerations 

and detailed step-by-step 

instructions for using the 

adaptation process, as well 

as links to regionally relevant 

information and resources

Comfortable working with an online tool 

First-time or repeat users of the workbook 

Working on relatively small projects, such 

as a small property or single management 

unit
78

Chapter 5. Adaptation Workboo

A 

D 

A 

P 

T 

A 

T 

I 

O 

N 

 

W 

O 

R 

K 

B 

O 

O 

K

Table 3.—A list of resources and information that may be helpful in completing the Adaptation

Workbook. If a team is going to complete the workbook, it is recommended that relevant information 

from this list is prepared and disseminated to team members before completing the workbook.

Workbook step Materials needed Potential sources for informatio

All steps Adaptation workbook worksheets URL for files

Step 1 Relevant maps of the location, such as: 

 Aerial photos 

 Ownership, project, stand boundarie

Geographic information systems (GIS) databas

Mapping software, such as that available through 

Forest*A*Syst (www.forestasyst.org) or MyLandPlan 

(www.mylandplan.org)

Step 1 Management goals and objectives for 

the project area

Forest or land management plans 

Other planning document

Step 1 Information on past and future

management

Management records 

GIS databas

Steps 2 and 3 Information on regional projected

climate change effects on ecosystems

Forest Ecosystem Vulnerability Assessments

 (Box 2 on p. 7) 

Regional vulnerability assessments (selected list 

available at www.adaptationworkbook.org) 

Other vulnerability and impact assessments (see

Chapter 2 for more details on this type of information) 

Climate Change Resource Center 

 (www.fs.usda.gov/ccrc)

Steps 2 and 3 Location-specific information that may 

help assess anticipated climate change 

impacts, such as soils, hydrology, 

habitat type, or past management 

influences (see Steps 1 and 2 for more 

details)

Forest or land management plans 

Local or regional ecosystem descriptions and 

assessments 

GIS databases or mapping program

Management records 

Local expertise

Step 4 A list of potential adaptation 

approaches that may be suitable for 

your forest ecosystem

Adaptation Strategies and Approaches (Chapters 3 and 

4 of this document) 

Other lists of adaptation actions, such as the list at

www.adaptationpartners.org/library.php 

Available literature on forest adaptation to climate 

change (see the Literature Cited section and Appendix 1 

for some resources)

Step 5 Information about any forest inventory

or monitoring that is taking place in (or 

near, if relevant) to the project area 

Forest or land management plans 

Monitoring reports 

Other planning documents

Regional forest monitoring programs 
79

Chapter 5. Adaptation Workboo

A 

D 

A 

P 

T 

A 

T 

I 

O 

N 

 

W 

O 

R 

K 

B 

O 

O 

K

In general, it works well to organize information in 

the workbook by ecosystem types or management 

topics; these will generally be the same groupings 

as you would use for other management projects. 

Additionally, you may decide to further subdivide 

your project area into more precise ecosystem 

groupings or by management units or stands. 

After you have organized your information, it may 

be most effective to move through the workbook by 

completing a single step for all parts of the project, 

and then moving on to the next step (as opposed to 

completing Steps  through5 for a single ecosyste

type and then moving on to the next type). This 

allows for better consideration of the interactions 

between the different ecosystem types at a larger 

geographic level, such as across an entire project or 

property. It also tends to be a faster, more efficient 

way to complete the Adaptation Workbook. 

At times you might get ahead of your place in the 

workbook and have ideas for future steps; this can 

be a good thing. Although you will generally go 

through the workbook sequentially, you may find 

it helpful to jump ahead or circle back from time to 

time. If you find yourself jumping ahead, be sure 

to write your ideas down regardless of where in the 

process they fall, and then return to where you left 

off.
80

Chapter 5. Adaptation Workboo

A 

D 

A 

P 

T 

A 

T 

I 

O 

N 

 

W 

O 

R 

K 

B 

O 

O 

K

Step 1: DEFINE location, proj

and time frames 

Key Questions:

• Where are you working?

• What are your management goals and 

plans for this area?

About this Ste

This step records fundamental information about 

the project area or property that will be used for the 

workbook process. Because it serves as a starting 

point for the subsequent steps, management goals 

and objectives should be as specific as possible. 

In many instances, this information will already 

be available as part of a management plan or other 

planning document. If you will be going through the 

workbook as part of a group, it may be most efficient 

for one or two people to compile information for this 

step before any group discussions.

Description of Workbook Item

Project Area or Property – Name the project area 

or property. 

Location – Describe the geographic location of the 

area that you are using for this project. 

Ecosystem Type or Management Topic – List 

the ecosystem types or management topics that 

are relevant to your project area. Because this 

information is tied to the management goals and 

objectives, as well as how actions are implemented, 

you may want to subdivide areas based upon 

management units, stands, or other features. 

Note: Sometimes the current condition of an 

ecosystem is different from the desired future 

conditions, and management seeks to change the 

community over time. If the management goals or 

planned activities will include the conversion of 

the current ecosystem to a different type, clearly 

describe both the current and desired future type 

(and conditions, where appropriate).

Management Goals – List the management goals 

for the project area (Box 16). These may include th

desired future characteristics of the location, such as 

forest conditions, habitat characteristics, anticipated 

products, or other ecological features or services. 

Management Objectives – List any management 

objectives for the project area (Box 16). These wil

explain how management goals will be achieved. 

There may be multiple objectives for a single 

management goal.

Time Frames – List approximate time frames for 

implementing management actions and for achieving 

management goals and objectives. As a default, 

identify a point in both the short term (10 years or

less) and the long term (30 or more years) that you 

can use to consider and visualize how things may 

change over time.
8

Chapter 5. Adaptation Workboo

A 

D 

A 

P 

T 

A 

T 

I 

O 

N 

 

W 

O 

R 

K 

B 

O 

O 

K

Box 16

Goals and Objective

Management Goals 

Management goals are broad, general statements, 

usually not quantifiable, that express a desired 

state or process to be achieved (Society of 

American Foresters 2008). These could include 

desired future ecosystem conditions, habitat 

characteristics, forest products, or other services. 

They are often not attainable in the short term, 

and they provide the context for more specific 

objectives (Table 4). 

Management Objective

Management objectives are concise statements 

of measurable planned results that correspond 

to preestablished management goals and help to 

achieve a desired outcome (Society of American 

Foresters 2008). These objectives commonly 

include information on resources to be used and 

form the basis for further planning to define the 

precise steps to be taken to achieve the identified 

goals (Table 4). 

Table 4.―Examples of a management goal and a corresponding management objective

Management goal Management objective

Enhance tree vigor and quality Maintain annual growth of 1.5 cords per acre per year for the

next 15 years

Restore Kirtland’s warbler habitat Increase acreage of early successional pine habitats by

harvesting and replanting 20 acres every 10 years
82

Chapter 5. Adaptation Workboo

A 

D 

A 

P 

T 

A 

T 

I 

O 

N 

 

W 

O 

R 

K 

B 

O 

O 

K

Step 2: ASSESS site-spe

climate change impacts and 

vulnerabilities

Key Questions:

• How might the area be uniquely affected 

by climate change and subsequent impacts?

• How might regional impacts be different in 

the project area?

About this Ste

Climate change will have a wide variety of effects 

on the landscape, and not all places will respond 

similarly. For this reason, it is critical not only to 

think about the general (e.g., statewide or regional) 

anticipated effects of a changing climate on 

ecosystems, but also to consider how specific places 

on the landscape may be affected. 

In this step, you will consider broad-scale 

scientific information about the expected effects of 

climate change in your region using vulnerability 

assessments or other published sources. After 

identifying these relatively general impacts, you 

will use your expertise and experience to evaluate 

how your specific project area or property may be 

vulnerable to climate change. Because there is a 

great deal of variability among different locations, 

your understanding of specific site conditions in that 

location will help you to identify the more relevant 

management responses in later steps. 

Description of Workbook Item

Ecosystem Type or Management Topic – Insert 

the forest type(s) or management topic(s) that you 

identified in Step 1.

Regional Climate Change Impacts and 

Vulnerabilities – Begin by creating a list of relevant 

climate change impacts and vulnerabilities for the 

region that you are working in. You may also want 

to include the source of this information. Some 

of this information may be relevant to the entire 

project area or property, while other information 

may be specific to some of the ecosystem type(s) or 

management topics(s) that you identified in Step 1.

Many resources on climate change impacts and 

vulnerabilities are available, such as reports and 

peer-reviewed papers on climate change. Several 

regions have a vulnerability assessment that 

describes this information for an entire region, as 

well as by forest or community type (see Box 2 

on p. 7 for a short list of available assessments). If 

you are trying to determine whether a vulnerability 

assessment meets your needs, Chapter 2 provides a 

starting point. 

Climate Change Impacts and Vulnerabilities for 

the Project Area or Property – As you consider 

the general impacts and vulnerabilities (above), 

draw upon your experience and knowledge of 

this particular area to describe more specific ways 

that your project area or property may be affected 

by a changing climate (see Box 17 for a list of

considerations). For example, a forest may have 

greater vulnerability to anticipated increases in the 

frequency and intensity of storm events because 

the trees on site are more susceptible to windthrow. 

Alternatively, an area may have less risk from 

late-summer moisture stress due to its topographic 

position and high water table. 

Vulnerability Rating – Vulnerability is the 

susceptibility of a system to the adverse effects 

of climate change (Chapter 2). It is a function of 

its sensitivity to climatic changes, its exposure to 

those changes, and its ability to cope with climate 

change impacts with minimal disruption (Glick et 

al. 2011, Levina and Tirpak 2006) (Fig. 13). 

example, an ecosystem subject to few potential 

impacts and having a high adaptive capacity would 

be determined to have low vulnerability. 

• High – Potential climate change impacts are 

expected to exceed the ability of the ecosystem 

to cope with impacts. Ecosystems may 

undergo changes that will disrupt important 

ecosystem functions and key environmental 

benefits.
83

Chapter 5. Adaptation Workboo

A 

D 

A 

P 

T 

A 

T 

I 

O 

N 

 

W 

O 

R 

K 

B 

O 

O 

K

• Moderate – Potential climate change 

impacts are expected to alter ecosystems, but 

ecosystems will be able to cope with some 

impacts. 

• Low – Ecosystems are expected to readily 

cope with potential climate change impacts. 

It is not anticipated that climate change will 

have substantial negative effects on important 

ecosystem functions and environmental 

benefits.

Box 17

Climate Change and Your Project Area or Proper

Most of the available information on the potential 

effects of climate change has probably been 

developed for spatial scales that are larger than 

your project area. It is important to consider

not only this broad-scale information, but also 

how your particular project area may be more 

or less vulnerable to these effects. Factors that 

may influence risk and vulnerability for a specific 

location include:

• Landscape pattern

• Location, such as topographic position or 

proximity to water features

• Soil characteristics

• Management history or current management 

plans

• Species or structural composition

• Presence of or susceptibility to pests, 

disease, or nonnative species that may 

become more problematic under future 

climate conditions.

Figure 13.—Diagram 

that helps identify a 

vulnerability rating 

reflecting an ecosystem’s 

sensitivity to climatic 

changes, its exposure to 

those changes, and its 

capacity to adapt to those 

changes while maintaining 

its character and function. 

Adapted from Swanston 

and Janowiak (2012).
84

Chapter 5. Adaptation Workboo

A 

D 

A 

P 

T 

A 

T 

I 

O 

N 

 

W 

O 

R 

K 

B 

O 

O 

K

Step 3: EVALUATE manage

objectives given projected impacts 

and vulnerabilities

Key Questions:

• What management challenges or 

opportunities might occur? 

• Can current management meet 

management goals?

• Do goals need to change?

About this Ste

In earlier steps, you defined management goals 

and objectives for your project area (Step 1)

and considered climate change impacts and 

vulnerabilities for this area (Step 2). In this step, 

you will identify management challenges and 

opportunities associated with climate change. You 

will also evaluate the feasibility of meeting your 

management objectives under current management 

and consider whether they should be altered or 

refined to better account for anticipated climate 

change impacts. 

Note: It is inevitable that discussion will jump ahead 

at times to identifying approaches or developing 

tactics that can help forests cope with the anticipated 

impacts; rather than lose these ideas or skip critical 

steps in the process, be sure to record any ideas that 

will be useful in later steps.

Description of Workbook Item

Ecosystem Type or Management Topic – Insert 

the forest type(s) or management topic(s) that you 

identified in Step 1.

Management Objectives – Insert the management 

objectives that you identified in Step 1.

Challenges to Meeting Management Objective 

with Climate Change – List ways in which climate 

change impacts and associated vulnerabilities may 

make it more difficult to achieve each management 

objective. For example, warmer temperatures and 

drier conditions may limit regeneration of a desired 

species and make it more challenging to maintain 

that species into the future. Focus on concerns 

related to ecological or environmental challenges; 

other considerations (e.g., financial, social) will be 

included later in this step.

Opportunities for Meeting Management 

Objective with Climate Change – List ways 

in which climate change impacts and associated 

vulnerabilities may make it easier to achieve each 

management objective or create new management 

opportunities. For example, increases in smalland medium-scale disturbance may help increase 

structural heterogeneity within a stand or landscape. 

Focus on concerns related to ecological or 

environmental challenges; other considerations (e.g., 

financial, social) will be included later in this step.

Feasibility of Meeting Management Objective 

under Current Management – Consider how 

the challenges and opportunities that you have 

identified may affect the feasibility of meeting your 

management objectives using current (businessas-usual) management strategies and actions. 

Feasibility can be determined for individual or 

multiple time frames (e.g., short-term versus longterm).

• High – Existing management options can 

be used to overcome the challenges for 

meeting management objectives under climate 

change. Opportunities are likely to outweigh 

challenges. 

• Moderate – Some challenges to meeting 

management objectives under climate change 

have been identified, but these can probably 

be overcome by using existing management 

options. Additional resources or enhanced 

efforts may be necessary to counteract key 

challenges or promote new opportunities.

• Low – Existing management options may 

not be sufficient to overcome challenges to 

meeting management objectives under climate 

change. Additional resources or enhanced 

efforts will be necessary to counteract key 

challenges or promote new opportunities.
8

Chapter 5. Adaptation Workboo

A 

D 

A 

P 

T 

A 

T 

I 

O 

N 

 

W 

O 

R 

K 

B 

O 

O 

K

Other Considerations – List any social, financial, 

administrative, or other factors that are part of your 

decision to pursue your management objectives. 

You may also want to note reasons that you would 

continue pursuing a management objective with 

low feasibility, such as requirement by law, a high 

social value, or if an area with low feasibility has 

the highest likelihood of success when compared to 

other areas with low feasibility.

 Slow Down to Consider

Climate change may make some management goals 

and objectives more difficult to achieve in the future 

(Joyce et al. 2008, 2009; Millar et al. 2007), and 

there may be situations in which they need to be 

altered or refined to better account for anticipated 

climate change impacts. After completing Step 3, 

you should have a much better idea about whether 

your management objectives are feasible, given the 

current management options that are available to 

you. You have also identified social, economic, or 

other considerations that may affect your decision to 

pursue certain management objectives.

Are you going to continue with the management 

objectives you have identified? 

If you have high feasibility of meeting your 

management objectives and these objectives are still 

sound given projected climate change impacts, you 

can proceed to Step 4 to explore adaptation actions.

If some or all of your management objectives have 

moderate or low feasibility, or if they no longer 

seem sensible under climate change (e.g., managing 

a species that very likely will experience a severe 

decline), you may reconsider your management 

objectives or your broader management goals. 

You can record any potential issues or changes in 

the “Other Considerations” section of Step 3 or 

return to Step  to alter your management goals

and objectives. Use the information that you 

have gathered up to this point to create goals and 

objectives that are more likely to succeed, given 

projected impacts from climate change.
8

Chapter 5. Adaptation Workboo

A 

D 

A 

P 

T 

A 

T 

I 

O 

N 

 

W 

O 

R 

K 

B 

O 

O 

K

Step 4: IDENTIFY adapta

approaches and tactics for 

implementation

Key Question:

• What actions can enhance the ability of the 

ecosystem to adapt to anticipated changes 

and meet management goals?

About this Ste

New or modified management practices may be 

needed to address the challenges to ecosystem 

management brought about by climate change. 

The Adaptation Workbook helps you identify and 

evaluate specific management actions that can help 

prepare for changing conditions given the challenges 

and opportunities that were identified in Step 3. 

In doing this you will generate a custom set of 

adaptation tactics—prescriptive actions specifically 

designed for your project area or property and your 

unique management objectives.

The step also helps you create a clear rationale 

for your suggested tactics by connecting them to 

broader adaptation ideas. Chapters 3 and 4 of this 

document contain menus of Adaptation Strategies 

and Approaches for forest management and 

conservation in natural and urban forests. As you 

brainstorm and evaluate ideas for adaptation tactics, 

you’ll also link these specific ideas to the list of 

more general adaptation strategies and approaches. 

These links will provide important context and 

rationale to justify your adaptation tactics. If you 

need help brainstorming specific adaptation tactics, 

you can use the menu of strategies and approaches 

as a springboard to develop specific tactics that can 

help achieve your management objectives.

Description of Workbook Item

Ecosystem Type or Management Topic – Insert the 

ecosystem type(s) or management topic(s) that you 

identified in Step 1.

Adaptation Actions

• Adaptation Approach – Review the 

Adaptation Strategies and Approaches 

(Chapters 3 and 4) and select any approaches 

that you think may be applicable. Also include 

any additional approaches that you devise. 

• Tactics – Describe specific actions that you 

can take in your project area to implement the 

adaptation approaches using your experience 

and expertise. 
87

Chapter 5. Adaptation Workboo

A 

D 

A 

P 

T 

A 

T 

I 

O 

N 

 

W 

O 

R 

K 

B 

O 

O 

K

Because adaptation approaches provide context 

for specific tactics that will be implemented, we 

encourage you to include both; however, you may 

find it easier to list tactics first and then go back to 

identify the corresponding strategies and approaches. 

Time Frames – List the approximate time frames in 

which the tactics would be implemented. The nature 

of the action can help determine an appropriate time 

frame. Some actions may occur in the short term 

(i.e., next  years), whereas others may not occur

for several decades or will occur only in certain 

situations (such as after a large disturbance). 

Benefits – For each tactic, list any benefits 

associated with using this tactic. For example, note if 

a tactic addresses your biggest challenge, addresses 

multiple challenges, or has a side benefit, such as 

improving overall ecosystem health.

Drawbacks and Barriers – For each tactic, list 

any drawbacks that may arise, such as negative 

ecosystem impacts, or any barriers to implementing 

the tactic, including legal, financial, infrastructural, 

social, or physical barriers.

Practicability of Tactic – An adaptation tactic 

is practicable if it is both effective (it will meet 

the desired intent) and feasible (it is capable of 

being implemented). Both of these characteristics 

increase the likelihood of success and are desirable 

in selected adaptation tactics. Consider the benefits, 

drawbacks, and barriers associated with each tactic 

in order to determine the practicability of meeting 

your management goals and objectives using that 

tactic (see Box 10 on p. 34). This is based on

ecological and nonecological factors. 

• High – The tactic is expected to be both 

effective and feasible. Benefits of the tactic 

clearly outweigh drawbacks and barriers. 

• Moderate – There are drawbacks or 

barriers that could reduce the effectiveness 

or feasibility of the tactic. The use of other 

adaptation tactics or management actions may 

make it possible to overcome some drawbacks 

or barriers.

• Low – The tactic does not appear to be 

effective or feasible. The drawbacks and 

barriers are insurmountable or the benefits are 

too small relative to the required effort. The 

tactic may need adjustment to be made more 

effective or feasible. 

Recommend Tactic? – Consider the time frame, 

benefits, drawbacks, barriers, and practicability for 

each tactic and select the tactics that you recommend 

for consideration in future management decisions. 

Tactics that overcome or avoid challenges, have 

high practicability, or have major benefits should 

be favored. For each tactic, determine whether you 

would recommend it for consideration in future 

management decisions:

• Yes – This tactic is likely to be helpful in 

overcoming management challenges from 

climate change and meeting management 

objectives, and it should be considered in 

future management decisions. If needed, note 

any barriers that must be overcome to use this 

tactic. 

• No – This tactic is not helpful or cannot be 

used in overcoming management challenges 

or meeting management objectives, and it is 

not recommended for current consideration in 

future management activities. 

As you identify recommended tactics, consider how 

they work together as a set of actions. The goal is 

to identify a set of actions that are complementary 

and help to overcome the barriers identified in the 

previous step in order to achieve your management 

goals and objectives.
88

Chapter 5. Adaptation Workboo

A 

D 

A 

P 

T 

A 

T 

I 

O 

N 

 

W 

O 

R 

K 

B 

O 

O 

K

Key Questions:

• How do you know if the selected actions 

were effective?

• What can you learn from these actions 

to inform future management?

About this Ste

Monitoring is critical for understanding what 

changes are occurring because of climate change as 

well as whether selected actions were effective in 

meeting management goals and adapting forests to 

future conditions. This step helps to identify metrics 

that will be used to monitor whether management 

goals are achieved in the future and to determine 

whether the recommended management tactics were 

effective. The outcome of this step is a realistic and 

feasible monitoring scheme that can be used to help 

determine whether management should be altered 

in the future to account for new information and 

observations. 

There are several types of monitoring, and many 

efforts are already underway to monitor some 

indicators in the region. Most of these efforts are 

not designed to specifically monitor climate change, 

but they can still be useful in the context of climate 

change. Drawing upon and contributing to existing 

monitoring efforts when possible will help to detect 

changes that may not be detectable at smaller 

spatial scales and also may require fewer resources 

to implement. Consider what existing monitoring 

efforts are available and if they need to be modified 

to better monitor the results of your adaptation 

actions. Also consider what new monitoring items 

may be needed to evaluate whether you have met 

your management goals. 

Description of Workbook Item

Ecosystem Type or Management Topic – Insert the 

ecosystem type(s) or management topic(s) that you 

identified in Step 1.

Adaptation Monitoring Variable – Identify 

monitoring items that will be used to evaluate 

whether you have achieved your management 

objectives and goals, or whether you have achieved 

a milestone that indicates progress toward your goal. 

When possible, select monitoring items that will 

also help you to understand whether the adaptation 

tactics recommended in the previous step were 

effective in working toward your management goals 

under climate change. 

Criteria for Evaluation – Identify a value or 

threshold that is meaningful for this monitoring item. 

For example, you may have a goal of 70-percent 

seedling survival after 3 years if your project will 

include tree planting. 

Monitoring Implementation – Describe how and 

when this information will be gathered. For example, 

you may monitor seedling survival every summer 

for  years after planting. It can be helpful and save

resources to take advantage of existing monitoring 

efforts when possible. 

Step 5: MONITOR and eva

effectiveness of implemented 

actions
89

Chapter 5. Adaptation Workboo

A 

D 

A 

P 

T 

A 

T 

I 

O 

N 

 

W 

O 

R 

K 

B 

O 

O 

K

Next Ste

Congratulations on completing the Adaptation 

Workbook! Now that you have considered how you 

can help your project area to adapt to the anticipated 

effects of climate change, you can work to integrate 

the information from the workbook, especially 

Steps 4 and 5, into existing management plans and

decisionmaking processes. As you work toward this 

integration, it is important to keep in mind that the 

tactics you developed by completing the workbook 

have been recommended for further consideration 

(Step 4). Taking this step does not necessarily mean, 

however, that the tactics must be implemented or 

that the recommendations must supersede other 

considerations. The workbook was designed to 

lead you through a process for considering climate 

change, and it is up to you and your organization 

to determine the ways in which you will use the 

information and ideas you have developed. 

Finally, the workbook is designed as part of an 

adaptive management process, which by definition 

needs to be able to incorporate new information 

as it becomes available. When developing a plan 

to implement your adaptation tactics and then 

monitor the results, also make plans to revisit this 

workbook as often as necessary to evaluate whether 

any changes are needed. Consult with experts 

whenever possible to gather new information and 

further refine your management decisions. As new 

information becomes available through scientific 

research, monitoring activities, or other avenues, 

use that information to consider how it may change 

your expectations about future conditions and 

whether it is appropriate to adjust your management 

or monitoring to better help the systems adapt to a 

changing climate.
90

Chapter 6. Adaptation Demonstratio

One of the unique aspects of the Climate Change 

Response Framework is that its comprehensive 

approach not only delivers high-quality information 

and tools, but also moves beyond general 

discussions of climate change to actual planning 

and implementation of adaptation in real-world 

management projects (Chapter 1). Climate-informed

management actions identified and selected through 

the Adaptation Workbook (Chapter 5) are carried

out in adaptation demonstration projects. Adaptation 

demonstrations serve as real-world examples of 

the integration of climate change information into 

natural resource management (Janowiak et al. 

2014b).

More than 185 adaptation demonstrations have bee

developed in collaboration with a variety of public, 

private, nongovernmental, and tribal land managers 

to illustrate a diverse array of adaptation tactics 

(Fig. 14). These “case studies” reflect a variety of

forest ownerships, management objectives, spatial 

scales, and complexity. In most of the adaptation 

demonstrations developed thus far, an individual 

or small group of landowners and land managers 

uses the adaptation workbook in a facilitated 

discussion or training session, which is led by a 

specialist with expertise in both climate change and 

forest management. This chapter summarizes five 

demonstration projects in order to show different 

applications of climate change adaptation in forest 

management. Additional summaries of adaptation 

demonstrations are available online at 

www.forestadaptation.org/demos. 

Figure 14.—Location of adaptation demonstrations developed through the Climate Change Response Framework as of 

the time of publication. Demonstrations featured in this chapter are identified with blue markers.
9

Chapter 6. Adaptation Demonstratio

Caroline Lake Propert

Project Area and Management Goal

The Nature Conservancy (TNC) owns and manages 

more than 1,000 acres of forest on the Caroline

Lake Property (Fig. 15) in northern Wisconsin. Th

property was acquired from industrial ownership in 

1997, and has since been maintained as a working

forest to demonstrate sustainable forestry practices. 

Natural resource professionals from TNC and 

the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 

used the Adaptation Workbook with facilitation to 

consider climate change effects on the property as 

part of updating the property’s forest management 

plan. A consulting forester worked with TNC staff to 

translate the proposed adaptation actions into standlevel recommendations for the new plan. 

The Caroline Lake Property has been actively 

managed since 1997 with the intent of restoring

characteristics associated with pre-European 

settlement forests. Much of the property contains 

upland northern hardwood forest, with numerous 

areas of lowland hardwood and conifer forest. 

Before considering the potential effects of climate 

change on the property, TNC management generally 

focused on:

• Encouraging mid- to late-successional forest 

characteristics 

• Emulating natural disturbance dynamics

• Increasing underrepresented species 

• Increasing age diversity 

• Protecting water quality along headwater 

tributaries.

Climate Change and the Caroline 

Lake Propert

Climate Change Impacts

A vulnerability assessment for forest ecosystems 

in northern Wisconsin (Swanston et al. 2011) wa

used to identify potential climate change effects 

across the region. The managers combined this 

broad-scale information with their knowledge of the 

local landscape to identify attributes of the property 

that they believed would increase or decrease risks 

from climate change (Fig. 16). For example, man

common tree species are projected to have reduced 

habitat suitability or productivity by the end of the 

century across northern Wisconsin (Janowiak et al. 

2014a, 2014b; Swanston et al. 2011). In particul

black spruce, balsam fir, quaking aspen, and other 

boreal species are at the southern extent of their 

range in the region, and these species are projected 

to decline substantially over the next century under 

multiple climate scenarios. Other important species, 

such as sugar maple, eastern hemlock, yellow 

birch, and eastern white pine, are also projected 

to decrease due to climate change; however, the 

projected decreases are less than for boreal species 

and generally only under climate scenarios that 

project greater levels of climate warming. The high 

abundance of boreal and northern tree species on 

the Caroline Lake property puts the forest at risk 

from potential changes in composition. At the same 

time, the property has a notably high diversity of 

Figure 15.—A wetland at the south end of Caroline Lake in 

northern Wisconsin. Photo by Maria Janowiak, U.S. Forest 

Service.
92

Chapter 6. Adaptation Demonstratio

tree species compared to other tracts in the vicinity, 

which may reduce certain risks if one or a few tree 

species undergo especially large declines. 

A number of other potential effects on the property 

from climate change were also considered. These 

included direct effects on forests from warmer 

temperatures, altered precipitation, and extreme 

weather events, as well as indirect impacts related 

to interactions with forest pests and diseases and 

other stressors (Janowiak et al. 2014a, Swanston

et al. 2011). Projected changes in precipitation an

associated hydrology were identified as having 

the potential to greatly affect forests, but these 

projections were also the most uncertain. Projections 

of summer precipitation are highly variable for 

the region, but the combination of earlier spring 

snow melts and warmer temperatures without a 

compensatory increase in summer precipitation 

generally suggests drier summer conditions and 

altered hydrology. Lowland conifer forests, which 

contain a disproportionate share of tree species that 

are expected to decline due to climate change, may 

be at particular risk if hydrology is disrupted. 

Challenges and Opportunities for

Management

In this step, managers explored the challenges and 

opportunities in meeting the property- and standlevel management goals and objectives under 

changing conditions. Many of the challenges were 

based upon the vulnerabilities identified in the 

previous step, such as the challenge of promoting 

eastern hemlock and yellow birch in the upland 

hardwoods stands when some model results suggest 

that these species are at increased risk of declining 

by the end of the century. 

Some of the expected climate change impacts 

were perceived as potential opportunities. 

The species diversity in these stands provided 

many opportunities to maintain a sufficiently 

healthy forest and work toward goals related to 

increasing underrepresented species and increasing 

characteristics associated with older forests. Even 

increased frequency of disturbance from extreme 

weather events was viewed as a potential benefit 

(as long as the extent was not too great) because 

of the interest in incorporating natural disturbance 

Figure 16.—Forestry professionals discussing the adaptation demonstration at Caroline Lake. Photo by Maria Janowiak, 

U.S. Forest Service.
93

Chapter 6. Adaptation Demonstratio

patterns into management and increasing structural 

diversity. Although the managers did not feel 

that the management trajectory needed to change 

dramatically as a result of considering climate 

change, they recognized that it could become more 

challenging to reach some of the management goals 

for tree species composition, and that considering 

a broader suite of tree species could increase the 

likelihood of achieving other management goals. 

Adapting to Climate Change

Approaches and Actions for Adaptation

Within this context, a number of potential adaptation 

actions were identified with the overarching intent 

to maintain the resilience of the forest to changing 

conditions (Table 5). In the northern hardwood

forest, actions to maintain and enhance tree species 

diversity were prescribed to reduce the risk from 

climate change-related declines in the dominant 

species. This included the use of group selection and 

shelterwood harvests to enhance natural regeneration 

of mid-tolerant species. Several of these species, 

including northern red oak and black cherry, were 

present on the property in relatively low numbers 

and are projected to fare better under climate change 

compared to other species on the site. Eastern white 

pine was also identified as a desirable species. 

Although it is projected to decrease under some 

climate scenarios, the species is at a lower risk of 

decline than other native conifer species. 

The managers generally viewed the proposed actions 

as slight adjustments to, rather than a significant 

departure from, the current management trajectory. 

Additionally, several “contingency plans” were 

discussed for responding to disturbances or other 

unforeseen events. For example, lowland hardwood 

forests were identified as at risk from altered 

hydrologic regimes and reduced late growing season 

soil moisture from climate change, introduction of 

the emerald ash borer, or a combination of these 

threats. Although no active management is currently 

planned in these stands, swamp white oak and bur 

oak were identified as two potential species that 

could be planted in lowland hardwood forests to 

maintain forest cover if intervention were deemed 

necessary. These species are not currently present 

on the property but can be found at the northern 

extent of their range in localized areas in northern 

Wisconsin, which would represent a small degree of 

assisted migration.

Monitoring

Managers from TNC and the consultancy 

responsible for the property management identified 

forest inventory data as an integral component of 

monitoring the effectiveness of adaptation actions 

over time. Permanent forest inventory plot locations 

were established in randomized locations across 

the property, and a comprehensive inventory was 

performed to document stand characteristics and 

ecological attributes. The robust inventory provided 

a useful baseline for prescribing management 

activities for adaptation. For example, data on 

tree species abundance were used to calculate tree 

species richness and diversity evenness and provided 

an indication of the relative risk associated with 

the loss of different tree species. Additionally, the 

presence of advance regeneration of northern red 

oak and black cherry (tree species that may be better 

adapted to future conditions) was evident in the 

inventory data. In the future, inventories repeated 

at approximately 10-year intervals will be used to

evaluate whether the selected management activities 

increase the abundance of these species in the 

understory and eventually the overstory.

More Information

A forest management plan for the Caroline Lake 

Property integrates the ideas that managers generated 

while using the Adaptation Workbook. More 

information on this adaptation demonstration is 

available at www.forestadaptation.org/CarolineLake. 
94

Chapter 6. Adaptation Demonstratio

white pine

Table 5.—Selected proposed adaptation actions identified for the Caroline Lake Property in northe

Wisconsin. The current management activities reflect the 2005 forest management plan and did not

take the effects of climate change into account. The proposed adaptation actions were identified

as part of the Adaptation Workbook process and will be integrated into a new, updated forest 

management plan.

Management area/topic Adaptation approach Proposed adaptation tactic

Northern hardwoods Promote diverse age classes

Maintain and restore diversity of 

native tree species 

Retain biological legacies

Use single-tree selection with additional use 

of targeted gaps and seed trees to maintain or 

enhance species diversity (e.g., mid-tolerant 

species) and age class diversity

Favor or restore native species that 

are expected to be better adapted to 

future conditions

Use large group selection or shelterwood harvests 

to increase northern red oak component in areas 

where natural regeneration is present

Prioritize and protect existing 

populations on unique sites 

Maintain and restore diversity of 

native tree species

Where opportunities exist, promote eastern white 

pine, black cherry, yellow birch, and other desirable 

species that have a lower risk of declining as a 

result of climate change 

Look for opportunities to reserve high-quality 

pockets of eastern hemlock on less vulnerable sites 

to serve as refugia for that species

Lowland conifer Maintain or restore soil quality 

and nutrient cycling 

Maintain or restore hydrology

Maintain as no harvest reserve area 

Increase monitoring to detect hydrological changes

in peatland systems; revisit planned management if 

changes are observed

Lowland hardwoods Maintain or restore soil quality and 

nutrient cycling 

Maintain or restore hydrology 

Maintain or restore riparian areas

Maintain as no harvest reserve area

Establish or encourage new mixes of

native species 

Identify and move species to sites

that are likely to provide future habitat

Monitor stocking and natural regeneration 

of desired species; if inadequate, consider 

experimental plantings of swamp white oak or bur 

oak as species that are not currently present in the 

area but may do well in the future

Shoreline buffer Maintain or restore riparian areas

Maintain and restore diversity of 

native tree species

Where opportunities exist, promote eastern white 

pine or other species to provide long-lived conifer 

component and shading along lake shorelines

Upland conifer Maintain and restore diversity of

native tree species 

Favor or restore native species that 

are expected to be better adapted to 

future conditions 

Manage for species and genotypes 

with wide moisture and temperature 

tolerances

Promote long-lived conifers, with additional 

emphasis on species that are at lower risk of 

decline under climate change, such as eastern 
9

Chapter 6. Adaptation Demonstratio

L-A-D Foundation’s Pioneer Fores

and the Ozark National Scen

Riverways: Jerktail Mountai

At 140,000 acres, the L-A-D Foundation’s Pioneer

Forest is Missouri’s largest private land ownership. 

Since the early 1950s, this forest has employed 

conservative, uneven-aged management method 

known as single-tree selection harvesting. Decadeslong application of this successful method on 

the Pioneer Forest indicates a truly sustainable 

forest management practice. Recognizing the 

importance of fire in managing glade ecosystems 

and shortleaf pine woodlands, foresters have 

developed fire prescriptions to reduce woody species 

encroachment, restore and maintain the targeted 

ecosystem, and enhance adaptive capacity to better 

cope with a range of future climates. 

Ozark National Scenic Riverways was established 

as a unit of the National Park System by the U.S. 

Congress in 1964 to conserve and interpret th

scenic, natural, scientific, ecological, and historic 

values and resources within the National Riverways, 

and to provide for public outdoor recreational use 

and enjoyment of those resources. The National 

Riverways includes portions of the Current and 

Jacks Fork Rivers, providing 134 miles of clear,

free-flowing, spring-fed waterways. The overarching 

goal of the fire management program in the 

Riverways is to restore and maintain fire-dependent 

natural communities such as glades and woodlands. 

Project Area and Management Goals

This project is located on a 1,836-acre tract withi

the Current River Hills subsection of the Missouri 

Ozark Highlands in south-central Missouri about 9 

miles northeast of Eminence. The rugged terrain of 

the Current River Hills features extensive forest and 

woodlands with high ridges dominated by shortleaf 

pine and oak with scattered igneous and dolomite 

glades. The L-A-D Foundation and National Park 

Service each own portions of the Jerktail Mountain 

management area, and jointly manage and monitor 

the area. This project is supported in part by the 

Wildlife Conservation Society’s Climate Adaptation 

Fund.

The overall goal of the project is to improve 

natural community health and resilience while also 

providing timber products. Two community types 

are found in the area: igneous and dolomite glades, 

and woodlands dominated by oak and shortleaf pine. 

The goal was to restore these ecosystems to natural 

conditions more in character with pre-European 

settlement conditions. 

Specific objectives included: 

• Restoring fire on the landscape by initiating a 

prescribed burn regime

• Removing encroaching eastern redcedar and 

nonnative invasive species

• Reducing the impacts of overuse 

• Decreasing stand density to align better with 

local site conditions.

Climate Change 

and Jerktail Mountain

Climate Change Impacts

According to a recently completed vulnerability 

assessment for the Central Hardwoods region 

(Brandt et al. 2014), several climate change impacts

are expected in the Missouri Ozarks region by the 

end of the century, including:

• Mean annual temperature increases from 2 to 

7 °F (1.1 to 3.9 °

• Increased precipitation in winter and spring 

and potential declines in summer

• Increased frequency and severity of wildfire.

These climatic changes will affect local ecosystems 

in the Jerktail Mountain management area. Glades 

are primarily dominated by nonwoody species. 

Although future distribution of these nonwoody 

species has not been modeled, many are adapted to 

the hot, dry conditions that are expected to become 

more common. Nevertheless, a number of modeling 

studies in other areas have shown that some species 

with very narrow geographic distributions, like 

many glade-associated species, are more at risk to 

climate change. Post oak is typically found in glade 

systems, and habitat suitability for this species is 

likely to increase. Eastern redcedar encroachment 
9

Chapter 6. Adaptation Demonstratio

(Fig. 17) is the main issue negatively affecting

herbaceous species on glades at this site, and that 

species is likely to expand in the future due to other 

factors besides climate change.

In the woodland, shortleaf pine and post oak 

are projected to benefit from a warmer climate. 

Shortleaf pine, however, is less prevalent in this site 

than in some nearby areas and will regenerate only 

on bare mineral soil in an open area. In addition, 

southern pine beetle could be a potential future 

risk for shortleaf pine, although risks are relatively 

low due to the low density of pine at the site. Other 

species common in the site, like black, chinkapin, 

red, and scarlet oak, are projected to be negatively 

affected by drier summers (Brandt et al. 2014).

White oak is also common, and models suggest it 

may persist in the area at least over the next several 

decades. Woodlands are adapted to frequent, lowintensity fires, but could be negatively affected if 

fires become too severe. 

Challenges and Opportunities

for Management

Managers identified potential management 

challenges on both the glade and woodland sites. 

The increased likelihood of rain during the winter 

could make it harder to conduct prescribed burns in 

glades compared to the woodlands because glades 

can absorb water like a sponge in the spring. This 

could make it difficult to control or reduce eastern 

redcedar with fire alone, and mechanical treatment 

for eastern redcedar might be needed. 

Shifts in precipitation could also alter the prescribed 

burn window, which might require the timing to be 

adjusted. Burn crews must be planned for months in 

advance, so it is hard to make last-minute changes to 

the timing of prescribed burns. It could also become 

more challenging to thin timber if conditions 

become too wet during some seasons, as there is an 

increased risk of damage to shallow roots and soil 

quality when operations are conducted on wet soils. 

Despite these challenges, the managers at Jerktail 

Mountain expressed confidence in their flexibility to 

make adjustments in their management as conditions 

change, especially with timber harvest. 

Adapting to Climate Change

Approaches and Actions for Adaptation

Staff from the L-A-D Foundation and Ozark 

National Scenic Riverways used the Adaptation 

Workbook to identify actions to enhance the 

adaptive capacity of pine woodland ecosystems 

(Table 6). Adaptation tactics identified were closely

in line with current management, but added an 

increased emphasis on restoring fire. 

Monitoring

Monitoring for the two sites will be focused on 

assessing the effectiveness of achieving management 

goals. Restoration of the understory flora will 

be evaluated by monitoring herbaceous species 

richness and cover in plots both pretreatment 

and post-treatment. To assess the effectiveness 

of the treatments at reducing stand density 

(Fig. 18), the density of pole-sized trees will be

monitored pretreatment and post-treatment and 

photo monitoring will be used for visual changes 

in structure and composition. Basal area, species 

composition, and growth of woody species will be 

monitored to assess how well the treatments favored 

future-adapted species. Shortleaf pine regeneration 

will also be monitored. 

Figure 17.—Encroachment of eastern redcedar on a glade

ecosystem on Jerktail Mountain in south-central Missouri. 

Photo by Leslie Brandt, U.S. Forest Service.
97

Chapter 6. Adaptation Demonstratio

More Information

Implementation of this project began in 2014. More

information on this adaptation demonstration is 

available at www.forestadaptation.org/Jerktail_

Mountain. 

Table 6.—Selected proposed adaptation actions identified for the Jerktail Mountain adaptatio

demonstration in south-central Missouri

Management area/topic Adaptation approach Proposed adaptation

tactics

Both sites Restore fire to fire-adapted systems Variable-intensity 

prescribed fire every 3 to 

4 years initially, then 

shifting to every 5 years Maintain or restore soil quality and nutrient cycling 

Glade Favor and restore native species that are expected to be 

better adapted to future conditions 

Mechanical reduction 

of eastern redcedar to 

increase light penetration 

to the ground and reduce 

competition Prioritize and protect existing populations on unique sites 

Prioritize and protect sensitive or at-risk species or 

communities

Woodland Maintain or improve the ability of forests to resist pests and 

pathogens 

Allow for areas of natural regeneration after disturbance 

Retain biological legacies

Selective thinning focused 

on removing scarlet oak 

and other species not 

favored under future 

climate conditions 

Maintain and restore diversity of native tree species

Disfavor species that are distinctly maladapted 

Favor and restore native species that are expected to be 

better adapted to future conditions

Figure 18.—Thinned woodland stand on Jerktail Mountain, 

Missouri. Photo by Leslie Brandt, U.S. Forest Service.
98

Chapter 6. Adaptation Demonstratio

Middle Blue River Watershed

Project Area and Management Goals

The Middle Blue River watershed (Fig. 19) is

located in Kansas City, Missouri, and covers an 

area of 13,500 acres. It is one o 11 locations in 

national Urban Waters Federal Partnership. The 

Kansas City Missouri Partnership has formed around 

four existing projects that have commonalities 

in their visions, planning elements, partners, and 

geographies in the Middle Blue River reach. This 

location is also at the confluence with Brush Creek, 

one of the Blue River’s most visible and degraded 

tributaries. The watershed includes a mix of 

developed urban areas and upland and bottomland 

natural areas. 

The Middle Blue River watershed has suffered 

from frequent and serious flooding, degraded 

water quality, habitat loss from channelization, 

and economic disinvestment and blight. However, 

the area is rich with potential for sustainable 

redevelopment and restoration. Municipal Farms, 

a largely abandoned site comprising multiple 

brownfields, has deep historical and cultural 

significance to the city and its residents. It also has 

extensive native wetland and upland areas, and a 

Figure 19.—Rocky Point Glade, Middle Blue River

watershed, Kansas City, Missouri. Photo by Wendy 

Sangster, Missouri Department of Conservation, used 

with permission.

Figure 20.—Vegetation along the Blue River, Missouri. 

Photo by Wendy Sangster, Missouri Department of 

Conservation, used with permission.

geographical nexus with the Blue River and Brush 

Creek confluence through the native stream Round 

Creek (Fig. 20). The former farm can be redeveloped 

to be a hub of connectivity to riparian greenways, 

conservation opportunity areas, and restoration sites 

that are being developed through the partnership 

project. This will address what local residents 

have identified as needs: connectivity, livable 

neighborhoods, recreation, river access, economic 

development, sustainable jobs, and access to fresh 

food.

Key management goals in the Middle Blue River 

watershed include: 

• Conserving the health and sustainability of 

forests, savannas, glades, and other natural 

areas in the watershed 

• Establishing and maintaining the ecosystem 

services of natural and urban ecosystems in 

the area, including minimizing stormwater 

runoff, improving water quality, improving air 

quality, and reducing urban heat island effects 

• Maintaining and establishing high-quality 

wildlife habitat 

• Improving the health and sustainability of 

residential and street trees in the watershed.
99

Chapter 6. Adaptation Demonstratio

Climate Change 

and the Middle Blue River

Climate Change Impacts 

At the time of using the workbook, no climate 

change vulnerability assessment was available 

for the Kansas City area. Instead, managers of the 

Middle Blue River watershed relied on regional 

technical input reports from the National Climate 

Assessment (Melillo et al. 2014), tree species habitat

suitability modeling results from the Climate Change 

Tree Atlas (Landscape Change Research Group 

2014), and other relevant primary and secondary

literature. Regional downscaled climate projections 

(Brandt et al. 2014) were also used.

One key climate change impact that managers 

identified as having the potential to affect the area is 

an expected increase in heavy precipitation events, 

which could increase runoff and the risk of severe 

flooding. Along with changes in precipitation and 

hydrology, temperatures in the area are projected to 

increase several degrees by the end of the century. 

Temperatures in some places in the watershed could 

be even more severe due to local urban heat island 

effects. The managers also discussed how changes in 

temperature and precipitation could lead to increased 

stresses on both native and cultivated species and 

increase habitat suitability for many weedy and 

invasive species. 

Challenges and Opportunities

for Management 

Based on the projected impacts to the area, managers 

of the Middle Blue River watershed identified 

numerous potential challenges and opportunities in 

meeting their management objectives. Examples 

of climate change-related challenges for the 

management of the watershed are as follows:

• Tree species diversity may decrease as many 

trees become stressed from increased flooding, 

extreme heat, and reduced habitat suitability. 

• It could become harder to manage invasive 

species due to a longer growing season and an 

increased range of southern invasive species.

• Extreme weather could inhibit recruitment and 

establishment of native species. 

• In upland sites, there could be difficulty 

matching appropriate weather and time for 

prescribed burning. 

• It could become challenging to find suitable 

species for planting in boulevards and yards 

that are able to withstand a suite of weather 

extremes. 

• Climate-related stressors could increase the 

susceptibility of trees to pests and pathogens 

in both natural and developed areas. 

Climate change-related opportunities for the 

management of the watershed include the following:

• Some native species could benefit from the 

projected changes in climate. 

• Some invasive species might be negatively 

affected by extreme rain events and heat. 

• A longer growing season could increase 

establishment of new tree species and cultivars 

in boulevard and residential plantings.

• A longer growing season could provide a 

longer window of opportunity for prescribed 

burns. 

• Increases in temperature could increase public 

desire for shade trees to help mitigate heat 

island effects. 

• New species that require less maintenance 

could be planted on developed sites. 

Adapting to Climate Change

Approaches and Actions for Adaptation

Several adaptation approaches were identified 

across the watershed that differed by landscape 

position and land use (Table 7). Adaptation actions 

for bottomland natural areas centered on restoring 

hydrology to increase resilience to more-extreme 

runoff and rainfall. Upland area adaptation actions 

focused on restoring native ecosystems and favoring 

native species that are more likely to withstand 

projected changes in climate. In developed urban 

areas, adaptation actions focused on replacing 

declining urban trees with a new, more diverse mix 

of species that is better suited to future climate 

conditions. 
10

Chapter 6. Adaptation Demonstratio

Table 7.—Selected proposed adaptation actions identified for the Middle Blue River watersh

adaptation demonstration in Kansas City, Missouri

Management area/topic Adaptation approach Proposed adaptation tactic

Riparian and

 bottomland areas 

Maintain or restore hydrology Create an incentive program that encourages residents 

and businesses to implement infiltration practices 

Adopt ordinances that require development plans to 

mimic predevelopment hydrology

Prevent the introduction and 

establishment of invasive plant 

species and remove existing 

invasive species

Expand funding to remove bush honeysuckles and

other invasive species through volunteer workdays and 

contracted removal 

Map honeysuckle by using aerial photography

Upland areas Prioritize and maintain unique

sites

Continue management of Blue River Glade as a

natural area

Favor or restore native species 

that are expected to be adapted 

to future conditions

Plant areas where natural regeneration is less likely 

Use species predicted to respond well to risks such 

as climate change and potential insect and disease 

problems

Restore fire in fire-adapted 

ecosystems

Conduct prescribed burns using appropriate timing and 

frequency

Developed and

 urban areas 

Disfavor species that are 

distinctly maladapted

Develop a replacement plan for declining and at-risk 

tree species

Establish or encourage new

mixes of native species that 

increase species diversity. 

Discourage species predicted 

to be maladapted to future risks

Develop recommendations for urban trees that include 

new species and discourage maladapted species

Adaptation actions identified were in line with 

conservation goals already identified by the 

partnership. However, managers felt that climate 

change places an additional urgency on restoring 

the system’s hydrology and native species diversity 

while also identifying new species that may be better 

suited to future climates. 

Monitoring

Managers of the Middle Blue River watershed 

identified a number of potential monitoring metrics 

to evaluate the effectiveness of their adaptation 

strategies. For example, in riparian areas, the number 

of acres of honeysuckles removed or replanted 

with desirable species would be measured. Across 

the watershed, changes in canopy cover in both 

developed and natural areas could be measured. In 

addition, as new trees are planted in developed areas, 

both the number and species diversity of trees could 

be monitored over time. 

More Information

At this time partners have applied for several grants 

to support restoration efforts in the Middle Blue 

River watershed. These grants pertain to different 

geographic areas and address various issues. If 

these efforts are funded, the forest management 

adaptation plan created using the Adaptation 

Workbook will inform the scope of work that will 

be performed. More information on this adaptation 

demonstration is available at www.forestadaptation.

org/MiddleBlueRiver. 
1

Chapter 6. Adaptation Demonstratio

Hudson Farm Club, Inc

Organized in the late 1970s, Gracie & Harrigan

Consulting Foresters, Inc. uses science-based forest 

management to serve more than 750 woodland

owners, including families, major corporations, and 

nonprofit organizations. Together, they own more 

than 34,000 acres of woodland which benefit from 

sustainable forestry. Responding to climate changeand climate-related disturbances is an important 

part of sustainable forest management. Gracie & 

Harrigan Consulting Foresters, Inc. demonstrated 

how to incorporate climate change into private forest 

management through the project described below.

Project Area and Management Goals

This project covers about 3,000 acres of privately 

owned forest land in northern New Jersey. Most 

of the property is forested upland characterized by 

mid-successional, closed-canopy upland oak and 

northern hardwood forest. Due to a combination 

of past management, fire suppression, and natural 

succession, this forest type is beginning to shift 

from oak/hickory to northern hardwood forest. The 

management goals included: 

• Improving the overall quality, health, and 

vigor of the forest 

• Restoring early successional habitat for the 

state-endangered golden-winged warbler and 

other species in this niche

• Increasing species and structural diversity

• Retaining hard mast sources on the landscape.

Early management actions included a modified 

seed tree harvest that retained 10 to15 songbi

perch trees per acre preceded by removal of 

invasive plants. After 2 years, the high-quality 

seed bed provided a source for native plants, and 

there was aggressive stump-sprouting. Post-harvest 

regeneration surveys confirmed dominance of 

maple and birch. The golden-winged warbler was 

not yet observed, probably due to lack of advance 

regeneration. The yellow-breasted chat, a songbird 

that is a state species of concern, was observed using 

young regeneration. Additionally, deer populations 

have been managed on this property over the last 

years through a Quality Deer Management Program.

Climate Change and the Hudson

Farm Club 

Climate Change Impacts 

At the time of using the workbook, no climate 

change vulnerability assessment was available 

for northern New Jersey. Instead, a consulting 

forester from Gracie & Harrigan relied on global 

and regional technical input reports from the 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007), 

tree species habitat suitability modeling results from 

the Climate Change Tree Atlas (Landscape Change 

Research Group 2014), and other relevant primary

and secondary literature. Projected changes in 

climate include:

• Warmer temperatures and drier soils during 

the summer

• Increased annual precipitation with a shift 

toward more-intense rain events and longer 

periods between events

• Increased disturbance from wind and storms.

These climatic changes are expected to affect forests 

in northern New Jersey. The Climate Change Tree 

Atlas projects declines in suitable habitat for many 

of the northern hardwood species, but also projects 

increases or stability in suitable habitat for oak and 

hickory species. Sugar maple, red maple, white ash, 

black cherry, American beech, and black birch are 

among the most common species on this property, 

and are all projected to lose suitable habitat. Species 

projected to increase include pignut hickory, 

bitternut hickory, mockernut hickory, shagbark 

hickory, white oak, and chinkapin oak. Some species 

that are currently rare or absent from northern New 

Jersey that are expected to have suitable habitat in 

the future are post oak, southern red oak, loblolly 

pine, slash pine, shortleaf pine, black hickory, and 

blackjack oak. Warmer temperatures and a shifting 

soil moisture regime are also expected to benefit 

invasive species such as autumn olive, ailanthus, 

garlic mustard, and bush honeysuckles. These 

species generally occupy a range of site conditions, 

and can outcompete seedlings and saplings, thus 

hindering the regeneration of native species. 
10

Chapter 6. Adaptation Demonstratio

Challenges and Opportunities

for Management 

Based on the projected impacts to the area, 

challenges and opportunities in meeting management 

objectives were identified. Overall, warmer and drier 

conditions are expected to favor species that are 

suited to warmer and drier conditions, which could 

reverse the ongoing transition from oak/hickory 

to northern hardwoods that has been occurring in 

this area in recent decades. Climate change-related 

challenges include the following: 

• It may be difficult to maintain American beech 

in the future, although this species is currently 

an important mast species. Beech bark disease 

is currently a problem for beech, and this 

species is also projected to decline sharply 

as a result of climate change.

• It may be harder to maintain other northern 

hardwood species in this location because 

suitable habitat for many species is also 

projected to decrease.

• Insect pests and pathogens are expected 

to become more damaging as tree species 

respond to a variety of climate-related 

stressors. For example, oak species are 

at greater risk of total mortality when 

consecutive years of gypsy moth defoliation 

are combined with drought.

Climate change-related opportunities include the 

following: 

• Warmer temperatures, drier soils, and more 

frequent drought are expected to create moresuitable conditions for the regeneration of 

oaks and hickories, which are currently not 

regenerating adequately.

• Successful regeneration of oak and hickory 

species would also provide important mast for 

wildlife in the absence of beech nuts.

Adapting to Climate Change

Approaches and Actions for Adaptation

Staff from Gracie & Harrigan Consulting Foresters 

used the Adaptation Workbook to identify actions 

to enhance the adaptive capacity of the property. 

A consulting forester first identified an overall 

approach to managing this stand under changing 

conditions: restoring the oak and hickory component 

of this forest while simultaneously reducing the 

northern hardwood component. Specific tactics 

were identified that, given anticipated challenges 

in maintaining northern hardwood species over the 

long term, support transition to an oak- and hickorydominated forest while providing early successional 

habitat (Table 8, Figs. 21 and 22).

Table 8.—Selected proposed adaptation actions identified for the Hudson Farm Club adaptati

demonstration in northern New Jerse

Management area/topic Adaptation approach Proposed adaptation tactic

Upland oak

 northern hardwood 

 forest

Restore fire to fire-adapted 

ecosystems 

Simulate low- to medium-intensity fire regime to 

stimulate or enhance oak regeneration and improve 

light conditions on the forest floor 

Perform intermediate treatment to reduce maple/

beech/birch seed sources and stimulate resprouting of 

the woody understory

Prevent the introduction and 

establishment of invasive plant 

species, and remove existing 

invasive species

Conduct preharvest invasive plant control and 

increase frequency of monitoring and control

Maintain or improve the ability 

of forests to resist pests and 

pathogens

Spray for gypsy moth to prevent two consecutive 

years of defoliation and reduce mortality of oaks 

during periods of drought
10

Chapter 6. Adaptation Demonstratio

Monitoring

Consulting foresters identified a number of potential 

monitoring metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of 

their adaptation strategies. For example, in harvested 

areas, the number of acres of successful oak and 

hickory regeneration will be measured at  and

3 years post-harvest. The number of gypsy moth 

egg casings per acre will be measured during the 

winter or fall following a season with widespread 

defoliation. A successful evaluation would confirm 

more species present in post-harvest stand survey 

than in the preharvest stand survey, with low 

occurrence of gypsy moth. Across the property, and 

larger northern New Jersey region, invasive species 

are expected to become a greater threat and require 

more resources. Although monitoring for invasive 

species is usually conducted 3 years post-harvest, an 

earlier and additional survey at  year post-harvest

will improve chances of early detection.

More Information

A forest management plan for the Hudson Farm 

Club integrates the ideas that were generated by 

using the Adaptation Workbook. More information 

on this adaptation demonstration is available at 

www.forestadaptation.org/demonstration-projects/

HudsonFarmClub. 

Figure 21.—Results of an intermediate stand treatment, 

which reduced the maple and beech component, and 

improved site conditions for oak regeneration, Hudson 

Farm Club demonstration site in northern New Jersey.

Photo by Steve Kallesser, Gracie & Harrigan Consulting

Foresters, Inc., used with permission

Figure 22.—Resprouting of the woody understory, which will provide early successional habitat for wildlife in the short 

term, at the Hudson Farm Club demonstration site, New Jersey. Photo by Steve Kallesser, Gracie & Harrigan Consultin

Foresters, Inc., used with permission
10

Chapter 6. Adaptation Demonstratio

Superior National Forest – Nor

Shore Forest Restoration Proj

Project Area and Management Goal

The forests along Minnesota’s North Shore of Lake 

Superior (Fig. 23) are important for wildlife habitat, 

as regulators of stream temperatures, and as scenic 

elements of the North Shore. Tourists who make the 

drive along Scenic Highway 1 from Duluth to th

Canadian border support a thriving recreation and 

tourism economy with many outfitters, restaurants, 

and lodges. Visitors and year-round residents have 

noticed a striking change in the landscape in the last 

few decades. Current stands of paper birch and aspen 

have reached their biological age limits and nearly 

80 percent of the birch along the North Shore are old 

and dying (Fig. 24). In addition, conifer regeneration 

is nearly absent in the understory of North Shore 

forests due to a lack of mature trees to provide 

seed, increased competition from native bluejoint 

grass, and heavy deer browse. Both the decline of 

aspen and birch and the apparent lack of conifer 

regeneration have prompted attention and concern 

from many agencies and landowners in the region. 

As a result, the Superior National Forest (SNF) is 

trying to restore forests in this landscape through 

active forest management. In 2013, SNF staff joined

with the State of Minnesota, the Grand Portage 

Tribe, and a broader group of stakeholders 

Figure 23.—The North Shore Forest Restoration Project location and surrounding area. Map prepared by the Superior

National Forest
1

Chapter 6. Adaptation Demonstratio

called the North Shore Forest Collaborative 

(www.northshoreforest.org/) to create the North 

Shore Forest Restoration Project. All partners shared 

the primary concern of restoring eastern white pine, 

northern white-cedar, and other native plants to 

the area to ensure the health and resilience of the 

forest. The SNF North Shore Interdisciplinary Team 

designed restoration treatments for this adaptation 

demonstration that would occur on SNF lands 

only. The project area for the Forest Service North 

Shore Forest Restoration Project is about 102,000

acres, which is part of a larger North Shore Forest 

Collaborative boundary of more than 200,000 

acres. Active management is planned for about 

12,000 acres within the Forest Service ownership.

This project was planned according to National 

Environmental Policy Act procedures used within 

the Forest Service. 

Goals for the North Shore Forest Restoration Project 

include: 

• Restoring native vegetation communities, 

including forests of paper birch and long-lived 

conifers

• Improving wildlife habitat, including cavities 

for nesting sites and coarse woody debris

• Improving watershed health, with a focus on 

riparian areas that drain into Lake Superior

• Ensuring a sustainable supply of timber 

products that provide an economic opportunity 

to local communities

• Reducing hazardous fuels to decrease wildfire 

risk.

Figure 24.—Stands of old and dying birch, with very little conifer regeneration in the understory, along the North Shore in

Minnesota. Photo by the Superior National Forest
1

Chapter 6. Adaptation Demonstratio

Climate Change and the North Shor

of Lake Superio

Climate Change Impacts

The SNF project team gathered information from 

the Minnesota Forest Ecosystem Vulnerability 

and Synthesis to capture large-scale trends and 

projections for northern Minnesota (Handler et al. 

2014a). The team also considered how the local

characteristics of the project area might modify 

some of the projected impacts of climate change. 

Northern Minnesota has experienced substantial 

changes in temperature and precipitation over the 

past 100 years, and the rate of change appears to

be increasing (Handler et al. 2014a). A few climate

trends relevant to the project area are: 

• Temperatures have increased across northern 

Minnesota, with the greatest warming 

occurring during winter, and this trend is 

expected to continue. Temperature increases 

during the 20th century were greater along the 

North Shore of Lake Superior than in other 

parts of northern Minnesota. 

• The North Shore project area received 

increased precipitation during the 20th 

century across all seasons, and heavy rainfall 

events became more frequent. Precipitation 

is projected to increase in winter and spring 

across a range of climate scenarios, but there is 

greater uncertainty for summer precipitation. 

Slight increases or large decreases are 

possible.

• Snowfall decreased across northern Minnesota 

over the past century and this trend is expected 

to continue, with more winter precipitation 

falling as rain. 

In summary, these climate trends point to a future 

that is warmer and more variable, presenting greater 

stress for paper birch, white spruce, balsam fir, 

and other boreal species present in the area. The 

steep terrain and shallow soils along the North 

Shore make the area more susceptible to flooding 

from heavy rain events, as was experienced in the 

summer of 2012. At the same time, forests may also

be at increased risk of moisture stress because the 

southern aspect, warmer conditions, thin soils, and 

longer growing season could combine to make water 

stress more challenging for forests in this landscape. 

Challenges and Opportunities

for Management

Based on the projected impacts to the area, 

project team members identified challenges 

and opportunities in meeting their management 

objectives. Examples of climate change-related 

challenges for forest restoration in the North Shore 

landscape are as follows:

• It may become more challenging to regenerate 

paper birch in the future as conditions change. 

• Deer herbivory will be an obstacle for 

planning and regenerating many tree species 

because deer populations are expected to 

remain high. 

• Many iconic tree species in the project area, 

such as white spruce, balsam fir, paper birch, 

and quaking aspen, are projected to decline in 

the future.

• Outbreaks of pests like spruce budworm may 

be larger and more damaging in the future. 

Climate change-related opportunities for forest 

restoration in the North Shore landscape 

include the following:

• There may be a window remaining for 

regeneration of paper birch during the next 

10 years, before conditions become more

unfavorable. 

• Lake Superior may moderate future changes. 

This landscape could provide one of the best 

long-term refugia for boreal species, compared 

to other parts of Minnesota. 

• There are some north-facing and wetter 

microsites within the project area that may be 

better options for retaining boreal species over 

the long term. 

• Eastern white pine is tolerant of a wide 

range of conditions and is projected to have 

increased suitable habitat. Red pine is also 

projected to increase in suitable habitat along 

the North Shore. 
10

Chapter 6. Adaptation Demonstratio

Adapting to Climate Change

Approaches and Actions for Adaptation

After going through the Adaptation Workbook, 

SNF staff continued to think about possible 

adaptation actions and refine the North Shore Forest 

Restoration Project (Table 9). Importantly, the team 

members recognized that many of the management 

actions they already had planned also had benefits 

for climate change adaptation. Northeastern 

Minnesota also has the potential to provide refugia 

for boreal species like paper birch and white spruce. 

Therefore, the team ultimately decided to proceed 

with many of the original goals and objectives of 

the project. Several modifications were added to 

the Proposed Action to increase diversity and future 

management flexibility.

Table 9.—Selected proposed adaptation actions identified for the North Shore Forest Restora

Project on the Superior National Forest in Minnes

Management area/topic Adaptation approach Proposed adaptation tactic

Entire project Maintain and create habitat corridors through

reforestation or restoration

Consider spatial arrangement of 

treatments for connectivity and corridors 

Use landscape-scale planning and 

partnerships to reduce fragmentation and 

enhance connectivity

Work with neighboring landowners and 

the North Shore Forest Collaborative to

connect treatment areas 

Manage herbivory to protect or promote 

regeneration 

Protect future-adapted regeneration from 

herbivory

Try a variety of strategies for protecting 

regeneration from deer herbivory, such as 

fences, tree cages, bud caps, or repellent 

sprays, or some combination

Establish or encourage new mixes of native

species

Plant additional native species that are 

present in the surrounding landscape 

that were not originally part of the project 

design, including bur oak and northern red 

oak

Paper birch Anticipate and respond to species decline

Favor or restore native species that are 

expected to be better adapted to future 

conditions

Identify stands of old, poor-quality paper

birch for restoration to other appropriate 

native or climate-adapted forest types 

Prioritize and protect existing populations on 

unique sites

Identify the best possible locations to

retain paper birch on the landscape for 

the long term, including stands of healthy 

paper birch, areas with north-facing 

slopes, and cold pockets

Eastern white pine Manage for species and genotypes with wide

moisture and temperature tolerances 

Favor or restore native species that are 

expected to be better adapted to future 

conditions 

Manage habitats over a range of sites and 

conditions

Increase the proportion of planted eastern

white pine, and plant this species within 

many other topographic positions and 

forest types
10

Chapter 6. Adaptation Demonstratio

Adding these adjustments to the original Proposed 

Action will help the Superior National Forest restore 

forest cover along the North Shore, and accomplish 

the objectives of restoring native vegetation 

communities, improving wildlife habitat, improving 

watershed health, providing sustainable timber 

products, and reducing hazardous fuels.

Monitoring

Project team members identified several monitoring 

items routinely applied or required on Forest Service 

vegetation management projects that would deliver 

important information about the effectiveness 

of adaptation actions. For example, standard 

silvicultural exams will provide information about 

the number of trees per acre by species, basal area, 

and size classes. These surveys can give managers a 

sense of the number of species or the volume within 

a stand that may be composed of species at risk of 

declining over time. Similarly, stocking surveys 

are routinely implemented during the first and 

third years after planting. It may be possible to add 

another survey at this time for the subset of futureadapted or off-site species to compare their success 

to more conventional species. 

After completing the Adaptation Workbook and 

subsequent project planning, the SNF decided that 

the North Shore Forest Restoration Project will be 

managed according to an adaptive management 

framework. This means that treatments are designed 

with built-in continuous assessment and processes 

for improvement (i.e., “If X happens, then action Y 

will be implemented.”). This approach will allow 

managers the latitude to treat successive portions of 

the project based on local conditions, and to learn 

from activities implemented in early years of the 

project. 

More Information

A final Decision Notice was issued for the North 

Shore Forest Restoration Project in August 2014.

More information about the final decision and 

planned actions is available on the Superior 

National Forest Web site (http://go.usa.gov/SyVz). 

Implementation of the project began in 2014 and

will continue for the next several years. More 

information on this adaptation demonstration is 

available at www.forestadaptation.org/NorthShore. 
10

Acknowled

The second edition of the Forest Adaptation 

Resources, like the first, has drawn heavily upon 

numerous contributors for their perspectives, 

expertise, critical review and feedback, testing, 

and enthusiasm. We are thankful to all of these 

people and organizations for their time and effort. 

Linda Parker and Matt St. Pierre were among the 

original authors who conceptualized and created the 

original interrelated resources, which persist into 

the current edition. Dave Peterson and Linda Joyce 

helped shape the original edition and provided early 

reviews of the vulnerability assessment chapter 

in this version. Dozens of experts from across the 

Northeast and upper Midwest generously donated 

their time to reviewing and amending the adaptation 

strategies and approaches chapters. The Adaptation 

Workbook has been used by hundreds of natural 

resource professionals, who have shown us what 

could be done in the real world with these tools 

and provided feedback to help us improve them. 

Our partners from The Nature Conservancy, L-A-D 

Foundation’s Pioneer Forest and the National Park 

Service, Kansas City Missouri Partnership, Gracie & 

Harrigan Consulting Foresters, Inc., and the Superior 

National Forest, were kind enough to let us share 

their stories and to work with us to make sure we got 

things right. Five intrepid peer reviewers formally 

reviewed the document; two provided anonymous 

reviews, and Toni Lyn Morelli and Michelle 

Staudinger from the Northeast Climate Science 

Center, and Karen Dante from the U.S. Forest 

Service, Office of Sustainability and Climate Change 

provided open reviews. We are indebted to all of 

them for greatly improving this edition. Finally, 

this work is made possible through core support 

by the U.S. Forest Service, especially the Northern 

Research Station and the Eastern Region; it took 

vision to launch this work, and requires dedication 

to continue it. We are honored to work with so many 

fine people.
1

Aber, J.D.; Ollinger, S.V.; Driscoll, C.T. 1997.

Modeling nitrogen saturation in forest 

ecosystems in response to land use and 

atmospheric deposition. Ecological Modelling. 

101 (1): 6

Abrams, M.D. 1992. Fire and the development of

oak forests. BioScience. 42: 346-35

Agee, J.K.; Bahro, B.; Finney, M.A.; Omi, P.N.; 

Sapsis, D.B.; Skinner, C.N.; Van Wagtendonk, 

J.W.; Weatherspoon, P.C. 2000. The use 

of shaded fuelbreaks in landscape fire 

management. Forest Ecology and Management. 

127: 5

Akçakaya, H.R.; Mills, G.; Doncaster, C.P. 2007. 

The role of metapopulations in conservation.

In: Macdonald, D.W.; Service, K., eds. Key topics 

in conservation biology. Malden, MA: Blackwell 

Publishing: 64-84

American National Standards Institute. 2008. 

American national standards for tree care 

operations—tree, shrub, and other woody 

plant maintenance—standard practices (A300 

Part 1—Pruning). Manchester, NH: Tree Care 

Industry Association. 13 p. Available at http://tcia

org/business/ansi-a300-standards (accessed 

April 20, 2016

Anderson, M.; Clark, M.; Sheldon, A.O. 2012.

Resilient sites for terrestrial conservation 

in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic region.

The Nature Conservancy, Eastern Conservation 

Science. 168 p. https://www.conservationgatewa

org/ConservationByGeography/

NorthAmerica/UnitedStates/edc/Documents/

TerrestrialResilience020112.pdf (accessed May 

2016)

Literature Ci

Anderson, P.D.; Chmura, D.J. 2009. Silvicultural 

approaches to maintain forest health and 

productivity under current and future 

climates. Western Forester. 54: 6-

Ashcroft, M.B. 2010. Identifying refugia from

climate change. Journal of Biogeography. 37: 

1407-14

Aubin, I.; Garbe, C.; Colombo, S.; Drever, C.; 

McKenney, D.; Messier, C.; Pedlar, J.; Saner, 

M.; Venier, L.; Wellstead, A. 2011. Why w

disagree about assisted migration 1: ethical 

implications of a key debate regarding the 

future of Canada’s forests. The Forestry 

Chronicle. 87: 755-

Ayres, M.P.; Lombardero, M.J. 2000. Assessing 

the consequences of global change for forest 

disturbance from herbivores and pathogens.

Science of the Total Environment. 262: 263-2

Bagne, K.E.; Friggens, M.M.; Finch, D.M. 2011. 

system for assessing vulnerability of species 

(SAVS) to climate change. Gen. Tech. Rep. 

RMRS-GTR-257. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Forest

Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 28 p.

Barling, R.D.; Moore, I.D. 1994. Role of buffer

strips in management of waterway pollution: 

a review. Environmental Management. 18:

543-5

Battin, J. 2004. When good animals love bad 

habitats: ecological traps and the conservation 

of animal populations. Conservation Biology. 

18: 1482-1
LITERA

Beever, E.A.; O’Leary, J.; Mengelt, C.; West, 

J.M.; Julius, S.; Green, N.; Magness, D.; Petes, 

L.; Stein, B.; Nicotra, A.B.; Hellmann, J.J.; 

Robertson, A.L.; Staudinger, M.D.; Rosenberg, 

A.A.; Babij, E.; Brennan, J.; Schuurman, 

G.W.; Hofmann, G.E. 2015. Improvin

conservation outcomes with a new paradigm 

for understanding species’ fundamental 

and realized adaptive capacity. Conservation 

Letters. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/conl

Beier, P.; Noss, R.F. 1998. Do habitat corridors

provide connectivity? Conservation Biology. 

12: 1241-

Benedict, M.E.; McMahon, E.T. 2006. Green

infrastructure: linking landscapes and 

communities. Washington, DC: Island Press. 

299 p.

Biringer, J. 2003. Forest ecosystems threatened 

by climate change: promoting long-term 

forest resilience. In: Hansen, L.J.; Biringer, J.; 

Hoffman, J.R., eds. Buying time: a user’s manual 

for building reistance and resilience to climate 

change in natural systems. Washington, DC: 

World Wide Fund for Nature: 41-6

Brandt, L.; He, H.; Iverson, L.; Thompson, F.R.; 

Butler, P.; Handler, S.; Janowiak, M.; Shannon, 

P.D.; Swanston, C.; Albrecht, M.; Blume-Weaver, 

R.; Deizman, P.; DePuy, J.; Dijak, W.D.; Dinkel, 

G.; Fei, S.; Jones-Farrand, D.T.; Leahy, M.; 

Matthews, S.; Nelson, P.; Oberle, B.; Perez, 

J.; Peters, M.; Prasad, A.; Schneiderman, J.E.; 

Shuey, J.; Smith, A.B.; Studyvin, C.; Tirpak, J.M.; 

Walk, J.W.; Wang, W.J.; Watts, L.; Weigel, D.; 

Westin, S. 2014. Central Hardwoods ecosystem

vulnerability assessment and synthesis: a 

report from the Central Hardwoods Climate 

Change Response Framework project. Gen. 

Tech. Rep. NRS-124. Newtown Square, PA:

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Northern Research Station. 254 p.

Brandt, L.; Swanston, C.; Parker, L.; Janowiak, M.; 

Birdsey, R.; Iverson, L.; Mladenoff, D.; Butler, 

P. 2012. Climate change science applications

and needs in forest ecosystem management: a 

workshop organized as part of the northern 

Wisconsin Climate Change Response 

Framework Project. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRSGTR-95. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research 

Station. 53 p

Brandt, L.A.; Butler, P.R.; Handler, S.D.; Janowiak, 

M.K.; Shannon, P.D.; Swanston, C.W. 2016

Integrating science and management to assess 

forest ecosystem vulnerability to climate 

change. Journal of Forestry. 

http://dx.doi.org/10.5849/jof.15

Breed, M.F.; Stead, M.G.; Ottewell, K.M.; Gardner, 

M.G.; Lowe, A.J. 2013. Which provenance

and where? Seed sourcing strategies for 

revegetation in a changing environment.

Conservation Genetics. 14: 1-

Breshears, D.D.; Myers, O.B.; Meyer, C.W.; Barnes, 

F.J.; Zou, C.B.; Allen, C.D.; McDowell, N.G.; 

Pockman, W.T. 2008. Tree die-off in response 

to global change-type drought: mortality 

insights from a decade of plant water potential 

measurements. Frontiers in Ecology and the 

Environment. 7: 185-1

Brubaker, L.B. 1986. Responses of tre

populations to climatic change. Vegetatio. 

67: 119-

Bryant, M.M. 2006. Urban landscape conservation

and the role of ecological greenways at local 

and metropolitan scales. Landscape and Urban 

Planning. 76: 23-44

Burger, J.A.; Gray, G.; Scott, D.A. 2010. Using soil

quality indicators for monitoring sustainable 

forest management. In: Page-Dumroese, D.; 

Neary, D.; Trettin, C., tech. eds. Scientific 

background for soil monitoring on National 

Forests and Rangelands: workshop proceedings; 

April 29-30, 2008; Denver, CO. Proc. RMRSP-59. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station: 13-42
1

LITERA

Burton, J.I.; Zenner, E.K.; Frelich, L.E. 2008. 

Frost crack incidence in northern hardwood 

forests of the southern boreal-north temperate 

transition zone. Northern Journal of Applied 

Forestry. 25: 133-1

Butler, P.R.; Iverson, L.; Thompson, F.R., III; 

Brandt, L.; Handler, S.; Janowiak, M.; Shannon, 

P.D.; Swanston, C.; Karriker, K.; Bartig, J.; 

Connelly, S.; Dijak, W.; Bearer, S.; Blatt, S.; 

Brandon, A.; Byers, E.; Coon, C.; Culbreth, 

T.; Daly, J.; Dorsey, W.; Ede, D.; Euler, C.; 

Gillies, N.; Hix, D.M.; Johnson, C.; Lyte, L.; 

Matthews, S.; McCarthy, D.; Minney, D.; 

Murphy, D.; O’Dea, C.; Orwan, R.; Peters, M.; 

Prasad, A.; Randall, C.; Reed, J.; Sandeno, C.; 

Schuler, T.; Sneddon, L.; Stanley, B.; Steele, 

A.; Stout, S.; Swaty, R.; Teets, J.; Tomon, T.; 

Vanderhorst, J.; Whatley, J.; Zegre, N. 2015

Central Appalachians forest ecosystem 

vulnerability assessment and synthesis: a 

report from the Central Appalachians Climate 

Change Response Framework peoject. Gen. 

Tech. Rep. NRS-146. Newtown Square, PA

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Northern Research Station. 310 p.

Butler, P.R.; Janowiak, M.K.; Brandt, L.A.; 

Swanston, C.W. 2011. Lessons learned from th

Climate Change Response Framework Project 

in northern Wisconsin. A white paper prepared 

by the Northern Institute of Applied Climate 

Science. 24 p. www.nrs.fs.fed.us/niacs/localresources/docs/LESSONS_LEARNED_from_

the_CCRFP.pdf (accessed May 2, 2016

Byers, E.; Norris, S. 2011. Climate chang

vulnerability assessment of species of concern 

in West Virginia. Technical Reports 02/2011

Elkins, WV: West Virginia Division of Natural 

Resources.

Cadotte, M.W.; Dinnage, R.; Tilman, D. 2012.

Phylogenetic diversity promotes ecosystem 

stability. Ecology. 93: 223-233.

Carlton, J.S.; Angel, J.R.; Fei, S.; Huber, M.; 

Koontz, T.M.; MacGowan, B.J.; Mullendore, 

N.D.; Babin, N.; Prokopy, L.S. 2014. State

service foresters’ attitudes toward using 

climate and weather information when 

advising forest landowners. Journal of Forestry. 

112(1): 9

Casper, B.B.; Jackson, R.B. 1997. Plant

competition underground. Annual Review of 

Ecology and Systematics. 28: 545-5

Castelle, A.J.; Johnson, A.; Conolly, C. 

1994. Wetland and stream buffer size

requirements—a review. Journal of 

Environmental Quality. 23: 878-882.

Chornesky, E.A.; Bartuska, A.M.; Aplet, G.H.; 

Britton, K.O.; Cummings-Carlson, J.; Davis, 

F.W.; Eskow, J.; Gordon, D.R.; Gottschalk, K.W.; 

Haack, R.A.; Hansen, A.J.; Mack, R.N.; Rahel, 

F.J.; Shannon, M.A.; Wainger, L.A.; Wigley, T.B. 

2005. Science priorities for reducing the threat

of invasive species to sustainable forestry.

Bioscience. 55: 335-3

Clark, J.R.; Matheny, N.P.; Cross, G.; Wake, V. 

1997. A model of urban forest sustainability

Journal of Arboriculture. 23: 17-30

Climate Change Wildlife Action Plan Work 

Group. 2009. Voluntary guidance for states to 

incorporate climate change into state wildlife 

action plans & other management plans.

Washington, DC: Association of Fish & Wildlife 

Agencies. 47 p.

Coates, D.J.; Dixon, K.W. 2007. Current 

perspectives in plant conservation biology.

Australian Journal of Botany. 55: 187-

Colding, J. 2007. ‘Ecological land-use 

complementation’ for building resilience 

in urban ecosystems. Landscape and Urban 

Planning. 81: 46
1

LITERA

Comer, P.J.; Young, B.; Schulz, K.; Kittel, G.; 

Unnasch, B.; Braun, D.; Hammerson, G.; Smart, 

L.; Hamilton, H.; Auer, S.; Smyth, R.; Hak, 

J. 2012. Climate change vulnerability and

adaptation strategies for natural communities: 

piloting methods in the Mojave and Sonoran 

Deserts. Report to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service. Arlington, VA: NatureServe.

Cross, M.S.; Zavaleta, E.S.; Bachelet, D.; 

Brooks, M.L.; Enquist, C.A.F.; Fleishman, 

E.; Graumlich, L.J.; Groves, C.R.; Hannah, 

L.; Hansen, L.; Hayward, G.; Koopman, M.; 

Lawler, J.J.; Malcolm, J.; Nordgren, J.; Petersen, 

B.; Rowland, E.L.; Scott, D.; Shafer, S.; Shaw, 

M.R.; Tabor, G.M. 2012. The Adaptation for

Conservation Targets (ACT) Framework: 

a tool for incorporating climate change into 

natural resource management. Environmental 

Management. 50(3): 341-

Dale, V.H.; Joyce, L.A.; McNulty, S.; Neilson, 

R.P.; Ayres, M.P.; Flannigan, M.D.; Hanson, 

P.J.; Irland, L.C.; Lugo, A.E.; Peterson, C.J.; 

Simberloff, D.; Swanson, F.J.; Stocks, B.J.; 

Wotton, B.M. 2001. Climate change and forest

disturbances. BioScience. 51(9): 723-73

D’Amato, A.W.; Bradford, J.B.; Fraver, S.; Palik, 

B.J. 2011. Forest management for mitigatio

and adaptation to climate change: insights 

from long-term silviculture experiments. Forest 

Ecology and Management. 262(5): 803-

Daniels, A.E.; Morrison, J.F.; Joyce, L.A.; 

Crookston, N.L.; Chen, S.C.; McNulty, S.G. 

2012. Climate projections FAQ. Gen. Tech.

Rep. RMRS-GTR-277WWW. Fort Collins, CO: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Rocky Mountain Research Station. 32 p. 

D’Antonio, C.M.; Jackson, N.E.; Horvitz, C.C.; 

Hedberg, R. 2004. Invasive plants in wildland 

ecosystems: merging the study of invasion 

processes with management needs. Frontiers in 

Ecology and the Environment. 2: 513-

Davis, M.B. 1983. Quaternary history of

deciduous forests of eastern North America 

and Europe. Annals of the Missouri Botanical 

Garden. 70(3): 550-

Davis, M.B.; Shaw, R.G. 2001. Range shifts and

adaptive responses to Quaternary climate 

change. Science. 292: 673-67

Davis, M.B.; Shaw, R.G.; Etterson, J.R. 2005.

Evolutionary responses to changing climate.

Ecology. 86: 1704-1

Delworth, T.L.; Broccoli, A.J.; Rosati, A.; Stouffer, 

R.J.; Balaji, V.; Beesley, J.A.; Cooke, W.F.; 

Dixon, K.W.; Dunne, J.; Dunne, K.A.; Durachta, 

J.W.; Findell, K.L.; Ginoux, P.; Gnanadesikan, 

A.; Gordon, C.T.; Griffies, S.M.; Gudgel, 

R.; Harrison, M.J.; Held, I.M.; Hemler, R.S.; 

Horowitz, L.W.; Klein, S.A.; Knutson, T.R.; 

Kushner, P.J.; Langenhorst, A.R.; Lee, H.C.; 

Lin, S.J.; Lu, J.; Malyshev, S.L.; Milly, P.C.D.; 

Ramaswamy, V.; Russell, J.; Schwarzkopf, 

M.D.; Shevliakova, E.; Sirutis, J.J.; Spelman, 

M.J.; Stern, W.F.; Winton, M.; Wittenberg, A.T.; 

Wyman, B.; Zeng, F.; Zhang, R. 2006. GFDL’s

CM2 global coupled climate models. Part I: 

Formulation and simulation characteristics.

Journal of Climate. 19(5): 643-

Devine, W.; Aubry, C.; Miller, J.; Potter, K.M.; 

Bower, A. 2012. Climate change and forest

trees in the Pacific Northwest: guide to 

vulnerability assessment methodology.

Olympia, WA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 49 p. 

http://ecoshare.info/wp-content/uploads/2012/04

CCFT_Methodology.pdf.

Dobrowski, S.Z. 2011. A climatic basis fo

microrefugia: the influence of terrain on 

climate. Global Change Biology. 17: 1022-1

Dreistadt, S.H.; Dahlsten, D.L.; Frankie, G.W. 1990.

Urban forests and insect ecology. BioScience. 

40: 192-19

Dukes, J.S.; Pontius, J.; Orwig, D.; Garnas, 

J.R.; Rodgers, V.L.; Brazee, N.; Cooke, B.; 

Theoharides, K.A.; Stange, E.E.; Harrington, R. 

2009. Responses of insect pests, pathogens, and 

invasive plant species to climate change in the 

forests of northeastern North America: What 

can we predict? Canadian Journal of Forest 

Research. 39: 231-248
1

LITERA

Duryea, M.L.; Kampf, E.; Littell, R.C. 2007. 

Hurricanes and the urban forest: I. Effects on 

southeastern United States coastal plain tree 

species. Arboriculture and Urban Forestry. 33: 

83-97.

Duveneck, M.J.; Scheller, R.M.; White, M.A. 2014a.

Effects of alternative forest management 

strategies in the face of climate change in the 

northern Great Lakes region. Canadian Journal 

of Forest Research. 44: 700-710

Duveneck, M.J.; Scheller, R.M.; White, M.A.; 

Handler, S.D.; Ravenscroft, C. 2014b. Climate

change effects on northern Great Lake 

(USA) forests: a case for preserving diversity.

Ecosphere. 5(2): 1-2

Dwyer, J.M.; Fensham, R.; Buckley, Y.M. 2010.

Restoration thinning accelerates structural 

development and carbon sequestration in an 

endangered Australian ecosystem. Journal of 

Applied Ecology. 47: 681-

EcoAdapt. 2014. A climate change vulnerability

assessment for focal resources of the 

Sierra Nevada. http://ecoadapt.org/

data/documents/EcoAdapt_CALCC_

SierraNevadaVulnerabilityAssessment_

26Feb2014.pdf (accessed December 2, 20

Elmqvist, T.; Folke, C.; Nystrom, M.; Peterson, 

G.; Bengtsson, J.; Walker, B.; Norberg, J. 

2003. Response diversity, ecosystem change, 

and resilience. Frontiers in Ecology and the 

Environment. 1: 488-494

Erickson, B.; Navarrete-Tindall, N. 2004. Missouri 

native ecotype program: increasing localsource native seed. Natural Areas Journal. 

24: 15-2

Evans, A.; Perschel, R. 2009. A review of forestry 

mitigation and adaptation strategies in the 

Northeast U.S. Climatic Change. 96: 167-

Everham, E.; Brokaw, N.L. 1996. Forest damag

and recovery from catastrophic wind. The 

Botanical Review. 62: 113

Fahey, R.T.; Bowles, M.L.; McBride, J.L.; 

McPherson, E.; Scharenbroch, B. 2012. Origins

of the Chicago urban forest: composition 

and structure in relation to pre-settlement 

vegetation and modern land-use. Arboriculture 

and Urban Forestry. 38(1): 181-

Fahey, R.T.; Darling, L.; Anderson, J. 2015

Sustaining our oaks: a vision for the future 

of oak ecosystems in the Chicago Wilderness 

Region. Extended summary report. The Chicago 

Wilderness Oak Ecosystem Recovery Working 

Group. 40 p. Available at http://c.ymcdn.com/

sites/www.chicagowilderness.org/resource/

resmgr/Publications/OERP-Ext-Report-lowrespgs_%28.pdf (accessed May 2, 2016

Fiedler, P.L.; Laven, R.D. 1996. Selectin

reintroduction sites. In: Falk, D.A.; Millar, C.I.; 

Olwell, M., eds. Restoring diversity: strategies for 

reintroduction of endangered plants. Washington, 

DC: Island Press: 157-

Fischer, J.; Lindenmayer, D.B. 2007. Landscape 

modification and habitat fragmentation: a 

synthesis. Global Ecology and Biogeography. 

16: 265-

Fischlin, A.; Ayres, M.; Karnosky, D.; Kellomaki, 

S.; Louman, B.; Ong, C.; Plattner, G.K.; Santoso, 

H.; Thompson, I.; Booth, T.H.; Marcar, N.; 

Scholes, B.; Swanston, C.; Zamolodchikov, 

D. 2009. Future environmental impacts 

and vulnerabilities. In: Seppala, R.; Buck, 

A; Katila, P., eds. Adaptation of forests and 

people to climate change: a global assessment 

report. IUFRO World Series Vol. 22. Helsinki, 

Finland: International Union of Forest Research 

Organizations: 53-10

Flannigan, M.; Stocks, B.; Turetsky, M.; Wotton, 

M. 2009a. Impacts of climate change on 

fire activity and fire management in the 

circumboreal forest. Global Change Biology. 

15(3): 549

Flannigan, M.D.; Krawchuk, M.A.; de Groot, 

W.J.; Wotton, B.M.; Gowman, L.M. 2009b. 

Implications of changing climate for global 

wildland fire. International Journal of Wildland 

Fire. 18: 483-50
LITERA

Francis, J.K. 2000. Comparison of hurricane 

damage to several species of urban trees in San 

Juan, Puerto Rico. Journal of Arboriculture. 

26: 189-

Frelich, L.E. 2002. Forest dynamics and 

disturbance regimes: studies from temperate 

evergreen-deciduous forests. New York: 

Cambridge University Press. 266 

Frelich, L.E.; Reich, P.B. 2010. Will environmental

changes reinforce the impact of global 

warming on the prairie-forest border of 

central North America? Frontiers in Ecology 

and the Environment. 8: 371-378

Frerker, K.; Sabo, A.; Waller, D. 2014. Long-term

regional shifts in plant community composition 

are largely explained by local deer impact 

experiments. PloS ONE. 9: e11584

http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.01

Furniss, M.J.; Roby, K.B.; Cenderelli, D.; Chatel, 

J.; Clifton, C.F.; Clingenpeel, A.; Hays, P.E.; 

Higgins, D.; Hodges, K.; Howe, C.; Jungst, L.; 

Louie, J.; Mai, C.; Martinez, R.; Overton, K.; 

Staab, B.P.; Steinke, R.; Weinhold, M. 2013.

Assessing the vulnerability of watersheds 

to climate change: results of national forest 

watershed vulnerability pilot assessments.

Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-884. Portland, OR: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Pacific Northwest Research Station. 32 p. plus 

appendix.

Furniss, M.J.; Staab, B.P.; Hazelhurst, S.; Clifton, 

C.F.; Roby, K.B.; Ilhadrt, B.L.; Larry, E.B.; Todd, 

A.H.; Reid, L.M.; Hines, S.J.; Bennett, K.A.; 

Luce, C.H.; Edwards, P.J. 2010. Water, climate

change, and forests: watershed stewardship 

for a changing climate. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNWGTR-812. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station. 75 p

Galatowitsch, S.; Frelich, L.; Phillips-Mao, L. 

2009. Regional climate change adaptation 

strategies for biodiversity conservation in 

a midcontinental region of North America.

Biological Conservation. 142: 2012-202

Gandhi, K.J.K.; Gilmore, D.W.; Katovich, S.A.; 

Mattson, W.J.; Spence, J.R.; Seybold, S.J. 2007. 

Physical effects of weather events on the 

abundance and diversity of insects in North 

American forests. Environmental Reviews. 

15: 11

Gibson, W.P.; Daly, C.; Kittel, T.; Nychka, D.; Johns, 

C.; Rosenbloom, N.; McNab, A.; Taylor, G. 2002. 

Development of a 103-year high-resolution 

climate data set for the conterminous United 

States. Proceedings, American Meteorological 

Society 13th conference on applied climatology:

181-1

Gill, S.; Handley, J.; Ennos, A.; Pauleit, S. 2007. 

Adapting cities for climate change: the role of 

the green infrastructure. Built Environment. 

33(1): 115

Girvetz, E.H.; Zganjar, C.; Raber, G.T.; Maurer, 

E.P.; Kareiva, P.; Lawler, J.J. 2009. Applied 

climate-change analysis: the Climate Wizard 

Tool. PLoS ONE 4(12): e8320. http://dx.doi

org/10.1371/journal.pone.000832

Gitay, H.; Suarez, A.; Watson, R.T.; Dokken, D.J., 

eds. 2002. Climate change and biodiversity.

IPCC Technical Paper V. Geneva, Switzerland: 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 

77 p. 

Glick, P.; Stein, B.A.; Edelson, N.A., eds. 2011

Scanning the conservation horizon: a guide 

to climate change vulnerability assessment.

Washington, DC: National Wildlife Federation. 

168 p. http://www.nwf.org/vulnerabilityguid

(accessed May 2, 2016

Groffman, P.M.; Bain, D.J.; Band, L.E.; Belt, 

K.T.; Brush, G.S.; Grove, J.M.; Pouyat, R.V.; 

Yesilonis, I.C.; Zipperer, W.C. 2003. Down by 

the riverside: urban riparian ecology. Frontiers 

in Ecology and the Environment. 1: 315-
LITERA

Gross, J.; Johnson, K.; Glick, P.; Hall, K. 2014.

Understanding climate change impacts and 

vulnerability. In: Stein, B.A.; Glick, P.; Edelson, 

N.; Staudt, A., eds. Climate-smart conservation: 

putting adaptation principles into practice. 

Washington, DC: National Wildlife Federation. 

Chapter 6. http://www.nwf.org/pdf/ClimateSmart-Conservation/NWF-Climate-SmartConservation_5-08-14.pf  (accessed May 

2016

Groves, C.; Game, E.; Anderson, M.; Cross, M.; 

Enquist, C.; Ferdana, Z.; Girvetz, E.; Gondor, 

A.; Hall, K.; Higgins, J.; Marshall, R.; Popper, 

K.; Schill, S.; Shafer, S. 2012. Incorporating

climate change into systematic conservation 

planning. Biodiversity and Conservation. 21(7):

165

Gunn, J.S.; Hagan, J.M.; Whitman, A.A. 2009. 

Forestry adaptation and mitigation in 

a changing climate: a forest resource 

manager’s guide for the northeastern United 

States. Brunswick, ME: Manomet Center for 

Conservation Sciences. 6 

Guyette, R.P.; Thompson, F.R.; Whittier, J.; 

Stambaugh, M.C.; Dey, D.C. 2014. Future fire

probability modeling with climate change data 

and physical chemistry. Forest Science. 60(5)

862-870

Halofsky, J.E.; Peterson, D.L.; O’Halloran, K.; 

Hoffman, C.H., eds. 2011. Adapting to climat

change at Olympic National Forest and 

Olympic National Park. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNWGTR-844. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station. 130 p

Halpin, P.N. 1997. Global climate change and

natural-area protection: management 

responses and research directions. Ecological 

Applications. 7: 828-843.

Handler, S.; Duveneck, M.J.; Iverson, L.; Peters, 

E.; Scheller, R.M.; Wythers, K.R.; Brandt, 

L.; Butler, P.; Janowiak, M.; Shannon, P.D.; 

Swanston, C.; Barrett, K.; Kolka, R.; McQuiston, 

C.; Palik, B.; Reich, P.B.; Turner, C.; White, M.; 

Adams, C.; D’Amato, A.; Hagell, S.; Johnson, 

P.; Johnson, R.; Larson, M.; Matthews, S.; 

Montgomery, R.; Olson, S.; Peters, M.; Prasad, 

A.; Rajala, J.; Daley, J.; Davenport, M.; Emery, 

M.R.; Fehringer, D.; Hoving, C.L.; Johnson, 

G.; Johnson, L.; Neitzel, D.; Rissman, A.; 

Rittenhouse, C.; Ziel, R. 2014a. Minnesota

forest ecosystem vulnerability assessment 

and synthesis: a report from the Northwoods 

Climate Change Response Framework project.

Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-133. Newtown Square, PA:

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Northern Research Station. 228 p.

Handler, S.; Duveneck, M.J.; Iverson, L.; Peters, E.; 

Scheller, R.M.; Wythers, K.R.; Brandt, L.; Butler, 

P.; Janowiak, M.; Shannon, P.D.; Swanston, C.; 

Eagle, A.C.; Cohen, J.G.; Corner, R.; Reich, 

P.B.; Baker, T.; Chhin, S.; Clark, E.; Fehringer, 

D.; Fosgitt, J.; Gries, J.; Hall, C.; Hall, K.R.; 

Heyd, R.; Hoving, C.L.; Ibanez, I.; Kuhr, D.; 

Matthews, S.; Muladore, J.; Nadelhoffer, K.; 

Neumann, D.; Peters, M.; Prasad, A.; Sands, M.; 

Swaty, R.; Wonch, L.; Daley, J.; Davenport, M.; 

Emery, M.R.; Johnson, G.; Johnson, L.; Neitzel, 

D.; Rissman, A.; Rittenhouse, C.; Ziel, R. 2014b.

Michigan forest ecosystem vulnerability 

assessment and synthesis: a report from 

the Northwoods Climate Change Response 

Framework project. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-

129. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research 

Station. 229 p.

Hannah, L. 2008. Protected areas and climate 

change. Annals of the New York Academy of 

Sciences. 1134: 201-

Harris, J.A.; Hobbs, R.J.; Higgs, E.; Aronson, J. 

Ecological restoration and global climate 

change. Restoration Ecology. 14: 170-
1

LITERA

Hatfield, J.; Swanston, C.; Janowiak, M.; Steele, 

R.; Hempel, J.; Bochicchio, J.; Hall, W.; Cole, 

M.; Hestvik, S.; Whitaker, J. 2015. Midwes

and Northern Forests Regional Climate Hub: 

assessment of climate change vulnerability 

and adaptation and mitigation strategies.

Anderson, T., ed. U.S. Department of Agriculture. 

55 p. http://www.climatehubs.oce.usda.gov/site

default/files/pdf/Midwest%20Region%20Vul

nerability%20Assessment%203_20_2015.pd

(accessed May 6, 201

Hatfield, J.L.; Bidwell, D.; Brown, D. 2014. Climate

change in the Midwest: a synthesis report for 

the National Climate Assessment. Washington, 

DC: Island Press. 272 p.

Havens, K.; Vitt, P.; Maunder, M.; Guerrant, E.O., 

Jr.; Dixon, K. 2006. Ex situ plant conservation

and beyond. BioScience. 56: 52

Heinz Center. 2008. Strategies for managing 

the effects of climate change on wildlife and 

ecosystems. 43 p. http://www.heinzctr.org/

publications/PDF/Strategies_for_managing_

effects_of_climate_change_on_wildlife_Nov_4_

2008.pdf (accessed April 15, 201

Heller, N.E.; Zavaleta, E.S. 2009. Biodiversity 

management in the face of climate change: 

a review of 22 years of recommendations.

Biological Conservation. 142: 14-3

Hellmann, J.J.; Byers, J.E.; Bierwagen, B.G.; 

Dukes, J.S. 2008. Five potential consequences 

of climate change for invasive species.

Conservation Biology. 22: 534-54

Hemery, G. 2008. Forest management and 

silvicultural responses to projected climate 

change impacts on European broadleaved 

trees and forests. International Forestry Review. 

10: 591-

Heneghan, L.; Fatemi, F.; Umek, L.; Grady, K.; 

Fagen, K.; Workman, M. 2006. The invasive

shrub European buckthorn (Rhamnus 

cathartica L.) alters soil properties in 

Midwestern US woodlands. Applied Soil 

Ecology. 32: 142-14

Hobbs, R.J. 2002. Habitat networks and biological 

conservation. In: Gutzwiller, K.J., ed. Applying 

landscape ecology in biological conservation. 

New York: Springer: 150-1

Hobbs, R.J.; Arico, S.; Aronson, J.; Baron, J.S.; 

Bridgewater, P.; Cramer, V.A.; Epstein, P.R.; 

Ewel, J.J.; Klink, C.A.; Lugo, A.E.; Norton, D.; 

Ojima, D.; Richardson, D.M.; Sanderson, E.W.; 

Valladares, F.; Vila, M.; Zamora, R.; Zobel, 

M. 2006. Novel ecosystems: theoretical and

management aspects of the new ecological 

world order. Global Ecology and Biogeography. 

15: 1-

Hoegh-Guldberg, O.; Hughes, L.; McIntyre, S.; 

Lindenmayer, D.; Parmesan, C.; Possingham, 

H.; Thomas, C. 2008. Assisted colonization and 

rapid climate change. Science (Washington). 

321: 345-3

Holling, C.S. 1973. Resilience and stability of

ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology 

and Systematics. 4: 1-23

Horsley, S.B.; Stout, S.L.; deCalesta, D.S. 2003. 

White-tailed deer impact on the vegetation 

dynamics of a northern hardwood forest.

Ecological Applications. 13: 98-1

Horton, R.; Yohe, G.; Easterling, W.; Kates, R.; 

Ruth, M.; Sussman, E.; Whelchel, A.; Wolfe, D.; 

Lipschultz, F. 2014. Northeast. In: Melillo, J.M.;

Richmond, T.C.; Yohe, G.W., eds. Climate change 

impacts in the United States: the Third National 

Climate Assessment. Chapter 16. Washington

DC: U.S. Global Change Research Program. 

http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/report/regions

northeast (accessed May 7, 2016

Hulme, P.E. 2005. Adapting to climate change:

Is there scope for ecological management in 

the face of a global threat? Journal of Applied 

Ecology. 42: 784-794.

Hunter, M.L. 2007. Climate change and moving 

species: furthering the debate on assisted 

colonization. Conservation Biology. 21:

1356-
1

LITERA

Iakovoglou, V.; Thompson, J.; Burras, L.; Kipper, 

R. 2001. Factors related to tree growth across

urban-rural gradients in the Midwest, USA.

Urban Ecosystems. 5: 71-

Innes, J.; Joyce, L.A.; Kellomaki, S.; Louman, B.; 

Ogden, A.; Parrotta, J.; Thompson, I.; Ayres, M.; 

Ong, C.; Santosa, H.; Sohngen, B.; Wreford, A. 

2009. Management for adaptation. In: Seppala, 

R.; Buck, A.; Katila, P., eds. Adaptation of forests 

and people to climate change: a global assessment 

report. IUFRO World Series vol. 22. Helsinki, 

Finland: International Union of Forest Research 

Organizations: 135-

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 

[IPCC]. 2007. Summary for policymakers.

In: Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation 

and vulnerability. Contribution of Working 

Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of 

the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 

[Parry, M.L.; Canziani, O.F.; Palutikof, J.P.; van 

der Linden, P.J.; Hanson, C.E., eds.]. Cambridge, 

UK, and New York: Cambridge University Press.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC]. 

2012. Managing the risks of extreme events

and disasters to advance climate change 

adaptation. In: A Special Report of Working 

Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel 

on Climate Change [Field, C.B.; Barros, V.; 

Stocker, T.F.; Qin, D.; Dokken, D.J.; Ebi, K.L.; 

Mastrandrea, M.D.; Mach, K.J.; Plattner, G.-K.; 

Allen, S.K.; Tignor, M.; Midgley, P.M., eds.]. 

Cambridge, UK, and New York: Cambridge 

University Press. 582 p

Iverson, L.R. 2002. Potential redistribution of 

tree species habitat under five climate change 

scenarios in the eastern US. Forest Ecology and 

Management. 155: 205-

Iverson, L.R.; Prasad, A.M. 1998. Predicting

abundance of 80 tree species following climate 

change in the eastern United States. Ecological 

Monographs. 68: 465-

Iverson, L.R.; Prasad, A.M.; Matthews, S.N.; Peters, 

M. 2008. Estimating potential habitat for 

134 eastern US tree species under six climate 

scenarios. Forest Ecology and Management. 

254: 390-406

Iverson, L.R.; Schwartz, M.W.; Prasad, A.M. 2004a. 

How fast and far might tree species migrate 

in the eastern United States due to climate 

change? Global Ecology and Biogeography. 

13: 209-21

Iverson L.R.; Schwartz, M.W.; Prasad, A.M. 2004b. 

Potential colonization of new available tree 

species habitat under climate change: an 

analysis for five eastern US species. Landscape 

Ecology. 19: 787-799

Jacobson, G.L., Jr.; Webb, T., III; Grimm, E.C. 1987.

Patterns and rates of vegetation change during 

the deglaciation of eastern North America. In: 

Ruddiman, W.F.; Wright, H.E., Jr., eds. North 

American and adjacent oceans during the last 

deglaciation. Geology of North America, 

vol. K-3. Boulder, CO: Geological Society of 

America: 277-288.

Janowiak, M.K.; Iverson, L.; Mladenoff, D.J.; 

Peters, E.; Wythers, K.R.; Xi, W.; Brandt, L.A.; 

Butler, P.R.; Handler, S.D.; Shannon, P.D.; 

Swanston, C.W.; Parker, L.R.; Amman, A.J.; 

Bogaczyk, B.; Handler, C.; Lesch, E.; Reich, P.B.; 

Matthews, S.; Peters, M.; Prasad, A.; Khanal, S.; 

Liu, F.; Bal, T.; Bronson, D.; Burton, A.; Ferris, 

J.; Fosgitt, J.; Hagan, S.; Johnston, E.; Kane, E.; 

Matula, C.; O’Conner, R.; Higgins, D.; St. Pierre, 

M.; Daley, J.; Davenport, M.; Emery, M.R.; 

Fehringer, D.; Hoving, C.; Johnson, G.; Neitzel, 

D.; Notaro, M.; Rissman, A.; Rittenhouse, C.; 

Ziel, R. 2014a. Forest ecosystem vulnerability

assessment and synthesis for northern 

Wisconsin and western Upper Michigan: a 

report from the Northwoods Climate Change 

Response Framework project. Gen. Tech. 

Rep. NRS-136. Newtown Square, PA: U.S

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Northern Research Station. 247 p.
1

LITERA

Janowiak, M.K.; Swanston, C.W.; Nagel, L.M.; 

Brandt, L.A.; Butler, P.R.; Shannon, P.D.; 

Iverson, L.R.; Matthews, S.N.; Prasad, A.; 

Peters, M.P. 2014b. A practical approach

for translating climate change adaptation 

principles into forest management actions.

Journal of Forestry. 112(5): 424-4

Janowiak, M.K.; Swanston, C.W.; Nagel, L.M.; 

Webster, C.R.; Palik, B.J.; Twery, M.J.; Bradford, 

J.B.; Parker, L.R.; Hille, A.T.; Johnson, S.M. 

2011. Silvicultural decisionmaking in a

uncertain climate future: a workshop-based 

exploration of considerations, strategies, and 

approaches. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-81. Newtown

Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service. 14 p

Johnston, M. 2009. Vulnerability of Canada’s tree 

species to climate change and management 

options for adaptation: an overview for policy 

makers and practitioners. Canadian Council 

of Forest Ministers. http://www.ccfm.org/pdf/

TreeSpecies_web_e.pdf (accessed May 2, 2016

Johnston, M.; Williamson, T.; Price, D.; 

Spittlehouse, D.; Wellstead, A.; Gray, P.; Scott, 

D.; Askew, S.; Webber, S. 2006. Adapting forest

management to the impacts of climate change 

in Canada. In: Final report, BIOCAP Research 

Integration Program Synthesis paper. https://

www.for.gov.bc.ca/hre/pubs/docs/Johnstonetal_

2006.pdf (accessed May 10, 20

Jones, J.A. 2011. Hydrologic responses to climat

change: considering geographic context and 

alternative hypotheses. Hydrological Processes. 

25: 1996-20

Joyce, L.; Blate, G.; McNulty, S.; Millar, C.; Moser, 

S.; Neilson, R.; Peterson, D. 2009. Managing 

for multiple resources under climate change: 

national forests. Environmental Management. 

44: 1022-103

Joyce, L.; Janowiak, M. 2011. Climate chang

assessments. U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Climate Change Resource Center. 

www.fs.usda.gov/ccrc/topics/assessments/

vulnerability-assessments (accessed May 2, 

2016

Kellomaki, S.; Strandman, H.; Nuutinen, T.; 

Peltola, H.; Korhonen, K.T.; Vaisanen, H. 2005.

Adaptation of forest ecosystems, forests 

and forestry to climate change. FINADAPT 

Working Paper 4. Finnish Environment Institute 

Mimeographs. Helsinki, Finland: Finnish 

Environment Institute. 44 p. 

Keppel, G.; Van Niel, K.P.; Wardell-Johnson, G.W.; 

Yates, C.J.; Byrne, M.; Mucina, L.; Schut, A.T.; 

Hopper, S.D.; Franklin, S.E. 2012. Refugia:

identifying and understanding safe havens 

for biodiversity under climate change. Global 

Ecology and Biogeography. 21: 393-404

King, D.A. 1986. Tree form, height growth

and susceptibility to wind damage in Acer 

saccharum. Ecology. 67: 980-990

Kirshen, P.; Ruth, M.; Anderson, W. 2008. 

Interdependencies of urban climate change 

impacts and adaptation strategies: a case study 

of Metropolitan Boston USA. Climatic Change. 

86: 105-

Klausmeyer, K.R.; Shaw, M.R.; MacKenzie, 

J.B.; Cameron, D.R. 2011. Landscape-scal

indicators of biodiversity’s vulnerability to 

climate change. Ecosphere 2:art88. http://dx.doi.

org/10.1890/ES11-000

Landscape Change Research Group. 2014. Climate

change atlas. Delaware, OH: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research 

Station. www.nrs.fs.fed.us/atlas (accessed 

February 13, 2014)

Larson, A.J.; Belote, R.T.; Williamson, M.A.; Aplet, 

G.H. 2013. Making monitoring count: project

design for active adaptive management.

Journal of Forestry. 111(5): 34
12

LITERA

Lawler, J.J. 2009. Climate change adaptation 

strategies for resource management and 

conservation planning. Year in Ecology and 

Conservation Biology. 2009(1162): 79-

Lawler, J.J.; Tear, T.H.; Pyke, C.; Shaw, M.R.; 

Gonzalez, P.; Kareiva, P.; Hansen, L.; Hannah, L.; 

Klausmeyer, K.; Aldous, A.; Bienz, C.; Pearsall, 

S. 2010. Resource management in a changin

and uncertain climate. Frontiers in Ecology and

the Environment. 8(1): 35-4

Levina, E.; Tirpak, D. 2006. Adaptation to climate

change: key terms. Organisation for Economic 

Co-operation and Development (OECD) and 

International Energy Agency. http://www.oecd.

org/dataoecd/36/53/36736773.pdf (acces

May 2, 2016

Lexer, M.J.; Seidl, R. 2009. Addressing 

biodiversity in a stakeholder-driven climate 

change vulnerability assessment of forest 

management. Forest Ecology and Management. 

28: S8-S7. http://dx.doi.org/0.0/

j.foreco.2009.07.0.

Liang, X.; Lettenmaier, D.P.; Wood, E.F.; Burges, 

S.J. 1994. A simple hydrologically based model

of land surface water and energy fluxes for 

GSMs. Journal of Geophysical Research. 9(D7): 

14415-14

Lindenmayer, D.B.; Franklin, J.F.; Fischer, J. 

2006. General management principles and

a checklist of strategies to guide forest 

biodiversity conservation. Biological 

Conservation. 131(3): 433-4

Littell, J.S.; Peterson, D.L.; Millar, C.I.; O’Halloran, 

K.A. 2012. US national forests adapt to

climate change through science-management 

partnerships. Climatic Change. 110: 269-

Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences and 

Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife. 

2010a. Climate change and Massachusetts fish

and wildlife: volume 2—habitat and species 

vulnerability. http://www.mass.gov/eea/docs/

dfg/dfw/habitat/cwcs/climate-change-habitatvulnerability.pdf (accessed December 2, 2015

Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences and 

Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife. 

2010b. Climate change and Massachusetts fish

and wildlife: volume 3—habitat management.

http://www.mass.gov/eea/docs/dfg/dfw/habitat/

cwcs/climate-change-habitat-management.pdf 

(accessed May 6, 201

Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences and 

National Wildlife Federation [NWF]. 2013.

The vulnerabilities of fish and wildlife 

habitats in the northeast to climate change.

A report to the Northeastern Association 

of Fish and Wildlife Agencies and the 

North Atlantic Landscape Conservation 

Cooperative. Manomet, MA. 188 p.

http://rcngrants.org/sites/default/files/

final_reports/Galbraith%20et%20al%20-

%20Terrestrial-Wetland%20Vulnerabililty

%20Assessment_0.pdf (accessed May 4, 2016

Marzluff, J.M.; Bowman, R.; Donnelly, R. 2001.

Avian ecology and conservation in an 

urbanizing world. New York: Springer. 585 

Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife. 

2006. 2005 Massachusetts comprehensive

wildlife conservation strategy. Boston, MA: 

Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and 

Wildlife, Department of Fish and Game and 

Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Executive 

Office of Environmental Affairs.

Mastrandrea, M.D.; Field, C.B.; Stocker, T.F.; 

Edenhofer, O.; Ebi, K.L.; Frame, D.J.; Held, 

H.; Kriegler, E.; Mach, K.J.; Matschoss, P.R.; 

Plattner, G.K.; Yohe, G.W.; Zwiers, F.W. 

2010. Guidance note for lead authors of the

IPCC Fifth Assessment report on consistent 

treatment of uncertainties. Intergovernmental 

Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Available at 

http://www.ipcc.ch/activities/activities.shtml 

(accessed Feb. 28, 2011

Mawdsley, J.R.; O’Malley, R.; Ojima, D.S. 2009. A 

review of climate-change adaptation strategies 

for wildlife management and biodiversity 

conservation. Conservation Biology. 23: 

1080-108
1

LITERA

McCarthy, M.P.; Best, M.J.; Betts, R.A. 2010.

Climate change in cities due to global 

warming and urban effects. Geophysical 

Research Letters. 37. http://dx.doi.org/10.102

2010GL04284

McDonnell, M.J.; Pickett, S.T.A.; Groffman, 

P.; Bohlen, P.; Pouyat, R.V.; Zipperer, W.C.; 

Parmelee, R.W.; Carreiro, M.M.; Medley, K. 

2008. Ecosystem processes along an urban-torural gradient. In: Marzluff, J.M.; Shulenberger, 

E.; Endlicher, W.; Alberti, M.; Bradley, G.; Ryan, 

C.; ZumBrunnen, C.; Simon, U., eds. Urban 

ecology: an international perspective on the 

interaction between humans and nature. New 

York: Springer: 299-313

McKenney, D.; Pedlar, J.; O’Neill, G. 2009. Climate 

change and forest seed zones: past trends, 

future prospects and challenges to ponder. 

The Forestry Chronicle. 85: 258-

McKinney, M.L. 2002. Urbanization, biodiversity, 

and conservation: The impacts of urbanization 

on native species are poorly studied, but 

educating a highly urbanized human 

population about these impacts can greatly 

improve species conservation in all ecosystems.

BioScience. 52: 883-890

McLachlan, J.S.; Hellmann, J.J.; Schwartz, M.W. 

2007. A framework for debate of assisted 

migration in an era of climate change.

Conservation Biology. 21(2): 297-302

Melillo, J.M.; Richmond, T.C.; Yohe, G.W., eds. 

2014. Climate change impacts in the United

States: the Third National Climate Assessment.

Washington, DC: U.S. Global Change Research 

Program. 841 p. http://nca2014.globalchang

gov/downloads (accessed May 7, 2014).

Millar, C.I. 1991. Conservation of germplas

in forest trees. In: Ahuja, M.R.; Libby, M.R., 

eds. Clonal Forestry II. Conservation and 

Applications. Berlin: Springer-Verlag: 42-6

Millar, C.I.; Brubaker, L.B. 2006. Climate change

and paleoecology: new contexts for restoration 

ecology. In: Palmer, M.; Falk, D.; Zedler, J., eds. 

Restoration science. Washington, DC: Island 

Press: 315-34

Millar, C.I.; Skog, K.E.; McKinley, D.C.; Birdsey, 

R.A.; Swanston, C.; Hines, S.J.; Woodall, C.W.; 

Reinhart, E.D.; Peterson, D.L.; Vose, J.M. 2012.

Adaptation and mitigation. In: Vose, J.M.; 

Peterson, D.L.; Patel-Weynand, T., eds. Effects 

of climatic variability and change on forest 

ecosystems: a comprehensive science synthesis 

for the U.S. forest sector. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNWGTR-870. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station: 7-95

Millar, C.I.; Stephenson, N.L.; Stephens, S.L. 2007. 

Climate change and forests of the future: 

managing in the face of uncertainty. Ecological 

Applications. 17(8): 2145

Millar, C.I.; Stephenson, N.L.; Stephens, S.L. 

2008. Re-framing forest and resource 

management strategies for a climate change 

context. Mountain Views Newsletter of the 

Consortium for Integrated Climate Research 

in Western Mountains. 2: 5-10. Available a

articles.extension.org/sites/default/files/w/b/b1

millar020508.pdf (accessed May 4, 201

Miller, R.W. 1997. Urban forestry: planning and

managing urban greenspaces. 2nd ed. Upper 

Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. 502 p

Mitchell, S. 2013. Wind as a natural disturbance

agent in forests: a synthesis. Forestry. 86(2):

147-15

Mladenoff, D.J.; Stearns, F. 1993. Eastern

hemlock regeneration and deer browsing 

in the northern Great Lakes region: a 

re-examination and model simulation.

Conservation Biology. 7: 889-900.
12

LITERA

Mooney, H.; Larigauderie, A.; Cesario, M.; 

Elmquist, T.; Hoegh-Guldberg, O.; Lavorel, 

S.; Mace, G.M.; Palmer, M.; Scholes, R.; 

Yahara, T. 2009. Biodiversity, climate change, 

and ecosystem services. Current Opinion in 

Environmental Sustainability. 1: 46-

Morelli, T.L.; Yeh, S.; Smith, N.; Hennessey, M.B.; 

Millar, C.I. 2012. Climate project screening

tool: an aid for climate change adaptation. Res. 

Pap. PSW-RP-263. Albany, CA: U.S. Department

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest 

Research Station. 29 p.

Morgan, D.; Daust, D. 2013. A climate change

vulnerability assessment for British 

Columbia’s managed forests. https://www.for.

gov.bc.ca/het/climate/knowledge/vulnerabilityassessment.htm (accessed December 2, 2015

Moritz, M.A.; Parisien, M.-A.; Batllori, E.; 

Krawchuk, M.A.; Dorn, J.V.; Ganz, D.J.; Hayhoe, 

K. 2012. Climate change and disruptions to

global fire activity. Ecosphere. 3(6): 1-2

Naeem, S.; Knops, J.M.; Tilman, D.; Howe, K.M.; 

Kennedy, T.; Gale, S. 2000. Plant diversity 

increases resistance to invasion in the absence 

of covarying extrinsic factors. Oikos. 91:

97-108

National Fish Wildlife and Plants Climate 

Adaptation Partnership. 2012. National fish,

wildlife and plants climate adaptation strategy.

Washington, DC: Association of Fish and 

Wildlife Agencies, Council on Environmental 

Quality, Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife 

Commission, National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service.

The National Wildlife Federation and Manomet 

Center for Conservation Sciences. 2013.

Implementing climate-smart conservation 

in northeastern upland forests. In: A report 

to the Wildlife Conservation Society and the 

Northeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife 

Agencies. Montpelier, VT: The National Wildlife 

Federation.

Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2012.

Introduced, invasive, and noxious plants. U.S. 

Department of Agriculture. http://plants.usda.gov/

java/noxiousDriver#state (accessed May 2, 2016

The Nature Conservancy. 2009. Conservation 

action planning guidelines for developing 

strategies in the face of climate change.

http://conserveonline.org/workspaces/

climateadaptation/documents/climate-changeproject-level-guidance/documents/climatechange-cap-guidance-october-2009 (accessed 

September 8, 2011

Nicotra, A.B.; Beever, E.A.; Robertson, A.L.; 

Hofmann, G.E.; O’Leary, J. 2015. Assessing th

components of adaptive capacity to improve 

conservation and management efforts under 

global change. Conservation Biology. 29: 

1268-127

Nitschke, C.R.; Innes, J.L. 2008. Integrating 

climate change into forest management in 

south-central British Columbia: an assessment 

of landscape vulnerability and development of 

a climate-smart framework. Forest Ecology and 

Management. 256: 313-3

Noss, R.F. 2001. Beyond Kyoto: forest

management in a time of rapid climate change.

Conservation Biology. 15: 578-

Nowacki, G.J.; Abrams, M.D. 2008. The demise 

of fire and “mesophication” of forests in the 

eastern United States. BioScience. 58(2):

123-13
12

LITERA

Nowak, D.J. 2000. The interactions between 

global climate change and urban forests. In: 

Abdollahi, K.A.; Ning, Z.H.; Appeaning, A., 

eds. Global climate change and the urban forest. 

Baton Rouge, LA: Gulf Coast Regional Climate 

Change Council: 31-44

Nowak, D.J.; Dwyer, J.F. 2007. Understanding the 

benefits and costs of urban forest ecosystems.

In: Kuser, J.E., ed. Urban and community forestry 

in the Northeast. The Netherlands: Springer: 

25-4

Nowak, D.J.; Hoehn, R.E., III; Crane, D.E.; Stevens, 

J.C.; Walton, J.T. 2006. Assessing urban forest

effect and values: Washington, D.C.’s urban 

forest. Resour. Bull. NRS-1. Newtown Square,

PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Northern Research Station. 24 p. 

Ogden, A.; Innes, J. 2008. Climate change 

adaptation and regional forest planning in 

southern Yukon, Canada. Mitigation and 

Adaptation Strategies for Global Change. 

13(8): 833-8

O’Hara, K.L.; Ramage, B.S. 2013. Silviculture

in an uncertain world: utilizing multi-aged 

management systems to integrate disturbance.

Forestry. 86: 401-4

Ohlson, D.W.; McKinnon, G.A.; Hirsch, K.G. 2005.

A structured decision-making approach to 

climate change adaptation in the forest sector.

The Forestry Chronicle. 81: 97-10

Oliver, C.D.; Larson, B.C. 1996. Forest stan

dynamics. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 

544 p

Papaik, M.; Canham, C. 2006. Species resistance

and community response to wind disturbance 

regimes in northern temperate forests. Journal 

of Ecology. 94: 1011-

Parry, M.L.; Canziani, O.F.; Palutikof, J.P., coord. 

lead authors. 2007. Technical summary.

In: Parry, M.L.; Canziani, O.F.; Palutikof, 

J.P.; van der Linden, P.J.; Hanson, C.E., eds. 

Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and 

vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group 

II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press: 

23-78.

Patterson, J.D.; Mader, D.L. 1982. Soil compaction:

causes and control in urban forest soils—a 

reference workbook. Syracuse, NY: SUNY 

College of Environmental Science and Forestry. 

Chapter 3. 

Pedlar, J.H.; McKenney, D.W.; Aubin, I.; 

Beardmore, T.; Beaulieu, J.; Iverson, L.; O’Neill, 

G.A.; Winder, R.S.; Ste-Marie, C. 2012. Placing

forestry in the assisted migration debate. 

BioScience. 62: 835-84

Peters, E.B.; Wythers, K.R.; Zhang, S.; Bradford, 

J.B.; Reich, P.B. 2013. Potential climate

change impacts on temperate forest ecosystem 

processes. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 

43: 939-95

Peterson, D.L.; Millar, C.I.; Joyce, L.A.; Furniss, 

M.J.; Halofsky, J.E.; Neilson, R.P.; Morelli, 

T.L. 2011. Responding to climate change o

national forests: a guidebook for developing 

adaptation options. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNWGTR-855. Portland, OR: U.S. Department o

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station. 109 p.

Peterson, G.C.; Allen, R.; Holling, C.S. 1998.

Ecological resilience, biodiversity, and scale. 

Ecosystems. 1: 6-

Poland, T.M.; McCullough, D.G. 2006. Emerald

ash borer: invasion of the urban forest and the 

threat to North America’s ash resource. Journal 

of Forestry. 104: 118-
12

LITERA

Putz, F.E.; Coley, P.D.; Lu, K.; Montalvo, A.; 

Aiello, A. 1983. Uprooting and snapping of

trees: structural determinants and ecological 

consequences. Canadian Journal of Forest 

Research. 13: 1011-

Raupp, M.J.; Cummings, A.B.; Raupp, E.C. 2006.

Street tree diversity in Eastern North America 

and its potential for tree loss to exotic borers.

Arboriculture and Urban Forestry. 32(6):

297-304.

Reed, T.E.; Schindler, D.E.; Waples, R.S. 2011

Interacting effects of phenotypic plasticity 

and evolution on population persistence in a 

changing climate. Conservation Biology. 

25: 56

Ricciardi, A.; Simberloff, D. 2009. Assisted 

colonization is not a viable conservation 

strategy. Trends in Ecology and Evolution. 

24: 248-253

Rissman, A.R.; Lozier, L.; Comendant, T.; Kareiva, 

P.; Kiesecker, J.M.; Shaw, M.R.; Merenlender, 

A.M. 2007. Conservation easements: 

biodiversity protection and private use.

Conservation Biology. 21: 709-71

Rooney, T.P.; Waller, D.M. 2003. Direct and 

indirect effects of white-tailed deer in forest 

ecosystems. Forest Ecology and Management. 

181: 1

Root, T.L.; Price, J.T.; Hall, K.R.; Schneider, S.H.; 

Rosenzweig, C.; Pounds, J.A. 2003. Fingerprints 

of global warming on wild animals and plants.

Nature. 421: 57-

Rudnick, D.A.; Ryan, S.J.; Beier, P.; Cushman, 

S.A.; Dieffenbach, F.; Epps, C.W.; Gerber, L.R.; 

Hartter, J.; Jenness, J.S.; Kintsch, J.; Merenlender, 

A.M.; Perkl, R.M.; Preziosi, D.V.; Trombulak, 

S.C. 2012. The role of landscape connectivity

in planning and implementing conservation 

and restoration priorities. Issues in Ecology. 

16(Fall): 1-

Santamour, F.S., Jr. 2004. Trees for urban planting: 

diversity uniformity, and common sense.

Proceedings, 7th Conference of the Metropolitan 

Tree Improvement Planting Alliance (METRA): 

57-

Sathre, R.; Gustavson, L. 2012.Time-dependent

radiative forcing effects of forest fertilization 

and biomass substitution. Biogeochemistry. 

109(1): 213-

Savard, J.-P. L.; Clergeau, P.; Mennechez, G. 2000. 

Biodiversity concepts and urban ecosystems. 

Landscape and Urban Planning. 48: 131-1

Scheller, R.M.; Domingo, J.B.; Sturtevant, B.R.; 

Williams, J.S.; Rudy, A.; Gustafson, E.J.; 

Mladenoff, D.J. 2007. Design, development, and 

application of LANDIS-II, a spatial landscape 

simulation model with flexible temporal and 

spatial resolution. Ecological Modelling. 

201(3-4): 409-41

Schiermeier, Q. 2010. The real holes in climate

science. Nature. 463: 284-287

Schmidlin, T.W. 2009. Human fatalities from 

wind-related tree failures in the United States, 

1995-2007. Natural Hazards. 50: 13-

Schmitz, O.J.; Lawler, J.J.; Beier, P.; Groves, 

C.; Knight, G.; Boyce, D.A., Jr.; Bulluck, J.; 

Johnston, K.M.; Klein, M.L.; Muller, K. 2015

Conserving biodiversity: practical guidance 

about climate change adaptation approaches 

in support of land-use planning. Natural Areas 

Journal. 35: 190-20

Seddon, P.J. 2010. From reintroduction to assisted

colonization: moving along the conservation 

translocation spectrum. Restoration Ecology. 

18: 796-80

Seymour, R.S.; White, A.S.; deMaynadier, P.G. 

2002. Natural disturbance regimes in 

northeastern North America—evaluating 

silvicultural systems using natural scales and 

frequencies. Forest Ecology and Management. 

155: 357
1

LITERA

Shuman, B.; Bartlein, P.; Logar, N.; Newby, P.; 

Webb, T. 2002. Parallel climate and vegetation 

responses to the early Holocene collapse of 

the Laurentide Ice Sheet. Quaternary Science 

Reviews. 21: 1793-1

Simpson, P.; van Bossuyt, R. 1996. Tree-cause

electric outages. Journal of Arboriculture. 

22: 117-

Society of American Foresters. 2008. The 

dictionary of forestry. Bethesda, MD. 

dictionaryofforestry.org/ (accessed August 8, 

2011

Spies, T.A.; Giesen, T.W.; Swanson, F.J.; Franklin, 

J.F.; Lach, D.; Johnson, K.N. 2010. Climate

change adaptation strategies for federal forests 

of the Pacific Northwest, USA: ecological, 

policy, and socio-economic perspectives.

Landscape Ecology. 25: 1185

Spittlehouse, D.L. 2005. Integrating climate

change adaptation into forest management.

The Forestry Chronicle. 81(5): 69

Spittlehouse, D.L.; Stewart, R.B. 2003. Adaptation 

to climate change in forest management.

BC Journal of Ecosystems and Management. 

4(1): 1

Stankey, G.H.; Clark, R.N.; Bormann, B.T. 2005.

Adaptive management of natural resources: 

theory, concepts, and management institutions.

Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-654. Portland, OR

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Pacific Northwest Research Station. 73 p.

Staudinger, M.D.; Grimm, N.B.; Staudt, A.; Carter, 

S.L.; Chapin, F.S., III; Kareiva, P.; Ruckelshaus, 

M.; Stein, B.A. 2012. Impacts of climate change

on biodiversity, ecosystems, and ecosystem 

services: technical input to the 2013 National 

Climate Assessment. Cooperative Report to 

the 2013 National Climate Assessment. 296 p

http://assessment.globalchange.gov (accessed 

December 21, 2015

Staudinger, M.D.; Morelli, T.L.; Bryan, A.M. 2015

Integrating climate change into Northeast and 

Midwest state wildlife action plans. Amherst, 

MA: U.S. Department of the Interior, Northeast 

Climate Science Center. 205 p. Available at http:/

necsc.umass.edu/projects/integrating-climatechange-state-wildlife-action-plans (accessed 

December 2, 2015)

Stein, B.A.; Glick, P.; Edelson, N.; Staudt, A., 

eds. 2014. Climate-smart conservation:

putting adaptation principles into practice.

Washington, DC: National Wildlife Federation. 

262 p

Stein, B.A.; Staudt, A.; Cross, M.S.; Dubois, N.S.; 

Enquist, C.; Griffis, R.; Hansen, L.J.; Hellmann, 

J.J.; Lawler, J.J.; Nelson, E.J. 2013. Preparing

for and managing change: climate adaptation 

for biodiversity and ecosystems. Frontiers in 

Ecology and the Environment. 11: 502

Stoner, A.M.K.; Hayhoe, K.; Yang, X.; Wuebbles, 

D.J. 2012. An asynchronous regional

regression model for statistical downscaling of 

daily climate variables. International Journal of 

Climatology. 33(11): 2473-249

Stromayer, K.A.K.; Warren, R.J. 1997. Are

overabundant deer herds in the eastern United 

States creating alternate stable states in forest 

plant communities? Wildlife Society Bulletin. 

25: 227-234

Swanston, C.; Janowiak, M.; Iverson, L.; Parker, L.; 

Mladenoff, D.; Brandt, L.; Butler, P.; St. Pierre, 

M.; Prasad, A.; Matthews, S.; Peters, M.; Higgins, 

D.; Dorland, A. 2011. Ecosystem vulnerabilit

assessment and synthesis: a report from the 

Climate Change Response Framework Project 

in northern Wisconsin. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS82. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research 

Station. 142 p
1

LITERA

Swanston, C.W.; Janowiak, M.J. 2012. Forest

adaptation resources: climate change tools and 

approaches for land managers. Gen. Tech. Rep. 

NRS-87. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research 

Station. 121 

Tang, Y.; Zhong, S.; Luo, L.; Bian, X.; Heilman, 

W.E.; Winkler, J. 2014. The potential impact

of regional climate change on fire weather in 

the United States. Annals of the Association of 

American Geographers. 105(1): 1

Tobin, D.; Janowiak, M.; Hollinger, D.; Skinner, 

R.H.; Swanston, C.; Steele, R.; Radhakrishna, 

R.; Chatrchyan, A.; Hickman, D.; Bochicchio, 

J.; Hall, W.; Cole, M.; Hestvik, S.; Gibson, D.; 

Kleinman, P.; Knight, L.; Kochian, L.; Rustad, 

L.; Lane, E.; Niedzielski, J.; Hlubik, P. 2015

Northeast and Northern Forests Regional 

Climate Hub assessment of climate change 

vulnerability and adaptation and mitigation 

strategies. Anderson, T., ed. Durham, NH: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Northern Research Station, Northeast Hub. 

65 p. http://www.climatehubs.oce.usda.gov/site

default/files/Northeast%20Regional%20Hub%

20Vulnerability%20Assessment%20Final.pdf 

(accessed December 21, 2015

Urban, J. 2008. Up by roots: healthy soils and 

trees in the built environment. Champaign, IL: 

International Society of Arboriculture. 479 p.

Urbanek, R.E.; Nielsen, C.K. 2012. Deer,

humans, and vegetation: a case study of deer 

management in the Chicago metropolitan area.

In: Timm, R.M., ed. Proceedings of the 25th

vertebrate pest conference. Davis, CA: University 

of California: 282-288.

Uriarte, M.; Papaik, M. 2007. Hurricane 

impacts on dynamics, structure and carbon 

sequestration potential of forest ecosystems 

in Southern New England, USA. Tellus. 59A:

519-5

U.S. Forest Service. 2008. Forest Service strategic 

framework for responding to climate change, 

ver. 1.0. http://www.fs.fed.us/climatechange/

documents/strategic-framework-climate-change-

1-0.pdf (accessed May 6, 20

U.S. Forest Service. 2010. National roadmap for

responding to climate change. http://www.

fs.fed.us/climatechange/pdf/roadmap.pdf 

(accessed May 6, 201

U.S. Forest Service. 2015. Forest Inventory an

Analysis national program homepage.

http://www.fia.fs.fed.us/ (accessed December 21,

2015

Vitt, P.; Havens, K.; Kramer, A.T.; Sollenberger, D.; 

Yates, D. 2010. Assisted migration of plants:

changes in latitudes, changes in attitudes.

Biological Conservation. 143: 18-2

Vose, J.M.; Peterson, D.L.; Patel-Weynand, T. 

eds. 2012. Effects of climatic variability and

change on forest ecosystems: a comprehensive 

science synthesis for the U.S. forest sector.

Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-870. Portland, OR: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Pacific Northwest Research Station. 265 p

Walck, J.L.; Hidayati, S.N.; Dixon, K.W.; 

Thompson, K.; Poschlod, P. 2011. Climat

change and plant regeneration from seed.

Global Change Biology. 17: 2145

Walk, J.; Hagen, S.; Lange, A. 2011. Adaptin

conservation to a changing climate: an update 

to the Illinois Wildlife Action Plan. In: Report 

to the Illinois Department of Natural Resources. 

Contract TNC10WAP. Peoria, IL: Illinois Chapter

of The Nature Conservancy.

Walther, G.-R.; Post, E.; Convey, P.; Menzel, 

A.; Parmesan, C.; Beebee, J.; Fromentin, J.-

M.; Hoegh-Guldberg, O.; Bairlein, F. 2002. 

Ecological responses to recent climate change.

Nature. 416: 389-3
12

LITERA

Wang, W.J.; He, H.S.; Fraser, J.S.; Thompson, F.R., 

III; Shifley, S.R.; Spetich, M.A. 2014. LANDIS

PRO: a landscape model that predicts forest 

composition and structure changes at regional 

scales. Ecography. 37: 225-229

Wang, W.J.; He, H.S.; Spetich, M.A.; Shifley, S.R.; 

Thompson, F.R., III; Larsen, D.R.; Fraser, J.S.; 

Yang, J. 2013. A large-scale forest landscape

model incorporating multi-scale processes and 

utilizing forest inventory data. Ecosphere. 4(9): 

106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/ES113-0

Washington, W.M.; Weatherly, J.W.; Meehl, 

G.A.; Semtner, A.J., Jr.; Bettge, T.W.; Craig, 

A.P.; Strand, W.G., Jr.; Arblaster, J.; Wayland, 

V.B.; James, R.; Zhang, Y. 2000. Parallel 

climate model (PCM) control and transient 

simulations. Climate Dynamics. 16(10-

755-77

Watson, G.W.; Himelick, E.B. 2013. Root-friendly

planting site design. Arborist News. 22: 64-6

Weiner, J. 1990. Asymmetric competition in plant

populations. Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 

5: 360-3

Whitlow, T.H.; Bassuk, N.L. 1987. Trees in difficult

sites. Journal of Arboriculture. 13: 10-

Wilkerson, E.; Sartoris, J. 2013. Climate change

adaptation plan for Allen Whitney Forest, 

Maine. Plymouth, MA: Manomet Center for 

Conservation Sciences.

Wilkerson, E.; Whitman, A. 2011. Climate chang

& forests. What can we expect? What can we 

do about it? Brunswick, ME: Manomet Center 

for Conservation Sciences. 8 p. 

https://www.manomet.org/sites/

default/files/publications_and_tools/

ClimateChangeandForests_10.11.pdf (access

May 6, 201

Williams, B.K.; Szaro, R.C.; Shapiro, C.D. 2007. 

Adaptive management: the US Department 

of the Interior technical guide. [N.p.]: U.S. 

Department of the Interior, Adaptive Management 

Working Group.

Woodall, C.W.; Nagel, L.M. 2007. Downed 

woody fuel loading dynamics of a large-scale 

blowdown in northern Minnesota, U.S.A.

Forest Ecology and Management. 247: 194-19

Woodall, C.W.; Nowak, D.J.; Liknes, G.C.; Westfall, 

J.A. 2010. Assessing the potential for urban

trees to facilitate forest tree migration in the 

eastern United States. Forest Ecology and 

Management. 259: 1447-1

Wullschleger, S.D.; Gunderson, C.A.; Tharp, 

M.L.; Post, W.M.; West, D.C. 2003 Simulated 

patterns of forest succession and productivity 

as a consequence of altered precipitation. In: 

Hanson, P.J.; Wullschleger, S.D., eds. North 

American temperate deciduous forest responses 

to changing precipitation regimes. New York: 

Springer-Verlag: 433-446

Yaussy, D.A.; Iverson, L.R.; Matthews, S.N. 2013.

Competition and climate affects US hardwoodforest tree mortality. Forest Science. 59(4):

416-43

Young, A.G.; Merriam, H.G.; Warwick, S.I. 1993.

The effects of forest fragmentation on genetic 

variation in Acer saccharum Marsh (sugar 

maple) populations. Heredity. 71(3): 277-289

Young, B.; Byers, E.; Gravuer, K.; Hall, K.; 

Hammerson, G.; Redder, A. 2010. Guidelines

for using the NatureServe Climate Change 

Vulnerability Index Release 1.2. Arlington, VA: 

NatureServe. 54 p
12

Appendix 1. Synthesis of Adaptation Strategi

and Approaches

The adaptation strategies and approaches described 

in Chapter 3 of this document provide a menu 

of strategies and approaches for adapting forest 

ecosystems to climate change. These strategies and 

approaches serve as stepping stones to enable natural 

resource managers to translate broad concepts into 

targeted and prescriptive tactics for implementing 

adaptation (Janowiak et al. 2010). For the updated

menu used in this document, we expanded our 

geographic extent to the Midwest and Northeast, and 

extended our consideration to the major forest types 

within those regions. The methods and processes 

used to develop and refine this menu are described 

in this appendix.

Synthesis of Adaptation Action

This menu of adaptation strategies, approaches, 

and example tactics builds on the menu that was 

originally published in Swanston and Janowiak 

(2012) and compiled from a number of sources in

both peer-reviewed and gray literature. We also 

used the BioOne®, Google Scholar, and TreeSearch 

search engines to conduct additional literature 

searches for peer-reviewed and gray literature 

that had been published in the last 3 years. Key 

words included climate change, adaptation, forest 

management, adaptive management, impacts, 

migration, and genetic conservation. A list of key 

literature used is presented in Table 10. Additional

actions were identified from contemporary literature 

and recent case studies of forest adaptation projects, 

such as those found at www.forestadaptation.

org/demonstrations. The adaptation concepts and 

actions compiled from the literature and case studies 

were organized into a hierarchy of adaptation 

actions from broad concepts to specific tactics (see 

Figure  in Chapter 2). Based on expert review (see

next section), adaptation actions were refined and 

organized into 10 strategies, 36 approaches, an

more than 100 example tactics.

Expert Comment Proce

We drew upon the experience and expertise of 

scientists, adaptation experts, and forest managers 

for input on how this expanded menu of adaptation 

strategies and approaches relates to forest types 

across ecological provinces in the Midwest and 

Northeast (Tables 1 and 12). We compiled a li

of individuals with expertise in forest ecology and 

management in the region, seeking representation 

from a variety of geographies and a balance 

of science and management from a range of 

institutions (Table 13). Expertise was determined

by publications related to key words, as well as 

previous experience working in a region or forest 

type. Overall, 42 experts provided feedback, with at 

least two experts commenting from each ecological 

province. 

We elicited comments from experts by using 

an online questionnaire that asked each person 

to evaluate all of the adaptation strategies and 

approaches for a single forest type. A draft chapter of 

the revised strategies and approaches was provided. 

Before beginning the review, experts were asked to 

think about potential climate change impacts that are 

most important to the ecological province that they 

would be considering. We provided a list of existing 

climate change vulnerability assessments and impact 

reports that they could use for reference.

For each adaptation strategy, experts were first 

asked a set of questions about the applicability of 

each adaptation approach under that strategy for 

their assigned forest type and region. Experts were 
12

Appendix 

Table 10.—Literature reviewed for compilation of adaptation strategies and approaches. Full citations

for these resources are in the Literature Cited section of this document

Biringer, J. 2003. Forest ecosystems threatened 

by climate change: promoting long-term forest 

resilience.

Brandt, L.; Swanston, C.; Parker, L.; Janowiak, M.; 

Birdsey, R.; Iverson, L.; Mladenoff, D.; Butler, P. 2012.

Climate change science applications and needs 

in forest ecosystem management: a workshop 

organized as part of northern Wisconsin Climate 

Change Response Framework Project

Chornesky, E.A.; Bartuska, A.M.; Aplet, G.H.; Britton, K.O

Cummings-Carlson, J.; Davis, F.W.; Eskow, J.; Gordon

D.R.; Gottschalk, K.W.; Haack, R.A.; Hansen, A.J.;

Mack, R.N.; Rahel, F.J.; Shannon, M.A.; Wainger, L.A.;

Wigley, T.B. 2005. Science priorities for reducing the

threat of invasive species to sustainable forestry.

Climate Change Wildlife Action Plan Work Group. 2009.

Voluntary guidance for states to incorporate 

climate change into state wildlife action plans & 

other management plans. 

D’Amato, A.W.; Bradford, J.B.; Fraver, S.; Palik, B.J. 2011. 

Forest management for mitigation and adaptation 

to climate change: insights from long-term 

silviculture experiments. 

Dale, V.H.; Joyce, L.A.; McNulty, S.; Neilson, R.P.; Ayres

M.P.; Flannigan, M.D.; Hanson, P.J.; Irland, L.C.; Lugo,

A.E.; Peterson, C.J.; Simberloff, D.; Swanson, F.J.;

Stocks, B.J.; Wotton, B.M. 2001. Climate change and 

forest disturbances.

Galatowitsch, S.; Frelich, L.; Phillips-Mao, L. 2009.

Regional climate change adaptation strategies

for biodiversity conservation in a midcontinental 

region of North America

Gitay, H.; Suarez, A.; Watson, R.T.; Dokken, D.J., eds.

2002. Climate change and biodiversity. 

Gunn, J.S.; Hagan, J.M.; Whitman, A.A. 2009. Forestry

adaptation and mitigation in a changing climate: 

a forest resource manager’s guide for the 

northeastern United State

Halpin, P.N. 1997. Global climate change and naturalarea protection: management responses and

research directions.

Hannah, L. 2008. Protected areas and climate change

Heinz Center. 2008. Strategies for managing the effects

of climate change on wildlife and ecosystems. 

Heller, N.E.; Zavaleta, E.S. 2009. Biodiversi

management in the face of climate change: a 

review of 22 years of recommendations. 

Hellmann, J.J.; Byers, J.E.; Bierwagen, B.G.; Dukes

J.S. 2008. Five potential consequences of climate 

change for invasive species. 

Hulme, P.E. 2005. Adapting to climate change: Is there

scope for ecological management in the face of a 

global threat? 

Innes, J.; Joyce, L.A.; Kellomaki, S.; Louman, B.; Ogden

A.; Parrotta, J.; Thompson, I.; Ayres, M.; Ong

C.; Santosa, H.; Sohngen, B.; Wreford, A. 2009. 

Management for adaptation. 

Janowiak, M.J.; Swanston, C.W.; Nagel, L.M.; Brandt,

L.A.; Butler, P.R.; Handler, S.D.; Shannon, P.D.; 

Iverson, L.R.; Matthews, S.N.; Prasad, A.; Peters

M.P. 2014. A practical approach for translating 

climate change adaptation principles into forest 

management actions. 

Janowiak, M.K.; Swanston, C.W.; Nagel, L.M.; Webster,

C.R.; Palik, B.J.; Twery, M.J.; Bradford, J.B.; Parker, 

L.R.; Hille, A.T.; Johnson, S.M. 2011. Silvicultural

decisionmaking in an uncertain climate future: a 

workshop-based exploration of considerations, 

strategies, and approaches.

Joyce, L.; Blate, G.; McNulty, S.; Millar, C.; Moser, S.

Neilson, R.; Peterson, D. 2009. Managing for multiple

resources under climate change: national forests. 

Lawler, J.J. 2009. Climate change adaptation strategies 

for resource management and conservation 

planning. 

Lawler, J.J.; Tear, T.H.; Pyke, C.; Shaw, M.R.; Gonzalez,

P.; Kareiva, P.; Hansen, L.; Hannah, L.; Klausmeyer, 

K.; Aldous, A.; Bienz, C.; Pearsall, S. 2010. Resource

management in a changing and uncertain climate. 

Lindenmayer, D.B.; Franklin, J.F.; Fischer, J. 2006. 

General management principles and a checklist 

of strategies to guide forest biodiversity 

conservation.

Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences and 

Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife. 

2010b. Climate change and Massachusetts fish and 

wildlife: volume 3—habitat management.

McLachlan, J.S.; Hellmann, J.J.; Schwartz, M.W. 2007. A 

framework for debate of assisted migration in an 

era of climate change.

Millar, C.I.; Stephenson, N.L; Stephens, S.L. 2007

Climate change and forests of the future: managing 

in the face of uncertainty.

Millar, C.I.; Stephenson, N.L.; Stephens, S.L. 200

Re-framing forest and resource management

strategies for a climate change context. 

The Nature Conservancy. 2009. Conservation action

planning guidelines for developing strategies in the 

face of climate change.

Nitschke, C.R.; Innes, J.L. 2008. Integrating climat

change into forest management in south-central 

British Columbia: an assessment of landscape 

vulnerability and development of a climate-smart 

framework. 

Sathre, R.; Gustavsson, L. 2012. Time-dependen

radiative forcing effects of forest fertilization and 

biomass substitution.

(Continued on next page)
13

Appendix 

Table 10 (continued)

Spies, T.A.; Giesen, T.W.; Swanson, F.J.; Franklin, J.F.;

Lach, D.; Johnson, K.N. 2010. Climate change

adaptation strategies for federal forests of the 

Pacific Northwest, USA: ecological, policy, 

socio-economic perspectives. 

Spittlehouse, D.L. 2005. Integrating climate change 

adaptation into forest management. 

Spittlehouse, D.L.; Stewart, R.B. 2003. Adaptation to 

climate change in forest management. 

U.S. Forest Service. 2008. Forest Service strategic

framework for responding to climate change, ver. 1.0.

U.S. Forest Service. 2010. National roadmap for

responding to climate change. 

Wilkerson, E.; Whitman, A. 2011. Climate change &

forests: What can we expect? What can we do 

about it?

Yaussy, D.A.; Iverson, L.R.; Matthews, S.N. 201

Competition and climate affects S hardwoodforest tree mortality

Table 11.—Number of reviewers for each ecological province in the Midwest and Northe

   Numbe

Province Province name Acres review

212 Laurentian Mixed Forest 64,486,516 20

222 Midwest Broadleaf Forest Province 91,504,442 17

221 Eastern Broadleaf Forest 50,063,685 

223 Central Interior Broadleaf Forest 43,500,974 1

251 Prairie Parkland 88,787,652 10

211 Northeastern Mixed Forest 33,980,801

M211 Adirondack-New England Mixed Forest-Coniferous Forest-Alpine Meadow 24,404,254

M221 Central Appalachian Broadleaf Forest-Coniferous Forest-Meadow 20,713,304 4

232 Outer Coastal Plain Mixed Forest 7,721,043

234 Lower Mississippi Riverine Forest 2,656,565 2

231 Southeastern Mixed Forest 367,860 2

Table 12.—Forest and forest ecosystem types represented by reviewers’ expertis

Forest type or forest ecosystem Forest type or forest ecosystem

Allegheny hardwoods Mixed oak

Aspen Mixed pine

Aspen-paper birch  Northern hardwoo

Bottomland hardwoods  Oak savanna and woodla

Central hardwoods  Oak-hicko

Coastal plain pine-hardwoods  Oak-pi

Dolomite glade Peatlands (forested)

Dry oak heath Pine-oak barrens

Flatwoods Red spruce 

Floodplain forest Riverine forest

Hemlock Shortleaf pine

Jack pine Southern hardwoods

Limestone glade and barrens Spruce-fir (boreal and montane)

Loblolly pine Tallgrass prairie

Loblolly-shortleaf pine Upland black spruce

Longleaf pine Urban hardwoods

Lowland conifer Wetlands (forested)

Lowland hardwoods White pine

Mixed mesophytic hardwoods
1

Appendix 

Table 13.—Name and affiliation of experts participating in the review process, listed alphabetically b

last name

RespondentID Name Organiza

2501616594 Scott Bearer The Nature Conservanc

2466763305 Tara Bergeson Wisconsin Department of Natural Resource

2465358976 Don Bragg U.S. Forest Service, Southern Research Station

2460741669 Diane Burbank U.S. Forest Service, Green Mountain and Finger Lakes National Fores

2460156915 Andrew Burton Michigan Technological University, School of Forest Resources and 

Environmental Scienc

2458772630 Greg Corace U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Seney National Wildlife Refu

Abigail Derby Lewis The Field Museum and Chicago Wilderness

2458498047 Dan Dey U.S. Forest Service, Northern Research Statio

2458456740 George F. Frame Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Fores

2458018735 Lee Frelich University of Minnesota, Department of Forest Resources

2457977386 Susan Galatowitsch University of Minnesota, Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and Conservation

Biology

2456799239 Erica Hahn U.S. Forest Service, Superior National Fore

2455969424 Robert G. Haight U.S. Forest Service, Northern Research Stati

2454659604 Beth Hardman U.S. Forest Service, Mark Twain National Fores

2454440654 Dawn Henderson Missouri Department of Conservation

2453270684 Brad Hutnik Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Division of Forestr

2451946637 John Kabrick U.S. Forest Service, Northern Research Statio

2451074763 Kent Karriker U.S. Forest Service, Monongahela National Fores

2450434996 William S. Keeton University of Vermont, Rubenstein School of Environment and Natura

Resources

2449659075 Benjamin Knapp University of Missouri, School of Natural Resource

2449008261 Rose-Marie Muzika University of Missouri, School of Natural Resource

2448789985 Christian Nelson Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippew

2447619854 David Neumann Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Forest Resources Divisi

2447372748 Greg Nowacki U.S. Forest Service, Eastern Reg

2447232755 Brian Palik U.S. Forest Service, Northern Research Statio

2445749238 Linda Parker U.S. Forest Service, Chequamegon-Nicolet National Fore

2445004553 Judi Perez U.S. Forest Service, Hoosier National Fores

Ann Pierce Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Division of Ecological an

Water Resources

2443096734 Charles Ruffner Southern Illinois University-Carbondale, Department of Forestry

2442974255 Lindsey Rustad U.S. Forest Service, Northern Research Statio

2441726031 Gregor Schuurman Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Endanger

Resources

2440156915 K. Rogers Simmons U.S. Forest Service, White Mountain National Fores

2438661117 Matthew St. Pierre U.S. Forest Service, Chequamegon-Nicolet National Fore

2438640191 Susan Stout U.S. Forest Service, Northern Research Statio

2433223991 Esther D. Stroh U.S. Geological Surv

2432921593 John B. Taft University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Prairie Research Institute, Illino

Natural History Survey

2432105714 Chris Thornton U.S. Forest Service, Hoosier National Fores

2428553992 Eric Ulaszek U.S. Forest Service, Midewin National Tallgrass Prair

2427998214 Laura Watts U.S. Forest Service, Mark Twain National Fores

2425112578 Mark White The Nature Conservancy in Minnesota and the Dakota

2421356782 Sandy Wilmot Vermont Department of Forests, Parks and Recreation
13

Appendix 

then asked to consider how effectively the suite of 

approaches helped support the broader strategy. 

The questions were open-ended to allow reviewers 

to comment freely. Experts were asked to evaluate 

every strategy and every approach and to provide 

examples of adaptation actions that apply to their 

forest type or ecological province (i.e., example 

tactics). If the expert determined that a strategy or 

approach was useful in the forest type considered, he 

or she was asked to provide a rationale. 

The instructions to the experts are reproduced 

on the next two pages (with deadline and project 

coordinator’s contact information omitted). Use of 

the online questionnaire enabled us to easily manage 

a large amount of feedback. However, some experts 

chose not to use the questionnaire and provided 

comments in a Microsoft® Word document.

Experts were given about  month to respond. After

the deadline, responses were collated by strategy, 

then by approach; and comments from multiple 

reviewers were listed together. Responses for all 

approaches and strategies were evaluated and 

incorporated into chapter revisions that clarified 

adaptation actions, reorganized adaptation concepts, 

and identified new examples of tactics that might 

be applied in a specific place to meet specific 

management objectives. 

Red pine needles in the Upper Peninsula, Michigan. Photo by Kailey Marcinkowski, Michigan Technological University, 

used with permission.
13

Appendix 

(continued on next page)
13

Appendix 
1

Appendix 2: Common and Scientific Names of Spec

Mentioned in this Documen

Flo

Common name Scientific nam

fir spp. Abies spp.

balsam fir Abies balsamea

maple Acer spp.

red maple Acer rubrum

silver maple Acer saccharinum

sugar maple Acer saccharum

ailanthus Ailanthus altissima

garlic mustard Alliaria petiolata

birch spp. Betula spp.

yellow birch Betula alleghaniensis

black birch Betula lenta

paper birch Betula payrifera

bluejoint grass Calamagrostis canadensis 

hickory Carya spp.

bitternut hickory Carya cordiformis

pignut hickory Carya glabra 

shagbark hickory Carya ovata 

black hickory Carya texana 

mockernut hickory Carya tomentosa 

chestnut Castanea spp.

American yellowwood Cladastris kentukea

glade coneflower Echinacea simulata

autumn olive Elaeagnus umbellata

beech Fagus spp.

American beech Fagus grandifolia

white ash Fraxinus americana 

blue ash Fraxinus quadrangulata 

Kentucky coffeetree Gymnocladus dioica 

eastern redcedar Juniperus virginiana 

tamarack Larix laricina 

sericea lespedeza Lespedeza cuneata

privet Ligustrum vulgare

tuliptree Liriodendron tulipifera

bush honeysuckles Lonicera spp.

southern blazing star Mentzelia lindleyi

Japanese stiltgrass Microstegium vimineum 

spruce spp. Picea spp.

white spruce Picea glauca 

black spruce Picea mariana

red spruce Picea rubens

pine spp. Pinus spp.

jack pine Pinus banksiana

shortleaf pine Pinus echinata 

slash pine Pinus elliottii 

longleaf pine Pinus palustris

red pine Pinus resinosus 

Common name Scientific nam

eastern white pine Pinus strobus 

loblolly pine Pinus taeda 

aspen Populus spp.

quaking aspen Populus tremuloides 

black cherry Prunus serotina 

kudzu Pueraria montana

oak Quercus spp.

white oak Quercus alba

swamp white oak Quercus bicolor 

scarlet oak Quercus coccinea 

southern red oak Quercus falcata 

bur oak Quercus macrocarpa 

blackjack oak Quercus marilandica 

chinkapin oak Quercus muehlenbergii 

northern red oak Quercus rubra 

post oak Quercus stellata 

black oak Quercus velutina 

European buckthorn Rhamnus cathartica

black locust Robinia pseudoacacia 

northern white-cedar Thuja occidentalis

eastern hemlock Tsuga canadensis 

American elm Ulmus americana

FAun

Common name Scientific nam

hemlock woolly adelgid Adelges tsugae

moose Alces americanus 

Asian longhorned beetle Anoplophora glabripennis 

cattle Bos spp. 

spruce budworm Choristoneura fumiferana

southern pine beetle Dendroctonus frontalis

yellow-breasted chat Icteria virens

gypsy moth Lymantria dispar

Indiana bat Myotis sodali

white-tailed deer Odocoileus virginiana

rabbit Oryctolagus cuniculus

prairie warbler Setophaga discolor

Kirtland’s warbler Setophaga kirtlandii

feral hog Sus scrofa 

black bear Ursus americanus

golden-winged warbler Vermivora chrysoptera

Flora (continue
1

Appendix 3. Lead Authors and Other Contributor

to Chapter 4 

Lead Authors

Abigail Derby Lewis, senior conservation ecologist, 

the Field Museum

Robert Fahey, assistant professor, University of 

Connecticut

Lydia Scott, director, Chicago Region Trees 

Initiative, the Morton Arboretum

Angela Kerber, wetland specialist and certified 

arborist, DuPage County

Jason Miesbauer, arboriculture scientist, the Morton 

Arboretum

Lindsay Darling, geographic information systems 

analyst, the Morton Arboretum

Other Contributor

Alison Anastasio, manager of graduate research, 

education, and outreach, University of Chicago

Susan Ask, director, Animalia Project

Judy Beck, Lake Michigan manager, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency

Jeffrey Brink, senior city forester, Chicago 

Department of Transportation

Mary Carroll, community education specialist, 

Metropolitan Water Reclamation District

Shawn Cirton, fish and wildlife biologist, U.S. 

Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife 

Service

Tom Dilley, natural resources specialist, U.S. Forest 

Service

Owen Donath, intern, the Wetlands Initiative

Aaron Durnbaugh, director of sustainability, Loyola 

University

Andrew Hipp, plant systematist and herbarium 

curator, the Morton Arboretum

Christian Keeve, undergraduate Fellow, 

Environmental Science and Urban Studies, 

Northwestern University

Martin Jaffe, director of and associate professor in 

Urban Planning and Policy Program, University 

of Illinois at Chicago

Kathryn Jonas, arborist, Openlands Tree Keepers

Kris Lah, endangered species coordinator, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service

John Legge, natural resources manager, Coastal 

Management Program, Illinois Department of 

Natural Resources

Joy Marburger, research coordinator, Indiana Dunes 

National Lakeshore

Karen Ann Miller, executive planner, Kane County 

Development Department

Bob Moseley, director of conservation, Illinois, The 

Nature Conservancy

Chris Mulvaney, staff, Chicago Wilderness 

Alison Neuman, landscape operations manager, 

Chicago Gateway Green

Brenda Occhiuzzo, resource technician, Forest 

Preserves of Cook County

Chip O’Leary, chief ecologist, Forest Preserves of 

Cook County

Daniella Pereira, regional forester, Openlands

Laura Perna, Community Outreach, Illinois 

Department of Natural Resources

Wendy Pollack, founder, Evanston Treekeepers

Izabella Redlinski, ecologist, the Wetlands Initiative
13

Appendix 

Bryant Scharenbroch, soil scientist, the Morton 

Arboretum

Jerome Scott, forester, Chicago Park District

Doug Stotz, conservation ecologist, the Field 

Museum

Matt Ueltzen, restoration ecologist, Lake County 

Forest Preserve

Nancy Williamson, ecosystem administrator, Illinois 

Department of Natural Resources 

Curtis Witek, Rivers, Trails and Conservation 

Assistance, U.S. Department of the Interior, 

National Park Service 

Claire Woolley, founder, AddATree
13

Appendix 4. Adaptation Workbook: Short Versi

This short version of the Adaptation Workbook 

provides a streamlined set of considerations 

using the adaptation process that is described in 

Chapter  of this document. It is intended for users

who are familiar with the process and the anticipated 

effects of climate change in the area in which they 

work. It can also be used to collect notes and ideas 

that will be integrated into the comprehensive 

version of the workbook found in Chapter 5
Step 1: DEFINE location, project, and time fra

What are your management goals and objectives for the project area?

The first step is to describe the project area and your management objectives before considering the potential 

effects of climate change. This may include identifying:

• Any ecosystem types, stands, or other distinct areas that you want to consider individually

• Any short- or long-term milestones that can be used to evaluate progress.
Step 2: ASSESS site-specific climate change impacts and vulnerabil

What climate change impacts and vulnerabilities are most important 

to this particular site?

Climate change will have a wide variety of effects on the landscape, and not all places will respond similarly. 

List site-specific factors that may increase or reduce the effects of climate change in your project area, 

such as:

• Site conditions, such as topographic position, soils, or hydrology

• Past and current management 

• Forest composition and structure

• Susceptibility to pests, diseases, or other stressors that may increase.

You can consult vulnerability assessments for information on the anticipated effects of climate change 

on forest ecosystems in a particular region. Select assessments are listed under “Resources” at 

www.adaptationworkbook.org.
Step 3: EVALUATE management objectives given projected imp

 and vulnerabilities.

What management challenges and opportunities may occur 

as a result of climate change?

This step explores management challenges and opportunities that may arise under changing conditions. For 

each of your management objectives, consider: 

• Management challenges and opportunities given the climate impacts you identified previously

• The feasibility of meeting each management objective under current management

• Other considerations (e.g., administrative, legal, or social considerations) beyond climate change that 

may affect your ability to meet your management objectives.

Do any of your management objectives need to change, given the projected

climate impacts listed above? 

 Yes  No

If yes, adjust management objectives before proceeding to the next step.
Step 4: IDENTIFY adaptation approaches and tactics for implementa

What actions can enhance the ability of the ecosystem to adapt to anticipated 

changes and meet management goals?

Generate a list of adaptation tactics—prescriptive actions specifically designed for your project area or 

property and your unique management objectives. Use the menu of Adaptation Strategies and Approaches 

(Box 18) as a starting point for identifying specific management tactics (e.g., what, how, when) that you can

implement. As you develop tactics, consider the 

• Benefits, drawbacks, and barriers associated with each tactic

• Effectiveness and feasibility of each tactic.
Box 18

Menu of Adaptation Strategies and Approache

Strategy 1: Sustain fundamental ecologica

functions.

1.1. Reduce impacts to soils and nutrient cycling.

1.2. Maintain or restore hydrology.

1.3. Maintain or restore riparian areas. 

1.4. Reduce competition for moisture, nutrients, 

and light.

1.5. Restore or maintain fire in fire-adapted 

ecosystems.

Strategy 2: Reduce the impact of biologica

stressors.

2.1. Maintain or improve the ability of forests to 

resist pests and pathogens.

2.2. Prevent the introduction and establishment 

of invasive plant species and remove existing 

invasive species. 

2.3. Manage herbivory to promote regeneration of 

desired species.

Strategy 3: Reduce the risk and long-ter

impacts of severe disturbances.

3.1. Alter forest structure or composition to reduce 

risk or severity of wildfire. 

3.2. Establish fuelbreaks to slow the spread of

catastrophic fire. 

3.3. Alter forest structure to reduce severity or 

extent of wind and ice damage. 

3.4. Promptly revegetate sites after disturbance.

Strategy 4: Maintain or create refugia.

4.1. Prioritize and maintain unique sites. 

4.2. Prioritize and maintain sensitive or at-risk 

species or communities.

4.3. Establish artificial reserves for at-risk and

displaced species. 

Strategy 5: Maintain and enhance species and

structural diversity.

5.1. Promote diverse age classes.

5.2. Maintain and restore diversity of native 

species. 

5.3. Retain biological legacies. 

5.4. Establish reserves to maintain ecosystem

diversity. 

Strategy 6: Increase ecosystem redundancy

across the landscape. 

6.1. Manage habitats over a range of sites and 

conditions. 

6.2. Expand the boundaries of reserves to increase

diversity.

Strategy 7: Promote landscape connectivity

7.1. Reduce landscape fragmentation. 

7.2. Maintain and create habitat corridors through 

reforestation or restoration.

Strategy 8: Maintain and enhance genetic

diversity.

8.1. Use seeds, germplasm, and other genetic 

material from across a greater geographic 

range. 

8.2. Favor existing genotypes that are better 

adapted to future conditions. 

Strategy 9: Facilitate community adjustments

through species transitions. 

9.1. Favor or restore native species that are 

expected to be adapted to future conditions. 

9.2. Establish or encourage new mixes of native

species.

9.3. Guide changes in species composition at early

stages of stand development.

9.4. Protect future-adapted seedlings and saplings.

9.5. Disfavor species that are distinctly 

maladapted.

9.6. Manage for species and genotypes with wide 

moisture and temperature tolerances.

9.7. Introduce species that are expected to be

adapted to future conditions.

9.8. Move at-risk species to locations that are 

expected to provide habitat. 

Strategy 10: Realign ecosystems afte

disturbance.

10.1. Promptly revegetate sites after disturbance. 

10.2. Allow for areas of natural regeneration to test 

for future-adapted species.

10.3. Realign significantly disrupted ecosystems to 

meet expected future conditions.
Step 5: MONITOR and evaluate effectiveness of implemented ac

What information can be used to evaluate whether the selected actions 

were effective and to inform future management?

Monitoring metrics can help you determine whether you are making progress on your management goals and 

evaluate the effectiveness of those actions. When identifying monitoring items, work to identify monitoring 

items that:

• Can tell you whether you have achieved your management goals and objectives 

• Can tell you whether the adaptation tactics had the intended effect

• Are realistic to implement. 
1

Appendix 5. Adaptation Workbook: Blank Worksheet
Step 1 Workshee

Project Area or Property: Locatio

Ecosystem Typ

or Management Topic Management Goals Management Objectives Time Fra
Step 2 Workshee

Ecosystem Typ

or Management Topic

(from Step 1

Regional Climate Change Impacts

and Vulnerabilities

Climate Change Impacts and Vulnerabilities 

for the Project Area or Proper

Vulnerability 

Determinatio
Step 3 Workshee

Ecosystem Type o

Management Topic

(from Step 1

Management 

Objectives

(from Step 1

Challenges to Meeting 

Management Objective

with Climate Change 

Opportunities for Meeting

Management Objective

with Climate Change

Feasibility of Meeting 

Management Objective

under Current 

Management

Other

Considerations

Slow down to consider
Step 4 Workshee

Ecosystem Type o

Management Topic

(from Step 1

Adaptation Actions

Time

Frames Benefits

Drawbacks and

Barriers

Practicability

of Tacti

Recommend

Tactic? Approach Tact
Step 5 Workshee

Ecosystem Type o

Management Topi

 (from Step 1) Adaptation Monitoring Variable Criteria for Evaluation Monitoring Implementati
Appendix 6. Adaptation Workbook: Example Workshee

A more complete set of information is provided 

in Tables 14 through 18 for the Jerktail Mountai

adaptation demonstration (see Chapter 6, pp. 95-97

for a description of the demonstration).
2

Appendix 

Table 14.—Example of a completed Step 1 worksheet for the Adaptation Workbook, drawn from the Jerktail Mountain adaptatidemonstration (described in Chapter 6)

Project Area or Property: Jerktail Mountain glade and woodland Location: Jerktail Mountain management unit, Pioneer Forest and Oza

National Scenic Riverway, 9 miles northeast of Eminence, Shannon CountyMissouri

Ecosystem Type o

Management Topic Management Goals Management Objectives Time Fra

All forest types Improve natural community

health and resilience. Provide timber products.

Use selective timber thinning and prescribed fire to achieve management goals. 

Ongoing

Igneous and

dolomite glades

Restore glade natural communities. 

Restore glade communities using prescribed fire of variable intensity (higher on igneous glades; lower in wetter, more protected areas) once every 3-4 years in beginning. Move to 5-year rotation after four to five entries. Reduce negative human impacts on sites (e.g., ATVs, horses). Reduce eastern redcedar encroachment. Monitor and treat invasive exotic species if feasible (e.g., hogs, plants), potentially using late summer burns (moisture-of-extinction burns).

Prescribed burns every 3-4 years initially, switching to every 5 years once established.

Woodland Restore woodland to more 

natural conditions.

Reduce eastern redcedar encroachment. Variable-intensity prescribed fire once every 3-4 years in beginning; 

move to 5-year rotation after four to five entries. Increase component offire-tolerant species including shortleaf pine, white oak, post oak, and chinkapin oak. Thin timber; stand density will be variable based on site conditions across the landscape (aspect, soil type).

Prescribed burns every 3-4 years initially, switching to every 5 years once established. Harvest every 20-30 years.
3

Appendix 

Table 15.—Example of a completed Step 2 worksheet for the Adaptation Workbook, drawn from the Jerktail Mountain adaptatidemonstration (described in Chapter 6). *Regional Climate Change Impacts and Vulnerabilities information was drawn from Brandt et al.(2014).

Ecosystem Type o

Management Topi

Regional Climate Change Impacts and

Vulnerabilities*

Climate Change Impacts and Vulnerabilities 

for the Project Area or Proper

Vulnerability 

Determinatio

All forest types Temperatures: warmer temperatures and longer 

growing seasons (especially warmer winter lows); more extremely hot days. Precipitation: wetter springs, heavy precipitation events. Winter conditions: less snow and freezing rain, reduced periods of frozen soil. Drier soil later in the growing season. 

Greater risk of wildfire.Exacerbation of oak decline.Increase in new and existing invasive plant species(kudzu, privet, Japanese stiltgrass, sericea lespedeza). Risk of southern pine beetle expanding into Missouri. See Chapter 6 of Brandt et al. (2014) for more details. 

Oak decline is not as much of an issue onPioneer Forest due to a history of uneven-aged management. Sericea lespedeza is currently the major nonnative invasive species of issue on these sites.

Igneous and dolomiteglades

Although future distribution of these nonwoody species has not been modeled, many are adapted to the hot, dry conditions that are expected to become more common. Despite this, a number of modeling studies in other areas have shown that species with narrow geographic distributions, like many glade-associated species, are more at risk to climate change. Post oak is typically found in glade systems, and is likely to increase. 

Eastern redcedar invasion has led to this speciesbecoming a dominant species in glades, and it is likely to expand in the future due to other factors besides climate change.

Eastern redcedar encroachment is the mainissue negatively affecting herbaceous species on glades at this site; some removal may be needed. Sericea lespedeza invasion is a local issue that also may need to be addressed. Reduction in human disturbance would reduce the risk of invasion of sericea lespedeza. Some removal may be needed in sites already invaded. In general, system is well positioned to respondfavorably to management planned for the area. There is a wide diversity of herbaceous species already present or in the seed bank. 

Low. Current management and species composition help reduce risks to the area.
1

Appendix 

Ecosystem

Type or

Management 

Topi

Regional Climate Change Impacts and

Vulnerabilities*

Climate Change Impacts and Vulnerabilities 

for the 

Project Area or

Propert

Vulnerability 

Determinatio

Woodland Many tree species in this community type are projected 

to do better under future climate conditions, such as shortleaf pine, blackjack and post oak, and black hickory. Changes in black, chinkapin, and scarlet oak may depend on whether summer precipitation increases or decreases. Although white oak is projected to decline slightly based on temperature and precipitation alone, its tolerance to drought and fire would be expected to allow it to persist. 

Eastern redcedar, which outcompetes herbaceousvegetation and limits pine regeneration, is projected to remain relatively stable under future climate changes and could expand for other reasons Oak decline is likely to remain a threat to black andscarlet oak. 

Oak decline may become a larger threat to

trees that become stressed by an increased duration and extent of drought conditions, which appear to be more likely under the 

GFDL A1FI scenario. Se

Chapter 2 in Brandt et al. (2014) for more information about general circulation models and scenarios.

Shortleaf pine, which is less prevalent on the site, is projected to do well under a range of climate scenarios. However, it will regenerate only on bare mineral soil in an open area. Therefore, it will do well only if conditions are established to allow regeneration. Southern pine beetle could be a potential future risk for shortleaf pine, but prescribed fire and reduction in stand density through timber thinning could reduce risk of pine beetle attack. Post oak, another common species on the site, is projected to do well under a range of scenarios. White oak and black oak, which are also common on the site, should generally do well, but Tree Atlas suggests a slight decline in habitat suitability under a harsher climate/emissions scenario. Scarlet oak, a species that is currently common on the site, is projected to be negatively affected under both scenarios. Chinkapin oak, which is more prevalent on this site than on the pine site, may be negatively affected under high emissions scenario, positively under low emissions scenario. 

Northern red oak is also more common on thissite than on the pine site and is projected to be negatively affected by warmer temperatures, especially if summers become drier. Eastern redcedar encroachment may continue tobe an issue at this site. Lower risk of pine beetle outbreaks due to a more open structure and less of a pine component than at the shortleaf pine site. Clay content is higher at this site (soils are less permeable).

Low. Current management and species composition help reduce risks to the area.

Table 15 (continued)
Append

ix 

Table 16.—Example of a completed Step 3 worksheet for the Adaptation Workbook, drawn from the Jerktail Mountain adaptatidemonstration (described in Chapter 6)

Ecosystem

Type or

Management 

Topi

Management Objectives

(from Step 1

Challenges to Meeting 

Management Objective with

Climate Change

Opportunities

for Meeting 

Management 

Objective with

Climate Change

Feasibility 

of Meeting 

Management 

Objective under

Current Management

Other

Considerations

Igneous anddolomite glades

Restore glade communities using prescribed fire of variable intensity (higher on igneous glades; lower in wetter, more protected areas) once every 3-4 years in beginning. Move to 5-year rotation after four to five entries. Reduce negative human impacts on sites (e.g., ATVs, horses). Reduce eastern redcedar encroachment. Monitor and treat invasive exotics as feasible (e.g., hogs, plants), potentially using late summer burns (moisture-of-extinction burns).

More winter moisture will mean that glades will be harder to burn than the 

woodlands. Glades can actlike a wet sponge in the spring. It could be difficult to controlor reduce eastern redcedar with fire alone; mechanical treatment for eastern redcedar may be needed. 

Moisture-ofextinction burns may be a way to reduce eastern redcedar without affecting woodland communities.

High. However, more mechanical treatments may be needed.

Rare species may be of more concern in these sites. Prairie warbler is declining nationally, but restoration will improve habitat.
Appendix 

Ecosystem

Type or

Management 

Topi

Management 

Objectives

(from 

Step 1

Challenges to Meeting 

Management 

Objective with

Climate Change

Opportunities

for Meeting 

Management 

Objective with

Climate Change

Feasibility 

of Meeting 

Management 

Objective under

Current Management

Other

Considerations

Woodland Reduce eastern redcedar 

encroachment. Variable-intensity prescribed fire once every 3-4 years in beginning; move to 5-year rotation after four to five entries. 

Increase component of firetolerant species includingshortleaf pine, white oak, post oak, and chinkapin oak. Thin timber; stand density will be variable based on site conditions across the landscape (aspect, soil type).

May need to shift timing of prescribed burns to align with seasonal changes in climate. Burn crews must be planned for months in advance, so it is hard to make last-minute changes to the timing of prescribed burns. May need to do some growing season burns for brush control; could run the risk of scarring hardwoods in the canopy. May be more challenging to do timber thinning if conditions are really wet during some seasons; there is an increased risk of tearing up the soil if it’s too wet.

Can easily make changes to management if conditions change (more flexibility to make last-minute changes with harvest than with prescribed fire).

High. Assumption that funding remains available.

Table 16 (continued)

Slow down to consider
7

Appendix 

Table 17.—Example of a completed Step 4 worksheet for the Adaptation Workbook, drawn from the Jerktail Mountain adaptatidemonstration (described in Chapter 6)

Ecosystem Typ

or Management 

Topi

Adaptation Actions

Time

Frames Benefits

Drawbacks

and Barriers

Practicability

of Tacti

Recommend

Tactic? Approach Tact

Igneous anddolomite glades

1.1. Reduce impacts to soils and nutrient cycling. 1.5. Restore or maintain fire in fire-adapted ecosystems.

Prescribed fire (variable intensity). 

Every3-4 years initially, shifting to every 5 years. 

Releases potash, which is beneficial to species such as glade coneflower, southern blazing star, and other glade herbaceous species. There is a secondary benefit to pollinators. 

Gladespecies are fire-adapted. Generally fewspecies that are at risk to fire on glades. 

There are concerns about erosion from loss of litter and duff layer (especially before herbaceous layer is established) over the short term. (However, effects will be reduced if burning is done in March. Can shift to fall burn once herbaceous layer is established.) Could be beneficial to sericea lespedeza. Need to be careful abouttiming with Indiana batbreeding. Black bear could be negatively affected. Because this site is partially federally owned, time is needed to go through NEPprocess. There is always a risk any time a prescribed burn is initiated. 

High. Yes
1

Appendix 

Table 17 (continued)

Ecosystem

Type

or Management 

Topi

Adaptation Actions

Time

Frames Benefits

Drawbacks

and Barriers

Practicability

of 

Tacti

Recommend

Tactic? Approac

Tacti

Igneous anddolomite glades

4.1. Prioritize and maintain unique sites. 4.2. Prioritize and maintain sensitive or atrisk species or communities. 9.1. Favor or restore native species that are expected to be adapted to future conditions. 

Mechanical reduction of eastern redcedar. 

Gradual. Maintains

and restores biodiversity, increases sunlight to the ground. Reduces competition for light and nutrients to favor glade herbaceous species. Restores genetically viable populations. Restores a community of conservation concern (glades). Gradualreduction reduces risks of fuel-loading. 

Time-consuming and costly. There can be localized scorching of the soil in areas where the redcedar was burned (short-term impact). Can create unnatural fuel loads if done incorrectly. Could damage post and chinkapin oaks with increased fuel load. Could create a niche where exotic species could come in. 

High.

Yes
9

Appendix 

Table 17 (continued)

Ecosystem Typ

or Management 

Topi

Adaptation Actions

Time

Frames Benefits

Drawbacks

and Barriers

Practicability

of Tacti

Recommend

Tactic? Approach Tact

Woodland 2.1. Maintain 

or improve the ability of forests to resist pests and pathogens. 5.2. Maintain and restore diversity of native species. 5.3. Retain biological legacies. 9.1. Favor or restore native species that are expected to be adapted to future conditions. 10.2. Allow for areas of natural regeneration to test for future-adapted species.

Selective thinning. 

Every 2030 years.

Provides timber (economic benefit). 

Increases lighton the ground to promote a herbaceous layer. Helps reduce the risk of pest/pathogen outbreaks by reducing density. 

This area has low accessibility for logging operations. Topography limits where logging can occur. Opens up the stand foradverse human use. Too much light can shock some of the timber and cause epicormic sprouting in oaks. Adds fuel-loading in short term. Logging equipment can disturb soil (which may be beneficial for shortleaf pine) and bring in exotic species. 

High. Yes
1

Appendix 

Table 17 (continued)

Ecosystem

Type

or Management 

Topi

Adaptation Actions

Time

Frames Benefits

Drawbacks

and Barriers

Practicability

of 

Tacti

Recommend

Tactic? Approac

Tacti

Woodland 1.1. Reduce 

impacts to soils and nutrient cycling. 1.5. Restore or maintain fire in fire-adapted ecosystems. 3.3. Alter forest structure to reduce severity or extent of wind and ice damage. 9.1. Favor or restore native species that are expected to be adapted to future conditions. 

Prescribed fire (variable intensity). 

Every3-4 years initially, shifting to every 5 years. 

Creates conditions for regeneration of shortleaf pine (a climateadapted species). Will increase herbaceous species abundance in the understory (which will help reduce erosion and maintain soil moisture). Reduces fuel loads. 

Improveshabitat for game species. Improveshabitat for some bird species. 

There are concerns about erosion from loss of litter and duff layer (especially before herbaceous layer is established) over the short term. (However, effects will be reduced if burning is done in March. Can shift to fall burn once herbaceous layer is established.) Could be beneficial to sericea lespedeza. Need to be careful abouttiming with Indiana batbreeding. Black bear could be negatively affected. Because this site is partially federally owned, time is needed to go through NEPprocess. There is always a risk any time a prescribed burn is initiated. 

High.

Yes
Append

ix 

Table 18.—Example of a completed Step 5 worksheet for the Adaptation Workbook, drawn from the Jerktail Mountain adaptatidemonstration (described in Chapter 6).

Ecosystem Typ

or Management Topi

Adaptation 

Monitoring Variable Criteria for Evaluatio

Monitoring 

Implementation

All forest types Herbaceous species richness 

and cover 

Jerktail woodland and glade: minimum of 20-percent increase in number of herbaceous species per quadrat in second year following second burn (90-percent confidence interval); increase mean percent cover of native herbaceous species by 50 percent after four burns. 

Use the National ParkService Fire Monitoring Handbook plot design: two plots each in glades and woodlands. Baseline monitoring in June 2014 (year prior to first burn). Return first and second growing season after each burn. 

Density of pole-sized trees Reduction in pole-sized trees 1-6 inches d.b.h. by at least 30 

percent by the second growing season after the second burn. (Lower density indicates open woodland structure.)

Photo monitoring of visual changes in structure/composition 

Photo accuracy: Capture identical images within +/-5 percent of original image for comparison. (Shows structural and species changes toward desired condition.)

Fuel loads Reduce fuel loads; reduce leaf litter depth by 50 percent by first 

year after second burn.

Tree basal area, growth, and composition

Increase in shortleaf pine, white oak, and chinkapin oak, andachievement of woodland structure.

Permanent inventory plots to be established. 

Shortleaf pine regeneration Presence of shortleaf pine seedlings and saplings. Qualitative observation. 

Tree mortality Presence of dead/declining trees. Visual observation.

Exotic invasive species Presence/absence, abundance. Mapping, observation.

Abundance, migration dates of birds (e.g., prairie warbler) 

Increase in prairie warbler abundance on glades. To be determined

Prescribed fire implementation

Coverage of fire implemented; visual changes postburn. Before/after photos; 

mapping fire coverage.

Igneous and dolomiteglades

Disturbance to ground from ATVs, feral hogs, and domestic/wild horse impacts

Extent of damage. Visual observation
Page intentionally left blank
Printed on recycled paper

Swanston, Christopher W.; Janowiak, Maria K.; Brandt, Leslie A.; Butler, Patricia R.; 

Handler, Stephen D.; Shannon, P. Danielle; Derby Lewis, Abigail; Hall, Kimberly; 

Fahey, Robert T.; Scott, Lydia; Kerber, Angela; Miesbauer, Jason W.; Darling, 

Lindsay. 2016. Forest Adaptation Resources: climate change tools and 

approaches for land managers, 2nd ed. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-GTR-87-2. 

Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern 

Research Station. 161 p. http://dx.doi.org/10.2737/NRS-GTR-87-2

Forests across the United States are expected to undergo numerous changes in 

response to the changing climate. This second edition of the Forest Adaptation 

Resources provides a collection of resources designed to help forest managers 

incorporate climate change considerations into management and devise adaptation 

tactics. It was developed as part of the Climate Change Response Framework and 

reflects the expertise, creativity, and feedback of dozens of direct contributors and 

hundreds of users of the first edition over the last several years (see http://

dx.doi.org/10.2737/NRS-GTR-87). Six interrelated chapters include: (1) a

description of the overarching Climate Change Response Framework, which

generated these resources; (2) a brief guide to help forest managers judge or initiate

vulnerability assessments; (3) a “menu” of adaptation strategies and approaches

that are directly relevant to forests of the Northeast and upper Midwest; (4) a second

menu of adaptation strategies and approaches oriented to urban forests; (5) a

workbook process with step-by-step instructions to assist land managers in

developing on-the-ground climate adaptation tactics that address their management

objectives; and (6) several real-world examples of how these resources have been

used to develop adaptation tactics. The ideas, tools, and resources presented in the

different chapters are intended to inform and support existing decisionmaking

processes of multiple organizations with diverse management goals.

KEy WORDS: climate change, adaptation, forest, workbook, 

vulnerability assessment, urban forests, Northeast, 

Midwest, resilience 

In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights 

regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating 

in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national 

origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, 

marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, 

or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by 

USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program 

or incident. 

Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information 

(e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible 

Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the

Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in 

languages other than English. 

To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint 

Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA 

office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in 

the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or 

letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil 

Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or 

(3) email: program.intake@usda.gov.
Northern Research Station

www.nrs.fs.fed.us