US Department of Agriculture Climate Change Adaptation Plan

June 2014

I. Policy Framework

Role and Mission of USDA 

The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) provides leadership on food, agriculture, natural 

resources, rural development, nutrition, and related issues through its evolving service role at the 

nexus of traditional rural American food, fiber and fuel production and the emerging economic 

opportunities in renewable energy, broadband, and recreation. The vision statement of the USDA 

Strategic Plan calls for the Department “to expand economic opportunity through innovation, 

helping rural America thrive; to promote agriculture production sustainability that better 

nourishes Americans while also helping to feed others throughout the world; and to preserve and 

conserve our Nation’s natural resources through restored forests, improved watersheds, and 

healthy private working lands.” Climate change has the potential to confound USDA efforts to 

meet these core obligations and responsibilities to the Nation. 

Rural America is rapidly transitioning to a diverse and competitive business environment driven 

by an increasingly sophisticated consumer market here and abroad. The economic vitality and 

quality of life in rural America depends on a financially healthy agricultural system and access to 

agricultural and emerging markets. US farmers, ranchers and foresters ensure that all of America 

and many other parts of the world have nutritious and safe food, adequate energy sources, and 

fiber products sufficient for the needs of a rapidly increasing population. Climate change 

adaptation is essential to sustain these capabilities.

Background 

Scientific evidence shows that US climate has changed substantially since 1900, that this rate of 

change is accelerating, and that even greater rates of change are likely to occur in the next 100 

years. Climate change has the potential to disrupt USDA’s efforts to meet the core obligations 

and responsibilities articulated by its mission and goals. The vulnerability of USDA operations 

and programs to climate change will be highly dependent on the variability, magnitude, and 

pattern of climate changes, as well as on changes in climate extremes. Changing precipitation 

and temperature patterns as well as increasing atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations affects 

forest- and agro-ecosystems at national, regional, and local scales. These changes may have 

significant implications for USDA program participation and associated costs. Such projections 

are accompanied by a great deal of uncertainty so policies will need to be flexible enough to 

adapt to this uncertainty. 

USDA is unique among many Federal Departments in that the broad spectra of its sub-agency 

missions include research, applications and technology transfer, public land management, 

technical assistance, and communications and delivery, missions that revolve around people and 

the land; private and public, rural and urban. These broad areas provide a strong foundation to 

address the complexities of climate change, climate variability, and extreme events. The 2014 

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 1
USDA Climate Change Adaptation Plan integrates input from 11 USDA sub-agencies and 

offices and updates their 2012 plans. The Adaptation Plan provides a vulnerability assessment, 

reviews the elements of USDA’s mission that are at risk from climate change, and provides 

actions and steps being taken to build resilience to climate change specifically in response to EO 

13653. In addition, the plan advances President Obama’s efforts to integrate climate change 

adaptation planning into the actions of the Federal Government through the President’s Climate 

Action Plan (PCAP), other executive orders, and the US Department of Agriculture departmental 

policies.

USDA is well-positioned to meet the requirements of the federal agency climate change 

adaptation guidance. The Department’s Strategic Plan for 2014-2018 provides a powerful 

foundation for climate change adaptation planning. 

All five goals of USDA’s Strategic Plan have objectives that articulate opportunities and 

challenges associated with climate change adaptation. Strategic Goal 2 specifically addresses the 

challenges of climate change and opportunities “to ensure our national forests and private 

working lands are conserved, restored, and made more resilient to climate change.” The Strategic 

Plan calls for the Department to capitalize on opportunities presented by the Nation’s efforts to 

develop markets for ecosystem services. The USDA Strategic Plan further calls on the 

Department to lead efforts to mitigate and adapt to climate change through Goals 1, 3, 4 and 5. 

Strategic Goal 1: Assist Rural Communities to Create Prosperity so They are Self-Sustaining, 

Repopulating, and Economically Thriving 

Objective 1.1 – Enhance Rural Prosperity, Leveraging Capital Markets to increase Government’s 

Investment in Rural America; 

Objective 1.2 – Increase Agricultural Opportunities by Ensuring a Robust Safety Net, Creating

New Markets, and Supporting a Competitive Agricultural System; 

Objective 1.3 – Contribute to Expansion of the Bioeconomy by Supporting Development, 

Production, and Consumption of Renewable Energy and Bio-based Products.

Strategic Goal 2: Ensure our National Forests and Private Working Lands are Conserved, 

Restored, and Made More Resilient to Climate Change while Enhancing our Water Resources

Objective 2.1 – Improve the Health of the Nation’s Forests, Grasslands, and Working Lands by 

Managing Natural Resources; 

Objective 2.2 – Lead Efforts to Mitigate and Adapt to Climate Change, Drought and Extreme 

Weather in Agriculture and Forestry; 

Objective 2.3 – Contribute to Clean and Abundant Water by Protecting and Enhancing Water 

Resources on National Forests and Working Lands; 

Objective 2.4 – Reduce the Risk from Catastrophic Wildfire.

Strategic Goal 3: Help America Promote Agricultural Production and Biotechnology Exports as 

America Works to Increase Food Security 

Objective 3.1 – Ensure US Agricultural Resources Contribute to Enhanced Global Food Security; 

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 2
Objective 3.2 – Enhance America’s Ability to Develop and Trade Agricultural Products Derived 

from New and Emerging Technologies; 

Strategic Goal 4: Ensure that All of America’s Children Have Access to Safe, Nutritious, and 

Balanced Meals

Objective 4.4 – Protect Agricultural Health by Minimizing Major Diseases and Pests to Ensure 

Access to Safe, Plentiful, and Nutritious Food.

Strategic Goal 5: Create a USDA for the 21st Century that is High-Performing, Efficient, and 

Adaptable

Objective 5.2 – Build a Safe, Secure, Efficient Workplace by Leveraging Technology and Shared 

Solutions across Organizational Boundaries.

Executive Directives, Policies, and USDA’s Role 

Climate change challenges the mission, operations, and programs of nearly every federal agency 

and USDA is no exception. Ensuring that the Federal Government has the capacity to execute its 

missions and maintain important services in the face of climate change is essential. Climatespecific strategies include and are based on:

Executive Order 13514 – Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic 

Performance (October 2009)

EO 13514 directed each agency to develop a sustainability strategy and reduce greenhouse gas 

emissions and to develop policies and practices to support the Federal Adaptation Strategy. This 

Executive Order challenged federal agencies to set sustainability goals for agency operations and 

directed agencies to improve their environmental, energy and economic performance. Each 

federal agency was asked to evaluate agency climate change risks and vulnerabilities to manage 

both the short- and long-term effects of climate change on the agency’s mission, programs, and 

operations. 

US Department of Agriculture Departmental Regulation 1070-001 (June 2011) – The purpose 

of this regulation is to implement sections of EO 13514 and establish a USDA-wide directive to 

integrate climate change adaptation planning and actions into USDA programs, policies and 

operations. This policy statement stands today. 

US Department of Agriculture Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan (June 2013) – On 

the 2013 plan, USDA identified climate change resilience as its sustainability practice Goal 9. 

Strategies included Sub-Agency plans to integrate climate change adaptation into agency and 

regional planning, establish 7 regional climate hubs, and report on progress in climate 

preparedness and resilience implementations. The previous year’s plan reported a risk analysis 

on how climate change might affect its functions and national agriculture production and 

included adaptation plans from eleven USDA sub-agencies. 

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 3
The President’s Climate Action Plan (June 2013)

This plan, consisting of a wide variety of executive actions, has three key pillars: a) Cut Carbon 

Pollution in America; b) Prepare the United States for Impacts of Climate Change; and c) Lead 

International Efforts to Combat Global Climate Change and Prepare for its Impacts. The 

President’s plan identifies approximately 72 actions that the Federal Government should take. 

USDA is participating wholly or in coordination with other agencies in 19 actions including 

identifying vulnerabilities to climate change, maintaining agricultural sustainability, managing 

drought and leading efforts to address climate change through international negotiations. Those 

focused primarily on national USDA resilience strategies include:

President’s Climate Action Plan

Pillar 1: Cut Carbon Pollution in America

Deploying Clean Energy Cutting Energy Waste Reducing Other Greenhouse 

Gas Emission

• Next Generation Biofuels

• Transmission Project Siting and 

Permitting

• Green Buildings and Energy 

Efficient Strategies

• Biogas Roadmap

• Energy Efficiency and 

Conservation Loan Program 

(reducing barrier to energy 

efficient investment)

• Rural Energy for America 

Program

• Interagency Methane Strategy

• Reduced Emissions from 

Deforestation and Forest 

Degradation (REDD+)

• NEPA Guidance Distinguishing 

Biogenic Carbon and Fossil 

Carbon

• Voluntary Carbon Partnerships

President’s Climate Action Plan

Pillar 2: Prepare the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change

Building Stronger and Safer

Communities and 

Infrastructure

Protecting Our Economy 

and Natural Resources

Using Science to Manage 

Climate Impacts

• Direct Agencies to support 

Climate-resilient Investment

• Support Communities Preparing

for Climate Impacts

• Rebuilding/Learning from 

Extreme events

• Tribal Adaptation and 

Resiliency Project

• Identify Vulnerabilities of Key 

Sectors

• Promote Insurance leadership 

for Climate Safety

• Conserve Land and Water 

Resources

• Maintain Agricultural 

Sustainability

• Manage Drought (National 

Drought Resilience Partnership)

• Conserve Forests - Reduce 

Wildfire Risks

• Prepare for Future Floods

• Develop Actionable Climate 

Science

• Assess Climate-Change Impacts 

in the US

• Launch Climate Data Initiative

• Provide Toolkits for Climate 

Resilience

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 4
President’s Climate Action Plan

Pillar 3: Lead International Efforts to Combat Global Climate Change and 

Prepare for its Impact

Work with Other Countries 

to Address Climate Change

Lead Efforts to Address Climate Change Through 

International Negotiation

• Expand Bilateral Cooperation 

with Major Emerging 

Economies

• Combat Short-lived Climate 

Pollutants

• Reduce Emissions from 

Deforestation and Forest 

Degradation

• Expand Clean Energy Use and 

Cut Energy Waste

• Negotiate Global Free Trade in 

Environmental Goods and 

Services

• Strengthen Global Resilience to 

Climate Change

• Climate Smart Agriculture 

• Global Research Agenda

• Support the Department of State in Ongoing Negotiations on Climate 

Change

• Prepare a major Interim Report for the National Climate Assessment 

entitled, Global Climate Change, Food Security, and the US Food 

System.

• Work with partners in establishment of the Climate Smart Agricultural 

Alliance

Executive Order 13653 – Preparing the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change

(November 2013)

EO 13653 directs agencies to develop or continue to develop, implement, and update 

comprehensive plans that integrate consideration of climate change risks and vulnerabilities into 

agency operations and overall mission objectives. This EO advances the focus of resilience 

strategy in the President’s Climate Action Plan.

II. Planning for Climate Change Related Risk

Section 5(a) of EO 13653 states “each agency shall develop or continue to develop, implement, 

and update comprehensive plans that integrate consideration of climate change into agency 

operations and overall mission objectives...” This portion of the USDA Adaptation Plan 

addresses the five subsections enumerated in EO 13653. 

Section 5(a)(i): identification and assessment of climate change related impacts on and risks to the 

Agency’s ability to accomplish its missions, operations, and programs.

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 5
Vulnerability Assessment

A sampling of the risks grouped by the USDA Strategic Goals1 and the Sub-Agencies’ strategies 

follow: 

Strategic Goal Objective Risks and 

vulnerabilities

Sub-Agencies 

Involved2

Possible Response 

Strategies

1 Assist Rural 

Communities to 

Create Prosperity to 

be Self-Sustaining, 

Repopulating and 

Economically 

Thriving

1.1 Enhance rural 

prosperity

Develop and support 

regional food systems

Some regions will 

face greater 

challenges in adapting 

to changes in extreme 

events such as 

droughts and storms

RD, ERS, FSA, 

RMA, ARS, 

NIFA

Better prepare farmers with 

adaptive responses to climate, 

encourage regional networks 

through USDA Climate Hubs. 

Develop new crop varieties to 

withstand changing climate 

conditions.

Generate and retain 

green jobs and 

economic benefits 

through natural 

resource and 

recreation programs

Tourism activities and 

green jobs will be 

positively (warmweather activities) and 

negatively (snowrelated activities)

impacted by climate 

change. Coastal 

tourism could be 

affected by sea-level 

rise.

FS, RD, NRCS, 

FSA

Work with rural communities 

to manage lands for tourism 

and outdoor recreation and 

find ways to use lands to 

enhance green employment 

opportunities.

1.2 Increase 

agricultural 

opportunities; 

robust safety net

Capitalize on 

opportunities 

presented by the 

nation’s efforts to 

develop markets for 

ecosystem services 

and mitigate climate 

change

Ecosystem services 

will be stressed by 

climate extremes and 

natural disasters.

Small producers may 

be impacted sooner 

than others; climate 

changes will stress

some crops and 

potentially affect 

sustainability and 

competitiveness of 

agricultural systems. 

ERS, FS, FAS, 

FSA, NRCS, RD, 

RMA

Work with producers to 

diversify agricultural practices 

and protect ecosystem 

services. Promote crops with 

mitigation potential and with 

greatest resilience to 

environmental changes. 

Establish more certified 

organic operations; Trade 

preserved through USDA staff 

resolution of market access 

issues; Improved crop 

insurance; Conduct research to 

improve seed and feed, 

improve agricultural practices, 

diversify, and develop 

ecosystem markets. 

1.3 Contribute to 

Expansion of 

Bioeconomy

Facilitate sustainable 

Energy crops subject 

to new and 

challenging growing 

conditions. Stressed 

ARS, ERS, FS,

FSA, NIFA,

NRCS, RD

Renewable energy can offset 

greenhouse gas emissions. 

Develop new energy crop 

varieties that can withstand 

1 Source: US Department of Agriculture Strategic Plan FY 2014-2018: http://www.ocfo.usda.gov/usdasp/sp2014/usdastrategic-plan-fy-2014-2018.pdf 2 Agency Abbreviations: ARS: Agricultural Research Service; APHIS: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service; 

ERS: Economic Research Service; FS: Forest Service; FAS: Foreign Agriculture Service; FSA: Farm Service Agency; 

NASS: National Agricultural Statistics Service; NIFA: National Institute of Food and Agriculture; NRCS: Natural 

Resources Conservation Service; RD: Rural Development; RMA: Risk Management Agency.

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 6

 
renewable energy 

development

environmental 

conditions with 

changing climate and 

weather patterns may 

increase market 

competition of crops 

used for food, fiber 

and fuel 

climate extremes. Promote 

resource-efficient cropping.

Develop advanced biomass 

crops and methods for 

sustainable biofuel production; 

Analysis and data from 

commodity markets for 

renewable energy sources; 

Integration of regional systems 

with sustainable agriculture, 

forestry and range 

management

2 Ensure Our 

National Forests 

and Private 

Working Lands are 

Conserved Restored 

and Made Resilient 

to Climate Change

while Enhancing 

our Water 

Resources

2.1 Improve Health 

of Nation’s Forests, 

Grasslands and 

Working Lands by 

Managing Natural 

Resources

Degradation of 

resources will lead to 

increased GHG 

emissions, and 

threaten wildlife, fish, 

plants, lands, water, 

recreation, community 

and prosperity, 

inability of USDA to 

assess or influence

pollutant causes 

through its programs

FS, FSA, NRCS Work with private and public 

land managers to improve 

health and protect lands

through conservation methods. 

Provide additional incentives 

to improve soil health and 

water quality while

maintaining working lands, 

preserve open space and 

restore public forests. Use 

environmental markets to 

establish ecosystem service 

benefits 

2.2 Lead Efforts to 

Mitigate and Adapt 

to Climate Change

Healthy soils and 

plants everywhere are 

challenged by a 

changing climate, 

extremes 

ARS, FSA, FS, 

NRCS, NIFA, 

RD, RMA

Integrate research results into 

policies and conservation 

practices, disseminate 

information, and support land 

managers who use these 

practices; Implement USDA 

Hubs to facilitate integration 

of science-based practical 

information 

2.3 Contribute to 

Clean and Abundant 

Water by Protecting 

and Enhancing 

Water Resources in 

National Forests and 

on Working Lands

Drought and increased 

runoff, increased 

urban development, 

increased impervious 

surfaces pose 

problems for 

increasingly limited 

quantities and quality 

of water resources 

FS, NRCS, RD, 

RMA

Encourage producers and 

forest managers to preserve 

wetlands, use sustainable 

farming practices that put 

minimal stress on water 

resources; deliver financial 

and technical assistance to 

landowners to implement 

conservation measures and 

management strategies to 

benefit water quality, 

availability and improve 

watershed health

2.4 Reduce Risk of

Catastrophic 

Wildfire 

Parts of the country, 

particularly the west, 

are increasingly 

threatened by drought 

and longer fire 

seasons; Budgetary, 

legal, and regulatory 

constraints

FS, NRCS Work with all communities to 

ensure they are fire-adapted,

for prevention, preparedness 

and response; USDA will 

work with private and public 

partners to implement 

hazardous fuel reduction and 

ecosystem restoration projects

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 7
3 Help America 

Promote 

Agricultural 

Production and 

Biotechnology 

Exports As America 

works to Increase 

Food Security

3.1 Ensure US

Agricultural 

Resources 

Contribute to 

Enhanced Global 

Food Security

Ensuring global food 

security will become 

more challenging as 

countries address 

growing global 

population, land 

degradation, scarce 

water and climate 

change; Many nations 

may experience 

failing crops and food 

insecurity 

APHIS, ARS, 

ERS, FAS, FSA, 

NASS, NIFA 

Research should continue to 

improve and protect US staple 

crops to adapt to changing 

climate conditions, markets 

can be opened to send these 

resources abroad; Cooperator 

participation from developing 

countries participating in 

scientific exchange provide 

critical learning opportunities; 

Research into climate-resilient 

crops and agricultural 

practices can be disseminated

globally to farmers to help 

them become self-sufficient

3.2 Enhance 

America’s Ability to 

Develop and Trade 

Agricultural 

Products derived 

from New and 

Emerging 

Technologies

Risks to food 

security and human 

health increase as 

shifts in 

distribution and 

nature of diseases, 

invasive species 

and agricultural 

pests increase; 

Public resistance to 

biotechnologybased food 

production; Global 

partnerships 

increase risk of 

natural and 

manmade events 

limiting success of 

programs. 

APHIS, ARS, 

FAS, NIFA

Enhance protection of 

agriculture, natural 

resources through adaptive 

risk analysis models, 

engaging larger number of 

stakeholders; USDA will 

increase support of global 

adoption of science-based 

systems models and 

contributions of innovative 

technology to global food 

and energy security and 

environmental 

sustainability with US 

trading partners which 

should increase trade 

opportunities for US 

producers

4 Ensure All 

America’s Children 

have Access to Safe, 

Nutritious and 

Balanced Meals 

4.4 Protect 

Agricultural Health 

by Minimizing 

Major Disease and 

Pests to Ensure 

Access to Safe, 

Plentiful, and 

Nutritious Food

Exposure to diseases, 

including plant and 

animal pests and 

pathogens, is expected 

to change as the 

climate warms and 

precipitation patterns 

change; Volume of 

smuggled or 

improperly imported 

agricultural products 

entering the US grows

APHIS, ARS, 

FAS, NIFA 

USDA has developed a 3-part 

strategy to: identify pests and 

diseases before they enter the 

US, and continue research into 

prevention and suppression of 

disease ; provide training and 

expertise to identify threats at 

ports of entry; and works to 

eradicate pests and diseases or 

manage limits of damage if 

they are already in the US 

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 8
5 Create a USDA 

for the 21st Century 

that is HighPerforming 

Efficient and 

Adaptable

5.2 Build a Safe, 

Secure, and Efficient 

Workplace by 

Leveraging 

Technology and 

Shared Solutions 

across Organization 

Boundaries 

Extreme events and 

rising sea level may 

impact facilities built 

decades ago near 

coastlines or along 

flood-prone river 

valleys; Aging 

infrastructure may not 

withstand severe 

storms, tornadoes and 

hurricanes

All agencies To ensure the security of 

USDA facilities infrastructure 

and employee safety, 

increased implementation of 

technology solutions and 

workplace enhancements 

including telework will be 

used to improve program 

delivery safely and with 

greater flexibility for its 

customer base 

Climate Change Effects on USDA Functions 

Climate change presents new challenges for regulatory and response agencies. Public safety is 

increasingly at risk due to fast-moving wildfires, unpredictable extreme weather events such as flash 

flooding and associated sudden appearance of disease vectors. Risks to food safety, ecosystem 

health, and challenges to human health associated with animal and plant diseases, invasive species, 

and pests may increase. The extent and greater range of endemic and exotic pests, weeds, and 

diseases are raising concerns for the agricultural and forestry sectors, with widely seen consequences 

to productivity and ecosystem health. Although the influence of these factors is increasingly 

recognized by scientists and policy makers, the role of climate change in their proliferation is often 

not well understood. USDA is conducting basic and applied research on the interacting effects of 

climate change on endemic and exotic pests, weeds and diseases, and their resistance to management 

actions designed to control these types of species. 

USDA’s costs for administering services such as disaster assistance, crop insurance, conservation 

and energy programs, and technical assistance are likely to increase as a result of climate change. 

Severe weather and other climate-related events such as associated excess moisture, more 

persistent and prolonged drought, pest infestations, and heat stress place pressure on the capacity 

of USDA agencies to meet demands. Shifts in climate may also affect USDA structures and 

infrastructure, particularly in areas subject to rising sea level and in areas of increased recurrence 

of extreme damaging storms, tornadoes, and hurricanes. USDA facilities, lands, and operations 

may be increasingly and less predictably affected by these events. Rising temperatures influence 

the energy costs associated with aging structures constructed when energy costs were a less 

significant portion of agency budgets.

Climate Change Effects on Agricultural Production3

Agriculture is dependent on a wide range of ecosystem processes that support productivity 

including soil health and availability of adequate potable water supplies. Multiple stressors, 

including climate change, increasingly compromise the ability of ecosystems to provide these 

services. Key near-term climate change effects on agricultural soil and water resources include 

the potential for increased soil erosion through extreme precipitation events, as well as regional 

and seasonal changes in the availability of water resources for both rain-fed and irrigated 

3 Source: Climate Change and Agriculture in the United States: Effects and Adaptation USDA Technical Bulletin 

1935. Submitted as a USDA Technical Report for 2013 National Climate Assessment.

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 9

 
agriculture. The vulnerability of agriculture to climatic change is strongly dependent on the 

responses taken by humans to moderate the effects of climate change. Adaptive actions within 

agricultural sectors are driven by perceptions of risk, direct productivity effects of climate 

change, and by complex changes in domestic and international markets, policies, and other 

institutions as they respond to those effects within the United States and worldwide. 

In the last 150 years, US agriculture has exhibited a sustained capacity to adapt to a diversity of 

growing conditions and associated dynamic social and economic changes. These adaptations 

occurred during a period of relative climatic stability and abundant technical, financial, and 

natural resources. During the next century, the predicted higher incidence of extreme weather 

events will have an increasing influence on agricultural productivity. Future agricultural 

adaptation will be undertaken in a decision environment characterized by uncertainty of the 

agricultural system response to increasing climatic variability, the complexity of interactions 

between the agricultural systems, non-climate stressors in the global climate system, and the 

increasing rate and intensity of climatic change. Climate change will exacerbate biotic stresses 

on agricultural plants and animals. Changing pressures associated with weeds, diseases, and 

insect pests, together with potential changes in timing and coincidence of pollinator lifecycles, 

will affect growth and yields. The potential magnitude of these effects is not yet well understood.

Crops: Plants are currently grown in areas in which they are exposed to temperatures that 

generally match their threshold values. As temperatures increase over the next century, shifts 

may occur in crop production areas because temperatures will no longer occur within the range, 

or during the critical time period for optimal growth and yield of grain or fruit. Many climate 

stressors are interrelated. Warming temperatures, for instance, will act to increase crop waterdemand. An increase in winter temperatures also affects perennial cropping systems through 

interactions with plant chilling requirements. All perennial specialty crops have a winter chilling 

requirement (typically expressed as hours below 10°C and above 0°C) ranging from 200 to 2,000 

cumulative hours. Yields will decline if the chilling requirement is not completely satisfied 

because flower emergence and viability will be low. Increasing carbon dioxide (CO2) in the 

atmosphere is a positive for plant growth, and controlled experiments have documented that 

elevated CO2 concentrations can increase plant growth while decreasing soil water-use rates. 

The effects of elevated CO2 on grain and fruit yield and quality are mixed. Because elevated CO2

concentrations disproportionately stimulate growth of weed species, they are likely to contribute 

to increased risk of crop loss from weed pressure. Crops and forage plants will continue to be 

subjected to increasing temperatures, increasing CO2, and more variable water availability 

caused by changing precipitation patterns. These factors interact in their effect on plant growth 

and yield. A balanced understanding of the consequences of management actions and genetic 

responses to these factors will form the basis for production systems more resilient to climate 

change. 

Livestock: Changing climatic conditions affect animal agriculture in four primary ways: (1) feedgrain production, availability and price; (2) pastures and forage crop production and quality; (3) 

animal health, growth and reproduction; and (4) disease and pest distributions. Livestock 

production systems are vulnerable to temperature stresses. An animal’s ability to adjust its 

metabolic rate to cope with temperature extremes can lead to reduced productivity, and in 

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 10
extreme cases, death. Prolonged exposure to extreme temperatures will also further increase 

production costs and productivity losses associated with all animal products. Water is also a 

limiting factor. Extended water stress on any animal can eventually lead to death. Livestock 

operations are increasingly faced with the sale of many, if not all, of their stock during prolonged 

drought when water supplies are no longer readily and continuously available. 

Climate Change Effects on Forests4

By the end of the 21st century, forest ecosystems in the US will differ from those of today. The 

most rapidly visible and most significant short-term effects on forest ecosystems will be caused 

by altered disturbance regimes. These include wildfires, insect infestations, pulses of erosion and 

flooding, and drought-induced tree mortality. These both direct and indirect climate–change 

effects are likely to cause losses of ecosystem services in some areas but may also improve and 

expand ecosystem services in others. The ability of communities with resource-based economies 

to adapt to climate change is linked to their direct exposure to these changes. Areas most 

vulnerable because of current infrastructure and resource production are based on past climate 

and steady-state conditions. Human communities that have diverse economies and are resilient to 

change today will also be better prepared for future climatic stresses. Building on practices 

compatible with adapting to climate change provides a good starting point for land managers 

who may want to begin the adaptation process. Establishing a foundation for managing forest 

ecosystems in the context of climate change as soon as possible will ensure that a broad range of 

options will be available for managing forest resources sustainably.

The effects of increased temperature and changes in moisture will alter the growing environment 

for many tree species in the US. Mortality may increase in older forests stressed by low soil 

moisture. The trend toward higher temperatures in recent decades has already decreased snow 

depth, duration and extent in the western US. Decreased snow cover increases long-term soil 

moisture deficit which in turn can decrease tree health and leave forests more susceptible to 

insect and pathogen damage. Regeneration may decrease for species affected by both low soil 

moisture and competition from other species at the seedling stage. Many models predict an 

upward elevation and northward latitude movement of species habitat as climate changes. The 

higher genetic diversity of most tree species aids tolerance of a broad range of environmental 

conditions including temperature variation. Therefore, extreme weather events may have a 

greater influence than gradual changes in temperature or precipitation on ecosystems and trigger 

multiple stressors and disturbances. These ‘pulses’ of biophysical disturbance have the potential 

to change ecosystem structure and function across millions of hectares in relatively short time 

spans. With increased atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitrogen deposition, the 

physiological function and productivity of forest ecosystems could be altered with significant 

variation in response among species and regions. Forest growth and afforestation in the United 

States currently account for a net gain in carbon storage, offsetting approximately 13 percent of 

the Nation’s fossil fuel CO2 production. During the next few decades, Eastern forest ecosystems, 

where soil moisture is sufficient and disturbances are low, are expected to continue to sequester 

4 Source: Effects of Climatic Variability and Change on Forest Ecosystems: A Comprehensive Science Synthesis for 

the US Forest Service, USDA FS General Technical Report PNW-GTR-870. Submitted as a USDA Technical Report for 

the 2013 National Climate Assessment

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 11

 
carbon through favorable response to elevated CO2 and to higher temperatures. Retention of 

carbon will depend on maintaining or increasing the total area of Eastern forest. Western forest 

ecosystems may begin to emit carbon if wildfire and insect disturbance continue to increase at 

the rates that they have in recent years.

One of the most visible short-term effects on forest ecosystems is caused by altered disturbance 

regimes that occur with increased frequency and severity. Interacting disturbances have the 

greatest effect on ecosystem responses and may simultaneously alter species composition, 

structure and function. The type and magnitude of disturbances will differ regionally and pose 

significant challenges for resource managers. These disturbances include wildfire, insect 

infestations, invasive species, increased flooding, erosion and movement of sediment into 

streams, increased drought and land use-change. Wilderness-urban interfaces and urban areas 

are projected to increase at the expense of rural forests. Land-use shifts in rural areas could 

involve conversion of forests to agricultural uses, depending on market conditions. While higher 

temperatures and population growth will increase the value of urban trees for mitigating climate 

change effects, these factors may also increase the difficulty of keeping trees healthy in more 

urban environments. 

Economic Effects of Climate Change on US Agriculture and Forestry 

The economic effects of climate change are shaped by an array of institutions from local to 

global scales ranging from commodity markets to systems of research, development, education,

communication, and transportation. These institutions define opportunities and constraints in 

which stakeholders can modify or adapt their behavior to minimize losses and take advantage of 

new opportunities for gain associated with changing climatic conditions. The economic 

implications of climate change in the US are sensitive to yield effects and adaptation 

opportunities, as well as constraints in the US and abroad. US farmers’ capacity to adapt, as well 

as to respond to shifting trade patterns, will mitigate potential effects on domestic producers and 

consumers. However, future climate scenarios with even the least extreme rates of warming may 

result in more severe implications for food security for the very poor and vulnerable populations 

worldwide.

Adaptive behavior can include a network of adaptive responses with changes in consumption, 

production, education, and research. The aggregate effects of a changing climate ultimately 

depend on the effectiveness of this network of adaptive responses -- from the local producer 

adjusting planting patterns in response to crop yield, to seedling producers investing in more 

drought-tolerant varieties, to nations changing trade restrictions in response to food, fiber, and 

fuel concerns at a global level. Producers’ financial viability will be affected by change in 

management costs associated with changing biophysical stressors, the effects of variability and 

extreme weather events, and potential credit or resource constraints. Regional capacity for 

expanding agriculture, forestry, or irrigated production will depend heavily on the availability of 

land and water. Agricultural, forest, and natural ecosystems are complex; the manner in which 

adaptive behaviors in production and consumption systems respond to biophysical changes and 

incorporate lessons from research and education will determine the overall effects of a changing 

climate.

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 12
Adaptive behavior can mitigate the potential effects of climate change on food production, 

agricultural and forest-based income, and food security by moving production out of regions 

with newly reduced comparative advantages in specific production sectors and into areas with 

improved relative productivity. Early analyses found that with adaptation, the production effects 

of climate change are reduced to one-fifth to one-sixth of initial yield effect (Reilly et al., 20075). 

More recent analysis has found that some regions can experience negative price effects from 

adaptation in other regions (Malcolm et al., 20126). In addition, there is a growing concern that 

farms may need to adapt to much higher levels of production risk as climate change interacts 

with threshold effects in cropping production systems (Schlenker and Roberts, 20097

). 

Attempts to quantify the economic effects of climate change are dependent on number of 

elements including climate and yield projections, treatment of adaptation constraints, and the 

methods and models used. For example, if global yields are generally lower, global prices rise 

regardless of domestic yield increases. The resulting price increases could benefit US producers 

but not necessarily the US consumer. Uncertainty in climate projections is also a critical element 

in assessing economic effects, in part because uncertainty about benefits of adaptation may

impede the adaptive response of farmers.

Agency Assessments of Risk and Vulnerability

USDA is composed of many sub-agencies with differing missions. Sub-agencies were requested 

to assess their risk and vulnerability to climate change. The responses are broad and address risks 

and vulnerabilities at global, national, regional, and local scales as they relate directly to a 

particular mission. A few sub-agency impacts are outlined below. Individual Sub-Agency 

Adaptation Plans with more detail are attached in Section VI. 

• Physical and Biological Impacts: Agriculture and forestry are impacted by shifts in 

temperature and precipitation patterns, amounts, intensities and extreme weather events and 

climate variability. Changes in key climate variables affect the seasonality of hydrologic 

regimes, reproduction cycles of pests and pathogens, and length of fire seasons. The 

changing climate is already altering species ranges and has the potential to alter ecosystem 

structure in the future. Management will require forward-looking approaches to novel 

ecosystems instead of depending on historical ranges of variability. These impacts pose 

challenges to sustaining agricultural lands, forest, grasslands and the supply of goods and 

services upon which society depends, such as clean drinking water, abundant food, forest 

products, outdoor recreation opportunities, and habitat.

5 Reilly, J. et. al., 2007. Energy Policy, 35(11): 5370-5383 6 Malcolm, S., E. Marshall, M. Aillery, P. Heisey, M. Livingston, and K. Day-Rubenstein. 2012. Agricultural 

Adaptation to a Changing Climate: Economic and Environmental Implications Vary by U.S. Region. Economic 

Research Report. USDA Economic Research Service (ERR-136) (http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/erreconomic-research-report/err136). 7 Schlenker, W. and M. Roberts. 2009. “Nonlinear temperature effects indicate severe damages to US crop yields 

under climate change.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 106(37): 15594-15598.

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 13

 
o Wildfires - Increasing wildfire season length and extent of fire on the landscape.

Research estimates the potential for up to 100 percent increase in the number of acres

burned annually by 2050. Increasing wildfire response requires increased funding. Forest 

Service (FS) - Fire suppression funding has grown from 16% of the FS budget in 1995 to 

42% currently and funding is transferred from other agency programs in years when 

suppression funds are exhausted. Firefighting employees and contractors, and residents in 

the wild land-urban interface are increasingly at risk due to extreme wildfire behavior. 

National Forest System lands bordering tribal lands are increasingly at risk of fire. Tribes 

are particularly vulnerable to fires both on and off tribal lands which complicates 

coordination of firefighting across shared fire-prone landscapes with various jurisdictional 

controls. Lack of resources, poverty, remote access, and poor infrastructure exacerbate 

already high risks areas.

o Heat Stress - Prolonged personnel exposure to the elements during extreme

temperatures. Human health and safety - Risk to employees and contractor/cooperators.

Events that include atypical weather patterns experienced during the 2013-2014 winter

season has result in extremely cold temperatures in most regions, especially unusual in

the southern states. Higher summer temperatures may increase field personnel risk of

heat exhaustion, heat stroke, and dehydration. Heat stress has the potential to impact

operations at all levels. Higher temperatures during the early to middle portions of the

row-crop growing season impact yields.

NRCS – Heat stress affects many aspects of NRCS’ mission: Changes in plant

adaptability in specific locations, such as plant hardiness zone movements and shifts in

crops, greater ground-level ozone concentrations due to slightly warmer temperatures,

and expansion of ozone nonattainment areas, increased cooling-related energy demands

in the warm months, including confined animal feeding operations, increased energy

demands associated with greater irrigation requirements, increased melting of permafrost

in transition zone regions in Alaska, decreased soil moisture due to increasing rates of

evapotranspiration, decreased winter snowpack in the mountains due to a shift in the

rain/snow transition zone and more rain-on-snow events

RMA - New Hardiness Zone Maps: RMA has been evaluating the new Hardiness Zone

Map published by Agricultural Research Service. As it gets warmer, some of the zones

may shift (mostly northward); therefore this could affect most of our plans of insurance

products, particularly the Nursery Crop plan of insurance. RMA insures nursery plants

based on county and hardiness zone; as a consequence of the changes in the climate,

some nursery plants may no longer be insurable in some specific locations or higher

insurance premiums may be necessary. RMA has been evaluating and having informed

conversations on this issue.

RD - Increased temperatures will likely increase the need for energy efficient homes in

low-income communities and an increased demand on power generation capacity. In

turn, these demands will produce a rise in the number of applications for assistance from

residential applicants, electric cooperatives, and rural businesses.

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 14
o Surface Water Temperature - Increased water temperatures in rivers, lakes and 

streams, lower water levels in late summer, and drying of streams and ponds.

FS - Forest Service and bordering tribal lands are increasingly at risk regarding watershed 

and fisheries maintenance. Tribes are particularly vulnerable to fluctuations in water 

temperatures and flow as many communities rely on aquatic species for subsistence and 

cultural purposes. These risks are frequently exacerbated by a lack of adaptive capacity 

due to lack of resources, poverty, ineffective or nonexistent infrastructure, and relative 

isolation. A further consideration is that failure to manage trust lands in a sustainable 

manner may result in abrogation of treaty rights, creating a risk position for federal 

natural resource agencies.

NRCS - increased stream and lake temperatures impacting fisheries and other biological 

processes, wildlife and fish species and habitat changes. 

o Insects and Disease - Increased exposure to and spread of damaging insects and 

disease, especially invasive species. Affects natural resource management on all lands. 

ARS - Greater uncertainties are associated with the effects on pests and pathogens. In 

general, the geographic distribution of pests is largely dependent upon climate, whereas 

the incidence and severity of outbreaks are largely dependent upon weather. 

APHIS – Effects of climate change will likely require new regulations and policies as 

well as innovative, non-regulatory approaches to address new or shifting pest and disease 

scenarios worldwide. Impacts on ecosystem and habitat characteristics will result in 

shifts of animal and pest populations into new or expanded habitats. This movement can 

result in increased spread of diseases (such as citrus greening and hemorrhagic disease of 

ruminants) and other pests. Such movements can also lead to increased encounters with 

wildlife in populated areas, potentially increasing disease transmission among wildlife, 

livestock, and people.

FS - The changing climate is already altering species ranges and has the potential to alter 

ecosystem structure in the future as evidenced by the mountain pine beetle (a native 

insect) now epidemic in the West. FS implemented a National Insect and Disease Risk 

Assessment and completed an updated map, supporting data and information to identify 

areas at risk for catastrophic levels of forest insects, pathogens, and abiotic mortality 

agents. 

NRCS – Climate change brings increased pest and disease pressures due to temperature 

changes in some regions including native and exotic pests, and changes in insect activity, 

including frequency, intensity, and location (including pollinators), increased competition 

from weed and invasive plants.

RMA - In 2004, RMA began monitoring soybean rust developments. The threat of 

soybean rust disease affecting US soybean growers in the near future is a serious concern. 

RMA participates on a soybean rust working group, hosted by the USDA Office of Pest 

Management Policy, and formed to prepare for the arrival of soybean rust by keeping 

State, commodity, and federal scientists informed of the recent activity related to soybean 

rust. Working group members include at least one Extension plant pathologist from each 

soybean state and any other representatives from state, federal, and commodity 

organizations with an interest in soybean rust. The working group meets as needed to 

discuss items such as management options, information resources, range of soybean rust, 

and recent research. 

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 15
o Effect on Food Safety, Food Security, and Food Research 

ARS - Flooding can have a major food safety impact. A Food and Drug Administration 

(FDA) rule now considers ready-to-eat crops that have been in contact with flood waters 

to be adulterated due to potential exposure to sewage, animal waste, heavy metals, 

pathogenic microorganisms, or other contaminants.

APHIS - Through enhanced coordination among the public and private sectors, APHIS 

expects to participate in more food-safety disaster relief because of the increased 

frequency of extreme weather events. For example, the risks of stored-product pest (e.g. 

khapra beetle) contamination increase during storage, deployment, and forward-staging 

of food-aid materials. Additionally, food security needs are increasing the demand for 

plants genetically engineered to resist pests as well as pests engineered to prevent the 

transmission of plant pathogens. Meeting these needs will lead to increased research and 

complexity of assessments (including requests for permits, field trials, inspections, 

compliance issues and deregulation petitions). 

FAS – Climate change may lead to declines in agricultural productivity exacerbating 

vulnerabilities that lead to increased number of countries becoming food insecure and 

request FAS administered food assistance in times of limited resources.

GIPSA – Operations at both interior and US export locations may become more 

vulnerable to extreme weather events. Increased need for quality verification of USDA 

food assistance purchases may overwhelm existing capacities.

o Rising Sea Levels - Tribal communities, National Forest System lands, Pacific Island 

communities, infrastructure most vulnerable. Coastal lands and coastal Tribes are 

increasingly at risk of damage to their lands, including infrastructure, due to rising sea 

level. Tribes and islanders are particularly vulnerable to sea level rise as many tribal 

communities and islanders have limited or no opportunity to relocate without extreme 

cost and/or Congressional action. Tribes that rely on aquatic species for subsistence and 

cultural purposes affected by sea level are further at risk. These risks are frequently 

increased due to lack of resources, poverty, ineffective or nonexistent infrastructure, and 

relative isolation. 

FS - Learn from and assist Tribes and other native peoples in managing our Nations’ 

natural resources in the context of changing climate in collaboration with Department of 

the Interior’s Landscape Conservation Cooperatives and Climate Science Centers.

NRCS - Increased salinization of near-coastal waters due to rises in sea level and greater 

storm activity impacts conservation planning.

o Extreme Weather Events - Prolonged personnel exposure to the elements during 

extreme flooding, tornadoes, hurricanes, etc. Human health and safety risk to 

employees and contractor/cooperators. Events that include atypical weather patterns 

experienced during the 2013-2014 winter season have resulted in extremely cold 

temperatures in most regions, especially unusual in the southern states. Higher summer 

temperatures may increase field personnel risk of heat exhaustion, heat stroke, and 

dehydration. Extreme events have the potential to impact operations at all levels. While 

the hurricane season this past year was not significant, hurricanes cause significant risk to 

human health and safety. In 2013, significant tornadoes in the Great Plains and Midwest 

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 16
caused significant damage to USDA facilities and severe and sustained stress to families 

that lost homes. Other extremes include:

- Increasing or Intensified Precipitation

ARS - To reduce the effect of seasonal extreme weather events, a significant amount of 

land susceptible to flooding has been taken out of production. This has affected ARS’ 

ability to continue some of its important produce-related research.

NRCS – Changes in precipitation will result in increased soil erosion potential due to 

increased precipitation intensity and amount, greater flood potential from increased 

precipitation frequency, duration, amount and intensity, especially in the East and 

Midwest, and greater potential for water quality impairments in some areas due to 

increased sedimentation and nutrient loading. Landslides may increase in saturated 

sediments disrupting transportation systems, burying residences and harming people. 

Saturated clay sediments near the Potomac River in 2014 caused residences to buckle, 

crack and slide following heavy rains and displaced homeowners indefinitely. 

- Increasing and Prolonged Drought

ARS - Implications for natural resources in research: Short and long-term water 

shortages (drought) and excesses (too much, too fast) are expected to increase in 

frequency with changing climate. Research that has always been based on rain-fed plots 

may thus require irrigation for the first time. Even among field plots that have been 

irrigated all along, greater amounts of water may be required, which can alter or 

compromise research objectives and/or progress. Water shortages may result in the loss 

of experimental material (plants, soil, animals), delay planting dates, suppress yield 

quantity and/or quality, and increase the threat of fire on grazing lands research locations. 

Water shortages will affect research priorities, especially when reduced water availability 

for research and industry alters what, where and how a crop or livestock can be grown.

NRCS - Water supply is challenged in areas already water-stressed, including the 

Southern Plains and the Southwest where drought is likely to become more frequent and 

longer lasting. There are water management challenges in the irrigated West, including 

amount and timing of water due to changes in snowpack and snowmelt, with consequent 

impacts on water rights, fisheries, hydroelectricity, and other water stakeholders.

RD - Climatic changes will disturb crop yields and modify growing locations, drought 

conditions may also lead to increased requirements for infrastructure to deliver water to 

areas that no longer have viable water sources as well as to power generation facilities, 

which may lead to a greater volume of applications for assistance from RD programs. 

This increased demand would divert resources from normal program operations, 

impacting RD’s ability to achieve its mission and goals. 

• Marketing and Trade Impacts 

o APHIS - Associated shifts in disease and pest prevalence may overwhelm the

current ability of off-shore programs to provide real-time information regarding pest

and disease potential and may increase risk to US agriculture. Existing surveillance 

and diagnostic networks for animal and plant health diseases (e.g., avian influenza,

foot and mouth disease, citrus greening, Asian long-horned beetle, fruit flies, etc.)

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 17
could be overwhelmed. Increased requirements for commodity and pathway risk 

analyses may overwhelm existing capacities. Moreover, APHIS may need to modify 

animal and plant health import requirements to protect the health of US agriculture.

o FAS - Increased frequency of extreme weather events may destabilize import and 

export markets and increase market volatility. Long-term strategies to build markets 

for US products could become difficult. Climate change may lead to production 

shortfalls and export bans abroad, undermining FAS efforts to promote free trade. 

Warmer average temperatures may increase the range and severity of disease 

outbreaks in the US raising Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) and Sanitary/PhytoSanitary (SPS) concerns abroad. Climate change may disrupt or slow agricultural 

development and trade in some countries and accelerate the demand for adaptation 

and mitigation strategies.

• Infrastructure Concerns

o APHIS has established animal and plant health emergency frameworks to facilitate

coordinated, timely responses to disease and pest emergencies. APHIS also has

established frameworks to address all hazards (e.g. hurricanes, floods, wildfires) for

impacts on plant and animal health and the needs of individuals with service animals 

and household pets, in addition to providing technical assistance for animal and 

agriculture emergency management. Climate change has the potential to overwhelm

existing frameworks as a result of increases in extreme weather events, wildfires, and

pest and disease outbreaks. In the event of wide-ranging climate disruption events, 

capacity could be overwhelmed. APHIS is working with assistance from other

USDA and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) emergency response resources

to develop procedures for requesting support and coordinating activities. State, local, 

Tribal, industry, and other stakeholders with key roles in threat mitigation also may

be overwhelmed. Changes in pest and disease biology will require APHIS to ensure

that its emergency response strategies (including new pest and disease response 

guidelines) and capabilities are updated and coordinated with the DHS National

Response Framework.

o FSA - FSA will conduct “continuity of operations” exercises to better understand 

the administrative implications of and prepare headquarters, state, and field office 

staff for large-scale crop failure, which will be increasingly likely with climate 

change. 

o FS - With increasing heavy rain events, the extensive road system on National Forest 

System lands will require increased maintenance and/or modification of infrastructure 

(e.g. larger culverts or replacement of culverts with bridges). Ski areas, reservoirs, and 

campgrounds are strongly influenced by past and current climate. Preserving highquality outdoor recreation experiences will depend not only on the condition of the 

land, facilities, and transportation infrastructure but also on where such opportunities 

can be accommodated safely and managed under a changing climate. The projected 

increase in US population and the continual decline of public access to privatelyowned undeveloped land will increase demand for recreation opportunities on public 

land.

o NIFA - A changing climate can result in more frequent, severe and longer term 

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 18
weather related disasters in the national capital region. There will be a future need to 

increase the agency’s resiliency to short and medium term weather events. NIFA 

should strive toward improvements in employee notification, increased productivity of 

unscheduled telecommute workdays, as well as decreased panel impacts of weather 

related travel delays. Impacts of a variable and changing climate will require an 

adaptation plan assessment that focuses on the ability to maintain primary operations 

when personnel are unable to report to the primary duty station. This also includes 

impacts to panels who are invited to DC to conduct reviews of proposals. 

Transportation and building infrastructure will also be impacted by climate and the 

safety of personnel travelling to and from the primary work site will need to be 

addressed. Climate will also impact the technological infrastructure where information 

systems are housed and require a controlled temperature and humidity environment. 

This also applies to NIFA’s back-up systems located outside Washington D.C. 

o NRCS - NRCS recognizes that impacts from climate change will influence NRCS’s 

ability to deliver its programs. Shifts in weather patterns may also diminish the 

performance of past and current conservation efforts unless steps are identified and 

implemented to modify these legacy federal investments. NRCS has offices in every 

State, the Pacific Islands Area, and the Caribbean Area. As of January 2014, NRCS 

employed about 10,150 full time staff. While nearly 400 employees are based in the 

four offices in the Washington, DC metropolitan area, more than 95% of NRCS staff 

is located outside of the DC area. Those staff are distributed among more than 2,600 

offices across the Nation and across the organization. Field offices include Centers, 

State Offices, Service Centers, and Support Offices. NRCS has the benefit of an 

inherent resilience to local or regional disaster or disruption because staff is widely 

geographically distributed. Only a national-scale event (total or near-total electric grid 

failure, for example) is likely to incapacitate NRCS. 

o RD – RD supports rural communities through loans, loan guarantees, and grants. For 

some of RD’s programs, the agency holds liens or other security interests in facilities 

and related infrastructure in areas that could be affected by hydrological changes and 

sea-level rises resulting from impacts such as inundation and erosion. Additionally, 

many climate change models predict increased frequency and severity of weather 

events such as tornados and hurricanes, which can damage utility facilities and 

infrastructure. Climate change therefore represents a risk to these agency assets and 

the communities they serve. Damage that may occur to such infrastructure and 

facilities would create an increased demand on RD to respond to requests for financial 

assistance to repair, replace, relocate or otherwise improve these assets. The potential 

for increased demands on financial resources could divert those resources from 

normal program operations, impacting RD’s ability to achieve its mission and goals. 

An increase in financial assistance requests could burden all aspects of RD operations, 

including but not limited to underwriting, engineering, and environmental review 

activities. Extreme weather events could also have devastating effects on rural 

communities as well as RD offices and their personnel stationed throughout the 

Nation. Events that could damage or destroy facilities and utility infrastructure needed 

to supply water, electricity, and telecommunications to communities and field offices 

could create significant health and safety problems for the public and for RD 

employees. Additionally, emergency response can be affected by telecommunications 

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 19
failure, including failure of the Federal Communications Commission’s Enhanced 911 

(E911) system, which is supported by towers and infrastructure financed by RD 

programs.

A number of ongoing actions to build resilience and address climate change impacts and risks 

are addressed through plans and activities already in place. Recently initiated activities include 

the USDA Regional Climate Hubs and the passage of the Agricultural Act of 2014. 

• USDA Regional Climate Hubs – Seven regional climate hubs, now established across the US,

deliver science-based tools, strategies and practical information to farmers, ranchers and 

forest landowners within each region of the United States to support decision-making related 

to climate change. These Hubs will maintain and strengthen agricultural production, natural 

resource management, and rural economic development under increasing climate variability. 

The Hubs will build capacity within USDA to deliver information and guidance on 

technologies and risk management practices at regional and local scales. The three primary 

goals of the USDA Regional Climate Hubs are: 1) Technical Support: The Hubs will 

provide support to USDA agriculture and land management program delivery by offering 

tools and strategies for climate change response. These approaches will help producers cope 

with challenges associated with drought, heat stress, excessive moisture, longer growing 

seasons, and changes in pest pressure. The Hubs will support applied research and develop 

partnerships to facilitate this process; 2) Assessments and Regional Forecasts: The Hubs 

will provide periodic regional assessments of risk and vulnerability in the production sector 

to contribute to the sustained National Climate Assessment process, and provide accessible 

regional data and interpret climate change forecasts for hazard and adaptation planning; 3) 

Outreach and Education: The Hubs will provide outreach and extension to farmers, 

ranchers, forest landowners, and rural communities on science-based risk management 

through the land grant universities, the Cooperative Extension System, USDA Sub-Agency 

Service Centers, and public/private partnerships and educate producers about the effects of 

climate change on agriculture and forests. They will also link a broad network of partners 

participating in climate risk adaptation and mitigation, including universities; nongovernmental organizations; federal agencies such as the Department of Interior (DOI) and 

the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); Native Nations and 

organizations; State departments of environment and agriculture; research centers; producer 

groups and more.

• Capacity Building: USDA sub-agencies are developing plans to educate their employees and 

their stakeholders and accommodate expected changes associated with climate change. 

Partnerships between scientists and land managers are being strengthened to improve the 

focus of research and technology to address current and emerging science and information 

needs. Identifying challenges, vulnerabilities, and further implications are key. 

Section 5(a)(ii) – a description of programs, policies, and plans the agency has already put in place, 

as well as additional actions the agency will take, to manage climate risks in the near term and 

build resilience in the short and long term

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 20
o Economic Research Service (ERS) - ERS efforts to address mission challenges related to 

climate change center around building research capacity in the area of climate change 

effects and adaptation. ERS is working closely with NASS and other USDA and federal 

agencies to develop a solid, spatially detailed baseline of current and past conditions related 

to land resources, climate, and land use and farmer decision-making. Such a baseline will be 

necessary to support robust analyses of how changes in the climate, and associated changes 

in the resource base, will affect farmer decision-making and how farmers interact with USDA 

programs. This effort involves a comprehensive integration into ERS analyses of key data 

sets from FSA, NRCS and NASS as well as close collaboration with other Federal agencies 

such as U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. ERS 

researchers are participating in the Agricultural Model Inter-comparison and Improvement 

Project (AgMIP) to compare and refine methods for both international and domestic 

economic modeling of the impacts of climate change. Development and enhancement of 

integrated economic, crop, climate and environmental process models expand ERS’ capacity 

to meet expected increases in demands for information about impacts and adaptation 

strategies in both the crop and livestock sectors. In addition to ongoing research on the role of 

USDA programs in farmer adaptation to drought risk, ERS is collaborating with the Forest 

Service to explore potential water shortages in the United States under changing climate 

conditions and the implications of such shortages for regional agricultural resilience to 

climate change. Specific research priorities are established based on formal and informal 

strategic planning efforts that incorporate input from customers, stakeholders, and USDA 

and external partners. 

o FSA - FSA programs will affect the climate change adaptation process to varying degrees 

and in various ways. FSA Farm loans: Because adaptation is likely to involve significant 

investment in new technologies and infrastructure, producers least able to cope with 

climate change may be those with limited access to credit, such as beginning and 

disadvantaged farmers. These populations are also more likely to be farming marginal 

lands that are more susceptible to climate change impacts. FSA Disaster programs: This 

assistance can be a lifeline to farmers who suffer losses from extreme weather events. 

The short term support offers farmers the opportunity to adapt.

o FS - Partnerships between scientists and land managers are being strengthened to 

improve the focus of research and technology to address current and emerging science 

and information needs. Resource inventory, monitoring, and assessment activities and 

decision support tools are being better aligned and coordinated across FS programs and 

with partner agencies at multiple scales. Examples of ongoing and newly initiated 

capacity-building efforts are: Climate Change Resource Center, Environmental Threat 

Assessment Centers, Conservation Education Programs, and participation in the new 

USDA Regional Climate Hubs. 

o NASS – Program changes and expansion in statistics sampling surveys due to climate 

change are being examined. 

o NIFA - will need to balance the increasing demand for scientific research, modeling, 

educational programs, and extension activities to address climate change issues with 

other research, education, and extension needs. For example, investigations of climate 

stressors and tipping points will become more essential to climate adaptation science 

research and will need to be balanced with vulnerable areas of crop and livestock 

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 21
production research and formal and informal state educational programs. There will also 

be a need to establish more long-term collaborations with federal funding agencies to 

provide research support to understand complex climate issues and develop the models 

and decision-making products essential for the sustainability of economic and natural 

resource systems.

o RMA - RMA’s principle vulnerability to climate change is through the insurance 

coverage offered through its crop insurance policies. RMA provides coverage to farmers 

and ranchers for flood, drought, hurricanes, and other natural disasters. Climate change 

can affect these agronomic risks. Some of the risks, and opportunities, associated with 

changing climate that RMA will face will likely come from farmers changing their 

farming practices and approach growing crops differently by adapting to earlier growing 

seasons, planting new varieties or shifting locations of their farming operations to adapt 

to climate change. Risk to farmers will be higher, if they decide to plant earlier due to 

warmer spring weather and the crop insurance program parameters have not been 

updated. For example, if grower’s plant earlier than the crop insurance policy allows, 

they will be required to carry more risk, as the crop insurance policies will not cover 

replanting payments.8

 RMA is educating and providing outreach to growers through 

interviews with news and other organizations to explain to farmers how planting early 

would affect their crop insurance coverage. The establishment of USDA Regional 

Climate Hubs should also facilitate these efforts. Citrus: RMA revised the Florida

Citrus Fruit Crop Policy for the 2014 and succeeding crop years to allow the Florida 

Automated Weather Network (FAWN) reporting stations to be used as verification for 

excess wind. RMA also now allows excess wind to be an insurable cause of loss for both

citrus fruit insured as fresh citrus and juice.

• USDA Departmental Regulation - has been in place since 2011 that addresses 

implementation of EO 13514 and climate change adaptation planning. This directive 

established a USDA-wide effort to integrate climate change adaptation planning and actions 

into USDA programs, policies and operations. It provides for the Climate Change Program 

Office (CCPO) located within the Office of the Chief Economist to support and help 

coordinate activities among the USDA agencies and offices. With the issuance of EO 13653 

and the President’s Climate Action Plan, the departmental regulation is well-placed to track 

progress. 

• Global Change Task Force – A monthly meeting of all USDA agencies and offices with 

climate change responsibilities is convened by the Climate Change Program Office Director. 

Department and agency activities are reported, issues discussed, and recommendations on 

actionable activities coordinated. The Task Force also includes members from the Office of 

the Chief Financial Officer as well as Legislative Affairs and General Counsel 

8 A grower signed up for crop insurance on March 15 and planted before the earliest planting date is still covered for 

the crop year. However, if they suffer a loss from freeze or any other cause of loss, they would have to cover the 

cost to “replant” the crop --as replanting payments would not be covered since the farmer chose to plant before the 

established earliest planting date http://mrcc.isws.illinois.edu/news/releases/2012/20120326_EarlyWarmth2012.pdf

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 22

 
• 2013 Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan: Goal 9 – The resilience strategies outlined

in Goal 9 are in progress and being integrated into regional planning. Additional

representation of tribal governments, other vulnerable communities, and stakeholder

engagement has been expedited by the inception of both a Task Force and Council outlined

by the President’s Climate Action Plan and the establishment of the USDA Regional Hubs

for Risk Adaptation and Mitigation to Climate Change (USDA Climate Hubs). The passage

of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (2014 Farm Bill) will allow agency updates of programs and

policies including grants, loans, and additional technical assistance to assist in addressing the

impacts of climate change.

Significant risk includes those operations identified as an ongoing impact to the USDA or USDA 

Sub-Agency that have the potential to impair or prevent the success of agency mission activities, 

particularly in the long term. These are:

o Wildfires: Increasing wildfire season length, size and severity of large fires, coupled

with an expanding wild land-urban interface, have been multiplying wildfire suppression

costs and reducing the capacity to provide other services including ecosystem services.

Personnel, the public, communities, and infrastructure are also at higher risk. Within the

Forest Service, wildfire suppression expenditures are now a significant percentage of the

agency’s budget, reducing capabilities to provide other critical services, including our

capacity to manage forests for increased resilience, to protect their capacity to sequester

and store carbon, and provide other ecosystem services. Fire suppression funding has

grown from 16% of the Forest Service (FS) budget in 1995 to 42%. Increasingly large and 

severe wildfires will result in increased restoration needs as well as decreased capacity to 

manage for other services. In order to protect funding of programs and activities that 

restore fire-adapted ecosystems, address resilience, and accomplish other adaptation 

priorities, a change in funding mechanism for wildfire suppression is needed. However, 

Congressional action is required to change funding structure. Some progress has been 

achieved through the FLAME Act of 2009 which established a separate account for 

funding emergency wildfire suppression activities undertaken on federal lands managed 

by Department of Interior and the Forest Service. Additional legislation is being

considered (Wildfire Disaster Funding Act (S 1875/HR 3992).

o Invasive Insects and Pathogens: Climate change impacts on ecosystems and habitat

characteristics will result in shifts of animal and pest populations into new and expanded

habitats. This movement can increase the rapid spread of diseases and pests in regions

already under stress from climate extremes. Pine bark beetle damage on thousands of

acres of pine forest in the western US has forced the Forest Service alone to spend more

than $300 million to remove standing and dead hazardous trees for safety, establish new

planting projects to restore healthy forests, treat over 850,000 acres, and dispose of over

Section 5(a)(iii) - a description of how any climate change related risk identified pursuant to 

paragraph (i) of this subsection that is deemed so significant that it impairs an agency’s 

statutory mission or operation will be addressed, including through the agency’s existing 

reporting requirements

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 23
410,000 tons of biomass because of limited dead-tree markets. Particular emphasis needs 

to be placed on global entry invasive species. The collaborative efforts and effectiveness 

of USDA sub-agencies and other federal agencies to identify unlawful entry and 

distribution of prohibited agricultural products, insects, and pathogens are increasingly 

stressed each year. Through increased trade, the volume of smuggled and improperly 

imported agricultural products as well as biological stowaways entering the US has the 

potential to grow. Escape of these pests and pathogens into US ecosystems can decimate 

cropping systems, livestock production, and ecosystem habitats. USDA detects and 

responds to new invasive species and emerging agricultural and public health threats 

using a three-pronged approach 1) identify pests and pathogens abroad and prevent their 

entry into the US; 2) provide training and expertise to identify threats at ports-of-entry; 3) 

work to eradicate pests and pathogens or manage them to limit damage if already in the 

US. The effectiveness of these and other programs to protect the food supply depends on 

all cooperating organizations working jointly to report infractions, prevent gaps in recordkeeping, and provide sufficiently trained staff to identify and counter the increasing 

volume of unlawful or inadvertent infestations and the management of these invasive 

species. These needs are placing greater demands on limited resources. 

o Drought: Drought is a very serious extreme that has occurred more frequently and for 

greater lengths of time in the last decade. Consequently, portions of the central and 

southern US, and more recently California, have experienced significant periods of 

widespread drought since 2010. While USDA and its sub-agencies and other federal 

agencies have jointly instituted new program incentives, a web-based clearinghouse for 

public access to federal disaster assistance, and improved tools for more reliable weekly 

analyses, critical western water supplies are in jeopardy and the impacts of the 

complexities associated with western water rights, hydroelectricity, fisheries and 

agriculture continue. USDA is partnering with NOAA, DOI and several other federal 

agencies to establish a National Soil Moisture Network with an emphasis on expansion 

into underserved regions and vulnerable populations. The framework would improve 

capabilities to monitor and plan for drought and support risk management strategies. 

Early collaboration to identify existing soil moisture networks, gaps and data 

compatibility is in progress. New approaches and resources to expand and fill network 

gaps will be needed to implement a strong framework for future drought monitoring. 

The USDA will focus ongoing efforts in improving climate adaptation and resilience on a 

number of current investments. Currently USDA supports climate adaptation and resilience in 

multiple initiatives in the areas of Energy Management and Greenhouse Gas (GHG), Sustainable 

Buildings, Sustainable Locations, Fleet Management, Sustainable Procurement and BioPreferred Products. Many of these initiatives are also detailed in Section IV.

Section 5(a)(iv) - a description of how the agency will consider the need to improve climate 

adaptation and resilience, including the costs and benefits of such improvement, with respect to 

agency suppliers, supply chain, real property investments, and capital equipment purchases such as 

updating agency policies for leasing, building upgrades, relocation of existing facilities and 

equipment, and construction of new facilities; 

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 24
Energy and Greenhouse Gas (GHG)Management

Energy: The Department is increasingly investing in energy and water efficiency, net zero 

energy facilities, and renewable energy projects. USDA is transitioning from traditional sources 

of electrical energy generation to those originating from agricultural products and other 

renewable sources. In each new construction and major renovation project, USDA validates the 

building’s performance as 30 percent more energy efficient than the industry standard. For 

energy-efficiency and water conservation projects, the Department is developing guidelines to 

incorporate design review into new construction and major renovation projects. From 2009 to 

2012, USDA investments assisting thousands of rural small business, farmers and ranchers have 

resulted in more than 6600 projects to install renewable energy systems and energy efficiency 

solutions and saved enough energy to power more than 680,000 homes annually. Additionally, 

USDA has initiated a $250 million loan program to assist rural utilities in financing energy 

efficiency and renewable generation. Projects are slated to generate more than 5.1 Megawatts of 

on-site renewable energy for multifamily properties. 

GHGs: In 2014, USDA has developed a comprehensive report on science-based methods for 

estimating greenhouse gas fluxes related to local agriculture and forest management. From 2010 

to 2012, annual greenhouse gas mitigation benefits associated with USDA conservation 

programs totaled more than 11 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent. USDA participates in an 

Interagency Methane Strategy to develop a measurement approach and entered into a partnership 

with the Innovation Dairy Center to voluntarily reduce the industry’s methane emissions. Under 

PCAP, USDA and the dairy industry are working to develop a Biogas Roadmap to broaden 

greenhouse gas reductions incentives. USDA continues to issue updated USDA National 

Greenhouse Gas Inventory Reports to track changes in emissions and carbon sequestration in the 

US agricultural and forestry sectors. The next edition is due for release in October, 2014.

USDA Sustainable Buildings and Sustainable Location Policies 

USDA measures sustainability in new construction and major renovations through third party 

certification systems such as LEED and Green Globes. In FY13, the Department increased its 

quantity of sustainable existing buildings to eleven percent of those larger than 5,000 gross 

square feet, using energy, water, and natural resources conservation criteria and plans to assess 

additional existing buildings in the future. USDA guidelines for new office sites include access 

to public transit, use existing transportation infrastructure, reduce parking demand, and avoid 

developing agricultural or other green space. USDA plans to initiate a policy consistent with the 

“Sustainable Locations for Federal Facilities,” to strive to select sites in diverse and 

economically stratified communities served by mass transit, consistent with mission 

accomplishment requirements. In the future, USDA plans to continue climate adaptation and 

resilience practices. In order to prepare for natural hazards events such as storms, earthquakes, 

and wildfires, the Department will incorporate federal guidance on structural integrity and on 

coastal and floodplain locations.

USDA Fleet Management

The USDA Fleet Management program, in operating slightly over 40,000 vehicles nationwide, is

taking action with respect to alternative fuel use and consumption levels, as well as fleet 

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 25
composition. The Department currently is reducing FY13 annual petroleum use by over 2 

million gallon equivalents, and surpassing the FY13 target to increase annual alternative fuel by 

1.2 million gallon equivalents. To facilitate this shift, USDA is implementing a close-loop fleet 

charge card program to better track and monitor vehicle alternative fuel use. In the future, 

USDA plans to promote GHG emission reduction by alerting drivers to E85 locations for 

fueling, revising current fleet card policy. The Department continues to reduce the number of 

conventional fuel vehicles and to increase the percentage of low greenhouse gas-emission subcompact and compact sedans and mid-size SUVs to reduce atmospheric emissions.

USDA Bio-Preferred Products and Sustainable Procurement 

USDA’s Bio-Preferred program designates industrial products made from sustainable, renewable 

feed stocks like corn, vegetable oils, and other agricultural commodities, forest, and marine 

resources, for preferred federal procurement to leverage the purchasing power of the Federal 

Government for finished products like, paints, coatings, dyes, inks, cleaners, lubricants, and bioplastic. These bio-based products may replace products derived from petroleum. Some 97 

categories, representing over 10,000 individual products, are designated. To date, the BioPreferred program has issued over 1,600 voluntary USDA Certified Product labels to help create 

consumer demand for bio-based products. Labels indicate the amount of new carbon each 

product contains. For the agency supply chain, USDA is reducing GHG emissions by procuring 

EPEAT (Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool9) equipment and specifying Energy 

Star and FEMP (Federal Energy Management Program10) equipment and appliances in buildings.

USDA contributes to and participates in many interagency efforts related to climate preparedness 

and resilience. USDA sub-agencies contribute extensively to many collaborative efforts, some 

of which are also described below.

USDA Interagency Efforts

USDA Regional Climate Hubs – USDA is coordinating closely with both the Department of 

Interior (DOI) Climate Science Centers (CSCs) and Landscape Conservation Cooperatives 

(LCCs), and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Regional Integrated 

Sciences and Assessments Program (RISAs) and Regional Climate Centers (RCCs); Native 

Nations and organizations, and a broad network of state and local departments of the 

environment and agriculture, university partners, and non-governmental organizations. FS hosts 

five and ARS hosts two of the seven USDA regional hubs recently established. These provide 

outreach and information to producers (farmers, ranchers, and forest land owners) on ways to 

mitigate risks; public education about the risks climate change poses to agriculture, ranchlands 

9 EPEAT is a method for consumers to evaluate the effect of a product on the environment.

10 FEMP helps federal purchasers comply with requirements by identifying energy- and water-efficient products. 

Section 5(a)(v) - a description of how the agency will contribute to coordinated interagency 

efforts to support climate preparedness and resilience at all levels of government, including 

collaborative work across agencies’ regional offices and hubs, and through coordinated 

development of information, data, and tools, consistent with section 4 of this order; 

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 26

 
and forests; regional climate risk and vulnerability assessments; and centers of climate forecast 

data and information.

Council on Climate Preparedness and Resilience – This interagency Council, established by EO 

13653 is co-chaired by the Chair of Council of Environmental Quality, the Director of Office of 

Science Technology Policy and the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and 

Counterterrorism. Senior officials from various White House offices including the USDA are 

members. The Council works across agencies and officesin partnership with the newly 

established State, Local, and Tribal Leaders Task Force on Climate Preparedness and Resilience, 

to coordinate and expand the Federal Government’s work to support communities in building 

climate change preparedness.

US Global Change Research Program – USDA and its agencies play an important role in federal 

climate change research, mitigation and adaptation activities. USDA is one of the 13 federal 

departments and agencies comprising the US Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) 

mandated by Congress in the Global Change Research Act (GCRA) of 1990. The USGCRP was 

tasked with improving the understanding of uncertainties in climate science research, expanding 

global observing systems, developing science-based resources to support policymaking and resource 

management and communicating findings broadly among scientific and stakeholder communities. 

USDA agency research scientists and program managers participate by serving on a variety of 

interagency working groups and strategic planning and program report committees to promote 

cooperative and collaborative research among federal agencies and their stakeholders. The USGCRP 

recently restructured and is re-evaluating the types of working groups and their charges. USDA is 

playing an active role in the new strategy and structure. The USGCRP provides an annual report 

entitled Our Changing Planet as a supplement to the President’s Budget. Relevant USDA research 

activities and plans are included in these annual reports.

National Climate Assessment – The GCRA also requires that USGCRP agencies produce periodic 

(not less than every four years) National Climate Assessments (NCA) that integrate, evaluate, and 

interpret findings of the USGCRP and discuss associated uncertainties. The assessments also provide 

analysis of the effects of global change on the natural environment, agriculture, energy production 

and use, land and water resources, transportation, human health and welfare, human social systems, 

and biological diversity. Finally, the assessments analyze current trends in global change, both 

human-induced and natural, and project major trends for the subsequent 25 to 100 years. USDA 

scientists led in organizing and writing several technical reports for the 2013 NCA: Climate Change 

and Agriculture in the US: Effects and Adaptation (USDA Technical Bulletin 1935, November 

2012); Effects of Climatic Variability and Change on Forest Ecosystems: A Comprehensive Science 

Synthesis for the US Forest Sector (USDA General Technical Report PNW-GTR-870, December 

2012); Biogenic greenhouse gases in North American terrestrial ecosystems (Frontiers in Ecology 

and Environment, Special Issue n. 10, v. 10, December 2012) and supported the process through 

participation in the Interagency National Climate Assessment Task Force and the National Climate 

Assessment and Development Advisory Committee. A NCA process broadly supporting the 

benefits of reframing the NCA as a sustained function of the Federal Government is in progress. 

The first USDA-supported technical report in progress for this interim period is entitled Global 

Climate Change, Food Security, and the U.S. Food System.

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 27
National Fish, Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy (NFWPCAS) Implementation

Team – This team, managed by DOI-US Fish and Wildlife Service, NOAA, and the Association 

of Fish and Wildlife Agencies is composed of federal natural resource agencies, State, and local 

agencies and Tribal representatives and tasked with implementing the NFWPCAS Strategy. The 

Strategy was developed through a similar partnership of federal, state, and local entities in 

response to a Congressional request to coordinate a nationwide fish, wildlife and plant climate 

adaptation plan. USDA APHIS, FS, FSA, and NRCS Sub-Agencies participated in the original 

strategy published in 2012. FS is the primary USDA Sub-Agency for the Implementation Team 

with input from FSA, APHIS, and NRCS. Provisions in the proposed Senate bill titled 

Safeguarding America’s Future and Environment (SAFE) Act (S.1202) have been introduced in 

part to support long-term activities associated with this effort.

USDA and NOAA Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) – the umbrella MOU is focused on 

improving cooperation to advance climate services and delivery to agriculture, forestry, and 

other environmental resource areas. Subsidiary Agreements (SAs) are providing frameworks for 

specific projects of mutual interest. A National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS) 

Subsidiary Agreement has been initiated to establish a framework to cooperate on improving 

capabilities to monitor and plan for drought and support risk management strategies with respect 

to agriculture. Deliverables, at least 4 of which directly respond to the President’s Climate 

Action Plan, include: 

• Improved access to data and products allowing greater exposure and access of NOAA products

 while potentially lowering costs for those agencies already obtaining data;

• Coordination of research to focus USDA’s drought research activities 

• More products to support US Drought Monitor (used as a trigger for USDA programs);

• Improved public outreach through release of information using Drought.gov;

• Integration of new USDA Regional Climate Hubs in existing programs;

• Input into the development of forecast products to improve utility to agriculture and

• Establishment of a National Soil Moisture Monitoring Network 

USDA Agricultural Air Quality Task Force (AAQTF) - This task force was established in 

accordance with Section 391 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform (FAIR) Act of 

1996 to better coordinate air quality activities and resources among USDA sub-agencies and 

other federal partners particularly the Environmental Protection Agency. The AAQTF chaired 

by NRCS, comprised of USDA employees, industry representatives, and other experts in the 

fields of agriculture and air quality, advises the Secretary on matters related to agricultural air 

quality, promotes USDA research efforts and identifies cost-effective ways the agricultural 

industry can improve air quality. 

Joint Fire Science Program (JFSP) - Provides research tailored to the needs of fire and fuel 

managers and develops focused lines of research responsive to those needs. The focus is on 

science delivery with a suite of communication tools to ensure that managers are aware of, 

understand, and can use the information to make sound decisions and implement projects. This 

Program is tailored to wild land fire research in response to the emerging needs of policymakers 

and fire managers. More than 90 colleges and universities have also collaborated on and 

partnered with JFSP-sponsored research projects. This collaboration extends to private, nonUS Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 28
profit organizations and tribal, state, county, and local governments as well. In all, nearly 200 

organizations have become partners in JFSP-sponsored research.

National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC) - The NIFC, located in Boise, Idaho, is the nation's 

support center for wild land firefighting. Eight different agencies and organizations are part of 

NIFC. Decisions are made using the interagency cooperation concept because NIFC has no 

single director or manager. The eight partner agencies are USDA-Forest Service, Department of 

Interior (DOI) Bureau of Land Management (BLM), National Weather Service, DOI-National 

Park Service, DOI-Bureau of Indian Affairs, DOI-US Fish and Wildlife Service, National 

Business Center, U S Fire Administration-FEMA, and National Association of State Foresters. 

Thirteen cooperating institutions including the American Red Cross and National Volunteer Fire 

Council are also members.

III. Providing Information, Data, and Tools for Climate Change Preparedness and 

Resilience (EO 13653 Section 4)

a) Supported by USGCRP, and in support of federal, regional, state, local, tribal, private-sector 

and nonprofit-sector efforts to prepare for the impacts of climate change, USDA “shall work 

together to develop and provide authoritative, easily accessible, usable, and timely data, 

information, and decision-support tools on climate preparedness and resilience.” A partial 

listing of USDA accomplishments and ongoing activities in support of preparedness and 

resilience are: 

Type of Information USDA Sub-Agencies11 Description

Decision Support Tools ARS, FS, NRCS, RD (RUS), 

RMA

COMET-Farm – Whole-farm greenhouse gas and 

carbon sequestration assessment 

http://cometfarm.nrel.colostate.edu/ ; NTT - 

Nutrient Tracking Tool for field-scale nutrient 

and sediment runoff

http://nn.tarleton.edu/NTTWebARS/ ; PRISM 

climate mapping system and web portal ; Cover 

Crop Termination and Zones – regionally 

appropriate cover crop management using local 

climate and cropping systems; Plant Hardiness 

Zone Map (also state and regional maps 

http://planthardiness.ars.usda.gov/PHZMWeb/ ; 

RUS program Energy Tool for energy efficiency 

programs

Conservation Education Courses FS, NRCS Climate change-related introductory and 

advanced curricula to enhance environmental 

11 Agency and Sub-Agency abbreviations: ARS: Agricultural Research Service, CCPO: Climate Change Program 

Office, FS: Forest Service, NASS: National Agricultural Statistics Service, NRCS: Natural Resources Conservation 

Service ; RMS: Risk Management Agency

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 29

 
literacy for agencies and interested stakeholders

Plant Materials Centers NRCS Geographically placed Plant Materials Centers 

provide information on regionally-adapted plants

Climate Change Websites CCPO, FS, NRCS, ERS Central data and information portals linking 

climate change information; FS - Climate Change 

Resource Center: Web-based technical 

information for forestry professionals

Databases, Inventories and Monitoring 

Systems

FS, NASS, NRCS, ERS FS: FIA – Forest Inventory and Analysis; NASS: 

agricultural surveys and census ; FS: Forest and 

Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act 

(RPA) Assessments; NRCS: National Resources 

Inventory (NRI); NRCS: Soil and Water 

Resources Conservation Act Appraisal (RCA);

NRCS: Conservation Effects Assessment Project 

(CEAP); NRCS: PLANTS; NRCS: Rapid Carbon 

Assessment (RaCA); NRCS: Ecological Site 

Inventory; NRCS: Web Soil Survey – soil maps 

of the US and its territories; NRCS: Snow Survey 

and Water Supply Forecasting, SNOTEL –

automated snow survey network in western US,

SCAN – automated continuously monitoring soil 

moisture network throughout US concentrated in 

cropland areas;

USDA Greenhouse Gas Inventory ARS, CCPO Annual emissions reports available electronically 

and in hard copy

Greenhouse Gas Protocols CCPO, NRCS, FS Comprehensive review of the best available 

methods for estimating greenhouse gas 

agricultural emissions available electronically and 

hard copy

Greenhouse Mitigation Options/Costs CCPO Cost-benefit analysis of technologies and 

practices on US agricultural lands

USDA Regional Climate Hubs All USDA agencies Regional centers to provide outreach and 

education, regional climate risk and vulnerability 

assessments and centers for climate data and 

information

b) Agencies will work with CEQ and OSTP, overseers of a web-based portal on Data.gov to 

establish, identify, develop, and integrate data and tools relevant to climate issues and 

decision-making. Agencies will coordinate their work on these data and tools with relevant 

interagency councils and committees that support the implementation of Presidential Policy 

Directive 21 ( Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience) and EO 13642 (Making Open 

and Machine Readable the New Default for Government Information). USDA will lead the 

Food Resilience theme within the Climate Data Initiative (CDAT).

IV. Modernizing Federal Programs to Support Climate Resilient Investment (EO 13653 

Section 2)

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 30
To support the efforts of regions, States, local communities, and tribes, all agencies, consistent 

with their missions and in coordination with the Council on Climate Preparedness and Resilience 

that was established in Section 6 of the EO 13653 will: 

USDA Program or Action Barrier 

Identified/Removed

USDA 

SubAgency12Milestones

Energy Efficiency and Conservation Loan Program 

Update

Enhanced authority to make 

loans targeted to energy 

efficiency and renewable 

generation

RUS Final rule published;

Resources available to 

targeted end-user 

stakeholders; Loan 

program initiated

Vulnerability and Food Security ‘Global Climate Change, 

Food Security and the US 

Food System’ report

CCPO Report in preparation that 

examines effect of 

changing climate on global 

food security

Regional Hubs for Risk Adaptation and Mitigation Regional scaling of climaterelated needsREE, NRE,

CCPO, ARS, 

FS, NRCS, 

RD, RMA

7 Hubs announced; Work 

plans to establish enhanced 

interagency networking and 

collaboration in progress

FS Engineering and Watershed Program, Flood 

Response Guidance and team development

Updating national guidance 

for flood emergencies, 

recommendations for 

rebuilding infrastructure to 

be more flood-resilient

FS, NRCS, 

DOI-BLM, 

ACE, State

FS manual and handbooks 

updates, development of 

command procedures; 

implementation in response 

to flood emergencies

Rule 7 CFR 1970 Streamlined program 

administration and reissue 

Environmental Policy Rule 

CFR 1970 to address 

environmental impacts 

RD Proposed rule and

comments; Final rule 

publication 

Rural Energy for America Programs Single and multi-faming 

housing issues, new and 

RD Program rules, proposed 

and final to improve 

12 Agency and Sub-Agency abbreviations: ACE: Army Corps of Engineers, AMS: Agricultural Marketing Service, ARS: 

Agricultural Research Service, APHIS: Animal, Plant Health Inspection Service, CCPO: Climate Change Program 

Office, CEQ: Council on Environmental Quality, DOI-BLM: Department of Interior Bureau of Land Management, 

DOJ: Department of Justice, EPA: Environmental Protection Agency, ERS: Economic Research Service, FS: Forest 

Service, FAS: Foreign Agriculture Service, FSA: Farm Service Agency, FWS: DOI Fish and Wildlife Service) NASS: 

National Agricultural Statistics Service, NIFA: National Institute of Food and Agriculture, NOAA: National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration, NRCS: Natural Resources Conservation Service, NRE: Natural Resources and the 

Environment Mission Area, REE: Research, Education and Economics Mission Area; RD: Rural Development, RMA: 

Risk Management Agency

Section 2 (a)(i): identify and seek to remove or reform barriers that discourage investments or other 

actions to increase the Nation’s resilience to climate change while ensuring continued protection of

public health and the environment. (ii) reform policies and federal funding programs (iii) identify

opportunities to support and encourage climate-resilient investments (iv) report on their progress in

achieving actions identified in (i-iii) including milestones.

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 31
existing renewable energy, 

increased energy efficiency 

upgrades 

National Drought Resilience Partnership Technical support for 

drought challenges

Financial assistance 

enhancements in targeted 

regions with reduced water

NRE, OCE National Soil Moisture 

Network Plan; Form 

partnerships with 

emergency services at State 

and Federal levels; Action 

register within USDA

Climate Smart Agriculture Alliance Lack of international 

alliances on climate change

FAS/CCPO Initiating and signing 

charter

Next Generation Biofuels Few resources available for 

biofuel mass production 

RD Commercial quantities of 

advanced biofuels

R&D reducing production 

costs 

Ecological Restoration and Resilience Policy (FSM 

2020)

Provides foundation policy 

for sustainable management 

of FS lands

FS with other 

Federal land 

management 

agencies

Interim directives issued 

and reissued; Proposed 

directive published and 

finalized in 2014

USDA-FS Forest Planning Rule Directives (FSM 

1920 and FSH 1909.12)

Revise forest land 

management planning and 

policy procedures to include 

climate change in planning

rule

FS, CEQ, 

OMB, DOJ, 

EPA, FWS, 

NOAA 

Fisheries

Finish public comments; 

Number of land 

management plans revised 

under finalized rule when 

issued in 2014 

Interagency Methane Strategy Methane Emissions 

Reductions

CCPO, RD Bio-Gas Roadmap 

Initiative; Establish 

Methane Measurement 

Workgroup

Agricultural Act of 2014 (2014 Farm Bill) Technical assistance less 

than needed by agencies to 

assist client stakeholders 

Multiple Additional funding released 

for technical assistance at 

field level 

Reducing Emission from Deforestation and Forest 

Degradation (REDD)

More interaction with 

developing countries in 

international negotiations

CCPO, FS Technical assistance on 

carbon inventories and 

forests in developing 

countries

Reducing Wild Fire Risks No ‘National Risk Map’ for 

underserved and other 

stakeholders

FS Wild Fire Potential Map 

with values at risk

Voluntary Carbon Partnerships Few public-private 

Partnerships focused to 

augments USDA 

environmental markets

NRCS, FS, 

OEM

Pilot programs with 

partners, e.g. Conservation 

Innovation Grants to 

establish publicpartnerships 

Climate Data Initiative Stimulate innovation and 

private-sector involvement 

in climate change 

preparedness through open 

data and tools; vulnerability 

REE Virtual food resilience data 

portal and toolkit for new 

climate portal in Data.gov;

First cut will focus on 

identifying food production 

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 32
of food production and 

supply to climate and 

weather events

and supply data sets and 

tools. 

V. USDA Adaptation Actions Table 

This section is attached in a separate file. 

VI. USDA Individual Agency Climate Change Adaptation Plans 

In the next section, USDA Agencies have provided their Agency Climate Change Adaptation Plans. 

These agencies are: Agricultural Research Service (ARS), Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service (APHIS), Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS), Farm Service Agency (FSA), Forest Service 

(FS), Grain Inspection Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA), National Agricultural 

Statistics Service (NASS), National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA), Natural Resources 

Conservation Service (NRCS), Rural Development (RD), and Risk Management Agency (RMA). 

US Department of Agriculture

2014 Adaptation Plan Page 33
5/29/2014 USDA Adaptation Actions Table

V. USDA Adaptation Actions Table Highlights

1 Agency Abbreviations: USDA – US Department of Agriculture; ARS – Agricultural Research Service; APHIS – Animal Plant Health Inspection Service; CCPO – Climate Change Program Office; FSA – Farm Service Agency; FAS – Foreign 

Agricultural Service; FS – Forest Service; NRCS – Natural Resources Conservation Service; NRE – Natural Resources and Environment Area DOI - Department of Interior; FWS – Fish and Wildlife Service; NOAA – National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration; UACE – Army Corps of Engineers; EPA – Environmental Protection Agency; FEMA – Federal Emergency Management Agency; DOE – Department of Energy

Action Description Action Goal Agency 

Lead1

Risk/Opportunity 

Description Scale Timeframe Implementation Methods

Performance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination1

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/ 

Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishme

nts to Date

USDA Regional Climate 

Hubs

Technical 

support to 

deliver tools 

and strategies 

for climate 

change 

response; 

Regional 

assessments of

risk and 

vulnerability; 

Outreach and 

Education on 

science-based 

risk 

management

USDA with 

DOI and 

NOAA as 

primaries

Provide tighter coordination 

among USDA agencies to 

translate and deliver climate 

adaptation and resilience 

information to USDA partners 

and stakeholders

Regional Ongoing Established 7 

centers in the US 

working through 

established USDA 

facilities and 

programs. 

Development of 

Work Plans, 

prepare 

regional 

vulnerabilities, 

develop 

partnerships, 

establish web 

presence 

DOI Climate 

Science Centers 

and Landscape 

Conservation 

Cooperatives; 

NOAA RISAs; 

Cooperative 

Extension 

System; State 

Agricultural 

Experiment 

Stations 

Existing 

support from 

USDA SubAgencies and 

USDA. 

Budget 

limitations 

may slow pace 

of hub 

effectiveness

Need to 

develop 

scorecard 

guidance; 

integrate 

completely 

with partners at 

regional level; 

Limited 

resources

New action –

Hub announced 

in February 

2014. Websites 

activated. Work 

plans in 

development

National Climate Assessment 

(NCA)

Assemble 

science to 

inform policy

USDA Publication of scientific 

assessments and technical 

reports available on 

agriculture, forests, 

biogeochemistry, and food 

security

National 

and 

Regional

Ongoing 

sustained 

process

Assessments and 

distributed 

publications

Assessment 

publications

Federal, State and 

local entities

Periodic 

publication 

costs must be 

factored into 

Agency 

budgets

Continuing 

assessment 

process in 4 

years between 

NCA 

publications

USDAsupported NCA 

technical report 

on ‘Global 

Climate Change, 

Food Security 

and the US Food 

System FY 2014

1

 
5/29/2014 USDA Adaptation Actions Table

Global Research Alliance 

(GRA)

Collaboration 

to determine 

the role 

agriculture 

plays in 

mitigating 

GHGs through 

improved 

management 

practices

USDA-FAS, 

ARS, CCPO

Opportunity to participate 

globally with nations fully 

engaged in greenhouse gas 

emissions mitigation

International 

National 

Ongoing Regular meetings 

and workshops to 

ensure and update 

countries on 

research advances

Improved 

models, 

database 

access, 

management 

practices and 

technologies; 

enhanced 

science 

exchange 

through GRA 

Fellows 

program

US Leadership 

Team in 

coordination with 

appropriate 

international 

representatives

New resources 

made available 

for meetings 

and workshops 

will add 

momentum to 

the GRA

Research 

published to fill 

critical 

knowledge gaps 

in mitigating 

agricultural 

greenhouse gas 

emissions; FAS 

has delivered 25 

GRA Fellows 

from 10 

countries

Feed the Future (FtF) To increase 

the food 

security of 

partner 

countries to 

become more 

resilient to 

climate 

change 

impacts

USDA-FAS Opportunity to assess 

prevailing conditions, define 

priorities and align US 

resources to develop food and 

agricultural sectors of food 

insecure countries

FtF 

countries

Ongoing FAS priorities 

candidates eligible 

to participate in 

capacity-building 

and scientific 

exchange activities

Participation in 

FtF working 

groups with a 

target of 100% 

attendance; 

Increase 

percentage of 

FtF countries 

recruited for 

capacitybuilding 

fellowship and 

scientific 

exchange 

programs

USAID Bureau 

of Food Security 

leads interagency 

FtF working 

group

Climate change 

adaptation may 

not be the most 

pressing 

concern of FtF 

countries to 

strengthen their 

food security 

measures

FAS has 

attended 

Working Group 

meetings and 

engaged FtF 

countries on 

food security 

initiatives for 

climate change

Climate Smart Agriculture 

Alliance

Working 

toward launch 

of a voluntary 

International 

Climate Smart 

Alliance 

USDA-FAS, 

CCPO, FS

Opportunity for private-public 

partnership for smart 

agricultural practices in 

relation to climate change 

adaptation 

International Ongoing Statement of Intent 

to Work on 

Alliance; Informal 

land sector 

dialogue to discuss 

post 20-20 climate 

regimes linked to 

the CEQ 

adaptation process 

and the US 

National Forest 

Carbon project.

Completion of 

initial 

collaboration 

documents and 

securing 

signatories

State Department, 

Treasury, USAID, 

USDA, World 

Bank, 

Netherlands and 

South Africa

Negotiating 

terms of 

agreements

Announcement 

of Initiative; 

Charter 

development and 

high-level 

rollout planned 

for Fall 2014

2
5/29/2014 USDA Adaptation Actions Table

Implement National Fish, 

Wildlife, Plants, Climate 

Adaptation Strategy 

(NFWPCAS)

Federal lands 

that are more 

resilient and 

able to sustain 

functions and 

productivity

USDA-FS, 

APHIS, FSA 

and NRCS; 

DOI -

FWS;NOAA; 

Assoc. Fish 

Wildlife 

Agencies; 

Tribal nations 

Opportunity to improve 

efficiency and effectiveness of 

strategic actions aligned with 

NFWPCAS

National 2014 Review agency 

programs and 

strategic plans and 

NFWPCAS

Crosswalk 

established 

USDA-FS and 

other goals and 

strategic actions 

with 

NFWPCAS 

goals, strategies 

and actions

Joint 

Implementation 

Working Group 

(JIWG) of 

NFWPCAS 

composed of 

multiple federal, 

state and local 

jurisdictional 

entities

Effective 

integration 

among USDA 

Sub-agencies 

with federal 

land 

management 

missions and 

those with 

missions to 

assist private 

landowners

NFWPCAS 

published and 

JIWG 

established 

National Drought Resilience 

Partnership

Establish a 

framework to 

improve 

capabilities to 

monitor and 

plan for 

drought and 

support risk 

management 

strategies

USDA-NRE; 

OCE

Opportunity to collaborate on 

development and 

implementation of tools and 

products, improve 

accessibility and compatibility 

of sharing data, and establish 

a National Soil Moisture 

Network (NSMN) with 

emphasis on expansion into 

underserved regions and 

vulnerable populations

National Ongoing Identify existing 

soil moisture 

networks, gaps and 

data compatibility

Develop unified 

approach to 

NSMN

USDA, NOAA, 

DOI, UACE, 

FEMA, EPA and 

DOE

Data 

compatibility

Held workshop 

with principle 

federal agencies 

in Kansa City, 

MO. White 

paper in progress 

detailing next 

steps

3
5/29/2014 USDA Adaptation Actions Table

Climate Change and Tribal 

Projects

Learn and 

assist Tribes 

and other 

native peoples 

in managing 

natural 

resources in 

context of 

climate 

change

USDA-NRE; 

FS in Northern 

Stations 

coordinating; 

Expect USDA 

Hubs to 

increase 

coordination 

nationally

Opportunity to engage 

underserved and culturally 

diverse groups

National, 

Regional

Ongoing Plan and facilitate 

workshops, 

support networks 

developing studies 

that highlight 

particular local 

challenges or 

adaptation options 

Number of 

Tribal Nations 

and 

organizations 

engaged 

effectively

Collaboration 

with DOI-LCCs 

and CSCs

Highlights 

needs for 

funding to 

monitor with 

and for 

culturally 

diverse groups

USDA-FS works 

with over 80 

tribes and 20 

intertribal and 

native 

organizations. 

Active networks 

established in 

Pacific 

Northwest and 

Southwest US. 

More than 60 

tribal experts 

and students 

supported to 

attend climaterelated 

workshops and 

conferences.

4
VI. USDA Individual Agency Climate Change Adaptation Plans

1. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

2. Agricultural Research Service

3. Farm Service Agency

4. Foreign Agricultural Service 

5. Forest Service 

6. Grain Inspection Packers and Stockyards Administration

7. National Agricultural Statistics Service 

8. National Institute of Food and Agriculture 

9. Natural Resources Conservation Service 

10. Risk Management Agency 

11. Rural Development 
1

USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Climate Change Adaptation Plan 2014
2

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Climate Adaptation Plan

January 28, 2014

APHIS Vision Statement 

Advance the well-being of U.S. consumers by ensuring the health and availability of affordable food 

products and protecting forests and private working lands against devastating pests and diseases so that 

U.S. farmers, ranchers, and other citizens of our rural communities thrive and prosper.

APHIS Mission Statement

Protect the health and value of U.S. agricultural, natural, and other resources.

APHIS’ Strategic Goals

Goal 1: Support rural communities

• Objective 1.1 – Implement agricultural pest and disease management programs, including those 

affected in rural areas

• Objective 1.2 – Protect and promote animal welfare

Goal 2: Protect forests, rangelands, and private lands

• Objective 2.1 – Reduce threats to forests and private working lands

Goal 3: Expand opportunities to develop and trade safe agricultural products, including biotechnologyderived agricultural products

• Objective 3.1 – Enhance the regulatory framework that allows for the safe development of 

genetically engineered organisms

• Objective 3.2 – Facilitate safe agricultural trade through international standard setting and 

effective management of sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) issues

Goal 4: Minimize and prevent damage to the U.S. food supply caused by plant and animal pests and 

diseases

• Objective 4.1 – Monitor the health status of U.S. agricultural resources

• Objective 4.2 – Develop and implement programs to address plant and animal pests and diseases 

of concern

• Objective 4.3 – Provide diagnostics and technical support to enhance pest and disease programs, 

including emergency response capabilities for these pests and diseases.

APHIS’ strategic goals listed above, and APHIS’ approaches to climate change, are identified in the 

APHIS Strategic Plan FY 2010-20151

. APHIS recognizes that climate change presents a threat to its 

ability to advance its strategic goals. The strategic plan describes activities that acknowledge climate 

change factors and incorporate response and adaptation strategies. 

The APHIS Strategic Plan identifies climate change as a key external threat to its ability to meet its 

mission critical goals. Climate change will influence the level of risk to food security and human health 

associated with a suite of animal and plant diseases, invasive species, and agricultural pests. Changes in 

environmental conditions will increase the likelihood of shifts in the distribution and nature of current 

domestic diseases, invasive species, and agricultural pests. These changes will influence the dynamics of 

invasion and establishment of exotic diseases and agricultural pests. They will require that APHIS 

develop appropriate predictive risk and epidemiological models, domestic and offshore surveillance, and 

mitigation strategies to respond to changing climatic conditions that may affect disease and pest biology. 

Appropriate diagnostic tools and response strategies will afford APHIS’ ability to maintain situational 

1 http://www.aphis.usda.gov/about_aphis/downloads/APHIS_Strategic_Plan_2015.pdf

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

 
3

awareness to support regulatory responses and sound decision-making. Tools that have been developed 

or are in consideration for development are described in more detail in Appendix A.

APHIS, in coordination with other federal agencies and cooperators, monitors weather, pest trends, and 

pest outbreaks worldwide to develop pest exclusion activities whenever needed to enhance protection at 

air, land, and sea ports of entry, and inland areas where trade and other pathways expose the environment 

and agriculture to foreign pests and diseases. Empirical evidence has demonstrated that short term 

climate disruptions (e.g. drought, heat, and hurricanes) can strongly influence pest and disease incursion. 

These disruptions sometimes exacerbate pest pressure; however, pest pressure also can be minimized. 

Climate change is already starting to influence invasion biology, pest/disease epidemiology, and 

ecosystem dynamics, which can influence not only the likelihood of arrival, but also the potential for 

establishment and spread. Therefore, APHIS is developing analytic systems and predictive models to 

protect agriculture, natural resources, commerce, and trade. More information about these tools is 

available in Appendix A.

APHIS does not anticipate that climate change will require a modification of its regulatory authority; 

however, climate change will likely require new regulations and policies as well as innovative, nonregulatory approaches to address new or shifting pest and disease scenarios.

Planning for Climate Change Related Risk

Section 5(a) of Executive Order 13653 (the “EO”) states that “each agency shall develop or 

continue to develop, implement, and update comprehensive plans that integrate consideration of 

climate change into agency operations and overall mission objectives...” This plan is organized 

according to the structure of Section 5 of the EO. Information requested in other sections of the 

EO is also presented. Actions related to each of these sections are summarized in a series of 

tables in the Appendices.

5.a.i. Identification and assessment of climate change related impacts on and risks to the 

agency’s ability to accomplish its missions, operations, and programs

Vulnerability Assessment

Risks associated with changing climate include:

Food Distribution and Aid

• APHIS regulations prohibit the importation of agricultural and food products that pose

risk to plant, animal, and human health. Disaster relief (including food distribution) 

efforts associated with increased frequency of extreme weather events resulting from 

climate change will require enhanced coordination with other Federal, State, and local 

agencies to protect public and agricultural resources.

• Novel patterns in the distribution and movement of regulated agricultural products may

create new or increased risk for introduction of pests and diseases. APHIS will work

with Federal and State partners to enhance capacity to meet the challenges

encountered with export and import requirements related to food distribution and aid.

• The storage, deployment, and forward-staging of food aid materials may be 

compromised as climate change and associated extreme weather events hamper the 

distribution of aid, impacting its local availability and potentially increasing the risks of 

stored product pests (e.g., khapra beetle).

U.S. Agricultural Production and Trade

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
4

• Climate change and associated shifts in disease and pest prevalence may overwhelm

the current ability of off-shore programs to provide real-time information regarding

pest and disease potential and may increase risk to U.S. agriculture.

• Existing surveillance and diagnostic networks for animal and plant health diseases

(e.g., avian influenza, foot and mouth disease, citrus greening, Asian long-horned 

beetle, fruit flies, etc.) could be overwhelmed.

• Increased requirements for commodity and pathway risk analyses may overwhelm 

existing capacities.

Emergency Response Systems

• APHIS has established animal and plant health emergency frameworks to facilitate coordinated,

timely responses to disease and pest emergencies. APHIS also has established frameworks to

address all hazards (e.g., hurricanes, floods, wildfires) for impacts on plant and animal health 

and the needs of individuals with service animals and household pets, in addition to providing 

technical assistance for animal and agriculture emergency management. Climate change has the

potential to overwhelm existing frameworks as a result of increases in extreme weather events,

wildfires, and pest and disease outbreaks.

• In the event of wide-ranging climate disruption events, capacity could be

overwhelmed and assistance from other USDA and Department of Homeland 

Security (DHS) emergency response resources would be required. State, local, 

Tribal, industry, and other stakeholders with key roles in threat mitigation also may

be overwhelmed.

• Changes in pest and disease biology will require APHIS to ensure that its emergency

response strategies (including new pest and disease response guidelines) and

capabilities are updated and coordinated with the DHS National Response 

Framework.

Shifts in Geographic Distribution of Wildlife, Weeds, Pests, and Diseases

Climate change impacts on ecosystem and habitat characteristics will result in shifts of animal

and pest populations into new or expanded habitats. This movement can result in increased

spread of diseases (such as citrus greening) and other pests and increased encounters with

wildlife in populated areas potentially increasing disease transmission among wildlife,

livestock, and people. APHIS will direct and coordinate its surveillance, reporting, and

mitigation initiatives with Federal, State, and Tribal stakeholders to maintain human, animal,

and plant health. Partnering with others, such as the Department of Commerce’s National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration on the development of predictive models related to 

climate change would afford APHIS increased capacity to protect U.S. agriculture and natural 

resources while maintaining the flow of trade. Increased coordination and collaboration with

international partners developing predictive models will enhance APHIS’ ability to prepare for 

pest and disease incursions and other changes driven by climate change.

Increase in Demand for Genetically Engineered (GE) Crops and Related APHIS Services

APHIS expects an increase in the demand for GE crops that are modified to adapt to the

effects of climate change and a commensurate increase in the numbers of permit and

notification applications, risk assessments, field trials, inspections, compliance issues, and

petitions for deregulation, thereby increasing demands on APHIS resources.

• Adapting to climate change will likely require innovations in agricultural technology,

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
5

including the introduction of novel traits. These innovations may create the need to 

revise and update protocols and approaches to risk assessments.

• Response to pest and disease outbreaks may require the increased use of treatment 

combinations and could therefore increase the complexity of environmental and risk

analyses such as those required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

• The increased desire for genetically engineered plants to resist pests or pests

engineered to prevent the transmission of plant pathogens is expected to result in 

increased complexity of assessments.

The vulnerabilities listed above identify the climate change related impacts and associated risk 

that APHIS has determined may affect its ability to accomplish agency policies and programs and 

continue agency operations. To ensure that APHIS is best situated to handle these impacts and 

associated risks, APHIS is incorporating climate change modeling into risk assessments. To do 

so, pest and disease forecasting systems must be updated to shift from climatological-based 

forecasts (based on historical data) to systematically consider General Circulation Model outputs 

and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change scenarios. This shift requires development of 

enhanced capacity to establish links to these resources and maintain updated modeling 

approaches that best capture forecasts and associated uncertainty. In order to make these 

enhancements, as well as to achieve other climate-related objectives, APHIS is developing 

partnerships to leverage resources and minimize impacts of changing pest, disease, and vector 

distribution throughout the United States (see action items in Appendix A, Table 1). 

In addition to understanding pest risks associated with climate change, APHIS also is working to 

understand climate-related environmental risks from and to its own actions to control pests, 

diseases, and vectors. An APHIS team comprised of multiple program areas developed a general 

draft APHIS-wide introductory NEPA climate change guidance document that lays the foundation 

for the various analytical approaches that programs may employ. These approaches, along with 

illustrative examples, will be provided in a supplemental document (Appendix A, Table 1). 

To better understand risk and opportunities and thus be better able to plan for them, APHIS will:

• Adapt risk analysis models (both epidemiological and forecasting) to incorporate 

changes in the distribution of environmental and biological attributes predicted under

different climate change scenarios. APHIS will use the output from these models to 

prioritize the likelihood and severity of threats and to focus subsequent activities on 

specific high-likelihood, high-impact diseases, agricultural pests or pest categories2.

• Develop proposals in collaboration with other partners to adapt risk analysis models 

(both epidemiological and forecasting) to incorporate changes in the distribution of 

environmental and biological attributes predicted under different climate change 

scenarios3

.

2 This corresponds to the second element in USDA’s Climate Change Science Plan

(http://www.usda.gov/oce/climate_change/science_plan2010/USDA_CCSPlan_112910.pdf): “to develop knowledge, institutional models,

and tools to enable adaptation...”

3 This corresponds to the second and third element in USDA’s Climate Change Science Plan: “to develop knowledge and tools to ...”

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

 
6

5.a.ii. Description of programs, policies, and plans the agency has already put in place, as

well as additional actions the agency will take, to manage climate risks in the near 

term and build resilience in the short and long term.

Opportunities to minimize APHIS’ vulnerability include:

Predictive Modeling Important to Preparedness

Regulatory Strategies

• Develop regulatory strategies that focus on risk pathways in lieu of specific pests.

• Ensure that climate change adaptation is incorporated into the APHIS

decisionmaking framework.

• Ensure that regulatory considerations regarding adaptation approaches are consistent 

with the APHIS mission of safeguarding the health of plants, animals, and 

ecosystems and ensuring safe trade.

Leverage Resources

• APHIS will partner with Federal, State, local, and Tribal agencies, academic 

institutions, industries and other stakeholders to ensure a well-informed

understanding and coordinated response to climate change.

• APHIS will leverage its research capabilities and program and response resources to

enhance preparedness and the ability to mitigate and adapt to impacts related to 

climate change. The Agency will do so by adopting an infrastructure that enables

rapid modification of policy and standard operating procedures.

• APHIS will seek to leverage trading partners to harmonize efforts and ensure that 

sanitary and phytosanitary measures are consistent with the goals of adaptation to 

climate change and the APHIS mission.

Ensure Continuity of Operations

• APHIS will maintain a workforce that is resilient to weather and other climate 

change-related disruptions so that the work of the Agency can continue as 

seamlessly as possible.

• APHIS will employ flexible management policies to assist employees impacted by 

disasters related to climate change (e.g., floods, hurricanes, wildfires) so that they 

may return to work as quickly as possible. 

By using predictive modeling, assessing regulatory strategies, and leveraging resources, APHIS 

will mitigate the risks discovered during the vulnerability assessment. In addition, APHIS will 

examine its cooperative agreement process to ensure that it is responsive to increased demand to 

enter into agreements and partnerships associated with climate change.

Appendix A, Table 2 shows several of the programs, policies, and plans involving APHIS’ 

management of climate risks in the near-term and anticipated actions in the short and long term. 

One ongoing activity involves APHIS’ animal and plant health emergency response systems.

Emergency Response Systems

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
7

• As stated in APHIS’ 2012 Climate Change Adaptation Plan, the Agency has established

animal and plant health emergency frameworks to facilitate coordinated timely

responses to disease and pest emergencies. 

o In 2013, the Emergency Support Function #11 (ESF#11) Annex to the National 

Response Framework was revised and changed the scope of ESF#11 

activities. Particularly, ESF#11 now includes technical assistance for animal and 

agricultural emergency management. As the delegated national coordinator for 

ESF#11, APHIS works with multiple Federal Departments and Agencies, and nongovernmental organizations to coordinate Federal support for disasters exceeding the 

response capability and resources of the local, State, territorial, and Tribal governments.

o APHIS works with the National and Regional Response Teams under the National Oil 

and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP; 40 CFR 300) to support 

wildlife response for oil and hazardous substances releases.

o In 2013, APHIS completed training eight Type 3 Incident Management Teams to 

respond to animal and plant health emergencies. These Incident Management Teams 

may be activated, if available, to support all-hazard emergencies, including those related 

to climate change.

o APHIS has continuity plans to sustain Essential Functions in multiple geographic 

locations, during and after a catastrophic incident.

• As described in the section on vulnerabilities, wide-ranging climate disruption events could 

overwhelm capacity and assistance from other USDA and DHS emergency response resources 

would be required. State, local, Tribal, industry and other stakeholders with key roles in threat 

mitigation also may be overwhelmed. In response to this vulnerability, APHIS has several 

actions underway:

o APHIS is working with USDA and DHS to develop procedures for requesting support 

and coordinating activities for large-scale responses.

o As part of the development of incident-specific response annexes to the National 

Response Framework, APHIS is working with local, State, Tribal, and territorial 

governments, and non-governmental organizations to develop Food and Agriculture 

Incident specific annexes for each of the 10 Federal Emergency Management Agency 

Regions and at the national level.

o APHIS maintains continuity plans to ensure that when disruptions occur, APHIS 

maintains redundancies to continue to perform its missions in other non-impacted 

operational locations. APHIS is expanding its Continuity of Operations plans to address 

business continuity and property protection issues.

o APHIS has prepared for climate risks in the short and long term by 

implementing the USDA Telework Directive. Approximately 63 percent of 

APHIS employees have telework agreements in place, which allows for

continuity in operations even during inclement weather such as a snowstorm.

o For more severe weather outbreaks, such as Hurricane Sandy, APHIS developed 

a document outlining flexibilities available to employees that will allow them to 

maintain or return quickly to work productivity. During Hurricane Sandy, 

APHIS employed the use of the emergency leave transfer program. This 

program provided six employees with a total of 1,720 hours of donated leave to 

help them in the recovery process and maintain their expertise within the 

Agency. 

Natural disasters also present a risk to animals and their owners. In FY 13, APHIS published a 

final rule (now under review) requiring all dealers, exhibitors, intermediate handlers, carriers, 
8

research facilities, and other entities regulated by APHIS under the Animal Welfare Act to 

develop contingency plans for responding to and recovering from emergencies most likely to 

impact their facility and animals. APHIS also has co-sponsored exercises and training in animal 

disaster response and has developed best practices for animal emergency planning and response.

In addition to preparing for the impacts of climate change, APHIS also is examining its own 

actions that may contribute to climate change. APHIS uses methyl bromide to control regulated 

plant pests; however, methyl bromide, an ozone-depleting substance, is also considered to be a 

greenhouse gas. Research is now underway to find suitable alternatives to methyl bromide 

(Appendix A, Table 2). 

5.a.iii. A description of how any climate change related risk identified pursuant to paragraph 

(i) of this subsection that is deemed so significant that it impairs an agency’s statutory 

mission or operation will be addressed, including through the agency’s existing 

reporting requirements

APHIS has not identified any climate change risks that could potentially impair, obstruct, or 

prevent the success of agency mission activities, both in the near and long term. 

5.a.iv. A description of how the agency will consider the need to improve climate adaptation 

and resilience, including the costs and benefits of such improvement, with respect to 

agency suppliers, supply chain, real property investments, and capital equipment

purchases such as updating agency policies for leasing, building upgrades, relocation 

of existing facilities and equipment, and construction of new facilities

APHIS considered the need to improve climate change adaptation and resilience as it relates to 

procurement, acquisition, real property, and leasing decisions. During 2014, APHIS intends to achieve 

85% compliance in the procurement of Energy Star qualified computers through USDA blanket purchase 

agreements. In addition, APHIS will continue its work with USDA’s Office of the Chief Information 

Officer to consolidate data centers to ensure resource optimization. These actions will decrease the 

computing footprint and energy consumption. They will also improve resilience to increased power needs 

for heating and cooling in the face of climate change and reductions in power supply in the event of 

climate-related emergencies (Appendix A, Table 3).

5.a.v. A description of how the agency will contribute to coordinated interagency efforts to 

support climate preparedness and resilience at all levels of government, including 

collaborative work across agencies’ regional offices and hubs, and through 

coordinated development of information, data, and tools, consistent with section 4 of 

this order.

A program that will enhance climate change resiliency involves eliminating nutria and their 

destructive impacts to the Delmarva Peninsula. Nutria is an invasive exotic rodent that severely 

damages wetlands by destroying native vegetation. In its undisturbed state, this vegetation 

provides not only essential natural habitat, but also serves as natural infrastructure to protect this 

coastal region from storms and floods. APHIS Wildlife Services participates in the Chesapeake 

Bay Nutria Eradication Project, a partnership between the Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

(USFWS), Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Virginia Department of Inland Fisheries 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
9

and Wildlife, and Delaware Fish and Wildlife. Funding and administrative control is provided by 

the USFWS, and APHIS is responsible for development and implementation of the program with 

mission critical support from relevant State agencies and the voluntary cooperation of hundreds of 

private landowners throughout the area of impact. The partnership as a whole is responsible for 

oversight (Appendix A, Table 4). 

The goal of the project is to eliminate this invasive species to protect the remaining wetlands for 

the ecological and economic benefit of the human population and fish and wildlife resources. 

Nutria have impacted more than 250,000 acres and severely degraded the ecological value of tens 

of thousands of acres of emergent marsh. Coastal wetlands provide critical ecological functions 

that contribute to the region’s resiliency to climate change, particularly sea level rise and 

increased frequency and severity of coastal storms. Coastal wetlands dampen the effects of storm 

surges, reducing the inland impacts of storm driven flooding. They also help protect upland 

habitats, including forest and agricultural resources from saltwater intrusion.

Additional actions that support climate change resiliency include the development of continuity of 

operations protocols (see Section 5.a.ii for more information) and information technology 

protocols. Development of information technology protocols permits the use of interagency tools 

and data. These protocols will support climate change simulation systems and database support. 

APHIS completed the transition in 2013 from a single pest forecasting provider to an interagency 

approach formalized through a multi-institution cooperative agreement in 2014 (Appendix A, 

Table 4). 

Modernizing Federal Programs and Policies to Support Climate Resilient Investment

Section 2(a) of Executive Order 13653 states that Federal agencies shall address efforts to 

modernize federal programs and policies “(to) support the efforts of regions, States, local 

communities, and tribes,...consistent with their missions and in coordination with the Council on 

the Climate Preparedness and Resilience (Council) established in section 6 of this order...” that 

section also states that agencies shall “report on their progress in achieving the requirements 

identified above, including accomplished and planned milestones, in the Agency Adaptation Plans 

developed pursuant to section 5 of this order.”

i. Identify and seek to remove or reform barriers that discourage investments or other 

actions to increase the Nation’s resilience to climate change while ensuring continued 

protection of public health and the environment

APHIS has not identified any policies or programs that unintentionally discourage or disallow 

investments by external partners or grant recipients that would improve their preparedness for 

climate impacts. 

ii. Reform policies and federal funding programs that may, perhaps unintentionally, 

increase the vulnerability of natural or built systems, economic sectors, natural 

resources, or communities to climate change related risks

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
10

During 2014, APHIS will examine its cooperative agreement process to ensure that it is 

responsive to increased demand for collaboration and partnership with others on climate change 

issues. 

iii. Identify opportunities to support and encourage smarter, more climate-resilient 

investments by States, local communities, and tribes, including by providing 

incentives through agency guidance, grants, technical assistance, performance 

measures, safety considerations, and other programs.

APHIS has not pursued a process to identify opportunities that may support and encourage 

smarter, more climate-resilient investments by States, local communities, and Tribes. APHIS 

will, however, engage international, Federal, State, local, and Tribal partners as well as other 

stakeholders to gather relevant information to support decision-making and, where applicable and 

appropriate, to partner in program delivery. APHIS also will work with other State, Federal, and 

Tribal entities to ensure impacts associated with Agency actions in response to climate change 

provide for continued existence of other fish, wildlife, and plant communities consistent with the 

National Fish, Wildlife, and Plant Climate Adaptation Strategy (Appendix B, Table 1).

Sustained Adaptation Process

Priority Setting

APHIS will define program elements that can be strongly influenced by climate change by

establishing clear science- and programmatic-based criteria and evaluate the importance of the

information using an analytical process to evaluate the relative importance of the potential

impacts associated with climate change on APHIS’ ability to meet its mission.

Sources of Information

APHIS will review and apply information from federal agencies, international initiatives and

academic institutions with demonstrated expertise in climate change (predictive modeling, basic

and applied research on pest/disease biology, ecology and environmental impacts) and integrate

the relevant information into its Climate Adaptation Plan and program performance measures.

Performance Metrics

APHIS programs will identify performance metrics that demonstrate climate change adaptation

is integrated into each program’s policies, response plans, risk assessments, and environmental

analyses.

Methods APHIS will use to evaluate progress

APHIS Leadership will review program operational plans and policies to ensure that adaptation

to climate change is factored into our planning, implementation and evaluation of program

performance.

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Appendix A. Section 5(a) Planning for Climate Change Related Risk

i. Identification and assessment of climate change related impacts on and risks to the agency’s ability to accomplish its mission, operations and programs.

Table 1. Identification and Assessment of Climate Change Related Impacts and Risks

Action

Description Action Goal Agency Lead Risk/Opportunity

Description

Scale Timeframe Implementation

Methods

Performance

Metrics

InterGovernmenta

l 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/

Further

Implications

Accomplishment

Highlights

to Date

Incorporate 

climate 

change 

modeling into 

risk 

assessments

Develop 

process to 

determine 

when risk 

evaluation 

should 

incorporate 

effects due to 

climate change

VS Centers for 

Epidemiology 

and Animal 

Health

Risk reduction –

assure that the 

possibility of new 

risks to imported 

animals/animal 

products as a result 

of climate change 

are evaluated 

timely

National 

and 

Internati

onal

Ongoing Research, 

collaboration 

with other 

agencies/ 

countries and 

development of 

methods

Projects 

completed as 

forecasted

Need for 

funding 

anticipated

Availability of 

information

Initiated 

development of 

process to interact 

with select 

countries to 

determine if 

climate change is 

affecting risk of 

disease.

Identify 

specific pests, 

diseases, or 

vectors that 

are changing 

their 

distribution in 

the United 

States as a 

result of 

climate 

change

Develop 

partnerships to 

leverage 

resources and 

minimize 

impacts of 

changing pest, 

disease, and 

vector 

distribution on 

the health and 

value of U.S. 

agriculture, 

natural, and 

other resources

VS Centers for 

Epidemiology 

and Animal 

Health and WS 

National 

Wildlife 

Research 

Center

Risk mitigation –

assure that shifts in 

disease and vector 

occurrence are 

known so 

appropriate 

mitigation methods 

can be established

National 

and 

Internati

onal

Ongoing Identify specific 

diseases and 

information 

needed to assess 

and potential 

partners for 

collaboration

Adaptation of 

climate models 

for forecasting 

vector 

distribution on 

a temporal, 

landscape, and 

local scale

As needed Need for 

funding 

anticipated

Availability of 

information 

and resources 

to determine 

disease 

distribution

1) Historical 

prevalence of 

Bluetongue and 

Epizootic 

Hemorrhagic 

Disease in United 

States examined.

2) Collaboration 

with National 

Center for 

Atmospheric 

Research and 

APHIS WS to 

develop National 

Science 

Foundation grant 

proposal to predict 

redistribution of 

orbiviruses. 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Action

Description Action Goal Agency Lead Risk/Opportunity

Description

Scale Timeframe Implementation

Methods

Performance

Metrics

InterGovernmenta

l 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/

Further

Implications

Accomplishment

Highlights

to Date

3) Initiated 

collaboration with 

University of 

Calgary and 

University of 

Prince Edward 

Island on climate 

change related 

projects

Develop 

guidance on 

how to address 

impacts 

associated 

with climate 

change, 

including 

those on low 

income, 

minority and 

Tribal 

communities,

in 

environmental 

compliance 

documents

Develop an 

analytical 

framework to 

assess impacts 

associated with 

climate change 

for Agency 

actions subject 

to the National 

Environmental 

Policy Act, 

consistent with 

draft CEQ 

guidance. 

PPD 

Environmental 

and Risk 

Analysis 

Services

Climate change is 

expected to impact 

the systems that 

APHIS regulates 

(e.g., plant and 

animal pests and 

diseases), which in 

turn can impact the 

need and type of 

actions necessary. 

Because some pests 

(e.g., forest insects) 

can increase net 

carbon release, 

long term impacts 

of agency actions 

may result in a net 

decrease in carbon 

release, whereas 

actions to fight the 

pest (e.g., tree 

removal) may 

result in temporary 

and local increases 

in carbon release. 

APHIS Ongoing Percentage/

number of

Agency 

environmental 

compliance 

documents that 

address 

impacts of 

climate change

N/A Time and 

resource 

constraints

Developing a 

unified 

approach to 

climate change 

in 

environmental 

compliance 

documents 

despite 

diversity in 

nature of 

agency 

programs and 

corresponding 

actions.

Internal draft near 

completion

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
ii. Description of programs, policies and plans that the agency has put in place and additional actions that the agency will take to manage climate risks in the near-term and build resilience in 

the short and long term:

Table 2. Actions Taken to Manage Climate Risks in the Short Term and Build Resilience in the Long Term

Action

Description Action Goal Agency Lead Risk/Opportunity

Description

Scale Timeframe Implementation

Methods

Performance

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/

Further

Implications

Accomplishment

Highlights

to Date

Revision of the 

Emergency 

Support 

Function 

(ESF) #11 

Annex to the 

National 

Response 

Framework

To ensure 

that ESF#11 

activities 

include 

technical 

assistance for 

animal and 

agricultural 

emergency 

management 

that may be 

necessary 

following 

increased 

frequency or 

intensity of 

extreme 

weather and 

weatherrelated events 

(e.g., floods, 

hurricanes, 

fires).

MRPBS 

Emergency 

Management 

Safety and 

Security 

Division

National-

-multiple 

Federal 

Departm

ents and 

Agencies

, local, 

State, 

Tribal 

and 

territorial 

governm

ents and 

NGOs

Ongoing Revision to 

emergency 

response 

plans, and 

CONOPs 

(Concept of 

Operations)

ESF#11 Annex 

revised in May 

2013: Revised 

the Emergency 

Support Function 

#11 (ESF#11) 

Annex to the 

National 

Response 

Framework and 

changed the scope 

of ESF#11 

activities such that 

ESF#11 now 

includes technical 

assistance for 

animal and 

agricultural 

emergency 

management. 

Implementation is 

ongoing.

Developing 

Food and 

Agriculture 

Incident 

Annexes for 

each of the 

FEMA 

Regions and at 

the national 

Develop 

Food and 

Agriculture 

Incident 

specific 

annexes to 

the National 

Response 

Framework

MRPBS 

Emergency 

Management 

Safety and 

Security 

Division

APHIS, 

USDA, 

HHS, 

multiple 

Federal 

Departm

ents and 

Agencies

, local, 

Ongoing Completed 

Food and 

Agriculture

Incident 

Annexes

Beginning 

template with 

FEMA Region 

VII.

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Action

Description Action Goal Agency Lead Risk/Opportunity

Description

Scale Timeframe Implementation

Methods

Performance

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/

Further

Implications

Accomplishment

Highlights

to Date

level State, 

Tribal, 

territorial 

governm

ents, and 

NGOs

Train Type3 

Incident 

Management 

Teams to 

respond to 

animal and 

plant health 

emergencies.

These Incident 

Management 

Teams may be 

activated, if 

available, to 

support allhazard 

emergencies

Provide 

trained Type 

3 Incident 

Management 

Teams to 

respond to 

all-hazard 

emergencies, 

some of 

which will be 

associated 

with climaterelated 

extremeweather 

events. 

MRPBS 

Emergency 

Management 

Safety and 

Security 

Division 

Emergency 

Preparedness 

Branch

APHIS Ongoing Completed 

training 

consistent 

with National 

Incident 

Management 

System 

requirements

As of August 

2013, provided 

complete training 

for 8 Type 3 

Incident 

Management 

Teams to respond 

to animal and 

plant health 

emergencies.

On-going training 

is planned for 

team member 

replacement and 

refresher.

Develop, 

maintain and 

update 

continuity 

plans to 

include 

business 

continuity and 

property 

protection

Ongoing 

Development 

of Continuity 

plans to 

sustain 

Mission 

Essential 

Functions in 

multiple 

geographic 

locations, 

during, and 

after a 

catastrophic 

incident 

MRPBS 

Emergency 

Management 

Safety and 

Security 

Division 

Emergency 

Preparedness 

Branch

APHIS Ongoing Complete and 

signed plans; 

training, tests, 

and exercises 

for continuity 

personnel

Agency-level plan 

revised in 2013. 

HQ (NCR) Annex 

in preparation.

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Action

Description Action Goal Agency Lead Risk/Opportunity

Description

Scale Timeframe Implementation

Methods

Performance

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/

Further

Implications

Accomplishment

Highlights

to Date

(including 

climaterelated 

events)

Work with 

USDA and 

DHS to 

develop 

procedures for 

requesting 

support and 

coordinating 

activities for 

large-scale 

emergency 

responses.

Develop 

process to 

request 

support from 

USDA and/or 

the Federal 

community 

for largescale 

responses

MRPBS 

Emergency 

Management 

Safety and 

Security 

Division

APHIS, 

USDA, 

DHS

Ongoing Written 

process for 

requesting 

assistance

Initial meeting 

held with USDAOGC and with 

DHS-OCC.

Continue to 

implement and 

follow the 

USDA 

Telework 

Directive

MRPBS 

Human 

Resources 

Division

Widespread use of 

telework will allow 

the Agency to 

continue the work of 

the Government 

despite workplace 

interruptions 

resulting from 

climate change

Ongoing Telework 

implementati

on is 

widespread; 

work 

continues 

with little 

disruption in 

inclement 

weather 

situations

Cost of agencyprovided 

equipment/capa

bilities

More than 63 

percent of APHIS 

employees have 

telework 

agreements in 

place, which 

cover Ad Hoc 

telework used in 

emergency 

situations.

Deploy 

established 

flexibilities to 

support 

employees 

affected by 

designated 

To ensure 

that agency 

employees 

are able to 

receive 

administrativ

e leave and 

MRPBS 

Human 

Resources 

Division and 

Financial 

Management 

Division

Supervisors may 

grant 40 hours of 

administrative leave 

to employees 

affected by a 

designated disaster. 

Affected employees 

APHIS As needed Continued 

productively 

in spite of 

emergency 

situations 

faced by 

individual 

Temporary drop 

in productivity; 

increased 

workload on 

payroll, 

financial and 

HR personnel

In an effort to 

provide assistance 

to Agency 

employees 

affected by 

Hurricane Sandy, 

APHIS created an 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Action

Description Action Goal Agency Lead Risk/Opportunity

Description

Scale Timeframe Implementation

Methods

Performance

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/

Further

Implications

Accomplishment

Highlights

to Date

disasters; 

granting of 

administrative 

leave; up to 30 

days advanced 

pay using 

flexible 

payment 

options; emer

gency leave 

transfer 

program to 

receive 

donated annual 

leave from 

other Federal 

employees; 

subsistence 

payments for 

relocation 

following 

disaster-related 

evacuation

pay when 

affected by 

natural 

disasters –

will improve 

employee 

retention and 

continuity of 

operations to 

ensure 

achievement 

of agency 

mission.

whose particular 

situation requires 

more recovery time 

may request an 

additional 40 hours 

of administrative 

leave, for a total of 

up to 80 hours.

employees emergency 

response 

document that 

outlines the 

various 

flexibilities 

available to its 

employees in an 

emergency that 

will help them 

maintain or return 

quickly to 

productivity. 

During Sandy, 

APHIS employed 

use of the 

Emergency Leave 

Transfer Program 

and provided 

employees with 

donated leave to 

help them with 

the recovery 

process. 

Joint 

development 

efforts with 

USGS’ FORT 

labs to 

integrate state 

of the art 

epidemiologica

l models into 

APHIS 

operations

Coordinate 

the 

development 

of 

epidemiologi

cal 

forecasting 

tools for plant 

pests and 

diseases

PPQ Center 

for Plant 

Health Science 

and 

Technology

APHISUSGS Adaptation of 

VIS-TRAILS 

and Software 

for Assisted 

Habitat 

Modeling 

(SAHM) 

simulation 

environments

The VIS-TRAILS 

and SAHM suite 

of simulation 

environments was 

identified as a 

partial alternative 

to current efforts. 

A new, integrated 

framework has 

been developed 

and data sharing 

needs identified

Conduct PPQ Science Increasing APHIS Research is 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Action

Description Action Goal Agency Lead Risk/Opportunity

Description

Scale Timeframe Implementation

Methods

Performance

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/

Further

Implications

Accomplishment

Highlights

to Date

research to 

develop and 

introduce 

alternatives to 

methyl 

bromide as a 

treatment 

against various 

regulated plant 

pests.

and 

Technology

regulatory pressure 

from Montreal 

protocol, EPA, and 

USDA to further 

reduce use of QPS 

methyl bromide (an 

ozone-depleting 

substance 

considered to be a 

greenhouse gas).

funded in PPQScience and 

Technology to 

develop 

alternatives to 

methyl bromide 

Provision of 

regulatory and 

non-regulatory 

support for 

emergency 

preparation to 

improve 

animal 

welfare. 

Specifically, 

publication of 

regulation to 

require entities 

regulated by 

APHIS under 

the Animal 

Welfare Act to 

prepare 

contingency 

plans for the 

care of their 

animals in the 

event of an 

emergency. 

Also, 

development 

To better 

prepare 

businesses 

(where 

animals are 

integral to 

that business) 

and pet 

owners to 

respond to 

disaster in 

order to 

reduce the 

burden on 

local, State, 

and Federal 

response 

personnel; to 

protect public 

health by 

safely 

evacuating or 

sheltering 

dangerous 

animals; and 

to support 

Animal Care Natural disasters 

present a risk to 

animals and their 

owners 

National 

–

Emergen

cy 

response 

is led by 

FEMA 

but 

involving 

other 

Federal, 

State and

local 

agencies 

and nongovernm

ental 

organizat

ions and 

businesse

s 

Ongoing Federal level 

horizontal 

coordination 

among USDA, 

HHS, FEMA, 

DHA, and other 

Agencies 

responsible for 

animal issues 

during 

disaster. Vertic

al coordination 

is needed to 

integrate the 

efforts of 

Federal, State, 

and local 

government 

with the efforts 

of NGOs, 

businesses, and 

pet 

owners. Presid

ential Policy 

Directive #8 

calls for this 

Appropriated 

funds for 

disaster 

planning and 

response are 

directed to 

FEMA.

1)In FY13, 

APHIS Animal 

Care published a 

final rule 

requiring all 

dealers, 

exhibitors, 

intermediate 

handlers, carriers, 

research facilities 

and other entities 

regulated by the 

agency under the 

Animal Welfare 

Act to develop 

contingency plans 

for responding to 

and recovering 

from emergencies 

most likely to 

impact their 

facility and 

animals, as well 

as train their 

employees on 

those plans. This 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Action

Description Action Goal Agency Lead Risk/Opportunity

Description

Scale Timeframe Implementation

Methods

Performance

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/

Further

Implications

Accomplishment

Highlights

to Date

of best 

practices for 

animal 

emergency 

planning and 

response and 

provision of 

training 

exercises in 

animal disaster 

response.

business 

continuity by 

helping 

owners and 

managers to 

be prepared. 

level of 

integration. 

The FEMA 

National 

Response Plan, 

Emergency 

Support 

Function #11 

provides the 

framework for 

this integration.

regulation is 

currently under 

review. 

2) APHIS 

coordinated the 

development of 

best practice 

documents for 

animal emergency 

planning and 

response and cosponsored 

exercises in 

animal disaster 

response.

iv. Description of how the agency will consider the need to improve climate change adaptation and resilience, including costs and benefits, regarding suppliers, supply chains, real property 

and capital equipment

Table 3. Actions Taken to Improve Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience as it relates to Procurement and Acquisition

Action

Description

Action

Goal

Agency

Lead

 Risk/Opportunity

Description

 Scale Timeframe Implementation

Methods

Performance

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/

Further

Implications

Accomplishment

Highlights

to Date

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Action

Description

Action

Goal

Agency

Lead

 Risk/Opportunity

Description

 Scale Timeframe Implementation

Methods

Performance

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/

Further

Implications

Accomplishment

Highlights

to Date

Ensure 

acquisition 

of Electronic 

Product 

Environment

al 

Assessment 

Tool 

(EPEAT) 

registered 

and 100% 

Energy Star 

qualified 

Federal 

Energy 

Management 

Program 

designated 

electronic 

products

APHIS 

will 

purchase 

Energy 

Star 

computer

s thru 

USDA 

blanket 

purchase 

agreeme

nts. The 

same 

blanket 

purchase 

agreeme

nts have 

EPEATonly 

imaging 

equipme

nt

APHIS 

MRPBS 

Informatio

n 

Technolog

y Division 

and 

Administra

tive 

Services 

Division

Interagency CY 2014 Achieve 85% 

compliance in 

the 

procurement 

of these 

technologies

Consolidatio

n of APHIS 

data centers

Ensure 

APHISwide 

resource 

optimizat

ion, 

including 

data and 

systems. 

Decrease 

computin

g 

footprint 

and 

energy 

APHIS 

MRPBS 

Informatio

n 

Technolog

y Division

APHIS/US

DA

CY 2014 Consolidate 

100% APHIS 

data centers 

at the NITC 

and the 100 

% of update 

backup and 

disaster 

recovery 

activities

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Action

Description

Action

Goal

Agency

Lead

 Risk/Opportunity

Description

 Scale Timeframe Implementation

Methods

Performance

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/

Further

Implications

Accomplishment

Highlights

to Date

consump

tion.

v. Description of how the agency will contribute to interagency efforts, including regional offices/hubs and coordinated development of information, data and tools:

Table 4. Climate Preparedness Interagency Efforts

Action

Description

Action

Goal

Agency

Lead

Risk/Opportunity

Description

 Scale Timeframe Implementation

Methods

Performance

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/

Further

Implications

Accomplishment

Highlights

to Date

Work 

towards

APHIS IT

protocols

that permit

the use of 

interagency

tools and

data

Coordinate 

with

APHIS IT

to establish

a

“developm

ent space” 

to test and

integrate 

state of the

art

simulation

systems

MRPBS 

Informatio

n 

Technolog

y Division 

and PPQ 

Center for 

Plant 

Health 

Science 

and 

Technolog

y

APHIS Review the 

strategy

white paper 

planned in 

CY 2012. 

Verify 

agency 

progress in 

the plan.

Protocols for

IT

interagency

communicatio

ns to support

climate

change 

simulation

systems and

database

support

Completed transition 

in 2013 from a single 

pest forecasting 

provider to an 

interagency approach 

formalized through a 

multi-institution 

cooperative 

agreement in 2014. 

IT protocols 

necessitate the 

development of a 

‘scientific computing 

environment’ due to 

regulatory security 

requirements. 

Strategy for this 

environment is 

expected in 2014. 

The 

Chesapeake 

Bay Nutria 

Eradication 

Project 

(CBNEP) 

aims to 

To 

eliminate 

this 

damaging 

invasive 

species in 

order to 

APHIS WS 

Nutria 

Program

Coastal wetlands 

provide critical 

ecological functions 

that contribute to the 

region’s resiliency to 

climate change, 

particularly sea level 

Regional at 

Federal and 

State 

levels.

Ongoing –

estimated 

completion 

2017

The CBNEP’s 

eradication 

strategy has 5 

phases:

1)Delimiting –

defining the 

geographic 

Phases 4 and 

5 of the

eradication 

campaign 

involve 

extensive 

population 

CBNEP is a 

partnership 

between APHIS 

WS, USFWS, 

Maryland 

Department of 

Natural 

To date project 

funding has 

been provided 

entirely through 

the USFWS 

Partners for 

Fish and 

Verifying 

eradication is 

the most 

challenging 

phase of 

eradication 

campaigns 

The eradication team 

discovered 

established nutria 

populations in 9 

major watersheds on 

the Delmarva 

Peninsula. As of 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Action

Description

Action

Goal

Agency

Lead

Risk/Opportunity

Description

 Scale Timeframe Implementation

Methods

Performance

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/

Further

Implications

Accomplishment

Highlights

to Date

eradicate the 

invasive 

nutria from 

the 

Delmarva 

Peninsula, 

thereby 

preventing 

further 

erosion of 

coastal 

wetlands. 

protect and 

preserve 

the 

remaining 

wetlands 

for the 

ecological 

and 

economic 

benefit of 

the 

Chesapeake 

Bay 

Region. 

rise and increased 

frequency and 

severity of coastal 

storms. Coastal 

wetlands dampen the 

effects of storm 

surges, reducing the 

inland impacts of 

storm driven 

flooding. They also 

help protect upland 

habitats, including 

forest and agricultural 

resources from 

saltwater intrusion.

extent of nutria; 

2)Knock-down -

rapid reduction 

of established 

populations to 

near-zero 

densities;

3)Mop-up –

rapid removal of 

colonizing nutria 

that either 

escaped knockdown or 

immigrated; 

4)Verification.-

confirming 

eradication has 

been achieved 

and that 

colonizing nutria 

are quickly 

detected;

5) Surveillanceensuring that 

nutria-free areas 

are maintained.

monitoring 

using 

observer 

based 

surveys, 

device based 

detection 

strategies, 

and detection 

dog surveys 

to determine 

presence/abse

nce of nutria.

Resources, 

Virginia 

Department of 

Inland Fisheries 

and Wildlife, and 

Delaware Fish 

and Wildlife. 

Funding and 

administrative 

control is 

provided by the 

USFWS and 

APHIS WS is 

responsible for 

development and 

implementation 

of the program 

with mission 

critical support 

from relevant 

state agencies 

and the voluntary 

cooperation of 

hundreds of 

private 

landowners 

throughout the 

area of impact.

Wildlife 

Program and 

National 

Wildlife Refuge 

System. Budget 

cuts resulting 

from the 

sequester have 

reduced the 

funding 

available to 

transfer to WS 

in 2013 and 

additional cuts, 

up to $150,000 

are possible in 

FY 2014. 

Maintaining the 

current WS 

work force and 

operational

costs will 

require an 

infusion of 

funds from 

alternate 

sources to 

compensate for 

any cuts to the 

USFWS budget.

because of: 1. 

withdrawal of 

institutional 

and financial 

support as the 

problem is no 

longer so 

apparent; 2. 

The increased 

effort 

required to 

detect the rare 

survivors of 

knockdown; 

3. 

Maintaining a 

skilled work 

force as the 

project nears 

completion 

January 2014, 8 of the 

nine have been 

depopulated and the 

ninth is scheduled for 

depopulation in 2014. 

Recovery of damaged 

marsh has been 

documented by 

research partners with 

the U.S. Geological 

Survey.

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Appendix B. Section 2(a) Modernizing Federal Programs and Policies to Support Climate Resilient Investment

iii. Identify opportunities to support and encourage (via funding programs, guidance, etc.) more climate-resilient investments by States, local communities, and Tribes.

Table 1. Opportunities to Support and Encourage Climate-Resilient Investments by States, Tribes, and local communities.

Action

Description

Action

Goal

Agency

Lead

Risk/Opportunity

Description

Scale Timeframe Implementation

Methods

Performance

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/

Further

Implications

Accomplishment

Highlights

to Date

Examine the 

cooperative 

agreement 

process to 

ensure that 

APHIS is 

responsive to 

increased 

demand for 

collaboration 

and 

partnerships 

with others 

on climate 

change 

issues.

MRPBS 

Financial 

Managem

ent 

Division

APHIS CY2014 Agency 

cooperative 

agreements 

documentatio

n addresses 

climate 

change

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
USDA Agricultural Research Service

Climate Change Adaptation Plan 2014

 23
USDA Agricultural Research Service

Climate Change Adaptation Planning Document

May 2014

Contact: Sally Schneider, Ph.D., Deputy Administrator, Natural Resources and Sustainable 

Agricultural Systems, 301-504- 7987

This plan has been prepared in accordance with Executive Order (E.O.) 13653, 

requiring all federal agencies to integrate climate change considerations into Agency 

operations and overall mission objectives. The Agricultural Research Service (ARS) 

prepared a climate change plan in response to EO 13514 and it was published with 

the June 2012 USDA Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan. Updating and 

building upon that plan, ARS has prepared this Climate Change Adaptation Plan that 

addresses how it is integrating climate change into its programs, policies, and 

operations. 

ARS Policy: ARS is committed to mitigating its impact on climate change, 

responsibly adapting to the impacts of climate change on the Agency, and responding 

programmatically to the need for research and information on the challenges of 

climate change as they affect its mission areas. 

ARS Vision: To lead America towards a better future through agricultural research 

and information.

ARS Mission: ARS conducts research to develop and transfer solutions of

agricultural problems of high national priority and provide information access and 

dissemination to: 

• ensure high-quality, safe food, and other agricultural products 

• assess the nutritional needs of Americans 

• sustain a competitive agricultural economy 

• enhance the natural resource base and the environment, and 

• provide economic opportunities for rural citizens, communities, and society as 

a whole.

ARS Goals and Strategic Approaches: ARS is the U.S. Department of Agriculture's

(USDA) chief in-house research agency. It is one of the four component agencies of 

the Research, Education, and Economics (REE) mission area. Congress first 

authorized Federally-supported agricultural research in the Organic Act of 1862, 

which established what is now USDA. That statute directed the Commissioner of 

Agriculture "... To acquire and preserve in his Department all information he can 

obtain by means of books and correspondence, and by practical and scientific 

experiments,..." The scope of USDA's agricultural research programs has been 

expanded and extended many times since the Department was first created. Today 

ARS has a workforce of approximately 6,200 employees including 2,200 scientists 

 24
and post docs representing a wide range of disciplines. ARS has 800 research projects 

working at 90+ locations, including overseas labs.

To achieve its mission, the agency identifies critical problems affecting American 

agriculture, plans and executes the strategies needed to address these problems by: 

mobilizing resources (both human and financial); fostering multi-disciplinary 

research; linking research to program and policy objectives; and communicating and 

interacting with customers, stakeholders, partners, and beneficiaries to insure program 

relevancy. Currently, ARS research is organized into 18 National Programs that 

provide a coordinating structure that ensures the most important research is conducted 

with minimal risk of redundancy. ARS also works to ensure the timely transfer of 

new knowledge and technologies to potential users, and to broaden public 

understanding of the value of agriculture and agricultural research to ensure the 

continued primacy of the U.S. agriculture in the 21st century.

ARS’s current Strategic Plan is in effect for fiscal years 2012 through 2017. Echoing 

ARS’ National Program structure, the agency’s Strategic Plan is organized into four 

main Goal Areas: Nutrition, Food Safety, and Quality, Natural Resources and 

Sustainable Agricultural Systems, Crop Production and Protection, and Animal 

Production and Protection. These Goal Areas—and the goals, performance measures, 

and actionable strategies identified within them—align with the components of the 

USDA Strategic Plan Goals as follows:

Each ARS Goal Area includes specific goals that are aligned groupings of ARS’ 18 

National Programs, derived from the Agency’s specific mission, as outlined in each 

National Program’s five-year Action Plan. In developing their individual Project Plans, 

each ARS scientist will, in turn, align his or her research objectives with the overarching 

goals identified in this portion of the ARS Strategic Plan, thereby ensuring continuity 

with the USDA, REE, and ARS vision for agricultural research.

Agricultural Research Service

 25
ARS will utilize its existing organizational structure to accomplish these goals so as to 

incorporate them into the core activities of the Agency.

Responses to changing climate and weather extremes and variability will be assessed 

annually in terms of the effectiveness of meeting expected research milestones as 

specified in peer-reviewed project plans. The degree of achievement of expected 

research milestones versus weather and climate related interference with research 

progress, personnel safety and health, and facilities management and costs will be 

reflected in the allocation of resources in subsequent years’ evaluation process for each 

management unit. When weather and climate interfere substantially with research, 

personnel, or facilities, increased resources will be allocated for appropriate mitigation. 

Assessments and responses are expected to be iterative as required

Identification and assessment of climate change related impacts on and risks to the 

agency’s ability to accomplish its missions, operations, and programs; 

ARS is the largest research agency in USDA and has experimental stations and field plots 

throughout the United States. Extreme weather events have recently and will continue to 

damage research facilities and infrastructure. Experiments have been disrupted due to 

plant and animal loss. Heavy snowfall and rain events leading to flooding have impacted

ability to care for animals, and greenhouse plants. Flooding of research facilities and 

fields has occurred. Drought has impacted experimental fields and animal facilities. 

Energy and water use has varied considerably from past experience due to prolonged 

high and low temperatures and drought. Heating and cooling expenses for workers, 

laboratories, and greenhouses have varied such that projecting needs and costs is 

increasingly difficult. Increased vigor of weeds and appearance of invasive species have

required additional resources to control in experimental plots and fields. Wide 

temperature and precipitation swings affect work force health and food safety and 

increase likelihood of pathogens and skin irritants. Water quantity and quality needed to 

maintain research may become an issue for locations where prolonged drought occurs or 

where water-treatment plants are compromised by weather events. These occurrences 

may require a shift in research priorities. Incorporating additional environmental factors

related to climate change must be considered in research planning for developing new 

crop varieties, management strategies, and conservation practices. Water is not only 

needed for buildings but for agricultural uses including irrigation, aquaculture and animal 

watering and cooling.

Thus, the ability of ARS to meet its mission can be compromised by climate change in 

several general ways:

• Reduced ability to conduct mission research at some current locations because 

environmental changes exceed the resilience of the agricultural systems under study 

at those locations.

Agricultural Research Service

 26
• Changes in budget allocations to research topics, made necessary because new 

environmental conditions have unexpected or unmitigated impacts on agricultural 

production systems and resources, thus diverting resources from current high-priority 

research.

• Threats to personnel arising from extreme weather conditions, e.g., extreme 

temperatures, severe storms, flooding.

• Increased costs of heating, cooling, and other “overhead” costs to mitigating 

untenable conditions for employees or research material, thus diverting resources 

from mission research itself.

• Increased costs of buildings and facilities that must withstand extreme and variable 

conditions, including retrofitting existing facilities and costs of building new ones.

The following examples of these kinds of events and impacts illustrate the risks to ARS’s 

capacity to meet its mission.

Extreme conditions and animal research: Extreme conditions associated with climate 

change impact livestock, and potential impacts on ARS research may be significant. 

Direct effects are related to the intensity and frequency of animal summer heat stress. 

Heat stress in dairy cattle can have an effect lasting weeks to months on reproduction and 

milk production; milk production declines at temperatures above 24C and is worsened by 

high humidity. Under severe conditions, milk production may be reduced by as much as 

20 percent per day. Poultry also are sensitive to stress from high heat and humidity. 

Although chickens can acclimate to heat, sudden heat waves significantly lower 

production (growth rate, egg production, hatching rate) and egg quality (smaller eggs, 

thinner egg shells, poor internal quality). Increased frequency and severity of heat waves 

can thus jeopardize ARS research on livestock and require ARS research locations to 

divert resources into mitigation costs such as increased energy costs for cooling, 

construction of facilities and equipment designed to keep research animals cool in hot 

conditions, and even relocation of research to cooler regions. 

Indirectly, climate change can affect livestock research via increased costs of animal 

feed, as yields of grain, forages, and silage are suppressed by heat, drought, or heavy or 

ill-timed precipitation. The need for research on mitigating heat stress will divert 

resources from research on other aspects of livestock production and health. To better 

address extreme heat events in confined animal production operations, ARS devotes 

resources at the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center (USMARC) in Lincoln, Nebraska, to 

research focused on managing heat stress in confined livestock operations, in partnership 

with the National Weather Service. A website was developed which incorporates the 

Geographic Resources Analysis Support System and provides daily heat stress forecasts 

for livestock producers on line through the ARS USMARC website 

(http://www.ars.usda.gov/Main/docs.htm?docid=21306). Additional research identified 

as necessary is focused on developing precision animal management technologies to 

enable livestock producers to monitor the health and heat stress levels of individual 

animals housed in large groups typical of modern animal production.

Agricultural Research Service

 27
Impact of climate change on crop research: There are many ways that climate change 

and weather extremes may affect ARS crop research and allocation of resources to crop 

research. Included are the many documented impacts of increasing CO2 concentrations, 

heat, precipitation extremes, and the various combinations on crop growth, reproduction, 

and yield. Greater uncertainties are associated with the effects on pests and pathogens. 

In general, the geographic distribution of pests is largely dependent upon climate, 

whereas the incidence and severity of outbreaks are largely dependent upon weather. 

Consequently, there is broad agreement that climate change will have substantial 

ramifications for pest control in crop systems. While more rainfall increases the 

protection needed for cereals and root crops against many pathogens, higher temperatures 

are likely to increase pesticide applications needed to protect fruits, vegetables, and 

beans. Under projected climate change, the total external costs over all pesticide classes 

for U.S. agriculture per hectare could increase up to 70 percent from 2000 to 2100. 

Higher CO2 concentrations provide a “fertilizer effect” to most plants, including crops, 

but there is likely to be a need for increasing rates of herbicide applications to control 

weeds because increased biomass of weeds requires more herbicide to kill them; ARS 

research has already demonstrated this. 

In addition, climate change is anticipated to result in changes in predominant weed 

populations within a region as the weather and climate conditions become more favorable 

for some weed species and not others. In rhizomatous perennial weeds, this could be the 

result of combinations of CO2 and weather conditions favorable for increased 

carbohydrate storage in rhizomes that may benefit overwintering and vegetative spread. 

However, ARS research has demonstrated that effects on weeds are not uniform for all 

weed species and all parts of the country. Plant invasions in pasture and rangeland are 

often preceded by major disturbances, such as wildfires. The incidence of wildfires is 

predicted to increase in areas of the south and west as precipitation in these regions 

declines with climate change. In general, adaptation to climate change probably will 

require more intensive pest management to protect crops. All this will mean new 

challenges for ARS in locating, designing, and conducting research programs on 

improving cropping systems – including the increasing costs of managing pests in 

research crops – to ensure that production and product quality of U.S. crops meet the 

needs of our citizens and on preserving our natural resources, while ensuring that our 

food supply is safe and our environment remains healthy. 

Impact on food safety research: Flooding can have a major food safety impact, as has 

been evident by the many produce-related food safety outbreaks originating in the Salinas 

area of California. A notable example occurred with a particular ranch, which 

periodically flooded from overflow water from the Santa Rita Creek that bordered the 

property. This event led directly to a collaboration of ARS, the State of California, and 

academic institutions to redirect resources to an environmental study of the impact of 

flooding. To conduct this work, ARS redirected its produce-related food safety research 

portfolio at the Western Regional Research Center, Albany, California, and realigned 

staff assignments from other research. Studies on significant events in 2003-2005, 2006, 

and 2011 indicated that flooding of small and major waterways, including the Salinas 

 28
River, have major consequences to the economy (hundreds of millions of dollars) and 

public health (hundreds of illnesses and many deaths). A Food and Drug Administration 

(FDA) rule now considers ready-to-eat crops that have been in contact with flood waters 

to be adulterated due to potential exposure to sewage, animal waste, heavy metals, 

pathogenic microorganisms, or other contaminants. 

The risks may be especially high for areas that have been under drought conditions 

immediately before flooding, since flood water can wash contaminants directly onto 

fields. To reduce the effect of seasonal extreme weather events, a significant amount of 

land susceptible to flooding has been taken out of production. This has affected ARS’ 

ability to continue some of its important produce-related research. This limits ARS’ 

capacity to provide research data to the FDA, which in turn uses such data with the 

produce industry and the State of California to develop actionable responses and 

corrective action plans through documents such as the Commodity Specific Food Safety 

Guidelines for the Production and Harvest of Lettuce and Leafy Greens. Unhindered 

research that allows the development of Good Agricultural Practices is at the heart of 

produce food safety, not only for California but for other fresh produce producing States 

such as Arizona, Colorado and the Delmarva Peninsula. Thus, extreme weather events 

affect not only food safety itself, but ARS’ abilities to conduct research that would 

mitigate food safety risks.

Implications for natural resources in research: Short and long-term water shortages 

(drought) and excesses (too much, too fast leading to floods) are expected to increase in 

frequency with changing climate. Research that has always been based on rain-fed plots 

may thus require irrigation for the first time, resulting in significant costs for irrigation 

equipment, energy to pump water, and water itself (if not drawn from wells or surface 

water). Even among field plots that have been irrigated all along, greater amounts of 

water may be required, which can alter or compromise research objectives and/or 

progress. Water shortages may result in the loss of experimental material (plants, soil, 

animals). Insufficient moisture may delay planting dates, suppress yield quantity and/or 

quality, and increase the threat of fire on grazing lands research locations. Water 

shortages will affect research priorities, especially when reduced water availability for 

research and industry alters what, where and how a crop or livestock can be grown. 

Continued shortages of water may dictate a shift of research priorities to emphasize 

reduced water use, more efficient water use, and gray water use. 

Conversely, excess water may stress plant research plots via flooding. Excessive 

moisture during a growing season may shorten available time for field access to plant, 

manage (treat pests, apply fertilizers, etc.) or harvest. A major concern is the threat of 

heavy rainfall intensities that exacerbate soil erosion, thus leading to degradation of 

topsoil and environmental quality as sediment, nutrients and pesticides move offsite with 

runoff and/or subsurface flow. Such erosion may incur costs associated with mitigation 

of sediment deposition off-site. The timing of rainfall events may also create pest and 

pathogen problems, for example, as increased frequency of precipitation lengthens the 

persistence of free water on leaves, which promotes fungal growth on late-stage crops 

and/or recently harvested crops. Under such conditions, costs of pest management or 

 29
even complete loss of experiments may occur. Flooding can also cause serious problems 

for livestock research units. Storage lagoons for animal waste management are 

vulnerable to heavy rainfall and may require modification to prevent overflows or 

collapse. Livestock waste spills cause spread of pathogens and excess nutrients to 

waterways, resulting in major environmental impacts and significant mitigation costs.

Costs of mitigating weather-related damage to research facilities: During January 2014, 

the Midwest and Eastern United States experienced three periods of polar temperatures 

that stretched the natural gas and electric power distribution systems to their limits. The 

electric bills of some ARS locations tripled in January 2014. Utilities normally are one 

third of the operations and maintenance cost of a facility and increased operating costs 

take funding away from research. 

In addition to storms, ARS facilities are located where they are vulnerable to flooding 

and wildfires, along the Mississippi and Red Rivers, the Florida coast and in forested 

areas. The Mississippi river floods of April and May 2011 approached ARS lands in 

Mississippi. When the Army Corp of Engineers opened the Morganza spillway to protect 

Baton Rouge and New Orleans as well as oil refineries and chemical plants, it flooded 

ARS lands near Houma, Louisiana. 

A tornado struck the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center in Wooster, 

Ohio on September 16, 2010, destroying the University-owned Ag Engineering Building 

that housed the ARS Application Technology Research Unit. The estimated cost to 

replace the structure is $11 million, in addition to the $260,000 worth of ARS equipment 

that was lost. The new facility will not be ready for occupancy before the end of 2014, 

and ARS research has been hindered by the loss of equipment and forced relocation to 

temporary space. 

In El Reno, Oklahoma, a tornado struck the Grazinglands Research Laboratory on May 

24, 2011. Five buildings were destroyed, nine buildings were heavily damaged, ten 

buildings sustained minor damage, expensive scientific equipment was damaged or 

destroyed, and more than 10 miles of fences were destroyed. The estimated funding 

needed to restore El Reno to its pre-tornado condition is $5.1 million, which has not been 

appropriated and thus must be diverted from research. On May 31, 2013 a large tornado 

again hit the lab in El Reno Oklahoma resulting in $132,000 in damage to windows, 

roofs, equipment and crops. 

In September 2004 two major hurricanes hit Ft Pierce Florida 22 days apart, and while 

the ARS buildings survived with some damage, the research citrus groves suffered a big 

loss. April 14, 2012 a tornado damaged ARS fences and structures in Woodward 

Oklahoma as well as neighboring NRCS and FSA facilities and left a large amount of 

debris to remove from farmland. 

On June 11, 2008, a tornado struck Manhattan, Kansas. It damaged or destroyed the 

ARS Center for Grain and Animal Health Research facilities, the Wind Erosion Research 

Laboratory, the laboratory’s attached greenhouse and a vehicle garage, and a greenhouse 

 30
used for Hessian fly research. Congress appropriated $2.8 million to replace the 

facilities, which took nearly four years. 

In August 2005, Hurricane Katrina caused extensive damage to the 400,000 square-foot 

Southern Regional Research Center in New Orleans, Louisiana. A total of $32.5 million 

was invested through a Rapid Recovery Phase and subsequent Long Term Recovery to 

replace major mechanical and electrical systems and equipment, repair buildings, 

renovate completely flooded and destroyed areas in the basement, and repair damaged 

areas on upper floors in the Main Building. Although the SRRC became fully 

operational again in August 2006, a full year earlier than expected, total recovery took six 

years. 

Other recent severe weather events that have damaged ARS facilities and incurred 

aggregate costs of more than $16 million to the agency include tornadoes in Houma, 

Louisiana; Beaumont, Texas, and Beltsville, Maryland; flooding in Grand Forks, North 

Dakota; and a hurricane in Miami, Florida In 2004 In addition to the cost to replace the 

facilities, there is significant impact on ARS’ research capacity through interruption or

loss of millions of dollars invested in experiments that have been lost, delays in planned 

research, and the obstacles inevitable in placing research programs in temporary space.

Impact to personnel and personnel-related costs: As a research agency, ARS’ most 

valuable asset is its personnel, who apply their scientific, technical, and administrative 

expertise to accomplish the ARS mission. There are many weather and climate related 

impacts on personnel, and the exact kind and impacts vary across the country. Heat 

stress, severe cold, flooding, and wind all are examples of hazards to people working at 

ARS locations. Additional hazards arise from people whose performance may be 

compromised by such stresses or weather conditions, such as accidents associated with 

loss of control of heavy equipment, motor vehicles, hazardous chemicals, and others. 

Damage to ARS research facilities can result in major costs to the agency, diverting 

resources from research into emergency response. Included among such costs, aside 

from costs required for repair or replacement of facilities as discussed above, are those 

associated with personnel. 

A striking example is the impact of Hurricane Katrina on the personnel associated with 

ARS facilities in Louisiana, especially the Southern Regional Research Center in New 

Orleans. Major damage and flooding of the Center occurred when Katrina made landfall 

in southeastern Louisiana on August 29, 2005, rendering the Center completely unusable. 

A total of 178 employees, along with their families, had to be relocated to 22 temporary 

duty stations in 12 states to maintain critical research projects and progress as much as 

possible. Personnel-related costs arising from Katrina totaled more than $4 million over 

three fiscal years.

Description of programs, policies, and plans the agency has already put in place, as 

well as additional actions the agency will take, to manage climate risks in the near 

term and build resilience in the short and long term; 

 31
ARS locations and specific operations are highly dispersed and heterogeneous with 

respect to activities conducted to meet the agency’s mission. ARS conducts research to 

address its mission at more than 90 locations in nearly all 50 states. Many locations have 

multiple research units with very different research (e.g., crop, livestock, natural 

resources, and/or post-harvest quality and safety research at a single location). Many 

ARS research units are co-located on university campuses, and at these locations, ARS 

research and personnel may be housed in facilities owned by the federal government, by 

the university, or some combination. 

Other ARS units are housed in stand-alone, government-owned research facilities that 

may be in remote locations or in large cities. In addition, resources are allocated by 

Congress to the agency specific to locations for specific research. Thus, plans for 

adaptation to climate change must be highly specific and relevant for each research unit’s 

unique combination of resources, research mission, facilities type and ownership, 

geographic location and environment, and climate change and weather 

variability/extremes in evidence. Adaptation strategies and plans for a natural resources 

unit in the desert southwest would not be appropriate for a human nutrition unit in 

hospital-like facilities in a large eastern city, nor for a crop breeding program operated by 

scientists conducting research on a university campus in the Midwest where management 

plans for university-owned facilities are in place.

Implementation plans for application of congressionally appropriated resources in 

research are developed annually by the Research Leader of each research management 

unit in consultation with, and approval by, the relevant Area Director (the most senior 

line manager in each of ARS’ seven multi-state Areas and the Beltsville Agricultural 

Research Center). The Annual Resource Management Planning (ARMP) process 

includes allocation of resources for personnel, direct research costs, and indirect research 

costs (e.g., facilities management; safety, health, and environmental management). 

Allocation of appropriated resources among these and other aspects of the unit’s 

operations may be affected by climate change and weather variability and extremes.

Accordingly, Research Leaders will allocate resources as required to respond to direct 

research costs (e.g., pest management in crops, heat stress management for livestock) and 

indirect costs (e.g., energy costs for buildings, equipment and supplies for personnel 

safety and health), as affected by climate change within the context of their research 

activities, facilities, and locale. Allocations of costs to respond to changes in research 

needs, personnel needs, and facilities management will be reviewed and approved by 

Area Directors in the ARMP process.

ARS sets its research priorities, develops National and management unit-level research 

plans, and implements its plans through a highly developed process that includes 

established procedures for obtaining formal input from a wide variety of customers, 

stakeholders, and research partners. These include priorities and needs expressed by the 

Administration and Congress; other departments of the Federal government and other 

 32
agencies within USDA, including action and regulatory agencies; state governments and 

agencies; non-government organizations such as commodity organizations; universities 

and other non-government research organizations; individual farmers and land-owners; 

and others. The five-year research project plans developed by agency scientists in 

response to input from customers, stakeholders, and partners are peer-reviewed by nonARS scientists for adequacy of research approaches and likelihood of success in 

achieving stated objectives. As climate change and weather variability are manifest 

through changing pressures and needs related to crop production and protection, animal 

production and protection, natural resources and sustainable agricultural systems, and 

nutrition, food safety, and quality, we anticipate that the agency’s customers, 

stakeholders, and partners will identify necessary changes to be recommended for 

research programs and changes in allocations of research resources to address any such 

issues that increase in importance.

One of ARS’ 18 National Programs is Climate Change, Soils, and Emissions. Goals of 

this National Program include adaptation of agricultural systems to climate change and 

mitigation of greenhouse gases, including mitigating those originating from agricultural 

production systems and offsetting agricultural and non-agricultural emissions with carbon 

sequestration in soils. Inherent in this research program is consideration of the likely 

magnitude of climate change and scenarios of impacts on crops, livestock, natural 

resources, and post-harvest product quality and safety. Resources allocated to ARS 

locations for climate change, soils, and emissions research are applied to research on 

impacts, adaptation, and mitigation, and results of this work informs all climate and 

weather related research throughout the agency.

Most ARS locations have emergency generators fueled by diesel fuel, natural gas or 

gasoline. They can be operated in power outages, to reduce demand during the operation 

of certain equipment or when called on by utilities to reduce load on the grid during peak 

periods (demand response). Natural Gas microturbine powered generators at Ames, Iowa,

have been decommissioned because they ceased to be cost effective. Often, however, due 

to budget constraints, this distributed generating capacity provides power to only the 

critical functions of a facility so systems like air conditioning may not be on emergency 

power. Property and research may be preserved but indoor air quality and working 

conditions may be compromised. Such measures are also dependent on a reliable supply 

of uncontaminated fuel after a weather event. 

Some labs have changed their heating fuels. The New England Plant, Soil and Water 

Research Laboratory in Orono, Maine converted from burning fuel oil (kerosene) in its 

boilers to natural gas in 2013. Eastern Regional Research Center converted its backup 

fuel from #6 fuel oil to #2 fuel oil. These actions reduced Green House Gas (GHG)

emissions, reduced energy costs, and increased energy efficiency among other things. 

Many locations have dual fuel boilers that can operate on fuel oil if there are utility 

curtailments in natural gas supply. But, fuel oil is more expensive and creates more 

greenhouse gas emissions than natural gas. There is also a disincentive to participate in 

demand response programs because 50 percent of utility incentives must be sent to 

Treasury which usually prevents demand response from being cost effective. 

 33
ARS is installing renewable energy as limited appropriated funds permit. Solar 

photovoltaic (PV) arrays are installed at several locations: Pendleton, Oregon –7 

KiloWatt (KW); Parlier, California – 96 KW; Washington, DC – 21.1 KW; Hilo, Hawaii 

– 40.46 KW; Tucson, Arizona – 5 KW; and Bushland, Texas – 2.4 KW. ARS is planning 

a 1,000 KW PV project in Maricopa, Arizona. Solar cells also used widely for remote 

telemetry. Solar hot water is used at Stoneville, Mississippi; Gainesville, Florida and 

Morris, Minnesota. 

ARS is utilizing performance contracting to leverage private financing in order to make 

cost effective energy and water saving improvements to its facilities. Financed Utility 

Energy Service Contracts and Energy Savings Performance Contracts are being awarded 

that are currently saving $3.75 Million annually. These contracts have been used at 23 

locations, representing 65 percent of ARS’ energy consumption. 

ARS policy requires that all new construction and renovations follow the US Green 

Building Council Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) methodology 

for a silver rating. ARS’ largest building which alone uses over 23 percent of the 

agency’s total energy consumption is LEED certified. 

ARS voluntarily participated in the road test of the public sector protocol for tracking 

greenhouse gas emissions and still closely monitors and reports its GHG emissions. ARS 

has brought its Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions down to 13.5 percent below the goal set by 

USDA and Executive Order 13514. This was accompanied by a $9.7 Million reduction 

in annual energy costs since FY 2008 from $47.2 Million to $37.3 Million. 

ARS is changing the materials used for buildings in response to changes in hot and cold 

temperature extremes. For instance, reflective cool roofs are being installed when roofs 

are replaced. Biobased spray foam insulation is being added or increased in buildings. 

Recovery of the SRRC in New Orleans, Louisiana after the flooding of Hurricane Katrina 

included raising equipment such as emergency generators above the flood level and 

changing the lower building level to limited use. 

A description of how any climate change related risk identified pursuant to the first 

paragraph of this subsection that is deemed so significant that it impairs an agency’s 

statutory mission or operation will be addressed, including through the agency’s 

existing reporting requirements; 

Funds intended to provide for mission support and the regular maintenance and 

replacement of equipment will need to be used for emergency replacement of equipment, 

facilities and infrastructures damaged or threatened by the more frequent and damaging 

storms and weather events. In the absence of increased appropriations this will create a 

larger backlog of deferred maintenance and decrease the operational life of equipment. 

 34
Facilities will be less viable into the future. In addition to emergency breakdown, ARS 

will be required to divert funds from research to pay for repair and replacement of 

facilities, fixtures and equipment damaged or destroyed by the impacts of climate change. 

The operating costs of ARS’ facilities will increase due to the increased cost of utilities, 

and the premium cost of providing energy through emergency methods and distributed 

generation and the increased operation and maintenance cost of aging equipment. 

A description of how the agency will consider the need to improve climate 

adaptation and resilience, including the costs and benefits of such improvement, 

with respect to agency suppliers, supply chain, real property investments, and 

capital equipment purchases such as updating agency policies for leasing, building 

upgrades, relocation of existing facilities and equipment, and construction of new 

facilities; and 

ARS Design Manual 242.1 and Policy and Procedure (P&P) 134.2 Energy Water and 

Sustainability, will be updated to incorporate the requirements of Executive Order 13653. 

New construction and renovation of existing facilities will incorporate provisions for 

climate change resiliency. Those two policies, which form the basis of facility design and 

sustainable operations in ARS, already incorporate requirements for energy, water, and 

resource conservation and environmentally preferable procurement that reduce the 

agency’s environmental footprint and greenhouse gas emissions. P&P 134.2 states the 

Agency’s policy as:

Consistent with REE’s mission and without compromising health and safety, it is REE 

policy to give energy and water conservation as well as sustainability, prime 

consideration in the acquisition, use, and disposal of all property and in the performance 

of all functions. This action will reduce the impact of our activities on the environment 

and help conserve resources. Efficiency and conservation shall be integrated into the 

core activities of the Agency. It shall be every employee’s responsibility to ensure that 

every reasonable effort is made to reduce operating costs and conserve energy, water, 

and resources.

Following the lead of the Secretary, and the Telework Enhancement Act of 2010, ARS is 

implementing an agency wide telework policy and encouraging employees to participate 

with several initiatives. 75 percent of USDA’s scope 3 GHG emissions were the result of 

commuting in FY 2008. ARS also encourages the use of public transportation and the 

reduction of business travel. USDA’s new goals are 60 percent participation in core 

telework and 50 percent participation in situational telework.

ARS uses the GSA Solicitation for Offers in leasing, which incorporates sustainability. 

A description of how the agency will contribute to coordinated interagency efforts to 

support climate preparedness and resilience at all levels of government, including 

collaborative work across agencies’ regional offices and hubs, and through 

coordinated development of information, data, and tools, consistent with section 4 of 

this order. 

 35
ARS participates actively in interagency working groups on energy, sustainability, 

greenhouse gas and water for its facilities and programs. ARS coordinates with other 

agencies to share information and cooperates in the development of guidance. 

The US Meat Animal Research Center is working with the Army Corps of Engineers on a 

groundwater cleanup effort in Clay Center NE. Groundwater is contaminated by 

munitions from prior DoD use of the area. The Corps is pumping water from the plumes, 

cleaning it and providing it to ARS for irrigation. This allows the water to percolate back 

into the aquifer rather than be dumped into the West Fork of the Big Blue River where it 

will not recharge the aquifer. The Ogallala aquifer, much of which is under Nebraska, is 

stressed by drought and irrigation demands. They are pumping the north plume at a rate 

of 2,500 gallons per hour (gph) now and preparing to pump the south plume at 1,300 gph 

into about 300 acre feet of ponds to be completed by April, 2014. Six center pivot 

irrigation systems are using the water now and twelve more are in design to be installed 

March, 2015. This offsets a portion of the Center’s regular irrigation. 

Identify and seek to remove or reform barriers that discourage investments or other 

actions to increase the Nation's resilience to climate change while ensuring 

continued protection of public health and the environment; 

Demand response programs, where facilities are paid by curtailment service providers to 

disconnect from the grid during times of high demand, are difficult to participate in, not 

only because research operations demand uninterrupted utility service but 50 percent of 

payments are required to be deposited in the general fund of the Treasury by Pub. L. 

104-52, § 625, 42 U.S.C. 8256 note. And, 40 CFR Part 63 Subpart ZZZZ limits the hours 

diesel emergency generators are allowed to run.

Solar photovoltaic and wind projects are difficult for USDA to install at Federal facilities 

because they have a large upfront cost, require a 20 year payback, and USDA lacks 

authority for long term contracts, power purchase agreements and enhanced use leasing. 

Renewable energy projects make ESPCs nonviable and UESCs under a GSA areawide 

contract are limited to 10 year terms. 

Reform policies and Federal funding programs that may, perhaps unintentionally, 

increase the vulnerability of natural or built systems, economic sectors, natural 

resources, or communities to climate change related risks; 

Not Applicable.

Identify opportunities to support and encourage smarter, more climate-resilient 

investments by States, local communities, and tribes, including by providing 

incentives through agency guidance, grants, technical assistance, performance 

measures, safety considerations, and other programs. 

 36
ARS is participating in the Agricultural Technology Innovation Partnership (ATIP)

Foundation which will provide grants to implement agricultural research results. It will 

help scientists take their research to market. The ATIP foundation has formed the 

Resilient Economic Agricultural Practices public private partnership to sustain long term 

research on land management practices across the United States. 

ARS will also be participating in the Foundation for Food and Agriculture Research 

established under the 2014 Farm Bill. The Foundation will advance research addressing 

key problems in plant and animal health and production, food safety, nutrition and health, 

renewable energy, natural resources and the environment, agricultural and food security, 

agricultural systems and technology and agricultural economics and rural communities, 

and to foster collaboration. 

 37
USDA Farm Service Agency

Climate Change Adaptation Plan 2014

 38
FSA Climate Change Adaptation Plan

Background

FSA’s mission is to deliver timely, effective programs and services to America’s farmers and 

ranchers to support them in sustaining our Nation’s vibrant agricultural economy, as well as to 

provide first-rate support for domestic and international food aid efforts. 

To assist the country in addressing today’s challenges, FSA’s Strategic Plan has four goals: 

• Provide a financial safety net for America’s farmers and ranchers to sustain economically 

viable agricultural production,

• Increase stewardship of America’s natural resources while enhancing the environment,

• Ensure commodities are procured and distributed effectively and efficiently to increase 

food security, and

• Transform and modernize the Farm Service Agency.

A particularly relevant Goal 2 objective is for FSA to “lead efforts to mitigate and adapt to 

climate change.” Strategies that have been identified in the Plan to achieve this objective include 

the following:

• Promote planting of trees, shrubs, grasses and forbs. 

• Collaborate with partners to develop planting and management specifications that are 

adaptive to climate change. 

• Provide financial incentives to mitigate the upfront cost of establishing practices adopted 

to adapt to climate change. 

• Educate producers on the impact of climate change. 

• Partner with external agencies to expedite extension and technical assistance.

Vulnerability and adaptation to climate change

Given the sensitivity of crop and livestock production to climate, the agricultural sector and 

producers will be disproportionately affected by climate change. Assuming current climate 

change predictions are borne out, producers will face increased average temperatures, more 

frequent temperature extremes, and changes in precipitation patterns. Climatic change may also 

pave the way for weed and insect pests and plant and animal disease vectors, increasing their 

geographic distribution. Even if producers are not directly impacted by climate change, they will 

feel its effects on other producers through the interconnected global market for agricultural 

commodities. 

On one hand, producers most vulnerable to climate change will have challenges with responding

to changing agronomic and market conditions when changing their production systems. 

On the other, meaningful adaptive strategies undertaken by producers may include one of more of 

the following: 

Farm Service Agency

 39
• Switching crops and varieties to those more conducive to changing conditions, 

• Diversifying crops, 

• Integrating livestock production and/or forestry (agroforestry) with crop production, 

• Increasing water use efficiency and conserving soil moisture, 

• Altering the timing of cropping activities, and

• Using climate forecasting to support farm planning.

FSA programs will affect the climate change adaptation process to varying degrees and in various 

ways:

• Commodity programs: FSA supports farm livelihoods by providing a financial safety net 

designed to address uncertainties with markets and weather

• Conservation programs: The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) is the largest 

conservation program administered by FSA. By taking marginal lands out of production 

for at least 10-15 years, the CRP can help sequester carbon.

• Farm loans: Because adaptation is likely to involve significant investment in new 

technologies and infrastructure, some producers facing challenges with climate change 

may be those with limited access to credit, such as beginning and disadvantaged farmers. 

These populations are also more likely to be farming marginal lands that are more 

susceptible to climate change effects.

• Disaster programs: This assistance can be a lifeline to farmers who suffer losses from 

extreme weather events. The short term support offers farmers the opportunity to adapt. 

FSA’s vulnerability to climate change relates to the increased outlays and pressure on staff 

resources that result.

Actions

FSA has identified three actions related to climate change adaptation on which it will continue to 

work in FY 2014, assuming that sufficient staff resources are available:

Action 1: To ensure that FSA programs encourage farmers to adapt to climate change, FSA will 

review programs and policies to assess whether they affect how producers respond to climate 

change, whether this impact is positive or negative, and whether opportunities exist to enhance or 

ameliorate this impact. Opportunities identified will be flagged according to whether they require 

a change in policy, a regulatory change, or an act of Congress 

This action will take place as NEPA and other regulatory process requirements are satisfied for 

the Agricultural Act of 2014. An informational memorandum for the Administrator will 

synthesize findings across programs.

Action 2: The seven regional and three subsidiary USDA Climate Change Hubs recently 

announced by the Secretary are intended to make science-based knowledge and practical 

information available that support climate change mitigation and adaptation in agricultural 

settings. With more than two thousand state and county offices throughout the U.S., the Farm 

 40
Service Agency is the “face” of USDA to producers who participate in the conservation and 

energy, commodity crop, disaster assistance, and farm loan programs it manages. Through 

participation on the Climate Change Hubs steering committee, the agency will help deliver 

meaningful information at the hubs to the hands of producers.

Action 3: FSA will conduct “continuity of operations” exercises to better understand the 

administrative implications of and prepare headquarters, state, and field office staff for large-scale 

crop failure, which will be increasingly likely with climate change. 

Bibliography

McKinley, D.C., R.D. Briggs, and A.M. Bartuska, 2012. When peer-reviewed publications are 

not enough! Delivering science for natural resource decision management. Forest Policy 

and Economics. In press. 

Appendix

Actions to address risks and opportunities

Action Agenc

y Lead

Risk or opportunity Scale Timeframe

Policy review FSA Opportunity to highlight to 

Administration and Congress policy 

changes to facilitate adaptation

National Every Farm 

Bill

Outreach 

efforts

FSA Opportunity to use field offices to 

deliver information available at hubs 

to producers

National Ongoing

Continuity of 

operations 

exercise

FSA Opportunity make sure agency can 

adequately deal with / respond to 

large-scale climatic events

National Periodically

 41
USDA Foreign Agricultural Service

Climate Change Adaptation Plan 2014

 42
USDA Foreign Agricultural Service Climate Change Adaptation Plan 2014

I. Policy framework 

a. Describe your agency vision, mission, goals, and strategic approaches

The USDA Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) has defined its mission and vision in its 2012-

2016 strategic plan as, “Linking U.S. agriculture to the world to enhance export opportunities and 

global food security.”4 To do so, FAS works around the globe building new markets for U.S.

agricultural exports, sustaining and expanding existing markets, improving the competitive 

position of U.S. agriculture, and ensuring food security and building agricultural capacity in 

fragile and developing markets. 

Various U.S. laws define specific duties that FAS is obliged to undertake. These include: (1) 

Acquiring information pertaining to agricultural trade; (2) Implementing market development 

programs; (3) Providing agricultural technical assistance and training; and (4) Carrying out 

specifically authorized food aid programs. Furthermore, USDA departmental regulations state 

that FAS is responsible for coordinating Department agencies’ functions involving foreign 

agriculture policies and programs and their operations and activities in foreign areas. 

To achieve its mission and fulfill its statutory duties, FAS has aligned its operations under three 

core activity pillars: (1) Trade Promotion; (2) Trade Policy; and (3) Trade Capacity Building and 

Food Security. Each activity pillar has specific program objectives that have been evaluated for 

their vulnerabilities to climate change. This process of considering vulnerabilities and planning 

climate change adaptation strategies aligns to FAS management initiatives that aim to incorporate 

new strategies and policies to improve FAS performance and efficiency. 

II. Vulnerability Assessment: 

a. Describe both the risks and opportunities associated with changing climate that 

your agency will face. For example, how will climate change affect: assets, 

operations, worker health, natural or cultural resources, security infrastructure, 

economic activities, or coordination. In this discussion you should consider 

physical factors such as temperature shifts, hydrological changes, extreme events, 

sea level rise, etc.

A changing climate poses a number of vulnerabilities for FAS to address in order to continue to 

fulfill its mission. In addition to creating vulnerabilities, climate change may provide new 

4 http://www.fas.usda.gov/FAS_SP2012-2016Final5-16-12.pdf

Foreign Agricultural Service

 43

 
opportunities that FAS should prepare to capitalize on. In the tables below, major vulnerabilities 

and opportunities are mapped to FAS activity pillars and objectives. 

Pillar #1: Trade Promotion

Vulnerability Opportunity

Objective 1.1: Increase 

effectiveness of FAS market 

development programs and 

outreach activities

Increased frequency of 

extreme weather events may 

destabilize import markets and 

increase the volatility of 

prices. Increasingly volatile 

trade conditions may make it 

more difficult to develop long 

term strategies to build 

markets for U.S. products. 

Also, increased variability in 

U.S. product supply and 

quality may make it more 

problematic to consistently 

promote U.S. products.

Climate change may cause 

geographic shifts in 

production that create new 

markets and/or less 

competition for U.S. 

agricultural exports

Objective 1.2: Manage FAS 

credit programs to yield the 

greatest benefit to U.S. 

agriculture 

NA NA

Pillar #2: Trade Policy

Vulnerability Opportunity

Objective 2.1: Negotiate and 

enforce market-expanding 

trade agreements for U.S. 

exporters of agricultural, fish, 

and forest products

Climate change may lead to 

production shortfalls and 

export bans abroad, 

undermining FAS efforts to 

promote free trade.

Climate change may require 

some countries to rely more on 

agricultural trade and imports 

from the U.S. to make up for 

domestic production shortfalls.

 44
Objective 2.2: Prevent or 

resolve foreign Technical 

Barriers to Trade (TBT) or 

Sanitary/Phyto-Sanitary (SPS) 

measures that hinder U.S. 

agricultural exports 

Warmer average temperatures 

may increase the range and 

severity of disease outbreaks 

in the U.S. raising TBT and 

SPS concerns abroad. 

NA

Objective 2.3: Pursue the 

development of rules-based 

international systems that 

facilitate global trade 

Climate change may be used 

as a pretext for implementing 

new labeling standards or 

trade rules that make claims 

about “sustainability” or 

“climate-smart” but are not 

based on reliable science.

1.Climate change may 

increase international 

demand/adoption of 

genetically engineered (GE) 

crops and products of other 

emerging technologies for 

sustainable agricultural 

intensification and 

innovation.

2. Increasing international 

awareness of agriculture 

and climate change creates 

opportunities in 

international fora to 

promote science-based free 

trade rules.

3.Climate change mitigation 

policies may present an 

opportunity for USDA 

stakeholders to consider 

new voluntary market 

incentives.

Pillar #3: Trade Capacity Building and Food Security 

Vulnerability Opportunity

Objective 3.1: Address food 

security challenges by 

building food and market 

systems that expand trade and 

economic growth through food 

assistance programs

U.S. agricultural productivity 

may stagnate or decline due to 

increases of atmospheric 

carbon dioxide (CO2), rising 

temperatures, and altered 

precipitation patterns. Climate 

change will exacerbate current 

biotic stresses on agricultural 

NA

 45
plants and animals.

Accordingly, U.S. 

commodities may become less 

available to meet future 

demands for FAS food 

assistance programs.

Objective 3.2: Enhance 

partner countries’ capacity for 

agricultural development, 

participation in international 

trade, and reduced dependence 

on fossil fuels.

Climate change may disrupt 

and stymie agricultural 

development and trade in 

some countries. Countries are 

too dependent on high-carbon 

emission fossil fuels.

Increasing demand for FAS to 

coordinate USDA capacity 

building for climate change 

mitigation and adaptation may 

be met through increasing 

FAS scientific exchanges and 

interagency funding 

agreements for activities that 

accelerate countries’ climate 

change mitigation and 

adaptation strategies. 

Increased demand for biofuels 

in liquid transport sector can 

support increased US ethanol 

and biodiesel exports.

III. The Adaptation Planning and Evaluation Process 

a. Integration: Describe agency plans to integrate climate change adaptation into 

policies, programs, and operations. This includes coordination with stakeholders 

including local, state or tribal entities and private landowners, as applicable.

FAS relies on its Climate Change Working Group to raise awareness and disseminate 

information across FAS about emerging climate change issues that may impact the mission, 

strategic objective pillars, and objectives of FAS. The group meets on an ad hoc basis and is 

charged with developing and evaluating the FAS climate change adaptation plan. The 

Climate Change Working Group is led by the Office of Agreements and Scientific Affairs 

(OASA) and has representation from each FAS program area. 

FAS is developing the internal capacity to tackle emerging climate change issues and is 

receptive to stakeholder concerns about climate change. Each summer, FAS Foreign Service 

Officers attend an Attaché conference in Washington, D.C. for briefings on emerging policy 

and trade issues, including the Department’s activities regarding climate change and the 

 46
agency’s involvement. FAS also participates in many regular stakeholder meetings and ad 

hoc consultations with cooperators. Regularly scheduled stakeholder meetings include: 

Pillar Focus Meeting Stakeholders

Trade Promotion U.S. Agricultural Export Development 

Council Annual Workshop

Commodity and food export 

interests

Trade Promotion Data Users Meeting Agricultural traders and 

exporters

Trade Policy Agricultural Technical Advisory 

Committee (ATAC)

Private industry 

representatives

Trade Policy Agricultural Policy Advisory 

Committee (APAC)

Private industry 

representatives

Trade Capacity

Building/Food

Security

The annual International

Food Aid and Development

Conference

USAID, Private voluntary 

organizations and US 

agriculture, and trade

associations

b. Understanding risks: Briefly describe actions that your agency will take to better 

understand risks and opportunities. This may include methods to assess 

vulnerability, to monitor climate impacts, or to project impacts based on 

scenarios.

FAS is currently engaged in assessing the risks and opportunities associated with climate 

change. There are various means by which FAS understands and evaluates these risks 

and opportunities. These mean include engaging in climate change related intra- and 

inter-departmental working groups (e.g. USDA’s Global Change Task Force, and Feed 

the Future working groups). FAS also relies on the extensive market intelligence 

gathering of Foreign Service Officers and Locally Employed Staff, who are the “on-theground” sources of information for over 100 countries. FAS also monitors and advises 

the work of various international organizations [e.g. UN, FAO, OECD, World Bank] and 

participates in several United Nations activities [e.g. Framework Convention on Climate 

Change (UNFCCC), Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD), and the 

Environmental Program], WTO committees [e.g. Agriculture, Trade and Environment, 

Trade and Development, the Subcommittee on Least Developed Countries, and Technical 

Barriers to Trade], and OECD committees [e.g. Committee on Environment, the Joint 

Working Party on Agriculture and the Environment (JWPAE), and the World Bank’s 

Global Environment Facility and development of Environmental Guidelines]. 

The FAS Climate Change Working Group will further consider additional actions to 

better understand the risks and opportunities that may affect FAS’s key strategic pillars:

Trade promotion. 

Proposed Actions: Participation in interdepartmental climate change modeling groups 

that can inform the integration of climate change projections into USDA agricultural 

production and trade models utilized by FAS’s Office of Global Analysis. 

 47
Trade policy. 

Proposed Action: Continued leadership in key international activities including the 

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Climate Smart Agriculture 

Alliance, and the Climate and Clean Air Coalition. Active engagement will ensure that 

the interests of USDA stakeholders are adequately considered and that emerging policies 

are based on sound science. 

Trade Capacity Building & Food Security.

Proposed Actions: (1) The USDA Global Change Task Force is coordinating an 

assessment on climate change & food security. FAS will participate in the 

assessment steering committee to ensure that agricultural trade capacity is addressed 

in the report, and (2) Collaboration with other U.S. agencies through cooperative 

agreements for agricultural development and trade capacity activities related to climate 

change adaptation and mitigation. 

Cross Cutting.

Proposed Action: Provide climate change reporting guidance for the Global Agricultural 

Information Network (GAIN). The GAIN system is a compilation of FAS information 

on foreign countries’ agricultural economy, products and issues which are most likely to 

have an impact on U.S. agricultural production and trade. 

 

IV. Sustained Adaptation Process 

a. What steps will your agency take annually in order to ensure that this Plan is 

current?

FAS will continue to rely on its Climate Change Working Group to coordinate annual 

reviews and updates to the Climate Change Adaptation Plan.

b. How will you prioritize (actions)?

The following are the most important considerations for prioritizing FAS climate change 

adaptation actions: 

(1) The President’s Climate Action Plan and U.S. Government priorities associated with 

climate change;

(2) Executive Order 13653--Preparing the United States for the Impacts of Climate 

Change and Executive Order 13514--Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy,

and Economic Performance;

(3) Departmental Regulation 1070-001 – USDA Policy Statement on Climate Change 

Adaptation;

(3) USDA’s Strategic Plan and priorities associated with climate change;

(4) Financial resources and the availability of trained personnel;

(5) Vulnerability, and threat to FAS mission; and 

(6) Opportunity to improve Agency services to stakeholders.

 48
c. What sources of information will your agency use to further develop the Plan 

through time?

FAS will rely on diverse information sources to aid in developing the Climate Change 

Adaptation Plan over time. As mentioned, FAS will consider the needs and input of 

stakeholders, the intelligence gathered by FSOs, as well as technical information on 

climate change impact reported in the National Climate Assessments. FAS relies on the 

USDA Global Change Task Force to provide linkages to cutting-edge scientific 

developments about climate change and agriculture. Additionally, FAS staff subscribe to 

the National Agricultural Library’s climate change and agriculture newsfeed to receive 

weekly updates on current events.

d. Performance Metrics

i. Describe the methods your agency will use to evaluate progress

ii. Roadmap, Scorecards, etc. 

The FAS Climate Change Working Group is the coordinating body for evaluating and 

updating the FAS Climate Change Adaptation Plan. This Working Group facilitates 

exchange of information and activity coordination within FAS, and has an advisory 

capacity to assist with answering questions from overseas offices of the agency. As 

part of the annual review process, each FAS program area is engaged to provide input on 

progress towards addressing the vulnerabilities and opportunities related to each FAS 

activity pillar. In addition to the performance metrics associated with specific activities 

listed in the Appendix, FAS will consider the following aggregate metrics:

Pillar Focus Performance Metric

Trade Promotion Improving FAS access to technical resources related to climate 

change 

Trade Policy Addressing climate change issues in a variety of forums

Trade Capacity Building

& Food Security

Addressing U.S. and partner countries’ capacities for climate 

change mitigation and adaptation through FAS agricultural 

development and trade capacity building activities 

Cross-Cutting Sharing information about climate change issues relevant to 

sustainable, global food and agriculture systems.

 49
V. Actions to address risks and opportunities (include as Appendix). 

a. This section should include pilot activities, the formal integration of adaptation into agency policy, the modification of programs or activities, or capacity building. It 

should be in tabular format and include the following: 

FAS ACTIONS TO ADDRESS RISKS AND OPPORTUNITIES

Pillar #1: Trade Promotion

Current 

Actions

Action 

Goal

Agency 

Lead

Description Scale TimeframePerformance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishments to 

Date

Advising in 

the National 

Climate 

Assessment 

on Food 

Security

Contribut

e to the 

Assessm

ent 

specifical

ly the 

trade 

related 

aspects

OASA The USDA Global

Change Task Force is 

coordinating an 

assessment on climate 

change & food security. 

FAS will participate in 

the steering committee 

to ensure that 

agricultural trade is 

considered in the report

Global Publish 

2015

Active FAS 

participation 

in the drafting 

and review 

process

USDA-OCE Limited 

resources 

available 

Ensuring that relevant 

subject matter experts 

are consulted

Initial draft of the report 

(Zero Order Draft) is 

completed and distributed 

to the author team for 

review in Feb 2014

Foreign Agricultural Service

 50
Pillar #2: Trade Policy

Current 

Actions

Action Goal Agency 

Lead

Description Scale TimeframePerformance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishments to 

Date

Integrating 

climate change 

considerations 

into Country 

Strategy 

Statements

(CSS)

Implement 

new climate 

change 

guidance

OCRA Each year FAS 

develops country 

strategy 

statements to 

further the 

Mission of FAS. 

Global Once per 

Year

CSS Reports can 

include 

addressing 

relevant climate 

change issues

USDA-FAS On-going 

annual activity

N/A 63 Country Reports Filed 

in 2013

Monitoring 

International 

Organizations

Representing 

and 

defending 

U.S. 

interests.

OASA FAS Promotes 

the importance of 

agriculture in 

international 

organizations and 

discourages trade 

restricting 

agreements 

Global Ongoing Input provided in 

meetings or 

reviewed reports 

by FAS in 

relation to 

climate change

State Dept., 

EPA, USTR

Limited 

resources 

available 

Many organizations 

want to support 

global efforts 

regarding climate 

change making it 

challenging to 

effectively montitor 

and to respond given 

limited resources

Foreign Agricultural Service

 51
Pillar #2: Trade Policy (Cont.)

Current 

Actions

Action Goal Agency 

Lead

Description Scale TimeframePerformance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishments to 

Date

UN climate 

change 

negotiations 

and other 

venues

Represent and 

defend U.S. 

interests

OASA FAS has been 

participating in 

the UNFCCC 

negotiations since 

2009 and seeks to 

ensure that 

agricultural 

issues are 

considered in the 

negotiations and 

do not hamper 

free trade; also 

FAS in involved 

in the Climate 

and Clean Air 

Collation 

(CCAC) and the 

Climate Smart 

Agriculture 

(CSA) Alliance 

Global Ongoing Engage with 

relevant 

stakeholders; 

establish working 

relationships with 

various 

negotiation 

groups

-establishment 

agriculture work 

program and 

launch 

agriculture 

initiatives in the 

CCAC and CSA 

Alliance

State Dept.,

USDA-Forest 

Service, 

USDA-FAS

USDA-OCE

One FTE 

allocated 100 

per cent to this 

action; also 

there is a need 

for additional 

staff support

Responding to 

additional work load 

with limited 

resources

Launched new 

agriculture sector 

initiative in the CCAC

Foreign Agricultural Service

 52
Pillar # 3: Trade Capacity Building & Food Security

Current 

Actions

Action Goal Agency 

Lead

Description Scale TimeframePerformance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishments 

to Date

FAS trade 

and 

scientific 

capacity 

building

programs

Through OCBD 

programs, foreign 

participant receive 

knowledge, skills 

and technologies 

that may be 

applied in-country 

to accelerate 

climate mitigation 

or adaptation 

plans in the food 

and agriculture 

sector 

OCBD FAS-administered 

scientific 

exchanges and 

capacity- building 

programs are 

flexible, critical 

tools for USDA to 

engage countries 

on climate change 

priorities. These 

activities enable 

U.S. and 

international 

counterparts to 

jointly promote 

economic 

development and 

environmental 

quality in the 

agriculture sector 

and, overall, 

promote global 

food security. 

Global Ongoing # of participants in 

FAS administered 

fellowships for the 

Global Research 

Alliance on 

Agricultural 

Greenhouse Gases 

(target: 2/year)

# of FAS 

agreements with 

other federal 

agencies in 

support of 

international 

initiatives for 

climate change 

mitigation or 

adaptation (target: 

agreements with 

State and USAID)

OCBD 

collaborates 

with OASA, 

USDA/ARS and 

USAID on GRA 

fellowships

OCBD has 

formal 

implementing 

agreements in 

place with State 

and USAID for 

international 

climate change 

initiatives 

OCBD has a 

designated policy 

and planning 

coordinator for 

climate change 

issues and 

activities

FAS appropriated 

funds are typically 

sufficient for only 

5 GRA fellows 

per year, while 

recruitment of any

additional GRA 

fellows requires 

prior 

commitments of 

extramural 

funding.

Climate change 

activities carried 

out under 

interagency 

agreements are 

fully reimbursable

FAS relies heavily on 

extramural funding for 

climate change 

activities. In these 

cases, the scale and 

programmatic focus of 

the activities are largely 

driven by the external 

funding partner.

OCBD has delivered 

a total of 25 GRA 

Fellows, representing 

10 countries*

Though an agreement 

with State, OCBD 

delivered three ECPA 

demonstration 

projects. Two 

additional projects 

are underway.** 

 

*= GRA Fellows have represented Chile, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Mexico, the Philippines, Thailand, Uruguay, and Vietnam

Foreign Agricultural Service

 53
**= ECPA demonstration projects were completed in Ecuador, Honduras and Uruguay, while projects were initiated in Colombia and Panama 

Pillar # 3: Trade Capacity Building & Food Security (Cont.)

Current 

Actions

Action Goal Agency 

Lead

Description Scale TimeframePerformance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishments 

to Date

Foreign Agricultural Service

 54
Participating 

in Feed the 

Future

(FtF) 

working 

groups 

To increase the 

food security of 

FtF partner 

countries, 

particularly so 

that those 

countries 

become more 

resilient to 

possible climate 

change impact 

on their food 

and agriculture 

systems

OCBD The FtF working 

groups assess 

prevailing 

conditions, define 

priorities and

accordingly align 

USG resources 

that can develop 

the food and 

agricultural 

sectors of food 

insecure 

countries. .

FtF 

countrie

s

Ongoing OCBD 

participation in 

assigned FtF 

working groups 

(target: 100% 

OCBD 

attendance)

-% of FtF 

countries OCBD

recruits for 

participants in 

OCBD’s 

capacity-building 

fellowship and 

scientific 

exchange 

programs 

(target: 100% of 

FtF countries)

-# of participants 

from FtF counties 

in OCBD’s 

capacity building 

fellowship and 

scientific 

exchange 

programs. (target: 

68 participants)

USAID Bureau 

of Food 

Security leads 

the interagency 

FtF working 

groups

OCBD prioritizes 

candidates from 

FtF countries 

who are eligible 

to participate in 

OCBD capacity 

building and 

scientific 

exchange 

activities. 

Climate change 

mitigation and 

adaptation may not be 

the most pressing 

concern of FtF 

countries to strengthen 

their food security 

measures

In 2013 OCBD fully 

participated FtF 

Working Groups for 

Climate Change, 

Resilience, Global 

Policy Enabling 

Environment and 

other relevant areas.

In 2013, OCBD 

engaged participants 

from Bangaldesh, 

Ghana, Guatemala, 

Haiti, Hondurasand 

Kenya in capacity 

building activities, .

 55
Cross-Cutting

Current 

Actions

Action Goal Agency 

Lead

Description Scale TimeframePerformance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishments 

to Date

Change to: 

Maintain 

Agency wide 

Climate 

Change 

Working 

Group

Sustain Agency 

wide 

involvement in 

climate change 

matters

OASA This Working 

Group acts to 

quickly 

communicate 

about climate 

change issues 

throughout FAS. 

Likewise, the 

Working Group 

may be quickly 

mobilized to help 

coordinate 

agency-level 

responses or 

tasks related to 

climate change. 

DC and 

select 

FAS 

posts

Ongoing Quality of 

response to 

climate change 

issues

USDA-FAS Limited resources 

available 

Sustain Agency 

climate change 

commitment given 

competing areas of 

responsibility

Working Group 

completed 2012 and 

2013 Adaptation 

Plan and is currently 

drafting revisions to 

2014 Plan

Providing 

guidance for 

Global 

Agricultural 

Information 

Network 

(GAIN) 

reporting on 

climate 

change

Issue guidance 

to overseas 

FAS Offices

OCRA FAS has a section 

within GAIN for 

voluntary 

reporting on 

“climate 

change/global 

warming/food 

security” 

Global In 2014 Implement new 

guidance in 2014

FAS Limited resources 

available 

Keeping focused 

reporting that doesn’t 

require more time than 

resources available

Prepared draft 

guidelines for 

comment

Foreign Agricultural Service

 56
USDA Forest Service

Climate Change Adaptation Plan 2014

 57
Forest Service Climate Change Adaptation Plan 2014

DRAFT

I. Policy Framework

Mission

The mission of the Forest Service (FS) is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the Nation’s 

forests and grasslands to meet the needs of present and future generations. 

Americans rely on their forests and grasslands for a wide range of benefits—for provisioning services 

such as water, wood, and wild foods; for regulating services such as erosion, flood, and climate control; 

and for cultural services such as outdoor recreation, spiritual renewal, and aesthetic enjoyment. These 

services are connected and sustained through the integrity of the ecosystems on these lands. 

Goals and Strategic Approach

FS policies, developed over many years, were mostly devised before the agency took climate change into 

account in its programs for public land management, private forest landowner assistance, and research. 

Such policies might not provide the most effective means for guiding actions to address climate change 

across broad landscapes, jurisdictions, and resource areas; however, these policies did consider 

establishing and maintaining resilient forests and rangelands in light of stressors. The FS is identifying 

shortcomings in its current policies, procedures, and program guidance. The goal is to reformulate them 

where necessary to align resources with an effective climate change response and to more effectively 

collaborate with other Federal agencies, States, Tribes, and other stakeholders for landscape-scale 

conservation.

The FS approach for adapting to climate change encompasses a) climate-specific strategies across the 

agency and b) direct program-by-program efforts to integrate climate-related policies and guidance, 

where climate change is one of many drivers of change to be considered in sustaining forest and grassland 

ecosystems. Climate-specific goals and strategies include:

• USDA 2010-2015 Strategic Plan - Goal 2. Ensure our national forests and private working lands 

are conserved, restored, and made more resilient to climate change, while enhancing our water 

resources. 

o Objective 2.2 - Lead efforts to mitigate and adapt to climate change. 

• FS National Roadmap for Responding to Climate Change (Roadmap). In October 2008, the FS 

had introduced a Strategic Framework for Responding to Climate Change. The Roadmap builds 

upon the strategic framework and lays out three types of actions for the FS to employ in a 

continuous cycle of adaptive management informed by monitoring and evaluation:

o Assess current risks, vulnerabilities, policies, and gaps in knowledge.

o Engage internal and external partners in seeking solutions.

o Manage for resilience, in ecosystems as well as in human communities, through adaptation, 

mitigation, and sustainable consumption strategies.

Forest Service

 58
All three modes of action are dynamic and mutually reinforcing. They are interconnected through 

monitoring and evaluation, forming a continual feedback loop to allow opportunities for 

adjustment in direction or tactics.

• FS Climate Change Performance Scorecard (Scorecard) Individual National Forest System 

(NFS) field units apply the Scorecard to facilitate implementation of the Roadmap and USDA 

Strategic Plan. The Scorecard is completed annually in fiscal years 2011-2015. By 2015, each 

field unit is expected to answer Yes to at least seven of the Scorecard’s 10 elements (questions), 

with at least one Yes in each of the four dimensions outlined below. The Scorecard’s multiple 

dimensions ensure that each Unit works toward a balanced response to climate change. The four 

dimensions and ten elements are: 

o Organizational capacity - Engage employees through training and integrate 

climate change into program of work.

1. Employee Education

2. Designated Climate Change Coordinators

3. Program Guidance

o Engagement – Develop partnerships and transfer knowledge. 

4. Science and Management Partnerships

5. Other Partnerships

o Adaptation – Assess impacts of climate change and manage change.

6. Assessing Vulnerability

7. Adaptations Actions

8. Monitoring

o Mitigation and Sustainable Consumption – Assess carbon stocks and reduce our Agency 

footprint.

9. Carbon Assessment and Stewardship

10. Sustainable Operations

• Executive Order 13514 – Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic 

Performance. Directs each agency to not only develop a sustainability strategy and reduce 

greenhouse gas emissions but to develop policies and practices to support the Federal Adaptation 

Strategy. The Scorecard will simplify accomplishment reporting for this order.

• Executive Order 13653 – Preparing the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change. 

Directs agencies to develop or continue to develop, implement, and update comprehensive plans 

that integrate consideration of climate change risks and vulnerabilities into agency operations and 

overall mission objectives.

• Forest Service Global Change Research Strategy 2009-2019. In keeping with the research goals 

of the U.S. Global Change Research Program, the FS Research and Development mission area 

helps define climate change policy and develop best management practices for forests (both rural 

and urban) and grasslands in order to sustain ecosystem health and services (adaptation), and 

Forest Service

 59
increase carbon sequestration (mitigation), all under changing climate conditions. The 

fundamental research focus of the FS Global Change Research Strategy is to increase 

understanding of forest, woodland, and grassland ecosystems, use this information to project 

potential futures. This information and the resulting tools will facilitate vulnerability assessments 

and the development of management practices to increase the probability of achieving projected 

futures that best meet the needs of the Nation. 

The FS also incorporates climate considerations into program- or resource-specific policies and 

guidance. Examples include: 

• Ecological Restoration and Resilience Directive (FSM 2020). The primary objective of this 

foundational policy for sustainable management of National Forest System (NFS) lands is to

restore and maintain resilient ecosystems that will have greater capacity to withstand stressors 

and recover from disturbances, especially those under changing and uncertain environmental 

conditions, including climate change and extreme weather events.

• 2012 Planning Rule. This new rule provides improved ability to respond to climate change and 

other stressors through an adaptive framework of assessment, planning and monitoring and new 

provisions intended to improve resilience of ecosystems on NFS lands. Examples include:

o 219.6(b)(3): “Identify and evaluate existing information relevant to the plan area for...the 

ability of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems on the plan area to adapt to change.”

o 219.12(a)(5)(vi): Monitoring programs must include monitoring questions and indicators that 

address “...measurable changes on the plan area related to climate change and other stressors 

that may be affecting the plan area.”

• Genetic Resource Management and Climate Change: Genetic Options for Adapting National 

Forests to Climate Change. This strategy provides an overview of current climate change 

knowledge and potential implications for forest tree species, as well as goals, principles, and 

recommendations for enhancing forest resilience and resistance through a re-aligned “climatesmart” NFS Genetic Resource Management Program.

II. Planning for Climate Change Related Risk

Section 5(a) of E.O. 13653 states that, “each agency shall develop or continue to develop, implement, and 

update comprehensive plans that integrate consideration of climate change into agency operations and 

overall mission objectives...” The five elements (subsections) are addressed in the remainder of this Plan.

Impacts, Risks, and Vulnerability Assessment

The FS uses numerous national, regional, and local scale assessments to inform policies, programs, and 

land management planning of the impacts of climate change and other environmental stressors and 

influences. Examples include the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act Assessment; 

National Climate Assessment – Forest Sector Report; Southern Forest Futures Assessment; and NFS land 

management plan assessments.

Section 5(a)(i) - identification and assessment of climate change related impacts on and risks to 

the agency’s ability to accomplish its missions, operations, and programs; 

Forest Service

 60
• Physical and Biological Climatic Concerns. The FS mission is impacted by shifts in temperature

and precipitation patterns and amounts, extreme weather events, and climate variability. The FS

manages public forests and grasslands and works with States, Tribes and private landowners to

restore and sustain the health, diversity and productivity of the Nation’s forests and grasslands.

Changes in key climate variables affect the seasonality of hydrologic regimes, reproduction

cycles of pests and pathogens, and length of fire seasons. Fire seasons in the West have increased

by 78 days since the mid-1980s.5

 Disturbance facilitates the introduction and spread of invasive

species, which increase extinction risks for native species and other alterations of ecosystem

processes and functions. The changing climate is already altering species ranges and has the

potential to alter ecosystem structure in the future as evidenced by the mountain pine beetle (a

native insect) epidemic in the West. Management will require forward-looking approaches to

novel ecosystems instead of depending on historical ranges of variability. These impacts pose

challenges to sustaining forests and grasslands and the supply of goods and services upon which

society depends, such as clean drinking water, forest products, outdoor recreation opportunities,

and habitat.

o Wildfires - Increasing wildfire season length and extent of fire on the landscape.

Research estimates the potential for up to 100 percent increase in the number of acres burned

annually by 2050. Increasing wildfire response requires increased funding. Fire suppression

funding has grown from 16% of the FS budget in 1995 to 42% currently and funding is

transferred from other agency programs in years when suppression funds are exhausted.

All FS program accomplishments are reduced when wildfire suppression funds are exhausted.

The increased extent of high severity fire on the landscape coupled with communities

expanding into in the wild land-urban interface are reducing capacity to provide other

services, including increasing the residence of ecosystems, and puts personnel, the public,

communities, and infrastructure at higher risk.

Tribal communities and firefighting- NFS lands and bordering tribal lands are increasingly at

risk of fire. Tribes are particularly vulnerable to fires both on and off tribal lands (e.g., on

NFS and/or private lands over which they have no control or jurisdiction) which complicates

coordination of firefighting across shared landscapes with such frequent fires. These risks are

frequently exacerbated by a lack of adaptive capacity due to lack of resources, poverty, poor

or nonexistent infrastructure, and relative isolation.

Human Health and Safety – Firefighting employees and contractors, and residents in the wild

land-urban interface are increasingly at risk due to extreme wildfire behavior.

o Air Temperature – Prolonged personnel exposure to the elements during extreme

temperatures. Human health and safety - Risk to employees and contractor/cooperators.

Events that include atypical weather patterns experienced during the 2013-2014 winter season

has result in extremely cold temperatures in most regions, especially unusual in the southern

states. Higher summer temperatures may increase field personnel risk of heat exhaustion, heat

stroke, and dehydration. Has the potential to impact operations at all levels.

o Insects and Disease - Increased exposure to and spread of damaging insects and disease,

especially invasive species. Affects natural resource management on all lands. Tribal

5 Westerling, Hidalgo, Cayan, and Swetnam. 2006. Science 313: 940-943.

Forest Service

 61 
communities and Forest Health – NFS and bordering tribal lands are increasingly at risk of 

damaging insects and disease.

o Water Temperature - Increased water temperatures in rivers and lakes, lower water 

levels in late summer, and drying of streams and ponds. Tribal communities and 

Watershed, Fish, Wildlife, Air and Rare Plants– Forest Service and bordering tribal lands are 

increasingly at risk regarding watershed and fisheries maintenance. Tribes are particularly 

vulnerable to fluctuations in water temperatures and flow as many communities rely on 

aquatic species for subsistence and cultural purposes. These risks are frequently exacerbated 

by a lack adaptive capacity due to lack of resources, poverty, poor or nonexistent 

infrastructure, and relative isolation. A further consideration is that failure to manage trust 

lands in a sustainable manner may result in abrogation of treaty rights, creating a risk position 

for federal natural resource agencies. 

o Rising Sea Levels - Tribal communities, NFS lands, infrastructure. Coastal NFS lands 

and coastal Tribes are increasingly at risk of damage to their lands, including infrastructure, 

due to rising sea level. Tribes are particularly vulnerable to see level rise as many tribal 

communities are place-based, with limited or no opportunity to relocate without extreme cost 

and/or Congressional action. Those tribes that rely on aquatic species for subsistence and 

cultural purposes that are affected by sea level are further at risk. These risks are frequently 

exacerbated by a lack adaptive capacity due to lack of resources, poverty, poor or nonexistent 

infrastructure, and relative isolation. A further consideration is that failure to manage trust 

lands in a sustainable manner may result in abrogation of treaty rights, creating a risk position 

for federal natural resource agencies.

o Extreme Weather Events - Impact to agency facilities, operations, and emergency 

response capability as a result of severe weather conditions. Affects all agency operations 

and programs. Past events such as Hurricanes Katrina and Irene had significant impact to 

infrastructures and personnel. Because FS has employees in all states, there is a high 

probability that a major function could be impacted by such weather events, requiring those 

offices to transfer duties until they can relocate to their COOP facility and get up and running. 

o Increased Rainfall – Transportation infrastructure concerns. With increasing heavy rain 

events, the extensive road system on NFS lands will require increased maintenance and/or 

modification of infrastructure (e.g. larger culverts or replacement of culverts with bridges).

o Fluctuating Precipitation and Temperature - Outdoor recreation and recreation 

infrastructure. Ski areas, reservoirs, and campgrounds are strongly influenced by past and 

current climate. Preserving high-quality outdoor recreation experiences will depend not only 

on the condition of the land, facilities, and transportation infrastructure but also on where 

such opportunities can be accommodated safely and managed under a changing climate. The 

projected increase in U.S. population and the continual decline of public access to privatelyowned undeveloped land will increase demand for recreation opportunities on public land.

• Economic and Marketing Concerns. Climate change may influence the demand for energy and 

its mix of sources. Woody biomass is gaining attention as a renewable energy source. An 

increasing demand for renewable energy may affect how forests are managed and influence a 

wide range of ecosystem services, such as water quantity and quality, wildlife habitat, and carbon 

sequestration. Changes in forest management objectives could affect the price of traditional forest 

products and downstream products such as housing.

Forest Service

 62
Management options to maintain healthy ecosystems include thinning stands to reduce moisture 

stress and regenerating stands where they have been decimated by insects or disease. Having a 

market for products from these operations is important to offset management costs and improve 

local/rural economies. Because of the demise of the forest industry in many areas, a major 

marketing effort will be necessary to reestablish mills and processing plants.

Potential impacts to other ecosystem services also may affect social and economic sectors. For 

example, climate change may adversely affect river-based outdoor recreation opportunities 

through changes in the timing and volumes of streamflow; thereby impacting many rural 

communities dependent on favorable water flow and a river based economy.

The economic benefits of outfitting and guiding and river-related recreation use are large 

contributors to local and rural economies where rivers are large enough to support such 

economies. They should be recognized just as are reservoir operations and other developed 

recreation opportunities (campgrounds) along riverways.

• Capacity Building. The FS provides a wide variety of climate change training opportunities and 

communication materials for its employees, other agencies, and the public. These range from 

basic awareness education to highly technical seminars, workshops, and courses for conducting 

vulnerability assessments and developing adaptation and mitigation strategies. 

Partnerships between scientists and land managers are being strengthened to improve the focus 

of research and technology to address current and emerging science and information needs. 

Resource inventory, monitoring, and assessment activities and decision support tools are being 

better aligned and coordinated across FS programs and with partner agencies at multiple scales. 

Examples of ongoing and newly initiated capacity-building efforts are:

o Climate Change Resource Center – The primary web-based science delivery portal for FS 

employees and partners who need information and tools to address the impacts of climate 

change in land management decision making.

o Environmental Threat Assessment Centers (Eastern Forest Environmental Threat 

Assessment Center and Western Wild land Environmental Threat Assessment Center) -

Provide interdisciplinary resources that are actively developing new technology and tools to 

anticipate and respond to forest threats, including climate change.

o Regional Hubs – Seven regional hubs now established across the US. They are repositories 

of data and offer practical, science-based tools and strategies farmers, ranchers, and forest 

land owners need to adapt and succeed in the face of a changing climate. The Hubs will 

provide outreach and information to producers on ways to mitigate risks; public education 

about the risks climate change poses to agriculture, ranchlands and forests; regional climate 

risk and vulnerability assessments; and centers of climate forecast data and information. They 

will also link a broad network of partners participating in climate risk adaptation and 

mitigation, including universities; non-governmental organizations; federal agencies such as 

the Department of Interior and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; Native 

Nations and organizations; state departments of environment and agriculture; research 

centers; farm groups and more.

o Conservation Education Programs - Increase environmental literacy through partnerships 

with groups who educate urban populations on the value of well-managed public and private 

forested lands and, through natural resource stewardship, improve the public’s quality of life. 

Forest Service

 63
Frequency of extreme events and more climatic variability will challenge stewardship 

programs that directly benefit urban dwellers. 

Framework to Continually Review and Update Impact Assessment and Risk Determination

• Understanding Risks – Actions the FS takes to better understand risks and opportunities. 

Management of forests and grasslands and associated resources involves making long-term 

commitments of resources and investments. The FS continues to refine its planning and decision 

making processes regarding the consideration of climate change risk and uncertainty. In January 

2009, national guidance was developed for the NFS to address climate change in land 

management planning and project-level National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analyses. 

The 2012 Planning Rule and forthcoming directives and guidance are updating that initial 

guidance. 

Agency research scientists work closely with land managers to downscale climate projections to 

better understand the range of potential ecosystem impacts, conduct vulnerability assessments for 

key resources, and develop localized adaptation approaches and options. For example, 

vulnerability assessments for water resources and aquatic ecosystems were recently completed on 

12 national forests, representing each of the nine FS regions. Likewise, two regions have 

completed risk assessments of their forest tree species. These serve as pilots for completing 

additional assessments. Also, comprehensive risk assessments are being completed when 

planning recreation infrastructure projects; and a risk assessment of all developed recreation sites 

was conducted recently to identify and mitigate public safety issues related to extreme weather 

events.

In cooperation with national, state, and local partners, urban forest health monitoring efforts of 

the FS are underway to identify existing and potential pest and disease threats to our urban forests 

and help understand the impact of climate change on the vulnerability of urban forests to 

infestations. 

All NFS unit level land management planning and project planning involves collaboration with 

the public and key partners such as Tribes and local governments. The FS is engaged with 

Department of Interior and State agencies in using the newly formed Landscape Conservation 

Cooperatives (LCCs), Climate Science Centers, and USDA Regional Hubs to coordinate sharing 

of resource information and science and developing adaptation strategies across these broader 

landscapes. 

Following are example policies, programs, processes, and actions that provide frameworks for 

regularly monitoring and assessing risks and vulnerabilities:

o Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act (RPA) Assessment - every 10 

years

o National Climate Assessment – Forest Sector Report - every four years

o Regional assessments, such as the Southern Forest Futures Assessment.

o National Cohesive Wild Land Fire Management Strategy 

o Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program (CFLRP) monitoring

Forest Service

 64
o Forest Health Monitoring Program – Determines the status, changes, and trends in indicators 

of forest condition on an annual basis and, in a federal/state partnership, produces the 

National Insect and Disease Risk Map every 5-6 years.

o NFS Land Management Planning – Monitor and assess regularly. Revise plans every 10-15 

years, including consideration of changes in environmental, social and economic conditions 

and stressors.

o Watershed Condition Framework - assess conditions every four years

o Continuity of Operations (COOP) Plans

o FS Health and Safety Program

• Sustained Adaptation Process. The Climate Change Advisor’s Office will lead the Adaptation 

Plan’s review, monitoring of actions listed in the appendix, and Plan update. Monitoring of 

resource conditions and trends with input from FS Research and Development, field units, other 

agencies, and stakeholders will inform prioritization or adjustment of national policies and 

programs. 

Climate Change Performance Scorecard annual reporting will track progress on implementing 

major actions of the Roadmap and this Adaptation Plan. Improvement in Scorecard results will 

reflect effectiveness of agency strategic approaches, policies, this Adaptation Plan, and other 

efforts within the FS and by partners. The Scorecard itself will also be reviewed regularly to 

ensure it continues to meet the agency’s needs, with potential to expand its application to other 

mission areas. 

The Adaptation Services Framework, a State & Private Forestry companion to the Performance 

Scorecard is being developed.

National and regional assessments will continue to monitor the health and productivity of the 

Nation’s forests and rangelands. Examples include:

o Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act (RPA) Assessment

o National Climate Assessment – Forest Sector Report

o Southern Forest Futures Project 

o Northern Forest Futures Project.

The 2012 Planning Rule requires national forests and grasslands to monitor progress towards 

their desired conditions and including key indicators of ecosystem status and measurable changes 

on the plan area related to climate change and other stressors that may be affecting the plan area.

Significant Risk

Section 5(a)(iii) - a description of how any climate change related risk identified pursuant to 

paragraph (i) of this subsection that is deemed so significant that it impairs an agency’s statutory 

mission or operation will be addressed, including through the agency’s existing reporting 

requirements;

Forest Service

 65
• Impact/Risk Considered Significant. Increasing wildfire season length, size and severity of large

fires, coupled with an expanding wildland-urban interface, has been multiplying wildfire

suppression costs. Fire suppression funding has grown from 16% of the FS budget in 1995 to 42% 

currently and funding is transferred from other agency programs in years when suppression funds 

are exhausted.

All FS program accomplishments are reduced when wildfire suppression funds are exhausted.

The increased extent of high severity fire on the landscape coupled with communities expanding

into in the wild land-urban interface are reducing capacity to provide other services, including

increasing the residence of ecosystems, and puts personnel, the public, communities, and

infrastructure at higher risk.

• Rationale for Classifying the Risk as Significant. Wildfire suppression expenditures are now a

significant percentage of the agency’s budget, reducing capabilities to provide other critical

services, including our capacity to manage forests for increased resilience, to protect their

capacity to sequester and store carbon, and provide other ecosystem services. Increasingly large

and severe wildfires will result in increased restoration needs as well as decreased capacity to

manage for other services. They also increase risk to personnel and communities.

• Action(s) that may decrease the threat/risk. Change funding mechanism for wildfire suppression

to protect funding of programs and activities that restore fire-adapted ecosystems, resilience, and

accomplish other adaptation priorities. The FLAME Act of 2009 established a separate account

for funding emergency wildfire suppression activities undertaken on DOI and NFS lands.

Additional legislation is being considered (Wildfire Disaster Funding Act of 2013 – HEN13D10).

• Can the action be addressed exclusively by the agency or do others need to be involved?

Congressional action is required to change funding structure.

FS Engineering and Watershed programs are developing national guidance to ensure flood 

emergencies are appropriately responded to and infrastructure is rebuilt to be more flood 

resilient. This guidance includes FS Manual and Handbook direction and development of 

incident command procedures. This is being coordinated with the USFWS, NRCS, BLM, 

USACE, and State Department. 

Section 5(a)(iv) - a description of how the agency will consider the need to improve climate 

adaptation and resilience, including the costs and benefits of such improvement, with respect to 

agency suppliers, supply chain, real property investments, and capital equipment purchases such 

as updating agency policies for leasing, building upgrades, relocation of existing facilities and 

equipment, and construction of new facilities; 

Section 5(a)(v) - a description of how the agency will contribute to coordinated interagency efforts 

to support climate preparedness and resilience at all levels of government, including collaborative 

work across agencies’ regional offices and hubs, and through coordinated development of 

information, data, and tools, consistent with section 4 of this order; 

Forest Service

 66 
The FS supports coordinated climate adaptation efforts through its substantial contributions of science, 

data, information, tools, and technical support to Federal, State, and local agencies; Tribes; the business 

sector and producers; other partners and stakeholders; and the international community. Examples 

include:

• Regional Hubs: FS is host to five of the seven USDA regional hubs recently established. These 

provide outreach and information to producers (farmers, ranchers, and forest land owners) on 

ways to mitigate risks; public education about the risks climate change poses to agriculture, 

ranchlands and forests; regional climate risk and vulnerability assessments; and centers of climate 

forecast data and information. They will also link a broad network of partners participating in 

climate risk adaptation and mitigation, including universities; non-governmental organizations; 

federal agencies such as the Department of Interior and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration; Native Nations and organizations; state departments of environment and 

agriculture; research centers; farm groups and more 

• Western and Eastern Environmental Threat Assessment Centers

• Climate Change Resource Center (www.fs.fed.us/ccrc)

• Forest Service Global Change Research Strategy 2009-2019

• Interagency Coordination on Climate Projections

• Inventory, Monitoring, and Assessment Strategy

• Watershed and Terrestrial Condition Frameworks for integrated resource restoration

• Genetic Diversity

• National Cohesive Wild Land Fire Management Strategy

• National Fish, Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy

• FS is an active partner in Landscape Conservation Cooperatives and is lead agency for the 

Caribbean LCC.

• Tribal support through:

o National Fish, Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy, Landscape Conservation 

Cooperatives, and other interagency efforts.

o Tribal Climate Change Network and FS Regional Climate Hubs

o Backstop tribal representatives on the White House/CEQ climate task force.

o Tribal Climate Change Adaptation Community of Practice (FS, White House, DOI’s BIA 

and USGS, DOE, EPA, and CEQ)

o Inter-Agency Forum on Climate Change Impacts & Adaptations.

Section 5(a)(ii) - a description of programs, policies, and plans the agency has already put in place, 

as well as additional actions the agency will take, to manage climate risks in the near term and 

build resilience in the short and long term;

Forest Service

 67
FS actions already completed, initiated, or proposed in response to climate-related impacts and risks 

(Section 5(a)(ii) are described in the Action Register below. In addition, the Action Register describes in 

greater detail those FS actions that contribute to interagency efforts to support climate preparedness and 

resilience, including coordinated development of information, data, and tools (Section 5(a)(v).

 68
Executive Order 13653, Sec. 5 - Federal Agency Planning for Climate Change Related Risk

USDA Forest Service Action Register

Action Description Action Goal Agency 

Lead

Risk/Opportunity 

Description Scale Timeframe Implementation Methods

Performance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/ 

Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishme

nts to Date

Implement the USDAForest Service (FS) 

Climate Change Roadmap 

and Performance 

Scorecard

Integration of 

climate 

change 

response into 

the agency’s 

policies, 

programs, and 

operations.

Climate 

Change 

Advisor’s 

Office

Natural resources, FS mission 

and operations are broadly at 

risk

Roadmap identifies ongoing 

actions and establishes short 

and longer term strategic 

actions and investments to 

respond and adapt to climate 

change. 

Performance Scorecard tracks 

progress implementing the 

Roadmap by individual 

national forests and 

grasslands.

Local, 

summarized 

at Regional 

and 

National 

levels

Ongoing Through various 

means, including 

policy 

formulation, and 

science support 

at national, 

regional, and 

local levels.

Percent of 

National Forests 

in compliance 

with a climate 

change 

adaptation and 

mitigation 

strategy

Annual reporting 

by field units on 

implementing at 

least seven of 

ten scorecard 

elements by end 

of FY2015.

Increased 

collaboration such 

as sharing of 

science, data, and 

tools,

Need to 

improve 

scorecard 

guidance; 

limitations of 

field units to 

conduct 

vulnerability 

assessments.

Roadmap and 

Scorecard issued 

in 2011.

By end of 

FY2013, 49% of 

NFS units have 

met the 

performance 

scorecard target. 

Forest Service

69
Action Description Action Goal Agency 

Lead

Risk/Opportunity 

Description Scale Timeframe Implementation Methods

Performance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/ 

Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishme

nts to Date

Develop Adaptation 

Services Framework 

Adaptation 

integrated into 

S&PF 

program and 

service 

delivery, 

improving 

assistance to 

forest 

landowners

and managers, 

allowing them 

to continue to 

meet their

unique 

management 

objectives in a 

changing 

climate

Climate 

Change 

Advisor’s 

Office, S&PFNA

Opportunity to collaboratively 

develop and provide a system 

to evaluate and adapt State & 

Private Forestry programs and 

policies in the delivery of 

climate change services to 

partners (non-Federal forest 

managers, landowners and 

urban communities). 

National, 

but may 

include 

regionspecific 

goals and 

guidance.

Draft 

Framework in 

development. 

Final in 

December 

2014

Northeast 

Area pilot in 

FY2015 along 

with updated 

S&PF 

program 

guidance. FSwide 

implementatio

n of 

Framework 

reporting in 

FY2020.

The deliverable 

would be the 

S&PF 

counterpart to 

the NFS Climate 

Change 

Performance 

Scorecard.

Publication of

the S&PF 

Adaptation 

Services 

Framework and 

Guidance 

Document

Framework 

Proposal drafted 

and currently 

under internal 

review. 

Forest Service

70
Action Description Action Goal Agency 

Lead

Risk/Opportunity 

Description Scale Timeframe Implementation Methods

Performance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/ 

Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishme

nts to Date

Develop national policy 

requiring the entire agency 

to develop COOP plans to 

ensure operability 

continues when impacted 

by an extreme weatherrelated event. 

Administrative units 

develop COOP Plans to 

ensure facilities have 

continuing operating 

capabilities if vulnerable 

to extreme weather events. 

Entire FS will 

have COOP 

Plans to 

implement in 

the event of an 

emergency 

requiring

relocation to 

an alternate 

operating 

facility, 

devolution of 

functions, etc.

Office of 

Safety and 

Occupational 

Health

Significant impact to 

facilities, other infrastructure, 

and agency operations, 

including emergency 

response, as a result of 

extreme weather events

National, 

Regional, 

Locals

Ongoing WO will provide 

template to 

create COOP 

plans by October 

1, 2014. Once 

created, plans 

will be 

reviewed/ 

updated at least 

yearly or when 

procedures 

change and 

warrant an 

immediate 

update. 

Yes. Coordinate 

with local 

agencies, esp

regarding 

continuity of FS 

emergency 

response 

assistance.

Personnel time 

required to 

develop new 

COOP plans

The WO and 

several regional 

offices currently 

have COOP 

Plans. 

Forest Service

71
Action Description Action Goal Agency 

Lead

Risk/Opportunity 

Description Scale Timeframe Implementation Methods

Performance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/ 

Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishme

nts to Date

Safety Training: Train 

employees on proper 

procedures for working in 

and surviving extreme

weather conditions, such 

as prolonged exposure to 

extremely high or low

temperatures, 

precipitation, and wind

Employees are 

prepared to 

protect 

themselves 

when working 

in extreme 

weather 

conditions.

Office of 

Safety and 

Occupational 

Health

Human Health and Safety -

Prolonged employee exposure 

to the elements during 

extreme high and low 

temperatures, potential 

flooding, or high wind events. 

National, 

Regional, 

Local

Ongoing Evaluations will 

be done during 

the WO 

assessments

USFS OSOH 

currently has 

procedures and 

policies to 

ensure 

employees 

understand 

hazards 

associated with 

prolonged 

exposure to 

extreme weather 

conditions as 

outlined in the 

Health and 

Safety Code 

Handbook, FSH 

6709.11.

Develop Flood Response 

guidance and teams

Rebuild 

infrastructure 

to be more 

flood resilient

Engineering/ 

Watershed

Increased risk of flooding. 

Opportunity to create flood 

response guidance and teams 

to assist forest and non- forest 

lands in flood emergencies

National 

and 

International

December 

2014

Guidance, 

manual 

handbook 

direction and 

development of 

incident 

command 

procedures 

Flood 

emergencies 

responded to and 

infrastructure 

improved

USFWS, NRCS, 

BLM, USACE, 

State Department

Stream 

Simulation 

Design 

development

Forest Service

72
Action Description Action Goal Agency 

Lead

Risk/Opportunity 

Description Scale Timeframe Implementation Methods

Performance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/ 

Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishme

nts to Date

Issue Ecological 

Restoration and Resilience 

Policy (FSM 2020)

Provides 

foundational 

policy for 

sustainable 

management 

of NFS lands. 

Forest 

Management

Addresses all risks and 

vulnerabilities of ecosystems 

and associated infrastructure. 

Objective is to restore and 

maintain resilient ecosystems 

that will have greater capacity 

to withstand stressors and 

recover from disturbances, 

especially those under 

changing and uncertain 

environmental conditions, 

including climate change and 

extreme weather events.

National Finalize 

directive in 

May 2014

Issue directive USFWS and other 

federal land 

management 

agencies 

Further 

integrating the 

policy into 

other agency 

policies and 

programs 

Interim directive 

first issued in 

September 2008; 

reissued in 2010 

2011,and 2013; 

Proposed 

directive 

published in 

Federal Register 

Revise NFS Planning Rule National 

Forest System 

(NFS) land 

management 

planning 

policy and 

procedures 

include 

consideration 

of climate 

change

Ecosystem 

Management 

Coordination

Prior rule was out of date. 

Revised process for 

establishing, amending and 

revising land management 

plans for national forests and 

grasslands. Incorporates 

consideration of climate 

change into land management 

plans through assessments and 

monitoring.

National Completed Early adopter 

units are 

developing new 

approaches, 

tools, etc. New 

rule will be 

implemented as 

forests and 

grasslands revise 

their plans.

Number or 

percentage of 

LMPs revised 

under the 2012 

Rule

Coordinated with 

CEQ, OMB, 

DOJ, EPA 

USFWS, and 

NOAA Fisheries

NA Several 

lawsuits filed

Planning Rule 

finalized March 

2012

Forest Service

73
Action Description Action Goal Agency 

Lead

Risk/Opportunity 

Description Scale Timeframe Implementation Methods

Performance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/ 

Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishme

nts to Date

Revise Planning Rule 

Directives (FSM 1920 and 

FSH 1909.12)

NFS units will 

have land 

management 

plans that 

provide long 

term direction 

for climate 

change 

adaptation and 

mitigation

address the 

impacts and 

risks of 

climate 

change.

Ecosystem 

Management 

Coordination

Opportunity to incorporate 

climate change adaptation 

guidance into 2012 Planning 

Rule directives. Will ensure 

consideration of climate 

change when NFS units revise 

their land management plans.

National May 2014 Issuance of 

directives to 

field units.

Final directives 

are issued. 

Coordinating with 

CEQ, OMB, 

DOJ, EPA 

USFWS, and 

NOAA Fisheries

NA. Work with 

science 

community on 

estimating 

uncertainty and 

risk and 

providing 

additional 

guidance in risk 

and 

vulnerability 

assessments 

and adaptation 

options. 

Addressing

17,449 public 

comments on 

proposed 

planning 

directives. 

Revise National Forest 

and Grassland Land 

Management Plans

(LMPs) under the 2012 

Planning Rule and 

directives.

LMPs are 

“climatesmart.” 

Ecosystem 

Management 

Coordination

Older LMPs may not reflect 

new science and information 

on risks to sustainable 

ecosystems and communities 

from impacts of stressors, 

including climate change. For 

plans under the 2012 Planning 

Rule, assessments should 

evaluate vulnerability of key 

resources related to LMP

decisions. As LMPs are 

revised, climate adaptation 

strategies are developed and 

incorporated as needed. 

Local Ongoing.

Unit LMPs are 

revised under 

the 2012 Rule 

and directives 

as per the 

national 

schedule 

Land 

management 

planning process

implemented by 

individual or 

grouped NFS 

units.

Number of plans 

revised annually

under the 2012 

Planning Rule.

Extensive 

intergovernmental 

coordination 

occurs at the scale 

of national 

forests, states and 

regions in 

preparation of 

these plans. 

Includes 

coordination with 

tribal, state and 

local governments 

and other federal 

agencies.

Budget 

limitations and 

collaboration 

slow the pace 

of LMP

revisions. 

Insufficient 

field resources 

to complete 

revisions. 

Difficulty 

meeting 

complex 

planning 

requirements . 

Controversy 

and litigation 

that drags out 

LMP revision 

process.

Baseline carbon 

assessments 

completed for 

each NFS unit. 

Publication of 

proposed final 

plans and Final 

EISs for 6 plan 

areas in the last 

8 months.

Forest Service

74
Action Description Action Goal Agency 

Lead

Risk/Opportunity 

Description Scale Timeframe Implementation Methods

Performance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/ 

Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishme

nts to Date

Update Silvicultural 

Practices Directive (FSM 

2470)

Update 

directive to 

incorporate

current Forest 

Service policy 

direction

Forest 

Management

Opportunity to provide 

direction and guidance on

ecological restoration, 

management at landscape 

scale, and managing for 

climate change. 

National Finalize in FY

2014

Issuance of 

directive to field 

units.

Final directive is

issued.

None NA Accompanying 

handbook 

needs revision 

to reflect 

changes made 

in directive.

Draft directive 

completed with 

collaboration 

from R&D and 

S&PF. Final 

draft submitted 

to ORMS for 

review and 

publishing.

Forest Service

75
Action Description Action Goal Agency 

Lead

Risk/Opportunity 

Description Scale Timeframe Implementation Methods

Performance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/ 

Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishme

nts to Date

Implement National 

Cohesive Wild Land Fire 

Management Strategy

Landscapes 

are more 

resilient, 

communities 

are adapted to 

fire, fire 

personnel 

have safe 

areas to work 

within

Fire and 

Aviation 

Management

Increasing wildfire season 

length, severity, and extent of 

fire on the landscape.

Risk reduction - Addresses the 

nation's wildfire problems by 

focusing on three key areas: 

Restore and Maintain 

Landscapes, Fire Adapted 

Communities, and Response 

to Fire. 

National, 

Regional

Ongoing. 

Phase III of 

plan to be 

finalized in 

FY 2014

Strategy being 

implemented in 

three phases.

Restoration 

component 

involves 

establishing 

resilient fireadapted 

ecosystems, 

which would 

also be better 

adapted to the 

effects of 

climate change 

and other 

stressors.

Implement 

through 

programs and 

projects, in 

collaboration 

with partner 

agencies, Tribes, 

landowners. 

Cohesive 

Strategy Goals 

and Performance 

Measures being 

developed. Fiveyear review 

cycle to provide 

updates to 

Congress.

Wild land Fire 

Leadership 

Council (WFLC), 

representing FS, 

DOI , States, 

Tribes, and local 

agencies

Phases I and II 

completed.

Forest Service

76
Action Description Action Goal Agency 

Lead

Risk/Opportunity 

Description Scale Timeframe Implementation Methods

Performance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/ 

Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishme

nts to Date

Implement National Fish, 

Wildlife and Plants 

Climate Adaptation 

Strategy (NFWPCAS) and 

FS goals

Landscapes 

are more 

resilient, 

maintain 

function and 

productivity

Watershed, 

Fish, Wildlife, 

Air, and Rare 

Plants

Opportunity to improve 

efficiency and effectiveness 

by identifying FS goals and 

strategic actions that can be 

implemented in alignment 

with NFWPCAS

National 2014 Review agency 

programs and 

strategic plans 

and NFWPCAS 

Crosswalk 

established 

between FS 

goals and 

strategic actions 

and NFWPCAS 

goals, strategies, 

and actions.

Joint 

Implementation 

Working Group 

(JIWG) 

JIWG 

established

Forest Service

77
Increase the pace of 

restoration on NFS lands

Landscapes 

are more 

resilient so as 

to maintain 

function, 

productivity, 

and adaptive 

capacity.

Forest 

Management

Risk reduction - Initiative lays 

out a series of ongoing and 

future actions related to the 

use of active forest 

management as one important 

tool to maintain and restore 

the functions and processes 

characteristic of healthy, 

resilient forests and 

watersheds. Many of these 

actions also support 

adaptation of ecosystems to 

climate change. 

Local Ongoing.

FY 2012-2015

On-the-ground 

resource 

management 

treatments

FS annual 

restoration 

performance 

metrics

(Resiliency 

Measure)

FY 2014 target 

is 2.7 million ac

FS and NRCS are 

working in 

partnership to 

accomplish 

needed restoration 

across national 

forest/private land 

boundaries

Budget 

limitations 

restrict how 

much 

restoration 

work is 

accomplished

Phase II of the 

Restoration 

Strategy to 

Deputy UnderSecretary 

requesting 

department 

support, 

included 

advocating 

expanding 

Good Neighbor 

Authority and 

reauthorization 

of Stewardship 

Contracting.

Restoration 

accomplishment

s from 23 

Collaborative 

Forest

Landscape 

Restoration 

Projects

A team has been 

developing 

restoration 

performance 

measures 

expected to be 

included in FY 

16 

Congressional 

Budget 

justification in 

July. 2014.

Put in place 3 

new categorical 

exclusions for 

soil and water 

projects. 

Acres treated:

FY 2012: 2.56 

million ac;

FY2013: 2.5 

million ac

Forest Service

78
Implement Western Bark 

Beetle Strategy (NFS 

lands)

Improve 1) 

human safety, 

2) forest 

recovery, and 

3) long-term 

forest 

resilience

Forest 

Management

Risk reduction - Addresses the 

West’s bark beetle problems 

by focusing on three goals: 

human safety, forest recovery, 

and long-term forest 

resiliency. Removal of 

standing or dead hazardous 

trees near roads, along trails, 

and in campgrounds is top 

priority. The strategy is 

restoring healthy forest 

ecosystems in beetle-killed 

areas through planting 

appropriate species and 

thinning.

National –

the strategy 

covers 

regions 1-6.

Ongoing.

FY 2011 -

2016

Through FS 

programs and 

projects, in 

collaboration 

with state 

governments. 

Acres treated 

for: hazardous 

fuels; vegetation 

established and

improved; 

noxious weeds 

and invasive 

plants; native 

pests; Acres of 

forestlands 

treated using 

timber sales

FS works in 

collaboration with 

state governments 

in the Western 

States.

Budget 

limitations

Limited 

markets for 

dead trees; 

litigations are 

on-going 

challenges.

FY11-FY13: 

85,0703 acres 

treated; 3,838 

miles of roads 

and trails had 

hazard trees 

removed; 851.4 

MBF of timber 

and 410,823 tons 

of biomass were 

produced. FS 

spent $321.3 M 

supporting 

safety, recovery

and resiliency 

activities

Implement National 

Strategic Tree Planting 

Initiative

Dual goals: 

Increase 

community 

resilience and 

sequester and 

store carbon.

Cooperative 

Forestry

Risk reduction - Establish tree 

planting projects in urban and 

community forests to increase 

the amount of carbon 

sequestered and carbon 

emissions avoided. Also helps 

communities adapt to 

increasing temperatures by 

increasing cooling effect and 

other ecosystem services 

provided by urban trees.

National Ongoing.

FY 2012-2015

Through 

programs and 

projects, in 

collaboration 

with partner 

organizations 

and 

communities. 

Number of trees 

planted. 

Amount of 

carbon 

sequestered and 

emissions offset 

per federal dollar 

invested

NA at this time. Initiative 

made possible 

by a 

Cooperative 

Agreement in 

2012 with 

Arbor Day 

Foundation. 

No other 

funding 

resource needs 

are anticipated 

at this time.

NA at this time. Currently nine 

electric utility 

companies 

participate in the 

program with 

nearly 17,000 

trees planted in 

the fall of 2013.

Forest Service

79
Promote wood as a green 

building material (FS)

Supports dual 

goals of 

adaptation and 

mitigation. 

Increases 

utilization of 

wood to help 

facilitate 

ecological 

restoration and 

adaptation 

activities.

Research & 

Development

Opportunity - Promote and 

seek recognition by the U.S. 

Green Building Council and 

others of the environmental 

benefits of wood building 

products. Supports restoration 

of forest ecosystems to make 

them more resilient to climate 

change and other stressors, 

while mitigating climate 

change through wood’s 

substitution for energyintensive building materials.

National Ongoing

FY 2012-2014

Percent 

completion of 

Life Cycle 

Inventory (LCI) 

wood database 

update for Life 

Cycle 

Assessment 

(LCA) use and 

EDP 

establishment 

for wood 

products to meet 

Green Building 

standards

Collaborate on 

changes in 

certification

Wood To Energy Supports dual 

goals of 

adaptation and 

mitigation. 

Increase 

utilization of 

wood to help 

facilitate 

ecological 

restoration and 

adaptation 

activities.

Cooperative 

Forestry

Opportunity to create and 

expand markets for smalldiameter material and lowvalued trees removed from 

forest restoration activities. 

Grant funds are targeted to 

help communities, 

entrepreneurs, and others turn 

residues into marketable forest 

products and/or energy 

products. Products help fund 

treatments that restore 

resilience of forests to 

stressors, including climate 

change

National Ongoing Grant Program Metric Tons Budget 

limitations

Forest Service

80
Contributions to Coordinated Interagency Efforts, Including Development of Information, Data, and Tools

Implement Forest Service 

Global Change Research 

Strategy 2009-2019

Provide 

science that 

supports 

adaptation 

Research & 

Development

Fundamental research focus of 

the FS Global Change 

Research Strategy is to 

increase understanding of 

forest, woodland, grassland, 

and urban ecosystems so they 

can be managed to sustain and 

provide ecosystem services 

for future generations.

National Ongoing

FY 2009-2019

Research, 

publications and 

other technology 

transfer 

activities

Broad diversity 

of research 

products 

including peerreviewed 

publications, 

number of tools 

developed, 

customersatisfaction 

surveys and 

science delivery 

efforts, such as 

workshops.

Coordinates with 

USGCRP

Budget 

limitations

Forest Service

81
Forest and Rangeland 

Renewable Resources 

Planning Act (RPA) 

Assessments

Provide 

science to 

inform policy, 

including 

adaptation 

Research & 

Development

Publication: Future of 

America’s Forests and 

Rangelands: Forest Service 

2010 Resources Planning Act 

Assessment

This scientific assessment 

provides a snapshot of current 

U.S. forest and rangeland 

conditions and trends on all 

ownerships, identifies drivers 

of change, and projects 

conditions 50 years into the 

future. Includes analyses of 

forests, rangelands, wildlife 

and fish, biodiversity, water, 

outdoor recreation, 

wilderness, urban forests, and 

the effects of climate change 

on these resources.

National, 

Regional

Ongoing -

every 10 years

Conduct 

assessment. 

Distribute/post 

publications

Research 

publications

Useful to other 

agencies, land 

managers, and 

sectors

2010 RPA 

Assessment 

published in 

2012

Forest Service

82
National Climate 

Assessment – Forest 

Sector Report

Provide 

science to 

inform policy, 

including 

adaptation

Research & 

Development

Publication: Effects of 

Climatic Variability and 

Change on Forest 

Ecosystems: A Comprehensive 

Science Synthesis for the U.S. 

Forest Sector.

A scientific assessment of 

current condition and likely 

future condition of forest 

resources in US relative to 

climatic variability and 

change. Assessment provides 

technical input to the NCA 

and serves as a framework for 

managing forest resources in 

the US.

National, 

Regional

Ongoing -

every four 

years

Conduct 

assessment. 

Distribute/post 

publication

Research 

publication

Useful to other

agencies, land 

managers, and 

sectors

Forest Sector 

Report published 

in 2012 

Forest Service

83
Establish regional climate 

hubs for risk adaptation 

and mitigation to climate 

change. FS hosts five of 

the seven hubs.

Support 

adaptation by 

providing 

information 

and technical 

advice needed 

by producers 

(farmers, 

ranchers, and 

forest land 

owners).

Research & 

Development, 

USDA CCPO

Hubs will provide outreach 

and information to producers 

on ways to mitigate risks; 

public education about the 

risks climate change poses to 

agriculture, ranchlands and 

forests; regional climate risk 

and vulnerability assessments; 

and centers of climate forecast 

data and information. 

Regional / 

Landscape, 

Local

Ongoing Work through 

existing USDA 

programs.

In startup, but 

initially will 

examine the 

processes 

involved in 

vulnerability 

assessments and 

implementation 

of management 

actions

Yes, within 

USDA. Will also 

link a broad 

network of 

partners 

participating in 

climate risk 

adaptation and 

mitigation, 

including 

universities; nongovernmental 

organizations; 

federal agencies 

such as DOI, 

NOAA, Native 

Nations and 

organizations; 

state departments 

of environment 

and agriculture; 

research centers; 

farm groups and 

more

No additional 

funding for 

this initiative

Limited 

resources

Hubs now 

established.

Forest Service

84
Implement Inventory, 

Monitoring, and 

Assessment Strategy

Provide 

monitoring 

and 

assessment 

information 

that support 

adaptation

planning and 

other business 

needs

Ecosystem 

Management 

Coordination

Opportunity to improve 

resource inventory, 

monitoring, and assessment. 

Goal is for land management 

information to be 

comprehensive, inclusive, 

credible, and responsive and 

adaptive to changes. Supports 

adaptation and mitigation 

policies, such as the 

President’s Climate Action 

Plan and the National Fish, 

Wildlife, & Plants Climate 

Adaptation Strategy.

National, 

Regional, 

Local

Ongoing Policy changes 

and improved 

information 

management

TBD - IM&A 

Strategy 

scorecard 

metrics

Coordination with 

other federal, 

state and local 

agencies on 

identifying and 

implementing 

opportunities to 

share data, 

standards, tools 

and products

Effectively 

addressing the 

large number of 

agency 

business areas 

and information 

needs; 

Conducting a 

collaborative 

process; 

Adjusting the 

way the agency 

has managed 

resource 

information

over time –

culture;

Drafted National 

Management 

Questions to 

guide 

Information 

Needs 

Assessment

Develop and implement 

Watershed and Terrestrial 

Condition Frameworks 

Provide 

information 

that supports 

integrated 

resource 

restoration and 

CC adaptation

Sustainable 

Landscape 

Management 

Board of 

Directors 

Opportunity to characterize 

and prioritize watersheds and 

landscapes for developing 

restoration and adaptation 

strategies. Continue effort to 

merge these into a 

comprehensive assessment 

tool and indicator set. 

Watershed Condition 

Framework is operational. 

TCF component is being 

developed.

National, 

Regional, 

Local

Ongoing

FY2016

Development of 

indicators, tools, 

and guidance for 

assessments. 

WCF and TCC

become an 

integrated 

dataset, 

assessment, and 

monitoring tool.

Sharing of 

science, data, 

tools applicable to 

vulnerability 

assessments, 

priority setting, 

etc

Better 

coordinated 

land 

management 

across 

jurisdictions.

Forest Service

85
Improve the Climate 

Change Resource Center

(www.fs.fed.us/ccrc)

Provide access 

to information 

and training 

that supports 

CC adaptation

Research & 

Development

Opportunity to enhance this 

web-based science-delivery 

portal for Forest Service 

employees and partners who 

need information and tools to 

address climate change in 

project planning and 

implementation.

National 2012-2015 Website 

development and 

improvement 

Annual 

monitoring of 

website 

improvements 

completed. 

Share science, 

data, tools, 

educational 

materials

Improve Interagency 

Coordination on Climate 

Projections

Climate 

Change 

Advisor’s 

Office, 

Research & 

Development

Opportunity to coordinate and 

provide guidance within 

Forest Service on the selection 

& use of downscaled climate 

projections and expand across 

land management agencies 

and climate science providers. 

The goal of this larger effort is 

to simplify the complex array 

of choices in a rigorous, 

defensible manner and 

facilitate greater 

comparability in data use

National but 

nested to 

apply at 

multiple 

levels

On-going. 

Work plan 

defined June 

2013, draft 

products 

expected by 

end of year.

Coordinating 

with other 

agencies

Published

# of agencies onboard

Publication of 

guidance

Adoption/use of 

guidance

Outreach 

activities to 

promote 

awareness

This one of 

several projects 

sponsored by the 

Interagency 

Landscape 

Management 

Adaptation Group 

(ILMAG). 

Interagency work 

group formed. 

Sharing science

and coordinating 

further work.

Climate 

Projections 

FAQs 

publication 

completed and 

distributed.

Conserve Genetic 

Diversity

Improve the 

success of 

adaptation 

projects. 

Forest 

Management, 

Rangeland 

Management

Risk reduction - Genetic 

differences found in forest and 

rangeland plant species would 

be mapped to the landscape 

using GIS and other spatial 

analyses. From these genetic 

landscape maps, develop seed 

movement guidelines for 

species of restoration and 

reforestation concern by 

predicting their ability to be 

adapted to future climates.

National On-going Research, 

publication of 

guidelines. 

Number of 

species 

genetically 

analyzed

No inter 

government 

coordination 

exists. However, 

inter-agency 

coordination exist 

between FS, 

ARS, NRCS, and 

BLM

Lack of funding 

and loss of 

trained 

geneticists.

Studies have 

been completed 

or are underway 

for 15 grass 

species, 9 forbs, 

and 7 trees and 

shrubs

Forest Service

86
Create climate-sensitive 

version of the Forest 

Vegetation Simulator 

(FVS), a nationally 

supported forest 

dynamics model.

Improve 

ability to 

simulate 

effects of 

climate 

change on 

forested lands

Forest 

Management

Provides opportunity to model 

effects of climate change and 

develop management 

strategies that are likely to 

result in a resilient ecosystem 

when planning for restoration, 

watershed improvement, and 

other activities. Reduces risk 

of planning activities likely to 

have an adverse effect on 

ecosystem resilience as the 

climate changes.

National 

model 

applied at 

Regional 

and Local 

levels

2014 - 2015 Through 

collaboration 

with Research 

Stations and 

universities

Successful 

completion of 

the model and 

full integration 

into the 

production FVS 

software

An inter-agency

steering team 

with members 

from the BIA, 

BLM, and NRCS 

helps direct work 

of the FVS staff, 

including 

development of 

the climate 

model.

Because 

climate change 

may result in 

conditions 

unlike anything 

recorded, data 

for validation 

of this model 

are lacking and 

will be slow to 

become 

available.

A climate 

sensitive version 

of FVS has been 

implemented for 

the western 

conterminous 

United 

States. Develop

ment of the 

eastern version 

is well 

underway.

Improve Forest Tree Gene 

Conservation

Supports 

adaptation of 

forests to CC

Forest Health 

Protection

Risk reduction - Prioritize 

forest trees for gene 

conservation, develop 

conservation plans, carry them 

out

National Ongoing

FY2012-2015

Research, 

planning, 

implementation

Ensure at least 

20 unrelated 

individuals (or 

seed) collected 

per seed zone.

Implement National Insect 

and Disease Risk 

Assessment

Manage forest 

ecosystems to 

increase 

resilience

Forest Health 

Protection

Identifies areas at risk to 

catastrophic levels of forest 

insects, pathogens and abiotic 

mortality agents. Projects 

anticipated levels of tree 

mortality over the next 15 

year period.

National, 

Regional, 

and Local

Completed in 

2013

Risk map and 

supporting data 

and information 

are posted on 

Forest Health 

Monitoring 

website.

information for 

strategic and 

tactical planning 

Updated map is 

issued

Covers all treed 

lands in US. 

Assessment 

completed 

through Forest 

Health 

Monitoring 

Program – a 

federal and state 

partnership

Future plans 

include 

enhanced 

climate 

projections

National Insect 

and Disease Risk 

Map was just 

updated.

Forest Service

87
R&D All Station Climate 

Change and Tribes 

Project

Learn from 

and Assist 

Tribes and 

other native 

peoples in 

managing our 

nations’ 

natural 

resources in 

the context of 

changing 

climate

R&D 

(Northern 

Station 

currently 

serving as 

project 

coordinator)

National, 

Regional 

On-going Plan and 

facilitate 

workshops, 

support 

Regional 

ScientistManager 

networks, 

develop 

“portfolio” 

studies 

highlighting 

particular local 

challenges and 

adaptation 

options.

# of 

Tribes/Native 

orgs engaged

Collaborative 

Work with many 

DOI LCCs and 

CSCs.

Highlights 

needs for 

funding for 

monitoring 

culturally 

important 

species.

Work with over 80 

Tribes and 20 

intertribal/native 

organizations. Active 

science-manager 

networks established in 

PNW and SW. Over 

60 tribal 

experts/students 

supported to attend 

climate-related 

conferences/workshops. 

Dozens of publications 

and guides for Tribes.

Synthesize climate 

change adaptation across 

all federal land 

management agencies

Coordinate 

adaptation 

among 

agencies

Climate 

Change 

Advisor’s 

Office, 

Research & 

Development 

Opportunity to improve 

coordination by 

documenting past and 

ongoing climate change 

adaptation efforts of all 

federal land management 

agencies, developing 

overarching inferences 

regarding adaptation, and 

emphasizing the consistency 

among agencies.

National, 

Regional, 

Local

2014 Research, 

review existing 

programs and 

efforts 

Publication

Forest Service

88
Grain Inspection Packers and 

Stockyards Administration

Climate Change Adaptation Plan 2014

89
Grain Inspection Packers and Stockyards Administration

Climate Change Adaptation Plan

January 2014

I. Policy Framework (Describe your agency vision, mission, goals and strategic 

approaches)

The Grain Inspection Packers and Stockyards Administration facilitates the marketing of livestock, 

poultry, meat, cereals, oilseeds, and related agricultural products, and promotes fair and competitive 

trading practices for the overall benefit of consumers and American agriculture through its two primary 

mission areas, the Packers and Stockyards Program (PSP) and the Federal Grain Inspection Service 

(FGIS). 

PSP promotes fair business practices and competitive environments to market livestock, meat and poultry. 

Through its oversight activities, including monitoring programs, reviews, and investigation, PSP fosters 

fair competition, provide payment protection, and guards against deceptive and fraudulent trade practices 

that affect the movement and price of meat animals and their products. PSP’s work protects consumer 

and members of the livestock, meat and poultry industries. PSP is primarily responsible for administering 

and enforcing the Packers and Stockyards Act (P&S Act) enacted in 1921 to assure effective competition 

and integrity in the marketing of livestock, meat, and poultry. PSP is responsible for bringing formal 

actions for violations of the Truth-in-Lending Act and the Fair Credit Reporting Act by persons and firms 

subject to the P&S Act. In addition to its primary responsibility, PSP carries out limited responsibilities 

for the Secretary of Agriculture under Section 1324 of the Food Security Act of 1985. These 

responsibilities include review of “central filing systems” establish by the States for pre-notifications of 

security interests against farm products. 

FGIS establishes quality standards for grains, oilseeds, pulses and legumes; provides impartial inspection 

and weighting service through a network of Federal, State, and private entities and monitors marketing 

practices to enforce compliance with the U.S. Grain Standards Act (USGSA), as amended and the 

Agricultural Marketing Act (AMA), as amended. FGIS administers uniform, national grain inspection 

and weighting programs established by the Act on a fee basis for both export and domestic grain 

shipments. The USGSA requires that most export grain be inspected and weighed, prohibits deceptive 

practices with respect to the inspection and weighing grain, and provides penalties for violations. The 

USGSA also requires most corn exported from the US be tested for aflatoxin prior to shipment

GIPSA’s Strategic Goals are linked to the USDA Strategic Goal 1: Assist Rural Communities to Create 

Prosperity so They Are Self-Sustaining, Repopulating, and Economically Thriving. PSP does this 

through its strategic objective to protect fair trade practices, financial integrity and competitive livestock, 

meat and poultry markets. FGIS, in turn, has three strategic objectives:

• Provide the market with terms and methods for quality assessment

• Protect the integrity of the U.S. grain and related markets, and

• Provide official grain inspection and weighing services

II. Vulnerability Assessment (Describe both the risks and opportunities associated with 

changing climate that your agency will face)

Grain Inspection Packers and Stockyards Administration

90
Risks

• Cyclical crop production due to weather and other production variables stemming from climate 

change could affect GIPSA’s ability to build steady inspection expertise. 

• Increased need for quality verification of USDA food assistance purchases may overwhelm 

existing GIPSA capacity.

• GIPSA operations at both interior and US export locations may be more vulnerable to extreme 

weather events.

Opportunities

• Increased demand for genetically engineered crops modified to adapt to the effects of climate 

change.

• Increased development and deployment of pesticides to address the effects of climate change.

• Increased demand for inspection tools and methods with a reduced environmental footprint. 

• Increased need for accurate collection and reporting of data indicating overall crop quality issues.

• Increased demand for verification of new crop varieties bred to adapt to the effects of climate 

change. 

III. The Adaptation and Evaluation Process (Integration into policies, programs and 

operation, includes coordination with stakeholders including local, state or tribal 

entities and private landowners)

GIPSA’s adaption and evaluation process addresses both continuity of operations and 

adaption of program operations. 

A changing climate can result in more frequent, severe and longer term weather related 

disasters, which will require GIPSA to be more resilient to short and medium term weather 

events. GIPSA will improve current policies on reducing its environmental footprint. It will 

also review occupant emergency plans, employee notification and accountability, increased 

productivity of unscheduled teleworking days, and decreased potential for service 

disruptions. 

GIPSA engages directly with stakeholders through its Grain Inspection Advisory Committee, 

which includes representatives from throughout the grain handling industry; direct interaction 

with various commodity groups; and with stakeholders in general through Federal Register 

publications soliciting input into what the grain and commodity market is most interested in 

GIPSA addressing. GIPSA relies on this information to establish strategic priorities for 

review of grain and commodity standards and methods development priorities.

 

Grain Inspection Packers and Stockyards Administration

91
IV. Sustained Adaptation Process (To ensure that the Climate Change Adaptation Plan 

remains current)

GIPSA Leadership will review program operational plans and policies annually to ensure that 

adaptation to climate change is factored into our planning, implementation and evaluation of 

program performance. 

Grain Inspection Packers and Stockyards Administration

92
V. Actions to Address Risks and Opportunities

Proposed New 

Actions

Agency 

Lead

Description Scale Timeframe Performance Metric InterGovernmental

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/

Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishme

nts to Date

Reduce GIPSA’s 

environmental 

footprint. 

GIPSA Examine all operations to reduce 

consumption of non-renewable 

energy and materials.

Global 3 years # of operational 

facilities reviewed 

annually.

None None None New plan

Confirm GIPSA’s 

ability to deliver 

service under 

extreme 

conditions. 

GIPSA Ensure Occupant Emergency Plans 

(OEP’s) and Continuity of 

Operations Plans (COOP) effectively 

address weather related service 

disruptions.

Global 3 years # of operational 

facilities reviewed 

annually.

None None None New plan

Enhance 

automated data 

collection and 

reporting systems.

GIPSA Improve and refine data collection 

and reporting tools that assess the 

quality of crop data.

Global 3 years % of available 

quality data 

accessible. 

None None Funding New plan

Review 

availability of 

inspection tools 

with a reduced 

environmental 

footprint. 

FGIS Evaluate efficacy of water based 

mycotoxin test kits 

Global Ongoing # of GIPSA 

approved water 

based test kits 

reviewed.

None None None New plan

Grain Inspection Packers and Stockyards Administration

93
Current Actions

Agenc

y Lead

Description Scale Timeframe Performance Metric InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/

Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishme

nts to Date

Continue to 

develop 

proficiency in 

determining and 

confirming genetic 

events in grain.

FGIS Conduct semi-annual biotechnology 

proficiency tests on corn and 

soybeans with collaborating 

laboratories. 

Global Ongoing # of participating 

laboratories. 

None None None Program grew 

from initial 18 

laboratories in 

2002 to 77 

participant 

laboratories in 

2012. 

Ensure pesticide 

residue services are 

available to detect 

pesticides most 

predominantly in 

use.

FGIS Develop appropriate methods and 

conduct pesticide residue analysis as 

needed. 

Global Ongoing # pesticide results 

tests conducted. 

Agricultural 

Marketing 

Service

None None GIPSA 

continues to 

offer service as 

needed. In FY 

2013, GIPSA 

upgraded 

instrumentatio

n used in this 

program. 

Facilitate 

identification of 

new crop varieties 

developed to 

respond the effects 

of climate change.

FGIS Develop and publish FGIS’ process 

for identifying new crop varieties. 

Global 1 year Process published. Agricultural 

Marketing 

Service

None None New plan

Grain Inspection Packers and Stockyards Administration

94
USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service

Climate Adaptation Plan 2014

95
National Agricultural Statistics Service Climate Change Adaptation Plan (Action Registry)

Action Description Action Goal Agency Lead Risk/Opportunity 

Description Scale Timeframe Implementation Methods

Performance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/ 

Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishmen

ts to Date

Industry consultation Data User’s 

Meetings or 

Advisory 

Committee on 

Agriculture 

Statistics

Agricultural 

Statistics 

Board

Opportunity - Outside 

review to identify ways to 

adapt

National 2013 Document, 

research, 

funding requests 

for 

implementation

Success of 

implementing 

recommendations

ERS, WOAB 

collaborate 

with the 

meetings

Program 

adjustments 

and additions 

need funding

None 2013 Data 

Users meeting 

held in October

Internal assessments Internal 

Meetings of 

Senior 

Leadership

Senior 

Executive 

Team

Opportunity – internal 

assessment and reallocation

Agencywide2013 Document, 

research, 

funding requests 

for 

implementation

Success of 

implementing 

recommendations

Education and training• Agency 

Training

Global 

Change

Task

Force 

Member

Opportunity - expanding 

knowledge

AgencywideBegin FY 

2013

Ag Learn, 

personal 

research, 

seminars & 

conferences

Completion USDA GCTF 

plan, 

promotes and 

publicizes 

events 

Travel 

restrictions 

have limited 

attendance

NASS was 

represented at 

the Grand 

Challenge 

meetings of the 

Gate 

Foundation in 

October 2013

GCTF participation • Continue 

participation 

in USDA 

GCTF 

•

Global 

Change

Task

Force 

Member

Opportunity - develop 

internal expertise

AgencywideFY 2013 Select, meet, 

communicate, 

implement

Implementation Other USDA 

agencies

National Agricultural Statistics Service

96
Action Description Action Goal Agency Lead Risk/Opportunity 

Description Scale Timeframe Implementation Methods

Performance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/ 

Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishmen

ts to Date

Recording/budgeting 

extreme events

Document 

additional 

resources for 

re-interviews

Program 

Administrati

on Branch

Opportunity - document AgencywideFY 2013 Record keeping 

and budgeting 

plans

Agency resources 

expended in 

response to 

extreme weather 

events

NASS/Nation

al Agriculture 

State 

Departments 

of Agriculture

Resurvey 

costs

Late plantings July 2013 

soybean 

resurvey for 14 

states

Document impacts • Document 

extreme 

weather and 

their impact

Geospatial 

Information 

Branch

Opportunity - document AgencywideFY 2013 Record keeping Agency resources 

expended in 

response to 

extreme weather

Produced 

internally in 

cooperation 

with 

Statistics 

Division

Satellite 

availability 

for ag 

monitoring

Derived 

independent 

July 2013 

soybean 

analysis

Program review • 5-year 

Program 

Review

•

Statistics 

Division

Opportunity - reprioritize 

agency programs

AgencywideFY 2014 Senior 

leadership

Program changes 

initiated due to 

climate change

Program 

expansions

require 

funding

Documenting 

decisions and 

actions

Sec. 5. Federal Agency Planning for Climate Change Related Risk.

Develop budget 

offering

Develop 

climate 

Geospatial 

Information 

Branch

Opportunity - document AgencywideFY 2015 Document, 

research, 

funding requests 

for 

implementation

Congressional 

program approval

ARS Scientific 

university 

collaboration

Staffing for 

new climate 

program

Budget 

offering 

submitted

National Agricultural Statistics Service

97
Action Description Action Goal Agency Lead Risk/Opportunity 

Description Scale Timeframe Implementation Methods

Performance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/ 

Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishmen

ts to Date

Target upcoming 

NASA solicitations

Seek funding 

for NASA 

food 

security/water 

resources/

disaster 

solicitations

Geospatial 

Information 

Branch

Opportunity-document AgencywideFY 2015 Seek 

collaborative 

partners for 

solicitations

Win solicitations Leverage 

NASA 

scientific 

instruments/

satellites

Scientific 

university 

collaboration

Developing 

observations 

and systems

Waiting for 

solicitations

98
USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture

Climate Change Adaptation Plan 2014
USDA - National Institute of Food and Agriculture

Agency Climate Change Adaptation Plan

I. Policy Framework

NIFA's mission is to advance knowledge for agriculture, the environment, human health and well-being, 

and communities by supporting research, education, and extension programs in the Land-Grant University

System and other partner organizations. NIFA doesn't perform actual research, education, and extension 

but rather helps fund it at the state and local level and provides program leadership in these areas.

NIFA's two key mechanisms for accomplishing its mission of "advancing knowledge" are:

National Program Leadership: NIFA identifies and supports research, extension, and education 

priorities in areas of public concern that affect agricultural producers, small business owners, youth and 

families, and others.

Federal Assistance: NIFA provides annual formula grants to land-grant universities and competitively

granted funds to researchers in land-grant and other universities, and other eligible institutions identified 

by law.

NIFA’s National Program Leaders and other program staff are empowered to carry out the mission of

NIFA. To accomplish this mission, these senior staff members perform critical tasks under the authority

of the NIFA Director and report to NIFA Assistant Directors and Division Directors. These tasks fall into 

four general categories:

• Network and collaborate with partners and stakeholders to identify mission-relevant problems, 

opportunities, and issues requiring federal attention and support;

• Conceive, formulate, and direct programs and activities to respond to existing or emerging

problems, opportunities, and issues through the development and application of science-based 

knowledge;

• Administer and manage programs and activities to develop and apply science and knowledge; 

and,

• Evaluate and assess the quality, outcomes, and impacts of these programs.

NIFA supports the base programs of state Agricultural Experiment Stations and the Cooperative 

Extension System nationwide at land-grant universities. As USDA's primary extramural research agency, 

NIFA provides working funds to researchers at institutions of higher education all over the United States. 

These research programs benefit all Americans. NIFA helps ensure that a high-quality higher education 

infrastructure will be available at the nation's land-grant universities to address national needs, and it uses 

the infrastructure of scientific expertise from these and other colleges and universities, and also of public

and private laboratories, to partner in addressing national priorities.

NIFA collaborates or has formal working partnerships with many institutions and individuals. NIFA’s key

partners are the institutions of higher learning making up the Land-Grant University System. However, 

NIFA also partners with other federal agencies, within and beyond USDA; non-profit associations; 

professional societies; commodity groups and grower associations; multistate research committees; 

private industry; citizen groups; foundations; regional centers; the military; task forces; and other groups. 

National Institute of Food and Agriculture

100
NIFA and its partners focus on critical issues affecting people's daily lives and the nation's future. The

advanced research and educational technologies supported by NIFA empower people and communities to 

solve problems and improve their lives on the local level.

II. Identification and assessment of climate change related impacts on and risks to NIFA’s ability to 

accomplish its missions, operations, and programs. 

NIFA will face both risks and opportunities associated with changing climate from an operational and 

mission perspective and impacts to its infrastructure and personnel. Physical factors associated with 

climate have the potential to disrupt the grant review and award process that is critical to the progress of

agricultural science and the infrastructure of the land-grant system. NIFA’s climate adaptation strategic

plan will focus on two major areas of vulnerabilities, NIFA’s Science Programs and NIFA’s infrastructure

and personnel. Both these areas will be impacted by extremes and wide variations in temperature, 

precipitation, and the secondary impacts of these events on transportation, communication, information 

technology systems and coordination with other federal, state, municipal, county and non-government 

partners, and industry.

Impacts to Science Programs

NIFA’s mission is to support exemplary research, education, and extension. As USDA's primary 

extramural research agency, NIFA provides funds for research, education and extension activities through 

the AFRI Climate Challenge Area. NIFA will need to balance the increasing demand for scientific

research, modeling, educational programs, and extension activities to address climate change issues with 

other research, education, and extension needs for agricultural. For example, investigations of climate

stressors and tipping points will become more essential to climate adaptation science research and will 

need to be balanced with vulnerable areas of crop and livestock production research and formal and 

informal state educational programs. There will also be a need to establish more long-term collaborations 

with federal funding agencies to provide research support to understand complex climate issues and 

develop the models and decision-making products essential for the sustainability of economic and natural 

resource systems.

NIFA collaborates or has formal working partnerships with many institutions and individuals. NIFA’s key

partners are the institutions of higher learning making up the Land-Grant University System, however, 

NIFA also partners with other federal agencies, within and beyond USDA;

non-profit associations; professional societies; commodity groups and grower associations; multistate

research committees; private industry; citizen groups; foundations; regional centers; the military; task 

forces; and other groups. NIFA and its partners focus on critical issues such as climate change that affects 

people's daily lives and the nation's future. NIFA will need to advance research and educational 

technologies that empower people and communities to solve problems and improve climate adaptation 

and mitigation efforts at the local level. NIFA also supports the base programs of state Agricultural

Experiment Stations and the Cooperative Extension System nationwide at land-grant universities with 

support from formula funds. NIFA needs to foster a high-quality higher education infrastructure will 

continue to be available at the nation's land-grant universities to address national needs, and uses the

infrastructure of scientific expertise from these and other colleges and universities, and also of public and 

private laboratories, to partner in addressing national priorities, such as climate change.

National Institute of Food and Agriculture

101
Impacts to Infrastructure and Personnel

A changing climate can result in more frequent, severe and longer term weather related disasters in the

national capital region. There will be a future need to increase the agency’s resiliency to short and 

medium term weather events. NIFA should strive toward improvements in employee notification, 

increased productivity of unscheduled telecommute workdays, as well as decreased panel impacts of

weather related travel delays.

All of the approximately 350 employees of NIFA report to the Waterfront Centre, the Whitten and South 

Buildings in Washington DC and reside in the metro DC area (DC, Maryland, Virginia). Impacts of a

variable and changing climate will require an adaption plan assessment that focuses on the ability to 

maintain primary operations when personnel are unable to report to the primary duty station. This also 

includes impacts to panels who are invited to DC to conduct reviews of proposals. Transportation and 

building infrastructure will also be impacted by climate and the safety of personnel travelling to and from 

the primary work site will need to be addressed. Climate will also impact the technological infrastructure

at the Waterfront Centre where information systems are housed and require a controlled temperature and 

humidity environment. This also applies to NIFA’s back-up systems located outside Washington D.C. 

Heating and cooling systems will also impact the performance of personnel in the building.

III. Programs, policies, and plans NIFA has in place to manage climate risks in the near term and 

build resilience in the short and long term;

NIFA implemented a set of enabling activities that will generate novel Ideas, Partnerships, and Tool for

Discovery, Learning, and Outreach that will address climate change issues in multiple sectors. This 

includes plans to integrate climate change adaptation science and resiliency into relevant NIFA policies, 

programs, and operations. Accomplishments include:

• Preparation and implementation of a comprehensive Climate Change Portfolio Plan for NIFA: A 

NIFA Climate Change Science Plan is an essential document for establishing the Institute’s goals 

and outcomes for research, education and extension activities addressing global change and 

climate. The plan includes adaptation, mitigation, and decision support as the primary

components and would identify human, financial, and infrastructure resources to achieve goals. 

The plan is complementary to the USDA Climate Change Science Plan, and the REE Action Plan

developed by the REE mission area. It would also support the goals of the USDA Strategic Plan

and the U.S. Global Change Research Program.

• Maintaining a well-funded competitive challenge area in AFRI focused on Agriculture and 

Natural Resources Science for Climate Variability and Change: AFRI provides competitive grants 

for fundamental and applied research, education and extension projects. AFRI will support 

climate projects of various scales that promote collaboration, open communication, and the

exchange of information; reduces duplication of effort; and coordinates activities among

individuals, institutions, states, and regions.

• Collaboration with NOAA Sea-Grant for Climate Extension: NIFA has facilitated interactions 

with Cooperative Extension and NOAA’s Sea Grant program to establish a joint climate

extension service, to identify and agree upon common focused goals, outcomes, and targeted 

audiences. Significant new resources are being identified to support a coordinated national effort 

providing climate information and decision support tools to clientele and stakeholders. This 

collaboration would contribute to federal government efforts with the National Climate

Assessment and the US Global Research Program. 

National Institute of Food and Agriculture

102
• Collaboration with other federal funding agencies: NIFA continues to foster and advance NIFA 

climate science work through partnerships with other science agencies (e.g., NOAA, NSF, DOE) 

in order to capitalize on the resources available to support multidisciplinary work and bring 

climate science expertise to agricultural and natural resource subject matter.

NIFA continues to develop plans to manage climate risks in the near term and build resilience in the short 

and long term through professional development. Plans include:

• Expanding National Program Leadership Areas to Address Climate Change Issues: Current 

expertise within NIFA national program leadership has gaps in areas relevant to climate change

science, especially in economics, social sciences, and behavioral sciences. The complexity of

climate change impacts on the environment and society requires a well-coordinated, 

multidisciplinary approach in arriving at system science methods to address specific climaterelated issues. Examples of expertise identified as important for implementing climate change

research, education and extension activities include science writing, climate modeling and 

behavioral science. Social scientists, economists and educators with climate change science 

backgrounds would complement the current subject matter expertise at NIFA. There is also a

need to maintain a standing division level unit within NIFA to address the larger climate

portfolio. 

• Developing a Plan for Workforce Development and Education: Educational programs at all levels 

need to address the critical skills and professions needed to meet the future demands for climate

change research, education and extension in agriculture. Non-formal education programs, such as 

4-H, and formal higher education curricula need to adopt a specific climate change component. 

Program developers need to be aware of the impacts of climate change on agricultural production 

and societal behavior so these can be incorporated into teaching and accompanying materials. 

Research and teaching capacity also needs to be built with minority serving institutions so they

can advance their contributions to climate change science and workforce development.

IV. Climate change related risks that impair NIFA’s statutory mission or operation and how they will 

be addressed.

A changing climate can result in more frequent, severe and longer term weather related disasters in the

national capital region. There will be a future need to increase the agency’s resiliency to short and 

medium term weather events. NIFA should strive toward improvements in employee notification, 

increased productivity of unscheduled telecommute workdays, as well as decreased panel impacts of

weather related travel delays. The following are NIFA approaches to climate adaptation at its 

Headquarters.

• NIFA uses the MIR3 system to increase its ability to notify employees and gather status 

information in the event of a disaster in the national capital region. Over 90% of NIFA employees

are MIR3 registrants. Users self-register with the following contact information: Work e-mail, 

work phone, home e-mail, home phone, mobile phone, pager, and/or emergency contact phone. 

The system can contact any or all of these devices, for any or all employees, and track message

retrieval and responses. The agency plans to conduct four limited and two agency-wide MIR3

drills annually.

National Institute of Food and Agriculture

103
• The agency will continue to increase the telework capacity and capability of the NIFA workforce

and IT system. Capacity is reflected by the number or percentage of employees that have a core

or situational telework agreement in place, as well as the capacity of agency information 

technology resources to support simultaneous users. Capability reflects the ability of individual 

employees and the organization to be productive in a telework environment, which could include

the variety of systems that employees can access and the types of tasks that can be conducted 

remotely. Regardless of whether conditions require a long term continuity of operations (COOP)

plan deployment or a single unscheduled telework day, the ability of the workforce to 

productively telework will increase the agency’s resiliency. Continuity plans will be adjusted to 

incorporate scenarios for devolution to a majority telework environment.

• Gathering together panels of experts to review funding applications is a significant function of the

agency. Historically, these panels have gathered face-to-face in Washington, DC area, which 

makes them dependent on nationwide travel reliability and the operability of a central facility.

NIFA plans to increase the employment of “virtual panels” as a method to decrease the process’s 

dependence on live meetings based in the national capital region.

V. NIFA considerations to improve climate adaptation and resilience with respect to agency 

suppliers, supply chain, real property investments, and capital equipment 

NIFA plans and implementation in this area are limited because of the small number of personnel 

allocated in the DC Headquarters. NIFA does not run any laboratories or operate any facilities. It does not 

own or operate any vehicles nor own buildings. Efforts have been made, however, to address real 

property issues in the following areas. 

• Increased temperature extremes have the potential to increase stress on the Heating, Ventilation, 

and Air Conditioning (HVAC) systems. As a result of this planning process, NIFA has solicited 

competitive bids to increase preventative maintenance on these systems in order to decrease

future breakdown and repair costs.

• Increased weather extremes can lead to a greater variety of safety hazards for the agency’s lease

facility and the employees it houses. NIFA will increase its all hazards education and safety

programming in coordination with the USDA Office of Homeland Security and Emergency

Coordination, Office of Operations, and the General Services Administration.

• Current online information technology asset backup on the east coast, coupled with planned 

server consolidation, will further distribute key data resources.

• Hotter days in summer are likely to lead to increases in air quality warnings and the severity of

those warnings. NIFA will continue to promote use of public transportation resources and 

telework.

VI. NIFA interagency efforts to support climate preparedness and resilience at all levels of 

government

NIFA has established new opportunities and interagency partnerships to better understand risks and 

opportunities. NIFA will continue to promote strategic partnerships which will advance community

preparedness for climate impacts and events. These partnerships have helped develop science-based 

National Institute of Food and Agriculture

104
methods to assess vulnerability, to monitor climate impacts, and to project impacts based on scenarios. 

Current accomplishments include:

• Interagency collaborations for funding basic and applied climate science: Multiple interagency

collaborations have been established to fund fundamental and interdisciplinary research that 

better understands the impacts and feedbacks of global and climate change on agricultural 

systems (including farm, crop, forest, and range lands) and provide potential adaptation and 

mitigation strategies, as well as discovery and demonstration of decision support tools for land, 

ecosystem and water resource managers to mitigate carbon and greenhouse gas emissions (i.e., 

increase carbon sequestration and storage). These projects will develop the science base and 

infrastructure to support a new generation of coupled agriculture and climate system models to 

improve attribution and prediction of high-impact regional weather and climate, to initialize

seasonal-to-decadal climate forecasting, and to provide predictions of impacts affecting adaptive

capacities and vulnerabilities of environmental and human systems.

• Effective Communication and Marketing Strategies for NIFA Activities on Climate Change: In 

order to engage stakeholders and elevate the science, a marketing strategy focused on climate

change is needed. Marketing strategies would include web site development and other

communication mechanisms that reach out to all public sectors for educational and service

purposes. A well-developed marketing process would also improve post-award management and 

the quality of reporting to NIFA from funded projects.

• Consultation with the USDA Office of the Chief Scientist, the REE and NRE mission area

agencies, the OCE Climate Change Program Office, and APLU for stakeholder input.

• Cascade compliance related to the USDA Strategic Plan, NIFA Strategic Plan, USDA Research,

Education and Economics Mission Area Action Plan, and the US Global Change Research

Program Strategic Plan,

• Organizing and producing syntheses products in Agroclimate Science: Syntheses products will be

produced from, a series of project director workshops and symposiums on climate change to 

address the needs of the portfolio and provide a benchmark for the status of scientific knowledge, 

technological advances, and producer needs in agriculture and forestry. The syntheses activities 

would be led by NIFA funded scientists with possible support from NIFA and the USDA Global 

Change Program Office. The syntheses would include the science needed to implement a carbon 

trading system and for natural resource management to adapt to and mitigate climate change. The

syntheses could also be the starting point for a sustained stakeholder input process.

VI. Sustained Adaptation Process

A. Agency steps for sustained planning

Climate Portfolio Review: NIFA conducts a portfolio review of its projects and programs to evaluate the

program success in achieving goals for the environment and natural resources. The portfolio review 

makes use of NIFA’s established knowledge areas of which Weather and Climate is one. In addition, a

knowledge area for Alternative Uses of Land is focused on climate change. A new portfolio review 

process has been developed by NIFA which includes a portfolio planning, assessment, and quality

improvement plan.

National Institute of Food and Agriculture

National Institute of Food and Agriculture

105
Continuous Assessment through Post-Award Management of Climate Change Research, Education and 

Extension Projects to Identify Gaps: An inventory and assessment of climate change research, education 

and extension projects funded by NIFA is needed for advancing climate science and its delivery to 

intended users. The assessment would also include programs conducted by other USDA agencies to 

identify gaps and how NIFA’s unique mission can fill those gaps. A reporting system designed to fit the

needs of the inventory and stakeholder groups will need to be created.

Expand Climate Change Communities of Practice within eXtension: Climate change education and 

outreach has not yet been part of eXtension which has the capacity to reach a broad audience through its 

communities of practice. Resources related to consumer knowledge, carbon footprints and environmental

markets are needed and should be developed. Significant efforts need to be made to soliciting these and 

other eXtension communities of practice for specific areas such as forest management, climate impacts on 

health, understanding carbon markets(such as cap and trade), and implementation of a National Climate

Service.

B. Process for Prioritization

NIFA will establish a Core Set of Climate Change Priorities as a Component of multiple NIFA 

Portfolios: The portfolio management and competitive grants planning processes have been evolving to 

improve trans-disciplinary approaches to research, education and extension. The portfolio document, in

particular, is becoming important for thematic planning purposes, in addition to its very important 

accountability function. Aligning portfolio outcomes to climate change will identify NIFA’s investments 

in climate change research, education, and extension and facilitate the planning of future competitive and 

non-competitive grants. The quality of reporting would also improve as expected outcomes will be clearly

defined in the solicitation planning process.

NIFA will establish a NIFA Science Priority-making Process for Climate Change: A climate science

priority-making team with an established management structure and guidance from the NIFA science

leadership council is needed to identify and manage a set of core climate change activities that cuts across 

agency programs and portfolios and would function as the central source of management for climate

change research, education and extension activities. The collaborative team would be able to address 

portfolio goals as well as the planning of all competitive and non-competitive funding lines related to 

climate change managed by NIFA. A collaborative issue team would be composed of national program 

leaders, program specialists and support staff representing disciplinary and mission area expertise from 

across the agency and would be accountable to the senior leadership within NIFA. The team would be

responsible for the development of criteria for competitive solicitations to achieve long-term outcomes. 

The collaborative issues team would be advised by the advisory group.

C. Sources of information for plan development

• External Advisory Group on Agriculture and Climate Change

• Diversified Stakeholder Base for New and Emerging Partners from industry and professional 

organizations

• Open Public Stakeholder Listening Sessions

• NIFA Project Directors Meetings

• NIFA Interagency Collaborations

• NIFA Competitive Proposal Review Process

• State Plans of Work and Annual Reports under the Hatch, and Evans-Allen Acts

• State Plans of Work and Annual Reports under the McIntire-Stennis Act

National Institute of Food and Agriculture

106
• State Plans of Work and Annual Reports under the Renewable Resources Extension Act

• State Plans of Work and Annual Reports under the Smith-Lever Act

• Consultation with the USDA Office of the Chief Scientist, the REE and NRE mission area

agencies, the OCE Climate Change Program Office, and APLU

• 2013 President Climate Action Plan

D. Performance Metrics

• Climate Portfolio Review: The NIFA portfolio review process includes gap analysis and 

performance metrics to evaluate progress and improvement of climate projects funded by NIFA.

• External Advisory Group on Agriculture and Climate Change: The external advisory group will 

be part of an evaluation process of the science program planning.

• NIFA responses to the REE Action Plan on Climate Change progress through a scorecard method 

that tracks quarterly progress of projected accomplishments.

• NIFA responses to the annual call of agency accomplishments that is published in the

• Annual Report to Congress of the US Global Change Research Program

• NIFA contributions to the National Climate Assessment which is now a sustained assessment 

process.

• Federal Agency Climate Adaptation Plan elements outlined here.

107
Action 

Description

Action 

Goal

Agency 

Lead

Risk or

Opportunity

Scale Timeframe Implementation

Methods

Performance

Metrics

Intergovernmenta

l 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges / Further 

Implications

Highlights of Accomplishments

Maintain and 

expand 

Climate 

Change as a 

grand 

societal 

challenge for 

NIFA

Increase 

accessibility 

to funding 

opportunities

NIFA Opportunity to 

advance the 

development of 

basic and applied 

science in 

agriculture to 

address climate 

issues

National Ongoing Agriculture and 

Food Research 

Initiative

Breadth and 

depth of 

portfolio of 

projects 

covering areas 

of need.

Not 

applicable

Existing and 

new 

resources

Farm Bill Resources NIFA Climate Change Portfolio Strategic Plan 

completed

Maintain and 

expand 

priority areas 

in the 

Climate 

Change 

Challenge 

Area in AFRI

Increase 

areas of 

climate 

adaptation in 

agriculture

NIFA Opportunity to 

develop regional 

based research to 

address regional 

climate impacts 

in agriculture

and natural 

resources

National Ongoing Agriculture and 

Food Research 

Initiative

Amount of 

funds invested 

for climate 

change 

research, 

education and 

extension

Not 

applicable

Existing and 

new 

resources

Farm Bill Resources Other AFRI Challenge Areas now

include Climate Change priorities

Develop 

Climate 

Change 

programs at 

land-grant 

institutions

Increased 

capacity for 

climate 

science

NIFA Opportunity to 

develop research, 

education and 

extension 

activities to 

address stateidentified issues

National Ongoing Formula funds,

Specials grants

Amount of 

funds invested 

for climate 

change 

research, 

education and 

extension

Association 

of Public and 

Land-grant 

Universities

Existing and 

new 

resources

Farm Bill Resources Seven Climate Coordinated Agriculture Projects 

are supported by NIFA

Host and 

expand 

stakeholder 

listening 

sessions

Increased 

stakeholder 

input for 

priority 

making

NIFA Opportunity to 

receive input to 

programs from 

stakeholders

National Ongoing NIFA Outreach Number of

participants 

reached

through 

stakeholder

sessions

Not 

applicable

Existing and 

new 

resources

NIFA Resources Webinars for funding opportunities are held 

annually

Maintain 

Climate as a 

standing 

portfolio in 

NIFA

Increased 

opportunity 

for climate 

science

NIFA Opportunity to 

evaluate 

progress, identify 

gaps and plan for 

climate activities 

funded by NIFA

National Ongoing NIFA Planning, 

Accountability and 

Reporting Process

Increased of 

Portfolio 

Implementation

Not 

applicable

Existing and 

new 

resources

Farm Bill Resources NIFA Climate Portfolio Strategic Plan in 2nd year 

of implementation

Establish 

Collaborative 

funding 

opportunities 

with other 

federal 

agencies

Increased 

funding 

capacity for 

climate 

science

NIFA Opportunity to 

leverage funding

for agriculture 

research in 

climate change

National Ongoing Memorandums of 

Understanding

Increased funds 

leveraged form 

other federal 

agencies

US Global 

Change 

Research 

Program

Existing and 

new 

resources

NIFA Resources Memorandums of Understanding with NSF and 

DOE are currently in force

Conduct 

annual 

Project 

Director 

Increased 

coordination 

of scientific 

investigation

NIFA Opportunity to 

network and 

advance science 

for climate 

National Ongoing Agriculture and 

Food Research 

Initiative

Increased 

number of

publications 

and

Not 

applicable

Existing and 

new 

resources

NIFA Resources Annual Project Directors Meeting have been held 

on schedule

National Institute of Food and Agriculture Climate Adaptation 

National Institute of Food and Agriculture
meetings of 

NIFA funded 

and 

interagency 

projects

adaptation and 

mitigation

presentations of 

research

projects. 

Work with 

extension for 

the 

translation 

and delivery 

of science to 

communities 

and decision 

makers

Increased 

delivery of 

science 

products

NIFA Opportunity to

deliver credible 

science and 

decision making 

tools to users

National Ongoing Agriculture and 

Food Research 

Initiative

Increased 

number of

publications 

and

presentations of 

research

projects. 

Association 

of Public and 

Land-grant 

Universities

Existing and 

new 

resources

Farm Bill Resources Funding for extension projects is increasing.

Work with 

other USDA 

agencies and 

offices like 

the US Forest 

Service and 

the Climate 

Change 

Program 

Office on 

climate 

change 

science.

Increased 

coordination 

of scientific 

objectives

NIFA Opportunity to 

better coordinate 

climate science 

research within 

USDA

USDA Ongoing Agriculture and 

Food Research 

Initiative

Increased 

number of

coordinated 

research 

activities and 

opportunities 

within USDA

USDA 

Global 

Change Task 

Force

Existing and 

new 

resources

NIFA Resources The USDA Climate Hubs is a coordinated effort at 

USDA.

Participation 

in the US 

National 

Climate 

Assessment

Increased 

assessment 

of 

knowledge 

gaps

NIFA Opportunity to 

assess impacts of 

agriculture 

science on 

climate

National Ongoing USDA Global 

Change Task Force 

activity

Reduction in

gaps of science 

and science

delivery for

agriculture

USDA 

Global 

Change Task 

Force

Existing and 

new 

resources

NIFA Resources NIFA funded scientists contributed to the 

assessment

Support a 

robust 

Extension 

Disaster 

Education 

Network 

(EDEN) to 

increase 

Cooperative 

Extension’s 

ability to 

decrease the 

impact of 

disasters 

through 

education.

Increased 

preparedness 

of 

communities 

foe disaster 

management

NIFA Opportunity for 

advancing 

climate science 

for risk 

management

National Ongoing Formula Funds Increased 

number of 

communities 

trained in 

disaster 

preparedness

Cooperative 

Extension

Existing and 

new 

resources

Farm Bill Resources EDEN network remains strong and is looking at 

potential collaboration with NOAA Sea Grant

Increase the 

agency’s 

Increased 

work 

NIFA Ability to notify 

employees of 

NIFA HQ Ongoing NIFA supported 

activity

Increased

number of 

USDA HQ Existing and 

new 

USDA HQ 

Resources

Emergency notification system at NIFA is in place 

and annually tested.

National Institute of Food and Agriculture

109
ability to 

notify 

employees 

and gather 

status 

information 

in the event 

of a disaster 

in the 

national 

capital 

region.

capacity at 

HQ

hazards 

associated with 

workplace 

impacts of 

climate change

employees 

working under 

adverse 

conditions

resources

Continue to 

increase the 

telework 

capacity and 

capability of 

the NIFA 

workforce 

and IT 

system.

Increased 

work 

capacity at 

HQ

NIFA Ability to 

support 

continuation of 

NIFA’s activities 

under extreme 

weather

NIFA HQ Ongoing NIFA supported 

activity

Increased

number of 

employees 

working under 

adverse 

conditions.

USDA HQ Existing and 

new 

resources

USDA HQ 

Resources

All employees have telework agreements.

Refine 

continuity 

plans by 

incorporating 

scenarios for 

devolution to 

a majority 

telework 

environment.

Increased 

work 

capacity at 

HQ

NIFA Ability to 

support 

continuation of 

NIFA’s activities 

under extreme 

weather

NIFA HQ Ongoing NIFA supported 

activity

Increased

number of 

employees 

working under 

adverse 

conditions

USDA HQ Existing and 

new 

resources

USDA HQ 

Resources

Increased training for supervisors for telework 

implementation.

Increase the 

employment 

of “virtual 

panels” as a 

method to 

decrease the 

process’s 

dependence 

on live 

meetings 

based in the 

national 

capital 

region.

Increased 

work 

capacity at 

HQ

NIFA Ability to 

support 

continuation of 

NIFA’s activities 

under extreme 

weather

NIFA HQ Ongoing NIFA supported 

activity

Increased

number of 

review panels 

working under 

adverse 

conditions

USDA HQ Existing and 

new 

resources

USDA HQ 

Resources

Virtual panels now account for 50% of all review 

panels at NIFA.

National Institute of Food and Agriculture

110
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment and

Adaptation Plan 2014
USDA-National Resources Conservation Service

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment 

and Adaptation Plan

Introduction

The Earth is undergoing climate change driven by human activities that are altering the Earth’s surface 

and atmospheric composition. Conservation can serve as a gateway to a more resilient landscape that also 

efficiently sequesters atmospheric carbon in the terrestrial ecosystem. More than 70% of the land surface 

in the United States is privately owned, and the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) is the 

primary Federal conservation agency working with private landowners to preserve and enhance our 

Nation’s natural resources. Actions must be taken in order to prepare these landowners for the inevitable

impacts of climate change. NRCS is a dynamic, action-oriented agency with a mission and reputation for 

assisting citizens in land management and addressing natural resource concerns. These actions will 

require a substantial devotion of resources and effort by NRCS leadership over the next decade, yet this 

issue also presents an opportunity for our agency. We can assist landowners in both adaptations that will 

develop more resilient soils, and also to assist in mitigation strategies that reduce present and future 

atmospheric greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations.

The anticipated impacts of climate change on private lands in coming years and decades will necessitate 

that NRCS place additional emphasis on actions that explicitly address climate change. NRCS is already 

well positioned to address (via adaptive strategies) soil quality, landscape stability, extreme weather 

events, climate variability, natural disasters, and other issues. The point at which existing systems are 

transformed will vary based on the interaction of climate change and variability of factors such as land 

use, land fragmentation, water availability, and energy costs. NRCS can work with a variety of research 

and development partners, as well as affected producers, to identify 1) land use alternatives, 2) land 

management systems, and 3) conservation priorities necessary to protect natural resources.

NRCS is committed to helping landowners develop coping mechanisms for climate-related impacts in 

coming years. This adaptation plan details the current conservation adaptation and mitigation efforts and 

includes an evaluation of NRCS infrastructure that may be impacted by climatic changes and/or extreme 

weather events associated with a changing climate. The report is designed to help NRCS management 

and employees understand and better prepare for current and future changes in the climate that impact all 

aspects of the environment and day-to-day operations. NRCS has set a goal of developing sub-national 

climate change adaptation and mitigation reports that will be consistent with the newly-formed USDA 

regional hubs and the U.S. Global Change Research Program’s regions and sectors. Over the coming 

decades, NRCS technical assistance can help to transform vulnerable U.S. working lands to a more 

healthy and resilient landscape. NRCS is committed to delivering the necessary assistance to address 

emerging issues and resource concerns to helping private landowners manage their lands in ways that are 

more resilient to future environmental changes.

Policy Framework for NRCS Adaptation Planning

In October 2009 Executive Order (EO) 13514 (Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and 

Economic Performance) was issued with a stated goal "...to establish an integrated strategy towards 

sustainability in the Federal Government and to make reduction of greenhouse gas emissions a priority for 

Federal agencies." Following up on this EO, the President's Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) 

issued Implementing Instructions for Federal Agency Climate Change Adaptation Planning in March 

Natural Resources Conservation Service

112
2011 that provided guidance on how each Department and Agency should conduct a climate change 

vulnerability assessment and develop an adaptation plan. Shortly thereafter on June 3, 2011, USDA 

Regulation 1070-001 established a USDA-wide directive to integrate climate change adaptation planning 

and actions into USDA programs, policies, and operations. The Department Regulation directed each 

Agency within USDA to identify potential impacts of climate change on agency missions, programs, 

operations, policies, and authorities—and also include potential budget impacts. 

In June 2013, The President’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) was released with three key objectives: to cut 

carbon pollution in America; to prepare the U.S. for impacts of climate change; and to lead international 

efforts to combat global climate change. Initiatives to guide these objectives were to build stronger and 

safer communities and infrastructure, protect our economy and natural resources, and to use sound 

science to manage climatic impacts. NRCS plays a key role in addressing the CAP initiatives. 

Plans in which NRCS is directly involved include removing barriers that hinder the support of climateresilient investments, especially in the area of natural resource management. NRCS will ensure that there 

is connectivity throughout our Agency to the citizens of the U.S. to achieve these goals in both rural and 

urban communities. NRCS must become familiar with climate change vulnerabilities, and future 

conservation actions must be taken to protect agricultural enterprises, water supply, forests, air quality, 

wildlife, and public lands. The President’s CAP directs NRCS to continue to develop, improve, and 

protect our natural resources, and to use those natural resources to minimize the impacts of climate 

change-related events. 

NRCS is directly involved in ensuring agricultural sustainability through our partnership with other 

USDA agencies in the USDA Regional Climate Hubs to help deliver important science-based knowledge 

to farmers, ranchers, and forest owners. Along these lines, the President’s CAP supports the grants and 

technical support NRCS provides for agricultural producers to develop more water efficient practices. 

And finally, the involvement of NRCS in the National Drought Resilience Partnership (established in the 

President’s CAP) is a key to developing long-term resilience strategies and drought preparedness for U.S. 

citizens and producers. 

To further develop the preparedness and resilience documented in the President’s CAP, EO 13653 

(Preparing the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change) was issued in November 2013 with the 

objective to modernize Federal programs for climate change. This EO encourages Federal agencies to 

engage in strong partnerships across all levels of government to promote information sharing and 

availability, create tools to make informed climate-preparedness decisions, use adaptive learning from 

past experiences to better prepare for the future, and for general preparedness planning. Part of EO 13653 

is a self-examination or evaluation of agency infrastructure to determine weaknesses that may be faced 

during an extreme weather event or to prepare for the adaptive management associated with climate 

change and associated extreme weather events. The results of this evaluation will be an established 

process to identify potential changes, adapt to increasing weather variability, to reduce atmospheric 

concentrations of GHGs, and prepare to adapt to inevitable changes.

In order to adequately prepare NRCS for the future impacts, an NRCS Climate Change Coordination 

(CCC) Team was formed in December 2011. The initial purpose of the CCC Team in 2011 was to 

complete an assessment of NRCS’s vulnerability to climate changes, and provide possible adaptation 

action items to NRCS leadership. Twenty NRCS staff composed the CCC Team, including three from 

state NRCS offices, with other members from Technology Centers and offices at National Headquarters 

(NHQ). Within the NRCS CCC Team, eight sub-teams were formed to assess potential natural resource 

impacts from changes in climate, and to evaluate how these impacts might affect NRCS operations. Subteams were formed around the major SWAPA+H,E conservation resource concerns. Each sub-team 

investigated the various intersections of resource issues with land use categories, and the sub-team reports 

Natural Resources Conservation Service

113
formed the basis for the 2012 summary report. This report has grown from that CCC Team’s efforts. The 

first USDA-NRCS Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation Plan (May 2012) is posted 

on the USDA website: http://www.usda.gov/oce/climate_change/adaptation/adaptation_plan.htm

The NRCS CCC Team currently consists of 11 members (see Appendix), representing the Soil Science 

and Resource Assessment, Science and Technology, Management, and Programs Deputy Areas, as well 

as the Regional Conservationists’ Offices. The current task of this team has been to prepare an updated 

report addressing information required by EO 13653. 

This document (NRCS Climate Change Vulnerability and Adaptation Plan) is a revision and extension of 

the 2012 Adaptation Plan and consists of five parts that address components of climate change adaptation 

guidance provided by the President’s Council on Environmental Quality: 

Part 1: Identification and assessment of climate change-related impacts on and risks to NRCS’s ability to 

accomplish its missions, operations, and programs. (EO 13653 Section 5(a)(i))

Part 2: Description of programs, policies, and plans NRCS has already put in place, as well as additional 

actions the Agency will take, to manage climate risks in the near-term and build resilience in the shortand long-term. (EO 13653 Section 5(a)(ii))

Part 3: A description of climate change related risks identified to be so significant that it would impair 

NRCS’s statutory mission or operation, including the Agency’s existing reporting requirements. (EO 

13653 Section 5(a)(iii))

Part 4: A description of how NRCS will consider the need to improve climate adaptation and resilience, 

including the costs and benefits of such improvements, with respect to agency suppliers, supply chain, 

real property investments, and capital equipment purchases such as updating Agency policies for leasing, 

building upgrades, relocation of existing facilities and equipment, and construction of new facilities. (EO 

13653 Section 5(a)(iv))

Part 5: A description of how NRCS will contribute to coordinated interagency efforts to support climate 

change preparedness and resilience at all levels of government, including collaborative work across 

Agencies’ regional offices and hubs, and through coordinated development of information, data, and 

tools. (EO 13653 Section 5(a)(v))

 

PART 1: Conservation in the Context of Climate Change

NRCS has a rich history of addressing environmental challenges on private working lands through a 

customized location-specific prescription of conservation practices. From wind erosion during the Dust 

Bowl era to more recent issues like aquatic nutrient-loading in sensitive water bodies, NRCS is tooled to 

address natural resource concerns and environmental degradation that result from both human-induced 

and natural disasters. Through the years NRCS has refined its analytical problem-solving methodologies 

and developed a robust suite of conservation practices that allow planners to turn environmental 

challenges into conservation opportunities. Climate change vulnerability and adaptation presents NRCS 

with a substantial conservation challenge, yet NRCS has tools in our toolbox for addressing conservation 

challenges like a changing climate. 

Agricultural producers in the United States are on the front lines of climate change adaptation. NRCS 

will be required to implement conservation practices in a manner that is more considerate of emerging 

Natural Resources Conservation Service

114
changes invoked by a shifting global climate. This comprehensive report of actions and evaluation of 

future ecosystem challenges is built on a solid conservation foundation and utilizes many advantages of 

NRCS’s dynamic conservation legacy, including our established conservation practices and program 

delivery mechanisms. 

An examination of current climate data used in NRCS and the likely data updates and enhancements 

needed over the next 40 years was conducted as part of NRCS’s 2012 study. These conditions used in 

that evaluation have not changed since the 2012 report and provide a consistent evaluation framework for 

examining climate vulnerabilities and providing possible adaptation strategies at a national scale. 

Temperature and precipitation changes were largely consistent with those from various modeling efforts, 

including synthesis products from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). If anything, 

the scenarios selected for this report were toward the higher end of the envelope of possible changes in 

order to provide a more thorough examination of impacts. The assumptions for this analytical exercise 

were: 

• Analytical timeframe of approximately 40 years (2014 – 2050)

• Mean annual temperature 2.00 C (3.8o F) above current in 2050 – approximates to 4.00 C by 2100

• Mean annual extreme minimum temperature (plant hardiness) 2.00 C (3.8o F) higher than current

• Mean annual precipitation -20% and +20% of current

• Precipitation amount 20% greater for all duration-frequency combinations

The direct effects of atmospheric CO2 concentration increases on plants (CO2 fertilization) was 

considered, using an assumed 2050 atmospheric CO2 concentration of 430 ppmv, or an approximately 8% 

increase over current atmospheric CO2 concentrations. The spatial resolution of this assessment is 

currently all states and U.S. territories, and all major land uses (crop, range, forest, etc.). The U.S. land 

area is very diverse; there certainly is a need for subdividing this report into similar climatic regions. The 

Climate Change Coordination Team recommends that future reports be subdivided into similar climatic 

regions.

Key Climate Change Impacts: Agricultural and Natural Resource Impacts

Key climate change vulnerabilities in the U.S. over the next 40 years are associated with projected 

increases in temperature across the entire country, with the most notable increases expected to occur in 

the coldest winter temperatures over interior and northern Alaska and across the northern tier of interior 

continental U.S. states. The Nation’s heartland is going to get warmer, even on the coldest nights.

The coastal regions of the continental U.S. are expected to warm less rapidly than inland regions due to 

oceanic influences. Above normal temperatures are expected to occur more frequently throughout much 

of the country. Higher night time temperatures and higher annual extreme minimum temperatures are the 

most likely temperature changes, especially in more northern latitudes of the United States. Coastal 

storms, especially of tropical origin, are expected to increasingly contain damaging winds leading to 

greater extreme wave heights (storm surges) and coastal damage. 

A warming climate is expected to reduce snow cover as well as the timing, duration, and magnitude of 

mountain snow water supply. Freezing elevations are expected to rise, causing low-elevation snowpack 

decline. Climate change is expected to modify the amount, intensity, timing, and location of 

precipitation. Increased precipitation intensity is expected to produce more frequent flood-producing 

storms. Changes in the frequency and duration of drought and flooding will also occur. Sea levels are 

Natural Resources Conservation Service

115
projected to rise 6 to 8 inches over the next 40 years. Hurricane rainfall and storm intensity are expected 

to increase in response to climate change and additional heat in the atmosphere.

These anticipated changes in climate will have a variety of impacts on both agricultural production and 

natural resource management in the United States. Natural resource impacts will be driven by the 

underlying time scale of phenomena and the actual physical and ecological changes. For example, 

changes in the statistically-computed extreme 24-hour precipitation amounts may result in enhanced 

engineering for water control structures. Changes in the maximum 24-hour precipitation amounts will 

require changes in NRCS engineering designs. These transitions will occur gradually and the engineering 

staff will rely on changes in precipitation data as it is made available. It will become more necessary to 

perform detailed risk-based analyses of associated changes in magnitude and duration of flooding for 

large-scale projects. Changes in mean annual precipitation will be expressed in long-term changes in 

water supply, perennial vegetation, cropping systems, soil moisture, and groundwater recharge. NRCS 

will leverage the expertise at the USDA Regional Climate Hubs to help develop regional climate change 

adaptation strategies and lead enhanced GHG mitigation measures.

Impacts were examined in this evaluation for their relevancy to NRCS conservation work on private 

lands. Those impacts meeting this criterion of relevancy are the focal points of this plan. These impacts 

were assessed for their likelihood of occurrence in the next 40 years. Significant agricultural and natural 

resource impacts identified in this assessment include:

Precipitation Changes and Impacts on Water-related Issues 

 increased soil erosion potential due to increased precipitation intensity and amount

 water supply challenges in areas already water-stressed, including the Southern Plains and the 

Southwest where drought is likely to become more frequent

 greater flood potential from increased precipitation frequency, duration, amount and intensity, 

especially in the East and Midwest

 water management challenges in the irrigated West—including amount and timing of water—due 

to changes in snowpack and snowmelt, with consequent impacts on water rights, fisheries, 

hydroelectricity, and others

 greater potential for water quality impairments in some areas due to increased sedimentation and 

nutrient loading

 increased salinization of near-coastal waters due to rises in sea level and greater storm activity

Temperature Effects

 changes in plant adaptability in specific locations, such as plant hardiness zone movements and 

shifts in crops

 increased stream and lake temperatures impacting fisheries and other biological processes

 increased pest and disease pressures due to temperature changes, in some regions including native 

and exotic pests

 changes in insect activity, including frequency, intensity, and location (including pollinators)

 greater ground-level ozone concentrations due to slightly warmer temperatures, and expansion of 

ozone nonattainment areas 

 increased cooling-related energy demands in the warm months, including confined animal 

feeding operations

 increased energy demands associated with greater irrigation requirements

 increased melting of permafrost in transition zone regions in Alaska

 decreased soil moisture due to increasing rates of evapotranspiration

 decreased winter snowpack in the mountains due to a shift in the rain/snow transition zone and 

more rain-on-snow events

Other Possible Impacts

Natural Resources Conservation Service

116
 increased management concerns with manure and nutrient management to minimize the negative 

impacts of water quality and air emissions

 greater drought stress on rangelands used for grazing and negative impacts on range plant health

 increasing problems for livestock production due to forage supply uncertainty, including milk 

production and dairy-associated cooling costs

 possible extinction or certainly greater stress on endangered plant and animal species

 forested land health stresses due to climatic changes and pest pressure

 increased competition from weed and invasive plants

 wildlife/fish species and habitat changes due to climatic changes

 soil health challenges due to erosion increases and changes in soil chemical and biological 

processes

 increased wildfire risk in some areas due to moisture deficits and changes in pest and disease 

stress

Potential Impacts to Agency Operations

NRCS recognizes that impacts from climate change will influence NRCS’s ability to deliver its 

programs. Shifts in weather patterns may also diminish the performance of past and current conservation 

efforts unless steps are identified and implemented to modify these legacy Federal investments. 

NRCS has offices in every State, the Pacific Islands Area, and the Caribbean Area. As of January 2014, 

NRCS employed about 10,150 full time staff. While nearly 400 employees are based in the four offices in 

the Washington, DC metropolitan area, more than 95% of NRCS staff is located outside of the DC area. 

Those staffs are distributed among more than 2,600 offices across the Nation and across the organization. 

Field offices include Centers, State Offices, Service Centers, and Support Offices. NRCS has the benefit 

of an inherent resilience to local or regional disaster or disruption because staff is widely geographically 

distributed. Only a national-scale event (total or near-total electric grid failure, for example) is likely to 

incapacitate NRCS. 

Continuous NRCS Climate Change Risk Assessments

Over the past 75 years, NRCS has developed a proficient and robust conservation delivery system to help 

private landowners address environmental challenges while maintaining economic viability and 

ecosystem health. With climate changes occurring, sustainable solutions are even more important to 

ensure agricultural systems remain productive and natural resources are preserved and enhanced. 

Climate simultaneously impacts many resources that necessitate comprehensive and holistic approaches 

to conservation planning. This situation requires many disparate entities within NRCS working together 

to find solutions. For example, NRCS maintains hundreds of conservation practice documents that 

include practice standards, handbooks, manuals, technical notes, and many others. Every year, 

approximately one-fifth of these documents and associated background materials are reviewed and 

updated to ensure that they reflect the latest scientific knowledge and technology. From 2013 through 

2017, all such document reviews will include the perspective of the potential impacts of climate change 

and extreme events on the integrity of the recommendations/guidelines provided in each document. For 

example, climate change predictions will be used to evaluate the adequacy of engineering design 

parameters (e.g. for animal manure storage lagoons) in light of extreme climate-induced weather events. 

NRCS conducts three recurring, national-scale assessments to determine the status of the Nation’s natural 

resources and to identify changes in extent and condition over time at a variety of scales. The Natural 

Resource Inventory (NRI) is a statistical survey of land use and natural resource conditions and trends on 

U.S. non-Federal lands. Data collection is continuous and updates are released every five years. Data 

from the NRI can be used to describe state trends, as well as regional and national trends. The Resource 

Natural Resources Conservation Service

117
Conservation Act (RCA) Appraisal provides an overview of land use and the U.S. agricultural sector; of 

the status, condition, and trends of natural resources on non-Federal lands; and of USDA’s program for 

soil and water resources conservation. It also examines interrelated issues that have implications for U.S. 

agriculture and forestry: climate change, biofuels production, and the quality and availability of water. 

The RCA appraisal is updated every five years and is a broad-based, strategic national assessment. The 

Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP) is a multi-agency effort to quantify the environmental 

effects of conservation practices and programs and develop the science base for managing the agricultural 

landscape for environmental quality. CEAP studies are conducted on a watershed scale (from small 12- to 

8-digit watersheds up to large watersheds such as the Chesapeake Bay Watershed or Upper Mississippi 

River Basin). The results of these assessments will continue to inform NRCS’s work to deliver 

conservation that addresses current and future resource concerns.

PART 2: NRCS Adaptation Actions 

NRCS is the principal Federal agency that provides technical and financial conservation assistance to 

private landowners. Much of this assistance can be interpreted as addressing climate change, both 

through adaptation (greater resiliency to climate variability to minimize risk associated with extreme 

weather events or changing climate in a region) and mitigation (via reduced greenhouse gas emissions 

and/or increased carbon sequestration). The following is a description of current activities and 

contributions NRCS will provide to address climate change within agency operations. 

Conservation Program Delivery

The primary mechanism that NRCS has for addressing climate change adaptation is through its 

conservation programs. Climate change adaptation and mitigation is a growing priority in conservation 

program delivery. With 70% of the United States land base in private ownership, NRCS is strategically 

positioned to provide leadership in addressing the climate change issues. NRCS will pursue this 

opportunity through its technology, programs, assessments, and nationwide field conservation network. 

Conservation Innovation Grants

The NRCS Conservation Innovation Grants (CIG) Program enables USDA to accelerate technology 

transfer and adoption of promising technologies and approaches to address some of the Nation’s most 

pressing natural resource concerns. More can be learned about the CIG program at 

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/national/programs/financial/cig/ .

Emerging environmental markets and the valuation of ecosystem services may offer a unique opportunity 

for U.S. agriculture to harness a new revenue stream from corporate entities. Shareholders and CEOs are 

beginning to realize the multi-faceted co-benefits of conservation and agriculture-based carbon projects. 

Recipients of NRCS CIG funding are exploring conservation opportunities and identifying NRCS 

conservation practices that can generate carbon credits and provide additional value to agricultural 

producers. For example, in 2011 NRCS awarded more than $7.4 million in nine CIGs that reduce 

greenhouse gas emissions or sequester carbon, and demonstrate transactions in emerging carbon markets 

(voluntary and regulatory). All grant recipients were tasked with originating agriculture-based carbon 

credits, verifying and certifying the credits, and then completing a credit transaction in the voluntary or 

compliance marketplace. 

In late 2012, NRCS announced the availability of funds from the CIG Program to address drought. Focus 

areas included projects that demonstrated and quantified innovative cropping or grazing systems that used 

water-conserving crops, provided innovative cultural practices that increased drought tolerance, 

demonstrated innovative approaches to increased water use efficiency to increase drought resilience, and 

demonstrated nutrient management practices to protect water quality following an extended drought. In 

Natural Resources Conservation Service

118
FY 2013, NRCS provided $10 million in EQIP (Environmental Quality Incentives Program) funding 

distributed across 13 states to enable recipients of the greenhouse gas CIGs to further engage producers. 

Grants will serve as demonstration projects for emerging environmental markets [See Adaptation 

Actions Table; aligns with President’s CAP (Conserving Land and Water Resources); USDA 

Strategic Goal Objectives 1.1 (Enhancing Rural Prosperity) and 2.2 (Lead Efforts to Mitigate and 

Adapt to Climate Change); and NRCS Strategic Goal Objectives 1.1 (Advance the Performance of 

Voluntary, Incentive-based Conservation Solutions) and 1.2 (Proactively Recognize and Address 

Emerging Natural Resource Issues)]. Three greenhouse gas CIG projects focus on nitrogen use 

efficiency and reducing emissions of nitrous oxide, a potent greenhouse gas, from row crops. The 

Fertilizer Institute, the Delta Institute, and the Chesapeake Bay Foundation all have nitrogen management 

projects underway that leverage EQIP resources. In 2013 these project participants worked closely with 

NRCS to implement and test these emerging nitrogen management techniques. 

From 2013-2015, NRCS CIGs will support development of a model that accounts for the impacts of 

organic material chemical composition (e.g. crop residue and animal manure lignin, cellulose, carbon, 

nitrogen, air quality, etc.), organic material placement, temperature, water, soil particle size, and 

mineralogy on rates of soil carbon sequestration and its relationship with soil available water-holding 

capacity. As some models already exist that account for some of these variables on crop residue 

decomposition and soil organic matter, the most pressing and remaining step is to quantify and model the 

relationships between soil organic matter content and available water-holding capacity for a range of 

soils. This will allow prescribing particular crop rotations, cover crops, green manures, animal manures, 

and tillage practices for specific soils and regions in order to increase soil resiliency to both drought and 

heavy precipitation. 

National Soil Health Campaign

NRCS launched an integrated campaign in 2012 to increase the adoption of Soil Health Management 

Systems (SHMS) among America’s farmers and ranchers. This campaign has the potential to lead to 

systemic, continental-scale improvements in soil, water, air, plants, livestock, and wildlife – all while 

reducing greenhouse gas emissions, increasing carbon sequestration, and enhancing long-term agricultural 

productivity.

A central tenet is enhancing a given soil’s capacity to function as a living system. This inherently includes 

increasing soil carbon sequestration (e.g. increasing soil organic matter), and the co-benefits of increasing 

resilience to drought, heavy precipitation, and extreme temperatures by increasing a soil’s available water 

holding capacity and water infiltration. Additional benefits accrue from using less petroleum based 

products (fewer greenhouse gas emissions) for tillage, fertilizer, and/or pesticides. 

NRCS is focusing on several functional areas to encourage and facilitate the widespread adoption of 

SHMS that increase resiliency to climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions [See 

Adaptation Actions Table; aligns with President’s CAP (Conserving Land and Water Resources); 

USDA Strategic Goal Objectives 2.1 (Restore and Conserve the Nation’s Forests, Farms, Ranches, 

and Grasslands) and 2.2 (Lead Efforts to Mitigate and Adapt to Climate Change); and NRCS 

Strategic Goal Objective 1.2 (Proactively Recognize and Address Emerging Natural Resource 

Issues)]. Those areas include: developing specific SHMS conservation practice criteria; training and 

preparing the NRCS workforce; developing tools for assessment and interpretation of soil health status; 

integrating Agency programs and planning to facilitate SHMS adoption; and developing and 

implementing a soil health awareness and education campaign. 

In addition, soil scientists (led by National Soil Survey Center staffs of Interpretations, Technical Soil 

Services, Soil Ecology, and Research and Laboratory) have proposed to develop “fragile soil 

Natural Resources Conservation Service

119
indicators” for the different ecological regions, to help recognize soils more vulnerable or 

susceptible to climate change [See Adaptation Actions Table; aligns with USDA Strategic Goal 

Objective 2.1 (Restore and Conserve the Nation’s Forests, Farms, Ranches, and Grasslands); and 

NRCS Strategic Goal Objective 1.2 (Proactively Recognize and Address Emerging Natural 

Resource Issues)]. Soil health assessment tools can be used as one basis of criteria. Interpretations may 

be developed as to specific soil health measures that can be used to minimize vulnerability, and 

interpretative maps developed across ecoregions for classes of these soils. Plant Material Centers can be 

used to develop targeted plant materials. Subsequently, Resource Soil Scientists and Soil Conservationists 

can do cooperative work to apply these technologies and assist land owners.

Landscape Conservation Initiatives

NRCS has implemented a broad spectrum of initiatives since January of 2009. These initiatives enable 

NRCS to more effectively address priority natural resource concerns by delivering systems of practices to 

the most vulnerable lands within geographic focus areas. Through these initiatives, NRCS seeks to 

accomplish (1) Conservation beyond boundaries (some landscape-scale natural resource concerns, such 

as species conservation and water quality, cannot be treated effectively based on geo-political 

boundaries); (2) A science-based approach (the Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP) 

indicates the most effective way to increase protection of natural resources is to target conservation to the 

most vulnerable or valuable areas and to apply a systems rather than a practice-by-practice approach; (3) 

Enhancement of existing locally-led efforts and partnerships — NRCS seeks to maximize the success 

of initiatives by leveraging partner interest and resources through programmatic and other tools; and (4) 

Regulatory certainty for agricultural producers — Where applicable, NRCS is working with 

regulators so agricultural producers can have certainty that the voluntary conservation systems they 

implement are consistent with current and potential regulations, as well as sustained agricultural 

production. 

Landscape Conservation Initiatives have been developed to address resource concerns such as water 

quantity (Bay Delta Initiative, Gulf of Mexico Initiative, and Ogallala Aquifer Initiative), soil and water 

quality (Mississippi River Basin Healthy Watersheds Initiative, Chesapeake Bay Watershed Initiative) 

and loss of habitat that includes wetland and forest habitats (Everglades Initiative, Northern Plains 

Migratory Bird Habitat Initiative, New England/New York Forestry Initiative, Long Leaf Pine Initiative, 

North Central Wetlands Conservation Initiative, and Red River Initiative). These initiatives increase the 

resiliency of the landscape and may have a significant impact on agriculture’s ability to adapt to the 

effects of climate change. We plan to use regional assessment tools like CEAP to evaluate possible 

climate change impacts on targeted initiative outputs such as water quality [See Adaptation Actions 

Table; aligns with President’s CAP (Conserving Land and Water Resources); USDA Strategic Goal 

Objectives 2.1 (Restore and Conserve the Nation’s Forests, Farms, Ranches, and Grasslands) and 

2.3 (Protect and Enhance America’s Water Resources); and NRCS Strategic Goal Objective 1.1 

(Advance the Performance of Voluntary, Incentive-based Conservation Solutions)].

Conservation Practice Standards

Conservation Practice Standards, along with the Conservation Planning Process, are the foundation of 

NRCS’s technical assistance program. NRCS’s Conservation Practice Standards are used by local, state, 

and Federal government agencies as well as by non-governmental organizations engaged in working 

lands conservation. NRCS conservation practices are being examined for 1) inherent climatic assumptions 

or data in relevant practice standards, and 2) modifications that might be needed in light of possible 

climate changes. Conservation practice standards 

(http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detailfull/national/technical/references/?cid=nrcs143_026849) 

are dynamic and are reviewed and updated at a minimum of every 5 years. This established review 

process is seen as a natural advantage for NRCS when evaluating future climate changes [See 

Adaptation Actions Table; aligns with President’s CAP (Conserving Land and Water Resources); 

Natural Resources Conservation Service

120
USDA Strategic Goal Objectives 2.1 (Restore and Conserve the Nation’s Forests, Farms, Ranches, 

and Grasslands) and 2.3 (Protect and Enhance America’s Water Resources); and NRCS Strategic 

Goal Objective 1.1 (Advance the Performance of Voluntary, Incentive-based Conservation 

Solutions)]. 35 of these Conservation Practice Standards were identified as having particularly positive 

benefits to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase carbon sequestration: 

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detailfull/national/air/?cid=stelprdb1044982. This knowledge 

allows conservation planners to readily choose practices to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and/or 

increase carbon sequestration.

Other Programs and Assets

Plant Materials Centers

The NRCS network of geographically distributed Plant Materials Centers is already positioned to 

contribute regionally-adapted plants that increase carbon sequestration, increase nitrogen fixation, 

enhance soil health, reduce runoff, increase soil water-holding capacity, increase bioenergy production, 

provide wildlife habitat (including pollinators), enhance drought tolerance, reduce soil-borne diseases, 

and provide numerous other contributions to regional climate change hubs. Plant Materials Centers, with 

support from the National Soil Survey Center, has started a coordinated evaluation of different 

combinations of cover crop species mixes and tillage practices across climates, soils, and cropping 

systems [See Adaptation Actions Table; aligns with USDA Strategic Goal Objectives 2.1 (Restore 

and Conserve the Nation’s Forests, Farms, Ranches, and Grasslands) and 2.3 (Protect and Enhance 

America’s Water Resources); and NRCS Strategic Goal Objectives 1.1 (Advance the performance 

of Voluntary, Incentive-based Conservation Solutions) and 1.2 (Proactively Recognize and Address 

Emerging Natural Resource Issues)]. These centers seek to identify optimal combinations of cover 

crop mixes and management practices to increase soil carbon sequestration and drought resilience through 

enhanced soil health. These field evaluations serve as a training ground for NRCS field staff and to 

transfer technology to farmers and ranchers to increase adoption of these conservation practices for 

reducing greenhouse gas emissions and increasing carbon sequestration. The evaluations are planned for 

2013-2016; however, it is NRCS’s goal to make these field projects an invaluable resource for training 

and technology transfer. 

Snow Survey and Water Supply Forecasting Program

The NRCS Snow Survey and Water Supply Forecasting Program (SS/WSF) in the western U.S. provides 

important historical, current, and projected information on western snowpack, precipitation, stream flow, 

and water supply. As part of this effort, NRCS maintains the SNOw TELemetry (SNOTEL) network of 

885 stations located in 13 States (including Alaska) and transmits snowpack and climate data hourly. The 

data collected at many of these sites includes snow depth, snow water equivalent, temperature, 

precipitation, relative humidity, solar radiation, wind speed and direction, and barometric pressure. In 

addition, many of the SNOTEL sites measure soil moisture and soil temperature at various depths. This 

is a critical source of high-elevation climate data for the mountainous West and is used extensively in 

climate change studies. In addition to the automated SNOTEL sites, there are over 1,000 manual snow 

courses providing snowpack and snow water equivalent data on a monthly basis during the winter and 

spring throughout the West, and many have extremely long and valuable historical records. Many climate 

groups, such as NIDIS (National Integrated Drought Information System), identify the NRCS Snow 

Survey as a major source of climate data for the U.S. These data are also used extensively in stream flow 

forecasting and water management by many Federal, State, local, and private entities. These data, 

analyses, and forecasts make a valuable contribution to climate and water resources management 

for the regional hubs [See Adaptation Actions Table; aligns with President’s CAP (Managing 

Drought); USDA Strategic Goal Objective 2.3 (Protect and Enhance America’s Water Resources); 

and NRCS Strategic Goal Objective 1.2 (Proactively Recognize and Address Emerging Natural 

Resource Issues)]. 

Natural Resources Conservation Service

121
NRCS operates the Soil Climate Analysis Network (SCAN) in 40 States and U.S. Territories. SCAN 

consists of 193 stations similar to SNOTEL that collect climate parameters, along with soil moisture and 

soil temperature at various depths below the surface. Soils can store large quantities of water, and greatly 

impact whether snowmelt and rainfall either infiltrate the subsurface or become runoff. Soil moisture and 

soil temperature relate closely to carbon storage, plant health, evapotranspiration, and drought 

determination. SCAN data are valuable input for making management decisions (e.g. planting, irrigation, 

fertilization, and harvest dates), drought assessment, soil climate and trends assessment, and flood 

forecasting. These networks make significant contributions to drought assessment and monitoring, 

and predicting changes in climate [See Adaptation Actions Table; aligns with President’s CAP 

(Managing Drought); with USDA Strategic Goal Objective 2.3 (Protect and Enhance America’s 

Water Resources); and NRCS Strategic Goal Objective 1.2 (Proactively Recognize and Address 

Emerging Natural Resource Issues)]. 

NRCS plans to continue these data collection and analysis activities. Currently, there is inadequate 

funding to maintain the current SCAN and SNOTEL monitoring sites and support the data analyses and 

forecasts at the NRCS National Water and Climate Center. This program is critical to drought 

assessment, water resource planning, energy management for irrigation scheduling, commodity crop 

predictions, and ecological site planning in the Western States. It is also part of the soil moisture network 

that is a cornerstone of the newly initiated National Drought Resilience Partnership. Funds must be 

increased to maintain existing sites, expand the networks to new locations as needed, develop data 

management infrastructure, and support thorough and high quality data analyses and water supply 

forecasts. Sites are proposed for the permafrost regions of Alaska, an area heavily impacted by climate 

change. Another long term (14-year) NRCS study of frozen soils has been performed in Antarctica in 

collaboration with LandCare Research and the University of Waikato of New Zealand. This study 

requires continued NRCS support for their effort to understand the fundamental properties and mechanics 

of cold and frozen desert soils, and to study the impacts of climate change on the soil active layer and 

upper permafrost.

Ecological Site Information

Ecological sites or ecosystems describe unique combinations of climate, soils, and plants. As climatic 

drivers change conditions across any region, alternative ecosystem states may develop. Efforts are 

underway to develop ecological site plans by region across the U.S. [See Adaptation Actions Table; 

aligns with President’s CAP (Conserving Land and Water Resources); USDA Strategic Goal 

Objectives 2.1 (Restore and Conserve the Nation’s Forests, Farms, Ranches, and Grasslands) and 

2.3 (Protect and Enhance America’s Water Resources); and NRCS Strategic Goal Objective 1.2 

(Proactively Recognize and Address Emerging Natural Resource Issues)]. 

Ecological Site Descriptions (ESDs) are descriptions of how soils and vegetation respond to changes in 

climate and management. ESDs are based on groupings of soils and include information divided into two 

separate, but related sections: 

• a description of states (vegetation and soils in the ecosystem) and transitions (pathways 

of soil and vegetation alterations that develop when that environmental change occurs; and

• ecological site values (such as forage or timber production, wildlife habitat, hydrologic 

yield etc.) associated with different discrete states that the soils and vegetation may provide.

ESDs go beyond basic soil survey information. They describe how important soil processes (infiltration, 

nutrient-holding capacity) change when vegetation changes, and they also express the probability of 

change in soil and vegetation properties associated with specific management practices. These 

probabilities, usually expressed categorically (high, medium, low) give guidance as to the risks and 

benefits associated with implementing a specific management option to achieve desired objectives. 

Natural Resources Conservation Service

122
The soil-to-vegetation ratio information in ESDs can be very useful in estimating how changes in 

management or climate will affect soil carbon storage. Vegetation structure (shrub-to-grass ratio, species 

composition, soil disturbance) are important determinants of the amount of carbon stored in the soil on 

range and forest lands. In addition, the probability of maintaining that carbon in the soil and vegetation 

can be assessed in terms of the risk of wildfire. 

ESDs are also a potentially invaluable technology to provide information for climate change adaptation. 

The ecological dynamics (including management) of a site respond to changes in climate, which in turn 

require management responses. While regional and state-wide analysis are important, eventually, 

conservation decisions must be made, implemented, and evaluated on a site-specific basis. Without an 

accurate working model for the interactions of climate and management, it is impossible to make costeffective decisions.

Watershed Rehabilitation Program and Small Watershed Program

NRCS, in partnership with local watershed sponsors across the country, has constructed over 11,000 

small dams to reduce the impacts of extreme precipitation and drought. By reducing peak runoff from 

extreme precipitation events and storing water during extended droughts, these Small Watershed Program 

dams reduce flood damages and provide critical water supply to agricultural producers and rural 

communities. Many of these dams are at the end of their designed life or no longer meet state or federal 

dam safety criteria. The Watershed Rehabilitation Program helps watershed sponsors restore these dams 

so they can continue to provide relief from the impacts of weather extremes and provide stronger and 

safer rural communities. In just one extreme precipitation even, Hurricane Irene, NRCS funded small 

watershed dams reduced flood damages to agricultural producers and local communities by about $40 

million. 

In addition to the 11,000 dams constructed through the Small Watershed Program, NRCS has completed 

numerous non-structural watershed project measures to reduce flood damages. These projects include 

measures such as the relocation of buildings and infrastructure from the floodplain, “flood proofing” 

existing buildings and infrastructure, and purchasing floodplain easements to restore floodplain functions. 

In turn, healthy, functioning floodplains provide natural extreme weather buffers by receiving and storing 

flood water during extreme precipitation and providing water in wetlands and moist floodplain soils 

during extended droughts. NRCS evaluates the economic, social, and environmental impacts of extreme 

weather mitigation alternatives, and often uses a combination of structural and non-structural measures to 

optimize the federal investment in these locally led projects.

Data and Databases

NRCS manages, maintains, and delivers several national and regional datasets useful to the identification 

and assessment of climate change impacts. In addition, NRCS, in cooperation with a variety of partners, 

has developed a series of planning tools that can help land owners, land managers, and others estimate the 

effect of conservation practices on water quality, water quantity, and carbon sequestration.

NRCS is currently working on plans to modify critical databases in order to create delivery systems 

that will simplify access to data and reports [See Adaptation Actions Table; aligns with President’s 

CAP (Launching a Climate Data Initiative); with USDA Strategic Goal Objective 2.1 (Restore and 

Conserve the Nation’s Forests, Farms, Ranches, and Grasslands); and NRCS Strategic Goal 

Objective 1.2 (Proactively Recognize and Address Emerging Natural Resource Issues)]. Most data is 

freely and publically available in some format (data or reports). As part of the effort to provide 

information, data, and tools for climate change preparedness and resilience, we propose to include these 

data sets in the proposed website “climate.data.gov” (See Adaptation Actions Table). The first three 

Natural Resources Conservation Service

123
listed below are currently posted in www.data.gov, but the others can be ready sources of data or 

interpretations of these data for private citizens, universities, or other government agencies.

Snow Survey and Water Supply Forecasting (SS/WSF)

Data can be accessed through NRCS’s National Water and Climate Center website at 

http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/ and at http://catalog.data.gov/dataset/snowpack-telemetry-network-snotel. 

Soil Climate Analysis Network (SCAN)

Data can be accessed through NRCS’s National Water and Climate Center website at 

http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/ and at http://catalog.data.gov/dataset/soil-climate-analysis-network-scan. 

Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP)

CEAP is a multi-agency effort to quantify the environmental effects of conservation practices and 

programs and to develop the science base for managing the agricultural landscape for environmental 

quality. Project findings are used to guide USDA conservation policy and program development and to 

help conservationists, farmers, and ranchers make more informed conservation decisions. CEAP reports 

are available from NRCS’s webpage at 

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/national/technical/nra/ceap/. 

PLANTS Database

The PLANTS Database is a repository of plant data. It provides standardized information about the 

vascular plants, mosses, liverworts, hornworts, and lichens of the U.S. and its territories. This information 

primarily promotes land conservation in the United States and its territories, but academic, educational, 

and general use is encouraged. These data are available at http://plants.usda.gov/ . 

National Cooperative Soil Survey Laboratory Characterization

The NCSS Laboratory Characterization Database contains soil characterization data from NRCS’s 

Kellogg Soil Survey Laboratory as well as cooperators’ laboratories. The data can be accessed at 

http://ncsslabdatamart.sc.egov.usda.gov/default.htm. 

Soil Survey Geographic Database (SSURGO) and Gridded (gSSURGO)

These databases maintain detailed spatial and tabular data on the distribution and attributes of soils for the 

United States. Maps were primarily developed at scales of 1:12,000 or 1:24,000, and tabular data are 

available for soil and landscape attributes. Spatial data are available in raster and vector format for most 

of the U.S. Examples of information available from the database include available water capacity, soil 

reaction, electrical conductivity, and frequency of flooding; yields for cropland, woodland, rangeland, and 

pastureland; and limitations affecting recreational development, building site development, and other 

engineering uses.

SSURGO data can be accessed through the Web Soil Survey 

(http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm) or the NRCS Geospatial Data Gateway 

(http://datagateway.nrcs.usda.gov/). More than 180,000 users access the Web Soil Survey every month, 

resulting in the creation of more than 20,000 printable soil survey reports and more than 75,000 

individual soil properties and interpretation reports. In addition, more than 25,000 soil survey data exports 

are downloaded, making the Web Soil Survey the most frequently used USDA web site.

National Resources Inventory

The NRI is a periodic assessment of the status, condition and trends of the soil, water, and related 

resources on private land in the United States. The survey has been conducted at 5-year intervals since 

1977, most recently in 2007, though a 2010 mid-cycle data release occurred in December 2013. NRI 

reports can be accessed through NRCS’s webpage at 

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/national/technical/nra/nri/. 

Natural Resources Conservation Service

124
Rapid Carbon Assessment (RACA)

NRCS has performed an assessment of the current carbon stocks in soils of the United States using 

statistically reliable methods in its Rapid Carbon Assessment project. Approximately 32,500 soil profiles 

have been sampled at 6,500 locations to develop the largest soil carbon dataset in the world. Data and 

maps are available from NRCS’s website at 

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/home/?cid=NRCS142P2_054164.

Ecological Site Inventory

Ecological Site Descriptions (ESDs) are descriptions of how soils and vegetation respond to changes in 

climate and management. ESDs are based on groupings of soils and include information on how 

vegetation and soils change in response to changes in management or other factors and the ability of the 

soil/vegetation community to deliver ecosystem services. Data can be accessed through the Ecological 

Site Inventory portal at https://esis.sc.egov.usda.gov/Default.aspx. 

Field Office Technical Guide (FOTG)

The NRCS Field Office Technical Guides (FOTG) are the primary scientific references containing 

technical information about the conservation of soil, water, air, and related plant and animal resources 

(practice standard, specifications, physical effects analysis, and outcomes and costs). These technical 

guides are localized so that they apply specifically to the geographic area for which they are prepared. 

They are a comprehensive and locally-tailored data set for conservation of natural resources in different 

regions of the U.S. 

Technology and Innovation

Training and Education

Climate change education for NRCS staff is a key priority [See Adaptation Actions Table; aligns 

with USDA Strategic Goal Objective 2.1 (Restore and Conserve the Nation’s Forests, Farms, 

Ranches, and Grasslands); and NRCS Strategic Goal Objective 1.2 (Proactively Recognize and 

Address Emerging Natural Resource Issues)]. Most NRCS employees have strong backgrounds in 

agriculture, natural resources, or environmental sciences. NRCS continues to develop a climate change 

curriculum to ensure that staff also have a solid understanding of the risks and impacts associated with 

climate change, as well as mitigation and adaptation actions that can assist landowners in addressing these 

risks and impacts,. 

To date, NRCS has developed four courses for employees and others to improve their knowledge of 

climate change:

• Air Quality, Climate Change and Energy

• Greenhouse Gasses and Carbon Sequestration

• Why do we care about Climate Change?

• Introduction to Environmental Credit Training

Two other courses are in development: Climate Change Adaptation and Carbon Markets [See 

Adaptation Actions Table; aligns with USDA Strategic Goal Objective 2.1 (Restore and Conserve 

the Nation’s Forests, Farms, Ranches, and Grasslands); and NRCS Strategic Goal Objective 1.2 

(Proactively Recognize and Address Emerging Natural Resource Issues)]. All of these courses are 

part of an agency-wide climate change training program available to employees as well as private citizens 

via USDA’s on-line training website AgLearn. 

Natural Resources Conservation Service

125
In addition to understanding climate change basics, NRCS employees need to be fully aware of the 

potential climate change impacts in their region as well as strategies for addressing associated resource 

concerns, methods to increase system resiliency, and to recognize potential transformations. Variability 

in physiography, production systems, and potential climate change impacts across the country will require 

the development of regional- and/or state-specific training. Thus, we need to explore the development 

of a course to help employees develop regional and sub-regional adaptation plans to properly 

address the changing climate [See Adaptation Actions Table; aligns with USDA Strategic Goal 

Objective 2.1 (Restore and Conserve the Nation’s Forests, Farms, Ranches, and Grasslands); and 

NRCS Strategic Goal Objective 1.2 (Proactively Recognize and Address Emerging Natural 

Resource Issues)]. When training is completed, employees should have the ability to evaluate and 

compile regional climate change plans documenting common crop and livestock production systems in 

each ecosystem and possible impacts that may occur from the changing climate or extreme climatic 

events. 

Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP)

CEAP is a multi-agency effort to quantify the environmental effects of conservation practices and 

programs and to develop the science base for managing the agricultural landscape for environmental 

quality. Assessments in CEAP are carried out at national, regional and watershed scales on cropland, 

grazing lands, and wetlands, and for wildlife. The three principal components of CEAP—the national 

assessments, the watershed assessment studies, and the bibliographies and literature reviews— contribute 

to building the science base for conservation. That process includes research, modeling, assessment, 

monitoring and data collection, outreach, and extension education. Project findings are used to guide 

USDA conservation policy and program development and help conservationists, farmers, and ranchers 

make more informed conservation decisions. 

Future CEAP-related monitoring and modeling activities will enhance the development of cost and 

benefit analyses of conservation practices as they relate to climate change metrics. These include 

measurement and prediction of potential carbon sequestration/loss and greenhouse gas 

mitigation/emission under current conditions as compared to simulated conditions predicted by climate 

change projection models. 

COMET-VR 2.0 and COMET-FARM

NRCS has partnered with Colorado State University to develop the on-line Carbon Management 

Evaluation Tool (COMET-VR 2.0) to help farmers and ranchers understand and assess impacts of 

changes in land management on soil carbon. The tool was initially designed as a simple and quick 

method to estimate management impacts on greenhouse gas emissions pertaining to soil carbon 

sequestration, fuel use, and fertilizer use. The most recent version of COMET-VR 2.0 estimates soil 

nitrous oxide (a potent greenhouse gas) emissions and gauges changes in biomass carbon stocks for 

agroforestry practices and perennial woody crops that include orchards and vineyards. COMET-VR 2.0 

provides land managers with agricultural management scenarios and a broad variety of nitrogen 

management options to assist them with identifying management alternatives and understanding their 

associated impacts on greenhouse gas emissions and carbon sequestration. 

Building on COMET-VR 2.0, the current model for evaluating management effects on greenhouse gas 

emissions and carbon sequestration, COMET-FARM was released in 2013 by Secretary Vilsack. 

COMET-FARM is available to create a whole farm and ranch accounting and reporting system for carbon 

and greenhouse gases. The decision-support tools help landowners and conservation planners account for 

carbon fluxes and greenhouse gas emissions on whole farm and ranch scales, and will provide alternative 

management scenarios for landowners and conservation planners to explore in order to reduce greenhouse 

gas emissions and increase carbon sequestration. 

Natural Resources Conservation Service

126
PART 3: Managing Significant Risks

To effectively respond to disasters of all kinds, NRCS established an Emergency Response and 

Continuity Programs Division. This division provides leadership and planning assistance to the various 

levels within NRCS to maintain Continuity of Government (COG); respond to crisis events of local, 

regional, and/or national significance; and recover from the effects of disasters that adversely impact the 

NRCS’s capability to carry out normal business operations. Plans developed under the guidance of this 

division relate to short-term weather events such as flooding, tornadoes, hurricanes, fires, etc., as well as 

deliberate actions such as bombings, arson, and cyber-attack. Most anticipated shifts in weather patterns 

fall under this umbrella of preparedness; climate change is expected to intensify certain weather events 

and increase their frequency which may result in a cumulative strain on the ability of NRCS personnel to 

respond.

NRCS has developed programs for emergency response and continuity that: 

• Test, evaluate, and validate senior leadership responses during simulated, scenario-based, crisis 

management activities;

• Work with NRCS soil and GIS specialists in 50 states and territories during exercise simulations 

involving dam safety/security;

• Support enhancing landscape conservation initiatives through a robust testing, training, and 

exercise program where real-world weather and natural disaster events are gained through exercise 

simulations that address emergency watershed protection, disaster response, and recover responsibilities, 

and State Office leadership collaboration with State, local, Tribal, and Federal partners;

• Support increasing conservation access for underserved communities by planning, developing, 

and conducting senior and subordinate level exercises that engage community groups in exercise play that 

would co-partner with NRCS during disaster response and mitigation activities.

• Assure that business continuity of operations and the continued performance of essential 

functions during and after an event of local, regional, or national significance continues. 

• Establish strategic partnerships with various entities including other USDA agencies, law 

enforcement agencies, emergency response agencies, and private and public landowners.

Identified Analysis Needs

We must recognize potential impacts of climate change as a threat to continuity of operations. Future 

revisions to national, state, and local continuity of operations plans will account for adverse impacts of 

climate change. In addition, future decisions regarding establishment of new offices, consolidation of 

existing offices, and leasing of new office space should consider climate change impacts. Anticipated 

changes in weather patterns call for a number of actions to more clearly identify the scope of possible 

vulnerabilities or to determine the actions adequate to reduce the risk connected to these areas. NRCS has 

identified the following critical analysis needs related to NRCS mission and operations, and will develop 

plans to address them over the next several years:

Short-term events (develop within minutes or days, sustained for no more than one to two weeks)

 Evaluate possible risk events for severity and length.

o Direct facility damage due to flood, fire, hurricane, etc.

o Loss of critical infrastructure (electricity, natural gas, telecommunications, etc.).

 Review positions identified as Essential Personnel for purposes of planned disruption to 

operations (as determined for October 2013 lapse in funding). Determine:

o If an adequate response to disaster events requires these same or different personnel to maintain 

critical NRCS services

o Depth of redundant, alternate staff required for each essential position

Natural Resources Conservation Service

127
o Contingency plans for staffing locations (back-up power, secure space, etc.) to support Essential 

Personnel

o Contingency plans to assure staff are able to work with assurance their families are also safe and 

secure

o Alternate back-up staff for each position and associated plans for each

 Evaluate original design parameters and expected changes in peak events relative to dams, 

manure lagoons, and other structures subject to catastrophic failure.

 Identify and coordinate possible support outside NRCS (National Guard, State Emergency 

Response networks, etc.).

Long-term events (develop over multiple weeks, sustained for several weeks to months or years)

 Evaluate possible risk events for severity and length.

o Sustained drought, coastal flooding exacerbated by higher median tides, etc.

o Probable time scale to respond

o Relevant, impacted NRCS facilities or substantial projects (impoundments, etc.)

 Steps to modify, move, or abandon threatened facilities or projects.

 Identify, review, and revise (as needed) long-lived Conservation Practices that may be rendered 

ineffective or severely compromised by shifted weather patterns. Two areas of concern, for example:

o Stream diversions may become ineffective if historic patterns of mountain snowmelt accelerate 

and surface water is no longer sufficient during the latter part of a summer growing season.

o Substantial USDA investments to build Anaerobic Digesters (AD) may prove misguided without 

careful long-range planning. An AD system (designed to operate for multiple decades) could be rendered 

obsolete if a dairy is driven out of business (or forced to reduce herd size) due to sustained drought. 

PART 4: Procurement, Acquisition, Real Property and Leasing

Existing or Ongoing Activities

Existing acquisition activities related to climate change impacts include development of policies, 

procedures, and requirement statements that incorporate “green” products and value-added service 

components that do not further environmental degradation or hasten negative climate change impacts. 

For example, NRCS participates in the Green Purchasing Program (GPP) which is a two-fold incentive 

program promoting Green Purchasing Categories and Labels (recycled content, energy efficient 

(ENERGY STAR® labeled, Federal Energy Management Program [FEMP]-designated, and low standby 

power); bio-based, environmentally preferable, Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool 

(EPEAT), water efficient, non-ozone depleting products; and alternative fuel vehicles and alternative 

fuels. NRCS incorporates a tracking system within the current reconciliation process. Purchase card 

holders are to document in the banking system when a “green” item is purchased and identify its recycled 

content. 

NRCS conducted comprehensive assessments for all its owned facilities in FY 2013 for existing real 

property. This assessment includes an ASHRAE Level II Energy Audit and the USDA Sustainability 

Survey, along with identifying Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs). Energy, water cost, and usage 

data are detailed in the NRCS FEMP 2013 Annual GHG and Sustainability Data Report (version 3.2). 

This included compiling energy, water, and other data through FY 2012. This information will guide 

NRCS on future projects to meet energy and water efficiency goals to reduce CO2 emissions. 

NRCS does not currently have a mechanism to compile energy and water usage data for leased facilities 

where NRCS is responsible for the utilities. The agency will develop a process during FY 2014 for 

Natural Resources Conservation Service

128
improving its data collection for all utilities paid by NRCS under the USDA Amersco (Third Party) 

payment contract with the goal to reduce emissions.

The potential risk for loss of critical materials or inputs due to climate change, from an acquisitions 

perspective, may be assessed as non-major and limited in scope (typically due to a location-specific 

event). The types of materials and/or inputs at risk for loss would potentially be items such as office 

space, equipment, vehicles, desks, and/or electronic equipment such as computers, printers, plotters, etc. 

Critical inputs may be considered to be electronic systems, software, and access to communications 

networks such as the worldwide web. 

Short-term events (develop within minutes or days, sustained for no more than one to two weeks)

NRCS will immediately evaluate possible risk events for severity and length. This will include:

• Direct facility/equipment damage due to flood, fire, hurricane, etc.

• Loss of critical infrastructure (electricity, natural gas, telecommunications, etc.)

• Review positions identified as Essential Personnel for purposes of planned disruption to 

operations. This will be done to determine:

o If an adequate response to disaster events requires these same or different personnel to maintain 

or reconstitute critical NRCS services

o The depth of redundant, alternate staff required for each essential position

NRCS will continue to develop contingency plans for staffing locations (back-up power, secure space, 

etc.) to support Essential Personnel. These will include:

o Plans to verify that staffs are able to work with reassurance their families are also safe and secure

o Alternate back-up staff for each position and associated plans for each

o Evaluate original design parameters and expected changes in peak events relative to dams, 

manure lagoons, and other structures subject to catastrophic failure

o Identify and coordinate possible support outside the Agency (National Guard, State Emergency 

Response networks, etc.)

Long-term events (develop over multiple weeks, sustained for several weeks to months or years)

NRCS will evaluate possible risk for severity and length. This will include:

• Sustained downtime/loss of critical internet or telecommunications and systems such as the 

Integrated Acquisition System

• Probable time scale to respond

• Relevant, impacted NRCS facilities/equipment or substantial projects (contracts, etc.)

• Steps to modify, move, or abandon threatened facilities/equipment/ projects or termination of 

contracts as needed for the convenience of the Government

NRCS will identify, review, and revise (as needed) response plans and strategies based upon the climate 

change impacts realized. For example, NRCS will charter a Space Utilization Management Strategy 

Workgroup to provide a proactive three-year strategy to optimize the Real Estate Footprint, reduce costs, 

make reductions in greenhouse gas and green building, and establish accountability and incentives for 

better space utilization.

Natural Resources Conservation Service

129
PART 5: Interagency Coordination

NRCS has a long history of working collaboratively with private landowners and partners from local,

State, and Federal government, Universities, and non-governmental organizations to solve challenging 

conservation problems across the United States. Several Programs and Initiatives in NRCS have multiple 

partners, such as CEAP. Climate change preparedness and resilience efforts provide another opportunity 

for NRCS to actively engage the conservation partnership. 

Regional Climate Change Hubs

NRCS’s key partnership priority with regard to climate change preparedness and resilience is the 

establishment of the new USDA Regional Hubs for Risk Adaptation and Mitigation to Climate Change. 

Seven USDA regional climate change hubs have been designated and their structure and activities 

will be developed over the next year [See Adaptation Actions Table; aligns with President’s CAP 

(Maintaining Agricultural Sustainability and Assessing Climate Change Impacts in the United 

States);USDA Strategic Goal Objective 2.2 (Lead Efforts to Mitigate and Adapt to Climate 

Change); and NRCS Strategic Goal Objective 1.2 (Proactively Recognize and Address Emerging 

Natural Resource Issues)]. These hubs are designed to develop science-based regional climatic change 

information for distribution to citizens of the regions, particularly producers, ranchers, and foresters. 

NRCS personnel associated with these hubs will help to develop and deliver important science-based 

assessment and tools, and will provide science and outreach related to climate change to communities. 

NRCS’s primary role will be to connect farmers, ranchers, and other public sectors to advances in climate 

change research and applications. In addition to technology transfer, NRCS must actively participate in 

determining and directing important research activities in each Regional Climate Hub. We should assist 

in the development of applicable research programs through Agricultural Research Service and other 

research partners to evaluate production systems across a variety of climatic zones under credible climate 

change scenarios. The result will be to determine types of practice combinations that are most effective in 

increasing climate resilience to the adaptation and transformation process. We can then identify land use 

alternatives, land management systems, and conservation priorities necessary to protect natural resources 

in the face of climate change.

The NRCS field office staff across the U.S. provides the technical link between research and application 

for the climate hubs. NRCS is the primary Federal agency that supplies conservation assistance on a 

voluntary basis to private citizens through its Conservation Technical Assistance (CTA) Program. NRCS 

has staff located in nearly every U.S. county; thereby well-positioning this agency to provide outreach 

and support, and to implement conservation measures to increase resiliency to climate change and reduce 

GHG emissions as a member of the regional climate change hubs. 

NRCS also has a network of soil scientists and other technical specialists distributed by Major Land 

Resource Areas (MLRA) across the U.S. that are positioned geographically to provide expert technical 

assistance in soil interpretations. The Web Soil Survey provides a means for spatial extrapolation of 

technologies to appropriate soils and landscapes, as well as providing base soil data and information for 

model simulations. In addition, state soil scientists, included on most NRCS state office staffs to provide 

technical soil services, are instrumental in linking soil science and conservation activities for these 

climate hubs. The National Soil Survey Center includes scientists from multiple disciplines as well as 

research soil scientists that can assist in research and application associated with climate change. The 

Kellogg Soil Survey Laboratory will continue to provide soil and water analyses for a variety of needs. 

Natural Resources Conservation Service

130
In addition to this on-the-ground implementation capacity, NRCS has other resources that will contribute 

to acquisition and development of technology for increasing resilience to and reducing impacts of climate 

change and related extreme events. These resources include the National Air Quality and Atmospheric 

Change Team, National Water and Climate Center, National Water Quality and Quantity Team, National 

Energy Team, National Wetlands Team, National Grazing Lands Team, National Wildlife Team, National 

Soil Health and Sustainability Team, National Manure Management Team, and National Plants Data 

Team. Also, staff members are associated with the Resource Assessment Division, Soil Science Division, 

including the Soil Quality and Ecosystems and the Research and Laboratory Branches, Ecological 

Sciences Division, and Conservation Engineering Division at National Headquarters. 

The technologies developed and acquired by these teams and divisions are transferred to field staff 

through the West, Central, and East National Technology Support Centers in Oregon, Texas, and North 

Carolina, respectively; the National Soil Survey Center in Nebraska; and the National Water Management 

Center in Arkansas. The capacity of these Centers can be coupled with the climate hubs to deliver regionspecific climate change adaptation and mitigation assistance.

National Drought Resilience Partnership

Creation of a National Drought Resilience Partnership was mandated in the 2013 Climate Action Plan. 

Scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) are the lead agency and 

charged to facilitate development of a coordinated national soil moisture network. The purpose of this 

partnership and network is to help forecast drought conditions around the U.S., better prepare for future 

droughts, and decrease economic impacts. This development of a single soil moisture network will likely 

be based on SCAN criteria. NRCS leads the National Cooperative Soil Survey program and possesses the 

level of expertise and capability to inventory and monitor soils and soil moisture on a nationwide basis. 

NRCS can play a major role in the formulation and leadership of just such a network and we will continue 

to work in cooperation with other agencies within this partnership.

Climate Preparedness Water Resources Workgroup

This workgroup was formed by the Federal Interagency Climate Change Adaption Task Force sponsored 

by the President’s Council on Environmental Quality to evaluate options of Federal agencies to help 

ensure freshwater resource managers would have adequate water supplies of needed quality to protect 

public health and support economic activity. The workgroup developed the “National Action Plan: 

Priorities for Managing Freshwater Resources in a Changing Climate” for Federal agencies. 

The Freshwater Action Plan touched a limited number of NRCS programs. Among the activities of this 

workgroup with NRCS involvement was the completion of two reports on Incorporating Adaptive 

Management into Water Project Designs, Operational Procedures, and Planning Strategies. The first of 

these reports was a summary of current Federal agency adaptive management practices and policies for 

integrated water resources management. The second report provided recommendations for Federal 

agencies to develop five key benchmarks for incorporating adaptive management into their planning and 

operations. The reports were published by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and NRCS was among the 

contributors in the interagency effort. 

Additional activities from the Freshwater Action Plan continue for improved water project planning 

standards and increases in water use efficiency continue under the mandate of the Climate Preparedness 

Water Resources Workgroup. 

Natural Resources Conservation Service

131
Appendix: NRCS Contributing Author Team

• Joel Brown – National Leader-Ecological Site Team, Soil Science Division (Soil Science 

and Resource Assessment)

• Adam Chambers – Air Quality Scientist, National Air Quality and Atmospheric Change 

Team (Science and Technology)

• Terry D’Addio – Natural Resource Specialist, Conservation Technical Assistance Division 

(Programs)

• Noel Gollehon – Senior Economist, Resource Economic, Analysis, and Policy Division 

(Strategic Planning and Accountability)

• Claudia Hoeft – National Hydraulic Engineer, Conservation Engineering Division (Science 

and Technology)

• Amanda Moore – Management Analyst, Office of the Regional Conservationists (Office of 

Regional Conservationists)

• Daniel Mullarkey – Acting Director, Resource Analysis Division (Soil Science and 

Resource Assessment) 

• Kip Pheil – Energy Specialist and Acting Leader, National Energy Team (Science and 

Technology)

• Michael Strobel – Director, Water and Climate Center (Soil Science and Resource 

Assessment)

• Norman Widman – National Agronomist, Ecological Science Division (Science and 

Technology)

• Michael Wilson, Team Leader, Acting National Leader-Climate Change, Soil Science 

Division (Soil Science and Resource Assessment)

Natural Resources Conservation Service

132
NRCS Adaptation Actions

Action 

Description

Action Goal Agency 

Leads†

Risk/Opportun

ity Description

Scale Timeframe Implementatio

n Methods

Performance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/ 

Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishments to Date

 CONSERVATION PROGRAM DELIVERY

Conservatio

n Innovation 

Grants

Develop 

demonstration 

projects for 

emerging 

environmental 

markets 

S&T, 

SSRA, 

RCs or 

STCs

Help protect 

marginal lands 

and provide 

producers with 

additional 

revenue stream

National 2014 and 

beyond

Work with 

producers and C 

credit funding 

sources

Soil Health 

Managemen

t System

Enhance 

promotion and 

implementation of 

Soil Health 

Management 

System concepts

SSRA,

S&T,

Prog

Develop and 

deliver field 

level training 

courses

Local 2014 and 

beyond

AgLearn, Eextension, onsite training 

courses

training 

delivered; 

webinars 

presented; fact 

sheets created

Coordinates 

with other 

USDA 

agencies, e.g., 

ARS, plus 

university 

partners

Multiple fact sheets created 

(http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/

wps/portal/nrcs/main/soils/

health/resource/) ; webinars 

completed and archived 

(http://conservationwebinar

s.net ), training cadre 

established and active in 

training

"Fragile 

Soil" 

indicators

Understand 

climatically 

vulnerable soils in 

each region and 

develop 

interpretations and 

maps from soil 

survey products; 

development of 

"Fragile Soil" 

indicators for 

different 

ecoregions

SSRA,

S&T,

Prog

Opportunity to

use existing soil 

survey 

information to 

develop these 

indicators; 

useful for soil 

health 

applications.

National 2014 and 

2015

Development of 

indicators for 

selected regions

Natural Resources Conservation Service

133
Action 

Description

Action Goal Agency 

Leads†

Risk/Opportun

ity Description

Scale Timeframe Implementatio

n Methods

Performance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/ 

Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishments to Date

Landscape 

Conservatio

n Initiatives

Integrate potential 

for climate change 

impacts on 

national 

initiatives, like 

Mississippi River 

Basin, Chesapeake 

Bay, and Sage 

Grouse

S&T, 

SSRA, 

RCs or 

STCs

Regional 2012 and 

beyond

Use regional 

assessment tools 

like CEAP to 

evaluate 

possible climate 

change impacts 

on targeted 

initiative 

outputs such as 

water quality

Climate change 

factor 

evaluations used 

in specific 

initiatives and 

recommendation

s for 

management 

changes

In December 2013, USDA 

announced the approval of 

a carbon crediting protocol 

for the avoided conversion 

of grasslands and 

shrublands. The protocol 

was approved by the 

American Carbon Registry 

and spearheaded by Ducks 

Unlimited (DU). Using this 

protocol, DU has worked to 

purchase conservation 

easements on working 

grasslands in North Dakota. 

Carbon credits generated by 

these lands are being sold to 

Chevrolet. In February, the 

Chicago-based Delta 

Institute—another recipient 

of an NRCS Conservation 

Innovation Grant—will 

announce the sale of carbon 

credits to a local electric 

utility.

Natural Resources Conservation Service

134
Action 

Description

Action Goal Agency 

Leads†

Risk/Opportun

ity Description

Scale Timeframe Implementatio

n Methods

Performance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/ 

Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishments to Date

NRCS 

Practice 

Standards

Review and revise 

(if necessary) 

NRCS practice 

standards; 

outcomes, 

engineering 

design and 

adjustments from 

assessments based 

analyses of useful 

life, risk tolerance, 

and failure in 

relation to climate 

trends and 

projections

S&T, 

SSRA, 

Prog

Review, modify, 

and/or improve 

designs based 

on best available 

climatic data 

withstand 

climate 

extremes and 

variability 

National FY 2015 

and beyond

Integrate into 

standing 

schedules for 

practice reviews 

and design 

updates

Percentage of 

existing 

structures, new 

designs, or 

practices 

evaluated; 

percentage using 

new and 

projected data

 OTHER PROGRAMS AND 

ASSETS

Plant 

Material 

Centers

Plant Materials 

Centers evaluate 

plant attributes for 

adaptation and 

impacts 

S&T Revise/Improve 

vegetative 

recommendation

s to maintain the 

effectiveness of 

conservation 

practices

National Begin FY 

2015

Data 

collection/analy

sis

Updated 

vegetative 

recommendations

Snow 

Survey and 

Water 

Supply 

Forecasting

Continued 

monitoring and 

possible 

expansion of 

existing SNOw 

TELemetry 

(SNOTEL) 

network; 

Continued data 

analysis and water 

SSRA Assess changes 

in water supply 

quantity, 

distribution and 

timing of 

snowmelt

Western 

US

Ongoing Snowpack 

monitoring and 

water supply 

forecasting

On-going 

operation of data 

collection 

network and 

water supply 

forecasting: 

http://www.wcc.

nrcs.usda.gov/

Additional 

funding is 

needed to 

maintain the 

current 

SNOTEL 

monitoring 

sites and 

support the data 

analyses and 

Natural Resources Conservation Service

135
supply forecasting forecasts

Action 

Description

Action Goal Agency 

Leads†

Risk/Opportun

ity Description

Scale Timeframe Implementatio

n Methods

Performance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/ 

Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishments to Date

Drought 

Assessment

Continued 

monitoring and 

possible 

expansion of 

existing Soil 

Climate Analysis 

Network (SCAN) 

SSRA, 

S&T

Assess 

hydrologic 

drought by 

measuring soil 

moisture at 

different depths 

using SCAN

National Ongoing SCAN in 

coordination 

with NIDIS 

(National 

Integrated 

Drought 

Information 

System) and US 

Drought 

Monitor

On-going 

operation of data 

collection 

network; 

Reports and 

maps: 

http://www.wcc.

nrcs.usda.gov/sc

an/

Additional 

funding is 

necessary to 

maintain the 

current SCAN 

monitoring 

sites and 

support the 

data analyses 

and forecasts

Ecological 

Site 

Information

Enhance 

understanding of 

responses to 

changes in 

ecosystem 

processes 

SSRA Document 

ecological sites 

in MLRA 

regions of the 

US - Identify 

major climatic 

changes and 

ecological 

impacts

National 

by LRR 

2014 Evaluation of 

soils/vegetation/

conditions in an 

area

Documentation 

and ESD Plans 

Completed

†

Agency: S&T = Science and Technology; SSRA = Soil Science and Resources Assessment: Prog = Programs; RC = Regional Conservationists; STC = State Conservationists

136
USDA Risk Management Agency

Climate Adaptation Plan 2014
USDA Risk Management Agency – 2014 Climate Adaptation Plan

Updated as of June 6, 2014

I. Policy Framework

The central vision of the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC) is to provide world class 

agricultural risk management products.

Consistent with this vision, FCIC serves America's agricultural growers through effective, 

market-based risk management tools and solutions to strengthen the economic stability of 

agricultural growers and rural communities. As part of this mission, FCIC through the Risk 

Management Agency (RMA) administers the Federal crop insurance program. RMA managed 

over $123 billion in liability in 2013 and paid over $11.9 billion in losses from natural disasters 

(as of May 2014), RMA assists growers manage losses due to insured causes of loss which 

include but are not limited to natural disasters, drought or flooding . RMA’s crop insurance 

policies provide financial stability for growers and are frequently required by lenders. 

In addition to providing crop insurance coverage to growers, Section 522(d) of the Agricultural 

Risk Protection Act of 2000 authorizes RMA to enter into partnerships with public and private

entities for the development of non-insurance risk management tools. These tools are developed 

for growers’ direct use to assist in mitigating and adapting to increased risks from climate 

change, drought, and other weather related conditions. The partnerships are wide-ranging, multiyear, research projects that offer new and innovative approaches to risk management that extend 

beyond traditional crops.

As stated in its’ Strategic Plan, RMA’s goals are: 

• Expand existing crop insurance programs where appropriate.

• Improve the effectiveness of existing programs in southern states and other regional or 

local areas by refining offers to be better tailored to unique types and practices, and 

where appropriate, adjusting premium rates, transitional yields, initial and final planting 

dates, acreage reporting dates, coverage conditions, and high risk or other map areas 

138
within each county to recognize structural changes to the risks of growing the crop in 

those areas.

• Continue to refine and expand the availability of innovative, grid-based, weatherderivative, insurance products to crops and areas that are either uninsured or 

underinsured.

• Monitor climate change research, to the extent that climate changes emerge over time, 

and update program parameters such as final planting dates and sales closing dates, to 

reflect such adaptation or other changes.

• Regional Offices develop and maintain maps used to identify high risk areas, uninsured 

acreage, and coverage. 

• Regional Offices develop special provisions of insurance to address unique crop or 

regional conditions to enhance the program or address potential program vulnerabilities

II. Planning for Climate Change Related Risk 

On November 1, 2013, Executive Order (E.O.) 13653, “Preparing the United States for the 

Impacts of Climate Change,” Section 5(a) states, “Each Agency shall develop or continue to 

develop, implement, and update comprehensive plans that integrate consideration of climate 

change into Agency operations and overall mission objectives...” These 5 Parts are addressed in 

this USDA, Risk Management Agency – 2014 Climate Adaptation Plan: 

Section 5(a)(i) - identification and assessment of climate change related impacts on and 

risks to the agency’s ability to accomplish its missions, operations, and programs; 

RMA’s principle vulnerability to climate change is through the insurance coverage offered 

through its crop insurance policies. RMA provides coverage to farmers and ranchers for flood, 

drought, hurricanes and other natural disasters. Climate change is additive with other agronomic 

risks.

Farmers purchase crop insurance for protection against climate and weather related losses such 

as flood, drought, hail, etc. There is significant uncertainty about how climate change may affect 

crop yields – with improvements forecasted in some areas and decreases in others. In areas 

139
where climate changes in a way that is less conducive to growing a given crop, either the 

growers’ insurance guarantee will decrease (and premium rates increase) because of the falling 

yields or they will stop planting the crop entirely. Either way, the liability exposure of the crop 

insurance program to climate change tends to be self-limiting. 

Agricultural producers have always faced numerous production and price risks, but forecasts of 

more rapid changes in climatic conditions in the future have raised concerns that these risks will 

increase in the future relative to historical conditions. In addition to implications for landowner 

decisions regarding land use, crop mix, and production practices, changing agricultural risks

could potentially affect the performance of the crop insurance program. In addition, to the extent 

that changing climatic conditions are negatively affecting yields over time, there will be greater 

incentives to conduct research on drought-tolerant, heat-tolerant, and other crop varieties better 

suited to the changing conditions, which would tend to reduce climate impacts on crop yields. 

Technological improvements have the potential to decrease, or even negate, the impacts of 

climate change. 

RMA will continue to evaluate and monitor potential risks that climate change presents to the 

Federal crop insurance program. With over a million crop insurance policies in force and over 

$11.9 billon paid out in natural disaster claims in 2013 and the world’s most extensive 

database of actual farm yields, RMA will monitor program performance and to update program 

parameters such as the crop planting dates as needed to reflect the changing risks resulting from 

climate change. 

Climate change effect on RMA Operations

• RMA predicts that climate change will only have a minor effect on operations in 16 

states where RMA has offices. 

• RMA will maintain a workforce that is resilient to weather and other climate 

change-related disruptions so that the work of the Agency can continue as 

seamlessly as possible.

• RMA will employ flexible management policies to assist employees impacted by 

disasters related to climate change (e.g., floods, hurricanes, wildfires) so that they 

may return to work as quickly as possible. 

140
Section 5 (ii) a description of programs, policies, and plans the RMA has already put in 

place, as well as additional actions RMA will take, to manage climate risks in the near term 

and build resilience in the short and long term;

RMA has implemented and invested in a variety of programs and policies over the lifecycle of 

the federal crop insurance program and specifically to monitor and manage climate risks, these 

include: 

Premium Rating Methodology: RMA continuously reviews and revises its premium rating 

methodology*. Recent changes include using a shorter historical timeframe to measure risk, and 

the introduction of a process that explicitly considers weather variables in calculating premium 

rates. This makes premium rates more responsive to any changes in agronomic risks, whether 

due to climate change or other factors. 

*A document about the rate changes and their overall premium impact for 2013 can be found on RMA’s website at

http://www.rma.usda.gov/news/2012/11/2013premiumrateqa.pdf .

Climate and weather services: RMA has been using climate and weather services provided 

through a partnership with Oregon State University’s PRISM Climate Group (ParameterElevation Regressions on Independent Slopes Model) climate mapping system to strengthen 

RMA’s underwriting and oversight of the Federal crop insurance program. PRISM provides 

high quality climate and weather data that will assist RMA with its program underwriting and 

actuarial responsibilities by developing crop suitability maps based on climate and soils to more 

accurately assess the production potential of land being farmed; to account for variations in 

climate due to elevation, rain shadows, coastal effects, temperature inversions and other 

conditions that may affect crop production; and it is assisting RMA in developing nationwide 

Bio-fuel resource mapping. 

The PRISM web portal has been available to RMA and the insurance companies since spring of 

2012, to improve service to producers across the nation as losses can be adjusted quickly and 

141
accurately. To expand RMA’s initiative for a strong educational component for producers, 

PRISM also made a web portal available which is designed for producers to help them better 

understand their local climate and how changes in the climate effect their farming operations 

along with other decision support tools. It can also be used by growers to make planting and 

production decisions every day. The PRISM web portal for producers and general public went 

live on October 2013. It provides public access to a wealth of PRISM climate data, maps, and 

documentation. The URL for the public website is http://prism.oregonstate.edu .

Since it opened on Oct 1, 2013, PRISM has had 31,442 visits; 166,025 dataset downloads and 

2.2 TB of data downloaded (not including a new ftp site we opened on Jan 1, 2014).

Catastrophic Loss Procedures - Emergency Loss Procedures for Crops Damaged by Hurricanes 

and other extreme events. For Example, on October 24, 2005, Hurricane Wilma made landfall in 

Florida. The President declared 29 counties Federal disaster areas and directed the Department 

of Agriculture to assist growers affected by the hurricanes. In Florida, RMA reported that 

Hurricane Wilma resulted in 2,420 citrus fruit crop loss claims totaling $60.8 million in 

indemnity payments. 

On November 4, 2005, RMA authorized emergency loss procedures via a Manager Bulletin, 

MGR-05-020, Emergency Loss Procedures for Crops Damaged by Hurricane Wilma, intended 

to streamline certain loss determinations6 on specific crops and accelerate the adjustment of 

losses, expedite processing of loss claims and payments to growers from Hurricane Wilma. The

application of the emergency loss procedures was intended to be limited to those situations where

the catastrophic nature of the losses was such that not authorizing these emergency loss

procedures would result in unnecessary delays in processing claims. 

These programs and policies guide RMAs decisions in supporting changes to planting patterns, 

agronomic practices, new varieties; varieties that can be planted earlier and revising the earliest 

planting date and final planting dates if planting earlier becomes a common practice. RMA will 

monitor the establishment of new practices for new areas/crops such as irrigation, limited 

irrigation, skip rows, cover crops, organic practices, and other insurance offers. Ten Regional 

6 When losses occur, the Standard Reinsurance Agreement (SRA) requires that Approved Insurance Providers 

(AIPs) send adjusters into the field to determine the extent of damage and the appropriate losses under the insured’s 

crop insurance policy.

142

 
Offices (RO’s) will review planting dates periodically and recommend changes to existing final 

planting dates, if necessary. 

143
Section 5 (iii) a description of how any climate change related risk identified pursuant to 

paragraph (i) of this subsection that is deemed so significant that it impairs an agency’s 

statutory mission or operation will be addressed, including through the agency’s existing 

reporting requirements;

RMA has not identified any climate change risks that could potentially impair, obstruct, or 

prevent the success of agency mission activities in the long term. As with all Federal agencies we 

remain susceptible to natural events that may disrupt operations in the short run, in the event of 

these cases-such as tornados, hurricanes, winter storms - RMA has developed a Continuity of 

Operations Plan as a directive to ensure minimal disruption to its mission. 

Section 5(a)(iv) a description of how RMA will consider the need to improve climate 

adaptation and resilience, including the costs and benefits of such improvement, with 

respect to agency suppliers, supply chain, real property investments, and capital equipment 

purchases such as updating agency policies for leasing, building upgrades, relocation of 

existing facilities and equipment, and construction of new facilities;

The real property investments and capital equipment for RMA is limited and appears to have 

limited exposure to climate change risks. However, the crop insurance program can play a role 

in helping growers be more adaptive and resilient to climate change by making it easier for 

growers to invest in adaptation measures.

In general, uncertainty discourages investment. It can take years for an adaptation measure to 

pay off. Why should growers invest in an adaptation measure if they may go out of business 

before they can fully enjoy the long-term benefits of that investment? Crop insurance helps 

reduce that uncertainty, which can promote investment in the adaptation measure. We have 

frequently heard that banks strongly encourage, or even require, crop insurance in order for a 

grower to secure an operating loan.

144
5(a) (v) a description of how RMA will contribute to coordinated interagency efforts to 

support climate preparedness and resilience at all levels of government, including 

collaborative work across agencies’ regional offices and hubs, and through coordinated 

development of information, data, and tools, consistent with section 4 of this order.

Understanding Risks: RMA, through USDA’s Climate Change Program Office, will continue to 

evaluate and monitor potential risks that climate change presents to the Federal crop insurance 

program. RMA will monitor the Federal crop insurance program and administer it in an 

actuarially sound manner—planting patterns, agronomic practices, new varieties; varieties that 

can be planted earlier or we will revise the earliest planting date and final planting dates if 

planting earlier becomes a common practice. RMA will monitor the establishment of new 

practices for new areas/crops such as irrigation, limited irrigation, skip rows, cover crops, 

organic practices, and other insurance offers. 

Limited Irrigation Practice - 2013: RMA is evaluating how Federal crop insurance currently 

addresses producers intending to apply reduced irrigation and evaluating the feasibility of 

establishing a limited irrigation guarantee for producers who apply less water than they may have 

historically applied to their irrigated acreage. This USDA initiative has led RMA to issue a 

contract to study initially the impacts of “limited irrigation” on crop insurance. For the study, 

"limited irrigation" is defined by RMA as "a method of producing a crop by which less water is 

artificially applied during the growing season by appropriate systems and at the proper times

than the quantity of water that was used to establish the irrigated production guarantee or amount 

of insurance on the irrigated acreage planted to the insured crop." Options for alternative crop 

insurance approaches for handling reduced irrigation were delivered under the “Limited 

Irrigation Research Study Contract.” RMA issued a new task order for development of one of the 

contractor’s recommended approaches for addressing reduced irrigation. The report is available 

on the RMA website: 

http://www.rma.usda.gov/pubs/

http://www.rma.usda.gov/pubs/2013/insuringirrigationfeasibilityreport508.pdf .

As part of the Limited Irrigation Research Study Contract study, two listening sessions were held 

to gather input from interested stakeholders on March 13, 2013 in Colby, Kansas, and on 

145
March 14, 2013, in Kearney, Nebraska. RMA sought input from growers, insurance industry, 

and other interested stakeholders who were encouraged to attend and share their concerns and 

feedback about limited irrigation and ideas to address the crop insurance consequences of the 

changing irrigation water situation in future years. 

http://www.wattsandassociates.com/Press/LIListeningSession.aspx

RMA will take additional actions to manage climate risks in the near future by monitoring 

climate data and research to the extent that climate changes over time, RMA will update 

program parameters (e.g. sales closing dates and earliest and final planting dates and other 

program dates) as needed to reflect such changes. In addition, RMA will continue to monitor 

premium rating methodology, loss adjustment standards, underwriting standards, and other 

insurance program materials to ensure that they are appropriate for new production regions or for 

changes in practices within existing regions. 

New common, science-based guidance on when cover crops should be terminated: In 2013, 

RMA, Farm Service Agency (FSA), and Natural Resources Conservation Services (NRCS) 

engaged stakeholders, universities, and the crop insurance industry to make cover crop 

guidelines straightforward and sensible. New guidance was issued by RMA via a “Cover Crop” 

Fact Sheet http://www.rma.usda.gov/pubs/rme/covercrops2.pdf that contains links to the NRCS 

web site. This site has a new model that uses local climate data, tillage management and soil 

data to account for daily crop growth and use of soil moisture. With this information, experts 

determined the latest possible time to terminate a cover crop, to maximize carbon sequestration 

and at the same time minimize risk to the cash crop yield. Four cover crop termination zones 

have been established across the United States. These provide a regionally-appropriate approach 

to cover crops and the tools to identify the proper cover crop management in an area, taking into 

account local climate and cropping systems. With this consistent, science-based cover crop 

guidance, farmers will have more flexibility and a greater opportunity to utilize cover crops on 

their operations, while staying in compliance across all USDA agencies. 

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detailfull/national/landuse/crops/?cid=stelprdb1077238

146
Working Groups Regarding Climate Change: RMA will contribute to coordinated interagency 

efforts to support climate preparedness, stakeholders such as the 18 approved insurance 

providers and over one million crop insurance policyholders – farmers and others with an interest 

in the Federal crop insurance program to inform them of choices when dealing with climate, and 

weather related droughts and flood events that may have prevented them from planting insured 

crops. For example, as production areas shift due to climate change adaptation, RMA has 

procedures in place for growers to request insurance coverage for insurable crops that is not 

currently available in a county: http://www.rma.usda.gov/pubs/rme/requestinginsurance.pdf

RMA supports coordinated interagency climate adaptation efforts of the following: USDA 

Global Climate Change Working Group; USDA Regional Climate Hubs Working Group; USDA 

Drought and Water Team; Environmental Markets Working Group; and RMA also participates 

on the Council for Environmental Quality (CEQ) Working Group - President's Climate Action 

Plan - Insurance which includes members from various Federal Agencies, such as NOAA, 

FEMA, EPA, Treasury, HUD, National Institute for Standards (NIST); USGCRP, since 2013. 

RMA plans to integrate climate change adaptation into Federal crop insurance policies, 

programs, and operations. RMA will increase its’ coordination with stakeholders such as crop 

insurance policyholders and others with an interest in the Federal crop insurance program to 

inform them of choices when dealing with climate, and weather related droughts and flood 

events that may have prevented them from planting insured crops. 

RMA is monitoring the efforts of the Working Group on Climate Change and Global Warming 

at the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC). This group is responsible for 

reviewing the enterprise risk management efforts by insurance carriers and how they may be 

impacted by climate change and global warming and investigating and receiving information 

regarding the use of modeling by carriers and their reinsurers concerning climate change and 

global warming and its possible impact on investments. Involvement with this committee allows 

RMA to be aware of climate change-related activities taking place in other lines of property and 

casualty insurance.

RMA and other USDA agencies engaged stakeholders, universities, and the crop insurance 

industry to make cover crop guidelines straightforward and sensible. New guidance was issued 

147
by RMA via a “Cover Crop Fact Sheet” that contains website links to the NRCS web site. The 

NRCS website has a new model that uses local climate data, tillage management and soil data to 

account for daily crop growth and use of soil moisture. With this information, experts determined 

the latest possible time to terminate a cover crop, to maximize carbon sequestration and at the 

same time minimize risks to the cash crop yield. Four cover crop termination zones have been 

established across the United States. These provide a regionally-appropriate approach to cover 

crops and the tools to identify the proper cover crop management in an area, taking into account 

local climate and cropping systems. With this consistent, science-based cover crop guidance, 

farmers will have more flexibility and a greater opportunity to utilize cover crops on their 

operations, while staying in compliance across all USDA agencies. Publication on Cover Crops 

issued, June 2013: http://www.rma.usda.gov/pubs/rme/covercrops2.pdf

RMA funded through its Risk Management Education Partnership Program a Webinar on Cover 

Crops with the National Sustainable Agriculture Information Service, National Sustainable 

Agriculture Coalition, and NRCS on January 23, 2014, to provide outreach to farmers, 

agriculture professionals, crop insurance industry and other USDA employees to provide 

information regarding the new cover crop termination zones. The Webinar discussed the recent 

efforts to assure greater uniformity and clarity on its policy related to farmers who currently 

grow “cover crops” or may grow them in the future. In addition, critical questions about how the 

new policy is designed to answer: When and how can cover crops be terminated without 

jeopardizing valuable Federal crop insurance coverage of the cash crops grown with them? This 

policy arose out of the concern that farmers planting cover crops could lose their eligibility for 

crop insurance coverage of the following crop. The new policy addresses this concern, using 

science-based cover crop management guidelines accepted across USDA agencies. 

https://attra.ncat.org/

Another method RMA uses to manage climate risks, is to increase the number of press releases, 

interviews, factsheets and questions and answers pages on RMA’s website to inform 

stakeholders and others of our policies when dealing with the severe climate and weather events. 

148
For example, RMA’s Regional Offices issued press releases to provide information to farmers 

about new crop insurance procedures in place for “prevented planting” for crop year 2014: 

http://www.rma.usda.gov/fields/mn_rso/2014/cipp.pdf

http://www.rma.usda.gov/news/currentissues/prevented/

149
Exhibit A.

Executive Order 13653, Section 5: Federal Agency Planning for Climate Change Related Risk.

Action Description Action Goal Agency 

Lead

Risk/Opportunity 

Description Scale Timeframe Implementation Methods

Performance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/ 

Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishme

nts to Date

PRISM Public Website

A version of the PRISM 

portal designed specifically 

for climate and weather 

scientists and for farmers was 

released, October 2013. 

To provide a 

tool that both 

Risk 

Management 

Agency 

(RMA) and 

Approved 

Insurance 

Providers 

(AIPs) and 

farmers (one 

day) can use. 

RMA in 

partnership with 

Oregon State 

University 

Assist producers to understand 

their local weather and climate 

patterns and to make appropriate 

adaptations in their farming 

operations in response to any 

changes in climate that might 

occur.

Recognizes changes in climate 

patterns on a timely basis and 

provides current and historical 

weather and climate data at a 

localized level. 

National On-going 

Released to 

public in 

October 2013.

Previously 

available since 

spring 2012 to 

RMA and 

AIPs. 

The URL for the 

public website is

http://prism.orego

nstate.edu

Released on to the 

public on October 

1, 2013. 

Implemented 

Phase One of the 

public portal. The 

Phase Once rollout 

is the raw data and 

the intended 

audience is the 

climate and 

weather 

scientists—

Once the scientist 

test the data and 

we get the green 

light to go 

forward, we will 

roll-out Phase Two 

which will be for 

the farmers and 

general public.

Web portal 

oriented to 

producers and 

general public

N/A N/A Strong Interest 

from public. 

RMA and its 

Partner are 

tracking usage.

Since it opened on 

Oct 1, 2013, we've 

had 31,442 visits

166,025 dataset 

downloads

2.2 TB of data 

downloaded (not 

including a new 

ftp site we opened 

on Jan 1, 2014).

Risk Management Agency 

150
Executive Order 13653, Section 5: Federal Agency Planning for Climate Change Related Risk.

Action Description Action Goal Agency 

Lead

Risk/Opportunity 

Description Scale Timeframe Implementation Methods

Performance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/ 

Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishme

nts to Date

RMA implementation of 

“Cover Crops Termination 

Guidelines.”

RMA, Farm 

Service Agency 

(FSA) and 

Natural 

Resources 

Conservation 

Services 

(NRCS)

A new model was developed that 

uses local climate data, tillage 

management and soil data to 

account for daily crop growth and 

use of soil moisture. With this 

information, experts determined 

the latest possible time to 

terminate a cover crop, to 

maximize carbon sequestration 

and at the same time minimize 

risk to the cash crop yield. 

Farmers will have more 

flexibility and opportunity to 

utilize cover crops on their 

operation, while staying in 

compliance across USDA.

On-going since 

6/2013 

Fact Sheets

Available on RMA 

Website. 

http://www.rma.us

da.gov/pubs/rme/c

overcrops2.pdf

Webinar 

sponsored by 

RMA Risk 

Management 

Education Funding 

–1/23/2014 to 

provide education 

and outreach to 

farmers, and Ag 

Professionals 

on how to use the 

four cover crop 

termination zones 

--established 

across the United 

States.

Created 

Frequently Asked 

Questions 

webpage in April 

2014. 

Engage 

Stakeholders 

universities, grower 

groups and the crop 

insurance industry 

to figure out how to 

make guidelines 

straightforward and 

sensible.

Crop insurance 

indemnity 

payments if 

suffer loss; 

NRCS provides 

incentives to 

plant cover 

crops; and FSA 

provides 

commodity 

payments to 

qualifying 

farmer.

Cover crops also 

sequester a 

significant amount 

of carbon; 

Farmers can reap 

conservation and 

economic benefits 

that cover crops 

can provide.

Regional Offices 

provide updates on 

Cover Crop 

Management 

http://www.rma.us

da.gov/fields/il_rs

o/2014/covercropf

aq.pdf

Frequently Asked 

Questions: 

http://www.rma.us

da.gov/help/faq/co

vercrops2014.html

Emergency Adjustment 

Procedures for 

Catastrophic Loss Events

RMA Enhance ability to provide 

timely payments to growers

National As needed. Establish 

procedures for 

Approved 

Insurance 

Providers. 

Revise Key Program Dates RMA Ensure that the crop insurance 

program reflects changes in 

climate and agronomics

National Annual Revise actuarial 

documents to 

reflect revised 

dates. 

Risk Management Agency 

151
Executive Order 13653, Section 5: Federal Agency Planning for Climate Change Related Risk.

Action Description Action Goal Agency 

Lead

Risk/Opportunity 

Description Scale Timeframe Implementation Methods

Performance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenges/ 

Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishme

nts to Date

New Methods to Assign a 

Hardiness Zone to Insured 

Nursery Locations- RMA 

provides crop insurance 

coverage for Nursery.

RMA As a consequence of the 

changes in the climate, some 

nursery plants may no longer 

be insurable in some specific 

locations or higher insurance 

premiums may be necessary.

 

Agricultural Research Service 

released an updated version of 

the Plant Hardiness Zone Map 

(PHZM). The PHZM identifies 

the geographic location where 

plants are likely to thrive based 

on the average annual 

minimum temperature.

National On-going Revise 

insurance policy 

materials to 

reference new 

hardiness zone 

maps

Informational 

Memo issued, 

9/17/2012 

http://www.rm

a.usda.gov/bull

etins/pm/2012/

12-045.pdf

Program Expansion RMA Ensured the crop insurance 

coverage is expanded to new 

areas where crops are grown 

due to changes in climate and 

agronomies.

National Annual Revise actuarial 

documents to 

reflect new 

county crop 

expansion. 

RMA Final 6/6/2014

RMA Final 6/6/2014

Risk Management Agency 

152
USDA Rural Development

Climate Change Adaptation Plan 2014

153
USDA Rural Development

Climate Change Adaptation Planning Document

February 2014

This plan originally prepared in accordance with Executive Order (E.O.) 13514, required all federal 

agencies to have a climate change adaptation plan submitted to the Council of Environmental Quality 

(CEQ) has been updated to comply with E.O. 13523, Preparing the United States for the Impacts of 

Climate Change, which was on November 1, 2013. USDA Departmental Regulation 1070-001 calls for 

the Climate Change Program Office (CCPO) to develop the USDA Climate Change Adaptation Plan with 

the full support and participation of USDA agencies and offices. To accomplish this, the Rural 

Development agencies (RD) have prepared this adaptation strategy that addresses how it is integrating 

climate change into its programs, policies, and operations. RD’s plan is submitted with the intent that it 

will be included in the Department’s response to CEQ. Per D.R. 1070-001, this plan will support USDA’s 

requirement to: 

(1) Analyze how climate change may affect the ability of agencies or offices to achieve their respective 

mission and its policy, program, and operational objectives by reviewing existing programs, operations, 

policies, and authorities to: identify potential impacts of climate change on the agency’s or office’s areas 

of responsibility; prioritize, implement, and mainstream response actions, contingent on the availability of 

resources; and continuously assess and improve the capacity to adapt to current and future changes in the 

climate. 

(2) Identify to the Office of Budget and Program Analysis, under the Office of the Chief Financial 

Officer, as part of the annual budget process areas where budget adjustments would be necessary in order 

to carry out the actions identified under this Departmental Regulation and include this information on the 

Global Change Cross-Cut that is compiled each year; 

(3) Identify, as appropriate, for USDA’s Office of the General Counsel areas where legal analysis is 

needed to carry out actions identified under this Departmental Regulation; and 

(4) Coordinate actions across the Department through USDA’s Global Change Task Force, as 

appropriate. 

Policy Framework 

RD’s mission is to increase economic opportunity and improve the quality of life for all rural Americans. 

RD’s vision is to maximize our program benefits to support a rural America that is a healthy, safe, and 

prosperous place to live and work. 

To assist the country in addressing today’s challenges, RD supports the Secretary’s Strategic Goals 

primarily through Goal # 1 Assisting rural communities to create prosperity so they are self-sustaining, 

re-populating, and economically thriving and Goal # 2 Ensuring our national forests

and private working lands are conserved, restored, and made more resilient to climate change, while 

enhancing our water resources. 

Particularly relevant are programs that focus on Climate Adaptation planning including: 

• Rural Utilities Service 

o Water and Environmental Programs providing clean and safe drinking water and 

sanitary water facilities. 

Rural Development

154
 Technical Assistance 

 Environmental Water & Waste Studies 

 NEPA requirements on all projects 

o Electric Programs provide reliable and affordable electricity to rural areas and have 

 Improvements to and diversification of base-load power generation. 

 Renewable energy at the utility size & scope 

 Energy Efficiency programs 

• Rural Business-Cooperative Service 

o Alternative Energy: The Bio-refinery Assistance Loan Guarantee Program and the 

Advanced Biofuel Payment Program loan support America’s development and use of 

alternative energies that benefit our country and are good for our environment. 

o Energy programs, such as the Rural Energy for America Program, help to lower supply 

chain GHG emissions due to consumer demand and to help agriculture reduce energy 

costs to provide cash flow for other adaptation strategies needed on operation. 

o Energy efficiency upgrades to rural business helping to reducing overall energy use to 

reduce strain of possible high unit energy cost. 

o Agro Forestry - Wood to Energy project finance modeling which may help to lower the 

cost of forest restoration work due to increased fire, disease and pest damage 

o Bio Fuels/Retail Infrastructure for lower GHG fuels to consumers 

o Bioeconomy Based Products 

• Rural Housing Service 

o Multi-family Housing Energy Efficiency Initiative 

o Multi-family Housing Portfolio Manager, Capital Needs Assessment/Utility Usage

o Energy Independence and Security Act compliance – Impacts Single Family 

Housing new construction

o Climate Action Plan installation of 100MW capacity onsite renewable energy 

Multi-Family Housing by 2020.

o Community Facilities Programs 

Vulnerability to Climate Change 

RD supports rural communities through loans, loan guarantees, and grants. For some of RD’s programs, 

the agency holds liens or other security interests in facilities and related infrastructure in areas that could 

be affected by hydrological changes and sea-level rises resulting from impacts such as inundation and 

erosion. Additionally, many climate change models predict increased frequency and severity of weather 

events such as tornados and hurricanes, which can damage utility facilities and infrastructure. Climate 

change therefore represents a risk to these agency assets and the communities they serve. Damage that 

may occur to such infrastructure and facilities would create an increased demand on RD to respond to 

requests for financial assistance to repair, replace, relocate or otherwise improve these assets. There is a 

high confidence level that climate related impacts are now affecting rural communities, regions that are 

highly dependent on natural resources for their livelihoods and social structures, and that these impacts 

will progressively increase over time shifting locations of where rural economic activities will thrive. The 

potential for increased demands on financial resources could divert those resources from normal program 

operations, impacting RD’s ability to achieve its mission and goals. An increase in financial assistance 

requests could burden all aspects of RD operations, including but not limited to underwriting, 

engineering, and environmental review activities. 

Extreme weather events could also have devastating effects on rural communities as well as RD offices 

and their personnel stationed throughout the Nation. Events that could damage or destroy facilities and 

utility infrastructure needed to supply water, electricity, and telecommunications to communities and field 

Rural Development

155
offices could create significant health and safety problems for the public and for RD employees. 

Additionally, emergency response can be affected by telecommunications failure, including failure of the 

Federal Communications Commission’s Enhanced 911 (E911) system, which is supported by towers and 

infrastructure financed by RD programs. RD is highly confident that responding to additional challenges 

from climate change will require significant adaptation of rural transportation and infrastructure systems 

as well as health and emergency response capabilities.

RD provides support to low-income communities and businesses in rural areas. Rural communities face 

particular geographic and demographic obstacles in responding to and preparing for climate change risks 

because of physical isolation, limited economic diversity, higher poverty rates, and aging populations. 

Assuming current climate change trends continue communities in certain geographic regions that are 

served by RD will face increased average temperatures, more frequent temperature extremes, and changes 

in precipitation patterns. Scientists predict the severe heat experienced during summer 2003 in Western 

Europe, while exceptional for the past century, will be more typical of climate patterns expected in this 

century. Increased temperatures will likely increase the need for energy efficient homes in low-income 

communities and an increased demand on power generation capacity, which in turn will create a rise in 

the number of applications for assistance from residential applicants, electric cooperatives, and rural 

businesses. Climatic changes will disturb crop yields and modify growing locations, drought conditions 

may also lead to increased requirements for infrastructure to deliver water to areas that no longer have 

viable water sources as well as to power generation facilities, which may lead to a greater volume of 

applications for assistance from RD programs. This increased demand would divert resources from 

normal program operations, impacting RD’s ability to achieve its mission and goals. 

The Adaptation Planning and Evaluation Process 

Through adaptive planning, RD can respond to potential impacts by conducting or utilizing risk 

assessments for new facilities and utility systems and determining what existing facilities and utility 

systems may be located in areas more vulnerable to the effects of climate change. Existing tools and 

available data can be used to consider the effects climate change may have on a proposed RD action, and 

can assist in contingency planning for existing assets and the communities they serve. 

One example of a tool in development for this type of risk evaluation is the National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA’s) Sea Level Rise Viewer, available at 

http://csc.noaa.gov/digitalcoast/tools/slrviewer/. This is just one example of tools that RD can use to 

assess risk. As additional tools become more available, RD can use these tools in decision making to 

evaluate the feasibility of its proposed actions and prepare for potential threats to areas where RD has 

existing interests. Additionally, RD can expand tools that already exist within the agency. For example, a 

geographic information system (GIS) program developed by ESRI called “Community Analyst” is 

currently available through an online portal to a limited number of licenses to RD staff and has the 

capability for expanded usage and expanded unique RD data sets. Community Analyst can be used to 

identify a number of community variables in areas impacted by disaster to understand where RD’s assets 

are threatened or impacted. This GIS assessment tool already has a wide range of environmental data 

layers and it could be expanded to include climate prediction models and to make this information 

available to RD program staff.

Sustained Adaptation Process 

RD has identified five actions related to climate change adaptation that it will initiate in FY 2013, 

dependent on funding availability, RD leadership approval, and partner support: 

Rural Development

156
Action 1: RD is in the process of rewriting its environmental regulations at 7 CFR 1970, which will 

include consideration of climate change in the environmental impact analyses it performs on each request 

for financial assistance. In addition, to ensure that RD programs have tools to consider how to adapt to 

climate change, RD will review programs and policies – with the assistance of Research, Education, and 

Economics (REE) mission area as necessary – to assess the extent to which there may be opportunities to 

improve RD decision making and prepare for and respond to potential impacts from climate change. 

Opportunities identified will be flagged according to whether they require a change in policy, a regulatory 

change, or an act of Congress. Changes in policy can be effected in the relatively short term. Regulatory 

changes will trigger longer term regulatory processes. Issues that require statutory changes can inform 

Farm Bill discussions. 

A summary of information gathered throughout the year and associated recommendations will be 

provided to RD leadership annually. Questions RD will consider during this review include the following: 

• Water, electric, and telecommunications programs: Do policies and regulations for these 

programs encourage adaptation to address potential effects of climate change? Are there 

opportunities to improve climate change adaptation considerations in the policies and regulations 

that define the management of these programs? 

• Rural Business and Rural Housing Programs: Is the state of the art science sufficient to identify 

areas of the Nation where climate change prediction models suggest higher potential impacts 

from rising temperatures in the near future? If so, do the available data warrant a consideration of 

proposals for seeking appropriations to expand or supplement these programs in high risk areas to 

respond to expected increases in applications for energy efficiency and alternative energy 

improvements as well as retreat/relocation efforts? 

• Disaster Response: How quickly can assistance be provided if losses are widespread? How 

could RD assist the traditional disaster response agencies in responding to widespread disasters? 

What type of programmatic partnership instruments could RD execute with other agencies and 

NGOs prior to catastrophic events to be poised to assist partner resources in the event of disaster 

response requirements? 

Action 2: RD will partner with the REE mission area and non –governmental organizations (NGOs) to 

evaluate decision-support tools that are based on sound state of the art science and their applicability to 

RD programs. When tools are found to meet these criteria, RD will disseminate data to field offices to 

facilitate their outreach to program applicants. These data and tools will provide practical resources for 

both agency decision making and to support applicant due diligence in their application assessment 

processes. 

Action 3: RD periodically, as new information becomes available, will prepare briefings or information 

packets to educate agency staff on the risks of climate change effects as they apply to specific program 

areas within RD. RD will continue to conduct “continuity of operations” assessments to better understand 

the administrative implications of climate change impacts to prepare headquarters, state, and field office 

staff to respond to events such as failures of borrower systems. 

Action 4: RD will review mechanisms for improving climate change adaption, for example: evaluating 

the potential for integrating alternative energy sources in appropriate RD programs; or seeking ways to 

develop partnerships among regional water supplies to address drought. 

Action 5: Evaluate whether through legislation USDA could pool funds allocated for a specific disaster, 

which are not expended during response to that disaster, and create a contingency fund for future disasters 

Rural Development

157
or disaster preparedness. If possible, RD will evaluate budgetary methods by which such funds could be 

used to address climate change related disasters.

Attachment: 

Table 1: USDA Rural Development (Rural Housing Service, Rural Business Service, Rural Utilities 

Service)

158
Table 1: USDA Rural Development (Rural Housing Service, Rural Business Service, Rural Utilities Service)

Climate Change Adaptation Planning Document

February 2014

Action Description Action 

Goal

Agency 

Lead

Rick/Opportunity 

Description

Scale Timeframe Implemen

tation 

Methods 

Performance 

Metrics

InterGovernmental 

Coordination

Resource 

Implications

Challenge/Further 

Implications

Highlights of 

Accomplishments to 

Date

1- Reissue Environment 

Policy Rule 7 CFR 1970

and evaluate other

areas

RD Highlight Policy 

Changes to 

Administration and 

Congress

National Early FY 

2105

7 CFR 1970 was 

published in the FR 

as Proposed Rule on 

February 4, 2014. 

Comment deadline 

April 7, 2014.

2-Partner with REE 

and NGOs to evaluate 

decision tools that 

incorporate sound 

climate in agency 

planning 

RD Leverage 

partnerships to 

improve climate 

change adaptation 

consideration in RD 

decision making

National Ongoing Rural Utility Service 

adopts Program 

Energy tool for 

energy efficiency 

programs

3-Prepare briefings or 

information packets 

to educate staff as 

new information on 

climate change 

becomes available 

RD Educate staff to 

encourage agencywide participation in 

climate change 

adaptation efforts

AgencywidePeriodically Need to be 

developed

FEMA, USGS, 

NOAA,

USACE

Environmental 

Briefing and Training 

for National Office 

Staff conducted 

December 2013

4-Review 

mechanisms for 

improving climate 

change adaptation

RD Seek ways to 

creative approaches 

to addressing 

climate change 

impacts and 

improve 

sustainability

AgencywideOngoing

RHS Program 

Rule

Implemented USDA 

Rural Development 

Multi-Family Housing 

Energy 1

Rural Development

159
RHS Program 

Rule

EPA, HUD, 

USDA RHS

Treasury,

DOE

Multi-family Housing 

Portfolio Manager, 

Capital Needs 

Assessment/Utility 

Usage

2

RHS Program 

Rule

USDA

HUD

Treasury

DOE

Energy 

Independence and 

Security Act 

compliance –

increase baseline 

energy code to IECC 

2009 . Affects USDA 

RHS Single Family 

Housing new 

construction

3

RHS Program 

Rule

USDA

HUD

Treasury

100 MW installed 

capacity of on-site 

renewable energy on 

the collective 

portfolio of federally-

funded multifamily 

housing by 2020 –

part of Climate 

Action Plan

4

RBS 9000 

Series 

Program 

Rules

In the last 2 years 

RBS has helped to 

assist >4,000 

individual producers 

of renewable energy 

responsible for 

generating the 

equivalent of 

>20,000,000 

Megawatt hours of 

energy

160
RUS Program 

Rule

The Energy Efficiency 

and Conservation 

Loan Program Final 

Rule published 

December 5, 2013 in 

the FR. Provides 

funding for energy 

efficiency upgrades 

for utilities and end 

user consumers

5-Use funding 

flexibilities to be 

poised to respond to 

future emergencies

RD Establish agency 

emergency 

responses affecting 

agency assets and 

communities served

National Ongoing Targeted efforts 

being tailored to 

special needs

Notes:

1

The USDA Rural Development Multi-Family Housing Energy Efficiency Initiative

In order to help create a more energy independent rural America for the next century, the USDA Rural Development Multi-Family Housing Energy Efficiency Initiative is enabling Section 515 Rural Rental Housing 

Program for New Construction, Section 514 Farm Labor Housing Loans and Section 516 Farm Labor Housing Grants for Off-Farm Housing, Section 522 Housing Preservation Grants, and Sections 514, 515 and 516 

Multi-Family Housing Revitalization Demonstration Program applicants to increase their eligibility for program funding by incorporating energy-efficient practices into project designs, construction, and operations.

An incentive scoring point system rewards projects that commit to energy-efficient building practices, on-site energy generation, and green property management. The initiative began in 2010 and continues today. 

Projects have been constructed that approach net zero energy consumption, with upwards of 80% of their energy requirements being produced on site with renewable sources such as geothermal heat pumps, solar 

panels, wood pellet boilers and wind turbines. We expect that this initiative will promote development projects that require a reduced quantity of energy to operate, use energy sources that do not produce greenhouse 

gases and that have little or no net emissions of greenhouse gases, and are economically viable.

2

The Capital Needs Assessment e-tool – White House Rental Policy Working group with USDA, HUD and Treasury

The White House Rental Policy Working group includes two working groups that impact climate adaption. USDA RHS has been actively involved with the working groups on Energy Efficiency and another on the 

development of a common Capital Needs Assessments online tool (CNA e-tool) for almost two years. The CNA e-tool will facilitate better decision making in design and development of construction and renovation 

by allowing cost benefit and life cycle cost analysis on utility-consuming equipment and appliances. Multifamily housing owners and developers will be able to see quickly how an upfront investment in a more 

energy-efficient building component today will be a better choice for tomorrow – both economically and environmentally.

3

Energy Independence and Security Act Compliance 

161
USDA RHS has been working with HUD directly on the publication of a notice in the federal register regarding the affordability of bringing the baseline energy code from a current regulatory 1992 code that is out of 

publication to the International Energy Conservation Codec (IECC 2009), which is currently the baseline code in at least 35 states. The publication is imminent and should be in the federal register within the next 

few weeks. This will allow both agencies to make changes to their regulations and guidance to cite the newer code as baseline. USDA RHS will be continuing to work with the interagency group to produce similar 

studies of affordability for the adaption of subsequent codes, as the IECC adopts a new code every three years. There is currently an IECC 2012, but it is adopted only in a few states. When that number increases 

and it is affordable enough to adopt the newer code, it is the goal of the agency to continually stay up to date. This compliance is mandated through the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, and affects 

only Single Family Housing, new construction at USDA, while affecting both single family housing and Multifamily housing at HUD. 

4

Joint Agency Commitment of HUD, Treasury and USDA to 100 Mega Watts of On-Site Renewable Energy on Multifamily Properties by 2020 through the Climate Action Plan 

USDA is working with HUD and Treasury to develop strategies to meet the goal of having an installed capacity of 100 Mega Watts on the collective portfolio of federally-funded housing by 2020. Because of 

USDA’s existing efforts in the Multifamily housing program, USDA is already on their way to this goal. Part of the strategy will be to explore collaboration between RHS and RUS with the RUS Energy Efficiency 

and Conservation Loan Program. 

162