Taking a Second Look at Biogeoclimatic Ecosystem Classification - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Taking a Second Look at Biogeoclimatic Ecosystem Classification (BEC)

FORREX webinar Tuesday, Dec. 7, 2010 10:30 am

Presenter: Sybille Haeussler, UNBC haeussl@unbc.ca Moderator: Don Gayton, FORREX Phone: 1-866-596-5278 ID: 3120346# Facebook: “BEC forum”

1

2

Karel Klinka

Photo: Bob Green

3

Why BEC matters in today’s world

• An integrated, holistic, multi-scaled view of

ecosystems that is concrete rather than fuzzy

• A framework for understanding and tackling

complex ecosystem responses to accelerating change

• Fundamentally compatible with evolving

notions of complex adaptive systems

• Proven adaptable to changing expectations for

BC’s public land base

4

Challenges faced by BEC

1) Loss of critical mass and institutional support 2) Outdated equilibrium concepts 3) Intellectual richness & contemporary relevance underappreciated

5

Outline of Webinar

• 1. Introduction (done)
• 2. Brief History of BEC  loss of critical mass
• 3. Addressing Outdated Equilibrium Concepts

(with one example)

Short question period

• 4. A plan to revitalize BEC

Discussion session

• 5. Post-webinar chat: Facebook “BEC forum”

6

• 2. A Brief History of BEC

Developed in 1949-70 by Vladimir Krajina & students in Botany Department at UBC

Vladimir J. Krajina 1905 - 1993

7

www.alumni.ubc.ca www.onf-nfb.gc.ca www.csns.cz

Adopted by BC Government mid-1970s

• Ecological Reserves program (Krajina, Foster, Pojar, Roemer)
• BC Forest Service (Annas, Pojar, Klinka, Meidinger, etc)

Raincoast Conservation Foundation Friends of Ecological Reserves Friends of Ecological Reserves

Bristol Foster Vladimir Krajina touring Eco Reserve Jim Pojar in Spatsizi 1978 Ecologists & Pedologists 2008 BEC program staff

BC Forest Service BECweb BC Forest Service BECweb

8

BEC has served BC well in changing times

DATE ERA/ISSUE REFERENCES Early 70’s IBP and Ecological Reserves program Krajina (1973, 1974) Late 70’s thru 1980s Golden Age of Silviculture (FRDA)

• tree species selection
• site preparation & backlog rehabilitation

Klinka et al. (1984) Coates et al. (1987) Early 1990s War in the Woods

• Old Growth Strategy
• Protected Areas Strategy
• Land and Resource plans
• Forest Practices Code guidebooks

OGSP (1992) Province of BC (1993) CCLUP (1994) Parminter (1995) Late 1990s

• Biodiversity conservation (red/blue lists)
• rangeland ecosystem restoration
• site index & productivity (SIBEC)

CDC website (2010) Gayton (2001) Mah and Nigh (2003) 2000s Results-Based & Ecosystem-Based Mgmt

• certification & SFM monitoring

FSC Canada (2005) FREP (2008) First Nations TEK and Non-Timber Resources Keefer et al. (2008) Climate Change

• Future Forests strategies (FFEI, FFESC)

Hamann & Wang (2006) Symmetree 2009

9

Loss of critical mass & support

10 ? ? ?

BC govt BEC group since 2008 (apologies for any errors)

• BEC still taught to (forestry) undergraduates
• a useful framework for management
• Not a serious topic for academic research
• descriptive; quaint?

Modified from BC Forest Service BECweb

• 3. Using Complex Systems Science to

Address Equilibrium Concepts

11

Paradigm Shift

12

Cause Effect

Linear Thinking (reductionist)

http://consciousevolution.com

Systems Thinking (holistic)

seed climate interspecific competition site microclimate (temp, moisture) natural disturbance extirpation plant community seed bank long-distance dispersal topography legacy patches short-distance dispersal inverts fungi vertebrates virus/bact. ecosystem stand-scale

Dave Daust 2010

Dialectic (Hegel)

• A dialogue between two (groups of) people

holding opposite views who want to pursue truth by seeking agreement with one another

• Simultaneously considering two diametrically
• pposed ideas (embracing the paradox)allows

the imagination to leap to a higher level

• The“reconciling third” (Carl Jung)
• “The Third Way” (Tony Blair and others)

13

14

Applying a dialectic to Ecosystems

Individualistic “Gleasonian” paradigm

Quantitative Hard Science Theory Building

Holistic “Clementsian” paradigm

Descriptive Soft Science Classification

Complex Systems Theory allows these two views to be reconciled

An Ecosystem as a “Dissipative, Non-Equilibrium System”

(Prigogine 1977) “an open, dynamical system operating far from thermodynamic equilibrium in an environment with which it exchanges energy and matter”

NASA Hurricane Dean

Complex Systems Science provides a framework for describing such systems mathematically and tools for modeling their dynamics

Keep this image in your mind

15

16

“Attractor”

Term from Non-linear Dynamics (math & physics)

Definition:

A set of states of a dynamic physical system toward which the system tends to evolve, regardless of the starting conditions of the system.

Different kinds of attractors:

• Point attractor (eye of hurricane)
• Periodic attractor = limit cycle (system oscillates)
• Strange attractor = chaos (trajectory appears random)

Attractors in Ecosystems

The set of states toward which a dynamic ecosystem tends to evolve, regardless of the starting conditions of the ecosystem. Fast-changing Variables (100s of yrs): Vegetation Succession

• Point attractor : monoclimax (ESSFmc)
• Periodic attractor: alternative “stable” states
• CH vs HA states in very wet CWH subzone
• Black spruce vs mixedwood in BWBS zone
• Chaotic attractor: urban ecosystems?

Slower-changing Variables (1000s of yrs): Soil Profile Development

I propose that the BEC system formally recognize the existence of multiple attractors (alternative states) and the potential for chaos. 17

• Attractor = climax (monoclimax, polyclimax)
• Attractors operating at multiple scales

Climate level: zonal ecosystem, zonal soil Site level: climatic climax (/01) edaphic climax (/02 , etc)

But the system doesn’t formally allow for:

1) More than one attractor (“seral”) 2) Shifting attractors (complex adaptive system)

18

Attractors in BEC

Tools and Techniques

• f Complex Systems Science

19

Technique References Agent-based models Gilbert and Terno 2000 Cellular automata Wolfram 2002 Data mining Kantardzic 2003 Fitness/Adaptive landscape models Gavrilets 2004 Fuzzy logic and uncertainty theory Liu 2010 Game theory Shoham and Leyton-Brown 2009 Information theory Cover and Thomas 2006 Machine learning Alpaydin 2004 Network analysis Barabasi 2002 Non-linear equations Khalil 2001 Statistical mechanics Evans and Morriss 2008 Symbolic dynamics William 2004

adapted from Haeussler & Thorpe (2010)

Linear, equilibrium thinking in BEC: Example 1

20

Jan 2009 inversion-induced dieback

Hamann & Wang 2006

current 2025 2055 2085 Hudson Bay Mountain, Smithers Perkins Peak near Tatla Lake Great science (null/neutral hypothesis) – but what will really happen?

• S. Curtis-McLane
• S. Curtis-McLane

Linear, equilibrium thinking in BEC: Example 2

“The relative relationship between sites at a local scale will remain stable into the future. E.g. drier, mesic, and wetter sites will retain their relative position and designation in the landscape.” BECweb climate change page Another great Neutral Hypothesis, but what’s the alternative?

21

Soil moisture regime Soil nutrient regime

Reimaging the Edatopic Grid as an Adaptive Landscape

22

ESSFl The Messy Ovals Yole et al. 1989 ESSFmk The Modernist Box Banner et al. 1993

• widely used in genetics (Wright 1932; Kauffman )

Fitness (Adaptive) Landscape Modeling

23

A Point Attractor (smooth landscape) Periodic Attractor Multiple Attractors (rugged landscape) Strange Attractor (chaotic landscape) Fitness

24

Complexity

The Edatopic Grid as a Dynamic Fitness Landscape

What does the vertical axis represent?

• Ecosystem complexity
• The degree of internal
• rganization (negentropy)
• Degree of succession and soil

development

• Ascendancy (Ulanowicz 2009)

How can we measure it?

• Time since major disturbance
• Carbon storage
• Retention rate (inverse of

erosion & leaching)

????

25

The Edatopic Grid as an Adaptive Landscape

Landscape Homogenization

6 ecosystem attractors (site series) 4 ecosystem attractors (site series)

xeric hygric mesic xeric mesic hygric

A B C D E A B C D E

26

Questions?

Contact haeussl@unbc.ca to obtain review copy of manuscript: Haeussler, S . 2010. Rethinking biogeoclimatic ecosystem classification (BEC) for a changing world. (Not for open distribution).

• 4. A Plan to Revitalize BEC

Summary of key points:

• BEC must adapt from static descriptions & maps of

climax ecosystems to dynamic non-equilibrium models of shifting ecosystem attractors

• A revitalized BEC will help practitioners better

understand complex ecosystem behaviour in changing times

• To retain critical mass, BEC must excite and

enlighten a new generation of ecologists, earth systems scientists and resource practitioners in academia, the private sector (& govt).

27

Practical Steps

• Discussion Forum (Facebook: “BEC forum”)
• Letter writing campaign from outside govt. to

maintain support for core program within govt.

• Proposal development and fundraising to:

– expand new research and modeling – integrate non-equilibrium ideas into BEC training materials – increase BEC awareness and appreciation (BEC history, artistic expression, public displays) – to coordinate training and mentoring opportunities

• Your ideas?

28

Thanks for participating

• Participate in the “BEC forum” on Facebook
• Login to your Facebook account
• Type “BEC forum” (with quotes) into search bar
• Look for icon at left
• Contact Sybille privately at haeussl@unbc.ca

Acknowledgements: FFESC, FIA-FSP, Santa Fe Institute, MITACS

• K. Lewis, S. Simard, E. Hamilton, E. Campbell

29