1 / 5

Where Do We Go From Here? Linking Climate and LMR Management in NOAA

Where Do We Go From Here? Linking Climate and LMR Management in NOAA. Some Impressions on the State of the Science and Management The need for clear guidelines for incorporation into Management Climate/LMR Science Requirements & Collaborations. Some Quick Impressions.

ulf
Download Presentation

Where Do We Go From Here? Linking Climate and LMR Management in NOAA

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Where Do We Go From Here? Linking Climate and LMR Management in NOAA • Some Impressions on the State of the Science • and Management • The need for clear guidelines for incorporation into Management • Climate/LMR Science Requirements & Collaborations

  2. Some Quick Impressions • The legal and public policy implications for climate impacts on LMRs regulated by NOAA place our agency at the forefront in impacts and adaptation – NOAA must respond because of our unique mandates • There are tremendous capabilities distributed across NOAA, its partners and collaborators to provide meaningful climate services relevant to management requirements for LMRs • The [exciting] case studies outlined demonstrate our unique capabilities focused on prediction and impacts with some work on socioeconomic adaptation – all key criticisms of the CCSP approach – this is the way forward for CCSP and operational Agencies

  3. continued…. • Most of the case studies so far are the products of individuals or groups and not necessarily corporate NOAA priorities. This approach takes advantage of the innovation at the regional level, but increases the risk that we do not have a clear coordinated definition of “best available science” • One concept mentioned in the legal and scientific discussions is the need to establish environmental “baselines” with which to judge the implications of climate impacts on LMRs. These baselines need some historical component, and require some projections into the future. What is the “right” time frame for projections? 30 years often mentioned… Ecologically-relevant spatial scales?

  4. continued…. • Need to establish guidelines for the incorporation of climate impacts in statutory responses for LMR management – example, ESA listing decisions, BiOPS, rebuilding targets for FMPs. Recommend the establishment of a WG for ESA Standard Operating Procedures for decision making • Wide variety of regional climate-LMR problems and issues, some of which can be addressed with standardized products, some of which require customized research – the role of curiosity-driven research? • Recommendation? Establish a minimum requirement for the new National Climate Service for some standardized products?

  5. continued…. • Potential minimum suite of products: SSTs & Temperature profiles, Sea Ice, Surface winds & upwelling, precip. • Role of regional collaborations vs. national products • If focused at regional level, how do we get consistent services from many NOAA entities (labs, RISAs, Sea Grant, Science Centers, NOAA regional teams…? Where is the accountability, how to assure priorities are addressed with minimal redundancy? How to assure consistency and prevent “skunk works” becoming the norm? • Important that we demonstrate leadership with end-to-end approaches Climate LMR WG? • Our capabilities are resource-limited, but much we can do with current resources.

More Related