MTNCLIM 2005
Chico Hot Springs, Pray MT
March 1-4, 2005
Report from Working Group on Paleoclimatology and Water Resources Management:
Working group participants:
Connie Woodhouse (organizer), connie.woodhouse@noaa.gov
Franco Biondi (organizer), fbiondi@unr.edu
Bob Westfall, bwestfall@fs.fed.us
Greg Pederson, gpederson@montana.edu
Eric Edlund, edlund@selway.umt.edu
Rob Kunzig, robert.kunzig@wanadoo.fr
Mark Shapley, shap0029@umn.edu
Cary Mock, mockcj@gwm.sc.edu
J.J. Shinker, jshinker@indstate.edu
Mitch Power, mpower@darkwing.uoregon.edu
Greg McCabe, gmccabe@usgs.gov
Emma Watson, emma.watson@ec.gc.ca
Tom Whitham, thomas.whitham@nau.edu
Tom Swetnam, tswetnam@ltrr.arizona.edu
Steve Gray, stgray@usgs.gov
did not attend but expressed interest:
Dennis Dahms, dennis.dahms@uni.edu
Glen MacDonald, macdonald@geog.ucla.edu
The rather specific goal that I had initially proposed for this group was to assess the support for
an integrated, collaborative effort to generate an up-to-date, spatially focused network of
hydroclimate reconstructions to assist water managers in long-term planning and scientists in
examining questions of hydrologic response to climate change. The participants included
scientists involved in demographic studies and evolutionary trajectories, pollen analysis in lake
sediments, historical climate data analysis, climate and drought, dendrochronological
reconstructions and applications, paleo-ecological responses and applications, and a science
writer. Because the working group attracted people with more diverse interests, a broader goal
evolved during the course of the hour of discussion. The common goal that emerged appeared to
be to make paleoclimatic and paleoecological data more applicable to users that range from
scientists in other disciplines to regional resource (both land and water) managers.
Discussions acknowledged the challenges of working with resource managers. On area of
concern is temporal perspective. Time scales of relevance may be viewed differently by
scientists and managers, both with regard to long-term research vs research with more immediate
results, and with regard to management issues related to the concept of long-term equilibrium vs
1
a more dynamic approach. In addition, data needs by managers, particularly water mangers,
have a time component not completely compatible with most available paleo data (e.g., daily
data to run models vs the annual values produced in tree-ring based reconstructions).
Another topic addressed was the delivery of paleo data in a way that is accessible and useful to
other users. The idea of a GIS-based paleodata atlas was discussed as a way to make data more
accessible or accessible in a more meaningful way to a range of users and agencies, and for
different regions. Steve Gray and Greg Pederson mentioned a USGS effort, National Biological
Information Infrastructure (NBII) that might be a mechanism for this (there is currently a pilot
project for the Yellowstone area that they will investigate, with regard to the possibility of
incorporating paleo data). A GIS-based interface could provide different layers of information,
including types of proxy data, time frame data are available, region, and applications.
Beyond delivery of existing data, the challenge is to develop data and data products that meet the
needs of users, as well as information on how paleo data might be used or analyzed for planning
and decision-making. One example of this came from Franco Biondi who provided some
information on the HEC-HMS hydrologic model. This model could be used with paleo data
input and could be a common base model for water managers. This hydrologic model is
downloadable at no cost, so is readily available and widely used in the hydrologic community.
The notion of trying to meet the needs of the broad range of potential users of paleo data is
certainly daunting. One thought voiced was to develop a gradient of applications that could
trickle down from broad to more specific. The notion of value-added data was attractive, but
again, the trick is to define what that might mean for different users. The suggestion was made
that it might be helpful to hear about the experiences people have had working with resource
managers to applying paleo data to management.
Tom Whitham brought up the idea of interfacing with the NEON effort, which certainly
should/will (?) include paleo data as it will address ecosystem responses to climate impacts. In
this case also, non-paleoscientists need help in locating and using paleodata. Involvement in this
type of effort could results in funding from NSF, which would likely not fund more applicationsbased efforts. NEON is currently seeking input from scientists, and the next science meeting is
this month. Tom plans to attend and would be willing to speak for the incorporation of paleodata
as part of this effort. We did not articulate exactly what our message might be to the NEON
group, but the general idea was that Tom and others in this group could provide input on how
paleodata might be useful to NEON. Steve Jackson, not at this meeting, but a paleoscientist, is
active in NEON and might be a good person to contact.
Our charge was to 1) come up with a set of working group goal, 2) next steps, and 3)
opportunities to work with the other working groups.
Our goal, as stated above, is to make paleoclimatic and paleoecological data more applicable to
users that range from scientists in other disciplines to regional resource managers.
Some steps towards that goal that we defined at this brief meeting:
2
1. Pursue the idea of a Paleodata Atlas, in the relatively near future, by investigating the
possibility of some involvement with the NBII effort (Greg Pederson is already acting on this).
2. Develop interfaces and value-added paleo products for a range of potential users, starting with
Franco Biondi, Bob Westfall, and Connie Woodhouse writing up some of the experiences they
have had with managers, lessons learned, successes they have had, and passing them around to
the group.
3. Investigate interactions with NEON, starting with Tom Whitham attending the upcoming
meeting and assessing how this group’s goals might be met regarding scientific users of paleo
data.
Although we did not meet with the other working groups, it seems likely that we could find
opportunities to work with some of the other groups, and in particular with the Mountain-Based
Hydrological Observations group and Jeremy Littell’s Ecosystems group.
3