Witness the Arctic - Spring 2011, Volume 15 Number 2

ARCTIC Chronicles of the NSF Division of Arctic Sciences Spring 2011, Volume 15 Number 2 Published by the Arctic Research Consortium of the United States • 3535 College Road - Suite 101 • Fairbanks, AK 99709 • [email protected] Feature Article (pgs 2-5) •Linking Inuit Knowledge and Scientific Understanding of Environmental Change: A Case Study in Wind Observations Study of Environmental Arctic Change (pg 6) •SEARCH Updates Arctic System Science Program (pg 7) •Study of the Northern Alaskan Coastal Systems (SNACS) Products Online Arctic Natural Science Program (pgs 8-10) •High-Resolution Permafrost Modeling and Planning Implications for Greenland and Alaska Arctic Research Support and Logistics (pg 11) •ARCUS Board President Honored in Keel-Laying Ceremony Science Education News (pgs 12-13) •Snow Science Expedition: Traveling 2000 km on Snowmobiles for Outreach and Education National Science Foundation News (pgs 14-16) •A Conversation with Dr. Brendan P. Kelly, Deputy Director of NSF’s Arctic Sciences Division Interagency News (pgs 17-23) •Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee (IARPC) Meeting of Principal Members •The Arctic Landscape Conservation Cooperative: Leveraging Arctic Climate Science •Arctic News from the Office of Naval Research •NOAA Releases Final Arctic Vision and Strategy U.S. Arctic Research Commission (pg 24) •Fran Ulmer Appointed Chair of the U.S. Arctic Research Commission International News (pg 25) •Workshop on International Collaboration and Cooperation in Arctic Science In this Issue Map showing Clyde River on Baffin Island, Nunavut, Canada. Inset map shows location of Clyde River community. Image courtesy: Shari Gearheard Inuit travel long distances by snow machine and dog sled. Photo courtesy: Shari Gearheard Linking Inuit Knowledge and Scientific Understanding of Environmental Change: A Case Study in Wind Observations Introduction Climate scientists and others investigating changes in the Arctic have increasingly incorporated indigenous knowledge and observations in their research. Valuable insights are gained by linking indigenous knowledge with scientific research; however, finding formal methods to connect culturally divergent observations can be a complicated task. Dr. Shari Gearheard is a research scientist with the University of Colorado's National Snow and Ice Data Center. Unlike most of her scientific colleagues, she lives year-round in the small arctic town of Clyde River, an Inuit community of approximately 850 people located on the northeastern shore of Baffin Island in the Canadian territory of Nunavut. Gearheard has worked for over 15 years with Inuit hunters and Elders documenting their knowledge and observations of local changes in the climate and environment. Case Study Introduction During her studies, Gearheard has built connections with local people interested in working with scientists studying climate and environmental change in the Arctic. One product of these connections is a case study that analyzes the level of agreement between local weather station data and the observations of wind pattern changes made by local experts at Clyde River. The study revealed inconsistency between the two sets of observations. Clyde River Inuit report an increase of variability in wind speed and direction since the 1980s, but data from the local weather station did not consistently indicate the same changes in wind patterns over those years. For Gearheard, the differences in observations offer interesting lessons to be learned. Inuit Observations of Wind Patterns For many Inuit hunters in the Arctic, weather is the determining factor for daily activity. Of all weather variables, wind is the element that most concerns hunters. Travel and hunting activities are constrained by strong winds that reduce visibility with blowing snow and create hazardous conditions including whiteouts, large waves, and moving ice. Shifting wind directions can bring additional hazards such as fog, open water leads in the sea ice, and altered orientation of snow features. Gearheard has recorded over one hundred interviews with experienced, active hunters and Elders who have extensive knowledge of wind and weather processes. 2 Uqalurait are tongue-shaped snowdrifts that form parallel to the prevailing wind direction and are used as navigational aids during poor visibility. Photo courtesy: Shari Gearheard For Clyde River Elders, the most noticeable changes related to wind were a shift in the prevailing wind direction from northwest toward north, and an increase in variability of wind speeds and directions. Experienced hunters are able to keep track of wind direction and strength while traveling by observing surface snow forms, blowing snow, and clouds. The shift in prevailing seasonal wind direction affects snowdrifts that run parallel to prevailing wind and create directional navigation aids known as uqulurait. This can present dangerous circumstances for inexperienced travelers. Without expert skills in keeping track of the changes of shifting winds, they may follow the snowdrifts in the wrong direction and become lost. Observers also note that during the past 30 years winds may shift direction several times over the course of one to two days and pick up or die down suddenly, especially in the spring. This makes it difficult to predict conditions or know if it is safe to go out on the water or sea ice. Additionally, winter winds are now both stronger and longer lasting than in the past. These winds pack the snow so hard that it is difficult to build igloos for shelter in bad weather. Clyde River observers make the point that although recent conditions have been mentioned in the past and weather has always been unpredictable, what is unprecedented is how quickly conditions are now changing and the persistence of this unpredictability over time. Weather Station Records of Wind Patterns Scientific observations of wind are made quite differently. Stationary instruments gather data individually and separately. In this study, statistical methods were used to interpret surface measurements made at the only available meteorological station for the area, maintained by Environment Canada at the Clyde River airport. Since 1977 this station has recorded hourly wind speed as a 2-minute average taken at the beginning of the hour. Time series data from 1980–2005 was analyzed on a monthly basis to allow comparison to the seasonal conditions reported by Clyde River Inuit. Both linear regression and a loess curve analyses were performed to identify overall trends in mean monthly wind speeds, wind direction, and wind variance. Results indicated that on an annual basis, the proportion of winds exceeding 30 km/hr had not significantly changed, however, the proportion of wind less than 20km/hr had significantly decreased. The lower proportion of calm winds aligned with Inuit observations of generally windier conditions. In contrast, no consistent changes in the variability of wind speed and wind duration were apparent from statistical analyses of the data. Similar methods were used to examine the trends in mean wind direction and wind direction variance. No significant changes in wind direction were found, some increase in the mean range of wind directions was revealed, and there was no notable change in the prevalence of northwest winds according to station records. Discussion of Divergent Observations Overall there is limited agreement between Inuit observations and weather station data analyses of wind change at Clyde River. Gearheard and colleagues were particularly interested in what could be learned from the lack of agreement and suggest three possible explanations. First, the weather station records are not representative of the areas where local hunters travel. The weather station is located near the sea in relatively flat terrain. Hunters often travel long distance in fjords that are bordered by high cliffs and mountains. Given the complex and varied topography of the area, a range of wind conditions is expected and the station may not be recording events that are of interest to local hunters. However, some correlation of general wind 3 patterns could still be expected. Gearheard and colleagues suggest that future studies of wind variability should include data from additional weather stations (a new project by Gearheard and colleagues has since installed three new weather stations in the region). Gearheard's group also recommends that scientists collaborate more with local hunters to better understand the degree to which Inuit rely on information from the weather station, and learn more about their weather observing and forecasting techniques. The second explanation considered is that because Inuit observations rely on personal recollections of events many years ago and on oral history records from older generations, they may be elastic. The importance of wind patterns may have changed over time. New technology and activity such as replacing dog teams with snowmobiles for hunting could have changed how weather was observed. Gearheard's research suggests that studies on long-term changes in hunter-wind interactions could clarify this possibility. Thirdly, the study suggests that since Inuit and meteorological records do not observe the same phenomena, a comparison may be invalid. Inuit are more concerned with the sudden and unpredictable changes in wind patterns that affect safety in travel and hunting. Weather stations record events over different time scales, at a fixed location, and with no sensitivity to other environmental factors (such as blowing snow) that may increase perceived severity of wind at a given speed. Further study could account more precisely for the concerns and knowledge of Inuit in terms of various wind events and how those events might, or might not, be captured in weather station records. Lessons for Designing Research Teams Gearheard and colleagues suggest that future studies comparing observations and records of the same event might help understand the differences in perspective. For example, a sudden change in wind patterns reported by Inuit observers could be compared to records captured at the weather station for the same time. Comparison of complementary observations could reveal useful information about general wind patterns, frequency of events, and the difference between statistically and personally significant environmental changes. Dr. Gearheard and other members of Sikulirijiit, Clyde River Nunavut sea ice experts working group edit maps for a publication. Photo courtesy: Shari Gearheard Gearheard's continued work focuses on gathering additional data and coordinating projects that bring Inuit and scientists together to design and implement research. In a recent study of changes in weather persistence at Baker Lake, Nunavut, Canada, Inuit observations and understanding of weather variability was linked with results from prior meteorological studies to develop the research questions for the study. A current project entitled Siku-Inuit-Hila (Sea Ice-PeopleWeather) is a multidisciplinary and multicultural study of sea ice and sea use. In this innovative research model, project teams of indigenous experts from the communities of Barrow, Alaska; Clyde River, Nunavut, Canada; and Qaanaaq, 4 Greenland work directly with sea ice scientists in all aspects of the study, including conceptualization, project design, field work, analysis, and reporting of results. Local community members monitor sea ice stations throughout the entire year, collecting sea ice thickness and temperature data and combining that information with their own qualitative observations. By bringing together Inuit knowledge, social science methods, and physical science, the team is able to examine the variability of sea ice characteristics on multiple scales through all seasons at three separate locations across the Arctic. Gearheard notes that linking indigenous knowledge with climate change science requires recognition of the distinct differences between the two, and an understanding that neither is superior. Indigenous knowledge must be documented with care and in collaboration with indigenous partners to make sure that interpretation, analysis, and application of the information is correct. For further information about Shari Gearheard's work, please see her website at the National Snow and Ice Data Center: http://nsidc.org/research/bios/gearheard.html or contact Dr. Gearheard at [email protected]. References S. Gearheard, M. Pocernich, R. Stewart, J. Sanguya, and H. Huntington. 2010. Linking Inuit knowledge and meteorological station observations to understand changing wind patterns at Clyde River, Nunavut. Climatic Change 100(2): 267-294, doi:10.1007/s10584-009-9587-1. Weatherhead, E., S. Gearheard, and R. G. Barry. 2010. Changes in weather persistence: Insight from Inuit knowledge. Global Environmental Change 3: 523-528, doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.02.002. S. Gearheard. 2008. A Change in the Weather. Natural History February: pages 33-38. S. Gaidos. 2010. Trusting the Public. ScienceCareers, June: from the journal Science, AAAS. 5 Study of Environmental Arctic Change SEARCH Updates SEARCH Strategic Planning The SEARCH Science Steering Committee (SSC) is continuing its strategic planning activities that began at the fall 2010 SSC meeting. As SEARCH is transitioning from a planning phase to an implementation phase, the SSC is developing a guiding vision, five-year goals, and an implementation plan to develop priorities and a clear path forward for SEARCH. The SSC has developed a draft Vision and Mission statement focused on providing a scientific foundation to help society understand and respond to a rapidly changing Arctic. The SSC is finalizing the Vision and Mission with the SEARCH Interagency Program Management Committee and will distribute it in summer 2011. The next stage of SEARCH strategic planning will be the development of five-year goals to provide specific priorities and to direct outcomes for the program. The SSC will meet in August to develop the 5-year goals, which will be finalized this fall. Sea Ice Outlook and Sea Ice for Walrus Outlook The Sea Ice Outlook 2011 season has been launched with a call for contributions for the first Outlook report, to be published in June. The SEARCH Sea Ice Outlook, supported by NSF, NOAA, and volunteer efforts, provides a synthesis of community projections of the September arctic sea ice minimum. This year, the scientific synthesis of the pan-arctic outlooks will be led by Jim Overland (NOAA), and the synthesis of the regional outlooks will be led by Adrienne Tivy and Hajo Eicken (University of Alaska Fairbanks). Additions to this season's reports will include increased reporting of error estimates, further development of a data resources webpage, and information on sea ice thickness. In March, ARCUS distributed a Sea Ice Outlook user survey, which was completed by 77 participants. The survey documented a wide variety of ways in which the Outlook is utilized: to evaluate modeling methods, as a classroom resource, as a tool for resource management, and others. A full report from the survey will be available this summer. The Sea Ice for Walrus Outlook 2011 season has also been launched. The Sea Ice for Walrus Outlook provides weekly reports on sea ice and weather conditions as a resource for Alaska Native subsistence hunters, coastal communities, and others interested in sea ice and walrus. The weekly reports, which combine satellite imagery, forecasting, and local observations, began in early April and will continue through June. Further information about the Sea Ice Outlook can be found at: http://www.arcus.org/search/seaiceoutlook/. For more information about the Sea Ice for Walrus Outlook, please go to: http://www.arcus.org/search/siwo. SSC Welcomes New Members Four new SSC members were recently appointed: Robert Bindschadler, Hydrospheric and Biospheric Sciences Laboratory, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center; Breck Bowden, Rubenstein School of Environment & Natural Resources, University of Vermont; Susan Crate, Department of Environmental Science and Policy, George Mason University; and Janet Intrieri, Earth System Research Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. For more information about SEARCH activities, please go to: http://www.arcus.org/search/ or contact Hajo Eicken, SEARCH SSC Chair, ([email protected]), or Helen Wiggins, SEARCH Project Office at ARCUS ([email protected]). 6 Study of the Northern Alaskan Coastal Systems (SNACS) Products Online A compilation of products from the National Science Foundation-funded Study of the Northern Alaskan Coastal System (SNACS) research projects is now available online. SNACS projects focused on the arctic coastal zone of Alaska and addressed one or more aspects of two coupled themes: How vulnerable are the natural, human, and living systems of the coastal zone to current and future environmental changes in the Arctic? How do biogeochemical and biogeophysical feedbacks in the coastal zone amplify or dampen change locally and at the pan-arctic and global levels? SNACS projects resulted in more than 60 journal publications, 88 conference presentations, and 25 other products. For more information about SNACS and the list of products, see the SNACS website: http://www.arcus.org/arcss /snacs/index.php. 7 Changes in permafrost temperature at different depths at the Barrow, Alaska Permafrost Observatory, 2003–2010. High-Resolution Permafrost Modeling and Planning Implications for Greenland and Alaska Introduction and Project Objectives Permafrost has received much attention recently because surface temperatures are rising in most permafrost areas of the earth, bringing permafrost to the edge of widespread thawing and degradation. The thawing of permafrost already occurring at the southern limits of the permafrost zone can generate dramatic changes in ecosystems and infrastructure. A project led by Vladimir Romanovsky, University of Alaska Fairbanks, and funded by the NSF Arctic Natural Sciences (ANS) Program, integrated climate change and permafrost modeling at a high-resolution, regional scale for western Greenland and Alaska. The project's objectives were to: Develop regional climate simulations for western Greenland (a coastal/maritime permafrost regime) and northern Alaska (a continental interior permafrost regime); Establish a series of monitoring sites representative of the range of permafrost types encountered in the two regions; Implement a state-of-the-art permafrost model to map present and future permafrost conditions; and Evaluate the implications for infrastructure planning in Greenland and Alaska. Monitoring Results For Alaska, air and ground temperature data were collected from four sites. Temperature data collected in 2006-2010 showed no significant changes except for Barrow, where mean annual soil temperatures have warmed continuously during the last several years. Mean annual temperature profiles down to 50 m depth obtained at the Barrow site show continuous warming at the depths below 10 m. This warming accelerated in 2009 and is in good agreement with accelerating warming at other coastal sites in Alaska and Russia. In Greenland, permafrost was monitored in nine sites. The data revealed changes in ground temperature regime occurring along the west coast. The transect spanned sample areas of continuous permafrost with ground temperatures around -3°C; discontinuous permafrost where permafrost boreholes showed temperatures between -1 and 0°C; and sporadic permafrost where permafrost is unstable and actively thawing, indicated by the ground temperatures at 0°C. Modeling Results A high-resolution regional climate model (HIRHAM model) was used to develop the permafrost simulations. Recent advances in computer power and model capabilities allowed the simulation of high spatial resolution on the order of a few kilometers. Greenland By the end of this century the bedrock mean annual temperature at 2 m below the surface will increase by an average of 1.56°C, and the mean annual temperature at 2 m in sediment will increase by 1.99°C. The active layer in sediment will increase by 0.44 m between current and future conditions; the greatest increases in the active layer depth will occur in the south. 8 Permafrost Thaw Potential for Greenland. High thaw potential corresponds with a greater than 2.5 m potential active layer depth increase. The potential active layer depth increase was calculated by subtracting current sediment active layer depths from future bedrock active layer depths. Active layer depth distributions averaged over the periods 1990-1999, 2046-2055, and 2090-2099, calculated using 5x5 km resolution climate forcing. The project results show much stronger degradation of permafrost by the end of the century as compared to lower resolution model results. The degradation is much more pronounced in the coastal areas and decreases towards the ice sheet. Strikingly, the high-resolution model results indicate much more substantial degradation of permafrost along the west coast of Greenland, even in higher latitudes. Alaska Results for Alaska are less developed at this point, but indicate that the area of permafrost degradation in Alaska is projected to be more substantial than in Greenland. By the end of the 21st century, permafrost will be stable only in the Brooks Range and on the North Slope. By contrast, the models suggest that more than half of the present-day permafrost area in Greenland will still be stable, although active layer depths will increase. Risk Assessment and Permafrost Thaw Potential: A Greenland Example A new risk assessment method was developed by the project to determine the risk of permafrost degradation (or Permafrost Thaw Potential, PTP) on settlement infrastructure. Risk was classified in four categories: low, limited, medium, and high, based on environmental variables and a thermal criterion. The three main variables are sediment or rock type, presence and amount of ground ice, and the ground thermal conditions. The states of these variables are determined from field investigations or estimated based on background information such as geological maps and modeling output. Most of the terrestrial portion of Greenland is at risk of permafrost degradation. The high-risk areas are mainly present in the southern part of the permafrost domain. In Sisimiut, the model forecasts a warming trend in the ground temperatures and present modeled permafrost temperatures as high as -1°C, so permafrost will soon be actively degrading in the area. For planning implications, this might mean that the cheapest solution to protect infrastructure is to remove perennially frozen soils and substitute them with non-frost-susceptible materials, or to use piles resting on bedrock. Due to its present resolution (25 km grid), the applied PTP approach cannot be used as design criteria for individual projects. However, high-resolution PTP mapping may be used during site-specific permafrost analysis to determine the particular permafrost degradation risk for that site. Future Research Directions To maximize the usefulness of this approach, future research should be oriented to more specific regional and local applications. Site-specific permafrost dynamics models and risk assessment maps should be developed at a high 9 really important that we function well across agencies. WTA: How is the strategic vision for the Division of Arctic Sciences being developed? BPK: It is just beginning to evolve; we are planning a retreat within the Division in early summer to bring out ideas and tap the knowledge of program officers and staff who have a tremendous history and perspective—that's a great potential. We'll also engage the Office Advisory Committee not only to inform the vision but also to inform the process of how to build that vision. Obviously it has to be an iterative process. We welcome ideas from anybody and everybody in the community on how to best proceed. WTA: Will this strategic vision impact the way business is done in the Division of Arctic Sciences? BPK: Yes, I think it very well could. I'm very encouraged by preliminary discussion within the Division. We recognize that the community is changing and we'd like to propel the enterprise. People are open to potentially very different ways of doing business. Earlier I talked about how the routine workload on program officers can hinder big picture thinking. People in the Division are stretched pretty thin. That's what I want to be addressed in the vision. Do we need to do something structurally different? Do we need to change the way the proposal and review enterprise works? I hope we can think very wisely about the possibilities so that we can support the best possible science. I'm amazed by the amount of human resources that goes into every single proposal: starting with the PIs who generate the idea, write it up, interact with colleagues, and get the proposal reviewed within their institution. There is substantial investment before the project arrives in NSF's Fastlane. At the Foundation, there's a huge investment of resources: vetting the proposal to make sure it fits all the criteria, the ad hoc review panels, and tremendous attention from program officers. Then, after this huge investment of resources, the most likely outcome is that the project will not get funded. Along the way we are burying everybody. During the 5-day review panel, really smart people are given 15 minutes to present their brilliant ideas—it's a daunting process for both the review panel and program officers. I worry that it's hard for them to step back and ask how each project fits into the overall vision. I want to be convinced that we're doing everything we can structurally to promote people at all levels of the process being able to keep their eyes on the big picture. I've got a real sense that people want to engage in these issues. My role is to allow a process to evolve for these discussions so that staff and program officers are energized by the potential. WTA: Dr. Kelly, thank you for sharing your thoughts about the challenges and opportunities facing the arctic research community at this time. BPK: It's been a pleasure; hopefully we'll see more of this kind of conversation in the near future. For information about the April 2011 IARPC Principal Members meeting, see the IARPC article in the Interagency News section. For further information about IARPC, please see: http://www.nsf.gov/od/opp/arctic/iarpc/start.jsp or contact Brendan P. Kelly ([email protected]). 16 Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee (IARPC) Meeting of Principal Members IARPC Principal Members met 26 April 2011. This was their first meeting since IARPC became a subcommittee of the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) in July 2010. Key issues IARPC members were briefed on and discussed include: The significance of chartering IARPC as a subcommittee within the NSTC, which will bring a policy focus to its work. IARPC will need to incorporate into its work National Ocean Policy, the work of the Climate Change Adaptation Task Force, the Arctic Research Policy Act of 1984, and the National Security Presidential Directive 66 and Homeland Security Presidential Directive 25 Arctic Regional Policy (NSPD/HSPD-25) (see: http://hspolitics.wordpress.com/2009/01/14/hspd-25-nspd-66-arctic-region...); The new requirement and obligations associated a NSTC Charter for IARPC, as well as those derived from the Arctic Research Policy Act of 1984; Recommendations for IARPC communication with individuals outside the Federal Government; IARPC's role in the NSPD/HSPD-25 Arctic Regional Policy as well as commitments related to the Arctic Council's international Search and Rescue Agreement; Alaska's interests and involvement in arctic research; The National Ocean Policy's Changing Conditions in the Arctic Ocean Strategic Action Plan; Planning for the arctic research budget cross-cut and the directive for the Office of Science and Technology Policy and the Office of Management and Budget to coordinate budget requests from the agencies; Six interagency priority research themes for FY11 and FY12; and The outline for the IARPC 5-year research plan. The next Principals meeting is scheduled for late summer 2011. The full notes from the IARPC meeting are available below: Download Meeting Notes (PDF - 80 KB) Or at: http://www.nsf.gov/od/opp/arctic/iarpc/iarpc_mtgs_public.jsp. For further information about IARPC, please see: http://www.nsf.gov/od/opp/arctic/iarpc/start.jsp or contact Brendan P. Kelly ([email protected]), IARPC Executive Director. 17 Land ownership in the Alaska portion of the Arctic LCC, and geographic extent of the Arctic LCC. Image courtesy: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Eroding bluffs on Barter Island, Kaktovik, Alaska resulting from an increase in storm surges in August 2008. Photo courtesy: M. Osborne, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The Arctic Landscape Conservation Cooperative: Leveraging Arctic Climate Science About Landscape Conservation Cooperatives Facilitated by the Department of the Interior, Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs) were established to provide a collaborative approach to conservation management. An initial federal investment of $25 million in 2010 funded the first nine LCCs of the 21 planned across North America. The LCCs will collectively form a network of resource managers, scientists, and public and private organizations with common interests in conservation. By leveraging existing resources and developing science-based tools, the network of LCCs will inform resource management decisions regarding the sustainability of natural systems and landscapes under stressors such as rapidly changing climatic conditions. The Arctic Landscape Conservation Cooperative The Arctic Landscape Conservation Cooperative (ALCC), one of the first LCCs formed, is a self-directed partnership that functions through a multitiered structure of at-large partners, a core staff, and a steering committee of cooperating agencies and organizations. Its geographic scope ranges across North America from Alaska to Labrador. The Alaska portion encompasses three eco-regions: the Brooks mountain range, the arctic foothills, and the arctic coastal plain. These areas provide critical breeding grounds and habitat for dozens of bird and mammal species. The Arctic presents extraordinary challenges for resource managers who must anticipate the effects of climate-associated habitat change and incorporate that understanding into conservation planning. The rapidly warming climate is associated with significant changes already observed in arctic terrestrial landscapes, such as: Summer sea ice pulling away from the coast, exposing coastlines to increased rates of erosion and severity of storm surges while reducing habitat for ice-obligate species. An increasingly thick layer of the tundra actively thawing during each growing season, which influences both stream flow patterns and the probability that lakes will be tapped and drained into adjacent fluvial systems. These changes in surface hydrology, coupled with precipitation and evaporation-transpiration changes, affect the timing and severity of tundra drying. This affects the vegetation community composition and increases the probability of severe and extensive tundra fires. Arctic breeding birds that migrate based on the solar calendar may become decoupled from their invertebrate food sources, which emerge based on temperature. Emerging chicks hungry for insects may hatch too late to take advantage of the peak insect abundance that was once timed perfectly to suit their needs. Shrub cover is increasing in the Brooks Range and foothills, and warming is expected to favor increased shrub cover, at the expense of sedges and lichens. 18 The Anaktuvuk River tundra fire, August 2007. Photo courtesy: Arctic Long Term Ecological Research program. In the face of such fundamental climate-driven changes, land managers remain uncertain of exactly how things will change on any given parcel of arctic landscape. In order to make crucial planning decisions, managers need improved scientific information and tools such as the development of vulnerability assessments for individual species, the compilation of widely scattered data sets, and access to those datasets. Working in collaboration with its partners, the Arctic LCC seeks to provide these tools. The conservation goals of the Arctic LCC are to provide information on, and predict effects of, climate driven changes and other landscape stressors; determine how climate driven changes affect subsistence users; and provide improved data and information access to managers. During its initial stages the ALCC’s science priorities were heavily influenced by previous assessments of arctic science needs including the USFWS WildREACH report and the North Slope Science Initiative’s Emerging Issues papers. Arctic LCC Science & Data Efforts The Arctic LLC funded approximately $2 million in climate-related research and data synthesis efforts in 2010, with an equal amount of support leveraged in the form of in-kind contributions of labor and funding from other agencies and non-governmental organizations. One product of this initial cycle is the “Connecting Alaska Landscapes into the Future” report (http://www.snap.uaf.edu/downloads/connecting-alaska-landscapes-future). The project used a climate envelope modeling approach to assess how future climate scenarios match mean temperature and precipitation conditions of the years 2000 to 2009. Results suggest that approximately 60% of Alaska may experience a shift to a new climate biome during the twenty-first century. Approximately $1.3 million of funding from the Arctic LCC and $1 million in leveraged work will support over two dozen distinct research and data synthesis projects during 2011. With a long-term science plan under development, the ALCC Steering Committee used an interim selection process to rank proposals based on responsiveness to ALCC goals, feasibility, degree of partnering, responsiveness to management concerns, and a number of other criteria. Currently, six technical working groups—permafrost, coastal processes, climate modeling, hydrology, arctic biology, and geospatial data—are providing input to the development of the Arctic LCC science plan, which will guide future project funding strategies. A draft of this plan will be available for comment in late 2011. For more information, see the Arctic Landscape Conservation Cooperative website: http://alaska.fws.gov /lcc/arctic.htm, or contact Greg Balogh, Arctic LCC Coordinator (Gr[email protected]). 19 Arctic Landscape Conservation Cooperative Steering Committee Member Agencies National Park Service Bureau of Land Management U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Geological Survey Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement U.S. Arctic Research Commission U.S. Army Corps of Engineers National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Alaska Department of Fish and Game 20 Scientists installing an ice mass balance buoy (IMB) near the ICEX 2011 ice camp in the Beaufort Sea, Arctic Ocean, March 2011. Photo Courtesy Jacqueline Richter-Menge, CRREL (Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory). Arctic News from the Office of Naval Research The Office of Naval Research (ONR) has launched a new program in the Ocean, Atmosphere, and Space Research Division of the Ocean Battlespace Sensing Department entitled "Arctic and Global Prediction." This program, a combination of new and realigned efforts, responds to the fifth focus area of the U.S. Navy Arctic Roadmap for "Environmental Assessment and Prediction." The objective of this focus area is to "provide Navy leadership and decision makers a comprehensive understanding of the current and predicted arctic physical environment on tactical, operational, and strategic scales in time and space." The U.S. Navy Arctic Roadmap, published in November 2009, was the first product of the U.S. Navy Task Force Climate Challenge. The goals of the Arctic and Global Prediction program are: Improve understanding of the physical environment and processes in the Arctic Ocean;1. Develop integrated ocean-ice-wave-atmosphere earth system models for improved prediction on time scales of years; and 2. Investigate new technologies, e.g., sensors, platforms, communications, for sustained operation and observation in the challenging arctic environment. 3. One of the first actions of the Arctic and Global Prediction program was to announce, in February 2011, a five-year Department Research Initiative (DRI): Emerging Dynamics of the Marginal Ice Zone. The goal of the DRI is to improve the knowledge and understanding of the physics of the retreating summer ice edge and marginal ice zone (MIZ) in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas. The approach will be to integrate data from in situ sensing platforms, remotely-sensed observations, and integrated process models to develop a comprehensive, quantitative picture of open-ocean, ice edge, and MIZ processes, interactions, and feedbacks as the ice retreats. The observational dataset that is generated will also be used to evaluate the skill of numerical models run by the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) and academic researchers. The announcement of the DRI included a call for planning letters, which were due on 1 April 2011, with a proposal submission deadline of 1 July 2011. ONR also accepts planning letters at any time for basic, curiosity-driven research that addresses the three Arctic and Global Prediction goals presented above. In March 2011 the Arctic and Global Prediction program supported a variety of research activities at the Arctic Submarine Laboratory Ice Exercise (ICEX) 2011 camp in the Beaufort Sea. A joint NRL/Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory (CRREL) team coordinated a combined in situ and airborne ice thickness, snow depth, and surface topography measurement campaign. Below the ice, Navy submarines obtained upward-looking sonar (ULS) ice draft data. These data will be coupled with the on-ice and airborne data to evaluate the performance of the different sensors and develop a comprehensive picture of the ice thickness distribution. Another team, from the Naval Postgraduate School, investigated under-ice hydrodynamics, particularly in the vicinity of a pressure ridge keel. The study is expected to provide new insights into mixing and drag that can be applied in models of the combined air-ice-ocean system in the Arctic. 21 USS Connecticut (SSN 22) at the surface of the frozen Beaufort Sea, Arctic Ocean, with a USCG HC-130 aircraft overhead, March 2011. Photo Courtesy Dan Eleuterio, U.S. Navy/Office of Naval Research. Ice draft data obtained by Navy submarines are a contribution to Scientific Ice Expeditions (SCICEX), the Arctic Submarine Science Program, which is a partnership among the U.S. Navy, other Federal agencies, and the arctic marine science community to use nuclear-powered submarines as platforms for scientific studies of the Arctic Ocean. In addition to measuring ice draft in spring 2011, the submarines obtained underway conductivity, temperature, depth, bathymetry, and navigation data for SCICEX. There were also two SCICEX projects that tested expendable conductivity temperature depth profilers and tested procedures and calibrated equipment for routine, underway ocean biogeochemistry measurements. To read the 2009 U.S. Navy Arctic Roadmap, please see: http://greenfleet.dodlive.mil/files/2010/08/US-Navy-Arctic-Roadmap11-10.... For more information about Task Force Climate Change and the Arctic Roadmap, please contact Bob Freeman ([email protected]). Further information about the ONR Arctic and Global Prediction Program and submission of planning letters can be found at: http://www.onr.navy.mil/Science-Technology/Departments/Code-32/All-Progr... or contact Martin Jeffries ([email protected]), or Scott Harper ([email protected]). 22 Arctic Vision and Strategy NOAA Releases Final Arctic Vision and Strategy In February, NOAA released its final Arctic Vision and Strategy, which provides a high-level framework and strategic goals to address NOAA's highest priorities in the Arctic. According to the vision document, NOAA will focus its efforts on the following six priority goals: Forecast Sea Ice1. Strengthen Foundational Science to Understand and Detect Arctic Climate and Ecosystem Changes 2. Improve Weather and Water Forecasts and Warnings3. Enhance International and National Partnerships4. Improve Stewardship and Management of Ocean and Coastal Resources in the Arctic 5. Advance Resilient and Healthy Arctic Communities and Economies6. In support of this vision and in order to fulfill NOAA's missions and responsibilities that are critical for other agencies to succeed in fulfilling their responsibilities, NOAA intends to undertake four steps. First, in the next five years, implement, through a NOAA five-year Arctic Action Plan, actions to achieve the six primary goals that are identified and described in this document in support of the arctic vision. Second, in order to accomplish these goals, coordination across all NOAA Line and Staff Offices and collaboration with local, regional, federal, academic, and non-governmental organizational partnerships will be required. Third, develop an engagement strategy to reach internal and external employees, partners, and stakeholders. As a starting point, establish a single point of contact within NOAA Senior Executive Leadership that is accountable for implementation of this strategy. Fourth, include the formalization of a detailed budget strategy as part of the NOAA Arctic Action Plan. NOAA anticipates initial investment of $10 million towards the implementation of this strategic plan, recognizing that additional funds will be needed to achieve these goals. The Vision and Strategy can be downloaded at: http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/. 23 Fran Ulmer Appointed Chair of the U.S. Arctic Research Commission Fran Ulmer Appointed Chair of the U.S. Arctic Research Commission President Barack Obama appointed Fran Ulmer to a four-year term as the Chair of the U.S. Arctic Research Commission (USARC) on 10 March 2011. Ulmer is Chancellor of the University of Alaska Anchorage. As the Chair of USARC, Chancellor Ulmer will advance federal arctic research in coordination with the state of Alaska and international partners. The Arctic Research Commission's current goals for the U.S. Arctic Research Program include: expanding a federal emphasis on Arctic Ocean and climate research; improving efforts to prevent and respond to oil spills in ice-covered waters; and strengthening research in arctic human health and indigenous languages and cultures. Ms. Ulmer has served as a member of the Aspen Institute's Commission on Arctic Climate Change and held Board of Directors positions with the Alaska Nature Conservancy, the National Parks Conservation Association, the Union of Concerned Scientists, the Alaska Commonwealth North Board, and several other state and community organizations. In 2010 President Obama appointed her to serve as a member of the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Oil Drilling. Prior to her academic appointments, including Director of the Institute of Social and Economic Research at the University of Alaska Anchorage, Ms. Ulmer served as Mayor of Juneau, Representative in the Alaska State Legislature, and Lieutenant Governor of Alaska. Ms. Ulmer earned a Doctor of Law cum laude from the University of Wisconsin Law School, and has been a Fellow at the Institute of Politics at the Kennedy School of Government. For more information, see: http://www.arctic.gov/ulmer.html. 24 International Study of Arctic Change (ISAC) Workshop on International Collaboration and Cooperation in Arctic Science The International Study of Arctic Change (ISAC) convened a workshop on international cooperation in the Arctic 30 May–1 June in Fairbanks, Alaska. About 30 participants representing international arctic programs attended the workshop from countries including Japan, China, Korea, Norway, Denmark, Canada, Russia, and the United States. The goal of the workshop was to develop a strategy for international cooperation and collaboration, and joint planning of arctic environmental change science programs and related observing activities. The workshop addressed three objectives: Improve international cooperation in arctic science;1. Advance planning for an Arctic Observing Summit in 2012; and2. Advance planning for a Responding to Change workshop.3. The outcomes will include a workshop report and a plan of action with specific and concrete coordination activities. For further information about ISAC, please go to: http://www.arcticchange.org or contact Maribeth Murray, ISAC Executive Director ([email protected]). 25