Climate pp 333-371 | Cite as

Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation on CONUS Military Installations

  • R. C. Lozar
  • M. D. Hiett
  • J. D. Westervelt
Conference paper
Part of the NATO Science for Peace and Security Series C: Environmental Security book series (NAPSC)


Military installations must be maintained and managed to provide appropriate training and testing opportunities. As climate changes, natural areas on installations may shift, and the costs to maintain training and testing areas may change. This chapter looks across continental U.S. (CONUS) installations with respect to the habitat and erosion consequences associated with climate forecasts from four Global Climate Models (GCMs). Habitat is important from two perspectives: its ability to support training and testing, and its capacity to meet federal requirements regarding the maintenance of listed threatened and endangered species. That capacity can change due to shifts in weather patterns, flooding, drought potential, and annual temperature patterns. With substantial change, species can be directly affected by invasive species, loss and fragmentation of habitat, or increased disease and predation. Population losses for these species can result in loss of training lands and/or time.

Additionally, climate change might result in changes in erosion patterns and intensity, which can also directly affect training. This chapter begins an exploration of how climate change forecasts can be converted to forecasts regarding potential challenges to habitats and species and potential impacts on erosion at each of about 130 CONUS installations. The chapter concludes with recommendations on how to adapt to these changes.


Revise Universal Soil Loss Equation Military Installation Australian Model Canadian Model Ecosystem Shift 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Bailey RG (1983) Delineation of ecosystem regions. Environ Manage 7(4):365–373 (Reference for Bailey’s ecoregions)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bailey RG (1984) Testing an ecosystem regionalization. J Environ Manage 19:239–248 (Reference for Bailey’s ecoregions)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bailey RG (1988) Ecogeographic analysis. USDA Forest Service, Washington, DC (Misc Publication 1465, Reference for Bailey’s ecoregions)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bailey RG (1991) Design of ecological networks for monitoring global change. Environ Conserv 18(2):173–175 (Reference for Bailey’s ecoregions)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bailey RG (2004) Identifying ecoregion boundaries. Environ Manage 34(Suppl 1):S14–S26 (Reference for Bailey’s ecoregions)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Boer, GJ (1995) A hybrid moisture variable suitable for spectral GCMs. Research activities in atmospheric and oceanic modelling. Report No. 21, WMO/TD-No. 665. World Meteorological Organization, Geneva (Reference for CGCM3)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cai W, McPhaden MJ, Collier MA (2004) Multidecadal fluctuations in the relationship between equatorial Pacific heat content anomalies and ENSO amplitude. Geophys Res Let 31:L01201. doi:10.1029/2003GL018714 (Reference for PCM1, Reference for CSIRO MK3)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dr. Radut (2010) Landscape simulation modeling: developing spatial simulation modeling across the army corps. climate change.
  9. 9.
    Favis-Mortlock D, Boardman J (1995) Nonlinear responses of soil erosion to climate change: a modelling study on the UK South Downs. Catena 25(1–4):365–387 (Reference for erosion)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gordon C, Cooper C, Senior CA, Banks H, Gregory JM, Johns TM, Mitchell JFB, Wood RA (2000) The simulation of SST, sea ice extents and ocean heat transports in a version of the Hadley centre coupled model without flux adjustments. Clim Dynam 16:147–168. Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research, Bracknell (Reference for HadCM3)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gordon HB, Rotstayn LD, McGregor JL, Dix MR, Kowalczyk EA, O’Farrell SP, Waterman LJ, Hirst AC, Wilson SG, Collier MA, Watterson IG, Elliott TI (2002) The CSIRO Mk3 climate system model. CSIRO Atmospheric research technical paper no. 60. CSIRO Atmospheric Research, Aspendale. (Reference for CSIRO MK3)
  12. 12.
    Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (HQUSACE). 30 November 2007. U.S. Army installation floristic inventory database, Public Works Technical Bulletin 200-1-52, HQUSACE, Washington, DC,
  13. 13.
    Installation Summaries from the FY2007 Survey of Threatened and Endangered Species on Army Lands, Army Environmental Division, Installation Services, Office of Assistant Chief of StaffGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL(eds) (2007) The physical science basis, contribution of working group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge/New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007: synthesis report. Contribution of working groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC, Geneva, Retrieved on 20 May 2009 (Reference for PCM1)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    IPCC, Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) (2007) Summary for policymakers. In: Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge/New York.
  17. 17.
    Karl TR, Knight RW (1998) Secular trends of precipitation amount, frequency, and intensity in the United States. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 79(2):231–241 (Reference for erosion)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Manabe S, Wetherald RT (1967) Thermal equilibrium of the atmosphere with a given distribution of relative humidity. J Atmos Sci 24(3):241–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Meehl GA et al (2005) Understanding future patterns of increased precipitation intensity in climate model simulations. Geophys Res Lett 32:L18719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20. 15 May 2006. Bailey’s ecoregions and subregions of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
  21. 21.
    Nearing M, Jetten V, Baffaut C et al (2005) Modeling response of soil erosion and runoff to changes in precipitation and cover. Catena 61(2–3):131–154 (Reference for erosion)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nunes JP, Seixas J, Keizer JJ, Ferreira AJ (2009) Sensitivity of runoff and soil erosion to climate change in two Mediterranean watersheds. Part II: assessing impacts from changes in storm rainfall, soil moisture and vegetation cover. Hydrol Process 1220(March):1212–1220 (Reference for erosion)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Omernik JM (1987) Ecoregions of the conterminous United States (map supplement). Ann Assoc Am Geogr 77(1):118–125 (Reference for Omernik’s ecoregions)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Omernik JM, Bailey RG (1997) Distinguishing between watersheds and ecoregions. J Am Water Resour Assoc 33(5):935–949 (Reference for Omernik’s ecoregions)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pruski F, Nearing M (2002) Climate-induced changes in erosion during the 21st century for eight U.S. locations. Water Resour Res 38(12):34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Quadrennial Defense Review Report (2010) Secretary of Defense, Department of Defense, Washington, DC.
  27. 27.
    Special report on emissions scenarios (2011) Wikipedia. Accessed 19 Jan 2011
  28. 28.
    Soil and Water Conservation Society (SWCS) (2003) Conservation implications of climate change: soil erosion and runoff from cropland.Soil and water. (Reference for Omernik’s ecoregions)
  29. 29.
    U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (2010) Bias corrected and downscaled WCRP CMIP3 climate projections. Accessed 19 Jan 2011
  30. 30.
    U.S. Department of the Interior (2010). National atlas of the United States.
  31. 31.
    Verseghy DL, McFarlane NA, Lazare M (1993) A Canadian land surface scheme for GCMs:II. Vegetation model and coupled runs. Int J Climatol 13:347–370 (Reference for CGCM3)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Watterson IG, Dix MR (2005) Effective sensitivity and heat capacity in the response of climate models to greenhouse gas and aerosol forcings. Q J Roy Met Soc 131:259–280 (Reference for CSIRO MK3)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Weatherly JW, Bitz CM (2001) Natural and anthropogenic climate change in the arctic. In: 12th symposium on global change and climate variations, Albuquerque, American Meteorological Society, Boston, 15–18 Jan 2001 (Reference for PCM1)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wei WL, Chen LY, Fu B (2009) Responses of water erosion to rainfall extremes and vegetation types in a loess semiarid hilly area, NW China. Hydrol Process 1791(May):1780–1791 (Reference for erosion)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hargrove WW, Hoffman F (2004) Potential of multivariate quantitative methods for delineation and visualization of ecoregions. Environ Manage 34(1):S39–S60. doi:10.1007/s00267-003-1084-0 (Springer Science and Business Media)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Zhou Z, Shangguan Z, Zhao D (2006) Modeling vegetation coverage and soil erosion in the Loess Plateau Area of China. Ecol Modell 198(1–2):263–268 (Reference for erosion)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Research and Development CenterChampaignUSA

Personalised recommendations