2025 Climate Report

Photo drferry/iStock

ASSESSING CLIMATE CHANGE PRIORITIES AND PROJECTS IN THE GREATER YELLOWSTONE ECOSYSTEM Sierra Harris, Greater Yellowstone Coalition Greater Yellowstone Coordinating Committee’s Climate Community of Practice November 2025

CONTENTS Introduction Purpose Interview Responses GYE 2022 Flood Impacts Priority Projects for Climate Mitigation 9 Limitations and Barriers to Accomplishing Climate Priority Projects 10 Framework for a Climate Adaptation and Resilience Action Plan in the GYE 10 Wildland Fire Management 11 Wildlife 12 Terrestrial 12 Aquatic 14 Tribal 14 Infrastructure and Roads 14 Ecosystem Assessment 14 Adaptation Planning and Project Screening 14 Climate Change Communications 15 Next Steps 15 Acknowledgements 3 6 6 7 7

4 5 8 9 11 13

16 16 17 28 19 20 21 23 25 25

List of Figures

Figure 1 – Bridging the Divide: Managing a Large Ecosystem Across Jurisdictional Boundaries Figure 2 – Representation Across the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem Figure 3 – 2022 Flooding Impacts Figure 4 – Limitations and Barriers to Accomplishing Climate Priorities and Projects Figure 5 – Spotlight on Issues and Solutions: Remote Sensing Tools Figure 6 – GYC Projects and Partnerships Profile: Managing Rivers in a Changing Climate

Appendices

Appendix A – Interview Representation Appendix B – Interview Form Appendix C – Evidence of Climate Change Impacts Appendix D – Climate Impacts of Greatest Concern Appendix E – 2022 Flood Impacts: Map Details Appendix F – 2022 Flood Impacts: Full Interview Responses Appendix G – Climate Mitigation Actions Appendix H – Barriers to Climate Action Appendix I – Additional Comments about Climate Change Impacts in the GYE Appendix J – GYCC Fisheries Subcommittee Project Checklist

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 2

INTRODUCTION The Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem is vast, spanning more than 22 million acres, and encompassing a diverse landscape that includes three states and six watersheds (Figure 1). This ecosystem is managed by a wide range of people that work for federal and state agencies, Tribes, and non-governmental organizations. Given the many agencies, political entities, and the wide array of landownership types, it is very challenging to enact widespread and unified action on climate change impacts to this region.

The Greater Yellowstone Coordinating Committee’s (GYCC) subcommittees (native fish, hydrology, and climate change adaptation) are working with the Greater Yellowstone Coalition (GYC) to develop ecosystem-wide, climate adaptation and resilience goals that are both ambitious and attainable within the next ten years (2035). The concept came about following the publication of the Greater Yellowstone Climate Assessment (GYCA) in June 2021. The GYCA details current and future impacts on the GYE, and this report provides insight into climate work in the GYE and identifies real-time climate change impacts occurring across this diverse landscape. This report synthesizes the concerns and current actions of resource managers and begins the process of developing attainable goals framed within a climate adaptation plan that are in direct response to the conversations and outreach that occurred during the interview process.

To better understand climate change impacts, concerns, and the work that is occurring across the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE), GYC collaborated with the GYCC to conduct a series of interviews with natural resource managers from federal and state agencies, the Eastern Shoshone, and Northern Arapaho Tribes, as well as non-governmental organizations (NGOs). The 36 interviews took place over a seven-month period from August 2022 to May 2023. (Figure 2 and Appendix A). The interviews consisted of eight questions and a request for respondents to insert details on current and future climate-related projects into a spreadsheet (Appendix B). The interviews generally lasted 30-45 minutes. Participants were requested to follow up with more detailed responses in the project spreadsheet. This report is a summary of observed climate change impacts, and current and proposed climate adaptation projects by natural resource managers and conservationists in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem.

It also describes ecosystem-wide climate adaptation and resilience goals that have been recommended by the interviewees.

Photo USFS

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 3

BRIDGING THE DIVIDE: Managing a Large Ecosystem Across Jurisdictional Boundaries

Figure 1. The Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem encompasses over 22 million acres across three states, and includes lands owned and managed by private entities, sovereign tribes, and various state and federal agencies. This patchwork of ownership – combined with differences in habitat type, social pressures, and management mandates – complicate efforts to advance projects and policies that improve climate adaptation and resilience at scale. Overcoming these hurdles will require innovation, coordination, and cooperation at an impressive scale.

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 4

REPRESENTATION

ACROSS THE GREATER YELLOWSTONE ECOSYSTEM

TRIBAL REPRESENTATION

FEDERAL AGENCIES Bureau of Land Management (BLM) – MT Field Office Bureau of Land Management (BLM) – WY Field Office Bureau of Land Management (BLM) – Montana/Dakotas Office National Park Service (NPS) – Grand Teton National Park National Park Service (NPS) – Yellowstone National Park Natural Resources Conservation Service – MT Field Office United States Forest Service (USFS) – Bridger-Teton, WY United States Forest Service (USFS) – Custer-Gallatin, MT United States Forest Service (USFS) – Beaverhead-Deerlodge, MT United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) – Wyoming Office United States Geological Survey – Regional Office

Eastern Shoshone Tribal Members Northern Arapaho Tribal Members STATE AGENCIES Wyoming Game and Fish Department Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks NGO REPRESENTATION The Nature Conservancy – WY Henry’s Fork Foundation – ID Beartooth Front Community Forum – MT North Central Climate Adaptation Science Center (CASC) Tribal Community Resilience Liaison, Great Plains Tribal Water Alliance National Wildlife Federation Wind River Indian Reservation Tribal Water Resources and Control Board

Figure 2.

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 5

PURPOSE The intended outcomes of these interviews are to increase coordination among managers, share management tools; lessons learned; and scale-up conservation projects that address climate change; and make this approach a model for tackling ecosystemwide, trans-boundary climate adaptation and climate resilience issues in the United States.

Our vision is to work together across agencies, Tribes, and non-governmental organizations to create an action plan to prioritize specific climate adaptation and resiliency projects in the GYE and then effectively communicate this plan to the public.

INTERVIEW RESPONSES To begin, we asked resource managers to share evidence of climate change, and which climate impacts were of the greatest concern in the landscapes where they work in the GYE. Respondents also brought up complicating factors that are important to consider. Their responses were categorized into three themes: terrestrial, aquatic, and wildlife concerns. Within these themes, topics that were mentioned three or more times were considered priority issues and are included in the summary below. See the appendices for the full list of issues discussed during the interview process (Appendices C and D).

Summary of Responses – Observations of Climate Change and Impacts of Greatest Concern Terrestrial • • • • •

Increased wildfires and drought Receding glaciers Increased summer temperatures Changes to vegetation Spread of invasive species

• • • •

Aquatic • • • •

Complicating Factors or Interactions

Increased water temperatures Changes to the water cycle Variability in flows Changes in the timing of precipitation

Lack of wildlife management plans Need for a better assessment of climate vulnerabilities and projects that have the most potential to mitigate climate impacts Lack of watershed planning Trying to streamline climate work across all Tribal governments

Wildlife • •

Population declines Shifts in migratory routes

Photo USDA

Photo NPS/C. Adams

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 6

GYE 2022 FLOOD IMPACTS Early in the interview process, a 500-year flood event occurred in the GYE. The floods were caused, in part, by an intense rain-on-snow event in the northern portion of the ecosystem. Natural disaster events like these are exacerbated by the effects of a changing climate and becoming more frequent across the planet. The lessons learned from the 2022 flood, recent wildfires, and severe drought across the landscape will be key for preparing for the next natural disaster. A 2025 report from the University of Montana indicated that the flood aftermath caused a $95 million dollar loss in visitor spending throughout the impact area, which covered Carbon, Photo NPS/Kyle Stone Park, Stillwater and Yellowstone counties. Other key findings noted that 88% of businesses in the impact area reported a loss of revenue, over 1,100 travel-supported jobs were lost and visitation at Yellowstone dropped 32% in 2022 (Wedell et al., 2024). It is important for natural resource managers to plan for extreme weather events like these as they are likely to become more common in the coming years, and it will be important to have the tools prepared to help protect property, the economic viability of the GYE, and the integrity of this ecosystem. This graphic is a snapshot of the impacts across the landscape (Figure 3). Additional map details and citation can be found in Appendix E, and the full set of responses can be reviewed in Appendix F.

PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR CLIMATE MITIGATION In addition to their climate concerns, we asked resource managers for examples of priority projects that are either in progress or are a high priority for future implementation. The examples below are a sample of the responses received from the people we interviewed. The full list of projects can be found in Appendix G.

Terrestrial Projects

Aquatic Projects

BLM – A lot of BLM work is focused on livestock grazing, USFWS – Improve fish passage and so the agency is working with grazing permittees to educate stream connectivity them on drought issues, support their efforts to use sustainable grazing practices, and encourage them to follow a rest-and- USFWS – Improve fish passage and stream recovery grazing schedule. connectivity.

USFS (Custer Gallatin National Forest) – Fuels reduction and habitat USFS (Bridger Teton National Forest) – During restoration in the West Rosebud area of the Beartooth Ranger District forest planning, create a landscape-scale assessment in Montana. of all the Forest’s watersheds and then rank the watersheds according to their health.

WYGF – Improve landscape resiliency to cheatgrass through improved technology and herbicides.

MTFWP – Work to streamline permitting to improve the pace and scale of riparian habitat projects.

NGOs – Wyoming has the last intact healthy sagebrush ecosystem—so it is a high priority to defend and protect core sagebrush habitat and NGOs – Increase education and outreach efforts support and grow programs with weed and conservation districts. on water conservation measures by reaching out to guides, outfitters, and fishermen. These groups will need to adapt to the new reality.

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 7

Figure 3.

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 8

Limitations and Barriers to Accomplishing Climate Priorities and Projects

The final portion of the interviews examined issues preventing resource managers from completing their priorities. There were seven main themes (Figure 4) that were discussed during our conversations on limitations and barriers to addressing climate priorities.

Figure 4.

Below are several example comments from each theme, with the total number of comments listed in parentheses. The full list of comments can be found in Appendix H. Limited Support for Climate Adaptation Projects in Lack of Scientific Expertise (14 comments) the Workplace (20 comments) • Lack of institutional knowledge—hard to know what will work.

• Better support from agency leadership • Challenging to us current scientific knowledge and apply it to • Staff coordination across programs project planning • Consistent language • Data collection and analysis are expensive, and it’s challenging to • Challenging to build climate resiliency into work with universities projects Politics and Policy (14 comments) Limited Capacity and Funding (16 comments) • Lack of policy that allows agencies and organizations policy to • Infrastructure bill funding doesn’t come with achieve more staff • Consistency and streamlining permitting for projects • Permitting bottlenecks due to limited staff time • With the increased rate of climate change, it is time to expedite • Timing and funding are not aligned. The money our work and restore habitats for water storage on the land is there but it is difficult to access it for projects

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 9

Limited Coordination and Partnerships (12 Challenges of Working at Scale (7 comments) comments) • Difficult to work across the GYE • Need to learn how to engage across many levels • Climate work is not happening at scale due to bureaucratic of government challenges • Improve partnerships between Tribal • Challenging to get permits to do low-tech process-based governments, NGOs, agencies, and others restoration at scale • Agencies and partners need to work together to get things done at the ecosystem level Limited Public Support (11 comments) • Improve dialogue around climate change and drought • Hard to get support for local projects/issues— need to improve engagement with the public and encourage people to show up and voice concerns • Lack of community education around water (stream setbacks, usage and other issues

Photo GYC/London Bernier

FRAMEWORK FOR A CLIMATE ADAPTATION AND RESILIENCE ACTION PLAN IN THE GYE This section provides a framework for developing ecosystem-wide climate action goals. It is based on assessments of resource vulnerabilities and values identified by interview participants. The goals will be prioritized by the GYCC Climate Community of Practice and linked to specific metrics to assist resource managers with measuring success through their activities and projects over the next ten years.

This framework primarily focused on climate change effects that fall into the same three themes as previous sections (terrestrial, aquatic, and wildlife). It is important to note that there were other important topics and ideas that were discussed during the interview process. These ideas are shared in detail in Appendix I. Below are several key actions identified by interview participants that can serve as a starting point for increasing the ecosystem’s resiliency to climate change. Once a working group has been established, the plan will need to be further built out to identify priority actions, timelines, and metrics.

FRAMEWORK FOR A CLIMATE ADAPTATION ACTION PLAN Wildland Fire Management

Actions • Develop and distribute to all GYE agencies and partners a list of best practices for planning and managing climate-amplified wildland fires to improve fire management in the GYE • Connect with the University of Colorado-Boulder research team leading a project to better understand how to apply Resist-Accept-Direct (RAD) framework to fire management (funded by North Central Climate Adaptation Science Center) • Track the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) Wildland Fire Risk Vulnerability Assessment (NPS), the GYE could be a potential pilot landscape • Track the NPS Climate-Fire Team, the Task 3 work group has drafted BMPs for managing fires • Research if the USFS has a similar assessment Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 10

Wildlife

Actions • Establish trans-boundary and trans-agency monitoring program for climate impacts to wildlife species across the GYE • Work with GYCC Wildlife Subcommittee to limit impacts to wildlife from invasive plants • Work with GYCC Wildlife Subcommittee to continue to fund and grow the bird vulnerability project • Grow the NPS Inventory and Monitoring herpetology monitoring program • Grow the WY-Department of Agriculture’s and NPS migration initiatives • Work with the Wind River Tribal Bison Initiative to restore bison as a keystone species in the ecosystem • Build relationships with Tribal leadership to understand the long-term goals of restoring bison to the Wind River Reservation • Continue to research the full benefits to ecosystem integrity, biodiversity, and carbon storage through the landscapescale restoration of bison to the GYE • Work with Wind River Tribal Fish and Game and other key partners to build a co-management program for wildlife migration • Create co-stewardship agreements with Tribal Fish and Game for off-reservation federal lands to meet conservation goals and priorities for large-scale ungulate restoration and migration • Improve connectivity for continued migratory behaviors and to better facilitate climateforced migration • Keep landscapes connected for wildlife by removing barriers, improving wildlife crossings, and maintaining quality and connected habitats

CLIMATE ADAPTATION ISSUES BEING ADDRESSED: Cheatgrass and other non-native early season invasive (ESI) grasses are an emerging threat to the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, where recent climatic changes like warmer spring temperatures and earlier snowmelt have made the region more susceptible to invasion from ESI species.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this project is to explore the use of remote-sensing data for early detection and mapping of cheatgrass, with a focus on identifying trade-offs related to spatial resolution, size of the study area, temporal resolution of different sensors and products and overall costs associated with collecting data and staff time. USGS scientists developed mapping workflows using multi-temporal Sentinel-2 imagery (10-m resolution), multi-temporal Planet Scope imagery (3-m resolution), as well as single date, 1-cm Unoccupied Aerial Vehicle (UAV) imagery. A field data collection protocol was developed and shared on tablets and cell phones to map cheatgrass location and abundance.

These field data are used to guide image classification and validation. Using this approach, data collected by GYA unit partners (NPS, USFS, counties) and shared and viewed in an online GIS interface.

PROJECT STATUS: This was a pilot project to test and develop methods, using high spatial and temporal resolution remote-sensing platforms, to map early season invasive plant species, including cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), desert alyssum (Alyssum desertorum), and annual wheatgrass (Eremopyrum triticeum) in the GYE.

NEXT STEPS: • Manuscript Publication: “Remote sensing detection of early season invasive grasses across scales and phenological gradients” is in press and will be published in the journal of Landscape Ecology in late 2025.

• Sampling efforts with NPS collaborators in Yellowstone National Park and elsewhere will identify and map the extent of invasive weeds this coming field season.

PROJECT PARTNERS: • Greater Yellowstone Coordinating Committee • U.S. National Park Service • U.S. National Forest Service • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • U.S. Bureau of Land Management • Idaho Fish and Game • Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks • Wyoming Game and Fish • United States Geological Survey – Invasives Program • Teton County, WY CHALLENGES: • The costs associated with expanding the effort beyond the pilot project.

• Determining cross-boundary goals when sensors are used to cover large areas but provide limited spatial resolution • Where in the GYCC should partners invest in detailed mapping.

• Management of ongoing research.

SOLUTIONS: YNP and the Terrestrial Invasive Subcommittee of the GYCC have received funding from the GYCC to host a cheatgrass workshop in late 2025 or early 2026. The hope is to find the answers to the above listed challenges.

Figure 5.

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 11

Terrestrial

Actions • Understand vegetation responses to climate change in the GYE • Research the effects of climate change on native and invasive plant species in the GYE (Figure 5) • Identify sensitive and vulnerable vegetation assemblages to prioritize RAD strategies • Increase efforts and research on cheatgrass mitigation in the Big Horn Basin • Work with NPS staff to host a workshop on cheatgrass management across the GYE • Restore whitebark pine forests across the GYE in areas where they are most likely to persist in the future • Work with the GYCC Whitebark Pine (WBP) Subcommittee to identify climate-resilient areas for planting WBP seedlings • Connect with NPS staff about current work funded through the Inflation Reduction Act and look for opportunities to Photo GYC / Emmy Reed expand the program • Work with glacier monitoring programs throughout the GYE to better understand and project how/when glaciers will recede due Actions to climate change • Identify Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS) issues • Connect with NPS staff to discuss glacier monitoring program that are likely linked to climate change in Grand Teton National Park • Contact USGS staff for a status update on • Investigate other programs in the GYE, specifically work in the AIS research in the GYE Shoshone National Forest and in the Wind River Mountains • Introduce the fisheries checklist to all GYE • Support the inventory of GYA rock glaciers as a source of units (Appendix J) frozen water storage that may be better protected than above • Train staff on how to use the checklist ground glaciers to screen fish/hydrological projects for • Investigate the status of ice patch archaeology research climate resilience • Connect with NPS staff in Yellowstone National Park to see • When possible, provide training on an if the GYCC has funding available to support future research. actual project • Work with partners on forest health projects across the ecosystem • Work with the BDNF to travel and train to improve climate resilience local fish or hydrological staff • Increase opportunities for conifer encroachment mitigation • Improve natural water storage and enhance by leveraging and raising funds, as well as establishing riparian habitat across the GYE through the partnerships with NGOs implementation of low-tech process-based • Support an ecotonal analysis (USFS) that looks at fuels restoration (LTPBR) techniques reduction, conifer-encroachment, aspen growth, and • Support the GYCC-funded partnership landscape restoration (GYC/USFS) in Montana by identifying pilot project locations and streamlining permitting for LTPBR project implementation • Pursue additional funding opportunities to support LTPBR project planning and implementation across the GYE (Ex. the riparian prioritization project that is being worked on at the Rocky Mountain Research Station) • Improve timing of LTPBR measures postfire for sediment control • Determine the timeline for large-scale project implementation Photo NPS/Diane Renkin

Aquatic

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 12

Aquatic (cont.)

•

•

•

Protect headwaters climate refugia for longterm persistence of native fish species • Collaborate with partners across the GYE to protect native cutthroat trout species from non-native fish populations • Collaborate with partners across the GYE to identify and protect priority streams and rivers to mitigate impacts on native fish from increased water temperatures Increase the pace and scale of natural water storage projects • Improve management of aquifer recharge through best management practices (BLM/NRCS)

CLIMATE ADAPTATION ISSUES BEING ADDRESSED: Anticipated water shortages resulting in reduced stream flows and increased water temperatures on the Snake River.

•

Increase groundwater storage through managed irrigation efficiency that increase return flows • Improve adaptive management using beaver relocation and low-tech process-based restoration techniques in headwaters streams to enhance natural water storage Assess the vulnerability of the Snake River hydrologic flow, recharge, and storage to the impacts of climate change • Use current research to manage climate risks to the Snake River watershed • Connect with University of WY, Wind River Tribes, Grand Teton NP, Bridger Teton NF, USGS to learn more about ongoing work in the watershed • Work with the Bureau of Reclamation to start forecasting water levels for Jackson Lake (Figure 6)

These factors affect the ecology of aquatic and riparian plants, fish and other animals in ways we do not yet fully understand.

Climate change and drought are also impacting how humans interact with the Snake River and its ecosystem. Recreationists that come to enjoy world-class fishing opportunities, encountered a rare occurrence in recent years when water temperatures in the main-stem Snake approached 70°F, the level at which trout become stressed due to low oxygen levels. In July 2021, the near-threshold water temperatures led the Wyoming Game and Fish department to recommend anglers avoid fishing past 2:00 pm, with Grand Teton supporting this and encourage anglers to stop fishing when the water reaches 68°F.

PROJECT STATUS: One Master’s level graduate project has been funded through Idaho State University, and the graduate student is in their second year of research. They are studying how fall flow reductions from Jackson Lake Dam impact the ecology and food webs in the Snake River downstream of the dam in Wyoming. Additional funding was provided to an Idaho State University staff member to complete geomorphological modeling of the Snake River in Wyoming at different flows.

BACKGROUND: Jackson Lake is a recreational draw for boating, fishing, and scenery enjoyment. It also serves as an important water storage for downstream Idaho irrigators. Severe drought in the headwaters and downstream throughout the Snake River Plain in 2021 led to historically PROJECT PARTNERS: low lake levels. The drought depleted soil • Wyoming Game and Fish (WYGF) moisture and increased demand on the system • Idaho State University from downstream irrigators. Dam operations • Grand Teton National Park completely dictate the flow of the Snake River • Teton Conservation District above the Pacific Creek confluence 4.5 miles • Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) • Trout Unlimited downstream. In recent years, the dam released about half of the estimated peak unregulated GYE LOCATION: flows. These low flows prevent an important part Snake River floodplain near Jackson Lake dam BARRIERS: No barriers currently exist for the project, but of the peak runoff which scours the riverbed (see map). any flow recommendations could be difficult to and transports material including downed trees. implement.

Figure 6.

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 13

Tribal

Adaptation Planning and Project Screening

Infrastructure and Roads

Climate Change Communications

Actions • Significantly increase Tribal involvement in natural resource management, decision- Actions • Develop a process to screen all GYCC proposed projects and making, and cultural impacts throughout the emphasize supporting and funding projects that have a focus on GYE climate adaptation and resiliency • Invite Tribes that consult with GYE federal • Design a screening process that uses climate resiliency as a land agencies to GYCC executive and priority ranking factor for funding projects subcommittee meetings on the topic of • Determine the status of climate mitigation projects climate change (Yellowstone National Park • Investigate status of the GYCC Sustainable Operations – 27 Tribes; Grand Teton National Park – Subcommittee 24 Tribes) • Understand the Federal administration mandates • Meet with Tribal members from the Wind • Research whether other units, beyond NPS, have Sustainable River Indian Reservation’s Wind River Operations Programs Water Resources Control Board and Tribal • Invest in climate adaptation planning Fish and Game Department to better • Host climate smart conservation workshops understand their landscape needs related • Use disasters like the 2022 Yellowstone floods as lessons to climate impacts learned to prepare and mitigate for future events • Include input from Eastern Shoshone and • Review agency planning documents frequently, staying ahead Northern Arapaho Tribal Elders about how of changes, and fixing issues before disasters occur Traditional Ecological Knowledge can be • Climate adaptation planning will benefit from quantitative used to mitigate climate impacts vulnerability assessments and near-term forecasting

Actions • Identify structures (i.e. historic cabins, ranger Actions • Develop a climate change communications plan both within stations, and public buildings) that are at risk managing agencies and for the broader public from the impacts of climate change • Create a robust plan that includes adaptation and mitigation • Contact state and federal agencies to assist techniques, exposure to climate issues across the GYE, and with identification of these structures identify key climate leaders in the GYE • Work with Federal Highways to Identify roads • Build a website with shared resources hosted by GYCC, GYC, and bridges in the GYE that are at risk from and other interested groups. The website could also host climate change. questions, answers and experiences from the community • Contact a Federal Highways employee • Create a listserv that will communicate current projects, new (YNP can provide) research, recent publications, and upcoming events • Review and update the current map that delineates projects in the works, projects completed, projects needing funding, areas of risk/concern Actions • Assess the ecological integrity of the GYE to protect and restore ecosystem function and components • Connect with NPS staff to learn more about the assessment process, current baseline, and how climate change is impacting ecological integrity

Ecosystem Assessment

Photo GYC/Sierra Harris

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 14

NEXT STEPS It is important to note that the interviews and subsequent report were done prior to the change in the federal administration in 2025. This report represents a snapshot in time when climate work was less limited. We plan to work with willing partners on the climate adaptation and resiliency framework over the next few years, as many of those projects are focused on infrastructure, invasive weeds, water resources, etc.

This climate strategy framework will need to cross agency, state, private, and Tribal political boundaries within the GYE. Below are some next steps for creating this GYE climate strategy: •

• • •

Use the framework from this report to create an ecosystem-wide climate adaptation plan • Form a working group to build and execute the plan.

• Create a realistic timeline for the completion of goals over the next 5 to 10 years • Prioritize action items and implement metrics to help measure the success of the plan.

Use existing tools and expertise in the GYE • Connect and collaborate with partners to streamline and scale-up adaptation work in the GYE • Create pathways for tools to be shared across agencies and organizations Identify gaps, people to fill leadership roles, and funding sources to move the plan forward Apply climate messaging and communication resources • Create a GYE Climate Change Communications plan to use for consistent messaging • Showcase the climate work that has been accomplished and share innovative ideas that can be applied elsewhere in the ecosystem

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to extend a heartfelt thank you to all people that participated in the interviews, the many others who supplied information and resources, and those who helped review and prepare this report. We now have some key ideas, a few more questions, and the motivation to move forward with an ecosystem-scale climate adaptation plan.

Photo NPS/Neal Herbert

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 15

APPENDICES APPENDIX A — Interview Representation

APPENDIX B — Interview Form

Federal Agencies • Bureau of Land Management (BLM) – MT Field Office • Bureau of Land Management (BLM) – WY Field Office • Bureau of Land Management (BLM) – Regional Office • National Park Service (NPS) – Grand Teton National Park • National Park Service (NPS) – Yellowstone National Park • Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)MT Field Office • United States Forest Service (USFS) – BridgerTeton, WY • United States Forest Service (USFS) – CusterGallatin, MT • United States Forest Service (USFS) – BeaverheadDeerlodge, MT • United States Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) – WY Office • United States Geological Survey (USGS) – Regional Office

We are interested in hearing from natural resource managers from federal and state agencies, Tribes, as well as from NGO’s, to best integrate the massive network of landscape-level knowledge, experience, scientific expertise, passion, and thoughtful ideas that exists across the ecosystem.

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the GYE The Greater Yellowstone Coordinating Committee’s (GYCC) subcommittees— Tribal Representation fisheries, hydrology, climate change adaptation—are working with the Greater • Eastern Shoshone Tribal Member – US Fish and Yellowstone Coalition to develop ecosystem-wide, climate adaptation and Wildlife Service (retired) resilience goals that are both ambitious and attainable over the next ten years.

• Eastern Shoshone Tribe Member – National Wildlife Federation Our vision is to work together across agencies, Tribes, and non-governmental • Eastern Shoshone and Northern Arapaho Tribes – organizations to create an action plan to prioritize specific climate adaptation Water Resources Control Board and climate resilience projects across the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem.

State Agencies • Wyoming Game and Fish Department • Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks

Our goals are to increase coordination amongst managers, share management tools, lessons learned, and scale-up conservation projects that address climate change, and make this approach a national model for tackling ecosystem-wide, trans-boundary climate adaptation and climate resilience issues, and ultimately communicate this approach in an effective and compelling manner to the public.

Interview Questions (I will fill this out during our interview) 1. What is your role at your agency/organization/Tribe? What is the geographic area you work in?

2. Have you seen evidence of climate change impacts? If so, what?

3. What climate change impacts are of greatest concern in the geography that you work in and why?

4. What actions do you feel need to be taken to mitigate the impacts of climate change?

5. What projects are your top priorities for climate related work in the next decade? Be as specific as possible.

6. What are the barriers to accomplishing your priorities and completing these projects? Are they limited by finances, capacity, support from leadership, bureaucratic challenges, politics, social opposition, scientific knowledge, or other issues?

7. Was the geography that you work in impacted by the recent flood events in 2022? If so, what things (places, designs, and habitats) withstood the flooding event? What things did not?

8. Is there anything else you’d like to share about climate change in your geography, its impacts, or efforts to address it that we did not ask about?

Non-Governmental Organizations • The Nature Conservancy, WY • Henry’s Fork Foundation, ID • Beartooth Front Community Forum, MT Project(s) Details (Will be entered into an Excel spreadsheet on call) • North Central Climate Adaptation Science Center • PROJECT(s) NAME (list priority level for each) (CASC) Tribal Climate Liaison, Regional • STAGE (initial planning, detailed design, implementation, or other) *If other, please explain • PROJECT PARTNERS • FUNDING NEEDS • CAPACITY NEEDS • PROJECT BARRIERS • PROJECT TIMELINE (0-2 years) (2-4 years) (4 years +) • COMMENTS

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 16

APPENDIX C — Evidence of Climate Change Impacts * Topics with an asterisk were mentioned three or more times during interviews TERRESTRIAL • Habitat conversion • Douglas fir converting to grassland and sagebrush • Changes from native grasses to alfalfa, causing a increased dependency on water • Increased wildfires* • Increased severity • Increased duration of fire season • Examples: – Recent Goose and Clover fires – Robertson Draw fire • Increased drought* • Increased volatility • Duration of extreme drought • Hotter summers • More severe warm season droughts • Drought impacts have been exacerbated due to mismanagement by the Army Corp of Engineers (ACOE) • Changes to vegetation* • Changes to soil moisture • Changes to length/duration of growing season • Changes to historic phenology (bloom timing) • Lack of grass and forage • Noticeable impacts from drought on vegetation • Glaciers are receding* • Teepee Glacier has noticeable ice loss (volume/ area) • Dust from the droughty Snake River plains is landing on glaciers and increasing melt on glaciers/snowpack • Glaciers in the Beartooth Mountains are shrinking • Loss of glaciers in the Wind River mountains— over last 30 years they have disappeared • Glaciers receding at a faster rate than can be seen in satellite imagery • Frequency of mass wasting events • Rockslides from increased annual rainfall • Increased rockfall (similar to issues in the Alps) • Spread of invasive species (plant and animal)* • Expansion of invasive grasses—threat to habitat • Increase in cheatgrass • Early season/winter annual invasives are no longer confined – Patches are now spreading out into undisturbed areas (ex. Cheatgrass in Lamar Valley) • Cheatgrass invasion at lower elevations due to extended drought

• •

Impacts to rangeland from feral horses Shifting species distribution driven by non-native species (i.e. brown trout population increase) • Forests • Conifer encroachment* • Changes in forest composition • Loss of aspen trees • Impacts on whitebark pine • Increased insect/beetle activity • Damaged trees due to wet/heavy snow • Warmer temperatures* • Since the 1970’s there has been a one-degree Fahrenheit increase in temperature each decade • Warmer spring (earlier) and fall (later) temperatures • Warmer winters—less days below zero • More hot summer days (90+ degree days) • More extreme heat events AQUATIC • Changes to hydrological budget* • Springs are drying up • Decrease in the duration of water on the landscape • Changes in timing of snowmelt • Streams, creeks, and springs going dry • Earlier run-off/faster snowmelt/lower snowpack • Increased water temperatures* • Increased hoot owl restrictions • Madison River temperatures are increasing • Firehole River temperatures are increasing—now lethal to trout • Variability in stream flows* • Increased spring run-off • Intermittent waterways • Lesser amounts of water, not as reliable • Run-off happens earlier and tapers off earlier • In-stream flow has changed • Decreased base flows – Base flows are occurring six weeks earlier • Unpredictable water delivery • Changes in availability and how it is used • Lower water levels in Jackson Lake (reservoir)—barely filling to 50% in recent years • Agricultural water* • WY doesn’t own water in the Snake River—demand is driven by downstream water users in Idaho and flow is regulated by dams • Shorter season of use for water • Stock water availability • Decreased or dried up earlier in the season • Tribal water* • Impacts on water quality and quantity (ex. Crow Tribe) • Less water available to Tribes for in-stream flow, due to increased amounts pulled by irrigators • There is enough water, if managed correctly • Larger flood events* • Factors that led up to Yellowstone River flood • Higher peak flow events—100 yr. floods are bigger than they used to be • Changes in timing of intervals between floods (5-year vs. 10-year flood events) • 500-year flood event in Red Lodge in 2022 • 2018 bomb cyclone—flooding event

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 17

APPENDIX D — Climate Impacts of Greatest Concern * Topics with an asterisk were mentioned three or more times during interviews

•

infrastructure Immediate concern is the risk of a large wildfire in YNP could cause catastrophic change – Fire will change the landscape and allow for new vegetation communities to come in, like cheatgrass – NPS staff won’t have time or space to mitigate impacts on trees and plants

TERRESTRIAL WATER • Changes to vegetation* • Changes in precipitation* • Impacts on rangeland (grazing allotments) • Diminished water resources due to less snowpack – Drought is a challenge for grazing on • Decline in snowpack—changed dynamics have consequences allotments • Agricultural water* • Loss of rangeland • Water is an important resource that impacts many projects and • Loss of land due to erosion resources managed by the BLM • Conifer expansion and encroachment—linked • Over-reliance on irrigation water supply (reservoirs) to drought/climate change • Influence of agriculture on the lower Gallatin River • Impacts to sagebrush/grass biome and sage • Water availability for irrigation and stock water grouse management • Sustainability of surface water • Impacts to native cool season vegetation— – Impacts grazing practices warmer temperatures will affect the growing • Dewatering due to agricultural use season – Need to balance overuse and lack of water quantity • Impacts to berry crops with an increase in • Tribal water rights* warmer temperatures • Overallocation of Tribal water rights • Changing/decreasing soil moisture – WY is using more water than they are allocated for irrigation • Challenges to maintain healthy and intact plant – Two-three times the water right is being used ecosystems • Tribes do not have the staff or budget to manage water rights on the – Changes to plant communities—need to Wind River reservation, so water is turned over to irrigation districts keep up with weed management to manage – Changes in vegetative succession of • Threats to groundwater contamination from oil and gas development plants—creates habitat for invasive species – Wind River Tribes staying involved through EPA • Spread of invasive species (plant and animal)* • Variability in stream flows* • Spread of terrestrial invasives (weeds) • Reduction in winter stream flows • Spread of invasive annual grasses impacts • Increased summer temperatures sagebrush ecosystem • Water availability decreasing during late summer flows • Impacts from feral horses on native vegetation/ • Flow permanence/changing flow regime grasses • People are falling into shifting baseline syndrome and blaming low • Annual invasive grasses invading large expanses flows on droughts that will end or comparing it to past low flow of sagebrush periods • Cheatgrass moving in across the GYE—this • Increasing flood events makes the Lamar Valley very vulnerable • Changes to hydrological budget* • Cheatgrass is a big issue that needs attention • Lack of natural water storage on the landscape due to degraded – Need to think about this across the riverscapes that are disconnected from the floodplain ecosystem, not unit by unit • Vast changes to water budget – Needs to be identified as a cross-boundary • Fluctuations in water levels issue • Water supply irregularities (too much or too little) – The GYE is an incredible ecosystem and • Water quantity and timing—system is dependent on snowpack/ climate change is going to force our hand runoff to have these discussions • Increased development in Bozeman and Big Sky is decreasing water • Increased wildfires* availability • Impacts on air quality from wildfires – FWP may have to call on Murphy Rights • Increased severity of wildfires • Water and water availability (surface and groundwater) • Changes in fire regime • Ripple effects from loss of groundwater • The USFS is very concerned about larger and • Changes in surface and groundwater interactions more frequent fires • Timing and magnitude of run-off – Impacts on water quality—especially • Less water staying in the watershed moving downstream towards municipal • Decrease in residency time for water on the landscape sources – Ideally you want hydrological efficiency to be less – Impacts from debris flows/damages to • Maintaining resiliency of our riparian areas*

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 18

•

Keep riparian areas intact on the landscape by meeting standards and keeping things in compliance • Intact riparian buffers hold rivers together • Impacts on aquatic ecosystems • Large scale changes to aquatic habitat (Examples in YNP: Grebe Lake, Gibbon River, and Grayling Creek) • In a warmer drier climate scenario—will cause for degradation of riparian areas • Increased water temperatures • Lack of watershed planning and management* • Better water management to manage impacts from flooding events • BTNF supplies water to three major watersheds—any one of these could dry up and create widespread problems across the landscape • Coordination of historical impacts to look at scope/scale of what needs to be accomplished • How do we adapt infrastructure to be more resilient to change WILDLIFE • Fisheries* • Maintaining riparian connectivity in the watershed for native fish (Yellowstone cutthroat trout) restoration • Lower summer base flows will have impacts to many species • The resiliency of Snake River cutthroat trout relies on good connectivity • Impacts on fisheries from increasing water temperatures • The timing of run-off is shifting to favor nonnative rainbow trout • Warming water downstream is favoring brown trout • Distribution and well-being of native coldwater fish • Mammals • Spread of invasive grasses affects migrating ungulates OTHER • Trying to streamline climate work across all Tribal governments • Example: The Salish Kootenai Tribal Historic Preservation Office—collects paleodata and Traditional Ecological Knowledge data sets— trying to partner with USGS to do some scenario planning • Access to Tribal Resource Funding program through BIA • Lack of climate mitigation work that focuses on carbon dioxide reduction • The role of forest and grassland ecosystems for sequestering carbon • Lack of wildlands management plan

• • •

Better assessment of climate vulnerabilities and problems Climate concerns vary depending on the partners and the projects Community resiliency and how to adapt to rapid growth and climate change • Impacts on water supply • Impacts of population growth in the area

APPENDIX E — 2022 Flood Impacts: Map Details Citation Information Weddell, Melissa, Grau, Kara, Holland-Stergar, Patrick, Barsky, Christina S., McKeague, Lauren K. (2024). Impacts and Insights: Assessing the Aftermath of Yellowstone’s 500-Year Flood in Montana. Institute for Tourism and Recreation Research, University of Montana. Missoula, Montana. 36p.

1. Custer Gallatin National Forest (CGNF) –Hebgen Ranger District (RD) • Water released from Hebgen Dam • Minor damage to bridges, headgates, and roads • Erosion impacts due to lack of riparian vegetation The upper Madison valley and Hebgen Basin experienced some impacts, though they were not as severe as the Yellowstone headwaters. Water had to be released from Hebgen dam. Minor damage to bridges, some erosion, and minor headgate issues. Being fixed through emergency 310 permits. Biggest issues seen in areas with a lack of riparian veg, especially those areas with heavy riprap. Moving forward, working with Landowners and Forest Service staff to use LTPBR techniques for repairs.

CGNF Madison Ranger District, MT – Yes, a few roads were impacted. Need to educate the Forest Service’s roads department about how to rebuild/repair roads for connectivity in the face of climate change.

2. Paradise Valley, MT • Loss of both traditional and green riprap along banks • Cottonwood regeneration may not be successful due to the short inundation period • Opportunity to improve outdated floodplain mapping for the Yellowstone Riprap that has been around for 60 years is now gone. “Softer” green measures were also washed away. Landowners still need to be able to use/access their land. Opportunity to improve the channel migration zone for the Yellowstone River. Need to educate people about floodplains and encourage them not to put things back the “way they were”. Unsure if cottonwood regeneration is going to be successful. There was not a long period of inundation. Plus, not finding funding to get a program moving forward...a TIP takes 2 years, so it will be too late for that program to work. NRCS can only protect/improve land to the 25-year floodplain. A big post-flood challenge is coordination among agencies, landowners, NGO’s... make sure everyone is on the same page.

3. East Rosebud, Custer Gallatin National Forest (CGNF) – Beartooth Ranger District (RD) • Roads, bridges, and other infrastructure in the floodplain were demolished • The East Rosebud Creek area had damage to undersized culverts • Newer fish passage structures did withstand the floodwaters

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 19

APPENDIX F — 2022 Flood Impacts: Full Interview Responses

Roads/other hard infrastructure were destroyed by the river. Things built in the floodplain (e.g., east Rosebud system, undersized culverts, etc.). Some of the newer AOP (aquatic organism passage) structures held up (especially arch culverts with natural bottoms).

Interview Question – Was the geography that you work in impacted by the recent flood events in 2022? If so, what things (places, designs, and habitats) withstood the 4. Red Lodge, MT flooding event? What things did not?

• Entire Rock Creek drainage was drastically changed • Post-flood repairs of homes, riprap, and bridges are Island Park, ID – No, but they did get 3” of rain which was good, decreased being built in the same place water temps and minor increase in sediment.

Many things are just being put back as they were before the flood. Houses, riprap, bridges. The entire Rock Creek Yes, the NW part of the region of the Clark’s Fork drainage. Washed out beaver dams and beavers moved on. Will need to work on when and how spring run-off drainage has shifted/changed. events affect beaver restoration projects.

5. Rock Creek, Custer Gallatin National Forest (CGNF) – Pinedale, WY – Yes, there were some minor flooding events (5-10 yr flood) in Beartooth Ranger District (RD) • Lower sections of the Beartooth Highway damaged mid-June. Tore up some river restoration projects. Most remained intact. The • All major drainages of Rock Creek were impacted total volume of water was lower this year and it all came down faster than usual. by flooding For the past two years, less total water has shown up earlier than usual.

• East Rosebud Road damaged by Rock Creek Cody, WY – Yes, the mouth of the Clark’s Fork is vastly changed. The flood Lower sections of the Beartooth Highway damaged, upper wiped out trees that were confined to the valley. Fish species are resilient to this section ok. In 2005, the upper portion was damaged during type of event – distribution will change but not the population size. a rain on snow event that closed the road for the entire summer. All major drainages of Rock Creek were impacted Jackson, WY – No big impacts; a few projects may have failed due to high flows by flooding. and altered channels.

6. Cody, WY • The mouth of the Clark’s Fork River has vastly changed • Flood wiped out trees that were confined in the valley • Fish species are resilient to these types of events; distribution will change but not the population size The mouth of the Clark’s Fork is vastly changed. The flood wiped out trees that were confined to the valley. Fish species are resilient to this type of event—distribution will change but not the population size.

7. Yellowstone National Park • Loss of access to the northern range due to closed roads, including Slough Creek and lower Lamar River • Yellowstone Lake was unharmed • High number of anglers in the park—the fishing was great!

Bridget Teton National Forest, WY – There were high flows in 2017 with some impacts. In the 2022 flood, impacts were limited to areas with low elevation and high snowpack. It did not really impact day-to-day work. There have been other “microburst” events that have caused flooding of roads and campgrounds on the Gros Ventre River.

Grand Teton National Park, WY – Not really impacted by the June flooding event. Minor flooding, no real erosion issues, or stream bank loss. 2017 and 2019 floods had more impact—washed out Gros Ventre Road, 10 days of inundation and severe stream bank erosion. Good cottonwood recruitment on Snake River, improved channel morphology and riparian ecology.

Yellowstone National Park, WY – Yes, loss of access to the northern range due to closed roads. This included lower Slough Creek and lower Lamar River.

Yellowstone lake was fine. High number of anglers this summer. The fishing was great.

Yes, the southern portion of the park was impacted, not the northern portion.

Roads were destroyed in multiple locations. Park visitors Billings, MT – Recently worked at Pompei’s Pillar on the Yellowstone River. lost access to the northern range due to closed roads. This Flood modeling was way off; these will need to be redone and updated as there included the Gardiner River, lower Slough Creek, and lower was significant flooding in areas that they had not predicted.

Lamar River.

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 20

APPENDIX G — Climate Mitigation Actions

Gallatin/Madison Valleys, MT – Yes, but not as severely as the Yellowstone River area. Water had to be released from Hebgen dam. Minor damage to bridges, some erosion, and TERRESTRIAL minor headgate issues. Being fixed through emergency • Improve soil health 310 permits. Biggest issues seen in areas with a lack of • Use NRCS Best Management Practices (BMP) riparian veg, especially those areas with heavy rip rap.

• Improving soil health is a beneficial way to sequester carbon (side Moving forward, work with landowners and Forest Service benefit) staff to use low-tech process-based restoration (LTPBR) • Invasive species (plant and animal) • Reduce impacts from feral horses through removal techniques for repairs.

• Increase efforts/research on cheatgrass mitigation on the Big Horn basin (herbicides not working) Custer Gallatin National Forest—Madison Ranger • Agriculture District, MT – Yes, a few roads were impacted. We need • Work with producers to improve grazing practices and improve to educate the Forest Service’s roads department about water availability how to rebuild/repair roads for connectivity in the face of • Forests climate change.

• Forest stand improvements • Conifer encroachment mitigation Custer Gallatin National Forest—Bozeman Ranger • Decrease loss of aspen stands on the landscape through conifer District, MT – Roads/other hard infrastructure were removal destroyed by the river. Things built in the floodplain (e.g., • BLM needs to increase fire and mechanical treatments for conifer east Rosebud system, undersized culverts, etc.). Some of management the newer AOP (aquatic organism passage) structures held • USFS needs to conduct an ecotonal analysis (main fork of Rock up (especially arch culverts with natural bottoms).

Creek) that looks at fuels reduction, conifer encroachment, supports aspen growth, and landscape restoration Custer Gallatin National Forest—Beartooth Ranger • Wildfire • Improve timing of low-tech process-based restoration (LTPBR) District, MT – Lower sections of the Beartooth Highway measures post-fire for sediment control damaged, upper section ok. In 2005, the upper portion was • 1988 Yellowstone National Park fires had a hands-off mentality damaged during a rain on snow event that closed the road about the fire, this policy will need to be re-examined in our current for the entire summer. All major drainages of Rock Creek situation were impacted by flooding. E. Rosebud Road damaged by • Planning Rock Creek.

• Improve wildlands management planning • Keep landscapes connected for wildlife by removing barriers, Red Lodge, MT – Many things are just being put back as improving wildlife crossings and maintaining quality and connected they were before the flood. Houses, riprap, bridges. The habitats entire Rock Creek drainage has shifted/changed.

• With respect to terrestrial work, we need to look at both weather and climate variability Paradise Valley, MT – Riprap that has been around for – Use Rangeland Analysis Platform (gives plant composition 60 years is now gone. “Softer” green measures were also across US) washed away. Landowners still need to be able to use/ • Improve scenario planning as the climate changes access their land. Opportunity to improve the channel • Use disasters (2022 flood) and work backwards: what can we migration zone for the Yellowstone River. Need to educate mitigate?

• As things warm up, what should be on the planning horizon? people about floodplains and encourage them not to put • As we move forward, look ahead, and learn how to stay ahead of things back the “way they were”. Unsure if cottonwood changes and fix issues regeneration is going to be successful. There was not a long period of inundation. Plus, not finding funding to get a AQUATIC • Natural Water Storage program moving forward. A Targeted Implementation Plan • Manage aquifer recharge (TIP) takes 2 years, so it will be too late for that program • Increase water storage by putting more water in the ground to work. NRCS can only protect/improve land in the 25• Increase groundwater storage through managed irrigation efficiency year floodplain. A big post-flood challenge is coordination to increase return flows among agencies, landowners, and NGOs. It is important to • Use beaver dam analogs (BDA) at a very large scale make sure everyone is on the same page.

• Implement upslope LTPBR measures • Improve adaptive management—use beaver and LTPBR to enhance natural water storage (NWS) • Increase NWS capacity in the mountains • Prolong the amount of time that water sits out on the landscape • BLM needs to pursue more LTPBR projects on the landscape

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 21

•

•

•

•

– Improve subsurface flows Indian Reservation (WRIR) is only for agricultural purposes Agricultural water – The Tribal Water Code has one of its beneficial uses listed as a • Reduce demand for water by offsetting crop spiritual connection to water, honor this values with financial incentives (you want it, • Address instream flow issues on the Big Wind River you pay for it) • Address water storage issue on the WRIR • Work with irrigators to be more efficient – Wyoming knows the only place for dam sites is on the WRIR • Educate landowners how to be more efficient – Tribes do not need a permit from the State with the water they have – There have been many years of hard feelings amongst Tribal • Improve policy for water allocation ranchers and the USFWS – Monitor use of allocations • Need a stream gauge network – Keep better track of water that people are – The Tribal Water Engineer’s office can partner with the using and that they are remaining within University of WY to install stream gauging stations their water allocation • Wyoming claims that Tribes need state money to implement water • Work with the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) monitoring programs on the WRIR to find the best outcome for water ramp down • Include the Tribal perspective that water is sacred and honor the in the fall spiritual connection to water Riparian Habitat Protection – Reconnect Tribal members to this idea • Improve fencing on grazing allotments – Respect the water, water has a spirit and is powerful medicine • Reduce impacts to fish WILDLIFE • Increase resiliency of projects to high flow • Beavers events • Use beavers to enhance natural water storage (50% success with • Increase stream setbacks translocation) • Limit riparian area disturbance and increase • Re-beaver Montana shading in riparian areas • Invasive weed issues that impact wildlife • Increase shade and cover along streams and • This needs to be a big priority for the Greater Yellowstone rivers Coordinating Committee (GYCC) Wildlife Subcommittee • Fix over-widening streams • Fisheries – Plant willows and improve fencing • Removal of non-native trout – Educate private landowners • Prioritize durable projects – Maintain/install stock tanks – Example: Greybull fish passage barriers – Localize and minimize impacts • Close fisheries—potential management tool for water temperature Riverscape Restoration mitigation • Improve health of riparian systems through • Maintain resilient Snake River cutthroat (SNCT) populations at all restoration efforts life stages • Increase lateral connectivity of rivers through • Secure Yellowstone cutthroat (YCT) populations from non-native restoration efforts fish populations • Reconnect stream channels to floodplain • Try to minimize impacts to native fishery from increase in non• Improve the ecological function of rivers and native fish species (priority work in the upper Snake River) influence the hydrological budget • Install a downstream barrier on Grayling Creek and Upper Gibbon • BLM needs to shore up gully erosion through River to protect upper river refugia Zeedyk structures • Use headwater refugia for long-term persistence of native fish • LTPBR work needs to include beaver respecies location, work to change policy and laws • Tribal programs • Streamline permitting process, work on policy • Keystone species restoration, especially bison, to larger landscapes change with attention to water rights for ecosystem integrity, biodiversity, and carbon storage • Improve watershed and floodplain planning • Tribal co-management or cooperative agreements with offefforts, plan for growth reservation federal lands to meet conservation goals and priorities Tribal Water for large scale ungulate restoration and migration • Increase water protections, uses, storage and OTHER fisheries • Better understanding/education on the differences between non• Readdress Big Horn adjudication case, ask for renewable and renewable resources enforcement and adherence to the Eastern • Improve relationships with internal/external partners and stakeholders Shoshone and Northern Arapaho Tribal Water • During (Bridger Teton National Forest) BTNF plan revision—the BTNF Code should add a climate lens to all projects over the next 50 years • Support Tribes and their water code (15 • Prioritize ecological integrity goals in the new BTNF plan beneficial uses) • Educate public on reasons for using conservation practices—provide – Their water code is better than Wyoming multiple benefits (climate or not) law that states water on the Wind River

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 22

• Hard to get internal climate working groups—the support is there but Change social outlook on how water is used—include all stakeholders in this conversation hard to get staff to do this beyond their regular workload • Change minds of “old timers”—i.e. private • Hard to build climate resiliency into projects ponds • There is opposition to this type of thinking, and it is difficult to build • Educate the public about water conservation (i.e. a project that can withstand climate change flood irrigation vs. pivots) • Emphasize that climate change is happening, so we will need to • Have BOR start forecasting water levels for Jackson account for the risk in all projects Lake • How to address issues • BLM general management plan needs to adapt to a • From the ground up changing climate • Buy-in at the regional level • We are past mitigation measures and need to move • Climate adaptation needs to be a part of all job descriptions into adapting to a changing climate • Provide staff with follow-up training after workshops • Implement regional/local strategies and education • Challenge for a multi-use agency with many priorities to align with about water conservation climate change—this leads to internal inefficiencies • Example: there are three diversions all still • Generally difficult to base management decisions on predictions pulling water—is this necessary?

• What does it mean to work/manage climate change • This needs to change—just because the water • Need to continue working in wetlands and riparian areas—climate is there doesn’t mean it is OK to use it at the related or not expense of the ecosystem (not doing it the old • Within the FS, all staff need to get on the same page about climate way) change, until then it will be very difficult to convey this message to the • Use Wyoming Game and Fish (WYGF) state habitat public plan to prioritize projects with climate resiliency • Climate messaging needs to come from FS leadership to staff • Example: inventory monitoring plan for instream habitats Capacity and Funding (16) • Find small scale projects that could have larger scale • Infrastructure bill funding doesn’t come with staff: we will need to get impacts creative • Decrease/reduce greenhouse gas emissions • BIL is sending $3 billion to the USFS but they are not staffed to • Transition to renewable energy and mitigate meet this level of funding impacts to landscape • WYGF permit bottleneck—only one staff person that works on permit • Need an education and outreach person to change coordination between the ACOE and the State Water Engineer’s office hearts and minds about climate work • Capacity is an issue—work in limited by lack of staff • Use citizen science to engage people with climate • It is a lot to get either 1 or 50 projects out on the ground, since projects work are limited by efforts to get permits in place • Example: wildflower project/phenology study • Limitations to getting funding, easy to find volunteers to do the work • Find climate refugia and focus on conserving these • Timing and funding not aligned—money is there to get projects done but areas it is difficult to access it • This type of conservation will promote gene • NRCS cost sharing programs are available, but costs of materials and flow, connectivity and migration labor make projects prohibitive • Often the cost exceeds the benefits to the landowners • Lack of field staff, too many people in management • Finances and capacity are big limitations • YNP – only 6 permanent staff, 12 seasonal, so only so much project work can be accomplished in a year • Ex. Yellowstone Lake is #1 priority Climate change in the workplace (20) • Limited funding given to city governments to get work done • Leadership • A lot of time and money wasted during USFS litigation • Stubborn • Too many non-profits in the community and not enough resources to • Changing attitudes to support range work get work done efforts over timber priorities • Always need more funding and capacity • Some issues with funding and support from • BLM – no one person is dedicated to climate work, they can do what leadership they can given their capacity and lack of answers • Staff coordination across all programs •

APPENDIX H — Barriers to Climate Action

• • • •

Streamlining bureaucracy with respect to climate Politics and Policy (14) work • Entrenched thinking (we would rather fight than win) Consistent language • Work on policy that will allow us to achieve more Challenging to expand work across boundaries • NEPA permitting is a barrier—really slows down restoration process Work with BLM field offices on watershed • NEPA process slows down projects—needs to be streamlined assessments, programmatic Environmental Assessments & standardization of Nationwide Permit (NWP) 27

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 23

Ex. Blacktail Creek Trail (motorcycle use) • Create a foundational language—this is a long-term endeavor for in the upper E. Boulder goes through a wet people trying to support the projects meadow… it has taken 5 years to re-route • Indigenous sovereignty—the right of a nation to govern the the trail collection, ownership, application of its own data • Consistency with permitting • On-the-ground work is slowed by the amount of Coordination and Partnerships (12) time it takes to submit and get a permit • Coordinate/share data collection and analysis • Bureaucratic process slows progress down • USFS, local districts need to continue partnerships with local • County government has been difficult to work with governments and interests • WY Water politics are very challenging • With State Agencies—WY Drought Plan mentions 28 climate change • Tribal councils are mired in bureaucratic issues priorities—hard to connect this with work getting done in the field offices • Tribal issues with BIA and Federal agencies • Limited by expertise sitting around the table—need to activate people to • As a federal agency, it is hard to be tied to an work across divisions within the NPS ever-changing administration—this is a source of • Improve partnerships with NGO’s, agencies, and others inefficiency • Need to learn how to engage across many levels of government • Hopeful that policy (internal or legislative/funding • NPS is not set-up to manage an ecosystem as an entity related) empowers resource managers to be able to • We all need to work together to get things done at the landscape address and anticipate impacts of climate change to level the forest, its water and timber resources • Improve partnerships with Tribal governments • Grateful for the new goal in the forest plan that • States vs. Tribes – improve relationships around water rights addresses ecological integrity • Easy for USFS to get tunnel vision and only work within their own group • With the increased rate of climate change, it is • Moving forward it will be important to partner with other agencies time to expedite our work and restore habitats for water storage on the land—need to elevate this as an Public Support/ Sociological issues (11) urgent issue and reduce regulatory hurdles • Water users’ distrust of conservation staff • For now, it is better to work on finding solutions • Will need to see a paradigm shift between landowners/operators and land to policy hurdles and do the science later managers • Improve communications around place-based education (ex. Stream Scientific expertise (14) table for schools, hiring staff for community outreach (i.e. staff that • It is important to try and drill down on scientific assisted with post-flood clean-up) knowledge and apply it to project planning • Getting support for local projects/issues—how to get people to show up • Implement LTPBR as an adaptive management tool and voice concerns • Work on implementing training and protocol • Lack of community education and outreach around water (stream across the GYE setbacks, usage, or other issues) • We need more scientific data but challenging to • Work on social issues by creating better communications/Education and work with universities Outreach programs • Difficult to make any progress on forest fire work, • Lack of support for non-native fish removal (opposition to chemicals and where to make an impact? electroshocking) • Body of scientific knowledge is not keeping up with • Getting landowners to embrace change and not cling to “old” ways cheatgrass—need better tools to battle the issue • Key to successful long term work is to keep people engaged • Hard to find money sources (grants) for • Improve dialogue around climate change and drought (not going away) research • Change culture around flood irrigation and growing food for cow/calf • Need more trained weed sprayers operations • Data collection and analysis are expensive • People’s identity is tied to flood irrigation • Need specific research done on cheatgrass in SW MT vs. Great Basin Working at scale (7) • Lack of institutional knowledge—hard to know what • Hard to work across the GYE will work • It is time to increase the scale/pace of our work, for example make it easy • Limited state and federal knowledge to get 1500 BDAs on the ground first, then take a step back to evaluate • Not enough focus and inertia to get work done and do the science • Limited knowledge transfer between local • Climate work has not happened at scale due to bureaucratic challenges governments institutions • BLM – it is hard work to manage for a healthy landscape at the field • We need to learn more about TEK but there is a lack office level of capacity for this work • Hard to get permits to do BDAs at scale • Data sovereignty—need to increase trust, develop • Tough to make landscape scale changes if you are only improving redundancy, work on relationships to increase half an acre at a time workforce development • Starting landscape programs • It takes 2 years to get a TIP program up and running but can be successful –

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 24

APPENDIX I — Additional Comments about Climate Change Impacts in the GYE As mentioned in the report, the final question we asked was “Is there anything else you’d like to share about climate change in your geography, its impacts, or efforts to address it that we did not ask about?” We received a wide variety of thoughtful responses and feel that these ideas merit consideration as we moved forward with climate mitigation actions in the GYE. • • • • • • • •

All climate change evidence documented in the GYCA has been seen in Grand Teton National Park There has been an increase in the number of “shoulder season” tourists due to the increasingly longer spring and fall seasons Influx of people moving to the area due to milder winters in the GYE Climate change has both micro and macro scale impacts We need to learn how to separate what is weather variability and what is climate change Overall seeing changes to temporal and thermal regime Need to find a way to deal with small diameter wood when it is logged during a fire management project— potential biochar option Increases in fish distribution and occurrence, due to climate change, are hard to disentangle from other

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

sources like rapid development Disruption of ecosystem feedback loops will continue to degrade the landscape Water rights and instream flow issues need to be addressed.

Educate the public and agencies on the location of the floodplain along the Madison River WY rivers have a lot of intact refugia and connectivity—it is important to keep this as a stronghold for Yellowstone Cutthroat Trout and Snake River Cutthroat Trout in the face of climate change Tribes are good partners; they have a lot of institutional knowledge and good relationships BLM will be introducing some climate programs in the coming months NRCS TIP program – this will likely be the program that will be used to roll out the infrastructure bill NRCS is investing a lot of money in Climate Smart practices. USDA is doubling their budget and allowing for more staff and programs to be funded in the near future Use WaterSmart/Infrastructure funding for projects, especially precision water management Partner with the MT Climate Office/MT Mesonet to look at plant, soil, and water data to see how plant communities are affected by climate change Create climate software that is accessible to all Work with city/county entities to prepare guidelines for setbacks that protect the river from growth and development (ex. Gallatin County – Gallatin Watershed Council work) Use Natural Climate Solutions to keep carbon in the ground through intact forests and sagebrush ecosystems Use the Climate Shield dataset to reflect how climate change is affecting fish and aquatics Involve working with local municipalities (city/county)

APPENDIX J — GYCC Fisheries Subcommittee Project Checklist STEP 1: State your project goals. Next, work through the following questions and then move to Section 2.

1. How has project planning considered climate change impacts?

2. Are goals specific enough to implement monitoring and track management actions over time?

3. Is the goal informed by current watershed, genetics, distribution, and nonnative fish data?

4. Are goals time-bound? e.g., 5yrs, 10yrs, 20yrs STEP 2: Score your project: With your project in mind, read through the following section questions below and award a score of 1, 2, or 3 to each section. Next, total the three sections. Use this total score in Section 3 and again in Section 4 to expand project planning by considering climate-based management goals and action strategies.

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 25

• • • • • • • • • •

Fisheries: Health of native stock (lineage assessment, genetic variability)?

Proximity of non-natives and potential genetic introgression?

Connected to other populations?

Is genetic stock thermally flexible?

Is population fluvial or adfluvial?

Has pathology been evaluated?

AIS a current influence or expected to be low, medium, high risk?

Will angling pressure threaten populations during higher stream temperatures?

Are anglers a threat to accelerating non-native/pathogen presence?

Is the public supportive of the project/fish management goals?

Fisheries likely to: 3. Persist at current abundance. No known immediate threat of invasive species 2. Non-native invasion possible but currently no invasive presence observed 1. Native fish gone, non-native dominated, or extensive introgression identified in population

Habitat/Temps/Flow/Connectivity: What is the condition of the habitat?

Can habitat be improved and how?

Is grazing pressure an issue and will that increase?

• Are specific reaches more suitable for conservation (e.g., spring fed)?

• Will gradient become a barrier under very low flows? Will fish stranding occur?

• Ecosystem processes functional?

• Thermal refuges available?

• Are culverts and passage structures expected to remain adequate?

• Are beavers present/reintroduced?

• Are cold water tributaries connected/ passable in the project area?

• Can cold water inputs be enhanced?

• What threats will occur from wildfire?

• • •

Habitat likely to: 3. Remain or become suitable 2. Expected to marginally decline 1. Remain or become unsuitable

Climate Change/Model Predictions: How does flow permanence change in available climate modeling?

• Will the snow:rain ratio change?

• Will riparian vegetation communities change? Consider wildfire risk.

• Will substrate shift with changing terrestrial influences and vegetation communities? Consider fire frequency.

• Will aquatic habitat be affected by changing terrestrial habitat? (e.g., debris flows) • Will water use compound climate change?

• Will temperature profile shift from historic?

• Will the combination of invasive species expansion, warming stream temperatures, and extreme low flows limit habitat suitability for life stages of target species?

•

Climate influence likely to: 3. Flow to remain stable, normal spawning season, and thermal resiliency identified 2. Severe flow events and geofluvial shifts possible, spawning season potentially shifted 1. Severe flow events likely, compounded by drought, water use, and invasives

STEP 3: Climate Management Goals: Consider the listed climate-based goals or provide your own on the worksheet Section 2 score: 7—9 points • Protect climate refugia • Protect existing habitat connectivity and monitor passage • Expand/refound populations; consider genetic introduction of neighboring isolated populations • Education campaigns for areas of high conservation value to reduce threat of nonnative invasion • Public affairs outreach summaries • Technology storyboarding • Plan non-native control strategy if detection occurs

Section 2 score: 5—7 points • Reduce stream temperature fluctuation • Reduce base flow decreases • Reduce peak flow increases • Minimize adverse influence from wildfire through riparian adjacent fuels reduction • Increase natural water storage • Protect existing interconnected aquatic habitat • Prevent non-native invasion • Reduce or eliminate diversion influence and entrainment • Increase AIS awareness, install wash stations • Establish and enhance native riparian vegetation

Section 2 score: 4 points or less • Reduce uncertainty through research • Consider alteration of fishery will occur due to increasing frequency of invasive species interactions and droughts • Identify potential beaver reintroductions • Plan monitoring goals to best track fishery impacts over time.

• Monitor nonnative threats to adjacent connected habitats that might lead to further invasive spread • Analyze road networks adjacent to invaded watersheds to consider invasive relocation/introduction risks

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 26

STEP 4: Climate Action Strategies: Consider listed management strategies or provide your own on the worksheet.

Section 2 score: 7—9 points • Consider climate mitigation or passage improvement measures that can increase project area • Long term eDNA non-native/AIS monitoring implementation • Expand partnerships with public and water rights owners/users • Expansion of signage to communicate value of project region on the ground • Monitor barriers for effectiveness over time/changing conditions

Section 2 score: 5—7 points • Reduce peak flows using beaver analogs • Consider process-based restoration techniques to improve floodplain connectivity and moderate stream temperatures • Examine potential for invasive expansion into project area from adjacent invaded regions • Consider angling closures at a thermal threshold, catch-kill regulations of nonnatives • Identify water diversion structures that can be improved.

• Consider grazing exclosures where sensitive spawning habitats may be impacted

Section 2 score: 4 points or less • Reduce peak flows/enhance base flows using beaver analog structures • Relocate remaining conservation stocks/genetics to suitable habitats • Investigate water use improvements • Incorporate public awareness or check stations for invasive species presence • Evaluate potential for a watershed to be a source population for invasive species transport or pathogen vector • Expect potentially severe drought, fire, and subsequent flood disturbance(s)

STEP 1: Climate Action Strategies: What management strategies are best suited for project planning? Are there climate management strategies not listed that can be helpful to improve the likelihood of your specific project success?

GYCC-Fisheries Subcommittee Project Checklist Provisional Worksheet Project goals: 1) 2) 3) 4) STEP 2: Score your project: Using the checklist, and after reading through each section, which questions are most relevant to your project?

The intent of the question list is to guide brainstorming and promote a framework of climate smart project design. You can have your own questions and list them. Circle a score below, then total.

Habitat/Temps/Flow/Connectivity: Climate Change/Model Predictions:

Fisheries: Circle score:

1 2 3

1 2 3

1 2 3

TOTAL:

STEP 3: Climate Management Goals: Which goals are most applicable? What project goals of yours can be expanded to include climate consideration? Read through each point category on the checklist as strategies can still apply across many projects.

Section 2 score: 7—9 points

Section 2 score: 5—7 points

Section 2 score: 4 points or less

Section 2 score: 7—9 points

Section 2 score: 5—7 points

Section 2 score: 4 points or less

Modified from: Nelson, R., Cross, M., Hansen, L., Taber, G. A three-step decision framework for climate adaptation: Selecting climate informed conservation goals and strategies for native salmonids in the northern US Rockies.

Assessing Climate Change Priorities and Projects in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem | 27