@prefix dcterms: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
@prefix gcis: <http://data.globalchange.gov/gcis.owl#> .
@prefix cito: <http://purl.org/spar/cito/> .
@prefix biro: <http://purl.org/spar/biro/> .

<http://52.38.26.42:8080/report/nca3/chapter/northwest/finding/streamflow-changes-reduce-water>
   dcterms:identifier "streamflow-changes-reduce-water";
   gcis:findingNumber "21.1"^^xsd:string;
   gcis:findingStatement "Changes in the timing of streamflow related to changing snowmelt are already observed and will continue, reducing the supply of water for many competing demands and causing far-reaching ecological and socioeconomic consequences."^^xsd:string;
   gcis:isFindingOf <http://52.38.26.42:8080/report/nca3/chapter/northwest>;
   gcis:isFindingOf <http://52.38.26.42:8080/report/nca3>;

## Properties of the finding:
   gcis:findingProcess "The authors and several dozen collaborators undertook a risk evaluation of the impacts of climate change in the Northwest that informed the development of the four key messages in this chapter (see also Ch. 26: Decision Support). This process considered the combination of impact likelihood and the consequences for the region’s economy, infrastructure, natural systems, human health, and the economically-important and climate sensitive regional agriculture sector (see Dalton et al. 2013 for details). The qualitative comparative risk assessment underlying the key messages in the Northwest chapter was informed by the Northwest Regional Climate Risk Framing workshop (December 2, 2011, in Portland, OR). The workshop brought together stakeholders and scientists from a cross-section of sectors and jurisdictions within the region to discuss and rank the likelihood and consequences for key climate risks facing the Northwest region and previously identified in the Oregon Climate Change Adaptation Framework. The approach consisted of an initial qualitative likelihood assessment based on expert judgment and consequence ratings based on the conclusions of a group of experts and assessed for four categories: human health, economy, infrastructure, and natural systems.\r\nThis initial risk exercise was continued by the lead author team of the Northwest chapter, resulting in several white papers that were 1) condensed and synthesized into the Northwest chapter, and 2) expanded into a book-length report on Northwest impacts. The NCA Northwest chapter author team engaged in multiple technical discussions via regular teleconferences and two all-day meetings. These included careful review of the foundational technical input report and approximately 80 additional technical inputs provided to the NCA by the public, as well additional published literature. They also drew heavily from two state climate assessment reports.\r\nThe author team identified potential regional impacts by 1) working forward from drivers of regional climate impacts (for example, changes in temperature, precipitation, sea level, ocean chemistry, and storms), and 2) working backward from affected regional sectors (for example, agriculture, natural systems, and energy). The team identified and ranked the relative consequences of each impact for the region’s economy, infrastructure, natural systems, and the health of Northwest residents. The likelihood of each impact was also qualitatively ranked, allowing identification of the impacts posing the highest risk, that is, likelihood × consequence, to the region as a whole. The key regionally consequential risks thus identified are those deriving from projected changes in streamflow timing (in particular, warming-related impacts in watersheds where snowmelt is an important contributor to flow); coastal consequences of the combined impact of sea level rise and other climate-related drivers; and changes in Northwest forest ecosystems. The Northwest chapter therefore focuses on the implications of these risks for Northwest water resources, key aquatic species, coastal systems, and forest ecosystems, as well as climate impacts on the regionally important, climate-sensitive agricultural sector.\r\nEach author produced a white paper synthesizing the findings in his/her sectoral area, and a number of key messages pertaining to climate impacts in that area. These syntheses were followed by expert deliberation of draft key messages by the authors wherein each key message was defended before the entire author team before this key message was selected for inclusion in the report. These discussions were supported by targeted consultation with additional experts by the lead author of each message, and they were based on criteria that help define “key vulnerabilities,” including likelihood of climate change and relative magnitude of its consequences for the region as a whole, including consequences for the region’s economy, human health, ecosystems, and infrastructure.\r\nThough the risks evaluated were aggregated over the whole region, it was recognized that impacts, risks, and appropriate adaptive responses vary significantly in local settings. For all sectors, the focus on risks of importance to the region’s overall economy, ecology, built environment, and health is complemented, where space allows, by discussion of the local specificity of climate impacts, vulnerabilities and adaptive responses that results from the heterogeneity of Northwest physical conditions, ecosystems, human institutions and patterns of resource use. "^^xsd:string;
   
   gcis:descriptionOfEvidenceBase "This message was selected because of the centrality of the water cycle to many important human and natural systems of the Northwest: hydropower production and the users of this relatively inexpensive electricity; agriculture and the communities and economies dependent thereon, and; coldwater fish, including several species of threatened and endangered salmon, the tribal and fishing communities and ecosystems that depend on them, and the adjustments in human activities and efforts necessary to restore and protect them. Impacts of water-cycle changes on these systems, and any societal adjustments to them, will have far-reaching ecological and socioeconomic consequences.\r\nEvidence that winter snow accumulation will decline under projected climate change is based on 20th century observations and theoretical studies of the sensitivity of Northwest snowpack to changes in precipitation and temperature. There is good agreement on the physical role of climate in snowpack development, and projections of the sign of future trends are consistent (many studies). However, climate variability creates disagreement over the magnitude of current and near-term future trends.\r\nEvidence that projected climate change would shift the timing and amount of streamflow deriving from snowmelt is based on 20th century observations of climate and streamflow and is also based on hydrologic model simulation of streamflow responses to climate variability and change. There is good agreement on the sign of trends (many studies), though the magnitude of current and near-term future trends is less certain because of climate variability.\r\nEvidence that declining snowpack and changes in the timing of snowmelt-driven streamflow will reduce water supply for many competing and time-sensitive demands is based on: \r\n•	hydrologic simulations, driven by future climate projections, that consistently show reductions in spring and summer flows in  mixed rain-snow and some snow-dominant watersheds; \r\n•	documented competition among existing water uses (irrigation, power, municipal, and in-stream flows) and inability for all water systems to meet all summer water needs all of the time, especially during drier years; \r\n•	empirical and theoretical studies that indicate increased water demand for many uses under climate change; and\r\n•	policy and institutional analyses of the complex legal and institutional arrangements governing Northwest water management and the challenges associated with adjusting water management in response to changing conditions. \r\nEvidence for far-reaching ecological and socioeconomic consequences of the above is based on:\r\n•	model simulations showing negative impacts of projected climate and altered streamflow on many water resource uses at scales ranging from individual basins (for example, Skagit, Yakima) to the region (for example, Columbia River basin);\r\n•	model simulations of future agricultural water allocation in the Yakima and the Snake River Basin, showing increased likelihood of water curtailments for junior water rights holders;\r\n•	model and empirical studies documenting sensitivity of coldwater fish to water temperatures, sensitivity of water temperature to air temperature, and projected warming of summer stream temperatures;\r\n•	regional and extra-regional dependence on Northwest-produced hydropower; and\r\n•	legal requirements to manage water resources for threatened & endangered fish as well as for human uses.\r\nEvidence that water users in managed mixed rain-snow basins are likely to be the most vulnerable to climate change and less vulnerable in rain-dominated basins is based on: \r\n•	observed, theoretical, and simulated sensitivity of watershed hydrologic response to warming by basin type;\r\n•	historical observations and modeled simulations of tradeoffs required among water management objectives under specific climatic conditions;\r\n•	analyses from water management agencies of potential system impacts and adaptive responses to projected future climate; and \r\n•	institutional and policy analyses documenting sources and types of management rigidity (for example, difficulty adjusting management practices to account for changing conditions).\r\n"^^xsd:string;
   
   gcis:assessmentOfConfidenceBasedOnEvidence "Confidence is very high based on strong strength of evidence and high level of agreement among experts. See specifics under “description of evidence” above."^^xsd:string;
   
   gcis:newInformationAndRemainingUncertainties "A key uncertainty is the degree to which current and future interannual and interdecadal variations in climate will enhance or obscure long-term anthropogenic climate trends.  Uncertainty over local groundwater or glacial inputs and other local effects may cause overestimates of increased stream temperature based solely on air temperature. However, including projected decreases in summer streamflow would increase estimates of summer stream temperature increases above those based solely on air temperature. Uncertainty in how much increasing temperatures will affect crop evapotranspiration affects future estimates of irrigation demand. Uncertainty in future population growth and changing per capita water use affects estimates of future municipal demand and therefore assessments of future reliability of water resource systems. A major uncertainty is the degree to which water resources management operations of regulated systems can be adjusted to account for climate-driven changes in the amount and timing of streamflow, and how competing resource objectives will be accommodated or prioritized. Based on current institutional inertia, significant changes are unlikely to occur for several decades. There is uncertainty in economic assessment of the impacts of hydrologic changes on the Northwest because much of the needed modeling and analysis is incomplete. Economic impacts assessment would require quantifying both potential behavioral responses to future climate-affected economic variables (prices of inputs and products) and to climate change itself. Some studies have sidestepped the issue of behavioral response to these and projected economic impacts based on future scenarios that do not consider adaptation, which lead to high estimates of “costs” or impacts."^^xsd:string;

   a gcis:Finding .

## This finding cites the following entities:


<http://52.38.26.42:8080/report/nca3/chapter/northwest/finding/streamflow-changes-reduce-water>
   cito:cites <http://52.38.26.42:8080/report/usbr-secure-2011>;
   biro:references <http://52.38.26.42:8080/reference/67b69161-5101-418a-a6c9-1b6a80773305>.

<http://52.38.26.42:8080/report/nca3/chapter/northwest/finding/streamflow-changes-reduce-water>
   cito:cites <http://52.38.26.42:8080/article/10.1007/s10584-010-9846-1>;
   biro:references <http://52.38.26.42:8080/reference/43f67f10-aff3-4d61-8d87-a883adb24771>.

<http://52.38.26.42:8080/report/nca3/chapter/northwest/finding/streamflow-changes-reduce-water>
   cito:cites <http://52.38.26.42:8080/report/usgcrp-ti-climatechange-northwest-2013>;
   biro:references <http://52.38.26.42:8080/reference/a2135da9-c8b1-486f-9656-59d8a52b1975>.

<http://52.38.26.42:8080/report/nca3/chapter/northwest/finding/streamflow-changes-reduce-water>
   cito:cites <http://52.38.26.42:8080/report/orclimchframework-2010>;
   biro:references <http://52.38.26.42:8080/reference/7450bfd8-54cc-4c42-8058-7ae93f7692a5>.

<http://52.38.26.42:8080/report/nca3/chapter/northwest/finding/streamflow-changes-reduce-water>
   cito:cites <http://52.38.26.42:8080/report/nca-workshoprisk-2012>;
   biro:references <http://52.38.26.42:8080/reference/429802a3-633d-447c-874c-250ae4ee0003>.

<http://52.38.26.42:8080/report/nca3/chapter/northwest/finding/streamflow-changes-reduce-water>
   cito:cites <http://52.38.26.42:8080/report/waccia-2009>;
   biro:references <http://52.38.26.42:8080/reference/219520b8-3d2e-40bf-8c39-fb51ded544d8>.

<http://52.38.26.42:8080/report/nca3/chapter/northwest/finding/streamflow-changes-reduce-water>
   cito:cites <http://52.38.26.42:8080/report/oregonstateu-ocar-2010>;
   biro:references <http://52.38.26.42:8080/reference/2ac1bce9-7e8e-41f5-a3ed-617646370b8c>.