The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the view of The Hill

The survival of iconic American birds depends on the future of national parks

by David Yarnold, opinion contributor - 03/25/18 12:30 PM ET

By mid-century, America’s national parks are going to become some of the most critical sanctuaries for birds struggling to adapt to climate change and human development. A groundbreaking new study by the National Audubon Society and the National Park Service looked at 274 national parks and sends a clear message: It’s more important than ever for the managers of these great natural landscapes to make decisions that anticipate the changes birds and people are likely to see.

On average, one quarter of the birds now found in some of America’s best-loved national parks could be completely different by 2050 if carbon emissions continue at their current pace. That’s because changing climate will draw more species of birds into some parks and push other species out. In many parks, the changes will be far more dramatic. Wind Cave National Park in Wyoming could see a whopping 40 percent change in its bird species populations.

{mosads}The study covered national park properties from Acadia National Park in Maine to the Everglades in Florida, from Denali National Park in Alaska to the Grand Canyon in Arizona. Scientists found that a national park may gain an average of 42 new species in winter because of temperature and precipitation changes. In some parks birds may choose to stop migrating and stay year-round. On the other hand, more than half of the parks could lose an average of 17 summer species per park due to unsuitable climate conditions.

On nature’s clock that is extraordinary turnover in the blink of an eye. But why does it matter if birds are forced to change where they live or breed?

Audubon’s Birds and Climate Change Report, published in September 2014, found that more than half of our North American birds are threatened by global warming, and many will be driven toward extinction if we do not act. National parks can play an outsized role in giving birds their best chance of survival in a changing climate. However, the federal government and National Park Service managers must begin efforts now to prepare the parks to accommodate the new species likely to move in and help preserve habitat for existing species that might be enticed to stay.

In the new study, scientists used data from Audubon’s Christmas Bird Count and the North American Breeding Bird Survey, two of the oldest volunteer-based bird counts in the U.S. and Canada. Each park’s projected changes in bird communities for winter and summer create a road map for beginning and expanding efforts to better provide safe havens for birds in the coming decades.

These calculations assume that the world continues on its current path and fails to cut greenhouse emissions. If government policies and public actions reduce carbon pollution, scientists found that the impact on birds and parks would be far less drastic. But, if for political and economic reasons, we can’t count on the best-case scenario, we have to prepare for worst-case scenarios.

So what do those scenarios look like and what can we do about them?

Maine’s Acadia National Park may find its wetlands, lakes and coastline more crowded as water birds like the Pied-billed Grebe and American Bittern skip their southern migrations and winter in Maine instead. Managers of Acadia National Park could work to maintain the park’s wetlands to prepare for the coming influx of winter water birds.

With warming forests, Virginia’s Shenandoah National Park could become a winter haven for many species including the Common Yellowthroat and Vesper Sparrow. But birds such as thrushes and warblers may find the park unsuitable for raising their young in the hotter summers.

In South Dakota’s rugged Badlands National Park, hotter conditions may trigger declines in many grassland birds, like the Sharp-tailed Grouse, Horned Lark and Burrowing Owl. At the same time, species more adapted to the arid Great Plains the Southwest may push into its borders. Preserving healthy grasslands in Badlands National Park will give all birds the best chance possible to survive and thrive.

Many of these solutions are plain common sense. But they cannot happen without planning and financial resources. Congress and the administration need to provide sufficient support to keep our national parks healthy, well maintained and protected from encroaching development.

To do that, the administration must stop its unprecedented attacks on our national heritage, cutting the size of some parks and opening others to damaging mineral extraction. In Utah, for example, reducing the protections for Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monuments could jeopardize climate-threatened species like the Golden Eagle and Mountain Bluebird.

Congress should reauthorize the Land and Water Conservation Fund, which has been one of America’s great conservation stories and has received strong bipartisan support from Republicans and Democrats. No other conservation program benefits so many places — including national parks — or people from all walks of life. And it doesn’t cost the taxpayers a dime. The money comes from a small portion of the billions of dollars in annual oil and gas royalties from offshore exploration and drilling.

The future of this extraordinary program depends on action from Congress, which this year must renew the program’s very existence by passing a reauthorization bill. Congress also must ensure that money designated for the program isn’t siphoned off by other non-related programs — as regularly occurs.

And this is not just about the birds. Protecting and improving our parks also improves conditions for the more than 331 million people who visit national parks each year, and the 318,000 local jobs that depend on our national parks.

Over the last century, Republican and Democratic presidents and lawmakers have worked together to protect our national parks — national treasures valued by all Americans. It’s hard to imagine the Grand Canyon without Bald Eagles soaring over the Colorado River, but that’s our future if we don’t listen to what birds tell us.