McCarthy Landcover Change Final.pdf - Google Drive

To The Graduate School: The members of the Committee approve the thesis of Forrest G. McCarthy presented on March 7, 2008.

Dr. John Logan Allen, Chairperson, Faculty Emeritus, Department of Geography

Dr. Jacqueline J. Shinker, Co-Chair, Assistant Professor, Department of Geography

Dr. Daniel B. Tinker, Graduate Faculty Representative, Department of Botany

Dr. Gary P. Kofinas, Associate Professor, Institute of Arctic Biology University of Alaska Fairbanks

APPROVED:

Dr. Gerald R. Webster, Department Chair, Department of Geography

Don Roth, Dean, The Graduate School

McCarthy, Forrest G., Landcover Change in Arctic Alaska: Observations Through Repeat Photography, M.A., Department of Geography, May 2008.

Abstract: During June and July of 2006 thirty-two landscape photographs from three early explorations of Arctic Alaska were reproduced. The pairs of historic and contemporary photos provided the opportunity to observe arctic landcover change over fifty and one hundred year time periods. Qualitative photo-pair comparisons revealed: glacier and aufeis cover has decreased; lake and pond cover has both increased and decreased; observations of decreased river channel cover was more common than increased; and observations of increased tundra, shrub, and tree cover was common than decreased. The character of these observations suggests a landscape wide response to observed changes in the arctic climate.

1

LANDCOVER CHANGE IN ARCTIC ALASKA: OBSERVATIONS THROUGH REPEAT PHOTOGRAPHY

by Forrest G. McCarthy

A thesis submitted to the Department of Geography and the Graduate School of The University of Wyoming in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS In GEOGRAPHY

Laramie, Wyoming May, 2008

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This thesis is dedicated to Dr. Olaus Murie who committed his life to the conservation of Arctic Alaska, its wildlife, and its wild landscapes. Without his vision and commitment, the untrammeled arctic landscape would be very different today and this research would not have been feasible. And in his footsteps, Dr. George Schaller, who extended this commitment to the preservation of wildlife and wild places throughout the world, while never forgetting the importance of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, I owe much gratitude. Spending six weeks with Dr. Schaller in the Arctic was truly a gift. I gratefully acknowledge my committee members Dr. John Logan Allen, Dr. Jacqueline J. Shinker, Dr. Daniel B. Tinker, and Dr. Gary P. Kofinas, whose patience and guidance helped mold this thesis into a cohesive scientific paper. The inspiration for my research in this remote wilderness is largely attributed to the members of the 1956 Sheenjek expedition, including: Mardy Murie, Dr. Olaus Murie, Dr. George Schaller, Dr. Robert Krear, and Dr. Brina Kessel. Following in their footsteps a half-century later, I was joined on the 2006 Arctic Traverse by Jonathan Waterman, Dr. George Schaller, Martin Robards, and Betsy Young, and to each of them I am extremely grateful to have shared that unique journey. I would like to thank Linda Franklin formally of the Murie Center, who helped locate and digitize the 1956 Murie Expedition photographs, as well as the helpful staff at the USGS Denver Library Photo Archives. Additionally, I would like to personally acknowledge the assistance and insight provided by Janet Jorgenson, Dr. Roman Dial, and Thomas Turiano.

ii

Spending the summer in Arctic Alaska would not have been possible without the supporters of the 2006 Arctic Traverse: The National Geographic Society, The Murie Center, Patagonia, and Alpacka Raft. Above all, I would like to thank my wife, Amy McCarthy, for her support, patience, and compassion. I hit the jackpot when she agreed to marry me.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………..…….….. .....................1 1.1. Overview of the Arctic Environment …………...….……………….... .................1 1.2. Research Objectives ……………………….……….……………...…....................3 1.3. Limitations ………….………………………….…………………….....................3 1.4. Study Area ……….……………………………….……………………………….4 2. ARCTIC LANDCOVER CHANGE ……………………………….……………….….6 2.1. Glaciers …………………………………………..………………...… ...................7 2.2. Aufeis ……………………………………………………………….......................9 2.3. Lakes, Ponds, and Permafrost ………………..………………………..................11 2.4. River Channels …………………………………..……………..……...................13 2.5. Tundra …………………………………………..……………..……....................15 2.6. Shrubs ……………………………………………..………………………..……17 2.7. Trees …….…………………………………………………………… .................18 3. METHODS .…..………….…………………………………………………..... ..........21 3.1. Repeat Photography …………..…………………………………….....................21 3.2. Historic Photographs …………..……...………………...…………,… ................21 3.3. Contemporary Photographs .………..………………………...………. ................23 3.4. Photo-pair Analysis ………………………………………………….. .................23 4. RESULTS ..……………………………….………………………………….... ..........27 4.1. Glaciers ..……………...…………………………………………..….. .................27 iv

4.2. Aufeis ..…………………………………………………………..…….................28 4.3. Lakes and Ponds …..…………....…………………………..………… ................28 4.4. River Channels ......……………………………...………………..…....................29 4.5. Tundra ..………………………………………………………….….....................29 4.6. Shrubs ......…………………………………………………………..... .................30 4.7. Trees ..……………………………………………………………….. .................31 5. DISCUSSION .…………………………………………………………..……...........32 5.1. Glaciers ..……………...…………………………………………..…. ..................33 5.2. Aufeis ..…………………………………………………………..….....................34 5.3. Lakes, Ponds, and Permafrost .……………………………..……….....................35 5.4. River Channels ......……………………………...………………..…....................36 5.5. Tundra ..………………………………………………………………..................37 5.6. Shrubs ......……………………………………………………………... ...............38 5.7. Trees ..……………………………………………………………… ...................39 6. CONCLUSIONS .………………………………………………………… ................40 7. REFERENCES ..........................................................................................……. ..........42 8. PHOTO PAIRS .……………………………………………….………………...........49 9. MAPS ...…………………………………………………………………........ ...........81 10. APPENDICES ……………..……………..……………………………......... ...........84 10.1. List of Figures ……………………………………………………......................84 10.2. List of Tables ……………………………………………………...... ................86 10.3. Visible Landcover Change ……...……………………………...……. ...............86 10.4. Photograph Information ……………………………………………...................88 v

1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Overview of the Arctic Environment In 2005 an international effort of eight nations produced a comprehensive and authoritative scientific synthesis of available information about observed and projected changes in arctic climate and environment. The synthesis report, the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA), found climate change is amplified in the Arctic, resulting in average arctic temperature rise of 2-30 Celsius in the last fifty years. Additionally, the 2005 ACIA reports rapid warming is significantly altering the arctic landscape including; melting glaciers, declining snow cover, diminishing lake and river ice, thawing permafrost, and shifts in vegetation. The Arctic is unique in its biota and landscapes. The effects of extreme annual variations in insolation and temperature have driven the development of unique species, ecosystems (Stonehouse, 1989), landscapes, and hydrologic processes (Smith et al., 1989). The thermal regime controlling the abrupt threshold and phase change from ice to water at 00 Celsius limits a variety of biological and physical processes. Rapid changes in the arctic thermal regime will have considerable effects on the landscape (Hinzman et al., 2005). Due to ocean currents and atmospheric wind patterns both climate models and observations indicate global warming is amplified in the Arctic (Serrez and Barry, 2005). Climate observations during the last fifty years have documented an average trans-arctic temperature increase of 0.90 Celsius per decade. This is 50% greater than the 0.60 Celsius warming per decade for the planet. Over the last 100 years arctic precipitation has increased by about 8%, mostly in the form of rain (Serrez and Barry, 2005). 1

In the time since the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), approximately 21,000 calendar years B.P., the general trend in the Arctic has been one of warming temperatures (Ellis et al., 1984). This overall warming trend is non-linear and includes periods of both warming and cooling (Simpson et al., 2002). Treeline advanced all the way to the Arctic Ocean in the last seven thousand years B.P., during the early Holocene (Bigelow et al., 2003; MacDonald et al., 1998). In more recent history (1400-1880 A.D.) the Arctic experienced a cooler climate. This period is referred to as the Little Ice Age (LIA) (Mann et al., 2002; Overpeck et al., 1997). The climate trends since the LIA have been an overall warming with a cooler period in the first half of the 20th century and rapid warming during the second half of the 20th century. The rate of arctic warming over the last thirty years has been rapid and without precedent (ACIA, 2005). As a result of the increasing release of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere and positive feedback loops climate models forecast that arctic warming will continue to accelerate (Kattsov & Källén, 2004). Uncertainties in these models result primarily from two major variables. The first variable is anthropologic; it is unknown how much CO2 will continue to be emitted into the atmosphere (Houghton et al., 2001). The other area of uncertainty is associated with positive feedbacks that have the potential to accelerate arctic warming. These feedbacks include the release of additional CO2 and other greenhouse gasses like methane (CH4) from thawing permafrost, changes in albedo due to decreasing snowcover and sea ice, increasing plant mass, and changes in ocean currents as a result of an increasing fresh water supply into the Arctic Ocean (Callaghan et al., 2004; Serrez and Barry, 2005).

2

The response of arctic landcover to observed and projected warming is likely to be significant. By comparing historic photos to contemporary photos of the exact geographic location the responses of arctic landcover can be assessed. Photo-pairs of historic and contemporary images are created and compared in an effort to detect visible changes in a diversity of arctic landcover types. Landcover types included: glaciers, aufeis or over-flow ice, river channels, ponds, lakes, tundra, shrubs, and trees.

1.2. Research Objectives This study incorporates the use of paired-photo analysis to asses the type and extent of landcover change in arctic Alaska. The objectives of this study are: ••

Compare historic and contemporary landscape photos to detect and document changes in arctic landscape.

••

Determine what types of landcover have changed, how they have changed, and when they have changed.

1.3. Limitations This study was geographically limited by the availability of historic photographs and the itinerary of the 2006 Arctic Traverse. There are numerous historic photographs of arctic Alaska. Contemporary photographs for this study were collected during the 2006 Arctic Traverse and matched with available historic photographs. The 2006 Arctic Traverse, sponsored by the National Geographic Society, celebrated the 50th anniversary of Olaus and Margaret Murie’’s historic 1956 expedition, by returning to northern Alaska. The 2006 Arctic Traverse had a pre-arranged itinerary and historic photographs were 3

selected from those locations that would be visited during the expedition. The coastal plain offers an additional geographic challenge. While historic photographs are available for this region, they lacked defining landmarks needed for their relocation. Additional variables such as weather affected photo opportunities. The assessment of landcover change in photo-pairs is by nature somewhat subjective. In an effort to confirm changes in landcover the author, when possible, visited the exact site where current landcover appeared different from what was displayed in historic photographs. However, the scale and remoteness of the study area made this more than challenging.

1.4. Study Area The region of this study, where the photo-pairs were generated, was within the eastern half of the Brooks Range in northern Alaska (Fig. 1). The majority of the photographs were located within The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. The remaining photographs were located within Gates of the Arctic National Park. Almost all the land displayed in the photographs is part of the National Wilderness Preservation System and is managed to maintain its pristine character. Human activities are restricted to nonmotorized recreation, subsistence harvesting, scientific research, and other non-invasive activities. Logging, mining, roads, mechanized vehicles, and other forms of development are prohibited (Wilderness Act, 1964). With the exception of several photographs that display human disturbance from the Alaska Pipeline, and the accompanying Dalton Highway, the region is pristine and void of direct anthropologic change.

4

The Brooks Range runs east to west across northern Alaska. The Continental Divide, between the Arctic and Pacific Oceans, roughly follows its crest. The south slope of the range is dominated by boreal forests of white and black spruce. On the north slope of the range, trees are absent, and the landscape is covered by tundra and shrubs. Landcover on the crest of the range is limited to alpine tundra, lichen, barren ground, seasonal snow fields, and in the highest locales, glaciers. The historic photos used in this study were made during three early arctic expeditions. In 1899, as part of a USGS survey, F.C. Schrader explored the Dietrich Fork River. The Schrader photos are the farthest west and south used in this study. In 1910, on another USGS survey, E.K. Leffingwell explored the Canning River Drainage. The Leffingwell photographs are the farthest north in this study. In 1956, The Murie Expedition, sponsored by the New York Zoological Society, spent two months camped in the Sheenjek River Valley, the farthest east location in this study.

5

Fig. 1. Study Area. This study examined landcover change in the arctic region of northeast Alaska within the Brooks Range of Northeast Alaska. The location of the three photo sets from previous expeditions are shown As follows A) 1899 F.C. Schrader; B) 1919 Earnest Leffingwell; and C) 1956 Murie and Schaller. 2. ARCTIC LANDCOVER CHANGE The combined observations of diverse and substantial research on arctic climate warming, and its associated effects on the cryosphere and biosphere, provide convincing evidence for a changing arctic landscape (ACIA 2005). The observed warming 2-30 Celsius in the last fifty years in northern Alaska has been reported and predicted to alter the arctic landscape (Serrez and Barry, 2005). Landscape responses to the known warming include receding glaciers, reduced aufeis, narrower river changes, increased tundra cover, increased shrub cover, increases and decreases in tree cover, and thawing

6

permafrost, which contributes to both increased and decreased lake and pond cover (Hinzman, et. al., 2005). The overwhelming evidence is for a complex shift in landcover consistent with rapid and recent warming.

2.1. Glaciers Unlike permanent snowfields, glaciers are moving bodies of ice, a mass of snow and ice that flows mostly down-gradient due to gravity (Pielou, 1994). Glaciers contain two important zones, separated by the firn line, that differ quantitatively in the fate of their ““permanent”” ice and annual snow deposition. The accumulation zone is where more snow accumulates than is lost through melting and ablation; it is the source region for most of the glacier’’s mass balance. The ablation zone, generally below the accumulation zone, is where more ice is lost through melting and evaporation (Oerlemans, 2001); it is the zone of most ice loss. The most important measures for understanding a glacier’’s dynamics are mass balance and the elevation of the firn line (Dyurgerov, 2000). Mass balance reflects the accumulation, transport, and ablation of glacier snow and ice. Changes in mass balance indicate a glacier’’s response to climatic variation (Mayo 1984, and Oerlemans, et. al., 2000). If the mass balance is hovering near zero, then a glacier is in equilibrium with its climatic environment, the elevation of the firn line is static, and its land cover remains constant. If the mass balance is positive, the firn line descends, the glacier advances and its landcover increases. If the mass balance is negative, then a glacier is receding, the firn line is ascending, and its landcover decreases (Oerlemans, 2001).

7

Across the Circumpolar North glaciologists have documented a glacial recession (retreat from the terminus) and/or mass wastage (thinning) of arctic glaciers and ice caps (Arendt et al., 2002; Braun et al., 2004; Brown et al., 2001; Dowesdell et al., 1997; Dyurgerov et al., 2000; Jania et al., 1996; Mayo, 1984; Nolan et al., 2005; Rabus et al., 1998). Although it is generally accepted that there has been an overall decrease in glacier mass since the last glacial maximum or LGM (21,000 years before present), and more recently the Little Ice Age or LIA, recent mass balance measurements indicate the wastage of arctic glaciers is rapidly accelerating (Brown et al., 2001). More importantly, the variation among rates of mass across various regions appears to be consistent with similar variation among rates of observed warming (Hinzman, et. al., 2005). The Romanzof and Franklin Mountains of the Northeast Brooks Range (Fig.1) support the highest concentration of alpine glaciers in the Brooks Range. The McCall Glacier near Mt. Isto has been intermittently surveyed since 1956 (Rabus et al., 1998). Nolan et al.,(2004 and 2005) utilized repeat photography (Fig. 2) to document the mass wastage of the McCall Glacier, where comparison of 1958 to 2003 photos show a dramatic glacial recession and thinning.

8

Fig. 2. McCall Glacier. This photo-pair of the McCall Glacier documents a negative mass balance and the resulting recession during a 45 year time lapse. Changes in climate and the associated negative mass have led to dramatic wastage of the McCall and other glaciers in Arctic Alaska. Photos: (left) Austin Post (1958) and (right) Mathew Nolan (2003). 2.2. Aufeis Aufeis (Fig. 3), frequently called ““overflow ice”” or even ““glacier ice”” by local Alaskans, is ice that accumulates during winter along stream and river valleys by the upwelling of river water through cracked river ice, blockage behind ice dams, and by ground-water discharge through unconstrained fluvial sediments. During winter, successive freezing of the overlapping ice layers can lead to aufeis accumulations several meters thick (Wanty, 2002). Aufeis in Alaska’’s more southerly ranges melts every summer; however, in the more northerly Brooks Range, with a colder climate, lower annual insolation, and continued permafrost, aufeis may not entirely melt in some places. Indeed, there is evidence that the more massive fields of aufeis in the Brooks Range can be perennial. Harden et al., (1977) reported that remnants of the largest fields of aufeis in the Brooks Range, such as those along the Kongakut, Sagavanirktok, and Canning Rivers, existed into September 1973, and it is probable that large fields of aufeis 9

persist for more than one season. In the vicinity of Last Lake in the Sheenjek Valley, members of the 1956 Murie Expedition reported that large aufeis fields persisted throughout the summer (Krear, 1990). Several Gwich’’in elders in Arctic Village reported that aufeis fields that once persisted year-round along the Chandalar River, are now smaller or completely gone (Gilbert, 2006). Recent analysis of aufeis on the Kuparuk River utilizing SAR imagery from 1996 to 2006 indicated that 3––18% of the maximum aufeis accumulation remained at the end of the summer (Yoshikawa et al., 2007). In the Eastern Brooks Range, Yoshikawa et al.,(2007) examined the recent (100 years) historical volume of the aufeis formations through the use of narratives, photographs, satellite imagery, and isotope analyses. While Yoshikawa (et al., 2007) states the size of the aufeis formations may be different today than in the past because the cumulative volume of discharge and climatic conditions have changed, they found no evidence of an overall decrease in aufeis. Analysis of repeat aerial photography collected over the past fifty years for the Hulahula, Sadlerochit, and Kongakut Rivers indicate that the aufeis fields have not dramatically changed in either volume or extent (Fig 3). Yoshikawa (et al., 2007) concludes the formation and melting of aufeis is less sensitive to climatic change, but very sensitive to the source spring water properties such as the temperature and the volume of discharge. To further understand the history of aufeis deposits in the Brooks Range Yoshikawa (et al., 2007) collected and dated soil samples from Sadlerochit and Hulahula aufeis areas. These efforts found the extent of aufeis cover, on the North Slope of the Brooks Range, has been consistent since the LGM (Last Glacier Maxium) (Yoshikawa et al., 2007). 10

Fig. 3. Aufeis on the Hulahula River. Aerial photographs (1950 and 1979) and Landsat TM (2001) image demonstrate the historical distribution of aufeis (Yoshikawa et al., 2007). 2.3. Lakes, Ponds, and Permafrost Permafrost is soil or rock that remains below 0°C throughout the year, and forms when the ground cools sufficiently in winter to produce a frozen layer that persists throughout the following summer (Pielou, 1994). The presence of permafrost depends on both the amount of heat lost in winter due to cold winter temperatures and the amount of heat gained in summer due to high summer temperatures. Permafrost can be as thick as 500 meters (Smith, et. al., 1989). Continuous permafrost refers to areas where the permafrost is uninterrupted; discontinuous permafrost refers to areas where the permafrost is more extensive than unfrozen ground; and patchy permafrost occurs where there is some frozen ground, but mostly unfrozen (Smith, et. al., 1989). Climate is the main factor determining the existence of permafrost (Heginbottom, 2000). In the continuous permafrost on the north slope of Alaska’’s Brooks Range permafrost temperatures in boreholes have displayed a 2––40 Celsius increase over the last 50––100 years (Lachenbruch, et. al., 1986). In a similar study on the north slope of the Brooks Range, Clow et. al., (2002) found permafrost warmed 30 Celsius since the late 11

1980s. Discontinuous permafrost is also warming and thawing and extensive areas of thermokarst terrain (marked subsidence of the surface resulting from thawing of ice-rich permafrost) are now developing as a result of climatic change, particularly in boreal regions (Osterkamp et. al., 1999; Osterkamp, et. al., 2000). The thawing of permafrost is known to visibly influence arctic landscape through the formation of ice wedges and the resulting drainage or expansion of tundra ponds and lakes (Hinzman et al., 1991; McNamara et al., 1998; Kane et al., 1991; Kane et al., 2000; Jorgenson et al., 2001). An ice wedge is a narrow mass of ice that can be 3 or 4 meters wide at ground surface and extend up to 10 meters downwards. Ice wedges begin during winter when the water in the ground freezes and expands, forming cracks. In the spring when the snow melts the melt-water flows into these cracks, re-freezing almost immediately, exerting pressure on the cracks, and forcing them to widen. The following year the ground cracks again along the same weak points and again in spring the water flows in and refreezes, expanding the wedges even further (Pielou 1994). The formation of ice wedges in previously stable permafrost has been quantified through repeat photography by Jorgenson (et. al., 2006). Jorgenson et. al., (2006) used extensive aerial photographs to determine the percentage of landmass affected by ice wedges. In sites underlain by ice-rich permafrost, trees die when their roots are regularly flooded, causing wet sedge meadows, bogs and thermokarst ponds and lakes to replace forests (Jorgenson et. al., 2006). Thawing permafrost in areas with lower water tables and thinner permafrost can result in the drainage of tundra ponds (Yoshikawa and Hinzman, 2003). Yoshikawa and Hinzman (2003) documented this phenomenon using repeat aerial 12

photography near Council, Alaska (Fig. 4). Moving through three time-slices from 1950, 1981, and 2000 Yoshikawa and Hinzman (2003) show a decrease in tundra pond extent. Riorden (et. al., 2006) believes that increased evapotranspiration due to warmer and longer growing seasons is another factor associated with decreased pond and lake cover.

Fig. 4. Tundra Ponds. Numerous tundra ponds near Council, Alaska, have decreased in surface area over the last 50 years. A probable mechanism for these shrinking ponds is internal drainage through the degradation of shallow permafrost (Yoshikawa and Hinzman, 2003). 2.4. River Channels Due to the lack of stream gauges with long-term records, evidence of changes in watershed runoff in Alaska is limited. Analyses of U.S. Geological Survey data from nine stream monitoring stations in central to northern Alaska with long-term records (those with about 50 years of data) do reveal interesting, statistically significant, trends (Hinzman, et. al., 2005). Basins with a substantial glacial component consistently display increasing trends in runoff, presumably due to increases in glacier melt. River basins

13

lacking large glaciers tend to show decreasing runoff, probably because evapotranspiration rates have increased faster than increasing precipitation (Hinzman, et. al., 2005). In the past thirty years degrading permafrost has driven increased winter river flows and decreased summer peak flows (Bolton et al., 2000). Repeat photography (Fig. 5) has been used to show how increasing shrub cover may be affecting river channels causing them to become narrower, shrubbier, and more constrained (Sturm et al., 2005; Tape et al., 2006). Changes in river flows and shrubbery are the likely causes for the decreased surface area of river channels visible in photo-pairs.

Fig. 5. Decreased River Channels. Active stream channels and gravel bars in 1950 are colonized by shrubs in 2000. These images were taken near the Nimiuktuk River in northwestern Alaska (Sturm et. al., 2006). Photos: U.S. Navy (1950) and Ken Tape (2000). 14

2.5. Tundra The word tundra is derived from the Finnish word for barren or treeless land. Comprised of lichens, mosses, sedges, perennial forbs, and dwarf shrubs, tundra dominates the high artic (Stonehouse, 1989). Tundra warming experiments at the Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) site at Toolik Lake, Alaska, have shown immediate physiological and morphological responses resulting in a general increase in the stature and cover of shrubs and graminoids (Fig. 6) (Hollister et al., 2005). The experiments at Tooloik Lake manipulated temperature, nutrient availability, and light attenuation. In an effort to simulate predicted arctic warming, greenhouses were used to increase temperatures by 30 Celsius. Fertilizer was added to simulate predicted increase in nutrient availability from micro-biological activity in tundra soil. To understand the role of possible changes in cloud cover and light attenuation shade was added. The treatments revealed deciduous dwarf shrubs responded quickly to increases in temperature with the availability of nutrients a limiting factor (Chapin et. al., 1995; Hollister et. al., 2005). The experiments at Toolik Lake are a part of the larger International Tundra Experiment (ITEX). ITEX is a collaborative, multi-site experiment using a common temperature manipulation to examine variability in species response across climatic and geographic gradients of tundra ecosystems (Arft, et. al., 1999). The additional ITEX sites confirm the Toolik Lake results, shrubs were the tundra plants most responsive to environmental change (Bret-Harte, et. al., 2002). ITEX and Toolik Lake experiments both found increased temperatures drove a decline in overall biodiversity of tundra

15

communities as deciduous shrubs flourished (Bret-Harte, et. al., 2002; Hollister et. al., 2005; Wahren, et. al., 2005). Changes in the composition, biomass, and diversity of tundra composed of dwarf shrubs, sedges, grasses, mosses, and lichens would be difficult to accurately assess at the landscape scale. Tape et al.,(2006) documented the transformations of tundra communities from dwarf shrub (