HomeMy WebLinkAboutresolution.council.035-05 RESOLUTION NO.~'
Series of 2005
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING AN
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN,
COLORADO, AND THE ASPEN GLOBAL CHANGE INSTITUTE, AND AUTHORIZING
THE CITY MANAGER OR MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID DOCUMENT ON BEHALF OF
THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO.
WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council an Agreement for Professional
Services bewteen the City of Aspen and the Aspen Global Change Institute, a copy of which
Agreement is annexed hereto and made a part thereof.
NOW, WHEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
Section One
That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves a Professional Services
Agreement between the City of Aspen, Colorado and The Aspen Global Change Institute, a copy
of which Agreement is annexed hereto, and does hereby authorize the City Manager or Mayor of
the City of Aspen to execute said Agreement on behalf of the City of Aspen in substantially the
form as appended hereto.
Dated: ~ ~t/
I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is
a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen,
Colorado, at a meeting held ~ ~-~._~ ,2005.
Kathryn S. Koch/City Clerk '
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
This Agreement made and entered on the date hereinafter stated, between the CITY
OF ASPEN, Colorado, ("City") and the Aspen Global Change Institute (AGCI),
("Professional").
For and in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties agree
as follows:
Scope of Work. Professional shall perform in a competent and professional
manner the Scope of Work as set forth and attached hereto and by this reference
incorporated herein.
Completion. Professional shall commence work immediately upon receipt
of a written Notice to Proceed fi.om the City and complete all phases of the Scope of Work
as expeditiously as is consistent with professional skill and care and the orderly progress of
the Work in a timely manner. The parties anticipate that all work pursuant to this agreement
shall be completed no later than March 1, 2006. Upon request of the City, Professional shall
submit, for the City's approval, a schedule for the performance of Professional's services
which shall be adjusted as required as the project proceeds. ·
Payment. In consideration of the work performed, City shall pay
Professional on a time and expense basis for all work performed. The City shall review such
invoices and, if they are considered incorrect or untimely, the City shall review the matter
with Professional within ten days fi.om receipt of the Professional's bill. The total
compensation under this agreement shall not exceed $t~t>. o7_~ under any circumstances.
Termination. The Professional or the City may terminate this Agreement,
without specifying the reason therefore, by giving notice, in writing, addressed to the other
party, specifying the effective date of the termination. No fees shall be earned after the
effective date of the termination. Upon any termination, all finished or unfinished
documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs, reports or other
material prepared by the Professional pursuant to this Agreement shall become the property
of the City. Notwithstanding the above, Professional shall not be relieved of any liability to
the City for damages sustained by the City by virtue of any breach of this Agreement by the
Professional, and the City may withhold any payments to the Professional for the purposes
of set-offuntil such I/me as the exact amount of damages due the City fi-om the Professional
may be determined.
Independent Contractor Status. It is expressly acknowledged and understood
by the patties that nothing contained in this agreement shall result in, or be construed as
establishing an employment relationship. Professional shall be, and shall perform as, an
independent Contractor who agrees to use his or her best efforts to provide the said services
on behalf of the City. No agent, employee, or servant of Professional shall be, or shall be
deemed to be, the employee, agent or servant of the City. City is interested only in the
results obtained under this contract. The manner and means of conducting the work are
under the sole control of Professional. None of the benefits provided by City to its
employees including, but not limited to, workers' compensation insurance and
unemployment insurance, are available from City to the employees, agents or servants of
Professional. Professional shall be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for the acts
of Professional's agents, employees, servants and subcontractors during the performance of
this contract. Professional shall indemnify City against all liability and loss in connection
with, and shall assume full responsibility for payment of all federal, state and local taxes or
contributions imposed or required under unemployment insurance, social security and
income tax law, with respect to Professional and/or Professional's employees engaged in the
performance of the services agreed to herein.
Completeness of Agreement. It is expressly agreed that this agreement contains the
entire undertaking of the parties relevant to the subject matter thereof and there are no verbal
or written representations, agreements, warranties or promises pertaining to the project
matter thereof not expressly incorporated in this writing.
Notice. Any written notices as called for herein may be hand delivered to
the respective persons and/or addresses listed below or mailed by certified mail return
receipt requested, to:
City:
City Manager
City of Aspen
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Professional:
Street Address
City, State & Zip Code__
Non-Discrimination. No discrimination because of race, color, creed, sex,
marital status, affectional or sexual orientation, family responsibility, national origin,
ancestry, handicap, or religion shall be made in the employment of persons to perform
services under this contract. Professional agrees to meet all of the requirements of City's
municipal code, Section 13-98, pertaining to non-discrimination in employment.
Waiver. The waiver by the City of any term, covenant, or condition hereof
shall not operate as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term. No
term, covenant, or condition of this Agreement can be waived except by the written consent
of the City, and forbearance or indulgence by the City in any regard whatsoever shall not
constitute a waiver of any term, covenant, or condition to be performed by Professional to
which the same may apply and, until complete performance by Professional of said term,
covenant or condition, the City shall be entitled to invoke any remedy available to it under
this Agreement or by law despite any such forbearance or indulgence.
Execution of Agreement by City. This agreement shall be binding upon all
parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns.
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, this agreement shall not be
binding upon the City unless duly executed by the Mayor of the City of Aspen (or a duly
authorized official in his absence) following a Motion or Resolution of the Council of the
City of Aspen authorizing the Mayor (or a duly authorized official in his absence) to execute
the same.
General Terms.
(a) It is agreed that neither this agreement nor any of its terms,
provisions, conditions, representations or covenants can be modified, changed, terminated or
amended, waived, superseded or extended except by appropriate written instrument fully
executed by the parties.
(b) If any of the provisions of this agreement shall be held invalid, illegal
or unenforceable it shall not affect or impair the validity, legality or enforceability of any
other provision.
(c) The parties acknowledge and understand that there are no conditions
or limitations to this understanding except those as contained herein at the time of the
execution hereof and that after execution no alteration, change or modification shall be made
except upon a writing signed by the parties.
(d) This agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of
Colorado as fzom time to time in effect.
1N WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed, or caused to be executed by
their duly authorized officials, this Agreement in three copies each of which shall be deemed
an original on the date hereinafter written.
]SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
ATTESTED BY: CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
PROFESSIONAL:
WITNESSED BY:
Climate Change and the City of Aspen: An Assessment of Impacts
and Potential Responses
Submitted to:
Lee Cassin
Director
Aspen Environmental Health Department
City of Aspen
Aspen, Colorado
for consideration by:
Aspen City Council
23 May 2005
Prepared by:
John Katzenberger
Aspen Global Change Institute
100 East Francis
Aspen, Colorado
(970) 925 7376
Joel Smith
Stratus Consulting Inc.
1881 9th Street, Suite 201
Boulder, CO 80302
(303) 381-8000
and
William R. Travis
Center of the American West
University of Colorado, Boulder
(303) 492-6312
Aspen Climate Change Impact Assessment Proposal 22 May 2005
Introduction
Climate has been a key factor in Aspen, Colorado's growth and prosperity. While mining first
put Aspen on the map, skiing was the centerpiece that allowed Aspen to become a world famous
resort. Aspen's natural beauty, terrain, long ski season, and good quality of snow combine to
make the city an international destination for skiers. Aspen is also a vibrant cultural and
intellectual community, and a gathering place for leading thinkers in business, science, and the
arts, and this has fueled other dimensions of Aspen's economy. Aspen's attractive physical and
social climate have also made it a summer resort.
Aspen is also forward looking: the community has taken on persistent problems, like affordable
housing, transportation, and environmental quality in an effort to achieve a sustainable
development. One threat to this is climate change. As a result of human activities, the earth's
climate is changing. Primarily because of the burning of fossil fuels, but also as a result of
deforestation and other human activities, the concentration of greenhouse gases in the
atmosphere has increased since the onset of the Industrial Revolution. This has led to a warming
of the Earth's climate and a change in climate patterns. An international consensus of scientists
agrees that haman activities are changing the climate, and good progress has been made in
projecting these changes decades into the future [see, for example, the report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Houghton et al., 2001)]. As a result governments
around the world, from local to national, are taking action by assessing current and future
impacts and planning for change, while simultaneously working to reduce the human causes of
change, such as greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel combustion.
Mountain environments may be especially vulnerable to global warming, given the tight link
between temperature and the biotic and abiotic processes that control montane ecosystems
(Watson et al., 1998; Reiners et al., 2003; Hobbs et al., 2004;). Climate change has long been
seen as a potential threat to snowpacks and ecosystems in the American West. Gleick (1990)
projected that higher temperatures would result in earlier snowmelt and could result in decreased
snowpacks in the West. This conclusion has been replicated in many studies such as Miller et al.
(2003) and Dettinger et al. (2004). Climate change may also result in major changes in the
location and productivity of western ecosystems (e.g., Bachelet et al., 2001). Lenihan et al.
(2003) found that the frequency and intensity of fires in the West could dramatically increase as
a result of climate change.
The U.S. Global Change Research Program's regional assessment for the Rocky Mountain/Great
Basin area (Wagner, 2003), concluded that higher temperatures would substantially shorten the
ski season and could add significant costs to ski operations, which would not only dissuade
skiers but have a ripple effect on other dimensions of resorts tied to skiing, such as the second
home market. It is reasonable to expect that an increase in temperatures would significantly
affect Aspen's ski sector and associated elements of the economy. More precipitation will fall as
rain rather than snow, the snowpack is likely to accumulate later in the fall, and snowmelt is
likely to begin earlier in the spring. Thus, the ski season could be shortened and lower altitude
ski areas and runs could be particularly at risk of late openings and earlier closings.
Recognizing the sensitivity of Aspen to climate change and the fact that human activities are
changing the climate, the Aspen City Council passed the "Canary Initiative" on March 16, 2005.
Aspen Climate Change Impact Assessment Proposal 22 May 2005 2
This initiative pledges the city to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions and to take steps to reduce
its vulnerability to climate change. The initiative also calls for the performance of an "integrated
scientific assessment specific to the Aspen area on the likely consequences to Aspen of global
warming over the course of the 21st century." This proposal begins the process of assessing the
potential consequences of climate change in order to reduce Aspen's vulnerability. In the context
of the larger Canary Initiative it is designed to provide information for decision-makers and other
stakeholders as they consider ways both to reduce global warming and to make Aspen's human
and ecological communities more resilient to changes likely to occur even as society attempts to
stabilize climate over the next century.
Proposed Work
The Aspen Global Change Institute (AGCI) proposes to lead an effort to study the potential
impacts of climate change on Aspen's future as a resort. The study will address the following
questions:
(1) How can climate change affect the length and quality of the ski season?
Are there climate thresholds for skiing, e.g., maximum temperatures, or
precipitation levels above or below which ski days substantially decrease?
What is the probability of an increase in temperature or decrease in precipitation
large enough to exceed such thresholds? When might these thresholds be
exceeded?
How will the change affect different elevations and areas?
How might climate change affect Aspen's ability to meet its environmental goals?
(2) What ecological impacts of climate change, such as forest fires, could affect skiing and other
aspects of Aspen's resort economy?
(3) How sensitive is Aspen's economy and other aspects of community well-being to climate
changes that affect skiing or Aspen's other natural and social capital?
(4) What options exist, over what time horizons, to adjust Aspen's economy to changes in
climate?
Project Team and Advisory Panel
The AGCI will form an assessment team coordinated by John Katzenberger to carry out this
study. The co-principal investigators will be Joel Smith at Stratus Consulting Inc. in Boulder,
and William Travis at the Center of the American West at the University of Colorado, Boulder.
AGCI, Stratus Consulting, and the Center of the American West will engage other researchers as
needed, to form an interdisciplinary team of experts. They include:
Aspen Climate Change Impact Assessment Proposal 22 May 2005 3
Bill Travis, geography
Joel Smith, environmental policy and decision analysis
Constance Travers, hydrology
Brain Lazar, hydrologic modeling
Russell Jones, geographic information systems
Diana Lane, ecology
Katherine LeJeune, ecology & bi0geochemistry
Rob Wilby, climate modeling
Tom Wigley, climate modeling
Mark Williams, snow dynamics, modeling
Hannah Gosnell, geography
Gabe Preston, geography, geography, resort planning
Andrew Klotz, geography, resort economics
Jonathan Lowsky, ecology
Dennis Ojima, ecological modeling
The National Advisory Panel will include:
Linda Joyce, USDA Forest Service
Ruby Leung, Battelle-Pacific Northwest Laboratories
Hadi Dowlatabadi, University of British Columbia
Ron Nielson, USDA Forest Service
Jerry Meehl, National Center for Atmospheric ResearchNick Flores, University of Colorado
Linda Meams; National Center for Atmospheric Research
Dan Cayan, University of California - San Diego/Scripps (invited)
Steve Schneider, Stanford University
Mike MacCracken, former head National Assessment Coordination Office, USGCRP (invited)
John Harte, Rocky Mountain Biological Lab (invited)
The Advisory Panel will be invited to participate in a science workshop at the Aspen Global
Change Institute for technical presentations and discussions relevant to the work of this proposal
(Task 7). In addition they will provide general advice as needed to the team.
The panel will form into several sub-groups:
1. A climate modeling advisory group consisting of Steve Schneider, Jerry Meehl, Dan Cayan
(invited), Ruby Leung, Linda Meams, and Mike MacCracken (invited). The climate modeling
group will advise on the selection of GCMs, RCMs, emission scenarios, downscaling methods,
and drivers for the local scale models -- basically help with the climate modeling work-plan.
The climate modeling group will also review the interpretation of the modeling results as applied
to Aspen that are utilized in the final report.
2. An ecological advisory group consisting ofRon Nielson, Linda Joyce, and John Harte
(invited) to provide advice on the approach (use of models if any, selection of relevant literature,
etc.) and the interpretation of the ecological impacts section of the work before it is utilized in
building the report.
Aspen Climate Change Impact Assessment Proposal 22 May 2005 4
3. An economic advisory group consisting of Roz Naylor and Nick Flores to provide advice on
the work that Center for the American West team is involved with regarding the socio-economic
components of the report.
An editorial board for the report that consists of Susan Joy Hassol and Randy Udall -- both
serving on the Aspen Global Warming Alliance formed as part of the Canary Initiative -- and
Steve Schneider from the advisory panel, will advise AGCI in completing Task 8.
Project Tasks
The project will involve eight tasks, as described below.
Task 1: Stakeholders Meeting (Lead: Aspen Global Change Institute)
The first step will be a meeting of stakeholders in Aspen to discuss objectives and structure for
the project. The stakeholders will be defined by AGCI, Canary Initiative's Global Warming
Alliance, and the City of Aspen. It is anticipated that the stakeholders group will include
members of the business community, the non-profit arts, education, and environmental
organizations, government (staff and elected officials, the Global Warming Alliance, and
concerned public. A key outcome of the meeting will be to define the potential impacts of
climate change that are of concern for the stakeholders, inform the group of the type of climate
and impact projections to be used, and start the discussion about possible adaptations. The
discussion will also address the results and levels of confidence that can be provided within the
scope of the proposed analysis.
Task 2: Analyze Baseline and Trends (Lead: Center of the American West)
In response to stakeholder concerns and drawing on a current understanding of mountain resort
development, we will analyze baseline conditions and trends in key indicators of Aspen's
economy. We will conduct an economic base analysis by canvassing of existing studies and
collecting appropriate public and private sector data. We will use check this analysis with related
resort and mountain community literature, and through interviews with Aspen climate change
stakeholders. We will in particular examine the ski sector, including trends in skier numbers and
other measures of ski resort activities and related resort indicators such as taxable sales, lodging,
and employment. Special attention will be paid to whether climate variation may be a factor in
current trends and how sensitive the economy is to climate variation. (Sensitivity implies both
impact and recovery, or what may be termed resilience, e.g., the effects of the economic down-
turn in 2001-2002 and recovery in subsequent years).
We will then examine, in conjunction with the stakeholders, future scenarios for the ski sector
and Aspen's overall development as a resort, assuming no further change in climate.
Finally, in this task we will examine data and literature on resort trends and climate impacts
(there is a growing literature on the subject, especially from Europe) to determine if we can
gauge thresholds at which impacts will become significant. These thresholds could be
temperature levels above which or precipitation levels below which skier days substantially
decrease. We will also work with the ski sector and other stakeholders and experts to use their
expert judgment in identifying these thresholds.
Aspen CHmate Change Impact Assessment Proposal 22 May 2005 5
Task 3: Selection of Climate Change Scenarios (Lead: Stratus Consulting)
Our goal is to develop scenarios of climate change for the Aspen area that reflect probabilities
and uncertainties about future changes in temperature and precipitation. We will first review the
state of knowledge about how climate in the Aspen area may change. We will examine literature
on the probability distribution of changes in global mean temperature, such as Wigley and Raper
(2001) and new results from the national program underway (North American Climate Change
Assessment Program (NARCCAP) under the direction of Linda Mearns at the National Center
for Atmospheric Research. These studies consider various greenhouse gas emission scenarios
and sensitivities of global mean temperature to increased greenhouse gas concentrations.
Working with the climate modeling advisory panel, we will select scenarios of potential future
climate conditions in the Roaring Fork Valley. This may include using general cimulation model
output, GCM output from MAGICC/SCENGEN, statistical downscaling of GCMs, or regional
climate models (RCMs). The assessment will utilize the recent RCM work of Ruby Leung of
the Pacific Northwest Laboratory
To assess near-term and longer-term impacts, we will develop climate change scenarios for the
following years:
2015
2025
2050
2075
2100.
The scenarios are proposed to be 25 years apart after 2025 because of the greater uncertainty
about future socioeconomic conditions after approximately a quarter of a century and because of
an expressed desire for more frequent information about conditions in the next few decades.
Joel Smith will coordinate the activities of the modeling team and integrate the input from the
advisory panel climate modeling group for this task. Tom Wigley of the National Center for
Atmospheric Research will be an advisor on the project. Dr. Rob Wilby will develop a scenario
using the Statistical Downscaling Model.
Task 4: Snowpack Modeling (Lead: Stratus Consulting)
We will develop and apply snowpack models and determine relationships with key climate
variables and apply them to an analysis of the four area ski mountains. We propose using the
Snowmelt Runoff Model (SRM; developed and maintained by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture Agricultural Research Service; Martinec, 1975; Martinec et al., 1994; SRM web site)
as our main model to examine four ski areas in the Roaring Fork Valley and the SNTHERM
model to obtain detailed information about one mountain. SNTHERM sacrifices simplicity for
complicated measurements and algorithms. The model was developed by Rachel Jordan, U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory.
SRM is focused on surface processes, and is specifically designed to assess snow coverage and
snow-melt runoff patterns.
Aspen Climate Change Impact Assessment Proposal 22 May 2005
The model requires GIS information (including a digital elevation model and land use/land
cover) for implementation. SRM includes a climate-change evaluation module, and uses current
snow cover from satellite imagery as a basis for predicting snow cover and runoff from a
changed climate. Required input data include:
Areas and elevations of hydrologic response units (HRUs) to be simulated
Current snow-covered areas (daily values)
Daily average or maximum/minimum temperatures
Daily precipitation
Degree-day factor
Temperature lapse rate
Critical temperature at which snow becomes rain.
The SRM model can predict variations in snowpack characteristics and nmoff volumes on
timescales ranging from short-term (weekly) to monthly or seasonal. Changes in predicted
temperature and precipitation under a climate change scenario can then be incorporated into the
model to evaluate changes in snowpack depth and spatial coverage
SNTHERM is a process driven, one dimensional energy and mass balance point model, as
opposed to the more simplified temperature-index approach to modeling snowpack. The model
runs on measured data, in contrast to empirical models (SRM), which run on only a few
measured parameters and then rely on calibration parameters.
SNTHERM takes initial snowpack conditions and observed meteorological conditions over a
given time period, and using mathematical equations based on known physical processes,
calculates melt and other snowpack fluxes. Parameters in SNTHERM that remain constant
through the period of interest are: elevation, slope incline and aspect, and surface roughness.
The state variables (those that do change with time) are: snow density, grain size, snow depth,
and snow temperature. Meteorological variables are used to drive the model, and these driving
variables are then distributed to each landscape type class, which are defined by the user, and can
include aspect, elevations, vegetative cover, etc.
We will use SRM to estimate changes for the four Aspen mountains in snow covered area (SCA)
and snowpack depth throughout the length of the season, in different elevation bands. Runoff
will also be estimated for a selected number of seasons. SNTHERM will be selectively applied
to one of the mountain areas during one or more selected seasons in order to estimate variations
in snow quality and depth due to changes in inclines, aspects, and landscape types. We will also
provide maps and graphs of model outputs.
Brian Lazar of Stratus Consulting will be the lead analyst on this task. Mark Williams, a snow
and alpine geomorphologist at the University of Colorado, will serve as an advisor on applying
the results of the model to the specific Aspen ski area settings.
Task 5: Analysis of potential ecological impacts of climate change on Aspen's forests (Lead:
Stratus Consulting)
We will examine how Aspen's forests could be affected by climate change through a review of
the literature and consultation with experts. The review will focus on the potential for
Aspen Climate Change Impact Assessment Proposal 22 May 2005
7
catastrophic impacts of climate change on forests. These impacts would need to be large enough
to affect skiing and other aspects of Aspen's resort economy. Large fires or dieback from
invasion of pests or disease may be examples of such catastrophes. Our definition of what
changes in forests would be catastrophic will be refined in Task 2.
In addition, we will look at shifts in the boundaries and productivity of major ecosystem types
(e.g., alpine vegetation shifting to boreal forest) that are predicted to result from climate change.
This type of vegetation modeling is typically done at broad spatial scales (e.g., 10 km2
resolution). The results of this work could predict potential changes in ecosystem types in the
Aspen area, but would not make specific predictions about vegetation shifts in individual
locations.
We will examine studies of vegetation change using a range of climate change scenarios that
include relatively wet and dry scenarios. Because we will rely on existing vegetation simulations,
the climate change scenarios will not be identical to the ones developed in Task 3, but we will
attempt to bracket the range of climate possibilities.
Drs. Diana Lane and Katherine LeJeune will conduct this analysis. Drs. Linda Joyce of the U.S.
Forest Service and Dennis Ojima of the Natural Resources Ecology Lab have agreed to serve as
advisors on this task. We will also enlist Dr. Ron Neilson of the U.S. Forest Service to serve as
an advisor. Additional work on the local impacts to wildlife will be conducted by Jonathan
Lowsky of Wildlife and Wetland Solutions, LLC.
Task 6: Impact and Adaptations Analysis (Lead: Center of the American West)
We will analyze the implications of changes in season length, snowpack, and forest ecology on
the ski sector and other aspects of Aspen's resort economy. Two questions apply to this and
similar climate impact studies:
1. What are the likely impacts of projected climate change? This is projected over time given the
range of potential climate effects (described above), and assessed against the baseline trends and
thresholds.
2. What adaptations can reduce the negative effects, and take advantage of positive effects, of
climate change? This is divided into anticipatory adjustments and reactive adjustments that can
be implemented as conditions change.
Our approach will start with an empirical assessment of the sensitivity of key indicators over
roughly the last 10 years, including variations in skier numbers, taxable sales, lodging
occupancy, and employment associated with variations in ski conditions, and confirmed in
interviews with stakeholders. We will then extrapolate these relationships to the future climate
scenarios. We will also attempt to extrapolate, at least in a qualitative way, impacts to warm-
season activities, second-home purchases, and other aspects of the broader amenity economy.
We will explore, in cooperation with the stakeholders, a range of impacts based on alternative
scenarios of Aspen's future evolution and regional development trends that can worsen or lessen
the effects of climate change (for example, alternative hypotheses on the centrality of skiing in
Aspen's economic well-being).
Aspen Climate Change Impact Assessment Proposal 22 May 2005 8
We will then work with stakeholders to identify and assess potential adaptations to the changing
climate, developing a roster in which we assess adaptive responses according to their potential:
· costs
· efficacy
· time horizon
· institutional locus (who implements?)
· feasibility, and
· secondary effects
The impact assessment team will include Travis and Hannah Gosnell at the Center of the
American West, and Gabe Preston and Andrew Klotz at the Rural Planning Institute in Durango.
We will work with AGCI to identify resort analyst familiar with Aspen and Colorado resorts and
an economist familiar with climate change issues to act as an advisor.
Task 7: Scientist Workshop and Second Stakeholders Meeting (Lead: Aspen Global Change
Institute and the Center of the American West)
On day one, the team will meet with the advisory panel of scientists for a one day technical
workshop followed on day two by a general session with the stakeholders. The purpose of the
second stakeholders meeting will be to present the results of the study and to help stakeholders
identify and evaluate ways to mitigate the potential negative effects of climate change. This
includes helping to initiate a discussion of the allocation of resources in addressing mitigation
and adaptation strategies in the context of possible impacts. Two main questions arise here: How
can Aspen best cope with anticipated climate changes, and how can Aspen further establish itself
as an adaptive community that responds positively to climate change and related challenges
while furthering its goal of mitigation locally and regionally?
Task 8: Prepare Report (Lead: Aspen Global Change Institute)
The Aspen Global Change Institute will compile the report components from Stratus Consulting
(tasks 3, 4, and 5) and the Center of the American West (tasks 2, 6, 7). The report will describe
the project, methods, and results. A draft report will be submitted and revised upon receipt of
comments. The report will be in pdf format and posted on the Canary Initiative website. Print-
on-demand copies will be available at a cost of reproduction basis.
Schedule
Task 1: Within 1 month of project initiation
Task 2: Draft Report within two months following the initial Stakeholders Workshop
Task 3: Within two months of project initiation
Aspen Climate Change Impact Assessment Proposal 22 May 2005 9
Task 4: Within six months of project initiation
Task 5: Within four months of project initiation
Task 6: Within two months of completion of Task 5
Task 7: Within 8 months of project initiation
Task 8: Within 10 months of project initiation.
Key Terms
Adaptation. The IPCC defines adaptation as "adjustments in ecological, social, or economic
systems in response to actual or expected climatic stimuli and their effects or impacts" (Smit et
al., 2001, p. 879). Adaptations are made to try to maintain a quality of life or services. They can
range from minor adjustments that allow a system to continue on or major changes that can
change the character of a system (e.g., reduced skiing) or even relocate activities.
Climate change. Human induced changes in climate. This is a result of increased greenhouse
gas emissions, other emissions, such as aerosols and other human activities that can affect global
or local climate such as land use changes.
Current climate. For the purpose of this project, current climate is defined as recent observed
climate. We will use at least 30 years of observations from the Aspen area (e.g., 1961-1990) to
define current climate. The current climate means, variances, and extremes will be based on the
analysis of observations.
Mitigation. Control of net greenhouse gas emissions and other human activities with the goal of
limiting climate change. This can be a reduction in emissions or an increase in the capture and
storage (sequestration) of emissions. It could involve other changes that would affect climate
(e.g., planting more trees in cities to reduce urban temperatures).
References
Bachetet, D., R.P. Neilson, J.M. Lenihan, and R.J. Draypek. 2001. Climate change effects on
vegetation distribution and carbon budget in the United States. Ecosystems 4:164-185.
Dettinger, M.D., D.R. Cayan, M.K. Meyer, and A.E. Jeton. 2004. Simulated hydrologic
responses to climate variations and change in the Merced, Carson, and American River Basins,
Sierra Nevada, California, 1900-2099. Climatic Change 62:283-317.
Gleick, P.H. 1990. Vulnerability of water systems. In Climate Change and lAS. Water
Resources, P.E. Waggoner (ed.). John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Hobbs, N.T et al. 2004. Impacts of Climate Change on Rocky Mountain National Park and its
Gateway Community. Natural Resource Ecology Lab, Colorado State University, Fort Collins.
Available at http://www.nrel.colostate.edu/projects/star/.
Aspen Climate Change Impact Assessment Proposal 22 May 2005 10
Houghton, J.T., Y. Ding, D.J. Griggs, M. Noguer, P.J. van der Linden, D. Xiaosu, and K.
Maskell (eds.). 2001. Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. Cambridge University Press,
New York.
Lenihan, J.M., R. Drapek, D. Bachelet, and R.P. Neilson. 2003. Climate change effects on
vegetation distribution, carbon, and fire in California. Ecological Applications 13(6): 1667-1681.
Martinec, J. 1975. Snowmelt-runoff model for stream flow forecasts. Nordic Hydrol. 6(3): 145-
154.
Martinec, J., A. Rango, and R. Roberts. 1994. The Snowmelt Runoff Model (SRM) User's
Manual, M.F. Baumgarmer (ed.). Geographica Berensia, Department of Geography, University
of Berne, Switzerland.
Miller, N.L., K.E. Bashford, and E. Strem. 2003. Potential impacts of climate change on
California hydrology. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 39:771-784.
Reiners, W.A. et al. 2003. Natural ecosystems I: The Rocky Mountains. In Rocky
Mountain/Great Basin Regional Climate-Change Assessment, F.H. Wagner (ed.). Report for the
U.S. Global Change Research Program. Utah State University, Logan, pp. 145-184.
Smit, B., O. Pilifosova, I. Burton, B. Challenger, S. Huq, R. Klein, and G. Yohe. 2001.
Adaptation to climate change in the context of sustainable development and equity. In Climate
Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability, J. McCarthy, O. Canziana, N. Leary, D.
Dokken, and K. White (eds.). New York, Cambridge University Press.
Wagner, F.H. 2003. Outdoor recreation and tourism. In Rocky Mountain/Great Basin Regional
Climate-Change Assessment, F.H. Wagner (ed.). Report for the U.S. Global Change Research
Program. Utah State University, Logan, pp. 1131-1144.
Watson, R.T., M.C. Zinyowera, and R. Moss. 1998. IPCC Special Report on the Regional
Impacts of Climate Change: An Assessment of Vulnerability. Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change, of the UN Environment Program and the Worm Meteorological Organization,
Geneva. Available at: http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc/regional/index.htm.
Wigley, T.M.L. and S.C.B. Raper. 2001. Interpretation of high projections for global mean
warming. Science 293:451-454.
Aspen Climate Change Impact Assessment Proposal 22 May 2005
Budget Overview:
Aspen Global Change Institute
(Tasks 1, 5, 7, 8)
Center of the American West
(Tasks 2, 6, 7)
Stratus Consulting
(Tasks 3, 4, 5)
$16,554
28,187
75,249
Total
$119,990
Aspen Climate Change Impact Assessment Proposal 22 May 2005 12
Aspen Global Change Institute budget for two stakeholder meetings and a science workshop
(tasks 1, 5, 7, 8):
Salaries (7 days)
Sue Bookhout
* John Katzenberger
Payroll costs & benefits
Contract labor
769
423
345
TOTAL DIRECT LABOR
$1,537
Transportation
Lodging
Meals
Conference Space
Equipment Rental
Supplies
Consultant
4700
1580
1614
1650
300
300
2000
TOTAL OTHER DIRECT
$12,144
Total Direct
13,681
Indirect Costs
2,873
TOTAL
$16,554
* John Katzenberger's time will be a donation by AGCI to the project.
Aspen Climate Change Impact Assessment Proposal 22 May 2005 13
Center of the American West subcontract budget (tasks 2, 6):
LABOR
Person Title Rate
Travis Project Manager $7200*
Gosnell Research Associate $3000
Months
1
5
Total
$3,000
$15,000
Total Labor
$18,000
OTHER DIRECT COSTS
Telephone, Copies
Data, Materials
Travel (4 trips, 2 people ~ 2 days, 1 night)
Mileage ~ $.28 (168 miles one way)
Lodging ~ $200
Per Diem ~ $92
$75
$200
$376
$800
$736
Total ODC $2,187
SUBCONTRACTS
Rural Planning Institute $8,000
conduct economic base analysis; translate climate scenarios into future economic
conditions; prepare and present results to stakeholders
Total Subcontracts $8,000
TOTAL $28,187
* CU will contribute $4,200 for Travis' salary
Aspen Climate Change Impact Assessment Proposal 22 May 2005 14
Stratus Consulting subcontract budget (tasks 3, 4, 5):
LABOR
Person Title
Smith Project Manager
Travers Senior Hydrologist
Lazar Hydrologist
Jones GIS Analyst
Lane Ecologist
Lejeune Ecologist
Word Proc
Couture Contracts
Cross Support
Labor Subtotal
OTHER DIRECT
COSTS
R~e Hours Total
$142 99 $14,200
$125 40 $5,000
$65 300 $19,500
$92 120 $11,040
$105 90 $9,450
$133 24 $3,192
$65 24 $1,560
$99 4 $396
$59 40 $2,360
741 $66,415
(telephone,
copies)
Materials
Local Travel
Per Diem
Total
23.06%
~$124/day
$75
$50
$300
$620
$1,045
$241
ODCTotal
SUBCONTRACTS
Ecologists
Wilby
Wigley
Williams
Subtotal
Handling
11%
($900/day)
$125.00
$125.00
$1,286
$1,500
$1,800
$1,000
$2,500
$6,800
$748
Subcontracts Total
$7,548
TOTAL
$75,249
Aspen Climate Change Impact Assessment Proposal 22 May 2005