Fifth National Climate Assessment
25. Northern Great Plains

Temperatures and Precipitation

Given the frequency of extremes and weather variability in the region, it is challenging to quantify long-term climate change trends. Even so, significant temperature trends and projections are clear (Figure 25.3). Since 1900, annual average temperature has increased in the region by 1.6°–2.6°F, with the largest increase in North Dakota and the smallest increase in southern Nebraska. Warming has occurred in all seasons but is most pronounced in winter. Summers have warmed little in North Dakota, South Dakota, and Nebraska. However, warm nights (minimum temperature of 70°F or higher), which were once rare, have become more common in Montana and Wyoming. The region has experienced fewer very cold days (maximum temperature of 0°F or lower) than the long-term average (1900–2020) for several decades. For instance, the number of very cold days has been below the long-term average in Montana since 1985, in Nebraska since 1990, and in Wyoming, North Dakota, and South Dakota since 2000.^{14,15,16,17,18} Decreasing snowpack will alter surface water availability for irrigation and may increase pressure on groundwater resources.^3,19 Overall aridity has increased and is projected to continue to do so because of increases in potential evapotranspiration, suggesting that the demarcation line between the humid East and arid West, traditionally defined by the 100th meridian, is moving eastward.^20,21

URL

Alternative text

Distinctive gradients of temperature will hold with projected warming.

Figure 25.3. The maps show temperature averages for 1991–2020 (a) and projected temperature for global warming of 2°C (3.6°F; b) and 4°C (7.2°F; c) above preindustrial levels for the Northern Great Plains region. Current and projected values demonstrate distinctive gradients of temperature from southeast to northwest, with implications for climate impacts and effective adaptation. White areas are large water bodies. Figure credit: USGS, NOAA NCEI, CISESS NC, and University of Wyoming. See figure metadata for additional contributors.

All states in the Northern Great Plains region recorded their wettest five-year period between 1995 and 2019.^{14,15,16,17,18} Total annual precipitation will be relatively stable across the region (Figure 4.3), but shifts in the form and timing of precipitation are expected. More intense precipitation events highlighting the projected increased variability in precipitation are expected to occur in all seasons, especially in the spring (Figure 2.12).²² Temporal and spatial variability continues to be a dominant factor with precipitation and temperature.

Much of the runoff in the Northern Great Plains region contributes to the Missouri River and eventually the Gulf of Mexico, but portions contribute to the Columbia River, Colorado River, and Red River of the North basins. Much of the increasing streamflow in North Dakota shown in Figure 25.4 occurs in the Red River of the North basin and has prompted an approximately $3.2 billion (in 2022 dollars) infrastructure project to divert flood water around Fargo, North Dakota, and Moorhead, Minnesota.²³ The upper Colorado River basin (Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, and New Mexico), with headwaters in the western Northern Great Plains region, has been experiencing extensive drought for the last 20 years. Flows in the upper Colorado River basin, which account for about 90% of the streamflow of the entire basin,²⁴ have decreased over the past 20 years.^25,26 Increases in evaporative demand (the loss of water from Earth’s surface to the atmosphere; Figure 25.5) have decreased runoff efficiencies, meaning that less rain and melted snow end up reaching the streams that feed the Colorado River.²⁷ Model-based analysis shows that continued warming is expected to further reduce flows in the upper Colorado River basin.²⁶

Hail

The region is prone to damaging hailstorms; southeastern Wyoming and the southwestern part of the Nebraska Panhandle lie in “hail alley,” the most hail-prone area in the United States.^17,18 Changes in low-level moisture, convective instability, melting level height, and wind shear will create shifts in hail occurrence.²⁸ From 1979 to 2017, the number of days favorable to significant (2 inches or greater diameter) hail in the central and eastern United States increased by 2 to 4 days each year.²⁹

Research on the response of severe convection to climate change has focused on a very high scenario (RCP8.5).^30,31,32,33 Hail size, frequency of large hail, and length of hail season are projected to increase through the rest of this century in the Northern Great Plains.³³ By 2071–2100, under a very high scenario (RCP8.5), projections for the Northern Great Plains show a 27% increase in moderate-size (0.79–1.4 inches) hail days, a 49% increase in large (1.4–2.0 inches) hail days, and a 302% increase in very large (2 inches and larger) hail days, with increases in hail coverage of 73%, 157%, and 882% for moderate, large, and very large hail, respectively.³³ Projections also indicate a lengthened hail season.³³ The largest increases in hail risk anywhere in the United States are in this region and in July.³³ Projections by late this century using the SRES (Special Report Emissions Scenarios) A2 scenario (a scenario with increasing greenhouse gas emissions, similar to those in RCP8.5) indicate more hail days and an increase in the potential size, with a correspondent increase in accumulated kinetic energy and damage potential.³⁴ Comparing intermediate (RCP4.5) and very high (RCP8.5) scenario projections for severe convection indicates that the projected trends for RCP4.5 are in the same direction with lower amplitude compared to RCP8.5.³⁵

Flooding

Precipitation changes do not have a one-to-one relation with flooding. Many factors influence floods, including short- and long-term antecedent moisture conditions, presence of frozen soils, snowpack accumulation, rain-on-snow events, storm tracks, and rainfall rates.^36,37,38,39

The Missouri River transects the region through 10 US states and 28 Tribal territories and is emblematic of the complex intergovernmental relations that will become increasingly important under climate change.⁴⁰ Record floods along the Missouri River and its tributaries in 2011 and 2019 caused evacuations, cost billions in damages,⁴¹ and created interstate closures. Research suggests that recent large floods were caused by natural variability within the system;⁴² however, model simulations suggest that climate change will reduce runoff in the upper Missouri basin.

Trends in annual peak streamflow, a proxy for flooding, differ across the 100th meridian divide (Figure 25.4). Observations show that annual peak streamflow is decreasing in the west and increasing in the east.⁴³ With few exceptions, the eastern Dakotas are an area of increasing peak streamflow (and flooding), while the western Dakotas, Montana, and Wyoming have decreasing peak streamflow. With 2° to 4°C (3.6° to 7.2°F) of global warming, the Northern Great Plains would expect to see some of the highest increases in annual flooding damage costs in the contiguous US due to climate change.⁴⁴

URL

Alternative text

Annual peak streamflow—a proxy for flooding—has been rising in eastern portions of the region and declining in the west.

Figure 25.4. This map of the water resource regions and rivers within the region shows distinct east–west differences in trends in annual peak streamflow for 1961–2020, expressed as percent per year, where the size of the dot is relative to the size of the trend. Red dots are downward trends, and blue dots are upward trends. A likelihood-based approach is used to report these trend results. When a trend is identified, the trend likelihood value (likelihood = 1 – p-value/2) associated with the trend is between 0.85 and 1.0. In other words, the chance of the trend occurring in the specified direction is at least 85 out of 100. Smaller black dots are sites for which there were sufficient data for trend analysis but likelihood was less than 0.85; that is, these sites do not exhibit a substantial trend in either direction. Figure credit: USGS, NOAA NCEI, and CISESS NC.

Drought

Drought is projected to increase in the region, with localized droughts increasing by 2040 and more widespread regional droughts by 2070, under intermediate (RCP4.5), high (RCP6.0), and very high (RCP8.5) scenarios across wet or dry global climate models.^22,45 After precipitation, the most significant component of the water budget is evapotranspiration—the moisture transfer from Earth’s surface and plants to the atmosphere.⁴⁶ Projected warming is expected to increase evapotranspiration (Figure 25.5), which may lead to drier soils later in the growing season (Figure 25.6).^47,48,49 Summer drought will be more probable than spring drought.^22,50 Multiple future climate scenarios indicate future increases in moderate, severe, and extreme drought, occurring approximately 10% and 20% more frequently by 2050 and 2100, respectively.⁴⁵ Recent droughts in the upper Missouri River basin between 2000 and 2010 were the most severe in the instrumental record,⁵¹ and flash droughts are a growing concern.^52,53

URL

Alternative text

Warming is expected to increase evapotranspiration.

Figure 25.5. Figure shows (center) simulated current evapotranspiration and its projected change for the summer months under (left) intermediate and (right) very high scenarios. Data presented were obtained from Variable Infiltration Capacity models driven by the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 and Localized Constructed Analogs downscaling methods. Potential evaporative demands in the summer months (June, July, and August) increase regionally, especially in western areas under moderate climate change, and in both western and eastern areas under severe climate change. An increase in potential evapotranspiration typically drives a decrease in surface soil moisture (4-inch depth; Figure 25.6). Figure credit: USDA Forest Service, NOAA NCEI, and CISESS NC. See figure metadata for additional contributors.

URL

Alternative text

Warming may not always lead to declines in soil moisture that would cause water stress in crops and natural plants.

Figure 25.6. Figure shows (center) simulated current soil moisture and its projected change for the summer months under (left) intermediate and (right) very high scenarios. Data presented were obtained from Variable Infiltration Capacity models driven by the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 and Localized Constructed Analogs downscaling methods. Soil moisture is expected to decrease slightly throughout the region in the summer months, with the largest decreases in the western mountain ranges of Montana. An increase in southwestern Wyoming is projected under both intermediate and very high scenarios. Snow water equivalent is decreasing at higher elevations in the Northern Great Plains (Figure 4.5) and can contribute to lower soil moisture in these areas. Declines in soil moisture can lead to crop, forest, and rangeland plant water stress, reduce plant growth, and increase ecosystems’ susceptibility to fire. Figure credit: USDA Forest Service, NOAA NCEI, and CISESS NC. See figure metadata for additional contributors.

Wildfire

Driven by increased temperature and decreased relative humidity, fire potential in this region is projected to increase under future climate change (HadCM3-HRM3 model), especially in summer and autumn, with fire seasons becoming longer.⁵⁴ Increased evapotranspiration and drought risk raise the probability of large fire occurrence.^55,56 The number of large grassland wildfires in the four semiarid ecoregional grasslands of the Northern Great Plains increased by 213%, from 128 between 1985 and 1995 to 273 between 2005 and 2014, with total area burned increasing in the western ecoregions of the region by 350% but decreasing in eastern ecoregions by 75% or more.⁵⁷ Wildfire numbers and fire-season length increased from the 1970s to the 2000s by 889% and 85 days, respectively, in western Montana and Wyoming forests, with most ignited by lightning strikes rather than humans.⁵⁸ Historically, snow cover prevented winter wildfires and increased fuel moisture conditions during snowmelt followed by spring precipitation.^59,60 However, early spring snowmelt has been correlated with increased fire activity.⁵⁸ From 1950 to 2010, the number of snow-cover days declined within the region,⁶⁰ increasing wildfire activity due to drying fuels, which can lead to changes in flash flooding and debris flow (Focus on Western Wildfires).

Close

Mental Health

Climate change adversely affects mental and spiritual health in multiple ways (Ch. 15).^61,62 Although this issue affects the entire country, it is especially relevant in the Northern Great Plains, where three states are among the top 10 in highest suicide rates per capita in the Nation.⁶³ Suicide rates are particularly high in rural and Indigenous populations,⁶⁴ in part because of remoteness from care and the limited number of mental health professionals.^65,66 Based on geographically broad-based studies, climate change is projected to amplify these risks.^67,68 Climate anxiety, also called eco-anxiety (a feeling of doom about future climate change), is already prominent among farmers and ranchers in the region.⁶⁹ Solastalgia—the distress specifically caused by environmental change while still in a home environment^70,71—is indicative of more subtle but potentially wider-reaching mental health impacts. Solastalgia is most often associated with Indigenous communities, who share collective ancestral ties to the lands and natural resources where they live or previously lived and which are inextricably linked to their identities, cultures, and livelihoods, as well as their physical and spiritual well-being.⁷² However, solastalgia can also affect others who are connected to the land, such as ranchers and farmers.⁷³

Direct impacts such as crop failure, increased disease, and biodiversity loss can lead to increased loss of Traditional Knowledge and language, further influencing the mental health of Indigenous Peoples.^61,74 Despair related to the loss of environmental, cultural, and human health is widespread among Crow Tribal elders, adversely affecting mental and spiritual health, and is exacerbated by a sense of inability to address the root causes of climate change.^75,76

Physical Health

Climate change is impacting the physical health of the region’s inhabitants in a number of ways. Wildfire is projected to increase in the region (KM 25.1), with correspondent health and property implications (Chs. 14, 15; Focus on Western Wildfires).⁶¹ One study suggests that although the total number of premature deaths attributable to wildfire smoke is higher in states with greater population density, Montana has the highest per capita rate of such deaths in the country.⁷⁷ In addition, heat is responsible for more climate-related deaths than any other factor in the United States.⁷⁸ Although the Northern Great Plains region lacks the extreme temperature increases experienced in some other regions, people in this region are still at risk given the large number of outdoor workers and recreationists.⁷⁹ Rising temperatures, as well as other climate impacts, are expected to increase the risk of some vector-borne diseases, such as West Nile virus.^80,81,82 Flood risk patterns in the United States are inequitable on a county basis, with some of the counties in this region at increased risk, including some that encompass or are adjacent to Tribal reservations.⁸³ Shifts in precipitation and increased flooding (KM 25.1) are expected to raise the risk of water-borne diseases such as Campylobacter infection.⁸⁴

Compound Health Impacts of Climate Events

Multiple climate pressures frequently act simultaneously, leading to compounding health-related outcomes (Ch. 15).^61,85,86 The impacts of floods resulting from earlier snowmelt combined with more intense precipitation events can be worsened by loss of ground cover from past wildfires,⁸⁷ putting people at risk of water-borne diseases, trauma and increased mental health issues, and economic losses. Wildfires are more common during hotter months when drought is more common,^55,56 exposing people to compounding risks and stress from smoke, heat, and poor water quality.^88,89

Ecological Health

Water Quality

Excess contributions of nutrients, such as nitrogen and phosphorus from agricultural runoff or point sources such as wastewater treatment plants, can cause water quality issues, which are expected to be exacerbated by climate change.^90,91 Nutrient loads (the total amount of a nutrient transported past a single location over a set period of time) can increase after droughts, when sediment is flushed in subsequent runoff events.⁹² Nutrient runoff from agricultural land spikes after heavy rain and contributes to harmful algal blooms and transport of nutrients to the Gulf of Mexico (KM 25.5).^93,94,95 Climate change has long been hypothesized as a driver of harmful algal blooms;⁹⁶ supporting these hypotheses with observations has been challenging because of gaps in monitoring, lack of long-term algae data, and changes in laboratory and remote-sensing methods.^97,98

Cascading Impacts to Biodiversity Loss

Climate change compounds existing threats to biodiversity (Ch. 8). Within the Northern Great Plains, conversion of perennial grasslands to monocultures of annual crops results in a loss of biodiversity.⁹⁹ Invasive species are also a contributor to biodiversity loss in the region,^100,101 and the dominant invasive species of concern varies from east to west (Figure 25.7). The region is a hotspot for grassland bird diversity and encompasses the entire breeding season range for many of the most vulnerable species;^102,103 based on projections under a scenario with 5.4°F (3.0°C) warming above preindustrial levels, more than 80% of grassland bird species will be vulnerable to climate-related threats during the breeding season.¹⁰⁴ Both native pollinators and honeybees are important components of the region’s ecosystems. The region supports approximately 40% of US honeybee colonies in the summer.¹⁰⁵ Over the last 15 years, pollinators have been experiencing declines.¹⁰⁶ Although not directly linked to climate change, changes in land-use patterns related to biofuel policies and loss of Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) lands are potentially contributing to these declines.^105,107 The CRP program pays farmers to take marginal land out of agricultural production for 10 years and plant perennial cover to reduce soil erosion and provide other ecosystem benefits. Recent modeling, however, indicates that targeting where CRP lands are planted on the landscape could improve the benefits to pollinators.¹⁰⁸ Finally, natural resource managers have identified a number of management strategies to help reduce biodiversity loss in the face of climate change, but for many taxa and ecological communities, there are still knowledge gaps.^109,110

URL

Alternative text

Invasive cool-season grasses are reducing biodiversity in the Northern Great Plains.

Figure 25.7. Acreage in the Northern Great Plains region where at least 50% of the soil surface is covered by two representative invasive plant species: cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum; left) in the western part of the region, and Kentucky bluegrass or Canada bluegrass (Poa pratensis or Poa compressa; right) in the eastern part of the region. The figure shows acreage for 2004–2010 (center) and 2011–2015 (bottom), as well as the change in extent of invasion between those two periods (top). These invasive grasses already pose a threat to the biodiversity of the region, and climate change is predicted to increase invasive species challenges for this region. Figure credits: (center left, bottom left, center right, bottom right) adapted from NRCS 2018;¹¹¹ (top left, top right) The Nature Conservancy, NOAA NCEI, and CISESS NC.

Close

Food and Agriculture

Farming (referring to all forms of agricultural production, including livestock operations) accounts for 6% of total earnings in the region, compared to 0.4% of total earnings nationally.¹¹² Although growing seasons and frost-free periods are lengthening,^113,114 other factors may stress crop production.⁴⁹ Negative crop yield impacts are anticipated from rising temperatures, which increase the potential for heat and moisture stress during reproductive periods, as well as the potential for increased weed competition and pest expansion.³ Although row crop agriculture generally occurs where greater average annual precipitation occurs (Figures 25.2, 25.8), farmers are expanding and intensifying croplands into less productive lands in the region^99,115,116 as climate change alters growing conditions. Although crop yield decline from increased evapotranspiration may be somewhat offset by soil moisture trends, soil moisture is projected to slightly decline on an annual basis across much of the region (KM 25.1).^117,118 Overwintering crops like winter wheat are expected to benefit from reduced exposure to frost days under climate change, but reduced ground insulation from declining snow cover may offset some of this gain.¹¹⁹ Additionally, higher carbon dioxide concentrations are expected to benefit the productivity of many crops.¹²⁰

The net effect of climate change on specific crop yields is uncertain and will depend on interacting effects of temperature, moisture, carbon dioxide, and ozone, as well as adaptation through shifts in cultivars, crop mix, and management practices.^120,121,122 For example, climate change was listed as a primary challenge to both dryland and irrigated agriculture in the 2022 Blackfeet Agricultural Resource Management Plan (ARMP), due to earlier snowmelt, increased evapotranspiration, and less water available for irrigation. Recent extreme events indicate potential future impacts to livelihoods of individuals throughout the agricultural value chain.¹²³ Climate change negatively impacts the ability of regional Indigenous communities to grow and use traditional foods, medicines, and plants due to species movements and shifts in growing and harvesting seasons. Two significant examples are the Lakota staples wild turnips and chokecherries.^124,125 In 2017, above-normal temperatures in late summer and fall delayed the harvest of berries and medicinal plants.¹²⁶

Northern Great Plains rangeland productivity may see less harm from climate change than other livestock-producing regions.^127,128 Rising temperatures and elevated carbon dioxide levels are projected to increase growing-season length and carbon assimilation by plants, thus increasing aboveground net primary productivity (atmospheric carbon converted into aboveground plant matter)^129,130,131 but decreasing nutritional quality.^132,133 However, drought-induced water limitation would produce the opposite response by reducing biomass production, concentrating nutrients, and enhancing forage quality.¹³⁴ While the northern part of the region could see more frequent forage surpluses under both intermediate (RCP4.5) and very high (RCP8.5) scenarios, the southern part of the region (e.g., Nebraska) may experience more frequent forage deficits.¹ Drought years have had a smaller impact on cattle numbers in the Northern Great Plains than in other regions,¹³⁵ and single-year droughts have only minimally impacted management or livelihoods.¹³⁶ However, ranchers face increasing challenges managing livestock health due to heat stress, parasites, and pathogens, as well as managing shifts in forage species, including invasive weeds.^137,138 Tribal producers may be more vulnerable to these stresses, as they tend to operate smaller farms and ranches on lands that have highly fractionated ownership, compared to non-Indigenous producers.¹³⁹ While cattle production has moved northward overall,¹ additional stressors to rangeland-based livelihoods exist in the region, including conversion to cropland,¹⁴⁰ rising land prices, and land ownership concentration trends.^141,142,143

URL

Alternative text

The Northern Great Plains region shows wide geographical variations in land use and social vulnerability.

Figure 25.8. The figure shows the geography of resource- and land-based livelihoods and vulnerabilities. Tribal reservation and trust lands are outlined on all maps. Panel (a) displays the predominant use of each county’s agricultural land as either pasture or cropland. Pasture is common throughout much of the region, with cropland prevalent in the eastern portion of the region. Panel (b) shows federally owned public lands, including lands managed by the National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, US Forest Service, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of Defense, Department of Energy, and other federal agencies. In addition to public lands, private protected areas voluntarily provided to the database are also included but make up a very small minority of the overall public and other protected land area. The amount of federally owned public land increases in the more arid western portion of the region. Panel (c) displays locations of major energy sources in the region. Surface coal mines, oil and gas wells, and wind turbine installations are located throughout the region. Panel (d) shows county-level Social Vulnerability Index (SoVI) scores, with higher scores closer to 1 indicating higher levels of social vulnerability to environmental hazards.¹⁴⁴ Capital letters in panel (d) display locations of recent extreme climate events highlighted in the “Community Infrastructure and Quality of Life” section below (A, D, and E highlight examples of flood impacts, B highlights storm damage, and C provides an example of drought impacts). Figure credit: University of Nebraska, USDA Forest Service, NOAA NCEI, and CISESS NC.

Tourism and Recreation

The region’s public and private lands provide tourism revenue, as well as benefits to residents’ quality of life (Figure 25.8).^145,146 Climate-related trends and extremes are expected to affect ecosystem services, wildlife, and tourism, with associated economic impacts.^147,148 Higher temperatures in the Yellowstone River in August 2016 are blamed for a fish kill that triggered the closure of the river to fishing and other uses, decreasing income for local and regional businesses.¹⁴⁹ Water-based activities are particularly vulnerable to drought and face increased conflicts with other water uses.¹⁵⁰ In 2017, Montana lost approximately 800,000 visitors and $289 million (in 2022 dollars) of tourism- and recreation- related income due to drought.¹⁵¹ Visitors also shortened their stays due to smoke and fires.¹⁵⁰ Warmer winter temperatures in recent decades are correlated with mountain pine beetle outbreaks in western Montana but were not significantly correlated with mountain pine beetle outbreaks in other forests within the region, such as the Black Hills.¹⁵² A 2017 drought decreased pheasant populations, affecting tourism income; its impact on wildlife populations also reduced Tribal-guided hunting opportunities and may have affected the competitiveness of culturally significant plants.¹²⁶ The length of winter sports seasons is expected to decrease¹⁵³ and thus negatively affect recreation economies in Montana, Wyoming, and South Dakota.¹⁵⁴ However, there may be improved opportunities for spring and autumn “shoulder season” recreation and both positive and negative effects on wildlife-based activities.¹⁵⁰

Energy

Energy revenue in the region supports local services, infrastructure, and income that includes per capita payments for some Tribal members.¹⁵⁵ Energy revenue can also create risks in the region stemming from short-term revenue volatility and long-term dependence.¹⁵⁶ The region has an extensive number of oil and gas wells, numerous surface coal mines, and increasing wind turbine installations (Figure 25.8c). The region’s share of employees working in fossil fuel extraction is four times greater (1.8% of all jobs) than in the Nation as a whole (0.4% of all jobs).⁵ Energy-related livelihoods are affected by climate change due to changes in power generation, transmission, and consumption, as well as shifts in demands for particular types of energy sources.

Climate change impacts and mitigation efforts are expected to change energy demand in the Northern Great Plains seasonally. Higher summer temperatures and heatwaves are expected to increase energy demand in the Northern Great Plains and throughout the country, while in the region, higher winter temperatures and fewer cold snaps are expected to reduce energy demand for heating (Ch. 5).^157,158 Increased energy demands from outside the region will place increased demands on regional energy resources and electricity supply.¹⁵⁹ Lower winter electricity demands may potentially lower annual household energy costs in this region,¹⁵⁷ but increased electrification of the grid may increase costs to utility ratepayers as natural gas utilization declines.¹⁶⁰ Finally, climate change, especially climate extremes, may also stress energy infrastructure (e.g. rail, pipelines, distribution lines, transmission lines; Ch. 5).^161,162

Energy-related livelihoods are also affected by shifts in the type of energy harvested. Energy extraction and generation in the region respond to external market and policy drivers.^163,164,165 For example, coal extraction has declined since 2011 due to air quality regulations, competition with lower-cost natural gas and renewables, and climate policy in states and utilities outside the region.¹⁵⁵ Tribal and other rural communities dependent on coal extraction for revenue and jobs have experienced losses to both as markets shift away from these resources.¹⁶⁶ Energy transition policy is heterogenous at the state level, and states in the region have pursued efforts to protect coal assets rather than help communities transition from coal.^155,167,168 In response to the demand for oil and gas, communities engaged in oil and natural gas extraction in the Northern Great Plains region grew faster than the regional average (14% compared to 6%),⁸ and oil and natural gas extraction is expected to remain at or near current levels through 2030.¹⁶⁹ Renewable energy production is on the rise in the Northern Great Plains, with the region supplying 12% of the total US electricity generation from wind, biomass, and solar sources.^163,170 Wind electricity generation tripled in the region between 2011 and 2021 and was often co-located alongside row crop agriculture (Figure 25.8).^159,170 A growing number of Tribal entities are leading the Nation’s renewable energy transition by installing renewable energy projects, including the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota (solar), the Oceti Sakowin Power Authority (wind), and the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes in Montana (hydroelectric).^171,172,173 The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA) is expected to accelerate deployment of renewable energy sources,¹⁶⁹ and the region may benefit from investments in hydrogen hubs; carbon capture, utilization, and storage; and advanced nuclear reactors (Ch. 5).¹⁷⁴ Without the IRA and other climate mitigation policies, additional energy produced by new renewable energy sources is expected to only meet the increased energy demand by 2050 rather than replace the current usage levels of petroleum and natural gas.¹⁶³

Community Infrastructure and Quality of Life

Tribal lands, governments, and peoples are integral to the energy, agriculture, and recreation sectors. Immigrant populations are tied to agriculture in the region through their role in meatpacking, dairy, and other key industries. These communities face social vulnerability to harm from environmental hazards (Figure 25.8d). Communities across the region have experienced damages to infrastructure, businesses, homes, and livelihoods due to extreme events, including drought (2017, 2021), hailstorms (2018), flooding (2019, 2022), and wildfire (2021).⁴¹ For example, after the 2019 Nebraska floods, community-level impacts included damage to homes, lack of water and sanitation services, and increased levels of anxiety and stress.¹⁷⁵ The effect of floods on the Santee Sioux Tribe included interruptions to power and drinking water supplies, wastewater backups, and destruction of many bridges and buildings (Figure 25.8d, point A).¹⁷⁶

Future extreme events will disproportionately affect communities in the Northern Great Plains region that have greater exposure and sensitivity to hazards and fewer resources to prepare, respond, and adapt compared to larger cities.¹² For example, two storms damaged nearly 600 homes on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in July 2018, half of which were not repaired one year later (Figure 25.8d, point B). In 2019, the region experienced widespread flooding and damaged roads,¹⁷⁷ stranding many residents without access to basic needs. Many communities were disconnected from major highways, and infrastructure repairs are still underway. In drought years, communities dependent on surface water, such as those across the Crow Reservation, are seeing water resources and adaptation options become increasingly scarce (Figure 25.8d, point C).¹⁶⁶

The lack of resilient infrastructure combined with regional climate impacts has created extreme water insecurity for Indigenous communities.¹⁷⁸ In the region, $159 million (in 2022 dollars) would be needed to bring either sewer or water access to 175 Tribal communities. Further, there are upwards of 18,000 homes within the region in need of sanitation (water and sewer) repair.¹⁷⁹

Finally, regional residents living in housing or locations that are vulnerable face potential harms due to climate change. States in the region have a higher percentage of mobile and manufactured homes (e.g., 12.3% in Wyoming and 10.4% in Montana) compared to the US average (5.5%).⁸ Mobile and manufactured homes are physically more vulnerable to extreme heat, flooding, and wildfires, exacerbating impacts from disasters.¹⁸⁰ Homes in floodplains are disproportionately occupied by renters and non-White populations. In Nebraska, Hispanic residents are overrepresented in floodplain areas (18% compared to 9% of residents in non-floodplain areas),¹⁸¹ which resulted in disproportionate impacts to their housing security during the 2019 flooding in areas like Fremont and Grand Island, Nebraska (Figure 25.8d, points D and E).

Close

Communities across the Northern Great Plains region experience complex tensions and trade-offs between land use, water availability, ecosystem services, and other factors, all exacerbated by the impacts of climate change. For example, higher temperatures and a longer growing season make the region attractive for climate-driven human migration⁹ and increased forage production,¹ which in turn increase the demand for water resources. However, shifts in precipitation and reductions in snowpack will alter the quantity and timing of available water.⁶⁰ These tensions culminate in difficult decisions about how best to manage water quantity and quality and balance trade-offs between consumptive and ecological uses. Chapter 18 highlights frameworks for understanding complex systems, cascading effects, and decision-making under uncertainty.

Art × Climate

Diane Burko
Grinnell Mt. Gould Quadtych
(2009, oil on canvas)

Artist’s statement: This work portrays Grinnell Glacier in Glacier National Park, Montana in four time periods between 1920 and 2006, with the glacier losing mass in each painting. The piece considers the marks that humanity leaves on the landscape, reflecting the impact of industrial and colonial activity on those same landscapes. While these paintings deal with impending climate catastrophe, rather than lingering in dystopia they celebrate the sublimity of the landscape by honoring the intricate geological and political webs that shape the identity of a place.

View the full Art × Climate gallery.

Artworks and artists’ statements are not official Assessment products.

Tensions: Navigating Barriers to Mitigation and Adaptation

Decision-makers are increasingly aware of current and projected climate change impacts, and communities are trying to adapt and mitigate. However, there are cultural, structural, and institutional barriers that prevent effective action in the Northern Great Plains region. States within the region currently rely on fossil fuel economies, creating resistance to energy transition and economic diversification.^155,156,182 For example, Wyoming has passed legislation designed to hamper the retirement of coal plants and to ensure a continued market for coal generation.¹⁶⁷ Other examples of barriers include less research funding than other regions;¹⁸³ lowered capacity to adapt (Box 25.1); varying perceptions of climate change;¹⁸⁴ and a confusing, and occasionally contradictory, set of water regulations and rights around surface water storage (e.g., implementation of artificial beaver dams to retain water on the landscape).^185,186 These factors limit transition planning and undermine community-level resilience.¹⁶⁸

Integration of climate change into K–12 science education standards in the Northern Great Plains region varies greatly, with several states in the region failing to link human activities to climate change.¹⁸⁷ Acceptance of the human link to climate change is lower than the national average among adults in the Northern Great Plains region, with particularly low acceptance among agricultural producers and agricultural interest groups.^188,189 This lack of acceptance highlights barriers to collective understanding and climate change response in the region and is matched by a stronger evidence base for actions that emphasize adaptation and resilience rather than mitigation (KM 25.5).

The employment, income, and public revenue impacts of the transition away from fossil fuels will vary by geography.^190,191 Declines in coal demand have, and will continue to have, negative effects on rural coal-dependent states and communities, such as Rosebud and Big Horn Counties in Montana.^155,156,192 The public revenue gains from renewable energy could be substantial but uneven, reflecting both the impact of facility siting on regional economic opportunity and the impacts of tax policy on the ability of state and local governments to capture and retain tax revenue.^155,193,194 Specifically, state taxation and expenditure limits preempt governments from generating revenue from diversified economic growth,¹⁹⁵ including from renewable energy, and tax incentives designed to lower costs for renewable energy projects can undermine the revenue benefits of an energy transition.¹⁹⁶ Tribal communities in this region also face barriers to developing and benefiting from renewable energy on Tribal lands, including a dependence on federal agencies for permitting, limited access to private finance, and an inability to access federal incentives, which makes private investment on Tribal lands less attractive.^197,198 Decision-makers and communities in the region have increased efforts to incorporate multiple values and ways of knowing (e.g., Indigenous Knowledge, local experience, and empirical science) into planning and action (KM 25.5).

Trade-Offs: Land-Use Conversion

To counterbalance the potentially negative effects of a warmer future climate and drier soils, a shift to more water-conservative and nutrient-retentive land cover may be needed, such as from row crops to grassland (Figure 25.9). This would enhance ecosystem services such as wildlife, flood retention, nutrient stabilization, and carbon sequestration.^203,204 While this would increase resilience, it would also require many social and infrastructure adjustments and investments, including identifying seed sources for native species. Crops and services produced would shift from grain to forage, animal products, native plant seed, biofuel from grass, increased hunting on private land, and carbon credits. This would disadvantage companies that currently serve the high-input needs of conventional farmers but result in smaller loans for grassland producers due to less costly equipment, smaller seed purchases, and less grain shipped overseas.

URL

Alternative text

Land-use conversion offers one strategy for adapting to climate change.

Figure 25.9. Climate stressors interact with regional land-use decisions in complex ways. Recent and historical land-use decisions (left) are altering the productivity of working lands. Potential alternative land-use decisions (right) have the potential to increase resilience against climate change. By converting agriculture to grassland in areas that will become marginal for production, landowners and resource managers can conserve water and enhance ecosystem services. Figure credit: USGS.

Transitioning away from fossil fuel energy systems is expected to result in the abandonment or reduction of fossil fuel energy infrastructure (e.g., pump jacks, well bores), siting of new wind energy generation (e.g., wind turbines), construction of linear transmission CO₂ pipelines, and continued land conversion to biofuels.^165,205 Because renewable energy sources are expected to require larger land areas (3 to 25 times larger) to produce similar amounts of energy as nonrenewables,^206,207 a trade-off exists between providing energy and conserving the few remaining intact grassland tracts in the world.^208,209 Fragmentation of these tracts by energy infrastructure involved in harvesting and transmitting energy can reduce wildlife populations and provide conduits for invasive species.¹⁵⁹ Siting of energy infrastructure on areas already disturbed by row-crop agriculture or other activities may help prevent further fragmentation in some areas but may not be a possibility in the more intact grasslands of the Northern Great Plains that are relatively undisturbed.^159,209,210 Water-use trade-offs are another concern with energy development. Water law can influence the ability of industry to access water rights in low-flow years.²¹¹ For instance, state and federal environmental policy may limit options to generate power from fossil fuel plants that require water for cooling during low-water years, which are projected to become more frequent (KM 25.1). Additionally, legal challenges related to water quantity and quality for endangered fish set up trade-offs between energy, wildlife, and recreation.^212,213

Another adaptation action, piloted locally on less productive farmland with promising regional mitigation potential, is planting low-input, productive tall grasses, such as switchgrass, as dedicated biofuel energy crops (Figure 25.10).²¹⁴ This approach sequesters carbon from the atmosphere,^215,216 and marketing this alternative crop for forage, seed, or biofuels could generate income equal to or exceeding current income.²¹⁷ Switchgrass is a native plant that requires little fertilization and is especially resilient to drought. Biofuel feedstocks could be burned to generate electricity or converted to ethanol or bio-oil, syngas, and biochar. Planting grasses would store more carbon in the soil, require fewer inputs of fossil fuel compared to the annual planting of conventional crops, and improve other components of soil health.²¹⁸ However, large-scale land-use conversion to biofuel energy crops could disrupt food production processes, reduce biodiversity, and drive water competition.²¹⁹

URL

Alternative text

Conversion of cropland to production of biofuels such as switchgrass is being piloted in the region as a climate adaptation action.

Figure 25.10. Switchgrass is a highly productive native prairie perennial that is the most promising species for future commercial growth as biofuel (for use as liquid transportation fuels and in electricity production). Photo was taken in 2021 at an experimental farm near South Shore, South Dakota, following two summers of drought, when production of switchgrass hay was 5 tons per acre and was more profitable than the production of corn. Photo credit: ©Arvid Boe, South Dakota State University.

Close

Effective adaptation accounts for climate change uncertainty as well as the complex interactions and trade-offs within and between ecological and social systems (Ch. 31).^220,221 The failure to carefully navigate the full suite of adaptation options and the consequences of those options can result in maladaptation—increased vulnerability to climate change due to poor or misguided action (Box 25.2)²²² or inequitable distribution of outcomes. Despite these challenges and risks, climate adaptation planning also presents opportunities to build collaborative partnerships and steward ecosystems.²²³ The communities, economic sectors, and natural resource practitioners in this region are advancing adaptation solutions (Box 25.3).

Adaptations in Agriculture

The agricultural community in the Northern Great Plains region is developing innovative climate adaptation solutions to support livelihoods in the region (e.g., Johnson and Knight 2022²⁴³), many of which also support mitigation by sequestering carbon (Ch. 11). Stakeholders recognize that soil improvements increase flood and drought resilience.²⁴⁴ Growing evidence from working farms and ranches in the region demonstrates how diversification strategies—such as reduced soil disturbance, increased crop residue, plant cover, and livestock and crop diversity (sometimes referred to as soil health or regenerative practices)—improve soil properties and processes, including water-holding capacity and infiltration, and provide many potential public and private co-benefits, including carbon sequestration.^245,246,247 These properties and processes produce enhanced carbon and nitrogen cycling and soil structure,²⁴⁰ increased soil microbial communities, and lower pest communities while reducing nutrient inputs and leading to greater yields and profitability.^{248,249,250,251,252} There is strong demand for, and proven efficacy around, producer knowledge networks to support transitioning to soil health practices.^253,254 Additionally, reintegrating row crop and livestock production systems could diversify income, increase operation resilience,²⁴⁶ and restore ecosystem services, including sequestering more carbon in soil; retaining nutrients, especially nitrate; and supporting biodiversity.^108,217,255

In arid parts of the region, adaptive solutions for irrigated agriculture will be critical. The majority of the region’s states assign water rights based on prior appropriation, under which the first person to put water to beneficial use has the right to continue to use that water as long as the water is being used for the same beneficial use. This can slow the ability to acquire new water rights that may be necessary to address climate impacts.²⁵⁶ The Upper Colorado River Commission (UCRC), as part of the 2019 Drought Contingency Plan,²⁵ is investigating the feasibility of implementing a demand-management program in the Upper Division states of the basin, including Wyoming. Under this program, water users would be compensated for voluntarily reducing consumptive uses. The conserved or imported water would be stored in federal reservoirs and released when needed to ensure compact compliance under a decision of the UCRC. On a smaller scale, many watershed and irrigation groups are investigating collaborative and shared water management strategies to manage scarce water resources to meet agricultural and ecological water needs, including the Brush Creek Irrigation District²⁵⁷ and the Popo Agie Watershed Healthy Rivers Initiative²⁵⁸ in Wyoming, as well as some Montana Tribes.²⁵⁹ Instead of directly following the prior appropriation doctrines, different approaches to collaboratively manage water resources to meet agriculture and instream needs are being implemented. All of these efforts include and rely on improved hydrologic monitoring and data collection, as well as strong communication and buy-in from stakeholders.

Ranchers are also exploring adaptation strategies that increase livestock production by adjusting range management for a warmer climate.²⁶⁰ One strategy to improve ranch resilience is through the use of drought planning.^261,262 Drought plans focus on identifying critical time periods for monitoring conditions and making decisions.²⁶³ A planned drought response may involve adjusting the number of cattle, the season of grazing, the length of grazing time in pastures based on precipitation and vegetation growth,²⁶⁴ or holistic planned grazing strategies that manage for ecosystem health by adapting to changing conditions.²⁶⁵ A 2017 study found that nearly 60% of ranchers in the region had some type of drought contingency plan;²⁶¹ however, adoption of weather and climate data into management decisions has been slow.^136,266 The development of new grassland productivity forecasts may increase adoption by translating climate outlooks into usable information for ranchers.²⁶⁷ Unique multistakeholder groups are also exploring collaborative adaptive management to understand and reconcile stakeholder experiences and ways of knowing about complex rangeland systems on public lands.²⁶⁴

Adaptation to Flooding

In response to significant flooding in 2011 and 2019 in the upper Missouri River basin (UMRB), improved monitoring was implemented to inform water management decisions. Frozen and saturated soil and significant snowpack in the UMRB were major contributors to flooding in those two years. Additionally, the drought west of the Missouri River in 2016–2017 highlighted the problem of sparse soil moisture data inhibiting accurate drought monitoring. As a result, the US Army Corps of Engineers, in collaboration with the state climate offices, is establishing a soil moisture and snowpack monitoring network.^268,269 A total of 529 stations are scheduled for installation between 2021 and 2027 on a 25-square-mile grid at elevations below 5,500 feet. The data from these stations, which include multiple soil moisture and temperature depths, as well as snow depths, will be directly available to NOAA to track and forecast flooding, drought, and other climatic and weather events.

With increased spring precipitation across much of the region, rural and Indigenous communities are adapting to more frequent flooding. Adaptation responses range from individual-scale approaches, such as elevating homes, to policy changes, including changing building codes and zoning regulations. Nebraska’s unique river-basin Natural Resources District structure has enabled watershed-scale approaches that bring together multiple jurisdictions and stakeholders to decrease flood risk.²⁷⁰ More drastic responses considered by some communities include relocating altogether. One increasingly successful adaptation strategy for responding to flood and natural disasters is the grassroots formation of local groups and coalitions to assist communities with disaster recovery and long-term adaptation (e.g., Sioux Empire Community Organizations Active in Disaster in South Dakota, Midwest Housing Resource Network in Nebraska). These groups are a mechanism for local communities to come together in mutual aid to plan for and support each other in response to flooding.

Adaptations in Indigenous Communities

Indigenous Peoples have called the Northern Great Plains region home for centuries, and today several regional Tribal Nations are leading the way in climate adaptation and implementation.^271,272,273 Several other Tribal Nations are leading the effort in water resilience and proactively addressing drought.^{274,275,276,277} Indigenous approaches to adaptation combine traditional and contemporary management practices often grounded in spirituality and cultural traditions.²⁷⁸ The key issues for Tribal climate adaptation in the region are capacity, sustainability, and sovereignty.¹⁹⁷

The Rosebud Sioux Tribe has several initiatives in progress to build resilience to climate change.^279,280 The Sicangu Climate Crisis Working Group developed a Tribal climate adaptation plan that covers 20 Tribal communities across more than a million acres of Tribal land. The plan incorporates Lakota philosophy and Traditional Knowledge, including historical migrations, astronomy, origin stories, and the Tribes’ special relationship with the buffalo. The plan prioritizes data sovereignty, interdepartmental collaboration, and directly supporting Tribal households to prepare for the impacts of climate change.²⁷³ Additionally, the Rosebud Sioux Tribal Water Department has developed a drought adaptation plan and extensive real-time monitoring that enables the management of stream flow and groundwater sources, including the Ogallala Aquifer.²⁷⁶ One of the major challenges has been the enforcement of the Rosebud water code to address neighboring farmers pumping Tribal-managed groundwater. However, with the removal of the moratorium on Tribal water codes, the Rosebud Sioux Tribe may now have the ability to manage its water as a sovereign nation.²⁸¹

In 2018, the Blackfeet Nation completed a climate adaptation plan, which includes all of the natural resource departments across the Tribal government.²⁷¹ This inclusive approach takes more time and coordination but also creates collaborative opportunities by breaking down silos, minimizing redundancy, and maximizing scarce resources. For many Tribal Nations, sustainability is a key issue. This was especially true during the COVID-19 pandemic and continues to be the reality in rural agricultural regions with smaller tax bases and higher turnover rates in staffing. Implementation includes the Ksik Stakii Project, which aims to protect beaver, restore rivers, and increase natural water storage to reduce vulnerability to drought and flooding.^271,282 A notable capacity-building strategy at Blackfeet is for Tribal resource departments to partner directly with Blackfeet Community College students on research projects. This type of a partnership is particularly important in the Northern Great Plains region, which has the highest concentration of Tribal colleges in the country.

Public Land Adaptation

The National Park Service (NPS) and partners have adapted scenario-based planning to help natural and cultural resource managers and others work with uncertainty and address the ways change might plausibly occur (Ch. 8).^283,284 Adaptation action on public lands in this region is challenged not only by the region’s inherent climatic variability but also by the uncertainty in how resources, lifeways, or livelihoods might be affected by climate change and which adaptation responses might be effective (Figure 25.12).

Adaptation of scenario-based planning for public resource stewardship has focused on NPS units within the region—including Knife River Indian Villages National Historic Site, Badlands National Park, Wind Cave National Park, and Devils Tower National Monument.^{283,285,286,287,288,289,290,291} This work has increased scenario plausibility and relevance and improved facilitation and efficiency of climate adaptation decision-making.²⁸³ It has also clarified the importance of distinguishing climate futures (i.e., climate scenarios) from climate-resource scenarios (i.e., scenarios of both changes in climate and associated changes in resource condition).^289,292 Importantly, this work has created a model to support climate adaptation for natural resource decision-making in the face of climate uncertainty.

URL

Alternative text

Scenario-based planning accounts for uncertainty by considering a range of ways in which change might occur.

Figure 25.12. Forecast-based planning uses predictions of a single future (b), whereas scenario-based planning works with a set of plausible futures that capture a broad range of potential future conditions, providing a framework to support decisions under conditions that are uncertain and uncontrollable. Scenario-based planning at Wind Cave National Park identified four potential outcomes (a, c) for grassland and pine forest vegetation, surface water availability, and American bison (Bison bison) and prairie dog colonies under different climate futures—very dry and droughty (brown), frequent droughts (red), generally drier (green), and a bit wetter (blue)—all of which have different management implications for the natural and cultural resources in the park. Each dot in the graph represents a climate projection, and the set of four circled projections collectively encompasses most of the range of ways in which drought and springtime moisture levels could change by midcentury. SPEI—the Standardized Precipitation–Evaporation Index—is a multi-scalar drought index, based on precipitation and potential evapotranspiration, that is used to identify wet and dry periods in a given location.²⁹³ A zero value indicates average moisture balance, positive values signify above-average wetness, and negative values represent drier-than-average conditions. SPEI-3 is a three-monthly SPEI calculation, and this figure shows values for April–June. Adapted from Schuurman et al. 2022²⁹⁴ and Runyon et al. 2021.²⁸⁹

Rural Community Adaptation

Rural communities have two key needs to foster climate adaptation (KM 11.3). The first is economic diversification to create more resilient economies (e.g., broadband connectivity, restoration activities that create jobs and restore ecological function, and conservation that improves access and opportunity in recreation-based economies). The second is the need for a new social contract around resource extraction, especially for communities that will remain rural, isolated, and resource-dependent.²⁹⁵ Major investments in community services, infrastructure, and economic development led by rural communities require long-term and sustainable funding to build capacity and resilience (Box 25.1).^194,200 Barriers to building adaptive capacity include a lack of coordinated federal assistance programs.²⁹⁶ The region also has the potential for population growth in communities currently facing out-migration driven by favorable changes in climate coupled with a robust recreation economy, particularly in the intermountain West.^297,298

Close