Science-management Partnerships Research Articles

Co‐production of a vulnerability assessment for aquatic and riparian ecosystems in the southwestern United States

AbstractTo address impacts of climate change and other stressors on stream ecosystems, managers must prioritize resources and locations for conservation actions to facilitate effective cross‐boundary solutions. Through a science management partnership, we co‐produced a spatially explicit landscape assessment framework for cold‐water fish habitat and riparian corridors in three large watersheds of the southwestern United States. Using literature review and stakeholder workshops, we developed indicators of vulnerability and built spatial datasets depicting areas of low to high vulnerability based on exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity for each resource. We found that, in general, vulnerability was greater for cold‐water fish habitat than for riparian corridors. The Little Colorado River and San Juan River watersheds had the highest percentages of subwatersheds with high vulnerability of cold‐water fish habitat. Conversely, the Upper Rio Grande watershed had the highest percentage with high vulnerability of riparian corridors. Assessments like ours facilitate the management of water resources at the scale of watersheds or river basins and incorporate physical characteristics, land‐use history, current management practices, and status of imperiled species into actionable management plans.

Science-management Partnerships as Catalysts for Governance Reform of National Parks in China

Protected areas have long been considered a cornerstone of biodiversity conservation by policy-makers and the conservation community. Yet, despite ongoing efforts, many countries, including China, continue to face persistent challenges in effectively managing these areas. Here we examine how science-management partnerships, particularly those headed by Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), have catalyzed governance reforms of protected areas in China. The integration of scientific research with policy action has enabled the establishment of a unified national park system, mitigating management inefficiencies and enhancing ecosystem resilience. We propose strategies for CAS to consolidate its leadership in this domain. These partnerships might offer global insights into evidence-based protected area management.

9 Practical Considerations for Adaptive Strategies By United States Grazing Land Managers with a Changing Climate

Abstract We outline practical considerations for grazing land adaptations with a changing climate, with an emphasis on the ranch operation scale and specific attention to directional climate changes and increased climate variability. These adaptive strategies fall into two themes: flexibility and learning under uncertainty. Ranches and livestock operations with greater land, social, or other capital resources may have more flexibility. Risk can be reduced for managers (ranchers, farmers, operators, and livestock managers) through participation in conservation or farm policy programs and/or market-based approaches. Bolstering adaptive capacity across landscapes and time can originate from social capital of operators and strategic collaborations among managers and scientists. As climate diverges from historical baselines and the realm of managers’ experiential knowledge, new conceptual frameworks are needed to structure conversations, influence research relevancy and impact, and drive imaginative solutions among researchers, managers, and local communities for socio-ecological systems. We provide simplified frameworks to help guide conversation, future research, and new imaginative solutions for systems-scale knowledge needs and adaptation to address increasingly uncertain and complex change at multiple scales. Practical considerations for adaptive strategies by grazing land managers with a changing climate will be accelerated through 1) collaborative efforts among managers and explicitly with science-management partnerships becoming more mainstream, 2) co-produced research with managers and researchers at ranch-scales, 3) development of communities of practice and associated learning opportunities, and 4) continued co-development and advancement of technologies and tools that result in high uptake adoption by ranch managers.

Practical considerations for adaptive strategies by US grazing land managers with a changing climate

AbstractWe outline practical considerations for grazing land adaptations with a changing climate, with an emphasis on the ranch operation scale and specific attention to directional climate changes and increased climate variability. These adaptive strategies fall into two themes: flexibility and learning under uncertainty. Ranches and livestock operations with greater land, social, or other capital resources may have more flexibility. Risk can be reduced for managers (ranchers, farmers, operators, and livestock managers) through participation in conservation or farm policy programs and/or market‐based approaches. Bolstering adaptive capacity across landscapes and time can originate from social capital of operators and strategic collaborations among managers and scientists. As climate diverges from historical baselines and the realm of managers’ experiential knowledge, new conceptual frameworks are needed to structure conversations, influence research relevancy and impact, and drive imaginative solutions among researchers, managers, and local communities for socio‐ecological systems. We provide simplified frameworks to help guide conversation, future research, and new imaginative solutions for systems‐scale knowledge needs and adaptation to address increasingly uncertain and complex change at multiple scales. Practical considerations for adaptive strategies by grazing land managers with a changing climate will be accelerated through (1) collaborative efforts among managers and explicitly with science–management partnerships becoming more mainstream, (2) co‐produced research with managers and researchers at ranch scales, (3) development of communities of practice and associated learning opportunities, and (4) continued co‐development and advancement of technologies and tools that result in high uptake adoption by ranch managers.

Securing the Environmental Water Requirements of Seasonally Ponding Wetlands: Partnering Science and Management through Benefit Sharing

Although environmental flow regime assessments are becoming increasingly holistic, they rarely provoke water managers to enact the adaptive water reallocation mechanisms required to secure environmental water for wetlands. The conditions that cause science-based environmental flow assessments to succeed or fail in informing the management of environmental water requirements remain unclear. To begin to resolve these conditions, we used process tracing to deconstruct the sequence of activities required to manage environmental water in four case studies of seasonally ponding wetlands in Mediterranean and Mesoamerican watersheds. We hypothesized that, when the flexibility and equitability of the socioeconomic system do not match the complexity of the biophysical system, this leads to a failure of managers to integrate scientific guidance in their allocation of environmental water. Diagnostic evidence gathered indicates that science-management partnerships are essential to align institutional flexibility and socioeconomic equitability with the system’s ecohydrological complexity, and thus move from determination to reallocation of environmental water. These results confirm that institutions e.g., river basin organizations need to be supplemented by motivated actors with experience and skill to negotiate allocation and adaptive management of environmental water. These institutional-actor synergies are likely to be especially important in water scarce regions when the need to accommodate extreme hydrological conditions is not met by national governance capacity. We conclude by focusing on benefit sharing as a means to better describe the conditions for successful science-based environmental flow assessments that realize productive efficiency in environmental water allocation i.e., recognition of multiple values for both people and ecosystems.

Gaining Insights about Forest Health Prescriptions from Loggers and Foresters: Understudied Voices in the Human Dimensions of Forest Health.

Maintaining healthy forests requires multiple individuals, including foresters who develop timber sale silvicultural prescriptions and loggers who implement those prescriptions, resulting in the transplantation of forest health science into workable management plans. However, data on the experiences, attitudes, and opinions of these two groups are often missing when developing or refining forest health treatment strategies. To explore the role that these groups play in sustaining forest health, we examined timber sale administrators' and loggers' perspectives on treatment approaches for eastern spruce dwarf mistletoe (Arceuthobium pusillum) (ESDM), a parasitic plant native to Minnesota that increases mortality and reduces growth rate and regeneration success of black spruce (Picea mariana). While ESDM has been managed for decades in black spruce stands in Minnesota, little is known about the effectiveness of the management approaches. Data were gathered through interviews and focus groups with loggers, as well as an online survey and focus groups with foresters who administer timber sales. Study participants identified a range of field-based barriers, knowledge gaps, and uncertainties that hamper the ability to effectively implement ESDM treatment strategies as designed, including financial, administrative, informational, policy-related, and environmental factors. These factors have a significant bearing on the ability to effectively implement ESDM treatment approaches; yet may be factors that were not known or considered when developing treatment strategies. This case study underscores the value of nurturing a science-management partnership to ensure that a broad set of voices are considered when developing or revising forest health treatment strategies.

Adaptation Strategies and Approaches for Managing Fire in a Changing Climate

As the effects of climate change accumulate and intensify, resource managers juggle existing goals and new mandates to operationalize adaptation. Fire managers contend with the direct effects of climate change on resources in addition to climate-induced disruptions to fire regimes and subsequent ecosystem effects. In systems stressed by warming and drying, increased fire activity amplifies the pace of change and scale of severe disturbance events, heightening the urgency for management action. Fire managers are asked to integrate information on climate impacts with their professional expertise to determine how to achieve management objectives in a changing climate with altered fire regimes. This is a difficult task, and managers need support as they incorporate climate adaptation into planning and operations. We present a list of adaptation strategies and approaches specific to fire and climate based on co-produced knowledge from a science–management partnership and pilot-tested in a two-day workshop with natural resource managers and regional stakeholders. This “menu” is a flexible and useful tool for fire managers who need to connect the dots between fire ecology, climate science, adaptation intent, and management implementation. It was created and tested as part of an adaptation framework used widely across the United States and should be applicable and useful in many fire-prone forest ecosystems.

Expanded Ethical Principles for Research Partnership and Transdisciplinary Natural Resource Management Science.

Natural resource researchers have long recognized the value of working closely with the managers and communities who depend on, steward, and impact ecosystems. These partnerships take various forms, including co-production and transdisciplinary research approaches, which integrate multiple knowledges in the design and implementation of research objectives, questions, methods, and desired outputs or outcomes. These collaborations raise important methodological and ethical challenges, because partnering with non-scientists can have real-world risks for people and ecosystems. The social sciences and biomedical research studies offer a suite of conceptual tools that enhance the quality, ethical outcomes, and effectiveness of research partnerships. For example, the ethical guidelines and regulations for human subjects research, following the Belmont Principles, help prevent harm and promote respectful treatment of research participants. However, science-management partnerships require an expanded set of ethical concepts to better capture the challenges of working with individuals, communities, organizations, and their associated ecosystems, as partners, rather than research subjects. We draw from our experiences in collaborative teams, and build upon the existing work of natural resources, environmental health, conservation and ecology, social science, and humanities scholars, to develop an expanded framework for ethical research partnership. This includes four principles: (1) appropriate representation, (2) self-determination, (3) reciprocity, and (4) deference, and two cross-cutting themes: (1) applications to humans and non-human actors, and (2) acquiring appropriate research skills. This framework is meant to stimulate important conversations about expanding ethics training and skills for researchers in all career-stages to improve partnerships and transdisciplinary natural resources research.

Using science management partnerships to develop landscape level indicators and assessments to measure vulnerability of Piñon-Juniper woodlands

The process of identifying tangible actions to conserve important resources in the face of climate change is challenged because of uncertainties regarding future conditions. There is also a lack of existing methods for evaluating the effectiveness of proposed management actions for mitigating negative impacts. For piñon-juniper (PJ) ecosystems within the Southwest U.S., efforts are further hampered by a lack of information on the direction and drivers of changing population trends. PJ ecosystems, while ecologically important, have been the focus of eradication efforts due to perceptions that they are encroaching into important grasslands. However, recent impacts of drought, insect outbreaks, and fire increasingly threaten these ecosystems. It is unclear at this time where and to what extent PJ ecosystems are vulnerable to climate change and other disturbances, challenging management. To develop a method for determining the current and future status of PJ ecosystems, we engaged with local land managers to identify key indicators and drivers of PJ population change and developed a vulnerability assessment approach based on these indicators. Our goal was to use this process to create data products that would assist resource managers dealing with rapidly changing landscapes. Borrowing from other successful assessments strategies, we used Adaptation Forums to facilitate stakeholder input to vet potentially relevant indicators of PJ status and response to climate change and other stressors. Through multiple iterations, we finalized a list of indicators that could be used to quantify vulnerability of PJ ecosystems. We then developed a vulnerability assessment framework that can systematically quantify risks to PJ based on these indicators and applied this framework to two landscapes in the southwestern U.S. This process allows us to support decision making processes by generating information on future PJ status even when data are incomplete.

Bridging the research-management gap: landscape science in practice on public lands in the western United States

ContextLandscape science relies on foundational concepts of landscape ecology and seeks to understand the physical, biological, and human components of ecosystems to support land management decision-making. Incorporating landscape science into land management decisions, however, remains challenging. Many lands in the western United States are federally owned and managed for multiple uses, including recreation, conservation, and energy development.ObjectiveWe argue for stronger integration of landscape science into the management of these public lands.MethodsWe open by outlining the relevance of landscape science for public land planning, management, and environmental effects analysis, including pertinent laws and policies. We identify challenges to integrating landscape science into public land management, including the multijurisdictional nature and complicated spatial pattern of public lands, the capacity of agencies to identify and fill landscape science needs, and perceptions about the meaning of landscape approaches to management.ResultsWe provide several recent examples related to landscape monitoring, restoration, reclamation, and conservation in which landscape science products were developed specifically to support decision-making.ConclusionsWe close by highlighting three actions—elevating the importance of science-management partnerships dedicated to coproducing actionable landscape science products, identifying where landscape science could foster efficiencies in the land-use planning process, and developing scenario-based landscape models for shrublands—that could improve landscape science support for public land planners and managers.

Assessing and adapting to climate change in the Blue Mountains, Oregon (USA): Overview, biogeography, and climate

The Blue Mountains Adaptation Partnership (BMAP) was established to increase climate change awareness, assess vulnerability to climate change, and develop science-based adaptation strategies for national forest lands in the Blue Mountains region of northeast Oregon and southeast Washington (USA). The BMAP process included (1) development of a science-management partnership, (2) a vulnerability assessment of the effects of climate change on natural resources and infrastructure, (3) development of adaptation options that will help reduce negative effects of climate change and assist the transition of biological systems and management to a changing climate, and (4) ongoing dialogue and activities related to climate change in the Blue Mountains region. This special issue of Climate Services describes social context and climate change vulnerability assessments for water use and infrastructure, vegetation, and riparian ecosystems of the Blue Mountains region, as well as adaptation options for natural resource management. This manuscript introduces the special issue, describing the management, biogeographic, and climatic context for the Blue Mountains region; the climate change vulnerability assessment and adaptation process used in BMAP; and the potential applications of the information described in the special issue. Although the institutional focus of information in the special issue is U.S. Forest Service lands (Malheur, Umatilla, and Wallowa-Whitman National Forests), the broader social context and adaptation options should be applicable to other lands throughout this region and the Pacific Northwest.

Adapting forest management to climate change: The state of science and applications in Canada and the United States

Over the last decade, considerable progress has been made in developing vulnerability assessment tools and in applying these methodologies to identify and implement climate change adaptation approaches for forest ecosystems and forest management organizations in Canada and the United States. However, given that adaptation processes are in early stages, evaluation of approaches across agency, organizational, and geographic boundaries is critical. Thus, we conducted a qualitative comparison of three conceptual frameworks for climate change vulnerability assessment and adaptation efforts in the Canadian and United States forestry agency contexts. We focus our comparison on components of the conceptual frameworks, development process, intended users, similarities and differences in institutional contexts (geographic and organizational), and implementation. Finally, we present case studies to illustrate how the frameworks have been implemented on the ground and in different contexts. Despite different trajectories of development, the Canadian and US forest agencies have developed similar conceptual frameworks for vulnerability assessment and adaptation. We found that key components of the conceptual frameworks included: establishing a science-management partnership; evaluating current forest conditions and management objectives; conducting detailed science-based vulnerability assessments; developing adaptation approaches and on-the-ground tactics; implementing adaptation tactics; and monitoring outcomes and adjusting as needed. However, the contexts in which these frameworks are implemented vary considerably within and between countries, mostly because of differences in land ownership, management norms, and organizational cultures. On-the-ground applications, although slow to develop, are beginning to proliferate, providing examples that can be emulated by others. A strategy for accelerating implementation of adaptation in Canada and the United States is suggested, building on successes by federal agencies and extending to public, private, and crown lands.

Collaborative Adaptive Rangeland Management Fosters Management-Science Partnerships

Rangelands of the western Great Plains of North America are complex social-ecological systems where management objectives for livestock production, grassland bird conservation, and vegetation structure and composition converge. The Collaborative Adaptive Rangeland Management (CARM) experiment is a 10-year collaborative adaptive management (CAM) project initiated in 2012 that is aimed at fostering science-management partnerships and data-driven rangeland management through a participatory, multistakeholder approach. This study evaluates the decision-making process that emerged from the first 4 yr of CARM. Our objectives were to 1) document how diverse stakeholder experiences, epistemologies, and resulting knowledge contributed to the CARM project, 2) evaluate how coproduced knowledge informed management decision making through three grazing seasons, and 3) explore the implications of participation in the CARM project for rangeland stakeholders. We evaluated management decision making as representatives from government agencies and conservation nongovernmental organizations, ranchers, and interdisciplinary researchers worked within the CARM experiment to 1) prioritize desired ecosystem services; 2) determine objectives; 3) set stocking rates, criteria for livestock movement among pastures, and vegetation treatments; and 4) select monitoring techniques that would inform decision making. For this paper, we analyzed meeting transcripts, interviews, and focus group data related to stakeholder group decision making. We find two key lessons from the CARM project. First, the CAM process makes visible, but does not reconcile differences between, stakeholder experiences and ways of knowing about complex rangeland systems. Second, social learning in CAM is contingent on the development of trust among stakeholder and researcher groups. We suggest future CAM efforts should 1) make direct efforts to share and acknowledge managers’ different rangeland management experiences, epistemologies, and knowledge and 2) involve long-term research commitment in time and funding to social, as well as experimental, processes that promote trust building among stakeholders and researchers over time.

Vulnerability of grazing and confined livestock in the Northern Great Plains to projected mid- and late-twenty-first century climate

The Northern Great Plains (NGP) region of the USA—which comprises Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Nebraska—is a largely rural area that provides numerous ecosystem services, including livestock products, cultural services, and conservation of biological diversity. The region contains 25% of the Nation’s beef cattle and approximately one-third of the confined beef cattle, as well as the largest remaining native prairie in the US—the Northern Mixedgrass Prairie. With rising atmospheric CO2, the NGP is projected to experience warmer and longer growing seasons, greater climatic variability, and more extreme events (e.g., increased occurrence of large precipitation events). These climatic changes may affect livestock production both directly via physiological impacts on animals and indirectly via modifications to forage, invasion of undesirable plants, and increased exposure to parasites. This raises concerns about the vulnerability of grazing livestock operations and confined livestock operations to projected changes in mid- (2050) and late- (2085) twenty-first century climate. Our objectives are to (1) describe the NGP’s exposure to temperature and precipitation trends, inter-annual variability, and extreme events; (2) evaluate the sensitivity of beef cattle production to direct and indirect effects imposed by these projected climatic changes; and (3) provide a typology of adaptation strategies to minimize adverse consequences of projected changes and maximize beneficial consequences. Agricultural managers have developed considerable adaptive capacity to contend with environmental and economic variability. However, projected climatic changes, especially the increased frequency and magnitude of weather extremes, will require even greater adaptive capacity to maintain viable production systems. Consequently, regional vulnerability to projected climatic changes will be determined not only by ecological responses but also by the adaptive capacity of individual managers. Adaptive capacity in the NGP will differ from other regions, in part because projections suggest some opportunities for increased livestock production. Adaptations in both grazing and confined beef cattle systems will require enhanced decision-making skills capable of integrating biophysical, social, and economic considerations. Social learning networks that support integration of experimental and experiential knowledge—such as lessons learned from early adopters and involvement with science-based organizations—can help enhance decision-making and climate adaptation planning. Many adaptations have already been implemented by a subset of producers in this region, providing opportunities for assessment, further development, and greater adoption. Context-specific decision-making can also be enhanced through science-management partnerships, which aim to build adaptive capacity that recognizes multiple production and conservation/environmental goals.

Adaptive Silviculture for Climate Change: A National Experiment in Manager-Scientist Partnerships to Apply an Adaptation Framework

Forest managers in the United States must respond to the need for climate-adaptive strategies in the face of observed and projected climatic changes. However, there is a lack of on-the-ground forest adaptation research to indicate what adaptation measures or tactics might be effective in preparing forest ecosystems to deal with climate change. Natural resource managers in many areas are also challenged by scant locally or regionally relevant information on climate projections and potential impacts. The Adaptive Silviculture for Climate Change (ASCC) project was designed to respond to these barriers to operationalizing climate adaptation strategies by providing a multiregion network of replicated operational-scale research sites testing ecosystem-specific climate change adaptation treatments across a gradient of adaptive approaches, and introducing conceptual tools and processes to integrate climate change considerations into management and silvicultural decisionmaking. Here we present the framework of the ASCC project, highlight the implementation process at two of the study sites, and discuss the contributions of this collaborative science-management partnership.

Developing and Implementing Climate Change Adaptation Options in Forest Ecosystems: A Case Study in Southwestern Oregon, USA

Climate change will likely have significant effects on forest ecosystems worldwide. In Mediterranean regions, such as that in southwestern Oregon, USA, changes will likely be driven mainly by wildfire and drought. To minimize the negative effects of climate change, resource managers require tools and information to assess climate change vulnerabilities and to develop and implement adaptation actions. We developed an approach to facilitate development and implementation of climate change adaptation options in forest management. This approach, applied in a southwestern Oregon study region, involved establishment of a science–manager partnership, a science-based assessment of forest and woodland vulnerabilities to climate change, climate change education in multiple formats, hands-on development of adaptation options, and application of tools to incorporate climate change in planned projects. Through this approach, we improved local manager understanding of the potential effects of climate change in southwestern Oregon, and enabled evaluation of proposed management activities in the context of climatic stressors. Engaging managers throughout the project increased ownership of the process and outcomes, as well as the applicability of the adaptation options to on-the-ground actions. Science–management partnerships can effectively incorporate evolving science, regardless of the socio-political environment, and facilitate timely progress in adaptation to climate change.

Climate Change Vulnerabilities and Adaptation Options for Forest Vegetation Management in the Northwestern USA

Recent vulnerability assessments, conducted in diverse regions in the northwestern United States, indicate that many commonalities exist with respect to projected vulnerabilities to climate change. Dry forests are projected to have significant changes in distribution and abundance of species, partially in response to higher temperature and lower soil moisture, but mostly in response to projected increases in extreme events and disturbances—drought, wildfire, and insect outbreaks. Wildfire and mountain pine beetles have caused extensive mortality across millions of hectares in this region during the past decade, and wildfire area burned is projected to increase 200%–300% by mid-21st century. Science–management partnerships associated with recent assessments have identified an extensive list of adaptation options, including both strategies (general planning) and tactics (on-the-ground projects). Most of the options focus on increasing resilience to disturbances and on reducing current stressors to resource conditions. Adaptation options are generally similar across the biogeographically diverse region covered by assessments, suggesting that there may be a limit on the number of feasible responses to climate change. Federal agencies in the northwestern United States are now using these assessments and adaptation approaches to inform sustainable resource management and planning, mostly through fine tuning of existing practices and policies.

Is 'Resilience' Maladaptive? Towards an Accurate Lexicon for Climate Change Adaptation.

Climate change adaptation is a rapidly evolving field in conservation biology and includes a range of strategies from resisting to actively directing change on the landscape. The term ‘climate change resilience,’ frequently used to characterize adaptation strategies, deserves closer scrutiny because it is ambiguous, often misunderstood, and difficult to apply consistently across disciplines and spatial and temporal scales to support conservation efforts. Current definitions of resilience encompass all aspects of adaptation from resisting and absorbing change to reorganizing and transforming in response to climate change. However, many stakeholders are unfamiliar with this spectrum of definitions and assume the more common meaning of returning to a previous state after a disturbance. Climate change, however, is unrelenting and intensifying, characterized by both directional shifts in baseline conditions and increasing variability in extreme events. This ongoing change means that scientific understanding and management responses must develop concurrently, iteratively, and collaboratively, in a science-management partnership. Divergent concepts of climate change resilience impede cross-jurisdictional adaptation efforts and complicate use of adaptive management frameworks. Climate change adaptation practitioners require clear terminology to articulate management strategies and the inherent tradeoffs involved in adaptation. Language that distinguishes among strategies that seek to resist change, accommodate change, and direct change (i.e., persistence, autonomous change, and directed change) is prerequisite to clear communication about climate change adaptation goals and management intentions in conservation areas.

Overcoming the challenges of monitoring and evaluating environmental flows through science–management partnerships

ABSTRACTEnvironmental flows programmes can be controversial, given that they transfer water from consumptive to environmental uses. It is, therefore, imperative that their performance is assessed against their anticipated ecological benefits. However, environmental flows present both technical and institutional challenges that cannot be addressed by traditional approaches to monitoring and evaluation. We present a framework that is currently being employed to evaluate the effectiveness of environmental flows in Victoria, Australia. The framework encourages a shift from expert-based models of ecological response to flow variation to those developed using the so-called ‘evidence-based’ methods that have become commonplace in medicine. The framework relies on close collaboration between scientists and managers for the design of monitoring programmes, collection and collation of data, and analysis and interpretation of results. Results will inform adaptive management of environmental flows in Victoria and improve basic understanding of the ecological impacts of changes in flow regime. Our experience suggests that the technical and institutional challenges for monitoring and evaluating environmental flows can be mostly overcome by close and continuing collaboration between managers and researchers. We are unaware of any equivalent programmes anywhere in the world and believe that our framework is transferable to any other large-scale environmental flows monitoring programme.

Assessing Watershed-Wildfire Risks on National Forest System Lands in the Rocky Mountain Region of the United States

Wildfires can cause significant negative impacts to water quality with resultant consequences for the environment and human health and safety, as well as incurring substantial rehabilitation and water treatment costs. In this paper we will illustrate how state-of-the-art wildfire simulation modeling and geospatial risk assessment methods can be brought to bear to identify and prioritize at-risk watersheds for risk mitigation treatments, in both pre-fire and post-fire planning contexts. Risk assessment results can be particularly useful for prioritizing management of hazardous fuels to lessen the severity and likely impacts of future wildfires, where budgetary and other constraints limit the amount of area that can be treated. Specifically we generate spatially resolved estimates of wildfire likelihood and intensity, and couple that information with spatial data on watershed location and watershed erosion potential to quantify watershed exposure and risk. For a case study location we focus on National Forest System lands in the Rocky Mountain Region of the United States. The Region houses numerous watersheds that are critically important to drinking water supplies and that have been impacted or threatened by large wildfires in recent years. Assessment results are the culmination of a broader multi-year science-management partnership intended to have direct bearing on wildfire management decision processes in the Region. Our results suggest substantial variation in the exposure of and likely effects to highly valued watersheds throughout the Region, which carry significant implications for prioritization. In particular we identified the San Juan National Forest as having the highest concentration of at-risk highly valued watersheds, as well as the greatest amount of risk that can be mitigated via hazardous fuel reduction treatments. To conclude we describe future opportunities and challenges for management of wildfire-watershed interactions.