Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Case Studies in EI Measurement: Fathom Five & Banff National Parks Gilles Seutin Parks Canada World Park Congress 2003 Summary • Monitoring at Parks Canada • Fathom Five National Park • Banff National Park • Challenges • Lessons Learned Monitoring at Parks Canada • Currently more than 700 projects • Increase over the last 10 years In general: • Ad-hoc, project-based • Poor indicators of overall park management objectives/effectiveness • Weak links to greater ecosystem monitoring From Project Outputs… Project Management Plan Recommendations for adjustments measurable targets Output monitoring Project Report … to Management Outcomes Park Management Plan assessment and recommendations measurable management targets EI monitoring State of Park Report Great Lakes Ecosystem Bruce/Fathom Five Ecosystem FFNP – Monitoring Framework Ecological Sustainability Physical Chemical Biological Social Water Level Water Quality Species at Risk Visitor Use 1 indicator Shoreline Dev. 2 indicators Residential Dev. 5 indicators 2 indicators 2 indicators Reason Invasive Species Education • Affect nearshore aquatic habitat 1 indicator 2 indicators Target • 0 new cribLower docks Trophic Partnerships 2 indicators 2 indicators • no loss of fish habitat Dock Facilities Fish Population 3 indicators Cultural Resources 1 indicator FFNP – Indicators Phytoplankton Species Composition 700 Dinophyceae Iron (size a) Cryptophyceae 600 Diatomeae 80% Iron (size b) 500 Chrysophyceae Chlorophyta 60% Cyanophyta ppm Percentage Composition 100% Iron Concentrations in Zebra Mussel Tissue 400 300 Background: 250 ppm 40% 200 20% 100 0% 0 July August Sampling Period October ZM-1 Wetmore ZM-2 ZM-3 ZM-4 Eagle Cove Sw eepstakes Lighthouse Size classes : a - 1.75 cm, b - 2.25 cm ZM-5 Little Tub FFNP – Report Card Physical Chemical Biological Social Sustainability Sustainability Sustainability Sustainability Water level Water Quality Shoreline Development ? Lower Trophic Levels Fish Community Education Partnerships Invasive Species Visitor Use ? ? Species at Risk Cultural Resources Banff National Park BNP – Ecosystem Model TERRESTRIAL AQUATIC PARK-WIDE: Climate and air quality, Geology and landforms, Species and genetic diversity, productivity ALPINE WETLANDS RIVERS & STREAMS ALPINE LAKES SUBALPINE MONTANE THERMAL SPRINGS BNP – Conceptual Model HUMANS Patterns of Use, Access, Development, Understanding Habitat Fragmentation Wildlife Behavior -Displacement -Habituation -Corridor Use -Human Conflict GRIZZLY BEARLYNX, WOLVERINE Predation/ Food Source Herbivory/ Food Source MOOSE, ELK, small mammals, BIGHORN SHEEP WILLOW- HEDYSERUM -LICHEN GRASSLANDS -BUFFALOBERRY WHITEBARK PINE Mortality and Translocation -Hunting [outside the park ] -Road/Rail -Problem Wildlife Fire Control and Use, Blister Rust & Non-Native Plant Introduction BNP – Indicators Indicator: Area burned 40000 Wildfire 35000 Burn Area (ha) Objective: Maintain and restore native vegetation communities 30000 Prescribed Fire 25000 20000 Target 15000 10000 5000 Target: 50% of longterm fire cycle 0 80 18 00 19 20 40 60 80 19 19 19 19 Decade Start Year BNP – Report Card Objective Indicator Target Condition Maintain and restore native vegetation communities Area of land burned Maintain 50% of long-term fire cycle () Burned area achieved for park overall Forest composition () Whitebark pine in decline Comparison Fathom Five NP: • Linked to ecoregional monitoring • Comprehensive • Good communication of results Banff NP: • Linked to management objectives • Targeted • Uses conceptual models by ecosystem Both: • Few monitoring targets Challenge: Comprehensiveness Monitoring of Mgnt. Issues • direct management-related issues • short term results (2003-2008) • PMP provides direction, active management PARK MONITORING PROGRAM Monitoring of Core EI Indicators • comprehensive assessment of park EI • medium to long term results (> 10 years) • monitoring framework/EIS provides direction Challenge: Coordination Typical Indicators National (System-wide) Bio-Regional (Ecozone) Local (Park-specific) water/air quality, AVHRR, phenology, land use changes focal species, ecosystem monitoring, fragmentation PMP-driven indicators, local human use issues Challenge: Agree on Framework and Approach Biodiversity Functions Stressors Species richness Succession Land-use patterns Population dynamics Productivity Habitat fragmentation Trophic levels Decomposition Pollutants Nutrient retention Climate Goal Objective Indicator Target Ecological Manage damage Vegetation trampling VTI not to Integrity to vegetation index (VTI) exceed 4.0 Challenge: Communicate Results Park SOP Report Card songbirds Realm System preyEcosystems base Terrestrial changes Forests Wetlands Freshwater Ecosystems prey base Streams Lakes changes forest floor invertebrates Biodiversity prey base changes climate change changes in vegetation structure/composition Ecosystem Function salamanders bark/leaf invertebrates leaf litter nutrient concentration herbivory Human Stressors – In Park forest canopy Human Stressors – Outside Park nutrient availability and uptake foliar nutrient concentrations ? climate change subcanopy < 1m chopsticks Other stressors subcanopy > 1m ? forest floor mineralization acid rain soil Ca/N nutrient leaching Code stressor effect Management Concern Symbol Condition Change ecological effect immediate management condition is worsening process indicator action is requiredstream water monitoring there is an important no change in condition management concern there is a minor condition Conceptual model showing relationships betweenis improving management concern indicators and two ecosystem monitored ecological no management condition trend unknown ? stressors –concern acid rain and climate change unmonitored factors monitored indicator soil process stressor biotic process Lessons Learned Need linkages to management objectives Need comprehensive coverage of EI Need system-wide consistency Need integration with greater ecosystem reporting Need clear indicators and targets Need effective communication of results Need integrated data management