ecosystem spatial analysis presentation - british columbia · pdf filebiodiversity. •use...

1

Coastal Information Team

Ecosystem Spatial AnalysesApril 2, 2004

OVERVIEWOVERVIEW•Scope, Purpose, Process

•Conservation Targets

•Conservation Goals

•Impacts

•Spatial Analysis

•Options and Scenarios

•Results

•Summary

2




•Impacts

•Spatial Analysis


•Results

•Summary

ESA terms of Reference

• Identify areas of biodiversity significance and set conservationpriorities for the CIT study area

• Use credible, transparent and repeatable planning techniques grounded in the principles of conservation biology

• Use explicit goals that can be translated into quantitative, operational benchmarks

• Create robust end products for communicating our results to the CIT, planning tables, and other appropriate stakeholders

• Integrate results into an ecologically based and shared framework for taking action and measuring results.

3

ESA Team

• Conservation Science Inc.• The Nature Conservancy of Canada• The Nature Conservancy (U.S.)• Living Oceans Society• Round River Conservation Studies • Min. of Sustainable Resource Management• Min. of Water, Air and Land Protection

4

SOURCES OFSOURCES OFINFORMATIONINFORMATION

• Government– MSRM– WALP– DFO

• Industry• NGO’s• Experts & Expert

Workshops

5

Data SourcesData Sources

• Administrative Boundaries• Bald eagle – known nest sites• Bedrock geology• Biogeoclimatic zones• CIT region• CIT subregions• Dams• Digital Elevation Model• Estuaries• Foreshore tenures• Protected Areas – proposed, candidate,

OIC areas• Heron distribution• Heron – known colonies• Herring spawning segments• Imagery – Landsat 7

•Land use•Marine flora – eelgrass, kelp beds•Marine mammals – grey and humpback whales, sea lions, seals•Offshore Oil & Gas tenures•Salmon escapement•Salmon bearing streams•Coastal Waterbird Inventory Database•Sea bottom substrate•Sea temperature, salinity,•TSA forest cover•Shorezone Units•Special Elements occurrences•SSPEM•TRIM•TSA forest data from ssPEM•Watershed Atlas

The Planning ProcessSelect

Conservation Targets

Set Conservation

Goals

Assess Viability/ Condition

Spatial Analysis

Options and Scenarios

6




•Impacts

•Spatial Analysis


•Results

•Summary

Conservation TargetsConservation Targets

–Terrestrial

–Freshwater

–Marine Nearshore

–Marine Deepwater

•Special Elements

•Focal Species

•Ecosystem Representation

7

• Species• imperiled, declining,

endemic

• Communities• rare plant communities• rare aquatic habitats

• Special Features• Unique environments,

e.g. hot springs, karst formations, species aggregations sites

Special ElementsSpecial ElementsBiodiversity & Scale

Geog

raph

ic S

cale

Local

Intermediate

Coarse

Regional

8

Seabird Colonies

Population Density and Marine Usage

CIT Marine AnalysisCIT Marine Analysis

D. Gunn

British ColumbiaBritish ColumbiaHerring Spawn

Keystone Species


9

Focal SpeciesFocal Species

• Wide-ranging• Low densities, large habitat

requirements or key habitat attributes

• Habitat Suitability Modeled

Terrestrial Focal SpeciesTerrestrial Focal Species

• Grizzly Bear• Black Bear• Mountain Goat• Black-Tailed Deer• Northern Goshawk

12

Freshwater Focal SpeciesFreshwater Focal Species

• Tailed Frog

• Steelhead– Winter Run– Summer Run

• Salmon– Sockeye– Coho– Chinook– Chum– Pink, Odd Year– Pink, Even Year

13

•DFO salmon escapement data for over 2000 salmon runs sampled for over 50 years.

•Run / population viability was assessed using trend analysis on DFO escapement data as well as expert review

•Biomass

•Salmon stock areas were defined for each salmon species based on expert review and known escapement data

Salmon and SteelheadSalmon and Steelhead

Chinook EscapementsLower Skeena River

14

Salmon and SteelheadSalmon and Steelhead• Representation of salmon escapement trend per

stock over time

• The stock trends were summarized into 2 slope classes -Stable or Declining:

• Stock Biomass divided into High and Low categories

• Total of 4 Status Classes

– Stable Trend / High Biomass– Stable Trend / Low Biomass– Declining Trend / High Biomass– Declining Trend / Low Biomass

18

0

50

100

150

200

Pink

(Eve

n Ye

ar)

Pink

(Odd

Yea

r)

Sock

eye

Chi

nook

Coh

o

Chu

m

Sum

mer

Ste

elhe

ad

Win

ter S

teel

head

Stable / High Biomass

Stable / Low Biomass

Declining / High Biomass

Declining / Low Biomass

(576)

Figure 6.3.1. Summary of salmon species condition within CIT study area.

Num

ber o

f sal

mon

po p

u lat

i on

uni ts

19

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Nass Skeena North Coast CentralCoast

Haida Gwaii

Stable / High BiomassStable / Low BiomassDeclining / High BiomassDeclining / Low Biomass

Figure 6.3.4. Summary of Sockeye condition by EDU.

Num

ber o

f sal

mon

po p

u lat

i on

uni ts

Representation AnalysesRepresentation Analyses

• The “coarse filter”• Represent range of natural variation along

environmental gradients• Protect high-quality examples of all

ecosystems in a region. • Ecosystems - Dynamic spatial assemblages of

communities that:– occur together in similar geomorphological patterns– are tied together by similar ecological processes or

environmental gradients – form a robust, cohesive and distinguishable spatial unit

20

TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS

• Terrestrial Ecosystem Analysis Units– Site productivity and BEC– BEC Variant x Site Index x Seral Stage – Distinguish between impacted and non-impacted • Productivity

– 3 classes: Low = 1-14, Medium = 15 – 21, and High = >22

• Seral Stage– Forest cover, ssPEM, image analysis– 3 classes: old growth forest, young intact forest,

logged forest

21

TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS

• Focal Ecosystems– Floristics x Structure x Ecosection– Represent a full range of old growth structural,

functional, and age characteristics– Florisitics (species) - Inventory type group,

alliance – Structure - height class, ageclass

– High Volume Old Growth– Medium Volume Old Growth– Woodland

22

Freshwater Ecosystems

• Freshwater communities have not been identified in most places.

• There is generally a lack of adequate data on native freshwater assemblages.

• There are gaps in information on the quality of freshwater environments with regards to biodiversity.

•Use physical habitat variables to model freshwater communities because:

23

Freshwater Classification Framework

• Drainage Area– headwater vs. mainstem

• Biogeoclimatic Zone– alpine tundra vs. coastal

western hemlock• Geology

– basalt vs. limestone• Gradient

– cascading vs. meandering• Glacial Connectivity• Dominant Lake/Wetland Features

Freshwater Ecosystem Types

•Drainage Area

•Biogeoclimatic Zone

•Geology

•Gradient

•Glacial Connectivity

•Presence of Dominant Lake / Wetland Features

24

Marine Nearshore Ecosystem Representation

25

Mapped Geological Attributes

• morphology• substrate• exposure• stability• dimensions (width, length,

slope)• man-made features• debris accumulations

substrate + exposure = biotic assemblage

26

CIT Marine Analysis

Jeff ArdronLiving Oceans Society

Prince Rupert

Port Hardy

Bella CoolaWaglisa

Q. Charlotte City

Campbell R.

BathymetryShaded Relief

27

Benthic Complexity

Offshore: Slope, Gullies, Seamounts.

Inshore: Rocky Reefs, Archipelagos.

50 km search radius

Continental Scale





•Impacts

•Spatial Analysis


•Results

•Summary

28

Conservation Goals•How much is enough?

•Quantitative basis for identifying and prioritizing areas

•Number and Distribution–Multiple examples

–Stratified across geographic range

Conservation Goals

Species Remaining

Habitat Remaining

100%

90%

70%

50%

30%

10%

50%

Species Numbers and Habitat Area

EcoregionalGoal of 30% of

Historical Extent

(e.g. circa 1850)

Estimated Range of Species Loss

29

Conservation Goals•Lack of Population Viability Assessments

•Available literature

•Consensus around 40 to 60% of a region

•40% lower responsible limit

•EBM 30 to 70% of natural variation

•ESA guideline: 30, 40, 50, 60 and 70% representation of targets




•Impacts

•Spatial Analysis


•Results

•Summary

30

Wide-Ranging Carnivores

Condition Assessment

• Measuring overall impact – Urban/Agricultural Areas– Logged Area– Road Impact Area: 200m buffer around roads

(overlap between physical impacts (20m –200m) and indirect impacts (200m – 2 km)

– Overlapping impacts counted only once (greatly reduces effect of missing and patchy data)

31

Viability Assessment

Class Description

Intact1 no industrial impact; pristine

Intact2 < 2% area impacted; modified

Intact3 < 10% of area impacted and < 10% of area in proximity to rivers/streams impacted

Restoration1 < 15% of area impacted and < 0.6 km/km2 road density

Restoration2 < 25% of area impacted and < 0.6 km/km2

Developed > 25% of area impacted or > 0.6km/km2

road density

32




•Impacts

•Spatial Analysis


•Results

•Summary

33

Special ElementsFocal Species

EcosystemsImpacts

Land Use

Data Integration

Data Integration

• Portfolio Design• select viable

occurrences of each target (species and systems) to meet goals

34

SITES Algorithm

COST = area + species penalty + boundary length

• Selects smallest overall area needed to meet target goals and by selecting planning units that are clustered or adjacent to existing reserves rather than dispersed.

• Minimizes Portfolio Cost

Data Integration

• Optimized all targets combined• 3 different boundary length modifiers • 5 different goals settings

– 30 to 70 percent in 10% intervals

• Summed Runs– Identify which analyses units are most frequently selected in

optimization runs

35




•Impacts

•Spatial Analysis


•Results

•Summary

Options• Summary of all 300 SITES runs

– summed solution score out of 300

• Indicates the importance of each planning unit or watershed to the overall conservation solution

• Indication of “Value”, “irreplaceability”, “Utility”Summed Solution Score Quintile Conservation

Value Rating

> 180 Top 2/5 High

< 179, > 120 3/5 Medium

< 119, > 60 4/5 Low

< 60 5/5 Not Ranked

36

Options

• Impacts – 3 “Condition” classes– Intact– Modified– Developed

• Impacts x Value: Surrogates for Irreplaceability and Vulnerability

• Criteria for ESA Conservation Tiers or “Options”

Condition

Intact Modified Developed

Value

High 1 1 2

Medium 1 2 3

Low 2 3 3

ConservationTiers

37

Scenarios

Preliminary Land-use ScenariosA. Unconstrained Analysis

B. Base Case – existing protected areas locked in

C. Candidate Case – existing protected areas and candidate areas locked in

D. Option Areas Case – existing protected, candidates, and option areas locked in




•Impacts

•Spatial Analysis


•Results

•Summary

39

Fig 6.3 Goal performance for CIT ESA Conservation targets under exisiting and proposed protected area scenarios

(Candidate and Options areas limited to Central Coast LRMP Boundaries)

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

0.45

12% 30% 50% 70% 100%

Goal threshold option

Prop

ortio

n of

targ

ets

mee

ting

goal

th

resh

old

Existing ProtectedAreas

Existing plusCandidates

Existing plusCandidates andOption Areas

Protected Area Scenario

Fig 6.2 Progress Toward Goals for CIT ESA SITES Summed Solutions: Existing Protected Areas Locked In.

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Percent of study area in conservation solution

Prop

ortio

n of

targ

ets

for w

hich

goa

l th

resh

old

is re

ache

d or

exc

eede

d

100705030

Goal Threshold

40

Condition

Intact Modified Developed

Value

High 1 1 2

Medium 1 2 3

Low 2 3 3

ConservationTiers

•Average Approx.3000 Ha

•~ 7000 watersheds

41





42



0

10

2 0

3 0

4 0

50

6 0

70

No areas lo cked in Exis t ing p ro tectedareas lo cked in

Exis it ing p ro tectedareas and cand id ate

areas lo cked in

Exis ting p ro tected ,cand id ate, and o p t io n

areas lo cked in

P ro t e c t e d A re a S c e na rio

Fig 6.1 Conservation tiers for CIT ESA analysis units,compared between protected area scenarios

Tier Three

Tier Two

Tier One

Protected

43



46

Yellow: Places almost always chosen.Pink: Areas chosen about ½ the time.Blue: Areas can be considered useful in only some reserve networks.93 data layers

6 different size targetsx 4 levels clumpingx 100 runs each= 2,400 solutions

Summed Solutions: A Measure of

Conservation Utility





•Impacts

•Spatial Analysis


•Results

•Summary

47

Next Steps

• Integrate marine, and terrestrial/ freshwater results

• Alternative LRMP scenarios • Alternative reporting units• Post hoc analysis• Conclusions• Final database

ecosystem spatial analysis presentation - british columbia · pdf filebiodiversity. •use...

Documents