Bioregional planning and management:

Protecting natural capital within lived-in and working landscapes: The case of the Beaver Hills

Guy S. SwinnertonProfessor Emeritus, University of Alberta

Member, Board of Directors & Protected Areas Working Group,and Chair, Planners Working Group, Beaver Hills Initiative

Presentation to RLS 452, Parks CourseUniversity of Alberta

February 5, 2009

Presentation outline Linking protected areas to the wider landscape – the

evolution of bioregional planning and management. Bioregional planning – distinguishing characteristics. Common threads – bioregional planning, biosphere

reserves, and protected landscapes (IUCN Category V). The Beaver Hills Initiative – A case study.• Overview of the Beaver Hills - Cooking Lake Moraine• The Beaver Hills Initiative (BHI) - Why and how it began• The BHI: Principles, practice, and accomplishments• The BHI: An example of the benefits and challenges of

bioregional planning and management• Questions and discussion.

Protected Area

A clearly defined geographical space, recognized, dedicated and managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long-term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values.

Dudley/IUCN (2008, p. 8)

Protected areas are a critical anchor in maintaining the ecological health of both wildlife and natural ecosystems.

NRTEE (2003, p. 18)

Naturalness and the IUCN Protected Area Categories

Protected areas Outside protected areas

Line shows degree ofenvironmental modification

Ia/IbII/III

IVVI

V

IUCN protected area management categories

Most natural conditions Least natural conditions

Ia - Strict nature reserve; Ib - Wilderness area; II - National park; III - Natural monument or feature;IV - Habitat/species management area; Category V - Protected landscape/Seascape; VI - Protected area with sustainable use of natural resources. Based on Dudley (2008)

Protected areas as open systemsAlternative types of systems1. Mechanical system – a system that works2. Organic system – a system that evolves

Parks and protected areas

Closed system(traditional paradigm)

Open system(new paradigm)

Linking protected areas to the wider landscape

Ecological and environmentally focused approaches: (linking with ecological systems)

Buffers, corridors and ecological networks Biogeographical regions/eco-regions (representative areas)

Integrated approaches: (linking with ecological & human systems)

Bioregional planning Biosphere reserves Protected landscape/seascape (IUCN Category V) Ecosystem approach (Convention on Biological Diversity)

Adapted from Crofts (2004)

The whole landscape

perspectiveProtected areas are important anchors in any conservation system. At the same time, the long-term health of these areas depends in large measure on the health of the lands around them. Conservation planning therefore needs to take whole landscapes into account to ensure that our natural capital is secured over the long term.

NRTEE (2003, p. 45)2003

A fundamental requirement:Sustaining natural capital

Natural capital includes the land and water resources that anchor our quality of life and support economic activity such as agriculture, forestry, tourism and recreation.

Natural capital includes living ecosystems, biodiversity, ecological integrity, and landscape character.

Natural capital provides the raw materials used in the production of manufactured goods.

Natural capital is subject to deterioration through excessive growth and waste, natural resource extraction, and modification of the landscape. Worbets & Berdahl (2003).

Canada West Foundation

Progressive approach to sustainable living

Gray & Davidson. (2000)

What is a bioregion?

The IUCN describes a bioregion as:A land and water territory, the limits of which are not defined by political boundaries but the geographical boundaries of human communities and ecological systems.

A bioregion therefore refers to both the geographicalterrain and a terrain of consciousness(i.e. to a place and the ideas that have developed about and how to live in that place).

Characteristics of bioregional planning Adaptive management Biotic viability Cooperative skills development Economic sustainability Full involvement of all stakeholders Institutional integration International co-operation (trans boundary areas) Leadership and management Reliable and comprehensive information Research and monitoring Restoration and rehabilitation Social acceptance Interrelated core(s), corridors and matrices Use of knowledge

Bioregional managementThe bioregional approach seeks to maintain biological diversity across entire landscape regions while meeting people’s needs. The key characteristics of this approach involves combining scientific, informational, social, and economic considerations to define management opportunities and to implement programmes of action and investment.

Miller & Hamilton (1999)

The bioregional approach

Core protected area

Buffer zone

Linkage/Corridor

Adapted from Miller (1999)

River

The difficulty of managing the rural or “middle” landscape

The lived- in and working landscapes of the countryside are a “cultural phenomena, both in terms of the way they are created and the way they are perceived: they are the result of the human hand and mind. ….[they are] a kaleidoscopic mixture of built and planted, manipulated and designed, semi-natural and natural –[that] simply defies the neat departmental geometry of [government]. Trow (2007, p. 3)

Yellowstone to

YukonY2Y

Thousand Islands Frontenac ArchBiosphere Reserve

Algonquin to Adirondack: A2A

Biosphere Reserves

UNESCO (2003)

CAPACITYBUILDING

531 Biosphere Reserves in 105 Countries: 15 in Canada

Biosphere Reserves

Relationship between IUCN management categories and Biosphere Reserve zones

IUCN ProtectedArea Management Category

Biosphere Reserve ZonesCore Buffer Transition

Ia Yes No No

Ib Yes No No

II Yes No No

III Yes No No

IV Yes Yes No

V No Yes Perhaps

VI Perhaps Yes Perhaps

Yes = compatibility of management purpose No = incompatibility of management purposePerhaps = management purpose may be compatible

2002

“The need to make sure that some places remain in broadly their natural condition is as great as ever – but it is not enough. Protected areas should also include those lived-in, humanized landscapes where people and nature live in some kind of balance. These places and the communities that live in them, are important in themselves and for the lessons that they teach us about sustainable living. This is the idea behind Protected Landscapes and Seascapes, or Category V in the IUCN system of protected area categorization.”

Yolanda KakabadseIUCN President

Protected Landscapes/SeascapesIUCN Protected Area Management Category V:

Lived-in and working landscapes

A protected area where the interaction of people and nature over time has produced an area of distinct character with significant ecological, biological, cultural and scenic value; and where safeguarding the integrity of this interaction is vital to protecting and sustaining the area and its associated nature conservation and other values.

IUCN/Dudley (2008)

NationalHeritage

AreasUSA

Brecon Beacons National Park, Wales

Protected Landscapes:Objectives and approach

To maintain a balanced interaction of nature and culture.

To provide opportunities for enjoyment, well-being and socio-economic activity through recreation and tourism.

To provide a framework to underpin active involvement by the community in the management of valued landscapes or seascapes and the natural and cultural heritage they contain.

To provide natural products and environmental services.

To act as models of sustainability so that the lessons can be learnt for wider application.

A process to accommodate and guide change.

Adapted from IUCN/Dudley (2008)

The concept of landscape

Nature

The past

Physical attributes(scenery, nature,historic heritage)

People

The present

Associative values(social and cultural)

Landscape arises from the interaction of people with their environment over time and provides a sense of place

Adapted from Phillips (2002)

Management systems for Protected Landscapes

Sustainable Landscapes

Natural capital and landscape characterNatural resources Biological resources Historical & cultural resources

Adaptive management systemsKnowledge Science Collaboration Openness Equity Respect

Stewardship Funding

Local support Political commitment

Fair decisions

Adapted from Ogden (2003)

Change ThreatsSustainable principles

Beaver Hills InitiativeTarget area

location

Beaver Hills – Cooking Lake Moraine and Alberta’s natural regions and sub-regions

Dry Mixedwood Boreal Forest

Central Parkland

Dry Mixedgrass

Central MixedwoodBoreal Forest

LowerFoothills

UpperFoothills

Alberta Parks & Protected Areas

Public land

Beaver Hills

Distribution ofpublic land within the Beaver Hills and the Edmonton region

Beaver Hills: The wider regional landscape

Young (2003)

The Beaver Hills: The bioregion Beaver Hills/Cooking Lake Moraine:

knob & kettle topography, 1600km2 in extent. A disjunct portion of the Dry Mixedwood Boreal Forest sub-region of Alberta located within the Province’s Central Parkland sub-region. Higher elevation, cooler, wetter climate.Rich in wetlands. Extensively treed upland.

Supports high biological diversity of vegetation, waterfowl, mammals, and birds.

Designated protected areas account for just over 25% of the area.

Provincial Environmental Significant Area.

NCC Masterpiece Landscape.

Increasingly impacted by one of Canada’s fastest growing metropolitan regions.

Protected Areas: IUCN Categories within the Beaver Hills

Elk Island National Park

Cooking Lake-Blackfoot

IUCN Category II IUCN Category II

IUCN Category IV IUCN Category V

Cooking Lake Blackfoot

The Beaver Hills: Landscape character & sense of place

Elk Island

Cooking Lake -Blackfoot

MinistikMiquelon

Agricultural capability of the Beaver Hills

Geogratis, CLI

Implications of low agricultural capability within the Beaver Hills

Discouraged widespread clearing of land for arable agriculture - extensive areas of natural habitat remain.

Constrains economically viable agriculture. Selling off land for development and/or moving out of

agriculture is seen as a means of realizing capital. As a result, agricultural land often becomes an

abandoned and marginalized landscape. In contrast, the amenity value of varied topography and

natural habitat is a positive attraction for country residential development.

Water quality

Landscape change and environmental qualityissues within the Beaver Hills

Water quality

Monitoring

Air qualityMonitoring

Threats to the biodiversity of the Beaver Hills

• Unsustainable grazing management• Invasive non-native/alien species• Vegetation encroachment • Site disturbance from industrial activity • Residential development • Recreational development • Fire suppression • Draining wetlands • Off highway vehicles

Nature Conservancy of Canada (2008)

Stakeholders in land stewardship

Elk Island National Park

Elk Island National Park’s contribution to national and international conservation initiatives

Elk restorationWood bison restoration Plains bison conservation Trumpeter swan conservation

1999

Revised 2003New plan approved 2005

Elk Island National Park: Managing the Park

Elk Island National Park: Thinking beyond boundaries

Beaver Hills InitiativeHow it began

Early 2000: Concern raised in reaction to proposed oil and gas development in the proximity of Elk Island National Park [EINP].

March 2000: Park staff promote the need for coordinated and long-term land-use planning in the Beaver Hills.

May 2000: Park staff initiate discussions with the five municipalities, landowners, selected provincial government departments, and NGOs about developing a partnership for adopting a proactive approach to land-use planning within in the Beaver Hills.

Fall 2001: Science Advisory Committee EINP identifies the relevance of the Protected Landscape approach to bioregional planning within the Beaver Hills.

September 9, 2002: A draft vision and operating principles, and a Coordinating Committee is established for the BHI.

November 7th 2002: Initial meeting of the BHI Coordinating Committee.

Beaver Hills Initiative

Conceptual framework for reconciling conservation and

change

Bioregional planning & management

The Protected Landscape approach

Beaver Hills Initiative: Partners Local Governments: Beaver County, Lamont County, Leduc County,

Strathcona County.

Government of Alberta: Agriculture and Rural Development, Environment, Municipal Affairs, Sustainable Resource Development; Tourism, Parks and Recreation.

Government of Canada: Parks Canada Agency (Elk Island National Park), Agriculture & Agri-Food Canada (PFRA).

Academia: University of Alberta. Industrial Partners: Alberta Industrial Heartland Assoc., Northeast Capital

Industrial Assoc., Fort Air Partnership, Strathcona Industrial Assoc. Non-Government Organizations: Alberta Invasive Plants Council,

Alberta Fish & Game Assoc., Alberta Conservation Assoc., Alberta Lake Management Society, Beaver Hills Dark Sky Preserve, Ducks Unlimited Canada, Kalyna Country, Nature Conservancy of Canada, North Saskatchewan Watershed Alliance, Royal Astronomical Society of Canada.

Beaver Hills InitiativeVision

The Beaver Hills Initiative values the region for its natural beauty, quality of life, and supports cooperative efforts to sustain the quality of water, land, air, natural resources, and community development.

Beaver Hills InitiativeMission

Working together for a sustainable region, through shared initiatives and coordinated action.

Beaver Hills InitiativeWorking together

Authority for decision making rests with each municipality; BHI does NOT make decisions for the municipalities; BHI acts in a supporting role by providing information to

decision makers; Cooperation and teamwork is key; Recognition of the varied skill sets of the team.

BHI - Guiding principles Respect appropriate use of land and water and the importance

of our natural environment in maintaining or improving our quality of life.

Foster long-term land use planning with clear consistent goals and objectives.

Promote regional coordination by reflecting the regional vision in all municipal land use policies, plans and actions.

Success requires community participation, input and support.

Conserve, enhance, and monitor improvements or impacts to the environment.

Guiding principles – cont’d Success requires commitment and leadership from all levels of Government.

Strive for a common level of data (identify critical data needed, improve access, and share where appropriate.

Determine habitat requirements and strive to ensure that the optimum amount is maintained.

Each partner has a responsibility to the environmental, social, and economic well being of the region.

W o r k i n g G r o u p s

Board of Directors

FiscalAgent

ExecutiveTeam

Executive Director

Planners GISParks

& Protected

Areas

Research &

Monitoring

Communic.&

EducationCouncillors

Beaver Hills InitiativeOrganization chart

To develop a framework for accommodating and guiding change by identifying appropriate opportunities for conservation and/or development within the Beaver Hills in order that the essential character of the landscape is protected and the quality of life of the community is enhanced and sustained.

To operationalize the BHI Land Management Principles.

To outline a consistent approach to planning decision-making geared to sustainable development.

To identify specific best management practices (BMPs) for sustainable resource development.

Goals of the Land Management Framework for the Beaver Hills

The BHI retained D. Patriquin (Spencer Environmental Management Services Ltd.) and I. Montgomerie (IMI Strategics) as consultants to undertake this work.

Beaver Hills InitiativeLand Management Areas (LMAs)

Issue: To demonstrate the distribution of biophysical features, indicative of the BHI land management planning principles, and provide an overview of the landscape character of the Beaver Hills.

Outcome: A GIS model that identifies in an aggregated format the areas where key environmental resources are present.

• A model that provides the basis for determining the extent of different Land Management Areas that reflect the relative importance and concentration of this natural capital.

• A model that provide as basis for bioregional planning and management within the Beaver Hills.

BHI Landscape Management Area principles

Quality of Life Essential Character Property Rights

Biodiversity Wetlands Native Upland

Habitat and Corridors

Species of Concern

Water Watersheds Water Quality

Land Land Use

Air Air Quality

Green – Existing Protected Areas

Blue – Natural Water & Wildlife Linkage

Yellow – Country

White – Multiple Use

Beaver Hills InitiativeLand Management

Areas map

Beaver Hills InitiativeApplying the Land Management Framework Assess current status of environment policy within the partner municipalities. Review tools and jurisdictions available to municipalities to manage environmental resources. Develop a process of moving towards consistent policies within the guidelines of the Land Management Framework. Identify Ecological Functional Zones (EFZs) based on: air quality, surface water, groundwater, biodiversity (core biodiversity area), and habitat connectivity. Determine Best Management Practices specific to each EFZ that will permit the identification of appropriate decisions and management actions at a strategic level and for development proposals.

Land use planning framework:Land use provision checklist

Beaver Hills Initiative

Maps of ecological function zones

BH Moraine:Ecological network

BH Moraine:Functional connectivity

BH Moraine:Key segments

BH Moraine:Landscape connectivity Surface

Water Risk –Parcels Only

GroundwaterContaminationWater Risk

Structural ecological connectivity

Patriquin, Spencer Environmental Management Services Ltd.

Functional ecological connectivity

Patriquin, Spencer Environmental Management Services Ltd.

BH Moraine:Ecological network

BH Moraine:Key segments

BH Moraine:Landscape connectivity

An information base in GIS and narrative format that provides in-put for planning decision-making at strategic and site specific levels for use by individual counties: e.g. preparation of Municipal Development Plans and Land Use By-Laws.

More informed and higher level evaluation of individual proposals for development and changes in land use.

The LMA, and especially the ecological network and connectivity information, provides supporting data for NCC and DU programs, and helps to identify “sending areas” for potential transfer of development credit (TDCs) initiatives.

Assists in the implementation of the Framework through:-resources, tools, and process.

Relevance of the LMA Frameworkand Reference Guide

• 1998 •2006

Tools forlandscapeprotection

and environmentalstewardship

Regulatoryinstruments

Voluntaryapproaches

Economicpenalties

Economicincentives

Motivational information, incentives, and educationAdapted from: Allen, Kilvington, & Horn (2002)

BHI: Currently funded projects Phase II of a fire history study Development of wetland assessment protocols Wetland inventory of existing and historically drained wetlands Ecological integrity and monitoring initiative Invasive alien species management plan and inventory Ag Capture: an agricultural land use inventory and GIS mapping Ag-Profiling, a geospatial assessment of the agri-food industry Transfer of development credits feasibility study and model development Air quality monitoring study using non-vascular plants Woodlot management.

Natural capital:The basis of nature-based outdoor

recreation and sustainable rural tourism

Natural capital including biodiversity, ecosystems, and landscape character are essential setting attributes for nature-based outdoor recreation experiences and many forms of sustainable rural tourism.

Parks and protected areas are not only important outdoor recreation and tourism opportunities in and of themselves but they help to enhance the overall value and attraction of a region.

Sustainable outdoor recreation & tourism

Beaver Hills Initiative: The future Implement the Strategic Plan to 2010 Fulfill Business Plan reporting requirements Successful completion of projects On-going education and awareness Strengthen and build partnerships Incorporate the socio - economic dimensions Examine sustainable tourism potential of the Beaver Hills Prepare Biosphere Reserve nomination

Benefits of bioregional planning: Collaboration and partnership

Facilitates the development of a greater awareness and appreciation for the unique qualities of the Beaver Hills.

Sharing of knowledge and expertise across disciplines and jurisdictions that has promoted innovation and the implementation of mutually beneficial projects and longer term outcomes – capacity building.

Development of a model that reflects a collective vision for accommodating and guiding change within the Beaver Hills that will protect the essential character of the region while enhancing the social and economic well-being of individuals and communities.

Beaver Hills Initiative: Benefits

Recognition of the benefits of a regional perspective to land-use planning and the adoption of management practices that ensure the sustainable use of natural capital.

Provides a forum for dialogue with a commitment to addressing and reconciling land use planning issues.

Leverage of funding. Support of research/science projects that have

demonstrable practical application in support of conservation and sustainable development.

Challenges associated with bioregional planning and management as

illustrated by the Beaver Hills Initiative Implications of the geographical disparity between the

boundary and area of the bioregion and the municipal/counties and the area of the Beaver Hills within their respective jurisdictions.

Implications for contributing funding to the BHI. Implications for the relevance of research, the Land

Management Framework, etc. to the wider county area. Concern that the BHI is going to override the autonomy

of individual counties in terms of land use planning and specifically development control.

Beaver Hills Initiative: Challenges

Effectiveness of two-way communication between BHI representatives and the interest group they represent. Capacity of representatives to contribute to the work of the BHI Board and its Working Groups (time, resources, agency priorities and commitments). Differences between counties in terms of their respective planning priorities and their schedules for the preparation and approval of municipal development plans and by-laws. Differences between the counties in terms of their commitment to conservation as reflected in their municipal plans, by-laws and policies. Decision making by the Board of Directors;

process & who makes decisions?

Beaver Hills Initiative

Additional information: BHI Website: www.beaverhills.ab.ca

Contact person:

Brenda Wispinski, Executive Director BHI

Strathcona County ph: (780) 464-8280

wispinsk@strathcona.ab.ca

Questions and discussion