1 / 21

Cumulative Impact Management: Cumulative Impact Indicators and Thresholds

Cumulative Impact Management: Cumulative Impact Indicators and Thresholds. Presented by: Salmo Consulting Inc. and AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. in association with Diversified Environmental Services GAIA Consultants Inc. Forem Technologies Ltd. May 29-30, 2003. Introduction.

colin-benson
Download Presentation

Cumulative Impact Management: Cumulative Impact Indicators and Thresholds

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Cumulative Impact Management:Cumulative Impact Indicators and Thresholds Presented by: Salmo Consulting Inc. and AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. in association with Diversified Environmental ServicesGAIA Consultants Inc.Forem Technologies Ltd. May 29-30, 2003

  2. Introduction Indicators and thresholds: ‘Speed limits’ for Cumulative Impact Management (CIM) Case Studies: Applying local information and knowledge in development of made-for-Northeast BC thresholds Moving Forward: Using thresholds in Northeast British Columbia as part of a broader Sustainable Resource Development Strategy

  3. Cumulative Impact Indicators:What are they? • Used to describe or monitor environmental or land use conditions • Provide common language for planning, assessment, management, monitoring, and research • Should be simple and easy to use • Should be numerical and easily calculated • Complementary suite of land use and habitat indicators most practical for CIM

  4. Cumulative Impact Indicators:Recommended Suite for Northeast BC • Land use Indicators • Access density • Stream crossing index • Habitat Indicators • Core area • Patch and corridor size

  5. Cumulative Impact Thresholds:What are they? • Objective, science-based standards • Linked to cumulative impact indicators • Clearly define desired outcome and ‘acceptable change’ • Recognize social, economic, and political factors • Can be used to evaluate acceptability of both project-specific and regional cumulative impacts • Already used in BC: • Air and water quality thresholds • Efficient and results-based • Tied to enhanced review and management decisions

  6. Cumulative Impact Thresholds:What are they?

  7. Cumulative Impact Thresholds:Tiered Thresholds • Reflect increasing degrees of concern • Provide a clear and integrated framework for assessment and management • Incorporate ecological, social, and economic values • Operating rules clear for all parties • Provide flexibility • Different land management regimes • Full spectrum of development proposals

  8. Cumulative Impact Thresholds:Tiered Thresholds • Cautionary Thresholds • Early warning • ‘Enhanced protection measures’ and monitoring • Ensures local data available • Target Thresholds • Acceptable value or range • ‘Restrictive protection measures’ and monitoring • Critical Thresholds • Maximum acceptable value • Impact management designed to keep indicator below this value

  9. Understanding the Landscape: Case Studies • Detailed evaluations in Blueberry and Sukunka Case Study areas • Document land use, fish and wildlife trends • Test CIM indicators and thresholds • Evaluate utility of readily-available data • Simulate future resource trends

  10. Understanding the Landscape: Case Study Findings • Readily-available resource data limits analyses • Access density and core area indicators both statistically related to moose and elk population indices • Predictive power equivalent to more detailed and costly habitat indicators • Published access density relationships may not apply directly to Northeast BC • ALCES simulations provide valuable historical and future insights

  11. Impact Management:Candidate Thresholds • Made-for-Northeast BC values developed as starting point • Tiered thresholds linked to LRMP management zones • Measure of ‘acceptable change’ • Results-based management • Focused on project review, but generally applicable

  12. Northeast BC LRMP Zones Resource Management Zone Management Intent Environment PriorityDevelopment Not Allowed Protected Areas Special Management Zones Environment and Wilderness PriorityLimited DevelopmentSpecial Protection Measures General Resource Management Zones Multiple Use PriorityExtensive Development Enhanced Protection Measures Development Priority Extensive Development Standard Protection Measures Enhanced Resource Development Zones

  13. Candidate Thresholds:Acceptable Change • Protected Areas/Special Management Zones • Managed to protect wildlife or wilderness values • Primary source habitat for all species • Relatively undisturbed areas for wilderness and backcountry recreation • ‘Very Low Risk’ • Thresholds established below lowest detected effect level for the most sensitive species

  14. Candidate Thresholds:Acceptable Change • General Resource Management Zones • Managed for wide variety of resource uses • Secondary source habitat for most species • Mixture of undisturbed and modified areas • ‘Low Risk’ • Thresholds established below lowest detected effect level for most species • More protective thresholds in defined Landscape Units • Candidate woodland caribou thresholds • Identified wildlife grizzly bear and bull trout thresholds

  15. Candidate Thresholds:Acceptable Change • Enhanced Resource Development Zones • Managed for intensive resource development • Neutral or sink habitat for most species • Primarily human-modified areas • ‘Moderate Risk’ • Thresholds established to sustain most species • More protective thresholds in defined Landscape Units • Candidate woodland caribou thresholds • Identified wildlife grizzly bear and bull trout thresholds

  16. Candidate Access Threshold Example

  17. Impact Management:Using Thresholds • Develop definitions of acceptable change • Use candidate thresholds as a foundation • Evaluate ecological, social, and economic implications • Develop standardized methods • Provide required land use data • Implement a pilot study to validate thresholds and optimize analysis, reporting, and review methods • Continue monitoring to refine thresholds and impact management

  18. Thresholds and CIM:Sustainable Resource Management • Generalized landscape and watershed thresholds (e.g. access density) and local/species-specific thresholds can be applied to all activities in region • Local: OGC Project Screener • Sub-regional: ‘Identified Wildlife’ guidelines • RMZs: Regional planning and management • Provincial: ‘State of the Environment’ reporting • Ongoing monitoring of indicator status and species response

  19. MUSKWA-KECHIKA MANAGEMENT AREA Environment Priority‘Very Low’ RiskPrecautionary Tiered Thresholds Protected Areas CaribouRange – Species-specificTiered Thresholds‘Very Low’ Risk Special Management Zones Environment and Wilderness Priority‘Very Low’ RiskStringent Tiered Thresholds General Resource Management Zones Multiple Use Priority‘Low’ Risk Moderate Tiered Thresholds Development Priority ‘Moderate’ Risk Least Stringent Tiered Thresholds Enhanced Development Zones Sustainable Resource Management

More Related