Ecosite Decision Support System for Sustainable Forest Management in Manitoba

1
Ecosite Decision Support System for Sustainable
Forest Management in Manitoba

• Project Overview

2
Partnership Approach

• Maximizes the opportunity to share available
  ideas, information, existing data and costs
  (financial support)
• Provides a forum for knowledge transfer among
  participants and interested stakeholders
• Promotes the use of the system across an array of
  users
• Ensures that the benefits of the project are
  immediately available

3
Contributing Partners

• University of Manitoba
• Tembec - Pine Falls
• Tolko Manitoba
• LP Canada Inc.
• GeoSpatial International

• ManitobaModel Forest
• Manitoba Conservation
• Manitoba Hydro
• Ducks Unlimited Canada

4
National Financial Awards

• Canadian Forest Service (CFS)
• Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council
  of Canada (NSERC)
• Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council
  of Canada (SSHRC)

5
Background

• A new approach for an SFM Decision Support System
  (DSS)
• to benefit a diverse array of users of forest
  resource information
• DSS based upon a land classification at a level
  useful for management, using
• Canada Committee on Ecological Land
  Classification (CCELC) created in 1976
• Forest Ecosystem Classification (FEC) for
  Manitoba developed in 1995
• An Ecosite-level classification unit required

6
What is an Ecosite?

• Unit Established by the Canada Committee on
  Ecological Land Classification
• spatial unit between lower order ecoelements and
  the ecosection level
• mappable at scales of 110,000 to 120,000 with
  areas of 10-1,000 ha
• relevant to resource use decision making
  (habitat, succession, land use, forestry, etc.)
• the fundamental unit for the Manitoba DSS
• the level at which biodiversity and recreational
  associated values will be incorporated

7
CCELC Hierarchy
8
Higher Order Land Units Ecozones
9
Project Goals

• Develop a methodology for consistent
  classification of ecosites and associated
  forestry/non-forestry values
• Build upon existing lower-order ecoelements
• e.g. aerial photo interpretation - stand
  delineation/typing, PHA.
• Produce a common communication tool
• e.g. resource managers, users and stakeholders
• Assist in forest resource management
  decision-making processes

10
Ecosite Classification for Manitoba

• Project to utilize a mapping approach
• refine already available V- and S- Type
  ecoelements in the Manitoba FEC
• formulate a consistent classification key and
  ecosite descriptions
• Ecosites are based upon abiotic features that
  generally remain stable and biotic associations
• Includes terrestrial and aquatic systems

11
Ecosite Development Process

• Preliminary Manitoba ecosite key and descriptions
  (completed 2001)
• review of existing ecosites and keys from similar
  jurisdictions
• integration of Manitoba FEC V S Types
• draft preliminary key for field testing and
  revision for Manitoba
• 40 preliminary ecosites
• refining ecosite-ecoelement relationship

12
Ecosite Development Ecosite Key
13
Ecosite-Ecoelement Relationships
14
Ecosite Development Technical Review

• Review preliminary ecosites key and descriptions
  (winter 2001)
• features to delineate ecosite polygons
• associations of ecoelements
• survey methodology
• integrate with partners
• e.g. Manitoba Forest Lands Inventory Technical
  Advisory Committee (FLITAC)
• Ducks Unlimited (for wetlands)

15
Field Trial Data Collection (2002-2003)

• Sample site locations determined in conjunction
  with partners
• Utilize new and existing data including already
  typed polygons, PHA and other data as available
• incorporate information from Duck Mountain pilot
  project
• Work with industry partners to field test ecosite
  keys

16
Post-field Work

• Utilize information from on-ground data
  collection and test trials of the keys
• refinement of the ecosites key
• including additions to FEC V S - Types
• ecosite description fact sheets including
  associated ecological values
• Workshops to review progress and ensure data
  transferability
• Development of DSS in 2003
• incorporate user needs and associated values

17
Ecosite DSS for Manitoba Incorporating
Biodiversity Values
18
Biodiversity Goals and Objectives

• Objective is to incorporate biodiversity values
  into our DSS and the Ecological Land
  Classification of Manitoba
• considers the scaling properties of biodiversity
  from the ecoelement to landscape scale
• focuses on habitat structural elements
• utilizes a mapping approach to identify areas of
  high diversity

19
Measuring Diversity For DSS

• The Ecosite sampling and mapping methodology
  previously discussed is compatible with assessing
  diversity
• Diversity has strong scaling properties from the
  ecoelement to landscape scale

20
Diversity hierarchy

• Landscape
• Abiotic and Biotic relations
• Number of community types
• Spatial arrangement
• Community
• Interactions among populations
• Species composition
• Guilds
• Population
• Interactions of individuals with habitat
• Species viability
• Genetics (Subspecies)

21
Diversity as an Associated Value

• Landscapes are the unit on which we manage
  forest biodiversity
• we incorporate diversity into the DSS by building
  links between levels of the hierarchy
• ecoelement based diversity principles to
  landscape-level
• ecoelement measures of habitat structure to
  landscape pattern
• Measures of habitat structure and spatial pattern
  included in DSS at Ecosite scale

22
Scaling Diversity to the Ecosite-level

• Diversity from measuring forest ecosite pattern
  on the landscape
• from Manitoba FRI, remotely sensed imagery and
  ecosite polygon maps (e.g. DU)
• assesses diversity among clusters of ecosites
• Examine habitat structure along toposequences
• assesses habitat diversity as changes in forest
  structure within the ecosites (e.g. L-P)
• aerial survey with paraglider (scaling-up)
• Approach emphasize habitat diversity

23
Mapping Ecosite Polygon Diversity
24
Mapping Ecosite Habitat Structure Toposequences
25
Advantage of Habitat Structure/Scaling Approaches

• Complete species and RTE lists, genetic studies
  etc. are ideal, but
• cost prohibitive
• requires intensive sampling over entire season
• species are often missed (RTE) or some are never
  counted (insects, mosses, etc.)
• time scale, structure and pattern on the
  landscape often not considered
• Habitat approach provides measures compatible
  with forest management
• spatially explicit, mappable, can be examined
  over time

26
Ecosite DSS for Manitoba Incorporating
Recreation Values

• Recreation Habitat Suitability Index

27
Context

• Forest recreation takes a variety of forms with
  each requiring specific environmental conditions
• Therefore individual forest recreation types can
  be seen as species with distinct habitat
  requirements
• To date most forest recreation research has
  attempted to ascribe economic value
• We need to identify preferred habitat
  requirements for recreation species

28
Goals and Objectives

• To integrate recreational values into Ecosite DSS
  for sustainable forest management in Manitoba
• inventory of outdoor recreation activities and
  environments
• develop a recreation atlas for the province
• identify feasibility of using recreation habitat
  suitability indices in forest planning and
  management

29
Methodology
Phase 2
Phase 1
Phase 3
Prior knowledge
GIS Layer Expert Interviews
Spatial Model
Species-environment relationship
GIS Layer Grey Literature
Species distribution map
Analysis of species-environment relationship
GIS Layer Academic Literature
Species
Observations
30
Coarse and Fine Filter Approach
31
Phase 1 Overview

• Expert interview - Delphi approach
• Site inventory
• Literature/media review
• Determine landscape criteria to model recreation
  habitat suitability indices

32
Preliminary Grey Literature Inventory

• Forest recreation represents a diverse array of
  activities

60
Angling
41
Hunting
36
Wildlife Viewing
35
Snowmobiling
33
Canoeing
29
X-country skiing
27
Hiking
23
Camping
23
Swimming
18
Power Boating
of References
33
Interview Step Methodology

• Will approximate a snowball sampling technique
• Sampling concludes when significant repetition
  occurs
• Experts will provide
• diverse perspectives
• data on landscape requirements
• specific activities and intensities

34
Phase 2 Overview

• Based on phase 1 preliminary sites identified
• document what people do and where
• Link activity with ecoelements
• creates the potential for future ecosite
  identification
• Field trial for specific recreation types
• RHSI (recreation habitat suitability index)

35
Phase 3 Overview

• Forest recreation atlas/RHSI at ecosite level as
  part of DSS (2003)
• forest recreation activities in Manitoba are
  diverse
• an atlas will assist in supporting SFM
• RHSIs likely to have complex distribution

36
Ecosite Decision Support System for Sustainable
Forest Management in Manitoba

• Concluding Remarks

37
Summary

• Foundation ecological classification established
• refinement continuing
• Incorporation of associated non-timber values for
  biodiversity and recreation
• ongoing iterative process
• Closely linked to sustainable forest planning and
  management
• cooperative partnerships established
• developing a DSS integrating a range of forest
  values for ease of application by the forest
  industry

38
(No Transcript)