Limits of Acceptable Change

1

• Limits of Acceptable Change
• (LAC)
• Pilot Project

2
Todays Session

• Introduction
• Why undertake the LAC Pilot?
• The 9 Step LAC process
• Recommendations from LAC Pilot
• Next Steps

3
Challenge Response

• Increasing recreation tourism demand and user
  conflicts
• 2006 - BC Govt and Tourism Industry Joint
  Steering Committee (JSC) propose to pilot test
  LAC system
• Goal is better management of public and
  commercial recreation use on Crown land

4
Objectives of Pilot Project

• To test the utility of the LAC system for tourism
  and recreation management in BC
• Propose how LAC can be used in other areas of BC
  considering the lessons learned from the pilot
  projects

5
LAC Pilots

• ILMB MTSA secure resources
• for 2 pilots
• Johnstone Strait area
• Golden/Windy Creek area

6

• Johnstone Strait

7
Broughton/ Johnstone Straits Map
Johnstone Strait Project Area
8
Johnstone Strait Pilot

• Mixture of commercial operators and public
  kayaking whale-watching
• Growing concerns about campsite use
• Little guidance for water-based rec/tourism in
  existing land use plans
• LAC seen as practical way of involving wide range
  of stakeholders in collaborative approach

9
Golden Pilot
Golden LAC Pilot
Golden
10
Golden/Windy Creek Pilot

• Area attracts motorized non-motorized
  recreation (heli-skiing, hiking, fishing,
  snowmobiling, ORVs)
• Both public and commercial use
• Area covered by Golden Backcountry Recreation
  Access Plan (GBRAP)
• Objective is to build on existing GBRAP

11
Context Scope

• LAC pilot project
• Linkages with land use plans and policy
• Involvement with First Nations, local govt,
  stakeholders

12
Overall Objective of LAC

• Control change, rather than try to prevent it
• Decide what management actions required to
  maintain or enhance desired conditions

13
Challenges

• Balance the needs and wants of public and
  commercial recreation
• Maintain the social and environmental values on
  which theyre based
• While faced with
• Increasing recreation user conflicts
• Increasing environmental impacts

14
Carrying Capacity

• Typical response to adverse impact -- limit
  number of users
• Amount of use not necessarily primary factor
• Other factors (type of use, season of use, etc) ?
  major role in degree of impact

15
Limitations of Carrying Capacity

• Impacts on resource and social conditions vary
  with the rec activity
• No strong cause-and-effect relationship between
  amount of use and impacts
• Carrying capacity is based on value judgements --
  not good science
• Confuses inputs and outputs -- collect data on
  number of visitors instead of what really counts
  ecological and social conditions

16
Need a New Approach

• IT HAS BECOME OBVIOUS THAT
• With visitor use, change is inevitable
• There is NO magic number of users
• The question revolves around how much change is
  acceptable?
• Management approaches best focus on objectives

17
LAC Builds on Existing Plans

• Since mid-1980's, LAC replacing traditional
  carrying capacity
• Now an important tool for managing recreational
  impacts on public lands
• LAC not meant to insert a new level of planning
  or replace existing plans
• LAC builds on existing land use plans from a
  recreation and tourism perspective

18
LAC Process

• Developed in mid-1980s to
• Help decide what kinds of resource and social
  conditions are acceptable in recreational
  settings, and
• To prescribe actions to protect or achieve those
  conditions.

19
Four Components of LAC

• Specify acceptable and achievable resource and
  social conditions (measurable)
• Compare existing conditions with those judged
  acceptable
• Identify management actions necessary to achieve
  these conditions
• Monitor and evaluate management effectiveness

20
9 Step LAC Process

• Identify issues concerns
• Describe opportunity classes
• Select indicators of resource and social
  conditions
• Inventory existing conditions
• Specify standards for resource and social
  conditions
• Identify opportunity classes
• Identify management actions
• Select preferred opportunity classes
• Implement actions and monitor conditions

21
LAC Assumptions

• Change is inevitable
• Focus on human-induced change (not natural
  influences)
• Focus on changes that management actions can
  affect
• Diversity is desirable in settings and in
  conditions

22
Issues Concerns
Step 1

• Identify issues, concerns, and special values
• Recreation related
• Distinctive features and characteristics

23
Johnstone Strait Issues

• Impacts on whales
• Campsite Conditions Availability
• Recreation Experience
• Respect for First Nations
• Viability of local communities
• more.

24
Golden/Windy Creek Issues

• Implementation of GBRAP (ensuring GBRAP zonations
  are followed)
• Communication
• Minimizing recreation impacts on wildlife
• Expectations and experiences of backcountry
  recreationists minimizing potential user
  conflicts

25
Opportunity Classes
Step 2

• Shared vision on future conditions
• Conceptual at this stage -- no maps
• Provide mix of desired settings
• Different resource, social, and managerial
  conditions maintained
• Note in the Golden pilot GBRAP zones used as
  Opportunity Classes

26
JS Camping Opp Classes

• No camping
• Natural/ pristine beach camping, no toilets
• Rustic  - small campsites, possible toilets
• Moderately developed campsites, toilets
• Intensively developed campsites, toilets, fees
  likely

27
Select Indicators
Step 3

• An indicator is a measuring tool
• Helps recognize changes over time
• Selected in response to issues

28
JS Indicators
Step 3
29
Golden/ WC Indicators
Step 3
30
Inventory Conditions
Step 4

• Inventory existing resource and social conditions
  for indicators
• Baseline data needed to develop standards
• Key indicators help focus inventory

31
BRIM
32
Measurable Standards
Step 5

• Represent heart of LAC framework
• These are NOT goals!!
• Act as thresholds of acceptability, not what is
  desirable
• Predetermined point that triggers one or more
  management actions

33
Example Weight Gain

• Indicator is weight change
• Acceptable standard existing 2 kg
• Predetermine management action to be taken if
  standard breached e.g.
• Current weight 80 kilos
• Standard for acceptable weight is 82 kilo
• Action If I reach 82 kilo I will modify diet
  and activity

34
Setting Standards
Step 5

• Difficult and subjective
• E.g, no universally accepted standard for degree
  of impact tolerable at campsite
• Acceptable impact varies by location, by user
  expectation, by management resources, etc.
• Group consensus plays a vital part diverse group
  far more credible than govt alone

35
JS Standards
Step 5
36
Golden/ WC Standards
Step 5
37
Identify Opportunity Classes
Step 6

• Identify mix of conditions to be maintained or
  achieved
• Refine descriptions of opportunity classes
• Propose range of appropriate conditions for
  feedback

38
Learning from Experience

• Early LAC approach ? identify several alternative
  allocations
• Land use planning exp. in BC
• Used to improve LAC approach
• Converge on preferred allocation (rather than
  alternatives)

39
Shared Agreement

• Less positional and adversarial (people become
  protective of their choices)
• Tendency for outcome to be more widely accepted
  as a result of a cooperative process

40
Conceptualize Recreation Features Values

• High value recreation areas
• Use patterns
• Areas of concern or conflict

41
Identify Management Actions
Step 7

• Identify problems ? compare existing conditions
  with standards
• Identify management actions needed to realize
  acceptable conditions

42
Appropriate Management Actions

• Consider range of options
• First -- least intrusive (education,
  communication)
• ? To increasingly heavy-handed (regulatory,
  limiting numbers)

43
Proactive Management Actions

• Examples
• Develop Comprehensive Information Package and
  Website
• Establish an Implementation Team
• Provide an up-to-date, accurate map
• Offer relevant educational programs, on-site and
  off-site 

44
Management ActionsIf Standards Breached

• Examples
• Provide caretakers at various sites
• Rehabilitate sites to reach desired conditions,
  including waste mgmt
• Seasonal closure of sites
• Camping at designated sites only
• Introduce use permits

45
Finalize Opportunity Classes
Step 8

• Finalize allocation of classes
• Map opportunity classes
• Formalize opportunity classes (e.g. via campsite
  designations)

46
Opportunity Class Allocation
Step 8
Zone 4
Zone 3
Example from Swan Lake Management Plan
47
JS Opp classes
Example Allocation of Potential Opportunity
Classes Along Foreshore
48
Implementation and Monitoring
Step 9

• Implement management program to achieve
  objectives
• Schedule and implement actions
• Provide periodic, systematic feedback to verify
  effectiveness of management actions and objectives

49
Importance of Monitoring
Step 9

• Monitoring is fundamental to continuous
  improvement
• Involves regularly assessing strengths
  weaknesses of management decisions
• Follow-up monitoring normally weakest aspect of
  LAC process

50
Lessons Learned Key Recommendations
51
Recommendation 1

• The LAC system is fundamentally sound as a useful
  framework. It should be considered for use in
  addressing recreation access and management
  issues in BC in appropriate situations.

52
Recommendation 2

• The LAC system can be used to enhance networking
  and communication amongst recreational
  stakeholders, First Nations, government agencies
  and other interests, particularly in areas where
  existing or potential conflicts are significant.

53
Recommendation 3 A

• Government-to-government First Nations
  consultation is needed to determine if First
  Nations supports an LAC process, if appropriately
  designed to address their interests and concerns.
  

54
Recommendation 3 B

• With 3A in mind, contact key local stakeholders
  and agency staff (federal, provincial, local as
  appropriate) before making a decision whether to
  proceed with a project since broad representation
  is crucial to the success of an LAC project.

55
Recommendation 4

• The LAC process should be at least a one-year
  commitment, initiating with the first workshop,
  which is
• adequately supported by participants and
  government in multi-day workshops, and
• where needed information is compiled ahead of
  time (e.g. inventory)

56
Recommendation 5

• Support LAC projects with a field trip so that
  participants can see the area first hand and
  learn about key issues.
• A benefit of this is strengthened participants
  capacity and willingness to address difficult
  issues and work collaboratively.

57
Recommendation 6

• For continuous improvements to LAC
• seek participant feedback
• develop conclusions considering this feedback and
  the teams experience with the project
• track the benefits and costs of each project
  and

58
Recommendation 6 (cont)

• provide recommendations to an appropriate
  provincial government/ non-government body (like
  ILMB and JSC) who would be responsible for
  ensuring suggested improvements are conveyed to
  those involved in LAC projects.

59
Recommendation 7

• To equip project participants in developing
  standards
• Allow time and resources for an inventory of
  resource and social conditions early on.
• Conduct an associated user survey.

60
Recommendation 8

• Modify Step 6 of the LAC process to focus on
  reaching shared agreement on proposed allocation
  of opportunity classes

61
Recommendation 9

• Modify step 7 in the LAC process to encourage
  project participants to identify management
  actions that are both proactive (i.e. those
  needed to retain acceptable conditions) and
  reactive (i.e. triggered when standards are
  breached).

62
Recommendation 10

• Clarify the project approval process at the
  outset.
• Provide clear commitment in-principle to
  project implementation in the early stages so
  participants have confidence that their efforts
  will be valued and acted upon.
• This should help generate greater participation
  and engagement.

63
Recommendation 11

• That public involvement be an integral part of
  the entire process including project approval
  where
• Public review and comment opportunities are
  provided so that interests not directly
  represented in the process have an ability to
  comment and
• Gov-to-gov FN consultation occurs to help ensure
  aboriginal interests and concerns are fully
  considered

64
Recommendation 12

• Promote implementation and monitoring as a
  partnership activity that involves commercial and
  public recreation stakeholders, First Nations and
  the provincial government.

65
Recommendation 13

• Undertake LAC planning projects in areas where
  local public recreation user groups and guided
  adventure tourism operators jointly agree, along
  with local agency staff, that the effort is
  indeed a priority for them and that they are
  committed to supporting it.

66
Recommendation 14

• Prioritize LAC planning projects in areas where
  there are outstanding recreation management
  issues and/or potential conflicts, rather than
  areas with approved strategic recreation access
  and management plans in place.

67
Recommendation 15

• ILMB regional planning staff should initially,
  then in conjunction with local organizations,
  evaluate the need for LAC projects based on a
  risk assessment.
• This process should ideally involve the
  Inter-Agency Management Committee (IAMC).

68
Recommendation 16

• Following Recommendation 15, ILMB should
  prioritize projects (with the assistance of
  provincial bodies such as JSC) in consideration
  of regional and local-level evaluations of
  recreation/ tourism priorities.

69
Thank You for your Time

• Project Contact
• Julie Chace
• Integrated Land Management BureauMinistry of
  Agriculture and LandsTel [phone]    Fax
  [phone] Email julie.chace_at_gov.bc.ca
• Project Website
• http//ilmbwww.gov.bc.ca/rcsd/lac/index.html