GOVERNMENT GUIDELINES ON PROTECTED AREAS

Transcription

1 Presented by Ministère du Développement durable, de l Environnement et des Parcs at the Forum on Protected Areas in the Abitibi-Témiscamingue Region September 21, 2012 Organized by the Abitibi-Témiscamingue Regional Conference of Elected Officers

2 Table of Contents 1. Background 3 2. Government Guidelines 3 3. Participation Process 4 4. Regional Overview of Protected Areas in the Abitibi-Témiscamingue Region 5 5. MDDEP Guidelines on Protected Areas for the Abitibi-Témiscamingue Region Conclusion 11 2

3 1. Background In 2009, Québec s network of protected areas covered 8.35% of the province. An overview of the state of this network was released in May On April 20, 2011, on the basis of the overview, the government adopted new strategic guidelines on protected areas. The goal is to expand the protected areas network to encompass 12% of Québec s territory. This would add approximately 65,000 km² to the existing network, for a total of 200,000 km². The process was initiated in 2011 with a view to meeting this quantitative objective by Government Guidelines The government s strategic guidelines on protected areas are divided into five themes. Together, they are designed to meet the qualitative goal of enhancing Québec s protected areas network. Areas to be added to the network must be selected based on their ability to improve the long term quality of the entire network and of each protected area (representativeness and effectiveness) and on the ecological services provided by the natural environments they encompass. The areas chosen must also be socially acceptable, and regional actors must be involved early on in the process. The five themes are as follows: 1. Representativeness of the protected areas network 2. Consolidation of the network of protected areas 3. Governance and participation by the public and aboriginal communities 4. Socioeconomic issues 5. Scientific knowledge Theme 1: Representativeness Previous action plans on protected areas ( and ) were implemented using the so-called representativeness approach. The ecological reference framework (see Appendix 1 for more details) developed by Ministère du Développement durable, de l Environnement et des Parcs (MDDEP) is a tool for ensuring that Québec s protected areas are appropriately distributed over the province s 1.7 million km² and that the network includes a sample of all the province s ecosystems. The framework is built around the coarse filter concept, which presumes that by protecting all types of ecosystems, we also protect all the species associated with those ecosystems. 1 Overview of Québec s Protected Areas Network Period : 3 This representativeness concept will be used again for the new protected areas to be created by Based on the findings of the overview, and especially the more precise assessments carried out for each of the administrative regions, the expansion of the protected areas network will serve to correct shortcomings, notably by including ecosystems that are underor non-represented in the existing network. Representativeness also means protecting rare, vulnerable, or threatened plant and animal habitats and exceptional ecosystems. In this case, the term fine filter is used. The objective of the representativeness concept is thus to enhance the protected areas network by protecting both rare elements (fine filter) and common ecosystems (coarse filter) that are not currently included in the network. Theme 2: Consolidation The network will be consolidated mainly by creating more strictly protected areas (International Union for Conservation of Nature categories I to III 2 ) that represent conservation cores. Note that the aquatic and biodiversity reserves correspond to IUCN s category III. The network can also be consolidated by enlarging existing protected areas in order to enhance their ability to maintain the ecological integrity of protected ecosystems. Special attention will also be paid to species and ecosystems that are particularly sensitive to climate change. In a second phase, the network can be improved and diversified, notably by adding categories IV, V, and VI protected areas, which could enhance connectivity or serve as buffer zones around the more strictly protected areas. 3 Theme 3: Governance and public and aboriginal participation All steps in the process of creating new protected areas should be participative and transparent. To this effect, MDDEP has invited the regional conferences of elected officers of Québec s various administrative regions to take part. In fact, regional bodies have been involved right from the beginning. The process is conducted in such a way that it dovetails as much as possible with regional land planning processes and those of the government ministries involved. 2 Guidelines for Applying Protected Area Management Categories: 3 Classification of protected areas in the Register: gouv.qc.ca/biodiversite/aires_protegees/registre/index.htm#classification

4 At the same time, MDDEP undertakes a similar process with the aboriginal communities concerned. Although the representativeness of the ecological elements to be protected serves as a guide for expanding the network, the current approach seeks to involve regional communities at each step to ensure that the associated cultural values are taken into consideration in the network of protected areas. Thus regional objectives or the cultural significance a community places on areas (e.g., exceptional landscapes, rivers of recreational importance, sites of aboriginal cultural significance) may give them conservation potential. Theme 4: Socioeconomic issues Social and economic issues associated with the creation of protected areas must also be taken into account. Thus the process takes into consideration the region s vision of development, existing rights granted on regional land, economic impacts that could affect businesses, particularly in the natural resource industry, as well as social repercussions for communities, especially access to the land. VI. Establishment of acceptable boundaries based on the constraints on each study area (which then become areas of interest) VII. Final consultation of regional bodies (regional conference of elected officers and RCM) and aboriginal communities concerned VIII. Creation of the protected area How these steps are implemented in each region may be adapted based on distinctive regional characteristics brought to the fore by the regional conference of elected officers. Therefore, to ensure the broadest possible participation by regional actors and Abitibi-Témiscamingue residents in implementing the first two steps, the Abitibi-Témiscamingue regional conference of elected officers has organized this forum on protected areas to define its regional objectives with regard to the creation of new protected areas. The participatory format of this forum reflects a regional intent that is specific to Abitibi-Témiscamingue. Theme 5: Scientific knowledge Knowledge development is crucial to creating a protected areas network that will meet established qualitative objectives. MDDEP will conduct and participate in research that enables it to optimize government decisions regarding the creation and management of protected areas. At the end of this major initiative in 2015, MDDEP will prepare a second overview of Québec s network of protected areas to evaluate how well conservation objectives have been met. 3. Participation Process MDDEP s regional participation process consists of eight steps: I. Presentation of the ecoregional deficiency analysis (regional overview of protected areas) II. Regional consultation to determine regional guidelines III. Proposal of study areas by MDDEP and regional bodies (including the public) IV. Selection of study areas and scenario analysis (i.e., evaluation of study area contributions to the ecoregional deficiency analysis) V. Comprehensive analysis of the constraints on creating a protected area for each area of interest (analysis performed by MRNF) 4

5 4. Regional Overview of Protected Areas in the Abitibi-Témiscamingue Region Calculated Variables The representativeness and deficiencies of the protected areas network are evaluated on the basis of the ecological reference framework by compiling a number of ecological variables: Landform (physiography of the area) Type of surface deposits Type of potential vegetation Presence of old-growth forests Type of wetland Presence of threatened or vulnerable species Other variables are analyzed to evaluate the condition of the natural environment (scale of human footprint), size of protected areas, and types of forest stands (species, age) and plant cover (deciduous, mixed, conifer, herbaceous, bryophyte, etc.). Although representativeness is evaluated based on these variables using the ecological reference framework, the document Portrait de réseau des aires protégées au Québec analyse de carence écorégionale Région administrative de l Abitibi-Témiscamingue 4 also presents the data by administrative region. Protected Areas and Administrative Boundaries Figure 1 presents the percentages of protected areas for each administrative region of Québec. 4 This document can be downloaded at Figure 1 : Protected areas by administrative region 5

6 In the Abitibi-Témiscamingue region, a little over 4,100 km², or 6.3% of the region s total area, are included in protected areas. Type of Protected Area Number Area (km ² ) Proposed biodiversity reserve 12 2,013.9 Proposed aquatic reserve 2 1,622.2 Biodiversity reserve National park White-tailed deer yard Ecological reserve Biological sanctuary Old-growth forest Water fowl gathering area Recognized nature reserve Proposed ecological reserve Muskrat habitat Heronry (nesting area and m buffer zone) Rare forest Habitat of a threatened or vulnerable plant species Island or peninsula inhabited by a colony of birds Total * This total includes the surface areas of overlapping protected areas of different statuses. The total protected area excluding overlaps is 4,105.4 km². Because of the concentration of private land and active mining claims in certain sectors of the region, protected areas are not distributed evenly. The percentages of protected areas, private land, and active mining claims are shown in the following table: RCM Percentage of Protected Areas Percentage of Private Land Percentage of Active Mining Claims* Abitibi 0.9% 14.9% 47.3% Abitibi-Ouest 1.3% 45.0% 37.7% Vallée-de-l Or 6.7% 1.2% 17.4% Rouyn-Noranda 12.4% 13.2% 51.7% Témiscamingue 7.2% 6.9% 14.9% Region % 8.2% 24.7% * Data from March Percentages may vary on a daily basis. 6

7 Twelve forest management units (FMU) are located in whole or in part in the Abitibi-Témiscamingue region. The FMUs with the lowest percentage of protected areas, i.e., FMUs and , are partially in Abitibi-Témiscamingue and have under 1% in protected areas. FMUs and are between 1% and 4% protected, while FMUs , , , and are between 6% and 8% protected. FMU is nearly 12% protected, and FMU is around 17% protected. Figure 2 illustrates the percentage of protected areas by FMU. Figure 2 : Protected areas by FMU 7

8 Protected Areas and Ecological Boundaries Protected elements and deficiencies are analyzed from an ecological perspective at the level of the natural regions defined in the ecological reference framework and sometimes at the physiographic unit level (see the appendix for an explanation of the ecological reference framework). These ecological boundaries do not match the region s administrative boundaries. There are five natural regions in the Abitibi-Témiscamingue region as shown in Figure 3. Figure 3 : Natural regions in the Abitibi-Témiscamingue region The percentage of protected areas in each of these natural regions is as follows: Natural Region Percent Protected Percent Protected in Abitibi-Témiscamingue Dumoine plateau 7.1% 9.8% La Vérendrye knolls 3.7% 3.8% Timiskaming Lake lowlands 7.5% 7.5% Abitibi Plain 4.5% 4.6% Lac Mégiscane hills 4.9% 7.9% These figures show that protected areas in the Dumoine plateau and Lac Mégiscane hills natural regions are located mainly in the Abitibi- Témiscamingue region. 8

9 Areas to Protect Although the 12% objective is not implemented on an administrative region basis, the number of square kilometers needed to create new protected areas is shown for information purposes. To reach the objective of 12% in the Abitibi-Témiscamingue region, the following additional areas by natural region (portion in Abitibi-Témiscamingue) and by RCM must be protected: Natural Region (portion in Abitibi-Témiscamingue) Additional Area Required (to reach 12%) RCM Additional Area Required (to reach 12%) Dumoine plateau 265 km² Abitibi La Vérendrye knolls 955 km² Abitibi-Ouest 390 km² 630 km² Vallée-de-l Or 1,455 km² Timiskaming Lake lowlands Abitibi Plain Lac Mégiscane hills Total 875 km² km² Rouyn-Noranda 0 km² 355 km² Témiscamingue 930 km² Total 3,650 km² 3,650 km² To increase the percentage of protected areas from 6.3% to 12% throughout the administrative region, a total area of approximately 3,650 km² is required. Figure 4 : Percentage of protected areas by physiographic unit Sectors deficient in protected areas can be identified by analyzing the distribution of protected areas at the more precise level of the physiographic unit (Figure 4). Figure 4 shows that physiographic units C0205, C0206, C0207, C0107, F0102, F0105, F0202, and F0204 have very few protected areas; in fact, less than 1% of their area is protected. Other physiographic units F0106, F0206, F0203, and G0102 are between 1% and 4% protected, while physiographic units C0104, C0204, and G0101 are between 4% and 8% protected. Among the units that are less well represented in terms of protected areas, some have either a great deal of private land or many active mining claims. This means it will be difficult to create conventional protected areas there. 9

10 5. MDDEP Guidelines on Protected Areas for the Abitibi-Témiscamingue Region Based on the regional overview of protected areas and the identification of deficiencies, MDDEP can target sectors and land with the desired characteristics in order to complete the protected areas network while meeting representativeness objectives. The key needs arising from the ecoregional deficiency analysis are listed below. They also represent MDDEP s specific ecosystem representativeness objectives for the development of the network of protected areas: Create protected areas in the physiographic units that have few or none, as illustrated in Figure 4 Increase the percentage of old-growth, mature, and lessfragmented forests in the regional network of protected areas Incorporate more threatened and vulnerable species habitats to the extent possible Modify or extend the boundaries of existing protected areas to increase their effectiveness in protecting target ecosystems and biodiversity; more specifically, extend them out to natural ecosystem and habitat boundaries or, in the case of rivers, drainage basin boundaries The objectives by natural region for the observed deficiencies are as follows: Dumoine plateau: Create a protected area in Physiographic Unit C0107 Protect more potential yellow birch fir, sugar maple yellow birch, balsam fir red spruce, balsam fir thuja, and balsam fir white birch ecosystems La Vérendrye knolls: Create one or more protected areas so that a higher percentage of Physiographic Units C0205, C0206, and C0207 are protected Provide greater protection for all types of potential vegetation, including yellow birch fir, balsam fir black spruce, white birch, and yellow birch, and black spruce moss, ericaceae, and sphagnum stands Timiskaming Lake lowlands: Create a protected area in Physiographic Unit F0105 If possible, protect special sites of ecological interest in Physiographic Unit F0102, particularly instances of threatened or vulnerable plant species, while adapting to private land related constraints Seek to provide greater protection for ecosystems on glaciolacustrine deposits Provide greater protection for potential yellow birch fir, balsam fir white birch, and black spruce moss and ericaceae ecosystems Increase the percentage of less-fragmented natural environments in this natural region s protected areas network Abitibi Plain: Increase the number of square kilometers protected in light of the low protection rate If possible, protect special sites of ecological interest in Physiographic Unit F0202, while adapting to private land related constraints Create a protected area in Physiographic Units F0203 and F0206, taking into account the significant amount of private land and active mining claims Create a protected area in the Abitibi part of Physiographic Unit F0204 where there are fewer active mining claims Provide greater protection for all types of potential vegetation, including black spruce trembling aspen, sphagnum, moss, and ericaceae, balsam fir white birch, black spruce and sphagnum, and yellow birch fir stands Provide greater protection for ecosystems on glaciolacustrine deposits Lac Mégiscane hills: Increase the number of square kilometers protected in light of the low protection rate Create new protected areas or enlarge existing protected areas for both physiographic units in the area (G0101 and G0102) Provide greater protection for ecosystems on glaciofluvial deposits (sand and gravel) Provide greater protection for all types of potential vegetation, including black spruce sphagnum, moss ericaceae, and lichen and balsam fir white birch and black spruce stands The following social and economic aims should also be taken into account in developing the network of protected areas: For physiographic units with few or no protected areas and that have a significant amount of private land and/or mining claims, discuss the possibility of establishing adaptiveconcept protected areas (e.g., fragmented protected areas, humanized landscapes, voluntary conservation on private land, mining agreements, etc.) 10

11 Balance the impact of protected areas on forest management units by targeting units with fewer protected areas, including FMUs , , , and, to a lesser extent, FMUs , , and Balance the geographic distribution of protected areas among the RCMs Guide the selection of protected areas to garner the broadest possible support from the communities concerned Create new protected areas or enlarge existing protected areas to address the needs and concerns of the aboriginal communities concerned However, before identifying study areas that meet these ecological objectives, MDDEP wants to understand and consider the specific concerns and objectives of Abitibi-Témiscamingue s communities. In addition, further to the regional forum, MDDEP would like to receive proposals for sectors or areas of regional interest that regional actors would like to see protected. MDDEP will then assess the contribution of these areas to the existing network of protected areas. The consideration of social and economic concerns is a guiding principle when it comes to creating protected areas. As such, when residents assign value to an area, this is reason for the area to be considered and assessed. Moreover, the creation of new protected areas is guided by a desire for regional participation throughout the entire process. Therefore, regional bodies will be called upon as representatives of the public to collaborate on every step until the new protected areas are established. MDDEP will assess the various protected area proposals, whether these come from citizens, groups, regional authorities, or a ministry (including MDDEP) in order to identify study areas for the analysis of new protected area scenarios, in cooperation with the CRRNT (regional land and natural resource commission) and MRNF. Once these analyses are completed, a scenario will be proposed. It should be noted that proposed protected areas and enlargements are in the process of being developed, and a consultation with regional actors has already been held. These new protected areas will change the current findings of the regional overview of protected areas. The main changes involve proposed biological sanctuaries and the granting of permanent status to four biodiversity reserves (Lac Opasatica, Lac des Quinze, Forêt Piché-Lemoine, Réservoir Decelles). It is estimated that approximately 350 km² could be added to the four biodiversity reserves, and an additional 480 km² in the proposed biological sanctuaries could be protected. The percentage of protected areas in Abitibi-Témiscamingue would reach nearly 7.7%. In addition, Bureau d audiences publiques sur l environnement (BAPE) will examine eight proposed reserves in November These are the proposed biodiversity reserves of Marais-du-lac Parent, Lac Wetetnagami, Lac Saint-Cyr, Dunes-de-la-Rivière-Attic, Wanaki, Basses-Collines-du-Ruisseau-Serpent, and Vallée-de-la- Rivière-Maganasipi, and the proposed Rivière-Dumoine aquatic reserve. Further to BAPE s examination and recommendations, the boundaries of these proposed reserves may be changed before they are granted permanent protected status. It is impossible to predict whether these reserves will be enlarged or reduced in size and, if so, by how many square kilometers. As a final point, since the end of the previous ( ) process to create protected areas, MDDEP has received additional proposals for protected areas. These have not yet been analyzed to determine their ecological value and complementarity with the existing network of protected areas. It seemed important to complete the regional overview of protected areas before assessing the new proposals. Moreover, although the areas of interest that came out of the process enjoyed a certain regional consensus, they were not able to get through the final steps in the process of creating a protected area in time to reach the objective of protecting 8% of Québec by These areas could therefore be reconsidered and their contribution to the network reassessed for the 12% objective. 6. Conclusion The Québec government plans to protect 12% of its area by At the present time, 6.3% of Abitibi-Témiscamingue is protected. These areas are more concentrated in certain of the region s RCMs, forest management units, and physiographic units. MDDEP estimates that an additional 3,650 km² must be added to Abitibi-Témiscamingue s protected areas. Proposed protected areas whose boundaries will be modified are on the verge of obtaining permanent status, and biological sanctuaries are going to be entered into Québec s register of protected areas. This will increase the percentage of protected areas to nearly 7.7% of the region. To reach 12%, 2,780 km² in new protected areas would be needed. The ministry would like these areas to be created in sectors with less protected area and seeks to correct the most significant deficiencies, namely those described in Section 5. MDDEP also wants to include regional stakeholders objectives from the very beginning of the process so that the network of protected areas better reflects regional values. The forum on protected areas in Abitibi-Témiscamingue is therefore an opportunity for regional stakeholders to establish common objectives for developing the protected areas network in Abitibi-Témiscamingue.

12 Appendix Representativeness: What it is and why it is important Québec covers a total area of 1,667,441 km². The biodiversity of this vast area cannot be characterized in a precise, exhaustive way. For this reason, the ecological reference framework proposes dividing the province into various ecological units or ecosystems at various levels of precision. Québec as a whole is first divided into natural provinces of approximately 100,000 km² in area. Each natural province is then divided into a number of natural regions of about 10,000 km². The process continues, with the territory being divided into smaller and smaller units (See figure below). With this approach, it would be theoretically possible to continue this process down to the eight level of precision, namely topographical facies units, which measure about a hectare (0,01 km²) in area. 12

13 Various elements can be considered in the analysis at each scale: major geological formations, regional or local geology, geomorphological formations and surface deposits, the drainage system, landforms (relief, topography), climatic categories, etc. It should be noted that all these elements are physical rather than biological. As it is impossible to characterize the biodiversity of Québec as a whole, it must be estimated on the basis of permanent ecosystem characteristics. Each territorial unit mapped according to the principles in the ecological reference framework represents an ecosystem whose physical characteristics allow us to predict the biological environment we are likely to find there. At a given latitude, and by extension in a given climate, a physical environment such as a fluvioglacial valley composed of sand and gravel could well contain a jack pine-black spruce forest ecosystem. Depending on the general topography and the associated drainage system, as well as other conditions created by this forest, we would expect to find certain plant and animal species commonly associated with this type of forest stand. Thus based on the physical characteristics of an environment, we can estimate the biodiversity likely to develop in it. The potential vegetation refers to the type of forest we can expect to find at a particular site based on its physical characteristics, so long as the stand was not disturbed before reaching maturity. However, this is only an estimate because natural (forest fires, pest epidemics, windfalls, beaver dams) and human disturbances (logging, roads, buildings, forest fires, drainage modifications) can create a different natural environment. Nonetheless, we can assume that over the long term and with infrequent natural disturbances, the anticipated biodiversity would develop if the area were protected. Representativeness and Deficiency Once this ecosystem relationship is understood, namely the link between an area s physical and biological characteristics, it is possible to determine the various ecosystems that should be represented in the protected areas network. Knowing the various ecosystems already represented in the network, we can target areas likely to contain ecosystems that are absent, i.e. the network s deficiencies. We might seek, for example, to create a protected area in a physiographic unit where there are none. If necessary, an even more precise scale such as ecological districts can be used. The value of protecting a particular area rather than another with the same physical characteristics is evaluated based on their biological components. Forests, potential and actual, are given more importance than herbaceous plants or animals. Mature forests, for example, are generally more interesting than former logging sites. The condition of the habitat is also taken into account, especially with regard to human disturbances, which may be revealed by the area s degree of fragmentation. In short, representativeness as an overall goal is important to achieve because it ensures that samples of all types of ecosystems in Quebec are protected and can develop under conditions that are as natural as possible over the long term. Although representativeness is the main benchmark for developing Québec s network of protected areas, other elements may also deserve protection, such as the habitats of threatened or vulnerable plant and animal species, exceptional natural landscapes, or sites of cultural or historical significance for aboriginal peoples or local communities. Lastly, it should be noted that beyond calculations of representativeness, which may be presented in a table and added up to achieve a desired target, such as 8% or 12% of a given type of ecosystem in a given natural region, the coherence of a protected area s boundaries, known as its configuration, is very important and cannot be expressed in terms of these kinds of statistics. However, this qualitative aspect can be assessed using the ecological frame of reference. The ecological units of a given protected area can be mapped using the ecological reference framework approach, enabling us to understand the true limits of the ecosystem we wish to protect. Knowledge of an ecosystem s ecological limits should serve as a guide for delimiting a protected area appropriately. For example, when seeking to protect a particular animal species, it is important to know the area corresponding to its habitat and to set the boundaries of the protected area accordingly. The overall objective of expanding Québec s protected areas network is to achieve a situation where samples of all Québec ecosystems are represented at a given scale. The scale in question may vary depending on the need. However, not all scales are appropriate for calculating representativeness and estimating deficiencies. At this time, given MDDEP s knowledge of Québec as a whole, this analysis is performed at the natural region level. For each natural region, MDDEP evaluates the percentage of existing elements that are already protected, namely landforms, surface deposits, drainage systems, types of forest cover (deciduous, conifer, shrub, etc.), potential vegetation (a theoretical forest in the absence of disturbances), species groups (actual forest on the ground), forest stand age classes, percentage of old forest stands, and various types of wetlands. Other variables may also be analyzed when available. Given that the results are calculated for each natural region, a more precise scale is used as a territorial analysis tool, namely physiographic units of about 1,000 km². 13

14