A Proposed Modelling and Scenariobased Approach for Identifying Natural Heritage Systems in Southern Ontario Discussion Paper Ministry of Natural Resources Draft - October 2006
Executive Summary Under the Natural Spaces program, the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) is developing and testing an approach for identifying landscape-scale natural heritage systems for southern Ontario. This is the first step in the development of science-based, replicable guidelines and tools that will be made available to interested municipalities, conservation authorities and other organizations involved in the conservation, restoration and stewardship of natural heritage. Use of these guidelines and tools will be entirely voluntary. They are intended to recognize, build on and support the natural heritage systems work of MNR, municipalities, conservation authorities, the Nature Conservancy of Canada, Ducks Unlimited, Carolinian Canada and Ontario Nature. A natural heritage system consists of a network of ecological systems made up of natural features and areas such as protected areas, forests, wetlands, river corridors, lakes and meadows. In southern Ontario s fragmented landscape, natural systems may include areas requiring restoration to function properly as part of a healthy ecosystem. Natural heritage systems support life and health for people, plants and wildlife. They clean our air and water, regulate flooding and drought, and support our province s biodiversity providing habitat for wildlife, including species at risk. The identification and protection of natural heritage systems can improve Ontarians quality of life, provide recreation and opportunities to enjoy nature and the outdoors, and encourage sustainable growth. Natural heritage systems also are an important part of the foundation for our rural economies. Many rural communities rely almost entirely on the attractions of their natural heritage assets for their residents livelihoods. There are several new and updated planning frameworks/documents, which help to maintain and/or restore natural heritage systems in Ontario, while providing for sustainable communities, infrastructure and economic growth, and benefits from other resources. The Greenbelt Plan (2005) and the Growth Plan (2006), coupled with changes to the Planning Act and the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) (2005) require municipalities (and other planning authorities) to make decisions that are consistent with provincial objectives for the wise use and management of resources while meeting needs for future growth. The PPS, which covers many provincial interests and must be read in its entirety, directs that the long-term ecological functions and biodiversity of natural heritage systems should be maintained, restored or where possible improved. Thus, it will be important for municipalities to identify natural heritage systems in their land use planning documents and decisions, and plan for sustainable long-term growth this approach and resulting products will be made available to municipalities as a voluntary tool to help them meet the policy requirements. This approach is voluntary; municipalities may choose to use other approaches for meeting the PPS requirements. Some municipalities and conservation authorities are far advanced in their identification of local natural heritage systems, and some municipalities have already incorporated systems in their land use plans. This tool is being developed for those who may not be so far advanced and for those wishing to see how their local systems relate to landscape-scale systems. It will also be a critical support to MNR s performance monitoring, priority setting and decision making in southern Ontario. The development of the Natural Heritage Systems Approach as a tool complements other tools that exist in today s planning framework. These tools are available for use by i
municipalities and their stakeholders to assist efforts to ensure the conservation of natural heritage while dealing with the demands of growth and development. This discussion paper describes a process for identifying landscape-scale natural heritage systems that is being developed and tested by MNR with the participation of technical experts from other ministries, municipalities, conservation authorities and conservation/stewardship organizations. This project has been endorsed by the Natural Spaces Leadership Alliance, an advisory group of representatives from a wide range of municipal and conservation organizations, who see it as a crucial vehicle for better identifying priorities for conservation partnerships and stewardship projects in future. Natural heritage systems can play an important educational role for landowners, by informing them of the conservation values on their lands. The approach may be used to produce high-level mapping as a starting point for further analysis and refinement by municipalities and conservation authorities as part of subarea assessments for the Growth Plan, which the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal (MPIR) will lead. In subsequent years, MNR will use the Natural Spaces proposed approach for the rest of southern Ontario south of the Canadian Shield and outside the Growth Plan area. This discussion paper is intended to provide the context for the development of the Natural Spaces natural heritage systems approach, and to describe the proposed process for designing and developing natural heritage systems for southern Ontario. Comments and suggestions are welcome and can be sent to: Greg Pulham, Municipal Planning Specialist Land Use and Environmental Planning Section Policy & Planning Coordination Branch Ministry of Natural Resources 300 Water St. Peterborough, ON K9J 8M5 Phone: 705-755-5969 Fax: 705-755-1971 ii
Table of Contents Executive Summary... i Table of Contents...iii 1. Introduction...1 2. Background...2 3. Natural Heritage Systems Planning...4 4. Why Identify Natural Heritage Systems for Southern Ontario?...5 5. A Natural Heritage Systems Approach...6 6. Defining Natural Heritage Systems for Southern Ontario...8 6.1. Identify vision, mission, principles and goals...10 6.1.1. Vision...10 6.1.2. Mission...10 6.1.3. Guiding Principles...11 6.1.4. System Design Goals...12 6.2. Assess Study Area Context and Background Analysis...12 6.2.1. Study Area...12 6.2.2. Ecological Land Classification...12 6.2.3. Comparative Analysis...12 6.3. Establish Objectives and Targets...13 6.4. Data Collection and Compilation...13 6.5. Natural Heritage System Core and Linkage Areas Scenarios...14 6.5.1. Modelling Scenarios (Methodology)...14 6.5.2. Expert Review and Validation of Model Inputs...14 6.6. Scenario Evaluation and Selection...14 6.7. Refinement of Natural Heritage Systems...15 6.8. Products...15 7. Implementation...15 7.1. Examples of Implementation...15 8. Monitoring and Review...16 9. Outreach and Consultation...16 10. Glossary of Terms...17 11. References...19 iii
1. Introduction This paper outlines an approach that the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) is developing as a tool to help identify a network of natural systems that should be conserved and restored over time in southern Ontario (Action 25, Ontario s Biodiversity Strategy. MNR, 2005). The identification and mapping of greenspace is one of several projects occurring under MNR s Natural Spaces program. MNR developed this paper through internal discussions, input from external advisors and application of the early steps in the proposed approach. The paper should be of interest to conservation organizations, land use planning organizations, land use and development organizations, and individuals with related interests. The purpose of this paper is to elicit comment and discussion on: 1. A context for a Natural Spaces natural heritage systems approach why it is being developed and for what purposes 2. A proposed process and methodology for identification of natural heritage systems and related natural spaces in southern Ontario. Through this paper, MNR is seeking input on the proposed approach as a tool for those involved in conserving, restoring and planning for natural heritage systems. MNR intends to run pilot projects in the winter of 2006/07 to test and refine the methodology these test runs will also be subject to local expert review and comment before a final methodology is established for broader use. Also, important to note is that the initial scenarios produced by this methodology will be landscape scale. This scale of information will be useful for informing local planning or decision-making, typically undergoing refinement and adjustment by municipalities, conservation authorities and other local agencies with the benefit of detailed local data. Such processes, i.e., local planning and decision making, will involve public review and input. This public review and input helps provide the necessary balance of conservation and preservation with long-term growth needs in a sustainable manner. For example, this methodology could be used to develop scenarios for natural systems as input into the sub-area assessment work under the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. In the future, MNR may use what it learns from this work to update related content in the Natural Heritage Reference Manual. MNR is designing and will use this approach and methodology to reflect and support the provincial standards in the Provincial Policy Statement, but municipalities and conservation organizations are free to adjust it to reflect higher standards for ecosystem protection if they so choose, as is currently the case in municipal planning documents. The Natural Spaces proposed approach for defining natural heritage systems is a departure from traditional approaches in several ways in that: It is built on goals, objectives and targets set in the context of a study area; It models natural heritage systems in a Geographic Information System, then refines modelled systems using local knowledge and expertise; 1
It produces a variety of scenarios of natural heritage systems, based on different sets of conditions and assumptions, for local review, discussion and decision. The scenarios are in the form of mapping and statistical products,. It uses best available science and information to achieve ecological function and biodiversity objectives; It enables comprehensive analysis of the roles of existing natural features and areas, protected areas, existing land uses and potential restoration areas; and It can be repeated with updated information and adjusted over time. In summary, this paper provides the context for natural heritage systems planning, a description of the proposed approach and some projections about how the MNR products resulting from the approach may be used. A glossary of terms is included as Section 10. 2. Background Southern Ontario is a complex and fragmented landscape. More than 90 per cent of the land is privately owned, and some areas are subject to intense pressure for growth. Many of the original forests, wetlands and grasslands have been lost; biodiversity has been reduced. The Ministry of Natural Resources launched the Natural Spaces program in August 2005. Its mandate is to establish a framework and mechanisms for conservation and restoration of healthy ecosystems in southern Ontario (see Figure 1) through the voluntary and cooperative efforts of landowners, conservation organizations and governments. The Natural Spaces Leadership Alliance, an advisory committee of conservation organization representatives, plays a key advisory role in the Natural Spaces program. With the alliance, MNR is developing a number of initiatives to provide tools to identify key natural heritage systems coordinate and promote important conservation and stewardship resources and approaches, create an effective outreach program for landowners, and communicate resources and results. The Natural Spaces program supports and complements the ministry s key strategic direction, Our Sustainable Future, and other provincial initiatives such as Places to Grow, source water protection, review of the Endangered Species Act, Ontario s Biodiversity Strategy, land use planning reform, the Ontario Trails Strategy and others. One of six components being developed under the Natural Spaces program, the proposed approach and methodology to identify natural heritage systems in southern Ontario is endorsed and supported by the Natural Spaces Leadership Alliance. The Alliance has provided significant technical support through appointments to a technical advisory committee. Under the Natural Spaces program, MNR will develop a flexible and dynamic approach for identifying natural heritage systems at a landscape scale in southern Ontario. The approach will facilitate the identification of features and areas that are important for supporting southern Ontario s ecosystems and their functions. The intent is to provide tools for voluntary use by conservation groups, municipalities and others that are working to maintain or enhance natural heritage systems. 2
MNR will promote the voluntary use of this Natural Spaces approach, and/or the results from MNR applying the approach, for two broad purposes. One is to provide a strategic framework for stewardship and securement activities. The second is as technical guidance to inform municipal planning under the Provincial Policy Statement (see Box 1). It will be geared to achieve the policy standard in the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) for areas outside the Greenbelt Area (the Greenbelt Area has mapping and policies in place for natural heritage systems or their equivalents). See Figure 2 for a generalized map of southern Ontario and various planning areas. It must be noted that under the PPS, 2005, the protection and preservation of natural heritage systems is not voluntary. A municipal planning authority would need to have in place or develop an alternative way to be consistent with the PPS, 2005 if it did not wish to use the Natural Spaces proposed approach or related products for the identification of natural heritage systems. Figure 1 3
Figure 2 3. Natural Heritage Systems Planning Natural heritage systems planning that is, planning for and on the basis of natural heritage systems is not new. It has been adopted as a method for landscape-scale conservation in jurisdictions throughout the world including Florida (Oetting et al., 2006), British Columbia (Warman et. al., 2004), Australia (Margules and Pressey, 2000), and South Africa (Cowling et al., 2003). In Ontario, this systems-based approach began decades ago with representation planning for protected areas, including provincial parks, conservation reserves and areas of natural and scientific interest (ANSIs). Landscape-level systems planning emerged with the recognition that these protected areas cannot be managed in isolation of one another or the landscape as a whole. Natural heritage systems planning has been described in Ministry of Natural Resources publications (MNR 1999, 2000, Riley & Mohr 1994), the Provincial Policy Statement and numerous scientific studies. A Natural Heritage Strategy for the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Southern Region (2003) identified initial provincial direction for natural heritage systems planning with the following mission: Box 1: What is a natural heritage system? A natural heritage system is defined in the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005 as: A system made up of natural heritage features and areas, linked by natural corridors which are necessary to maintain biological and geological diversity, natural functions and viable populations of indigenous species and ecosystems. These systems can include lands that have been restored and areas with the potential to be restored to a natural state. 4
To identify, evaluate, protect and recover significant natural heritage species, spaces and functions to create a viable natural heritage system; and effectively work with others in order to conserve our natural heritage on a sustainable basis and, as a result, contribute to the quality of life in Southern Region. Natural heritage systems analysis and natural heritage systems planning have occurred on a number of fronts in Ontario: Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (2002) and the Greenbelt Plan (2005). The Nature Conservancy of Canada, Ontario Nature and Carolinian Canada collaborated with the MNR s Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC) on landscape planning initiatives such as the original Big Picture project for the Carolinian region of Ontario (Jalava, 2000) and the subsequent Big Picture 2002 (Riley et al., 2003) covering southern Ontario. Ontario Nature has released the Southern Ontario Greenways Strategy (Ontario Nature, 2004) and the Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation has completed a conservation and restoration priority analysis to support stewardship planning on the moraine. Most recently The Nature Conservancy of Canada and NHIC have completed the Great Lakes Conservation Blueprint for Terrestrial Biodiversity (Henson et al., 2005, Wichert et al. 2005). The goal of the Conservation Blueprint is to identify a network of sites on the landscape that, if conserved, could sustain biodiversity in the Great Lakes region. The methodology and results from the Conservation Blueprint will serve as a key reference in the development of natural heritage systems for southern Ontario (see Section 6.4, Box 4 for details on how the Conservation Blueprint will apply to the natural heritage systems approach). Conservation authorities in southern Ontario also have expertise in the development of natural heritage systems. In 2004, the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority released the Toronto and Region Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy (Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, 2004). Credit Valley Conservation has been using a natural heritage systems approach for several years including the Silver Creek and West Credit sub-watershed studies (Credit Valley Conservation, 2001) and Greenlands Securement Strategy (Puddister, M. and Paleczny, H., 2004). A number of municipal planning initiatives have also been undertaken, including those by the City of Hamilton (2005), the Region of Waterloo (2006), the District of Muskoka (2005), and the Township of Oro-Medonte (2005). Elgin Stewardship Council developed the Elgin Landscape Strategy (2005) to identify and prioritise stewardship options in Elgin County In southern Ontario, landowners have played a vital role in protecting the province s rich natural heritage. Natural heritage systems identified using the Natural Spaces proposed approach will provide guidance and information for landowners interested in initiating stewardship projects on their land. 4. Why Identify Natural Heritage Systems for Southern Ontario? The Natural Spaces program covers a portion of southern Ontario south of the shield that is contained within two ecological regions, called the Lake Simcoe Rideau Ecoregion (6E) and the Carolinian Forest Ecoregion (7E) (Figure 3). 5
In southern Ontario, natural areas are increasingly facing threats from land use change and development that fragment and degrade the composition, structure and functions of natural heritage features and areas. In order to address this, the provincial government is taking a number of actions to protect and enhance southern Ontario s natural spaces. Protecting What Sustains Us: Ontario s Biodiversity Strategy, adopted in 2005, identifies strategic actions to support biodiversity conservation across the province. Key strategic actions include work to reestablish and/or retain natural linkages and connectivity between natural features and areas on the landscape, as well as conserving a network of natural systems through the Natural Spaces program (OMNR 2005). Figure 3: Ecoregions and ecodistricts of southern Ontario. Biodiversity is at risk in southern Ontario. This part of the province is home to 69 endangered species, 43 threatened species and 43 species of special concern. Ten species have already been extirpated and four are now extinct. Identifying and implementing natural heritage systems across all of southern Ontario will support the long-term conservation and recovery of these species and their habitats. In order to sustain ecosystems and quality of life in southern Ontario, the first step is to understand where the critical natural spaces are. Every landscape, whether pristine or developed, has nodes of unusually high conservation value. These nodes should receive top priority for protection, but to function in perpetuity, sites must be buffered, interconnected by corridors, and permitted to interact with surrounding natural habitats (Adams et al., 1989). The proposed natural heritage systems approach will identify these important habitats as well as areas that may be restored to counteract the fragmentation and degradation of greenspace. While the recovery of a predominantly forested landscape across southern Ontario is not realistic, focussed restoration can soften the countryside as upland and riparian corridors reappear and woodlands are buffered, enlarged and consolidated (Friesen, 1995). 5. A Natural Heritage Systems Approach A natural heritage systems approach is founded on the premise that individual areas and features have strong ecological ties to other features and areas across the landscape. It s the upstream/downstream concept applied more broadly, the recognition that various natural features work together as a natural system, just as various organs in the human body work together to keep us functioning. This approach facilitates ecosystem planning and management across planning boundaries by identifying an ecological system that includes natural linkages and the natural areas they connect. Linkages are important because they support ecological functions between natural 6
areas, including species and genetic migration and hydrologic connectivity. Woodlands, wetlands, stream corridors and habitats of significance are some of the features that are fundamental components of the cores and linkages in natural heritage systems. Natural heritage systems also may include protected areas such as parks, and areas that have potential to be restored in order to increase natural cover and connectivity within the system. A natural heritage systems approach such as this one offers the following advantages: Assessment of individual natural heritage features and areas in their overall landscape context, not just site-specific values in isolation (e.g. role in connectivity, etc.). Identification of the most important natural heritage features from a landscape perspective that evaluates representation and linkages. Allows natural heritage planning to be more strategic by facilitating collaboration between agencies and community partners, enabling them to work together to focus on key landscape elements. The Natural Spaces proposed approach for natural heritage systems recognizes that it is important to consider: the representation of native species, communities and landscapes natural heritage systems should be designed to include the array of native species and ecosystems found on the landscape, to support the conservation of biological diversity; the size and overall extent of the areas identified for conservation and restoration; existing protected areas, conservation lands and local natural heritage system initiatives; public priorities regarding the conservation of identified natural heritage features and areas; economic benefits and costs of conserving natural heritage features and areas; the feasibility of connecting, maintaining or improving natural heritage features and areas within the context of land use, access to resources and other social and economic factors; and the physical and biological characteristics of an area, as well as the pattern of settlement and landscape alteration. Box 2: The Context of Different Landscapes The extent of natural heritage systems may vary in relation to the physical and biological characteristics of an area, as well as the pattern of settlement and landscape alteration. In landscapes where there are few remaining natural areas, it may not be possible to identify connected natural heritage systems. However, one way these areas can become a part of a connected system is to restore linkages to other natural areas over time. Thus, in such landscapes, a priority will be placed on including as much of the remaining natural area as possible within systems, in addition to identifying lands for restoration and rehabilitation. Here, the natural heritage systems approach may include important natural areas that cannot be directly connected to other areas in the system (often called disjunct core areas or islands of green ). Built up areas and greenfield areas already designated for growth each present a unique set of challenges in terms of a natural heritage systems approach. Systems could be comprised of smaller cores and narrower and potentially intermittent connections along riparian strips and utility rights-of-way. In areas where natural vegetation covers a large portion of the total land base natural heritage systems identified will be fairly intact, therefore emphasis will be on identifying the most representative areas and linkages as a priority for inclusion in the system. Focus will be placed on maintaining existing systems with less need to focus on restoration areas. 7
6. Defining Natural Heritage Systems for Southern Ontario The Natural Spaces proposed approach for identifying natural heritage systems applies the latest in conservation science, and includes focused input from specialists and advice from stakeholders and others interested in natural heritage conservation. The following steps are proposed for designing and developing natural heritage systems in southern Ontario: 1) Assess study area context and conduct background analysis 2) Establish objectives and targets 3) Collect and compile supporting data 4) Model natural heritage systems core and linkage areas to create various system scenarios and undertake expert review and validation of model inputs 5) Select a scenario 6) Refine natural heritage systems through local input The Natural Spaces proposed approach will provide a multi-scale, adaptable process for designing natural heritage systems in southern Ontario. MNR will utilize this process to identify landscape-scale natural heritage systems for all of southern Ontario, beginning with the Greater Golden Horseshoe. Local agencies and community partners, such as municipalities and conservation authorities, would be able to use and/or adapt the Natural Spaces proposed approach, and produce refined natural heritage systems based on local information and expertise. Figure 4 outlines the proposed process. Although this figure depicts the process as a sequence of steps, several of these steps may need to be revisited as new information becomes available through subsequent steps in the process. The vision, mission, principles and design goals for the system are developed at the outset to guide and inform the process. The process has three stages: Design, Implementation, and Monitoring and Review. 8
Figure 4: Process - design steps and how they relate to subsequent work. Vision, Mission, Principles, Goals 1. Assess Study Area Context & Background Analysis 6. Refinement of Natural Heritage System Design 2a. Establish Objectives 2b. Establish Targets 5. Scenario Selection 3. Data Collection & Compilation 4b.Expert Review & Validation of Model Inputs 4a. Modelling Natural Heritage System Core & Linkage Areas Scenarios Implementation Provide a stragic focus for restoration, stewardship, securement, and the conservation of biodiversity AND inform and support land use planning and resource management Monitoring & Review Monitor and report on the state of natural heritage systems and periodically review and update its design based on new knowledge, science, and information MNR will apply the Natural Spaces proposed approach for natural heritage systems in two phases. Phase 1: Natural heritage systems scenarios and data will be produced on an ecodistrict basis for the area of the Greater Golden Horseshoe, outside the Greenbelt Area. MNR would supply this information as an initial input into the sub-area assessments for the Growth Plan, led by the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal. Phase 2: Natural heritage systems scenarios and data will be produced on an ecodistrict basis for the remaining areas in southern Ontario over subsequent years. 9
The following sections outline the design phase in detail. These sections are written in the context of the Ministry of Natural Resources applying the Natural Spaces proposed approach for natural heritage systems. If another agency plans to adopt this approach it would need to consider repeating the process steps in the context of its own jurisdiction or study area. 6.1. Identify vision, mission, principles and goals The Ministry of Natural Resources proposes the following vision, mission, guiding principles and system design goals for natural heritage systems of southern Ontario. 6.1.1. Vision The vision articulates a long-term desired state that will be achieved through the implementation measures (See section 7) that can be used to maintain or enhance natural heritage systems. This vision is adapted from A Natural Heritage Strategy for the Ministry of Natural Resources, Southern Region (2003) and was developed with input from external experts participating in the design and development of the Natural Spaces approach. Natural heritage systems that effectively conserve biodiversity, including composition, structure and function, and support a high quality of life in Southern Ontario. 6.1.2. Mission The mission defines the purposes of the Natural Spaces proposed approach for natural heritage systems. To identify ecologically sustainable natural heritage systems for southern Ontario, in order to: provide a strategic focus for restoration, stewardship, securement and the conservation of biodiversity; and, inform and support land use planning and resource management decision making for sustainable development. The application of the proposed approach for natural heritage systems provides a mapping and information framework to prioritise restoration, stewardship and securement activities. Lands with restoration potential will be identified within the system. These restoration lands may include degraded habitats, marginal lands, and areas identified in recovery plans for species at risk. The Natural Spaces proposed approach and the scenarios and modelling produced by MNR applying the approach at a landscape scale provide a voluntary tool intended to inform land use planning and support municipalities in identification of natural heritage systems under Policy 2.1.2 of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005, which states: The diversity and connectivity of natural features in an area, and the long-term ecological function and biodiversity of natural heritage systems, should be maintained, restored or, where possible, improved, recognising the linkages between and among natural heritage features and areas, surface water features and groundwater features. 10
6.1.3. Guiding Principles This section outlines the fundamental principles guiding the development of the Natural Spaces proposed approach for natural heritage systems. Take direction from the Provincial Policy Statement and integrate with provincial plans (e.g. Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, Greenbelt Plan, and Niagara Escarpment Plan). Be ecologically-based while considering social and economic factors. Be dynamic and adaptive, based on best-available science and information. Engage staff and stakeholders in design and development. Be open and transparent in reporting on process, methods, outcomes and results. Recognise the value of wildlife and the importance of interactions with humans within and adjacent to the system The natural heritage systems will link with systems and areas identified for the Niagara Escarpment Plan, Oak Ridges Moraine Plan and Greenbelt Plan, and will not overlap them. In these areas outside the provincial plans, MNR takes its direction from Policy 2.1 of the Provincial Policy Statement. The systems are to be ecologically-based, meaning that ecological features and areas such as forests and wetlands are considered in its design and development. Through the scenario-based approach and the engagement of stakeholders and public in scenario design and selection, the process allows for an informed balance between ecological and socio-economic factors. The refinement of the systems at the local level provides additional opportunity for adjustments based on local social and economic factors and local ecological knowledge. The maintenance, restoration and improvement of natural heritage systems comprise an ongoing process. In addition, natural ecosystems are dynamic meaning they evolve over time under natural processes. As a result, the delineation of natural heritage systems needs to be refined on a regular basis, using new information. The Natural Spaces proposed approach for defining natural heritage systems is also dynamic. By using the best available science and information and through the functionality of modelling, the identification of natural heritage systems can evolve over time as data sources and science advance. In developing the approach for natural heritage systems, the Ministry of Natural Resources recognises the need to match efforts to conserve critical wildlife habitat with efforts to promote positive interactions between humans and wildlife, and minimize human-wildlife conflicts, most notably in rural areas. 11
6.1.4. System Design Goals The system design goals outline the Natural Spaces proposed approach for the types of features and areas the natural heritage systems will include, and the considerations for other land uses. 1. The natural heritage system consists of a network of natural core areas, regional connections and local linkages, and includes: A. the diversity of ecological communities and native species; B. areas for restoration and recovery including representative and threatened natural areas; C. significant natural heritage features as defined in the Provincial Policy Statement; D. known occurrences of species at risk and their habitats; E. protected areas and public lands; and F. sensitive surface water and groundwater features and other aquatic habitats. 2. The natural heritage system respects existing and approved land uses. 6.2. Assess Study Area Context and Background Analysis 6.2.1. Study Area This step involves setting the study area or the area for which natural heritage systems will be developed and assessing the ecological, social, and economic context for that area. The proposed framework for identifying study areas is described below. Also, comparative analysis is outlined as one of the key analytical steps. 6.2.2. Ecological Land Classification To achieve a natural heritage system that is relevant at various ecological scales, Ecological Land Classification (ELC) (Crins and Uhlig, 2000) is proposed as the framework for designing and developing the system. ELC divides the province into functional, nested ecological units at varying scales and enables a natural heritage system to be tailored to a particular geography based on the unique ecological characteristics of the area (see Figure 3). 6.2.3. Comparative Analysis The proposed process applies comparative analysis to assess the current extent of natural features against their historical extent and/or what is currently found within conservation lands such as provincial parks, areas of natural and scientific interest, conservation authority lands, and others. Box 3: Identifying Terrestrial Ecological Communities Ecosystems comprise assemblages of nonliving (abiotic) and living (biotic) components. For terrestrial ecosystems, Ontario s approach uses naturally occurring associations of landforms and vegetation as surrogates for biodiversity (Davis and McCalden, 2004). MNR is proposing to use a combination of Southern Ontario Land Resource Information System (SOLRIS) vegetation mapping (1:5,000) and soils data from Agriculture Canada (1:50,000) as surrogates for forested ecosystems. 12
This analysis is applied on an ecodistrict basis to inform the target setting step by identifying natural features that are underrepresented. For example, if the comparative analysis reveals that forests on loamy soils are underrepresented within an ecodistrict, an objective or ecological target may be set, as described below, to capture a higher percentage of these forest types. See Box 3 for a discussion on the terrestrial ecosystem surrogates proposed for use in developing the natural heritage system. 6.3. Establish Objectives and Targets Setting objectives involves first defining an explicit list of features or elements to be included (or not included, depending on the case) within a natural heritage system. The list of features is clearly tied to the goals for the system design, and objectives are then set for each of the features. These objectives inform how the model will consider the features in the design of the system. For example, one objective may be to maximize the inclusion of a certain feature (e.g. prairie communities) in the system (i.e. include as much as possible) and another objective may be to minimize the inclusion of a certain land cover type (e.g. prime agricultural land) in the system (i.e. include as little as possible). Quantitative targets relate to the objectives and are set on an ecodistrict basis. The target setting exercise is informed by the comparative analysis in the previous step. For example, specific targets may be set to capture all of the existing prairie communities (target = 100%) in ecodistricts where their former extent was once Box 4: Great Lakes Conservation Blueprint and the Natural Heritage System In November 2005 the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Nature Conservancy of Canada (NCC) released the Great Lakes Conservation Blueprint. This Blueprint identifies a portfolio of sites that, if conserved, could sustain essential elements of biodiversity in the Great Lakes region of Ontario (OMNR, 2005). The Conservation Blueprint is one of the tools that will be used to inform the development of the natural heritage system. The Aquatic Ecosystem Classification may assist in assessing aquatic representation. Other Blueprint data layers, will be used as inputs into the model, with updates where new information is available. much greater. Targets for common features may be lower as they may cover a greater extent. 6.4. Data Collection and Compilation The list of features established in the previous step informs the data sources needed for identifying and modelling the natural heritage systems. In some cases, where data may not be available for a specific feature, surrogates (i.e. substitute data sources) will need to be identified (e.g. SOLRIS, soils, protected areas). See Box 4 for a discussion on the Great Lakes Conservation Blueprint and how the results of the Blueprint will be used to support the development of the natural heritage systems. The inventory and objective-setting steps can be repeated. Data compiled in this phase will inform the comparative analysis step, which in turn will inform the setting of objectives and targets. These steps form the basis for enabling adaptive management. 13
6.5. Natural Heritage System Core and Linkage Areas Scenarios 6.5.1. Modelling Scenarios (Methodology) It is proposed that modelling of the natural heritage systems be done in a Geographic Information System (GIS) using MARXAN, a conservation planning computer program that supports scenario-based system design (Ball and Possingham, 2004). MARXAN utilizes individual analysis units (pre-defined divisions of the landscape) to evaluate their contribution to optimizing a system scenerio. Areas are selected based on their contribution to the objectives and targets established for the system. Mathematical modelling, using many repetitions, is used to produce a near-optimal or best possible solution that best meets all of the established objectives. The areas identified through modelling may include existing natural areas, protected areas, areas with restoration potential, and linkages as defined in the goals and objectives for the system (Figure 5). Additional spatial analyses may be required to identify and map linkages between core areas. The science and tools for modelling natural heritage linkages in GIS are continuing to evolve. The Ministry of Natural Resources will work with experts to define an approach to mapping linkages. Manual refinement of core and linkage areas may be required based on ground-truthing and consultations with local experts. The step involves the running of numerous Figure 5: Types of areas that may be scenarios to test the range of objectives and captured through modelling. targets. The result of this step is a series of scenarios that represent a range of possible natural heritage systems. For example, one scenario may be strictly ecological, while another may include social and economic considerations. 6.5.2. Expert Review and Validation of Model Inputs Expert review and validation of the model and its inputs is a critical step to ensure that the modelling process is transparent and well documented. This is also required to validate all of the data sources, assumptions, and parameters that are used in the model, so that experts in natural heritage systems design are confident that the modelling will achieve the established objectives. 6.6. Scenario Evaluation and Selection The Ministry of Natural Resources will provide opportunities for public evaluation of some potential scenarios for natural heritage systems. Scenario evaluation considers the benefits and costs (advantages and disadvantages) of each scenario. This includes reporting how well each objective was met in each scenario. It may also include additional evaluative indicators to measure comparative characteristics of each scenario. For example, the amount of interior forest habitat may be used to compare one scenario to another. Based on input received, the Ministry of Natural Resources will select for its purposes a preferred 14
scenario from the range of scenarios presented. The preferred scenario will be one that best meets all of the system design goals and supports the vision and mission statements. 6.7. Refinement of Natural Heritage Systems Once the scenario analysis for natural heritage systems has been completed, the boundaries of the systems will need to be refined using expert knowledge and data at the local level. Taking advantage of expert knowledge along with computer-based methods is most likely to ensure that important features aren t missed in a natural heritage system (Cowling et al., 2003). This step is intended to ensure the boundaries of natural heritage systems are meaningful and relate appropriately to existing natural heritage features and the landscape context. This refinement step is not meant to describe the implementation of this system design process by local agencies. 6.8. Products The results of this process for designing natural heritage systems will be mapped and may be presented as a series of mapping layers, similar to an atlas product. This atlas would include multiple layers of information about the natural heritage systems, such as restoration lands, key natural areas, protected areas and other important natural heritage features and areas. These layers will have information associated with them, including how well each individual area met the established system targets. 7. Implementation Once the Natural Spaces proposed approach has been developed and mapping products produced, it is through implementation that the vision statement can be achieved. This paper does not have the purpose of providing details on an implementation strategy. However, to project how the approach and its products may be used in an implementation phase, several examples are described below. Separate forms of implementation may emphasize different components of the natural heritage systems (e.g., natural core and linkage areas versus potential restoration areas). 7.1. Examples of Implementation Individuals, community organisations and agencies can contribute to implementation through a variety of mechanisms including conservation easements, acquisition, stewardship, land use and resource management planning, and donations of land. The mapped systems will provide a strategic focus for the MNR and other conservation interests and groups to help guide the selection of appropriate sites for their conservation programs and activities. The mapped systems and related data will help to inform the Ontario government on how to best manage its land holdings, including Crown land, provincial parks and other lands in southern Ontario. The mapped systems may also be used by stewardship groups to set priorities for stewardship projects. For example, a stewardship council may want to focus on restoring areas that have restoration potential within the system to strengthen the ecological connections between existing core natural areas. The mapped natural heritage systems may provide a framework for engaging local landowners within these areas. 15
The approach and/or the products can be used as technical guidance to inform municipal land use planning and achieve consistency with the Provincial Policy Statement through the normal processes under the Planning Act. For example, a municipality may choose to adopt the appropriate elements of the natural heritage systems within its official plan through a separate land use designation, a separate map schedule or an overlay type of designation. Alternatively, a municipality may wish to take a building block approach and reapply the methodology using local information, prior work on identifying significant features, and/or finer grained analyses. This would produce a refined natural heritage system geared to the municipality s needs and priorities for community planning while supporting the provincial-scale vision, mission, principles and goals. A municipality that has delineated natural heritage systems through a different approach could use the Natural Heritage products for evaluating its work on systems identification. Similarly, when MNR fulfills its roles in the municipal planning process, it would use the products of the Natural Spaces proposed approach to advise whether the municipal approach is meeting provincial interests as per MNR s mandate. Conservation authorities may also choose to use the system to inform watershed planning across watershed and municipal boundaries. 8. Monitoring and Review Once the natural heritage systems have been identified and implementation occurring (see Mission in Section 6.1.1 and Implementation in Section 7.0), monitoring and assessment are required on an ongoing basis. Tracking land use change, land cover and ecological health over time will provide an indication of how well the natural heritage systems are being maintained or enhanced. Monitoring the effectiveness of implementation will support adaptive and sustainable management of natural heritage and biodiversity in southern Ontario. 9. Outreach and Consultation Public and key interests will be consulted in design of the natural heritage systems. MNR will also collaborate with external experts during the process. Information and reports, such as this one, will be made available to the public through a variety of means, including the Environmental Bill of Rights (EBR) Environmental Registry (http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/env_reg/ebr/english/index.htm). For more information, please visit the Natural Spaces website at www.naturalspaces.mnr.gov.on.ca. 16
10. Glossary of Terms Adaptive management Approach (proposed by Natural Spaces) Aquatic habitats Biodiversity Conservation lands Core natural area Diversity Ecoregion Fish habitat Fragmentation Interior forest Key habitats Adaptive management is a process for addressing the uncertainties of resource management policies by implementing the policies experimentally and documenting the results (MacDonald et al, 1999). The MNR-developed process for defining natural heritage systems at a landscape scale for southern Ontario, including actual design work such as data analysis, ecological target setting and modelling. The modelling component may be described by the term methodology and will be described in a separate paper. Important habitats that are not captured within the definition of fish habitat or significant wetlands under the Provincial Policy Statement (2005). The variability among living organisms from all sources including terrestrial, marine, and other aquatic ecosystems and ecological complexes of which they are a part; this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems (adapted from Protecting What Sustains Us: Ontario s Biodiversity Strategy, 2005) Geographically defined areas of land and/or water that are managed to achieve broad conservation objectives; this is broader than and includes protected areas. Areas with the greatest concentrations of natural heritage features as defined in the system goals and objectives. Representation of all the variability of ecological communities and native species (richness & abundance) A large area of land and water defined by characteristic climatic features of temperature, precipitation and humidity. As defined in the Fisheries Act, c. F-14, means spawning grounds and nursery, rearing, food supply, and migration areas on which fish depend directly or indirectly in order to carry out their life processes (PPS, 2005). A form of habitat disturbance accompanying extensive human land use in which originally continuous natural habitat is broken into smaller, more isolated pieces (Friesen, 1995). Part of a forest patch that is greater than 100 meters from the outer forest boundary (Environment Canada, 2004). Extant occurrences of species with active recovery plans. Key habitats are those required for breeding and foraging. Known occurrences Native species Landscape Extant species occurrences of threatened, endangered, and special concern species (including tracked species). Extant means occurrences within the last 20 years except where occurrence is known to be extirpated. Includes the full range of native plant, insect and animal species including common, rare, tracked, disjunct, and declining and keystone species (e.g. lake trout) that were known to have occurred prior to European settlement and not introduced by humans. A heterogeneous land area composed of a cluster of interacting ecosystems that is repeated in similar form throughout (Forman and Godron quoted in Friesen, 1995). 17