LANDSCAPE UNIT PLANNING
IMPLEMENTATION AND EFFECTIVENESS MONITORING FRAMEWORK
Draft for Review
June, 2001
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Implementation Monitoring
Effectiveness Monitoring
Data Management
Framework Evaluation
Recommendations
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Background
Monitoring Context
Monitoring Framework
Cost and Benefit Considerations
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION and METHODOLOGY
3.0 NEED FOR A MONITORING FRAMEWORK
4.0 IMPLEMENTATION AND EFFECTIVENESS MONITORING
Implementation Monitoring
Effectiveness Monitoring
5.0 REPORTING STEPS, TIMEFRAMES AND ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Effectiveness Monitoring Reporting
Implementation Monitoring Reporting
6.0 DATA MANAGEMENT
Data Storage - Regional Data Service Centres
Reports and Use of Data
Accessing the Data
Managing Data Gaps
7.0 FRAMEWORK EVALUATION
8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
GLOSSARY
Literature Cited
Appendices
Appendix A: Project Management and Consulting Team
Appendix B: Key Messages from the Nelson, Richmond and Prince George workshops
Appendix C: Training Needs
Appendix D: Communication Materials
Appendix E: Other Monitoring Concepts and Programs
Appendix F: Implementation (A) and Effectiveness Monitoring (B) Tables
1
Landscape Unit Planning Implementation and Effectiveness Monitoring Framework
Executive Summary
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report provides the framework for conducting and reporting on implementation and effectiveness monitoring for Landscape Unit (LU) Planning. The purpose is to identify the components and describe the principles to assist practitioners responsible for monitoring LU plan implementation and effectiveness at the forest district, regional and provincial levels.
A number of key principles were used to guide the development of the LU Plan implementation and effectiveness monitoring framework including:
keeping the framework simple;
identifying monitoring indicators that are supported by data;
ensuring monitoring results can be rolled-up from landscape units to districts to regions to provincial level reporting;
ensuring there is consistency in reporting;
ensuring adaptive management by incorporating monitoring results into decision-making processes.
Monitoring is a process to determine the extent to which a program, plan or activity achieves its specified goals and objectives. It provides insight into the consequences associated with any changes that may arise, both extrinsic (human-induced) and intrinsic (expected environmental variations or cycles), in order to inform decision-making in directing changes in management practices. Such changes may include environmental, economic or social factors.
The Landscape Unit Planning Monitoring Framework includes suggested indicators to measure the achievement of old growth, wildlife tree, other biodiversity objectives, and associated cumulative changes to the timber harvesting land base (THLB). Benefit/cost and operational cost analyses will be required and it is recommended that these initiatives be undertaken over the next fiscal year in order to form a baseline for further monitoring work.
Implementation Monitoring
Implementation monitoring provides an assessment to determine the extent to which management direction has been met in terms of actions taken, conditions, standards or targets complied with, or resources expended.
The implementation monitoring framework outlines steps for monitoring the program delivery of landscape unit planning including the degree to which landscape unit planning complies with legislation and government direction. It provides a comprehensive yet simple procedure to complete implementation monitoring requirements. Most information will be collected from existing LU planning data sources, and reported using standard reporting tables and templates.
Implementation reports will be used to describe progress, identify bottlenecks and identify items that may require change based on four primary tables:
A.1 Landscape Unit Plan Status Reports;
A.2 Old Growth Management Area and Recruitment Reports;
A.3 Wildlife Tree Retention Reports; and,
A.4 Timber Harvesting Landbase Reports.
Landscape Unit Plan Status Reports are designed to provide summary information on the progress of LU planning, and also describe where there are issues that require resolution.
Old Growth Management Area (OGMA) and Recruitment Strategy Reports are designed to provide summary information on the targets, accomplishments and compliance for old growth retention by BEC variant.
Wildlife Tree Retention (WTR) Reports are designed to provide summary information on the targets, accomplishments and compliance for wildlife tree retention by BEC Subzone.
Timber Harvesting Landbase Reports are designed to provide summary information on the implications of LU planning on timber supply indicators collected during LU plan preparation, including the impact on category A cutblocks.
Effectiveness Monitoring
Effectiveness monitoring provides an assessment – based on measurement of specified indicators – of a program, plan or activity in terms of its progress towards desired outcomes or future condition (e.g., goals and objectives) and is intended to detect trends indicating short and long term change.
Indicators measure the performance of a program, plan or activity in terms of its progress toward stated goals and objectives (i.e., desired outcomes).
Effectiveness reports will be used to monitor the extent to which biodiversity conservation goals have been met through application of the guidelines in the Landscape Unit Planning Guide. Effectiveness monitoring will be based on the following reports:
B.1 OGMA Representation Report;
B.2 OGMA Rare Forest Types Report;
B.3 OGMA Stand Structure Reports;
B.4 OGMA Seral Stage Distribution Report;
B.5 OGMA Recruitment Report;
B.6 OGMA Forest Interior Report;
B.7 OGMA Connectivity Report;
B.8 OGMA Old Seral Patch Sizes Report; and,
B.9 OGMA Representation by variant traded for Marbled Murrelet.
OGMA Representation Reports provide old forest and old forest attribute data to reflect what is currently captured in OGMAs relative to current conditions and the range of natural variability (when available).
OGMA Rare Forest Type Reports provide data on current “rare” old forest ecosystems relative to what is captured in OGMAs within landscape units.
OGMA Stand Structure Reports provide an initial indication of the stand structural characteristics associated with OGMAs.
OGMA Seral Stage Reports provide a measure of old seral stage distribution within the landscape unit against estimated Biodiversity Guidebook disturbance patterns and return intervals (or more recent data if available). Early, mid, mature and late seral stage distributions (ha and % of LU) are calculated for the timber harvesting land-base as well as the non-contributing and partially- constrained forest in terms of contribution to OGMAs within the landscape unit.
OGMA Recruitment Reports provide a measure of seral stage contributions (ha) of proposed, or recruitment, OGMAs in terms of meeting old seral forest requirements within a landscape unit.
OGMA Forest Interior Reports provide a measure of the amount (ha) of interior forest habitat within OGMAs within a landscape unit.
OGMA Connectivity Reports provide a measure of the linkage between OGMAs and/or old forest reserves within the landscape unit.
OGMA Old Seral Patch Size Reports provide a measure of the amount of old forest (forest cover >age class 8) by patch size ranges (<10ha; 11-40 ha; 41-80ha; 81-250ha; 251-500ha; 501-1000ha; and, >1000ha) within a landscape unit.
OGMA Representation by variant traded for Marbled Murrelet Reports provide a measure of the extent to which additional Marbled Murrelet nesting habitat is acquired in landscape units that are in Marbled Murrelet range.
Effectiveness and implementation monitoring should be conducted at least once per year at the district and regional levels, or as required for LU planning, TSR or other planning needs. Provincial reporting should be conducted annually or semi-annually especially during the implementation phase of landscape unit planning across the Province, or as directed by the executive of the Ministry of Forests and Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks. MoF will assume lead responsibility with participation from MELP.
Data Management
Implementation and effectiveness monitoring will utilize spatial and tabular data compiled to provincial landscape unit planning standards[1]. It will also include some data and information that has to be entered manually during the preparation of monitoring reports. The Ministry of Forests regional data service centres (DSC) will be the data storage sites, and source of information for reporting.
Monitoring reports will be generated from LU planning templates. Where the data do not exist, fields will be provided to allow manual entry of data or text comments. It is anticipated that most information for monitoring will be obtained or derived in an automated manner in order to minimize operations staff workload. Custom analysis and mapping will also be possible from the database of information, using the data reporting features that will be provided at the time that automated templates are prepared.
All of the data needed to complete the monitoring tables are not currently available. Data are expected to be acquired over the next few years. In the interim, where information does not exist to complete certain fields in LU monitoring tables, it will be necessary to bridge the data gap using professional judgement, for example in the case of limited WTR or inventory information on old growth.
Framework Evaluation
As part of the development process, the monitoring framework was tested with a LU dataset from the Bunster Landscape Unit. (Sunshine Coast Forest District). The evaluation involved reviewing the data from the Bunster LU, checking that the data existed for the draft monitoring tables and running several queries with GIS. It was determined that while data were readily available for a portion of the reporting tables, data for some of the implementation tables may need to be updated locally. In addition, baseline data (e.g., range of natural variability) are not readily available for all effectiveness monitoring indicators.
It is recognized that requirements may change over time, and that the framework should be flexible enough to permit reporting of new information as the need arises. The provincial review process for this initial draft framework may provide revisions to the scope of this document. These revisions may focus on the amount of effort estimated in using this monitoring framework as well as the availability or content of information required for the proposed reports. Stakeholder review of the approach and monitoring reports, tables and indicators presented in this report is thus a critical component for ongoing feedback and revision.
Recommendations
This report provides a number of recommendations for improving the implementation and effectiveness monitoring process for Landscape Unit Plans as follows
1. Prepare Standard Operating Procedures for:
- filing Landscape Unit objectives and data with regional data service centres;
- identifying and collecting data for OGMAs;
- identifying and tracking OGMA recruitment areas; and,
- collecting spatial data for Wildlife Tree Retention.
2. Provide adequate resources for implementation and effectiveness monitoring.
3. Conduct additional research to establish scientific baselines.
4. Develop templates to automate the preparation of monitoring tables.
5. Undertake a full scope pilot project to further refine the framework and work out operational challenges.
6. Develop a training module and deliver training to MoF and MELP staff.
7. Develop a communication strategy.
8. Proceed with caution during the first year of reporting.
9. Define roles, responsibilities, timelines and outcomes in an activity matrix.
1
Landscape Unit Planning Implementation and Effectiveness Monitoring Framework
Acknowledgements
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This project was undertaken by a consulting team led by Stuart Gale and Associates Ltd. in collaboration with a provincial project team with representatives from the Ministry of Forests and the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks.
The project included three regional workshops with representatives from forest industry, environmental specialists, university researchers and Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks and Ministry of Forests staff.
The contribution of workshop participants and specialists is acknowledged and appreciated. Preparation of the Landscape Unit Planning Implementation and Effectiveness Monitoring Framework would not have been possible without this contribution.
1
Landscape Unit Planning Implementation and Effectiveness Monitoring Framework
1.0 Introduction
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report provides the framework for conducting and reporting on implementation and effectiveness monitoring for Landscape Unit Planning. The purpose is to identify the components and describe the principles to assist practitioners responsible for monitoring LU plan implementation and effectiveness. Forest Practices Branch (MoF) and Habitat Branch (MELP) will be responsible for monitoring at the provincial level.
Background
The ministries of Forests and Environment, Lands and Parks March 1999 Memorandum (Release and Implementation of the Landscape Unit Planning Guide - LUPG) identifies LUPG implementation and overall effectiveness monitoring as key elements to assess the success of landscape unit planning. The memorandum further directs staff from Forest Practices Branch and the Resource Stewardship Branch[2], in consultation with field staff, to develop a detailed LU planning implementation and effectiveness monitoring strategy. This report provides the LU planning monitoring framework to address this directive.
Although LU planning is currently underway across the province, there is not yet a process to monitor its progress or effectiveness. The Landscape Unit Planning Guide – released March 1999 and updated March 2000 – provides guidance and policy to manage landscape level biodiversity through the achievement of priority objectives for the retention of old growth and wildlife trees in all landscape units and specific additional objectives under Higher Level Plans (HLPs).
Legal landscape unit objectives for other biodiversity elements and forest resources can also be established where these values have been enabled through approved higher level plans. For areas where there is no other higher level plan to take precedence, the District Manager (DM) and Designated Environment Official (DEO) may agree to develop landscape unit objectives for biodiversity elements and forest resource values other than ‘priority’ old growth and wildlife tree retention. Those values will be tested as draft objectives in accordance with direction in the LUPG. Consideration of biodiversity elements other than wildlife tree and old growth retention (e.g., seral stage distribution, temporal and spatial patch size distribution, old seral representation, landscape connectivity, stand structure and species composition) may therefore be considered in this context.
This report addresses the monitoring component within the context of other ongoing activities such as WTR field audits, field collection of old growth data to aid in the establishment of OGMAs and assessment of options to mitigate any impacts on a local basis. The initial component – a broad level, primarily data driven product – will generate “canned” reports that can be added in conjunction with the existing Landscape Unit Planning template. Reports can be generated from LUP data sets as required, and electronically archived on the Data Service Centre warehouse. Data for these reports are mostly derived from Timber Supply Review (TSR), Forest Cover (FCI, FIP), base (TRIM) and resultant data files.
Although the purpose of these reports is to support short- to long-term monitoring of the LU program, the reports may also be used to inform front-end decision making for draft LU plans or at the final stages of LU establishment.
Monitoring Context
The LUP monitoring framework is intended to work at the landscape and stand level, i.e. course filter level. The issue of fine-filter assessments, i.e. species specific, that address actual biological effectiveness of Old Growth Management Areas (OGMAs), Wildlife Tree Retention (WTR)[3] or other HLP objectives (e.g. mature) as opposed to biodiversity design elements such as those outlined in the Biodiversity Guidebook (BGB) is currently outstanding. At some point, a comprehensive monitoring strategy for LU planning should include an assessment of WTRs, OGMAs and other seral stage requirements under HLPs in terms of their ability to maintain desired landscape- and stand-level attributes through space and time. This assessment will require studies or evaluations of WTRs, OGMAs or other specific biodiversity objectives enabled by an HLP to determine their ability to retain the structural, compositional, and functional attributes necessary for sustainable forest management.
A comprehensive monitoring strategy must provide:
- sufficient data to support decision-making; and,
- the ability to assess program outcomes at several levels including the field level.
The framework outlined on the following pages reflects the progress that has been made toward broad-level provincial monitoring. Future work that builds on this framework and enhances a larger monitoring strategy will include:
Incorporation of the tables in this document into the LU template reports module, viewers and geographic information systems (GIS) to enhance the current decision-making tool so that it includes a broader range of values while providing more detail to the Landscape Unit Planning Guide implementation tables (2.8, 2.9, 3.1);
A field evaluation of current wildlife tree patches by Ministry of Forests and Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks; and,
Adaptive management projects directed towards areas of greater uncertainty.
A comprehensive monitoring strategy must also evaluate impacts through analyses of costs and benefits. Evaluation of impacts should occur ‘up-front’ in the LU planning process as part of the implementation monitoring component. More detailed cost benefit analyses or local fine tuning of impact levels might best take place once more information is obtained.
Monitoring Framework
Monitoring in the generic sense is a process to determine the extent to which a program, plan or activity has been achieved relative to its design, implementation or specified goals and objectives for resource management initiatives. It provides insight into the consequences associated with any changes which may arise, both extrinsic (human-induced) and intrinsic (expected range of environmental variations or frequency of cycles), in order to assist decision-makers in communicating results, directing changes in management practices or maintaining the status quo.