SOUTHWEST NOVA SCOTIA FORESTED WETLANDS
Forested Wetlands in Atlantic Canada Workshop Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia
Kespukwitk Conservation Collaborative
March 12, 2019
The intent of this initiative is to work collaboratively to strategically identify, prioritize, and ultimately implement and
monitor, effective conservation actions to address priority threats using an integrated two-eyed seeing approach
Kespukwitk Conservation Collaborative
Two-eyed seeing: Etuaptmumk
Etuaptmumk is the Mi'kmaq word for Two-Eyed Seeing introduced by a Mi'kmaq Elder from
Eskasoni First Nation, Albert Marshall. It refers to learning to see with one eye the strengths of
Indigenous knowledge and ways of knowing, and with the other eye the strengths of western
knowledges and ways of knowing, and to learn to use both eyes together to gain a clearer
understanding of the world. A Two-Eyed Seeing approach is one way to integrate, and develop a
greater understanding of, and appreciation for Indigenous worldviews
Graphic arts students at ANSD school in Miramichi
https://screenshotscdn.firefoxusercontent.com/images/ac59be4b-7fcf-443a-81a0-788a08a0d6f8.png
Kespukwitk Conservation Collaborative
5
• Significant and unique assemblage of biodiversity
features: - 354 priority species: SAR,
MB, S1/S2 spp.
- 56 COSEWIC SAR; CH for 18 SAR; Action Plan for 23
SAR
• Area: 1.6 million Ha (29% of NS): - 65% Private - 31% Provincial Crown- 3% Federal Crown
Southwest Nova Scotia
• Kespukwitk (Ges-pug-witg) - Mi’kmaq district closely aligned with SWNS
• SWNS partners poised for integrated conservation action identification, implementation and enhanced collaboration
◻ Developed by leading organizations & agencies
◻ Open source
◻ Common language & framework
◻ Used around the world• Gov’t Wildlife Agencies• Protected Areas• Bilateral Biodiversity Funding• Private Donor Funding• Academic Training
The Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation
The Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation
A framework to explore:
◻ How are species and ecosystemsdoing?
◻ Are we taking the right actionsto conserve them?
◻ Are we doing them well?
◻ Are our actions leading to thedesired result?
◻ If not, what do we need to do to adapt our strategies?
8
Scope:
Southwest Nova
Scotia, also known as
Kespukwitk
SWNS Conceptual Model of Conservation Targets
9
Conservation Targets:
Broad ecosystems
that represent and
encompass the full
suite of biodiversity in
SWNS
SWNS Conceptual Model of Conservation Targets
10
Nested Targets:
Important elements of
biodiversity (species,
communities, or
ecological systems)
that the team wants to
emphasize within the
conservation targets
SWNS Conceptual Model of Conservation Targets
11
The importance of human-
wellbeing benefits and ecosystem
services considerations has been
emphasized by the Kespukwitk
Conservation Collaborative
SWNS Conceptual Model of Conservation Targets
Netukulimk:
Within a Mi’kmaw
world view,
ecological targets
and human
wellbeing would not
be separated – they
would be part of the
target together at
the center
12
SWNS Conceptual Model of Conservation Targets
Conservation Target Case Studies
◻ Case Studies to pilot approach:
⬜ Forested Wetlands ⬜ Coastal Islands⬜ Acadian Forest – Hemlock Wooly Adelgid
◻ Selected based on their ability to test an integrated approach
⬜ Range of targets and methods
◻ Subject area working groups
⬜ Establish common understanding of the conservation context and status of the target
⬜ Identify important knowledge gaps
⬜ Identify and prioritize key conservation strategies
Nested Targets
Subject Area Expert
Working Group
Information Gathering Process
◻ Preliminary information was gathered from a small number of regional experts (n = 8)
◻ Input was summarized and presented by WebEx
◻ Input from the WebEx was incorporated and presented at the workshop
◻ Feedback and discussion from workshop was incorporated and is presented here (32 participants)
March 20-21 Forested Wetlands Workshop
OBJECTIVES
❑ Build our common understanding of forested wetlands (FW) in Southwest Nova Scotia (SWNS):❑ Define FW in SWNS, and identify potential nested targets
❑ Ecosystem services & human wellbeing benefits
❑ Indicators of FW health
❑ Threats & drivers
❑ Identify strategies to conserve FW❑ Prioritize
❑ Specify theories of change (results chains)
❑ Develop objectives & indicators
❑ Specify monitoring needs
✓
✓✓
✓
✓
✓✓
What are forested wetlands in SWNS?
◻ Agreement that we are talking about more than just treed swamps
◻ Diversity:
⬜ Swamps (treed/tall shrub)
⬜ Treed/tall shrub peatlands
⬜ Vernal pools
Proposed Working definition: Wetlands with 30% or more cover of woody species > 2m (tall shrubs & trees)
◻ Uncertainties:
⬜ Include floodplains? Or are these covered by ‘Riparian & floodplain systems’ target?
⬜ Include peatlands with lower threshold of cover (e.g., 5-30%)?
Forested Wetlands: Attributes
◻ Forested wetlands were identified as important ecological systems that represent significant biodiversity in Southwest Nova Scotia
QUESTION
◻ What are some important attributes of forested wetlands in SWNS?
◻ Large proportion of the (forested) landscape
◻ Preponderance of deadwood
◻ High insect productivity
◻ High species diversity
◻ Fire refugia
◻ Structurally complex
◻ Old growth
◻ SAR habitat
◻ Habitat connectivity/corridors
◻ Source of water/moisture even in dry periods
◻ Important hydrologic connections with adjacent landscape and groundwater
Where are they?
QUESTIONS
◻ What do we know about the distribution of forested wetlands in Southwest Nova Scotia?
◻ NOT well-mapped, especially swamps
◻ Estimated to be 5-10% of SWNS landscape
◻ Need LiDAR and better models
◻ Opportunity for synthesis of many different projects
◻ Has implications for all threats
Initial Land Tenure Mapping
Land Tenure Area (ha.) %
Federal Lands 1,422 3
Provincial Crown 18,190 43
Other 22,389 53
Total 42,001 100
Land Conservation Area (ha.) %
Federal Protected Areas 1,414 3
Provincial Protected Areas 6,458 15
Private Conserved Lands 230 1
Unprotected 33,899 81
Total 42,001 100
◻ From NS DNR wetland inventory layer (2013)
◻ Only includes ‘Shrub swamp’ and ‘treed swamp’
◻ 2.6% of SWNS
◻ From NS DNR recent analysis, more like 7%
Indicators
QUESTION
◻ How do we measure/assess the health of forested wetlands in Southwest Nova Scotia?
◻ Agreement that more work is needed to ID best indicators
◻ Areal extent: Temporal & spatial change
◻ Hydrological regime
◻ Amount of deadwood/large deadwood
◻ Species/community metrics (#, diversity, biomass)
◻ Tree growth rate
◻ Presence/abundance of exotic species
◻ Forest continuity (lichen diversity & abundance, functional groups like geophytes, ant-dispersed species or slow-growing trailing species)
◻ Presence/absence of orchids
◻ WESP-AC monitoring at regular intervals
◻ Rare species (e.g., blue cohosh, southern twayblade)
Threats
QUESTION
◻ What are the dominant threats to forested wetlands in Southwest Nova Scotia?
◻ Incompatible forestry practices
◻ Climate change
◻ Roads
◻ Invasive Species
◻ Hydroelectric Damming
◻ Long-range Transport of Air Pollutants (e.g., acid precipitation, mercury)
◻ Incompatible Agricultural Activities
◻ Residential/Cottage Development
◻ Industrial Development (e.g., mines, quarries)
◻ Off-Highway Vehicle Use
◻ Pesticides
DEFINITION
◻ Primarily human activities that immediately degrade forested wetlands
Relative Threat Ranking & Rating
Direct Threats Threat Rating
Forestry Harvesting Practices High
Habitat Shifting and Alteration (Climate Change) Medium
Roads Medium
Invasive Non-native Species Medium
Agricultural Activities Medium
Residential/Cottage Development Medium
Industrial Development Medium
Off-Highway Vehicle Use Low
Hydroelectric Damming Low
Long-range Transport of Air Pollutants Low
Industrial Effluents Low
Conceptual Models
◻ A Conceptual Model is a tool for visually depicting the context within which a project is operating and the major forces that influence conservation targets
⬜ They are diagrams that use a series of boxes and arrows to succinctly represent a set of causal relationships among factors that are believed to impact one or more conservation targets
⬜ They illustrate the logical flow of influence and allow practitioners to see how their potential or current strategies may affect certain factors within the model and consequently, contribute to improving conservation at the site
⬜ They can be useful for identifying the most strategic factors to try to influence
What factors are driving those threats?
◻ Contributing Factors are the key factors that are believed to drive direct threats and ultimately influence conservation targets, including indirect threats, opportunities, and enabling conditions.
Conceptual Model Building
◻ Participants in small groups were asked to identify contributing factors to key threats to forested wetlands and their nested targets
◻ Participants were then asked to identify key intervention points and brainstorm strategies
Brainstorm Strategies
Conceptual Model Building in Miradi
Conceptual models developed through small group work at the workshops were input into Miradi Software
Brainstormed Strategies
◻ Strategies were rated for potential impact and feasibility
Strategy Impact Feasibility
Cross-cutting - Connecting youth H
Threat - Incompatible Forestry Practices
ID/Promote BMPs to private landowners M H
Revise Provincial DB & link to new EC/LIDAR H H
Guide small woodlot owners in Netukulimk M H
Public Outreach (including schools) about coolness of FW (media campaign about biodiversity and what we're losing)
M H
Awareness raising targeting politicians (including municipal, provincial) & First Nation
H-M M
Brainstormed Strategies
Strategy Impact Feasibility
Threat - Incompatible Agricultural Practices
Creation and enforcement of regulations H
Strengthen farm plan (incentives) - Incentives to set aside for wetlands - Financial incentives for ecosystem services - Reduce barriers to farm plan participation
M
Zoning within municipal planning strategies (enforcement)
H
Threat - Hydroelectric Damming
Locate feasible restoration opportunities L M
Identify economic & ecosystem BMPs for hydro M H
Pilot small river system restoration M L
Brainstormed Strategies
Strategy Impact Feasibility
Threat - Invasive Species
Identify forestry BMPs for invasives (clean equipment, selective cutting, no clear cutting)
M M-H
Pilot implementation of forestry BMPs M M-H
Update regulations on FW buffers H M
Threat - Roads
Develop better mapping H M
Advocate for decomissioning regulations on crown land H L
Promote BMPs for private road development M M
Identify restoration opportunities for FW via decomissioning legacy roads
H H
Landowner outreach regarding FW, policy & road BMPs M M
Brainstormed Strategies
Strategy Impact Feasibility
Threat – Long range transport of air pollutants
Identify:- high risk activities / areas for air pollution - interaction between FW integrity and effects of air
pollution - interaction between forestry practices and effects of
air pollution on FW
L H
Strategy Prioritization
◻ Following strategy development and grouping of similar strategies in plenary, each workshop participant received four dots (votes); for a given participant, more than one of their votes could go to the same strategy
Strategy Prioritization
Strategy Group # of Votes
Reconnecting with nature 32
Improve mapping of forested wetlands 28
Improve wetland policy & regulations 25
Fill key knowledge gaps 22
Restoration 7
BMPs for private lands 7
Environmental Farm Plans 2
BMPs for invasive species 1
BMPs for hydroelectric damming 0
Results Chains (Theory of Change)
◻ Diagrams that define and help to make explicit how you think that a project strategy is going to contribute to achieving a conservation goal
◻ Results chain focus on the achievement of results and are composed of assumptions that can be tested
- Conservation Target
- Threat Reduction Result
- Intermediate Result
- Conservation Strategy
Results Chains (Theory of Change)
Results Chains (Theory of Change)
Results Chains (Theory of Change)
Results Chains (Theory of Change)
Results Chains (Theory of Change)
Key Outcomes
◻ Workshop Objectives
⬜ Refinement of a common understanding of the current conservation context of forested wetlands in Kespukwitk
⬜ Identification of knowledge gaps
⬜ Identification and prioritization of strategies
⬜ Results chains, including identification of key sectors to engage in specific conservation strategies
Key Outcomes
◻ Approach
⬜ Incorporation of Mi’kmaw workshop approaches
⬜ Improved understanding of the ‘Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation’ as a tool for advancing an integrated conservation approach
⬜ Developed capacity to use the Open Standards as a framework for conservation planning
◻ Relationships and Partnerships
⬜ Strengthened relationships among forested wetland conservation partners in SWNS (Kespukwitk)
⬜ Initial engagement with private/industrial sector
Next Steps
◻ CWS coordinating role◻ CWS to continue to compile and incorporate comments and revisions to materials and
share these with partners.
◻ Sub-group/ team◻ Revisit forested wetland definition, viability assessment, nested targets, indicators, and
threat ratings with a smaller sub-group of experts.
◻ Refining, vetting and updating outputs and strategies◻ It was emphasized at the meeting that this is an iterative process and that these
models and results chains will be updated and amended as new information becomes available.
◻ Advancing strategies◻ Individual organizations to assess their potential role in the implementation of
prioritized strategies and identify potential funding or supporting opportunities. Results chains, knowledge gaps, objectives, indicators and monitoring needs will need to be further fleshed out for each strategy to be pursued.
Thank you / Merci / Wela’lioq
Top Related