Top-Down vs. Bottom Up: Working Towards Consensus ... - CASIOPA

Recommendations

Info

TOP-DOWN VS. BOTTOM UP? WORKING TOWARDS CONSENSUSON SYSTEMATIC PROTECTED AREAS PLANNING IN ONTARIOName of Presenter(s): Steve Kingston and Julee Boan1. Title of presentation: Square pegs? Adapting conservation planning tools for an intact landscape2. Name of representative protected area design project: Protected areas design in intact landscapes: theNorthern Boreal Initiative3. Date of project inception: 2001 and ongoing4. Number of staff involved in the project: 25. Please describe the conservation applications for your project: Results eventually to be submitted asinput to community-based land use planning, and to Ministry of Natural Resources planners as part oflandscape-level planning.6. Brief overview of project:Goal/purpose of project: To apply concepts of systematic conservation planning and protected areasdesign, through ecological representation and conservation values mapping, as applied to Ecoregion 3S,with a closer look at Ecodistrict 3S-4 in northwestern Ontario.Specific objectives: To provide landscape-level advice to the community-based land use planningprocesses, demonstrate the application of systematic conservation planning tools in northern Ontario,and potentially create a model for application to planning processes through the Northern BorealInitiative planning areas.Study region for project: Ecoregion 3S, specifically Ecodistrict 3S-4Partners: Ontario Parks/CPAWS- Wildlands LeagueTarget audience/clients: First Nation community planners, and MNR planners7. Please list all tools and techniques used in identifying proposed representative protected areas (e.g.,reserve selection algorithms, software packages, community consultation, etc.), and for each list source(e.g., developed in-house; purchased; contracted out; shareware; tool described in literature; etc.):Tool or techniqueSourceMNR gap toolOntario Parks: contracted to Cuesta SystemsWWF Assessment of Representation Developed in-house / contract(AoR) toolC- PLAN SharewareHCVF FrameworkDescribed in literature22 | P a g e
SUMMARY OF THE PARKS RESEARCH FORUM OF ONTARIO (PRFO)STATE OF THE ART PROTECTED AREAS DESIGN WORKSHOP, 20068. Please list specific data inputs used in the process of identifying proposed representative protectedareas, and for each, list the source of the data (e.g., fieldwork; GIS data obtained from ________;satellite imagery obtained from _________; etc.), and year in which the data was collected.Data input Source YearLVassociationsMNR (Landcover 2000 satellite imagery data and anEnhanced Landform Layer developed in 2005)2000 and2005Enduring WWF / Soil Landscapes of Canada 1996FeaturesBasedata MNR Ongoing9. Please list specific hardware platform(s) for analysis and identify what stage of the process it is usedfor (e.g., data compilation, analysis, presentation of results, etc.).Hardware platformPCStage of project usedAll10. Please list specific software packages used as part of the project, their source (e.g., purchased;shareware; developed in house) and identify what stage of the process it is used for (e.g., datacompilation, analysis, presentation of results, etc.).Software package Source Stage of project usedArcView 3.x ESRI AnalysisArcGIS 8.2 & 9.0 ESRI Analysis, presentation of resultsC-PLAN shareware Analysis, results11. Please describe the nature of any field work conducted in support of the project.None12. Please list the specific project outputs (e.g., maps; databases; reports) and identify the targetaudience (e.g., university researchers; government staff and management; stakeholders/partners; nongovernmentalorganizations; general public; etc.).Project OutputDatabasesMapsReportsTarget AudienceFirst Nation communities/MNRFirst Nation communities/MNRFirst Nation communities/MNR13. Please describe any process undertaken for validation of project results (e.g., peer review, publicconsultation, etc.)C-PLAN is documented in the literature, and peer-reviewed.WWF AoR tool has undergone peer-review and has been presented through ENGO/industry/governmentworkshops.23 | P a g e
Page 3 and 4: Top-Down vs. Bottom Up?Working Towa
Page 5: SUMMARY OF THE PARKS RESEARCH FORUM
Page 8 and 9: TOP-DOWN VS. BOTTOM UP? WORKING TOW
Page 13 and 14: SUMMARY OF THE PARKS RESEARCH FORUM
Page 22: TOP-DOWN VS. BOTTOM UP? WORKING TOW
Page 27: SUMMARY OF THE PARKS RESEARCH FORUM
Page 79 and 80:
SUMMARY OF THE PARKS RESEARCH FORUM
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
show all

Top-Down vs. Bottom Up: Working Towards Consensus ... - CASIOPA

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?