No abstract

A prerequisite to sustaining ecosystems is the inventory and classification of landscape structure and composition. Ecological classification and mapping involves the delineation of landscapes into easily recognizable units. Topography, soils, vegetation, physical landscape form, and successional pathways are delineation criteria commonly used.Damman (1967) developed a forest type classification system for Newfoundland using vegetation, soil and landforms as the defining criteria. Damman's forest types were used in combination with mensurational data to assign forest types to timber volume productivity classes. Since each of the Damman forest types is associated with characteristic soils, parent materials, moisture regime and topographic position, the mapping units are similar to Canada Land Inventory (CLI) mapping units. Field work to confirm the correlation between Damman forest types and CLI capability classes was initiated in 1993. CLI maps were recoded in 1994 and Damman forest types were determined; resulting ecosystem-based maps provide a common framework to assess forestry/wildlife interactions in an ecosystem planning process.

The Canadian Council of Forest Ministers' (CCFM) framework of Criteria and Indicators (C&I) for Sustainable Forest Management, published in 1995, provide a science-based framework to define and measure Canada's progress in the sustainable management of its forest. In 2001, the CCFM launched a review of its C&I to ensure the continued relevance of the indicators to Canadian values and to improve the ability to report on indicators. This paper describes the threestep review process, which engaged a broad array of representatives of various sectors of society. First, focus groups were used to identify public values, issues and concerns with respect to the sustainable use of Canada's forest. Second, technical experts from across the forest sector revised the indicators. Third, the revised C&I were validated with users of the framework. The revised framework, released in September 2003, consists of six criteria and 46 indicators. The number of indicators has been reduced, compared to the 1995 framework, by focusing on indicators that are most relevant to Canadians' values, are most often measurable with available data, and are understandable to policy makers, forest managers and an informed public. Links between criteria are better defined and, in some cases, indicators address multiple values under different criteria. A number of tools and techniques originally developed for use at the sub-national level were adapted for use at the national level in this review. Canada's experience with reviewing its indicators may serve as an example and model to other countries now considering reviewing their national C&I frameworks.

The assessment of the impacts of forestry activities on water quality is a critical component of forestry management and planning, especially when watersheds are being used for different water uses by different stakeholders. Traditional methodologies for assessing these impacts, while accurate, often do not take into account the intended use of water. Water quality data are inherently technical and are not conducive to communication to all stakeholders-especially the public. There is a need for a communications-based assessment tool that assesses the impact of forestry activities on water quality from the perspective of different water uses. This paper describes the development and application of such a tool, the Forestry Water Quality Index (FWQI). The FWQI has been developed specifically to capture, evaluate and communicate the impact of forestry activities on water quality to multiple stakeholders. Initially based on the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment's Water Quality Index, the FWQI was specifically adapted for applications in forestry management. Details of this adaptation and its methodology are outlined. Case studies from Newfoundland and Labrador illustrate the use of the FWQI for communication, performance evaluation, and planning and technical data analysis. The FWQI tool has the ability to compare pre-and post-forestry water quality data (communication), determine the effectiveness of best management practices (performance evaluation), predict water quality after forestry activities (planning) and evaluate seasonal variations in water quality (data analysis). These components provide useful information for the evaluation of the effects of forestry activities on water quality and to ensure sustainable forest management. It can be utilized by both forestry and water resources management to ensure sustainable development of the forestry sector.

No abstract