An SFMN State of Knowledge Project

1. The “state of knowledge” on protected areas and sustainable forest management:What do we know and what do we want to find out? An SFMN State of Knowledge Project

2. Presentation Overview • Overview of SOK project • Research Team, Partners, Plans • Progress to date • Preliminary findings • Why are we all here today??

3. Who is involved? Yolanda Wiersma, Memorial University of Newfoundland • Peter Duinker, Dalhousie University School for Resource and Environmental Studies • Fiona Schmiegelow, University of Alberta Department of Renewable Resources, Environment Canada • Glen Hvenegaard, University of Alberta • Wolfgang Haider, Simon Fraser University • Research Assistant: Anne Munier (Memorial) • Research Assistant: Martin Sowa (SFU/Boku University, Austria) • University of Western Ontario Team • Champagne-Aishihik First Nation • Gwyichya Gwich’in Band • Kaska Tribal Council • Kluane First Nation • Manitoba Metis Federation • Pikangikum First Nation • Tl’azt’en First Nation • Treaty 8 First Nations of Alberta • Tsawout First Nation • Wemindji Cree First Nation • Alberta Sustainable Resource Development- Forestry Division • Environment Canada- Western Boreal Initiative • Newfoundland and Labrador Department of Natural Resources • Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources • Parks Canada • Alberta Pacific Forest Industries Inc. • Bowater • Daishowa-Marubeni International Ltd. • Weyerhaeuser Company • Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society • Ducks Unlimited Canada • World Wildlife Fund • Principal Investigator • Researchers • Partners: • First Nations • Government agencies • Forest Industry • NGOs

4. Project Background Desire from communities for sustainable economies that don’t compromise natural capital Historical conflicts between PAs & SFM, and between PAs & human communities Considerable uncertainty regarding the relationships between protected areas and SFM

5. Gradients of forest protection and forest activity large, high ecological integrity Protection small, low ecological integrity intensive SFM Forestry activity

6. Large PA surrounded by large area of intensive forestry activities • Small woodlots within a large PA protected areas forestry • Small PAs within a large area of intensive forestry activities • Small woodlots and small PAs interspersed within a larger (intact) landscape

7. Gradients of forest protection and forest activity Protection Forestry activity

8. Gradients of forest protection and forest activity Protection Large, high integrity Small, developed Forestry activity Intensive SFM Intact forest

9. Types of protected areas • Legislated, set-aside areas (IUCN I-VI) • Management regimes (e.g., “no-cut” zones) • Regulations • Land-use designations • Traditional Aboriginal lands • Recovery habitat (e.g., for species at risk) • Private stewardship (e.g., easements) • Certification forests

10. Courtesy Canadian Council on Ecological Areas

11. Current knowledge • Academics – Natural Science • Ecology • Individual species/sites • Academics – Social Science • Tourism • TEK • Economics • Government • Management • Planning • Species-at-risk • Industry • Planning • Natural Disturbance Pattern Emulation • Certification Aboriginal peoples -Cultural values -Non-timber values -TEK NGOs -Flagship areas -Species-at-risk

12. Current knowledge

13. Current knowledge • Lots of research! • Very little communication between research foci. • Need for broader application of knowledge across sectors. • Knowledge sectors often perceived to be in conflict.

14. Academics - Science • Ecology • Individual species/sites • Academics – Social Science • Tourism • TEK • Economics • Government • Management • Planning • Species-at-risk • Industry • Planning • Natural Disturbance Pattern Emulation • Certification • SYNTHESIS • Best practices • Innovation • Integration Aboriginal communities -Cultural values -Non-timber values -TEK NGOs -Flagship areas -Species-at-risk

15. Progress to date… • Assembly of a database of literature (peer-reviewed and grey literature) germane to the topic of how PAs and SFM have (or have not) worked in the past • Preparation of an annotated bibliography • Development of a survey to project partners • Concept paper • Website

16. Some preliminary findings.... • ~200 documents included in database of information, including: • National & International case studies • Community / Aboriginal forest mgmt projects • Theory-based articles (PA or SFM) • Direct benefit of PAs to SFM • Certification • Model Forest • Joint Management • Some categories more fruitful than others • Stronger focus on extractive forest management than on PA management • Examination of European literature

17. Concept paper - highlights • Many initiatives in Canada attempt to integrate ecosystem management with SFM • Most case studies are in the boreal • Emphasis in many papers on the importance of co-management • Co-management also identified as a key challenge

18. Concept paper - highlights • Strategies to integrate conservation and SFM vary in scale and methods • Some general strategies employed: • Co-management strategies • Model Forests/Forest Communities Program • Certification • Community Forestry • Aboriginal-led initiatives • Ecosystem-based management

19. European focus • Similar issues, but different government and ownership rules • Large-scale coordination of protected areas • (Natura 2000)

20. Why are we here today? • Feedback on concept paper • Feedback on presentations • Interaction from across the country and across knowledge sectors to stimulate dialogue on these issues

21. Why are we here today? • Academics - Science • Ecology • Individual species/sites • Academics – Social Science • Tourism • TEK • Economics • Government • Management • Planning • Species-at-risk • Industry • Planning • Natural Disturbance Pattern Emulation • Certification • SYNTHESIS • Best practices • Innovation • Integration Aboriginal communities -Cultural values -Non-timber values -TEK NGOs -Flagship areas -Species-at-risk

22. Critical Questions • What is an appropriate schematic for the various types/categories of PAs and SFM; how do they relate to each other? Give examples.

23. Large PA surrounded by large area of intensive forestry activities • Small woodlots within a large PA protected areas forestry • Small PAs within a large area of intensive forestry activities • Small woodlots and small PAs interspersed within a larger (intact) landscape

24. Gradients of forest protection and forest activity Protection Large, high integrity Small, developed Forestry activity SFM Intensive Intact forest

25. Critical Questions • What is an appropriate schematic for the various types/categories of PAs and SFM; how do they relate to each other? Give examples. • Based on your experiences, what factors have contributed to successful biodiversity conservation and SFM?

26. Acknowledgements • Project partners • Peter Duinker, workshop facilitator • Peter, Fiona Schmiegelow, workshop preparation • Glen Hvengaard, Concept paper • Anne Munier, workshop logistics • All of you for participating in the next day and a half

27. Critical Questions • What is an appropriate schematic for the various types/categories of PAs and SFM; how do they relate to each other? Give examples. • Based on your experiences, what factors have contributed to successful biodiversity conservation and SFM?