Integrated Coastal Planning in British Columbia: Lessons Learned As an area of resource extraction for consumption or refinement
elsewhere, coastal communities have been forever subjected to economic
vagaries or changes in harvesting methods. Declining resource bases
and reduced employment due to ever more efficient technology have
left coastal communities with the choice between economic diversification
and perishing. Consequently, an increasingly broad range of activities,
from aquaculture to ecotourism, have started to compete for finite
coastal area and resources. Demand for access and concerns for the
environmental implications of some activities have resulted in strident
conflict and economic instability. Integrated coastal planning is
seen as having the potential to balance development interests within
the context of long-term environmental stability. Strategic land use planning undertaken by the province of BC beginning
in the early 1990s identified a number of priority areas for coastal
planning. The Vancouver Island Strategic Land Use Plan (2000) highlighted
the need for focused plans in a number of high conflict areas including
Nootka, Kyuquot and Quatsino Sounds on the west coast of Vancouver
Island and the Queen Charlotte Strait/Broughton Archipelago areas
of the Central Coast/North Island region The Central Coast Land and
Coastal Resource Management Plan’s work in coastal zone planning
further emphasized the need for planning in Queen Charlotte Strait
and the Broughton. At the federal level, Canada’s Oceans Act (1997) and Canada’s
Oceans Strategy (2002) provide direction for the Pacific Region of
Fisheries & Oceans Canada to undertake a lead Integrated Management
initiative, Central Coast Integrated Management (CCIM), which has
been underway since 1999. Located within the central coast, Quatsino
Sound was identified as a pilot Coastal Management Area (CMA) under
the federal Oceans Strategy. The objectives of the federal government’s
participation in coastal management are to empower and enable governments,
communities, First Nations, and interests and to meet their objectives
through: improved communication; enhanced information sharing; and
the development of an ecosystem-based adaptive management approach
which includes the identification of unique, sensitive, and critical
habitats leading to more comprehensive coastal planning for small
geographic areas. In 2001, the newly formed Coast and Marine Planning Branch of BC’s
Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management initiated a program of
integrated coastal planning for selected areas of the Pacific coast.
These plans focus on developing recommendations to provincial tenure
programs for intertidal and aquatic lands. Taking direction from
the strategic work already completed, the first project addressed
the coastal nearshore and aquatic lands extending from Cape Caution
to the western end of Johnstone Strait, including the waters of the
Seymour-Belize Complex, Kingcome Inlet, the Broughton Archipelago
and Tribune Channel. The North Island Straits Coastal Plan (NIS)
was completed in December 2002 after a 14 month process and provided
a model for subsequent efforts. Nearly one year later, with one additional
plan completed (Kyuquot Sound), a third undergoing final review (Quatsino
Sound) and three more (Chatham Sound, Johnstone-Bute, Malaspina-Okeover)
scheduled for completion by March 31, 2004, it is worthwhile to consider
the lessons learned and evaluate next steps. The numerous learning opportunities identified over the past two
years of regional level coastal planning can be grouped into several
broad categories:
-
Ecosystem based planning
-
Impact profiling
-
Developing networks
-
Managing Input
Ecosystem based Planning Recognizing the need to develop a credible model for analysis and
decision making, efforts were undertaken to employ existing provincial
instruments that supported an ecosystem approach to planning. The
provincial Marine Ecosystem Classification uses physical characteristics
of the marine environment (depth, benthic substrate, exposure to
open ocean) and provides a hierarchical framework for classifying
coastal ecosystems. The smallest division, the marine eco-unit serves
as the primary instrument for identifying planning units. Although
planning units are ultimately administrative in nature for provincial
purposes, an effort to base recommendations on physically consistent
units ensures that environmental considerations are included in the
decisions making process from the outset. DFO is also employing an
ecosystem basis for its coastal IM planning; consequently, eco-units
offer a common basis for analysis and information sharing. Currently physical shore type and shore zone habitat modeling are
being incorporated into the environmental profile, to permit a more
comprehensive examination of the relationship between human activities
and environmental impacts. Another trial involves examining water
quality samples in combination with tidal models to more fully incorporate
features of the water column (for example, salinity and temperature)
into the planning model while enabling a means to study the impact
of circulation patterns on sedimentation and the dispersal of deleterious
substances. DFO has worked cooperatively to bring additional information to
the table. In the Quatsino Sound process, DFO staff identified areas
of ecological significance throughout the Plan area where sensitive
values would likely limit the range of potential uses and activities. Impact Profiling The suite of uses under consideration in the NIS Coastal Plan closely
mirrored the tenure programs managed by Land and Water BC (LWBC),
the provincial Crown Corporation responsible for lease and sale of
Crown land. Although this approach provides a common basis for discussion
between planners and LWBC, a number of shortcomings quickly became
apparent. Some tenure types were narrowly defined and could be used
as surrogates for physical impacts (for example, aquaculture) while
other tenure programs, such as commercial use, were so broad in scope
that they frustrated any opportunity to engage in planning on an
ecosystem basis; the impacts were essentially unquantifiable. Furthermore,
as most of the provincially managed uses are linked to upland features
and uses, recommendations on appropriate commercial use might have
the ultimate effect of complicating resource management rather than
clarifying it. In subsequent plans, use recommendations are based on a mixture
of narrowly defined uses (finfish aquaculture, log booming) and structure-based
development (light and heavy docks, floating lodges and base camps).
Work is currently focused on developing profiles of these categories,
including siting requirements and likely impacts on biological and
physical values. This will support more informed use recommendations
and economic and environmental impact assessments. A future goal
is to develop use potential modeling that will serve to generally
identify areas of suitability for a given use or structure. Networking A significant challenge for provincial staff early on was that
of creating networks of a very different group of stakeholders from
those more frequently found at terrestrial- based planning processes.
DFO has faced a similar challenge to bring its staff and well-developed
but dispersed networks of coastal user groups together in an integrated
framework. During the Quatsino Sound process, provincial and federal
staff worked on a one-to-many basis, consulting with stakeholders
individually, with staff responsible for integration of material.
Products were reviewed by a broad-based local Public Advisory Committee
and stakeholders with public input available through the internet
and open house sessions. Developing effective working relationships with First Nations has
been another challenge, particularly given past challenges to effectively
engage First Nations in strategic level planning. In the NIS, only
one of ten First Nations with asserted traditional territory in the
planning area actually participated in the process. By contrast,
Quatsino and Kyuquot Sound Coastal Plans, each closely reflecting
the traditional territories of a single First Nation, benefited from
close ties and regular input from First Nations. The two other plans
currently under development are also enjoying positive relationships
with respective First Nations. Managing Input Integration of local and First Nations traditional ecological knowledge
sources has proven to be a challenge of a different sort. Faced with
demands for fiscal restraint, agencies are generally less able to
undertake extensive data collection efforts now than at other times.
Existing provincial and federal datasets, which may be informative
at the strategic level, are shown to have glaring errors and gaps
when scrutinized at the larger scale of regional plans. Nevertheless,
inventory standards frequently lack the flexibility to consider the
tweaking of datasets that local and traditional knowledge offer.
Further concerns relate to liability issues of basing management
recommendations (and by extension, tenure approval) on data of uncertain
origin. Some non-governmental organizations, for example the Inner
Coast Natural Resource Centre (ICNRC), have developed extensive datasets
incorporating data oversight mechanisms, but at present their material
is not available to the planning processes. In the case of NIS, Kyuquot
and Quatsino, local input has been included in unit profiles in a
text format and considered during planning, but it is not displayed
on unit maps that are created entirely from validated datasets. A further challenge will be to ensure that data provided to users
following a planning process conforms to the direction provided by
the plan. For example, general aquaculture capability is modified
not only by provincial siting criteria, but by the social recommendations
of the plan; release of the capability data alone offers a very different
context than that provided by the final plan. This may require the
development of specific protocols to identify the precise uses of
specific data layers, particularly those related to use capability
assessments, or may result in limiting data release. Future Considerations With the completion of the provincial aspect of the Quatsino Sound
Coastal Plan, comes the real work of determining next steps. For
the province, plan follow-up will include employment of the management
recommendations to guide the tenure allocation process and engaging
in identified projects with federal departments, provincial agencies,
First Nations and local government regarding such matters as economic
diversification support, conservation assessments and guidelines
for tourism. Monitoring of the Plan’s recommendations is set
to be conducted annually with a review of the entire product in 2006.
DFO is in the process of developing its model for ongoing IM planning
and management of resources. This will take the form of regular and
ongoing review of management options within the context of an integrated
framework. Work is also being undertaken to determine mechanisms
for public input, perhaps in the form of a general management advisory
board.
|