Moving Beyond Brundtland: The Conservation Value of British Columbia's 12 Percent Protected Area Strategy
Dr. M. A. Sanjayan and Dr. M. E. Soul
British Columbia's Protected Area Strategy
- How did the 12 percent target become provincial policy?
- How is this target being implemented in British Columbia?
- Strength of the 12 percent target strategy in British Columbia
Potential Drawbacks of Using 12 Per Cent Protected
- The 12 percent target is not biologically defensible
- Gap analysis and the 12 percent ceiling in British Columbia
- Pre-existing parks are part of the 12 percent target
- Network of protected areas inadequately represent ecosystems
- Recently established parks are usually very small
- Assumption that areas outside protected areas will remain wilderness
- The 12 percent target essentially ignores areas outside protected areas
- Current Protected Areas Strategy provides little direction once the 12 percent target is reached
- Achieving the 12 percent goal can induce a false sense of security
- Effectiveness of B.C.'s Protected Areas Strategy
In 1987, the United Nations Commission on Environment and Development recommended in the Brundtland Report that in order to conserve the earth's ecosystems adequately, the total expanse of protected areas need to be at least tripled. Many governments and conservation organizations have interpreted this as a target to protect between 10 and 12 percent of a region's land area. Recently, the provincial government of British Columbia (B.C.), Canada, has instituted a protected areas strategy (PAS) based on this 12 percent land area target. Specifically, the B.C. strategy attempts to increase representation of ecosystems and maintain viable populations of species by essentially doubling the amount of land set aside for conservation from about 6 percent of the land area in 1992, just before the PAS came into effect, to 12 percent by the year 2000. This level of protection, implemented in such a short time, is unprecedented. It reflects the value of using specific land area targets in achieving conservation objectives.
Unfortunately, some biologically important criteria have been all but ignored in favor of simply meeting the 12 percent target, with devastating consequences to the long term persistence of some of the province's species, including two large umbrella species, the grizzly bear and the salmon. The major flaw is that the fixed 12 percent target is not biologically defensible and represents political reality at the time, rather than scientific fact.
Even the scientists involved with the Brundtland Report agree that while the goal of increasing protected areas was deemed worthwhile, the numerical target was set because it seemed politically achievable in 1987. It seems likely that in most areas, a far larger percentage of land area needs to be protected from intensive land use if populations of all species, particularly the large mammals, are to be maintained at viable levels. For example, in a recent scientifically rigorous land use plan for Florida, the authors recommended that over 30 percent of the state be protected from activities incompatible with biodiversity (Cox et al. 1994).
Even though the provincial government is setting aside land for conservation at a rapid rate (almost one percent per year thus far), adequate representation of ecosystems, particularly the more economically valuable and often coincidentally species rich areas, is clearly not being met. The vast majority of land set aside as part of the 12 percent target are in alpine or sub-alpine zones and ecosystems such as the coastal Douglas fir, interior Douglas fir, ponderosa pine, and bunchgrass are severely. In addition, almost half of the recently established parks (established since 1992) are less than 100 hectares in size.
While such parks can play a useful role in protecting important populations of endemic plants, studies have shown that medium and large size mammals will become extinct over time in all but the largest parks, essentially parks or connected park complexes around 10,000 km2 (Newmark 1995; 1996). This problem has been ignored by the provincial government who have assumed that much of the land outside protected areas will remain as wilderness. However, the practice of building numerous logging roads and new zoning regulations that effectively relax biodiversity concerns specified under the governments own Forest Practices Code means that much of the land outside protected areas will become sub optimal habitats that may even act as sinks for animals moving out of primary habitat (Doak 1992).
Finally, because there is little discussion by the provincial government about what might be done to enhance conservation after the 12 percent target has been achieved, the logical conclusion is that adequate representation of ecosystems and the protection of viable populations of species will continue to remain an elusive goal.
From a global perspective, international conservation organizations that recommend national targets for tropical nations of, say, 10 percent, are implicitly justifying an extinction of roughly 50 percent, on average, of each nation's species (MacArthur and Wilson 1967). Such loss of species represents one of the greatest mass extinction of life on earth.
Given this scenario, it is important to know whether such "politically realistic" guidelines actually encourage nations to improve conservation of species and ecosystems. Unfortunately, there is little evidence to show that this is true. Even in a relatively rich, industrialized province such as BC, the 12 percent target has become a ceiling for conservation, rather than a floor, essentially circumventing the more important goals of achieving ecosystem representation and maintaining viable populations.
Concern with conservation is not a recent phenomenon. Emperor Ashoka of India enacted the first recorded laws to protect wildlife in the 5th century. In recent years however, there has been a rise in the number of conservation protection efforts by governments, landowners, and concerned citizen groups (Talbot 1982). These modern conservation efforts took a great leap forward in 1872 with the establishment of the first internationally recognized national park, Yellowstone National Park. Unfortunately, burgeoning human populations and habitat encroachment has also led to a concurrent increase in the number of conflicts between development goals and conservation.
Realizing that protected areas (PA's) must be the cornerstone of any nations conservation strategy, the conservation community and national governments came together in an international strategy session dubbed the World Congress on National Parks. The third meeting of this World Congress (1982) proved to be particularly instrumental in calling for a universal strategy for increasing protected area coverage and implementing better management of already existing protected areas. Its findings were summarized in the Bali Action Plan authored by Kenton Miller representing the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). The Bali Action Plan specifically called for an increase in PA's and recommended that at least 10 percent of a nation's land area be set aside for conservation purposes (Miller 1982). It is Kenton Miller's opinion that this number represents a balance between political considerations and biological criteria. In 1982, a 10 percent coverage would have meant a doubling of existing conservation areas, greatly improving the prospects of species protection and would have been low enough to avoid instant dismissal for being considered "unrealistic" by national governments.
This 10 percent target was picked up in 1987 by the United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development. The report of this commission titled Our Common Future or sometimes The Brundtland Report was a milestone document in the evolution of international standards and practices for environmental protection. It was envisioned by Gro-Harlem Brundtland, the then Norwegian Prime Minister, as a global agenda for change. Like the Bali Action Plan before it, the Brundtland Report suggested that by the year 2000 a fixed percentage of land area be set aside for protection. Specifically, the Brundtland Report quoted the opinion of scientists (primarily Jeff McNeely and Kenton Miller from the International Union for Conservation of Nature) who suggested that the total expanse of protected areas needed to be at least tripled if it was to constitute a representative sample of the Earth's ecosystem (UN Commission on Environment and Development 1987). This has often been interpreted as a target of 12 percent, even though this number was not explicitly mentioned.
In fact, there are several ways to calculate the amount of land that the Brundtland Report recommends for protection depending on exactly what starting numbers and assumptions are used. For North America, this can range from 12 percent to 24.3 percent. During this decade, government agencies, industry, some conservation organizations (World Wide Fund for Nature and World Conservation Monitoring Center), have repeatedly cited the 10 or 12 percent target as providing adequate protection of nature (B.C. government 1993; Hummel 1989; Icobelli et al. 1995; Green et al. 1996). New campaigns continue to promote these targets as a fundamental conservation goal (e.g., Endangered Spaces Campaign of WWF, the new international campaign of WWF) and there is evidence that governments are being influenced by this message.
It is unclear, however, how useful such fixed targets are in promoting actual conservation and the question remains whether such protection targets actually do more harm than good in maintaining the integrity of the ecosystem and the viability of the component species. In this paper, we use the decision by the government of British Columbia (B.C.) to follow the recommendations of the Brundtland Report and protect 12 percent of its land area, as a case study to explore these questions. Specifically, we examine the PA strategy of B.C. and the usefulness of such fixed percentage target numbers as a goal for conservation. We also examine the implementation of the strategy, its advantages and potential drawbacks, and the effectiveness of the planned PA system in maintaining viable populations of species. Our primary method of investigation is through interviews of scientists, researchers, government agency personnel and representatives from several conservation organizations. A complete list of interviewees is appended (Annex 1).
B.C. was selected because it provides a recent, clearly defined example of a target percentage number inspired by the Bali Action Plan and the Brundtland Report, actually being implemented at a rate which if sustained, will achieve the 12 percent target by the year 2000. In addition, B.C. has the greatest diversity of wildlife found in Canada and still contains relatively large intact remnants of the coastal temperate rainforest ecosystem, an ecotype of great conservation and economic value. Even in a relatively rich, industrialized province such as B.C., the 12 percent target has become a ceiling for conservation, rather than a floor, essentially circumventing the more important GOALS of achieving ecosystem representation and maintaining viable populations.
BRITISH COLUMBIA'S PROTECTED AREAS STRATEGY
HOW DID THE 12 PERCENT TARGET BECOME PROVINCIAL POLICY?
Because the Brundtland Report acknowledged human needs and sustainable development, it was being cited by industry as international justification for the level of resource use and habitat destruction. Concurrently, WWF Canada was becoming increasingly concerned about the level of habitat destruction in British Columbia and decided an effective strategy would be to use the same Brundtland Report to counter the actions of the timber companies and make the provincial government more environmentally responsible. To this end, WWF Canada devised the Endangered Spaces Campaign which promoted the preservation of at least 12 percent of the representative ecosystems of Canada. This target was specifically derived from the Brundtland Report because WWF believed that it would be a prudent tactical move to associate the Endangered Spaces Campaign with a document that had already received support from critics of PA expansion (Hummel 1996). Although the Brundtland Report does not specifically mention a target number for protection, it does recommend a tripling of the current protected area network. One interpretation of this, based on a 4 percent PA coverage worldwide, would lead to a 12 percent target.
After WWF and other conservation organizations (Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, etc.) enlisted public support for increasing the PA network in B.C., the New Democratic Party (NDP) decided to run an election campaign that included the specific goal of protecting 12 percent of the province by the year 2000. The NDP won the premier's post in 1992 and kept its election promise by initiating the British Columbia Protected Areas Strategy (PAS), an ambitious plan that is well on its way to achieving its goal of protecting 12 percent of B.C., although with some changes. Unfortunately, these changes (Box 1) have seriously undermined the intent of the 12 percent objective. (Hummel 1996). These changes have also called into question the biological integrity of the current PA strategy.
HOW IS THIS TARGET BEING IMPLEMENTED IN BRITISH COLUMBIA?
In a public process beginning in 1990, the Parks and Wilderness Project for the 90's identified wilderness areas for possible inclusion into the PA network. After public meetings and consultations, the provincial government revealed a preliminary list of "study areas" between May and October of 1992 and since then a few modifications to the list have occurred. Initially, base line information, mapping and description of an area (ecosection) was carried out, followed by a gap analysis. The gap analysis initiated in B.C. uses ecoregion classification (Demarchi et al. 1990), as well as a biogeoclimatic ecosystem classification (Meidinger and Pojar 1991), to identify areas that are unique and poorly represented under the existing protected area network. Finally, economic considerations and broad land use patterns are taken into consideration before an area is recommended for study area status. After cabinet approval, the study area becomes subject to interim conservation management and via a regional planning process either becomes a designated protected area or is returned to its original status (B.C. Gap Analysis Workbook 1993; B.C. Protected Areas Strategy 1993). Actual recommendation of an area as a candidate for PA designation rests with a consensus board at the regional level. Two distinct procedures have been used for designating PA's.
The CORE (Commission on Resources and Environment) process was used for about three years starting in 1992/93 for four regions (Vancouver Island, Cariboo-Chilcotin, West Kootney, and East Kootney). Unfortunately, CORE was eventually terminated by the provincial government in favor of a new process. There was widespread dissatisfaction with CORE, particularly from the timber industry, because it attempted land use planning on huge areas with a high human population density, a sure recipe for controversy.
The process that replaced CORE is called LRMP (Land Resource Management Plan) and it differs from its predecessor in that it targets smaller areas and is more community based in the composition of its decision making team. The progress of LRMPs has been haphazard and although in many areas LRMPs are either complete or underway, there are at least three regions where LRMPs have not yet begun (North Cassiar, North Coast, Kalum, etc.). In other areas LRMPs have just started or their status is unclear (Mackenzi, Central Coast, Cessiar/Stikine). These regions that lack LRMPs include the mid-coast area of B.C. which is valuable both from an economic and biological perspective.
On Vancouver Island, with its high population density and easy access to timber stands, the industry and the conservation community believed that the CORE process was inadequate. An additional planning process was therefore enacted in 1996 termed the Vancouver Island Resource Targets (VIRT). The VIRT process designates resource zonation and a more detailed planning strategy for a majority of Vancouver Island excluding Clayoquot Sound and the areas already designated as PA's via the CORE process. Two types of process have been used at this regional level to achieve consensus.
As of April 1996, 167 new protected areas totalling approximately 2.7 million hectares had been created bringing B.C.'s total protected area to 9.16 percent. Some PA's of outstanding value that have recently been created are the Tatshenshini-Alsek Wilderness Park (945,568 hectares), the Khutzeymateen Grizzly Sanctuary (45,112 hectares), the Valley watershed (317,000 hectares), and the Ts'yl-os Park (236,322 hectares).
STRENGTH OF THE 12 PERCENT TARGET STRATEGY IN BRITISH COLUMBIA
1. No one disagrees that it is politically difficult to essentially double the amount of land under protected status in less than a decade. The only way to achieve this is with popular support. The Endangered Spaces Campaign galvanized local people into action, collecting thousands of signatures in support of conservation and eventually prompting the NDP to run an election campaign which highlighted environmental concerns. The fact that the NDP had increased conservation protection in B.C. is a direct result of the inclusion of the intent to double existing PA's within the party platform during the election campaign. Such swift sweeping changes may not have been possible without specific conservation goals (such as a 12 percent target) being included in the platform of the victorious party.
2. Clear targets are useful in galvanizing the public and NGO community to action. Often, the magnitude of the change needed for effective conservation and nature protection is so large that it may seem unattainable, paralyzing agencies into inaction, especially in the face of vigorous political opposition. Having a fixed target, 12 percent for B.C., or 10 percent world wide may be useful psychologically and politically, though it ignores the scientific principles of protected area design and management, including viable populations, connectivity, habitat size, reserve design and ecosystem integrity.
3. It is very easy to measure progress (success) against a fixed target number and this progress can then be effectively communicated to the voting public. If fixed numerical targets did not exist then success would have to be measured either qualitatively or with the aid of long-term research employing concepts and methodologies that are both arcane and ambiguous. For example, as of April 1996, it can be very clearly stated that 167 new protected areas have been established, bringing B.C.'s total protected area from 6 percent to 9.16 percent. At this rate, the full 12 percent will be achieved before the target year 2000. There is no ambiguity about this progress towards the main goal of the PAS of B.C.
4. Typically, the main objection to increasing the amount of protected area comes from industry and their lobby groups. In areas where natural resource extraction (logging, mining, commercial fishing) is high, such as in the Pacific Northwest, British Columbia, or Brazil, powerful industry groups often oppose liberalization of governmental policies that would set aside more land for conservation purposes. These industries, particularly the logging industry, are dominated by a few very large companies whose profit margins are carefully followed by shareholders. Uncertainty about future availability of suitable forests for timber extraction is detrimental to stability and long term financial planning. Both in Canada and the United States, industry is more amenable to restrictions on their activities if they are convinced that no additional restrictions will be placed in the future. In other words, they are more concerned about future uncertainty than about limited and immediate restrictions on their activity. For example, the acceptance of Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs) by landowners in the United States is enhanced by assurances from the Department of Interior that future restrictions on land use are unlikely. As such, the finality of a fixed ceiling (such as the 12 percent target) may alleviate the concerns about future financial uncertainty facilitating agreement between industry and environmental organizations.
POTENTIAL DRAWBACKS OF USING 12 PERCENT PROTECTED AREAS STRATEGY IN BRITISH COLUMBIA
THE 12 PERCENT TARGET IS NOT BIOLOGICALLY DEFENSIBLE
Perhaps the most damaging criticism of the 12 percent target specified in the B.C. PAS is that it is not scientifically defensible. Essentially all experts we interviewed agreed that the 10 percent target of the Bali Action Plan and the 12 percent target derived from the recommendations of the Brundtland Report are numbers derived primarily for political reasons. Kenton Miller and Jeff McNeely were two senior IUCN scientists who were involved with the 10 percent target set in the Bali Action Plan and whose opinions were cited as the source for the recommendation to triple existing PA's in the Brundtland Report. McNeely and Miller picked these targets because they believed it represented a dramatic increase in existing protected area coverage, something these scientists felt was necessary given the need to improve representative coverage of natural areas (Urvady 1975) and set aside large connected blocks of intact habitat for wildlife (Soul and Simberloff 1986). It is the opinion of McNeely and Miller that anything much more than 10 percent would be politically unacceptable and would be dismissed as being "unrealistic" and that without specific targets they would be criticized for being too vague with their conclusions.
Today, virtually all of the prominent conservation biologists interviewed (including Reed Noss, Dan Simberloff, and John Terborgh) agreed that the 10 and 12 percent targets for total land area in PA's are not sufficient to maintain viable populations of species and adequately represent ecosystems in biologically heterogeneous areas such as B.C. These researchers also concur that the popularity of such target numbers can be attributed to political, not biological, reasons. So if the consensus is that the 12 percent ceiling is clearly too low, how much would be considered adequate? The answer to this question will vary from site to site. The only way to establish a reasonable answer is through a comprehensive gap analysis that is based on both ecosystem representation and key species coverage (Cox et al. 1994; Scott et al. 1995). For purposes of comparison, a general range of target numbers, often derived through gap analysis, is discussed in Box 2.
As the target number determined in B.C. was determined for political rather than biological reasons, it may prove instructive to compare the level of protection afforded by current policies in B.C. with suggested targets developed for other regions by ecologists and conservation biologists. Table 1 specifies the proportion of regions recommended for protection motivated by ecological factors rather than political considerations. In all cases except one, much more than 10 or 12 percent has been recommended for protection. The average is about 50 percent. In the case of Idaho, Noss and Cooperrider explain that the low target percentage is derived from a gap analysis based only on vegetation cover. In part, they say, this low estimate is an artifact of the relatively small number of vegetation types in this state. Moreover, this proportion does not take into account the quality of the habitat, nor does it provide for viability and connectivity of wide-ranging animal species. Noss and Cooperrider predict that a comprehensive estimate would be several times larger.
Table 1
| Source | Region | Area to be protected |
| Odum 1970 | Georgia | 40 percent |
| Odum and Odum 1972 | General | 50 percent |
| Noss 1991 | Oregon Coast | 50 percent |
| Cox et al. 1994 | Florida | 33.3 percent |
| Mosquin et al. 1993; Kiester et al. 1996 | Idaho | 8 percent |
| Ryti 1992 | San Diego Canyons | 65 percent |
| Ryti 1992 | Islands in Gulf of California | 99.7 percent |
| Margules et al. 1988 | Australian river valleys | 44.9 - 75.3 percent |
| Noss 1996 | General | 25 - 75 percent |
It is clear that all experts believe that some degree of protection for about half of the terrestrial lands and fresh waters would be required to protect biodiversity. Many experts have speculated that the proportion might be a little lower in temperate and polar regions, and higher in regions with considerable local endemism and greater habitat heterogeneity, the tropics in particular. A caveat mentioned by some experts is that not all of this habitat need be in strictly protected reserves, depending on the cultural and political context (McNeeley and Miller, personal communication).
The same experts add, however, that all of these lands must be managed with the objective of protecting ecological integrity and species diversity, and there should be a system of inviolate (free of commercial activities), large, and interconnected core areas throughout to serve as wildlife refuge population reservoirs, and to protect evolutionary processes.
Finally, we draw the reader's attention to the section on Global Implications below, where we point out that "successful" implementation of the 10 to 12 percent guidelines, when viewed in the light of the well established principles of island biogeography, could push half of the world's species over the brink into extinction.
GAP ANALYSIS AND THE 12 PERCENT CEILING IN BRITISH COLUMBIA
To achieve ecosystem representation in the PA network, the provincial government used gap analysis (Burley 1988; Wright and Scott 1996) to select PA's. Gap analysis requires copious data on the biological and physical diversity of a region, including the distribution of vegetation, climates, soils and species. In B.C., a detailed gap analysis was performed to identify candidate areas for protection based on adequate representation and preserving special features. The analysis identifies "gaps" in the existing protected area system where adequate representation of a biological feature is not being achieved. Gap analysis uses digital maps that are overlaid in a geographic information system (GIS) to identify underrepresented species and ecosystems. Recently, some detailed and scientifically credible PA strategies have been developed using gap analyses for Australia (Pressey et al. 1992), Idaho (Wright et al. 1994) and Florida (Cox et al. 1994).
In B.C., two ecological classification systems are used to divide the province into ecological units: these are the ecoregion classification system (Demarchi et al. 1990) which focuses on landform and climate, and the biogeoclimatic ecosystem classification (Meidinger and Pojar 1991) which focuses on climate and vegetation. The scale of the ecoregion classification system is low with B.C. divided into 110 ecosections while the biogeoclimatic classification identifies just 14 zones such as coastal western hemlock, alpine tundra, etc., for the entire province. Because B.C. has both maritime and mountain influences, several biogeoclimatic zones can occur in sequence within one ecosection. These two systems of classification assess biological representation in different ways and scales. Granting that gap analysis represents the newest scientific methodology available for identifying areas for protection, several shortcomings have diluted the impact and scientific credibility of the analysis in B.C., including:
a. Because the 12 percent cap on PA designation was established prior to the conclusions of the gap analysis, no matter how rigorous the analysis, the outcome can never be described as scientific or purely biological. In other words, the results of the gap analysis were not limited to biological issues but were distorted by an externally imposed cap. Designations of various candidate areas for protection had to conform to this cap. It would have been more objective, transparent, prudent and scientifically defensible to proceed with the gap analysis using strictly biological criteria with no target land area or ceiling.
b. Vegetation type plays a prominent role in both the ecoregion and biogeoclimatic classification system. Thus representation is defined largely in terms of vegetation or plant cover and there is an attempt to equalize the amount of land area devoted to the protection of each vegetation type. The implicit assumption in this is that all defined vegetation types have equal importance, and that their individual thresholds for ecological integrity are identical. To thoroughly evaluate this assumption an analysis of the risk associated with the loss of each cover type throughout its entire range would have to be undertaken (Wright and Scott 1996).
c. Similarly, the emphasis on vegetation types also assumes that they are surrogates for the viability of other biological attributes, such as salmon and goshawks. There is always a trade-off between accuracy and expediency when using surrogates and some past studies have indicated that vegetation cover can reasonably predict species occurrence (Scott et al. 1993; Edwards et al. 1996). Occurrence, however, is not a guarantee of viability. Moreover, some biologically important species such as the grizzly bear or salmon which have very large ranges and certain specific habitat requirements, may be missed by the use of a gap analysis that relies so heavily on vegetation type. The ecological significance of so-called keystone species (such as salmon, wolf, beaver, and the grizzly) is now widely accepted. These species perform important ecological functions (Mills et al. 1995), that maintain the ecological functions and diversity of systems. The absence of such species may trigger a cascade of deleterious changes, culminating in much simpler, more vulnerable ecological systems. It is essential, therefore, that gap analysis such as the one completed in B.C. be complemented with a species-specific strategy to conserve key species (Noss 1987).
PRE-EXISTING PARKS ARE PART OF THE 12 PERCENT TARGET
At the onset of the current PA Strategy, B.C. had an existing system of protected areas totalling 6 percent of the province's land area (B.C. Government 1993). When the current PA strategy was developed in 1992, with the commitment to the 12 percent target, existing parks were considered part of that target. Their boundaries were declared inviolable and no alterations were permitted. Therefore only 6 percent of provincial land area is being newly designated. Not only was this new condition inconsistent with the original intent of the 12 percent rule, it makes it very difficult to achieve adequate representation of all ecosystems given that many pre-existing parks were designated on recreational and political criteria.
In fact B.C. Parks, the main management agency for protected areas, has a mandate for providing recreational opportunities and as such many pre-existing parks were in the alpine or sub-alpine zones (B.C. Land Use Coordination Office 1996). In addition, areas in such alpine zones are relatively easy to designate as protected areas because of a lack of potentially conflicting resource values (e.g., low timber value). Although some changes were suggested in early planning meetings, no alterations of pre-existing protected areas were permitted because many environmental groups believed that this precedent would undermine the concept of perpetuity implicit in the definition of PA's.
NETWORK OF PA's INADEQUATELY REPRESENT ECOSYSTEMS
A major original goal of the PAS is to protect viable representative examples of the natural ecosystems of the province (B.C. Government 1993). Unfortunately, with time, the focus has shifted to the 12 percent overall target and the objective of adequate representation of ecosystems has largely been ignored. This means that the provincial government can claim victory in its conservation efforts by pointing to the amount of coverage being achieved while making little effort to extend protection to underrepresented and often economically valuable ecosystems such as the coastal temperate rainforest. So why are ecosystems not being adequately represented? There are several reasons including:
a. At the onset of the current PA strategy, 6 percent of the province was already designated as pre-existing protected areas, much of it in alpine or sub-alpine zones (B.C. Government 1993). This means that representation was already compromised.
b. Although a gap analysis was performed to select areas for protection, the government did not use strictly scientific criteria for final designation, relying more on socio-economic or political considerations. Since the two types of planning processes, CORE and LRMP, are consensus based processes, in many regions the strength of the timber industry has played a significant role in deciding what areas eventually become designated as part of the PA network. Sometimes, only one person representing conservation organizations was permitted at the planning table, making it less likely that conservation issues were adequately addressed (Sierra Club 1996). As a result, the truly "representative" areas have seldomly been recommended for protection (B.C. Government 1996).
c. In keeping with the tradition of emphasizing recreational opportunities and outstanding features, the regional planning boards continue to choose areas for protection based on these non-scientific, non-biological criteria rather than seek full representation as mandated in the PAS policy (B.C. Government 1996). This is certainly not an issue exclusive to B.C. In many other regions, particularly in northern temperate countries, similar anthropocentric values dominate the selection process for PA's (Gotmark and Nilsson 1992; Nilsson and Gotmark 1992).
d. In some areas, very little opportunity exists to protect examples of certain types of ecosystems because only a few scattered remnants exist, often in private holdings (e.g., interior douglas-fir, coastal douglas-fir, and bunch grass ecosystems).
e. At least three regions in B.C. have yet to begin the process for designating candidate areas for protection. Several other regions have only just started the process. This is troubling since the 12 percent target is rapidly being approached with little land still available for designation, distributed over six regions. Inevitably this means that achieving representation will become harder with time.
These and other shortcomings have had a significant impact on the goal of the PAS to achieve viable, representation of major ecosystems. About 30 percent of the terrestrial ecosections defined by the provincial gap analysis continue to have essentially no representation and half of the ecosections have less than 6 percent of their areas designated for protection. Even more disturbing is that as of 1996, when the last provincial status report was produced, 61.2 percent of the total new protected area designated since November 1991, was classified as alpine or sub-alpine perpetuating the bias in favor of "rock and ice". This means that only 2.8 percent remains to be designated in a manner that would compensate for the imbalances of the past, a goal that even the Land Use Coordination Office of the provincial government admits is unachievable (B.C. Government 1996).