Guiding principles for developing an indicator and monitoring framework

Forestry Chronicle

Volumn 80, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 82-90

  Rempel, Robert S ^a   Andison, David W ^b   Hannon, Susan J ^c  

^a LAKEHEAD UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b Bandaloop Landscape Ecosystem Serv   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Adaptive learning; Biodiversity; Focal species; Indicators; Sustainable forest management

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; ECOLOGY; LEARNING SYSTEMS; PLANNING; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT;

FORMAL PLANS; INTENDED GOALS; LOGICAL MONITORING; MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES;

FORESTRY;

FOREST MANAGEMENT; MONITORING SYSTEM; SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY;

EID: 2442446308     PISSN: 00157546     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5558/tfc80082-1     Document Type: Review

References (35)

1. Andelman, S.J. and W.F. Fagan. 2000. Umbrellas and flagships: efficient conservation surrogates or expensive mistakes? Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 97: 5954-5959.
2. Andison, D.W., R. Wright, R. Rempel, D. Dye, R. Nesdoly, B. Christiansen, D. Ens, P. Mackasey, P. Maczek and R. Fincati. 2002. Vegetation pattern indicators V 6.0. Saskatchewan Environment and Resource Management. Prince Albert, Saskatchewan.
3. Andren, H. 1994. Effects of habitat fragmentation on birds and mammals in landscapes with different proportions of suitable habitat: a review. Oikos 71: 355-366.
4. Bryce, S.A., R.M. Hughes and P.R. Kaufmann. 2002. Development of a bird integrity index: Using bird assemblages as indicators of riparian condition. Environ. Manage. 30: 294-310.
5. Caro, T.M. and G. O'Doherty. 1999. On the use of surrogate species in conservation biology. Cons. Biol. 13: 805-814.
6. Carlsson, M. 1999. A method for integrated planning of timber production and biodiversity: a case study. Can. J. For. Res. 29: 1183-1191.
7. Dufrêne, M. and P. Legendre. 1997. Species assemblages and indicator species: the need for a flexible asymmetrical approach. Ecol. Mon. 67: 345-366.
8. Fahrig, L. 1997. Relative effects of habitat loss and fragmentation on population extinction. J. Wildl. Manage. 61: 603-610.
9. Failing, L. and R. Gregory. 2003. Ten common mistakes in designing biodiversity indicators for forest policy. J. Environ. Manage. 68: 121-132.
10. Ferris, R. and J.W. Humphrey. 1999. A review of potential biodiversity indicators for application in British forests. Forestry 72: 313-328.
11. Fleishman, E., R.B. Blair and D.D. Murphy. 2001. Empirical validation of a method for umbrella species selection. Ecol. Appl. 11: 1489-1501.
12. Fleishman, E., D.D. Murphy and P.F. Brussard. 2000. A new method for selection of umbrella species for conservation planning. Ecol. Appl. 10: 569-579.
13. Hunter, M.L. Jr. 1990. Wildlife forests, and forestry principles of managing forests for biological diversity. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
14. Hunter, M.L. Jr. 1993. Natural fire regimes as spatial models for managing boreal forests. Biol. Cons. 65: 115-120.
15. Karr, J.R. 1991. Biological integrity: a long-neglected aspect of water resource management. Ecol. Appl. 1: 66-84.
16. Kneeshaw, D.D., A. Leduc, P. Drapeau, S. Gauthier, D. Paré, R. Carignan, R. Doucet, L. Bouthillier and C. Messier. 2000. Development of integrated ecological standards of sustainable forest management at an operational scale. For. Chron. 76: 481-493.
17. Lambeck, R.J. 1997. Focal species: a multi-species umbrella for nature conservation. Cons. Biol. 11: 849-856.
18. Landres, P.B., J. Verner and J.W. Thomas. 1988. Ecological uses of vertebrate indicator species: a critique. Cons. Biol. 2: 316-328.
19. Lindenmayer, D.B. and J.F. Franklin. 1997. Managing stand structure as part of ecologically sustainable forest management in Australian mountain ash forests. Cons. Biol. 11: 1053-1068.
20. Lindenmayer, D.B., R.B. Cunningham, R.B., C.F. Donnelly and R. Lesslie. 2002. On the use of landscape surrogates as ecological indicators in fragmented forests. For. Ecol. Manag. 159: 203-216.
21. Lindenmayer, D.B., C.R. Margules and D.B. Botkin. 2000. Indicators of biodiversity for ecologically sustainable forest management. Cons. Biol. 14: 941-950.
22. Martin, K. and J.M. Eadie. 1999. Nest webs: a community-wide approach to the management and conservation of cavity-nesting forest birds. For. Ecol. Manag. 115: 243-257.
23. McAlpine, C.A. and T.J. Eyre. 2002. Testing landscape metrics as indicators of habitat loss and fragmentation in continuous eucalypt forests (Queensland, Australia). Landscape Ecology 17: 711-728.
24. McLaren, M.A., I.D. Thompson and J.A. Baker. 1998. Selection of vertebrate wildlife indicators for monitoring sustainable forest management in Ontario. For. Chron. 74: 241-548.
25. Mills, L.S., M.E. Soule and D.F. Doak. 1993. The keystone-species concept in ecology and conservation. BioScience 43: 219-224.
26. Noss, R.F. 1999. Assessing and monitoring forest biodiversity: a suggested framework and indicators. For. Ecol. Manage. 115: 135-146.
27. Pearson, D.L. 1994. Selecting indicator taxa for the quantitative assessment of biodiversity. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B. 345: 75-79.
28. Rempel, R.S., P.C. Elkie, A.R. Rodgers and M.J. Gluck. 1997. Timber-management and natural-disturbance effects on moose habitat: landscape evaluation. J. Wildl. Manage. 61: 517-524.
29. Simberloff, D. 1998. Flagships, umbrellas, and keystones: is single-species management passé in the landscape era? Biol. Cons. 83: 247-257.
30. Simberloff, D. 1999. The role of science in the preservation of forest biodiversity. For. Ecol. Manage. 115: 101-111.
31. Sinclair, A.R.E. 1991. Science and the practice of wildlife management. J. Wildl. Manage. 55: 767-773.
32. Walters, C.J. 1986. Adaptive management of renewable resources. Macmillan Publishing Company, NY. 374 p.
33. Walters, C.J. 1997. Adaptive policy design: thinking at larger spatial scales. Bissonette, J.A. Wildlife and Landscape Ecology. pp. 386-394. Springer-Verlag Inc., New York, NY.
34. With, K.A., and T.O. Crist. 1995. Critical thresholds in species' responses to landscape structure. Ecology 76: 2446-2459.
35. Zacharias, M.A. and J.C. Roff. 2001. Use of focal species in marine conservation and management: a review and critique. Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 11: 59-76.