Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

An evaluative framework for forested areas in the rural-urban interface McLelan, Michael Gary 1983

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1983_A6_7 M24_7.pdf [ 17.84MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0076992.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0076992-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0076992-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0076992-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0076992-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0076992-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0076992-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0076992-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0076992.ris

Full Text

AN EVALUATIVE FRAMEWORK FOR FORESTED AREAS IN THE RURAL-URBAN INTERFACE by MICHAEL GARY McLELAN B . S c . < A g r . ) , The U n i v e r s i t y of G u e l p h , 1980 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Resource Management S c i e n c e ) INTERDISCIPLINARY STUDIES U)e accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d s t a n d a r d THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA 1983 ( 2 ) M i c h a e l Gary M c L e l a n , 1983 In presenting t h i s thesis i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the Library s h a l l make i t f r e e l y available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of t h i s thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It i s understood that copying or publication of t h i s thesis for f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my written permission. Department of • ' R .gSO j ygce nWN\AGgH&Mr "5Ctg 'VJCe" The University of B r i t i s h Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 Date S e P T E K T S e ^ 9 , 1 9 8 * 3 i i ABSTRACT The b e n e f i t s of f o r e s t s in any landscape can be d e s c r i b e d in e n v i r o n m e n t a l , s o c i a l , and economic terms. T h i s s tudy d e a l s wi th the environmenta l and s o c i a l b e n e f i t s of f o r e s t s , and i s c o n f i n e d to the land area between predominant ly urban and r u r a l a r e a s , termed the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . F o r e s t cover in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e i s u s u a l l y s u b s t a n t i a l and s i g n i f i c a n t in terms of p r o v i d i n g environmental and s o c i a l b e n e f i t s . However, intense urban and other development in t h i s zone, over t ime, r e s u l t s in an incremental removal of the f o r e s t r e s o u r c e , r e s u l t i n g in a l o s s of a s s o c i a t e d environmenta l and s o c i a l b e n e f i t s . To ensure that the b e n e f i t s of f o r e s t e d areas are c o n s i d -ered in l and use p l a n n i n g in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e , an e v a l -u a t i v e framework i s p r e s e n t e d which p r o v i d e s a measure of the " q u a l i t y " or importance of i n d i v i d u a l f o r e s t e d areas in t h i s zone . F o r e s t e d areas are r a t e d out of 100 p o i n t s f o r the b e n e f i t s o f : <1) w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t , <2) water r e s o u r c e s , <3) e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y s e n s i t i v e a r e a s , and (4) r e c r e a t i o n . To t e s t the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of the e v a l u a t i v e framework, twelve f o r e s t e d areas in a r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e ( D i s t r i c t of S u r r e y , B r i t i s h Columbia) are e v a l u a t e d for the above four b e n e f i t s . The r e s u l t s of the e v a l u a t i o n i n d i c a t e that " q u a l i t y " of f o r e s t e d areas i s l a r g e l y a f u n c t i o n of the b i o p h y s i c a l d i v e r s i t y e x h i b i t e d by the f o r e s t e d a r e a . The q u a l i t y r a t i n g s o b t a i n e d f o r the twelve f o r e s t e d areas appear to a c c u r a t e l y r e f l e c t the r e l a t i v e importance of the f o r e s t e d areas in the i i i 1andscape. To i n c o r p o r a t e -forested areas in to i n t e g r a t e d land use p l a n n i n g , a procedure i s p r e s e n t e d which i s based on output p r o v i d e d by the e v a l u a t i v e -framework. Management g u i d e l i n e s c o r -r e s p o n d i n g to v a r i o u s c a t e g o r i e s o-f f o r e s t e d area q u a l i t y are o u t l i n e d which recommend a l l o w a b l e l i m i t s of development in f o r e s t e d a r e a s . Recommendations are made f o r a " f o r e s t e d area p lan" f o r the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e based on t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n . L a s t l y , v a r i o u s l ega l and r e l a t e d techniques are l i s t e d which can be used to ach ieve r e t e n t i o n o b j e c t i v e s set out in the management g u i d e l i n e s . i v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT i i LIST OF TABLES v M LIST OF FIGURES '. x ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS x i i INTRODUCTION 1 BACKGROUND 4 The R u r a l - U r b a n Inter-face 4 U r b a n i z a t i o n and the N a t u r a l Environment 6 The F o r e s t Resource in the R u r a l - U r b a n I n t e r f a c e 7 B e n e f i t s of F o r e s t e d A r e a s in the R u r a l - U r b a n Inter-face • 9 P l a n n i n g -for F o r e s t e d A r e a s in the R u r a l - U r b a n . I n ter-f ace 13 E v a l u a t i n g F o r e s t e d A r e a s in the R u r a l - U r b a n Inter-face f o r P l a n n i n g 15 SCOPE OF STUDY 17 Problem Statement . . . . . 1 7 Study O b j e c t i v e s 18 Study C o n s t r a i n t s 18 E v a l u a t i v e Framework O b j e c t i v e s 20 OVERVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION METHODOLOGIES 22 Descr i p t i ve , S ta t i c & Dynamic Methodo log ie s . . . 2 2 S t a t i c , M u l t i p l e F a c t o r E v a l u a t i o n Techniques 25 Over 1 ays 25 P o i n t R a t i n g Sytems 27 Key Element Systems 28 V P o i n t R a t i n g E v a l u a t i o n T e c h n i q u e s : D i s c u s s i o n 32 METHODOLOGY FOR EVALUATING FORESTED AREAS IN THE RURAL-URBAN INTERFACE 34 Procedure . . 34 Parameter S e l e c t i o n and Q u a l i t y R e l a t i o n s h i p s 38 W e i g h t i n g o-f Parameters 39 Parameter M e a s u r e / Q u a l i t y R e l a t i o n s h i p s and Weights •for S e l e c t e d B e n e f i t s 40 W i l d l i f e Habi tat 41 Water Resources 60 E n v i r o n m e n t a l l y S e n s i t i v e A r e a s 84 Recreat i on 96 V i g o r R a t i n g • 112 C a l c u l a t i o n of Q u a l i t y of F o r e s t e d A r e a s 113 P r e p a r a t i o n and Parameter Measurement . . . . 1 1 3 C a l c u l a t i o n of Q u a l i t y 115 EVALUATION OF FORESTED AREAS IN THE DISTRICT OF SURREY, BRITISH COLUMBIA 116 I n troduc t i on 116 D e s c r i p t i o n of Surrey . . . 1 1 6 L o c a t i o n and P o p u l a t i o n 116 S u r r e y as a R u r a l - U r b a n I n t e r f a c e . . . . . 1 2 0 CI imate 121 Topography and Soi I s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 Hydrol ogy 1 22 F i s h Resources . . . . . 1 2 4 W i l d l i f e Resources 125 The F o r e s t Resource in S u r r e y . . . 1 2 7 Present P o l i c y R e l a t e d to F o r e s t e d Areas in S u r r e y 131 v i E v a l u a t i o n of Sample F o r e s t e d A r e a s in Surrey :Me t h o d . . . 132 C a l c u l a t i o n o-f Q u a l i t y o-f Sample F o r e s t e d Areas in S u r r e y 135 D i s c u s s i o n of the E v a l u a t i v e Framework A p p l i c a t i o n in S u r r e y 1 60 PLANNER'S USE OF THE EVALUATIVE FRAMEWORK IN THE RURAL-URBAN INTERFACE 170 F o r e s t e d A r e a P l a n n i n g P r o c e s s . . . . . 170 Implementation of a F o r e s t e d A r e a Plan in the R u r a l -Urban I n t e r f a c e 175 CONCLUSIONS 177 BIBLIOGRAPHY 181 APPENDICES 197 Appendix I . G l o s s a r y of Termino logy 197 Appendix I I . S o i l E r o d i b i l i t y F a c t o r <K) and Nomograph 203 Appendix I I I . T o p o g r a p h i c a l F a c t o r <LS) and Slope E f f e c t Chart 208 Appendix IV. F l o o d Hazard C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 215 v i i LIST OF TABLES T a b l e Page 1. F e a t u r e s E x h i b i t e d by V a r i o u s Mu1tip1e F a c t o r E v a l u a t i o n Techn iques 30 2. Q u a l i t y of F o r e s t e d A r e a s Based on Spec i e s D i v e r s i t y . . . . 3 5 3. O v e r s t o r y S p e c i e s / Q u a l i t y for W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t 48 4. O v e r s t o r y H e i g h t / Q u a l i t y f o r W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t 4? 5. Percent O v e r s t o r y C o v e r / Q u a l i t y f o r W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t . . . . 5 0 6. Percent U n d e r s t o r y C o v e r / Q u a l i t y for W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t . . . 5 1 7. Percent Groundcover /Qual i t y f o r W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t . . . 52 8. Snags per H e c t a r e / Q u a l i t y f o r W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t .53 9. Percent Dead and Down C o v e r / Q u a l i t y f o r W i l d l i f e Habi tat 54 10. Percent A r e a s Streams and R a v i n e s / Q u a l i t y f o r W i l d l i f e Habi tat , 55 11. Percent A r e a W e t l a n d / Q u a l i t y f o r W i l d l i f e Habi tat 56 12. Percent A r e a Human D i s t u r b a n c e / Q u a l i t y f o r W i l d l i f e Habi ta t 57 13. S u r r o u n d i n g Land U s e / Q u a l i t y f o r W i l d l i f e Habi ta t 58 14. F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e / Q u a l i t y f o r W i l d l i f e Habi ta t 59 15. Sediment Y i e l d s and T u r b i d i t y L e v e l s Produced From V a r i o u s Land Uses 68 16. O v e r s t o r y S p e c i e s / Q u a l i t y f o r Water R e s o u r c e s . . . . . 74 17. O v e r s t o r y H e i g h t / Q u a l i t y for Water Resources 75 18. Percent O v e r s t o r y C o v e r / Q u a l i t y for Water Resources 75 19. Percent U n d e r s t o r y C o v e r / Q u a l i t y for Water Resources 76 20. Percent G r o u n d c o v e r / Q u a l i t y f o r Water Resources 77 v i i i T a b l e Page 21. S o i l Erod i b i 1 i t y / Q u a l i ty f o r Water Resources 78 22. T o p o g r a p h y / Q u a l i t y for Water Resources 80 23. Percent A r e a Streams and R a v i n e s / Q u a l i t y f o r Water Resources 81 24. Percent A r e a W e t l a n d / Q u a l i t y f o r Water Resources 82 25. F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e / Q u a l i t y f o r Water Resources .33 26. S o i l E r o d i b i 1 i t y / Q u a l i t y f o r E n v i r o n m e n t a l l y S e n s i t i v e A r e a s 88 27. T o p o g r a p h y / Q u a l i t y f o r E n v i r o n m e n t a l l y S e n s i t i v e A r e a s 8? 28. Percent A r e a Streams and R a v i n e s / Q u a l i t y for E n v i r o n m e n t a l l y S e n s i t i v e A r e a s 90 29. Percent A r e a W e t l a n d / Q u a l i t y f o r E n v i r o n m e n t a l l y S e n s i t i v e A r e a s . . . . 91 30. Percent A r e a Human D i s t u r b a n c e / Q u a l i t y for E n v i r o n m e n t a l l y S e n s i t i v e A r e a s 92 31. S i g n i f i c a n t N a t u r a l / B i o l o g i c a l F e a t u r e s / Q u a l i t y f o r E n v i r o n m e n t a l l y S e n s i t i v e A r e a s 93 32. Percent A r e a F l o o d Z o n e / Q u a l i t y f o r E n v i r o n m e n t a l l y S e n s i t i v e A r e a s 95 33. F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e / Q u a l i t y f o r E n v i r o n m e n t a l l y S e n s i t i v e A r e a s 95 34. O v e r s t o r y S p e c i e s / Q u a l i t y for R e c r e a t i o n 102 35. O v e r s t o r y H e i g h t / Q u a l i t y f o r R e c r e a t i o n 103 36. Percent O v e r s t o r y C o v e r / Q u a l i t y for R e c r e a t i o n 104 37. Percent U n d e r s t o r y C o v e r / Q u a l i t y for Recreat i on 105 38. Percent Groundcover /Qual i ty f o r R e c r e a t i o n 106 39. Percent A r e a Streams and R a v i n e s / Q u a l i t y f o r R e c r e a t i o n 107 40. Percent A r e a W e t l a n d / Q u a l i t y f o r R e c r e a t i o n 108 i x T a b l e Page 41. Percent A r e a Human D i s t u r b a n c e / Q u a l i t y f or Recreat i on 10? 42. S i g n i f i c a n t N a t u r a l / C u 1 t u r a l F e a t u r e s / Q u a l i t y f or R e c r e a t i o n 110 43. F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e / Q u a l i t y f or R e c r e a t i o n I l l 44. V i g o r R a t i n g s f o r F o r e s t e d A r e a s . . . . . 1 1 3 45. Methods Used -for O b t a i n i n g Parameter Measurements in S u r r e y 134 46. Summary of P o i n t R a t i n g s of Q u a l i t y f or Sample F o r e s t e d A r e a s in Surrey 160 47. Maximum and Minimum Q u a l i t y V a l u e s C a l c u l a t e d f o r F o r e s t e d A r e a s in S u r r e y 163 48. Mean Q u a l i t y V a l u e s C a l c u l a t e d f o r Three C a t e g o r i e s of F o r e s t e d A r e a s 166 49. Management G u i d e l i n e s f o r F o r e s t A r e a Q u a l i t y CI asses 171 X LIST OF FIGURES F i g u r e Page 1. The R u r a l - U r b a n Inter-face (Urban Shadow) in R e l a t i o n to an Urban Center 5 2. Changes in Wooded A r e a of Cadiz Township , Green County , W i s c o n s i n from 1831 to 1950 7 3. A e r i a l Photograph Showing T y p i c a l F o r e s t e d A r e a s in the R u r a l - U r b a n I n t e r f a c e ( S u r r e y , B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a ) . . . . . 9 4. Example of "Fores t ed Area" Loca ted in the R u r a l -Urban I n t e r f a c e ( S u r r e y , B r i t i s h Columbia) 14 5. O v e r l a y E v a l u a t i o n Procedure 26 6. P o i n t R a t i n g System of E v a l u a t i o n 27 7. Key Element System of E v a l u a t i o n 28 8. Qual i t y of F o r e s t e d A r e a s Based on S p e c i e s D i v e r s i t y 35 9. T o t a l Number of T e r r e s t r i a l Mammal S p e c i e s Found in D i f f e r e n t H a b i t a t s of B r i t i s h Columbia 43 10. The H y d r o l o g i c C y c l e 62 11. A q u a t i c H a b i t a t in F o r e s t e d A r e a in S u r r e y , B r i t i s h Columbia 66 12. Hydrograph f o r a N o n - F o r e s t e d V e r s u s F o r e s t e d Watershed . 67 13. The Sed imentat ion Pathway 69 14. Example of Bank E r o s i o n A l o n g Mahood Creeit, S u r r e y , B r i t i s h Columbia 72 15. Example of E r o s i o n and Mass Wast ing Caused by Heavy R a i n f a l l and Removal of V e g e t a t i v e Cover 86 16. Nature T r a i l in S u r r e y , B r i t i s h Columbia 97 17. 1:390,000 Map of S u r r e y , B r i t i s h Columbia 118 18. 1:153,000 S t r e e t Map of S u r r e y , B r i t i s h Columbia 119 19. Mass Wast ing in Ravine L o c a t e d in North Surrey 122 F i g u r e Page 20. Wetland A r e a in S u r r e y L o c a t e d in P o o r l y D r a i n e d Depression 124 21. Mahood Creek L o c a t e d in C e n t r a l Surrey 125 22. F o r e s t C o v e r , Snags, Moderate U n d e r s t o r y , and Water P r o v i d e E x c e l l e n t H a b i t a t . . . . 1 2 7 23. Mature Douglas F i r L o c a t e d in C e n t r a l S u r r e y , (Mound Farm) 128 24. R e s i d e n t i a l S u b d i v i s i o n in East Surrey Be ing Developed in ( P r e v i o u s ) F o r e s t e d A r e a . . . . . . . 1 3 0 25. 1:153,000 S t r e e t Map o-f Surrey Showing L o c a t i o n of Sample F o r e s t e d A r e a s 133 26. FORESTED AREA #4: Example of "High B i o p h y s i c a l Di v e r s i ty" 164 27. FORESTED AREA #1: Example of "Moderate B i o p h y s i c a l Di v e r s i ty" 165 28. FORESTED AREA *10: Example of "Low B i o p h y s i c a l Di v e r s i ty" 166 29. Flow Chart of F o r e s t e d A r e a P l a n n i n g Process 172 x i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am g r a t e f u l to D r . A l a n D. Chambers, t h e s i s s u p e r v i s o r , D r . L . M. L a v k u l i c h , M r . Pat M i l l e r , and M r . Robin Gardner ( G a r d n e r , Peepre , and A s s o c i a t e s ) -for t h e i r h e l p f u l s u g g e s t i o n s and c r i t i q u e of the m a n u c s c r i p t . I thank M r . Wolf Renner, S u r r e y Parks and R e c r e a t i o n , f o r o f f i c e space and m a t e r i a l s r e q u i r e d d u r i n g c o l l e c t i o n of f i e l d d a t a , a n d h i s time and i n t e r e s t in t h i s p r o j e c t . F u r t h e r , thanks are due to S u r r e y M u n i c i p a l S t a f f who p r o v i d e d time and i n f o r m a t i o n f o r t h i s p r o j e c t . L a s t l y , I would l i k e to thank Bev Maga f o r her time devoted to t y p i n g and p u t t i n g the t h e s i s i n t o i t s f i n a l f o r m . Page 1 INTRODUCTION T h i s s tudy c o n c e n t r a t e s on the nonconsumptive e n v i r o n -mental and s o c i a l b e n e f i t s of f o r e s t s , as opposed to the consumptive commercial b e n e f i t s such as lumber, plywood, and other f o r e s t p r o d u c t s . F o r e s t s in any landscape p l a y an important f u n c t i o n in environmenta l proces se s a f f e c t i n g w i l d -l i f e , f i sh , so i 1 , a i r , and water . I n add i t i on , f o r e s t s c o n -t r i b u t e s t r o n g l y to s o c i e t y ' s demand f o r a m e n i t i e s such as scenery and r e c r e a t i o n . In the landscape between predominant ly urban and r u r a l areas i s a zone, termed the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e , where f o r e s t s are a common f e a t u r e , i n t e r s p e r s e d among other l and use s . The r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e i s a l s o a zone of intense development a c t i v i t y as urban a c t i v i t e s expand outward from the urban c e n t r e . One impact of t h i s development a c t i v i t y i s the r e m o v a l , or c l e a r i n g of f o r e s t e d areas as land i s prepared f o r r e s i d e n t i a l , c o m m e r c i a l , i n d u s t r i a l , and other uses . The net r e s u l t i s a l o s s of the environmenta l and s o c i a l b e n e f i t s p r o v i d e d by f o r e s t s . In s p i t e of the v a l u e s of f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e , there has t r a d i t i o n a l l y been l i t t l e attempt by d e v e l o p e r s to p r o t e c t even s i n g l e t r e e s on development s i t e s . T h i s p r a c t i s e can be a t t r i b u t e d to the " p u b l i c " nature of t h i s r e s o u r c e . P u b l i c goods have been d e s c r i b e d by Sindon and Worrel (1979:48-49) as goods " where the economic system has o n l y a l i m i t e d p o t e n t i a l to demonstrate the a c t u a l va lue of the goods due to the f a i l u r e of the market to r e f l e c t e x t e r n a l i t i e s , Page 2 l o n g - r u n s o c i e t a l v a l u e s , and the nature o-f the consumption o-f p u b l i c goods." In o ther words , the s h o r t - t e r m r e t u r n s to a deve loper -for p r o t e c t i n g f o r e s t e d areas may be minimal or even n e g a t i v e ; whereas , the cumula t ive r e t u r n s to a l l members o-f s o c i e t y in the l o n g - t e r m are very s i g n i f i c a n t . T h i s f e a t u r e of p u b l i c goods , and f o r e s t e d areas s p e c i f i c a l l y , r e q u i r e s that p u b l i c d e c i s i o n makers , a c t i n g in the best i n t e r e s t of s o c i e t y , formula te measures to overcome market inadequac ies to ensure that the v a l u e s of f o r e s t e d areas are r e c o g n i z e d and p r o t e c t e d . I d e a l l y , f o r e s t e d areas s h o u l d be i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o o v e r -a l l l and use p l a n n i n g to ensure that a l l l and use requ irements are r e c o g n i z e d and , at the same t ime , c r i t i c a l f o r e s t e d areas are i d e n t i f i e d so that development can be d i r e c t e d around them. At tempts that have been made to p lan f o r f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e have g e n e r a l l y been inadequate m a i n l y because of a lack of b a s i c r e s o u r c e data and an i n a b i l i t y of p l a n n e r s to i n t e r p r e t such data (Rosenberger and C o u g h l i n , 1979:1 and Thurow et. aj_. , 1975:59) . These d e f i c i e n c i e s u s u a l l y r e s u l t in the f o r m u l a t i o n of general p o l i c i e s or p r a c t i s e s that r e l a t e to f o r e s t e d areas which tend to be n o n -s p e c i f i c and d i f f i c u l t to a p p l y in p r a c t i c a l s i t u a t i o n s . An i n i t i a l s tep in p l a n n i n g f o r f o r e s t e d areas i s f or p l a n n e r s to develop an a c c u r a t e measure of the l e v e l of bene-f i t s c u r r e n t l y p r o v i d e d by each f o r e s t e d area w i t h i n t h e i r j u r i s d i c t i o n (Rosenberger and C o u g h l i n , 1979'.9> . Once t h i s k i n d of i n f o r m a t i o n i s a v a i l a b l e , i t i s p o s s i b l e to develop s t fetegies f o r the u t i l i z a t i o n and p r o t e c t i o n of f o r e s t e d a r e a s . The e v a l u a t i o n of f o r e s t e d areas to determine the l e v e l of Page 3 b e n e f i t s p r o v i d e d s h o u l d be based on a c c u r a t e , b i o p h y s i c a l and r e l a t e d data which i s in a form useable by p l a n n e r s . The e v a -l u a t i o n s h o u l d a l s o be des igned to p r o v i d e i n form at i on which can be used f o r d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g and d e t e r m i n i n g t r a d e - o f f s between f o r e s t v a l u e s and development v a l u e s . To p r o v i d e the i n f o r m a t i o n r e q u i r e d f o r p l a n n i n g f o r f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e , an e v a l u a t i v e framework i s p r o p o s e d . T h i s framework i s des igned to p r o v i d e an e v a l u a t i o n based on e x p l i c i t b i o p h y s i c a l and r e l a t e d data wi th output that r e f l e c t s the r e l a t i v e l e v e l of b e n e f i t s p r o v i d e d by each f o r e s t e d a r e a . The scope of the e v a l u a t i v e framework i s l i m i t e d to the e v a l u a t i o n of f o r e s t e d areas f o r the b e n e f i t s o f : <1> w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t , <2> water r e s o u r c e s , <3) e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y s e n s i t i v e a r e a s , and <4) r e c r e a t i o n . The e v a l u a t i v e framework i s " f i e1dte s t ed" in an area r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e and the r e l i a b i l i t y of the methodology and output i s a n a l y z e d and d i s c u s s e d . The f i n a l phase of t h i s s tudy i s a d i s c u s s i o n of the p r a c t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n of the e v a l u a t i v e framework by p l a n n e r s in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . T h i s i n c l u d e s an o u t l i n e of the use of da ta and output by p l a n n e r s , d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g based on t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n , and the i n c o r p o r a t i o n of f o r e s t e d areas in o v e r a l l l and use p l a n s . Page 4 BACKGROUND The Rural -Urban Inter-f ace In the past s e v e r a l decades , the proces s of "urban s p r a w l " , or u r b a n i z a t i o n has been g iven much a t t e n t i o n from people wi th a wide range of c o n c e r n s . A major concern i s the negat ive impact of u r b a n i z a t i o n on the " n a t u r a l " environment . The area that i s e x p e r i e n c i n g the impact of u r b a n i z a t i o n i s termed the " r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e d a l s o termed the urban shadow, c o u n t r y - c i t y f r i n g e , exurban a r e a , e t c . ) . T h i s area i s d e s c r i b e d as the "urban shadow" by Russwurm (1975) and i s shown in F i g u r e 1. In g e n e r a l , t h i s zone i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by three major f e a t u r e s : <1) change, <2) s p a t i a l t r a n s i t i o n , and <3> land use mix ture (Russwurm, 1977:107). It i s an area undergo ing "change" from a predominant ly r u r a l c h a r a c t e r of farms , f o r e s t s , and wet lands to a t y p i c a l suburban c h a r a c t e r of c o u n t r y r e s i d e n c e s , s u b d i v i s i o n s , shopping c e n t e r s , and u t i l i t y and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o r r i d o r s . S e c o n d l y , i t i s an area of " s p a t i a l t r a n s i t i o n " l o c a t e d between the c o n c e n t r a t e d p o p u l a t i o n of the b u i l t u p c i t y and the d i s p e r s e d p o p u l a t i o n of the r u r a l c o u n t r y s i d e . And l a s t l y , i t i s an area of " land-use mixture" c o n s i s t i n g of a mosaic of i r r e g u l a r l y i n t e r s p e r s e d land a c t i v i t i e s and land ownership , mixed between f a r m e r s , u r b a n i t e s , n o n - r e s i d e n t s , and commercial f i ruts. Page 5 F igu re 1. The Rura l-Urban I n t e r f a ce <Urban Shadow) in R e l a t i o n to an Urban Center (From Russwurm,1975: 151). A d e t a i l e d a p p r a i s a l of the soc io -economic proces s at work in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e has been completed by CIawson (1971) . An important c o n c l u s i o n he makes that r e l a t e s to f o r e s t e d areas i s t h a t , " the d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g wi th r e s p e c t to land i s so d i f f u s e d that the p l a n n i n g and c o n t r o l of u r b a n i z a -t i o n i s v i r t u a l l y n o n - e x i s t a n t in most communit ies ." F u r t h e r soc io -economic f e a t u r e s of the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e c i t e d by Pryor (1968) i n c l u d e an incomplete range and p e n e t r a t i o n of urban u t i l i t y s e r v i c e s , u n c o o r d i n a t e d z o n i n g and p l a n n i n g r e g u -l a t i o n s , an absence of environmenta l r e g u l a t i o n s , and an ac tua l and p o t e n t i a l increase in p o p u l a t i o n d e n s i t y . The d i s t a n c e of Page 6 the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e measured outward from the c i t y core has been e s t imated at a p p r o x i m a t e l y 50 k i l o m e t e r s <Russwurm, 1975:151). Urban i zat i on and the N a t u r a l Env i ronmen t As the c i t y spreads i n t o the r u r a l l andscape , v e g e t a t i o n i s cut back, marshes are f i l l e d , wet lands are d r a i n e d , t o p s o i l i s removed, and land i s paved o v e r . E c o l o g i c a l systems are o f ten degraded or d e s t r o y e d and v i t a l environmenta l proces se s i r r e v e -r s i b l y a l t e r e d <Lang and Armour ,1980 \180 ) . A component of the n a t u r a l environment that i s h i g h l y impacted by u r b a n i z a t i o n i s the f o r e s t re source in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . F o r e s t s i n -t e r a c t w i th other components of the landscape to enhance w i l d -l i f e h a b i t a t , h y d r o l o g y , c l i m a t e , r e c r e a t i o n , s c e n e r y , and so on , and p r o v i d e a g e n e r a l l y b e t t e r l i v i n g environment f o r s o c i e t y . The b e n e f i t s of f o r e s t s to the environment and s o c i e t y are substan t i al . The s e v e r i t y of the impact by u r b a n i z a t i o n on the f o r e s t re source can be a t t r i b u t e d to l and development p r a c t i s e s c u r r e n t l y used . In most c a s e s , p r e p a r a t i o n for development r e q u i r e s that a l l v e g e t a t i o n be s t r i p p e d from the s i t e f o r purposes of g r a d i n g , s u r v e y i n g , and b u i l d i n g . The incremental e f f e c t of t h i s p r a c t i s e over t ime , t h e r e f o r e , i s a landscape which i s e s s e n t i a l l y d e v o i d of f o r e s t c o v e r . The proces s of incremental f o r e s t removal i s e x e m p l i f i e d in a s tudy by C u r t i s <1956) where f o r e s t cover was moni tored over time in Cadiz Page 7 Township , Green County , W i s c o n s i n . As shown in F i g u r e 2, the f o r e s t component of the landscape i s d i m i n i s h e d over time as land i s c l e a r e d f o r v a r i o u s human a c t i v i t i e s . The same proces s takes p l a c e in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e as land i s deve loped f o r urban p u r p o s e s . F igure 2. Changes in the Wooded Area of Cadiz Township , Green County , W iscons in from 1831 to 1950 (From C u r t i s , 1956). (The shaded areas r e p r e s e n t f o r e s t cover >, The Fo res t Resource in the Rura l - U r b a n I n t e r f a c e The f o r e s t r e s o u r c e in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e v a r i e s in p h y s i c a l s t r u c t u r e , l and base c h a r a c t e r , and l ega l ownership . In s t r u c t u r e , the re source ranges from p l a n t e d , ornamental t r e e s found in the r e s i d e n t i a l l o t s to r e l a t i v e l y large t r a c t s Page 8 o-f n a t u r a l l y o c c u r r i n g , mature - forest . The land base c h a r a c t e r v a r i e s g r e a t l y -from dense ly deve loped areas of f l a t topography to r e l a t i v e l y undeveloped areas of h i g h l y broken topography. A n d , l a s t l y , l and ownership can be p u b l i c or p r i v a t e : p u b l i c land c o n s i s t i n g of p a r k s , r e s e r v e s , r i g h t s of way, g r e e n b e l t s , e t c . and p r i v a t e l and b e i n g r e s i d e n t i a l , c o m m e r c i a l , i n d u s -t r i a l , v a c a n t , etc . The most v i s i b l e f e a t u r e of the f o r e s t r e s o u r c e in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e , and the s u b j e c t of t h i s s t u d y , i s the n a t u r a l l y - o c c u r r i n g , r e s i d u a l or r e v e r s i o n f o r e s t cover that has not been removed f o r development or o ther p u r p o s e s . I t s appearance in the landscape i s t y p i c a l l y patches of i r r e g u l a r l y - s h a p e d f o r e s t e d areas r a n g i n g in s i z e from l e s s than a h e c t a r e to s e v e r a l hundred h e c t a r e s . T y p i c a l f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e are shown in F i g u r e 3. In many c a s e s , these areas c o i n c i d e wi th the l o c a t i o n of r a v i n e s , steep s l o p e s , r i v e r banks , w e t l a n d s , and other areas that are l e s s s u i t a b l e f o r urban development . T h i s c o i n c i d e n c e of f o r e s t wi th s e n s i t i v e l and forms makes these f o r e s t s h i g h l y v a l u a b l e f o r m a i n t a i n i n g environmenta l q u a l i t y . Page 9 F i g u r e 3. A e r i a l Photograph Showing T y p i c a l F o r e s t e d A r e a s in in the R u r a l - U r b a n I n t e r f a c e ( S u r r e y , B r i t i s h Columbi a ) . Benef i t s of F o r e s t e d A r e a s i n the R u r a l - U r b a n I n t e r f a c e The b e n e f i t s of f o r e s t e d areas to the environment and s o c i e t y have been we l l documented in the l i t e r a t u r e . In b r i e f , f o r e s t s c o n t r i b u t e to and enhance environmental q u a l i t y , as Page 10 we l l as perform v i t a l f u n c t i o n s of d i r e c t and i n d i r e c t b e n e f i t s to human se t t l ement (Lang and A r m o u r , 1 9 8 0 : 9 5 ) . P r o v i d e d below i s an o u t l i n e of the major b e n e f i t s wi th a b r i e f d e s c r i p t i o n . Reference to o ther s t u d i e s i s p r o v i d e d f o r a more comprehensive d e s c r i p t i o n of each b e n e f i t . 1. A i r C o n d i t i o n i n g : T r e e s have the a b i l i t y to remove a c e r t a i n amount of p o l l u t a n t s such as carbon d i o x i d e , su lphur d i o x i d e and ozone from the a i r and , in t u r n , g ive o f f oxygen. Tree f o l i a g e a l s o a c t s as a n a t u r a l f i l t e r in the c o l l e c t i o n of dust p a r t i c l e s from the a i r (Grey and Deneke,1978:44-57; Thurow e_t aj_. , 1975:57-58; Pi 11 e_t aj . . , 1979:21 8-221 ; Schmid, 1979:507-511; and M c B r i d e , 1 9 7 7 : 2 9 7 ) . 2. Mi c roc 1imate M o d i f i c a t i o n : Loca l m i c r o c l i m a t e s are i n f l u e n c e d g r e a t l y by the q u a n t i t y , s p e c i e s c o m p o s i t i o n , and s i t i n g of f o r e s t s . T r e e s i n t e r c e p t and f i l t e r s o l a r r a d i a t i o n , i n h i b i t windl fow, t r a n s p i r e w a t e r , and reduce s u r f a c e e v a p o r a t i o n of s o i l m o i s t u r e . A f o r e s t environment i s g e n e r a l l y c o o l e r than the s u r r o u n d i n g environments w i th l e s s di urnal temperature v a r i a t i o n (Grey and Deneke,1978:44-57; Thurow et a l . . 1 9 7 5 : 5 8 ; P i t t ejfc. a]_. , 1979:214-218; Lang and Armour , 1 980 :95; Schmid, 1979:506-507; Tregay ,1979:277-280; and M c B r i d e , 1 9 7 7 : 2 9 8 ) . 3 . Water R e t e n t i o n : T r e e s help m a i n t a i n the q u a n t i t y and q u a l i t y of water by i n t e r c e p t i n g p r e c i p i t a t i o n , i n c r e a s i n g i n f i l t r a -t i o n , r e d u c i n g r u n o f f , and b i n d i n g and a e r a t i n g the s o i l . The Page 11 nature of the shrub canopy, ground c o v e r , and l i t t e r are a l s o important in water r e a l t i o n s < Grey and Deneke, 1978:56-61; Lul 1 ,1970 :65-69; Thurow et. aj . . , 1975:56-57; P i t t e t al_. , 1979:212-213; and Lang and Armour, 1980:95) . 4. E r o s i o n C o n t r o l : T r e e s e f f e c t i v e l y reduce e r o s i o n by b i n d i n g the s o i l w i t h t h e i r r o o t s , i n t e r c e p t i n g r a i n f a l l , and i n c r e a s -ing water a b s o r p t i o n through the i n c o r p o r a t i o n of o r g a n i c m a t t e r . E r o s i o n i s f u r t h e r i n h i b i t e d by the root system of u n d e r s t o r y p l a n t s and the l a y e r of l e a f or needle l i t t e r (Grey and Deneke , 1978:60-61 ; Thurow et. a].. , 1975: 56-57; P i t t e_t aj_, 1979:212-213; Lang and Armour , 1 980 :95; a n d M c B r i d e , 1977:301) . 5 . No i se A t t e n u a t i o n : Depending on s p e c i e s , h e i g h t , d e n s i t y , and l o c a t i o n , t r e e s have been found to p l a y a use fu l r o l e in r e d u c i n g the i n t e n s i t y of n o i s e . In many c a s e s , t r e e s have been used in b u f f e r i n g r e s i d e n t i a l areas from noise sources such as t r a f f i c , i n d u s t r y , e t c . ( Grey and Deneke,1978:67-76; Thurow e_t al_. , 1975:57-58; Lang and Armour , 1 980 :95; Schmid, 1979: 511-513; and M c B r i d e , 1 9 7 7 : 2 9 7 ) . 6. W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t : T r e e s p r o v i d e c o v e r , b r e e d i n g a r e a s , and food f o r w i l d l i f e s p e c i e s , even in h i g h l y u r b a n i z e d a r e a s . The removal of t r e e s from a landscape w i l l s i g n i f i c a n t l y reduce the q u a l i t y of the area as h a b i t a t f o r many w i l d l i f e s p e c i e s (DeGraaf and Thomas,1976:54-62; Larson ,1970:125-127; Grey and Deneke , 1978:95-98; P i t t e_t aj_ . , 1979:21 4 ; and Schmid,1979s 516) . Page 12 7. R e c r e a t i o n : T r e e s enhance r e c r e a t i o n a l a c t i v i t e s such as nature s t u d y , w a l k i n g , h i k i n g , and r i d i n g by p r o v i d i n g an environment that i s d i v e r s e , s h e l t e r e d , e n c l o s e d , and r i c h in animal and p l a n t l i f e . In many c a s e s , -forests p r o v i d e the most " n a t u r a l " environment in the r u r a l - u r b a n inter-face (Eche 1 berger and Wagar,1979:435-4405 Lang and Armour ,1980:96; S i n t o n , 1 9 7 0 : 71-75; and T r e g a y , 1 9 7 9 : 2 8 4 - 2 8 8 ) . 8. A e s t h e t i c s : T r e e s enhance the v i s u a l q u a l i t y o-f most l a n d s c a p e s , whether h i g h l y u r b a n i z e d or r e l a t i v e l y undeve loped . T r e e s enframe v i ews , s o f t e n a r c h i t e c t u r a l l i n e s , u n i f y d i v e r -gent e l ements , and i n t r o d u c e a "natura lness" to otherwise s t a r k s e t t i n g s <He 11 iwe 11 ,1976:27-37; Grey and Deneke,1978: 94-98; E c h e l b e r g e r and Wagar,1979:429-435; Schmid,1979:504-506; and Lang and A r m o u r , 1 9 8 0 : 9 6 ) . 9. S o c i a l V a l u e s : T r e e s are b e l i e v e d to p r o v i d e sensory d i v e r s i t y , v i s u a l o r d e r , a e s t h e t i c p l e a s u r e , and awareness of changing s easons . The s i g n i f i c a n c e of t h i s i s a b e t t e r community image, i n c r e a s e d p r o p e r t y v a l u e s , and a g r e a t e r sense of w e l l - b e i n g . T r e e s are a l s o an i r r e p l a c a b l e n a t u r a l h e r i t a g e f o r presen.t and f u t u r e g e n e r a t i o n s <Lang and Armour, 1980:96; G o l d , 1 9 7 7 : 8 5 - 9 0 ; Schmid, 1979:515-516; Grey and Deneke,1978:98; and M c B r i d e , 1 9 7 7 : 2 9 9 ) . The above o u t l i n e d b e n e f i t s are generated by a l l f o r e s t e d a r e a s ; however, the magnitude of b e n e f i t s w i l l vary wi th the Page 13 b i o p h y s i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of each f o r e s t , the a s s o c i a t e d land base , and s u r r o u n d i n g land use . In a d d i t o n , depending on s o c i e -ta l v a l u e s and p r e f e r e n c e s , the magnitude of the d e s i r a b i l i t y of the b e n e f i t s w i l l vary ( e . g . , d e s i r e f o r s c e n e r y ) . R e g a r d l e s s of these c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , f o r e s t e d areas p l a y an important r o l e in the landscape and c o n t r i b u t e s t r o n g l y to environmental and s o c i a l q u a l i t y in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . PIann i no f o r F o r e s t e d A r e a s i n the R u r a l - U r b a n In t e r f a c e P l a n n i n g f o r l and use has been d e f i n e d as , " . . . t h e process of d e t e r m i n i n g the s p a t i a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n of human a c t i v i t i e s and n a t u r a l areas as an attempt by man to c o n t r o l or modify h i s environment wi th the goal to p r o v i d e a b e t t e r l i f e f o r present and f u t u r e genera t ions" (Rosenberger and Cough 1 in ,1979:5 and Jaakson ,1976:245) . In view of t h i s d e f i n i t i o n , f o r e s t e d areas as n a t u r a l areas s h o u l d be an i n t e g r a l par t of the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . Without p l a n n i n g , i t can be presumed that u r b a n i z a t i o n w i l l work to g r a d u a l l y remove t h i s r e source from the l a n d s c a p e . While p l a n s and r e g u l a t i o n s have been developed to manage many c r i t i c a l environmenta l r e s o u r c e s such as s treams , wet-l a n d s , f l o o d p l a i n s , and h i l l s i d e s , f o r e s t e d areas have been r e l a t i v l e y ignored d e s p i t e the f a c t that t h e i r va lue to e n -v ironmenta l and s o c i a l q u a l i t y has been wel l documented (Thurow e_t aj_. , 1975:58) . Rosenberger and C o u g h l i n (1979:1) a t t r i b u t e t h i s ommission to a general p e r c e p t i o n among p l a n n e r s that v e g e t a t i o n i s e s s e n t i a l l y an a e s t h e t i c r e source which i s d i f f i -c u l t to e v a l u a t e d i r e c t l y in r e l a t i o n to s o c i a l b e n e f i t s . Page 14 F u r t h e r , they s t a t e that s t u d i e s by f o r e s t e r s and o t h e r s that document the b e n e f i t s of f o r e s t s are not in a form that lends i t s e l f to use by p l a n n e r s . Thurow e_t al_. (1975:59) s t a t e that f o r e s t e d areas are not p lanned f o r because p l a n n e r s u s u a l l y do not have the a v a i l a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n and knowledge r e q u i r e d to make informed d e c i s i o n s r e l a t i n g to t h i s r e s o u r c e . F i g u r e 4. Example of a F o r e s t e d A r e a in the R u r a l - U r b a n I n t e r f a c e ( S u r r e y , B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a ) . In g e n e r a l , i t i s c l e a r from the above s tatements that p l a n n e r s lack the i n f o r m a t i o n and means r e q u i r e d to e v a l u a t e f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . If the b e n e f i t s from f o r e s t e d areas are to be r e a l i z e d , p l a n n e r s must be made o Page 15 knowledgeable o-f the -function of f o r e s t s in the l andscape , i n f o r m a t i o n and data must be in a form that i s u s e a b l e , and a framework be a v a i l a b l e f o r e v a l u a t i n g f o r e s t e d areas to d e t e r -mine the l e v e l of b e n e f i t s they p r o v i d e . E v a ! u a t i no F o r e s t e d A r e a s i n the R u r a l - U r b a n I n t e r f a c e f o r  PIann i no In view of the l a r g e demand f o r land in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e , i t i s ev ident that not a l l f o r e s t s c a n , or shou ld be saved from development . T h e r e f o r e , the main goal of p l a n n i n g for f o r e s t e d areas s h o u l d be to i d e n t i f y key areas that s h o u l d be r e t a i n e d in t h e i r present s t a t e f o r environmental and s o c i a l f u n c t i o n s and ensure urban development i s d i r e c t e d around them. Based on the assumption that f o r e s t e d areas can be e v a l -uated i n d i v i d u a l l y to determine t h e i r r e l a t i v e importance in the l a n d s c a p e , the i n i t i a l s tep in p l a n n i n g f o r f o r e s t e d areas i s f o r p l a n n e r s to develop an a c c u r a t e measure of the l e v e l of b e n e f i t s c u r r e n t l y p r o v i d e d by each f o r e s t e d area w i t h i n t h e i r j u r i s d i c t i o n . With t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n the p lanner can rank f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to t h e i r import ance or " q u a l i t y " . T h i s knowledge of the q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas p r o v i d e s the b a s i s f o r w e i g h i n g the v a l u e s of f o r e s t s a g a i n s t v a l u e s of o ther l and uses and subsequent ly p e r m i t s p l a n n e r s to make d e c i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g the manner in which the f o r e s t e d areas are to be d e a l t w i th ( i . e . , f u l l r e t e n t i o n , p a r t i a l r e t e n t i o n , or no r e t e n t i o n ) . Page 16 To ga in a measure o-f the l e v e l of b e n e f i t s p r o v i d e d by each f o r e s t e d a r e a , an e v a l u a t i v e framework i s proposed . The s t r u c t u r e of the framework i s to be des igned to p r o v i d e the p lanner wi th i n f o r m a t i o n and knowledge r e q u i r e d f o r d e c i s i o n making and i s to be based on e x p l i c i t b i o p h y s i c a l and r e l a t e d c r i t e r i a which can be used to j u s t i f y d e c i s i o n s made r e l a t i n g to f o r e s t e d a r e a s . The remainder of t h i s paper i s devoted to the development and a p p l i c a t i o n of the proposed e v a l u a t i v e framework. Page 17 SCOPE OF STUDY Problem Statement F o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e c o n t r i b u t e s t r o n g l y to environmenta l and s o c i a l q u a l i t y . However, as development a c t i v i t y i n t e n s i f i e s in t h i s zone, f o r e s t e d areas are q u i c k l y c l e a r e d in p r e p a r a t i o n f o r r e s i d e n t i a l and other c o n s t r u c t i o n r e s u l t i n g in a l o s s of f o r e s t b e n e f i t s . Because of the " p u b l i c " nature of f o r e s t e d a r e a s , i t i s the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of p u b l i c d e c i s i o n makers ( i . e . , p l a n n e r s ) to ensure that the b e n e f i t s of f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e are r e c o g n i z e d and p lanned f o r . To d a t e , many at tempts to p l a n f o r f o r e s t e d areas have been inadequate f o r the f o l l o w i n g r e a s o n s : - a lack of r e c o g n i t i o n that f o r e s t e d areas are a re source in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e - a lack of u n d e r s t a n d i n g or t e c h n i c a l knowledge (on the p l a n n e r ' s p a r t ) of the b e n e f i t s of f o r e s t e d areas - a d e f i c i e n c y in b i o p h y s i c a l and other data r e q u i r e d f o r f o r e s t e d area p l a n n i n g - a lack of a framework or g u i d e l i n e s which can be used to make informed d e c i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g the use of f o r e s t e d a r e a s . To r e c t i f y t h i s s i t u a t i o n , an e v a l u a t i v e framework f o r f o r e s t e d areas i s proposed which w i l l address the above p l a n n i n g i nadequac i e s . Page 18 Study Object i ves 1. To develop an e v a l u a t i v e -framework which can be used by p l a n n e r s in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e to p lan for f o r e s t e d areas 2. To overview e x i s t i n g environmenta l e v a l u a t i o n schemes in order to s e l e c t approaches or components of approaches that are relevan.t to the e v a l u a t i o n of f o r e s t e d a r e a s . 3 . Upon s e l e c t i n g an approach f o r e v a l u a t i o n and d e v e l o p i n g the framework, to app ly the e v a l u a t i v e framework to sample f o r e s t e d areas in an area r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . 4. To ana lyze and d i s c u s s the a p p l i c a t i o n and r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d from the e v a l u a t i o n of sample f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . 5. To d i s c u s s the p r a c t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n of the e v a l u a t i v e ^ framework by p l a n n e r s f o r p l a n n i n g f o r f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . Study C o n s t r a i n t s The major c o n s t r a i n t s that l i m i t the scope of t h i s s tudy are t ime, f i n a n c e s , and d a t a . The time a v a i l a b l e f o r t h i s s tudy i s a p p r o x i m a t e l y one year and f i n a n c i a l support i s e s s e n t i a l l y n i l . These two c o n s t r a i n t s f u r t h e r r e s t r i c t data c o l l e c t i o n which r e q u i r e s that da ta and i n f o r m a t i o n must be drawn from p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h and the l i t e r a t u r e . To a d e q u a t e l y e v a l u a t e f o r e s t e d areas f o r every b e n e f i t Page 1? they p r o v i d e i s beyond the scope o-f t h i s s t u d y ; t h e r e f o r e , o n l y s e l e c t e d b e n e f i t s w i l l be d e a l t w i t h . For purposes of t h i s s t u d y , f o r e s t e d areas w i l l be e v a l u a t e d f o r the f o l l o w i n g b e n e f i t s ; <1> w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t , (2) water q u a l i t y , (3) e n v i r o n -m e n t a l l y s e n s i t i v e a r e a s , and (4) r e c r e a t i o n . The r a t i o n a l e f o r s e l e c t i n g these b e n e f i t s i s t w o f o l d : f i r s t , most of the p r e -v i o u s l y l i s t e d b e n e f i t s (pages 9-13) are i n c l u d e d w i t h i n these four c a t a g o r i e s and , s econd , f o r land use p l a n n i n g in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e , these b e n e f i t s are assumed to be of the most concern to p l a n n e r s . To a d e q u a t e l y e v a l u a t e every f o r e s t e d a r e a , from s i n g l e tree to l a r g e f o r e s t t r a c t s , i s a l s o beyond the scope of t h i s s t u d y . T h e r e f o r e , the concept of a " f o r e s t e d area" i s d e f i n e d as: "any l a n d area g r e a t e r than 0 .5 h e c t a r e s and l e s s than 50 h e c t a r e s in s i z e , e i t h e r p u b l i c l y or p r i v a t e l y owned, that s u p p o r t s a more or l e s s c o n t i g u o u s cover of tree s p e c i e s . " T h i s d e f i n i t i o n takes in those areas that are of s u b s t a n t i a l s i z e that are most l i k e l y to be impacted by major development ( i . e . , by l a r g e s u b d i v i s i o n s ) . F o r e s t e d areas g r e a t e r than 50 h e c t a r e s f a l l o u t s i d e the d e f i n i t i o n of " f o r e s t e d area" and are b e t t e r d e f i n e d as " f o r e s t " . ( F o r areas g r e a t e r than 50 h e c t a r e s , i t i s recommended that an independant s tudy be undertaken to document the b e n e f i t s of the f o r e s t f o r p l a n n i n g p u r p o s e s ) . Page 20 E v a l u a t i ve Framework Obj ec t i ves In order to develop and subsequent ly analyze the e f f e c t -iveness of the e v a l u a t i v e framework, i t i s necessary to formu-l a t e e v a l u a t i v e framework o b j e c t i v e s to p r o v i d e the g u i d e l i n e s for d e v e l o p i n g the methodology and to ensure that the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s r e q u i r e d f o r p l a n n i n g f o r f o r e s t e d areas are p r e s e n t . The achievement of these o b j e c t i v e s can be determined when the framework has been a p p l i e d to sample f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . 1. The e v a l u a t i v e framework must generate output that can be used to rank or p r i o r i z e f o r e s t e d areas in the landscape in r e l a t i o n to the l e v e l of b e n e f i t s p r o v i d e d by each area < i . e . , " q u a l i t y " of each f o r e s t e d a r e a ) . 2. The q u a l i t y r a t i n g of each f o r e s t e d area must be based on e x p l i c i t l y s t a t e d b i o p h y s i c a l and r e l a t e d parameters and e s t a b -l i s h e d b i o l o g i c a l and p h y s i c a l p r i n c i p l e s in order that such r a t i n g s can be j u s t i f i e d by p l a n n e r s to d e v e l o p e r s , p u b l i c , p o l i t i c i a n s , and so on . 3 . Parameters that are used in the e v a l u a t i o n must be r e l a t -i v e l y easy to measure or e x i s t i n g data must be a v a i l a b l e for these parameters . 4. Va lue judgements and r e l a t e d methodo log ica l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s must be m i n i m i z e d in the e v a l u a t i o n p r o c e d u r e . Page 21 5. The e v a l u a t i v e framework must be des igned to p r o v i d e an e v a l u a t i o n of any f o r e s t e d area r a n g i n g from 0.5 h e c t a r e s to 50 hec t a r e s . 6. The o v e r a l l e v a l u a t i o n procedure sh ou ld p r o v i d e p l a n n e r s and other d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s wi th a complete set of both data and i n f o r m a t i o n which can be used to make informed d e c i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g the u l t i m a t e use of f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . Page 22 OVERVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION METHODOLOGIES Descr i p t i ve . S ta t i c . and Dynami c Methodolooi es A rev iew of e x i s t i n g e v a l u a t i o n methodolog ies i s a p r e -l i m i n a r y step in d e v e l o p i n g a framework f o r the e v a l u a t i o n of f o r e s t e d a r e a s . The main o b j e c t i v e of t h i s review i s to s e l e c t a methodology or components of methodolog ies which best f u l f i l l the s tudy o b j e c t i v e s and e v a l u a t i v e framework o b j e c t i v e s o u t -l i n e d in the p r e v i o u s s e c t i o n s . Environmenta l e v a l u a t i o n methodolog ies are wide r a n g i n g in form and vary s u b s t a n t i a l l y in methodo log i ca l g o a l s ; the c o n -s t r a i n t s under which the method was d e v e l o p e d , or under which i t o p e r a t e s ; the da ta v a r i a b l e s which are i n v e s t i g a t e d ; the l o g i c of the a n a l y t i c a l approach; the a p p l i c a b i l i t y of the method to other a r e a s ; and p r i n c i p a l documentation < S t e i n i t z e t aj_. , 1969:1) . Moreover , methodolog ies that are p r o b l e m -s p e c i f i c tend to be d i f f i c u l t to a p p l y in areas other than those in which they were d e v e l o p e d . As s u c h , fundamental approaches to environmental e v a l u a t i o n w i l l be rev iewed r a t h e r than a p p l i e d approaches . Murray e_t aj_. (1971:446-462) have broken down e v a l u a t i o n methodolog ies i n t o three fundamental c a t e g o r i e s which are d e s c r i b e d below. (a) Descr i p t i ve: These methods attempt to e s t a b l i s h o b j e c t i v e measures of v a r i o u s r e s o u r c e s wi thout the i n t r o d u c t i o n of an e v a l u a t i o n i n t o the i n v e n t o r y s t a g e . In many c a s e s , zones of homogenous c h a r a c t e r are i d e n t i f i e d , but no q u a l a t i t i v e or Page 23 q u a n t i t a t i v e e v a l u a t i o n i s made. As a method o-f e v a l u a t i o n , t h i s ca t egory i s ex tremely l i m i t e d due to the minimal l e v e l o-f data a n a l y s i s that a c t u a l l y takes p l a c e . <b) S t a t i c : Most of the c u r r e n t l y used methods of e v a l u a t i o n are s t a t i c ; that i s , changes in the data wi th time or the i n t e r v e n t i o n of man are t y p i c a l l y not c o n s i d e r e d . S t a t i c e v a l u a t i o n s are of two types : <i) s i n g l e f a c t o r e v a l u a t i o n , and <2) m u l t i p l e f a c t o r e v a l u a t i o n . S i n g l e f a c t o r e v a l u a t i o n s u t i l i z e one v a r i a b l e in the e v a l u a t i o n and are seldom used because of t h e i r obvious s i m p l i c i t y and f a i l u r e to adequate ly d e s c r i b e a system. A common example of t h i s method i s s o i l c a p a b i l i t y s t u d i e s which u t i l i z e a s i n g l e , yet complex v a r i a b l e . More t y p i c a l examples inc lude some v i s u a l s t u d i e s which use topography as the p r i n c i -pal data s o u r c e . Most s t a t i c methods make use of s e v e r a l v a r i a b l e s in the e v a l u a t i o n and a r e , t h e r e f o r e , m u l t i p l e f a c t o r e v a l u a t i o n s . The use of more than one v a r i a b l e p r o v i d e s g r e a t e r f l e x i b i l i t y in a c h i e v i n g a more complete e v a l u a t i o n of the system be ing a n a l y z e d . T e c h n i q u e s of m u l t i p l e f a c t o r e v a l u a t i o n inc lude o v e r l a y s , p o i n t r a t i n g systems, and key element systems. <c) Dynamic: E v a l u a t i o n methods of t h i s ca tegory are t y p i c a l l y s i m u l a t i o n models which account f o r changes in data over time and a l l o w f o r m u l t i p l e e v a l u a t i o n s of the same problem under d i f f e r e n t c o n s t r a i n t s or assumpt ions . The dynamic c h a r a c t e r of these models i s o f t en a c h i e v e d through computer t echno logy . Page 24 Dynamic e v a l u a t i o n s are of two major types : <1) s i n g l e s e c t o r models , and <2) m u l t i - s e c t o r models . S i n g l e s e c t o r models e v a l u a t e or s i m u l a t e a s i n g l e system < e . g . , h y d r o l o g i c a l system) and are most common. M u l t i - s e c t o r models , on the o ther hand, are l e s s common due to t h e i r l a r g e r s c a l e and c o m p l e x i t y . These models are t y p i c a l l y the s y n t h e s i s of s i n g l e s e c t o r models i n t o an i n t e g r a t e d model which s i m u -l a t e s the i n t e r a c t i o n of v a r i o u s systems. M u l t i - s e c t o r models have been a p p l i e d in the f i e l d of e c o l o g y , urban s t u d i e s , and resource u t i l i z a t i o n . The above c a t e g o r i e s of e v a l u a t i o n methodolog ies have v a r y i n g degrees of a p p l i c a b i l i t y f o r the development of an e v a l u a t i v e framework f o r f o r e s t e d a r e a s . Based on the c r i t e r i a of the s tudy o b j e c t i v e s and e v a l u a t i o n framework o b j e c t i v e s , a s t a t i c , m u l t i p l e f a c t o r e v a l u a t i o n i s s e l e c t e d as most s u i t a b l e for t h i s purpose . In b r i e f , the major f e a t u r e s of t h i s method which are d e s i r a b l e a r e : <1> the l e v e l of c o m p l e x i t y of t h i s method i s best s u i t e d to the c o n s t r a i n t s and o b j e c t i v e s , (2) the s t a t i c nature i s s u i t e d to the e v a l u a t i o n of f o r e s t e d areas at one p o i n t in t ime , and <3> the m u l t i - f a c t o r f e a t u r e a l l o w s f o r a more complete d e s c r i p t i o n and e v a l u a t i o n of the f o r e s t e d a r e a s . The d e s c r i p t i v e method i s l e s s s u i t a b l e because i t does not p r o v i d e a complete e v a l u a t i o n of the r e s o u r c e . As a method that i s more an i n v e n t o r y than an e v a l u a t i o n , i t c o u l d not be used to p r o v i d e q u a l i t y r a t i n g s f o r f o r e s t e d areas u n l e s s a f u r t h e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the output was made. T h i s method, as wel l as a s i n g l e f a c t o r s t a t i c e v a l u a t i o n , does not s a t i s f y the Page 25 o b j e c t i v e of p r o v i d i n g a complete set of data and i n f o r m a t i o n r e q u i r e d by p l a n n e r s f o r p l a n n i n g f o r f o r e s t e d a r e a s . A dynamic e v a l u a t i o n , on the other hand, appears to be too complex and s o p h i s t i c a t e d f o r the purposes of p l a n n e r s . The data and i n f o r m a t i o n requ irements f o r m o d e l l i n g are s u b s t a n t i a l and are o u t s i d e the c o n s t r a i n t s of t h i s s t u d y . In a d d i t i o n , the ' o b j e c t i v e s are o r i e n t e d toward an e v a l u a t i o n of the e x i s t i n g f o r e s t e d a r e a s , r a t h e r than an e v a l u a t i o n which accounts f o r changes over t ime . In g e n e r a l , a dynamic model i s beyond the l e v e l of e v a l u a t i o n r e q u i r e d . S ta t i c . M u l t i p l e F a c t o r E v a l u a t i on Techn i ques S t a t i c , m u l t i p l e f a c t o r e v a l u a t i o n t echniques are a common method used in the e v a l u a t i o n of v a r i o u s r e s o u r c e s . These t echn iques combine s p e c i f i c v a r i a b l e s in a number of methods which can be c l a s s i f i e d as o v e r l a y s , p o i n t r a t i n g systems, and key element sys tems. These technique c l a s s e s are d e s c r i b e d below as d e r i v e d from Murray e_t aj_. (1971:447-450) . Over 1 ays A common s t y l e of s t a t i c a n a l y s i s p o p u l a r i z e d by McHarg (1969) i s that of u s i n g o v e r l a y methods or " s i e v i n g " to i d e n t i f y c o n s t r a i n t areas or areas w i th a combinat ion of s o u g h t - a f t e r r e s o u r c e s . In t h i s t e c h n i q u e , maps of d i f f e r e n t v a r i a b l e s are made, t y p i c a l l y in c o l o r on a t r a n s p a r e n t base . These are then superimposed and the v a r i o u s v a r i a b l e combina-t i o n s are r e c o r d e d . Page 26 The advantages of t h i s system a r e : (1) i t i s a f a s t , s imple way to i d e n t i f y zones of p a r t i c u l a r v a r i a b l e combina-t i o n s , <2) i t p r o v i d e s g r a p h i c c l a r i t y , and (3) r e s u l t s of t h i s method are r e a d i l y d e l i n e a t e d on the maps. I t s main d i s a d v a n -tages a r e : (1) an i n a b i l i t y to d i s t i n g u i s h many l e v e l s of i n t e r n a l s c a l i n g of the v a r i a b l e s , (2) an i n a b i l i t y to deal wi th a l arge number of v a r i a b l e s in one a n a l y s i s , and (3) an i n a b i l i t y to weight the r e l a t i v e s i g n i f i c a n c e of d i f f e r e n t var i a b l e s . j >STNTH6515 VARiFWLE 1 VARIABLE Z . VARIABLE 3 V A R I A B L E 4 F i g u r e 5. O v e r l a y E v a l u a t i o n Procedure (From Twiss & Heyman). Page 27 Poi nt Rat i no Systems Numerica l p o i n t r a t i n g systems are a common method used in combining s e v e r a l v a r i a b l e s in a p a r t i c u l a r a n a l y s i s . In t h i s method, numerica l p o i n t r a t i n g s are a s s i g n e d to d i f f e r e n t i a l l y weighted v a r i a b l e s . The p o i n t s are then accumulated as the a n a l y s i s i n c o r p o r a t e s a d d i t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s , and the r e s u l t a n t numerica l t o t a l s are assumed to the sought a f t e r q u a l i t y r a t i n g f o r p o t e n t i a l development or use . Po i n t Rat i no System var i able 1 = score = XI var i able 2 = score = X2 var i able 3 = score = X3 var i able 4 = score = n X4 Sum of s c o r e s = X = i = l F igu re 6. Po in t Ra t i ng System of E v a l u a t i o n . The advantages of t h i s method a r e : <1) i t i s a convenient and e f f e c t i v e approach f o r making e x p l i c i t the e v a l u a t i o n c r i -t e r i a used , (2) the concept of an index of q u a l i t y as the output from the method i s easy to u n d e r s t a n d , and <3> the approach i s s t r u c t u r e d , s y s t e m a t i c , and p r o v i d e s use fu l r e l a -t i v e i n d i c a t o r s of p o t e n t i a l or c a p a b i l i t y . I t s main d i s a d v a n -tages a r e : <1) the s u b j e c t i v i t y i n v o l v e d in a s s i g n i n g p o i n t s and w e i g h t i n g v a r i a b l e s , and (2) problems a s s o c i a t e d wi th the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of aggregated p o i n t r a t i n g t o t a l s . Page 28 Key Elemen t Systems In t h i s method, a l arge number of v a r i a b l e s are u t i l i z e d in the e v a l u a t i o n . These v a r i a b l e s , in t u r n , are broken down in to manageable numbers by combining r e l a t e d v a r i a b l e s to form "key e lements". Each key element i s g iven a score and the system be ing e v a l u a t e d i s r a t e d f o r the key element out of that s c o r e . M u l t i p l i e r s are a p p l i e d to the key elements which r e p r e -sent the r e l a t i v e importance of the key element to other key e lements . The score a d j u s t e d by the m u l t i p l i e r g i v e s a n u m e r i -cal r a t i n g f o r the key e lement . The sum of numerical r a t i n g s for a l l key e lements i s assumed to be the s o u g h t - a f t e r q u a l i t y r a t i n g f o r p o t e n t i a l development or use . Key Elemen t System var i able 1 — var i abl e 2--var i able 3 -var i abl e 4~i var i able 5 var i able 6 var i abl e 7*1 var i able 8 var i abl e ?*-* -*1 Key El emen t 1 Score = XI -*• Key Element 2 : Score = X2 Score = X< Sum of s c o r e s = £ X i=l F i g u r e 7. Key Element System of E v a l u a t i o n . * Key Element 3 = Qual i ty Rat i ng The key element system and p o i n t r a t i n g system are e s s e n -t i a l l y the same in terms of e v a l u a t i o n p r o c e d u r e ; t h e r e f o r e , the advantages and d i sadvantages of the p o i n t r a t i n g system l i s t e d above a p p l y to the key element system. Because of the c o n s o l i d a t i o n of v a r i a b l e s in to key e lements , a d d i t i o n a l advan-Page 29 tages and d i s a d v a n t a g e s are i n t r o d u c e d . One advantage i s that the c o m p l e x i t y of u s i n g many v a r i a b l e s i s reduced by c o n s o l i d a t i n g v a r i a b l e s i n t o a l e s s e r number of key e lements . A d d i t i o n a l d i s a d v a n t a g e s ares <1> the same v a r i a b l e may be used in more than one key e lement , thus c a u s i n g an o v e r l a p in the e v a l u a t i o n , <2) key e lements o f t en combine v a r i a b l e s which d i f f e r in measurment s c a l e < e . g . , nominal v s . o r d i n a t e s c a l e ) , and <3> the e x p l i c i t d e s c r i p t i o n of s p e c i f i c v a r i a b l e s used in the e v a l u a t i o n i s l o s t w i t h the c o n s o l i d a t i o n of v a r i a b l e s i n t o key e l ements . The three above s t a t i c m u l t i p l e f a c t o r t echn iques have v a r y i n g degrees of a p p l i c a b i l i t y f o r the development of an e v a l u a t i v e framework f o r f o r e s t e d a r e a s . D e s i r a b l e f e a t u r e s e x h i b i t e d by each technique are d i s p l a y e d in T a b l e 1. Based on t h i s m a t r i x and the s tudy and e v a l u a t i v e framework o b j e c t i v e s , i t i s c o n c l u d e d that the p o i n t r a t i n g system of e v a l u a t i o n i s most s u i t a b l e f o r the e v a l u a t i o n of f o r e s t e d a r e a s . The f e a t u r e s that make i t most s u i t a b l e a r e : <1) i t p r o v i d e s output that can be used to rank the q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d a r e a s , <2) e v a l u a t i o n c r i t e r i a are e x p l i c i t l y s t a t e d , (3) a l arge number of v a r i a b l e s can be i n c o r p o r t e d in the e v a l u a t i o n ; thus , i t p r o v i d e s a more complete set of i n f o r m a t i o n , and <4) i t r e f l e c t s the l i m i t a t i o n s imposed by the c o n s t r a i n t s of the s t u d y . Page 30 Tab le 1. Fea tu res E x h i b i t e d by V a r i o u s M u l t i p l e Fac to r E v a l u a t i o n Techn iques . Feature 1 O v e r l a y 1 Poi nt Rat i ng 1 Key 1 Elemen t 1. F a s t , s imple method 1 x i ! 2. Large no. v a r i a b l e s 1 p o s s i b l e 1 X 1 X 3. Weight ing of v a r i a b l e s 1 X 1 X 4. Adjustment f o r d i f f e r e n t l v a r i a b l e measurement 1 s c a l e s 1 X 1 X 5. E x p l i c i t e v a l u a t i o n 1 cr i ter i a* i x 1 X 1 6. Systemat ic i x 1 X 1 X 7. No d o u b l e - c o u n t i n g of 1 v a r i a b l e s 1 x 1 X ! 8. Parameters easy to I measure* 1 x 1 X ! 9. Output can be mapped 1 x 1 X 1 X 10 . Output s u i t a b l e f o r i r a n k i n g q u a l i t y of 1 f o r e s t e d areas * 1 X 1 X 11 . Output r e l a t i v e l y easy 1 to i n t e r p r e t * 1 x 1 X 1 X 12 . L i t t l e s u b j e c t i v i t y 1 i n v o l v e d in o u t p u t * 1 x 1 J 13 . E f f e c t i v e e v a l u a t i o n 1 of a range of f o r e s t 1 s i z e s * 1 X 1 X 14 . P r o v i d e s p l a n n e r s wi th 1 r e q u i r e d i n f o r m a t i o n 1 f o r d e c i s i o n making* 1 X 1 X Note: ' x ' denotes f e a t u r e s t r o n q l y e x h i b i t e d by technique ' * ' denotes f e a t u r e which r e l a t e s to s tudy and e v a l u a t i v e framework o b j e c t i v e s Page 31 O v e r l a y s p r o v i d e a f a s t and s imple means of i d e n t i f y i n g c o n s t r a i n t areas or areas of v a r y i n g importance; however, they lack s e v e r a l f e a t u r e s r e q u i r e d f o r the e v a l u a t i o n of f o r e s t e d a r e a s . The major inadequac ie s of o v e r l a y s a r e : <1> the number of v a r i a b l e s in the e v a l u a t i o n i s l i m i t e d because of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n problems wi th many v a r i a b l e s , (2) d i f f e r e n t measurement s c a l e s among v a r i a b l e s cannot be accounted f o r in the e v a l u a t i o n , <3> v a r i a b l e s cannot be d i f f e r e n t i a l l y weighted on o v e r l a y maps, and <4> because of the l i m i t e d number of v a r i a b l e s used , a l e s s than complete set of data and i n f o r m a t i o n i s generated by the e v a l u a t i on . Key element systems are very s i m i l a r to p o i n t r a t i n g systems in that both f o l l o w the same e v a l u a t i o n procedure and both have s i m i l a r o u t p u t . The major d i f f e r e n c e i s that key elements c o n s o l i d a t e v a r i a b l e s i n t o a l e s s e r number of "elements". T h i s s tep i s advantageous when d e a l i n g wi th a l a r g e number of v a r i a b l e s ; however, f o r the most p a r t , t h i s s tep i s not warranted f o r the e v a l u a t i v e framework. The major inadequac ie s of the key element system a r e : <1) e x p l i c i t e v a l u a t i o n c r i t e r i a are l o s t in c o n s o l i d a t i n g v a r i a b l e s , (2) p o s s i b l e "doub le - count ing" of v a r i a b l e s u s i n g key e lements , and <3> p o s s i b l e d i f f i c u l t y in measur ing and i n t e r p r e t i n g f i n a l key e lements . CIn cases where s e v e r a l v a r i a b l e s are r e q u i r e d to adequate ly d e s c r i b e a parameter , i t i s permis sab le to combine these v a r i a b l e s ( e . g . , s o i l e r o d i b i 1 i t y ) ; however, t h i s procedure w i l l be min imized as much as p o s s i b l e in the e v a l u a t i v e framework.] Page 32 Poi nt Ra t i n Q E v a l u a t i on Techn i guess Pi s c u s s i on P o i n t r a t i n g systems have been employed in many re source e v a l u a t i o n s t u d i e s as a means o-f d e t e r m i n i n g the q u a l i t y o-f a r e source or area -for p r o v i d i n g v a r i o u s bene- f i t s . B e n e f i t s that have been s t u d i e d p r e v i o u s l y that are r e l a t e d to the -four b e n e f i t s of t h i s paper i n c l u d e : <a) w i l d l i f e and f i s h h a b i t a t (Basket t e_t a i . , 1 9 8 0 ; U . S . Corps of E n g i n e e r s , 1 9 8 0 ; and Whi taker and McCuen, 1976') ; <b> n a t u r a l areas <Peterken, 1981; Sargent and Brande ,1976; Tans ,1974 ; and W r i g h t , 1 9 7 7 ) ; (c) scenery (Dee e l a l . , 1 9 7 2 and L e o p o l d , 1 9 6 9 ) ; and <d) r e c r e a t i o n ( C r a i g h e a d and C r a i g h e a d , 1 9 6 2 ; Parks Canada,1977; and R e y - L e s c u r e , 1 9 7 8 ) . In most of these s t u d i e s a t o t a l landscape e v a l u a t i o n i s performed r a t h e r than a s p e c i f i c landscape com-ponent such as f o r e s t e d a r e a s . In g e n e r a l , p o i n t r a t i n g systems that have been deve loped are s i m i l a r in format and e v a l u a t i o n p r o c e d u r e , but v a r y in s p e c i f i c a r e a and d i s c i p l i n e s t u d i e d . Two s t u d i e s which present the p o i n t r a t i n g system in a g e n e r a l , yet d e t a i 1 e d manner, are Dee et aj_.<1972) and U . S . Army Corps of E n g i n e e r s (1980) . Both s t u d i e s are r e l a t e d to h a b i t a t e v a l u a t i o n f o r water r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g . The format p r o v i d e d in these s t u d i e s w i l l be used as a guide f o r the development of an e v a l u a t i v e framework f o r f o r -e s t ed areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . The u n d e r l y i n g assumption of these two e v a l u a t i v e schemes, and of p o i n t r a t i n g t echn iques in g e n e r a l , i s that the q u a l i t y of a system i s a f u n c t i o n of the q u a l i t y of the i n d i v i d u a l components or "parameters" that make up or i n f l u e n c e the o v e r a l l system. T h e r e f o r e , by measur ing the q u a l i t y of the i n d i v i d u a l Page 33 parameters , i t i s p o s s i b l e to c a l c u l a t e the q u a l i t y o-f the o v e r a l l sys tem. E s s e n t i a l l y , t h i s i s the approach to be used to determine the q u a l i t y o-f f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . Page 34 METHODOLOGY FOR EVALUATING FORESTED AREAS IN THE RURAL-URBAN INTERFACE Procedure The procedure f o r e v a l u a t i n g f o r e s t e d areas i s o u t l i n e d below as d e r i v e d from Dee e_t al_.<1972> and U . S . Army Corps of Engi neers <1980). 1. The f i r s t s tep in the e v a l u a t i o n of f o r e s t e d areas i s the s e l e c t i o n of parameters that determine q u a l i t y . Parameters may be assumed to be c r i t i c a l f a c t o r s f o r which data must be c o l l e c t e d and subsequent ly e v a l u a t e d (Fuhriman §_t al . . 1974 s 8) . These parameters may be f o r e s t parameters such as s p e c i e s c o m p o s i t i o n , s t a n d d e n s i t y , crown c o v e r , e t c . , or other b i o p h y -s i c a l parameters such as s o i l t ype , s l o p e , and s u r r o u n d i n g land use . S e l e c t i o n i s based on p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s , o ther e v a l u a t i o n s schemes, expert o p i n i o n , and l i t e r a t u r e r e v i e w s . 2. The second step i n v o l v e s the d e r i v a t i o n of a parameter m e a s u r e / q u a l i t y r e l a t i o n s h i p . The two s t u d i e s noted above use " f u n c t i o n a l curves" f o r t h i s purpose , which g r a p h i c a l l y d i s p l a y t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p as shown in the example in F i g u r e 8. Page 35 1 .0 QUALITY 0.5 0.0 0 2 4 6 8 10 Number of S p e c i e s F igu re 8. Q u a l i t y of F o r e s t e d A rea Based on Spec i e s D i v e r s i t y (Example o n l y ) . Q u a l i t y i s r a t e d from 0.0 (extemely poor) to 1.0 (extremely good) in r e l a t i o n to the measurment of the parameter . Dee et aj_. ( l?72) s t a t e that the added advantage of u s i n g t h i s a p -proach i s that a l l parameters are r e l a t e d to a common base ( i . e . , 0.0 to 1.0) and, therefore, i t i s p o s s i b l e to compare parameters that d i f f e r in measurement s c a l e . To t rans form p a r a -meter measures to q u a l i t y r a t i n g s in the e v a l u a t i v e framework f o r f o r e s t e d areas i t i s proposed that a t a b u l a r format be used as shown in the example in the T a b l e 2. NUMBER OF SPECIES QUALITY RATING 1 - 2 0.2 3 - 4 0.4 5 - 6 0.6 7 - 8 0.8 9 - 10 1 .0 TABLE 2. Q u a l i t y of F o r e s t e d A rea Based on Spec i e s D i v e r s i t y (Examp 1e on 1y) . 3. In the s e l e c t i o n of parameters , i t must be r e c o g n i z e d that some parameters are more important than o t h e r s ; t h e r e f o r e , the Page 36 t h i r d step of the e v a l u a t i o n i n v o l v e s the w e i g h t i n g of parameters in r e l a t i o n to t h e i r importance . The method used i s the a l l o c a t i o n of p o i n t s to parameters . For the e v a l u a t i v e framework, 100 p o i n t s w i l l be d i s t r i b u t e d among the parameters based on r e l a t i v e importance . The a c t u a l d i s t r i b u t i o n of p o i n t s may vary from area to area depending on the b i o p h y s i c a l r e s o u r c e s , l o c a l p o p u l a t i o n p r e f e r e n c e s , and i n s t i t u t i o n a l and l ega l c o n s t r a i n t s . 4. The f o u r t h s tep i n v o l v e s the c o l l e c t i o n of parameter measure-ments . T h i s da ta may be o b t a i n e d from e x i s t i n g s o u r c e s , a e r i a l photographs , or f i e l d measurements. The parameter measurements are r e c o r d e d and trans formed to parameter q u a l i t y r a t i n g s through the use of parameter m e a s u r e / q u a l i t y t a b l e s as shown in T a b l e 2. 5. The f i f t h step i s to o b t a i n commensurate u n i t s f o r the p a r a -meters . For each parameter , t h i s i n v o l v e s m u l t i p l y i n g the q u a l i t y r a t i n g from step 4 < i . e . , 0.0 - 1.0) by the p o i n t s (weight) a l l o c a t e d to the parameter in step 3. The product i s the p o i n t r a t i n g of q u a l i t y f o r the parameter . 6. The s i x t h and f i n a l step i s the summation of the p o i n t r a t i n g s f o r a l l parameters to y i e l d an o v e r a l l p o i n t r a t i n g of q u a l i t y f o r the f o r e s t e d area be ing e v a l u a t e d . The maximum p o i n t r a t i n g p o s s i b l e f o r any f o r e s t e d area i s 100. T h i s would occur when a l l parameters had a q u a l i t y r a t i n g of 1.0 < i . e . , t o t a l Page 37 p o i n t s o-f 100 a l l o c a t e d m u l t i p l i e d by 1.0 f o r a l l parameters equa l s 100 p o i n t s . ) The above approach of d e t e r m i n i n g f o r e s t q u a l i t y through p o i n t r a t i n g systems has been c r i t i q u e d by P e t e r k i n (1981:242) for woodland e v a l u a t i o n in B r i t i a n . He s t a t e s : " . . . t h e s e assessments s h o u l d , and u s u a l l y do, have 3 c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which make the r e s u l t s more secure in the face of c r i t i c i s m : (1) judgements are c o n f i n e d to the d e f i n i t i o n of c r i t e r i a and the r e l a t i o n s h i p s between them, and removed from the assessment of p a r t i c u l a r f e a t u r e s in p a r t i c u l a r s i t e s , which shou l d be r e c o r d e d as o b j e c t i v e l y and q u a n t i t a t i v e l y as p o s s i b l e ; (2) the c r i t e r i a are e x p l i c i t and the w e i g h t i n g s g iven to each f e a t u r e are p r e c i s e and open to debate; (3) the o v e r a l l assessment of a s i t e i s the sum or product of separate a s s e s s -ments of s e v e r a l f e a t u r e s , and i t i s not t h e r e f o r e u s u a l l y v i t i a t e d by s u c c e s s f u l c r i t i c i s m of any one judgement. A s s e s s -ments made in t h i s way have 3 f u r t h e r advantages: (1) i n e x p e r i e n c e d p e o p l e , by a p p l y i n g a p r e - d e t e r m i n e d system, can e v a l u a t e woods almost as r e l i a b l y as e x p e r i e n c e d p e o p l e ; (2) woods can be compared on the b a s i s of f i n e d e t a i l ; and (3) the a s s e s s o r ' s s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t s and p r e j u d i c e s have to be d e c l a r e d at the out se t and j u s t i f i e d i f they are to i n f l u e n c e the f i n a l v e r d i c t . " In view of the above c r i t i q u e , i t i s b e l i e v e d that the o u t l i n e d approach to f o r e s t e v a l u a t i o n i s a v a l i d and r e l i a b l e method. In summary, the procedure of e v a l u a t i n g f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e i s a c h i e v e d through the f o l l o w i n g s i x s t e p s : Step 1 . Step 2. Step 3 . Step 4. SELECT parameters that are most important in d e t e r m i n i n g the q u a l i t y of a f o r e s t e d area for the b e n e f i t b e i n g c o n s i d e r e d . DERIVE a parameter m e a s u r e / q u a l i t y r e l a t i o n s h i p f o r a l l parameters and d i s p l a y in t a b u l a r f o r m a t . WEIGHT parameters out of 100 p o i n t s a c c o r d i n g to t h e i r r e l a t i v e importance in d e t e r m i n i n g q u a l i t y . OBTAIN measurements f o r parameters f o r each f o r e s t e d area and TRANSFORM parameter measures to q u a l i t y r a t i n g s u s i n g t a b l e s . Page 38 Step 5. MULTIPLY the q u a l i t y r a t i n g f o r each parameter by c o r r e s p o n d i n g p o i n t s (weight) to y i e l d a p o i n t r a t i n g of q u a l i t y f o r each parameter . Step 6. SUM p r o d u c t s of step 5 f o r a l l parameters to y i e l d an o v e r a l l p o i n t r a t i n g of q u a l i t y f o r the f o r e s t e d a r e a f o r the b e n e f i t b e i n g c o n s i d e r e d . Parame ter Se1ec t i on and Q u a l i ty Re 1 at i onsh i ps The f i r s t two s t e p s of the f o r e s t e d area e v a l u a t i o n p r o c e d u r e , which i n c l u d e : (1) s e l e c t i o n of parameters that are major d e t e r m i n a n t s of q u a l i t y , and <2) d e r i v a t i o n of p a r a m e t e r / q u a l i t y r e l a t i o n s h i p s , may be a c h i e v e d through p r e -v i o u s r e s e a r c h or expert judgement. For t h i s paper , both sources w i l l be r e l i e d upon. The lack of q u a n t i t a t i v e r e s e a r c h in the s u b j e c t of f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e makes i t d i f f i c u l t to c i t e s p e c i f i c r e s e a r c h as a r a t i o n a l e f o r the cho ice of parameters and t h e i r q u a l i t y f u n c t i o n . T h e r e f o r e , d e c i s i o n s made r e g a r d i n g these s t e p s w i l l be based l a r g e l y on: <1) r e l a t e d s t u d i e s or r e s e a r c h p r o v i d e d in the l i t e r a t u r e , <2) b a s i c b i o l o g i c a l and p h y s i c a l p r i n c i p l e s , and <3) correspondance wi th i n d i v i d u a l s knowledgeable on the s u b j e c t . Parameter m e a s u r e / q u a l i t y r e l a t i o n s h i p s , which are o u t l i n e d f o r each b e n e f i t in "parameter m e a s u r e / q u a l i t y t a b l e s " , are d e r i v e d u s i n g the three above s o u r c e s of i n f o r m a t i o n f o r a " t y p i c a l " s i t u a t i o n . The f l e x i b i l i t y of the p o i n t r a t i n g t e c h n i -que p e r m i t s a l t e r a t i o n of parameters and q u a l i t y r e l a t i o n s h i p s to b e t t e r r e p r e s e n t a s p e c i f i c a r e a ' s r e s o u r c e s , l o c a l know-l edge , p r e f e r e n c e s , and i n s t i t u t i o n a l and l ega l c o n t r a i n t s . How-e v e r , f o r the most p a r t , i t i s b e l i e v e d that the o u t l i n e d Page 39 parameters and q u a l i t y r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i l l be s u i t a b l e -for most r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e a r e a s . U)e i oht i no of Parame t e r s The t h i r d s tep of the f o r e s t e d area e v a l u a t i o n procedure i n v o l v e s the a l l o c a t i o n of p o i n t s , or w e i g h t i n g of parameters . As s t a t e d p r e v i o u s l y , t h i s measure i s necessary to account f o r the d i f f e r e n c e in the magnitude that parameters c o n t r i b u t e to the d e t e r m i n a t i o n of q u a l i t y . The method of w e i g h t i n g that w i l l be used in the e v a l u a t i o n of f o r e s t e d areas i s adopted from Dee et aj_.<19?2) where 100 p o i n t s are d i s t r i b u t e d among parameters . The number of p o i n t s a s s i g n e d to each parameter r e p r e s e n t s the r e l a t i v e magnitude of the degree to which the parameter d e t e r -mines q u a l i t y of a f o r e s t e d area f o r a s p e c i f i c b e n e f i t . The technique used to a l l o c a t e p o i n t s to parameters v a r i e s g r e a t l y depending on the p l a n n e r ' s conf idence in the w e i g h t i n g p r o c e d u r e , e x p e r t i s e and i n f o r m a t i o n a v a i l a b l e , and the c o n -s t r a i n t s one i s f a c e d wi th ( i . e . , t ime , f i n c a n c e , p e r s o n n e l , e t c . ) . In g e n e r a l , the a l l o c a t i o n of p o i n t s to parameters may be performed through two major t e c h n i q u e s : <1) a n a l y t i c a l methods, or (2) expert judgement (Eckenrode , 1965:180). For f o r e s t e d areas the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e , the lack of p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h and data p r e c l u d e s the use of a n a l y t i c a l methods; t h e r e f o r e , expert judgement must be r e l i e d upon. A l l o c a t i n g p o i n t s to parameters u s i n g expert judgement i s d e s c r i b e d as " . . . the e x p e r t ' s va lue judgements are q u a n t i f i e d as numerica l parameter weights" <Eckenrode,1965:180) . T h i s t e c h -nique can be c r i t i c i z e d on the b a s i s of s u b j e c t i v i t y i n v o l v e d ; Page 40 however, w e i g h t i n g s are e x p l i c i t l y s t a t e d and are open to debate . For purposes o-f t h i s p a p e r , a p o i n t a l l o c a t i o n s t r u c t u r e i s presented as d e r i v e d -from l i t e r a t u r e rev i ew , correspondence wi th in-formed i n d i v i d u a l s , and va lue judgements on the par t of the a u t h o r . It i s b e l i e v e d that the p o i n t a l l o c a t i o n p r e s e n t e d i s s u i t e d f o r the e v a l u a t i o n of f o r e s t e d areas in a " t y p i c a l " r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . Parameter Measure /Qual i ty Re 1 at i onsh i ps and Parameter w~e i qh t s  f o r S e1e c t e d Benef i t s For each of the b e n e f i t s o f : <1> w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t , <2) water r e s o u r c e s , (3) e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y s e n s i t i v e a r e a s , and (4) r e c r e a t i o n , i n f o r m a t i o n i s p r o v i d e d on the b e n e f i t , parameters , q u a l i t y r e l a t i o n s h i p s , and p o i n t a l l o c a t i o n ( w e i g h t i n g ) . For each b e n e f i t , the i n f o r m a t i o n i s o u t l i n e d in the f o l l o w i n g general format : - a d e f i n i t i o n of the b e n e f i t b e i n g c o n s i d e r e d - the s i g n i f i c a n c e of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to the benef i t - s e l e c t e d parameters that determine q u a l i t y f o r the f o r e s t e d area - a d e f i n i t i o n of each parameter - a d e s c r i p t i o n of the measurement of the parameter - the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the parameter in r e l a t i o n to the benef i t - an o u t l i n e of the general r e l a t i o n s h i p of parameter measure to q u a l i ty Page 41 - a "parameter m e a s u r e / q u a l i t y tab le" - the p o i n t s (weight) a s s i g n e d to the parameter . Uli l d l i f e Habi ta t Def i n i t i ons : W i l d l i f e : a l l undomest icated mammals, b i r d s , r e p t i l e s , and some h igher i n v e r t e b r a t e s l i v i n g in a n a t u r a l env ironment , i n c l u d i n g both game and non-game s p e c i e s , whether c o n s i d e r e d b e n e f i c i a l or o therwise (Schwarz et. a]_. , 1 976:233) . H a b i t a t : the p l a c e where an organism l i v e s , t e m p o r a r i l y or permanent ly , where a l l e s s e n t i a l s f o r i t s e x i s t a n c e and deve-lopment are p r e s e n t . T h i s p e r t a i n s to the c o n d i t i o n s found at such l o c a t i o n s , i n c l u d i n g the p h y s i c a l , chemical and b i o l o g i c a l f e a t u r e s such as s u b s t r a t e , c o v e r , water , and food (Toews and Brown 1 ee , 1981 :104 and Schwarz e_t a l . .1976:91) . W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t : in s imple terms, i s the b i o p h y s i c a l s u r r o u n d i n g s that a w i l d l i f e s p e c i e s u t i l i z e s to ensure i t s e x i s t e n c e . R e g a r d l e s s of s p e c i e s , w i l d l i f e r e q u i r e four b a s i c e lements to s u r v i v e : <1) water , <2) f o o d , <3> cover for p r o t e c t i o n from enemies and the e lements , and <4> areas where they can reproduce and bear t h e i r young in s a f e t y ( P i t t e_t al_. , 1979:21 4) . These requ irements change over time and space . T h e r e f o r e , a l though many s p e c i e s show s t r o n g a f f i n i t y f o r s p e c i f i c types of h a b i t a t , most r e q u i r e a variety of h a b i t a t s f o r d i f f e r e n t p o r t i o n s of Page 42 t h e i r l i f e c y c l e s , or to s a t i s f y d i f f e r e n t requ irements d u r i n g a 24 hour p e r i o d . The number and v a r i e t y of w i l d l i f e s p e c i e s found in any area w i l l depend on the d i v e r s i t y of h a b i t a t s a v a i l a b l e (Dean , 1976:46; Leeson , 1 979:458; and Leedy et al_. , 1978:1) . T h e r e f o r e , f o r opt imal w i l d l i f e p r o d u c t i o n and management, i t i s necessary to preserve or c r e a t e as wide a v a r i e t y of n a t u r a l h a b i t a t s as p o s s i b l e . One of the most important types of n a t u r a l h a b i t a t i s v e g e t a t i o n (Whitaker and McCuen,1976:254; S t e a r n s , 1974:151; and U . B . C . F o r e s t C I u b , 1 9 7 1 : 1 7 2 ) . In g e n e r a l , the g r e a t e r the amount and d i v e r s i t y of p l a n t communit ies in an a r e a , the b e t t e r i s the area as h a b i t a t f o r w i l d l i f e s p e c i e s (Keyes ,1976:96 ) . F o r e s t s are an important form of v e g e t a t i o n that i s r e q u i r e d f o r w i l d -l i f e s u r v i v a l . F o r e s t s p r o v i d e f o o d , c o v e r , p r o t e c t i o n from p r e d a t o r s and weather , and s i t e s f o r r e s t i n g , b u r r o w i n g , n e s t i n g , and b r e e d i n g ( i . e . , 3 of the ' 4 b a s i c e lements of s u r v i v a l ) . As shown in F i g u r e 9, t e r r e s t r i a l mammals in B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , f o r example, use f o r e s t h a b i t a t p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y more than other h a b i t a t s (Bunne11,1982:114) . S i m i l a r l y , the d i v e r s i t y of f o r e s t v e g e t a t i o n i s important in p r o v i d i n g a range of h a b i -t a t s for w i l d l i f e . Combining these two c o n s i d e r a t i o n s makes i t ev ident that the amount and d i v e r s i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e i s a s t r o n g determinant of the q u a l i t y of h a b i t a t f o r w i l d l i f e s p e c i e s in t h i s a r e a . The removal of f o r e s t cover f o r urban development r e s u l t s in a d i r e c t l o s s of w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t and may a l s o l e a d to i n t e r -ference wi th w i l d l i f e movement, i n t r o d u c t i o n or removal of p r e -Page 43 II) t o •o (0 O E e c a <5 •o c <0 0» a E u c a in ? CO « a o 09 a) c (0 3 F igure 9. T o t a l Number o-f T e r r e s t r i a l Mammal Spec i e s Found in Di-f-ferent H a b i t a t s o-f B r i t i s h Columbia ( from B u n n e l l , 1982:114) . (Dot ted bars i n d i c a t e the r e l a t i v e number o-f s p e c i e s r e s t r i c t e d to each h a b i t a t wh i l e the bars i n d i c a t e the r e l a t i v e number of genera l i s t s which use the h a b i t a t at l e a s t par t of the time ). Page 4 4 d a t o r s , i n t r o d u c t i o n o-f more competat ive s p e c i e s , d e t e r i o r a t i o n of water q u a l i t y , and an increase in no i se l e v e l s <Keyes,1976:100) . Because most w i l d l i f e r e s e a r c h has been d i r e c t e d toward game s p e c i e s in w i l d l a n d a r e a s , s t u d i e s that document the impact of u r b a n i z a t i o n on w i l d l i f e are few and, i f a v a i l a b l e , are h i g h l y s i t e - s p e c i f i c . In g e n e r a l , i t i s assumed that the removal of f o r e s t s in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e by u r b a n i z a t i o n w i l l tend to e l i m i n a t e those w i l d l i f e s p e c i e s that are f o r e s t - d e p e n d a n t , u n l e s s these s p e c i e s can adapt to man-impacted c o n d i t i o n s . The importance of f o r e s t s as h a b i t a t f o r w i l d l i f e in B r i t i s h Columbia i s o u t l i n e d by Bunnel1<1982:13) where he s t a t e s : "Of 98 t e r r e s t r i a l mammal s p e c i e s t r e a t e d , about 60'/. of the " s p e c i a l i s t " s p e c i e s (those u s i n g o n l y one h a b i t a t type) are r e s t r i c t e d to f o r e s t c o v e r ; about 70V. of al 1 spec i es need some f o r e s t cover to surv i ve ." F u r t h e r , he s t a t e s : " . . . t h e great m a j o r i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia w i l d l i f e - from amphibians through mammals - are dependant upon f o r e s t c o v e r . " S o c i e t y ' s a t t i t u d e to the presence of w i l d l i f e in a r u r a l -urban area i s g e n e r a l l y f a v o u r a b l e . Dagg (1973) , in a s tudy of p e o p l e ' s r e a c t i o n s to w i l d l i f e in W a t e r l o o , O n t a r i o , found that people l i k e d s e e i n g b i r d s in the c i t y , a lon g wi th other small mammals such as chipmunks, s q u i r r e l s , and r a b b i t s . In 1976, the N a t i o n a l W i l d l i f e F e d e r a t i o n in the U n i t e d S t a t e s lauched i t s Backyard H a b i t a t Program wi th an a r t i c l e t e l l i n g people how to manage v e g e t a t i o n to a t t r a c t w i l d l i f e to t h e i r p r o p e r t i e s ; i t r e c e i v e d r e q u e s t s f o r o n e - q u a r t e r m i l l i o n r e p r i n t s w i t h i n h a l f a year (Lang and Armour ,1980:102) . And Payne and DeGraaf (1975) Page 45 s t a t e that the e s t i m a t e d t o t a l d i r e c t e x p e n d i t u r e s -for the nonconsumptive enjoyment o-f nongame b i r d s in the U . S . in 1974 was 500 m i l l i o n d o l l a r s , wi th b i r d seed s a l e s a long amounting to about 170 m i l l i o n d o l l a r s . From these s t u d i e s , i t i s c o n c l u d e d that w i l d l i f e presence i s g e n e r a l l y a d e s i r e d f e a t u r e of the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . As s u c h , important f o r e s t h a b i t a t must be p lanned f o r to ensure the presence of w i l d l i f e s p e c i e s . Leedy e_t al_. < 1 978; v i ) s t a t e that p l a n n e r s r e c o g n i z e the importance of w i l d l i f e in deve loped a r e a s , but f i n d few g u i d e -l i n e s to help p l a n f o r t h i s r e s o u r c e . In a d d i t i o n , they s t a t e that a t tempts to use the e x p e r t i s e of w i l d l i f e b i o l o g i s t s i s o f ten hampered by the lack of common ground between the two p r o f e s s i ons . To p lan f o r f o r e s t h a b i t a t s r e q u i r e s the knowledge of the r e l a t i v e importance or q u a l i t y of each f o r e s t e d area f o r w i l d -l i f e . T h e r e f o r e , a p o i n t r a t i n g system of e v a l u a t i o n i s h i g h l y s u i t a b l e f o r t h i s purpose . P o i n t - r a t i n g schemes are a common method of h a b i t a t e v a l u a t i o n and have been used to e v a l u a t e v a r i o u s types of h a b i t a t . Current1y , the U . S . F i s h and W i l d l i f e S e r v i c e uses a p o i n t r a t i n g scheme <HEP> to eva lua te h a b i t a t s f o r major f e d e r a l water p r o j e c t s (Schamberger and Krohn ,1982:154) . P o i n t r a t i n g e v a l u a t i o n schemes f o r h a b i t a t have a l s o been deve loped by F l o o d e_t. al_.<1977), Basket et al_.<1980), Dee et. al_.<1972), U . S . Army Corps of E n g i n e e r s (1980) , Whitaker and McCuen (1976) , L a n c i a e_t al_. (1982) , Short <1982), and L i n e s and P e r r y (1978) . Two major approaches are used in the above schemes. The scheme i s e i t h e r s p e c i e s - s p e c i f i c ( i . e . , f o r a c e r t a i n w i l d l i f e Page 46 s p e c i e s ) , or general < i . e . , t h e four e s s e n t i a l s for w i l d l i f e s u r v i v a l are used as c r i t e r i a ) . In t h i s paper , the l a t t e r a p -proach w i l l be u s e d . T h i s approach i s based on the as sumpt ion: " . . . t h e presence or absence , and abundance and d i v e r s i t y of animal p o p u l a t i o n s in a h a b i t a t or community are determined by b a s i c b i o t i c and a b i o t i c f a c t o r s that can be r e a d i l y i d e n t i f i e d " , and, " . . . that i f the neces sary h a b i t a t requ irements f o r a s p e c i e s are p r e s e n t , then a v i a b l e p o p u l a t i o n of the s p e c i e s w i l l be , or p o t e n t i a l l y c o u l d be , supported by the h a b i t a t " ( U . S . Army Corps of E n g i n e e r s , 1980:8) . The parameters s e l e c t e d to determine q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas f o r w i l d l i f e in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e are based on the above assumption and s t u d i e s c i t e d from the l i t e r t u r e . In b r i e f , q u a l i t y i s based m a i n l y on : (1) the f o r e s t s a b i l i t y to p r o v i d e f o o d , c o v e r , w a t e r , and r e p r o d u c t i v e s i t e s , and (2) the f o r e s t s a b i l i t y to p r o v i d e a wide d i v e r s i t y of h a b i t a t s . The parameters that determine q u a l i t y a r e : (1) o v e r s t o r y s p e c i e s , (2) o v e r s t o r y h e i g h t , (3) percent o v e r s t o r y c o v e r , (4) percent u n d e r s t o r y c o v e r , (5) percent ground c o v e r , (6) snags per h e c t a r e , (7) percent dead and down c o v e r , (8) percent area streams and r a v i n e s , (9) percent area w e t l a n d , (10) percent area human d i s t u r b a n c e , (11) s u r r o u n d i n g l and use , and (12) f o r e s t t r a c t s i z e . Page 47 m i d l i f e H a b i t a t Parameters 1. O v e r s t o r y S p e c i e s : i s d e f i n e d as the s p e c i e s of t r e e s which form the uppermost l a y e r in a f o r e s t of more than one s t o r y . T r e e s i n c l u d e d in t h i s l a y e r are v e t e r a n s , dominants , codomin-a n t s , i n t e r m e d i a t e s , and suppressed t r e e s that are g r e a t e r than 10 meters in he ight <Walmsley §_t al_. , 1980:138) . O v e r s t o r y s p e c i e s are important in d e t e r m i n i n g h a b i t a t d i v e r s i t y ; a v a i l a b l e f o o d , c o v e r , and r e p r o d u c t i v e a r e a s ; and h o r i z o n t a l and v e r t i c a l v e g e t a t i o n s t r u c t u r e . In g e n e r a l , the l a r g e r the d i v e r s i t y of o v e r s t o r y s p e c i e s , the more v a l u a b l e i s the f o r e s t as h a b i t a t f o r a wide v a r i e t y of w i l d l i f e s p e c i e s <Whitaker and McCuen,1976;254; B lack and Thomas,1978:50; Meslow,1978:13; Thomas ejt al_. , 1979;30-38; and T r e g a y , 1 979:281) . More tree s p e c i e s p r o v i d e more h a b i t a t n i c h e s , g r e a t e r food v a r i e t y , c o v e r , and g r e a t e r o v e r a l l h a b i t a t d i v e r s i t y . A f u r t h e r c o n s i d -e r a t i o n i s the r a t i o of c o n i f e r o u s to dec iduous s p e c i e s . C o n i f e r o u s p r o v i d e y e a r - r o u n d f o l i a g e b e n e f i t s ; whereas , d e c i d -uous s p e c i e s p r o v i d e f o l i a g e from s p r i n g to f a l l . Because of t h i s f a c t , c o n i f e r o u s s p e c i e s are r a t e d h igher than dec iduous s p e c i e s as w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t <Leedy jet aj_. , 1978:18) . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to o v e r s t o r y s p e c i e s i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the d i v e r s i t y of o v e r s t o r y s p e c i e s , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r w i l d l i f e . A h igher content of c o n i f e r o u s s p e c i e s a l s o i n c r e a s e s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d a r e a . F i v e c a t e g o r i e s of o v e r s t o r y s p e c i e s are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 3. Page 48 T a b l e 3 . O v e r s t o r y S p e c i e s / Q u a l i t y -for W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t Parame ter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Po i n t s 1. Homogenous O 8 0 X ) Deciduous 0 .5 2. Homogenous (>80/O C o n i f e r o u s 0.6 3. Heterogenous (50-80X) Deciduous 0 .9 8 4. Heterogenous (50-80/O C o n i f e r o u s 1.0 5. Mixed Homogenous C o n i f . / D e c i d . 0 .8 ( i . e . , 2 d i s t i n c t types of a p p r o x i m a t e l y equal area) 2 . O v e r s t o r y H e i g h t : i s d e f i n e d as the average he ight of the o v e r s t o r y canopy in m e t e r s . In most c a s e s , the t r e e s d e t e r m i n i n g t h i s he ight would be the dominant and codominant t r e e s in the s t a n d . The he ight of the o v e r s t o r y i s an i n d i c a t o r of the v e r t i -ca l d i v e r s i t y in v e g e t a t i o n and the general age of the s t a n d . V a r i o u s s t u d i e s by MacArthur and MacArthur (1961) , MacArthur e_t al_. < 1962) , Cau ley (1974:143-147) , Thomas et a i - (1973:160-162), and Edgerton and Thomas (1978:57) show that b i r d s and mammals i n h a b i t v e g e t a t i o n at s p e c i f i c h e i g h t s above the ground. In g e n e r a l , v e g e t a t i o n in l a y e r s above the ground have been shown to have a d i r e c t e f f e c t on the number and d i v e r s i t y of s p e c i e s p r e s e n t . In a d d i t i o n , o v e r s t o r y h e i g h t , as an i n d i c a t o r of s tand age, p r o v i d e s a measure of the time the s tand has been e s t a b -l i s h e d and, t h e r e f o r e , the amount of time w i l d l i f e s p e c i e s may have been dependent on the h a b i t a t . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to o v e r s t o r y he ight i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the he ight of o v e r s t o r y , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area as w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t S ix c a t e g o r i e s of o v e r s t o r y he ight are p r o v i d e d Page 49 in T a b l e 4. T a b l e 4 . O v e r s t o r y H e i g h t / Q u a l i t y -for W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t . Parameter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 1 . 2. 3 . 4. 5. 6. 0 - 10 m 11 - 20 m 21 - 30 m 31 - 40 m 41 - 50 m 50 m+ 0.3 0 .5 0 .7 0.8 0 .9 1 .0 8 3. Percent O v e r s t o r y C o v e r : i s d e f i n e d as the p r o p o r t i o n of ground s u r f a c e under a e r i a l p a r t s of the o v e r s t o r y canopy. Percent o v e r s t o r y cover i s c a l c u l a t e d by p r o j e c t i n g the o v e r -s t o r y canopy v e r t i c a l l y down to the ground s u r f a c e and e s t i -mat ing the approximate coverage of the ground s u r f a c e . O v e r s t o r y c o v e r , as one of the l a y e r s of v e g e t a t i o n , i s important f o r p r o v i d i n g cover to w i l d l i f e , h o r i z o n t a l d i v e r s i t y in h a b i t a t type , f o o d , and areas f o r r e p r o d u c t i o n . In g e n e r a l , the g r e a t e r the d e n s i t y and volume of o v e r s t o r y , the g r e a t e r i s the amount of h a b i t a t f o r w i l d l i f e < Leedy e_t aj_. , 1978: 22 5 DeGraaf , 1 978:15 5 S h o r t , 1982:57; Thomas e_t al_. , 1973:1 61 ; and Edgerton and Thomas ,1978:57) . It i s a l s o r e c o g n i z e d , however, that too dense an o v e r s t o r y w i l l r e s t r i c t s u n l i g h t p e n e t r a t i o n and movement of some s p e c i e s <Leedy e_t aj_. , 1 978:20) . T h e r e f o r e the optimum percent o v e r s t o r y cover i s assumed to be somewhat l e s s than 100X. The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to percent o v e r -s t o r y cover i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the percent cover of o v e r s t o r y , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r w i l d l i f e . Q u a l i t y i n c r e a s e s wi th i n c r e a s i n g Page 50 cover to a p o i n t where s u n l i g h t p e n e t r a t i o n and w i l d l i f e move-ment are s e v e r e l y r e s t r i c t e d . F i v e c a t e g o r i e s of percent o v e r -s t o r y cover are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 5. T a b l e 5 . P e r c e n t O v e r s t o r y C o v e r / Q u a l i t y f o r W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t . Parame t e r Measure Qua! i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 1 . 0 - 20'/. 0.2 2. 21 - 40% 0.4 3. 41 - 60V. 0 .7 10 4. 61 - 80% 1.0 5. 81 - 100% 0.8 4. Percent U n d e r s t o r y C o v e r : i s d e f i n e d as the p r o p o r t i o n of ground s u r f a c e under a e r i a l p a r t s of the u n d e r s t o r y canopy. The u n d e r s t o r y canopy i s a v e g e t a t i o n l a y e r found below the o v e r -s t o r y canopy l a y e r . I t c o n s i s t s of suppressed tree l e s s than 10 meters in h e i g h t , t a l l shrubs < 2 to 10 meters in h e i g h t ) , and low shrubs < 15 c e n t i m e t e r s to 2 meters in h e i g h t ) (Walmsley, 1980:190-140). U n d e r s t o r y cover i s c a l c u l a t e d by p r o j e c t i n g the u n d e r s t o r y canopy v e r t i c a l l y down to the ground s u r f a c e and e s t i m a t i n g the approximate percent c o v e r a g e . The u n d e r s t o r y canopy i s important f o r p r o v i d i n g f o o d , c o v e r , and r e p r o d u c t i v e areas f o r w i l d l i f e , e s p e c i a l l y b i r d s ( M a c A r t h u r , 1 9 6 2 ) . In a d d i -t i o n , i t has been s t a t e d that t h i s l a y e r of v e g e t a t i o n i s impor-tant as a b u f f e r f o r p r o t e c t i n g w i l d l i f e from urban p r e d a t o r s such as dogs and c a t s <Leedy e_t aj_. , 1978:13,18) . In g e n e r a l , the grea ter the d e n s i t y and volume of u n d e r s t o r y , the g r e a t e r the amount of h a b i t a t f o r w i l d l i f e ( U . S . Army Corps of E n g i n e e r s , 1980:65; Leedy e_t a]_. , 1978:21 ; Shor t , 1982:57; Mesl ow, 1 978:1 3-15; Page 51 and G a v a r s k i , 1 9 7 6 ) . It i s a l s o r e c o g n i z e d that too dense an u n d e r s t o r y may r e s t r i c t w i l d l i f e movement. The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to percent u n d e r -s t o r y i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the percent u n d e r s t o r y c o v e r , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r w i l d l i f e . Q u a l i t y i n c r e a s e s w i th i n c r e a s i n g cover to a p o i n t where w i l d l i f e movement may be r e s t r i c t e d . F i v e c a t e g o r i e s of percent u n d e r s t o r y cover are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 6. T a b l e 6 . P e r c e n t U n d e r s t o r y C o v e r / Q u a l i t y f o r W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t . Parame ter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 1 . 0 - 20'/. 0 .5 2. 21 - 40% 0 .7 3. 41 - 60V. 0.9 8 4. 61 - 80% 1 .0 5. 81 - 100% 0.9 5 . P e r c e n t Groundcover: i s d e f i n e d as the p r o p o r t i o n of ground s u r f a c e under a e r i a l p a r t s of the groundcover canopy. Ground-cover i n c l u d e s a l l herbaceous s p e c i e s , r e g a r d l e s s of h e i g h t , and some low woody p l a n t s i f l e s s than 15 c e n t i m e t e r s in he ight (Walmsley ,1980:140) . Groundcover i s c a l c u l a t e d by p r o j e c t i n g the groundcover canopy v e r t i c a l l y down to the ground s u r f a c e and e s t i m a t i n g the approximate percent coverage . Groundcover i s important f o r p r o v i d i n g f o o d , s h e l t e r and r e p r o d u c t i v e areas to w i l d l i f e , e s p e c i a l l y amphib ians , r e p t i l e s , and i n v e r t e b r a t e s . In g e n e r a l , the g r e a t e r the d e n s i t y and volume of groundcover , the g r e a t e r the amount of h a b i t a t f o r w i l d l i f e <U.S. Army Corps of E n g i n e e r s , 1980:65; F l ood e_t aj_. , 1 977; Campbe 1 1 ,1974 :61-66; and S h o r t , 1982:57) . Page 52 The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to percent groundcover i s based on the assumption that f o r e s t q u a l i t y f o r w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t i n c r eases wi th i n c r e a s i n g groundcover . F i ve c a t e g o r i e s of percent groundcover are p rov ided in Tab le 7. Tab le 7 .Percent G roundcove r /Qua l i t y f o r W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t . Parameter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 6. Snags per Hec t a r e : i s d e f i n e d as the per hec tare count of s t and ing dead t r e e s from which the l eaves/need l es and most of the l imbs have f a l l e n . For w i l d l i f e , the dead t ree must be at l e a s t 10.2 c e n t i m e t e r s d iameter b reas t he ight (1 .37 meters above ground) , and at l e a s t 1.8 meters t a l l <Thomas, 1979:60 ) . Snags prov ide r e q u i r e d h a b i t a t f o r "snag-dependent" s p e c i e s such as woodpeckers, f l i c k e r s , ow ls , s q u i r r e l s , r a c c o o n s , and other s p e c i e s in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . In most c a s e s , snags are important f o r f e e d i n g , p e r c h i n g , n e s t i n g , p r o t e c t i o n , and r e p r o -d u c t i o n . The importance of snags to w i l d l i f e has been documented in many s t u d i e s i n c l u d i n g Bu l l (1978:74-78) , Evans and Conner (1979:214-225) , Thomas et al_. (1979:60-77) , Edwards (1976 :45 ) , and o t h e r s . The number of snags r e q u i r e d per hec ta re i s depen -dent on the s p e c i f i c s p e c i e s . Based on the work by Thomas (1979) and Bu l l (1978) on c a v i t y - n e s t i n g b i r d s , i t i s assumed that the minimum h a b i t a t requi rement i s 10 snags per h e c t a r e . 1 . 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 - 20% 21 - 40% 41 - 60% 61 - 80% 81 - 100% 0.3 0.5 0 .7 0 .9 1 .0 7 Page 53 The q u a l i t y o-f f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to snags per hec tare i s based on the assumption that snags are a necessary h a b i t a t f o r c e r t a i n s p e c i e s in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e and that the g r e a t e r the number of snags per h e c t a r e , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of h a b i t a t f o r snag-dependent s p e c i e s ( up to a p o i n t where the f o r e s t i s in an advanced s t a t e of d e c a y ) . F i v e c a t e g o r i e s of snags per hec tare are p r o v i d e d in Tab le 8. T a b l e 8.Snags per H e c t a r e / Q u a l i t y f o r W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t . Parame ter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Poi n ts 7. Percent Dead and Down C o v e r : i s d e f i n e d as a l l woody m a t e r i a l , from whatever s o u r c e , that i s dead and l y i n g on the f o r e s t f l o o r (Thomas,1979:473) . For a maximum f u n c t i o n as w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t , the m a t e r i a l must be at l e a s t 30 c e n t i m e t e r s at the l a r g e s t end and at l e a s t 6 meters in length <Maser,1979: 95) . Percent dead and down cover i s c a l c u l a t e d by p r o j e c t i n g the m a t e r i a l v e r t i c a l l y down to the ground s u r f a c e and e s t i m a t i n g the approximate percent coverage . Dead and down m a t e r i a l such as l o g s , stumps, b r a n c h e s , and root wads p r o v i d e h a b i t a t d i v e r s i t y and have been r e f e r r e d to as one of the most important r e s o u r c e s for animal s p e c i e s in a n a t u r a l f o r e s t <El ton ,1966:279; and G a v a r s k i , 1 9 7 6 ) . T h i s m a t e r i a l p r o v i d e s f o o d , c o v e r , and r e p r o -d u c t i v e areas f o r many w i l d l i f e s p e c i e s , e s p e c i a l l y small 1 . 2. 3 . 4. 5. 0 - 5 6 - 1 0 11 - 15 1 6 - 2 0 21 + 0.4 0 .7 0 .9 1 .0 0 .9 5 Page 54 mammals and amphibians <Maser e_t a]_. , 1979:78-95; Winn,1976; Hoos and Packman,1974:Appendix 11 .2; and Thomas, 1979:398). The q u a l i t y o-f -forested areas in r e l a t i o n to percent dead and down m a t e r i a l i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the coverage o-f dead and down m a t e r i a l , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y o-f the f o r e s t as h a b i t a t f o r dependent s p e c i e s < up to a p o i n t where t h i s m a t e r i a l r e s t r i c t s w i l d l i f e movement). S ix c a t e g o r i e s of percent dead and down cover are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 9. Tab le 9. Percent Dead and Down C o v e r / Q u a l i t y f o r W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t . Parameter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 1 . 0 - 1 0 % 0.4 2. 11 - 20% 0.7 3. 21 - 30% 0.9 5 4. 31 - 40% 1.0 5. 41 - 50% 0.9 6. 51% + 0.8 8. Percent A r e a Streams and R a v i n e s : i s d e f i n e d as the p e r c e n -tage land area w i t h i n a f o r e s t e d area that has been s i g n i f i c a n t -l y a l t e r e d by f l u v i a l f o r c e s r e s u l t i n g in s t e e p - s l o p i n g stream v a l l e y s , c h a n n e l s , or r a v i n e s which are d i s t i n c t l y d i f f e r e n t from the s u r r o u n d i n g topography . T h i s l a n d a r e a c o n t a i n s a water c o u r s e , i t s f l o o d channel and v a l l e y , or c o n t a i n s ephemeral , i n t e r m i t t e n t , or p e r e n n i a l s treams in an e l o n g a t e d , narrow d e p r e s s i o n t y p i c a l of a r a v i n e . These areas are h i g h l y important for w i l d l i f e because: (1) they c o n t a i n the four f e a t u r e s e s s e n -t i a l f o r s u r v i v a l ( e . g . , f o o d , c o v e r , r e p r o d u c t i v e a r e a s , and w a t e r ) ; (2) they e x h i b i t high d i v e r s i t y in s l o p e , a s p e c t , s o i l , Page 55 moi s ture reg ime , v e g e t a t i o n , and m i c r o c l i m a t e ; and <3) they p r o v i d e n a t u r a l t r a v e l l anes or c o n n e c t o r s between h a b i t a t t y p e s . Stream a r e a s , or r i p a r i a n zones , are used by w i l d l i f e d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y more than any other type of h a b i t a t due to c o m p l e x i t y of v e g e t a t i o n , h igh p r o d u c t i v i t y , abundant food s u p p l y , edge e f f e c t , and v e g e t a t i v e s t r u c t u r e (Thomas e_t al . , 1979:41; Odum,1979:3; Brown et. aj_. , 1979:22; Johnson e_t aj_. , 1977:71 ; C a r o t h e r s and Johnson , 1975:3; and B u l l , 1978:80) . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to percent area streams and r a v i n e s i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the percentage of t h i s h a b i t a t type , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y f o r w i l d l i f e . S ix c a t e g o r i e s of percent area streams and r a v i n e s are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 10. T a b l e 10. Percent A r e a Streams and R a v i n e s / Q u a l i t y f o r W i l d l i f e Habi t a t . Parame ter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 1 . 2. 3 . 4. 5. 6. 0 - 10% 11 - 21% 21 - 30% 31 - 40% 41 - 50% 51% + 0.2 0 .5 0 .7 0 .8 0 .9 1 .0 11 9. Percent A r e a Wet land : i s d e f i n e d as the percentage l and area w i t h i n a f o r e s t e d area that i s w e t l a n d ; or more s p e c i f i c a l l y , land where the water t a b l e i s a t , n e a r , or above the land s u r -face long enough each year to promote the f o r m a t i o n of predomin-a n t l y h y d r i c s o i l s and to support the growth of h y d r o p h y t e s , at l e a s t p e r i o d i c a l l y (Cowardin e_t aj_. , 1 976: 6) . Wetlands a l s o inc lude p e a t l a n d s formed by the accumulat ion of h y d r o p h y l i c Page 56 v e g e t a t i o n and areas of s h a l l o w water l e s s than 2 meters deep dominated by emergent v e g e t a t i o n ( Z o l t a i , 1979:1) . Wet lands , w i t h t h e i r combinat ion of p l a n t and water reg imes , support a great d i v e r s i t y of f l o r a and fauna and c o n t a i n the most p r o d u c -t i v e w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t forms <Schamberger e_t aj_. , 1978: 74) . Due to the j u x t a p o s i t i o n of a q u a t i c and t e r r e s t r i a l ecosystems, w e t l a n d s , l i k e o ther r i p a r i a n h a b i t a t s , are used by w i l d l i f e p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y more than any other type of h a b i t a t <Keyes,1976:96; L a r s o n , 1 9 7 0 : 1 2 6 ; We 11er ,1978:210; S c h i t o s k e y and L i nder , 1978:307; CI ark , 1978:310 ; and Thomas §_t al_. , 1979:41) . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to percent area wet land i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the p e r c e n t -age of w e t l a n d , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d a r e a for w i l d l i f e . S ix c a t e g o r i e s of percent area wet land are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 11. T a b l e 11. Percent A r e a W e t l a n d / Q u a l i t y f o r W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t Parame ter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 1. 0 - 1 0 % 0.2 2. 11 - 20% 0.5 3. 21 - 30% 0 .7 7 4. 31 - 40% 0.8 5. 41 - 50% 0.9 6. 51% + 1 .0 10. Percent A r e a Human D i s t u r b a n c e : i s d e f i n e d as the percentage land area w i t h i n a f o r e s t e d area that has been denuded of f o r e s t cover f o r the purpose of s u p p o r t i n g human a c t i v i t i e s such as h o u s i n g , r o a d s , d r i v e w a y s , q u a r r i e s , e t c . These a c t i v i t i e s are of a permanent nature and, t h e r e f o r e , have a p e r s i s t a n t Page 57 i n f l u e n c e on w i l d l i - f e . The impact of human a c t i v i t i e s on w i l d -l i f e i s , in most c a s e s , nega t ive <Leedy e_t a ! . , 1978:11 ) . Many w i l d l i f e s p e c i e s are s e n s i t i v e to human i n f l u e n c e s such as n o i s e , t r a f f i c , h a b i t a t a l t e r a t i o n , and so on and w i l l move out of an area when human p o p u l a t i o n d e n s i t i e s reach i n t o l e r a b l e l e v e l s . In a d d i t i o n , human p e t s , such as c a t s and dogs, have been noted as b e i n g p r e d a c i o u s on many w i l d l i f e s p e c i e s . The number of human pe t s in an a r e a , t h e r e f o r e , i s a major d e t e r m i n -ing f a c t o r on the presence of w i l d l i f e <Shoesmith,1978:54; Keyes ,1976:98; and Lang and Armour ,1980:104) . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to percent area human d i s t u r b a n c e i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the human d i s t u r b a n c e , the lower i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r w i l d l i f e . S ix c a t e g o r i e s of percent human d i s t u r b a n c e are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 12. T a b l e 12. Percent A r e a Human D i s t u r b a n c e / Q u a l i t y f o r W i I d l i f e Habi t a t . Farame ter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Po i n ts 1 . 0 - 5 % 1.0 2. 6 - 1 2 % 0.85 3. 13 - 25% 0.7 9 4. 26 - 40% 0.5 5. 41 - 60% 0.3 6. 61% + 0.1 1 1 . S u r r o u n d ! n g Land Use: i s d e f i n e d as the predominant type of land use found in a 0 .5 k i l o m e t e r r a d i u s around the per imeter of the f o r e s t e d area and determined by the maximum percentage area devoted to a s i n g l e land use t y p e . The va lue of s u r r o u n d i n g land Page 58 use f o r w i l d l i f e i s a f u n c t i o n of the s u r r o u n d i n g l a n d s ' a b i l i t y to p r o v i d e f o o d , c o v e r , r e p r o d u c t i v e a r e a s , and water , and reduce the nega t ive impact of human a c t i v i t i e s <Leedy e_t a]_. , 1978:19) . T h e r e f o r e , the land use that can p r o v i d e as optimum combinat ion of these two f a c t o r s i s assumed to be most d e s i r a b l e f o r w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to s u r r o u n d i n g land use i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the number of b e n e f i t s p r o v i d e d by the s u r r o u n d i n g land use to w i l d l i f e , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area to w i l d l i f e . S ix c a t e g o r i e s of s u r r o u n d i n g land use are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 13. T a b l e 13. S u r r o u n d i n g Land U s e / Q u a l i t y f o r W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t . Parame ter Measure Qua! i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 1. S c r u b / F o r e s t 1.0 2. S c r u b / V a c a n t F i e l d 0 .9 3. A c t i v e A g r i c u l t u r e C r o p p i n g 0 .8 10 4. Low D e n s i t y Development 0 .5 (< 1 b l d g / H a ) 5. Medium D e n s i t y Development 0 .3 ( 1 - 5 b l d g / H a ) 6. High D e n s i t y Development 0.2 <> 5 b l d g / H a ) 12. F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e : i s d e f i n e d as the land area between 0 .5 h e c t a r e s and 50 h e c t a r e s in s i z e , e i t h e r p u b l i c l y or p r i v a t e l y owned, that s u p p o r t s a more or l e s s cont iguous cover of n a t u r a l l y - o c c u r r i n g tree s p e c i e s . The s i z e of the f o r e s t e d area i s an i n d i c a t o r of the amount of h a b i t a t a v a i l a b l e and the number of w i l d l i f e s p e c i e s that may be s u p p o r t e d . Many w i l d l i f e s p e c i e s have s p e c i f i c home ranges or t e r r i t o r i e s : t h e r e f o r e , f o r e s t s i z e i s an important c o n s i d e r t i o n . However, f o r most Page 5? deve loped a r e a s , the home range of most s p e c i e s has not been s t u d i e d or determined (Leedy e_t al_. , 1978:21) . As such , i t w i l l be assumed that the l a r g e r the f o r e s t s i z e , the g r e a t e r the number and d i v e r s i t y of w i l d l i f e s p e c i e s that can be s u p p o r t e d ( G a v a r s k i , 1 9 7 6 ; U . S . Army Corps of E n g i n e e r s , 1 9 8 0 : 6 6 ; U . B . C . F o r e s t CIub,1971:174-178; Wat t ,1973:73 -81 ; Evans and Conner , 1979:215; and Anderson and R o b i n s , 1 9 8 1 : 5 1 1 ) . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to f o r e s t t r a c t s i z e i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the t r a c t s i z e , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r w i l d l i f e . E i g h t c a t e g o r i e s of f o r e s t t r a c t s i z e are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 14. T a b l e 14. F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e / Q u a l i t y f o r W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t . Parameter Measure Qua! i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 1 . 2. 3 . 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 0 . 5 - 2 Ha 0.2 0.4 0 .6 0.8 0 .85 0 .9 0 .95 1 .0 3 - 5 Ha 6 - 10 Ha 11 - 20 Ha 21 - 35 Ha 36 - 50 Ha 51 - 70 Ha 71 Ha + 13 Page 60 Water Resources Def i n i t i ons Water Resources : inc lude the v a r i o u s -forms of water found in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e that are a f f e c t e d by f o r e s t s in terms of h y d r o l o g y , water q u a l i t y , and a q u a t i c h a b i t a t . These terms are d e f i n e d as: Hydro logy : the s c i e n c e that t r e a t s the waters of the e a r t h , t h e i r o c c u r r e n c e , c i r c u l a t i o n and d i s t r i b u t i o n ; t h e i r chemical and p h y s i c a l p r o p e r t i e s ; and t h e i r r e a c t i o n with t h e i r e n v i r o n -ment, i n c l u d i n g t h e i r r e l a t i o n to l i v i n g t h i n g s (Chow, 1964). Water Q u a l i t y : the r e l a t i v e c o n d i t i o n or s t a t e of water in r e l a t i o n to i t s u s e f u l n e s s f o r a p a r t i c u l a r purpose . A q u a t i c H a b i t a t : the p lace where f i s h , amphib ians , or i n v e r t e -b r a t e s l i v e , t e m p o r a r i l y or permanent ly , where e s s e n t i a l s for t h e i r e x i s t a n c e and development are p r e s e n t . H y d r o l o g y , water q u a l i t y , and a q u a t i c h a b i t a t in the r u r a l -urban i n t e r f a c e can be s t u d i e d through the concept of the h y d r o -c y l i c c y c l e which c o n s i d e r s the p r o c e s s of m o t i o n , l o s s , and recharge of the e a r t h ' s w a t e r s . T h i s c y c l e has r e c e i v e d a c o n s i d e r a b l e amount of s t u d y ; t h e r e f o r e , to e l a b o r a t e in d e t a i l on the component p r o c e s s e s of the c y c l e would be beyond the scope of t h i s paper . In b r i e f , the h y d r o l o g i c c y c l e can be d e s c r i b e d in terms of seven major proces se s as shown in F i g u r e 10. They are (. 1) p r e c i p i t a t i o n , <2) i n t e r c e p t i o n , <3) e v a p o r a -t i o n , (4) t r a n s p i r a t i o n , (5) i n f i l t r a t i o n or p e r c o l a t i o n , Page 61 (6) s t o r a g e , and (7) s u r f a c e r u n o f f . For a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n of these p r o c e s s e s , see Dunne and L e o p o l d (1978) , Gray (1970) , L i n s l e y e_t al_. (1975) , Sopper and L u l l (1967) , or Chow (1964) . With r e f e r e n c e s to the f o r e s t e d a r e a s , these p r o c e s s e s are d e e r i b e d below. 1. P r e c i p i t a t i o n : i s the input of m o i s t u r e to the e a r t h ' s s u r -face in the form of r a i n , s l e e t , h a i l or snow. 2. I n t e r c e p t i o n : i s the p r e c i p i t a t i o n i n t e r c e p t e d or r e -t a i n e d by v e g e t a t i o n or other f e a t u r e s above the s o i l s u r f a c e ( e . g . , t r e e s , s h r u b s , l i t t e r , e t c . ) . 3 . E v a p o r a t i o n : i s the p r o c e s s by which water i s t rans formed from a l i q u i d to a vapour . 4. T r a n s p i r a t i o n : i s the b i o l o g i c a l p r o c e s s where water vapour i s t r a n s p i r e d from v e g e t a t i o n (main ly from the stoma of l e a v e s ) . C Because s o i l e v a p o r a t i o n and t r a n s p i r a t i o n draw from the same s o i l - w a t e r s u p p l y , e v a p o r a t i o n and t r a n s p i r a t i o n are commonly combined as " e v a p o t r a n s p i r a t i o n " . ] 5. I n f i l t r a t i o n / P e r c o l a t i o n : i n f i l t r a t i o n i s the movement of water through the s o i l s u r f a c e and p e r c o l a t i o n i s the movement of water through the u n d e r l y i n g s o i l . 6. S t o r a g e : i s the p o r t i o n of water that i s r e t a i n e d , e i t h e r above or below the s o i l s u r f a c e , f o r any g iven time p e r i o d . Storage can take p l a c e on v e g e t a t i o n or other s u r f a c e s , in s o i l , d e p r e s s i o n s , c h a n n e l s , or as groundwater . Page 62 7. Runoffs i s the f low of water over the s o i l s u r f a c e when a l l s u r f a c e or s o i l s torage i s o c c u p i e d and the i n f i l t r a t i o n c a p a c i t y of the s o i l s i s exceeded ( i . e . , i n t e n s i t y of p r e c i p i t a -t i o n i s g r e a t e r than i n f i l t r a t i o n r a t e ) . F i g u r e 10. The H y d r o l o g i c C y c l e (From Toews and Brown 1ee,1981:6). F o r e s t s i n f l u e n c e the h y d r o l o g i c c y c l e through three c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of f o r e s t v e g e t a t i o n . F i r s t , i s the he ight of f o l i a g e above the ground and the number of l a y e r s of v e g e t a t i o n which make up the t o t a l t h i c k n e s s of the v e g e t a t i v e p r o f i l e . Second, i s the l a y e r of f a l l e n l e a v e s / n e e d l e s and other d e b r i s on the ground s u r f a c e c o n s t i t u t i n g the f o r e s t f l o o r . And t h i r d , i s the subsur face component made up of root systems which vary in s i z e , d e n s i t y , d e p t h , a n d form. Page 63 Major Inf 1 uences o-f F o r e s t s on Water Resources I n t e r c e p t i o n : The -forest v e g e t a t i o n , which i n c l u d e s the o v e r -s t o r y canopy, shrub l a y e r , and herbaceous ground l a y e r , i n t e r -cept s and s t o r e s p r e c i p i t a t i o n on v e g e t a t i v e s u r f a c e s which subsequent ly e v a p o r a t e s . Deciduous and c o n i f e r o u s canop ie s have been found to i n t e r c e p t and evaporate about 15 to 20 percent of the growing season r a i n f a l l ( L u l l and Sopper,1969:5 and Wigham, 1970:41) . C o n i f e r s are more e f f i c i e n t i n t e r c e p t o r s because they g e n e r a l l y have g r e a t e r masses of f o l i a g e and branches throughout the y e a r , and t h e i r needles can h o l d more i n t e r c e p t i o n s torage than broad l eaves (Dunne and L e o p o l d , 1978:87) . E v a p o t r a n s p i r a t i o n : F o r e s t s are e f f e c t i v e in m a i n t a i n i n g h igh e v a p o t r a n s p i r a t i o n r a t e s w h i c h , in most c a s e s , reduces s o i l mois ture c o n t e n t , ground water r e c h a r g e , and s treamf low. In areas of h igh annual p r e c i p i t a t i o n and f l o o d i n g , f o r e s t s are b e n e f i c i a l in r e d u c i n g the a v a i l a b l e water on the land s u r f a c e through e v a p o r a t i o n of the above s u r f a c e water and t r a n s p i r a t i o n of s u b - s u r f a c e water . I n f i l t r a t i o n / P e r c o l a t i o n : The c o n d i t i o n of the f o r e s t l i t t e r l ayer and u n d e r l y i n g s o i l r e s u l t s in h igh i n f i l t r a t i o n c a p a c i -t i e s . A t h i c k pbrous l i t t e r l a y e r r e a d i l y absorbs incoming p r e c i p i t a t i o n and u n d e r l y i n g s o i l s u s u a l l y have c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s that are f a v o u r a b l e f o r i n f i l t r a t i o n . These c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n -c lude channe l s due to root and animal a c t i v i t y and high o r g a n i c matter content in s u r f a c e l a y e r s ( P i e r c e , 1 9 6 7 : 2 4 8 ) . Because of these c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , i n f i l t r a t i o n in an u n d i s t u r b e d f o r e s t i s Page 64 g e n e r a l l y assumed to be g r e a t e r than r a i n - f a l l i n t e n s i t i e s ( L u l l and Sopper , 1969:6; S t r i f f 1 e r , 1 9 7 9 : 8 0 5 ; and Thurow et al . . 1975:56) . S t o r a g e : F o r e s t s s t o r e water in v a r i o u s areas o-f the v e g e t a t i v e pro- f i l e and enhance s o i l water s torage by c o n t i n u a l l y removing water out o-f the s o i l through t r a n s p i r a t i o n . F o r e s t s are e f f e c -t i v e in r e d u c i n g the amount of water a c t u a l l y e n t e r i n g the s o i l by p r o v i d i n g water s torage c a p a c i t y on v e g e t a t i v e s u r f a c e s such as l e a v e s , b r a n c h e s , and b o l e s , and w i t h i n the p l a n t i t s e l f . The f o r e s t l i t t e r l a y e r a l s o s t o r e s a r e l a t i v e l y l arge amount of water ( L u l l and Sopper , 1969:6) . R u n o f f : S u r f a c e r u n o f f from f o r e s t e d areas i s , in most c a s e s , lower than any other l and use because of high i n t e r c e p t i o n , h igh i n f i l t r a t i o n c a p a c i t y , e v a p o t r a n s p i r a t i o n , l arge s torage c a p a -c i t y , and s u r f a c e roughness which reduces f low v e l o c i t y ( L u l l and Sopper , 1969:8 and Branson §_t al_. , 1981 :244) . I t has been shown that l i t t l e , i f any, s u r f a c e r u n o f f comes from h e a v i l y f o r e s t e d a r e a s , except d u r i n g p e r i o d s of intense p r e c i p i t a t i o n (Thurow e_t aj_. , 1975:56 and Lu 1 1 ,1970 : 67) . In a d d i t i o n , s u r -face r u n o f f from adjacent land a r e a s , upon r e a c h i n g a f o r e s t e d a r e a , i s s lowed in v e l o c i t y and p e r m i t t e d to i n f i l t r a t e i n t o the so i 1 . E r o s i o n : F o r e s t v e g e t a t i o n i s an e f f e c t i v e agent in r e d u c i n g s o i l e r o s i o n , e s p e c i a l l y water e r o s i o n . F o r e s t s reduce r a i n d r o p impact; increase i n f i l t r a t i o n ; b i n d the s o i l wi th l i t t e r , o r g a n -ic matter and r o o t s ; and reduce s u r f a c e r u n o f f v e l o c i t i e s , which Page 65 r e s u l t s in e s s e n t i a l l y no sediment p r o d u c t i o n -from f o r e s t e d areas ( L u l l , 1970:67) . The g r e a t e s t d e t e r r e n t to s o i l e r o s i o n i s the a b i l i t y of the f o r e s t to reduce r u n o f f , which i s the pr imary source in i n i t i a t i n g e r o s i o n and t r a n s p o r t i n g sediment and d i s -s o l v e d s o l i d s to waterways (Branson et a l . . 1 9 8 1 : 7 3 ) . F i l t e r i n g : The herbaceous v e g e t a t i o n and l i t t e r l a y e r of the f o r e s t f l o o r a c t s as a f i l t e r f o r sediment in s u r f a c e r u n o f f from adjacent l and a r e a s . Severa l v a r i a b l e s i n c l u d i n g l ength of the s l o p e , depth of f i l t e r , v e g e t a t i o n , and i n t e n s i t y of the r u n o f f , determine the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of the f o r e s t f o r removing sediment (Karr and S c h 1 o s s e r , 1 9 7 7 : 3 ) . Because n e a r l y a l l phosphorous (>85%) and most n i t r o g e n (>70%) in s u r f a c e r u n o f f i s a t t a c h e d to sed iment , the f o r e s t i s a l s o an important and e f f e c t i v e n u t r i e n t f i l t e r ( K a r r and Sch1osser ,1977:12 - 15) . A q u a t i c H a b i t a t : The f o r e s t has a s t r o n g i n f l u e n c e on the c o n d i t i o n of a q u a t i c h a b i t a t f o r f i s h , amphib ians , and i n v e r t e -b r a t e s . In b r i e f , the b e n e f i t s of f o r e s t s to a q u a t i c h a b i t a t a r e : (1) r e d u c i n g s o l a r input to w a t e r , (2) r e d u c i n g the input of sediment to waterways, (3) p r o v i d i n g t e r r e s t r i a l energy input to the a q u a t i c ecosystem ( e . g . , l e a v e s , l i t t e r , i n s e c t s , e t c . ) , i (4) r e d u c i n g or s t a b i l i z i n g peak f l o w s , (5) p r o v i d i n g h a b i t a t d i v e r s i t y through the presence of woody s t r u c t u r e s in a q u a t i c env ironments , and (6) s t a b i l i z a t i o n of stream banks by v e g e t a -t i v e roo t sys tems . Page 66 F i g u r e 11. A q u a t i c H a b i t a t i n F o r e s t e d A r e a i n S u r r e y , B r i t i sh C o l u m b i a. Impac t s o f F o r e s t Removal on W a t e r R e s o u r c e s The r e m o v a l o f f o r e s t c o v e r i n t h e r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e t a k e s p l a c e m a i n l y when l a n d i s c o n v e r t e d t o u r b a n u s e s . T h i s t r a n s i t i o n o v e r t i m e r e s u l t s i n l e s s f o r e s t a r e a and an i n c r e a s e i n t h e p e r c e n t a g e a r e a o f i m p e r v i o u s s u r f a c e s . L e o p o l d ( 1 9 6 8 ) i n d i c a t e s t h e r e a r e f o u r i n t e r r e l a t e d , b u t s e p a r a b l e , e f f e c t s o f u r b a n i z a t i o n on the w a t e r r e s o u r c e s o f an a r e a : ( 1 ) c h a n g e s i n s u r f a c e r u n o f f , <2) c h a n g e s i n peak f l o w c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , ( 3 ) c h a n g e s i n t h e w a t e r q u a l i t y , and <4) c h a n g e s t o h y d r o l o g i c a m e n i t i e s <in t h i s c a s e , a q u a t i c h a b i t a t ) . The n e t e f f e c t o f r e m o v i n g f o r e s t s and i n t r o d u c i n g l e s s p e r m e a b l e s u r f a c e s i s t h a t a h i g h e r p r o p o r t i o n o f p r e c i p i t a t i o n Page 67 becomes sur-face r u n o f f ; t h i s r u n o f f o c c u r s more q u i c k l y ; and the peak f lows in streams and r i v e r s are h igher and " f l a s h i e r " , r e a c h i n g s tages more r a p i d l y than was the case before f o r e s t removal (Branson e_t al_. , 1981 :250) . T h i s i s d e p i c t e d in F i g u r e 12 which d i s p l a y s the hydrograph f o r an area before and a f t e r f o r e s t r e m o v a l . ( N o t e the d i f f e r e n c e in time and magnitude of d i s c h a r g e between the two a r e a s . ) One set of e s t i m a t e s shows annual r u n o f f i n c r e a s i n g 15, 29, and 41 percent by i n c r e a s i n g the impervious s u r f a c e of a f o r e s t e d watershed by 25, 50, and 75 p e r c e n t , r e s p e c t i v e l y ( L u l l and S o p p e r , 1 9 6 9 : 1 4 ) . Regard ing peak f l o w s , a s tudy by Rutgers U n i v e r s i t y found that 10 percent u r b a n i z a t i o n of a f o r e s t w a t e r -shed caused a 41 percent increase in peak f low ( F u s i l l o , 1978:381) . L u l l and Sopper (1969:27) review s e v e r a l s t u d i e s that show peak f lows are i n c r e a s e d 1.2 to 5 t imes when r u r a l areas are u r b a n i z e d . HIGH Di scharge 3 m / s L O W T i me F i g u r e 12. Hydrograph f o r a N o n - F o r e s t e d v e r s u s F o r e s t e d Watershed (From Branson e_t. al_. , 1981 :250)• Page 68 Impact of F o r e s t Removal on Water Qua l i ty R e l a t e d to the i n c r e a s e s in r u n o f f and peak -flows, i s the c o r r e s p o n d i n g change in water q u a l i t y caused p r i m a r i l y by s e d i -ment p r o d u c t i o n -from water e r o s i o n as shown in F i g u r e 13. With i n c r e a s e d sur-face runo-f-f, h igher -flow v e l o c i t i e s , and l e s s p r o -t e c t i o n of the s o i l s u r f a c e , s o i l p a r t i c l e s are detached and t r a n s p o r t e d in f l o w i n g s u r f a c e water . The impact of t h i s p r o c e s s on water c o u r s e s i s i n c r e a s e d s e d i m e n t a t i o n and t u r b i d i t y . O'Bryan and McAvoy <1?66> conc luded that sediment y i e l d and t u r b i d i t y l e v e l s from a 350 square m i l e watershed in M a r y l a n d under v a r i o u s l and uses were as shown in T a b l e 15. Land Use Sedimentat i on Y i e l d Max imum < t o n / m i z / y r ) T u r d i d i ty< ppm) F o r e s t Land 50 45 Urban & Suburban 50 - 100 90 Farmland 1000 - 5000 4500 Land s t r i p p e d f o r cons true t i on 25000 - 50000 45000 T a b l e 15. Sed imenta t ion Y i e l d s and T u r b i d i t y L e v e l s Produced From V a r i o u s Land Uses (From O'Bryan and McAvoy ,1966) . Page 69 F i g u r e 13. The Sed imenta t ion Pathway <From Toews and Brownl ee , 1981 :6>. In a s tudy c i t e d by Thurow e_t aj_. , (1975:11) , s i m i l a r r e s u l t s were -found. On a 1.2 square m i l e dra inage b a s i n in New J e r s e y , the sediment y i e l d -from 50 a c r e s of c o n s t r u c t i o n s i t e was 50 t imes the y i e l d from an undeveloped a r e a , d e s p i t e the use of sediment c o n t r o l measures ( L u l l and S o p p e r , 1 9 6 9 : 1 3 ) . Once c o n s t r u c t i o n i s comple ted , the sediment y i e l d i s r e d u c e d , but may s t i l l be 5 to 10 t imes the r a t e from f o r e s t e d areas ( L u l l and S o p p e r , 1 9 6 9 : 1 3 ) . Impact of F o r e s t Removal on A q u a t i c Habi ta t The impact of f o r e s t removal on a q u a t i c h a b i t a t may be d i r e c t where the f o r e s t forms p a r t of the h a b i t a t , or i n d i r e c t where f low p a t t e r n s or water l e v e l s of a h a b i t a t are a f f e c t e d by f o r e s t removal at a d i s t a n c e from the h a b i t a t . The major impacts of both are d e s c r i b e d below. Page 70 1. The removal of f o r e s t s from streambank areas reduces shade and p e r m i t s an i n c r e a s e d amount of so l or r a d i a t i o n to reach the w a t e r ' s s u r f a c e <Chapman,1963:324; Toews and Brownlee , 1981:65; and Brown,1971:175-181) . V e g e t a t i o n a l s o a c t s a b u f f e r a g a i n s t temperature extremes , a l l o w i n g shaded streams to be c o o l e r in the summer and warmer in the w i n t e r (Karr and S c h l o s s e r , 1977:44) . Temperature i n c r e a s e s in the summer of 2 0 ° F above normal stream temperatures have been r e c o r d e d (. Lynch , 1978: 374) . Shading from v e g e t a t i o n has a p o s i t i v e e f f e c t on the number of f i s h p r e s e n t , s p e c i e s p r e s e n t , and t h e i r p h y s i c a l c o n d i t i o n <Karr and S c h l o s s e r , 1977:56) . 2. The removal of f o r e s t s r e s u l t s in a l o s s of energy input to a q u a t i c environments in the form of <a) o r g a n i c d e b r i s f a l l such as l e a v e s and l i t t e r , and <b) insec t d r o p . It has been e s t i m a t e d that 44X of the t o t a l energy input i n t o a small s tream comes from the f o r e s t l i t t e r ( F i s h e r and L i k e n s , 1 9 7 2 ) , and that up to 66'/. of the d i e t of salmon f r y and t r o u t i s made up or t e r r e s t r i a l i n s e c t s ( Dew" i 11,1968:41) . Removal of f o r e s t s , t h e r e -f o r e , reduces the p r o d u c t i v e c a p a c i t y of a q u a t i c h a b i t a t s . 3 . The removal of f o r e s t s b o r d e r i n g a q u a t i c h a b i t a t r e s u l t s in the l o s s of the f i l t e r i n g a b i l i t i e s of the f o r e s t a g a i n s t sediment and a t t a c h e d n u t r i e n t s , such as phosphorous and n i t r o -gen. Sediment in a q u a t i c h a b i t a t s i s d e t r i m e n t a l to most animal l i f e t h e r e i n , e s p e c i a l l y salmon and t r o u t . The major negat ive impacts of sediment in a q u a t i c environments a r e : (1) i n c r e a s e d t u r b i d i t y which reduces l i g h t p e n e t r a t i o n and p h o t o s y n t h e t i c Page 71 a c t i v i t y ( P h i11 i p s , 1 9 7 1 : 6 5 ) , <2) damage to r e s p i r a t o r y membranes of a q u a t i c organisms ( P h i11 i p s , 1 9 7 1 : 6 5 ; L a n t z , 1 9 7 1 : 1 0 ; and K a r r and S c h l o s s e r , 1977:50) , and (3) an adverse e f f e c t on grave l beds f o r salmon and t r o u t by p l u g g i n g i n t e r s t i t i a l grave l spaces to reduce oxygen exchange and f r y emergence ( L a n t z , 1 9 7 1 : 1 3 ; Chapman, 1963:324; P h i11 i p s , 1 9 7 1 : 6 5 ; and Toews and Brownlee , 1981:61) 4. The removal of f o r e s t s b o r d e r i n g a q u a t i c h a b i t a t r e s u l t s in the l o s s of bank s t a b i l i z a t i o n and h a b i t a t d i v e r s i t y p r o v i d e d by r o o t s , b r a n c h e s , d e b r i s , e t c . in the a q u a t i c env ironment . F o r e s t s p r o t e c t banks a g a i n s t e r o s i o n and scour by b i n d i n g the s o i l , which p r e v e n t s f u r t h e r s e d i m e n t a t i o n and h a b i t a t d e s t r u c -t i o n (Toews and Brown 1ee ,1981:66; F i s i l l o , 1978:381; and DeWit t , 1968:44) . The presence of woody s t r u c t u r e s in the a q u a t i c e n -vironment a l s o c r e a t e s a d d i t i o n a l h a b i t a t and cover f o r a q u a t i c s p e c i e s ( F i s h e r i e s and Oceans Canada,1978:2; Karr and S c h l o s s e r , 1977:60; and Toews and Brown 1e e , 1 9 8 1 : 6 5 ) . 5. The removal of f o r e s t s in any area w i l l impact a q u a t i c h a b i t a t by i n c r e a s i n g s u r f a c e r u n o f f . Increased s u r f a c e r u n o f f w i l l r e s u l t i n : (1) h igher peak f lows c a u s i n g f l u c t u a t i n g water l e v e l s , s c o u r i n g , and h a b i t a t d e s t r u c t i o n ; (2) i n c r e a s e d s o i l e r o s i o n c a u s i n g h igher sediment and n u t r i e n t inputs to h a b i t a t ; and (3) changes in the water regime of the wet lands areas which may have adverse e f f e c t s . Page 72 F i g u r e 14. Example o-f Bank E r o s i o n A l o n g Mahood C r e e k , S u r r e y , Br i t i sh C o l u m b i a . The parameters s e l e c t e d to determine q u a l i t y o-f f o r e s t e d areas f o r water re souces are d e r i v e d m a i n l y from l i t e r a t u r e rev i ew . The parameters were s e l e c t e d to r e f l e c t the f o r e s t s a b i l i t y to prevent s u r f a c e r u n o f f , m a i n t a i n water q u a l i t y , and enhance a q u a t i c h a b i t a t . The f o l l o w i n g parameters are used in the e v a l u a t i o n : <1) o v e r s t o r y s p e c i e s , (2) he ight of o v e r s t o r y , (3) percent o v e r s t o r y c o v e r , (4) percent u n d e r s t o r y c o v e r , (5) percent groundcover , <6) s o i l e r o d i b i l i t y , <7) topography, (8) percent ?rea streams and r a v i n e s , (?) percent area w e t l a n d , and <10) f o r e s t t r a c t s i z e . 1. O v e r s t o r y S p e c i e s : d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as the s p e c i e s of t r e e s which form the uppermost canopy l a y e r in a f o r e s t of more than Page 73 one s t o r y . The va lue o-f o v e r s t o r y s p e c i e s to water r e s o u r c e s in m a i n l y in t h e i r a b i l i t y to i n t e r c e p t and s t o r e p r e c i p i t a t i o n over the y e a r . In most c a s e s , coni - fers are b e t t e r s u i t e d -for t h i s f u n c t i o n . C o n i f e r s g e n e r a l l y have g r e a t e r masses of f o l i a g e and branches throughout the y e a r , and t h e i r needles can h o l d more i n t e r c e p t i o n s torage than broad l eaves <Dunne and L e o p o l d , 1978:87) . It i s e s t i m a t e d that c o n i f e r s , in the w i n t e r , i n t e r -cept 3 to 4 t imes more p r e c i p i t a t i o n than dec iduous s p e c i e s <Lull and Sopper , 1969:5) . The main va lue of dec iduous s p e c i e s for water r e s o u r c e s i s t h e i r input of l e a f l i t t e r to the f o r e s t f l o o r each year as p r o t e c t i o n f o r the s o i l s u r f a c e , and the o r g a n i c energy input (as food ) to a q u a t i c ecosystems (Karr and S c h l o s s e r , 1977:57) . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to o v e r s t o r y s p e c i e s i s based on the assumption that the opt imal f o r e s t s tand i s a mixed c o n i f e r / d e c i d u o u s s t a n d , which c o n t a i n s a h igher p r o p o r t i o n of c o n i f e r s . In g e n e r a l , the g r e a t e r the p r o p o r t i o n of c o n i f e r s , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r water r e s o u r c e s . F i v e c a t e g o r i e s of o v e r s t o r y s p e c i e s are p r o -v i ded i n T a b l e 16. I Page 74 T a b l e 16. O v e r s t o r y S p e c i e s / Q u a l i t y f o r Water Resources . Parame ter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 1. Homogenous 080%) Deciduous 0 .5 2. Homogenous <>80%) C o n i f e r o u s 0 .9 3 . Heterogenous < 50-80%) Deciduous 0.7 10 4. Heterogenous (50-80%) Coni-ferous 1.0 5. Mixed Homogenous Con i-f e r / D e c i d 0.8 ( i . e . 2 D i s t i n c t types o-f a p p r o x i m a t e l y same area) 2. O v e r s t o r y H e i g h t : d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as the average he ight of the o v e r s t o r y canopy in m e t e r s . The o v e r s t o r y he ight i s an i n d i c a t o r o f : (1) the volume of f o l i a g e a v a i l a b l e f o r i n t e r -c e p t i o n and s t o r a g e , <2) age of the s t a n d , hence, development of the f o r e s t f l o o r and s o i l , <3) the amount of t r a n s p i r a t i o n that takes p l a c e to d i s p l a c e s o i l m o i s t u r e , and <4) the degree of root system development of the s t a n d . In g e n e r a l , the g r e a t e r the o v e r s t o r y h e i g h t , the g r e a t e r i s the development of the f o r e s t s tand and , hence , the degree to which the s tand i n f l u e n c e s water r e s o u r c e s . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to o v e r s t o r y he ight i s based on the assumption that the h igher the o v e r s t o r y , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area for water r e -s o u r c e s . S ix c a t e g o r i e s of o v e r s t o r y he ight are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 17. Page 75 T a b l e 17. O v e r s t o r y H e i g h t / Q u a l i t y f o r Water Resources . Parameter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 1 . 2. 3 . 4. 5. 6. 0 - 10 m 11 - 20 m 21 - 30 m 31 - 40 m 41 - 50 m 51 m + 0.6 0 .7 0 .85 0 .9 0 .95 1 .0 6 3 . Percent O v e r s t o r y C o v e r : d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as the p r o p o r t i o n of ground s u r f a c e under a e r i a l p a r t s of the o v e r s t o r y canopy. The o v e r s t o r y cover i s the most important index to the h y d r o l o -g i c c o n d i t i o n of an area < S t r i f f 1 e r , 1 9 7 9 : 8 0 3 ) . Percentage cover determines the: (1) volume of f o l i a g e a v a i l a b l e f o r i n t e r c e p t i o n and s t o r a g e , <2) p r o t e c t i o n p r o v i d e d a g a i n s t r a i n d r o p impact to the f o r e s t f l o o r , <3) amount of t r a n s p i r a t i o n , <4) volume of root system that b i n d s the s o i l , and <5) amount of o r g a n i c matter d e p o s i t e d to the f o r e s t f l o o r and a q u a t i c env ironments . In g e n e r a l , the g r e a t e r the o v e r s t o r y c o v e r , the g r e a t e r are the b e n e f i t s and p r o t e c t i o n p r o v i d e d by the f o r e s t . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to percent o v e r -s t o r y cover i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the c o v e r , the h i g h e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r water r e s o u r c e s . F i v e c a t e g o r i e s of percent o v e r s t o r y cover are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 18. T a b l e 18. Percent O v e r s t o r y C o v e r / Q u a l i t y f o r Water R e s o u r c e s . Parame ter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Po i n t s 1 . 2. 3 . 4. 5. 0 - 20% 21 - 40 % 41 - 60% 61 - 80% 81 - 100% 0.3 0 .5 0.7 0 .9 1 .0 10 Page 76 4. Percent U n d e r s t o r y C o v e r : d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as the p r o p o r -t i o n of ground s u r f a c e under a e r i a l p a r t s of the u n d e r s t o r y c a n -opy. The u n d e r s t o r y canopy f u n c t i o n s the same as the o v e r s t o r y to : <1> s t o r e m o i s t u r e on f o l i a g e , <2) i n t e r c e p t r a i n d r o p s and o v e r s t o r y d r i p , <3) t r a n s p i r e s o i l m o i s t u r e , (4) b i n d the s o i l wi th r o o t s , and <5) d e p o s i t l i t t e r to the f o r e s t f l o o r and a q u a t i c e n v i r o n m e n t s . In g e n e r a l , the g r e a t e r the u n d e r s t o r y c o v e r , the g r e a t e r are the b e n e f i t s and p r o t e c t i o n p r o v i d e d by the f o r e s t . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to percent under -s t o r y cover i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the c o v e r , the h igher i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r water r e s o u c e s . F i v e c a t e g o r i e s of percent u n d e r s t o r y cover are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 19. T a b l e 19. Percent U n d e r s t o r y C o v e r / Q u a l i t y f o r Water R e s o u r c e s . Parameter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 5 . Percent Groundcover : d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as the p r o p o r t i o n of ground s u r f a c e under a e r i a l p a r t s of groundcover p l a n t s . Ground-cover f u n c t i o n s the same as the other v e g e t a t i o n l a y e r s , and a l s o had a s t r o n g i n f l u e n c e on s u r f a c e r u n o f f . The major r o l e s of groundcover are to : <1) s t o r e moi s ture on f o l i a g e , (2) i n t e r -cept r a i n d r o p s and canopy d r i p , (3) t r a n s p i r e s o i l m o i s t u r e , 1 . 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 - 20% 21 - 40% 41 - 60% 61 - 80% 81 - 100% 0.3 0 .5 0 .7 0 .9 1 .0 7 Page 77 (4) b i n d the s o i l , (5) d e p o s i t l i t t e r , (6) p r o v i d e sur-face roughness to reduce sur-face runo-f-f v e l o c i t y , and (7) to enhance i n f i l t r a t i o n c a p a c i t y . In g e n e r a l , the g r e a t e r the groundcover , the g r e a t e r are the b e n e f i t s and p r o t e c t i o n p r o v i d e d by the f o r e s t . The q u a l i t y of f o r s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to percent g r o u n d -cover i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the c o v e r , the h igher i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r water r e s o u r c e s . F i v e c a t e g o r i e s of percent groundcover are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 20. T a b l e 20. Percent 6 r o u n d c o v e r / Q u a l i t y f o r Water R e s o u r c e s . Parameter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 6. S o i l E r o d i b i l i t y : i s d e f i n e d as a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the s o i l that denotes s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to e r o s i v e agents ( H e w l e t t , 1982:136). The index of s o i l e r o d i b i l i t y has been measured as the "K" va lue of the U n i v e r s a l S o i l L o s s E q u a t i o n and w i l l be used f o r t h i s parameter . "K" v a l u e s have been d e r i v e d f o r many s o i l c l a s s e s . For s o i l s wi thout known "K" v a l u e s , Wischmeier and Smith (1978:11- 16) have deve loped a nomograph which may be used to c a l c u l a t e "K" v a l u e s f o r t o p s o i l s and s u b s o i l s . T h i s nomograph i s p r o v i d e d in Appendix I . The r e l a t i o n s h i p between s o i l e r o b i l i t y and f o r e s t cover i s that the va lue of f o r e s t p r o t e c t i o n to s o i l s i n c r e a s e s as s o i l e r o d i b i l i t y i n c r e a s e s . The exposure of h i g h l y e r o d i b l e s o i l would r e s u l t in a c c e l e r a t e d 1 . 2. 3 . 4. 5. 0 - 20% 21 - 40% 41 - 60% 61 - 80% 81 - 100% 0.2 0.4 0 .6 0.8 1 .0 8 Page 78 e r o s i o n , h igh sediment p r o d u c t i o n , and d e g r a d a t i o n o-f a q u a t i c habi t a t . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to s o i l e r o d i -b i l i t y i s based on the assumption that the h igher the "K" value ( e r o d i b i 1 i t y ) of the s o i l f o r the f o r e s t e d a r e a , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r water r e s o u c e s . S ix c a t -e g o r i e s of s o i l c r e d i b i l i t y C r a n g i n g from low (0) to h igh (0 .65) e r o d i b i l i t y l are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 21. T a b l e 21 . S o i l E r o d i b i 1 i t y / Q u a l i t y f o r Water Resources , Parame ter Measure (K) Qual i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 1 . 0 - 0 . 1 2 0.2 2 . 0 . 1 3 - 0 . 2 5 0.4 3. 0 .26 - 0.38 0 .6 9 4. 0 .39 - 0.51 0.8 5. 0.52 - 0.64 0 .9 6. 0 .65 + 1.0 7. Topography: i s d e f i n e d as the average s lope and length of s lope w i t h i n a f o r e s t e d a r e a , where: (1) average s lope i s measured as percent s l o p e , and <2) l ength of s lope i s measured from a p o i n t where s u r f a c e r u n o f f may begin to a p o i n t where e i t h e r the s lope g r a d i e n t decreases to permit d e p o s i t i o n , or where r u n o f f water e n t e r s a we l l d e f i n e d channel (Wischmeier and S m i t h , 1 9 7 8 : 1 4 ) . An index of topography has been measured as the "LS" va lue of the U n i v e r s a l S o i l Loss E q u a t i o n and w i l l be used f o r t h i s parameter . The c a l c u l a t i o n of "LS" r e q u i r e s the knowledge of s lope l ength <L) in f ee t or meters ; the g r a d i e n t (S) of the s u r f a c e in p e r c e n t ; and g r a p h s , t a b l e s , and i n s t r u c -t i o n s as p r o v i d e d in Wischmeier and Smith (1978:12-17) as shown Page 78a PAGE 79 MISSED IN NUMBERING Page 80 in Appendix I I . Steep s l o p e s -favor r u n o f f over i n f i l t r a t i o n , and a c c e l e r a t e f low p a r t i c u l a r l y on long s l o p e s where v e l o c i t y i n -c r e a s e s as a f u n c t i o n of time and mass <Butzer ,1974:59) . I n g e n e r a l , the s t eeper and longer the s l o p e , the g r e a t e r i s the p o t e n t i a l f o r s u r f a c e r u n o f f and e r o s i o n <Dryness ,1967:600) . The r e l a t i o n s h i p between topography and f o r e s t cover i s that the more severe the topography , the g r e a t e r i s the value of the f o r e s t f o r p r o t e c t i n g the s i t e . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to topography i s based on the assumption that the h igher the "l_S" value ( t o p o g r a p h i c s e v e r i t y ) of the f o r e s t e d a r e a , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r water r e s o u c e s . S ix c a t e g o r i e s of topography <LS) [ r a n g i n g from low <0) to h igh (15 ) topographic s e v e r i t y ] are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 22. T a b l e 22. T o p o g r a p h y / Q u a l i t y f o r Water Resources . Parameter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 8. Percent A r e a Streams and R a v i n e s : d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as the percent land area w i t h i n a f o r e s t e d area that has been t r a n s -formed by f l u v i a l p r o c e s s e s and c o n t a i n s a water c o u r s e , i t s f l o o d channel and v a l l e y , or c o n t a i n s e p h e r m e r a l , i n t e r m i t t e n t , or p e r e n n i a l streams in an e l o n g a t e d , narrow d e p r e s s i o n t y p i c a l of a r a v i n e . The va lue of f o r e s t s to the s tream, stream v a l l e y 1 . 2. 3 . 4. 5. 6. 0 - 2 3 - 5 6 - 8 9 - 11 12 - 14 15+ 0 .3 0 .5 0 .7 0.8 0 .9 1 .0 12 Page 81 and banks , and r a v i n e s has been d i s c u s s e d p r e v i o u s l y and can be summarized as : <1> r e d u c i n g sur-face r u n o f f , <2) f i l t e r i n g sediment , (3) r e d u c i n g s o l a r energy input to water , (4) p r o v i d i n g o r g a n i c d e b r i s to a q u a t i c h a b i t a t , <5) s t a b i l i z i n g s o i l s a g a i n s t e r o s i o n , and (6) i n c r e a s i n g a q u a t i c h a b i t a t d i v e r -s i t y . In g e n e r a l , f o r e s t s are a very important agent in d e t e r m i n i n g the c o n d i t i o n of s treams and r a v i n e s . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to percentage area streams and r a v i n e s i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the percentage area of s treams and r a v i n e s w i t h i n the f o r e s t e d a r e a , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r water r e s o u c e s . S ix c a t e g o r i e s of percent area streams and r a v i n e s are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 23. T a b l e 23. Percent A r e a Streams and R a v i n e s / Q u a l i t y f o r Water R e s o u r c e s . Parame ter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Po i n t s 1. 0 - 10% 0.2 2. 11 - 20% 0.5 3. 21 - 30% 0.7 4. 31 - 40% 0.9 5. 41 - 50% 0 .95 6. 51% + 1 .0 14 9. Percent A r e a W e t l a n d : d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as the percentage land area w i t h i n a f o r e s t e d area that i s w e t l a n d ; or more s p e c i -f i c a l l y , l and where the water t a b l e i s a t , n e a r , or above the land s u r f a c e long enough each year to promote the format ion of h y d r i c s o i l s and support the growth of h y d r o p h y t e s , at l e a s t p e r i o d i c a l l y . Wet lands are important c o n t r i b u t o r s to h y d r o l o g y , water q u a l i t y , and a q u a t i c h a b i t a t . Wetlands a t tenuate f l o o d Page 82 peaks and storm -flows by t e m p o r a r i l y s t o r i n g s u r f a c e water ; they decrease e r o s i o n by r e d u c i n g v e l o c i t y of s u r f a c e r u n o f f and i n t e r c e p t i n g r a i n d r o p s , and they enhance water q u a l i t y by s e r v i n g as s e t t l i n g areas f o r sediment and n u t r i e n t s ( C a r t e r e t a_l_. , 1978:348 - 376) . In some c a s e s , wet lands a l s o act as a l i n k between s u r f a c e water and groundwater <Odum,1978:18; Darnel 1 ,1978:201 ; and C a r t e r e_t al_. , 1978:351) . In terms of a q u a t i c h a b i t a t , the f o r e s t / w e t l a n d combinat ion p r o v i d e s v a l u a b l e f e e d i n g , r e p r o d u c t i v e , and cover a t t r i b u t e s f o r f i s h , amphib ians , and i n v e r t e b r a t e s (Schamberger e_t a_]_. , 1978:74 and CI a r k , 1 9 7 8 : 3 3 0 ) . These areas e x h i b i t high s p e c i e s d i v e r s i t y , s p e c i e s d e n s i t y , and p r o d u c t i v i t y (Brown e_t aj_. , 1979:18). In g e n e r a l , f o r e s t s are very important in d e t e r m i n i n g the c o n d i t i o n of wet lands for v a r i o u s f u n c t i o n s . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to percent area wet land i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the p e r c e n -tage of the f o r e s t e d area that i s w e t l a n d , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r water r e s o u c e s . S ix c a t e g o r i e s of percent area wet land are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 24. T a b l e 24. Percent A r e a W e t l a n d / Q u a l i t y f o r Water Resouces . Parame ter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Po i n t s 1 . 2. 3 . 4. 5. 6. 0 - 10% 11 - 20% 21 - 30% 31 - 40% 41 - 50% 51% + 0.2 0 .5 0.7 0 .9 0 .95 1 .0 10 Page 83 10. F o r e s t T r a c t S izes d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as the land area between 0 .5 h e c t a r e s and 50 h e c t a r e s in s i z e , e i t h e r p u b l i c l y or p r i v a t e l y owned, that s u p p o r t s a more or l e s s c o n t i g u o u s cover of tree s p e c i e s . T r a c t s i z e i s a d i r e c t measure of the land s u r f a c e that i s enhanced by f o r e s t cover f o r the b e n e f i t of water r e s o u c e s . The s i z e of the f o r e s t e d area w i l l have a p r o -p o r t i o n a l i n f l u e n c e on the h y d r o l o g y of an a r e a , in p a r t i c u l a r , i n t e r c e p t i o n , i n f i l t r a t i o n , and s u r f a c e r u n o f f . T h e r e f o r e , in g e n e r a l , the l a r g e r the t r a c t s i z e , the g r e a t e r i s the i n f l u e n c e of the f o r e s t in enhanc ing the water resouces of an a r e a . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to t r a c t s i z e i s based on the assumption that the l a r g e r the t r a c t s i z e , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r water r e s o u c e s . E i g h t c a t e g o r i e s of f o r e s t t r a c t s i z e are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 25. T a b l e 25. F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e / Q u a l i t y f o r Water Resouces . Parameter Measure Qua l i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 1 . 2. 3 . 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 0 .5 - 2 Ha 3 - 5 Ha 6 - 10 Ha 11 - 20 Ha 21 - 35 Ha 36 - 50 Ha 51 - 70 Ha 71 Ha + 0.2 0 .3 0 .5 0 .65 0 .8 0 .9 0 .95 1 .0 14 Page 84 Env i ronroen t a l 1 y Sens i t i ve A r e a s Def i n i t i ons E n v i r o n m e n t a l l y S e n s i t i v e A r e a s : are l and areas o-f c e r t a i n b i o -p h y s i c a l make-up where u n c o n t r o l l e d or incompat ib l e d i s t u r b a n c e c o u l d r e s u l t in s i g n i f i c a n t , i r r e v e r s i b l e damage to the env ironment , l i f e , p r o p e r t y , or the long term p u b l i c i n t e r e s t (Schwarz et. a]_. , 1976:29) . C e r t a i n l and areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e e x h i b i t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s that make them e s p e c i a l l y s e n s i t i v e to human d i s t u r b a n c e . These a r e a s , a l s o termed " f r a g i l e a r e a s " , "areas of c r i t i c a l c o n c e r n " , and "natura l hazard l a n d s " , deserve s p e c i a l a t t e n t i o n because of t h e i r f u n c t i o n in p h y s i c a l and b i o l o g i c a l p r o c e s s e s , or t h e i r inherent f r a g i l i t y in terms of p o t e n t i a l e r o s i o n , mass w a s t i n g , e t c . F o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e have v a r y i n g degrees of " s e n s i t i v i t y " to d i s t u r b a n c e depending on the b i o p h y s i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s s p e c i -f i c to each s i t e . In o ther e c o l o g i c a l land c l a s s i f i c a t i o n schemes, f o r e s t e d a r e a s , in g e n e r a l , have been d e s i g n a t e d as e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y s e n -s i t i v e , r e g a r d l e s s of d i f f e r e n c e s in s i t e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ( C i t y of C a l g a r y , 1980:8; K u s l e r , 1 9 8 0 ; and Regional M u n i c i p a l i t y of Hal t o n , 1 9 7 8 : 1 7 ) . For t h i s p a p e r , however, q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas as e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y s e n s i t i v e areas i s e v a l u a t e d in r e l a -t i o n to the f o r e s t ' s a b i l i t y to : (1) p r o v i d e w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t ; (2) enhance water r e s o u r c e s ( i . e . , h y d r o l o g y , water q u a l i t y , and a q u a t i c h a b i t a t ) ; and (3) prevent e r o s i o n and mass w a s t i n g . Page 85 The va lue o-f f o r e s t s to w i l d l i f e in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r -face has been t h o r o u g h l y d i s c u s s e d in the p r e v i o u s s e c t i o n on w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t . F o r e s t s are e s s e n t i a l to the s u r v i v a l of many forms of w i l d l i f e , i n c l u d i n g mammals, b i r d s , r e p t i l e s , amphi-b i a n s , and i n v e r t e b r a t e s , because they p r o v i d e f o o d , c o v e r , and r e p r o d u c t i v e areas which are neces sary f o r t h e i r e x i s t e n c e . F o r e s t s f o r w i l d l i f e can t h e r e f o r e be c o n s i d e r e d e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y s e n s i t i v e as human d i s t u r b a n c e and f o r e s t removal would r e s u l t in the i r r e v e r s i b l e l o s s of h a b i t a t and, thus , f ore s t -dependent w i l d l i f e s p e c i e s . The va lue of f o r e s t s to h y d r o l o g y , water q u a l i t y , a q u a t i c h a b i t a t , e r o s i o n , and mass was t ing has a l s o been d i s c u s s e d p r e v i o u s l y . In many c a s e s , the l o c a t i o n of f o r e s t s in the r u r a l -urban i n t e r f a c e c o i n c i d e wi th areas that have a s t r o n g i n f l u e n c e on these v a r i a b l e s . These are areas t h a t , because of t h e i r b i o p h y s i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , are not s u i t a b l e for development . They are c h a r a c t e r i z e d by steep s l o p e s , e r o d i b l e s o i l s , h igh water t a b l e s , f l o o d i n g , and other f e a t u r e s that render them e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y s e n s i t i v e . The va lue of f o r e s t s to these areas i s to reduce s u r f a c e r u n o f f , p r o t e c t the s o i l s u r f a c e , b i n d the s o i l , and enhance a q u a t i c h a b i t a t . The removal of f o r e s t cover and the l i t t e r l a y e r from these areas would: <1> increase s u r -face r u n o f f , (2) increase peak f lows and frequency of f l o o d i n g ; (3) increase e r o s i o n from r a i n d r o p impact , s u r f a c e f l o w , and channel s c o u r i n g ; <4) increase mass w a s t i n g by removal of the s o i l - b i n d i n g r o o t systems; (5) i n c r e a s e sediment and n u t r i e n t input to water ways; and <6) degrade a q u a t i c h a b i t a t s through s e d i m e n t a t i o n , f l u c t u a t i n g water l e v e l s , m i c r o c l i m a t e change, Page 86 reduced t e r r e s t r i a l energy i n p u t , and so on . F i g u r e 15. Example of E r o s i o n and Mass Wast ing Caused by Heavy R a i n f a l l and Removal of V e g e t a t i v e Cover (From Thurow e_t aj_. , 1975:68) . In a l l of the above examples , the d i s t u r b a n c e or removal of f o r e s t cover in v a r i o u s e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y s e n s i t i v e areas l eads to a s i t u a t i o n which c o u l d r e s u l t in " s i g n i f i c a n t , i r r e v e r s i b l e damage to the environmentj l i f e , p r o p e r t y , or long term p u b l i c i n t e r e s t " . In view of t h i s , i t i s important to i d e n t i f y those f o r e s t e d areas which e x h i b i t a l e v e l of s e n s i t i v i t y that war-rant p r o t e c t i o n . Severa l p o i n t r a t i n g systems have been deve loped f o r i d e n t i f y i n g e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y s e n s i t i v e a r e a s ; examples i n c l u d e Dee e_t aj_. <1972), Wright (1977) , and Sargent Page 87 and Brande <1976). These schemes are des igned -for broad l a n d -scape a p p l i c a t i o n and, as s u c h , are not d e t a i l e d enough to adequate ly e v a l u a t e i n d i v i d u a l - forested a r e a s . However, many o-f the parameters used in these schemes are i n c l u d e d in the e v a l u a -t i v e framework. The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in t h i s e v a l u a t i v e framework i s based on the f o r e s t ' s a b i l i t y to p r o v i d e w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t , enhance water r e s o u c e s , and prevent e r o s i o n and mass w a s t i n g . A c c o r d i n g l y , the f o l l o w i n g parameters w i l l be used in the e v a l -u a t i o n : <1> s o i l e r o d i b i l i t y , (2) topography, (3) percent area streams and r a v i n e s , <4) percentage area w e t l a n d , <5) percentage area human d i s t u r b a n c e , <<£> s i g n i f i c a n t b i ol og i c a l / n a t u r a l f e a t u r e s , (7) percentage area f l o o d zone, and (8) f o r e s t t r a c t s i z e . 1. S o i l E r o d i b i l i t y : d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the s o i l that denotes susceptabi1 i t y to e r o s i v e agents and measured as the "K" value of the U n i v e r s a l S o i l Loss E q u a t i o n . The removal of f o r e s t cover and a s s o c i a t e d l i t t e r l a y e r from e r o d i b l e s o i l s a l l o w s energy from r a i n d r o p impact and s u r f a c e runof f to e f f e c t i v l e y detach and t r a n s p o r t s o i l p a r t i c l e s from the s i t e . In a d d i t i o n , e r o d i b l e s o i l s are more l i k e l y to s lump, or mass waste i f the b i n d i n g and p r o t e c t i v e agents such as r o o t s , o r g a n i c m a t t e r , and l i t t e r are removed (Butzer ,1974 :58 -59) . In most c a s e s , the s o i l d i s t u r b e d i s c a r r i e d in s u r f a c e r u n o f f to s t reams , w e t l a n d s , or other a q u a t i c env ironments , r e s u l t i n g in an adverse impact on water q u a l i t y and a q u a t i c l i f e such as f i s h , amphib ians , and i n v e r t e b r a t e s . Page 88 The q u a l i t y o-f f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to s o i l e r o d i -b i l i t y i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the s o i l e r o d i b i l i t y , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y o-f the -forested area -for p r o t e c t i n g the s i t e . S ix c a t e g o r i e s of s o i l e r o d i b i l i t y (K) [ r a n g i n g from low (0) to high (0 .65) e r o d i b i l i t y ] are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 26. T a b l e 26. S o i l E r o d i b i 1 i t y / Q u a l i t y f o r E n v i r o n m e n t a l l y S e n s i t i v e A r e a s . Parameter Measure (K) Qual i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 1. 0 - 0.12 0.2 2. 0.13 - 0 .25 0.4 3. 0.26 - 0 .38 0.6 4. 0.39 - 0 .51 0 .8 5. 0.52 - 0 .64 0 .? 6. 0 .65 + 1 .0 2. Topography: d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as the average s lope and length of s lope w i t h i n a f o r e s t e d a r e a , where: <1) average s lope i s measured as percent s l o p e , and <2) length of s lope i s measured from a p o i n t where s u r f a c e r u n o f f may begin to a p o i n t where r u n o f f e s s e n t i a l l y ceases < See: Water Resources Parameter 7 ) . The s e v e r i t y of topography d i r e c t l y r e f l e c t s the p o t e n t i a l f or s u r f a c e r u n o f f , e r o s i o n , mass w a s t i n g , and i r r e v e r s i b l e damage to the s i t e . The removal of f o r e s t cover from steep s l o p e s would g r e a t l y a c c e l e r a t e these p r o c e s s e s , r e s u l t i n g in severe consequences (Thurow e_t aj_. , 1 ?75:67- 8 4 ) . In many s t u d i e s , s l ope has been noted as one of the major f a c t o r s that determines the " s e n s i t i v i t y " of a s i t e (McHarg,196?; Keyes ,1976:123; Thurow,1975; C i t y of C a l g a r y , 1979:5; and Page 8? K u s l e r , 1 9 8 0 ) . The q u a l i t y o-f f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to topography i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the s e v e r i t y of • the topography, the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r p r o t e c t i n g the s i t e . S ix c a t e g o r i e s of topography (LS) [ r a n g i n g from low <0) to h igh (15 ) topographic s e v e r i t y ] are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 27. T a b l e 27. T o p o g r a p h y / Q u a l i t y f o r E n v i r o n m e n t a l l y S e n s i t i v e A r e a s . Parameter Measure (LS) Qual i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 1. 0 - 2 0.3 2. 3 - 5 0 .5 3. 6 - 8 0 .7 4. 9 - 1 1 0.8 5. 12 - 14 0 .9 6. 15+ 1 .0 3. Percent A r e a Streams and R a v i n e s : d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as the percentage land area w i t h i n a f o r e s t e d area that has been t r a n s -formed by f l u v i a l p r o c e s s e s and c o n t a i n s a water c o u r s e , i t s f l o o d channel and v a l l e y , or c o n t a i n s ephemeral , i n t e r m i t t e n t , or p e r e n n i a l streams in an e longated narrow depres s ion t y p i c a l of a r a v i n e . As d i s c u s s e d p r e v i o u s l y , s treams , stream v a l l e y s , and r a v i n e s serve as important components in environmental c y c l e s and p r o c e s s e s . They are i n t e g r a l p a r t s of h y d r o l o g i c a l and n u t r i e n t c y c l e s ; important f o r t e r r e s t r i a l and a q u a t i c s p e c i e s , p r o v i d i n g areas f o r f e e d i n g , spawning, b r e e d i n g , and w a t e r i n g ; and f r a g i l e areas in terms of e r o s i o n and mass w a s t i n g . The c o n t r i b u t i o n of f o r e s t s to these areas i s to enhance and p r o t e c t the environmental proces se s and b i o p h y s i c a l Page 90 p r o p e r t i e s that are s p e c i f i c to these s i t e s . The q u a l i t y o-f - forested areas in r e l a t i o n to percent area streams and r a v i n e s i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the area in s treams and r a v i n e s , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y o-f the -forested area -for enhancing and p r o t e c t i n g the s i t e . S ix categor i es<sP percen t area s treams and r a v i n e s are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 28. T a b l e 28. Percent A r e a Streams and R a v i n e s / Q u a l i t y f o r E n v i r o n m e n t a l l y S e n s i t i v e A r e a s . Parame ter Measure^ Qual i ty Rat i no Po i n t s 1 . 0 - 1 0 ' / . 0 .3 2. 11 - 207. 0 .5 3. 21 - 30% 0.7 15 4. 31 - 407. 0.8 5. 41 - 507 0 .9 6. 517+ 1.0 4. Percent A r e a W e t l a n d : d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as the percentage land area w i t h i n a f o r e s t e d area where the water tab le i s a t , n e a r , or above the l and s u r f a c e long enough to promote the format ion of h y d r i c s o i l s and support the growth of h y r o p h y t e s , at l e a s t p e r i o d i c a l l y . As d i s c u s s e d p r e v i o u s l y , wet lands are an important p a r t of environmenta l c y c l e s and p r o c e s s e s . They act to a t t enuate peak f l o w s , s t o r e water , l i n k s u r f a c e water to groundwater , a l l o w f o r sediment s e t t l i n g , and s t o r e and c y c l e n u t r i e n t s . They are e s s e n t i a l h a b i t a t f o r a wide v a r i e t y of t e r r e s t r i a l and a q u a t i c s p e c i e s , and have been r e c o r d e d as h a v i n g the h i g h e s t d i v e r s i t y of f l o r a and fauna of any 1andform <Schamberger e_t aj_. , 1978:74) . The c o n t r i b u t i o n of f o r e s t s to these areas i s to improve water q u a l i t y , increase d i v e r s i t y of Page 91 h a b i t a t s , and s t a b i l i z e the area in terms o-f water l e v e l s , sediment and n u t r i e n t i n p u t , s o l a r energy i n p u t , and so on . The q u a l i t y o-f f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to percent area wet land i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the area of w e t l a n d , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r enhancing and p r o t e c t i n g the s i t e . S ix c a t e g o r i e s of percent area we t land are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 29. T a b l e 29. Percent A r e a W e t l a n d / Q u a l i t y f o r E n v i r o n m e n t a l l y S e n s i t i v e A r e a s . Parame ter Measure Qua! i ty Rat i no Po i n t s 1. 0 - 10% 0.3 2. 1 1 - 20% 0.5 3. 21 - 30% 0.7 4. 31 - 40% 0.8 5. 41 - 50% 0.9 6. 51% + 1 .0 5. Percent A r e a Human D i s t u r b a n c e : d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as the percentage l and area w i t h i n a f o r e s t e d area that has been denuded of f o r e s t cover f o r the purpose of human a c t i v i t i e s such as h o u s i n g , r o a d s , d r i v e w a y s , q u a r r i e s , e t c . The e f f e c t of human d i s t u r b a n c e on e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y s e n s i t i v e areas i s to d i s r u p t p h y s i c a l and e c o l o g i c a l c y c l e s and p r o c e s s e s , and permit n a t u r a l hazards such as e r o s i o n and mass w a s t i n g to take p l a c e . The r e s u l t i s an i r r e v e r s i b l e d e g r a d a t i o n of the s i t e w h i c h , in e f f e c t , reduces the " s e n s i t i v i t y " of the area over t ime . A r e a s that are h i g h l y impacted by human d i s t u r b a n c e have high f o r e s t d e n u d a t i o n ; t h e r e f o r e , the b e n e f i c i a l i n f l u e n c e of the f o r e s t on the s i t e i s m i n i m i z e d . Page 92 The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to percent area human d i s t u r b a n c e i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the human d i s t u r b a n c e , the l e s s the c o n t r i b u t i o n , thus , q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d a r e a f o r enhancing or p r o t e c t i n g the s i t e . S ix c a t e g o r i e s of percent human d i s t u r b a n c e are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 30 . T a b l e 30. Percent A r e a Human D i s t u r b a n c e / Q u a l i t y f o r E n v i r o n m e n t a l l y S e n s i t i v e A r e a s . Parameter Measure 1 . 2. 3 . 4. 5. 6. 0 - 57. 6 - 1 2 7 13 - 257 26 - 407 41 - 607 617 + Qual i ty Rat i no 1 .0 0 .85 0 .7 0 .5 0.3 0.2 Poi n t s 10 6. S i g n i f i c a n t N a t u r a l / B i o l o g i c a l F e a t u r e s : i s d e f i n e d as u n i q u e , r a r e , or o ther s p e c i a l f e a t u r e s of i n t e r e s t of a f o r e s t e d a r e a , not i n c l u d e d in other parameters , that deserve s p e c i a l r e c o g n i t i o n because of t h e i r i r r e p l a c a b l e n a t u r e . T h i s parameter i s i n c l u d e d as a "red f l a g " type of i n d i c a t o r to ensure that s p e c i a l b i o p h y s i c a l f e a t u r e s of f o r e s t e d areas are not exc lude d from the e v a l u a t i o n . In a l l c a s e s , such f e a t u r e s must be documented and r e c o r d e d so that they may be used as " a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n " f o r p l a n n i n g d e c i s i o n s . S i g n i f i c a n t f e a t u r e s c o n t r i b u t e to environmenta l s e n s i t i v i t y and may inc lude such e n t i t i e s as endangered s p e c i e s of f l o r a or f a u n a , s p e c i a l h a b i t a t s such as heron r o o k e r i e s or r a p t o r n e s t s , important spawning or b r e e d i n g a r e a s , or landforms that are e s s e n t i a l to environmenta l c y c l e s or p r o c e s s e s . The measurement of Page 93 s i g n i f i c a n c e o-f a -feature i s d i f f i c u l t and, in many c a s e s , h i g h l y s u b j e c t i v e . Methods of c a l c u l a t i n g s i g n i f i c a n c e that have been deve loped i n c l u d e : s c a r c i t y a n a l y s i s i n v o l v i n g both supp ly and demand, o p i n i o n p o l l s of p u b l i c p e r c e p t i o n , expert j u d g e -ment, s e n s i t i v i t y or hazard p o t e n t i a l , number of c i t i z e n s a f f e c t e d at d i f f e r e n t j u r i s d i c t i o n a l l e v e l s , and so on (Kul s e r , 1 9 8 0 : 8 4 - 8 5 ) . For t h i s paper , the l a s t method noted w i l l be used . In g e n e r a l , the more unique or s i g n i f i c a n t the f e a t u r e i s , the h igher i s the j u r i d i c t i o n a l l e v e l a f f e c t e d . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to s i g n i f i c a n t n a t u r a l / b i o l o g i c a l f e a t u r e s i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the feature<s) w i t h i n the f o r e s t e d a r e a , the g r e a t e r i s t h i s q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t as an e n v i r o n -m e n t a l l y s e n s i t i v e a r e a . F i v e c a t e g o r i e s of s i g n i f i c a n t n a t u r a l / b i o l o g i c a l f e a t u r e s are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 31. T a b l e 31. S i g n i f i c a n t N a t u r a l / B i o l o g i c a l F e a t u r e s / Q u a l i t y f o r E n v i r o n m e n t a l l y S e n s i t i v e A r e a s . Parameter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 1. Low s i g n i f i c a n c e 0.2 ( e . g . s i t e ) 2. Moderate s i g n i f i c a n c e 0.6 ( e . g . 1oca l ) 3 . Mod-high s i g n i f i c a n c e 0.8 16 ( e . g . m u n i c i p a l ) 4. High s i g n i f i c a n c e 0 .9 ( e . g . r e g i o n a l ) 5. O u t s t a n d i n g s i g n i f i c a n c e 1.0 ( e . g . prov i nc i a l ) Page 94 7. Percent A r e a F l o o d Zone: i s de-fined as the percentage land area w i t h i n a -forested area a d j o i n i n g the channel o-f a stream or other water course that w i l l be inundated by any r e l a t i v e l y h igh stream-flow that o v e r t o p s the n a t u r a l or a r t i f i c i a l banks of the water course < K u s l e r , 1 9 8 0 : 1 8 6 ) . The f l o o d frequency of t h i s area i s l e s s than 50 y e a r s . The d e t e r m i n a t i o n and measurement of the f l o o d zone w i t h i n a f o r e s t e d area i s based on a tab le of "Flood Hazard C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s " adopted from Ulalmsley et. al_. < 1 980 :50) as shown in Appendix I I I . The f l o o d zone parameter corresponds to "frequent" and "may be expected" f l o o d c a t e g o r i e s of t h i s t a b l e . The s i g n i f i c a n c e of f l o o d zones as s e n s i t i v e areas i s t h a t , f o r some time p e r i o d , these areas are s u b j e c t e d to the f o r c e s of f l o w i n g water and suspended d e b r i s . The impact of t h i s event i s hazard to l i f e , d e s t r u c t i o n of t e r r e s t r i a l and a q u a t i c h a b i t a t , s c o u r i n g of banks , and extreme e r o s i o n and s e d i m e n t a t i o n . The va lue of f o r e s t cover in the f l o o d zone i s to p r o t e c t and s t a b i -l i z e s o i l and s treambanks , trap sediment and d e b r i s t r a n s p o r t e d in f l o o d w a t e r , and m a i n t a i n the water course in i t s present c o n d i t i o n and l o c a t i o n . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to percent area f l o o d zone i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the area of f l o o d zone , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r p r o t e c t i n g the s i t e . S ix c a t e g o r i e s of percent area f l o o d zone are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 32. Page 95 T a b l e 32. Percent A r e a F l o o d Z o n e / Q u a l i t y f o r E n v i r o n m e n t a l l y Sensi t i ve A r e a s . Parameter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 1. 0 - 5% 0.4 2. 6 - 10% 0.6 3. 11 - 15% 0.7 4. 16 - 20% 0.8 5. 21 - 25% 0.9 6. 26% + 1 .0 8. F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e : d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as the land area between 0 .5 h e c t a r e s and 50 h e c t a r e s in s i z e , e i t h e r p u b l i c l y or p r i v a t e l y owned, that s u p p o r t s a more or l e s s cont iguous cover of tree s p e c i e s . The s i z e of the f o r e s t e d area i n d i c a t e s the r e l a t i v e amount of f o r e s t cover that enhances and p r o t e c t s the s i t e . In g e n e r a l , the l a r g e r the area i s , the g r e a t e r i s i t s c o n t r i b u t i o n to p r o v i d i n g h a b i t a t , enhancing water r e s o u c e s , and p r e v e n t i n g e r o s i o n and mass w a s t i n g . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to t r a c t s i z e i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the t r a c t s i z e , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r enhancing and p r o t e c t i n g the s i t e . E i g h t c a t e g o r i e s of f o r e s t t r a c t s i z e are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 33. T a b l e 33. F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e / Q u a l i t y f o r E n v i r o n m e n t a l l y S e n s i t i v e A r e a s . Parameter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 1. 0 . 5 - 2 Ha 0 .3 2. 3 - 5 Ha 0.4 3. 6 - 10 Ha 0.5 4. 11 - 20 Ha 0.6 5. 21 - 35 Ha 0 .7 6. 36 - 50 Ha 0.8 7. 51 - 70 Ha 0.9 8. 71 Ha + 1 .0 Page 96 Recreat i on Def i n i t i on R e c r e a t i o n : i s c o n f i n e d to the a c t i v i t y . . o f nature a p p r e c i a t i o n , which i s d e f i n e d as the noncomsumptive s tudy of the f l o r a , f a u n a , n a t u r a l p r o c e s s e s , and h e r i t a g e v a l u e s of f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . S p e c i f i c a c t i v i t i e s inc lude those which are based in i n t e r a c t i o n wi th the n a t u r a l environment that do not s i g n i f i c a n t l y a l t e r or degrade the n a t u r a l s t a t e of the 1 and. The r e c r e a t i o n a l a c t i v i t y of nature a p p r e c i a t i o n has become i n c r e a s i n g popular in the past s e v e r a l decades . In p a r t i c u l a r , t h i s a c t i v i t y i s an important p u r s u i t of urban p o p u l a t i o n s as a temporary escape from the p r e s s u r e s and t e n s i o n s c r e a t e d by urban l i f e ( C i t y of C a l g a r y , 1 9 8 0). The areas that are f r e q u e n t e d are those which e x h i b i t minimum human d i s t u r b a n c e and u s u a l l y c o n t a i n n a t u r a l a t t r i b u t e s such as w i l d l i f e , water , t r e e s , s c e n e r y , and so on . More (1979:7) r e p o r t s that in the U n i t e d S t a t e s , "nature walks" ( d e f i n e d as o u t i n g s taken p r i m a r i l y to be c l o s e to na ture ) are a popular a c t i v i t y , w i th p a r t i c i p a t i o n r a t e s i n c r e a s i n g at a p p r o x i m a t e l y 19 percent per y e a r . F u r t h e r , he r e p o r t s that approx iamte1y 70 percent of the a c t i v i t y i s on the weekends, f a i r l y c l o s e to home, w i th an average a c t i v i t y d u r a t i o n of 2 h o u r s . The second major s e c t o r of the p o p u l a t i o n that p a r t i c i p a t e s in nature a p p r e c i a t i o n i s o r g a n i z e d groups such as c o n -s e r v a t i o n s o c i e t i e s , n a t u r a l i s t groups , rod and gun c l u b s , Page 97 j u v e n i l e c l u b s , s c h o o l s , and r e s e a r c h g r o u p s . The s p e c i - f i c i n t e r e s t s o-f t h e s e g r o u p s a r e v a r i e d and r a n g e -from s h o r t - t e r m a c t i v i t i e s s u c h a s w a l k i n g , v i e w i n g , and p h o t o g r a p h y t o l o n g -t e r m a c t i v i t i e s s u c h a s s c i e n t i f i c r e s e a r c h t h a t i n v o l v e s d a t a c o l l e c t i o n and d o c u m e n t a t i o n o f n a t u r a l p r o c e s s e s . In g e n e r a l , t h e u n d e r l y i n g f o c u s o f i n t e r e s t o f a l l t h e above g r o u p s i s s i m i l a r : t h e a p p r e c i a t i o n o f n a t u r a l e n v i r o n m e n t s t h a t have r e c e i v e d m i n i m a l d i s t u r b a n c e f r o m t h e a c t i v i t e s o f man. F i g u r e 16. Nature T r a i l in F o r e s t e d A r e a in S u r r e y , B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . (Note e x c e s s i v e use of t r a i 1 ) . Page 98 Much work has been c o n c e n t r a t e d on the s t u d y , i d e n t i f i -c a t i o n , and r e g u l a t i o n of "natura l areas" , or areas which e x h i b i t unique f e a t u r e s worthy of p r e s e r v a t i o n and s c i e n t i f i c s tudy < D i t t r i c h and T r a p p e r , 1 9 7 0 ) . A major c o n c e r n . i s the l o s s of these areas w i th land use change. Regarding the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e , the d e s t r u c t i o n of n a t u r a l areas i s a c c e l e r a t e d as land i s deve loped f o r r e s i d e n t i a l , a g r i c u l t u r a l , commerc ia l , and other use s . Edwards (1976:46) sugges ts that the main reason why these va lued areas are d e s t r o y e d i s that most people have no sense of e c o l o g y , or even h i s t o r y , on which to base va lue j u d g e -ments about l and and i t s l i f e . To r e c t i f y t h i s s i t u a t i o n , Keyes (1976:87) recommends the p r o t e c t i o n of these n a t u r a l a r e a s , e s p e c i a l l y in deve loped l a n d s c a p e s . T h i s would , at the very l e a s t , promote environmenta l p e r c e p t i o n and permit people to become b e t t e r a q u a i n t e d wi th n a t u r a l p r o c e s s e s ; w h i c h , in t u r n , p lace them in a b e t t e r p o s i t i o n to make d e c i s i o n s r e l a t e d to environmental m a t t e r s . F o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e can be c o n s i d e r e d "natura l areas" that are e c o l o g i c a l l y important and worthy of r e s e a r c h . A c c o r d i n g to Peterken (1981:281): "Natural woodlands are i n t e r e s t i n g s u b j e c t s in t h e i r own r i g h t as they r e p r e s e n t the environment w i t h i n which much of our n a t i v e w i l d l i f e and n a t u r a l communit ies o r i g i n a t e d . They a l s o prov ide the best form of c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n s a g a i n s t which the e f f e c t s of human i n f l u e n c e in the environment can be a p p r e c i a t e d and s t u d i e d . " The removal of f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e r e s u l t s in a l o s s of a r e c r e a t i o n re source that i s becoming Page 99 i n c r e a s i n g l y popular to a wide range o-f i n d i v i d u a l s and groups . For nature a p p r e c i a t i o n , there i s a d i r e c t l o s s o-f f l o r a and fauna and a l s o and i n d i r e c t l o s s in terms of adverse impacts on other n a t u r a l systems, s cenery and o v e r a l l "natura lness" of the r u r a l - u r b a n l a n d s c a p e . In a d d i t i o n , as f o r e s t e d areas have in many cases e x i s t e d in t h i s landscape f o r a long p e r i o d of t ime, they may be c o n s i d e r e d a h e r i t a g e r e s o u r c e , e s p e c i a l l y o l d -growth f o r e s t s t a n d s . T h e i r removal means the l o s s of a s i g n i f i -cant p a r t of the h i s t o r i c a l makeup of the landscape that i s v i r t u a l l y i r r e p l a c e a b l e . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e f o r nature a p p r e c i a t i o n has not been d e a l t w i th in the l i t e r a -ture per se; however, s e v e r a l approaches have been developed to e v a l u a t e f o r e s t e d areas in terms of n a t u r a l uniqueness and s c e n i c q u a l i t y . P o i n t r a t i n g systems have been deve loped by Tans (1974) , 6ehlback (1975) , Sargent and Brande (1976) , and Wright (1977) for c l a s s i f y i n g and e v a l u a t i n g n a t u r a l a r e a s . In most c a s e s , these schemes were des igned to i d e n t i f y areas which shou ld be p r e s e r v e d f o r s c i e n t i f i c s t u d y , as opposed to r e c r e a t i o n a l use by the general p u b l i c . N e v e r t h e l e s s , some of the c r i t e r i a used in these schemes are a p p l i c a b l e in d e t e r m i n i n g the q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas f o r nature a p p e c i a t i o n . The second approach of f o r e s t e v a l u a t i o n i n v o l v e s the e v a l u a t i o n of s c e n i c q u a l i t y through v a r i o u s s c e n i c assessment t e c h n i q u e s . For a comprehensive overview of these techniques r e f e r to A r t h u r e_t al_. (1977) and E i s n e r and Smardon (1979) . The Page 100 technique that w i l l be u t i l i z e d in the e v a l u a t i v e -framework i s i s based l a r g e l y on a method deve loped by Jones e_t aj_. (1976) •for a s c e n i c highway s tudy in the Sta te of Washington. The Jones s tudy i s p a r t i c u l a r l y s u i t e d f o r t h i s purpose as many areas e v a l u a t e d in Washington were f o r e s t e d r o a d s i d e s . They conc luded from c o n s i d e r a b l e r e s e a r c h that four major headings may be used under which a l l a e s t h e t i c c r i t e r i a may be grouped f o r the p u r -pose of v i s u a l assessment: <1) Uniqueness , (2) V i v i d n e s s (or C o m p l e x i t y ) , <3) I n t a c t n e s s , and (4) U n i t y . These terms are d e f i n e d below. 1. Uniqueness : r e f e r s to the r e l a t i v e s c a r c i t y or abundance of the s c e n i c r e s o u r c e w i t h i n a l a r g e r framework or geograph ica l a r e a . The s c a l e of i n v e s t i g a t i o n i s important when e x p r e s s i n g the uniqueness of a f e a t u r e . 2. V i v i d n e s s ( or Complex i ty ) : i n c l u d e s a l l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s and terms which convey the d i s t i n c t i v e n e s s of the v i s u a l impress ion r e c e i v e d from the s i t e . A h i g h l y v i v i d s i t e may be one where v i s u a l r e s o u r c e s are h i g h l y d i s t i n c t , prominent , of high i n t e r e s t , and of maximum v a r i e t y and degree of c o n t r a s t . D i f f e r e n c e s in the p a t t e r n of l i n e , form, c o l o u r , and t e x t u r e increase the v i v i d n e s s of a v i s u a l a r r a y . L o o s e l y s p e a k i n g , i t r e f l e c t s how much i s "going on" in a p a r t i c u l a r s i t e ( K a p l a n , 1979:243). 3. I n t a c t n e s s : r e f e r s to the s i t e ' s apparent degree of n a t u r a l c o n d i t i o n , and may be e v a l u a t e d by the l e v e l to which man has developed or u r b a n i z e d the l andscape , as we l l as the presence of Page 101 v i s u a l d i s t u r b a n c e s or eyesores and obv ious p h y s i c a l a l t e r a t i o n s to the s i t e . 4. U n i t y : i s the c o m p o s i t i o n a l r e s u l t o-f the - factors which c o n t r i b u t e to v i v i d n e s s and i n t a c t n e s s . U n i t y i s a measure o-f the degree to which the r e s o u r c e s o-f a v i s u a l a r r a y j o i n together to -form a s i n g l e , c o h e r e n t , harmonious v i s u a l u n i t . The e v a l u a t i o n o-f -forested areas w i l l be based upon three major components which are important in d e t e r m i n i n g q u a l i t y -for nature a p p r e c i a t i o n : these i n c l u d e : (1) n a t u r a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s for s tudy such as f l o r a , f a u n a , and n a t u r a l p r o c e s s e s ; <2) s c e n i c q u a l i t y in terms of the four c r i t e r i a o u t l i n e d above; and <3) h e r i t a g e va lue which may inc lude b i o p h y s i c a l or c u l t u r a l f e a t u r e s of h i s t o r i c a l or a r c h e o l o g i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e < e . g . , land marks , h i s t o r i c f o r e s t , e t c . ) . These three components are measured through the f o l l o w i n g parameters : <1) o v e r s t o r y s p e c i e s , <2) o v e r s t o r y h e i g h t , <3) percent o v e r s t o r y c o v e r , (4) percent u n d e r s t o r y c o v e r , (5) percent groundcover , <6) percent area streams and r a v i n e s , (7) percent area w e t l a n d , (8) percent area human d i s t u r b a n c e , (9) s i g n i f i c a n t n a t u r a l / c u 1 t u r a l f e a t u r e s , and <10) f o r e s t - t r a c t s i z e . 1. O v e r s t o r y S p e c i e s : d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as the s p e c i e s of t r e e s which form the uppermost canopy l a y e r in a f o r e s t of more than one s t o r y . The o v e r s t o r y s p e c i e s are important in d e t e r m i n i n g y e a r - r o u n d cover ( i . e . , dec iduous v e r s u s c o n i f e r o u s ) ; , h a b i t a t d i v e r s i t y for fauna; d i v e r s i t y of f l o r a f o r nature a p p r e c i a t i o n ; v i v i d n e s s a n d j i n some c a s e s , u n i t y of the s t a n d . In g e n e r a l , the Page 102 more d i v e r s e the s p e c i e s c o m p o s i t i o n , the more opt imal i s each o-f the above v a r i a b l e s f o r nature a p p r e c i a t i o n . In any -forested a r e a , the p r o p o r t i o n of c o n i f e r o u s s p e c i e s shou ld be s u b s t a n t i a l as t h e i r p e r e n n i a l f o l i a g e p r o v i d e s cover and c o l o u r to the area throughout the y e a r ; whereas , dec iduous s p e c i e s are bare in the f a l l and w i n t e r months. T h e r e f o r e , f o r nature a p p r e c i a t i o n , a d e s i r a b l e f o r e s t s tand s h o u l d have h igh d i v e r s i t y of o v e r s t o r y s p e c i e s , a high p r o p o r t i o n of c o n i f e r o u s s p e c i e s , and s h o u l d , i d e a l l y , p r o v i d e nature b e n e f i t s throughout the y e a r . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to o v e r s t o r y s p e c i e s i s based on the assumption t h a t , in g e n e r a l , the g r e a t e r the d i v e r s i t y of o v e r s t o r y s p e c i e s , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d a r e a f o r nature a p p e c i a t i o n . A s u b s t a n t i a l content of c o n i f e r o u s s p e c i e s a l s o adds to q u a l i t y . F i v e c a t e g o r i e s of o v e r s t o r y s p e c i e s are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 34. T a b l e 34. O v e r s t o r y S p e c i e s / Q u a l i t y f o r R e c r e a t i o n . Parame ter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Po i n t s 1. Homogenous (>85%) Deciduous 0 .7 2. Homogenous (>85%) C o n i f e r o u s 0.8 3 . Heterogenous (50-807.) Deciduous 0 .9 7 4. Heterogenous (50-80%) C o n i f e r o u s 1.0 5. Mixed Homogenous C o n i f / D e c i d 0.8 ( i . e . , 2 d i s t i n c t types of a p p r o x i m a t e l y equal area) 2. O v e r s t o r y H e i g h t : d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as the average he ight of the o v e r s t o r y canopy in meters . The o v e r s t o r y he ight i s impor-tant in d e t e r m i n i n g the volume and v e r t i c a l d i v e r s i t y of v e g e t a -t i o n f o r nature a p p r e c i a t i o n ; the abundance of h a b i t a t f o r Page 103 •fauna; v i v i d n e s s and, in some c a s e s , uniqueness o-f the s t a n d ; and the r e l a t i v e age of the s tand as an i n d i c a t o r of s tand e s tab l i shment and h e r i t a g e v a l u e s . It i s assumed that the g r e a t e r the h e i g h t , the o l d e r i s the s t a n d , hence, g r e a t e r the h e r i t a g e v a l u e . A l s o i t i s assumed that e x c e e d i n g l y t a l l , l arge diameter stems are a unique f e a t u r e in the r u r a l - u r b a n landscape which are of i n t e r e s t to p a r t i c i p a n t s of nature a p p r e c i a t i o n ( B r u s h , 1980:350) . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to o v e r s t o r y he ight i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the he ight of o v e r s t o r y , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r nature a p p r e c i a t i o n . S ix c a t e g o r i e s of o v e r s t o r y he ight are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 35. T a b l e 35. O v e r s t o r y H e i g h t / Q u a l i t y f o r R e c r e a t i o n . Parame ter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Po i n ts 1. 0 - 10 m 0.3 2. 11 - 20 m 0.5 3. 21 - 30 m 0.6 8 4. 31 - 40 m 0.8 5. 41 - 50 m 0 .9 6. 51 m + 1.0 3. Percent O v e r s t o r y Cover : d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as the p r o p o r t i o n of ground s u r f a c e under a e r i a l p a r t s of the o v e r s t o r y canopy. The percent o v e r s t o r y cover i s important in d e t e r m i n i n g the volume of v e g e t a t i o n a v a i l a b l e f o r nature a p p r e c i a t i o n ; the amount of h a b i t a t f o r fauna; the degree of openness of the s t a n d ; the v i v i d n e s s , i n t a c t n e s s , and u n i t y of the s t a n d ; and and the amount of p r o t e c t i v e cover that i s p r o v i d e d to e n t i t i e s Page 104 beneath the o v e r s t o r y canopy. The opt imal s t a t e of o v e r s t o r y cover for the above v a r i a b l e s i s assumed to be a v a r i e t y of c o v e r , r a n g i n g from open to c l o s e d , and expressed as an average v a l u e . Such a c o n d i t i o n would a l l o w l i g h t p e n e t r a t i o n to the f o r e s t f l o o r , v a r i o u s degrees of s i g h t p e n e t r a t i o n , and v a r y i n g degrees of p r o t e c t i v e c o v e r . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to percent o v e r -s t o r y cover i s based on the assumption that q u a l i t y i n c r e a s e s wi th i n c r e a s i n g o v e r s t o r y cover to a p o i n t where the opt imal s t a t e i s reached and then decreases wi th i n c r e a s i n g c o v e r . F i v e c a t e g o r i e s of percent o v e r s t o r y cover are p r o v i d e in T a b l e 36. T a b l e 36. Percent O v e r s t o r y C o v e r / Q u a l i t y f o r R e c r e a t i o n . Parame ter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Po i n ts 4. Percent U n d e r s t o r y C o v e r : d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as the p r o p o r -t i o n of ground s u r f a c e under a e r i a l p a r t s of the u n d e r s t o r y canopy. The percent u n d e r s t o r y i s important in d e t e r m i n i n g the volume of v e g e t a t i o n f o r nature a p p r e c i a t i o n ; the amount of h a b i t a t f o r fauna; the degree of openness w i t h i n the s t a n d ; the v i s u a l p e n e t r a t i o n w i t h i n the s t a n d ; and ease of p a r t i c i p a n t m o b i l i t y w i t h i n the s t a n d . In some c a s e s , the u n d e r s t o r y cover may determine v i v i d n e s s , i n t a c t n e s s , and u n i t y of the s t a n d . For nature a p p r e c i a t i o n , i t i s assumed that opt imal u n d e r s t o r y cover shou ld p r o v i d e adequate v e g e t a t i o n f o r nature s tudy and w i l d l i f e 1 . 2. 3 . 4. 5. 0 - 207 21 - 407 41 - 607 61 - 807 81 - 1007 0.3 0.6 0.8 1 .0 0 .9 8 Page 105 h a b i t a t , but s h o u l d not exceed the p o i n t where v i s u a l p e n e t r a -t i o n and m o b i l i t y o-f the p a r t i c i p a n t are g r e a t l y r e s t r i c t e d . I d e a l l y , a range o-f cover s h o u l d be a v a i l a b l e -from open to s e m i -dense, expressed as an average v a l u e . The q u a l i t y o-f -forested areas in r e l a t i o n to percent u n d e r -s t o r y cover i s based on the assumption that a range of cover i s o p t i m a l ; however, in g e n e r a l , q u a l i t y decreases w i th i n c r e a s i n g u n d e r s t o r y cover ( i . e . , d e c r e a s i n g s i g h t p e n e t r a t i o n and m o b i l i t y ) . F i v e c a t e g o r i e s of percent u n d e r s t o r y cover are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 37. T a b l e 37. Percent U n d e r s t o r y C o v e r / Q u a l i t y f o r R e c r e a t i o n . Parameter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 5. Percent Groundcover: d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as the p r o p o r t i o n of ground s u r f a c e under a e r i a l p a r t s of the groundcover canopy. The percent groundcover i s important in d e t e r m i n i n g the volume of v e g e t a t i o n f o r nature a p p r e c i a t i o n ; the amount of h a b i t a t f o r fauna; and the v i v i d n e s s and i n t a c t n e s s of the s t a n d . It i s assumed that the groundcover does not i n t e r f e r e wi th s i g h t p e n e t r a t i o n or m o b i l i t y w i t h i n the s t a n d . For nature a p p r e c i a -t i o n , groundcover i s an important a t t r i b u t e f o r p a r t i c i p a n t s who take i n t e r e s t in v i e w i n g , s t u d y i n g , and c o l l e c t i n g herbaceous s p e c i e s such as f e r n s , f l o w e r i n g s p e c i e s , f u n g i , e t c . The amount 1 . 2. 3 . 4. 5. 0 - 207 21 - 407 41 - 607 61 - 807 81 - 1007 0.8 1 .0 0.8 0 .6 0 .3 8 Page 106 of groundcover on the f o r e s t f l o o r i s a l s o a s t r o n g i n d i c a t o r of the "natura lness" of the s t a n d . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to percent groundcover i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the d e n s i t y of groundcover , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r nature a p p r e c i a t i o n . F i v e c a t e g o r i e s of percent groundcover are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 38. T a b l e 38. Percent G r o u n d c o v e r / Q u a l i t y f o r R e c r e a t i o n . Parame ter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Po i n ts 6. Percent A r e a Streams and R a v i n e s : d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as the percentage land area w i t h i n a f o r e s t e d area that has been transformed by f l u v i a l p r o c e s s e s and c o n t a i n s a water c o u r s e , i t f l o o d channel and v a l l e y , or c o n t a i n s ephemeral , i n t e r m i t t e n t , or p e r e n n i a l streams in an e longated narrow, d e p r e s s i o n t y p i c a l of a r a v i n e . Streams and r a v i n e s are important f e a t u r e s f o r nature a p p r e c i a t i o n because they p r o v i d e d i v e r s i t y in land form; high d i v e r s i t y and abundance of t e r r e s t r i a l f l o r a and fauna; a q u a t i c f l o r a , f a u n a , and h a b i t a t ; n a t u r a l proces se s f o r s tudy ( e . g . , h y d r o l o g y , e r o s i o n , p l a n t s u c c e s s i o n , e t c . ) ; and f l o w i n g water which enhances the area in terms of s i g h t , sound, and fee l ' . A l l these f e a t u r e s c o n t r i b u t e to the a e s t h e t i c q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area in terms of un iqueness , v i v i d n e s s , i n t a c t n e s s , and u n i t y ( C l a y , 197? and L i t t o n ejt aj . . , 1974). 1 . 2. 3 . 4. 5. 0 - 207. 21 - 407 41 - 607 61 - 807 81 - 1007 0.3 0 .5 0 .7 1 .0 0 .9 6 Page 107 The q u a l i t y o-f -forested areas in r e l a t i o n to percent area streams and r a v i n e s i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the percent area streams and r a v i n e s , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y o-f the -forested area -for nature a p p r e c i a t i o n . S ix c a t e g o r i e s of percent area streams and r a v i n e s are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 39. T a b l e 39. Percent A r e a Streams and R a v i n e s / Q u a l i t y f o r Recreat i o n . Parame ter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Poi n t s 1. 0 - 107 0.3 2. 1 1 - 207 0.6 3. 21 - 307 0.8 4. 31 - 407 0 .9 5. 41 - 507 0 .95 6. 517. + 1 .0 7. Percent A r e a Wet land: d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as the percentage land area w i t h i n a f o r e s t e d area where the water tab le i s a t , near , or above the l a n d s u r f a c e long enough to promote the format ion of h y d r i c s o i l s and support the growth of h y d r o p h y t e s , at l e a s t p e r i o d i c a l l y . Wetlands are important f e a t u r e s f o r nature a p p r e c a t i o n because they p r o v i d e : d i v e r s i t y in landform; high d i v e r s i t y and abundance of t e r r e s t r i a l and a q u a t i c f l o r a and fauna; a g r a d i e n t from a t e r r e s t r i a l to a q u a t i c environment; n a t u r a l p r o c e s s e s f o r s t u d y ; unique fauna and f l o r a s p e c i f i c to wet lands ; and in some c a s e s , open water that enhances the environment f o r nature a p p r e c i a t i o n . A l l these f e a t u r e s c o n t r i -bute to the a e s t h e t i c q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d a r e a in terms of un iqueness , v i v i d n e s s , i n t a c t n e s s , and u n i t y . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to percent area Page 108 wet land i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the percentage o-f w e t l a n d , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r nature a p p r e c i a t i o n . S ix c a t e g o r i e s of percent area wet land are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 40. T a b l e 40. Percent A r e a W e t l a n d / Q u a l i t y f o r R e c r e a t i o n Parame ter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Poi n ti 1 . 0 - 1 0 % 0.4 2. 11 - 207. 0 .7 3. 21 - 307. 0 .9 10 4. 31 - 407 1 .0 5. 41 - 507 0 .9 6. 517 + 0.8 8. Percent A r e a Human D i s t u r b a n c e : d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as the percentage of land area w i t h i n a f o r e s t e d area that has been denuded of f o r e s t cover f o r the purpose of human a c t i v i t i e s such as houses , r o a d s , d r i v e w a y s , q u a r r i e s , e t c . The e f f e c t of human d i s t u r b a n c e on the q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas f o r nature a p p r e -c i a t i o n i s always n e g a t i v e . Removal of f o r e s t cover d i s p l a c e s the n a t u r a l f l o r a and fauna of the a r e a : reduces the n a t u r a l d i v e r s i t y of the a r e a ; d i s r u p t s n a t u r a l p r o c e s s e s ; degrades the " n a t u r a l " h e r i t a g e va lue of the a r e a ; and reduces the n a t u r a l a e s t h e t i c va lue in terms of v i v i d n e s s , i n t a c t n e s s , and u n i t y . The ideal s t a t e of the f o r e s t e d area i s when no d i r e c t human d i s t u r b a n c e i s o b s e r v e d . In t h i s s t a t e , the p a r t i c i p a n t ' s p e r c e p t i o n of "natura lness" i s at a maximum ( M c B r i d e , 1977:296). The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas f o r nature a p p r e c i a t i o n in r e l a t i o n to percent area human d i s t u r b a n c e i s based on the assumption that q u a l i t y decreases wi th i n c r e a s i n g human Page 109 d i s t u r b a n c e . S ix c a t e g o r i e s of percent human d i s t u r b a n c e are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 41. T a b l e 41 . Percent A r e a Human D i s t u r b a n c e / Q u a l i t y f o r Recreat i o n . Parame ter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Poi n ts 1 . 0 - 5 % 1.0 2. 6 - 12% 0.8 3. 13 - 25% 0.6 14 4. 26 - 40% 0.3 5. 41 - 60% 0.2 6. 61% + 0.1 9. S i g n i f i c a n t N a t u r a l / C u 1 t u r a l F e a t u r e : d e f i n e d as un ique , r a r e , h i s t o r i c , a r c h e o l o g i c a l , or other s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t f e a t u r e s of a f o r e s t e d a r e a , not i n c l u d e d in other parameters , that deserve s p e c i a l r e c o g n i t i o n because of t h e i r i r r e p l a c a b l e n a t u r e . T h i s parameter i s i n c l u d e d as a "red f l a g " type of an i n d i c a t o r to ensure that s p e c i a l b i o p h y s i c a l f e a t u r e s of the f o r e s t e d area are not exc luded from the e v a l u a t i o n . In a l l c a s e s , such f e a t u r e s must be documented and r e c o r d e d so that they may be used as " a d d i t i o n a l in format ion" for p l a n n i n g d e c i -s i o n s . Examples of such f e a t u r e s i n c l u d e : i n t e r e s t i n g or unique s p e c i e s of f l o r a or fauna; b r e e d i n g or spawning a r e a s ; i n t e r e s t i n g landforms; s c e n i c a r e a s ; unique n a t u r a l proces se s < e . g . , s p r i n g s , w a t e r f a l l s , caves , e t c . ) ; a r c h e o l o g i c a l s i t e s ; and h i s t o r i c v e g e t a t i o n or f e a t u r e s . Of the v a r i o u s methods used to r a t e s i g n i f i c a n c e (See K u s l e r , 1 9 8 0 : 8 4 - 8 5 ) , the method of j u r i s d i c t i o n a l s i g n i f i c a n c e w i l l be used h e r e . In g e n e r a l , the more unique , or s i g n i f i c a n t the f e a t u r e i s , the h igher i s the j u r i s d i c t i o n a l l e v e l a f f e c t e d . Page 110 The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n to s i g n i f i c a n t n a t u r a l / c u1 t u r a l f e a t u r e s i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the f e a t u r e ( s ) w i t h i n the f o r e s t e d a r e a , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r nature a p p r e c i a t i o n . F i v e c a t e g o r i e s of s i g n i f i c a n t n a t u r a l / c u1 t u r a l f e a t u r e s are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 42. T a b l e 42. S i g n i f i c a n t N a t u r a l / C u 1 t u r a l F e a t u r e s / Q u a l i t y f o r Recreat i o n . Parame ter Measure Qual i ty Rat i no Po i n t s 1. Low s i g n i f i c a n c e 0.2 ( e . g . s i t e ) 2. Moderate s i g n i f i c a n c e 0 .6 ( e . g . 1oca l ) 3. Mod-High s i g n i f i c a n c e 0.8 15 ( e . g . m u n i c i p a l ) 4. High s i g n i f i c a n c e 0 .9 ( e . g . r e g i o n a l ) 5. O u t s t a n d i n g s i g n i f i c a n c e 1.0 ( e . g . p r o v i nc i a l ) 10. F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e : d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y as the land area between 0.5 h e c t a r e s and 50 h e c t a r e s in s i z e , e i t h e r p u b l i c l y or p r i v a t e l y owned, that s u p p o r t s a more or l e s s cont iguous cover of tree s p e c i e s . The s i z e of the f o r e s t area i s important in d e t e r m i n i n g the amount of f o r e s t and a s s o c i a t e d f e a t u r e s a v a i l a b l e f o r s t u d y ; the number of p a r t i c i p a n t s that may be s a t i s f a c t o r i l y accomodated at one p o i n t in t ime; the general r e s i l i e n c e of the area to human use; and the uniqueness of the area where l arge f o r e s t t r a c t s are encountered . A l l of the above f a c t o r s increase w i th i n c r e a s i n g f o r e s t t r a c t s i z e . The q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas in r e l a t i o n , to f o r e s t t r a c t Page 111 s i z e i s based on the assumption that the g r e a t e r the t r a c t s i z e , the g r e a t e r i s the q u a l i t y o-f the f o r e s t e d area for nature a p p r e c i a t i o n . E i g h t c a t e g o r i e s of f o r e s t t r a c t s i z e are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 43. T a b l e 43. F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e / Q u a l i t y f o r R e c r e a t i o n . Parame ter Measure Qua! i ty Rat i no Po i n ts 1. 0 .5 - 2 Ha 0.2 2. 3 - 5 Ha 0.3 3. 6 - 10 Ha 0.4 4. 11 - 20 Ha 0.6 5. 21 - 35 Ha 0.8 6. 36 - 50 Ha 0 .9 7. 51 - 70 Ha 0.95 8. 71 Ha + 1 .0 Page 112 Vi oor Rat i no Def i n i t i on : V i g o r : the general h e a l t h of a -forest s tand measured as percent death and decay in the o v e r s t o r y , where percent death and decay i s de-fined as the percentage o-f o v e r s t o r y t r e e s that are dead < i . e . , snags) or show advanced s i g n s o-f decay ( i . e . , dead tops and b r a n c h e s , hear t r o t , sap r o t , but t r o t , e t c . ) . (For i n d i c a t o r s o-f decay in B r i t i s h Columbia see F o s t e r and Wall i s , 1969). Advanced decay i s de-fined as : g r e a t e r than 50% of the tree volume has been a f f e c t e d by the decay agent . Stand v i g o r i s i n c l u d e d in the e v a l u a t i o n of f o r e s t e d a r e a s as " a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n " to be used f o r p l a n n i n g d e c i s i o n s . In g e n e r a l , s tand v i g o r p r o v i d e s an i n d i c a t i o n of the l o n g e v i t y of the f o r e s t s t a n d . Assuming that the goal of p l a n n i n g i s to manage f o r e s t e d areas in p e r p e t u i t y , the o v e r a l l h e a l t h or v i g o r of the s t a n d may be an important c o n s i d e r a t i o n f o r p l a n n i n g . For example, in s tands of marginal q u a l i t y , the knowledge of v i g o r may be the d e c i d i n g f a c t o r on the end-use of the a r e a . Stand v i g o r may be e s t i m a t e d from v a r i o u s s tand parameters , such as crown form, a g e / h e i g h t r a t i o s , decay f a c t o r s , e t c . , each r e q u i r i n g d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s of e x p e r t i s e and measurement to a c c u r a t e l y e s t imate the parameter . For the e v a l u a t i o n of f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e , percent death and decay in the s t a n d i s used to e s t imate v i g o r . T h i s i s the percentage of t r e e s w i t h i n the s tand that are dead or in advanced s tages of decay . For t h i s parameter , i t i s assumed Page 113 that the e v a l u a t o r has some knowledge of tree p h y s i o l o g y . A r a t i n g of v i g o r i s c a l c u l a t e d f o r a l l f o r e s t e d areas and i s r e c o r d e d as a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n to the q u a l i t y r a t i n g s . It i s emphasized that t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n i s secondary to the c a l -c u l a t e d q u a l i t y r a t i n g s and s h o u l d be used in cases of d i f f i -c u l t , complex, or marg ina l s i t u a t i o n s . F i v e c a t e g o r i e s of v i g o r are p r o v i d e d in T a b l e 44, based on percent death and decay wi th i n the s t a n d . T a b l e 44. V i g o r R a t i n g s f o r F o r e s t e d A r e a s . Percen t Death and Decay Jjn Stand V i oor Rat i no C a l c u l a t i on of Qual i ty of F o r e s t e d A r e a s P r e p a r a t i on and Parameter Measurement For a bounded area in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e < e . g . , m u n i c i p a l i t y ) , the f i r s t requirement in p r e p a r i n g f o r the e v a -l u a t i o n of f o r e s t e d areas i s an i n v e n t o r y of the f o r e s t r e s o u r c e s w i t h i n the a r e a . T h i s i s best a c h i e v e d through the use of u p - t o - d a t e a e r i a l photographs of the a r e a ; however, o ther methods such as f i e l d s u r v e y s may a l s o be used . For the e v a l u a -t i o n , f o r e s t e d areas g r e a t e r than 0 .5 h e c t a r e s and l e s s than 50 h e c t a r e s in s i z e s h o u l d be d e l i n e a t e d on a e r i a l photos or maps, showing t h e i r l o c a t i o n in r e l a t i o n to o ther land f e a t u r e s , l ega l 0 - 5V. 6 - 12'/. 13 - 25'/. 26 - 407 41% + V e r y good Very poor Good Fa i r Poor Page 114 time i n c l u d e the area o-f each f o r e s t in h e c t a r e s and the type of land ownership of each area < i . e . , p r i v a t e or p u b l i c ) . Each f o r e s t e d area s h o u l d be i d e n t i f i e d by a l e t t e r , number, or symbol and a p lan f o r c o l l e c t i n g the r e q u i r e d p a r a -meter measurements s h o u l d be f o r m u l a t e d . Parameter measurements may be o b t a i n e d through three major s o u r c e s : <1) e x i s t i n g data from other s t u d i e s or i n v e n t o r i e s ; (2) a e r i a l photo i n t e r p r e t a -t i o n ; and <3) d i r e c t f i e l d measurement. Of these three s o u r c e s , data c o l l e c t i o n through f i e l d measurement i s the most time consuming and c o s t l y ; t h e r e f o r e , where p o s s i b l e , o ther sources shou l d be u t i l i z e d . In many c a s e s , f i e l d measurement i s necessary because of lack of data from other s o u r c e s , or because of the nature of the parameter ( e . g . , percent u n d e r s t o r y cover or g r o u n d c o v e r ) . T h i s r e q u i r e s a p lan f o r f i e l d measurement, which u s u a l l y i n v o l v e s the technique of "sampl ing" . The purpose of sampl ing i s to es t imate p o p u l a t i o n parameters through methods of s t a t i s t i c a l i n f e r e n c e < U . B . C . F o r e s t C l u b , 1971:456). The ac tua l sampl ing des ign and sampl ing u n i t s u t i l i z e d f o r the e v a l u a t i o n of f o r e s t e d areas are l e f t to the d i s c r e t i o n of the p l a n n e r ; t h e r e -f o r e , no one technique or system i s recommended h e r e . For a comprehensive d i s c u s s i o n of sampl ing t echniques and methods f o r parameter measurement see Hays e_t a_l_. (1981) . The e v a l u a t i v e framework i s des igned f o r parameter measure-ment when v e g e t a t i o n c o n t a i n s f u l l f o l i a g e ; t h e r e f o r e , f i e l d data c o l l e c t i o n s h o u l d take p l a c e in l a t e s p r i n g through e a r l y summer. Data c o l l e c t e d from other s o u r c e s , such as e x i s t i n g data or a e r i a l photos , must a l s o r e f l e c t f u l l f o l i a g e c o n d i t i o n s . Page 115 Parameters which are not v e g e t a t i o n - r e l a t e d ( e . g . , s o i l ) can be measured at any t ime . Upon c o l l e c t i n g and r e c o r d i n g parameter measurements -for each f o r e s t e d area in the s tudy a r e a , the f i n a l two s t e p s of c a l c u l a t i n g parameter q u a l i t y and f o r e s t e d area q u a l i t y can be ach i eved . Calcu1 at i on of Qual i ty The f o u r t h to s i x t h s t e p s of the e v a l u a t i o n procedure l ead to c a l c u l a t i o n of a p o i n t r a t i n g of q u a l i t y of f o r e s t e d areas for the b e n e f i t s o f : (1) w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t , <2) water r e s o u r c e s , <3) e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y s e n s i t i v e a r e a s , and <4) r e c r e a t i o n . For each b e n e f i t , parameter measurements for each f o r e s t e d area are c o n v e r t e d to parameter q u a l i t y r a t i n g s through the use of the parameter m e a s u r e / q u a l i t y t a b l e s (s tep 4 ) . The r e s u l t a n t p a r a -meter q u a l i t y r a t i n g s m u l t i p l i e d by the c o r r e s p o n d i n g a s s i g n e d p o i n t s (weight) y i e l d a p o i n t r a t i n g of q u a l i t y f o r each parameter ( s tep 5 ) . The sum of these p r o d u c t s f o r a l l parameters i s the p o i n t r a t i n g of q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area f o r the s e l e c t e d b e n e f i t ( s tep 6 ) . As a mathematical e x p r e s s i o n , the p o i n t r a t i n g of q u a l i t y of a f o r e s t e d area i s c a l c u l a t e d as : n Q(x) - (ViUli) i=l where : Q(x) = Qual i ty of the f o r e s t e d area for b e n e f i t (x) n number of parameters q u a l i t y r a t i n g of parame ter ( i ) wi P o i n t s (weight) a s s igned to parame ter ( i ) Page 116 The maximum p o i n t r a t i n g of q u a l i t y of a f o r e s t e d area i s 100. T h i s r a t i n g would be a c h i e v e d when the q u a l i t y r a t i n g f o r each parameter was 1.0 ( i . e . , t o t a l p o i n t s of 100 a l l o c a t e d m u l t i p l i e d by 1.0 f o r a l l parameters equa l s 100 p o i n t s ) . Page 117 EVALUATION OF FORESTED AREAS IN THE DISTRICT OF SURREY, B . C . I n t r o d u c t i on To t e s t the v a l i d i t y and a p p l i c a t i o n o-f the e v a l u a t i v e •framework -for -forested areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n in ter - face , the C o r p o r a t i o n of the D i s t r i c t of S u r r e y , B r i t i s h Columbia was s e l e c t e d as a s tudy a r e a . Surrey i s an area that i s c h a r a c t e r i s -t i c of the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e and has a land base that s u p -p o r t s a s u b s t a n t i a l p r o p o r t i o n of f o r e s t c o v e r . The approach for t e s t i n g the e v a l u a t i v e framework i s to s e l e c t a range of f o r e s t e d areas v a r y i n g in s i z e and b i o p h y s i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s f o r e v a l u a t i o n . The major aim of t h i s approach i s to t e s t the framework under as many s i t u a t i o n s as p r a c t i c a l to de tec t any weaknesses or inadequac i e s in the e v a l u a t i v e framework. Descr i p t i on of S u r r e y L o c a t i o n and P o p u l a t i o n : The C o r p o r a t i o n of the D i s t r i c t of Surrey i s a m u n i c i p a l i t y that i s l o c a t e d in the F r a s e r V a l l e y in the southwest corner of B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . It i s bounded by the F r a s e r R i v e r on the n o r t h ; the M u n i c i p a l i t y of D e l t a and Mud and Semiahmoo Bays on the west; the 4?th p a r a l l e l ( U . S . / C a n a d a border) on the s o u t h ; and the M u n i c i p a l i t y of Lang ley on the east as shown in F i g u r e s 17 and 18. I t s area i s a p p r o x i m a t e l y 300 square k i l o m e t e r s and i t s 1981 p o p u l a t i o n was 147,000 ( S t a t i s t i c s Canada, 1981). Page 118 igure 17. 1:390,000 Map of S u r r e y , B r i t i s h Columbia in R e l a t i o n to S u r r o u n d i n g J u r i s d i c t i o n s (From G r e a t e r Vancouver Regional Parks D i s t r i c t , 1 9 7 8 ) . Page 119 igure 18. 1:153,000 S t r e e t Map of S u r r e y , B r i t i s h Columbi (From: C o r p o r a t i o n of the D i s t r i c t of S u r r e y , P l a n n i n g Department ,1983) . Page 120 S u r r e y as a R u r a l - U r b a n Inter- face: Surrey e x h i b i t s the three f e a t u r e s of the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e as o u t l i n e d by Russwurm (1977): (1) change, (2) s p a t i a l t r a n s i t i o n , and (3) land use m i x t u r e . S u r r e y i s undergoing change from a r e l a t i v e l y r u r a l area to an urban "bedroom community" f o r m e t r o p o l i t a n Vancouver . Many areas of S u r r e y that were f a r m s , f o r e s t , or vacant a decade ago are now shopping c e n t e r s , s u b d i v i s i o n s , and commercial and i n d u s t r i a l deve lopments . D u r i n g the 1976 to 1978 p e r i o d , S u r r e y e x p e r i e n c e d p o p u l a t i o n growth r a t e s c l o s e to 57 per annum, which i s almost four t imes h igher than the growth r a t e of B r i t i s h Columbia in the same p e r i o d ( C o r p o r a t i o n of the D i s t r i c t of S u r r e y , 1979:9) . The bulk of the growth can be a t t r i b u t e d to sprawl from nearby urban a r e a s . S e c o n d l y , S u r r e y i s an area of s p a t i a l t r a n s i t i o n l o c a t e d between the b u i l t - u p urban areas of Vancouver , Burnaby, and New Westminster to the west and the p r e d o m i n a n t l y r u r a l areas of the upper F r a s e r V a l l e y to the e a s t . A n d , l a s t l y , S u r r e y i s an area of land use mixture c o n s i s t i n g of a mosaic of urban and r u r a l l and a c t i v i t i e s . The major land uses in S u r r e y in 1982 c o n s i s t e d of r e s i d e n t i a l ( 36 .27 ) ; a g r i c u l t u r a l ( 2 8 . 5 7 ) ; open and undeveloped (15 .97 ) ; t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , communicat ions and u t i l i t i e s ( 10 .77 ) ; and commercial and i n d u s t r i a l (3 .47) ( G r e a t e r Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t , 1982:2) . With present i n c r e a s i n g p o p u l a t i o n s , l a n d use p a t t e r n s in S u r r e y are becoming more urban o r i e n t e d with l arge areas b e i n g deve loped f o r r e s i d e n t i a l , commerc ia l , and i n d u s -t r i a l p u r p o s e s . Page 121 C l i m a t e : " The c l i m a t e o-f S u r r e y i s predominant ly a m i d - l a t i -tude west coas t marine type wi th cool summers, r a t h e r m i l d w i n t e r s , moi s t a i r , and a smal l d a i l y and annual range in t emperature . Average temperatures in summer months range -from 15* to 20 C e l s i u s and average w i n t e r temperatures range from 0 to 7 C e l s i u s . Annual p r e c i p i t a t i o n i s a p p r o x i m a t e l y 105 c e n t i m e t e r s wi th p r e c i p i t a t i o n i n c r e a s i n g in O c t o b e r , r e a c h i n g a peak in m i d - w i n t e r , d e c r e a s i n g in the s p r i n g , w i th r a t h e r a sharp drop in J u l y and August" (Ul i l sey and Ham, 1971:3) . P h y s i o l o g y and S o i l s : S u r r e y i s d i v i s i b l e i n t o two major land forms . These a r e : <i) u p l a n d and h igher v a l l e y areas wi th e l e v a -t i o n s of a p p r o x i m a t e l y 3 to 100 meters above sea l e v e l ( a . s . l . ) , and <2) l owland a r e a s of the N i c o m e k l - S e r p e n t i n e R i v e r v a l l e y s of e l e v a t i o n s below 3 meters a . s . l . (Sprout and K e l l e y , 1961:5) . Upland a r e a s have g e n t l y to s t e e p l y s l o p i n g topography and e x h i b i t l and f e a t u r e s most s u i t a b l e f o r urban development . The s o i l - f o r m i n g m a t e r i a l s of the up land area c o n s i s t s m a i n l y of m a r i n e , g l a c i o m a r i n e , and t i l l d e p o s i t s of g l a c i a l and d e -g l a c i a l o r i g i n ; o f t en they are mant led by marine shore d e p o s i t s c o n s i s t i n g of sands and g r a v e l s (Sprout and K e l l e y , 1961:5) . Lowland a r e a s are l o c a t e d in the N i c o m e k l , S e r p e n t i n e , and p a r t s of the Campbell R i v e r V a l l e y s . These areas have been deve loped m a i n l y f o r a g r i c u l t u r a l p u r p o s e s . The s o i l forming m a t e r i a l s c o n s i s t m a i n l y of o r g a n i c d e p o s i t s u n d e r l a i n by f l o o d -p l a i n and channel d e p o s i t s of the F r a s e r R i v e r and some lowland stream d e p o s i t s of the Nicomekl and S e r p e n t i n e R i v e r s (Sprout and K e l l e y , 1961:6) . The m a j o r i t y of s o i l s in Surrey have been Page 122 mapped and r e p o r t e d by S p r o u t and K e l l e y ( 1 9 6 1 ) and L u t t m e r d i n g ( 1 9 8 0 ) . A t t h e i n t e r - f a c e o-f u p l a n d and l o w l a n d a r e a s t h e r e a r e s l o p e s o-f s u b s t a n t i a l r e l i e f , w h i c h i n some c a s e s can be d e s -c r i b e d a s b l u f f s o r c l i f f s . T h e s e a r e a s a r e s t e e p s l o p i n g and r e l a t i v e l y u n s t a b l e i n some a r e a s a s shown i n F i g u r e 19. R a v i n e s and s l u m p s a r e common f e a t u r e s a l o n g t h e s e b l u f f s . The most p r e d o m i n a n t b l u f f s a r e l o c a t e d a d j a c e n t t o r i v e r s and s t r e a m s , and a l o n g t h e p e r i m e t e r s o f Semiahmoo and Mud B a y s . F i g u r e 19. Mass W a s t i n g i n R a v i n e L o c a t e d i n N o r t h S u r r e y . H y d r o l o g y : S e v e r a l r i v e r s and numerous s t r e a m s d r a i n t h e l a n d base o f S u r r e y , w i t h w a t e r e v e n t u a l l y b e i n g d i s c h a r g e d i n the F r a s e r R i v e r o r Semiahmoo o r Mud B a y s . D r a i n a g e i n the a r e a i s Page 123 h i g h l y v a r i a b l e depending on land-form and subsur face m a t e r i a l s . In lowland a r e a s , s o i l s are s u b j e c t to high water tab le and are p o o r l y d r a i n e d . The h igh water tab le g i v e s the most t r o u b l e d u r i n g w i n t e r months when a combinat ion of high p r e c i p i t a t i o n and r u n o f f from adjacent uplands causes f l o o d i n g in v a l l e y bottoms (Sprout and K e l l e y , 1961:3) . Numerous d i t c h e s have been dug to c o n t r o l the water l e v e l , and dykes have been b u i l t a long the Nicomekl and S e r p e n t i n e R i v e r s f o r the same purpose . Upland s o i l s are b e t t e r d r a i n e d than those in the v a l l e y bottoms; however, the u n d u l a t i n g topography of the u p l a n d c o n -t a i n s numerous d e p r e s s i o n s which are f l o o d e d in w i n t e r and are p o o r l y d r a i n e d d u r i n g the ba lance of the y e a r . T h i s i s due to impervious and s l o w l y p e r v i o u s g e o l o g i c a l s t r a t a beneath the s o i l s (Sprout and K e l l e y , 1961:3) . Poor dra inage a l s o o c c u r s in areas of s l o p i n g topography, e s p e c i a l l y i f imperv ious m a t e r i a l s are near the s u r f a c e . In up land areas of poor d r a i n a g e , combined with the impervious areas of urban development , excess p r e c i p i t a t i o n r e s u l t s in r a p i d r u n o f f to s u r r o u n d i n g streams and r a v i n e s . Page 124 F i g u r e 20. W e t l a n d A r e a i n S u r r e y L o c a t e d i n P o o r l y D r a i n e d D e p r e s s i o n . F i s h R e s o u r c e s : S u r r e y c o n t a i n s r i v e r s , s t r e a m s , and d i t c h e s t h a t a r e i m p o r t a n t -for - f i s h p r o d u c t i o n . T h i r t y - e i g h t s p e c i e s o f b o t h f r e s h w a t e r and anadromous f i s h e s have been o u t l i n e d by Hoos and Packman ( 1 9 7 4 : 1 0 1 ) a s i n h a b i t a t i n g t h e Lower F r a s e r s y s t e m . Many o f t h e s e f i s h a r e p r e s e n t i n S u r r e y ' s w a t e r c o u r s e s . S p o r t f i s h s u c h a s c o h o s a l m o n ( O n c o r h y n c h u s k i su t c h ) . chum s a l m o n ( 0 • k e t a ) . s t e e l h e a d t r o u t ( S a l mo oa i r d n e r i ) . c u t t h r o a t t r o u t < S. c1 a r k i c1 a r k i ) and D o l l y V a r d e n ( S a l v e 1 i nus malma) a r e f o u n d i n t h e r i v e r s and c r e e k s o f S u r r e y i n d i f f e r e n t s t a g e s o f t h e i r l i f e c y c l e . N o n - s p o r t f i s h s u c h a s the t h r e e s p i n e s t i c k l e b a c k ( G a s t e r o s t e u s a c u 1 e a t u s ) . c a r p ( C y p r i nus c a r p i o ) . brown b u l l h e a d ( I c t a l u r u s n e b u 1 o s u s ) . and v a r i o u s s p e c i e s o f s c u l p i n a l s o f r e q u e n t t h e s e w a t e r s . Page 125 A l l o-f the r i v e r s i n S u r r e y ( N i c o m e k l , S e r p e n t i n e , and C a m p b e l l ) and many o f the s t r e a m s ( L a t i m e r , Mahood, H y l a n d , E l g i n , B r o m f e l t , e t c . ) a r e i m p o r t a n t s p a w n i n g and r e a r i n g a r e a s f o r v a r i o u s s a l m o n i d s p e c i e s . The m a i n t e n a n c e o f t h e s e r i v e r s and s t r e a m s i n a s t a t e f a v o u r a b l e t o s a l m o n i d s p e c i e s i s , t h e r e -f o r e , an i m p o r t a n t c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n the m a i n t e n a n c e o f h e a l t h y f i sh popu1 a t i o n s . F i g u r e 21 . Mahood C r e e k L o c a t e d i n C e n t r a l S u r r e y . W i l d l i f e R e s o u r c e s : A w i d e v a r i e t y o f w i l d l i f e i s f o u n d i n S u r r e y , r a n g i n g f r o m s m a l l a m p h i b i a n s t o l a r g e mammals s u c h a s d e e r . The abundance o f w i l d l i f e i n S u r r e y can be a t t r i b u t e d t o h a b i t a t f e a t u r e s s u c h a s f o r e s t s , f a r m l a n d , w e t l a n d , r i v e r s , and s t r e a m s t h a t a r e common i n S u r r e y ' s l a n d s c a p e . Hoos and Packman (1 974-.Append i x 11.1) o u t l i n e a l a r g e number of w i l d l i f e s p e c i e s t h a t a r e f o u n d i n the F r a s e r d e l t a , many o f them i n Page 126 S u r r e y . Of p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t are those s p e c i e s that u t i l i z e f o r e s t e d areas as h a b i t a t . Some of the s p e c i e s found in S u r r e y that u t i l i z e f o r e s t h a b i t a t i n c l u d e : <1) Amphib ians : P a c i f i c tree toad < Hy1 a reo i1 l a ) . P a c i f i c Coast newt (Tar i cha oranu1osa  oranu1osa ) . and B r i t i s h Columbia salamander (Ambystoma orac i1e  decor t i catum); (2) R e p t i l e s : Puget g a r t e r snake (Thanmoph i s  ord i no i des) and the western p a i n t e d t u r t l e (Chrysemys p i c ta  be 11 i ) : <3) B i r d s : r e d - t a i l e d hawk (Bure i j ama i cens i s ) . l o n g -eared owl (As i o o tus w i1 son i a n u s ) , r u f f e d grouse (Bonasa  umbe11 u s ) . common raven (Corvus c o r a x ) . common f l i c k e r ( C o l a p t e s a u r a t u s ) , p i l e a t e d woodpecker (Dryocopos pi 1 e a t u s ) . and b l a c k - c a p p e d ch ickadee (Parus a t r i cap i11 u s ) ; and (4) Mammals: shrews (Sorex s p p . ) , f l y i n g s q u i r r e l (Glaucornys  sabr i nus oreoonens i s ) , c r e e p i n g vo le ( M i c r o t u s oreoon i s e r p e n s ) , American oppossom (D i de1ph i s marsup i al i s v i ro i n i a n a ) , raccoon (Procyon 1otor pac i f i c u s ) , red fox (Vu1 pes fu1va cascadens i s ) , and Columbian b l a c k t a i l deer (Odoco i1eus 1 em i onus columba i n u s ) . The maintenance of the f o r e s t base w i t h i n Surrey i s c r i t i -ca l f o r the e x i s t e n c e of the above, and many other s p e c i e s of w i l d l i f e that u t i l i z e f o r e s t s f o r t h e i r s u r v i v a l . Under present trends of i n c r e a s i n g p o p u l a t i o n and land development f o r urban purposes in S u r r e y , i t i s l i k e l y that the f o r e s t base w i l l g r a d u a l l y be reduced to the p o i n t where f o r e s t - d e p e n d e n t s p e c i e s w i l l be e l i m i n a t e d or d i s p l a c e d from the a r e a . Page 127 F i g u r e 22. F o r e s t C o v e r , S n a g s , M o d e r a t e U n d e r s t o r y , and W a t e r i n S u r r e y P r o v i d e E x c e l l e n t W i l d l i f e Habi t a t . The F o r e s t R e s o u c e i n S u r r e y The o r i g i n a l f o r e s t s t a n d s o f f i r , c e d a r , and h emlock i n S u r r e y were l o g g e d i n the l a t e 1800's and e a r l y 1 9 0 0 ' s , w i t h t h e l a s t s t a n d o f v i r g i n t i m b e r r e c o r d e d a s b e i n g l o g g e d i n 1930 < T r e l e a v e n , 1 9 7 8 : 8 7 ) . T h e r e f o r e , e x i s t i n g f o r e s t e d a r e a s i n S u r r e y a r e l a r g e l y s e c o n d g r o w t h s t a n d s w h i c h a r e i n many c a s e s u n m e r c h a n t a b l e f o r lumber b e c a u s e o f s i z e and s p e c i e s . The g r e a t e s t amount o f f o r e s t c o v e r i n S u r r e y i s l o c a t e d i n u p l a n d s a r e a s , as l o w l a n d s have l o n g been c l e a r e d f o r a g r i c u l t u r a l Page 128 p u r p o s e s . The v e g e t a t i o n o-f S u r r e y h a s been i n v e n t o r i e d and mapped by H u b b a r d and B e l l ( 1 9 7 6 ) , and d e s c r i b e d i n t e r m s o-f m a j o r p l a n t a s s o c i a t i o n s . T r e e s p e c i e s t h a t a r e most common i n S u r r e y i n c l u d e : b r o a d l e a f m a ple ( A c e r macrophy11 urn), r e d a l d e r ( A 1 n u s  r u b r a ) . D o u g l a s f i r ( P s e u d o t s u o a menz i e s s i ) . w h i t e b i r c h (Be tu1 a  p a p y r i -f e r a ) . S i t k a s p r u c e < P i c e a s i t c h e n s i s ) . Pac i f i c w i l l o w ( S a l i x 1 a s i a n d r a ) . b l a c k c o t t o n w o o d < Popu1 us t r i c h o c a r p a ) . and w e s t e r n h e m l o c k ( T s u q a h e t e r o p h y l 1 a) . Most - f o r e s t s t a n d s i n S u r r e y a r e d e c i d u o u s ; h o w e v e r , s e v e r a l o l d - g r o w t h s t a n d s o f D o u g l a s f i r a s shown i n F i g u r e 23 s t i l l r e m a i n i n the a r e a . F i g u r e 23. Mature Douglas F i r L o c a t e d in C e n t r a l (Mound Farm) . Surrey Page 129 The s i z e o-f f o r e s t e d areas in S u r r e y range from r e l a t i v e l y small ( i . e . , 0 . 5 ha) to r e l a t i v e l y l arge ( i . e . , 1 5 0 ha) wi th average f o r e s t e d area s i z e be ing a p p r o x i m a t e l y 5 to 15 h e c t a r e s . The t o t a l l and area under f o r e s t cover in S u r r e y i s e s t imated at a p p r o x i m a t e l y 10 - 20 p e r c e n t . The average age of these s tands i s e s t i m a t e d at approximat 1ey 30 - 40 y e a r s . In many c a s e s , the p a t t e r n of f o r e s t cover in S u r r e y ' s landscape r e f l e c t s the s u i t a b i l i t y of the land for a g r i c u l t u r a l or urban uses . A r e a s s u i t a b l e f o r these uses have been c l e a r e d of f o r e s t cover and deve loped; whereas , areas wi th u n s u i t a b l e f e a t u r e s such as s teep s l o p e s , h igh water t a b l e s , f l o o d i n g , poor d r a i n a g e , e t c . , have been l e f t in a r e l a t i v e l y u n a l t e r e d s t a t e . The s i g n i f i c a n c e of t h i s c o i n c i d e n c e i s that these undeveloped areas are u s u a l l y the most s e n s i t i v e in terms of w i l d l i f e , h y d r o l o g y , f i s h e r i e s , e r o d i b i l i t y , and so on . The f o r e s t cover i s , t h e r e f o r e , e x c e e d i n g l y important in p r o t e c t i n g these a r e a s . In the past decade in S u r r e y , the demand for land for urban uses has i n c r e a s e d wi th i n c r e a s i n g p o p u l a t i o n . In a d d i t i o n , much of the lowland of S u r r e y has been d e s i g n a t e d as a g r i c u l t u r a l land ( A g r i c u l t u r a l Land Reserve) under the B . C . Land Commission A c t , which p r e c l u d e s the use of t h i s l a n d f o r r e s i d e n t i a l or other urban uses . The i n c r e a s e d demand f o r deve lopable l a n d , coup led wi th the removal of land f o r a g r i c u l t u r a l purposes in S u r r e y , has f o r c e d d e v e l o p e r s to c o n c e n t r a t e t h e i r e f f o r t s on s u i t a b l e up land areas that may be deve loped . A r e a s that were p e r c e i v e d as be ing l e s s d e s i r a b l e f o r urban development a decade ago are now prime s u b d i v i s i o n a r e a s . Page 130 F i g u r e 24. R e s i d e n t i a l S u b d i v i s i o n in East S u r r e y Be ing Developed in ( P r e v i o u s ) F o r e s t e d A r e a . Many a r e a s i n S u r r e y t h a t a r e now un d e r p r e s s u r e -for d e v e l -opment e x h i b i t s u b s t a n t i a l f o r e s t c o v e r and a s s o c i a t e d f e a t u r e s t h a t a r e i m p o r t a n t f o r e n v i r o n m e n t a l and s o c i a l q u a l i t y . W i t h o u t an u n d e r s t a n d i n g and r e c o g n i t i o n o f the v a l u e s o f t h e s e f o r e s t e d a r e a s , i t i s l i k e l y t h a t u r b a n d e v e l o p m e n t w i l l c a u s e the i n c r e -m e n t a l e l i m i n a t i o n o f s u c h a r e a s f r o m t h e l a n d s c a p e . Page 131 Presen t Pol i cy Re 1ated to F o r e s t e d A r e a s i n Surrey In the O f f i c i a l Community Plan of Surrey ( C o r p o r a t i o n of the D i s t r i c t of S u r r e y , F i n a l D r a f t , A p r i l 1983) there are four s t a t e d p o l i c i e s which d i r e c t l y r e l a t e to the b e n e f i t s of f o r e s t e d a r e a s . These are o u t l i n e d in the O f f i c i a l Plan under the h e a d i n g , "OBJECTIVE 5: NATURAL ENVIRONMENT: To Preserve and Enhance the N a t u r a l Environment" and i n c l u d e : (1) Land C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , ( 2 ) Watercourse P r e s e r v a t i o n , (3) H a b i t a t P r e s e r v a t i o n , and (4) Tree P r e s e r v a t i o n . The p o l i c y s tatements that accompany each n a t u r a l environment component are p r o v i d e d be 1ow. 1. Land C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s : "That in the development of h i g h l y v i s i b l e l andforms , s p e c i a l a t t e n t i o n be g iven to the r e t e n t i o n of the land c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ; that developments e i t h e r s t a y w i t h i n the tree cover o r , i f they are of major p r o p o r t i o n s , that they be d e s i g n a t e d f o r t h e i r f u l l v i s u a l impact and c o o r d i n a t e d with t h e i r s u r r o u n d i n g . " 2. Watercourse P r e s e r v a t i o n : "That r a v i n e s and s i g n i f i c a n t watercourses be p r e s e r v e d in t h e i r n a t u r a l s t a t e and wherever p o s s i b l e l i n k e d wi th each other so that a c o n t i n o u s network of the n a t u r a l environment t r a v e r s e s the deve loped areas of S u r r e y . " 3. H a b i t a t P r e s e r v a t i o n : "That n a t u r a l h a b i t a t s be i d e n t i f i e d and p r o t e c t e d , and that human a c t i v i t i e s in and around p r o t e c t e d h a b i t a t s be reduced to a l e v e l a p p r o p r i a t e to the s e n s i t i v i t y of each habi t a t . " Page 132 4. Tree P r e s e r v a t i o n : "That s i g n i f i c a n t s tands o-f t r e e s be i d e n t i f i e d , p r e s e r v e d , and i n c o r p o r a t e d in to hous ing and commer-c i a l development and that e x i s t i n g mature t r e e s be p r e s e r v e d at the edges of i n d u s t r i a l developments and other land uses r e q u i r i n g s c r e e n i n g . " In the broad i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , of a l l four of the above p o l i c i e s , r e f e r e n c e i s made to the r e t e n t i o n of f o r e s t cover to enhance each of the n a t u r a l environment components. In many c a s e s , d i r e c t r e f e r e n c e i s made to the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and p r o t e c t i o n of f o r e s t v e g e t a t i o n in order to a t t a i n h igh e n v i r o n -mental q u a l i t y . The i n t e n t of the o b j e c t i v e of p r e s e r v i n g f o r e s t cover i s c l e a r ; however, l i t t l e s p e c i f i c in format ion i s p r o v i d e d on "how" t h i s o b j e c t i v e i s to be a c h i e v e d . In p a r t i c u l a r , c o n -s i d e r a t i o n s not addressed i n c l u d e : "What l e v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e i s r e q u i r e d before p r o t e c t i o n i s warranted?" , "How i s s i g n i f i -cance determined or c a l c u l a t e d ? " , and "How are p r o t e c t i o n measures to be implemented in S u r r e y ' s l a n d use p l a n n i n g f rame-work?" As w i l l be d i s c u s s e d in f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n s , i t i s b e l i e v e d that the e v a l u a t i v e framework can be u t i l i z e d to e f f e c t i v e l y a s s i s t in implementing p o l i c i e s that r e l a t e to the r e t e n t i o n of f o r e s t e d a r e a s . E v a l u a t i on of Samp 1e F o r e s t e d A r e a s i n S u r r e y : Method Twelve f o r e s t e d areas v a r y i n g in s i z e , l o c a t i o n , and b i o -p h y s i c a l makeup were s e l e c t e d for e v a l u a t i o n in Surrey as shown Page 133 in F i g u r e 25. These areas were s e l e c t e d in c o n j u n c t i o n with Surrey m u n i c i p a l s t a f f from a 1:25,000 a e r i a l photo mosaic of the D i s t r i c t of S u r r e y . Upon s e l e c t i o n , the f o r e s t e d areas were l o c a t e d on 1:10,000 b lack and white a e r i a l photographs and viewed under a s t ereoscope to develop a p lan for parameter measurement. At the same t ime, a l l a v a i l a b l e in format ion and data was c o l l e c t e d from e x i s t i n g sources f o r these f o r e s t e d areas ( e . g . , s o i l s , w i l d l i f e p r e s e n c e , h e r i t a g e v a l u e s , e t c . ) . F i g u r e 25. 1: 153:000 S t r e e t Map of S u r r e y Showing L o c a t i o n of Sample F o r e s t e d A r e a s . Page 134 Parameter measurements -for the e v a l u a t i o n were o b t a i n e d through three methods: (1) e x i s t i n g d a t a , (2) a e r i a l photograph i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , and <3) - f i e l d measurement. For the twelve f o r e s t e d areas in S u r r e y , t h e s p e c i f i c . method used to o b t a i n the parameter measurement v a r i e d as shown in T a b l e 45. 1. E x i s t i n g Data 2. Photo I n t e r p r e t a t i o n 3. F i e l d Measurement O v e r s t o r y Height 7 U n d e r s t o r y Cover 7 Groundcover Snags/Hec tare 7 Dead & Down Cover 7 A r e a F l o o d Zone \> i gor Rat i ng * These parameters were a l s o examined in the f i e l d . T a b l e 45. Methods Used f o r O b t a i n i n g Parameter Measurements in S u r r e y . Parameter measurements from " e x i s t i n g data" came from v a r i o u s s o u r c e s . S o i l e r o d i b i l i t y was determined from s o i l maps of the area u s i n g the s o i l s e r i e s to d e r i v e "K" v a l u e s . "K" va lues were c a l c u l a t e d u s i n g the nomograph shown in Appendix I . Topography was measured from topographic maps and f i e l d examina-t i o n and c o n v e r t e d to "LS" v a l u e s u s i n g the "slope e f f e c t chart" Soi 1 Erod i bi 1 i ty <K> Topography <LS)* S i g . N a t / B i o l F e a t u r e s * S i g . N a t / C u l t F e a t u r e s * O v e r s t o r y S p e c i e s * 7 O v e r s t o r y Cover* 7 A r e a Human D i s t u r b a n c e * 7 A r e a Streams & Rav ines* 7 A r e a Wet land* S u r r o u n d i n g Land Use* F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e * Page 135 shown in Appendix I I . S i g n i f i c a n t f e a t u r e s were determined through v a r i o u s methods i n c l u d i n g correspondence wi th informed i n d i v i d u a l s , l i t e r a t u r e on the s u b j e c t , and f i e l d e x a m i n a t i o n . Parameter measurements from a e r i a l photographs were ob-t a i n e d through photo i n t e r p r e t a t i o n u s i n g <1?78) b lack and w h i t e , 1:10,000 a e r i a l photographs of Surrey and a m i r r o r s t e r -eoscope. Many of these parameters were a l s o examined in the f i e l d to "ground proof" the photo i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Parameter measurements o b t a i n e d through f i e l d measurement <and f i e l d examinat ion) were e s t i m a t e d by sampl ing each f o r e s t e d a r e a . T r a n s e c t l i n e s were l o c a t e d through the f o r e s t e d areas on the a e r i a l photographs before f i e l d s a m p l i n g . The l o c a t i o n of the t r a n s e c t was des igned to achieve a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e sample of the a r e a . In most c a s e s , t r a n s e c t l i n e s were o r i e n t e d a c r o s s contours and a long environmental g r a d i e n t s as recommended by McBride (1977:294) . In the f i e l d , t r a n s e c t l i n e s were l o c a t e d u s i n g a p o i n t of commencement p r e v i o u s l y i d e n t i f i e d on the a e r i a l photograph and a compass f o r l i n e of d i r e c t i o n . Parameter measurements were e s t imated and r e c o r d e d a long the l ength of the t r a n s e c t l i n e . A d d i t i o n a l l i n e s were e s t a b l i s h e d as necessary to adequate ly sample v a r i a t i o n not p r e v i o u s l y a n t i c i p a t e d . Calcu1 at i on of Qual i ty of Samp 1e F o r e s t e d A r e a s i n Surrey For each f o r e s t e d area e v a l u a t e d in Surrey the f o l l o w i n g i n f o r m a t i o n i s p r o v i d e d : (1) a e r i a l photograph coverage of the s i t e , (2) a general d e s c r i p t i o n of the s i t e , (3) parameters and measurements o b t a i n e d , and (4) p o i n t r a t i n g s of q u a l i t y f o r the Page 136 • f o r e s t e d a r e a f o r : ( i ) w i l d l i - f e h a b i t a t , ( i i ) w a t e r r e s o u r c e s , ( i i i ) e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y s e n s i t i v e a r e a s , and ( i v ) r e c r e a t i o n . A l s o i n c l u d e d a r e a s t a n d v i g o r r a t i n g and l i s t i n g o f n a t u r a l / b i o l o -g i c a l / c u l t u r a l f e a t u r e s c o n t a i n e d w i t h i n the s i t e . P o i n t r a t i n g s of q u a l i t y c a l c u l a t e d f o r the f o u r b e n e f i t s f o r a l l s a m p l e f o r e s t e d a r e a s s u m m a r i z e d i n T a b l e 46. FORESTED AREA ttl G e n e r a l D e s c r i p t i o n T h i s s i t e i s l o c a t e d i n n o r t h S u r r e y e x t e n d i n g f r o m the j u n c t i o n o f 1 4 4 t h S t r e e t and 1 1 2 t h Avenue t o 1 1 6 t h A v e n u e . The m ain l a n d f o r m i s a l o n g , n a r r o w , s t e e p - w a l l e d r a v i n e c o n t a i n i n g a s m a l l c r e e k . R e s i d e n t i a l d e v e l o p m e n t has e n c r o a c h e d up t o t h e edge o f the r a v i n e i n many a r e a s ; t h e r e f o r e , the b u l k of the Page 137 •forest i s l o c a t e d on the s l o p e d areas o-f t h i s s i t e . Severa l major land slumps were noted in t h i s a r e a . Much of t h i s s i t e i s w i t h i n a S u r r e y p a r k . Parameter Measurements Recorded 1. O v e r s t o r y S p e c i e s : 2. O v e r s t o r y H e i g h t : 3 . % O v e r s t o r y Cover 4. % U n d e r s t o r y C o v e r : 5. % Groundcover: 6. S n a g s / H e c t a r e : 7. % Dead & Down C o v e r : 8. % A r e a Streams & Ravines ; 9. % A r e a Human D i s t u r b a n c e ; 10. S u r r o u n d i n g Land Use: 11. S i g . N a t / B i o F e a t u r e s : 12. S i g . N a t / C u l t F e a t u r e s : 13. F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e : 14. E r o d i b i1 i ty <K): 15. Topography ( L S ) : 16. % A r e a F l o o d Zone: 17. % A r e a We 11 and: 85% Dec i duous 34 m 60% 35% 60% 4 5% 80% 15% Medium d e n s i t y development Moderate 1y h i gh Moderate 1y h i qh 29.2 Ha 0 .46 20 0 0 P o i n t R a t i n g of Q u a l i t y C a l c u l a t e d A . WILDLIFE HABITAT B. WATER RESOURCES C . ENVIROMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA D. RECREATION R a t i n g Out of 100 P o i n t s 65.8 72. 1 75.8 77. 1 A d d i t i o n a l In format ion V i g o r r a t i n g : F a i r S i g n i f i c a n t F e a t u r e s : R a v i n e , s t ream, and f o r e s t in a r e s i -d e n t i a l area i s unique and important f o r a l l of the above bene-f i t s . Steep s l o p e s and e r o d i b l e s o i l s of the r a v i n e s are h i g h l y s e n s i t i v e to d i s t u r b a n c e . Page 138 FORESTED AREA #2 General D e s c r i p t i o n T h i s s i t e i s l o c a t e d i n n o r t h S u r r e y n e a r t h e j u n c t i o n o-f 160th S t r e e t and 102B A v e n u e . The main land-form i s a m o d e r a t e l y , s t e e p - w a l l e d r a v i n e c o n t a i n i n g a s m a l l c r e e k . S i n c e the above a e r i a l p h o t o was t a k e n i n 1978, r e s i d e n t i a l d e v e l o p m e n t h a s c a u s e d t h e r e m o v a l o-f f o r e s t c o v e r up t o the s o u t h edge o f the r a v i n e . The r e m a i n i n g f o r e s t i s , t h e r e f o r e , a n a r r o w s t r i p c o n t a i n e d w i t h i n the r a v i n e . Page 139 Parameter Measurements Recorded I. . O v e r s t o r y S p e c i e s : 2. O v e r s t o r y H e i g h t : 3. 7 O v e r s t o r y Cover : 4. 7 U n d e r s t o r y Cover : 5. 7 Groundcover: 6. S n a g s / H e c t a r e : 7. 7 Dead & Down Cover : 8. 7 A r e a Streams and Ravines 9. 7 A r e a Human D i s t u r b a n c e : 10. S u r r o u n d i n g Land Use: I I . S i g . N a t / B i o l F e a t u r e s : 12. S i g . N a t / C u l t F e a t u r e s : 13. F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e : 14. Erod i bi 1 i ty <K>: 15. Topography <LS): 16. 7 A r e a F l o o d Zone: 17. 7 A r e a Wet land: 60'/. dec i duous 37 m 607. 657. 607 13 357 i707 107 medium d e n s i t y development moderate ly high moderate ly hiqh 9.2 Ha 0 .26 15 57 207 Po in t R a t i n g s of Q u a l i t y C a l c u l a t e d R a t i n g Out of 100 P o i n t s A . WILDLIFE HABITAT 75.9 B. WATER RESOURCES 75.5 C . ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA 73.9 D. RECREATION 76 .7 A d d i t i o n a l In format ion V i g o r R a t i n g : Poor S i g n i f i c a n t F e a t u r e s : R a v i n e , s t ream, and wet land are l o c a t e d w i t h i n t h i s a r e a . Steep s l o p e s of r a v i n e are s e n s i t i v e to di s t u r b a n c e . Page 140 FORESTED AREA #3 General D e s c r i p t i o n T h i s s i t e i s l o c a t e d i n c e n t r a l S u r r e y n e a r t h e j u n c t i o n o-f 160 t h S t r e e t and ? 6 t h A v e n u e . The land-form i s m a i n l y f l a t u p l a n d w i t h a s m a l l c r e e k t h a t r u n s f r o m n o r t h t o s o u t h t h r o u g h t h e s i t e . A s m a l l r a v i n e h a s been f o r m e d a t the s o u t h end of the c r e e k . A s t h i s a r e a i s w i t h i n a S u r r e y p a r k , l i t t l e d e v e l o p m e n t has t a k e n p l a c e . S e v e r a l n a t u r e t r a i l s r u n t h r o u g h o u t the a r e a . Page 141 Parameter Measurements Recorded 1. O v e r s t o r y S p e c i e s : 2. O v e r s t o r y H e i g h t : 3. 7 O v e r s t o r y C o v e r : 4. 7 U n d e r s t o r y C o v e r : 5. '/. Groundcover : 6. S n a g s / H e c t a r e : 7. 7 Dead & Down Cover : 8. 7 A r e a Streams & Ravines : 9. 7 A r e a Human D i s t u r b a n c e : 10. S u r r o u n d i n g Land Use: 11. S i g . N a t / B i o l F e a t u r e s : 12. S i g . N a t / C u l t F e a t u r e s : 13. F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e : 14. E r o d i bi1 i ty ( K ) : 15. Topography <LS>: 16. 7 A r e a F l o o d Zone: 17. 7 A r e a We 11 and: 957 dec i duous 30 m 657 407 807 4 107 107 0 low d e n s i t y development moderate moderate 41.2 Ha 0.41 2.0 0 57 P o i n t R a t i n g s o-f Q u a l i t y C a l c u l a t e d R a t i n g Out of 100 P o i n t s A . WILDLIFE HABITAT 66.0 B. WATER RESOURCES 57.2 C . ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA 57.2 D. RECREATION 72.8 A d d i t i o n a l In format ion V i g o r R a t i n g : Good S i g n i f i c a n t F e a t u r e s : Stream, r a v i n e , and mature t r e e s are found on t h i s s i t e . R e l a t i v e l y l arge u n a l t e r e d f o r e s t . E r o d i b l e s o i l s are found in t h i s a r e a . Page 142 FOREST AREA #4 General D e s c r i p t i o n T h i s s i t e i s l o c a t e d i n c e n t r a l S u r r e y n e a r t h e j u n c t i o n o f 144 t h S t r e e t and 8 0 t h A v e n u e . The 1 a n d f o r m i s made up o f s t r e a m -b e d s , f l o o d c h a n n e l s , r a v i n e s , and some f l a t u p l a n d a r e a s . S e v e r a l c r e e k s r u n t h r o u g h t h i s s i t e i n c l u d i n g Mahood C r e e k , w h i c h i s a s p a w n i n g a r e a f o r s a l m o n i d s p e c i e s . T h i s a r e a i s , f o r the most p a r t , u n a l t e r e d by d e v e l o p m e n t and a p p e a r s t o c o n t a i n a va r i e t y o f w i l d l i f e . Page 143 Parameter Measurements Recorded 1. O v e r s t o r y S p e c i e s : 2. O v e r s t o r y H e i g h t : 3 . 7 O v e r s t o r y Cover : 4. 7 U n d e r s t o r y C o v e r : 5. '/. Groundcover : 6. S n a g s / H e c t a r e : 7. V. Dead & Down Cover : 3 . 7 A r e a Streams & Ravines; 9. '/. A r e a Human D i s t u r b a n c e : 10. S u r r o u n d i n g Land Use: 11. S i g . N a t / B i o l F e a t u r e s : 12. S i g . N a t / C u l t F e a t u r e s : 13. F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e : 14. E r o d i bi1 i ty <K>: 15. Topography <LS): 16. '/. A r e a F l o o d Zone: 17. V. A r e a Wet land: 707 dec i duous 29 m 757 407 857 7 157 407 57 s c r u b / v a c a n t - f i e ld h i gh h i gh \9~.9 Ha 0 .31 8 157 207 P o i n t R a t i n g s of Q u a l i t y C a l c u l a t e d R a t i n g Out of 100 P o i n t s A . WILDLIFE HABITAT 85.1 B . WATER RESOURCES 73.1 C . ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA 74.5 D. RECREATION 86.2 A d d i t i o n a l In format ion V i g o r R a t i n g : F a i r S i g n i f i c a n t F e a t u r e s : Mahood C r e e k , w e t l a n d , r a v i n e s , mature t r e e s , and steep s l o p e s are l o c a t e d w i t h i n the a r e a . The water course i s a spawning area f o r salmon id s p e c i e s and v a r i o u s forms of w i l d l i f e are found in t h i s r e l a t i v e l y l a r g e , n a t u r a l a r e a . Page 144 FORESTED AREA #5 G e n e r a l D e s c r i p t i o n T h i s s i t e i s l o c a t e d i n c e n t r a l S u r r e y n e a r t he j u n c t i o n o-f 172nd S t r e e t ( i f e x t e n d e d f r o m the s o u t h ) and 6 4 t h A v e n u e . The 1an d f o r m i s f l a t u p l a n d w i t h no o t h e r s i g n i f i c a n t l a n d f e a t u r e s . H i g h d e n s i t y r e s i d e n t i a l s u b d i v i s i o n s have r e c e n t l y been b u i l t t o the e a s t and s o u t h o f the s i t e . Page 145 Parameter Measurements Recorded 1. O v e r s t o r y S p e c i e s : 2. O v e r s t o r y H e i g h t : 3. 7 O v e r s t o r y Cover : 4. 7 U n d e r s t o r y Cover : 5. 7 Groundcover: 6. S n a g s / H e c t a r e : 7. 7 Dead & Down Cover : 8. 7 A r e a Streams & R a v i n e s : 9. 7 A r e a Human D i s t u r b a n c e : 10. S u r r o u n d i n g Land Use: 11. S i g . N a t / B i o l F e a t u r e s : 12. S i g . N a t / C u l t F e a t u r e s : 13. F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e : 14. Erod i bi 1 i ty <K> : 15. Topography <LS): 16. 7 A r e a F l o o d Zone: 17. 7 Area We 11 and: 1007 dec iduous 27 m 507 307 707 2 57 0 0 high d e n s i t y development 1 ow 1 ow 5.6 Ha 0 .24 0 . 1 0 0 Po in t R a t i n g s o-f Q u a l i t y C a l c u l a t e d R a t i n g Out of 100 P o i n t s A . WILDLIFE HABITAT 56.1 B. WATER RESOURCES 46.0 C . ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA 38.1 D. RECREATION 59 .7 A d d i t i o n a l In format ion V i g o r R a t i n g : Good S i g n i f i c a n t F e a t u r e s : None noted FORESTED AREA #6 Page 146 General D e s c r i p t i o n T h i s s i t e i s l o c a t e d i n c e n t r a l S u r r e y n e a r t h e j u n c t i o n o f 146th S t r e e t and 6 4 t h A v e n u e . The 1andform i s made up of s t r e a m -b e d s , f l o o d c h a n n e l s , m a r s h , r a v i n e s , and some f l a t u p l a n d a r e a . H y l a n d C r e e k , a s p a w n i n g a r e a f o r s a l m o n i d s p e c i e s , f l o w s t h r o u g h t h i s s i t e . T h i s a r e a i s , f o r t h e most p a r t , u n a l t e r e d by d e v e l o p m e n t and a p p e a r s t o c o n t a i n a v a r i e t y o f w i l d l i f e . Page 147 Parameter Measurements Recorded 1. O v e r s t o r y S p e c i e s : 2. O v e r s t o r y H e i g h t : 3. 7 O v e r s t o r y Cover : 4. 7 U n d e r s t o r y Cover : 5. 7 Groundcover : 6. S n a g s / H e c t a r e : 7. 7 Dead & Down Cover : S. 7 A r e a Streams & Ravines ; 9. 7 A r e a Human D i s t u r b a n c e : 10. S u r r o u n d i n g Land Use: 11. S i g . N a t / B i o l F e a t u r e s : 12. S i g . N a t / C u l t F e a t u r e s : 13. F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e : 14. E r o d i bi1 i ty <K): 15. Topography <LS>: 16. '/. A r e a F l o o d Zone: 17. 7 A r e a We 11 and: 60V. dec iduous 24 m 507. 807 657 9 357 507 57 medium d e n s i t y development h i gh h i qh 8.2 Ha 0 .39 3.0 87 207 P o i n t R a t i n g s o-f Q u a l i t y C a l c u l a t e d R a t i n g Out o+" 100 P o i n t s A . WILDLIFE HABITAT 75.8 B. WATER RESOURCES 70.3 C . ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA 69.7 D. RECREATION 80.5 A d d i t i o n a l In format ion V i g o r R a t i n g : F a i r S i g n i f i c a n t F e a t u r e s : Hyland C r e e k , w e t l a n d , small r a v i n e s , and moderate s l o p e s are l o c a t e d w i t h i n the s i t e . The water course i s a spawning area f o r salmon id s p e c i e s and v a r i o u s forms of w i l d l i f e are found w i t h i n t h i s r e l a t i v e l y u n a l t e r e d f o r e s t e d a r e a . FORESTED AREA **7 Page 148 G e n e r a l D e s c r i p t i o n T h i s s i t e i s l o c a t e d i n c e n t r a l S u r r e y n e a r t he j u n c t i o n oHF 168th S t r e e t and 5 6 t h A v e n u e . The l o c a l name -for t h i s a r e a i s "Mound Farm", w h i c h d e s c r i b e s t he "dome-shaped" land-form w h i c h r i s e s above the s u r r o u n d i n g - f l a t l o w l a n d . I t i s b e l i e v e d t h a t t h i s s i t e c o n t a i n s some o-f the o l d e s t and l a r g e s t <1.5 m d i a m e t e r and 55 m h i g h ) D o u g l a s F i r i n S u r r e y . A p o r t i o n o f the a r e a h a s been c l e a r e d f o r b u i l d i n g s . Page 149 Parameter Measurements Recorded 1. O v e r s t o r y S p e c i e s : 2. O v e r s t o r y H e i g h t : 3 . 7 O v e r s t o r y Cover : 4. 7 U n d e r s t o r y C o v e r : 5. 7 Groundcover: 6. S n a g s / H e c t a r e : 7. 7 Dead & Down Cover : 8. 7 A r e a Streams & R a v i n e s : 9. 7 A r e a Human D i s t u r b a n c e : 10. S u r r o u n d i n g Land Use: 11. S i g . N a t / B i o l F e a t u r e s : 12. S i g . N a t / C u l t F e a t u r e s : 13. F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e : 14. E r o d i bi1 i ty <K>: 15. Topography <LS): 16. 7 A r e a F l o o d Zone: 17. 7 A r e a Wet land: 657 c o n i f e r o u s 53 m 707 57 607 13 57 0 257 a c t i v e a g r i c u l t u r a l c r o p p i n g moderate h i qh 11~? Ha 0 .23 1 .7 0 0 P o i n t R a t i n g s o-f Q u a l i t y C a l c u l a t e d R a t i n g Out of 100 P o i n t s A . WILDLIFE HABITAT 70.1 B. WATER RESOURCES 53.0 C . ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA 42.3 . D. RECREATION 70.3 A d d i t i o n a l In format ion V i g o r R a t i n g : F a i r S i g n i f i c a n t F e a t u r e s : The unique landform and extremely large Douglas F i r in t h i s area are a c u l t u r a l a s s e t . R a p t o r i a l b i r d s ( e . g . , hawks, eag l e s ) have been noted to perch in the l a r g e c o n i f e r s . FORESTED AREA #8 Page 150 General D e s c r i p t i o n T h i s s i t e i s l o c a t e d i n e a s t S u r r e y n e a r t h e j u n c t i o n o-f 184th S t r e e t and 5 4 t h A v e n u e . The 1 a n d f o r m i s f l a t l o w l a n d w i t h s e v e r a l m a r s h y a r e a s . A s t r i p o f f o r e s t on the e a s t s i d e o f t h e s i t e h a s been c l e a r e d f o r h y d r o l i n e s and a s u r v e y l i n e h a s r e c e n t l y been s l a s h e d t h r o u g h t h e a r e a . No o t h e r s i g n i f i c a n t f e a t u r e s a r e p r e s e n t . Page 151 Parameter Measurements Recorded 1. O v e r s t o r y S p e c i e s : 2. O v e r s t o r y H e i g h t : 3 . % O v e r s t o r y Cover : 4. '/. U n d e r s t o r y Cover : 5. % Groundcover: 6. S n a g s / H e c t a r e : 7. % Dead & Down Cover : 8. % A r e a Streams & Ravines 9. % Area Human D i s t u r b a n c e 10. S u r r o u n d i n g Land Use: 11. S i g . N a t / B i o l F e a t u r e s : 12. S i g . N a t / C u 1 t F e a t u r e s : 13. F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e : 14. Erod i bi 1 i ty <K>: 15. Topography <LS>: 16. '/. A r e a F1 ood 2one : 17. V. Area Wetl and: 90'/. dec iduous 23 m 60% 20% 50% 4 15% 0 10% a c t i v e a g r i c u l t u r a l 1 ow 1 ow 3.1 Ha 0 .24 0 .1 0 15% c r op p i n g Po in t R a t i n g s of Q u a l i t y C a l c u l a t e d R a t i n g Out of 100 P o i n t s A . WILDLIFE HABITAT 57.5 B. WATER RESOURCES 43.2 C . ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA 39.4 D. RECREATION 55.4 A d d i t i o n a l In format ion V i g o r R a t i n g : Good S i g n i f i c a n t F e a t u r e s : Some marshy areas are found w i t h i n t h i s s i t e . No other f e a t u r e s n o t e d . Page 152 FORESTED AREA *9 G e n e r a l D e s c r i p t i o n T h i s s i t e i s l o c a t e d i n e a s t S u r r e y n e a r the j u n c t i o n o f 192nd S t r e e t and C o l e b r o o k Road < a p p r o x . 5 1 s t S t r e e t ) . The l a n d f o r m i s made up o f s t r e a r n b e d s , f l o o d c h a n n e l , w e t l a n d , r a v i n e , and some f l a t u p l a n d . A n d e r s o n C r e e k , a s p a w n i n g a r e a f o r s a l m o n i d s p e c i e s , f l o w s t h r o u g h t h e c e n t e r o f t h i s s i t e . S i n c e the above a e r i a l p h o t o was t a k e n i n 1978, a g r a v e l p i t h a s been o p e n e d i n the s o u t h - e a s t p o r t i o n o f the s i t e and r e s i d e n -t i a l d e v e l o p m e n t h a s e x p a n d e d i n t o t h e e a s t b o u n d a r y o f the f o r e s t . The r e m a i n i n g a r e a , h o w e v e r , i s i n a v e r y n a t u r a l c o n d i -t i o n . V a r i o u s w i l d l i f e < e.g., d e e r , b e a v e r ) a r e p r e s e n t . Page 153 Parameter Measurements Recorded 1. O v e r s t o r y S p e c i e s : 707 dec i duous 2. O v e r s t o r y H e i g h t : 33 m 3. 7 O v e r s t o r y Cover : 657 4. 7 U n d e r s t o r y Cover : 507 5. 7 Groundcover: 807 6. S n a g s / H e c t a r e : 1 1 7. 7 Dead & Down C o v e r : 307 8. 7 A r e a Streams & R a v i n e s : 657 9. 7 A r e a Human D i s t u r b a n c e : 57 10 . S u r r o u n d i n g Land Use: low d e n s i t y d e v e l o p / s c r u b 1 1 . S i g . N a t / B i o l F e a t u r e s : h i gh 12. S i g . N a t / C u l t F e a t u r e s : h i qh 13. F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e : 34l2 Ha 14. E r o d i bi1 i ty <K): 0.10 15. Topography <LS): 20 16. 7 A r e a F l o o d Zone: 207 17. 7 A r e a Ule 11 and : 257 P o i n t R a t i n g s of Q u a l i t y C a l c u l a t e d R a t i n g Out of 100 P o i n t s A . WILDLIFE HABITAT 89.0 B. WATER RESOURCES 78.7 C . ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA 79.0 D. RECREATION 90.9 A d d i t i o n a l In format ion V i gor Rat i ng: Fa i r S i g n i f i c a n t F e a t u r e s : Anderson Creek , w e t l a n d , r a v i n e s , steep s l o p e s , and mature c o n i f e r s are found w i t h i n the a r e a . The water course i s a spawning area f o r salmon id s p e c i e s and v a r i o u s forms of w i l d l i f e < e . g . , d e e r , beaver ) are found in t h i s r e l a t i v e l y l a r g e , n a t u r a l a r e a . Page 154 FORESTED AREA # 10 General D e s c r i p t i o n T h i s s i t e i s l o c a t e d i n s o u t h - e a s t S u r r e y n e a r the j u n c t i o n of l ? 2 n d S t r e e t and 3 6 t h A v e n u e . The 1 a n d f o r m i s f l a t u p l a n d w i t h no o t h e r s i g n i f i c a n t l a n d f e a t u r e s . The s o u t h - w e s t p o r t i o n of t h i s y o u n g c o n i f e r o u s f o r e s t i s b e i n g c l e a r e d f o r f i r e wood p r o d u c t i o n . A p o r t i o n o f the f o r e s t h a s been c l e a r e d a l o n g t h e n o r t h b o u n d a r y f o r a r e s i d e n c e . Page 155 Parameter Measurements Recorded 1. O v e r s t o r y S p e c i e s : 1007 c o n i f e r o u s 2. O v e r s t o r y H e i g h t : 18 m 3. 7 O v e r s t o r y C o v e r : 907 4. 7 U n d e r s t o r y Cover : 57 5. 7 Groundcover : 107 6. Snags/Hec t a r e : 0 7. 7 Dead & Down C o v e r : 57. 8. 7 A r e a Streams & R a v i n e s : 0 9. 7 A r e a Human D i s t u r b a n c e : 107. 10 . S u r r o u n d i n g Land Use: low d e n s i t y development 1 1 . S i g . N a t / B i o l F e a t u r e s : 1 ow 12 . S i g . N a t / C u l t F e a t u r e s : 1 ow 13 . F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e : 5.4 Ha 14 . E r o d i b i1 i ty <K): 0.10 15 . Topography <LS): 0 .10 1<£. . 7 A r e a F l o o d Zone: 0 17 . 7 A r e a We 11 and : 0 P o i n t R a t i n g s o f Q u a l i t y C a l c u l a t e d R a t i n g Out of 100 P o i n t s A . WILDLIFE HABITAT 49.5 B. WATER RESOURCES 41.3 C . ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA 33.4 D. RECREATION 50.7 A d d i t i o n a l In format ion V i g o r R a t i n g : F a i r S i g n i f i c a n t F e a t u r e s : None n o t e d . FORESTED AREA # 11 Page 156 General In format ion T h i s s i t e i s l o c a t e d i n s o u t h S u r r e y n e a r t h e . j u n c t i o n o-f 152nd S t r e e t and 4 8 t h A v e n u e . The l a n d f o r m i s - f l a t l o w l a n d w i t h no o t h e r s i g n i f i c a n t l a n d f e a t u r e s . Some t r e e s have been c l e a r e d i n the n o r t h - w e s t p o r t i o n o f the s i t e . Page 15? Parameter Measurements Recorded i . O v e r s t o r y S p e c i e s : 100% dec i duous 2. O v e r s t o r y Height 18 m 3. % O v e r s t o r y Cover 60'/. 4. % U n d e r s t o r y Cover 30% 5. % Groundcover 50% 6. Snags/Hec tare 4 7. % Dead & Down Cover 5% 8. % A r e a Streams & Ravines 0 9. % A r e a Human D i s t u r b a n c e 0 10 . S u r r o u n d i n g Land Use: s c r u b / v a c a n t 1 1 . S i g . N a t / B i o l F e a t u r e s : 1 ow 12 . S i g . N a t / C u l t F e a t u r e s : 1 ow 13 . F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e : 3 .8 Ha 14 . E r o d i bi1 i ty <K): 0.17 15 . Topography <LS): 0.10 16 . % A r e a F l o o d Zone: 0 17 . % A r e a We 11 and : 0 P o i n t R a t i n g s o-f Q u a l i t y C a l c u l a t e d R a t i n g Out of 100 P o i n t s A . WILDLIFE HABITAT 57.5 B. WATER RESOURCES 40.7 C . ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA 37.3 D. RECREATION 56.0 1 A d d i t i o n a l In format ion V i g o r R a t i n g : F a i r S i g n i f i c a n t F e a t u r e s : None n o t e d . Page 158 FORESTED AREA # 12 General D e s c r i p t i o n T h i s s i t e i s l o c a t e d i n s o u t h S u r r e y n e a r the j u n c t i o n o f 172nd S t r e e t and 4 t h A v e n u e . The l a n d f o r m i s made up of s t r e a m -b e d , f l o o d c h a n n e l , w e t l a n d , and g e n t l y s l o p i n g u p l a n d a r e a s . C a m p b e l l R i v e r , a s p a w n i n g a r e a f o r s a l m o n i d s p e c i e s , f l o w s t h r o u g h a s e c t i o n o f the f o r e s t . A v a r i e t y o f w i l d l i f e ( e . g . , d e e r , b e a v e r ) a r e p r e s e n t i n t h i s s i t e . The a r e a i s i n a v e r y n a t u r a l c o n d i t i o n . Page 15? Parameter Measurements Recorded 1. O v e r s t o r y S p e c i e s : 2. O v e r s t o r y H e i g h t : 3 . 7 O v e r s t o r y C o v e r : 4. 7 U n d e r s t o r y Cover : 5. 7 Groundcover: 6. S n a g s / H e c t a r e : 7. 7 Dead & Down C o v e r : 8. 7 Area Streams & Ravines 9. 7 A r e a Human D i s t u r b a n c e : 10. S u r r o u n d i n g Land Use: 11. S i g . N a t / B i o l F e a t u r e s : 12. S i g . N a t / C u l t F e a t u r e s : 13. F o r e s t T r a c t S i z e : 14. Erod i bi 1 i ty <K> : 15. Topography <LS): 16. 7 Area F l o o d Zone: 17. 7 A r e a Wet land: 50/50 con i f / d e c id 30 m 707 507 507 9 207 257 57 s c r u b / v a c a n t h i gh h i gh 11.9 Ha 0 .21 5 0 207 Po in t R a t i n g s of Q u a l i t y C a l c u l a t e d R a t i n g Out of 100 P o i n t s A . WILDLIFE HABITAT 80.7 B. WATER RESOURCES - 65 .3 C . ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA 65.1 D. RECREATION 82.1 A d d i t i o n a l In format ion Vi gor Rat i ng: Fai r S i g n i f i c a n t F e a t u r e s : Campbell R i v e r , w e t l a n d , moderate s l o p e s , and mature c o n i f e r s are found in t h i s a r e a . The water course i s a spawning area f o r sa lmonid s p e c i e s and v a r i o u s forms of w i l d l i f e are found in t h i s r e l a t i v e l y u n a l t e r e d a r e a . Page 160 T a b l e 46. Summary o-f P o i n t R a t i n g s o-f Q u a l i t y f o r Sample F o r e s t e d areas in S u r r e y . F o r e s t e d W i l d l i f e Water E . S . A . R e c r e a t i o n A r e a tt H a b i t a t Resources 1. 65 .8 72.1 75.8 77.1 2. 75 .9 75 .5 73 .9 76.7 3. 66.0 57 .2 57.2 72.8 4. 85.1 73.1 74 .5 86.2 5. 56.1 46.0 38.1 59 .7 6. 75 .8 70 .3 69 .7 80 .5 7. 70 . 1 53.0 42.3 70.3 8. 57 .5 43 .2 39.4 55.4 9. 89.0 78 .7 79.0 90 .9 10. 49 .5 41 .3 33.4 50 .7 1 1 . 57 .5 40 .7 37 .3 56.0 12. 80 .7 65 .3 65.1 82.1 Pi s c u s s i on of the E v a ! u a t i ve Framework A p p l i c a t i on i n S u r r e y The S u r r e y a p p l i c a t i o n of the e v a l u a t i v e framework p r o v i d e s a p r a c t i c a l " t e s t i n g " of the framework to expose any weaknesses or inadequac ie s in the b a s i c methodology and e v a l u a t i v e p r o c e -dures and p r o v i d e s output f o r a n a l y s i s . In g e n e r a l , no major f a u l t was found in the methodology and the output appears to be r e a l i s t i c . Parameter measures were r e l a t i v e l y easy to o b t a i n from a e r i a l photographs , e x i s t i n g s o u r c e s , and f i e l d t r a n s e c t s . T r a n s f o r m a t i o n of parameter measurements to p o i n t r a t i n g s of q u a l i t y was s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d , and was performed wi th a hand c a l c u l a t o r in a s h o r t time p e r i o d . Minor r e v i s i o n s were made to Page 161 the s t r u c t u r e of parameter m e a s u r e / q u a l i t y t a b l e s and w e i g h t i n g s based on the i n i t i a l output of the e v a l u a t i v e framework. T h i s was r e q u i r e d where predetermined e s t i m a t e s were found to be u n r e a l i s t i c when compared to the r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d from the f i e l d a p p l i c a t i o n . For example, tree h e i g h t s were i n i t i a l l y a n t i c i p a t e d to be much s m a l l e r than a c t u a l h e i g h t s r e c o r d e d in the f i e l d . The r e v i s e d , present s t r u c t u r e appears to p r o v i d e output that r e p r e s e n t s the r e l a t i v e q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d a r e a s . Two of the f o r e s t e d areas i n i t i a l l y s e l e c t e d for e v a l u a t i o n were r e j e c t e d upon f i e l d i n s p e c t i o n . One area was in an a c t i v e s t a t e of be ing logged; t h e r e f o r e , many t r e e s in the area were gone and the s i t e was h i g h l y d i s t u r b e d . The second f o r e s t e d area had, f o r the most p a r t , been c l e a r e d of t r e e s and the i n f r a -s t r u c t u r e "for a s u b d i v i s i o n was in the process of be ing c o n s t r u c t e d . These two examples r e f l e c t the land use change that i s t a k i n g p lace in Surrey and, s e c o n d l y , the general a t t i -tude toward f o r e s t e d areas in t h i s r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . Of the s i t e s that were e v a l u a t e d , many e x h i b i t e d h i g h l y i n t e r e s t i n g and important f e a t u r e s . W i l d l i f e was noted in many a r e a s , e s p e c i a l l y those areas wi th streams and w e t l a n d , and s i g n s of an imals such as deer , beaver , w a t e r f o w l , r a b b i t s , s q u i r r e 1 s , a n d s o n g b i r d s were s i g h t e d . Most r i v e r s and major streams c o n t a i n e d f i s h at the time of e v a l u a t i o n . Land-forms such as r a v i n e s , b l u f f s , f l o o d c h a n n e l s , and g u l l e y s were noted in many of the a r e a s , and in areas of steep s l o p e s , major land slumps had taken p l a c e . L a s t l y , much of the Page 162 v e g e t a t i o n was h i g h l y i n t e r e s t i n g , r a n g i n g from s m a l l , - f rag i l e w i l d f l o w e r s to t o w e r i n g , 50 meter Douglas F i r . The l e v e l of human d i s t u r b a n c e in the f o r e s t e d areas was v a r i e d . Some areas e x h i b i t e d e s s e n t i a l l y no d i s t u r b a n c e ( e x c e p t i n g stumps that were l e f t from t r e e s that were logged at the turn of the c e n t u r y ) , wh i l e o t h e r s had r e c e n t l y been p a r t i a l l y c l e a r e d f o r merchantable t i m b e r . Almost a l l areas showed s i g n s of human p r e s e n c e , r a n g i n g from f o o t p r i n t s of a person w a l k i n g through the area to t ree -houses and t r a i l s that had been c o n s t r u c t e d . In g e n e r a l , i t can be s t a t e d that most f o r e s t e d areas i n s p e c t e d were of a c o n d i t i o n that c o u l d be d e s c r i b e d as " n a t u r a l " . The p o i n t r a t i n g s of q u a l i t y c a l c u l a t e d f o r f o r e s t e d areas in Surrey appear to c o r r e s p o n d to the q u a l i t y of these areas i n t u i t i v e l y noted d u r i n g f i e l d i n s p e c t i o n . In s evera l c a s e s , such as F o r e s t e d A r e a s 6 and 12 the q u a l i t y r a t i n g appeared to be somewhat low in view of the s i g n i f i c a n t parameters which e x i s t e d in these areas ( e . g . , s t reams , we t lands , and s l o p e s ) . However, upon f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n i t was noted that a low p r o p o r t i o n of the land a c t u a l l y c o n t a i n e d these f e a t u r e s . No f o r e s t e d areas were noted as hav ing an o v e r s t a t e d q u a l i t y r a t i n g . O v e r a l l , q u a l i t y r a t i n g s c a l c u l a t e d appear to be very accep t a b l e . In g e n e r a l , the q u a l i t y c a l c u l a t e d f o r any f o r e s t e d area i s p o s t u l a t e d to be a f u n c t i o n o f : (1) the number of s e l e c t e d parameters c o n t a i n e d w i t h i n the s i t e , and (2) the c o n d i t i o n , or measure of these parameters . As shown in T a b l e 47, p o i n t r a t i n g s of q u a l i t y f o r v a r i o u s b e n e f i t s have a wide range of va lues Page 163 which re - f l ec t t h i s parameter v a r i a b i l i t y among s i t e s . Tab le 47 . Maximum and Minimum Q u a l i t y V a l u e s C a l c u l a t e d -for F o r e s t e d Areas in Su r r e y . Po in t Ra t i ngs o-f Q u a l i t y Bene-f i t Max i mum Poss i b l e Va lue Obta ined M i n i mum Poss i b l e Val ue Obtai ned Wi1dl i -fe Habi ta t 100 89.0 27 .6 49 .5 Water Resources 100 78 .7 28 .3 40 .7 E • S • A • 100 79.0 27.3 33.4 Recreat i on 100 90.0 28 .7 50 .7 From the S u r r e y s t u d y , two major o b s e r v a t i o n s r e l a t e d to the above t a b l e are no ted : <1) - forested areas o-f h igh b i o p h y s i -ca l d i v e r s i t y u s u a l l y c o n t a i n most s e l e c t e d parameters and , a t t a i n e d h igh q u a l i t y r a t i n g s ; whereas , (2) -forested areas of low b i o p h y s i c a l d i v e r s i t y lack many s e l e c t e d parameters and a t t a i n lower q u a l i t y r a t i n g s . To t e s t the v a l i d i t y of these o b s e r v a t i o n s , the twelve samples are grouped a c c o r d i n g to b i o -p h y s i c a l d i v e r s i t y and mean q u a l i t y v a l u e s are c a l c u l a t e d f o r purposes of c o m p a r i s o n . Grouping of f o r e s t e d areas i s based on parameter measure s i m i l a r i t y and personal knowledge of the s i t e s . Three c a t e g o r i e s of d i v e r s i t y and c o r r e s p o n d i n g f o r e s t e d areas are o u t l i n e d below. High B i o p h y s i c a l V a r i a b l i t y : These f o r e s t e d areas are complex in landform and v e g e t a t i o n . A l l areas c o n t a i n water -dominated f e a -t u r e s such as s treams and w e t l a n d s , and most c o n t a i n r a v i n e a r e a s . V e g e t a t i o n i s u s u a l l y d i v e r s e due to v a r i a b i l i t y in moi s ture reg ime , r e l i e f , s o i l , and aspect w i t h i n the s i t e . These areas are r a t e d as "high" in terms of s i g n i f i c a n t n a t u r a l / Page 164 b i o l o g i c a l / c u l t u r a l - features . Sample areas in Surrey that are r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o-f t h i s c a t e g o r y are f o r e s t e d areas 2 , 4 , 6 , 9 , and 12. F i g u r e 26. FORESTED AREA #4: Example of "High" B i o p h y s i c a l Di v e r s i t y . Moderate B i o p h y s i c a l V a r i a b i l i t y : These areas e x h i b i t a moderate degree of c o m p l e x i t y in landform and v e g e t a t i o n ; however, they do not e x h i b i t a f u l l range of parameters , or do not e x h i b i t d e s i r a b l e parameter measure to be r a t e d as "h igh" . These areas are r a t e d as "moderate" to "moderately high" in terms of s i g n i -f i c a n t n a t u r a l / b i o l o g i c a l / c u l t u r a l f e a t u r e s . Sample areas in S u r r e y that are r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of t h i s ca t egory are f o r e s t e d Page 165 areas 1,3, and 7. F i g u r e 27. FORESTED AREA #1: Example of "Moderate" B i o p h y s i c a l D i v e r s i t y . Low B i o p h y s i c a l D i v e r s i t y : These areas e x h i b i t a low degree of c o m p l e x i t y in landform and v e g e t a t i o n . In most c a s e s , landform and v e g e t a t i o n are un i form throughout the s i t e . Parameters such as s t reams , w e t l a n d , r a v i n e s , e t c . are u s u a l l y l a c k i n g or inade-quate in parameter measure to be r a t e d as "moderate". These areas are r a t e d as "low" in terms of s i g n i f i c a n t n a t u r a l / b i o l o g i c a l / c u t 1 u r a l f e a t u r e s . Sample areas in Surrey that are r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of t h i s c a t e g o r y are f o r e s t e d areas 5 , 8 , 1 0 , and 11 . Page 166 F i g u r e 28. FORESTED AREA # 10: Example o-f "Low" B i o p h y s i c a l Di v e r s i t y . Us ing the above c a t e g o r i e s o-f sample -forested a r e a s , mean <x> p o i n t r a t i n g s of q u a l i t y are c a l c u l a t e d f o r each ca tegory and d i s p l a y e d in T a b l e 48. T a b l e 48. Mean Q u a l i t y V a l u e s f o r Three C a t e g o r i e s of F o r e s t e d A r e a . Bi ophysi ca l Var i abi1 i ty Cateoor i es Benef i t High Moderate Low Uli 1 dl i f e Habi ta t x — 81 .3 x = 66.1 x = 54.2 Water Resources x — 72.6 x = 60.8 x = 42.8 E . S . A . X = 72.4 x = 58.4 x = 37.0 Recreat i on X = 83.3 x = 74.3 x = 56.8 From the above t a b l e , i t i s apparent that there i s a d e f i n i t e p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p between b i o p h y s i c a l d i v e r s i t y and Page 167 q u a l i t y f o r the v a r i o u s b e n e f i t s . T h i s t r end i s l o g i c a l because , in most c a s e s , the c o m p l e x i t y of a f o r e s t e d area i s the u n d e r -l y i n g f e a t u r e which governs the q u a l i t y of the area for a s p e c i -f i c b e n e f i t . In many of the parameter measure/ q u a l i t y t a b l e s , parameter d i v e r s i ty 'was assumed to be the major f a c t o r in d e t e r -m i n i n g q u a l i t y . In g e n e r a l , t h e r e f o r e , f o r e s t e d areas which d i s p l a y h igh b i o p h y s i c a l d i v e r s i t y and are d i v e r s e in parameters such as s t reams , r a v i n e s , w e t l a n d s , and v e g e t a t i o n tend to be b e t t e r s u i t e d f o r the four s e l e c t e d b e n e f i t s and are r a t e d a c c o r d i n g l y . On the o ther hand, f o r e s t e d areas which d i s p l a y low b i o p h y s i c a l d i v e r s i t y and lack many of the d e s i r e d parameters tend to be l e s s s u i t e d f o r the four b e n e f i t s and are r a t e d as lower q u a l i t y . The v a r i a n c e of q u a l i t y r a t i n g s f o r e a c h f o r e s t e d area f o r the four b e n e f i t s i s a l s o determined l a r g e l y by b i o p h y s i c a l d i v e r s i t y . From T a b l e 46, i t i s noted that the four q u a l i t y r a t i n g s ( h o r i z o n t a l ) f o r each f o r e s t e d area tend to be n u m e r i -c a l l y s i m i l a r in many cases ( i . e . , e i t h e r a l l h i g h , a l l moderate , or a l l l o w ) . T h i s tendancy i s predominant because: <1) parameters which determine q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d area a r e , in many c a s e s , s i m i l a r f o r each b e n e f i t , and <2) the f o r e s t e d a r e a ' s b i o p h y s i c a l d i v e r s i t y i s a s t r o n g determinant of q u a l i t y , r e g a r d l e s s of parameters u s e d . Based on these two f a c t s , i t i s not s u r p r i s i n g that a numerica l s i m i l a r i t y e x i s t s among the four q u a l i t y r a t i n g s f o r each f o r e s t e d a r e a . Because the four q u a l i t y r a t i n g s were not i n t e g r a t e d i n t o a s i n g l e v a l u e , the problem of "doub le -count ing" of parameters i s Page 168 not p r e s e n t . The major advantage of hav ing q u a l i t y r a t i n g s f o r four b e n e f i t s , r e g a r d l e s s of whether they are n u m e r i c a l l y s i m i -l a r or d i s s i m i l a r , i s that a more d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n of the v a l u e s of f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e i s prov i ded . The major c o n c l u s i o n s drawn from the a p p l i c a t i o n of the e v a l u a t i v e framework in S u r r e y as r e l a t e d to the " e v a l u a t i v e framework o b j e c t i v e s " (pages 20-21) ares 1. The p o i n t r a t i n g s of q u a l i t y f o r f o r e s t e d areas out of 100 p o i n t s i s an easy concept to grasp and p r o v i d e s a r e l a t i v e l y good i n d i c a t i o n of the importance of i n d i v i d u a l f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n l a n d s c a p e . 2. Q u a l i t y r a t i n g s are c a l c u l a t e d from b i o p h y s i c a l and r e l a t e d parameters that are e x p l i c i t l y o u t l i n e d and e v a l u a t e d a c c o r d i n g to e s t a b l i s h e d b i o l o g i c a l , p h y s i c a l , and r e l a t e d p r i n c i p l e s . 3 . Parameter measurements are r e l a t i v e l y easy to o b t a i n through a e r i a l photograph i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , e x i s t i n g data s o u r c e s , and f i e l d measurement. L i t t l e t r a i n i n g would be r e q u i r e d f o r p e r s o n -nel in order f o r them to c o l l e c t parameter measurements. 4. Some va lue judgement and s u b j e c t v i t y i s present in the e v a l -u a t i o n p r o c e d u r e ; however, i t i s b e l i e v e d the l e v e l of s u b -j e c t i v i t y i s a c c e p t a b l e because where s u b j e c t i v i t y i s i n v o l v e d i t i s c l e a r l y s t a t e d , j u s t i f i e d , and open to debate . 5. The e v a l u a t i v e framework output f o r the 12 sample f o r e s t e d areas i n d i c a t e s that the e v a l u a t i v e framework i s wel l s u i t e d f o r Page 16? the e v a l u a t i o n of f o r e s t e d areas between 0.5 h e c t a r e s and 50 h e c t a r e s in s i z e . 6. The i n f o r m a t i o n p r o v i d e d in the e v a l u a t i o n procedure which i n c l u d e s parameters and measurements, q u a l i t y r e l a t i o n s h i p s , b i o l o g i c a l and p h y s i c a l p r i n c i p l e s , and f o r e s t q u a l i t y r a t i n g s , c o u p l e d wi th " a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n " p r o v i d e d in the e v a l u a -t i o n , i s b e l i e v e d to p r o v i d e a complete set of data and i n f o r m a -t i o n which i s r e q u i r e d f o r d e c i s i o n s made r e l a t i n g to f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . With r e f e r e n c e to S u r r e y ' s p o l i c i e s r e l a t e d to f o r e s t e d areas and the n a t u r a l env ironment , the e v a l u a t i v e framework p r o v i d e s i n f o r m a t i o n that i s v a l u a b l e in a s s i s t i n g in the i m p l e -mentat ion of these p o l i c i e s . In p a r t i c u l a r , the e v a l u a t i v e framework i n c l u d e s and e v a l u a t e s b i o p h y s i c a l f e a t u r e s that are deemed s i g n i f i c a n t in S u r r e y ' s landscape ( e . g . , r a v i n e s , w a t e r -c o u r s e s , v e g e t a t i o n , e t c . ) and p r o v i d e s q u a l i t y r a t i n g s f o r f o r e s t e d areas based on such f e a t u r e s . The major va lue of t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n to p l a n n e r s i s that p o l i c y can be implemented on the b a s i s of the s p e c i f i c q u a l i t y or importance of the f o r e s t e d a r e a , as opposed to a general b lanke t p o l i c y c o v e r i n g a l l f o r e s t e d a r e a s . T h i s " q u a l i t y " approach i s more p r a c t i c a l in terms of l a n d use p l a n n i n g p r e c i s i o n , i n f o r m a t i o n a v a i l a b l e f o r d e c i s i o n making , e f f i c i e n c y in l and a l l o c a t i o n , and j u s t i f y i n g p o l i c y d e c i s i o n s to p o l i t i c i a n s , d e v e l o p e r s , p u b l i c , and other a f f e c t e d g r o u p s . A d e t a i l e d d i s c u s s i o n of the use of the e v a l u a -t i v e framework in p l a n n i n g f o r f o r e s t e d areas i s p r o v i d e d in the next s e c t i o n . Page 170 PLANNER'S USE OF THE EVALUATIVE FRAMEWORK IN THE RURAL-URBAN INTERFACE F o r e s t e d A r e a PIann i no P r o c e s s P l a n n e r s in the r u r a l - u r b a n inter - face , in many c a s e s , do not have the neces sary e x p e r t i s e or in f ormat ion a v a i l a b l e to deal w i t h , or make informed d e c i s i o n s r e l a t i n g to b i o p h y s i c a l c r i t e r i a f o r p l a n n i n g f o r f o r e s t e d a r e a s . T h i s lack of e x p e r t i s e and i n f o r m a t i o n i s u s u a l l y r e p r e s e n t e d by the c r e a t i o n of a s e r i e s of g e n e r a l i z e d p r a c t i s e s or p o l i c i e s that r e l a t e to such a r e s o u r c e , or a t o t a l absence of p o l i c y . Where p o l i c y i s f o r m u l a t e d , i t i s g e n e r a l l y a b lanket p o l i c y which i s ex tremely d i f f i c u l t to apply in s p e c i f i c s i t u a -t i o n s . An example of t h i s i s the C a l i f o r n i a Environmental Q u a l i t y Act which d e c l a r e s that i t i s the p o l i c y of the s t a t e to " . . . pre serve r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s of a l l p l a n t and animal communit ies and p r o v i d e the people wi th enjoyment of a e s t h e t i c , n a t u r a l , s c e n i c , and h i s t o r i c environmental q u a l i t i e s . " As wi th many s i m i l a r b lanke t p o l i c i e s <e .g . , S u r r e y ' s environmental p o l i c y ) , no s p e c i f i c g u i d e l i n e s are p r o v i d e d to a s s i s t the p lanner in i d e n t i f y i n g the b i o p h y s i c a l parameters that r e l a t e to these environmenta l q u a l i t i e s ( M c B r i d e , 1977: 292) . For e f f e c t i v e p l a n n i n g , i t i s e s s e n t i a l that s p e c i f i c and r e l e v e n t b i o p h y s i c a l and other c r i t e r i a be made a v a i l a b l e to the p lanner so that informed d e c i s i o n s can be made r e l a t i n g to the n a t u r a l component of the l a n d s c a p e . In making d e c i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g f o r e s t e d areas, in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e , i t i s b e l i e v e d that the e v a l u a t i v e framework p r o v i d e s p l a n n e r s with necessary and a c c u r a t e i n f o r m a t i o n to e f f e c t i v e l y p lan f o r t h i s Page 171 r e s o u r c e . A s o p p o s e d t o b l a n k e t p o l i c i e s -for f o r e s t e d a r e a s , t h e e v a l u a t i v e f r a m e w o r k o u t l i n e s t h e r e l a t i v e q u a l i t y o f e a c h f o r e s t e d a r e a i n t h e l a n d s c a p e w h i c h p r o v i d e s t h e b a s i s f o r f o r m u l a t i n g p o l i c y b a s e d on the r e l a t i v e " w o r t h " o f each a r e a . The i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f the e v a l u a t i v e f r a m e w o r k i n p l a n n i n g f o r f o r e s t e d a r e a s i n the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e i s d e p i c t e d i n the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s shown i n F i g u r e 29. The " I n v e n t o r y " and " A s s e s s m e n t " phase o f the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s i s a c h i e v e d t h r o u g h t h e use o f the e v a l u a t i v e f r a m e w o r k . The i n v e n t o r y and q u a l i t y r a t i n g s o f a l l f o r e s t e d a r e a s i n the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e p r o v i d e t h e f o u n d a t i o n f r o m w h i c h p l a n n i n g may be i n i t i a t e d . To s i m p l i f y t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e d u r e , f o r e s t e d a r e a s a r e c l a s s i f i e d a c c o r d i n g t o p o i n t r a t i n g o f q u a l i t y and management g u i d e l i n e s f o r m u l a t e d f o r e a c h q u a l i t y c l a s s . Recommended q u a l i t y c l a s s e s and c o r r e s p o n d i n g management g u i d e l i n e s a r e o u t l i n e d i n T a b l e 4 9 . T a b l e 4 9 . Management G u i d e l i n e s f o r F o r e s t e d A r e a Q u a l i t y CI a s s e s Qual i t y CI a s s Manaqemen t Gu i de1 i n e s * VH: V e r y H i g h T h e s e a r e a s a r e c r i t i c a l f o r e s t e d a r e a s P o i n t s : 85-100 w h i c h e x h i b i t e x c e p t i o n a l f e a t u r e s f o r the s u b j e c t b e n e f i t . Such a r e a s w a r -r a n t f u l l p r o t e c t i o n f r o m d e v e l o p m e n t and s h o u l d be m a i n t a i n e d i n an u n a l t e r e d s t a t e . S u r r o u n d i n g l a n d use w h i c h have e x t e r n a l i m p a c t s on t h e s e a r e a s s h o u l d be c l o s l e y m o n i t o r e d and c o n t r o l l e d . Page 172 FORESTED AREA CONSIDERATIONS OTHER CONSIDERATIONS Inventory and Parameter Measurement of A H F o r e s t e d A r e a s in Study A r e a | Assessmen t; Po i n t R a t i n g of Quality C a l c u l a t e d f o r Benef i t s 1 . W i l d l i f e Habi ta t Water Resources E . S . A . Recreat i on 2, 3, 4 Qual i ty CI asses Based on P o i n t R a t i n g s of Q u a l i t y ( e . g . , High Moderate , Low) 1 Recommended Fores ted:Area Management G u i d e l i n e s Based on Qual i ty CI asses P u b l i c P r e f e r e n c e ; L e g a l , . I n s t i t u t i o n a l , and Other C o n s t r a i n t s ; and Present Pol i cy Present Land Use O f f i c i a l Community PI an I n v e n t o r y , Assessment and O b j e c t i v e s Land Uses - Res i den t i al - Commerc i al - I n d u s t r i a l - Aqr i c u 1 t u r a l - U t i l i t i e s - Other for Other t TRADEOFFS FORESTED AREA PLAN PLAN IMPLEMENTATION FOLLOW-UP AND REVIEW gure 29. Flow Chart of F o r e s t e d A r e a P l a n n i n g P r o c e s s . Page 173 Qual i t y CI a s s ManaQemen t Gu i de1 i n e s * H: H i g h T h e s e a r e a s a r e h i g h l y i m p o r t a n t f o r e s t e d P o i n t s : 75-84 a r e a s w h i c h e x h i b i t h i g h l y d e s i r a b l e f e a t u r e s f o r the s u b j e c t b e n e f i t . Where f e a s i b l e , s u c h a r e a s s h o u l d be p r o t e c t e d f r o m d e v e l o p m e n t and be m a i n t a i n e d i n a r e l a t i v e l y u n a l t e r e d s t a t e . C o m p a t i b l e s u r r o u n d i n g l a n d use i s d e s i r a b l e . MH: M o d e r a t e l y H i g h T h e s e a r e a s a r e r e l a t i v e l y i m p o r t a n t P o i n t s : 65-74 f o r e s t e d a r e a s w h i c h e x h i b i t i m p o r t a n t f e a t u r e s f o r the s u b j e c t b e n e f i t . Such a r e a s do n o t w a r r a n t f u l l p r o t e c t i o n f r o m d e v e l o p m e n t ; h o w e v e r , o n l y v e r y l i m i t e d , c o m p a t i b l e d e v e l o p m e n t s h o u l d t a k e p l a c e i n o r d e r t o m a i n t a i n t h e q u a l i t y o f the s i t e . M: M o d e r a t e T h e s e a r e a s a r e i m p o r t a n t t o a v e r y P o i n t s : 50-64 l i m i t e d d e g r e e and e x h i b i t few f e a t u r e s t h a t a r e i m p o r t a n t f o r the s u b j e c t b e n e f i t . D e v e l o p m e n t , may t a k e p l a c e i n t h e s e a r e a s t o the e x t e n t t h a t i t i s c o m p a t i b l e and the f o r e s t c h a r a c t e r o f th e s i t e i s r e t a i n e d . L: Low T h e s e a r e a s a r e r e l a t i v e l y u n i m p o r t a n t P o i n t s : 2 5 - 4 ? and e x h i b i t no s i g n i f i c a n t f e a t u r e s t h a t a r e r e l a t e d t o the s u b j e c t b e n e f i t . D e v e l o p m e n t may t a k e p l a c e a s n e c e s s a r y . Where p o s s i b l e , t r e e s on the s i t e s h o u l d be r e t a i n e d . ^Management g u i d e l i n e s do n o t a c c o u n t f o r " a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n " p r o v i d e d i n the e v a l u a t i o n ; t h e r e f o r e , s u c h i n f o r m a t i o n must be c o n s i d e r e d j_n add i t i on t o g u i d e l i n e recommendat i o n s , The above management g u i d e l i n e s a r e f o r m u l a t e d f o r each b e n e f i t ; t h e r e f o r e , i t i s c o n c e i v a b l e t h a t a s i n g l e f o r e s t e d a r e a may be s u b j e c t t o d i f f e r e n t g u i d e l i n e s f o r v a r i o u s b e n e -f i t s . T h i s i s n o t s e e n a s a p o t e n t i a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n p r o b l e m f o r p l a n n e r s , b u t r a t h e r , a s an a d v a n t a g e i n t h a t i t p r o v i d e s a more c o m p l e t e s e t o f i n f o r m a t i o n a v a i l a b l e f o r d e c i s i o n m a k i n g . W i t h d i s a g g r e g a t e d i n f o r m a t i o n , t h e p l a n n e r i s i n a b e t t e r p o s i t i o n Page 174 to make d e c i s i o n s which c o r r e s p o n d wi th land use p o l i c i e s , p u b l i c p r e f e r e n c e s , and long range p l a n s . In a d d i t i o n , separate management g u i d e l i n e s are neces sary when p l a n n i n g -for a s i n g l e d i s c i p l i n e < e . g . , r e c r e a t i o n ) , or where p l a n n i n g departments are d i v i d e d by d i s c i p l i n e . It i s recommended that management g u i d e l i n e s and " a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n " p r o v i d e d f o r i n d i v i d u a l b e n e f i t s be used as s eparate "pieces" of i n f o r m a t i o n in order to make more informed d e c i s i o n s r e l a t i n g to f o r e s t e d a r e a s . In s p e c i a l or unique c a s e s , " a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n " may weigh h e a v i l y in the d e c i s i o n making p r o c e s s . T h i s would occur when h i g h l y s i g n i f i c a n t f e a t u r e s are e x h i b i t e d by the f o r e s t e d area and r e -corded as such under a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n . A l l i n form at ion a v a i l a b l e must be u t i l i z e d in d e c i s i o n making f o r f o r e s t e d a r e a s . The i n f o r m a t i o n c o l l e c t e d in the i n v e n t o r y and a s s e s s -ment phase and the c o r r e s p o n d i n g management g u i d e l i n e s can be c o n s i d e r e d as the e s s e n t i a l i n f o r m a t i o n r e q u i r e d to develop a " f o r e s t e d area p l a n " . However, as shown i s F i g u r e 29, p l a n n i n g f o r f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e cannot be p r e -formed in i s o l a t i o n and must r e c o g n i z e other land use r e q u i r e -ments and c o n s t r a i n t s imposed by other frameworks. It i s on ly a f t e r these c o n s i d e r a t i o n s have been taken in to account that t r a d e o f f s can be made between f o r e s t v a l u e s and other land use v a l u e s and a f i n a l f o r e s t e d area p lan p r e p a r e d . As the e v a l u a -t i v e framework does not account f o r other land use v a l u e s , the f u n c t i o n of d e t e r m i n i n g t r a d e o f f s i s l a r g e l y the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the p l a n n i n g body. I d e a l l y , the o u t l i n e d management g u i d e l i n e s for f o r e s t e d Page 175 areas would be implemented wi thout m o d i f i c a t i o n . A plan d e v e l -oped from these g u i d e l i n e s i s b e l i e v e d to represen t a r e a l i s t i c p i c t u r e of the v a l u e s of f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e ; the va lue of other land uses; the s h o r t - t e r m and long- t erm impact of development on f o r e s t e d a r e a s ; and the r e v -v e r s i b i l i t y of these impacts . Compliance to a p lan deve loped from the g u i d e l i n e s would ensure that development i s d i r e c t e d around c r i t i c a l f o r e s t e d areas and accomodated in areas l e s s s i g n i f i c a n t in terms of environmental and s o c i a l b e n e f i t s . Amendments c o u l d be made to the p lan as land use t r a d e o f f d e c i -s i o n s were made or as e x c e p t i o n a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s d i c t a t e d . Imp 1emen tat i on of a F o r e s t e d A r e a PI an i n the R u r a l - U r b a n  I n t e r f a c e To implement a f o r e s t e d area p lan r e q u i r e s the a p p l i c a t i o n of land use r e s t r i c t i o n s to ensure that the o b j e c t i v e s (manage-ment g u i d e l i n e s ) of the p l a n are a c h i e v e d and that the d e s i r e d q u a l i t y of the f o r e s t e d areas i s m a i n t a i n e d . On p u b l i c l y owned l a n d , p lan implementat ion i s not a d i f f i c u l t task as d e c i s i o n s made r e g a r d i n g the best use of the land i s e n t r u s t e d to a p u b l i c d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g body (which i s assumed to advocate the p l a n ) . On the other hand, most f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e are l o c a t e d on p r i v a t e l y - o w n e d land where the r i g h t s to the t r e e s are ve s t ed in the landowner. As such , the landowner has the r i g h t to c l e a r f o r e s t e d areas as he sees f i t . The argument that the p r i v a t e landowner shou ld have so l e power to dec ide what i s to be done wi th the v e g e t a t i o n on h i s land i s a l e g a l l y v a l i d one. However, the p r a c t i s e of f o r e s t Page 176 c l e a r i n g may l e a d t o s e v e r e e x t e r n a l i m p a c t s on o t h e r r e s o u r c e s and o t h e r l a n d a r e a s . T h i s i s a v a l i d c o u n t e r - a r g u m e n t t o the a b o v e . I t i s b e l i e v e d t h a t where s i g n i f i c a n t e x t e r n a l a d v e r s e i m p a c t s may be c a u s e d by f o r e s t c l e a r i n g on p r i v a t e l a n d , p r o t e c t i v e m e a s u r e s s h o u l d be t a k e n t o c i r c u m v e n t s u c h i m p a c t s . V a r i o u s l e g a l and o t h e r t e c h n i q u e s have been s u g g e s t e d and u s e d t o p r o t e c t f o r e s t e d a r e a s b o t h on p r i v a t e and p u b l i c l a n d . F o r an o u t l i n e o f s u c h m e t h o d s , r e f e r t o A n d r e s e n ( 1 9 7 6 ) , G r e a t e r V a n c o u v e r R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t ( 1 9 7 9 ) , K u s l e r <1980), L a p p i n g and K u r t z C 1 9 7 6 ) , and S w a i g e n jet aj_.<1980>. In b r i e f , t e c h n i q u e s most a p p l i c a b l e f o r p r o t e c t i n g f o r e s t e d a r e a s i n c 1 u d e : - P r o t e c t i o n S t a t u t e s : e . g . , W i l d l i f e A c t , F i s h e r i e s A c t , M u n i c i p a l A c t , e t c . - L e g i s l a t i o n : e . g . , o f f i c i a l p l a n s , z o n i n g , s u b d i v i s i o n con t r o l , e t c . - P u r c h a s e o f I n t e r e s t : e . g . , f e e s i m p l e , c o m p e n s a t i o n , l a n d e x c h a n g e , e t c . - P u r c h a s e o f P a r t i a l I n t e r e s t : e . g . , e a s e m e n t s , r e s t r i c t i v e c o v e n e n t s , l e a s e s , e t c . - P r i v a t e A c t i o n s : e . g . , a b s o l u t e and c o n d i t i o n a l g i f t s o f 1 and - Tax T e c h n i q u e s : e . g . , t a x d e f e r r a l , p r e f e r e n t i a l t a x , e t c . - O t h e r : e. g . , t r a n s f e r o f d e v e l o p m e n t r i g h t s , v o l u n t a r y p a r t i c i p a t i o n , e t c . Page 177 CONCLUSIONS F o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n inter-face are an impor-tant asset in terms of p r o v i d i n g nonconsumptive b e n e f i t s to both the environment and s o c i e t y . In s p i t e of t h i s importance , f o r e s t e d areas are c o n t i n u a l l y be ing c l e a r e d , f or r e s i d e n t i a l , commerc ia l , i n d u s t r i a l , and other development. The reason f o r t h i s n e g l e c t of f o r e s t v a l u e s can be a t t r i b u t e d to the " p u b l i c " nature of f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . The v a l u e s of p u b l i c goods, as a general r u l e , are of ten n e g l e c t e d or o v e r l o o k e d because the economic market has o n l y a l i m i t e d p o t e n t i a l to demonstrate the a c t u a l va lue of the goods due to : (1) the f a i l u r e of the market to r e f l e c t e x t e r n a l i t i e s , (2) l ong- term s o c i e t a l v a l u e s , and <3) the nature of the consumption of p u b l i c goods. For example, to a deve loper the b e n e f i t s of r e t a i n i n g large areas of f o r e s t s on a development s i t e i s m i n i -mal or even nega t ive in terms of p r o f i t s ; however, f o r the whole of s o c i e t y , the accumulated b e n e f i t s ( p r o f i t s ) d e r i v e d over the long- term are very s u b s t a n t i a l . The p u b l i c nature of f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e d i c t a t e s that p u b l i c d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s < e . g . , p l a n n e r s ) must in tervene to ensure that the v a l u e s of these areas are r e c o g n i z e d and m a i n t a i n e d . Such i n t e r v e n t i o n has t r a d i t i o n a l l y not been a t tempted . The major reasons put f o r t h f o r t h i s f a i l u r e to act a r e : (1) p l a n n e r s in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e are not aware of the true va lue of f o r e s t e d a r e a s , (2) s t u d i e s that are a v a i l a b l e on f o r e s t e d areas are not in a form that can be used by p l a n n e r s , ; and (3) p l a n n e r s do not have the a v a i l a b l e e x p e r -Page 178 t i se r e q u i r e d to i n t e r p r e t f o r e s t and r e l a t e d data when p r o v i d e d f o r t h e i r j u r i s d i c t i o n . To a l l e v i a t e the above inadequac ie s in p l a n n i n g , an e v a l u a t i v e framework i s deve loped to p r o v i d e the i n f o r m a t i o n neces sary f o r p l a n n i n g f o r f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . The i n i t i a l s tep in p l a n n i n g f o r f o r e s t e d areas i s to determine an a c c u r a t e measure of the l e v e l of b e n e f i t s p r o v i d e d by each f o r e s t e d a r e a ( i . e . , q u a l i t y of each f o r e s t e d a r e a ) . To a t t a i n t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n , a p o i n t r a t i n g system of e v a l u a t i o n i s c o n c l u d e d to be the most s u i t a b l e f o r t h i s purpose . T h i s t e c h n i -que of e v a l u a t i o n was s e l e c t e d over other t echn iques because: (1) i t p r o v i d e s output which i n d i c a t e s the r e l a t i v e q u a l i t y of each f o r e s t e d a r e a , (2) e v a l u a t i o n c r i t e r i a are e x p l i c i t l y s t a t e d , (3) a l a r g e number of v a r i a b l e s can be u t i l i z e d in the e v a l u a t i o n , which l eads to a more complete set of i n f o r m a t i o n f o r p l a n n i n g , and (4) i t r e f l e c t s the l i m i t a t i o n s imposed by the c o n s t r a i n t s of t h i s s t u d y . Other t echn iques of e v a l u a t i o n rev iewed were found to be l e s s s u i t a b l e than the p o i n t r a t i n g sys tem. The e v a l u a t i v e framework i s deve loped to e v a l u a t e f o r e s t e d areas f o r the b e n e f i t s o f : (1) w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t , (2) water r e s o u r c e s , (3) e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y s e n s i t i v e a r e a s , and (4) r e c r e a -t i o n . These b e n e f i t s are c o n c l u d e d to be of major concern f o r p l a n n i n g p u r p o s e s . Twelve sample f o r e s t e d areas in the D i s t r i c t of S u r r e y , B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , were e v a l u a t e d f o r these four b e n e f i t s to t e s t the framework f o r e f f e c t i v e n e s s f o r p l a n n i n g . From t h i s a p p l i c a t i o n , i t i s c o n c l u d e d that the e v a l u a t i v e framework i s an e f f e c t i v e method f o r d e t e r m i n i n g r e l a t i v e Page 179 q u a l i t y o-f the f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . P o i n t r a t i n g s of q u a l i t y d e r i v e d from o b j e c t i v e measurement of b i o p h y s i c a l and r e l a t e d parameters and based on e s t a b l i s h e d b i o l o g i c a l , p h y s i c a l , and r e l a t e d p r i n c i p l e s prov ide a r e l i a b l e i n d i c a t i o n of the r e l a t i v e importance of i n d i v i d u a l f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n l a n d s c a p e . The implementat ion of the e v a l u a t i v e framework by p l a n n e r s in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e i s h i g h l y f e a s i b l e because the e v a l u a t i o n procedure i s p r e d e t e r m i n e d . I n t e r p r e t a t i o n of b a s i c data to p r o v i d e q u a l i t y r a t i n g s i s performed with the e v a l u a t i v e framework; t h e r e f o r e , l i m i t e d a d d i t i o n a l e x p e r t i s e or r e s e a r c h i s r e q u i r e d for the e v a l u a t i o n of f o r e s t e d a r e a s . In some c a s e s , i n s t r u c t i o n on the measurement of parameters may be neces sary to ensure c o n s i s t e n c y in the e v a l u a t i o n p r o c e d u r e . However, in g e n e r a l , the procedure can be a c h i e v e d wi th a minimal amount of a d d i t i o n a l manpower, i n s t r u c t i o n , m a t e r i a l s , and f i n a n c e s , in a r e l a t i v e l y s h o r t time frame. The f o r e s t e d area management g u i d e l i n e s c o r r e s p o n d i n g to q u a l i t y c l a s s e s of f o r e s t e d a r e a s , combined with " a d d i t i o n a l in format ion" p r o v i d e d from the e v a l u a t i o n , p r o v i d e the e s s e n t i a l i n f o r m a t i o n f o r d e c i s i o n s made r e l a t i n g to f o r e s t e d a r e a s . T h i s i n f o r m a t i o n can be used to weigh the b e n e f i t s of f o r e s t s a g a i n s t other l and uses in order to ach ieve informed d e c i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g the use of a p a r t i c u l a r l and a r e a . Compliance to the f o r e s t e d area management g u i d e l i n e s as set out i s b e l i e v e d to r e p r e s e n t : (1) a balance between b e n e f i t s p r o v i d e d by f o r e s t s and b e n e f i t s p r o v i d e d by other land uses , Page 180 <2) the s h o r t - t e r m and l o n g - t e r m impact or urban and other development on -forested a r e a s , and (3) the r e v e r s i b i l i t y of these impacts . To achieve r e t e n t i o n o b j e c t i v e s set out in the management g u i d e l i n e s , v a r i o u s l ega l and r e l a t e d t echniques are a v a i l a b l e which may be used to ensure f o r e s t e d areas remain i n tac t . At the out se t of the development of the e v a l u a t i v e framework, s tudy o b j e c t i v e s and e v a l u a t i v e framework o b j e c t i v e s were f o r m u l a t e d as a means to l i m i t the scope of the s tudy and to ensure the framework met the requ irements for p l a n n i n g in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . A l l of these o b j e c t i v e s were a c h i e v e d ; t h e r e f o r e , i t i s conc luded that the e v a l u a t i v e framework presented i s s u i t e d f o r i t s intended purposes . In summary, i t i s conc luded that the v a r i o u s components of the e v a l u a t i v e framework; which inc lude parameters , parameter measurements, q u a l i t y r e l a t i o n s h i p s , p o i n t r a t i n g s of q u a l i t y , management g u i d e l i n e s , and so on; p r o v i d e the p lanner wi th the r e q u i r e d i n f o r m a t i o n neces sary to make informed d e c s i o n s r e l a t i n g to f o r e s t e d areas in the r u r a l - u r b a n i n t e r f a c e . Page 181 BIBLIOGRAPHY A n d r e s e n , John W. 1976. " L e g i s l a t i o n to Enhance and P r o t e c t Canada' s Urban T r e e s and F o r e s t s . " Jjn: Uliken, E . B . and G . R . I r o n s i d e ( e d s . ) . E c o l O Q i ca l Land CI ass i f i cat i on i n  Urban A r e a s . P r o c e e d i n g s o-f a Workshop, November 23-24, 1976, T o r o n t o , O n t a r i o , E c o l o g i c a l Land C l a s s i f i c a t i o n S e r i e s , No. 3 , Canada Committee on E c o l o g i c a l ( B i o p h y s i c a l ) Land C l a s s i f i c a t i o n , Lands D i r e c t o r a t e , Environment Canada, Ottawa, pp . 99-104. A n d e r s o n , S t a n l e y H. and Chandler S. Robbins . 1981. "Habi ta t S i z e and B i r d Community Management." I_n: Sabol , Kenne th ( e d ) . Transae t i ons of the For t y - S i x th Nor th Amer i can  W i1dl i fe and N a t u r a l Resources C o n f e r e n c e . W i l d l i f e Management I n s t i t u t e , Washington , D . C . , pp. 511-520. A r t h u r , L o u i s e M . , T . C . D a n i e l , and R . S . B o s t e r . 1977. "Scenic Assessment: An Overview." Landscape PIann i no• 4 (1977):109-129. B a s k e t t , Thomas S. e_t al_. 1980. A Handbook for T e r r e s t r i al Habi ta t E v a l u a t i on i n Cen tr a1 M i ssourI . Uni ted S t a t e s Department of the I n t e r i o r , F i s h and W i l d l i f e S e r v i c e , Washington , D . C . , 154 pp. B l a c k , Hugh and Jack Ward Thomas , . 1978. "Fores t and Range W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t Management: E c o l o g i c a l P r i n c i p l e s and Management Systems." I_n: De G r a a f , R i c h a r d M. ( T e c h . C o o r d . ) . Nonqame B i r d Hab i ta t Manaoemen t i n the  Con i f e r o u s F o r e s t of the Western Un i ted S t a t e s . P r o c e e d i n g s of a Workshop, U n i t e d S t a t e s Dept . of A g r i c u l t u r e - F o r e s t S e r v i c e , General T e c h n i c a l Report PNW-64, P a c i f i c Northwest F o r e s t and Range Exper imenta l S t a t i o n , P o r t l a n d , Oregon, pp . 47-55. Branson , F a r r e l A . , G e r a l d F . G i f f o r d , Kenneth G. Renard, and R i c h a r d F . H a d l e y . 1981. Ranoe1 and Hydro!ooy . Second Edi t i o n , K e n d a l l / H u n t P u b l i s h i n g Company, T o r o n t o , 340 pp . B r i t i s h Columbia M i n i s t r y of F o r e s t s . 1981 .Fores t Landscape  Handbook• In format ion S e r v i c e s B r a n c h , B . C . M i n i s t r y of F o r e s t s , V i c t o r i a , B . C . , 100 pp. Brown, George W. 1971. "Water Temperature in Small Streams as I n f l u e n c e d by Environmenta l F a c t o r s and L o g g i n g . " In: K r y g i e r , J . T . and J . D . H a l l ( e d s . ) . F o r e s t Land Uses and  S t r e am Env i ronmen t . P r o c e e d i nos of a Symposium, October 19 - 21 ,1970, Oregon Sta te U n i v e r s i t y , C o r v a l l i s , Oregon, pp . 175-181. Page 182 Brown, S a n d r a , Mark M. Bimson, and A r i e l E . Lugo. 1979. " S t r u c t u r e and F u n c t i o n of R i p a r i a n wet1ands ."In: Johnson , R.Roy and J . Frank McCormick ( T e c h . C o o r d s . ) . S t r a t e g i e s f o r P r o t e c t i on and Management of F l o o d p l a i n  U)e 11 ands and Other R i par i an Ecosystems . Proceed ings of a Symposium, December 11 - 13,1978, Cal laway Gardens , G e o r g i a , U n i t e d S t a t e s Dept . of A g r i c u l t u r e - F o r e s t S e r v i c e , General T e c h n i c a l Report WO-12, Washington , D . C . , pp. 17-31. B r u s h , Robert 0. 1980. " F o r e s t s Can be Managed f o r A e s t h e t i c s : A Study of F o r e s t Land Owners in M a s s a c h u s e t t s . " J_n: H e r r i n g t o n , L . P . , H . K . C o r d e l l , H . D . G e r h o l d , L.Wood, and G. Hopkins ( e d s . ) . Proceed i nos of  the Nat i onal Urban F o r e s t r y C o n f e r e n c e . November 13 -16, 1978, Washington , D . C , Volume I , ESF P u b l i c a t i o n 80-003, C o l l e g e of Environmenta l Sc ience and F o r e s t r y , S ta te U n i v e r s i t y of New Y o r k , S y r a c u s e , N . Y . , pp. 349-360 . B u l l , E v e l y n L . 1978. " S p e c i a l i z e d H a b i t a t Requirements of B i r d s : Snag Management, O ld Growth, and R i p a r i a n H a b i t a t . " Jjn: De Graaf 5 , R i c h a r d M. ( T e c h . C o o r d . ) . Nonqame B i r d Hab i ta t Manaoemen t i n the Con i f e r o u s  F o r e s t s of the Western Un i ted S t a t e s . Proceed ings of a Workshop, U n i t e d S t a t e s Dept . of A g r i c u l t u r e - F o r e s t S e r v i c e , General T e c h n i c a l Report PNW-64, P a c i f i c N o r t h -west F o r e s t and Range Exper imenta l S t a t i o n , P o r t l a n d , Oregon, pp. 74-82. B u n n e l l , F . L . 1982. " W i l d l i f e and Land: The Vancouver I s l a n d Example ." Ijn: Day, J . C . and R. S tace -Smi th ( e d s . ) . Br i t i sh Columb i a Land f o r W i1d1 i f e: P a s t . Presen t « and  F u t u r e . P r o c e e d i n g s of the Symposium Held at Simon F r a s e r U n i v e r s i t y , October 23-24 ,1981, B . C . M i n i s t r y of Env ironment , F i s h and W i l d l i f e B r a n c h , V i c t o r i a , B . C . , pp. 111-130. B u t z e r , K a r l W. 1974. " A c c e l e r a t e d S o i l E r o s i o n : A Problem of Man-Land R e l a t i o n s h i p s . " I_n: Manners , Ian R. and Marv in W. M i k e s e l l ( e d s . ) . P r e s p e c t i v e s on Env i ronmen t• A s s o c i a t i o n of American Geographers , P u b l i c a t i o n No. 13, Washington , D . C , pp . 57-78. C a m p b e l l , C r a i g A . 1974. " S u r v i v a l of R e p t i l e s and Amphibians in Urban E n v i r o n m e n t s . " Jjn: Noyes , J . H . and D . R . Progu l ske ( e d s . ) . W i1d1 i f e i n an Urban i z i no Env i ronmen t . P l a n n i n g and Resource Development S e r i e s No. 28, Holdsworth N a t u r a l Resources C e n t e r , U n i v e r s i t y of Mass -e c h u s e t t s , Amhers t , M a s s . , pp. 61-66. Page 183 Car-others , S.W. and R . R . J o h n s o n . 1975. "The E f f e c t s of Stream Channel M o d i f i c a t i o n on B i r d s in the Southwestern U n i t e d S t a t e s . " J_n : Proceed i nos of a Sympos i urn on Stream  Channe1 Mod i f i cat i on . U . S . Dept . of the I n t e r i o r , F i s h and W i l d l i f e S e r v i c e , O f f i c e of B i o l o g i c a l S e r v i c e s , Washington , D . C . , pp. 60 - 76. C a r t e r , V i r g i n i a , M . S . B e d i n g e r , R . P . N o v i t z k i , and W.O. W i l s o n . 1978. "Water Resources and Wet lands ." I_n: Greeson , Ph i 1 1 i p E . et. a_]_. ( e d s . ) . We 11 and Func t i on and U a l u e s :  The S ta te of Our Understand i no . Proceed ings of the N a t i o n a l Sympsium on Wet lands , Lake Buena V i s t a , F l o r i d a , November 7-10,1978, American Water Research A s s o c i a t i o n , M i n n e a p o l i s , M i n n e s o t a , pp. 344-376. C a u l e y , D a r r e l l L . 1974. "Urban H a b i t a t Requirements for Four W i l d l i ' f e S p e c i e s . " In.: Noyes , J . H . and D . R . Progul ske ( e d s . ) . W i1dl i fe i n an Urban i z i no Env i ronmen t . P l a n n i n g and Resource Development S e r i e s No. 28, Holdsworth N a t u r a l Resources C e n t r e , U n i v e r s i t y of M a s s a c h u s e t t s , Amhers t , M a s s . , pp. 143-147. Chapman, D.W. 1963. " P h y s i c a l and B i o l o g i c a l E f f e c t s of F o r e s t P r a c t i s e s Upon Stream E c o l o g y . " I_n_: S o c i e t y of American F o r e s t e r s . Symposi urn of F o r e s t Watershed Manaoement. March 25-28, 1963, Oregon Sta te U n i v e r s i t y , C o r v a l l i s , Oregon, pp . 321-330. Chow, Ven T . ( e d . ) . 1964. Handbook of Appl i ed Hydro! oqy. M c G r a w - H i l l Book Company, I n c . , T o r o n t o , 1418 pp. C i t y of C a l g a r y . 1979. A Pol i cy f o r Env i ronmen t a l 1 y Sens i t i ve  A r e a s . C a l g a r y P a r k s / R e c r e a t i o n and P l a n n i n g Departments , C a l g a r y , A l b e r t a , 17 pp . C l a r k , J u d i t h . 1978. "Freshwater Wet lands: H a b i t a t s f o r A q u a t i c I n v e r t e b r a t e s , A m p h i b i a n s , R e p t i l e s and F i s h . " I n : Greeson , Ph i 1 1 i p E . et aj_. ( e d s . ) . We 11 and Func t i on  and V a l u e s : The Sta te of Our Understand i no. Proceed ings of the N a t i o n a l Symposium on Wet lands , Lake Buena V i s t a , F l o r i d a , November 7 -10 ,1978 ,Amer ican Water Research A s s o c i a t i o n , M i n n e a p o l i s , M i n n e s o t a , pp. 330-343. CIawson, Mar i on . 1971. Suburban Land Convers i on i n the Un i ted  S t a t e s . Resources f o r the F u t u r e , I n c . , Washington, D . C . , 406 pp . CI ay, Grady ( e d . ) . 1979. Water and the Landscape . McGraw-H i11 Book Company, New Y o r k , 193 pp. C o r p o r a t i o n of the D i s t r i c t of S u r r e y . 1979. Popu1 at i on Growth  Study• P r e l i m i n a r y R e p o r t , P l a n n i n g Department, C o r p o r a t i o n of the D i s t r i c t of S u r r e y , S u r r e y , B . C . , 57 pp. Page 184 C o r p o r a t i o n o-f the D i s t r i c t of S u r r e y . 1983. The Surrey  Off i c i al Commun i ty PI an . F i n a l D r a f t , A p r i l 1983, C o r p o r a t i o n of the D i s t r i c t of S u r r e y , B . C . Cowardin , Lewis M. e_t aj_. 1976. "Inter im C l a s s i f i c a t i o n of Wet lands and A q u a t i c H a b i t a t s of the U n i t e d S t a t e s . " In; S a t h e r , J . Henry ( e d . ) . Proceed i nqs of the Nat i onal  We 11 and C I ass i f i cat i on and Inventory Workshop. J u l y 20-23, 1975, U n i v e r s i t y of M a r y l a n d , U n i t e d S t a t e s Department of the I n t e r i o r , F i s h and W i l d l i f e S e r v i c e , O f f i c e of B i o l o g i c a l S e r v i c e s , Washington, D . C . , (Addendum, 249 p p . ) . Cowardin , Lewis M . , V . C a r t e r , F . C . G o l e t , and E . T . L a r o c . 1979. C I ass i f i cat i on of We 11ands and Deepwater  Habi t a t s of the Un i t e d S t a t e s . U n i t e d S t a t e s Department of the In ter i o r , F i sh and W i l d l i f e S e r v i c e , O f f i c e of B i o l o g i c a l S e r v i c e s , FWS/OBS-79/31 , Washington , D . C . , 1 0 3 p p . C r a i g h e a d , J . and F . C r a i g h e a d , J r . 1962. "River Systems: R e c r e a t i o n a l C l a s s i f i c a t i o n , I n v e n t o r y , and E v a l u a t i o n . " N a t u r a l i s t . 13 (2 ) :3 -13 . C u r t i s , J . T . 1956. "The M o d i f i c a t i o n of M i d - L a t i t u d e G r a s s l a n d s and F o r e s t s by Man." Ijn: Thomas, W . L . ( ed . ) . M a n ' s Role i n Chang i no the Face of the Ear t h . U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago P r e s s , C h i c a g o , 111 . , pp. 721-736. Dagg, Anne Inn i s . 1973. "React ions of People to Urban W i l d l i f e . " I_n: Noyes , J . H . and D . R . Progul ske ( e d s . ) . Wi 1dl i fe i n an Urban i z i no Env i romen t . P l a n n i n g and Resources Development S e r i e s No. 28, Holdsworth N a t u r a l Resources C e n t r e , U n i v e r s i t y of M a s s a c h u s e t t s , Amherst , M a s s . , pp . 163 - 165. D a r n e l l , Rezneat M. 1978. "Impact of Human M o d i f i c a t i o n on the Dynamics of Wetland Systems." J_n: Greeson , P h i l l i p E . e_t ( e d s . ) . We 11 and Func t i on and Val ues: The S ta te of Our Understand i no. Proceed ings of the N a t i o n a l Symposium on Wet lands , Lake Buena V i s t a , F l o r i d a , November 7-10 ,1978, American Water Research A s s o c i a t i o n , M i n n e a p o l i s , M i n n e s o t a , pp. 200-209. Dean, P . B . 1976. " W i l d l i f e Needs and Concerns in Urban A r e a s . " J_n: Wiken , E . B . and G . R . I rons ide ( e d s . ) . E c o l Q Q i ca l Land C I ass i f i cat i on i n Urban A r e a s • P r o c e e d i n g s of a Workshop, November 23-24,1976, T o r o n t o , O n t a r i o , E c o l o g i c a l Land C l a s s i f i c a t i o n S e r i e s , No. 3, Canada Committee on E c o l o g i c a l ( B i o p h y s i c a l ) Land C l a s s i f i c a t i o n , Lands D i r e c t o r a t e , Environment Canada, Ottawa, pp . 43-47 . Page 185 Dee, N o r b e r t e_l al_. 1972. Env i ronmen ta l E v a l u a t i on System -for  Water Resource PI ann i no. U . S . Dept . o-f the I n t e r i o r , Bureau o-f R e c l a m a t i o n , C o n t r a c t 14-06-D-7182, B a t t e l ie Columbus L a b o r a t o r i e s , Columbus, O h i o , 188 pp. DeGraaf , R i c h a r d M. 1978. "Avian Communities and H a b i t a t A s s o c i a t i o n s in C i t i e s and Suburbs ." I_n: K i r k p a t r i c k , C h a r l e s M. ( e d . ) . W i1dl i fe and Peop1e:Proceed i nos . The 1978 John S. Wright F o r e s t r y Conference , Prudue Research F o u n d a t i o n , West L a f a y e t t e , I n d i a n a , p p . 7 - 2 4 . DeGraaf , R i c h a r d M. and Jack Ward Thomas. 1976. " W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t In or Near Human S e t t l e m e n t s . " I_n: Andresen , John W. <ed . ) . T r e e s and F o r e s t s f o r Human Se 111emen t s . P r o c e e d i n g s of Symposia in Vancouver , B . C . at U n i t e d N a t i o n s H a b i t a t Forum, I n t e r n a t i o n a l Union of F o r e s t r y Research O r g a n i z a t i o n s , pp. 54-62. DeWit t , John W. 1968. "Streamside V e g e t a t i o n and Small Coas ta l Salmon Streams." In.: Forum on the Re 1 at i on  Be tween Logo i no and Salmon: Proceed i ngs . February 8-9 ,1968, Juneau , A l a s k a , American I n s t i t u t e of F i s h e r y Research B i o l o g i s t s , p p . 3 8 - 4 7 . " D i t t r i c h , Wm. J . and J . M . Trappe ( e d s . ) . 1970. N a t u r a l A r e a s : Needs and Qpportuni t i e s . P r o c e e d i n g s of a Symposium Held at the Northwest S c i e n t i f i c A s s o c i a t i o n 43rd Annual M e e t i n g , March 27-28, 1970, C o r v a l l i s , Oregon, 54 pp. Drynes s , C . T . 1967. " E r o d i b i l i t y and E r o s i o n P o t e n t i a l of F o r e s t Watersheds ." Ijn: Sopper , Wm. E . and Howard W. L u l l ( e d s . ) . F o r e s t Hydro! ogy. Pergamon P r e s s , New Y o r k , pp . 599-611. Dunne, Thomas and Luna B . L e o p o l d . 1978. Water i n Env i ronmen ta l  PIann i no. W . H . Freeman and Company, San F r a n s i s c o , C a l i f o r n i a , 818 pp . E c h e l b e r g e r , Herber t E . and J . A l a n Wagar. 1979. "Noncommodity V a l u e s of F o r e s t s and Woodlands." In.: B e a t t y , M a r v i n . T . e_t al_. ( e d s . ) PI ann i no the Uses and Managemen t  of L a n d . Agronomy, No. 21, S o i l Sc ience S o c i e t y of A m e r i c a , M a d i s o n , W i s c o n s i n , pp. 429-443. Eckenrode , Robert T . 1965. "Weighting M u l t i p l e C r i t e r i a . " Managemen t Sc i ence . 12(3):180-192. E d g e r t o n , Paul J . and Jack Ward Thomas. 1978. " S i 1 v i c u 1 t u r a l O p t i o n s and H a b i t a t V a l u e s in C o n i f e r o u s F o r e s t s . " In.: DeGraaf , R i c h a r d M. ( T e c h . C o o r d . ) Nongame B i r d Hab i tat  Managemen t i n the Con i f e r o u s F o r e s t s of the Western  Un i ted S t a t e s . P r o c e e d i n g s of a Workshop, U . S . Dept . of A g r i c u l t u r e - F o r e s t S e r v i c e , General T e c h n i c a l Report PNW-64, P a c i f i c Northwest F o r e s t and Range Exper imenta l S t a t i o n , P o r t l a n d , Oregon, pp. 56-65. Page 186 Edwards, R. Y o r k e . 1976. "Old N a t u r a l H a b i t a t s : A V a n i s h i n g H e r i t a g e . " Nature Canada. 5 ( 3 ) : 4 4 - 4 7 . E i s n e r , Gary H. and R . C . Smardon ( e d s . ) . 1979. Proceed i nos of  "Our N a t u r a l Landscape": A Conference on App1 i ed  Techniques f o r A n a l y s i s and Manaqemen t of the V i sual  Resource . A p r i l 23-25,1979, U . S . Dept . of A g r i c u l t u r e -F o r e s t S e r v i c e , P a c i f i c Southwest F o r e s t and Range Exper imenta l S t a t i o n , B e r k e l e y , C a l i f o r n i a , 752 pp. E l t o n , C h a r l e s S. 1966. "Dying and Dead Wood." i n : The Pat tern of An i mal Commun i t i e s . John W i l e y and Sons, I n c . , New Y o r k , pp . 279-305. Evans , K e i t h and R i c h a r d N . Conner . 1979. "Snag Management." In: DeGraaf , R i c h a r d M. and K e i t h E . Evans ( e d s . ) . Manaqemen t of Nor th Cen t r a l and Nor theas tern F o r e s t s f o r  Nonqame B i r d s . U . S . Dept . of A g r i c u l t u r e - F o r e s t S e r v i c e , General T e c h n i c a l Report NC-51 , North C e n t r a l F o r e s t Exper imenta l S t a t i o n . S t . P a u l , M i n n e s o t a , pp. 214-225. F i s h e r , S . G . a n d G . E . L i k e n s . 1972. "Stream Ecosystem: Organic Energy Budget ." B i osc i ence . 22:33-35. F i s h e r i e s and Oceans Canada. 1978. Gu i de1 i nes for Land  Deve1opmen t and Protec t i on of the Aquat i c Env i ronmen t . F i s h and W i l d l i f e S e r v i c e , T e c h n i c a l Report No. 807, Vancouver , B . C . , 55 pp. F l o o d , B e t t i n a S. §_t al_. 1977. Handbook f o r Habi tat E v a l u a t i on P r o c e d u r e s . U . S . Dept . of the I n t e r i o r , F i s h and W i l d l i f e S e r v i c e , Resource P u b l i c a t i o n 132, Washington , D . C . , 77 pp . F o s t e r , R . E . and G.W. W a l l i s . 1969. Common Tree D i seases of  Br i t i sh Columb i a• F o r e s t r y Branch Publ i c a t i o n No. 1245, Dept . of F i s h e r i e s and F o r e s t r y Canada, Ottawa, 116 pp. Fuhriman, J e r r y W. and Edward S. C r o z i e r . 1974. PI ann i no for  W i l d ! i fe and Man. U . S . Dept . of the I n t e r i o r , F i s h and W i l d l i f e S e r v i c e , Washington , D . C . , 56 pp. F u s i l l o , Thomas V . 1978. " U r b a n i z a t i o n and I t s Impact on Water Resources ." I_n: H e r r i n g t o n , L . P . ejt. aj_. ( e d s . ) . Proceed i nqs of the Nat i onal Urban F o r e s t r y Conference . November 13-16,1978, Washington , D . C . , Volume I , ESF P u b l i c a t i o n 80-003, C o l l e g e of Environmenta l Sc ience and F o r e s t r y , S ta te U n i v e r s i t y of New Y o r k , S y r a c u s e , N . Y . , pp. 380-391. Gavarski , Caro l A . 1976. " R e l a t i o n of Park S i ze and V e g e t a t i o n to Urban B i r d P o p u l a t i o n s in S e a t t l e , Washington." Condor . 78(3) :375-382 . Page 187 Geh lback , F . R . 1975. " I n u e s t i g a t i o n , E v a l u a t i o n , and P r i o r i t y Rankinq o-f N a t u r a l A r e a s . " B i ol og i ca l Conservat i on . 8 :79-88. G o l d , Seymour M. 1977. "Soc ia l B e n e f i t s of T r e e s in Urban E n v i r o n m e n t s . " I n t e r n a t i o n a l Journa l of Env i ronmen ta l  Studi e s . 10:85-90. G r a y , Donald M. <ed . ) . 1970. Handbook of the Pr i nc i p1es of  Hydro1ogy. Water In format ion C e n t r e , I n c . , S y o s s e t , New Y o r k , 564 pp . Grea ter Vancouver Regional Parks D i s t r i c t . 1978. Qu tdoor Re- c r e a t i on Rev i ew: Reg ional Recreat i on O p p o r t u n i t i e s . G r e a t e r Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t , Vancouver , B . C . , 67 pp . G r e a t e r Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t . 1979. Open Space Conservacy:Manual of Legal T e c h n i q u e s . Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t , P l a n n i n g Department, Vancouver , B . C . , 93 pp . Grea ter Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t . 1982. Greater V a n c o u v e r ' s  Land Resource : C u r r e n t Use and Land Supp1y. Grea ter Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t , P l a n n i n g Department, V a n c o u v e r , B . C . , 17 pp. G r e y , Gene W. and F r e d e r i c k J . Deneke. 1978. Urban F o r e s t r y . John W i l e y and Sons, T o r o n t o , O n t a r i o , 279 pp. Hays , Robert L . , C l i f f Summers, and Wm. S e i t z . 1981. Est i mat i no W i1dl i fe Habi tat Var i a b l e s . U . S . Dept . of the I n t e r i o r , F i s h and W i l d l i f e S e r v i c e , O f f i c e of B i o l o g i c a l S e r v i c e s , FWS/OBS - 81 /47 , Washington, D . C , 111 pp . H e l l i w e l l , D . R . 1976. "The Amenity V a l u e s of T r e e s and Woodlands in Urban A r e a s . " A n d r e s e n , John W. ( ed . ) , T r e e s and F o r e s t s f o r Human Se 111emen t s . Proceed ings of Symposia in Vancouver , B . C . at U n i t e d N a t i o n s H a b i t a t Forum, I n t e r n a t i o n a l Union of F o r e s t r y Research O r g a n i z -a t i o n s , pp . 27-37 . H e w l e t t , John D. 1982. Pr i nc i p1es of F o r e s t H y d r o l o g y . The U n i v e r s i t y of G e o r g i a P r e s s , A t h e n s , G e o r g i a , 183 pp. Hoos, L i n d s a y M. and Glen A . Packman. 1974. The F r a s e r R i v e r  E s t u a r y : S t a t u s of Env i ronmen ta l Know!edge to 1974. S p e c i a l E s t u a r y S e r i e s No. 1, Environment Canada , Department of the Env ironment , P a c i f i c Regional B o a r d , Vancouver , B . C . , 518 pp. Page 188 Hubbard, W . F . and M . A . M . Bel 1 . 1976. Pre 1 iminary Descr i p t i on .  Mapp i n q . and I n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the Veqe tat i on of the  Grea ter Vancouver Req i onal D i s t r i c t . C o n t r a c t R e p o r t , P r e p a r e d by Biocon Research L t d . f o r the P a c i f i c F o r e s t Research C e n t r e , Canadian F o r e s t r y S e r v i c e , V i c t o r i a , B . C . J a a k s o n , R e i n e r . 1976. " U r b a n i z a t i o n and N a t u r a l Env ironments : A P o s i t i o n P a p e r . " Urban E c o l o q y . 2:245-257. J a c k s o n , B r i a n J . 1981. Seen i c Her i taqe Op t i ons . Prepared f o r : The H e r i t a g e C o n s e r v a t i o n B r a n c h , P r o v i n c e of B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , V i c t o r i a , B . C . , 37 pp . Johnson , R. Roy and Dale A . J o n e s . 1977. Impor tance , P r e s e r v a - t i o n , and Manaqemen t of R i par i an Hab i t a t : A Sympos i urn. J u l y 9 ,1977, T u s c o n , A r i z o n a , U n i t e d S t a t e s Dept . of A g r i c u l t u r e -F o r e s t S e r v i c e , General T e c h n i c a l Report RM-43, Rocky Mountain F o r e s t and Range Exper imenta l S t a t i o n , F o r t C o l l i n s , C o l o r a d o , 217 pp. J o n e s , G r a n t R . , John Ady , and B r i a n A . G r a y . 1976. "Scenic and R e c r e a c t i o n a l Highway Study f o r the State of Washington ." Landscape PIann i no . 3(1976): 164 - 302. K a p l a n , S tephen . 1979. "Percept ion and Landscape: Concept i'ons and M i s c o n c e p t i o n s . " In_: E i s n e r , Gary H . and R . C . Smardon ( e d s . ) . Proceed i nqs of "Our Nat i onal Landscape": A Conference on App1 i ed Techn i ques for A n a l y s i s and Manaqe- men t of the V i sua! Resource . U . S . Dept . of A g r i c u l t u r e -F o r e s t S e r v i c e , P a c i f i c Southwest F o r e s t and Range Exper imenta l S t a t i o n , B e r k e l e y , C a l i f . , pp. 241-248. K a r r , James R. and Isaac J . S c h l o s s e r . 1977. Impac t of N e a r - Stream V e q e t a t i on and Stream Morpholoqy on Water Qual i ty  and Stream B i o t a . Environmenta l Research L a b o r a t o r y , O f f i c e of Research and Development, U . S . Environmental P r o t e c t i o n Agency , A t h e n s , G e o r g i a , 90 pp. Keyes , Dale L . 1976. Land Deve1opmen t and the N a t u r a l Env i r o n - men t : Es t i mat i no Impac t s . The Urban I n s t i t u t e , Washington , D . C . , 129 pp . K u s l e r , Jon A . 1980. Requ1 at i nq Sens i t i ve Lands . Environmental Law I n s t i t u t e , Washington , D . C , Bal l i n g e r P u b l i s h i n g Company, Cambridge , M a s s a c h u s e t t s , 248 pp. L a n c i a , R i c h a r d A . , S .Doug las M i l l e r , David A . Adams, and Dennis W. H a z e l . 1982. " V a l i d a t i n g H a b i t a t Q u a l i t y Assessment: An Example ." J_n: Sabol , Kenneth ( e d . ) . Transae t i ons of the For ty-Seven th Nor th Amer i can  W i1d1 i f e and N a t u r a l Resources C o n f e r e n c e . March 26-31 , 1982, P o r t l a n d , Oregon, W i l d l i f e Management I n s t i t u t e , Washington , D . C , pp . 96-110. Page 18? L a n g , Reg and Audrey Armour. 1980. Env i ronmen ta l PIann i no  Resourcebook . P r e p a r e d -for: Lands D i r e c t o r a t e , Environment Canada, M u l t i s c i e n c e P u b l i c a t i o n s L t d . , M o n t r e a l , Quebec, 355 pp . L a n t z , R i c h a r d L . 1971. "Inf luence of Water Temperature on F i s h S u r v i v a l , Growth, and B e h a v i o r . " In.: K r y g i e r , J . T . and J . D i H a l l ( e d s . ) . F o r e s t Land Uses and S t r e am Env i ronment. P r o c e e d i n g s of a Symposium, O c t o b e r , 19-21,1970, Oregon Sta te U n i v e r s i t y , C o r v a l l i s , Oregon, p . 182. L a p p i n g , Mark B. and W.B. K u r t z . 1976. " P r o t e c t i n g P r i v a t e l y Owned Urban Woodlo t s : Trends in M u n i c i p a l Tree O r d i n a n c e s . " J o u r n a l of F o r e s t r y . 74(9) :622-624 . L a r s o n , Joseph S. 1970. "Managing Woodland and W i l d l i f e In and Near C i t i e s . " J_n: L i t t l e , S i l a s and John H. Noyes ( e d s . ) . T r e e s and F o r e s t s i n an Urban i z i no Env i ronmen t; A Sympos i urn. August 18-21, 1970, U n i v e r s i t y of M a s s a c h u s e t t s , Amhers t , M a s s . , pp . 125-132. Leedy , Danie l L . , Robert M a e s t r o , and T . M . F r a n k l i n . 1978. PIann i no f o r W i l d l i f e i n C i t i e s and Suburbs . U . S . Dept . of the I n t e r i o r , F i s h and W i l d l i f e S e r v i c e ; , Washington , D . C , 64 pp. Leeson , Bruce F . 1979. " L o w - I n t e n s i t y R e c r e a t i o n a l Uses for W i l d l a n d E n v i r o n m e n t s . " I_n_: B e a t t y , Marv in T . e_t al_. ( e d s . ) PIann i no the Uses and Managemen t of L a n d . Agronomy, No. 21, S o i l Sc i ence S o c i e t y of A m e r i c a , M a d i s o n , W i s c o n s i n , pp . 445-464. L e o p o l d , Luna B. 1968. Hydro!ogy for Urban Land PIann i no; A Gu i debook on the H y d r o ! O Q i c E f f e c ts of Urban Land Use. U . S . Dept . of the I n t e r i o r , G e o l o g i c a l Survey , C i r c u l a r 554, Washington , D . C , 18 pp. L e o p o l d , Luna B . 196?. Quan tat i ve Compar i son of Some Aesthe t i c  Fac t o r s Among R i v e r s . U . S . Dept . of the I n t e r i o r . G e o l o g i -ca l S u r v e y , C i r c u l a r 620, Washington , D . C , 16 pp. L i n e s , Ivan L . , J r . and C h a r l e s J . P e r r y . 1?78. "A Numerical H a b i t a t E v a l u a t i o n P r o c e d u r e . " i n : S a b o l , Kenneth ( e d . ) . T r a n s a c t i ons of the For t y - T h i r d Nor th Arner i can W i l d l i f e and  N a t u r a l Resources C o n f e r e n c e . March 18-22,1978, Phoenix , A r i z o n a , W i l d l i f e Management I n s t i t u t e , Washington , D . C , pp . 284-301. L i n s l e y , Ray K . , Max A . K o h l e r , and J . L . H . P a u l h u s . 1975. Hydro!ogy f o r Eng i n e e r s . Second E d i t i o n , McGraw H i l l Book Company, New Y o r k , 482 pp. Page 190 L i t t o n , R . B u r t o n , J r . , R o b e r t J . T e t l o w , Jens Sorensen , and Russel A . B e a t t y . 1974. Water and Landscape; An Aesthe t i c  Qverv i ew o-f the Rol e o-f Water i n the Landscape . Water I n-f ormat i on C e n t r e , I n c . , Port Washington , New Y o r k , 314 PP • L u l l , Howard W. 1970. "E-f-fects o-f T r e e s and F o r e s t s on Water R e l a t i o n s . " I_n_: L i t t l e , S i l a s and John H. Noyes ( e d s . ) . T r e e s and F o r e s t s i n an Urban i z i no Env i ronment: A Sympo- s i um. August 18-21,1970, U n i v e r s i t y o-f M a s s a c h u s e t t s , Amhers t , M a s s . , pp. 65-70. Lu11 , Howard W. and W . E . Sopper . 1969. H y d r o ! O Q i ca l E f f e c t s From  Urban i zat i on of F o r e s t e d Watersheds i n the Nor t h e a s t . U . S . Dept . of A g r i c u l a t u r e - F o r e s t S e r v i c e , F o r e s t S e r v i c e Research Paper NE-146 , Nor theas t F o r e s t Exper imenta l S t a t i o n , Upper Darby, P A . , 31 pp. L u t t m e r d i n g , H . A . 1980. S o i l s of the Lano ley -Vancouver Map A r e a . Volumes 1-3, B . C . S o i l Survey Report No. 15, RAB B u l l e t i n 18, B . C . M i n i s t r y of the Env ironment , Assessment and P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n , Kelowna, B . C . L y n c h , James A . 1978. "Water Q u a n t i t y and Q u a l i t y : F o r e s t H y d r o -logy A s p e c t s . " J_n: H e r r i n g t o n , L . P . e_t aj_. ( e d s . ) . Proceed i nqs of the Nat i onal Urban F o r e s t r y C o n f e r e n c e . November 13-16,1978, Washington , D . C , Volume I , ESF P u b l i -c a t i o n 80-003, C o l l e g e of Environmenta l Sc ience and F o r e s t r y , S ta te U n i v e r s i t y of New Y o r k , S y r a c u s e , New Y o r k , pp. 368-379. Maser , C h r i s e_t aj_. 1979. "Dead and Down Woody M a t e r i a l ." I n: Thomas, Jack Ward ( e d . ) . W i I d ! i fe Hab i t a t s i n Managed  F o r e s t s : The Blue Moun ta i ns of Oregon and Wash i ng ton . U . S . Dept . of A g r i c u l t u r e - F o r e s t S e r v i c e , A g r i c u l t u r a l Hand-book No. 553, Washington , D . C , 511 pp. M c A r t h u r , R . H . and J . W . M c A r t h u r . 1961. "On B i r d S p e c i e s D i v e r s i t y . " E c o l o g y . 42:594-598. M c A r t h u r , R . H . , J . W . M c A r t h u r , and J . P r e e r . 1962. "On B i r d S p e c i e s D i v e r s i t y : P r e d i c a t i o n of B i r d Census from H a b i t a t Measurements ." The Amer i can N a t u r a l i s t . 96 (888): 167-174. M c B r i d e , Joe R. 1977. " E v a l u a t i o n of V e g e t a t i o n in E n v i r o n -mental P l a n n i n g . " Landscape P l a n n i n g . 4(1977):291-312. McHarg, Ian L . 1969. Pes i gn Wi th Nature • The N a t u r a l H i s t o r y P r e s s , Garden C i t y , New Y o r k , 198 pp. Page 191 Meslow, E . C h a r l e s . 1978. "The R e l a t i o n s h i p of B i r d s to H a b i t a t S t r u c t u r e : P l a n t Communities and S u c c e s s i o n a l S tages ." In : DeGraaf , R i c h a r d Ii. <Tech . C o o r d . ) . Nonqame B i r d Hab i tat  Manaqemen t i n the Con i f e r o u s F o r e s t s of the Western Un i ted  S t a t e s . P r o c e e d i n g s of a Workshop, U . S . Dept . of A g r i c u l -ture - F o r e s t S e r v i c e , General T e c h n i c a l Report PNW-64, P a c i f i c Northwest F o r e s t and Range Exper imenta l S t a t i o n , P o r t l a n d , Oregon, pp. 12-18. Moore, M. Ke i t h . 1980. Streams i de Manaqemen t: A Dec i s i on Mak i nq  Procedure f o r Sou th Coas ta l Br i t i sh Columb i a . Second Rev i sed E d i t i o n , Land Management Handbook No. 1, B . C . M i n i s t r y of F o r e s t s , V i c t o r i a , B . C . , 88 pp . More , Thomas A . 1979. The Demand f o r Noncomsump t i ve W i1dl i fe  Uses: A Rev i ew of the L i t e r a t u r e . U . S . Dept . of A g r i c u l -ture - F o r e s t S e r v i c e , General T e c h n i c a l Report NE-52 , N o r t h e a s t e r n F o r e s t Exper imenta l S t a t i o n , Broomal1 , P A . , 16 PP • M u r r a y , T imothy e_t aj_. 1971. Honey H i l l : A Systems Anal ys i s f o r  PIann i no the M u l t i p l e Use of Con t r o l 1 e d Water A r e a s . Volumes 1-2, U . S . Dept . of Commerce, N a t i o n a l T e c h n i c a l In format ion S e r v i c e , S p r i n g f i e l d , V i r g i n i a , 726 pp. 0 ' B r y a n , D e r i c and R u s s e l l L . McAvoy. 1966. Greenpowder F a l I s .  Mary1 and. U . S . Dept . of the I n t e r i o r , G e o l o g i c a l Survey , Water Supply Paper 1916, Washington , D . C , 90 pp. Odum, Eugene P. 1978. "The Value of Wet lands: A H i e r a r c h i a l Approach . " J_n : Greeson , Ph i 1 1 i p E . e_t aj_. < eds . ) . We 11 and  Func t i on and V a l u e s : The Sta te of Our Understand i n q . P r o c e e d i n g s of the N a t i o n a l Symposium on Wet lands , Lake Buena V i s t a , F l o r i d a , November 7-10,1978, American Water Research A s s o c i a t i o n , M i n n e a p o l i s , M i n n e s o t a , pp. 16-25. Odum, Eugene P . 1979. " E c o l o g i c a l Importance of the R i p a r i a n Zone." I_n: Johnson , R.Roy and J . Frank McCormick ( T e c h . C o o r d s . ) . S t r a t e q i es f o r Pro tec t i on and Manaqemen t of  F l o o d p l a i n We 11ands and Other Ri par i an Ecosystems. P r o c e e d i n g s of a Symposium, December 11-13,1978, Cal laway Gardens , G e o r g i a , U . S . Dept . of A g r i c u l t u r e - F o r e s t S e r v i c e , General T e c h n i c a l Report WO-12, Washington, D . C , pp . 6-10. Parks Canada. 1977. A System to Inventory and E v a l u a t e Moun t a i n  R i v e r s f o r Canoe i no and Kayak i nq . Parks Canada, Western R e g i o n , N a t u r a l H i s t o r y Research D i v i s i o n , Research Paper 77-3 , C a l g a r y , A l b e r t a , 70 pp. Page 192 Payne, B . R . and R i c h a r d M. DeGraaf . 1975. "Economic V a l u e s and R e c r e a t i o n a l Trends A s s o c i a t e d With Human Enjoyment o-f Nongame B i r d s . " ln_: Sympos i urn on Manaqemen t o-f F o r e s t  and Range Habi t a t s -for Nongame B i r d s . U . S . Dept . of A g r i c u l t u r e - F o r e s t S e r v i c e , General T e c h n i c a l Report WQ-1 , Washington , D . C , pp. 6-10. P e t e r k e n , G . F . 1981. Woodland Conservat i on and Managemen t . Chapman and H a l l , New Y o r k , 328 pp. P h i l l i p s , Robert W. 1971. " E f f e c t s of Sediment on the Gravel Environment and F i s h P r o d u c t i o n . " In.: K r y g e i r , J . T . and J . D . H a l l ( e d s . ) . F o r e s t Land Uses and S t re am Env i ronmen t . P r o c e e d i n g s of a Symposium, October 19-21,1970, Oregon Sta te U n i v e r s i t y , C o r v a l l i s , Oregon, pp. 64-74d. P i e r c e , Robert S. 1967. "Evidence of Over land Flow on F o r e s t Watersheds ." I_n: Sopper , Wm. E . and Howard W. L u l l ( e d s . ) . F o r e s t Hydrol oqy. Pergarnon P r e s s , New Y o r k , pp . 247-253. P i t t , D a v i d , Kenneth S o e r g e l l I I , and E r v i n Zube. 1979. "Trees in the C i t y . " In.: L a u r i e , Ian C . ( e d . ) . Nature i n C i t i e s . John W i l e y and Sons, T o r o n t o , O n t a r i o , 428 pp . P r y o r , R . J . 1968. " D e f i n i n g the R u r a l - U r b a n F r i n g e . " Soc i al  F o r c e s . 47:202-215. Reg i onal Mun i c i pal i ty of Hal t o n . 1978. Env i ronmen t a l1 y Sens i t i ve  A r e a s S t u d y . Regional M u n i c i p a l i t y of Hal t o n , O a k v i11e , On tar i o, 260 pp. R e y - L e s c u r e , E r i c . 1978. E v a l u a t i nq the Recreat i onal Poten t i al  of Urban F o r e s t s . Canadian F o r e s t r y S e r v i c e , L a u r e n t i a n F o r e s t Research C e n t r e , S t e . F o y , Quebec, 88 pp. Rosenberger , L i s a and R . E . C o u g h l i n . 1979. P l a n n i n g for V e q e t a - t i on i n Urban i z i no A r e a s • RSRI D i s c u s s i o n Paper S e r i e s No. 115, Regional Sc ience Research I n s t i t u t e , P h i l a d e l p h i a , Penn . , 25 pp . ' Russwurm, L o m e H . 1975. "Urban F r i n g e and Urban Shadow." I n: B r y f o g l e , R. C h a r l e s and Ralph R. Krueger ( e d s . ) . Urban  Probi ems. H o l t , R i n e h a r t , and Winston of Canada, T o r o n t o , O n t a r i o , pp . 148-164. Russwurm, L o m e H. 1977. "The Urban F r i n g e as a Regional Env ironment ." I_n_: Russworm, L o m e H. e_t aj_. ( e d s . ) . Essays  on Canad i an Urban Proces s and Form. Dept . of Geography, F a c u l t y of Env iromenta l S t u d i e s , U n i v e r s i t y of W a t e r l o o , O n t a r i o , pp. 181-228. S a r g e n t , F r e d e r i c 0. and J u s t i n H . Brande . 1976. " C l a s s i f y i n g and E v a l u a t i n g Unique N a t u r a l A r e a s f o r P l a n n i n g Purposes ." J o u r n a l of Soi1 and Water Conservat i on . 31(3) :113-116. Page 193 Schamberger, Me 1 v i n L . , Cath l een S h o r t , and A d r i a n Farmer. 1978. " E v a l u a t i o n of Wetlands as W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t . " In.: Greeson , Ph i 1 1 i p E . e_t al_. ( e d s . ) . We 11 and Func t i on and V a l u e s : The  S ta te of Our Understand i n o j . Proceed ings of the N a t i o n a l Symposium on Wet lands , Lake Buena V i s t a , F l o r i d a , American Water Research A s s o c i a t i o n , M i n n e a p o l i s , M i n n e s o t a , pp. 74-83. Schamberger, M e l v i n L . and Wm B. K r o h n . 1982. "Status of W i l d -l i f e H a b i t a t P r o c e d u r e s . " In.: Sabol , Kenneth ( e d . ) . Transae t i ons of the For ty-Seven th Nor th Amer i can W i1dl i fe  and N a t u r a l Resources C o n f e r e n c e . March 26-31,1984, P o r t l a n d , Oregon, W i l d l i f e Management I n s t i t u t e , Washington , D . C . , pp. 154-164. S c h i t o s k y , F r a n k , J r . and Raymond L . L i n d e r . 1978. "Use of Wetlands by Up 1 and W i 1 dl i f e . " J_n: Greeson , P h i l l i p E . e_t al . ( e d s . ) . We 11 and Func t i on and V a l u e s : The S ta te of Our  Understand i no. P r o c e e d i n g s of the N a t i o n a l Symposium on We t lands , Lake Buena V i s t a , F l o r i d a , American Water Research A s s o c i a t i o n , M i n n e a p o l i s , M i n n e s o t a , pp. 307-311. Schmid, James A . 1979. "Vegetat ion T y p e s , F u n c t i o n s , and Con-s t r a i n t s in M e t r o p o l i t a n Env ironments ." I_n_: B e a t t y , Marv in T . e_t. aj_. ( e d s . ) . PI ann i no the Uses and Manaoemen t of Land . Agronomy, No. 21. S o i l Sc ience S o c i e t y of A m e r i c a , Madi son , W i s c o n s i n ; , pp . 499-528. Schwarz, C h a r l e s F . , Edward C . Thor and Gary H. E i s n e r . 1976. W i 1 d l a n d PIann i no G l o s s a r y . U . S . Dept . of A g r i c u l t u r e F o r e s t S e r v i c e , General T e c h n i c a l Report PSW-13/1976, P a c i f i c Southwest F o r e s t and Range Exper imenta l S t a t i o n , B e r k e l e y , C a l i f o r n i a , 252 pp . Shoesmith , M e r l i n W. 1978. " W i l d l i f e Management C o n f l i c t s in Urban Winnepeg." J_n: K i r k p a t r i c k , C h a r l e s M. ( e d . ) . W i 1dl i fe and Peop1e: Proceed i n o s . The 1978 John S. Wright F o r e s t r y C o n f e r e n c e , Purdue Research F o u n d a t i o n , West L a f a y e t t e , I n d i a n a , pp . 49-57. S h o r t , Henry L . 1982. "Development and Use of a H a b i t a t G r a d i e n t Model to E v a l u a t e W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t . " In.: S a b o l , Kenneth ( e d . ) . Transae t i ons of the For ty-Seven th Nor th Amer i can  Wi 1 dl i fe and N a t u r a l Resources Conference . March 26-31,1982, P o r t l a n d , Oregon, W i l d l i f e Management I n s t i t u t e , Washington , D . C , pp. 57-81 . S i n d e n , John A . and A l b e r t C W o r r e l . 1979. Unpr i ced  V a l u e s : D e c i s i ons W i thou t Marke t Pr i c e s . John W i l e y and Sons, I n c . , New Y o r k , 511 pp . Page 194 S i n t o n , John W. 1970. "The S o c i a l V a l u e s of T r e e s and F o r e s t s f o r R e c r e a t i o n and Enjoyment of W i l d l i f e . " I_n.: L i t t l e , S i1 as and John H. Noyes < e d s . ) . T r e e s and F o r e s t s i n an  Urban i z i no Env i ronmen t: A Sympos i urn. August 18-21,1970, U n i v e r s i t y of M a s s a c h u s e t t s , Amherst , M a s s . , pp. 71-76. Sopper , Wm. E . and Howard W. L u l l ( e d s . ) . 1967. F o r e s t  H y d r o l o o y . Pergamon P r e s s , New Y o r k , 813 pp. S p r o u t , P . N . and C . C . K e l l e y . 1961. So i1 Survey of Surrey Mun i - c i pal i t y . P r e l i m i n a r y Report No. 3 of the Lower F r a s e r V a l l e y , B . C . Dept . of A g r i c u l t u r e , Kelowna, B . C . , 68 pp. S t a t i s t i c s Canada. 1981. Census T r a c t s : Popu1 at i on , Qccup i ed  Pr i vate Dwe11 i nos . Pr i vate Househo lds . Census Fami1 i es i n  Pr i vate H o u s e h o l d s : V a n c o u v e r . Cata logue 95-937, 1981 Census of Canada, M i n i s t r y of Supply and S e r v i c e s Canada, Ottawa. S t e a r n s , F o r e s t . 1974. " W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t s in the U r b a n i z i n g Env ironment ." J_n: Noyes , J . H . and D . R . Progul ske ( e d s . ) . W i1d l i fe i n an Urban i z i no Env i ronmen t . P l a n n i n g and Resource Development S e r i e s No. 28, Holdsworth N a t u r a l Resources C e n t r e , U n i v e r s i t y of M a s s a c h u s e t t s , Amherst , M a s s . , pp . 151-153. S t e i n i t z , C a r l , Timothy M u r r a y , Dav id S i n t o n , and Douglas Way. 1969. A Comparat i ve Eva!uat i on of Resource A n a l y s i s  Me thods . Dept . of Landscape A r c h i t e c t u r e , Harvard U n i v e r s i t y , Cambridge , M a s s . , 383 pp . S t r i f f l e r , W.D. 1979. "Watershed P l a n n i n g and Management." Ins B e a t t y , Marv in T . e_t a l _ . ( e d s . ) . PI ann i no the Uses and  Management of L a n d . Agronomy, No. 21, S o i l Sc ience S o c i e t y of A m e r i c a , M a d i s o n , W i s c o n s i n , pp. 795-811. Swaigen, J . and J . W . A n d r e s e n . 1980. Mode 1 Tree By-Laws f o r  Canad i an M u n i c i p a l i t i e s . Report 0 -X-309 , Canadian F o r e s t r y S e r v i c e , Great Lakes F o r e s t Research C e n t r e , Sau1 t S t e . M a r i e , O n t a r i o , 43 pp. T a n s , W i l l i a m . 1974. " P r i o r i t y Ranking of B i o t i c N a t u r a l A r e a s . " The Mi ch i pan Botan i s t . 13(1) : 31-39. T a r n o c a i , C . 1979. "Canadian Wetland R e g i s t r y . " I_n: Rubec, C D . A . and F . C P o l l e t ( e d s . ) . Proceed i nos of a Workshop on  Canad i an We 11ands. June 11-13,1979, Saskatoon , Saskatchewan, E c o l o g i c a l Land C l a s s i f i c a t i o n S e r i e s No. 12, Lands D i r e c t o r a t e , Environment Canada, Ottawa, pp. 9 - 38. Thomas, Jack Ward ( e d . ) . 1979. W i1d1 i f e Hab i t a t s i n Managed  F o r e s t s : The Blue Mountai ns of Oregon and Wash i ngtgn . U . S . Dept . of A g r i c u l t u r e - F o r e s t S e r v i c e , A g r i c u l t u r a l Handbook No. 553, Washington , D . C , 511 pp. Page 195 Thomas, Jack Ward, R . M . DeGraaf , and J . C . Mawson. 1974. "A Technique f o r E v a l u a t i n g B i r d H a b i t a t . " J_n: Noyes , J . H . and D . R . Progu l ske ( e d s . ) . W i1d1 i f e i n an Urban i z i nq Env i r o n - men t . P l a n n i n g and Resource Development S e r i e s No. 28, Holdsworth N a t u r a l Resource C e n t r e , U n i v e r s i t y of M a s s a c h u s e t t s , Amherst , M a s s . , pp . 159-162. Thomas, Jack Ward, C h r i s Maser , and Jon E . Rodiek . 1979. " R i p a r i a n Zones ." I_n_: Thomas, Jack Ward ( e d . ) . W i 1 dl i f e  Habi t a t s i n Manaqed F o r e s t s s The Blue Moun ta ins of Oregon  and Wash i nqton• U . S . Dept . of A g r i c u l t u r e - F o r e s t S e r v i c e , A g r i c u l t u r a l Handbook No. 553, Washington , D . C , pp. 40-47. Thurow, C h a r l e s , Wm. T o n e r , and D. E r l e y . 1975. Performance C o n - t r o l s f o r Sens i t i ve Lands: A Prac t i ca l Gu i de for Local  Adm i n i s t r a t o r s . P a r t s 1-2, O f f i c e of Research and D e v e l o p -ment, U . S . Environmenta l P r o t e c t i o n Agency, Washington , D . C . , 156 pp . Toews, D . A . A . and M . J . Brown l e e . 1981. A Handbook for F i sh  Hab i tat Pro tec t i on on F o r e s t Lands i n Br i t i sh Columb i a . F i s h e r i e s and Oceans Canada, Vancouver , B . C . , 166 pp. Tr egay, Rob. 1979. "Urban Woodlands." In: Laur i e, I an C• ( e d . ) . Nature i n C i t i e s . John W i l e y and Sons, I n c . , T o r o n t o , O n t a r i o , pp. 267-295. T r e l e a v e n , G. F e r n . 1978. The S u r r e y S t o r y . Surrey Museum and H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y , S u r r e y , B . C . , 200 pp. Trough t o n , Michae l J . 1978. "The R u r a l - U r b a n F r i n g e : Land Use C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and Resource Management C h a l l e n g e s . " Urban  Forum. 3 ( 5 ) : 8 - 1 3 . T w i s s , Robert H. and I r a M. Heyman.(date n . a . ) "Nine Approaches  to Env i ronmen ta l PIann i no ." Department of Landscape A r c h i -t e c t u r e , C o l l e g e of Environmenta l D e s i g n , U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , B e r k e l e y , C a l i f o r n i a . , pp. 125 - 133. U n i t e d S t a t e s Army Corps of E n g i n e e r s . 1980. A Hab i tat E v a l u a - t i on System f o r Water Resources PIann i nq . Lower M i s s i s s i p p i V a l l e y D i v i s i o n , V i c k s b u r g , M i s s i s s i p p i , 89 pp. U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia F o r e s t C l u b , T h e . 1971. F o r e s t r y  Handbook f o r Br i t i sh Columb i a . U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , V a n c o u v e r , B . C . , 815 pp. Walrnsley, M. e_t aj_. 1980. Descr i b i nq Ecosystems i n the F i e l d . RAB T e c h n i c a l Paper 2, Land Management Report No. 7, Resources A n a l y s i s B r a n c h , B . C . M i n i s t r y of Environment , Vi c t o r i a , B . C . , 224 pp. Watt , Kenneth . 1973. Pr i nc i p1es of Env i ronmen ta l Sc i ence• McGraw -H i l l Book Company, New Y o r k , 319 pp . Page 196 W e l l e r , M i l t o n Ul. 1978. "Management o-f Freshwater Marshes for W i l d l i f e . " J_n: Good, Ralph E . et aj . . ( e d s . ) . Freshwater  We 11ands; E c o l Q Q i ca l Proces se s and Manaqemen t Poten t i al . Academic P r e s s , New Y o r k , pp. 267-284. Whitaker Gene A . and R i c h a r d H. McCuen. 1976. "A Proposed Methodology f o r A s s e s s i n g the Q u a l i t y of W i l d l i f e H a b i t a t . " E c o l o g i ca l Model 1 i no. 2:251-272. Wigham, John M. 1970. " I n t e r c e p t i o n . " I_n: Gray , Donald M. ( e d . ) . Handbook on the Pr i nc i p1es of Hydro1ogy. Water Informat ion C e n t r e , I n c . , S y o s s e t , New Y o r k , pp. 4 . 1 - 4 . 9 . W i l s e y and Ham I n c . 1971. The South Surrey PI an Study: Phys i ca l Cond i t i ons . Memorandum Report No. 1, Prepared for R i c h a r d L e i t c h and A s s o c i a t e s , I n c . , The C o r p o r a t i o n of the D i s t r i c t of S u r r e y , S u r r e y , B . C . , 34 pp. Winn, Dav id S. 1976. T e r r e s t r i al Ver t ebrate Fauna and Se1ec ted  Con i f e r o u s F o r e s t Hab i ta t Types on the Nor th SI opes of the  Un i ta Moun ta i n s . U . S . Dept . of A g r i c u l t u r e - F o r e s t S e r v i c e , Region 4, Wasatch N a t i o n a l F o r e s t , S a l t Lake C i t y , U t a h , 145 pp . Wischmeier , W.H. and D . D . S m i t h . 1978. Predi ct i no Rai nfal1  Eros i on Losses - A Gu i de to Conservat i on PIann i no• U . S . Dept . of A g r i c u l t u r e , A g r i c u l t u r a l Handbook No. 537, Washington , D . C , 58 pp . W r i g h t , D . F . 1977. "A S i t e E v a l u a t i o n Scheme for Use in the Assessment of P o t e n t i a l Nature Reserves ." B i o l o g i ca l  Conservat i on . 11(4) :293-306. Z o l t a i , S . C 1979. "An O u t l i n e of the Wetland Regions of Canada." I_n: Rubec , C D . A . and F . C P o l l e t t ( e d s . ) . Proceed i nos of a Workshop on Canad i an We 11ands. June 11-13,1979, S a s k a t o o n , Saskatchewan, E c o l o g i c a l Land C l a s s i f i -c a t i o n S e r i e s No. 12, Lands D i r e c t o r a t e , Environment Canada, Ottawa, pp. 1-8. Page 197 APPENDICES Appendix I . G l o s s a r y of T e r m i n o l o g y Page 198 6L0SSARY OF TERMINOLOGY A e s t h e t i c s . P e r t a i n i n g to the q u a l i t y o-f the human p e r c e p t u a l exper i ence ( i n c l u d i n g s i g h t , sound, s m e l l , t a s t e , and movement) evoked by the phenomena of e lements or c o n f i g -u r a t i o n s of e lements in the environment (Moore , 1 980 :84) . A m e n i t y . Something p r o v i d i n g comfort or p l e a s a n t n e s s . Anadromous. Of a s tock or s p e c i e s of f i s h which reproduce in f r e s h water and migrate to s a l t or b r a c k i s h water to r e a r f o r a p o r t i o n of i t s l i f e ( L i s t e r e_t. al_. , 1980: Appendix D ) . A s p e c t . A measure of the o r i e n t a t i o n of a s lope by means of compass p o i n t s ( L u t t m e r d i n g , 1 9 8 1 : 2 0 9 ) . A q u a t i c . P e r t a i n i n g to water ; of the water ( e . g . , f r e s h w a t e r , e s t u a r i n e , or marine) (Toews and Brown 1ee ,1981:103) . Codominant T r e e . T r e e s w i th crowns forming the general l e v e l of the f o r e s t canopy. The crown i s u s u a l l y s m a l l e r than that of a dominant tree and i s u s u a l l y more crowded on the s i d e s ( T a r n o c a i , 1979:18) . C o n i f e r o u s T r e e . A tree of the Gymnospermae; mos t ly evergreens that bear cones and have need le - shaped or s c a l e - l i k e l eaves (Thomas,1979:472) . C o n t i g u o u s . Having c o n t a c t or adjacent t o . C o v e r . V e g e t a t i o n used by w i l d l i f e or f i s h for p r o t e c t i o n from p r e d a t o r s , or to a m e l i o r a t e c o n d i t i o n s of weather , or in which to reproduce (Thomas,1979:473) . Dead and Down. A l l woody m a t e r i a l , from whatever s o u r c e , that i s dead and l y i n g on the f o r e s t f l o o r . For w i l d l i f e purposes , the m a t e r i a l must be at l e a s t 30 c e n t i m e t e r s at the l a r g e s t end and at l e a s t 6 meters in l ength (Thomas,1979:473) . Deciduous T r e e . A tree of the Angiospermae; t r e e s that shed t h e i r l eaves and are l e a f l e s s f o r some time d u r i n g the year (Thomas,1979:473) . D i v e r s i t y . The r e l a t i v e degree of abundance of w i l d l i f e s p e c i e s , p l a n t s p e c i e s , h a b i t a t s , e t c . per u n i t of area (Thomas, 1979:474) . Dominant T r e e . T r e e s wi th crowns e x t e n d i n g above the general l e v e l of the f o r e s t canopy. They are l a r g e r than the average tree in the s tand and have wel l developed crowns which may be somewhat crowded on the s i d e s (Tarnoca i , 1979:18) . Page 19? Ephemera l . A stream or p o r t i o n o-f a stream that -flows on ly in d i r e c t response to p r e c i p i t a t i o n <Schwarz,1976:74) . E r o s i o n . The p r o c e s s by which the s o i l and rock components o-f the e a r t h ' s c r u s t are worn away and moved -from one p lace to another by n a t u r a l f o r c e s such as w e a t h e r i n g , s o l u t i o n , and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n <Thurow,1?75:85) . Fauna. The animal community of an area or r e g i o n (Toews and Brownlee ,1981:104) . F l o r a . The p l a n t community of an area or r e g i o n (Thomas,1979: 476) . F l u v i a l . V a r i o u s p r o c e s s e s caused by f l o w i n g water . Game S p e c i e s . S p e c i e s of v e r t e b r a t e w i l d l i f e hunted by man for s p o r t (Thomas,1979:477) . Groundcover . I n c l u d e s a l l herbaceous s p e c i e s r e g a r d l e s s of t h e i r he ight and some low woody p l a n t s i f l e s s than 15 c e n t i -meters in he ight (Walmsley ejfc al . . 1 980 : 1 40) . Groundwater . Water that i s p a s s i n g through or s t a n d i n g in the s o i l and the u n d e r l y i n g s t r a t a . It i s f r e e to move by g r a v i t y ( L u t t m e r d i n g , 1 9 8 1 : 2 1 2 ) . Herbaceous S p e c i e s . With the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of a herb; a p l a n t wi th no p e r s i s t a n t woody stem above ground (Cowardin ,1979: 42) . H e r i t a g e . R e f e r s to o b j e c t s , s i t e s , or landscapes of c u l t u r a l or h i s t o r i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e to the l o c a l a r e a , m u n i c i p a l -i t y , r e g i o n , p r o v i n c e , or n a t i o n ( J a c k s o n , 1 9 8 1 : 4 ) . Home Range. The area which an animal t r a v e r s e s in the scope of normal a c t i v i t i e s ( Thomas,1979:478) . H y d r i c S o i l s . S o i l s that are w a t e r - s a t u r a t e d for most of the y e a r . In most cases they are o r g a n i c s o i l s . Hydrograph . Is a graph of the stage or d i s c h a r g e of a stream p l o t t e d over time ( L i n s l e y , 1 9 7 5 : 1 3 2 ) . Hydrophyte . Any p l a n t growing in a s o i l that i s at l e a s t p e r -i o d i c a l l y d e f i c i e n t in oxygen as a r e s u l t of exces s ive water content ( C o w a r d i n , 1 9 7 9 : 3 7 ) . Imperv ious . R e s i s t a n t to p e n e t r a t i o n by f l u i d s or r o o t s (Lut tmerd i ng ,1981:213) . Intermediate T r e e . T r e e s wi th crowns below, but s t i l l ex tend ing i n t o the general l e v e l of the f o r e s t canopy. They u s u a l l y have small crowns that are c o n s i d e r a b l y crowded on the s i d e s ( T a r n o c a i , 1979:18) . Page 2 0 0 I n t e r m i t t e n t Stream. A stream wi th a d e f i n e d c h a n n e l , but which i s dry f o r p e r i o d s of the y e a r , u s u a l l y the l a t e summer and f a l l p e r i o d of low p r e c i p i t a t i o n and no snow melt <Toews and Brownlee ,1931:104) . L i t t e r L a y e r . The uppermost l a y e r of o r g a n i c d e b r i s on a f o r e s t f l o o r ; e s s e n t i a l l y the f r e s h l y f a l l e n or s l i g h t l y decom-posed v e g e t a t i v e m a t e r i a l i n c l u d i n g f o l i a g e , b a r k , f l o w e r s , and f r u i t s ( Thomas,1979s480) . Mass W a s t i n g . The downslope movement of masses of s o i l and o r g a n i c matter under the i n f l u e n c e of g r a v i t y ( e . g . , s lumps , s l i d e s ) (Toews and Brown 1ee ,1981:105) . M i c r o c l i m a t e . The c l i m a t i c c o n d i t i o n s w i t h i n a small or l o c a l area that i s we l l d e f i n e d (Thomas,1979:482) . N a t u r a l n e s s . The r e l a t i v e c o n d i t i o n of a s i t e , l andscape , or o b j e c t that p e r t a i n s to the s t a t e of nature or n o n a l t e r a -t i on . N i c h e . With r e f e r e n c e to h a b i t a t : The p e c u l i a r arrangement of f o o d , c o v e r , and water that meets the requ irements of a p a r t i c u l a r s p e c i e s (Thomas,1979:483) . Non-Game S p e c i e s . S p e c i e s of v e r t e b r a t e w i l d l i f e that are not o r d i n a r i l y hunted by man f o r s p o r t (Thomas,1979:483) . O v e r s t o r y . The p o r t i o n of the t r e e s which form the uppermost canopy l a y e r in a f o r e s t of more than one canopy. T r e e s i n c l u d e d in t h i s s t o r y would be v e t e r a n s , dominants , c o -dominants , i n t e r m e d i a t e s , and suppressed t r e e s g r e a t e r than 10 meters in he ight (Walmsley e_t al . , 1980 :138) Peak F low. The maximum stage or d i s c h a r g e of a stream r e s u l t i n g from maximum input from s u r f a c e r u n o f f and subsur face f1ows. P e a t . U n c o n s o l i d a t e d s o i l m a t e r i a l c o n s i s t i n g l a r g e l y of undecomposed, or s l i g h t l y decomposed o r g a n i c matter ( L u t t m e r d i n g , 1 9 8 1 : 2 1 5 ) . P e r e n n i a l S tream. A stream which has f l o w i n g water a l l year (Toews and Brown 1ee ,1981:105) . P e r v i o u s . A v a i l a b l e to p e n e t r a t i o n by f l u i d s and r o o t s . R a v i n e . An e l o n g a t e d narrow d e p r e s s i o n , l a r g e r than a g u l l e y , u s u a l l y formed by r u n n i n g water . It i s d i s t i n g u i s h e d from s u r r o u n d i n g land by i t s V-shaped form, steep s l o p e s , and r e l a t i v e l y u n s t a b l e c h a r a c t e r . R i p a r i a n . An area i d e n t i f i e d by the presence of v e g e t a t i o n that r e q u i r e s f r e e or unbound water , or c o n d i t i o n s more moist than n o r m a l l y found in the area (Thomas,1979:486) . Page 201 Salmon i d . R e f e r s to a member o-f the f i s h f a m i l y c l a s s e d as Sa lmonidae , i n c l u d i n g the salmons, t r o u t s , c h a r s , w h i t e -f i s h e s , and g r a y l i n g ( L i s t e r ejt aj_ . , 1 980 :Appendi x D) . Sediment . Fragmentary m a t e r i a l that i s t r a n s p o r t e d by water or a i r , or i s accumulated in beds by n a t u r a l proces se s (Karr and S c h l o s s e r , 1 9 7 7 : 8 8 ) . S e d i m e n t a t i o n . The p r o c e s s of subs idence and d e p o s i t i o n of s e d i -ment c a r r i e d in water by g r a v i t y ; u s u a l l y the r e s u l t of r e d u c t i o n of water v e l o c i t y below the p o i n t at which i t can t r a n s p o r t the m a t e r i a l in suspended form (Toews and Brownlee ,1981:106) . Shrub . A p l a n t w i th p e r s i s t e n t woody stems and r e l a t i v e l y low growth form. It u s u a l l y produces s e v e r a l basal shoots as opposed to a s i n g l e bole and d i f f e r s from a tree by i t s low s t a t u r e and n o n - a r b o r e s c e n t form (Thomas,1979:488) . Snag. A s t a n d i n g dead tree from which the l eaves or needles and most of the l imbs have f a l l e n . For w i l d l i f e purposes , the snag must be at l e a s t 10.2 c e n t i m e t e r s diameter breas t he ight (1 .37 meters above ground) and at l e a s t 1.8 meters t a l l (Thomas,1979:489) . Snag-Dependent W i l d l i f e . S p e c i e s of w i l d l i f e that are dependent on snaqs f o r n e s t i n g or r o o s t i n g h a b i t a t , or for food (Thomas~1979:489). S o i l . Is the n a t u r a l l y o c c u r i n g , u n c o n s o l i d a t e d ! , minera l or o r g a n i c m a t e r i a ! at the e a r t h ' s s u r f a c e that i s capable of s u p p o r t i n g p l a n t growth. It extends 15 c e n t i m e t e r s below the depth at which p r o p e r t i e s produced by s o i l - f o r m i n g p r o c e s s e s can be d e t e c t e d ( L u t t m e r d i n g , 1 9 8 1 : 2 1 6 ) . Suppressed T r e e s . T r e e s wi th crowns e n t i r e l y below the general l e v e l of the f o r e s t canopy, u s u a l l y g r e a t e r than 10 meters in he ight (Tarnoca i ,1979:19) . T e r r e s t r i a l . P e r t a i n i n g to the l a n d , as opposed to water (Toews and Brown 1ee,1981:107) . T u r b i d i t y . A c o n d i t i o n of water r e s u l t i n g from the presence of suspended m a t e r i a l . T y p i c a l l y expressed in Jackson T u r b i d i t y U n i t s , a measure of i n t e r f e r e n c e wi th l i g h t t r a n s m i s s i o n (Karr and S c h 1 o s s e r , 1 9 7 7 : 9 0 ) . U n d e r s t o r y . T r e e s and shrubs growing under the canopy formed by t a l l e r t r e e s ( o v e r s t o r y ) . P l a n t s in t h i s s t o r y would i n -c lude suppressed t r e e s g e n e r a l l y l e s s than 10 meters in h e i g h t , t a l l shrubs (2 to 10 meters in h e i g h t ) , and low shrubs (15 c e n t i m e t e r s to 2.0 meters in h e i g h t ) . (Walmsley e_t al_. ,1980 :1 38 - 140) . Page 202 U n i v e r s a l S o i l Loss E q u a t i o n . Is an e r o s i o n model des igned to p r e d i c t the longt ime average s o i l l o s s e s in r u n o f f from s p e c i f i c f i e l d areas in s p e c i f i c c o n d i t i o n s (Wischmeier and Smi t h , 1 9 7 8 : 3 ) . V e t e r a n T r e e . T r e e s s i g n i f i c a n t l y o l d e r than the t r e e s of the main canopy. V e t e r a n s are u s u a l l y i s o l a t e d in d i s t r i b -u t i o n and o f ten extend wel l above the main tree canopy (Tarnoca i , 1979:19) . Page 203 Appendix I I . S o i l E r o d i b i l i t y F a c t o r <K> and Nomograph. Source : Wischmeier , W.H. and D . D . Smi th . 1978. Pred i c t i no Ra i nfal1 E r o s i on Losses - A Gu i de to Conservat i on PIann i no. A g r i c u l t u r e Handbook No. 537, U n i t e d S t a t e s Department o-f A g r i c u l t u r e , Washington, D . C , pp. 8 - 11. Paqe 204 8 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, AGRICULTURE HANDBOOK NUMBER 5 3 7 west that has an erosion index of 20 (fig. 1) and averages 12 in of precipitation between De-cember 1 and March 31 would have an estimated average annual R of 1.5(12) + 20, or 38. This type of runoff may also be a significant factor in the northern tier of Central and Eastern States. Where experience indicates this to be the case, it should be included in R and also in the erosion index distribution curves as illustrated on page 27 . SOIL ERODIBILITY FACTOR (K) The meaning of the term "soil erodibility" is distinctly different from that of the term "soil ero-sion." The rate of soil erosion. A , in the soil loss equation, may be influenced more by land slope, rainstorm characteristics, cover, and management than by inherent properties of the soil. However, some soils erode more readily than others even when all other factors are the same. This differ-ence, caused by properties of the soil itself, is re-ferred to as the soil erodibility. Several early at-tempts were made to determine criteria for scien-tific classifications of soils according to erodibility (6, 18, 28, 35), but classifications used for erosion prediction were only relative rankings. Differences in the natural susceptibilities of soils Definit ion The soil erodibility factor, K, in the USLE is a quantitative value experimentally determined. For a particular soil, it is the rate of soil loss per ero-sion index unit os measured on a "unit" plot, which has been arbitrarily defined as follows: A unit plot is 72.6 ft long, with a uniform length-wise slope of 9 percent, in continuous fallow, tilled up end down the slope. Continuous fallow, for this purpose, is land that has been tilled and kept free of vegetation for more than 2 years. During the period of soil loss measurements, the plot is plowed and placed in conventional corn seedbed condition each spring and is tilled as needed to prevent vegetative growth and severe surface crusting. When all of these conditions are met, L, S, C, and P each equal 1.0, and K equals A / E l . The 72.6 ft length and 9 percent steepness were selected as base values for L, S, and K because they are the predominant slope length and about the average gradient on which past erosion mea-to erosion are difficult to quantify from field ob-servations. Even a soil with a relatively low erodi-bility factor may show signs of serious erosion when it occurs on long or steep slopes or in lo-calities with numerous high-intensity rainstorms. A soil with a high natural erodibility factor, on the other hand, may show little evidence of actual ero-sion under gentle rainfall when it occurs on short and gentle slopes, or when the best possible man-agement is practiced. The effects of rainfall differ-ences, slope, cover, and management are ac-counted for in the prediction equation by the sym-bols R, I, S, C , and P. Therefore, the soil erodibility factor, K, must be evaluated independently of the effects of the other factors. of Factor K surements in the United States had been made. The designated management provides a condition that nearly eliminates effects of cover, manage-ment, and land use residual and that can be dupli-cated on any cropland. Direct measurements of K on well-replicated, unit plots as described reflect the combined effects of all the soil properties that significantly influence the ease with which a particular soil is eroded by rainfall and runoff if not protected. However, K is an average value for a given soil, and direct mea-surement of the factor requires soil loss measure-ments for a representative range of storm sires and antecedent soil conditions. (See I n d i v i d u a l Storm Soi l Losses under A P P L Y I N G THE SOIL LOSS EQUATION. ) To evaluate K for soils that do not usually occur on a 9-percent slope, soil loss data from plots that meet all the other specified condi-tions are adjusted to this base by S. Va lues of K for Specific Soils Representative values of K for most of the soil available research information. These tables are types and texture classes can be obtained from available from the Regional Technical Service Cen-' tables prepared by soil scientists using the latest ters or State offices of SCS. Values for the exact t Page 205 PREDICTING RAINFALL EROSION LOSSES-A GUIDE TO CONSERVATION PLANNING 9 TABLE I.—Computed K values for soils on erosion cator of erodibility. However, a soil's erodibility research stations is a function of complex interactions of a substan-SM Source of data Computed X tial number of its physical and chemical properties Dunkirk . i i t loam Geneva, N.v. 'iyti a n d o f , e n varies within a standard texture class. Koono i i l i loam Zaneiville, Ohio .48 Values of K determined for 23 major soils on S M b y loam Bethany, M o . .41 which erosion plot studies under natural rain were l o d i l o 0 ' " Blacbburg, V a . .39 conducted since 1930 are listed in table 1. Seven Fayette tilt loam LaCroue, W i i . '.38 - , , - , . - ., _ , _ ., j i , u, .L. ..i r- of these values are from continuous fa ow. The Cecil .andy clay loam Watkmtville, G a . .36 Mar ihol l silt loam Clar inda, Iowa .33 others are from row crops averaging 20 plot-years Ida li l t loam Caitana, Iowa .33 of record and grown in systems for which the Mamie cloy loam Hay», Kons. .32 cropping effect had been measured in other stud-Haa.er.tow,, . i l ty clay loom State College. Po. '.31 i e s 0 t h e ( . $ o i | s 0 „ w h , e h v a | u a b | e e r o . i o n t t u d i e s Auitin cloy Temple, Tex. . 2 ° , . , . . . . . . . u . ... , u - u „fl have been conducted* were not included tn the Mexico tut loam McCredie, Mo. .28 Honeoye tilt loam Morwl tu i , N .Y. '.28 table because of uncertainties involved in adjust-Cecil tandy b a m Clemton, s.C. 1 .28 ments of the data for effects of cropping and man-Ontario loam Geneva, N.Y, 1.27 agement. C « i l cloy l „ m W a t k i n . . i l l . , O a . .26 Direct' measurement of the erodibility factor is Botw«ll find tandy loam Tyler, Tex. .25 . 1 1 1 . , 1 Cecil . a n d , loom wotk in .v i l l . . G a . .23 b o , h c o s , l v o n d , , m e consuminfj and has been Zonei . fine tandy loom Guthrie, Oklo. .22 feasible only for a few major soil types. To achieve Tifton loamy lond Tifton, G a . .10 a better understanding of how and to what ex-Freehold loomy .and Marlboro, N . j . .08 t e n t e a c h of various properties of a soil affects its Both fiaggy tilt loam with .urface Arnot, N .Y. '.05 • * i . j • . . . . j ., , , erodibility, an interregional study was initiated •tone. > 2 Inche. removed . . . . , Alb io gravelly loam Beemerville, N . J . .03 i n 1961. The study included the use of field-plot i T~i • 77, TH Z Z rainfall simulators in at least a dozen States to ob-Evaluated from continuou. fallow. A l l other, were computed from rowcrop data. * a m comparative data on numerous soils, labora-tory determinations of physical and chemical prop-erties, and operation of additional fallow plots soil conditions at a specific site can be computed u n d e r n a t u r a l r a i n- Several empirical erodibility by use of the soil erodibility nomograph presented equations were reported (3, 60). A soil erodibility in the next subsection. nomograph for farmland and construction sites Usually a soil type becomes less erodible with <58' P r i d e d a more generally applicable work-decrease in silt fraction, regardless of whether the i n9 , 0 0 1- Approximate K values for 10 benchmark corresponding increase is in the sand fraction or s o i l s i n H a w a i i a r e l i s , e d i n , o b l e 2-the clay fraction. Overall, organic matter content. ranked next to particle-size distribution as an indi- * See footnote 3, p. i. Order Ul t i io l . O x i i o l . \ Oxi .ol* V Vert i .ol . \ A r i d i i o l . V v l n t e p t i i o l l TABLE 2.—Approximate values of the so Suborder Subgroup Great group Humult. Tropohumulti Humoxic Tropohumult. Torrox Torrox Typic Torrox U.tox Eutru.tox Tropeptlc Eutrurtox U.tert. Chromu.tert. Typic Chromu.tert. il erodibility factor, K, for 10 benchmark soils in Hawaii Family Orthids Andepti Andepti Andepti Andepti Tropeptt Camborthidt Dystrandepts Eutrartdepti Eutrandfepti Hydrandepti Uttropepti Uttollie Camborthidt Hydric Dyttrandepti Typic Eutrartdepti Entic Eutrondeptt Typic Hydrandepti Verttc Uttropepti Clayey, koolinttic, itohyperthermic Cloyey, koolinttic, itohyperthermic ..Clayey, koolinitic, itohyperthermic Very fine, montmorillonitic, itohyperthermic Medial , itohyperthermic Thixotropic, itothermic Medial , itohyperthermic Medial , itohyperthermic Thixotropic, itohyperthermic Very fine, koolinttic, itohyperthermic Sen'., Woikane K 0.10 Moldkai .24 Wahiawa .17 Lualualei .28 Kawaihae .32 (Extremely .tony pha.e) Kukaiau .17 Naolehu (Variant) .20 Pakini .49 Hilo .10 Waipohu .20 Page 206 10 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, AGRICULTURE HANDBOOK NUMBER 537 Soil Erodibil The soil loss data show that very fine sand (0.05-0.10 mm) is comparable in erodibility to silt-sized particles and that mechanical-analysis data are much more valuable when expressed by an inter-action term that describes the proportions in which the sand, silt, and clay fractions are combined in the soil. When mechanical analysis data based on the standard USDA classification are used for the nomograph in figure 3, the percentage of very fine sand (0.1-0.05 mm) must first be transferred from the sand fraction to the silt fraction. The mechani-cal analysis data are then effectively described by a particle-size parameter M, which equals percent silt (0.1-0.002 mm) times the quantity 100-minus-percent-clay. Where the silt fraction does not ex-ceed 70 percent, erodibility varies approximately as the 1.14 power of this parameter, but prediction accuracy is improved by adding information on organic matter content, soil structure, and profile permeability class. For soils containing less than 70 percent silt and very fine sand, the nomograph (fig. 3) solves the equation: 100 K = 2.1 M ' " (10-) (12 - . ) + 3.23 (b — 2) + 2.3 (« — 3) (3) where M = the particle-size parameter defined above, a = percent organic matter, b = the soil-structure code used in soil classifica-tion, and c = the profile-permeability class. The intersection of the selected percent-silt and per-cent-sand lines computes the value of M on the unidentified horizontal scale of the nomograph. (Percent clay enters into the computation as 100 minus the percentages of sand and silt.) The data indicate a change in the relation of M to erodibility when the silt and very fine sand fraction exceeds about 70 percent. This change was empirically reflected by inflections in the percent-sand curves at that point but has not been de-scribed by a numerical equation. Readers who would like more detail regarding the data and relationships underlying the nomo-graph equation may obtain this from journal arti-cles (58, 60). N o m o g r a p h So lut ion With appropriate data, enter the scale at the lity Nomograph left and proceed to points representing the soil's percent sand (0.10-2.0 mm), percent organic mat-ter, structure code, and permeability class as il-lustrated by the dotted line on the nomograph. The horizontal and vertical moves must be made in the listed sequence. Use linear interpolations between plotted lines. The structure code and per-meability classes are defined on the nomograph for reference. Many agricultural soils have both fine granular topsoil and moderate permeability. For these soils, K may be read from the scale labeled "first ap-proximation of K," and the second block of the graph is not needed. For all other soils, however, the procedure must be completed to the soil erodi-bility scale in the second half of the graph. The mechanical analysis, organic matter, and structure data are those for the topsoil. For evalua-tion of K for desurfaced subsoil horizons, they per-tain to the upper 6 in of the new soil profile. The permeability class is the profile permeability. Coarse fragments are excluded when determining percentages of sand, silt, and clay. If substantial, they may have a permanent mulch effect which can be evaluated from the upper curve of the chart on mulch and canopy effects (p. 19, fig. 6) and applied to the number obtained from the nomograph solution. Conf idence Limits In tests against measured K values ranging from 0.03 to 0.69, 65 percent of the nomograph solutions differed from the measured K values by less than 0.02, and 95 percent of them by less than 0.04. Limited data available in 1971 for mechanically exposed B and C subsoil .horizons indicated about comparable accuracy for these conditions. How-ever, more recent data taken on desurfaced high-clay subsoils showed the nomograph solution to lack the desired sensitivity to differences in erodi-bilities of these soil horizons. For such soils the content of free iron and aluminum oxides ranks next to particle-size distribution as an indicator of erodibility (37). Some high-clay soils form what has been called .irreversible aggregates on the surface when tilled. These behave like larger pri-mary particles. o o z o I z -n > o •z o c n O z < > o z > z z z o M o -\1 FIGURE 3 . - T h . ,o i l - . rodibi l i t , nomograph. W h . r . t h . . i l l fraction doe. not exceed 70 p.rc.nt, t h . equation i . 100 K = 2.1 M ' " (10-) (12 - a) + 3.25 (b - 2) + 2.5 (c - 3) w h . r . M = (percent . i + »f0 (100 - percent c). . = percent organic matter, b = structure cod . , and e = profile permeability c lou . Page 208 Appendix I I I . Topograph ic F a c t o r <LS) and Slope E f f e c t C h a r t . Source : Wischmeier , W.H. and D . D . Smi th . 1978. Pred i c t i nq Ra i nf al 1 Er os i on Losses -A Gu i de to Conservat i on PIann i nq . A g r i c u l t u r e Handbook No. 537, U n i t e d S t a t e s Department of A g r i c u l t u r e , Washington, D . C , pp . 12 - 16 3 58". Page 209 12 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, AGRICULTURE HANDBOOK NUMBER 537 TOPOGRAPHIC FACTOR (LS) Both the length and the steepness of the land slope substantially affect the rate of soil erosion by water. The two effects have been evaluated sep-arately in research and are represented in the soil loss equation by L and S, respectively. In field applications, however, considering the two as a single topographic factor, LS, is more convenient. Slope-Effect Chart LS is the expected ratio of soil loss per unit area from a field slope to that from a 72.6-ft length of uniform 9-percent slope under otherwise identical conditions. This ratio for specified combinations of field slope length and uniform gradient may be obtained directly from the slope-effect chart (fig. 4). Enter on the horizontal axis with the field slope length, move vertically to the appropriate percent-slope curve, and read LS on the scale at the left. For example, the LS factor for a 300-ft length of 10-percent slope is 2.4. Those who prefer a table may use table 3 and interpolate between listed values. To compute soil loss from slopes that are ap-preciably convex, concave, or complex, the chart LS values need to be adjusted as indicated in the section LS Values for Irregular Slopes. Figure 4 and table 3 assume slopes that have essentially uniform gradient. The chart and table were de-rived by the equation IS = ( V 7 3 . 6 ) " 1 (63.41 iin' 8 + 4.34 l i n 6 + 0.045) (4) where X = slope length in feet; 6 = angle of slope; and m = 0.5 if the percent slope is 5 or more, 0.4 on slopes of 3.5 to 4.5 percent, 0.3 on slopes of 1 to 3 percent, and 0.2 on uniform gradients of less than 1 percent. The basis for this equation is given in the sub-section discussing the individual effects of slope length and steepness. However, the relationships expressed by the equation were derived from data obtained on cropland, under natural rainfall, on slopes ranging from 3 to 18 percent in steepness and about 30 to 300 ft in length. How far beyond these ranges in slope characteristics the relation-ships derived from the data continue to be accu-rate has not been determined by direct soil loss measurements. The Palouse Region of the Northwest represents TABLE 3.—Values of the topographic factor, LS, for specific combinations of slope length and steepness1 Slop* length (feet) Percent • lope 25 50 75 100 150 200 300 400 500 600 800 1.000 0.2 0.060 0.069 0.075 0.080 0.086 0.092 0.099 0.105 0.110 0.114 0.121 0.126 0.5 .073 .083 .090 .096 .104 .110 .119 .126 .132 .137 .145 .152 0.8 .086 .098 .107 .113 .123 .130 .141 .149 .156 .162 .171 .179 2 .133 .163 .185 .201 .227 .248 .280 .305 .326 .344 .376 .402 3 .190 .233 .264 .287 .325 .354 .400 .437 .466 .492 .536 .573 4 .230 .303 .357 .400 .471 .528 .621 .697 .762 .820 .920 1.01 5 .268 .379 .464 .536 .656 .758 .928 1.07 1.20 1.31 1.52 1.69 6 . . . .336 .476 .583 .673 .824 .952 1.17 1.35 1.50 1.65 1.90 2.13 8 .496 .701 .859 .992 1.21 1.41 1.72 1.98 2.22 2.43 2.81 3.14 10 .685 .968 1.19 1.37 1.68 1.94 2.37 2.74 3.06 3.36 3.87 4.33 12 .903 1.28 1.56 1.80 2.21 2.55 3.13 3.61 4.04 4.42 5.11 5.71 14 1.15 1.62 1.99 2.30 2.81 3.25 3.98 4.59 5.13 5.62 6.49 7.26 16 1.42 2.01 2.46 2.84 3.48 4.01 4.92 5.68 6.35 6.95 8.03 8.98 IS 1.72 2.43 2.97 3.43 4.21 3.86 5.95 6.87 7.68 8.41 9.71 10.9 20 2.04 2.88 3.53 4.08 5.00 5.77 7.07 8.16 9.12 10.0 11.5 12.9 1 LS = ( V 7 2 . 6 ) m (65.41 s in 5 6 + 4.56 i i n 6 + 0.065) where X — tlcjpe length in feet; m = 0.2 for gradient* < 1 percent, 0.3 for 1 to 3 percent slopes, 0.4 for 3.5 to 4.5 percent slopes, 0.5 for 5 percent slopes and steeper; and 6 = angle of slope. (For other combinations of length and gradient, interpolate between adjacent values or see fig. 4.) Page 210 PREDICTING RAINFALL EROSION LOSSES-A GUIDE TO CONSERVATION PLANNING 13 T O P O G R A P H I C F A C T O R Page 211 14 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, AGRICULTURE HANDBOOK NUMBER 537 a different situation. The rainfall erosion index is quite low because most of the rain comes as small drops and at low intensities. But many of the crop-land slopes are long or steep, and substantial ero-sion occurs because of runoff from snowmelt or light rains over saturated soil surfaces. Limited erosion data from this region, mostly observa-tional, strongly indicate that for this type of runoff (not accompanied by raindrop impact) the effects of percent and length of slope are of lower magni-tude than indicated by the humid region data. In-vestigations designed to develop a more accurate LS equation for this region are underway at Pull-man, Wash. (21). In the meantime, the researchers are temporarily recommending using a modified equation which computes I S values that are close to those that would be calculated by the equation given above if s i n 1 5 8 were substituted for s i n 2 6 and the length-exponent, m, were assumed to equal 0.3. Intuitively, these changes seem reason-able for the conditions under which about 90 per-cent of the erosion in this region occurs. Slope-Length Effect Slope length is defined as the distance from the point of origin of overland flow to the point where either the slope gradient decreases enough that deposition begins, or the runoff water enters a well-defined channel that may be part of a drain-age network or a constructed channel (40). A change in land cover or a substantial change in gradient along a slope does not begin a new slope length for purposes of soil loss estimation. The effect of slope length on annual runoff per unit area of cropland may generally be assumed negligible. In some of the studies runoff per unit area was slightly lower on the longer slopes dur-ing the growing season and slightly higher during the dormant season, but the differences were rela-tively small and neither of the relationships was consistent (52). However, the so// loss per unit area generally increases substantially as slope length increases. The greater accumulation of runoff on the longer slopes increases its detachment and transport ca-pacities. The plot data showed average soil loss per unit area to be proportional to a power of slope length. Because L is the ratio of field soil loss to the cor-responding loss from 72.6-ft slope length, its value may be expressed as I — (X/72.6)1", where X is the field slope length in feet, and m assumes approxi-mately the values given in the LS equation in the preceding section. These are average values of m and are subject to some variability caused by interaction effects which are not now quantita-tively predictable. The existing field plot data do not establish a general value greater than 0.5 for m on slopes steeper than 10 percent, as was suggested in 1965 (64). Although apparent values up to 0.9 were ob-served in some of the data (63), the higher values appear to have been related to soil, crop, and management variables rather than to greater slope steepness. However, basic modeling work has sug-gested that m may appreciably exceed 0.5 on steep slopes that are highly susceptible to rilling, like some construction slopes (10). Additional re-search data are greatly needed to quantify the significant interaction effects so that specific site values of m can be more precisely computed. Sub-dividing erosion between interrill (or sheet) erosion and rill erosion, being done in recent modeling work (10, 17, 22), promises to be quite helpful for solving this problem. Some observations have indicated that the val-ues of the' length exponent that were derived from the plot data may overestimate soil loss when ap-plied to lengths in the range of a quarter of a mile or more. This is logical because slopes of such lengths would rarely have a constant gradient along their entire length, and the slope irregu-larities would affect the amount of soil movement to the foot of the slope. By the definition of slope length quoted earlier, such slopes would usually consist of several lengths, between points where deposition occurs. Slope length is difficult to determine for long slopes with an average gradient of less than 1 percent, unless they are precisely formed with a land leveler. On flat slopes, reflecting both the erosion and the deposition accurately by a length factor may not be possible. However, on a nearly zero-percent slope, increased length would have minor effect on runoff velocity, and the greater depths of accumulated runoff water would cushion the raindrop impact. An exponent of 0.2 for gradi-ents of less than 1 percent is compatible with the Page 212 PREDICTING RAINFALL EROSION LOSSES-A scarce data available for such slopes and was used to derive figure 4 and table 3. Dist r ibut ion o f Length Effect LS values from figure 4 or table 3 predict the average erosion over the entire slope. But this ero-sion is not evenly distributed over the entire length. The rate of soil loss per unit of area increases as the m* power of the distance from the top of the slope, where m is the length exponent in the pre-ceding equation. An equation by Foster and Wisehmeier (12) esti-mates the relative amounts of soil loss from suc-cessive segments of a slope under conditions where there is no deposition by overland flow. When the gradient is essentially uniform and the segments are of equal length, the procedure can be shortened (55). Table 4, derived by this pro-cedure, shows the proportionate amounts of soil detachment from successive equal-length segments of a uniform slope. Table 4 is entered with the total number of equal-length segments, and the fraction of the soil loss for each segment is read beneath the ap-plicable value of nt. For example, three equal-length segments of a uniform 6-percent slope would be expected to produce 19, 35, and 46 per-cent, respectively, of the loss from the entire slope. Percent Runoff from cropland generally increases with increased slope gradient, but the relationship is influenced by such factors as type of crop, surface roughness, and profile saturation. In the natural rain slope-effect studies, the logarithm of runoff from row crops was linearly and directly propor-tional to percent slope. With good meadow sod and with smooth bare surfaces, the relationship was insignificant. The effect of slope on runoff de-creased in extremely wet periods. Soil loss increases much more rapidly than run-off as slopes steepen. The slope-steepness factor, S, in the soil loss equation is evaluated by the equation S == 65.41 tin' 6 + 4.56 <ln 6 + 0.065 (5) where 6 is the angle of slope. This equation was used to develop the slope-effect chart. The values reflect the average effect of slope steepness on soil loss in the plot studies. The relation of percent slope to soil loss is believed to GUIDE TO CONSERVATION PLANNING 15 TABLE 4.—Estimated relative soil losses from successive equal-length segments of a uniform slope' Number of segments Sequence number of Moment Fraction of toil m — 0.3 m 0.4 Ion m = 0 J 2 1 0.35 0.38 0.41 2 .65 .62 J 9 3 1 .19 .22 .24 2 .35 .35 .35 3 .46 .43 .41 4 t .12 .14 .17 2 M .24 .24 3 .30 .29 .28 4 .35 .33 .31 3 1 .09 .11 .12 2 .16 .17 .18 3 .21 .21 .21 4 .25 .24 .23 5 .28 .27 .25 ' Derived by the formula: m + 1 m + l i -li-D Soil l ou fraction = — — — — m - f 1 N where f = legment tequence number; m = slope-length exponent (0.5 for slopes ^ 5 percent, 0.4 for 4 percent slopes, end 0.3 for 3 percent or leu) ; and N = number of equal-length segments into which the slope was divided. Four segments would produce 12, 23, 30, and 35 percent, respectively. Segment No. 1 is always at the top of the slope. Slope to be influenced by interactions with soil properties and surface conditions, but the interaction effects have not been quantified by research data. Neither are data available to define the limits on the equa-tion's applicability. This equation can be derived from the formerly published equation for S. Expressing the factor as a function of the sine of the angle of slope rather than the tangent is more accurate because rain-drop-impact forces along the surface and runoff shear stress are functions of the sine. Substituting 100 sin 8 for percent slope, which is 100 tan 9, does not significantly affect the initial statistical deriva-tion or the equation's solutions for slopes of less than 20 percent. But as slopes become steeper, the difference between the sine and the tangent be-comes appreciable and projections far beyond the range of the plot data become more realistic. The numerator was divided by the constant denomina-tor for simplification. Page 213 16 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, AGRICULTURE HANDBOOK NUMBER 537 Soil loss is also affected by the shape of a slope. Many field slopes either steepen toward the lower end (convex slope) or flatten toward the lower end (concave slope). Use of the average gradient to enter figure 4 or table 3 would underestimate soil movement to the foot of a convex slope and would overestimate it for concave slopes. Irregular slopes can usually be divided into segments that have nearly uniform gradient, but the segments cannot be evaluated as independent slopes when runoff flows from one segment to the next. However, where two simplifying assumptions can be accepted, LS for irregular slopes can be routinely derived by combining selected values from the slope-effect chart and table 4 (55). The assumptions are that (1) the changes in gradient are not sufficient to cause upslope deposition, and (2) the irregular slope can be divided into a small number of equal-length segments in such a man-ner that the gradient within each segment for practical purposes can be considered uniform. After dividing the convex, concave, or complex slope into equal-length segments as defined ear-lier, the procedure is as follows: List the segment gradients in the order in which they occur on the slope, beginning at the upper end. Enter the slope-effect chart with the total slope length and read LS for each of the listed gradients. Multiply these by Irregular Slopes the corresponding factors from table 4 and add the products to obtain IS for the entire slope. The following tabulation illustrates the procedure for a 400-ft convex slope on which the upper third has a gradient of 5 percent; the middle third, 10 per-cent; and the lower third, 15 percent: 5egment 1 2 3 Percent i/ope 5 10 I ] Tab/e 3 1.07 2.74 5.12 Tot ! . 4 0.19 .35 .46 Product 0.203 .959 2.355 For the concave slope of the same length, with the segment gradients in reverse order, the values in the third column would be listed in reverse or-der. The products would then be 0.973, 0.959, and 0.492, giving a sum of 2.42 for LS. Research has not defined just how much gradi-ent change is needed under various conditions for deposition of soil particles of various sizes to be-gin, but depositional areas can be determined by observation. When the slope breaks are sharp enough ta cause deposition, the procedure can be used to estimate LS for slope segments above and below the depositional area. However, it will not predict the total sediment moved from such an interrupted slope because it does not predict the amount of deposition. Changes in Soi l Type or Cover A l o n g the S lope The procedure for irregular slopes can include evaluation of changes in soil type within a slope length (55). The products of values selected from table 3 or figure 4 and table 4 to evaluate LS for irregular slopes are multiplied by the respective values of K before summing. To illustrate, assume the K values for the soils in the three segments of the convex slope in the preceding example were 0.27, 0.32, and 0.37, respectively. The average KLS for the slope would be obtained as follows: Segment N o . 1 2 3 Within limits, the procedure can be further ex-tended to account for changes in cover along the slope length by adding a column of segment C values. However, it is not applicable for situations where a practice change along the slope causes deposition. For example, a grass buffer strip across the foot of a slope on which substantial erosion is occurring induces deposition. The amount of this deposition is a function of transport relationships (10) and cannot be predicted by the USLE. Tob/e 3 table 4 K Product 1.07 0.19 0.27 0.053 2.74 .35 .32 .307 5.12 .46 .37 .871 KLS = 1.233 Page 214 58 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, AGRICULTURE HANDBOOK NUMBER 537 T O P O G R A P H I C F A C T O R - L S AU.S . GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1978 O—278-995/6583 Page 215 Appendix IV. F l o o d Hazard C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . Source : Walmsley, M. e_t a_l_. 1980. Descr i b i nq Ecosystems i n the F i e l d . RAB T e c h n i c a l Paper 2, Land Management B r a n c h , B r i t i s h Co lumbia , M i n i s t r y of the Environment , V i c t o r i a , B . C . , p . 50 . FLOOD HAZARD L I T T E R COVER OVERBANK D E P O S I T S E T C . F L U V I A L L Y TRANSPORTED D E B R I S V E G E T A T I O N T E R R A I N H E I G H T T E R R A I N U N I T E S T I M A T E D FLOOD F R E Q U E N C Y S O I L C L A S S -I F I C A T I O N * a ) FREQUENT a n d I R R E G U L A R b ) FREQUENT No l i t t e r t o a t h i n l a y e r o f n o n - d e c o m -p o s e d m a t e r i a l P r e s e n c e o f r e c e n t s i l t o r s a n d d e p o s i t s . O c c a s i o n a l s c o u r h o l e s . F l u v i a l l y d e p o s i t e d l o g s a n d o r g a n i c d e b r i s o n c h a n n e l b a n k s . O c c a s i o n -a l l y d e b r i s i n l o w e r b r a n c h e s o f t r e e s . N o n e ; o r s p e c i e s t y p i c a l o r p r i -m a r y c o l o n i -z a t i o n ; o r s p e c i e s t y p i c a l o f w e t -l a n d s . L o w L y i n g A r e a s A c t i v e F l o o d -p l a i n s , o r f a n s , i n c l u d e s a c t i v e c h a n -n e l s , s i d e c h a n n e l s , d r a i n a g e c h a n -n e l s a n d a r e a s o f m a r s h o r s w a m p . 1-3 y e a r r e t u r n i n t e r v a l O r t h i c a n d C u m u l i c R e g o s o l s c ) HAY BE E X P E C T E D T h i n l i t t e r c o v e r p r e s e n t r a n g i n g f r o m r e c e n t t o p a r t l y o r c o m -p l e t e l y d e c o m p o s e d m a t e r i a l . S i l t a n d / o r f i n e s a n d d e p o s i t s i n t e r -b e d d e d w i t h o r g a n i c l i t t e r . F l u v i a l l y d e p o s i t e d l o g s a n d o r g a n i c d e b r i s may b e p r e s -e n t o n t h e g r o u n d a n d i n t h e l o w e r b r a n c h e s o f t r e e s . M a t u r e t r e e s . P o s s i b l y c o n -t a i n i n g some s p e c i e s t y p i c a l o f p r i m a r y c o l o n i z a t i o n . A r e a s o f m o d -e r a t e e l e v a t i o n . A r e a o f v a l l e y f l a t d i s e c t e d b y b a c k , s i d e a n d d r a i n a g e c h a n n e l s . L e s s t h a n 5 0 y e a r r e t u r n i n t e r v a l . / C u m u l i c R e g o s o l s d ) RARE T h i c k l i t t e r c o v e r , l o w e r l a y e r c o m -p l e t e l y d e c o m p o s e d . N o e v i d e n c e o f " r e c e n t " o v e r -b a n k d e p o s i t s . N o t p r e s e n t . M a t u r e t r e e s . A r e a s o f h i g h e r e l e v a t i o n . A r e a s o f l o w t e r r a c e s , f l u -v i a l f a n s , o r c o l l u v i a l d e p o s i t s . I n t h e r a n g e o f 5 0 t o g r e a t e r t h a n 2 0 0 y e a r r e t u r n i n t e r v a l C u m u l i c R e g o s o l s ; B r u n i s o l i c s e ) NO HAZARD T h i c k 1 i t t e r c o v e r , l o w e r l a y e r c o m -p l e t e l y d e c o m p o s e d . S o i l p r o f i l e d e v e l -o p m e n t . No e v i d e n c e o f " r e c e n t " o v e r -b a n k d e p o s i t s . N o t p r e s e n t . M a t u r e t r e e s . A r e a s o f h i g h e r e l e v a t i o n . A r e a s o f h i g h e r t e r r a c e s , f l u -v i a l f a n s , c o l l u v i a l d e -p o s i t s e t c . U s u a l l y a d j a -c e n t t o t h e v a l l e y w a l I s . T h i s u n i t i s u n l i k e l y t o b e f l o o d e d u n d e r t h e p r e s e n t h y d r o -l o g i c c o n d i t i o n s . U s u a l l y n o t R e g o s o l i c ; w i l l d e p e n d o n a r e a s u r v e y e d * f o r f l u v i a l m a t e r i a l s 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0076992/manifest

Comment

Related Items