Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
Canada Wordmark

Using Ecological Standards, Guidelines and Objectives for Determining Significance: An Examination of Existing Information to Support Significance Decisions Involving Wetlands

Appendix 3 - Source Name: Criteria for Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network Sites

Appendix 3: Candidate Ecological Benchmark

Source Type: Criteria for Important Areas

Source Name: Criteria for Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network Sites

Number: 15/77

Benchmark:
Four categories of Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network sites are recognized:

"Hemispheric sites" support at least 500,000 shorebirds annually, or 30 percent of a species' flyway population. Hemispheric sites are intended to include areas supporting major concentrations of shorebirds, with daily totals reaching about 50,000 birds during migration.

"International sites" support at least 100,000 shorebirds annually, or 15 percent of a species' flyway population.

"Regional sites" support at least 20,000 shorebirds annually, or 5 percent of a species' flyway population.

"Endangered species sites" are critical to the survival of endangered species (no minimum number of birds is required).

Applies to whom: All

Applies to what: Critical habitat for shorebirds

Applies where: Canada, U.S.A., Mexico, Central America and South America

Reference:
Morrison, R.I.G., Butler, R.W., Beyersbergen, G.W., Dickson, H.L., Bourget, A., Hicklin, P.W., Goossen, J.P., Ross, R.K. and Gratto-Trevor, C.L. 1995. Potential Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network Sites for Shorebirds in Canada: Second Edition 1995. Canadian Wildlife Service Technical Report Series No. 227, 104 pp. Canadian Wildlife Service, Headquarters. Ottawa, Ontario. Excerpt Environment Canada Green Lane [http://www.mb.ec.gc.ca/nature/whp/whsrn/ df01s00.en.html]. Accessed December 2000.

Evaluation:

Effective: 5

Effective Comments:
Quantitative thresholds define functions that should be protected.

Adverse effects to the ecological attributes or habitat functions for which the area is identified as important should be considered significant.

Authoritative: 1

Authoritative Comments:
Initiative supported by government programs, not directly tied to official commitments

Relevant: 6

Relevant Comments:
Loss of habitat, obstruction of migration, geographic extent, magnitude of effect

Sound: 3

Sound Comments:

Straightforward: 6

Straightforward Comments: Unequivocal

Practical: 4

Practical Comments:

Total Effective + Authority Score: 6

Total Overall Score: 25

Appendix 3 - Criteria for Important Areas |

<< Previous  Page 44   Next >>