18. Biodiversity of Canadian Forests
359
tional status (Munro & Low, 1980; British Columbia Environment, 1991).
Those species included in the "red list" on the basis of scores for these
criteria are considered to be endangered or threatened, while species on
the "blue list" are sensitive or vulnerable. Seventeen species of mammals
appear on the red and blue lists (6 on the red and 11 on the blue),
together with 30 species of birds (5 red, 25 blue), 1 reptile (red), and 2
amphibians (both blue) , This list encompasses all of the COSEWIC listed
species, except for the Queen Charlotte Islands' ermine (Mustela erminea
haidarum) , which is COSEWIC-listed as vulnerable.
Ecosystem and Landscape Diversity
The quantification of habitat or ecosystem diversity has received far less
attention than species or genetic diversity (Christensen & Peet, 1984).
Also , the frame of reference for ecosystem diversity must be larger than
the ecosystem itself, and will therefore usuallybe completely arbitrary
(e.g ., provincial) . Nevertheless, some studies of ecosystem diversity have
been conducted (e.g. , Romme, 1982). In order to enable comparison
of measurements of ecosystem diversity, however , the ordination and
classification procedures must be identical , or at least comparable , and
this is rarely the case.
The measurement of ecosystem diversity within a landscape again
encounters the problem of scale, along with problems related to pattern
and shape. Most methods of estimating spatial statistics , such as autocorrelation , require classification of types through procedures such as ordination (Turner, O'Neill, Conley et al., 1991). However, image textural
measures (originally derived for engineering applications) , which do not
require a priori classification, have recently been used to quantify the
spatial arrangement of landscapes (Musick & Grover, 1991).
The mountainous nature of British Columbia , and associated steep
environmental gradients, mean that ecosystem diversity in the Coastal
forest is the highest in Canada. Several different ecosystem classification
systems have been developed in Canada. These reflect the needs of
the individual agencies responsible for their development. In British
Columbia, two systems have been used for various purposes in recent
years: the biogeoclimatic system , and the biophysical classification system.
The Biogeoclimatic Ecosystem Classification System
The biogeoclimatic ecosystem classification (BEe) system of British
Columbia, which has been adapted for use in Alberta, is a hierarchical
system that integrates ecosystem variation at regional and local levels
and over time (Pojar, Klinka, & Meidinger, 1987). At the local level,
ecosystems are organized according to similarities in vegetation and
site. At the regional level, the ecosystems are categorized according
to vegetation-inferred climatic space. Zonal climax ecosystems define a
359
tional status (Munro & Low, 1980; British Columbia Environment, 1991).
Those species included in the "red list" on the basis of scores for these
criteria are considered to be endangered or threatened, while species on
the "blue list" are sensitive or vulnerable. Seventeen species of mammals
appear on the red and blue lists (6 on the red and 11 on the blue),
together with 30 species of birds (5 red, 25 blue), 1 reptile (red), and 2
amphibians (both blue) , This list encompasses all of the COSEWIC listed
species, except for the Queen Charlotte Islands' ermine (Mustela erminea
haidarum) , which is COSEWIC-listed as vulnerable.
Ecosystem and Landscape Diversity
The quantification of habitat or ecosystem diversity has received far less
attention than species or genetic diversity (Christensen & Peet, 1984).
Also , the frame of reference for ecosystem diversity must be larger than
the ecosystem itself, and will therefore usuallybe completely arbitrary
(e.g ., provincial) . Nevertheless, some studies of ecosystem diversity have
been conducted (e.g. , Romme, 1982). In order to enable comparison
of measurements of ecosystem diversity, however , the ordination and
classification procedures must be identical , or at least comparable , and
this is rarely the case.
The measurement of ecosystem diversity within a landscape again
encounters the problem of scale, along with problems related to pattern
and shape. Most methods of estimating spatial statistics , such as autocorrelation , require classification of types through procedures such as ordination (Turner, O'Neill, Conley et al., 1991). However, image textural
measures (originally derived for engineering applications) , which do not
require a priori classification, have recently been used to quantify the
spatial arrangement of landscapes (Musick & Grover, 1991).
The mountainous nature of British Columbia , and associated steep
environmental gradients, mean that ecosystem diversity in the Coastal
forest is the highest in Canada. Several different ecosystem classification
systems have been developed in Canada. These reflect the needs of
the individual agencies responsible for their development. In British
Columbia, two systems have been used for various purposes in recent
years: the biogeoclimatic system , and the biophysical classification system.
The Biogeoclimatic Ecosystem Classification System
The biogeoclimatic ecosystem classification (BEe) system of British
Columbia, which has been adapted for use in Alberta, is a hierarchical
system that integrates ecosystem variation at regional and local levels
and over time (Pojar, Klinka, & Meidinger, 1987). At the local level,
ecosystems are organized according to similarities in vegetation and
site. At the regional level, the ecosystems are categorized according
to vegetation-inferred climatic space. Zonal climax ecosystems define a