Ecosystem Monitoring
To protect the environment effectively, the public, business and governments need the capacity to discern early warning signs and unexpected trends in environmental degradation. There is widespread agreement that we should anticipate and prevent environmental damage wherever possible. But we cannot hope to anticipate dam- age if we fail to monitor our ecosystems, including those elements without apparent economic value.
Ecosystem monitoring is an important tool – arguably the only tool – for discovering unexpected ecological trends and detecting early warning signs of environmental harm. For example:
- It was ecosystem monitoring that allowed scientists first to understand the impacts of acid rain in the 1970s.
- It was ecosystem monitoring in the 1990s that let researchers piece together the facts on high mercury concentrations in loons.
- The decline of certain frog populations world-wide is also a phenomenon that was first noticed and then tracked through ecosystem monitoring.
Data collected by monitoring for ecosystem health and integrity provide a basis to evaluate the status of an ecosystem as a whole.
Ecosystem monitoring measures key attributes of the system such as the quantity and health of species, the food chain, the location and extent of forest woodlots, or changes in forest cover. Carefully chosen indicators can give an overall indication of problems that may be developing, analogous to data received from an annual check-up that individuals receive when they visit the doctor.
In Ontario, the Ministry of the Environment and the Ministry of Natural Resources are both entrusted with the stewardship of the province’s ecosystems, and both ministries acknowledge this responsibility. For example, MNR lists as the first objective of its Statement of Environmental Values (SEV) “to ensure the long-term health of ecosystems by protecting and conserving our valuable soil, aquatic resources, forest and wildlife resources as well as their biological foundations.” Similarly, MOE’s SEV states that “the ministry will adopt an ecosystem approach to environmental protection and resource management.” However, the majority of both ministries’ monitoring programs do not indicate that either ministry has a serious interest in the ecosystem perspective. In fact, relative to the amount of monitoring data collected by both ministries, they do very little ecosystem monitoring.
Instead, ministry monitoring programs tend to be client-driven and focused on species that have economic value. As a result, ministries have a sporadic knowledge of ecosystem health and only for limited areas of the province, as indicated by the examples below. This lack of knowledge often precludes taking steps to prevent or avoid damage to ecosystems and thereby creates the potential for unforeseen ecosystem collapse similar to what occurred to the East Coast cod fisheries.
For aquatic ecosystems, MOE collects broad information for the Great Lakes but more limited information for inland lakes through its aquatic monitoring programs. MOE operates an integrated nearshore ambient monitoring program in the Great Lakes in which lakes are sampled on a lake-by-lake basis over a multi-year cycle. Data have been used to assess long-term trends in eutrophication, climate change and the impacts of invading exotic species in the Great Lakes. MOE tests sport fish for a number of contaminants in over 1,500 lakes and locations in the Great Lakes as a part of the Sport Fish Contaminant Monitoring program. The results are published every other year in the “Guide to Eating Ontario Spor t Fish.” However, this is limited information and cannot be described as an ecosystem monitoring program.
MNR collects considerably more of this type of information as part of the Fish Assessment Monitoring Program. This program, conducted at the Great Lakes and at eight additional sites, is designed to represent the types of sportfish in Ontario and the kinds of stresses that fish communities are exposed to. These stresses include exploitation, eutrophication, acidification, changes in water levels and habitat alteration. Each site has a core data program to be followed that includes a five-year baseline, water quality parameters and some monitoring of the biological community. Data is also collected on benthic invertebrates and zooplankton, on occasion. These programs also include long-term monitoring of key commercial and recreational fish species, some other important species in the fish community and Ontario’s progress in rehabilitating species such as lake trout. Not all aspects of fish community are monitored nor is the entire geography of the lakes covered. The historical data allow MNR to monitor variability at the site and are useful in sorting out other stresses. However, MNR staff acknowledge that the eight sites are not a very good representation of the province as a whole. They are oriented toward coldwater fish types and geographically biased towards the south-central area of the province.
For terrestrial ecosystems, MNR’s approach to monitoring and information management has changed radically in the past few years. In most terrestrial program areas, including natural heritage, aggregates, forestry and wildlife management, MNR staff no longer do resource inventories or field work to collect data. Instead, the ministry has entered into partnerships with industries, user groups, conservation organizations and others, who provide data which is limited in scope and quantity. MNR then manages this information in its computerized geographic information systems.
In 1996, MNR staff identified a concern about planned cuts to forest science and information management staff and budget: “The collection of little or no new Ontario data for science could lead to a reduction in fundamental knowledge and understanding of Ontario’s forest ecosystems in the long-term.” MNR still has at least an intention to monitor and report on the condition and trends of forest ecosystems in the areas of the province supporting the forest industry, but no corresponding plan to assess the condition or trends in southern Ontario terrestrial ecosystems or ecosystems with low economic value. Similarly, while they are scaled back significantly, MNR still carries out some long-term forest ecosystem research studies at its Centre for Northern Forest Ecosystem Research, located at Lakehead University and at the Ontario Forest Research Institute in Sault Ste. Marie, but the ministry does not appear to have many projects applying to southern Ontario ecosystems.
To improve Ontario’s ecosystem monitoring, ministries will need to consider some fundamental questions, e.g., what existing information frameworks are available to build upon, what new frameworks need to be established, what are minimum acceptable levels of monitoring, and how partners can be involved in gathering information. It will also be important to ensure that information is published promptly and regularly, to be useful in decision-making. Ecosystem monitoring information should be considered as important as financial information whenever decisions are made about Ontario’s environment and natural resources. Moreover, the precautionary principle argues against making any significant environmental decisions in the absence of reliable ecosystem monitoring information.
As the pressures on Ontario’s ecosystems build, especially in southern Ontario, MOE and MNR need to ensure that provincial decision-makers have adequate current information on the health of those systems. This information would allow decision-makers to create scientifically defensible rationales for pollution abatement and habitat protection activities, to evaluate the effectiveness of current and future activities, and more importantly, to identify new issues as they emerge.
| Recommendation 17:
The ECO recommends that MOE and MNR ensure that provincial decision-makers have information on the health of ecosystems which is current and of a sufficient quality to permit the development of scientifically defensible rationales for habitat protection activities and to allow the identification of emerging ecological problems. |
| This is an article from the 1999/2000 Annual Report to the Legislature from the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. |
Citing This Article
Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. 2000. "Ecosystem Monitoring." Changing Perspectives, ECO Annual Report, 1999-2000. Toronto, ON : Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. 128-131.
