3 - Research Approach: Objective Two

The goal of this research is to target and prioritize the land parcels which have been identified as suitable for Alvar conservation initiatives, according to specific attributes associated with each parcel.  The factors discussed below represent attributes that have been identified in the literature which influence Alvar conservation priority or conservation value and priority in general.

1)  Proximity to Shoreline

Among the thirteen Alvar community types identified by Caitling and Brownell (1995), six have strong association with near-shore settings (SOLEC, 2005).  It has been determined that less than 20% of near shore Alvars are currently fully protected, while more that 60% have been designated high risk (IACI, 2002).  We will consider proximity to shorelines as an attribute which elevates a land parcel's conservation priorityl.

2)  Proportion of Alvar Landcover Within Each Parcel
Given that it is desirable to conserve the largest amount of Alvar land cover possible (IACI, 2002), elevated value should be assigned to land parcels that encompass a large proportion of Alvar land cover.  We will consider a high proportion of Alvar landcover within a parcel to be an attribute which adds conservation value to that parcel.

3)  Presence of Catalogued Alvar Sites Within Each Parcel

For the purpose of our research, the term catalogued Alvar sites will refer to the Alvar sites listed in the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC) on-line database (2007) that are catalogued according to a standard classification system (Caitling and Brownell CITE).  In the past it has been difficult to assess the health of any individual Alvar site because a consistent classification system did not exist (Conserving Great Lakes Alvars, 1999).  Catalogued sites are inherently more valuable for conservation purposes since there is a wealth of existing recorded data associated with each site (Conserving Great Lakes Alvars, 1999).  Alvar sites that have been catalogued in the NHIC already have valuable site specific research, therefore we will consider the presence of catalogued Alvar sites as an attribute which adds conservation value to a parcel.

4)  Proximity to Existing Parks and Native Reserves

Conserving land that is in close proximity to existing protected land can provide connectivity or corridor opportunities to be developed between parks, and can increase the effective area of natural habitats around parks (Merkl et. Al, 2003).  We will consider close proximity to existing protected parks or native reservations to be an attribute that elevates a parcel of land's  conservation value.

5)  Total Area of the Parcel

Larger conservation sites have greater potential to contain and support rare, endangered or endemic species (Poianie et al., 2000), are more likely to contain greater overall diversity, and represent more Alvar community types (Conserving Great Lake Alvars, 1999).  We will therefore consider large contiguous parcel areas as an attribute which elevates conservation value.

6)  Average Degree of Anthropogenic Disturbance Within Each Parcel

Anthropogenic disturbances can negatively impact sensitive areas and are considered threats to conservation (Conserving Great Lakes Alvars, 1999, Simberloff, 1982).  We will therefore consider parcels of land with  lower degrees of anthropogenic disturbance to have elevated conservation values.