Research Document 2019/057
A review of functional monitoring methods to assess mitigation, restoration, and offsetting activities in Canada
By Braun, D.C., Smokorowski, K.E., Bradford, M.J., and Glover, L
Abstract
Fisheries and Oceans Canada's Fisheries Protection Program (FPP) manages the impacts of habitat degradation or loss of fish productivity through management measures that include mitigation, restoration, and offsetting. To determine the effectiveness of these management measures, three levels of standardized monitoring have been recommended: 1) compliance, 2) functional, and 3) effectiveness monitoring. This report focuses on functional monitoring and provides a review of functional assessment approaches, methods, and the information needed to develop a standardized functional monitoring program. Functional monitoring is defined as a science-based, scaled-down version of effectiveness monitoring that relies on surrogate metrics to assess whether management measures provide expected conditions suitable for fish to carry out their life processes. Functional monitoring will use a quantitative approach that employs quick and easy to measure indicators of fish productivity. It will be applied to projects predicted to have low and/or well understood impacts. Objectives of a functional monitoring program are to determine if management measures recommended in the letter of advice, or required by the Fisheries Act authorization (e.g., mitigation, restoration, offsetting) are functioning as intended (Table 1). This report is the first step in providing science advice on the approaches, methods, and information required to develop a standardized functional monitoring program.
We conducted a literature review to gather information about how and where functional monitoring is conducted, and its key components. Important considerations for designing a functional monitoring program are identified and discussed in the following sections: 1) Monitoring Designs, 2) Rapid Assessments, 3) Metrics to Measure Function, and 4) Standardized Monitoring. Each section describes the benefits and challenges of common approaches and methods as well as considerations relevant to implementation.
The majority of studies we reviewed used the Reference Condition Approach, while other monitoring designs, mainly the Before-After-Control-Impact design, were used for longer-term monitoring of fish productivity or other biotic indicators, not habitat function. Rapid assessments were used in many of the studies reviewed, but definitions of what constituted a rapid assessment varied greatly. Clearly defining the level of effort to be invested in a functional monitoring program will be important in guiding the development of an effective program. We found functional assessments used a range of indicators, and selection of indicators for standardized functional monitoring may vary by region, system type, species, and life stage. There should be national oversight that ensures the results from monitoring projects are comparable among these organizational levels (e.g., region, system type, species, and life stage). We outline an example of a checklist approach for assigning indicators to project specific monitoring protocols, which is based on the FPP's Pathways of Effects models. This approach allows for consistent use of indicators for projects where the same pathways of effects have been identified. Finally, the discussion of standardized functional monitoring programs highlights the value of such programs, but also the challenges and limitations.
Accessibility Notice
This document is available in PDF format. If the document is not accessible to you, please contact the Secretariat to obtain another appropriate format, such as regular print, large print, Braille or audio version.
- Date modified: