Thank you.
The point I was getting to is that if we add ecological benchmarks, we now have en experiment.
If the population declines in both the tenure and the ecological benchmarks, the decline is due to external influences such as climate change, rather than the forestry practices. However, if the population declines in a tenure only, then can we draw the conclusion that the forestry practices are not ecologically sustainable and they must be adapted.
To support the protection of biodiversity and the identification of sustainable land use practices, the CBFA has committed itself to the establishment of ecological benchmarks and the implementation of adaptive management. To this end, the CBFA has supported the BEACONs project in undertaking a pan-boreal assessment of existing and proposed protected areas.
The pan-boreal assessment has two primary components. The first is the evaluation of protected areas with regard to the representation of 25 biodiversity surrogates, which includes biophysical features, freshwater systems, songbirds, and species at risk. The second component is the identification of ecological benchmarks, which starts with the evaluation of existing protected areas and the identification of new areas.
The tool overall is flexible, and additional data sets can be easily incorporated. It is a decision support tool that can be used to evaluate protected areas and conservation proposals, including indigenous conservation areas.
Now I'll share some of the results with you.
I'm not sure if the slides are advancing are not, but hopefully they are. This figure highlights in black—