This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
YUKON TERRITORY


NORTHWEST TERRITORIES


BRITISH COLUMBIA


NEWFOUNDLAND & LABRADOR


ALBERTA Vancouver


Fraser Basin Council


Bow River Basin Council


North Saskatchewan Watershed Alliance Meewasin Valley Authority


Muskoka Watershed Council Grand River Conservation Authority Upper Thames River Conservation Authority Figure 1: Watershed Case Studies 38


Districts Act) enabled the respective for- mation of Ontario’s 36 conservation authorities and Manitoba’s 18 conservation districts. Over the past two decades, the watershed approach has gained popularity among governments and civic society in other parts of Canada. As a result, many new watershed organizations have formed.⁴ Starting in the mid-1990s, watershed


organizations began developing watershed report cards and many have produced sev- eral successive editions. The actual versus anticipated values and benefits of these planning tools have not been systematic- ally assessed and compared in Canada. To address this knowledge gap, research to compare and contrast the substance and influence of 39 watershed report cards


produced by 13 watershed organizations from across Canada was conducted (Figure 1).


METHODS


An analysis of watershed report card charac- teristics was supplemented by information obtained from 109 semi-structured inter- views and structured questionnaires. Of these, 49 were completed with chiefs-of- staff, senior technical staff, and board chairs, vice-chairs, or past-chairs. The remainder were undertaken with additional stakeholders in the Fraser Basin and Humber River watershed to further explore opinions and perceptions about the value of water- shed report cards. Participants included


representatives from the Board of Directors, watershed municipalities, non-government organizations, and, in the case of the Fraser Basin, provincial and federal agencies. Questions focused on: 1) how closely con- nected the watershed organization Board of Directors are to the watershed report card process and how it influences decision- making at the board level; and 2) whether or not there is a difference between the perceptions of people associated with the watershed organizations and others regard- ing the use and effectiveness of watershed report cards. Face-to-face or telephone inter- views were conducted with about half of the respondents, while the remainder of the participants responded in writing to the questionnaire.


Kitchener London


Toronto


Calgary Edmonton


SASKAT- CHEWAN


MANITOBA Saskatoon ONTARIO NEW BRUNSWICK QUEBEC P.E.I. NOVA SCOTIA


Clean Annapolis River Project


Miramichi River Environmental Enhancement Committee


Credit Valley Conservation Humber Watershed Alliance Don Watershed Regeneration Council Richelieu Basin Enhancement Committee


NUNAVUT


p l an c ana da | summe r · étÉ 201 1


                    


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56