2.0 AN AD HOC EXPLORATION OF 1:20,000 TRI: CLAYOQUOT SOUND SCENIC CORRIDORS PROCESS
2.1 A Policy Priority Offers Data Standards Development Opportunity
The Clayoquot project was given a high priority, and the task of those providing data support was to do the best job possible with available resources within a sharply-constrained timeframe. In the spring of 1993, SBTC had conducted three regional TRI projects at the 1:250,000 scale. The eventual maturation of the on-going 1:250,000 scale TRI could be foreseen, and SBTC could foresee a need for a more detailed scale of inventory.
As detailed-scale tourism inventory data was to be collected, it was determined to use this report to look back at the effort, with a view to considering how it might contribute to the development of data standards for detailed-scale TRI work. The constraints on the effectiveness of this exercise as a test of standards for data are significant, including:
the need to produce information of immediate use to the planning team;
the need to analyse and present the data in a manner the public advisory group could understand and endorse;
the absence of mature standards from the broader-scale TRI efforts; and
the absence of a rigorous analysis of methods and data standards.
The demands of this planning process were unique, due to its high public profile. Issues of timelines and which projects are given priority are seldom within the planner’s purview, at any rate. However we can address the final two constraints. Standards at 1:250,000 are now in place, and this report suggests a process to test and implement 1:20,000 TRI standards.
2.2 General Approach to Data Collection
Data were collected from three types of sources in the Clayoquot project. The first group of datasets were provided by external agencies, often in digital form. The second was the Clayoquot Sound Scenic Corridors Landscape Inventory, conducted for SBTC and MoF by Don Benn of Juan de Fuca Environmental Consultants Ltd. and Vera Vukevich of Viewpoint Consulting, and prepared for the scenic corridors planning process. The third group of data sets were collected by planning team staff directly from sources in the groups participating in the planning process’ advisory group, and were digitally input under contract by Clover Point Cartographics Ltd.
The collected data were compiled from sources by direct manual mapping on 1:20,000 TRIM hardcopy plots for resource features, facilities and use areas. Travel routes were captured on 1:20,000 plots or on a 1:100,000 planning base derived from the TRIM base.
Attribute information for the features, facilities, use areas and routes was held in database files associated with the map files. Key codes permitted relational linking between the feature, route or area used and the tourism operator or recreation group, where applicable.
2.3 Definition of Individual Datasets
Note: the following data schema reflect the work performed during the Clayoquot Sound pilot project. However, some aspects have been redefined for the purpose of this summary to reflect current practices.
2.3.1 Base Mapping
The planning process set the base map as the TRIM 1:20,000 digital product. Portions of 36 mapsheets were joined and clipped to the Clayoquot Land Use Decision boundary. Planimetry, hydrography, certain cultural and natural resource features, and a digital elevation model were taken from the TRIM data. All data were based on the NAD83 datum, and were utilized in Universal Transverse Mercator Zone 10 projection. Specifications for the TRIM base map product have been published by RIC.
The Surveyor General Branch of the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks provided 1:20,000 cadastral coverage indicating administrative and legal boundaries, tied to the TRIM base. Land use zoning mapping was provided by the Alberni-Clayoquot Regional District in paper form. This cadastral and zoning information was required as the scenic corridors management plan could only be applied to provincially-owned lands.
2.3.2 Tourism Resource Features
The 1:250,000 TRI and Ministry of Forests’ Port Alberni District Recreation Inventory data provided the foundation for point and line map layers which identified features of importance to tourism. Features are identified in several databases managed by other agencies, and were also collected directly from planning process participants. These features were most likely to be a natural or cultural feature, identified as contributing to tourism.
Features were stored in map layers by source. Each file had a database structure as outlined below, although not all field were populated in all cases, and naturally some external sources provided additional attribute data which was not maintained in this exercise.
The following is the database scheme for the features data layers:
ITEM WIDTH TYPE DESCRIPTION
Data Layers collected in this manner included (with name of data provider in parentheses):
1:250,000 Vancouver Island and Coast TRI (SBTC);
1:20,000 Recreation features mapping (MoF Port Alberni);
1:250,000 Archaeological Sites (SBTC Archaeology Branch);
1:250,000 Cultural Heritage Overview (SBTC Cultural Heritage Branch);
1:20,000 Clayoquot Sound Landscape Inventory (SBTC and MoF);
1:20,000 tourism/recreation resource features (tourism operators and recreation groups).
2.3.3 Tourism Facilities/Operators
Information on tourism sector facilities and operators was collected from the existing 1:250,000 Vancouver Island/Coast TRI files, supplemented by direct contact with the tourism operator community. Data was stored in the then-extant 1:250,000 TRI format, and has since been slightly modified to fit with the current tourism accommodations database standard, as approved by RIC.
This file is intended to maintain data which will answer the questions relating to ‘who is in the tourism business.’ For this reason, both operations with a physical facilities (eg. office, accommodation, outlying camp) inside the study area, and those who use the area but do not have facilities, are maintained. The following table outlines the data standards used for the tourism facilities/operators point file. Operators without facilities in the study area were represented by a point at the map margin.
As the keystone TRI file, the facilities/operators file contain a key field for linking to other map layers representing use areas and resources. By means of a database relationship it permits addressing the questions of ‘where do tourism operators operate,’ and ‘what resources do tourism operators use.’
The following is a definition of the database structure for the tourism facilities/operators file:
ITEM WIDTH TYPEDESCRIPT
2.3.4 Existing Use Data
Data on existing use of the Sound was collected from all sectors, not just the tourism/recreation groups. Each group or agency was asked to map points indicating facilities, lines indicating travel routes, and shapes indicating areas of use.
In some instances the existing use data provided by sectors had been compiled by government agencies to their own, or RIC’s, data standards. Much of this attribute information was not relevant to the Clayoquot process and was not used. Where new data was collected, the following table indicates the form of the database used to store attribute data.
Each resource use layer was stored separately, with point, line and shape files (where relevant) for each sector participating in the planning process. Attributes were maintained to describe the type of use, the seasons of use, the peak times of use, and an identification of the specific resource of interest. Metadata on the source was noted. The key link attribute was included to permit linking between the files, where appropriate.
All data collected in this segment was noted on the 1:20,000 bases, and may be assigned an effective scale of 1:20,000. Data Layers collected in this manner included (with name of data provider in parentheses):
aquaculture facilities and travel routes (Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, in cooperation with aquaculture industry sources);
forest industry facilities and travel routes (MacMillan Bloedel, Ltd. and Interfor, Ltd., in cooperation with MoF);
hunting and fishing features, travel routes and use areas (Pacific Rim Fish and Game Association in cooperation with the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks);
trap lines and trappers’ cabins (licenced trappers)
guide-outfitter features and territories, (licenced guide-outfitters);
kayak features, travel routes and use areas (Clayoquot Sound Kayak Guide-Outfitters);
touring and wildlife-viewing features, travel routes and use areas (tourism operators);
sport fishing travel routes and fishing areas (tourism operators);
cultural heritage and archaeology features (SBTC Heritage Conservation and Archaeology Branches);
wildlife habitat and occurences (Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Wildlife Branch, with assistance of tourism operators and conservation sector representatives);
anchorages and safe harbours (Pacific Yacht Council)
mineral tenures and occurences (Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources).
2.3.5 Potential Use Data
Where sector representatives, members of interest groups, or government agencies had prepared it, potential use data was collected. Where presented by other agencies, the data was prepared to the source agency’s standards. Where collected by the Clayoquot process, the data carried the following attribute set:
With only a few exceptions, the potential use data referred to shapes, or polygons, which referred to derived potential as a classified value in the ‘use_status’ code. Due to the highly-variable quality of data input under this heading, the process did not weight this dataset as being as important as existing use.
Data Layers collected in this manner included (with name of data provider in parentheses):
1:250,000 tourism product potential (SBTC);
1:250,000 mineral potential (Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources)
1:20,000 aquaculture potential for finfish and shellfish (Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food)
1:20,000 forest operability (MacMillan Bloedel Ltd., InterFor Ltd., and MoF)
1:20,000 forest recreation potential (MoF Port Alberni)
Note that tourism product capability was not modelled at the 1:20,000 scale. Such modelling should form an intrinsic part of a standardized 1:20,000 TRI, but was beyond the scope of the Clayoquot project.
HTML Created: May 97
Copyright © 1997 Province of British Columbia
Published by the Resources Inventory Committee