Stakeholder Engagement¶

The Canadian Wildlife Federation was interested in developing the CABD to support our growing national fish passage program, including barrier remediation prioritization analyses; however, the utility of a national-scale database of this nature extends beyond fish passage applications. The creation of a national database and framework to support freshwater connectivity efforts necessitates multilateral collaboration across geographic regions, legislative jurisdictions, and private and public sectors. No such forum existed to facilitate discussions specific to freshwater aquatic connectivity and barrier remediation at a national scale. As such, to support and facilitate the development of the CABD, we established an external stakeholder engagement framework to discuss barriers to aquatic connectivity and fish passage, and to actively engage with interested parties, potential end-users, and data providers, to elicit feedback to help guide the design and development of the CABD.

Stakeholders include representatives from all levels of government, NGOs, local and community groups, researchers, and industry. The stakeholder engagement process has successfully provided advice on feasibility, identification of target end uses and associated data requirements, data acquisition and compilation, database design, and mechanisms to fill data gaps. This stakeholder network supports Canada-wide collaboration on aquatic connectivity, allows for efficient dissemination of information, and ensures that the CABD is a functional tool that can support a range of projects across multiple sectors.

Stakeholder Engagement Framework¶

Stakeholder engagement began in 2019, and continues in an active capacity. The Stakeholder Engagement Framework comprises the following components:

User Requirements Interviews¶

We developed a standardized questionnaire that was used during phone interviews to help answer some key questions about the database:

What types of work could the CABD support?
What feature types and attributes would be most useful to support this work?
How would potential users like to access the data?

We interviewed over 40 individuals during 2019-20, and the results of these interviews were synthesized to lay out key user requirements and to develop a set of CABD use cases.

CABD User and Advisory Groups¶

CABD Advisory Committee (Active)

The Advisory Committee is the active CABD engagement group and is responsible for providing guidance and feedback on strategic planning, data and user requirements, web tool testing, and technical development aspects of project implementation. The committee was established in spring 2022 and is anticipated to remain active with monthly conference calls through 2023.

Current members:

Name	Organization
Axel Anderson	Watercourse Crossing Program - Alberta Environment and Parks
Amelia Atkin	Fisheries and Oceans Canada
Sean Butler	Fisheries and Oceans Canada
Steven Cooke	Carleton University
Natalie Deseta	Environment and Local Government - Government of New Brunswick
Neil Fisher	Fisheries and Oceans Canada
Richard Gervais	Fisheries and Oceans Canada
Scott Jackson	University of Massachusetts/North Atlantic Aquatic Connectivity Collaborative
Jennifer MacDonald	Fisheries and Oceans Canada
Margo Morrison	Nature Conservancy of Canada
Lauren Murdock	Nashwaak Watershed Association Inc.
Josh Noseworthy	Global Conservation Solutions Ltd.
Catherine Paquette	World Wildlife Fund - Canada
Mark Sondheim	Natural Resources Canada
Amy Weston	Nova Scotia Salmon Association
Lawrence Keyte	Fisheries and Oceans Canada

Former members:

Name	Organization
Will Daniels	Nova Scotia Salmon Association
Rick Devine	Fisheries and Oceans Canada
Philip Harrison	University of Waterloo
Wendy Harrison	Alberta Environment and Parks
Erik Martin	The Nature Conservancy

Practitioner Working Group (Retired)

The Working Group helped synthesize the results of the stakeholder interviews. The group was responsible for providing feedback and input on (among other topics) target end uses and data requirements, decisions related to project objectives and outcomes, web tool design and functionality, and identifying existing aquatic barrier datasets from spring 2020 to spring 2022. This group has since been amalgamated with the Technical Advisory Committee to form a single advisory committee for the CABD.

Technical Advisory Committee (Retired)

The Technical Advisory Committee was responsible for providing feedback and input on technical aspects of project implementation, including but not limited to, database design, logistic consideration for data compilation and mechanisms to fill data gaps, and long-term strategic planning from spring 2020 to spring 2022. The committee also assisted in final decision-making review of products from the Working Group. This group has since been amalgamated with the Practitioner Working Group to form a single advisory committee for the CABD.

Use Cases¶

The results of the user requirements interviews were synthesized by the CABD team and discussed with the user and advisory groups to finalize potential end uses for the CABD, data requirements associated with each use, and means of accessing the data. The results of the individual user interviews were synthesized to identify common potential end uses and create broad ‘Use Types’ that encompass related ‘Use Cases’. The following tables summarize the proposed ‘Use Types’ following preliminary synthesis of the stakeholder interview results, including the most commonly identified ‘Use Cases’.

Summary of CABD ‘Use Types’ and ‘Use Cases’¶

**Use Type: Habitat connectivity assessment, reporting, and management decision-making**¶
Use Case	Requirements		Data Access
Variable-scale reporting on the state of fish, fish habitat, and watershed status, including the development of indicators to assess/quantify freshwater connectivity	Consistent geographic scales/coverage and standardized attributes for each barrier type Identify, locate, and visualize barriers to aquatic connectivity in a defined area of interest Assessments or estimates of passability for each barrier structure (focus is on fish, though other species may be considered) based on physical attributes and hydrologic conditions Topological coincidence of barrier data and hydrographic network to support network analyses (e.g., upstream/downstream traces, calculation of contributing catchment areas, calculation of barrier densities, etc.) Ability to calculate some basic connectivity indicators (to be determined) within the web mapping tool would be useful, but not a necessity		Visualize barrier data and hydrographic network, and access attribute information, via web mapping interface Download data in either .csv or geopackage/shapefile format High-quality metadata is required Provision of data through an API would be useful, but not a necessity
Assessing regulation, compliance, and enforcement of existing hydropower facility	Detailed, consistent, and accurate attributes for dams and associated hydropower facilities (i.e., focus on data quality) Ability to link to key hydrologic data (e.g., reservoir size, rate of discharge, degree of regulation, etc.) Ability to crosswalk with existing databases (e.g., Fisheries and Oceans Canada’s Fisheries Act Authorizations database) Ability to input assessment data into CABD as it is collected to ensure data currency		Visualize barrier data and hydrographic network, and access attribute information, via web mapping interface Download data in either .csv or geopackage/shapefile format Provision of data through an API would be useful, but not a necessity Access to data entry portal for accredited partners

**Use Type: Conservation/restoration planning and prioritization**¶
Use Case	Requirements	Data Access
Strategically prioritize barriers for remediation to improve fish passage	Support cost-benefit analyses to identify “high-value” barriers based on replacement cost, species distributions, and habitat quality/quantity to efficiently allocate resources and obtain “biggest bang for buck” Identify, locate, and visualize barriers to aquatic connectivity in a defined area of interest Assessments or estimates of passability for each barrier structure (focus is on fish, though other species may be considered) based on physical attributes and hydrologic conditions Topological coincidence of barrier data and hydrographic network to support network analyses (e.g., upstream/downstream traces, calculation of amount/quality of habitat upstream of a barrier, calculation of contributing catchment areas, calculation of barrier densities, etc.) Ability to score/rank or optimize “high-value” barriers based on different management objectives (to be determined) within the web mapping tool would be useful, but not a necessity	Visualize barrier data and hydrographic network, and access attribute information, via web mapping interface Download data in either .csv or geopackage/shapefile format High-quality metadata is required Provision of data through an API would be useful, but not a necessity
Identify projects for habitat banking and mitigation/offsetting	Identify, locate, and visualize/symbolize barriers to aquatic connectivity based on remediation/restoration “value” in a defined area of interest Ability to integrate barrier data and “value” with high-resolution habitat data to accurately estimate habitat banking and mitigation/offsetting value	Visualize barrier data and hydrographic network, and access attribute information, via web mapping interface Download data in either .csv or geopackage/shapefile format Provision of data through an API would be useful, but not a necessity

**Use Type: Infrastructure asset management**¶
Use Case	Requirements	Data Access
Modernized, standardized, and central repository for inventory of barrier infrastructure (e.g., dams, culverts) locations and physical conditions	Identify, locate, and visualize barriers to aquatic connectivity in a defined area of interest Detailed, consistent, and accurate attributes for each barrier type to facilitate modernization of data storage and management (i.e., move away from paper/Excel and towards technologically current DBMS) Accurate and precise barrier locations Ownership and liability attributes are required Ability to track renovation and assessment cycles for barrier infrastructure to identify opportunities to take advantage of scheduled replacement/maintenance to improve passability of structures (i.e., need to keep attributes up to date) Ability to input assessment data into CABD as it is collected to ensure data currency	Visualize barrier data and hydrographic network, and access attribute information, via web mapping interface Download data in either .csv or geopackage/shapefile format Provision of data through an API would be useful, but not a necessity Access to data entry portal for accredited partners

**Use Type: Research and monitoring**¶
Use Case	Requirements	Data Access
Develop functional and/or structural connectivity indicators and explore links to biological/ecological processes	Identify, locate, and visualize barriers to aquatic connectivity in a defined area of interest Consistent geographic scales/coverage and standardized attributes for each barrier type to allow for comparative analyses Assessments or estimates of passability for each barrier structure (focus is on fish, though other species may be considered) based on physical attributes and hydrologic conditions Topological coincidence of barrier data and hydrographic network to support network analyses (e.g., upstream/downstream traces, calculation of amount/quality of habitat upstream of a barrier, calculation of contributing catchment areas, calculation of barrier densities, etc.) Ability to link to/integrate other ecological/biological datasets (e.g., species distributions, land use, water quality, etc.)	Visualize barrier data and hydrographic network, and access attribute information, via web mapping interface Download data in either .csv or geopackage/shapefile format High-quality metadata is required Provision of data through an API would be useful, but not a necessity
Effectiveness monitoring to evaluate management and mitigation measures following project implementation to improve connectivity	Identify, locate, and visualize barrier remediation/restoration projects that have been completed in a defined area of interest Consistent geographic scales/coverage and standardized attributes for each barrier type to allow for comparative analyses Ability to link to/integrate monitoring datasets associated with individual projects Ability to edit/update data in CABD based on results of effectiveness monitoring (e.g., passability score)	Visualize barrier data and hydrographic network, and access attribute information, via web mapping interface Download data in either .csv or geopackage/shapefile format High-quality metadata is required Provision of data through an API would be useful, but not a necessity Access to data entry portal for accredited partners

**Use Type: Education and outreach**¶
Use Case	Requirements	Data Access
Identify restoration projects and communicate success stories	Identify, locate, and visualize barrier remediation/restoration projects that have been completed in a defined area of interest Ability to link to project documentation (e.g., website, reports, etc.) Ability to visualize the impact each project achieved to improve freshwater connectivity (e.g., highlight amount of stream kilometers or other habitat measures that are now accessible due to the project’s implementation) Ability to edit/update data in CABD based on project implementation (e.g., remove ‘barrier’, change passability score, etc.)	Visualize successful projects and hydrographic network, and access attribute information, via web mapping interface Download data in either .csv or geopackage/shapefile format Access to data entry portal for accredited partners
Create a central repository of resources to support the transfer of knowledge across the country	As a compliment to the database, a separate section of the web interface to house the compilation and curation of a ‘Freshwater Connectivity Toolkit’ with documents and links to resources (e.g., local/regional/provincial legislations, best management practices, etc.)	Access toolkit through web interface

Stakeholder Engagement¶