Ecological integrity of national parks
Access PDF (942 KB)
According to the Canada National Parks Act, “ecological integrity” is
with respect to a park, a condition that is determined to be characteristic of its natural region and likely to persist, including abiotic components and the composition and abundance of native species and biological communities, rates of change and supporting processes.
In other words, ecosystems have integrity when their native components, such as native species, biological communities, natural landscapes and ecological functions, are intact and are likely to persist. The ecological integrity of national parks is assessed by monitoring representative components of major park ecosystems, such as forest, freshwater and wetlands. It is a key measure of the condition of our national parks.
Results
Key results
- 117 ecosystems in 42 national parks were assessed in 2021. Of those:
- 60% are in good condition, 22% are in fair condition, and 18% are in poor condition
- 59% are stable, 20% are improving, and 21% are declining
- Overall, the ecological integrity of 79% of park ecosystems was maintained or improved since 2016.
Ecological integrity conditions and trends of ecosystems in 42 national parks, Canada, 2021
Data table for the long description
| Ecological integrity condition | Improving (number of ecosystems) |
Stable (number of ecosystems) |
Declining (number of ecosystems) |
Total (number of ecosystems) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Good | 16 | 52 | 2 | 70 |
| Fair | 7 | 7 | 12 | 26 |
| Poor | 0 |
11 | 10 | 21 |
| Total | 23 | 70 | 24 | 117 |
Download data file (Excel/XLSX; 10.6 KB)
How this indicator was calculated
Note: Monitored ecosystems include forests, freshwater, wetlands, grasslands, shrublands, tundra, coastal/marine and glaciers, depending on what is present in each park. Akami-Uapishkᵁ-KakKasuak-Mealy Mountains National Park Reserve, Nááts'įhch'oh National Park Reserve, Thaidene Nëné National Park Reserve, Rouge National Urban Park, Ukkusiksalik National Park and Qausuittuq National Park did not report on ecological integrity in 2021.
Source: Parks Canada (2022) Protected Areas Establishment and Conservation Directorate.
The conditions and trends of ecosystems within national parks are evaluated regularly using a series of monitoring measures (for example, plant and animal populations and soil properties) which are designed to track changes in biodiversity and natural processes within those ecosystems, or stressors (for example, presence of invasive species). The condition of an ecosystem is determined by comparing these measures to threshold values, and each measure is assigned a score. The scores are then averaged together to rate the condition of the ecosystem (good, fair or poor). The trend of an ecosystem (improving, stable, declining) reflects a change in condition over a 5 year period (2016-2021).
Condition and trend must always be interpreted with caution. Because the condition represents an average of several monitoring measures, the condition may show no change over time, even if individual measures are improving or declining.
An ecosystem that is rated as good and stable is secure and likely to persist, and no major management actions like ecosystem restoration are required. Fair or declining ecological integrity indicates that the ecosystem is vulnerable and management actions may be required. Poor ecological integrity indicates that the ecosystem is impaired, and significant management actions may be required. Improving ecological integrity results may indicate that restoration actions are working.
| Ecosystem | Improving (number of ecosystems) |
Stable (number of ecosystems) |
Declining (number of ecosystems) |
Total (number of ecosystems) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coastal/marine | 3 | 9 | 2 | 14 |
| Forests | 8 | 15 | 8 | 31 |
| Freshwater | 4 | 24 | 6 | 34 |
| Glaciers | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Grasslands | 2 | 2 | 1 | 5 |
| Shrublands | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Tundra | 2 | 11 | 5 |
18 |
| Wetlands | 4 | 8 | 0 | 12 |
Download data file (Excel/CSV; 0.6 KB)
Source: Parks Canada (2022) Protected Areas Establishment and Conservation Directorate.
National parks are interlinked with their surrounding ecosystems and are affected by many of the same pressures on the environment. Some of the stressors affecting ecosystems in Canada’s national parks include:
- habitat loss and degradation
- reduction of landscape connectivity (for example, building of roads and trails)
- climate change impacts (for example, increasing temperatures) and climate-mediated ecological changes and cumulative effects (for example, diseases and natural disturbances)
- loss of keystone species (for example, wolves or bison)
- pollution and contaminants
- invasive species
Parks Canada implements management actions (for example, ecosystem restoration) when issues are identified. Each ecosystem responds differently to stressors and to management actions. It may take many years to make measurable improvements to ecological integrity and to demonstrate the ecological benefits of management actions. Six ecosystems that were declining in 2020 are now stable and 13 ecosystems that were stable are now improving. These improvements can be attributed, at least in part, to management actions implemented for species at risk and ecosystem restoration.
Data for individual parks
Ecological integrity condition and trends of ecosystems in 42 national parks by province and territory, Canada, 2021
Data table for the long description
| Province or territory | National park | Ecosystem type | Ecological integrity condition | Ecological integrity trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) | Gros Morne | Forests | Fair | Improving |
| Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) | Gros Morne | Freshwater | Good | Stable |
| Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) | Gros Morne | Tundra | Fair | Declining |
| Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) | Terra Nova | Coastal/marine | Good | Stable |
| Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) | Terra Nova | Forests | Fair | Declining |
| Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) | Terra Nova | Freshwater | Good | Stable |
| Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) | Terra Nova | Wetlands | Good | Stable |
| Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) | Torngat Mountains | Freshwater | Good | Stable |
| Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) | Torngat Mountains | Tundra | Good | Stable |
| Prince Edward Island (PE) | Prince Edward Island | Coastal/marine | Poor | Declining |
| Prince Edward Island (PE) | Prince Edward Island | Forests | Poor | Stable |
| Prince Edward Island (PE) | Prince Edward Island | Freshwater | Fair | Declining |
| Prince Edward Island (PE) | Prince Edward Island | Wetlands | Good | Stable |
| Nova Scotia (NS) | Cape Breton Highlands | Forests | Poor | Stable |
| Nova Scotia (NS) | Cape Breton Highlands | Freshwater | Good | Stable |
| Nova Scotia (NS) | Cape Breton Highlands | Wetlands | Good | Stable |
| Nova Scotia (NS) | Kejimkujik | Coastal/marine | Fair | Improving |
| Nova Scotia (NS) | Kejimkujik | Forests | Good | Stable |
| Nova Scotia (NS) | Kejimkujik | Freshwater | Good | Stable |
| Nova Scotia (NS) | Kejimkujik | Wetlands | Good | Improving |
| Nova Scotia (NS) | Sable Island Reserve |
Coastal/Marine | Good | Stable |
| Nova Scotia (NS) | Sable Island Reserve |
Freshwater | Good | Stable |
| New Brunswick (NB) | Fundy | Forests | Good | Stable |
| New Brunswick (NB) | Fundy | Freshwater | Good | Stable |
| New Brunswick (NB) | Fundy | Wetlands | Good | Stable |
| New Brunswick (NB) | Kouchibouguac | Coastal/marine | Good | Stable |
| New Brunswick (NB) | Kouchibouguac | Forests | Good | Stable |
| New Brunswick (NB) | Kouchibouguac | Freshwater | Good | Declining |
| Quebec (QC) | Forillon | Coastal/marine | Good | Improving |
| Quebec (QC) | Forillon | Forests | Poor | Stable |
| Quebec (QC) | Forillon | Freshwater | Good | Stable |
| Quebec (QC) | La Mauricie | Forests | Fair | Declining |
| Quebec (QC) | La Mauricie | Freshwater | Fair | Improving |
| Quebec (QC) | La Mauricie | Wetlands | Poor | Stable |
| Quebec (QC) | Mingan Archipelago Reserve | Coastal/marine | Good | Improving |
| Quebec (QC) | Mingan Archipelago Reserve | Forests | Good | Stable |
| Quebec (QC) | Mingan Archipelago Reserve | Tundra | Fair | Stable |
| Ontario (ON) | Bruce Peninsula | Forests | Good | Improving |
| Ontario (ON) | Bruce Peninsula | Freshwater | Good | Stable |
| Ontario (ON) | Bruce Peninsula | Shrublands | Fair | Stable |
| Ontario (ON) | Georgian Bay Islands | Coastal/marine | Good | Stable |
| Ontario (ON) | Georgian Bay Islands | Forests | Good | Stable |
| Ontario (ON) | Georgian Bay Islands | Wetlands | Good | Improving |
| Ontario (ON) | Point Pelee | Coastal/marine | Fair | Stable |
| Ontario (ON) | Point Pelee | Forests | Poor | Declining |
| Ontario (ON) | Point Pelee | Wetlands | Good | Improving |
| Ontario (ON) | Pukaskwa | Coastal/marine | Fair | Declining |
| Ontario (ON) | Pukaskwa | Forests | Good | Stable |
| Ontario (ON) | Pukaskwa | Freshwater | Good | Stable |
| Ontario (ON) | Thousand Islands | Forests | Good | Stable |
| Ontario (ON) | Thousand Islands | Freshwater | Good | Improving |
| Ontario (ON) | Thousand Islands | Wetlands | Good | Stable |
| Manitoba (MB) | Riding Mountain | Forests | Poor | Stable |
| Manitoba (MB) | Riding Mountain | Freshwater | Good | Stable |
| Manitoba (MB) | Riding Mountain | Grasslands | Poor | Stable |
| Manitoba (MB) | Wapusk | Coastal/marine | Good | Stable |
| Manitoba (MB) | Wapusk | Wetlands | Good | Stable |
| Saskatchewan (SK) | Grasslands | Grasslands | Fair | Stable |
| Saskatchewan (SK) | Prince Albert | Forests | Good | Stable |
| Saskatchewan (SK) | Prince Albert | Freshwater | Poor | Declining |
| Saskatchewan (SK) | Prince Albert | Grasslands | Fair | Improving |
| Alberta (AB) | Banff | Forests | Good | Improving |
| Alberta (AB) | Banff | Freshwater | Poor | Declining |
| Alberta (AB) | Banff | Tundra | Good | Improving |
| Alberta (AB) | Elk Island | Forests | Fair | Declining |
| Alberta (AB) | Elk Island | Freshwater | Good | Stable |
| Alberta (AB) | Elk Island | Grasslands | Poor | Declining |
| Alberta (AB) | Jasper | Forests | Fair | Stable |
| Alberta (AB) | Jasper | Freshwater | Good | Stable |
| Alberta (AB) | Jasper | Tundra | Poor | Declining |
| Alberta (AB) | Waterton Lakes | Forests | Fair | Improving |
| Alberta (AB) | Waterton Lakes | Freshwater | Poor | Stable |
| Alberta (AB) | Waterton Lakes | Grasslands | Good | Improving |
| British Columbia (BC) | Glacier | Forests | Fair | Stable |
| British Columbia (BC) | Glacier | Freshwater | Good | Stable |
| British Columbia (BC) | Glacier | Tundra | Poor | Declining |
| British Columbia (BC) | Gulf Islands Reserve | Coastal/marine | Poor | Stable |
| British Columbia (BC) | Gulf Islands Reserve | Forests | Fair | Improving |
| British Columbia (BC) | Gulf Islands Reserve | Freshwater | Fair | Improving |
| British Columbia (BC) | Gwaii Haanas Reserve, National Marine Conservation Area Reserve, and Haida Heritage Site | Coastal/marine | Good | Stable |
| British Columbia (BC) | Gwaii Haanas Reserve, National Marine Conservation Area Reserve, and Haida Heritage Site | Forests | Good | Improving |
| British Columbia (BC) | Gwaii Haanas Reserve, National Marine Conservation Area Reserve, and Haida Heritage Site | Freshwater | Good | Stable |
| British Columbia (BC) | Kootenay | Forests | Good | Improving |
| British Columbia (BC) | Kootenay | Freshwater | Poor | Stable |
| British Columbia (BC) | Kootenay | Tundra | Good | Stable |
| British Columbia (BC) | Mount Revelstoke | Forests | Fair | Declining |
| British Columbia (BC) | Mount Revelstoke | Freshwater | Good | Stable |
| British Columbia (BC) | Mount Revelstoke | Tundra | Fair | Stable |
| British Columbia (BC) | Pacific Rim Reserve | Coastal/marine | Good | Stable |
| British Columbia (BC) | Pacific Rim Reserve | Forests | Good | Stable |
| British Columbia (BC) | Pacific Rim Reserve | Freshwater | Poor | Declining |
| British Columbia (BC) | Yoho | Forests | Good | Improving |
| British Columbia (BC) | Yoho | Freshwater | Poor | Stable |
| British Columbia (BC) | Yoho | Tundra | Good | Stable |
| Yukon (YT) | Ivvavik | Freshwater | Good | Stable |
| Yukon (YT) | Ivvavik | Tundra | Poor | Declining |
| Yukon (YT) | Kluane | Forests | Fair | Declining |
| Yukon (YT) | Kluane | Freshwater | Good | Improving |
| Yukon (YT) | Kluane | Tundra | Good | Stable |
| Yukon (YT) | Vuntut | Tundra | Good | Stable |
| Yukon (YT) | Vuntut | Wetlands | Good | Stable |
| Northwest Territories (NT) | Aulavik | Freshwater | Good | Stable |
| Northwest Territories (NT) | Aulavik | Tundra | Poor | Stable |
| Northwest Territories (NT) | Nahanni Reserve | Forests | Fair | Declining |
| Northwest Territories (NT) | Nahanni Reserve | Freshwater | Good | Stable |
| Northwest Territories (NT) | Nahanni Reserve | Tundra | Good | Improving |
| Northwest Territories (NT) | Tuktut Nogait | Freshwater | Good | Stable |
| Northwest Territories (NT) | Tuktut Nogait | Tundra | Good | Stable |
| Northwest Territories (NT) | Wood Buffalo | Forests | Fair | Declining |
| Northwest Territories (NT) | Wood Buffalo | Freshwater | Poor | Declining |
| Northwest Territories (NT) | Wood Buffalo | Wetlands | Good | Improving |
| Nunavut (NU) | Auyuittuq | Glaciers | Fair | Declining |
| Nunavut (NU) | Auyuittuq | Tundra | Good | Stable |
| Nunavut (NU) | Quttinirpaaq | Freshwater | Good | Stable |
| Nunavut (NU) | Quttinirpaaq | Tundra | Good | Stable |
| Nunavut (NU) | Sirmilik | Glaciers | Good | Declining |
| Nunavut (NU) | Sirmilik | Tundra | Fair | Declining |
Download data file (Excel/CSV; 7.2 KB)
Note: Results presented above for Wood Buffalo National Park may differ from other ecosystem reporting as the Park is undertaking a review and update of its monitoring program.
Source: Parks Canada (2022) Protected Areas Establishment and Conservation Directorate.
About the indicator
About the indicator
What the indicator measures
The Ecological integrity of national parks indicator summarizes the condition (good, fair, poor) and trend (improving, stable, declining) of ecosystems within 42 national parks.
Why this indicator is important
The Ecological integrity of national parks indicator provides an indication of the condition of Canada's national parks. National parks help to protect biodiversity, preserve ecosystem services, connect landscapes, and provide a natural solution for climate change by capturing and storing carbon. National parks also help to build knowledge and understanding of ecosystems, and connect Canadians with nature.
Parks Canada regularly monitors and assesses the condition of the main ecosystems in national parks (for example, forests, tundra, wetlands or freshwater). Ecosystems are managed to improve or maintain ecological integrity. Management plans systematically address opportunities for improving the ecological integrity of park ecosystems.
Related initiatives
This indicator supports the measurement of progress towards the following 2022 to 2026 Federal Sustainable Development Strategy Goal 15: Life on land – Protect and recover species, conserve Canadian biodiversity.
The indicator also contributes towards the Pathway to Canada Target 1 initiative. It is linked to Priority 3: Maximize conservation outcomes. Canada Target 1 is one of the 2020 Biodiversity Goals and Targets for Canada.
In addition, the indicator contributes to the Sustainable Development Goals of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. It is linked to Goal 15: Life on land.
It also contributes to the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. It is linked to Target 11: "By 2020, at least 17 percent of terrestrial and inland water, and 10 percent of coastal and marine areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services, are conserved through effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well connected systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, and integrated into the wider landscapes and seascapes."
Related indicators
Canada's conserved areas indicators report the amount and proportion of Canada's terrestrial and marine area that is conserved.
The Global trends in conserved areas indicator compares Canada's protected area to a peer group of countries.
Data sources and methods
Data sources and methods
Data sources
The indicator summarizes the condition and trend of ecosystems in National Parks. Parks Canada regularly monitors the condition of ecosystems using a set of representative measures. Selected measures in each major park ecosystem are combined and the ecosystem is scored as good, fair or poor. Parks Canada monitoring for ecological integrity formally began in 2008 and is ongoing.
More information
Ecological integrity is reported for major ecosystems in 42 of Canada's national parks. Data are not available for Akami-Uapishkᵁ-KakKasuak-Mealy Mountains National Park Reserve, Nááts'įhch'oh National Park Reserve, Thaidene Nëné National Park Reserve, Qausuittuq National Park, Ukkusiksalik National Park, and Rouge National Urban Park.
Between 1 and 4 ecosystems are assessed in each park. Examples of ecosystems include forests, wetlands, and glaciers. The selected ecosystems form most of the area of a park and are important to its biological functioning. For each ecosystem, a scientifically sound set of environmental measures is developed, based on appropriateness, representativeness, monitoring needs and cost-effectiveness. Some examples of ecological integrity measures include wildlife population size, estimates of plant productivity, water quality, and extent of invasive species. Data for these measures are gathered from a variety of sources, including on-the-ground field sampling, satellite imagery, academic and government partners, and traditional knowledge. Measured values are compared to thresholds, such as whether a wildlife population is near desirable size or whether water meets a water quality standard threshold. When such thresholds are not available, interim thresholds based on available information of historical variability are used. The frequency of monitoring varies from annually to once a decade, depending on the specific measures.
For this report, data were collected in 2021-2022, then collated and stored in Parks Canada's Information Centre for Ecosystems database to support management and reporting by the end of March 2022.
Data sets for individual measures are published in the Government of Canada Open Data Portal.
Methods
Ecological integrity monitoring is adapted to the ecology of each park. Information is gathered for each selected ecosystem, and a determination is made as to whether the ecosystem is in good, fair or poor condition and whether that condition is improving, declining, or stable. Complete methods information is available in Parks Canada's 2011 Consolidated Guidelines for Ecological Integrity Monitoring in Canada's National Parks, available from the Protected Areas Establishment and Conservation Directorate, Parks Canada.
More information
Ecosystem condition is determined from the monitoring results as follows: each measure is assigned a score based on its condition compared to its threshold (good = 2, fair = 1, poor = 0). If one-third or more of the measures are scored poor, the ecosystem-level indicator is also scored poor. If less than one-third of the measures are scored poor, the average score of the measures (weighted equally) determines the ecosystem score.
The assessment of the overall trend for each ecosystem is based on a change in its overall condition over 5 years, or in the trend of monitoring measures. If the condition of the ecosystem has not changed, it is considered stable unless a strong majority of the monitoring measures shows the same trend.
The national indicator (% of ecosystems maintained or improved) is an overall assessment of the trend of ecological integrity across national parks. It is generated by dividing the number of ecosystem that are stable or improving by the total number of ecosystems monitored.
High quality ecological monitoring provides information that helps prioritize funding for ecological restoration projects to the ecosystems where it was needed most. In 2021-2022, more than 70 restoration projects were underway in areas administered by Parks Canada. These projects are designed to contribute to maintaining and improving ecological integrity. In 16 of these projects, monitoring results already demonstrate measurable progress: 5 projects may have contributed to halting decline or maintaining stable condition, and 11 projects may have contributed to improved ecological integrity. For example, increasing ecological integrity in the freshwater ecosystem in La Mauricie National Park is likely due to the removal of old dams leading to improved aquatic connectivity.
Recent changes
The monitoring program was enhanced in 2021-2022 by adding and improving ecological integrity measures, and through improved use of different ways of knowing (i.e., western science and Indigenous knowledge). In some cases, improved monitoring provided information that changed our understanding of the condition and trend of an ecosystem. For example, in Thousand Islands National Park, additional measures were assessed in the freshwater ecosystem that changed the condition of the ecosystem from fair to good in 2021. At other times, new information reveals new stressors. For instance, the assessment of glaciers in Auyuittuq National Park was improved through collaboration with Inuit partners to include Inuit knowledge as well as western science. This work revealed that the trend was declining.
Caveats and limitations
The monitoring measures used to determine the condition and trend of ecosystems are chosen to represent the most important elements of the ecosystem and thus provide an indication, rather than a complete assessment, of ecological integrity. Monitoring takes place against a background of natural variability, and because many locations are remote and some measurements are time-consuming or expensive to conduct, the frequency of monitoring may be low. This leads to unavoidable uncertainty in assigning conditions and trends to ecosystems.
Ecosystems are not of equal area or of equal importance in parks; comparisons between systems or between parks must be made with caution.
Some parks have not yet reported results, while others are basing their reporting on incomplete suites of measures that reflect current data availability. Monitoring methods are selected using objective techniques to provide credible overall assessments. Where information is incomplete, expert opinion, literature review, preliminary data and statistical principles are used to support the definition of thresholds.
The equal weighting of measures may not always reflect their relative ecological importance.
The data do not include provincial or other parks or other types of protected areas.
Resources
Resources
References
Government of Canada (2000) Canada National Parks Act. Retrieved August 23, 2022.
Parks Canada (2011) Consolidated Guidelines for Ecological Integrity Monitoring in Canada’s National Parks. Protected Areas Establishment and Conservation Branch, Parks Canada.
Parks Canada (2021) State of Canada's Natural and Cultural Heritage Places 2021. Retrieved on August 23, 2022.
Related information
Report a problem or mistake on this page
- Date modified: