Detailed Soil Survey of the Mount Revelstoke Summit Area.

ENVIRONMENTAL FRAGILITY RATINGL . Knapik and M.M . LandalsIntroductionThe rating of the landscape according to its sensitivity tothe effects of human use isincreasingly recognized as an importantconsideration in land use planning .Although reference is often madeto thelittlefragility of alpine and sub-alpine ecosystems, there has beenquantitative definition of actual levels of fragility .Kuchar (1972a, 1972b, 1972c) develo?ed fragility ratings foralpinePark .and sub-alpine ecosystems in three areas of Jasper NationalBy estimating the vulnerability of vegetation to trampling, therate of vegetation recovery and the susceptibility of the soil surfaceto erosion, he set up a five-point fragility scale .was devised without the benefit of quantitative data .This rating scaleLandals andKnapik (1972) devised a similar type of five-point scale to ratelandscape fragility with emphasis on trail location in Jasper NationalPark .This system was based on quantitative data from experimentaltrampling of five common plant communities and considerations ofsoilbearing capacity and erosion potential .As used in this report,an environmental fragility rating isdefined asa classification of vegetation and soil units according totheir predicted response to anthropogenic use .Response is evaluatedby the estimated amount of change in the naturalecosystem .Manyspecific types of human usemust be made to retain somecould be considered, but some assumptionsuniversality of the system and eliminatethe need for a separate rating for each land use . If a site is subjectedto construction or very intensive use, it is destroyed as a natural