RE: canards v. forplane
Having designed aircraft models using both, it's my understanding that these are not interchangeable terms...
An aircraft which uses the forward surface to control pitch is using a canard. (i.e., the Long EZ)
An aircraft such as the Piaggio "Avanti" is a 3-lifting-surface design, and the front surface, (the foreplane ) is not used for pitch control, but rather as a balancing force, allowing the wing area (and thus drag) to be reduced. It has slotted flaps, and uses them only for takeoff and landing.) As a bonus, this allows the horizontal stab (an inverted airfoil) to fly at almost zero lift in cruise. (again, reducing drag)
Practical effects in modeling are:
A canard aircraft has to be built in such a way that the canard is effective, and this means that the canard chord should not be below about 4.5 inches, to be effective. As a scale enthusiast, it follows that to build a scale canard design, you need to build it large. (Even at 1/3rd scale, the canard on a scale Long EZ is only about 4.25" chord ! )
A 3-lifting-surface design, such as the "Avanti" can get around this requirement, if built carefully, because the horizontal stabilizer/elevator still controls the pitch.
Of course, there are other canard configurations, such as the jet "Eurofighter", "Rafale", and others, but in those cases, the flight control system is integrated anyway, and I believe that the elevons also play a part in pitch control.