Habitat Management of the Yukon Little Rancheria

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Habitat Management of the Yukon Little Rancheria Habitat Management in the Yukon Winter Range of the Little Rancheria Caribou Herd J.Z. Adamczewski, R.F. Florkiewicz and V. Loewen Habitat Management in the Yukon Winter Range of the Little Rancheria Caribou Herd TR-03-02 Acknowledgements Many biologists and students contributed to the biological studies summarized in the companion report on Rancheria caribou habitat use and ecology (Florkiewicz et al. 2003). They are listed in that report and we thank them again, as their work built the biological foundation on which this report is based. We would also like to thank Shawn Francis, Bob Wynes, Simon Dyer, Brad Stelfox, Robert Anderson and Elston Dzus for their work, reports, and ideas on caribou conservation and management. Special thanks to Norm MacLean and his British Columbia colleagues Rick Marshall, Tom Smith and Mark Williams for working with us on management of this caribou herd and for providing their radio-collar data. Jean Carey was a patient and thoughtful technical editor for this report. We greatly appreciate the peer reviews provided by Sue Kemmett, Norm MacLean, Rick Ward, Len Mychasiw, and Debbie Cichowski. ©2003 Department of Environment, Government of the Yukon You may use the information in this report for education or information purposes. If you want to use any portion of this report in scientific publications, you must have permission in writing from the Department of Environment, Fish and Wildlife Branch, Government of Yukon, Box 2703, Whitehorse, Yukon Territory Y1A 2C6 Rancheria caribou habitat management, Adamczewski, Florkiewicz & Loewen, 2003 page 1 Habitat Management in the Yukon Winter Range of the Little Rancheria Caribou Herd J.Z. Adamczewski, R.F. Florkiewicz and V. Loewen ____________________________________________ Director, Fish and Wildlife Branch ____________________________________________ Chief, Habitat and Regional Management Executive Summary was 50% or greater, the population was Woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus likely to be declining at 1–3% annually, caribou) ranges have shrunk substantially even with little or no hunting. Threshold across North America due to the complex levels limiting the footprint in caribou range effects of human-caused habitat changes. As have been proposed as a management option a result, COSEWIC1 listed nearly all for the Yukon. Management guidelines for woodland caribou populations in Canada as caribou ranges in British Columbia and either Threatened or of Special Concern in Ontario focus on protecting critical caribou May 2002. The Little Rancheria Herd habitat from development and access, and (LRH) of caribou, which numbered about allow carefully managed development in 1,000 in 1999, has a lowland forested winter less sensitive caribou range. range with some merchantable pine and Three management zones in the Yukon spruce stands just west of Watson Lake, LRH winter range were identified in the Yukon. Timber harvest in this range has to 1990s based first on reconnaissance surveys date (2003) been limited but the potential for and later confirmed by radio-collar habitat fragmentation is high. In this report locations: a heavily used core, a surrounding we develop a long-term approach to habitat extended range, and a migration corridor. management of the Yukon LRH winter Although just 3.6% of the land-base had range, based on the herd’s habitat use and been cut for timber by 2002, the ecology, together with studies and development footprint in the LRH Yukon management of woodland caribou winter range was 16% overall, with 18% in elsewhere. the core, 18% in the extended range, and 5% The direct and indirect effects of in the migration zone. development on woodland caribou include: Like most Yukon caribou herds, the • loss of fragile, slow-growing lichens, the LRH is hunted. The estimated annual • primary caribou winter forage, harvest rate averaged 5% from 1992 to • avoidance of disturbed areas, 2002. To enable continued hunting of this particularly those with heavy traffic, herd, and to allow for periodic range losses • increased hunter access and harvest, to fire, development in this winter range must be kept at levels well below the 50% • collisions with vehicles, footprint values linked to serious declines in • increased access to remote caribou Alberta. range for predators, primarily wolves, and • The suggested management approach for improved habitat suitability for other the LRH Yukon winter range is based on • ungulates like moose. Where these British Columbia models, Alberta studies, other prey sustain elevated wolf numbers, and recent reports proposing thresholds for caribou numbers often decline. development footprint in caribou range. The Alberta studies showed that caribou were main points of the approach are: more likely to be killed by wolves in areas • withdraw the core winter range from within 250 m of all recent cut-blocks and further logging or development, other developments, and that caribou used • establish a connected reserve network these areas much less than undisturbed of high-quality habitat in the extended range forests. The development “footprint” was and migration zone, and defined as the proportion of the land-base • establish maximum development within such avoidance zones. Where the footprint values of 30% in the extended development footprint in a caribou range range and 25% in the migration zone. 1 COSEWIC - Committee On the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada Rancheria caribou habitat management, Adamczewski, Florkiewicz & Loewen, 2003 Page 1 Table of Contents Page 1 Executive Summary Page 2 Table of Contents Page 3 List of Figures and List of Tables Page 4 Status and management of woodland caribou in Canada and Yukon Status of woodland caribou in Canada Status and management of woodland caribou in northern BC and Yukon Page 5 Direct and indirect effects of development on woodland caribou Loss of terrestrial and arboreal lichens Loss of forest cover and avoidance of disturbed forests Increased hunter access and harvest Collisions with vehicles Increased predator access and higher predation risk Altered predator-prey balances leading to caribou declines Population ecology linked to development footprint Natural habitat alterations, including fire Synthesis – woodland caribou and development Page 9 Management of woodland caribou ranges – examples from Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia Ontario Alberta British Columbia Synthesis – management of caribou ranges in Ontario, Alberta and BC Page 11 Little Rancheria Herd ecology and habitat use Population ecology Hunting and other mortality sources Seasonal range use Changes in LRH range use over time Habitat use and habitat quality Page 14 Management of LRH Yukon winter range and risk evaluation Management status of the LRH winter range Proposed approach to LRH caribou range management Page 23 References Page 28 Appendix 1. Management recommendations for Little Rancheria Caribou winter range and forestry, 1996. Page 2 Rancheria caribou habitat management, Adamczewski, Florkiewicz & Loewen, 2003 List of Figures Page 6 Figure 1. Year-round (beige) and Yukon winter range (orange) of the Little Rancheria Herd of woodland caribou in British Columbia and Yukon. Boundaries of the BC portion of the LRH winter range were under review in 2003 (M. Domazet, B.C. Min. Sustainable Resource Management, Smithers, personal communication 2003) (from Florkiewicz et al. 2003). Page 18 Figure 2. Distribution of radio-collared caribou locations in winter in three management zones of the Yukon Little Rancheria Herd winter range, 1996–1999 (from Florkiewicz et al. 2003). Page 19 Figure 3. Habitat quality map for the Yukon Little Rancheria Herd winter range(from Florkiewicz et al. 2003). Page 20 Figure 4. Predicted habitat quality in areas north and west of the main Yukon winter range of the Little Rancheria Herd. Page 21 Figure 5. Overlap of Liard Timber Harvest Agreement (THA) with Yukon winter range of the Little Rancheria Herd. Page 22 Figure 6. Development footprint (all developed areas plus a 250m buffer) in November 2001 in the Yukon winter range of the Little Rancheria Herd. Page 23 Figure 7. Core winter range and surrounding connected network of high-quality habitat in the Yukon winter range of the Little Rancheria Herd. List of Tables Page 12 Table 1. October composition counts of the Little Rancheria Caribou Herd. Page 12 Table 2. Estimated average annual hunter kills of LRH caribou in BC and Yukon, l992– 2002. Page 3 Rancheria caribou habitat management, Adamczewski, Florkiewicz & Loewen, 2003 Status and management of tracts of old forest with abundant slow- woodland caribou in Canada growing lichens and relatively little use by and Yukon other hoofed mammals. As these forest tracts are reduced in size, made more accessible to predators and hunters, and Status of woodland caribou in converted to younger stands attractive to Canada other hoofed mammals, their capacity to The North American range of woodland support caribou erodes. caribou has shrunk substantially since settlement by Europeans (Bergerud 1974, Status and management of woodland Edmonds 1991). In May 2002, boreal eco- caribou in northern BC and Yukon type populations were listed as Threatened Ranges of the northern caribou eco-type by COSEWIC over a large National in British Columbia have to date been less Ecological Area (NEA) that includes impacted (Seip and Cichowski 1996) than Northwest Territories, British Columbia, Alberta’s caribou ranges (see Dzus 2001) Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, because development
Recommended publications
  • Little Rancheria Caribou in the Yukon: Evaluation of Winter Habitat Quality and Habitat Use
    Little Rancheria Caribou in the Yukon: Evaluation of Winter Habitat Quality and Habitat Use R. F. Florkiewicz1, N. Flynn2, N. MacLean3, S. R. Francis4, J. Z. Adamczewski and V. Loewen TR-03-03 Acknowledgements This study benefited from the dedication and assistance of many individuals over the years. James Magun, Philip Donnessey, Frances Naylen, Jennifer Stanniforth and Bruce Bennett worked days and seasons tallying the many varieties of plants and habitats of the study area. Rhonda Rosie supervised fieldwork that provided detailed insights into the plants and nuances of ecosystem classification in the southeast Yukon. Jason Marshal provided able bodied and companionable assistance in the field and on the computer during the data collation phase of the project. Aaron Foos spent many days cleaning and organizing data into a useable form. Stuart Alexander and Marcus Waterreus assisted with presentation of spatial information and animal relocations. Len Mychasiw, Manfred Hoefs, Brian Pelchat and Mary Gamberg provided support throughout the many phases of this work. The data and information collected during this study would not have been possible without the fixed wing expertise and extensive study area knowledge of Byron Dalziel, Myles Bradford, Leland Bradford, Devlin and Bill Oestreich, with logistical support by Sherry Bradford and Rebecca Bradford-Andrew. Jim Reid of Pacific Western Helicopters provided expert flying in all kinds of weather conditions and Sharon Reid provided logistical support for the project. Rick Marshall and Mark Williams (MWLAP) gave permission for information and data for this report. We are grateful to conservation officers Daryl Anderson and Kevin Johnstone for their assistance with location and distribution flights.
    [Show full text]
  • Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative
    Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative Jodi Hilty [email protected] 403 678 1137 www.y2y.net Canada, US Size: 500,000 sq mile Page 1 of 6 Participants in coordinating the ongoing transboundary cooperation: Over our 20+ years of existence we Have partnered witH more than 300 different entities, see examples below. National Government: • Canada • USA Local Government: • State and provincial land and wildlife manaGement aGencies • Town Governments (e.G., Canmore) Protected area administration: • US Fish and Wildlife Service • US Forest Service • Alberta Parks • Parks Canada • National Park Service International NGOs: • Wildlife Conservation Society National NGOs: • Canadian Parks and Wilderness • Defenders of Wildlife • The Wilderness Society Local NGOs: • Great Yellowstone Coalition • Alberta Wilderness Association InterGovernmental orGanizations: • NAFTA • CEC Multi-National Corporations: • Timber companies • MininG companies Local Small Businesses: • Yes, a variety have sponsored our work over the years Community-based Organizations: • Road Watch • Bow Valley Naturalists Objectives: Protect and connect Habitat from Yellowstone to Yukon so that people and nature can thrive. Values and importance: • Natural - one of tHe most intact mountain ecosystems in tHe world. • Social and cultural– mountain communities witH a stronG fabric of indiGenous cultural presence and values. Page 2 of 5 • Economic – Strong eco-tourism, a lonG history of energy exportation. • Political – stable but lots of boundaries within and across countries. • Security
    [Show full text]
  • Alberta and Yukon Forge Stronger Ties with Formal Agreement Premiers Sign Accord of Cooperation on a Variety of Mutual Interests
    September 11, 2009 Alberta and Yukon forge stronger ties with formal agreement Premiers sign accord of cooperation on a variety of mutual interests Edmonton... A new Alberta-Yukon Accord signed by Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach and Yukon Premier Dennis Fentie will promote closer ties between the two jurisdictions for sharing information and ideas, and identifying new opportunities for cooperation. The Accord will be in effect until 2013. “The Alberta-Yukon Accord will enhance our ability to move forward on issues that are important to the residents of both Yukon and Alberta,” said Premier Stelmach. “It makes good economic sense given the natural resources in both Yukon and Alberta, and the markets we seek together.” “Yukon and Alberta governments have had a productive and cooperative relationship in the past for the benefit of our citizens,” Premier Fentie said. “I look forward to the opportunities arising from this Accord to further enhance our relationship.” Mutual interests covered by the Accord include: climate change and environmental management; education, literacy and skills training; emergency response planning; energy and resource development; health care; labour mobility; regional economic development; research and innovation; sport, recreation and healthy living; tourism; trade and investment; and transportation and infrastructure. The Alberta and Yukon governments have a history of cooperation in a number of areas including energy and resource development, wildland fire response, education and health. For more information visit www.international.alberta.ca. -30- Media inquiries may be directed to: Tom Olsen Roxanne Vallevand Office of the Premier Cabinet Communications 780-422-4905 Government of Yukon 780-718-3034 (cell 867-633-7949 E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] To call toll free within Alberta dial 310-0000.
    [Show full text]
  • The Alaska-Yukon Region of the Circumboreal Vegetation Map (CBVM)
    CAFF Strategy Series Report September 2015 The Alaska-Yukon Region of the Circumboreal Vegetation Map (CBVM) ARCTIC COUNCIL Acknowledgements CAFF Designated Agencies: • Norwegian Environment Agency, Trondheim, Norway • Environment Canada, Ottawa, Canada • Faroese Museum of Natural History, Tórshavn, Faroe Islands (Kingdom of Denmark) • Finnish Ministry of the Environment, Helsinki, Finland • Icelandic Institute of Natural History, Reykjavik, Iceland • Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Greenland • Russian Federation Ministry of Natural Resources, Moscow, Russia • Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Stockholm, Sweden • United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, Alaska CAFF Permanent Participant Organizations: • Aleut International Association (AIA) • Arctic Athabaskan Council (AAC) • Gwich’in Council International (GCI) • Inuit Circumpolar Council (ICC) • Russian Indigenous Peoples of the North (RAIPON) • Saami Council This publication should be cited as: Jorgensen, T. and D. Meidinger. 2015. The Alaska Yukon Region of the Circumboreal Vegetation map (CBVM). CAFF Strategies Series Report. Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna, Akureyri, Iceland. ISBN: 978- 9935-431-48-6 Cover photo: Photo: George Spade/Shutterstock.com Back cover: Photo: Doug Lemke/Shutterstock.com Design and layout: Courtney Price For more information please contact: CAFF International Secretariat Borgir, Nordurslod 600 Akureyri, Iceland Phone: +354 462-3350 Fax: +354 462-3390 Email: [email protected] Internet: www.caff.is CAFF Designated
    [Show full text]
  • Ministerial Order 112/1997
    PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA ORDER OF THE MINISTER OF HEALTH Ministerial Order No. M 112 I, Joy K. MacPhail, Minister of Health and Minister Responsible for Seniors, order that 1. B.C. Reg. 27/97, the Community Health Council Regulation, is amended as set out in the attached Appendix. 2. (1) Section 1 (75) of B.C. Reg. 115/94, the Health Council Regulation, is rescinded. (2) B.C. Reg. 260/95, the Queen Charlotte Islands/Haida Gwaii Health Council Regulation, is rescinded. 3. (1) Section 1 (64) of B.C. Reg. 115/94, the Health Council Regulation, is rescinded. (2) B.C. Reg. 60/95, the Fort Nelson-Liard Health Council Regulation, is rescinded. Mir,jdter o Health and Minister Responsible for Seniors This Order made the 11 day of fr A2C,14 , 199/ at Victoria, British Columbia. (This part is for administrative purposes only and is not pan of the Order) Authority under which Order is made: Act and section:- Health Authorities Act, section section 6(1) and (2) Other (specify):- ist h-.7//s KAHAMM0.97\CHC.MAR APPENDIX B.C. Reg 27/97, the Community Health Council Regulation, is amended by adding the following sections: Queen Charlotte Islands/Haida Gwaii Health Council 33. (1) The Queen Charlotte Islands/Haida Gwaii Health Council is continued as a community health council under section 6(1) of the Act. (2) The area of British Columbia constituting the Queen Charlotte Islands/Haida Gwaii Health Council is set out in Schedule A. (3) The Queen Charlotte Islands/Haida Gwaii Health Council consists of 15 members.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Gmc Yukon Contents
    YUKON 2021 GMC YUKON CONTENTS INTRODUCTION DENALI AT4 TECHNOLOGY CAPABILITY YUKON XL TRAILERING CONNECTIVITY FEATURES AND OPTIONS ACCESSORIES 3 LIVE LIKE A PRO Living large is no small feat. Pros do it with confidence and plenty of companions. Whether they’re hitting the highways (and fairways), pulling their passions, catching their limit or bagging that trophy, pros do it all. The Next Generation Yukon and Yukon XL were inspired by and built for them. And now, the First Ever Yukon AT4 allows pros to follow their imagination to travel beyond the paved and predictable. Experience Professional Grade—the 2021 GMC Yukon and Yukon XL. Preproduction models shown throughout. Actual production models may vary. INTRODUCTION DENALI AT4 TECHNOLOGY CAPABILITY YUKON XL TRAILERING CONNECTIVITY FEATURES AND OPTIONS ACCESSORIES 4 MADE TO REIGN FIRST-CLASS EXPERIENCE I EXCLUSIVE INTERIOR ON DENALI I POWER-SLIDING CENTER CONSOLE IS AVAILABLE (LATE AVAILABILITY) I FOUR-CORNER AIR RIDE ADAPTIVE SUSPENSION IS AVAILABLE (LATE AVAILABILITY) TECHNOLOGY I MULTICOLOR 15" DIAGONAL HEAD-UP DISPLAY IS AVAILABLE I UP TO NINE CAMERA VIEWS1 ARE AVAILABLE PROFESSIONAL GRADE CAPABILITY I 6.2L 420-HP V8 ENGINE ON DENALI I ALL-NEW ACTIVE RESPONSE 4WD™ SYSTEM IS AVAILABLE (LATE AVAILABILITY) The Next Generation 2021 Yukon is ready for anything. Designed to be bigger and bolder than ever,2 it delivers first-class accommodations for up to nine, available technologies and legendary Professional Grade capability. Travel in the premium-packed Yukon Denali or give free rein to your wanderlust by traveling beyond the predictable—and the paved—in the First Ever Yukon AT4.
    [Show full text]
  • Print PDF and Play!
    Match each image with the right Guess where? province or territory on the map. 7 1 8 10 Yukon 9 2 11 Nunavut Northwest Territories Newfoundland and Labrador 3 Alberta 12 British Columbia Manitoba Prince Edward Island Quebec Saskatchewan Nova Scotia Ontario 5 New Brunswick 4 13 6 Did you know that Library and Archives Canada has over 30 million photographs in its collection? Check out the website at bac-lac.gc.ca. You can use images from our collection in your own projects (subject to copyright). Answer key: 1. Quebec; 2. New Brunswick; 3. Ontario; 4. Manitoba; 5. Northwest Territories; 6. British Columbia; 7. Prince Edward Island; 8. Nova Scotia; 9. Alberta; 10. Saskatchewan; 11. Newfoundland and Labrador; 12. Nunavut; 13. Yukon; All of the images are from the Library and Archives Canada collection. Here are the titles and reference numbers of the original photographs: 1. Quebec. “Percé Rock from South Beach.” Percé Rock, Quebec, 1916. Reference no. a011350. 2. New Brunswick. “Rocks at Hopewell, N.B.” Hopewell, New Brunswick, no date. Reference no. a021073. 3. Ontario. “Canadian Falls, Niagara Falls.” Niagara Falls, Ontario, ca. 1870-1873. Reference no. a031559. 4. Manitoba. “Canadian National Railways station and yards, Winnipeg, Manitoba.” Winnipeg, Manitoba, no date. Reference no. a047871-v8. 5. Northwest Territories. “Dog teams carrying mail.” Mackenzie River, Northwest Territories, 1923. Reference no. a059980-v8. 6. British Columbia. “First through train between Montreal and coast, [B.C.].” British Columbia, 1886. Reference no. a066579. 7. Prince Edward Island. “On the shore near Cavendish, Prince Edward Island National Park, P.E.I.” Near Cavendish, Prince Edward Island, 1953.
    [Show full text]
  • Immigration Matters Across Canada, Visit Canada.Ca/Immigration-Matters
    Economic Profile Series: Whitehorse, Yukon Spring 2020 This series looks at communities across Canada and highlights key labour market statistics and the role that immigration has played, or could play, to help these communities flourish. It is important to note that predicting future labour market demand can be challenging as economies are always evolving. This -31101-2 profile uses current population and labour market trends to give a profile of how immigration might play a role in this community. 660 Ensuring Whitehorse remains an important urban centre in Northern Canada: the role of immigration The looming workforce challenge Figure 1: Share of the Whitehorse workforce1 over the The 2016 Census reported that nearly 30% of age of 55 in selected industries the Whitehorse workforce1 was over the age of Professional services 37% 55. Overall, more than 4,500 people are likely to retire in the next decade or so (as they are 55 Mining* 29% and older). Thirty-seven percent of those Heavy construction** 29% working in professional services was 55 and Transportation 28% older at the time of the Census (Figure 1). More than 1 out of every 4 workers in mining, Educational services 28% Cat. No. Cat. Ci4-193/18-2019E-PDF ISBN 978-0- construction, transportation, education, finance Finance and insurance 27% and insurance, and health care are over the age Health care 26% of 55. *Includes mining and quarrying (except oil and gas). There are not enough young people coming **Heavy and civil engineering construction. Source: Statistics Canada, 2016 Census. through the education system to meet the demand of the current labour market, let alone provide the workforce for potential future economic growth.
    [Show full text]
  • Dease Liard Sustainable Resource Management Plan
    Dease Liard Sustainable Resource Management Plan Background Document January, 2004 Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management Table of Contents Table of Contents................................................................................................................. i List of Tables ...................................................................................................................... ii List of Maps ........................................................................................................................ ii List of Acronyms ...............................................................................................................iii Glossary .............................................................................................................................. v 1. Introduction.................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Plan Objectives ........................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Background.............................................................................................................. 1 1.3 MSRM Mandate, Principals and Organizational Values......................................... 2 1.4 SRM Planning and Plans Defined............................................................................ 3 1.5 Scope of Dease-Liard SRM Plan ............................................................................. 5 1.6 The Process .............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Wolf Management Programs In
    Wolf Management Programs in Northwest Territories, Alaska, Yukon, British Columbia, and Alberta: A Review of Options for Management on the Bathurst Caribou Herd Range in the Northwest Territories Ashley McLaren, M. Sc. Environment and Natural Resources 2016 File Report No. 149 ii ABSTRACT Various jurisdictions in Canada and the United States have implemented programs to manage wolves, often in response to concerns for declining ungulate populations. Lethal and/or non- lethal methods have been used in Northwest Territories (NWT), Yukon, Alaska, British Columbia, and Alberta with varying results. Historically, trapping and ground shooting of wolves was encouraged through incentive programs, some of which included use of poisons. Current, on- going wolf management programs often integrate harvest-based techniques with more intensive approaches, such as aerial shooting. For programs that have included monitoring initiatives, results suggest that without continued, targeted wolf removals in the area of concern, any positive responses by the ungulate population(s) of concern are typically not sustained. In an effort to support recovery of the Bathurst caribou herd and contribute to an informed response, this report provides information on options for management of wolves using examples from jurisdictions surrounding NWT, including the effectiveness, cost, and humaneness of control methods, local and First Nations involvement in programs, and plans used to guide wolf management. A significant challenge to wolf management on the range of the Bathurst caribou herd is the migratory nature of this predator-prey system resulting in a potential need to consider management actions on wolves more broadly. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................................................ iii LIST OF FIGURES..............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Fish 2002 Tec Doc Draft3
    BRITISH COLUMBIA MINISTRY OF WATER, LAND AND AIR PROTECTION - 2002 Environmental Indicator: Fish in British Columbia Primary Indicator: Conservation status of Steelhead Trout stocks rated as healthy, of conservation concern, and of extreme conservation concern. Selection of the Indicator: The conservation status of Steelhead Trout stocks is a state or condition indicator. It provides a direct measure of the condition of British Columbia’s Steelhead stocks. Steelhead Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) are highly valued by recreational anglers and play a locally important role in First Nations ceremonial, social and food fisheries. Because Steelhead Trout use both freshwater and marine ecosystems at different periods in their life cycle, it is difficult to separate effects of freshwater and marine habitat quality and freshwater and marine harvest mortality. Recent delcines, however, in southern stocks have been attributed to environmental change, rather than over-fishing because many of these stocks are not significantly harvested by sport or commercial fisheries. With respect to conseration risk, if a stock is over fished, it is designated as being of ‘conservation concern’. The term ‘extreme conservation concern’ is applied to stock if there is a probablity that the stock could be extirpated. Data and Sources: Table 1. Conservation Ratings of Steelhead Stock in British Columbia, 2000 Steelhead Stock Extreme Conservation Conservation Healthy Total (Conservation Unit Name) Concern Concern Bella Coola–Rivers Inlet 1 32 33 Boundary Bay 4 4 Burrard
    [Show full text]
  • The Seasonality of a Migratory Moose Population in Northern Yukon
    THE SEASONALITY OF A MIGRATORY MOOSE POPULATION IN NORTHERN YUKON Dorothy Cooley1,5, Heather Clarke1, Shel Graupe2,6, Manuelle Landry-Cuerrier3, Trevor Lantz4, Heather Milligan1, Troy Pretzlaw3,7, Guillaume Larocque3,8, and Murray M. Humphries3 1Department of Environment, Yukon Government, Whitehorse, YT, Canada, Y1A 2C6; 2Vuntut Gwitchin Government, Old Crow, YT, Canada, Y0B 1N0; 3Natural Resource Sciences, Macdonald Campus, McGill University, Ste-Anne-de-Bellevue, QC, Canada H9X 3V9; 4Environmental Studies, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada, V8W 2Y2; 5Teslin Tlingit Council, Teslin, YT, Canada, YOA 1B0; 6SGS Canada Inc, Edmonton, AB, Canada, T6E 4N1; 7Parks Canada, Annapolis, NS, Canada, B0T 1B0; 8Québec Centre for Biodiversity Science, Montréal, QC, Canada, H3A 1B1 ABSTRACT: At the northern edge of their North American range, moose (Alces alces) occupy treeline and shrub tundra environments characterized by extreme seasonality. Here we describe aspects of the seasonal ecology of a northern Yukon moose population that summers in Old Crow Flats, a thermokarst wetland complex, and winters in surrounding alpine habitat. We collared 19 moose (10 adult males and 9 adult females) fitted with GPS radio-collars in Old Crow Flats during summer, and monitored their year-round habitat use, associated environmental conditions, and movements for 2 years. Seventeen of 19 moose were classified as migratory, leaving Old Crow Flats between August and November and returning in April to July, and spent winter in alpine habitats either northwest (n = 8), west (n = 4), or southeast (n = 5) of Old Crow Flats. The straight-line migration distance between summer and winter ranges ranged from 59 to 144 km, averaging 27 km further for bulls than cows.
    [Show full text]