DOCSLIB.ORG

Biological Assessment of the Effects of National Forest Land and Resource Management Plans and Bureau of Land Management Land Use Plans on Canada Lynx

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Biological Assessment of the Effects of National Forest Land and Resource Management Plans and Bureau of Land Management Land Use Plans on Canada Lynx Biological Assessment of the Effects of National Forest Land and Resource Management Plans and Bureau of Land Management Land Use Plans on Canada Lynx J. Randal Hickenbottom (Initial Team Leader), USDA Forest Service, Pike-San Isabel National Forest, 19316 Goddard Ranch Ct., Morrison, CO 80465 Bob Summerfield (Final Team Leader), USDA Forest Service, Kootenai National Forest, 1101 U.S. Hwy. 2 W., Libby, MT 59923 Jeff Aardahl, USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1620 L Street NW, Room 204, Washington, DC 20036 George Halekas, USDA Forest Service, Okanogan National Forest, 1 West Winesap, Tonasket, WA 98855 Mark Hilliard, USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1387 S. Vinnell Way, Boise, ID 83709 Lynn Jackson, USDA Forest Service, Chippewa National Forest, Rt 3 Box 244, Cass Lake, MN 56633 David Prevedel, USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Region, Federal Bldg., 324 25th Street, Ogden, UT 84401 John Rupe, USDA Forest Service, Black Hills National Forest, RR2, Box 200, Custer, SD 57730 Executive Summary The Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis) is identifies the potential effects resulting from proposed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 57 FS Land and Resource Management Plans Service (FWS) for listing as a threatened and 56 BLM Land Use Plans (collectively species under provisions of the Endangered referred to as Plans) within the 16 state area Species Act (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service where lynx are proposed for listing. Five 1998a). Informal conferencing among FWS geographic areas were considered: Cascade and USDA Forest Service (FS) and USDI Mountains, Northern Rocky Mountains, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) began in Southern Rocky Mountains, Great Lakes and the fall of 1998 under the direction of an the Northeast. The Plans are assessed as interagency Lynx Steering Committee. As a written and amended, but not including any part of this effort, a Science Report (Ruggiero subsequent policy direction which has not et al. in press 1999a) and a draft Lynx been officially incorporated into the Plans. Conservation Assessment and Strategy (Ruediger et al. in press 1999) have been The BA makes a determination of effect prepared. Using these documents and other based on the not likely/likely to adversely currently available scientific and commercial affect standard of the Endangered Species Act information, this Biological Assessment (BA) (ESA), which will serve as the basis for both Lynx Biological Assessment, December 1999 Page 1 of 149 conferencing and, if the lynx is listed, for (Appendix G). All Plans did not meet at least formal consultation. The definitions used for some of the criteria. Not meeting the criteria determination of adverse effects are those means there is a risk of adverse effects to lynx specified in the FWS ESA Section 7 in one or more of the following categories: Consultation Handbook (U.S. Fish and (1) reduction in habitat quantity or quality, (2) Wildlife Service 1998b) and Forest Service habitat fragmentation contributing to loss of Manual 2670.5(1). connectivity, (3) improved access for competing carnivores, or (4) direct mortality The assessment of direct, indirect, and to lynx. The effects may possibly occur to cumulative effects of the Plans was conducted individual lynx as well as to the population as at three scales: administrative unit (local), a whole. geographic area (regional), and distinct population segment (national). The The effects identified for individual assessment used two methods, as follows: administrative units are cumulative at the geographic area scale, affecting 1. A questionnaire filled out by the 93 subpopulations over a broader geographic administrative units covering 113 Plans extent. Also, the effects at the geographic addressed in the analysis was used to area scale accumulate to the distinct determine how well the Plans directly or population segment scale. indirectly incorporate an array of programmatic lynx conservation measures While most Plans do, either directly or recommended in the Lynx Conservation indirectly, incorporate some positive measures Assessment and Strategy (LCAS). for lynx, the BA makes the following findings: 2. A geographic information system (GIS) analysis using currently available data was 1. Within the Great Lakes geographic area, used to characterize historical and current weak direction to provide denning habitat, lynx habitat with respect to habitat coupled with the high percentage of the connectivity and likelihood for supporting geographic area in developmental lynx conservation. Inferences were drawn allocations (65 percent) may risk adversely about how the Plans, as well as other affecting lynx. cumulative effects, may potentially affect these factors. 2. Plans in the Great Lakes geographic area may risk adversely affecting lynx by a lack Since the conservation measures in the of direction to provide a mix of forest LCAS were designed to address specific risk species and age classes across the factors to lynx, the basic assumption was that landscape needed for lynx foraging. Plans failure of the Plans to either directly or in the Northern Rockies, Southern indirectly incorporate the programmatic Rockies, and Northeast geographic areas conservation measures may result in adverse may risk adversely affecting lynx foraging effects to lynx. The programmatic habitat by allowing type conversions and conservation measures were consolidated into because of limited direction pertaining to 15 evaluation criteria against which the Plans thinning. were assessed. 3. Plans within the Northern Rockies, The Plans showed varied success in Southern Rockies, and Northeast meeting the evaluation criteria, ranging from geographic areas generally direct an fully meeting some to not meeting others at all aggressive fire suppression strategy within Lynx Biological Assessment, December 1999 Page 2 of 149 developmental land allocations. While landscapes. Plans within all geographic understandable in terms of protection of areas lack direction for coordinating resources and property, this strategy may construction of highways and other be contributing to a risk of adversely movement barriers with other responsible affecting lynx by limiting the availability agencies. These factors may be of foraging habitat within these areas. contributing to a risk of adverse effects to lynx. 4. Plans within the Southern Rockies, Great Lakes, and portions of the Northeast 9. Plans within the Northern Rockies, geographic areas provide weak direction Southern Rockies, Great Lakes, and for distributing lynx habitat components Northeast geographic areas are weak in across the landscape. This may be providing direction for coordinating contributing to the risk of adverse effects management activities with adjacent to lynx. landowners and other agencies to assure consistent management of lynx habitat 5. Plans within portions of the Northern across the landscape. This may contribute Rockies, Southern Rockies, Great Lakes, to a risk of adverse effects to lynx. and within the Northeast geographic areas allow levels of human access via forest 10. Plans within all geographic areas except roads that may present a risk of incidental the Northeast fail to provide direction for trapping or illegal shooting of lynx or monitoring of lynx, snowshoe hares, and access by other competing carnivores. their habitats. While failure to monitor The risk of road-related adverse effects is does not directly result in adverse effects, primarily a winter season issue. it makes the detection and assessment of adverse effects from other management 6. Plans within the Northern Rockies, activities difficult or impossible to attain. Southern Rockies, and Northeast geographic areas are weak in providing 11. For all geographic areas, forest guidance for new or existing recreation management has resulted in a reduction of developments. Therefore, these activities the area in which natural ecological may contribute to a risk of adverse effects processes were historically allowed to to lynx. operate, thereby increasing the area potentially affected by known risk factors 7. Plans within all geographic areas allow to lynx. The Plans have continued this both mechanized and non-mechanized trend. The Plans have also continued the recreation that may contribute to a risk of process of fragmenting habitat and adverse effects to lynx. The potential reducing its quality and quantity. effects occur by allowing compacted snow Consequently, Plans may risk adversely trails and plowed roads which may affecting lynx by potentially contributing facilitate the movements of lynx to a reduction in the geographic range of competitors and predators. the species. 8. Plans within portions of the Northern Determination of Effect Rockies and within the Southern Rockies, Great Lakes, and Northeast geographic A determination of effect is made areas provide weak direction for collectively for the 113 Plans at the distinct maintaining habitat connectivity within population segment scale. One determination naturally or artificially fragmented Lynx Biological Assessment, December 1999 Page 3 of 149 for the entire distinct population segment was Critical habitat for the Canada lynx has not reasonable given that: been proposed to date and, therefore, a determination of effect of the existing Plans 1. The analysis showed that some adverse on critical habitat is not applicable. effects exist on each administrative unit and in each geographic area. Recommendations 2. Making a determination at the same scale The BA team recommends amending or at which the species is proposed
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Physiography Geology
    BRITISH COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF MINES HON. W. K. KIERNAN, Minister P. J. MULCAHY, Deputy Minister NOTES ON PHYSIOGRAPHY AND GEOLOGY OF (Bli BRITISH COLUMBIA b OFFICERS OF THE DEPARTMENT VICTCRIA, B.C. 1961 PHYSIOGRAPHY Physiographic divisions and names are established by the Geographic Board of Canada. Recently H. S. Bostock, of the Geological Survey of Canada, studied the physiography of the northern Cordilleran region; his report and maps are published CI I c Fig. 1. Rglief map of British Columbia. in Memoir 247 of the Geological Survey, Department of Mines and Resources, Ottawa. The divisions shown on the accompanying sketch, Figure 2, and the nomenclature used in the text are those proposed by Bostock. Most of the Province of British Columbia lies within the region of mountains and plateaus, the Cordillera of Western Canada, that forms the western border of the North American Continent. The extreme northeastern comer of the Province, lying east of the Cordillera, is part of the Great Plains region. The Rocky Mountain Area extends along the eastern boundary of the Province for a distance of 400 miles, and continues northwestward for an additional 500 miles entirely within the Province. The high, rugged Rocky Mountains, averaging about 50 miles in width, are flanked on the west by a remarkably long and straight valley, known as the Rocky Mountain Trench, and occupied from south to north by the Kootenay, Columbia, Canoe, Fraser, Parsnip, Finlay, Fox, and Kechika Rivers. Of these, the first four flow into the Pacific Ocean and the second four join the Mackenzie River to flow ultimately into the Arctic Ocean.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effects of Linear Developments on Wildlife
    Bibliography Rec# 5. LeBlanc, R. 1991. The aversive conditioning of a roadside habituated grizzly bear within Banff Park: progress report 1991. 6 pp. road impacts/ grizzly bear/ Ursus arctos/ Banff National Park/ aversive conditions/ Icefields Parkway. Rec# 10. Forman, R.T.T. 1983. Corridors in a landscape: their ecological structure and function. Ekologia 2 (4):375-87. corridors/ landscape/ width. Rec# 11. McLellan, B.N. 1989. Dymanics of a grizzly bear population during a period of industrial resource extraction. III Natality and rate of increase. Can. J. Zool. Vol. 67 :1865-1868. reproductive rate/ grizzly bear/ Ursus arctos/ British Columbia/ gas exploration/ timber harvest. Rec# 14. McLellan, B.N. 1989. Dynamics of a grizzly bear population during a period of industrial resource extraction. II.Mortality rates and causes of death. Can. J. Zool. Vol. 67 :1861-1864. British Columbia/ grizzly bear/ Ursus arctos/ mortality rate/ hunting/ outdoor recreation/ gas exploration/ timber harvest. Rec# 15. Miller, S.D., Schoen, J. 1993. The Brown Bear in Alaska . brown bear/ grizzly bear/ Ursus arctos middendorfi/ Ursus arctos horribilis/ population density/ distribution/ legal status/ human-bear interactions/ management/ education. Rec# 16. Archibald, W.R., Ellis, R., Hamilton, A.N. 1987. Responses of grizzly bears to logging truck traffic in the Kimsquit River valley, British Columbia. Int. Conf. Bear Res. and Manage. 7:251-7. grizzly bear/ Ursus / arctos/ roads/ traffic/ logging/ displacement/ disturbance/ carnivore/ BC/ individual disruption / habitat displacement / habitat disruption / social / filter-barrier. Rec# 20. Kasworm, W.F., Manley, T.L. 1990. Road and trail influences on grizzly bears and black bears in northwest Montana.
    [Show full text]
  • Avalanche Characteristics of a Transitional Snow Climate—Columbia Mountains, British Columbia, Canada
    Cold Regions Science and Technology 37 (2003) 255–276 www.elsevier.com/locate/coldregions Avalanche characteristics of a transitional snow climate—Columbia Mountains, British Columbia, Canada Pascal Ha¨gelia,*, David M. McClungb a Atmospheric Science Program, University of British Columbia, 1984 West Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6T 1Z2 b Department of Geography, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Received 1 September 2002; accepted 2 July 2003 Abstract The focus of this study lies on the analysis of avalanche characteristics in the Columbia Mountains in relation to the local snow climate. First, the snow climate of the mountain range is examined using a recently developed snow climate classification scheme. Avalanche observations made by a large helicopter operator are used to examine the characteristics of natural avalanche activity. The results show that the Columbia Mountains have a transitional snow climate with a strong maritime influence. Depending on the maritime influence, the percentage of natural avalanche activity on persistent weak layers varies between 0% and 40%. Facet–crust combinations, which primarily form after rain-on-snow events in the early season, and surface hoar layers are the most important types of persistent weak layers. The avalanche activity characteristics on these two persistent weak layers are examined in detail. The study implies that, even though the ‘avalanche climate’ and ‘snow climate’ of an area are closely related, there should be a clear differentiation between these two terms, which are currently used synonymously. We suggest the use of the term ‘avalanche climate’ as a distinct adjunct to the description of the snow climate of an area.
    [Show full text]
  • Rangifer Tarandus Caribou) in Canada
    PROPOSED Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series Recovery Strategy for the Woodland Caribou, Southern Mountain population (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in Canada Woodland Caribou, Southern Mountain population 2014 Recommended citation: Environment Canada. 2014. Recovery Strategy for the Woodland Caribou, Southern Mountain population (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in Canada [Proposed]. Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series. Environment Canada, Ottawa. viii + 68 pp. For copies of the recovery strategy, or for additional information on species at risk, including COSEWIC Status Reports, residence descriptions, action plans, and other related recovery documents, please visit the Species at Risk Public Registry1. Cover photo: © Mark Bradley Également disponible en français sous le titre « Programme de rétablissement de la population des montagnes du Sud du caribou des bois (Rangifer tarandus caribou) au Canada [Proposed] » © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, represented by the Minister of the Environment, 2014. All rights reserved. ISBN Catalogue no. Content (excluding the cover photo and illustrations) may be used without permission, with appropriate credit to the source. Note: The Woodland Caribou, Southern Mountain population is referred to as “southern mountain caribou” in this document. 1 www.registrelep.gc.ca/default_e.cfm Recovery Strategy for the Woodland Caribou, Southern Mountain population in Canada 2014 PREFACE The federal, provincial, and territorial government signatories under the Accord for the Protection of Species
    [Show full text]
  • Sawtooths to Selkirks| Connecting the Wild in Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 2004 Sawtooths to Selkirks| Connecting the wild in Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia Joshua W. Burnim The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Burnim, Joshua W., "Sawtooths to Selkirks| Connecting the wild in Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia" (2004). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 3484. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/3484 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Maureen and Mike MANSFIELD LIBRARY The University of Montana Permission is granted by the author to reproduce this material in its entirety, provided that this material is used for scholarly purposes and is properly cited in published works and reports. **Please check "Yes" or "No" and provide signature** Yes, I grant permission No, I do not grant permission Author's Signature; On Date; hk jbH Any copying for commercial purposes or financial gain may be undertaken only with tiie author's exphcit consent. 8/98 SAWTOOTHS TO SELKIRKS CONNECTING THE WILD IN IDAHO, MONTANA, AND BRITISH COLUMBIA by Joshua Bumim B.A. Colgate University, 1996 presented in the partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science The University of Montana May 2004 Approved by: 'pLcTl trv\ irperson Dean, Graduate School Date UMI Number EP36026 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology of the Canadian Rockies and Columbia Mountains Summary by Ben Gadd
    Geology of the Canadian Rockies and Columbia Mountains Summary by Ben Gadd 1. Basic geological history of western Canada The evidence reposes in four great layers, each thousands of metres thick. These four great layers (I call them the ancient sediments, the old clastics, the middle carbonates and the young clastics) show two main phases in the geological history of western Canada. First came a long period of sediment deposition, followed by a shorter period of mountain-building. Throughout this time—1.7 billion years altogether—the movement of the world’s crustal plates played a key role. • See last page for the currently accepted geological time scale, with period names and dates. First phase: deposition of most of the rock. About 1.7 billion years ago, part of what is now North America was imbedded in a supercontinent (amalgamation of continents) called Columbia (no relation to the Columbia Mountains). The oldest sedimentary rock in the Rockies was deposited about this time in an inland sea on Columbia. This rock is mostly argillite—very hard mud—and it is now found at the northern end of the Rockies. It is not found in ranges west of the Rockies. The supercontinent of Columbia broke up about 200 million years later. While North America was drifting free some 1.5 billion years ago, a second batch of ancient argillite, with additional limestone and dolostone—more on dolostone in a minute—was deposited in another inland sea, this time at the southern end of the Canadian Rockies in the Waterton area, and to the west in what are now the Purcell Mountains, one of the ranges in the Columbia Mountains (Purcells, Selkirks, Monashees and Cariboos).
    [Show full text]
  • Mountain Hemlock
    Tsuga mertensiana (Bong.) Carr. Mountain Hemlock Pinaceae Pine family Joseph E. Means Mountain hemlock (Tsuga mertensiana) is usually found on cold, snowy subalpine sites where it grows slowly, sometimes attaining more than 800 years in age. Arborescent individuals that have narrowly con- ical crowns until old age (300 to 400 years) and shrubby krummholz on cold, windy sites near tim- berline add beauty to mountain landscapes. Taylor and Taylor (76) thoroughly describe its form. Uses of its moderately strong, light-colored wood include small-dimension lumber and pulp. Habitat Native Range Mountain hemlock (fig. 1) grows from Sequoia Na- tional Park in California (lat. 36° 38 N.) (62) to Cook Inlet in Alaska (lat. 61° 25 N.) (83). It grows along the crest of the Sierra Nevada in California (31); the Cascade Range in Oregon; the Cascade Range and Olympic Mountains in Washington; the northern Rocky Mountains in Idaho and western Montana; the Insular, Coast, and Columbia Mountains in British Columbia; and in southeast and south-central Alaska. Climate Areas occupied by mountain hemlock (fig. 2) generally have a cool to cold maritime climate that includes mild to cold winters, a short, warm to cool growing season and moderate to high precipitation (table 1). Annual and summer precipitation and the proportion of precipitation as snow show notable latitudinal climatic trends in the range of mountain hemlock (table 1). Latitudinal trends in mean temperatures are not evident. The high snowfall results in snowpacks with max- imum depths that range from 245 cm (96 in) in Idaho to 380 cm (150 in) in British Columbia (9).
    [Show full text]
  • Selecting Plants for Pollinators Selecting Plants for Pollinators
    Selecting Plants for Pollinators A Guide for Gardeners, Farmers, and Land Managers In the Columbia Mountains and Highlands ecoregion Revelstoke, Nelson, Blue River, Wells, and Creston Table of CONTENTS Why Support Pollinators? 4 Getting Started 5 Columbia Mountains and Highlands 6 Meet the Pollinators 8 Plant Traits 10 Developing Plantings 12 Farms 13 Public Lands 14 Home Landscapes 15 Plants That Attract Pollinators 16 Notes 21 Habitat hints 22 Habitat and Nesting requirements 23 This is one of several guides for S.H.A.R.E. 24 different regions of North America. We welcome your feedback to assist us in making the future guides Checklist 24 useful. Please contact us at [email protected] Resources and Feedback 25 2 Selecting Plants for Pollinators Selecting Plants for Pollinators A Guide for Gardeners, Farmers, and Land Managers In the Columbia Mountains and Highlands Ecoregion Revelstoke, Nelson, Blue River, Wells, and Creston A NAPPC and Pollinator Partnership Canada™ Publication Columbia Mountains and Highlands 3 Why support pollinators? IN THEIR 1996 BOOK, THE FORGOTTEN POLLINATORS, Buchmann and Nabhan estimated that animal pollinators are needed for the reproduction “Flowering plants of 90% of fl owering plants and one third of human food crops. Each of us depends on these industrious pollinators in a practical way to provide us with the wide range of foods we eat. In addition, pollinators are part of the intricate across wild, web that supports the biological diversity in natural ecosystems that helps sustain our quality of life. farmed and even Abundant and healthy populations of pollinators can improve fruit set and quality, and increase fruit size.
    [Show full text]
  • Canadian Rocky Mountains Ecoregional Assessment
    CANADIAN ROCKY MOUNTAINS ECOREGIONAL ASSESSMENT Volume Two: Appendices British Columbia Conservation Data Centre CANADIAN ROCKY MOUNTAINS ECOREGIONAL ASSESSMENT • VOLUME 2 • APPENDICES i Citation: Rumsey, C., M. Wood, B. Butterfield, P. Comer, D. Hillary, M. Bryer, C. Carroll, G. Kittel, K.J. Torgerson, C. Jean, R. Mullen, P. Iachetti, and J. Lewis. 2003. Canadian Rocky Mountains Ecoregional Assessment, Volume Two: Appendices. Prepared for The Nature Conservancy and the Nature Conservancy of Canada. Cover page photo credits: Top, left to right: The Nature Conservancy of Canada’s Mount Broadwood Conservation Area (Dave Hillary); Water howellia (howellia aquatilis); Grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) (Dave Fraser); Northern Leopard Frog (rana pipiens), Columbia Valley Wildlife Management Area (Dave Hillary); Maligne Lake, Jasper National Park (Pierre Iachetti) Bottom, left to right: Mission Valley, Montana (Marilyn Wood); Palouse Prairie, Idaho (KJ Torgerson); Harlequin duck (histrionicus histrionicus) CANADIAN ROCKY MOUNTAINS ECOREGIONAL ASSESSMENT • VOLUME 2 • APPENDICES ii TABLE OF CONTENTS APPENDIX 1.0 SPECIES CONSERVATION TARGETS...................................................... 1 APPENDIX 1.1 CONSERVATION TARGETS CHARACTERISTICS............................... 23 APPENDIX 1.2 HABITATS/ECOSYSTEMS CONSERVATION TARGETS .................... 24 APPENDIX 1.3 GOALS CAPTURED IN THE CANADIAN ROCKY MOUNTAINS ECOREGIONAL PORTFOLIO ................................................................... 27 APPENDIX 2.0 ECOLOGICAL LAND UNITS
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Ecosystem Components, Volume I
    United States Department of Agriculture An Assessment of Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station Ecosystem Components United States Department of the Interior in the Interior Columbia Bureau of Land Management Basin and Portions of General Technical Report PNW-GTR-405 June 1997 the Klamath and Great Basins Volume I United States United States Department of Department Agriculture of the Interior Forest Service Bureau of Land Management Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project This is not a NEPA decision document An Assessment of Ecosystem Components in the Interior Columbia Basin And Portions of the Klamath and Great Basins: Volume I Thomas M. Quigley Sylvia J. Arbelbide Technical Editors Volume I contains pages 1 through 335 Thomas M. Quigley is a range scientist at the Pacific Northwest Research Station, Walla Walla, WA 99362; Sylvia J. Arbelbide is a geologist at the Pacific Southwest Region, Walla Walla, WA 99362 June 1997 United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station Portland, Oregon Abstract Quigley, Thomas M.; Arbelbide, Sylvia J., tech. eds. 1997. An assessment of ecosystem components in the interior Columbia basin and portions of the Klamath and Great Basins: volume 1. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-405. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 4 vol. (Quigley, Thomas M., tech. ed.; The Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project: Scientific Assessment). The Assessment of Ecosystem Components in the Interior Columbia Basin and Portions of the Klamath and Great Basins provides detailed information about current conditions and trends for the biophysical and social systems within the Basin.
    [Show full text]
  • A. Canadian Rocky Mountains Ecoregional Team
    CANADIAN ROCKY MOUNTAINS ECOREGIONAL ASSESSMENT Volume One: Report Version 2.0 (May 2004) British Columbia Conservation Data Centre CANADIAN ROCKY MOUNTAINS ECOREGIONAL ASSESSMENT • VOLUME 1 • REPORT i TABLE OF CONTENTS A. CANADIAN ROCKY MOUNTAINS ECOREGIONAL TEAM..................................... vii Canadian Rocky Mountains Ecoregional Assessment Core Team............................................... vii Coordination Team ....................................................................................................................... vii Canadian Rocky Mountains Assessment Contact........................................................................viii B. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS................................................................................................... ix C. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................................................... xi Description..................................................................................................................................... xi Land Ownership............................................................................................................................. xi Protected Status.............................................................................................................................. xi Biodiversity Status......................................................................................................................... xi Ecoregional Assessment ..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A Synthesis of Scale-Dependent Ecology of the Endangered Mountain Caribou in British Columbia, Canada
    A synthesis of scale-dependent ecology of the endangered mountain caribou in British Columbia, Canada Robert Serrouya 1,2, Bruce N. McLellan2, Clayton D. Apps3 & Heiko U. Wittmer4 1 Columbia Mountains Caribou Project, RPO #3, P.O. Box 9158, Revelstoke, British Columbia, V0E 3K0, Canada ([email protected]). 2 British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Research Branch, RPO #3, P.O. Box 9158, Revelstoke, British Columbia, V0E 3K0, Canada. 3 Aspen Wildlife Research Inc., 2708 Cochrane Road N.W., Calgary, Alberta, T2M 4H9, Canada. 4 Wildlife, Fish & Conservation Biology, University of California, One Shields Ave., Davis, California, 95616, USA. Abstract: Mountain caribou are an endangered ecotype of woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) that live in high- precipitation, mountainous ecosystems of southeastern British Columbia and northern Idaho. The distribution and abundance of these caribou have declined dramatically from historical figures. Results from many studies have indi- cated that mountain caribou rely on old conifer forests for several life-history requirements including an abundance of their primary winter food, arboreal lichen, and a scarcity of other ungulates and their predators. These old forests often have high timber value, and understanding mountain caribou ecology at a variety of spatial scales is thus required to develop effective conservation strategies. Here we summarize results of studies conducted at three different spatial scales ranging from broad limiting factors at the population level to studies describing the selection of feeding sites within seasonal home ranges of individuals. The goal of this multi-scale review is to provide a more complete picture of caribou ecology and to determine possible shifts in limiting factors across scales.
    [Show full text]