IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

Parc international de la paix Waterton- Glacier

2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

INFORMATIONS Country: Canada, United States of America (USA) Inscribed in: 1995 Criteria: (vii) (ix)

RÉSUMÉ

2020 Conservation Outlook Finalised on 02 déc 2020

GOOD WITH SOME CONCERNS

Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park can be an exemplar for cooperation across national boundaries and offer positive examples of working together to achieve results, but there is always room for improvement. Managers at the park level work diligently to manage according to their respective countries’ laws and policies applying the broader World Heritage values and goals to their actions. While there are both existing and potential threats, overall, the threats are largely being addressed in a manner that could be a model for other transboundary areas (including a variety of cooperative initiatives). Concerns at the landscape scale, particularly regarding wildlife security and connectivity have been addressed in part through land protection at the state and provincial level. Climate change represents particular challenge and adaptation and monitoring has become a focus of both parks, and includes ecosystem level initiatives. Visitation management is a challenge in both component parks. Understanding and limiting impacts of increasing visitation will be important to maintain the sites's ecological and cultural integrity. IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

FULL ASSESSMENT

Description of values

Valeurs

World Heritage values

▶ Superlative scenery Criterion:(vii)

Both Waterton Lakes (Canada) and Glacier (United States of America) National Parks were originally designated by their respective nations because of their superlative mountain scenery, their high topographic relief, glacial landforms, and abundant diversity of wildlife and wildflowers (World Heritage Committee, 1995).

▶ Unique ecological complexes Criterion:(ix)

The property occupies a pivotal position in the Western Cordillera of North America resulting in the evolution of plant communities and ecological complexes that occur nowhere else in the world. Maritime weather systems unimpeded by mountain ranges to the north and south allow plants and animals characteristic of the Pacific Northwest to extend to and across the continental divide in the park. To the east, prairie communities nestle against the mountains with no intervening foothills, producing an interface of prairie, montane and alpine communities. The International Peace Park includes the headwaters of three major watersheds draining through significantly different biomes to different oceans. The biogeographical significance of this tri-ocean divide is increased by the many vegetated connections between the headwaters. The net effect is to create a unique assemblage and high diversity of flora and fauna concentrated in a small area (World Heritage Committee, 1995).

Other important biodiversity values

▶ Biodiversity & Connectivity

The two parks sit at the centre of the 18 million acre Crown of the Continent ecosystem. Like the two parks, the Crown of the Continent ecosystem straddles the international boundary between the United States and Canada and is one of North America’s iconic landscapes. Much of the Crown is still mostly in a natural undeveloped state – its spectacular landscapes are home to the entire suite of North America’s endemic large carnivores and the greatest floristic and aquatic biodiversity in the Rocky Mountains. In the Crown the Great Plains meet the Rocky Mountains, and on the west side of the continental divide Pacific ecological influences are also found. At its core, in addition to Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park, is also the third largest wilderness area in the lower 48 states – the Bob Marshall Wilderness Complex. It also links with montane protected areas in British Columbia (Akamina-Kishinena Provincial Park), and Alberta (Castle Provincial Parks). The Crown of the Continent ecosystem connects north to the Rocky Mountain Parks Complex, which includes the Kananaskis Country protected area complex in Alberta and the Rocky Mountain Park National Park Complex (including Banff, Kootenay, and Yoho National Parks) that straddle the Alberta-BC border.

Assessment information

Threats

Current Threats High Threat

Existing major threats include climate warming, rapid glacier retreat, increased visitation, spread of terrestrial and aquatic invasive species, and loss of habitat connectivity. All threats are known and actively IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

addressed through management action and research. However, their cumulative impacts need to be taken into account to ensure connectivity between species populations. Climate change (glacier retreat due to warming climate) may cause significant impact to the site’s unique ecological complexes and adaptation for climate change effects will also be important. Updated management plans should explicitly address climate change and its impacts across the protected area ecosystems.

▶ Air Pollution Low Threat (Air-borne pollutants) Inside site, scattered(5-15%) Outside site Shell Canada gas plant about 30 km north of the Waterton Lakes National Park raises some concerns over emissions. However, with prevailing winds from south and west, the impact is minimal. Threat from air-borne pollutants from further afield is much higher and ongoing, as some of these contaminants accumulate preferentially in colder areas of the global environment, such as high elevations, due to a process called global fractionation. The Waterton Gas Complex was sold by Shell to Peridae Energy; however, in May 2020 the Alberta Energy Regulator refused the sale (Owen, 2020). Regardless of ownership, the gas plant is only expected to be in operation for 5-10 more years (Verde, 2016).

The 2010 WACAP study demonstrated the sensitivity of high elevation sites to air-borne contaminants (Landers et al., 2010) and air-borne contaminants were registered in fish, vegetation, snow, and lake sediments in the park (Landers et al., 2010; Landers et al., 2008). Snowpack in Glacier National Park showed high levels of pesticide contamination, and high levels of nitrogen and sulphur were detected in lichens. Nitrogen and sulphur may have harmful effects, including acidification and nutrient enrichment (National Park Service, 2019a). Some vegetation communities in Glacier, including alpine and wetland, are at high risk of nitrogen enrichment (National Park Service, 2019a). Dieldrin concentrations in fish were significantly higher than similar studies found in Canada (Landers et al., 2010). Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) concentrations were highest at Snyder Lake than any other site tested in the study, presumably due to the aluminium smelter that was still in operation during the study (National Park Service, 2019a). Fish sampled in Glacier National Park also showed indication of oestrogen exposure based on vitellogenin content and presence of intersex fish. Sampled fish also tested positive for DDT, a pesticide that was banned for use in the U.S. in 1972, and chlordane (Landers et al., 2010). Levels of DDT in fish are higher than in other western U.S. national parks (Landers et al. 2010; Landers et al. 2008). Concentrations of mercury in fish in the park are of concern and exceed safe consumption thresholds for human and wildlife health (National Park Service, 2019a).

▶ Housing/ Urban Areas, Tourism/ Recreation Areas Low Threat (Residential and commercial development) Inside site, scattered(5-15%) Outside site Development of private lands outside Glacier National Park entrances could result in increased accommodation that supports increasing visitor use (IUCN Consultation, 2017a). Currently new campgrounds are proposed in West Glacier and St. Mary. Development along Glacier National Park boundaries could impede wildlife movement between the park and the adjoining United States Forest Service lands and provide a vector for increasing populations of invasive species in the park (IUCN Consultation, 2017a). Past assessment noted limited availability of services and accommodation and potential for development to impact park values (Peterson, 2013). In Waterton, although Nature Conservancy of Canada has protected 110 km2 on the eastern boundary (Waterton Park Front Project) (Nature Conservancy of Canada, n.d.), new acreages continue to be built, which impedes wildlife movement and leads to increased carnivore mortality. However, there has been significant opposition by adjacent land owners to large scale recreational developments proposed for areas near the park boundary. This has led to these proposals being turned down by local municipalities.

▶ Other Activities Very Low Threat (Fragmentation due to land development in lands surrounding Outside site Glacier and Waterton Lakes National Parks.)

Various initiatives have aimed to reduce the potential for fragmentation due to land development. In the US portion of the Crown, the Montana Legacy Project was a partnership between public and private entities which resulted in the protection of 310,000 acres of western Montana forest land previously IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

owned by Plum Creek Timber (IUCN Consultation, 2017a). The lands are now managed for the benefit of people, wildlife, water and working lands. In 2016, all of the oil and gas leases were retired in the Badger Two Medicine area on the east side of the continental divide in the Crown of the Continent ecosystem (IUCN Consultation, 2017a). Additionally, the Blackfeet Tribe are in the beginning stages of restoring a wild bison herd to the Blackfeet Reservation adjacent to Glacier National Park. Known as the Iinnii Initiative, this wild herd will eventually roam onto park and forest lands and into Canada (IUCN Consultation, 2017a; Wildlife Conservation Society, 2016). Waterton Lakes National Park is also planning to re-introduce Iinnii in its bison paddock following their removal as a result of the 2017 Kenow Wildfire, and is in discussing Iinnii and other conservation measures with nearby Indigenous communities (IUCN Consultation, 2020).

Waterton National Park is realtively small (i.e., not large enough on its own to carry a viable grizzly population). Therefore, the surrounding landscape is incredibly important for Waterton to maintain its ecological integrity. Developments and potential changes to legislation in Alberta could impact connectivity and ecological integrity in Waterton National Park. A 2020 plan released by the Alberta Government to "Optimize Alberta Parks" proposed four of the nearest Provincial Recreation Areas be removed from the Alberta Parks system and open for partnerships to allow for expanded development opportunities (Alberta Environment and Parks, 2020). Potential development opportunities arising from this plan have not been determined.

An issue of concern for people living on agricultural land surrounding Waterton National Park was concern for personal safety and livestock due to grizzly bears and cougars in the area, even though people are supportive of coexisting with large carnivores (Quinn et al., 2011). As Waterton National Park is at the heart of a transboundary grizzly bear population and both resident and non-resident bears have the potential to be involved in negative incidents, and the management of large predators inside the parks can mediate conflict outside their boundaires (Sawaya et al., 2012), grizzly bear management should be considered through multi-jurisdictional processes (Morehouse and Boyce, 2016). Waterton Biosphere Reserve, which includes Waterton National Park, has developed a carnivore conflict management programme, working with local landowners to reduce risk factors to connectivity caused by human disturbance (Waterton Biosphere Reserve, 2017a). Waterton Lakes National Park has strategies in place to manage human-wildlife conflict, and promotes responsible behaviour to visitors by managing attractants, keeping distance and respecting warnings and closures. The Glacier National Park Bear Management Guidelines prohibit the presence of attractants that may lead to bears becoming habituated and/or food conditioned (US National Park Service, 2006).

Another development in Alberta that may negatively impact connectivity on the landscape scale is a proposed open-pit metallurgical coal mine north of Waterton in the Crowsnest Pass area. The Grassy Mountain Coal Project is awaiting a decision by the Joint Review Panel (Government of Canada, 2020), which will present a recommendation to the Minister.

▶ Other Ecosystem Modifications High Threat (Loss of connectivity between species population nodes) Outside site

Concentrations of large carnivores and aquatic species migration (bears, wolves, salmonids) have been adversely affected over time by settlement and road corridors becoming a barrier to connectivity between species populations. Isolated populations suffer species loss and with loss of major carnivores, as umbrella species, leading to loss of species of all types (UNESCO & IUCN, 2009; Konstant et al., 2005; Locke, 2012; Proctor et al., 2015; Northrup et al., 2012; Squires et al., 2013). However, measures have been undertaken to address the issue. In 2013, Teck Resources, which operates large mines in British Columbia, purchased for conservation purposes Flathead Townsite and the Alexander Creek, two large parcels of private land which are of great significance to the integrity and connectivity of the World Heritage Site. Management plans were to be prepared, but as yet have not been announced (Teck, 2019- 20). Southern Alberta Land Trust and the Nature Conservancy of Canada have also purchased parcels or secured easements of private land along Highway 3 for connectivity purposes. However, concerns remain at the Michel Creek linkage. Alberta’s 2014 South Saskatchewan Land Use identified connectivity across Highway 3 as a biodiversity value. To date, Alberta Transportation has installed wildlife fencing and jumpouts along a portion of the IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

highway in a high collision zone (Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative, 2020), and will be installing more fencing and two wildlife crossing underpasses within the next two years (Vogt, 2019). In 2017, the province of Alberta established Castle Provincial Park, enhancing the linkage between the International Peace Park and the Livingstone Range, which connects to the Kananaskis Country area and Banff and Kootenay National Park. Bans on mining in the Flathead (CPAWS, 2017; Natural Resources Canada, 2014) have reduced the risk of fragmentation as well. Waterton Biosphere Reserve, which includes Waterton National Park, has developed a carnivore conflict management programme, working with local landowners to reduce risk factors to connectivity caused by human disturbance (Waterton Biosphere Reserve, 2017a).

▶ Invasive Non-Native/ Alien Species High Threat (Invasive species and pathogens) Inside site, widespread(15-50%) Outside site Non-native plants have established near visitor-use corridors and they are present in significant numbers in the Crown and within Waterton and Glacier International Peace Park (IUCN Consultation, 2017a; Crown Managers Partnership, n.d.3). Both parks have programmes in place to control weeds (Waterton Lakes National Park, 2017c) and Waterton is working with regional partners on weed management through the South West Alberta Cooperative Weed Management Area and internal initiatives (Waterton Lakes National Park, 2017b, 2017c). In Waterton the invasive non-native plants continue to be the main stressor affecting the fescue grasslands, although the trend cannot be assessed as monitoring is newly established (Parks Canada, 2019a). Glacier National Park has an active treatment and eradication programme that is budget dependent but whose activites have increased in recent years (IUCN Consultation, 2020) and includes a well-established native plant nursery to treat disturbed areas (IUCN Consultation, 2017a). The problem also exists outside the park, but treatment has been sporadic, uncoordinated and largely ineffective (Adams, 2009). The whitebark pine and limber pine population of both parks and throughout the Crown of the Continent have been heavily impacted by white pine blister rust, a non-native pathogen (Parks Canada, 2019a; IUCN Consultation, 2017a; Keane et al., 2017; Tomback et al., 2014). Waterton and Glacier have an active restoration programme underway (Parks Canada, 2019a; Waterton Lakes National Park, 2017c), while in 2019, a Strategy was developed to guide limber pine conservation for the whole Greater Rocky Mountain National Park Area (Schoettle et al., 2019).

Historic stocking, largely with non-native species, have highly altered fish communities in Waterton lakes and streams, resulting with poor condition in the lake fish index and the stream fish occupancy, and changing the ecosystem of lakes in Glacier (Parks Canada, 2019a; National Park Service, 2020a). Stocking of fishless lakes has altered food webs and impacted zooplankton and amphibians (Parks Canada, 2019a). Waterton and Glacier are also susceptible to aquatic invasive species introduced by people who travel from infected regions, with watercraft, fishing gear, trailers, etc. In Glacier National Park, recreational fishing is minor, but popular. Even though actively managed, fishing has the potential to introduce changes to aquatic ecosystems through introduction of aquatic invasive species (National Park Service, 1999; Missoulian, 2014). A 2017 ban on motorboats was introduced in Waterton Lakes NP in response to the state of Montana detecting aquatic alien invasive species – most notably mussels (freshwater zebra and quagga mussels), in Tiber Reservoir and Canyon Ferry Reservoir (IUCN Consultation, 2017a; National Park Service, 2020a) in the vicinity of the International Peace Park. In 2018, Parks Canada allowed the Improvement District 4 to implement a mandatory motorized watercraft sealing and inspection program for Upper and Middle Waterton Lakes. There is a self-inspection program for non-motorized watercraft in Waterton Lakes National Park. The effectiveness of the self-inspection program is being monitored, and further measures to prevent the introduction of aquatic invasive species may be implemented. The State of Montana and the provinces of Alberta and British Columbia are increasing boat inspections and Montana offers decontamination sites around the state (IUCN Consultation, 2017a). Glacier has similarly implemented an Aquatic Invasive Species Management Plan which includes mandatory inspections of watercraft and 30-day quarantine for gas motorboats which are allowed only on Lake McDonald, among other restrictions.

White-nose Syndrome, a fungus that has decimated bat populations in the eastern U.S. and other areas is another imminent threat with occurrences in the adjoining states of Washington, North and South IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

Dakota in the U.S. and as close as the Manitoba province in Canada (whitenosesyndrome.org). Managers actively prevent spread by limiting cave access and cleaning equipment, but anticipate it is only a matter of time before the disease spreads to the site (IUCN Consultation, 2020).

▶ Temperature extremes Very High Threat (Decrease in glacial extent, drying/warming climate) Inside site, throughout(>50%) Outside site Climate change may cause significant impact to the site’s unique ecological complexes (Hall & Fagre, 2003; UNESCO & IUCN, 2009; Sholar, 2004; Bay et al., 2012; Reuling et al., 2015; Crown Managers Partnership, n.d.1). The Crown of the Continent is a region at great risk from climate change, and already experiencing warmer and drier weather (Bay et al., 2012; Crown Managers Partnership, n.d.1). In 1850, the area had about 150 glaciers and in 1910 when Glacier National Park was established, those 150 glaciers were still present, while in 2015 only 26 remained (USGS, n.d.). It is predicted that by 2030 to 2080, the glaciers will no longer exist in Glacier National Park (Luce, 2018; Brown et al., 2010; UNESCO & IUCN, 2009; Reuling et al., 2015; National Parks Traveller, n.d.). More frequent rain and snow events and flooding in the fall are evident now (IUCN Consultation, 2017a). Drying soils, increased temperatures and potential wildfire incidents will combine to modify the scale and character of subalpine forests (Harvey et al., 2016), tree species’ prevalence and biome types (Hansen & Phillips, 2015; Kulakowski et al., 2013; Smith-McKenna et al., 2014; Tomback et al., 2014; Harvey, 2015). Arctic- Alpine plants, especially dicots have declined in Glacier National Park over the last two decades due to climate change (Lesica & Crone, 2017). With reduced glacial stream flow and higher water temperatures, changes in native and non-native trout species (D’Angelo & Muhlfeld, 2013; Fredenberg, 2014; Muhlfeld et al., 2014; Crown Managers Partnership, n.d.2), invertebrate (Giersch et al., 2014) and aquatic ecosystems in general have been observed (Slemmons et al., 2013; USGS, n.d.).

Wildfire, which will increase with global warming, will have significant ecological impacts. The 2017 Kenow Wildfire significantly impacted park ecology, burning approximately 39% (19,303 hectares) of the park’s area, or 50% of its vegetated landscape, affecting plants, wildlife and aquatic systems. While fire is a natural part of the Waterton Lakes NP ecosystem and essential to maintain its ecological integrity, this wildfire was of uncommon size and exceptional, uniform intensity (IUCN Consultation, 2020). Wildfires occur naturally and fulfil critical ecosystem functions, and a complete understanding of the impact of this wildfire on the park’s ecology will take many years to assess. Parks Canada is undertaking the necessary assessments, analysis and planning to develop a long-term recovery approach for Waterton (IUCN Consultation, 2020). Reintroducing fire to maintain key habitats was a priority in the Waterton National Park mangement plan in 2010 (Parks Canada, 2010). The current State of Parks Report rates the extent of area disturbed by fire as fair and improving (Parks Canada, 2020a). The combination of the prescribed burning program and the Kenow fire brought the park significantly closer to its burned area objective and very close to a good rating for extent burned (Parks Canada, 2020a).

Waterton Lakes-Glacier is recognized as a ‘resilient landscape’ with respect to large landscape connectivity and iconic North American wildlife and a place where Canada and the United States can implement adaptation measures and actions to maintain and enhance resource resilience to assure the Crown’s protection in the face of climate change. The Crown of the Continent Initiative is actively researching potential climate impacts (Bay et al., 2012; Reuling et al., 2015) and has developed (and tracks) an action plan to address climate change impacts (Nelson, 2014; Crown Managers Partnership, n.d.5). The Crown of the Continent Landscape Conservation Design initiative is a current multi-agency effort to ensure a resilient, connected landscape that supports healthy ecosystems and human communities.

▶ Tourism/ visitors/ recreation High Threat (Increasing visitation and tourism infrastructure development ) Inside site, widespread(15-50%)

The target set out in the current management plan of Waterton Lakes National Park 2010-2020 is to increase visitation to the park by 2% per year for 5 years (Parks Canada, 2010). One key action to achieve this was to build a new multi-use (mainly bicycle) trail, which resulted in 7 km of new linear disturbance. Any additional infrastructure was only to be implemented following careful and rigorous IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

environmental review. Visitation has changed significantly between 2015 and 2020. According to the newest available assessment by Parks Canada (2019a), visitation to the park between 2011/2012 and 2016/2017 increased by 34% with more than 536,000 annual visitors to the park, surpassing the national target of 2% per year increase. This situation was creating traffic congestion and parking issues, especially on weekends. In the summer of 2017, entry to all National Parks was free, which led to dramatic increases in visitation. On 6th August 2017, Waterton National Park access to the park was temporarily limited for the safety of visitors and wildlife (Rumbolt, 2017). After the 2017 Kenow Wildfire, the visitation levels have recovered as areas and facilities once closed due to the fire have reopened, and it is anticipated that the trend for increasing visitation will continue (Parks Canada, 2019a). Like other National Parks across Canada, access to Waterton Lakes National Park by visitors was temporarily suspended in spring 2020 due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Visitation year to date for 2020 is close to 2016 (IUCN Consultation, 2020).

Visitation to Glacier National Park has increased significantly since 2012 when annual visitation was 2.1 million (IUCN Consultation, 2017a). In 2019, visitation was over 3 million (National Park Service, 2020b; IUCN Consultation, 2020), with 2017 holding the record in that 1 million visitors came to Glacier in July; more than any park has ever received in a single month (National Park Service, 2019b). Visitation at these levels is straining the operational capacity of the park, impacting natural resources and resulting in severe congestion and delays on roads, in parking areas and on trails (National Park Service, 2019b; IUCN Consultation, 2017a; Nickerson, 2016). Increased visitation can lead to negative impacts associated with motorised vehicle and air tours noise levels for both wildlife and human visitors (National Park Service, 2019b; Weinzimmer et al., 2014). Glacier National Parks has implemented various measures to manage congestion, such as temporary road closures limiting access to districts with no through traffic to prevent grid-lock. Minor to major accidents along the Going-to-the-Sun Road can halt traffic for 3 hours or more causing traffic to back-up for distances in excess of 10 miles and extending to U.S. Highway 2. Communication efforts are used to provide visitors with realistic expectations as to crowding conditions in the park. Increased visitation can lead to negative impacts associated with motorised vehicle and air tours noise levels for both wildlife and human visitors. Sightseeing air tours, according to the Glacier National Park Management Plan, were requested to be prohibited, yet, in 2016, there were 767 reported flights (National Park Service, 1999b; National Park Service 2019). Going-to-the-Sun Road is particularly utilised during the peak summer months. Increased development outside the site, including large RV campgrounds has also occurred (IUCN Consultation, 2020). Safety concerns are raised due to conflicts between motorized vehicles and bicyclists, as well as due to pedestrian conflicts (visitors park elsewhere and walk along the road) (National Park Service, 2019b). Also, there are increased human encounters with wildlife reported in early mornings/evenings, e.g., at Logan Pass, and there may be disturbance of Harlequin ducks at McDonald Creek due to increased human presence (National Park Service, 2019b). Human waste found along the trails is another important issue.

▶ Fire/ Fire Suppression Low Threat (Fire suppression effects/ecological succession) Inside site, widespread(15-50%) Outside site Waterton Lakes National Park and the Castle Provincial Parks to the north are landscapes with a long history of fire suppression. Prior to protection, the Castle Provincial Parks were open to commercial logging; forest supression was part of the efforts to conserve timber resources. There has been no logging in the Castle since early 2015. The current Castle Provincial Parks management plan contain objectives to incorporate wildland fire management into a vegetation management strategy and to involve First Nations in the planning phases of prescribed burning (Alberta Environment and Parks, 2018). The 2017 Kenow Wildfire burnt approximately 39% (19,303 hectares) of the park’s area, or 50% of its vegetated landscape. Waterton Lakes National Park plans to continue using prescribed fire to restore grassland habitat, an early succession community of the montane ecosystem (Waterton Lakes National Park, 2017c). Prescribed fires restore a natural disturbance regime, while minimizing risk to human infrastructure.

Glacier National Park also has a Fire Management Plan and utilizes prescribed fire mainly on the west side of the park to maintain grasslands when parameters meet prescribed conditions. Prevailing winds IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

that risk carrying fire outside of park boundaries generally prevent prescribed fire use on the east side. Wildland fires may be managed for resource benefits when prescriptions are met. However, in recent years, a lack of resource availability due to a large number of fires elsewhere in the region or country have prevented utilization of this tool, and most new fires are suppressed as promptly as possible (IUCN Consultation, 2020). Recent significant wildland fires in Glacier NP include the 2015 Reynolds Creek Fire that burned adjacent to the Going-to-the-Sun Road in the St. Mary Valley, the 2017 Sprague Fire that destroyed the Sperry Chalet, a National Historic Landmark, and the 2018 Howe Ridge Fire which caused significant structural damage to the Kelly Camp Historic District. Local ecosystems evolved with fire as a natural recurring process, but years of fire suppression in addition to a warming climate may contribute to increased fire severity and frequency (Naficy, 2017).

Potential Threats Low Threat

The effects of potential energy development and further fragmentation of connectivity and wildlife migration across international boundaries has been reduced through land protection measures. Canadian federal protection of the Flathead region, as promoted by local NGOs, would help to enhance connectivity along this section of the Rocky Mountains. In the coming years, it will need to be ensured that coal and recreational developments on the surrounding the land base have minimal impacts on the ecological integrity of Waterton Lakes National Park itself.

▶ Mining/ Quarrying Low Threat (Mining and energy developments in the Flathead Valley) Outside site

The Province of British Columbia banned oil and gas and mining in most of the Canadian Flathead Valley in 2010 (British Columbia, Province of and State of Montana, 2010). In 2013, the Government of Canada made a policy commitment to sell the Dominion Coal Block in the Canadian Flathead to the province as protected lands (Natural Resources Canada, 2014), but the land transfer has not yet been legislated. Reciprocal action under a 2010 Memorandum of Understanding between British Columbia and Montana occurred on the US side in 2014. The US Congress approved the North Fork Watershed Protection Act (2014) that withdrew certain federal lands and interests from mining (IUCN Consultation, 2017a). These actions have reduced a major threat of fragmentation in the lands connecting the World Heritage site with other montane habitats along the Rocky Mountains.

▶ Roads/ Railroads Low Threat (Roads and rail corridors) Inside site, scattered(5-15%) Outside site While minor, both rail and motor traffic in this major east-west corridor can affect wildlife populations, especially grizzly bears which have been adversely affected by railroad spills of grain that becomes an attractant as an unnatural food source, resulting in accidental death from collision with road and rail traffic (National Park Service, 2008; US Department of the Interior, 2010). Highway 5/6 is a through road, other roads in the park are scenic. Akamina Parkway, Red Rock Parkway and Chief Mountain Highway are subject to seasonal vehicle access restrictions. Most visitors arrive by private vehicle. The park monitors vehicle use and implements traffic measures as necessary during peak periods. Further adjustments may be needed if visitation increases (IUCN Consultation, 2020).

Glacier National Park is working with Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad to address the risk of petroleum spills as a result of the increased train traffic carrying oil and gas from the Bakken Region to the east (IUCN Consultation, 2017a). Glacier National Park is also working with the railroad to address wildlife safety and crossings. New research is underway to identify those crossing locations. Wildlife mortalities along road corridors are also significant in the region, and may act as barriers to wildlife connectivity especially in busy summer months (Waller et al., 2020).

▶ Tourism/ Recreation Areas Low Threat (Increasing visitation and tourism infrastructure development) Inside site, scattered(5-15%)

Visitation to Waterton Lakes National Park between 2011/2012 and 2016/2017 increased by 34%. In 2016/17, more than 536,000 visitors to the park were recorded. Increased visitation can lead to IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

negative impacts associated with motorised vehicle noise levels for both wildlife and human visitors (Weinzimmer et al., 2014). While growing visitation to protected areas can increase negative impacts to species (Cole & Landres, 1995), overly restricting tourists can be met with public resistance because some believe that these efforts unfairly constrain an individual’s right to use publicly owned resources (Brisette et al., 2001). Visitation to Waterton Lakes National Park is anticipated to remain strong, particularly as popular visitor areas (Red Rock Canyon, Cameron Lake, Bear’s Hump Trail) reopen after restoration of visitor facilities following the 2017 Kenow Wildfire, with high concentrations of visitation over peak months in these areas. Understanding and limiting impacts of increasing visitation on the park’s ecological integrity, character, resources, and experiences is crucial to developing effective strategies to manage park visitation in the future.

Visitation to Glacier National Park has increased significantly since 2012 when annual visitation was 2.1 million (IUCN Consultation, 2017a). In 2016, visitation reached 2.9 million, a more than 25% increase. Visitation at these levels is straining the operational capacity of the park, impacting resources and resulting in congestion and delays on roads, in parking areas and on trails (IUCN Consultation, 2017a; Nickerson, 2016).

▶ Invasive Non-Native/ Alien Species High Threat (Recreational fishing; aquatic invasive species) Inside site, widespread(15-50%) Outside site In Glacier National Park, recreational fishing is minor, but popular. Even though actively managed, fishing has the potential to introduce changes to aquatic ecosystems through introduction of aquatic invasive species (National Park Service, 1999; Missoulian, 2014). The State of Montana and the provinces of Alberta and British Columbia are increasing boat inspections and Montana offers decontamination sites around the state (IUCN Consultation, 2017a). Both Glacier and Waterton are inspecting non-motorised watercraft before they are permitted to enter park waters. The Blackfeet Reservation has 3 inspection stations and is also sampling 4 lakes. Approximately 50 lakes in the US portion of the Crown are being sampled for aquatic invasive species (IUCN Consultation, 2017a). Aquatic invasive species are one of the greatest threats to the ecosystem of the Crown of the Continent.

▶ Invasive Non-Native/ Alien Species Low Threat (Invasive terrestrial vegetation species) Inside site, scattered(5-15%) Outside site Terrestrial invasive species are also present in significant numbers in the Crown of the Continent and within Waterton Glacier International Peace Park (IUCN Consultation, 2017a; Crown Managers Partnership, n.d.). Waterton Lakes and Glacier National Parks have programmes in place to control weeds (Waterton Lakes National Park, 2017c). Waterton Lakes National Park is working with regional partners on weed management through the South West Alberta Cooperative Weed Management Area (Waterton Lakes National Park, 2017b, 2017c). In Waterton Lakes National Park, a monitoring program is being established, and implementation of a “Play-Clean-Go” program for visitors is underway (IUCN Consultation, 2020).

▶ Other Data Deficient (COVID-19 Outbreak) Inside site, extent of threat not known Outside site The effects of the COVID-19 outbreak are likely to be felt in the park, albeit to an as yet unknown scope and degree of seriousness. On March 19, 2020, Parks Canada temporarily suspended all visitor services in all national parks, national historic sites and national marine conservation areas across the country, limiting its activities to basic critical operations (IUCN Consultation, 2020). On June 1, 2020, limited visitor access and services were offered at select National Parks, including Waterton Lakes. This will allow day use and trail access but all visitor service facilities will remain closed (Derworiz, 2020). Townsite campground opened with limited services as did select backcountry campgrounds on June 22, 2020. Long-term monitoring that may provide insights into the response of wildlife to changes in human use and landscape composition that resulted from the Kenow wildfire, may also reveal responses to changes in human use resulting from the COVID-19 restrictions. IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

Meanwhile, the US NPS has coordinated closely with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), state and local public health authorities, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in responding to the outbreak (IUCN Consultation, 2020; National Park Service, 2020c). On March 24, 2020 Glacier National Park closed to visitors due to Covid-19, following guidance from the White House, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and state and local public health authorities. It reopened on June 8, 2020, however only on the west side of the park. The Blackfeet Reservation had been closed since March 28, 2020 due to Covid-19, and has not reopened as of 11/20/20. Therefore the park was not able to open the east side to visitors in 2020. All visitation to Glacier came in through the North Fork at Polebridge and West Glacier. Visitors were only permitted to travel as far as Rising Sun on the Going-to-the-Sun Road. Even with only half the park open, Glacier experienced gridlock at times on the GTSR and back up as far as a couple of miles on Highway 2. Glacier received about 50% of the 2019 visitation in 2020, but visitation in the month of October was up 60% (NPS, 2020d).

Overall assessment of threats High Threat

Existing and potential threats include climate warming, rapid glacier retreat, increased visitation, spreading of invasive species, including aquatic invasive species, and loss of habitat connectivity. All threats are known and actively addressed through management action and research. However, their cumulative impacts need to be taken into account to ensure connectivity between species populations. Climate change (glacier retreat due to warming climate) may cause significant impact to the site’s unique ecological complexes and adaptation for climate change effects will also be important. Updated management should explicitly address climate change and its impacts across the protected area ecosystems. The effects of potential energy development and further fragmentation of connectivity and wildlife migration across international boundaries has been reduced through land protection measures. Canadian federal protection of the Flathead region, as promoted by local NGOs, would help to enhance connectivity along this section of the Rocky Mountains. In the coming years, it will need to be ensured that coal and recreational developments on the surrounding the land base have minimal impacts on the ecological integrity of Waterton National Park itself. While there are both existing and potential threats, overall, the threats are being actively addressed through research and management action, although funding limits available resources to apply to problems.

Protection and management

Assessing Protection and Management

▶ Management system Mostly Effective

Collaborative management occurs between Waterton Lakes and Glacier national parks, and also between the parks and surrounding lands in the Crown of the Continent ecosystem through an array of partnerships with stakeholders. Such arrangements include the Crown Managers Partnership, a transboundary land managers group with participation from Waterton Lakes and Glacier national parks and Alberta, British Columbia, the State of Montana, federal and provincial governments, US tribes, Canadian First Nations and universities in the Crown of the Continent to collaborate and address shared issues and opportunities. The emphasis of joint programmes of the two parks has been on fire management, public safety and rescue operations, management of shared wildlife populations, control or eradication of non-native weeds and pest animals, maintenance and restoration of biodiversity and ecological processes, and impacts of habitat fragmentation (UNESCO & IUCN, 2009; IUCN Consultation, 2020). Fire management techniques in both parks are similar with ongoing prescribed fires that proved to be valuable for lessening the intensity of wildfires, creating a mosaic of habitat types for plants and animals (Parks Canada, 2019e; National Park Service, 2018). Work on aquatic invasive species, including bans on motor craft use have been implemented in both parks to address a current growing threat (IUCN Consultation, 2017a; National Park Service, 2020). IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

In terms of management planning, in Waterton Lakes National Park, the new Management Plan is currently in development and antici[ated for approval in winter 2020 (the operational one covers the period from 2010 to 2020) (Parks Canada, 2019b; IUCN Consultation, 2020), while Glacier National Park Management Plan, developed in 1999, provides a management strategy for the next 20 years.

▶ Effectiveness of management system Mostly Effective

Effectiveness of management system is considered to be good, although resource management staff are always challenged with funding needs in both countries (UNESCO/IUCN, 2009; Northern Rocky Mountains Science Center, 2017; Crown Managers Partnership, 2010; National Park Service, 2008; Wells, 2009; Spencer et al., 1991; Hall & Fagre, 2003; National Park Service, 1999; UNESCO & IUCN, 2009; US Department of the Interior, 2010).

▶ Boundaries Highly Effective

Boundary of the site is considered sufficient and effective (UNESCO & IUCN, 2009).

▶ Integration into regional and national planning systems Highly Effective

In the USA, the integration of Glacier National Park into the national planning system is considered effective (National Park Service, 1999). In Canada, good integration is ensured through various collaborations (Crown Managers Partnership, Prairie Conservation Forum, South West Alberta Cooperative Weed Management Area, Waterton Biosphere Reserve). Through the Crown Managers Partnership and other established relationships, both parks are apprised of other planning efforts going on throughout the Crown and participate where appropriate (IUCN Consultation, 2017a). The Crown Managers Partnership was formed in 2001 to explore partnering across international boundaries to address common ecological challenges using cooperative institutional capacity (Crown Managers Partnership, n.d.4). Similarly, Waterton is part of the Waterton Biosphere Reserve, which brings together municipal, NGO, university and national and provincial park managers to address land use affecting the park and surrounding lands (Parks Canada, 2019c). These arrangements are designed to reach across traditional jurisdictional boundaries in the interest of rational approaches to management. The Glacier Biosphere Reserve was renamed the Crown of the Continent Biosphere Reserve in 2017 with Proposed Wilderness lands within Glacier at its Core, the remainder of the park as Managed Use Areas, and the U.S. portion of the Crown of the Continent Ecosystem as an area of Cooperation and Partnership. Future consideration to combine the two Biosphere Reserves as a single unit to match the World Heritage Site and Peace Park designations may further enhance the integration of regional and national planning system to further secure landscape connectivity and enhance the existing values of the site concomitantly.

▶ Relationships with local people Mostly Effective

In Glacier National Park relationships with local people are solid, supportive and valued; but relationships with Confederated Salish and Kootenai and Blackfeet tribal officials can always be improved (Scott, 2012; Crown Managers Partnership, 2010; Wells, 2009; Craig et al., 2012; National Park Service, 1999; UNESCO & IUCN, 2009). Glacier NP participates in cooperative efforts and discussions, such as the Crown Managers Partnership, the Crown Roundtable, the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem consortium, and Climate Smart Glacier Country. The Superintendent regularly communicates with the Rotary Club, members of the Chamber of Commerce, local businesses, and private land owners. The Concessions office manages relationships with permitted concessionaires. Affiliated Tribes are consulted on undertakings in the park, and communications with Tribes are documented in an annual report. The Native America Speaks program and Sun Tours shuttle operation give voice to the stories of local indigenous people within the park (IUCN Consultation, 2020).

Parks Canada is working to improve connections with external stakeholders, especially Indigenous groups.. Parks Canada participates in the Waterton Biosphere Reserve, which works with local landowners to raise awareness on specific issues (e.g., carnivore conflict management, Waterton Biosphere Reserve, 2017a) and identified community engagement as a key strategic goal in its 2016- 2021 business plan (Waterton Biosphere Reserve, 2017b). Progress has been made to improve the IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

relationship with Indigenous Peoples throughout Canadian national parks, including Waterton Lakes. The measures of the relationship between Parks Canada and Indigenous Peoples have not yet been determined and should be collaboratively determined based on shared understanding and evaluation of what is meaningful to both parties (Parks Canada, 2019a). Parks Canada cooperates with Piikani and Kainai First Nations on a range of projects, including the new Visitor Centre, a Blackfoot cultural centre and conservation initiatives (Parks Canada, 2019a). Furthermore, members of Piikani and Kainai First Nations can obtain fee-exempt passes for entry into the park, while Métis Nation of Alberta members are granted a daily park pass for the length of their stay. Piikani and Kainai First Nations participate in ceremonial events in the park, e.g., Blessing Ceremony was held in April 2018 to give thanks for the past, present and future, and to recognize the efforts of park staff during the Kenow Wildfire (Parks Canada, 2019a). It is planned to continue to make efforts to further strengthen relationships with the Blackfoot Confederacy, particularly the Kainai and Piikanai First Nations, related to Indigenous programming, traditional knowledge and traditional use (Parks Canada, 2019a).

▶ Legal framework Highly Effective

The Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park comprises Waterton Lakes National Park, Alberta, Canada and Glacier National Park, Montana, USA, both of which are ranked as IUCN Category II Protected Areas. Waterton Lakes National Park was set aside as a Forest Reserve in 1895 and reclassified as a Dominion Park in 1911 and a National Park under the National Parks Act in 1930. It is Crown Land administered by Parks Canada, Gatineau, Quebec and managed from the park’s headquarters in Waterton, Alberta. Glacier National Park was originally established as a National Park under its own legislation in 1910. It is Federal Land administered by the US Department of the Interior National Park Service, Washington, DC, and managed from the park’s headquarters in West Glacier, Montana (UNESCO & IUCN, 2009). The International Peace Park was established in 1932 by parallel acts of the United States Congress and the Canadian Parliament (Parks Canada, 2019c). It was the world’s first Peace Park. Today, the two national parks build on peace and goodwill to cooperate in management, protecting the water, plants and animals. Because it straddles the Canada-US border it is also governed by the Boundary Waters Treaty between Canada and the United States. The legal framework for the property is considered highly effective.

▶ Law enforcement Some Concern

Enforcement is affected by available staff, in turn dictated by budgets and funding, in both recent (US) and past (Canadian) park systems. Proposed 2020 budget cuts to the US National Park Service (Missoula Current, 2020) have yet to be confirmed and implications for enforcement are unclear. Similarly, in Waterton Lakes National Park, enforcement of the National Parks Act is the responsibility of Law Enforcement Wardens, and currently in Waterton there are two law enforcement staff.

▶ Implementation of Committee decisions and Highly Effective recommendations

In 2010, the World Heritage Committee welcomed “the commitments made by the Province of British Columbia to remove mining threats from the Flathead River Basin, and the initiatives in the United States of America regarding extinction of mining licenses” and congratulated the State Parties on the successful transboundary cooperation and the signing of the new Memorandum of Understanding regarding the Flathead River Basin, but also requested the State Parties to continue working on the issues of connectivity (Decision 34COM 7B.20) (World Heritage Committee, 2010). As for climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies mentioned in Decision 33COM 7B.22, in 2014, the Waterton Glacier International Peace Park helped to organise and present a conference on Climate Change Adaptation in Missoula Montana as a member of the Crown Managers Partnership (CMP). The final report of that forum and several other climate change adaptation initiatives has been compiled and is being used by both parks and the Crown Managers Partnership to guide development of adaptation strategies for fire on the landscape, native salmonids, wildlife connectivity, meso-carnivores, and terrestrial and aquatic invasive species (IUCN Consultation, 2017a). There have been no Committee decisions since 2010. IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

▶ Sustainable use Some Concern

Overall, effective; however, in Canada, a recent requirement for parks to increase visitation and revenue has been a concern in light of reduced resource staff levels. Operational staff levels have remained steady since 2015. Capital funding to modernize park infrastructure, restore visitor assets damaged in the Kenow Wildfire and investments in conservation and restoration are ongoing. Reliance on visitation for revenue generation remains a key funding source though. No specific initiatives are currently in place related to sustainable use within the park, but a partnering organisation (Waterton Biosphere Reserve) has identified community engagement and sustainable economic activities as key initiatives within the region (Waterton Biosphere Reserve, 2017c).

The requirement in the Waterton Lakes National Park management plan to increase visitation by 2% annually was not supported by any social science or visitation demand data. The management plan states that increasing visitation will be undertaken with a framework of ecological integrity and high quality visitor experience opportunities. The management plan, however, contains no specific interdisciplinary objectives that speak to how visitation will be increased in ways that prioritize ecological integrity. This runs the risk of creating a disconnect between intention, management plan details, and on-the-ground management.

Glacier National Park has a number of programmes in place to work towards carbon footprint reduction (IUCN Consultation, 2017a). The park is working with the community increase sustainable practices.

▶ Sustainable finance Some Concern

Previously, financing was considered sufficient in the USA, while recognising budget and staffing fluctuations based on national priorities and direction (UNESCO & IUCN, 2009). As of 2017 and including 2020, US federal budgets have proposed significant cuts to all federal parks (Missoula Current, 2020). Operating budgets remain stable in Waterton Lakes National Park. Investments have been made through funding to modernize infrastructure, restore assests damaged in the 2017 Kenow Wildlfire and funding under Nature Legacy will serve to enhance capacity and resources to deliver on our mandate and to modernize the Agency’s approaches to conservation (IUCN Consultation, 2020).

Flat budgets in Glacier over the past several years have eroded capacity due to cost of living increases. Reduced visitation during the pandemic cut funds generated through entrance fees and funding through philanthropic partners by almost 50%, likely straining operations in the next few years (IUCN Consultation, 2020).

▶ Staff capacity, training, and development Some Concern

In both countries the parks have dedicated and well-trained staff. However, the several years of budget cuts have also resulted in a decrease in the number of staff members. In Waterton Lakes National Park, the number operational staff has remained steady since 2017. There are a few short-term project based positions primarily in project management, resource conservation including environmental assessment, and communications. In Canada, training opportunities are available for Indigenous staff to advance their career development (Parks Canada, 2019a).

All US parks have had dramatic budget cuts recently. In both parks, travel budget restrictions have reduced the ability to attend off-site training and to network with others (IUCN Consultation, 2017a).

▶ Education and interpretation programs Mostly Effective

Education and interpretation programs are considered to be very good, although there could be greater emphasis on the World Heritage status (UNESCO & IUCN, 2009). Three integrated projects, Restoring Terrestrial Ecosystems Together (2009/10 through 2013/14), Rescue the Fescue, and 5 Needle Pine Restoration (2014/15 to 2018/19), helped support in park education program and raise the interest of volunteer participation significantly. Formal partnering agreements include relationships with local organizations, academic institutions and Earthwatch Institute to achieve visitor experience and resource conservation priorities (Parks Canada, 2019a). Interpretation and education programmes will further be IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

strengthened with the accomplishment of the construction of new Visitor Centre planned for spring 2021 (Parks Canada, 2019d).

The Flathead Community of Resource Educators (CORE) is a network of individuals and organizations working together to increase awareness and understanding about the natural, historical and cultural resources of the Flathead Region (see https://flatheadcore.org/) .

Both parks have recently been named as an International Dark Sky Park by the International Dark Sky Association (Parks Canada, 2019c; IUCN Consultation, 2017a). Part of achieving this status required both parks to significantly expand the education and interpretive programmes on dark skies. These programmes are attracting many visitors every summer. Approximately 800 visitors are attending The Star Parties at Logan Pass in Glacier National Park (of which there are three per season). The two parks have been replacing exterior lighting with night-sky friendly fixtures and are on track to receive official designation in 2021.

Researchers studying the promotion of Leave No Trace backcountry camping practices at Glacier suggest communications[CG1] that target perceived difficulty (or ease) of practising Leave No Trace as well as targeting camping party group norms would be most beneficial for promoting pro-environmental camping behaviours (Vagias et al., 2014).

▶ Tourism and visitation management Some Concern

Investment has been directed towards innovative programmes designed to mitigate negative ecological impacts and enhance visitor experiences. Glacier and Waterton Lakes national parks have long engaged in backcountry camping permitting programmes (Manning, 2011). During the 2016 visitor season, Glacier National Park’s four largest campgrounds were fully booked (with the exception of a few camp site nights) during the months of July and August (Nickerson, 2016). Ecological footprints associated with high occupancy levels need to be managed carefully in both parks. High visitor pressure on Glacier National Park (3.3 million in 2017) (National Park Service 2020b; National Park Service, 2019b) called for measures to manage tourism. For example, in 2007, Glacier National Park established the Going-to-the- Sun Road voluntary shuttle to ease congestion, improve visitor safety, and enhance visitor enjoyment on this iconic highway. The shuttle may have inadvertently added 40-60 day-long passenger vehicles at the Logan Pass parking lot as people park to use the shuttle for loop day hikes (Weinberg, 2014). The parking lot at Logan Pass reaches full capacity very early each day of the summer months, exacerbating visitor congestion (National Park Service, 2019b; Nickerson, 2016). Congestion was still prevalent after the shuttle bus was implemented (National Park Service, 2019b). In December 2019, Flathead County officials decided to terminate their agreement with the park to continue providing the shuttle service (National Parks Traveller, 2019), some fear this decision and the newly created situation will lead to even higher traffic congestion. There are conflicts between bicycles and motorized vehicles, including road-sharing issues and congestion (National Park Service, 2019b). The new Going-to-the-Sun Road Corridor Management Plan aims to control visitation according to the daily visitor capacity for key locations , extend shuttle service operation time (the Management Plan was developed prior to the park losing the shuttle service), introduce a range of measures for private vehicles and parking, trails and associated facilities, enabling bicycles to use the shuttle system and installing bicycle racks, and providing better education of visitors regarding natural resource protection (National Park Service, 2019b). Some of these measures primarily focus on raising visitor satisfaction. The National Park Service (2019b) noted that future construction projects have the potential to disturb grizzly bear habitat, rare plants and other species, and result in long-term displacement of these species due to fragmentation and increasing number of visitors, yet it claims the impact would be minimally adverse.

In Waterton Lakes National Park, numerous actions have been undertaken to ensure quality visitor experiences, e.g., campground washroom replacement, street and sidewalk improvements, additional parking in the townsite and major day use areas, traffic management strategies and additional janitorial staff (Parks Canada,2019). Prior to the Kenow Wildfire of 2017, visitation had been increasing considerably, and has increased to pre 2017-levels in the summer as areas and facilities once closed due to the fire have reopened. Parks Canada is marketing shoulder season options to increase visitation in the spring and fall. However, the park is using several strategies to manage visitiation, i.e., pro- IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

active trip planning messaging, traffic modelling and on the ground observations. If necessary, Parks Canada will temporarily divert traffic entering the park gate for the safety of staff, residents, visitors and wildlife. Considerations for a long term approach to manage ongoing congestion in the park and asset sustainability are needed. (Parks Canada, 2019a)

▶ Monitoring Some Concern

Previously, monitoring was considered good (Northern Rocky Mountains Science Center, 2017; Crown Managers Partnership, 2010; National Park Service, 2008; IUCN Consultation, 2017b; Wells, 2009; Adams, 2009; Hauer et al., 2007; Hauer, 2007; Spencer et al., 1991; Hall & Fagre, 2003; US Department of the Interior, 2010), however, the reduction of staff and budgets has become a concern in both parks. Waterton and Glacier now have a number of monitoring programmes in place, but funding limitations severely limit monitoring to only the species of highest concern (IUCN Consultation, 2017a). Parks are turning to citizen scientist programmes to assist with some monitoring gaps while providing educational opportunities. When published, the new Waterton Lakes NP Management Plan will reflect transparency in planning, monitoring and reporting.

▶ Research Highly Effective

Research has been successfully ongoing in the parks for decades (Northern Rocky Mountains Science Center, 2017; Crown Managers Partnership, 2010; National Park Service, 2008; IUCN Consultation, 2017b; Wells, 2009; Adams, 2009; Hauer et al., 2007; Hauer, 2007; Spencer et al., 1991; Hall & Fagre, 2003; US Department of the Interior, 2010). Due to the relatively undisturbed setting of the national parks compared to surrounding lands, Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park is a popular location for scientists to conduct research (IUCN Consultation, 2017a; Waterton Lakes National Park, 2017a). The parks acquire some funding for priority research projects from both federal and private sources. In addition, numerous independent researchers from agencies and universities conduct research under approved permits. Topics of study include wildlife, land geomorphology, social science, vegetation, air/water quality, climate change and much more.

Overall assessment of protection and management Mostly Effective

Protection and management are effective overall and provide a positive example to other transboundary World Heritage Sites. Management systems, both within the two countries and in transboundary aspect, are considered effective and efficient. Transboundary cooperation is particularly successful. However, some concern has been raised in relation to sustainable financing and tourism and visitation management. In recent years visitor pressure has been increasing and the parks are being challenged to manage high visitation at peak periods.

▶ Assessment of the effectiveness of protection and Mostly Effective management in addressing threats outside the site

External land use threats to the parks were previously considered a major concern that improved after World Heritage listing. The extensive purchase and easement programme of low elevation prairie lands adjacent to Waterton Lakes National Park by the Nature Conservancy of Canada in the area of the Waterton Biosphere Reserve has increased habitat available for park mammals especially in spring and fall. Shortly after the Province of Alberta’s South Saskatchewan Land Use Plan (2014), the Alberta Government designated the Castle Provincial Parks, a 54,588 ha wildland and provincial park immediately adjacent to the north boundary of Waterton Lakes (Alberta Environment and Parks, 2018) which enhances the World Heritage site’s ecological integrity. There are potential threats coming from Alberta public lands outside of these protected areas, including a new coal mine north of the Castle provincial parks and various changes in provincial regulations and legislation that may change human use patterns in and around Waterton (these are described more thoroughly in the threats section of this assessment).

As mentioned, Glacier National Park and Waterton Lakes National Park together have been named as an International Dark Sky Park. They are the first transboundary park to receive this designation IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

(Parks Canada, 2019c; IUCN Consultation, 2017a). This designation requires both parks to continue improving their exterior lighting to protect dark skies and to work with neighbouring communities. Additionally, Glacier National Park jointly manages the Flathead Wild and Scenic River with the Flathead National Forest.

▶ Best practice examples

World Heritage values, international transboundary cooperative management, wildlife–human interaction, natural fire regime reestablishment, International Peace Park issues, working with Indigenous communities, environmental education. Specific programmes: • Native America Speaks; an educational and interpretive programme by the National Park Service in cooperation with the Blackfeet and Salish-Kootenai tribes and the Glacier Conservancy where American Indian tribal members present interpretive programmes for park visitors about traditional stories, practices and folkways. • Crown Managers Partnership: a cooperative effort by managers of both Glacier and Waterton Lakes National Parks to involve adjacent land managers and political entities in a broad effort to coordinate management activities at a landscape scale. • Reserved Water Rights Compacts: Development of formal, treaty-level compacts with both the State of Montana and adjacent Indian Tribes for water rights issues to ensure necessary water for species conservation in Glacier National Park. • Great Northern Landscape Conservation Cooperative The GNLCC partnership is a network of US federal, Canadian provincial and federal, Tribal Nations, state, academic and conservation organisations. Working to achieve a collective landscape vision, the partnership implements a regional approach to address conservation issues across boundaries and jurisdictions by sharing data, science and capacity (IUCN Consultation, 2017a). • South West Alberta Cooperative Weed Management Area manages noxious invasive weeds in cooperation between Waterton and local municipal governments, provincial parks and Nature Conservancy of Canada (Waterton Lakes National Park, 2017b). • Conservation and restoration projects to control non-native plants and restore grasslands and threatened whitebark and limber pine forests adapted as a result of the 2017 Kenow Wildfire (IUCN Consultation, 2020). • In Waterton Lakes National Park, pro-active external relations, media relations and social media activity during the major 2017 Kenow Wildfire event. • Working with UNESCO/IUCN to protect the North Fork drainage from mining development (IUCN Consultation, 2017a). • Potential cooperative fisheries restoration programmes between State, US Geological Survey (USGS) and Glacier National Park, and ongoing cooperative grizzly bear monitoring and management (IUCN Consultation, 2017a; National Park Service, 2004; 2006). • Flathead Community of Resource Educators (CORE) – a network of individuals and organisations working together to increase awareness and understanding about the natural, historical and cultural resources of the Flathead Region (IUCN Consultation, 2017a). • Rocky Mountains Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit that facilitates science and research connections between agencies and universities (IUCN Consultation, 2017a). • Rocky Mountain Inventory and Monitoring Program for efficiencies in inventory and monitoring (IUCN Consultation, 2017a). • Waterton Biosphere Reserve Carnivore Working Group, public meetings with local municipalities to address wildlife conflict management and plan future action (Waterton Biosphere Reserve, 2017b). • 2017 Multi-species Action Plan for Waterton Lakes National Park developed by Parks Canada to address management of species at risk in the park (Parks Canada Agency, 2017), and associated research programmes in the park for species reintroduction (leopard frog), non-native species reduction, and monitoring (bats, Waterton Lakes National Park, 2017a). IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

State and trend of values

Assessing the current state and trend of values

World Heritage values

▶ Superlative scenery Low Concern Trend:Stable

The values of this World Heritage site have mainly been maintained through continuing active management, monitoring and research. While superlative scenic values of the site were stable and largely intact in the past (World Heritage Committee, 1995; National Park Service, 1999; UNESCO & IUCN, 2009; Konstant et al., 2005), changes of the scenic values have started to be seen. Climate change with warming trend has already caused many of the glaciers, which serve as stunning spectacle and therefore contirbute significantly to the superlative scenery, to completely disappear or retreat, e.g., in 1910 when Glacier National Park was designated there were about 150 glaciers, while in 2015 only 26 remained (USGS, n.d.). The scientific predictions estimate complete retreat of glaciers in Glacier National Park by 2030 to 2080 (Luce, 2018; Brown et al., 2010; UNESCO & IUCN, 2009; IUCN Consultation, 2017a; Wines, 2014). Glaciers are a key feature of the park and that will be modified, however, the mountain landscapes themselves will remain are therefore of low concern. Increased wildfire activity related to climate change will alter views at an accelerated rate (Duffield et al., 2013). In Waterton National Park, the Kenow fire affected 38% of the park and 50% of its vegetation (Parks Canada, 2019a). Visitiation is returning to pre-2017 levels, areas of the park have been restored and are now available for visitation and ecological renewal in a fire-adaptated landscape is taking place.

▶ Unique ecological complexes High Concern Trend:Deteriorating

The loss of glaciers in the headwaters will have significant impact for the site’s unique ecological complexes (USGS, n.d.). Glacial meltwater regulates stream temperatures and maintains streamflow during summer and drought periods. As glaciers disappear, summer stream temperatures are predicted to increase, potentially causing local extinctions of some aquatic insects. Changes in invertebrates (Giersch et al., 2014), trout species (D’Angelo & Muhlfeld, 2013; Fredenberg, 2014; Muhlfeld et al., 2014; Crown Managers Partnership, n.d.2) and aquatic ecosystems generally (Slemmons et al., 2013; Hossack et al., 2013a, Hossack et al., 2013b; USGS, n.d.), are already evident. Drier weather and continued loss of sustained water source may impact vegetation communities (USGS, n.d.). Arctic-Alpine plants, especially dicots have declined in Glacier National Park over the last two decades due to climate change (Lesica & Crone, 2017) and recession of glacier fronts is driving land vegetation cover change (Lambert et al., 2020). The site’s ecosystems are also threatened by invasion of non-native species (Wong & Daniels, 2017; Muhlfeld et al., 2016), however measures to address the threat posed by invasive species are being undertaken. Climate change, as the main driver of concern regarding the uniqe ecological effects of the site, cannot necessarily be fully addressed at the site level. Furthermore, it should be recognised that Waterton Glacier International Peace park continues to represent a positive example of transboundary conservation efforts which buffer against the effects of climate change through enhanced landscape connectivity. However the signficant effects of warming temperatures on glaciers, which mediate the functioning of many of the parks habitats and ecosystems, in combination with other threats such as invasive species is of high concern.

Summary of the Values

▶ Assessment of the current state and trend of World Low Concern Heritage values Trend: Deteriorating

The values for which Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park was inscribed on the World Heritage List have largely been preserved, but with continued threats, particularly the already occurring IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

effects of climate change, the trend of the condition of the values can be assessed as deteriorating. In Glacier National Park, disappearance and complete retreat of glaciers has particularly been evident since the beginning of 20th century, i.e., since then the number of glaciers reduced by more than 80%. Considering the continuation of warmer weather with higher temperatures, this trend will continue, posing threats to sustainability of the site’s World Heritage values. The impacts of climate change have affected the site’s ecological complexes, e.g., the changes in aquatic ecosystems and disappearance of some vegetation communities, and also the site’s scenic and aesthetic value. Apart from climate change, other threats are affecting the site’s World Heritage values, e.g., invasive species, loss of connectivity, visitor pressures. However, the parks’ management authorities are addressing the threats as part of a robust management programme, and the trasnboundary site itself represents an example of best practice in fostering landscape connectivity across borders.

▶ Assessment of the current state and trend of other Low Concern important biodiversity values Trend: Stable

Aquatic invasive species and landscape level connectivity are key concerns affecting the site. Active management on the part of state, provincial and parks managers aims to control the former, while landscape connectivity has been enhanced through recent land protection efforts in both USA and Canada. Ongoing lobbying of NGOs for additional protection in the Flathead valley will ensure that this issue remains in active discussion.

Informations complémentaires

Benefits

Understanding Benefits

▶ Outdoor recreation and tourism

Destination for hiking, backpacking, camping, photography, skiing/snowshoeing, fishing, boating, climbing, spiritual renewal and connection to the land. Supports a seasonal business community. Factors negatively affecting provision of this benefit : - Climate change : Impact level - High, Trend - Increasing - Pollution : Impact level - Low, Trend - Continuing - Overexploitation : Impact level - Moderate, Trend - Increasing - Invasive species : Impact level - Moderate, Trend - Increasing - Habitat change : Impact level - Low, Trend - Continuing

Climate change and invasive aquatic species have the potential to change the ecological character of the parks, and in the case of aquatic invasive species, have already imposed changes on recreational boating use. Increasing visitation that is not managed strategically can lead to an array of impacts on species and ecosystem, including changes in habitat use and displacement due to high human use levels or fragmentation. This risk is increasing with increasing visitation in both Waterton and Glacier National Parks.

▶ Importance for research, Contribution to education

Good resource for research, and for disseminating knowledge about natural processes, ecosystems and species, particularly because so much biodiversity is contained within such a small area. Factors negatively affecting provision of this benefit : - Climate change : Impact level - High, Trend - Increasing - Pollution : Impact level - Low, Trend - Continuing IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

- Overexploitation : Impact level - Low, Trend - Continuing - Invasive species : Impact level - Moderate, Trend - Increasing - Habitat change : Impact level - Low, Trend - Continuing

Climate change is predicted to have dramatic effect on habitat, vegetation and wildlife communities over the longer term. Such changes, and adaptation planning resulting from those changes, offer research opportunity and sharing of new knowledge, given the current research interest and activity in the park. Partnerships between park managing agencies and local First Nations or US Tribes also offers an opportunity to achieve Truth and Reconciliation in the daily actions of the park from data gathered to inform management to interpretive programming that enhances the visitor experience.

▶ Flood prevention, Water provision (importance for water quantity and quality)

Although a small park, the Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park serves as a water tower for the Crown of the Continent Ecosystems, communities, recreational users and agricultural landowners. Climate adaptation will be important in future years, as changes in storm event frequency and flooding, and glacial retreat are predicted to change in the near to long term. Factors negatively affecting provision of this benefit : - Climate change : Impact level - High, Trend - Increasing - Pollution : Impact level - Low, Trend - Continuing - Overexploitation : Impact level - Low, Trend - Continuing - Invasive species : Impact level - Moderate, Trend - Increasing - Habitat change : Impact level - Low, Trend - Continuing

Climate change, and loss of glaciers in Glacier National Park in particular, will dramatically change the park’s role as a water source. Increased storm frequency and precipitation could affect downstream land use, beyond the park.

▶ History and tradition, Wilderness and iconic features, Cultural identity and sense of belonging

Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park preserves evidence of many generations of human use, extending back thousands of years. Early peoples looked to the region both for spiritual ceremonies and sustenance. European settlers tried homesteading, prospecting, and ultimately recreational tourism, particularly in connection with Great Northern Railway. Numerous prayer flag and vision quest sites within the Waterton Lakes National Park are actively visited by First Nations. Factors negatively affecting provision of this benefit : - Climate change : Impact level - High, Trend - Increasing - Pollution : Impact level - Low, Trend - Continuing - Overexploitation : Impact level - Low, Trend - Continuing - Invasive species : Impact level - Moderate, Trend - Continuing - Habitat change : Impact level - Low, Trend - Continuing

Climate change is predicted to reduce or eliminate glacial features in both Glacier and Waterton, changing the park’s recreational, tourism and other cultural values. Glacier National Park’s fundamental identity as one of the US’s glaciated national parks will soon cease to exist, transforming residents’ and tourists’ experiences of that place forever (Wines, 2014). The Buffalo Treaty, which the Blackfoot Confederacy has signed, has brought First Nations and US Tribes together to explore how the reintroduction of bison to the Great Plains can enhance cultural and spiritual connections to the landscape and ecosystems (Buffalo Treaty, 2020).

Summary of benefits

Glacier National Park along with Waterton Lakes National Park is the oldest legislated transboundary protected area in the world. Both parks have a history of working together, both formally and informally, across national frontiers to cooperatively manage world heritage and national park values of benefit to, not only park visitors, but as an example to others in the world, to both the conservation and broader IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

community of people. IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

RÉFÉRENCES

№ Références

1 Adams, A. (2009). Invasive Weeds in Glacier National Park: Habitat, Vectors of Spread, and Areas at Greatest Risk of Invasion. MS Thesis. [online] North Carolina: Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University. Available at: ;. Accessed 2 August 2019.

2 Alberta Environment and Parks (2018). Castle Management Plan. Edmonton, Alberta: Queens Printer: pp.1-166.

3 Alberta Environment and Parks (2019). Grizzly Bear Occurrence Summary 2017: Bear Management Area (BMA) 6. Edmonton, Alberta. pp:1-25.

4 Baruch-Mordo, Sharon, Stewart W. Breck, Kenneth R. Wilson, and David M. Theobald. 2008. Spatiotemporal Distribution of Black Bear–Human Conflicts in Colorado, USA. Journal of Wildlife Management, 72, pp:1853-1862.

5 Bay, L., Broberg, L., Carlson, A., Cross, M., Deuel, K., Hanna, D. (2012). Climate-impacts assessment of the Crown of the Continent. [online] Bozeman, Montana: Crown of the Continent Conservation Initiative. Available at:

6 Brisette, A. P., Haas, G. E., Wells, M., & Benson, D. E. (2001). Justifications for recreation carrying capacity: What the public is wIlling to accept. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 19, pp:22- 41.

7 British Columbia, Province of and State of Montana (2010). Memorandum of Understanding and Understanding on Environmental Protection, Climate Change and Energy. [online] Available at: < http://www.gov.bc.ca/igrs/attachments/en/MTEnvCoop.pdf>;. Accessed 2 August 2019.

8 Brown, J., Harper, J., Humphrey, N. (2010). Cirque glacier sensitivity to 21st century warming: Sperry Glacier, Rocky Mountains, USA. Global and Planetary Change 74(2), pp. 91-98.

9 Buffalo Treaty (2020). Treaty. [online] The Buffalo: A Treaty of Cooperation, Renewal and Restoration. Available at: ; [Accessed 27 May 2020].

10 CPAWS (2017). Flathead River Valley. [online] Available at: ;.

11 Canada, Government of, 2013. “Government of Canada Divestiture of Crown Lands [Dominion Coal Blocks]”. http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/media-room/news-release/2013/11416

12 Chief Mountain Landowners. (2011). ‘Chief Mountain cumulative effects study: assessing the footprint of human activity in southwest Alberta’. [Online] Available at: http://www.watertonbiosphere.com/uploads/biosphere-resource… (Accessed 10 February 2013).

13 Clevenger, A. et al, 2010. Highway 3: Transportation Mitigation for Wildlife and Connectivity. Western Transportation Institute. Bozeman, Montana.

14 Clevenger, A., Apps, C., Lee, T., Quinn, M., Paton, D., Poulton, D. and Ament, R. (2010). Highway 3: Transportation Mitigation for Wildlife and Connectivity in the Crown of the Continent Ecosystem. Bozeman, Montana: Western Transportation Institute. Available at: https://www.rockies.ca/files/reports/H3%20Final%20Report%20… (Accessed 2 August 2019).

15 Cole, D.N. & Landres, P.B. (1995). Indirect effects of recreation on wildlife. In: R.L. Knight and K.J. Gutzwiller (Eds.) Wildlife and recreationists- Coexistence through management and research. (Pp: 183- 202). Washington, D.C: Island Press.

16 Craig, D.R., Yung, L., Borrie, W.T. (2012). Blackfeet Belong to the Mountains: Hope, Loss, and Blackfeet Claims to Glacier National Park, Montana. Conservation & Society; 10, pp.232-242. IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

№ Références

17 Crown Managers Partnership (2010). NPScape Products. November 2010. [online] Available at: < http://www.crownmanagers.org/cce-landscapes-analysis/>;. Accessed 2 August 2019.

18 Crown Managers Partnership (n.d.1). Climate Change Adaptation. Transboundary Conservation Initiative Fact sheet. [online] Available at: < http://crownmanagers.org/storage/TCI%20factsheet%20CCA.pdf&… 2 August 2019.

19 Crown Managers Partnership (n.d.2). Native Salmonids – Transboundary Conservation Initiative Fact sheet. [online] Available at:

20 Crown Managers Partnership (n.d.3). Terrestrial Invasive Species – Transboundary Conservation Initiative Fact sheet. [online] Available at: < http://crownmanagers.org/storage/TCI%20factsheet%20Terrestr…;. Accessed 2 August 2019.

21 Crown Managers Partnership (n.d.4). About us. [online] Available at: < https://www.crownmanagers.org/>;. Accessed 16 March 2020.

[Crown Managers Partnership (n.d.5). Crown of the Continent Landscape Conservation Design. [online 22 Available at: https://www.crownmanagers.org/landscape-conservation-design

23 Derworiz, C. (2020). 29 of Canada's National Parks to Reopen to Day-Use Visitors June 1. [online] Edmonton, Alberta: CBC News Canada. Available at:

24 Duffield, J.W., Neher, C.J., Patterson, D.A. and Deskins, A.M. (2013). Effects of wildfire on national park visitation and the regional economy: a natural experiment in the Northern Rockies. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 22, pp.1155-1166.

25 D’Angelo, V.S. and Muhlfeld, C.C. (2013). Factors influencing the distribution of native Bull Trout and Westslope Cutthroat Trout in streams of western Glacier National Park, Montana. Northwest Science, 87(1), pp.1-11.

26 Fredenberg, C.R. (2014). Efficacy of suppressing non-native lake trout in an isolated backcountry lake in Glacier National Park. PhD dissertation. Bozeman, USA: Montana State University-Bozeman.

27 Giersch, J.J., Jordan, S., Luikart, G., Jones, L.A., Hauer, F.R. and Muhlfeld, C.C. (2014). Climate-induced range contraction of a rare alpine aquatic invertebrate. Freshwater Science, 34(1), pp.53-65.

28 Government of Alberta. (2014). South Saskatchewan Regional Plan, 2014-24. [Online] Available at: https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/460ac866-4416-4d77-a25a-a02… (Accessed 2 August 2019).

29 Government of Canada (2020). Grassy Mountain Coal Project. [online] Ottawa, Ontario: Government of Canada. Available at: ; [Accessed 28 May 2020].

30 Hall, M.H.P. and Fagre, D.B. (2003). Modelled Climate-Induced Glacier Change in Glacier National Park, 1850-2100. BioScience, 53, pp.131-140.

31 Hansen, A.J. and Phillips, L.B. (2015). Which tree species and biome types are most vulnerable to climate change in the US northern Rocky Mountains? Forest Ecology and Management, 338, pp.68-83.

32 Harvey, B.J. (2015). Causes and consequences of special patterns of fire severity in northern Rocky Mountain forests: The role of disturbance interactions and changing climate. PhD (Zoology) dissertation. Madison, USA: University of Wisconsin-Madison.

33 Harvey, B.J., Donato, D.C. and Turner, M.G. (2016). High and dry: Post-fire tree seedling establishment in subalpine forests decreases with post fire drought and large stand-replacing burn patches. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 25, pp.255-669. IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

№ Références

34 Hauer F.R. (2007). Assessment of Septic Leachate: A Survey of Lake McDonald Glacier National Park. Flathead Lake Biological Station, University of Montana.

35 Hauer, F.R., Stanford, J.A. and Lorang, M.S. (2007). Pattern and Process in Northern Rocky Mountain Headwaters: Ecological Linkages in the Headwaters of the Crown of the Continent. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 43 (1), pp. 104-117.

36 Hossack, B.R., Lowe, W.H. and Corn, P.S. (2013a). Rapid Increases and Time‐Lagged Declines in Amphibian Occupancy after Wildfire. Conservation Biology, 27(1), pp.219-228.

37 Hossack, B.R., Lowe, W.H., Ware, J.L. and Corn, P.S. (2013b). Disease in a dynamic landscape: host behavior and wildfire reduce amphibian chytrid infection. Biological Conservation, 157, pp.293-299.

38 IUCN (1995). World Heritage Nomination – IUCN Technical Evaluation, Waterton Glacier International Peace Park (Canada/United States of America). [Online] Available at: http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/354/documents/ (Accessed 10 February 2013).

39 IUCN Consultation (2017a). IUCN World Heritage Confidential Consultation: Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park, Canada and the USA.

40 IUCN Consultation (2017b). IUCN World Heritage Confidential Consultation: Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park, Canada and the USA.

41 IUCN Consultation. (2017b). IUCN World Heritage Confidential Consultation: Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park, Canada & USA

42 IUCN Consultation. (2020). IUCN World Heritage Confidential Consultation- Waterton Glacier International Peace Park, Canada/ USA

43 Keane, R.E., Holsinger, L.M., Mahalovich, M.F. and Tombach, D.F. (2017). Evaluating future success for whitebark pine ecosystems restoration under climate change using simulation modeling. Restoration Ecology, 25(2), pp.220-233.

44 Konstant, W., Locke, H. and Hanna, W. (2005). Waterton-Glacier: The first of its kind. In: R.A. Mittermeier, Kormos, C.F., Mittermeier, C.G., Gil, P.R., Sandwith, T. and Besançon, C. (Eds.), Transboundary Conservation. Mexico: Cemex DF.

45 Kulakowski, D., Kaye, M.W. and Kashian, D.M. (2013). Long-term aspen cover in the western US. Forest Ecology and Management, 299, pp.52-59.

46 Lambert, C. B., Resler, L. M., Shao, Y., & Butler, D. R. (2020). Vegetation change as related to terrain factors at two glacier forefronts, Glacier National Park, Montana, USA. Journal of Mountain Science, 17(1), 1-15.

47 Landers, D.H., Simonich, S.L., Jaffe, D.A., Geiser, L.H., Campbell, D.H., Schwindt, A.R., Schreck, C.B., Kent, M.L., Hafner, W.D., Taylor, H.E., Hageman, K.J., Usenko, S., Ackerman, L.K., Schrlau, J.E., Rose, N.L., Blett, T.F. and Erway, M.M. (2008). The Fate, Transport, and Ecological Impacts of Airborne Contaminants in Western National Parks (USA). EPA/600/R-07/138. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, NHEERL, Western Ecology Division, Corvallis, Oregon. [Online] Available at: http://www.nature.nps.gov/air/Studies/air_toxics/wacap.cfm (Accessed 20 February 2013).

48 Landers, D.H., Simonich, S.L., Jaffe, D.A., Geiser, L.H., Campbell, D.H., Schwindt, A.R., Schreck, C.B., Kent, M.L., Hafner, W.D., Taylor, H.E., Hageman, K.J., Usenko, S., Ackerman, L.K., Schrlau, J.E., Rose, N.L., Blett, T.F. and Erway, M.M. (2008). The Fate, Transport, and Ecological Impacts of Airborne Contaminants in Western National Parks (USA). [online] EPA/600/R-07/138. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, NHEERL, Western Ecology Division, Corvallis, Oregon. Available at: ;. Accessed 16 March 2020. IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

№ Références

49 Landers, D.H., Simonich, S.M., Jaffe, D., Geiser, L., Campbell, D.H., Schwindt A., Schreck C., Kent M., Hafner W., Taylor H.E., Hageman K., Usenko S., Ackerman L., Schrlau J., Rose N., Blett T., Erway, M.M. (2010). The Western Airborne Contaminant Assessment Project (WACAP): An Interdisciplinary Evaluation of the Impacts of Airborne Contaminants in Western U.S. National Parks. Environmental Science & Technology, 44, pp.855-859.

50 Leisica, P. (2014). Arctic-alpine plants decline over two decades in Glacier National Park, Montana, USA. Arctic, Antarctic, and Alpine Research, 46(2), pp.327-332.

51 Lesica, P., & Crone, E. E. (2017). Arctic and boreal plant species decline at their southern range limits in the Rocky Mountains. Ecology Letters, 20(2), 166-174.

52 Levesque, L.M. (2005). Investigating landscape change and ecological restoration: an integrated approach using historical ecology and GIS in Waterton Lakes National Park, Alberta. MSc thesis. Victoria: University of Victoria.

53 Locke ,H , 2011-12. Transboundary Cooperation to Achieve Large Landscape Conservation and Wilderness Protection, Park Science Vol 28, No.3 . US Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Washington.

54 Locke, H. (2011). Transboundary Cooperation to Achieve Large Landscape Conservation and Wilderness Protection, PARKScience, 28(3), 24.

55 Locke, H. (2012). Transboundary Cooperation to achieve wilderness protection and large landscape conservation; 2011-2012 Park Science, US National Park Service.

56 Locke, H. and McKinney, 2013. “The Flathead River Basin” in Water Without Borders, E. Norman et al 193- 220. University of Toronto Press

57 Locke, H. and McKinney, M. (2013). The Flathead River Basin. In: E. Norman, A. Cohen, K. Bakker (Eds.) Water Without Borders. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, pp. 193-220.

58 Luce, C. H. (2018). Effects of climate change on snowpack, glaciers, and water resources in the Northern Rockies Region [Chapter 4]. In: J.E. Halofsky, D.L. Peterson, S.K. Dante-Wood, L. Hoang, J.J. Ho, L.A. Joyce. (Eds.) Climate change vulnerability and adaptation in the Northern Rocky Mountains [Part 1]. Fort Collins, CO, USA: Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 374, pp.48-86.

59 Manning, R.E. (2011). No bad trip in Glacier. In: Manning, R.E. and Anderson, L.E. (Eds.) Managing Outdoor Recreation: Case Studies in the National Parks, pp. 150-154.

60 Missoula Current (2020). Proposed Trump budget threatens Superfund, National Park Service. [online] Available at: < https://missoulacurrent.com/government/2020/02/proposed-tru…;. Accessed 16 March 2020.

61 Missoulian (2014). Glacier Fish Tainted With Mercury. [online] 22 April, Missoulian. Available at: < http://missoulian.com/news/local/study-finds-mercury-tainte…;. Accessed 2 August 2019.

62 Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (2017). [Online] Available at: http://fwp.mt.gov/fishAndWildlife/species/ais/molluscs.html (Accessed 21 December 2018).

63 Morehouse, A.T., Boyce, M.S. (2016). Grizzly Bears Without Borders: Spatially explicit capture- recapture in southwestern Alberta. Journal of Wildlife Management, 80, pp. 1152-1166.

64 Muhlfeld, C. C., D’Angelo, V. S., Downs, C., Powell, J., Amish, S., Luikart, G., ... & Kalinowski, S. (2016). Genetic status and conservation of westslope cutthroat trout in Glacier National Park. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 145(5), 1093-1109. IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

№ Références

65 Muhlfeld, C.C., Kovach, R.P., Jones, L.A., Al-Chokhachy, R., Boyer, M.C., Leary, R.F., Lowe, W.H., Luikart, G. and Allendorf, F.W. (2014). Invasive hybridization in a threatened species is accelerated by climate change. Nature Climate Change, 4(7), pp.620-624.

66 Naficy, C. E. (2017). A cross-scale assessment of historical fire severity patterns, landscape dynamics, and methodological challenges in mixed-severity fire regimes of the northern US Rockies. PhD Thesis. Boulder: University of Colorado at Boulder.

67 National Park Service (1999). Final General Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement, Record of Decision, and Summary, Glacier National Park. [online] Available at: < http://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?parkID=61&proj…;. Accessed 2 August 2019.

68 National Park Service (2004). Bear Management Plan: Glacier National Park. West Glacier, Montana, USA: Glacier National Park, pp.1-6.

69 National Park Service (2006). Bear Management Guidelines. West Glacier, Montana, USA: Glacier National Park, pp.1-47.

70 National Park Service (2008). Avalanche Hazard Reduction by Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway in Glacier National Park and Flathead National Forest, Montana, Final Environmental Impact Statement, June 2008. [online] Available at:

71 National Park Service (2018). Glacier National Park Montana. Fire Management. [online] Available at: < https://www.nps.gov/glac/learn/nature/fire-managment.htm>;. Accessed 16 March 2020.

72 National Park Service (2019). Going-to-the-Sun Road Corridor Management Plan Environmental Assessment. West Glacier, MT: NPS. [online] Available at: < https://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?documentID=98289&…;. Accessed 13 March 2020.

73 National Park Service (2019a). Air Profiles - Glacier National Park. [online] Available at: < https://www.nps.gov/articles/airprofiles-glac.htm>;. Accessed 16 March 2020.

74 National Park Service (2020a). Help Stop Aquatic Invasive Species. [online] Available at: < https://www.nps.gov/glac/planyourvisit/ais.htm>;. Accessed 16 March 2020.

75 National Park Service (2020b). Annual Park Recreation Visits 1911- Last Calendar Year. Glacier NP. [online] Available at: ;. Accessed 13 March 2020.

76 National Park Service. (2020c). NPS Public Health Update. [online] Available at: https://www.nps.gov/aboutus/news/public-health-update.htm (Accessed 21 April 2020).

77 National Park Service. (2020d). National Park Service- Glacier National Park- Glacier National Park Reports Increase in October Visitation. [online] NPS. Available at: https://www.nps.gov/glac/learn/news/media20-34.htm [Accessed 28 November 2020].

78 National Parks Traveller (2019). Glacier National Park Loses Its Shuttle Service. [online] Available at: < https://www.nationalparkstraveler.org/2019/12/glacier-natio…;. Accessed 16 March 2020.

79 National Parks Traveller (n.d). Traveler Special Report: Threatened and Endangered Parks Myriad Threats Assault The Essence Of America’s Best Idea. [online] Available at: < https://www.nationalparkstraveler.org/2019/12/traveler-spec…;. Accessed 17 March 2020.

80 Natural Resources Canada (2013). Government of Canada Divestiture of Crown Lands [Dominion Coal Blocks]. [online] Available at: ;. Accessed 2 August 2019.

81 Natural Resources Canada (2014). Divesture of the Dominion Coal Blocks. [online] Available at: < https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/environmental-assessment/public-sta…;. Accessed 2 August 2019. IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

№ Références

82 Nature Conservancy of Canada. (n.d.). Waterton Park Front Project. Available at: https://www.natureconservancy.ca/en/where-we-work/alberta/f…

83 Nelson, R. (2014). A Climate Change Adaptation Gap Analysis for the Crown of the Continent. Boozeman, Montana: Crown of the Continent Conservation Initiative.

84 Nelson, R., Initiative, C. C., & Bozeman, M. T. (2017). Taking Action on Climate Change in the Crown of the Continent Ecosystem. [online] Available at: < https://lccnetwork.org/sites/default/files/Resources/Taking…;. Accessed 13 March 2020.

85 Nickerson, N. (2016). Montana’s Crowded Parks: Record visitation is taking its toll. Spring, Montana Business Quarterly, pp.10-15.

86 Northern Rocky Mountains Science Center. (2017). U.S. Geological Survey. [Online] Available at: https://www.usgs.gov/centers/norock (Accessed 2 August 2019).

87 Northrup, J.M., Pitt, J., Muhly, T.B., Stenhouse, G.B., Musiani, M. and Boyce, M.S. (2012). Vehicle traffic shapes grizzly bear behaviour on a multiple-use landscape. Journal of Applied Ecology, 49(5), pp.1159- 1167.

88 Owen, W. (2020, May 18). Pieridae responds to Alberta Foothills Assets regulatory decision. LNG Industry. Available at: https://www.lngindustry.com/liquid-natural-gas/18052020/pie…

89 Parks Canada (2010). Waterton Lakes National Park of Canada park management plan. [online] Available at:

90 Parks Canada (2019a). Waterton Lakes National Park. State of the Park Assessment 2019. [online] Available at:

91 Parks Canada (2019b). Waterton Lakes National Park- Management Plan. [online] Available at: < https://www.pc.gc.ca/en/pn-np/ab/waterton/info/index/direct…;. Accessed 13 March 2020.

92 Parks Canada (2019c). Waterton Lakes National Park. Designation Information. [online] Available at: < https://www.pc.gc.ca/en/pn-np/ab/waterton/culture/designati…;. Accessed 13 March 2020.

93 Parks Canada (2019d). Waterton Lakes National Park. New Visitor Centre. [online] Available at: < https://www.pc.gc.ca/en/pn-np/ab/waterton/info/public>;. Accessed 13 March 2020.

94 Parks Canada (2019e). Waterton Lakes National Park. Fire. [online] Available at: < https://www.pc.gc.ca/en/pn-np/ab/waterton/nature/environmen…;. Accessed 16 March 2020.

95 Parks Canada Agency. (2017). Multi-species Action Plan for Waterton Lakes National Park of Canada and Bar U Ranch National Historic Site of Canada [Proposed]. Species at Risk Act Action Plan Series. Ottawa: Parks Canada.

96 Parks Canada. (2008). ‘Waterton Lakes National Park of Canada state of the park report’. [Online] Available at: http://www.pc.gc.ca/pn-np/ab/waterton/plan/plan1/plan1c.asp…;. (Accessed 10 February 2013).

97 Parks Canada. (2019f). Kenow Wildifre. [online] Available at: https://www.pc.gc.ca/en/pn- np/ab/waterton/nature/environmen… (Accessed 02 April, 2020).

98 Parks Canada. (2020). Infrastructure Projects. [online] Available at: https://www.pc.gc.ca/en/pn- np/ab/waterton/visit/infrastruct… (Accessed 2 April 2020).

99 Peterson, C. (2013). Glacier Raft Company Sale, 16 January, Hungry Horse News, Montana. IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

№ Références

10 Proctor, M.F., Nielsen, S.E., Kasworm, W.F., Servheen, C., Radandt, T.G., Machutchon, A.G. and Boyce, 0 M.S. (2015). Grizzly bear connectivity mapping in the Canada-United States trans-border Region. Journal of Wildlife Management, 79(4), pp.544-558.

10 Province of British Columbia and State of Montana. (2010). Memorandum of Understanding on 1 Environmental Protection, Climate Change and Energy [Online] Available at: http://www.gov.bc.ca/igrs/attachments/en/MTEnvCoop.pdf.

10 Quinn, M.S., Alexander, S.M. (2011). Final Survey Report: Carnivores and Communities in the 2 Waterton Biosphere Reserve. Calgary, Alberta: Miistakis Institute, University of Calgary: pp.1-65.

10 Reuling, M., Johnson, S., Higgins, S., Bixler, P., Williams, S. and Tabor, G. (2015). Adapting to change 3 in the Crown of the Continent; an ecosystem scale approach to collaborative management. Bozeman, Montana: Center for Large Landscape Conservation.

10 Roush, W.M. (2009). A substantial upward shift of the alpine treeline ecotone in the southern 4 Canadian Rocky Mountains. MSc thesis. Victoria: University of Victoria.

10 Rumbolt, R. (2017). National Park's Temporary Closure Due to Overcrowding Not Expected to Happen 5 Elsewhere, Parks Says. [online] Calgary, Alberta: CBC News Canada. Available at: < https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/national-parks-closu…; [Accessed 28 May 2020].

10 Sawaya, M. A., Stetz, J. B., Clevenger, A. P., Gibeau, M. L., & Kalinowski, S. T. (2012). Estimating 6 grizzly and black bear population abundance and trend in Banff National Park using noninvasive genetic sampling. PLoS ONE 7:e34777.

10 Schoettle, Anna W.; Burns, Kelly S.; Cleaver, Christy M.; Connor, J. J. (2019). Proactive limber pine 7 conservation strategy for the Greater Rocky Mountain National Park Area. [online] Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-379. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 81 p. Available at:

10 Scott, T. (2012). Oil Exploration Plans Suspended at Blackfeet Sacred Site. [online] 18 March, 8 Missoulian, Montana. Available at:

10 Sholar, C. (2004). Glacier National Park and the Blackfoot Nation’s Reserved Rights: Does a Valid 9 Tribal Co-Management Authority Exist? American Indian Law Review, 29, pp.151-172.

11 Slemmons, K.E., Saros, J.E. and Simon, K. (2013). The influence of glacial meltwater on alpine aquatic 0 ecosystems: a review. Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts, 15(10), pp.1794-1806.

11 Smith, C.M., Shepherd, B., Gillies, C. and Stuart-Smith, J. (2013). ‘Changes in blister rust infection and 1 mortality in whitebark pine over time’. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 43, pp.90-96.

11 Smith, C.M., Wilson, B., Rasheed, S., Walker, R.C., Carolin, T. and Shepherd, B. (2008). ‘Whitebark 2 pine and white pine blister rust in the Rocky Mountains of Canada and northern Montana’. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 38. pp.982-995.

11 Smith-McKenna, E.K., Malanson, G. P., Resler, L. M., Carstensen, L. W., Prisley, S. P., & Tomback, D. F. 3 (2014). Cascading effects of feedbacks, disease, and climate change on alpine treeline dynamics. Environmental Modelling & Software, 62, pp.85-96.

11 Spencer, C.N., McClelland, B.R. and Stanford, J.A. (1991). Shrimp Stocking, Salmon Collapse, Eagle 4 Displacement, Cascading interactions in the food web of a large aquatic ecosystem. BioScience, 41: (1), pp.14-21.

11 Squires, J.R. et al. (2013). Combining resource selection and movement behavior to predict corridors 5 for Canada lynx at their southern range periphery. Biological Conservation, 157, pp.187-195. IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier - 2020 Conservation Outlook Assessment

№ Références

11 Teck (2019-20). Teck Access Boundaries in the Elk Valley. [online] Available at: < 6 https://www.teck.com/media/2019-2020-Elk-Valley-Access-Maps…;. Accessed 17 March 2020.

11 Tomback, D.F., Chipman, K.G., Resler, L.M., Smith-McKenna, E.K. and Sith, C.M. (2014). Relative 7 abundance and functional role of whitebark pine at treeline in the northern Rocky Mountains. Arctic, Antarctic, and Alpine Research, 46(2), pp.407-418.

11 UNESCO. (2006). ‘2006 periodic report on the application of the World Heritage Convention’. [Online] 8 Available at: http://www.pc.gc.ca/eng/docs/pm-wh/rspm-whsr/rapports-repor… (Accessed 10 February 2013).

11 UNESCO. (2010). Report on the State of Conservation of Waterton Glacier International Peace Park. 9 State of Conservation Information System of the World Heritage Centre. [Online] Available at: http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/354/documents/ (Accessed 10 February 2013).

12 UNESCO/IUCN (2009). Comments and Observations to the UNESCO/IUCN Reactive Monitoring mission 0 of September 2009, Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park World Heritage Site.

12 UNESCO/IUCN (2009). Reactive Monitoring Mission Report: Waterton Glacier International Peace Park 1 (Canada/United States of America). [online] Paris, France and Gland, Switzerland: UNESCO World Heritage Centre and IUCN. Available at: ;. Accessed 2 August 2019.

12 US Department of the Interior (2010). Bear Management Plan, Glacier National Park, West Glacier. 2 [online] Montana: National Park Service. Available at: < https://www.nps.gov/glac/learn/management/loader.cfm?csModu…;. Accessed 2 August 2019.

12 USGS (n.d.). Retreat of Glaciers in Glacier National Park. [online] Available at: < 3 https://www.usgs.gov/centers/norock/science/retreat-glacier…;. Accessed 18 March 2020.

12 Vagias, W., Powell, R.B., Moore, D.D. and Wright, B. (2014). Predicting behavioral intentions to comply 4 with recommended leave no trace practices. Leisure Sciences, 36, pp.439-457.

12 Verde, C. (2016, July 21). Is Pincher Creek ready for life after Waterton?. Pincher Creek Echo. Available 5 at: https://www.pinchercreekecho.com/2016/07/21/is-pincher-cree…

12 Vogt, T. (2019). New Wildlife Underpass East of Crowsnest Pass Takes Important Step Forward. 6 [online] Calgary, Alberta: CTV News Canada. Available at:

12 Waller, J, TA Graves, B Anderson, B Kittson, S Gaulke. (2020). Connectivity in the Crown: U.S. Highway 7 2 Wildlife Crossings 2019 Report. Unpublished report. National Park Service, Glacier National Park. 37 pp.

12 Waterton Biosphere Reserve (2017a). Carnivores and Communities. [online] Available at: < 8 www.watertonbiosphere.com/projects/carnivores-communities/&…;. Accessed 2 August 2019.

12 Waterton Biosphere Reserve (2017b). Tag Archives: Grizzly Bear Recovery Plan. [online] Available at: 9 ;. Accessed 2 August 2019.

13 Waterton Biosphere Reserve (2017c). WBR Cooperation Plan 2016-2021. [online] Available at: < 0 www.watertonbiosphere.com/about-waterton-biosphere-reserve/… 2 August 2019.

13 Waterton Lakes National Park (2017a). Research: Ecological Initiatives. [online] Available at: < 1 https://www.pc.gc.ca/en/pn-np/ab/waterton/info/recherche-re…;. Accessed 2 August 2019.

13 Waterton Lakes National Park (2017b). Partners. [online] Available at:

№ Références

13 Waterton Lakes National Park (2017c). Protection and Restoration. [online] Available at: < 3 www.pc.gc.ca/en/pn-np/ab/waterton/info/index/enviro/protect…;. Accessed 2 August 2019.

13 Weinberg, A. B. (2014). An empirical test of the effectiveness of an indirect management tool in 4 increasing optional shuttle use at Glacier National Park. MSc Thesis (unpublished). Missoula, USA: The University of Montana.

13 Weinzimmer, D., Newman, P., Taff, D., Benfield, J., Lynch, E., & Bell, P. (2014). Human response to 5 simulated motorized noise in National Parks. Leisure Sciences, 36, pp.251-267.

13 Wells, G. (2009). Wildland Fire Use: Managing for a Fire-Smart Landscape.[online] Fire Science Digest, 6 4. Available at: ;. Accessed 2 August 2019.

13 Wildlife Conservation Society (2016). Home again: WCS and Blackfeet Nation partner to bring buffalo 7 back to their original homeland. Press Release. New York: Wildlife Conservation Society.

13 Wines, M. (2014). Climate change threatens to strip the identity of Glacier National Park. [online] 23 8 November, The New York Times. Available at:

13 Wong, C. M., & Daniels, L. D. (2017). Novel forest decline triggered by multiple interactions among 9 climate, an introduced pathogen and bark beetles. Global Change Biology, 23(5), 1926-1941.

14 World Heritage Committee (1995). Decision 19 COM VIIIA.1. Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park 0 Statement of Outstanding Universal Value (Canada/United States of America). [online] Berlin, Germany. Available at: ;. Accessed 2 August 2019.

14 Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative (2020). Making Highway 3 Wildlife-Friendly. [online] 1 Canmore, Alberta: Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative. Available at: < https://y2y.net/work/hot-projects/highway-3-wildlife-friend…; [Accessed 28 May 2020].