DOCSLIB.ORG

Taiga Plains

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

ECOLOGICAL REGIONS OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES Taiga Plains Ecosystem Classification Group Department of Environment and Natural Resources Government of the Northwest Territories Revised 2009 ECOLOGICAL REGIONS OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES TAIGA PLAINS This report may be cited as: Ecosystem Classification Group. 2007 (rev. 2009). Ecological Regions of the Northwest Territories – Taiga Plains. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Government of the Northwest Territories, Yellowknife, NT, Canada. viii + 173 pp. + folded insert map. ISBN 0-7708-0161-7 Web Site: http://www.enr.gov.nt.ca/index.html For more information contact: Department of Environment and Natural Resources P.O. Box 1320 Yellowknife, NT X1A 2L9 Phone: (867) 920-8064 Fax: (867) 873-0293 About the cover: The small photographs in the inset boxes are enlarged with captions on pages 22 (Taiga Plains High Subarctic (HS) Ecoregion), 52 (Taiga Plains Low Subarctic (LS) Ecoregion), 82 (Taiga Plains High Boreal (HB) Ecoregion), and 96 (Taiga Plains Mid-Boreal (MB) Ecoregion). Aerial photographs: Dave Downing (Timberline Natural Resource Group). Ground photographs and photograph of cloudberry: Bob Decker (Government of the Northwest Territories). Other plant photographs: Christian Bucher. Members of the Ecosystem Classification Group Dave Downing Ecologist, Timberline Natural Resource Group, Edmonton, Alberta. Bob Decker Forest Ecologist, Forest Management Division, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Government of the Northwest Territories, Hay River, Northwest Territories. Bas Oosenbrug Habitat Conservation Biologist, Wildlife Division, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Government of the Northwest Territories, Yellowknife, Northwest Territories. Charles Tarnocai Research Scientist, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa, Ontario. Tom Chowns Environmental Consultant, Powassan, Ontario. Chris Hampel Geographic Information System Specialist/Resource Analyst, Timberline Natural Resource Group, Edmonton, Alberta. i Acknowledgements The Ecosystem Classification Group acknowledges the contribution of the following Environment and Natural Resources staff to the Taiga Plains mapping revisions, report and poster – Terrianne Berens, Suzanne Carrière, Ray Case, Evelyn Gah, Tom Lakusta, John Nagy, Richard Popko, Paul Rivard, and Alasdair Veitch. Additional advice and support was gratefully received from David Kroetsch, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, for providing the initial classification upon which the Northwest Territories version was built, and advice at the December 2004 workshop; John Downing, for assistance in obtaining and interpreting bedrock geology information; and Wayne Pettapiece, for compiling most of the glossary of terms in Appendix 4. We also acknowledge members of the 1995 Ecological Stratification Working Group and members of the 1989 Ecoclimatic Regions Working Group, who provided the original conceptual and mapping framework from which this version of the Taiga Plains classification was derived. Darcy King, Stuart Poirier, Dawson Somerville and Wayne Sorghe provided safe and courteous air transport throughout the summer field season. The Forest Management Division and Wildlife Division of Environment and Natural Resources, Government of the Northwest Territories (GNWT) provided the primary funding for the Taiga Plains Ecosystem Classification Project. The Western NWT Biophysical Study, a joint GNWT/Federal research program, provided additional funding support. The Western NWT Biophysical Study, initiated in 2003, provides funding to assist in the collection of necessary baseline data to help industry, regulators, communities and government assess, mitigate, monitor and manage environmental impacts of proposed developments in the western Northwest Territories. ii Preface The vast landscapes of the Northwest Territories include a remarkable array of terrain and climate conditions interacting to produce an abundance of ecosystems ranging in size from a few square meters to thousands of square kilometers. Productive and diverse forests and wetlands on the rich terraces of the Liard River in the southwest, an intricate complex of alpine and subalpine communities in the western mountains, open and stunted black spruce forests on permanently frozen soils in the northern interior plains, low-growing tundra communities in dry arctic areas north of tree line, and huge expanses of treeless or sparsely forested Canadian Shield rock are but a few of the ecosystems that define the land north of 60. These broad-scale vegetation cover and terrain features provide, in part, the basis for defining and understanding the climatic and physiographic patterns that control vegetation and soil distribution. Both plant communities and soils develop in response to abiotic factors (those which affect temperature, moisture, light, and nutrient conditions, such as latitude, elevation, and parent materials), and biotic factors (for example, competition between species, or individual species tolerances to climatic conditions). The relative influence of each factor at any place in the landscape is determined by the interaction of atmospheric and landscape attributes – climate, topography, parent materials, and biotic elements – all acting over time, as described by Major (1951) and Jenny (1941) for vegetation and soils, respectively. These attributes can be delineated and represented as abstract ecological map units, and may be described at various scales. At the global scale, the Biome or Vegetation Zone is recognized (Walter 1979, Scott 1995, Commission for Environmental Cooperation 1997). At the national scale in Canada, Ecozones, Ecoregions and Ecodistricts are described (Ecological Stratification Working Group 1995). The Northwest Territories has modified the Canadian national scale and classification framework to match the multi-level continental ecosystem classification framework – Ecological Regions of North America – developed by the Commission for Environmental Cooperation in 1997. The Canadian and continental systems are outlined in Section 1 of this report. The value of regional ecosystem classification systems as a foundation for sustainable resource management has been recognized for at least four decades in Canada; they provide a means of presenting and understanding biophysical patterns in a geographic context, and a common basis for communication. The Government of the Northwest Territories has used the national ecosystem classification framework since 1996 as the basis for identifying candidate protected areas, forest management planning, wildlife habitat management and environmental impact assessment and mitigation. Increasing pressures from non-renewable resource development in the southern portion of the Taiga Plains, and the planned Mackenzie Gas Project along the Mackenzie River corridor prompted an evaluation of the national framework within the Taiga Plains and Boreal Plains Ecozones that together comprised most of the south-central Northwest Territories south of tree line and lying between the mountains on the west and the Canadian Shield to the east. This evaluation, undertaken in 2004, concluded that the national framework was appropriate for these purposes and suggested changes to improve its usability. Recommended changes included the re-assignment of ecosystem units that were part of the 1995 Taiga Plains to adjacent geographic areas, the re-assignment of Boreal Plains ecosystem units within the Northwest Territories to the Taiga Plains, and the creation of new ecosystem units to better reflect regional climatic, physiographic and biotic variations (Downing 2004). Proposed revisions to the classification system were modeled and assessed through a series of workshops in 2004, 2005 and 2006 at which experts from the Government of the Northwest Territories, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, and consulting firms participated. A variety of spatial data sources including Landsat imagery, digital elevation models, hydrology, permafrost, bedrock and surficial geology, soils, and interpolated climate models were brought together iii within a geographic information system. This information allowed participants to view landscapes and existing mapped ecosystem units from a number of different perspectives. Air and ground verification of the proposed changes was an integral part of the revision process. In the summer of 2005, an intensive float plane and helicopter survey was undertaken throughout the entire Taiga Plains, including the eastern border of the Taiga Cordillera, the western border of the Taiga Shield, and the southern boundary of the Southern Arctic. Over 35,000 km of transects were flown, and a detailed and large-scale record of landscape features was captured in over 16,000 geographically located digital images accompanied by text commentaries; site, vegetation and soil information was also collected from 57 ground plots. Both the photographs and thematic maps derived from the commentaries proved to be indispensable for the revision process. This report and the accompanying map (map pocket inside back cover and Appendix 3) provide a summary of ecoregions within the Taiga Plains. Better spatial information and an improved understanding of climate and landscape patterns and processes through intensive aerial surveys have resulted in the delineation of 45 Level IV1 ecoregions within the Taiga Plains, compared with 16 ecoregions described by the Ecological Stratification Working Group in 1995. Some significant re-assignments
Recommended publications
  • Yukon College Student Survey Results

    Yukon College Student Survey Results

    Yukon College Student Survey Results 2014-15 Dawn Macdonald Institutional Research and Planning Officer December 24, 2014 Yukon College Student Survey Results: 2014-15 TABLE OF CONTENTS HIGHLIGHTS ...................................................................................................................................................... 3 PURPOSE AND METHODS ............................................................................................................................. 5 RESULTS .............................................................................................................................................................. 6 STUDENT SATISFACTION ............................................................................................................................................ 6 More than nine out of ten would recommend their program or courses .................................... 6 Nearly everyone is satisfied with the quality of instruction ............................................................. 7 More than nine out of ten are satisfied with course content ........................................................... 7 Nine out of ten are satisfied with support services ............................................................................. 8 Nine out of ten are satisfied with program advising and library resources ............................... 9 Satisfaction with spaces for group work lags behind satisfaction with social spaces and study spaces ...................................................................................................................................................
  • Geographic Patterns in Morphometric and Genetic Variation for Coyote Populations with Emphasis on Southeastern Coyotes

    Geographic Patterns in Morphometric and Genetic Variation for Coyote Populations with Emphasis on Southeastern Coyotes

    Received: 19 March 2018 | Revised: 2 December 2018 | Accepted: 20 December 2018 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.4966 ORIGINAL RESEARCH Geographic patterns in morphometric and genetic variation for coyote populations with emphasis on southeastern coyotes Joseph W. Hinton1 | Elizabeth Heppenheimer2 | Kyla M. West3 | Danny Caudill4 | Melissa L. Karlin5 | John C. Kilgo6 | John Joseph Mayer7 | Karl V. Miller1 | Margaret Walch8 | Bridgett vonHoldt2 | Michael J. Chamberlain1 1Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, Abstract Georgia Prior to 1900, coyotes (Canis latrans) were restricted to the western and central re- 2 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary gions of North America, but by the early 2000s, coyotes became ubiquitous through- Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey out the eastern United States. Information regarding morphological and genetic 3Tacoma, Washington structure of coyote populations in the southeastern United States is limited, and 4 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation where data exist, they are rarely compared to those from other regions of North Commission, Gainesville, Florida America. We assessed geographic patterns in morphology and genetics of coyotes 5Department of Physics and Environmental Sciences, St. Mary’s University, San Antonio, with special consideration of coyotes in the southeastern United States. Mean body Texas mass of coyote populations increased along a west‐to‐east gradient, with southeast- 6United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Southern ern coyotes being intermediate to western and northeastern coyotes. Similarly, prin- Research Station, New Ellenton, South cipal component analysis of body mass and linear body measurements suggested Carolina that southeastern coyotes were intermediate to western and northeastern coyotes in 7United States Department of Energy, Environmental Sciences, and body size but exhibited shorter tails and ears from other populations.
  • Ecoregions of New England Forested Land Cover, Nutrient-Poor Frigid and Cryic Soils (Mostly Spodosols), and Numerous High-Gradient Streams and Glacial Lakes

    Ecoregions of New England Forested Land Cover, Nutrient-Poor Frigid and Cryic Soils (Mostly Spodosols), and Numerous High-Gradient Streams and Glacial Lakes

    58. Northeastern Highlands The Northeastern Highlands ecoregion covers most of the northern and mountainous parts of New England as well as the Adirondacks in New York. It is a relatively sparsely populated region compared to adjacent regions, and is characterized by hills and mountains, a mostly Ecoregions of New England forested land cover, nutrient-poor frigid and cryic soils (mostly Spodosols), and numerous high-gradient streams and glacial lakes. Forest vegetation is somewhat transitional between the boreal regions to the north in Canada and the broadleaf deciduous forests to the south. Typical forest types include northern hardwoods (maple-beech-birch), northern hardwoods/spruce, and northeastern spruce-fir forests. Recreation, tourism, and forestry are primary land uses. Farm-to-forest conversion began in the 19th century and continues today. In spite of this trend, Ecoregions denote areas of general similarity in ecosystems and in the type, quality, and 5 level III ecoregions and 40 level IV ecoregions in the New England states and many Commission for Environmental Cooperation Working Group, 1997, Ecological regions of North America – toward a common perspective: Montreal, Commission for Environmental Cooperation, 71 p. alluvial valleys, glacial lake basins, and areas of limestone-derived soils are still farmed for dairy products, forage crops, apples, and potatoes. In addition to the timber industry, recreational homes and associated lodging and services sustain the forested regions economically, but quantity of environmental resources; they are designed to serve as a spatial framework for continue into ecologically similar parts of adjacent states or provinces. they also create development pressure that threatens to change the pastoral character of the region.
  • The Eastern Africa Coastal Forests Ecoregion

    The Eastern Africa Coastal Forests Ecoregion

    The Eastern Africa Coastal Forests Ecoregion Strategic Framework for Conservation 2005 – 2025 Strategic Framework for Conservation (2005–2025) The Eastern Afrca Coastal Forests Ecoregon Strategc Framework for Conservaton 2005–2025 The Eastern Africa Coastal Forests Ecoregion Publshed August 2006 Editor: Kimunya Mugo Design and layout: Anthony Mwangi Cover design: Kimunya Mugo Front cover main photo: WWF-EARPO / John SALEHE Front cover other photos: WWF-UK / Brent STIRTON / Getty Images Back cover photo: WWF-EARPO / John SALEHE Photos: John Salehe, David Maingi and Neil Burgess or as credited. © Graphics (2006) WWF-EARPO. All rights reserved. The material and geographic designations in this report do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of WWF concerning the legal status of any country, territory or area or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers and boundaries. WWF Eastern Africa Regional Programme Office ACS Plaza, Lenana Road P.O. Box 62440-00200 Nairobi, Kenya Tel: +254 20 3877355, 3872630/1 Fax: +254 20 3877389 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.panda.org/earpo Strategic Framework for Conservation (2005–2025) Contents Acknowledgements......................................................................................................... iv Foreword........................................................................................................................... v Lst of abbrevatons and acronyms.............................................................................. v A new approach to
  • Grasslands 4/16/03 3:46 PM

    Grasslands 4/16/03 3:46 PM

    Ecoregion: Grasslands 4/16/03 3:46 PM Grasslands INTRODUCTION About 25% of Earth’s land surface is covered by temperate grassland. These large expanses of flat or hilly country cover much of North America, as well as large areas of Europe, Asia, and South America. Most grasslands are found in the interiors of continents, where there is too little rainfall for a forest but too much rain for a desert. Art Explosion Art Explosion Rolling hills covered with grasses and very few trees A few scattered trees are found on savannas, are typical of North American grassland prairies. tropical grasslands of Africa. Temperate grasslands have subtle differences and different names throughout the world. Prairies and plains of North America are grasslands with tall grasses, while the steppes of Russia are grasslands with short grasses. Veldts are found in South Africa, the puszta in Hungary, and the pampas in Argentina and Uruguay. Savannas are tropical grasslands that support scattered trees and shrubs. They often form a transitional biome file:///Ecoregion/grass/content.html Page 1 of 6 Ecoregion: Grasslands 4/16/03 3:46 PM between deserts and rain forests. Some temperate grasslands are also called savannas. The word savanna comes from the Spanish word zavanna, meaning “treeless plain.” Savannas cover almost half of Africa (mostly central Africa) and large areas of Australia and South America. ABIOTIC DATA The grassland climate is rather dry, averaging about 20 to 100 centimeters (8–40 inches) of precipitation a year. Summers are very hot and may reach 45°C (113°F). Winter temperatures often fall below freezing, which is 0°C (32°F).
  • The Alaska-Yukon Region of the Circumboreal Vegetation Map (CBVM)

    The Alaska-Yukon Region of the Circumboreal Vegetation Map (CBVM)

    CAFF Strategy Series Report September 2015 The Alaska-Yukon Region of the Circumboreal Vegetation Map (CBVM) ARCTIC COUNCIL Acknowledgements CAFF Designated Agencies: • Norwegian Environment Agency, Trondheim, Norway • Environment Canada, Ottawa, Canada • Faroese Museum of Natural History, Tórshavn, Faroe Islands (Kingdom of Denmark) • Finnish Ministry of the Environment, Helsinki, Finland • Icelandic Institute of Natural History, Reykjavik, Iceland • Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Greenland • Russian Federation Ministry of Natural Resources, Moscow, Russia • Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Stockholm, Sweden • United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, Alaska CAFF Permanent Participant Organizations: • Aleut International Association (AIA) • Arctic Athabaskan Council (AAC) • Gwich’in Council International (GCI) • Inuit Circumpolar Council (ICC) • Russian Indigenous Peoples of the North (RAIPON) • Saami Council This publication should be cited as: Jorgensen, T. and D. Meidinger. 2015. The Alaska Yukon Region of the Circumboreal Vegetation map (CBVM). CAFF Strategies Series Report. Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna, Akureyri, Iceland. ISBN: 978- 9935-431-48-6 Cover photo: Photo: George Spade/Shutterstock.com Back cover: Photo: Doug Lemke/Shutterstock.com Design and layout: Courtney Price For more information please contact: CAFF International Secretariat Borgir, Nordurslod 600 Akureyri, Iceland Phone: +354 462-3350 Fax: +354 462-3390 Email: [email protected] Internet: www.caff.is CAFF Designated
  • Fact Sheet- Central California Coast Ecoregion

    Fact Sheet- Central California Coast Ecoregion

    California State Wildlife Action Plan (SWAP) 2015 Central California Coast Region Annual and Perennial Grassland Habitat About Our Region and the Grassland Habitat Annual grassland habitats are open grasslands composed primarily of annual plant species such as introduced annual grasses and forbs. Annual grasslands also occur as understory plants in Valley Oak Woodland and other habitats. Perennial grassland habitats occur as coastal prairie and interspersed within annual grasslands. Vernal pools also are an important habitat component of many grassland systems. The structure of grasslands depends upon prevailing weather patterns and grazing. A number of wildlife species spend their entire life within grasslands while others use grasslands for foraging and breeding. What are the sensitive species found in the grassland habitat? The following 32 grassland dependent species from this region are found to be sensitive: Amphibian [3] CALIFORNIA TIGER SALAMANDER WESTERN SPADEFOOT RED-LEGGED FROG Reptile [1] BLUNT-NOSED LEOPARD LIZARD Bird [15] BURROWING OWL NORTHERN HARRIER CALIFORNIA CONDOR OREGON VESPER SPARROW GIANT KANGAROO RAT PURPLE MARTIN GRASSHOPPER SPARROW SAND-HILL CRANE GOLDEN EAGLE SHORT-EARED OWL LOGGERHEAD SHRIKE SWAINSON’S HAWK LONG-BILLED CURLEW TRICOLORED BLACKBIRD MOUNTAIN PLOVER Mammal [13] BIG FREE-TAILED BAT PALLID SAN DIEGO POCKET MOUSE CALIFORNIA LEAF-NOSED BAT POCKETED FREE-TAILED BATRINGTAIL HOARY BAT SOUTHERN GRASSHOPPER MOUSE JACUMBA POCKET MOUSE SAN JOAQUIN KIT FOX LONG-EARED MYOTIS TOWNSEND BIG- EARED BAT MAINLAND
  • Compendium of Research in the Northwest Territories 2014

    Compendium of Research in the Northwest Territories 2014

    Compendium of Research in the Northwest Territories 2014 www.nwtresearch.com This publication is a collaboration between the Aurora Research Institute, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Fisheries and Oceans Canada and the Prince of Wales Northern Heritage Centre. Thank you to all who submitted a summary of research or photographs, and helped make this publication possible. Editor: Ashley Mercer Copyright © 2015 ISSN: 1205-3910 Printed by Aurora Research Institute Foreword Welcome to the 2014 Compendium of Research in the Northwest Territories. This year marked a special anniversary for the Aurora Research Institute and northern research. Fifty years ago, the Inuvik Research Laboratory was built and has served as a hub for research in the western arctic ever since. The Lab, as it was known, was first built as an initiative of the Canadian federal government in the newly established community of Inuvik. It remains on the same site today, but in 2011, a new modern multi-purpose facility opened to continue to support research in the north. We have included a brief history of the Lab and its impact in this edition of the Compendium to mark its long lasting importance to many researchers and community members. As part of the 50th anniversary celebration, the Aurora Research Institute team undertook a full set of NWT-wide celebrations. We celebrated the history, capacity and growth of research in the NWT that touched all corners of the territory and beyond. We honoured the significant scientific contributions that have taken place in the NWT over the past 50 years, and the role of NWT researchers, technicians and citizens in these accomplishments.
  • Évolution Spatio-Temporelle Du Pergélisol Alpin Marginal Au Mont Jacques-Cartier, Massif Des Chic-Chocs, Gaspésie (Qc)

    Évolution Spatio-Temporelle Du Pergélisol Alpin Marginal Au Mont Jacques-Cartier, Massif Des Chic-Chocs, Gaspésie (Qc)

    Université de Montréal Évolution spatio-temporelle du pergélisol alpin marginal au mont Jacques-Cartier, massif des Chic-Chocs, Gaspésie (Qc) par Gautier DAVESNE Département de Géographie Faculté des arts et sciences Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des arts et des sciences en vue de l’obtention du grade de maîtrise en géographie Août 2015 © Gautier Davesne, 2015 ii Université de Montréal Faculté des études supérieures et postdoctorales Ce mémoire intitulé : Évolution spatio-temporelle du pergélisol alpin marginal au mont Jacques-Cartier, massif des Chic- Chocs, Gaspésie (Qc) Présenté par : Gautier Davesne a été évalué par un jury composé des personnes suivantes : François Cavayas, président rapporteur Daniel Fortier, directeur de recherche James Gray, membre du jury iii iv Résumé L’objectif de ce mémoire est d’acquérir une connaissance détaillée sur l’évolution spatiale de la température de surface du sol (GST) au mont Jacques-Cartier et sur la réponse thermique de son îlot de pergélisol alpin aux changements climatiques passés et futurs. L’étude est basée sur un ensemble de mesures de température (GST, sous-sol) et de neige, ainsi que des modèles spatiaux de distribution potentielle de la GST et des simulations numériques du régime thermique du sol. Les résultats montrent que la distribution de la GST sur le plateau est principalement corrélée avec la répartition du couvert nival. Au-dessus de la limite de la végétation, le plateau est caractérisé par un couvert de neige peu épais et discontinu en hiver en raison de la topographie du site et l’action des forts vents. La GST est alors couplée avec les températures de l’air amenant des conditions froides en surface.
  • Deforestation in Central Saskatchewan

    Deforestation in Central Saskatchewan

    DEFORESTATION IN CENTRAL SASKATCHEWAN: EFFECTS ON LANDSCAPE STRUCTURE AND ECOSYSTEM CARBON DENSITIES A Thesis Submitted to the College ofGraduate Studies and Research in Partial Fulfilment ofthe Requirements for the Degree ofDoctor ofPhilosophy in the Department ofPlant Sciences University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon By Michael Joseph Fitzsimmons Spring, 2003 © Copyright Michael Joseph Fitzsimmons, 2002. All rights reserved. PERMISSION TO USE In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment ofthe requirements for a Postgraduate degree from the University of Saskatchewan, I agree that the Libraries of this University may make it freely available for inspection. I further agree that permission for copying ofthis thesis in any manner, in whole or in part, for scholarly purposes may be granted by the professor or professors who supervised my thesis work or, in their absence, by the Head ofthe Department or the Dean ofthe College in which my thesis work was done. It is understood that any copying or publication or use ofthis thesis or parts thereof for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. It is also understood that due recognition shall be given to me and to the University of Saskatchewan in any scholarly use which may be made ofany material in my thesis. Requests for permission to copy or to make other use ofmaterial in this thesis in whole or part should be addressed to: Head ofthe Department ofPlant Sciences University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7H 5A8 ABSTRACT Deforestation is recognized as a serious global problem that contributes to biodiversity loss, soil degradation and atmospheric change. This thesis is an investigation ofdeforestation in central Saskatchewan.
  • Download Delinedistrict Map 11X17

    Download Delinedistrict Map 11X17

    Sahtu Land Use Plan - Draft 3 Land Use Zones - Deline District Inuvialuit Settlement Region Colville Tso Gah Tuktut Nogait Upland Lakes Nunavut ¹ Horton Lake Maunoir Dome Aubrey Lake Great Bear & Dunedelatue Lake Lake Watershed Anderson River Colville Lake ^^ Lac Belot Lac Des Bois Dene Di Gon'e Neregah (NorthShore) Edaññla Underground River Sentinel Islands Sentinel Islands Great Bear Lake Watershed Hare Indian Tunago Lake Nerehtene Lake Great Bear Lake Watershed Lac a Jacques Sentinel Islands Edacho Sam McRae Sentinel Islands Great Bear Turton Lake Lake Watershed Norman Range Doctor Lake Sentinel Islands Oscar Kelly and Mahoney Whitefish River Lake Lennie Lake Lake Kelly Lake Great Bear Lake Watershed Protected Area Willow Lake Sahyoue ^^ Tlicho Norman Wells Wetlands ^^ Agreement Area Willow Lake Wetlands Deline Three Day Lake Great Bear Great Bear River Canol Heritage Trail Bear Rock Lake Watershed ^ Mountain ^ Lakes Tulita Great Bear Lake Watershed Mackay, Rusty Plains of and Yellow Lakes Abraham Mio Lake Johnny Hoe River (Teh Kaicho Dé) Stewart and Mackenzie Mountains Tate Lakes Shúhtagot'ine Néné Red Dog Mountain Mackenzie R. Mackenzie Mountains Shúhtagot'ine Néné 0 50 100 200 Kilometers Mackenzie Mountains ^^ Sahtu Towns Community Boundary District Boundaries Conservation Zones Rivers and Streams General Use Zones Lakes and Large Rivers National Park/Historic Sites Sahtu Settlement Area Boundary Proposed Conservation Initiatives Special Management Zones.
  • Thermopolis Rural Resource Team Assessment Report

    Thermopolis Rural Resource Team Assessment Report

    TABLE OF CONTENTS Thermopolis Resource Report September 16-18, 2003 1. Process for the Development of This Report…………………………..pg. 3 2. Executive Summary…………………………………………………… pg. 4 3. Profiles of Thermopolis………………………………………………..pg. 5 4. Resource Team Member………………………………………………..pg. 18 5. Local Coordination………..……………………………………………pg. 19 6. Interview Agenda/Tour…………………………………………………pg. 20 7. Major Themes and Sub themes…………………………………………pg. 25 8. Team Members Recommendations……………………………………..pg. 28 9. Team Member Recommendations in Matrix Form…………………..…pg. 63 10. What Was Said………………………..………………………………..pg. 97 11. Appendix….……………………………………………………………pg. 169 20 Clues to Rural Community Survival Population and Aging Charts Any recommendations contained herein are not mandatory. The Wyoming Rural Development Council has not endorsed any recommendations and opinions contained herein. Neither the WRDC, nor any of its employees, contract labor, committee chairs, and/or members makes any warranty, express or implied, including warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, or assumes any legal liability for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of this report or any information, recommendations, or opinions contained herein. 1 THE WYOMING RURAL DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL The Wyoming Rural Development Council is a collaborative public/private partnership that brings together six partner groups: local/regional government, state government, federal government, tribal government, non-profit organizations and private sector individuals and organizations.