DOCSLIB.ORG

Canada: the State of the World's Forest Genetic Resources

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Canada: the State of the World's Forest Genetic Resources CANADA This country report is prepared as a contribution to the FAO publication, The Report on the State of the World’s Forest Genetic Resources. The content and the structure are in accordance with the recommendations and guidelines given by FAO in the document Guidelines for Preparation of Country Reports for the State of the World’s Forest Genetic Resources (2010). These guidelines set out recommendations for the objective, scope and structure of the country reports. Countries were requested to consider the current state of knowledge of forest genetic diversity, including: Between and within species diversity List of priority species; their roles and values and importance List of threatened/endangered species Threats, opportunities and challenges for the conservation, use and development of forest genetic resources These reports were submitted to FAO as official government documents. The report is presented on www. fao.org/documents as supportive and contextual information to be used in conjunction with other documentation on world forest genetic resources. The content and the views expressed in this report are the responsibility of the entity submitting the report to FAO. FAO may not be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained in this report. Report On The State of Canada’s Forest Genetic Resources April 2012 Preparation of the report The report was prepared by: Tannis Beardmore Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service – Atlantic Region, Hugh John Fleming Forestry Centre, 1350 Regent St. S. PO 4000, Fredericton, New Brunswick, E3G 5P7. E-mail: [email protected] Kathleen Forbes Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service – Atlantic Region, Hugh John Fleming Forestry Centre, 1350 Regent St. S. PO 4000, Fredericton, New Brunswick, E3G 5P7. E-mail: [email protected] Dale Simpson Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service – Atlantic Region, Hugh John Fleming Forestry Centre, 1350 Regent St. S. PO 4000, Fredericton, New Brunswick, E3G 5P7. E-mail: [email protected] Martin Williams Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service – Atlantic Region, Hugh John Fleming Forestry Centre, 1350 Regent St. S. PO 4000, Fredericton, New Brunswick, E3G 5P7. E-mail: [email protected] Beth Arsenault 775 MacLaren Ave., Fredericton, New Brunswick. With contributions from members of CONFORGEN Steering Committee: Leonard Barnhardt Alberta Sustainable Resource Development Tree Improvement and Seed Centre PO Box 750 Smoky Lake, AB, T0A 3C0 E-mail: [email protected] Gord Falk Manitoba Conservation - Forestry Branch PO Box 27, Group 8, RR 2 Dugald, MB, R0E 0K0 E-mail: [email protected] Vicki Gauthier Silviculture Expert Forest Service, Ministry of Environment P.O. Box 3003, Prince Albert, SK, S6V 6G1 E-mail: [email protected] 2 Michée Lemieux Department of Natural Resources PO Box 68 Truro, NS, B2N 5B8 E-mail: [email protected] Barry Linehan Department of Natural Resources Wooddale Provincial Tree nursery Grand Falls-Windsor, NL, A2A 2K2 E-mail: [email protected] Brenda McAfee Wildlife and Landscape Science Environment Canada National Wildlife Research Centre 1125 Colonel By Drive Ottawa, ON, K1S 5B6 E-mail: [email protected] Mary Myers Department of Agriculture & Forestry PO Box 2000 Charlottetown, PE, C1A 7N8 E-mail: [email protected] Andre Rainville Ministère des Ressources naturelles et de la Faune 2700, rue Einstein Québec, QC, G1P 3W8 E-mail: [email protected] Robin Sharples Energy, Mines and Resources Forest Management Branch PO Box 2703 (K918) Whitehorse, YT, Y1A 2C6 E-mail: [email protected] Yuhui Weng Department of Natural Resources 3732 Route 102 Island View, NB, E3E 1G3 E-mail: [email protected] Jack Woods Forest Genetics Council of British Columbia and SelectSeed Co. Ltd. 3250 West 15th Avenue Vancouver, BC, V6K 3A9 E-mail: [email protected] The contributions of Caroline Simpson, Debby Barsi, and Jessica Thomson, Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service are gratefully acknowledged. 3 Contents Preface 5 Executive Summary 6 Introduction 10 1. The Current State of Forest Genetic Resources 17 1.1 Diversity Within and Between Forest Tree Species 17 1.2 The Main Value of Forest Genetic Resources 34 1.3 Factors Influencing the State of Forest Genetic Resources 68 1.4 Future Needs and Priorities 72 2. The State of In Situ Genetic Conservation 87 3. The State of Ex Situ Conservation 103 4. The State and Use of Sustainable Management of Forest Genetic Resources 110 4.1 Genetic Improvement programs and their implementation 110 4.2 Delivery/Deployment Systems: Availability of Reproductive Materials 118 5. The State of National Programs, Research, Education, Training and Legislation 120 5.1 National Programs 120 5.2 Education, Research and Training 131 5.3 Information Systems 132 5.4 Public Awareness 132 6. The State of Regional and International Collaboration 137 6.1 Regional and Sub-Regional Thematic Forest Genetic Resource Networks 137 in Canada 6.2 International Programs 138 6.3 International Agreements 139 7. Access to Forest Genetic Resources and Sharing of Benefits Arising From Their Use 146 7.1 Access to Forest Genetic Resources 146 7.2 Benefits Arising Out of the Use of Forest Genetic Resources 148 8. Contribution of Forest Genetic Resources to Food Security, Poverty Alleviation, 150 and Sustainable Development 4 Preface Scientific names used through out the report are the current (2012) accepted names according to the Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS). Chapter 1, Table 1.13B. Shrub species scientific names are according to Wild Species Canada. Information presented in this report was obtained through literature searches, personal communication with experts and reflects the data that is available as of 2012 unless otherwise stated. A jurisdictional survey was conducted with participation from Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Quebec and Saskatchewan, in order to obtain data pertaining to such areas as ex situ and in situ conservation and this data is current as of 2010. 5 Executive Summary Canada is one of a few countries that still have large tracts of forests that are relatively undisturbed by human activity and are believed to contain much of their native biodiversity. In Canada approximately 400 million hectares of land is forested or has forest cover, representing 10% of the world’s forest cover and 30% of the world’s boreal forest. Of this forested land, 93% is owned by the public (77% provincial/territorial and 16% federal), while the remaining 7% belongs to private landowners who range from woodlot owners to forest companies. The provinces and territories have legislative authority over the management and conservation of provincial/territorial owned forest land. The federal government is responsible for matters related to the national economy, trade and international relations, and federal lands and parks, and has constitutional, treaty, political and legal responsibilities related to Aboriginal peoples. Forest ecosystems in Canada contain approximately 126 native tree species, depending on the definition of large shrub vs. small tree. In general, actions taken to survey and inventory intraspecific variation of tree species vary greatly depending on the organization conducting the work and much of the research assessing intraspecific variation is collaborative across various federal and provincial agencies, universities, and industry. Organizations such as the Canadian Forest Genetics Association (formerly the Canadian Tree Improvement Association, which was established in 1939) have had a significant impact in fostering collaborations to—among other research areas—assess intraspecific variation within Canada. Also the pan-Canadian group CONFORGEN (Canadian program for the Conservation of Forest Genetic Resources), a federal–provincial/territorial collaborative group that monitors and reports on genetic resources of native tree species in support of Canada’s national and international commitments promotes, where possible, research assessing intraspecific variation. At a national level, information systems that contain data pertaining to intraspecific variation include NatureServe Explorer and the Canadian Forest Genetic Resources Information System (CAFGRIS) which is deployed through the National Forest Information System. Many jurisdictions and universities maintain databases with information pertaining to intraspecific genetic variation patterns (e.g. University of British Columbia’s Centre for Forest Conservation Genetics and Arborea (Laval University)). Improving the understanding of intraspecific variation is recognized as important for the sustainable management of forest genetic resources. It is recognized that monitoring changes below the species level provides necessary information for ensuring that the species’ adaptive potential is maintained so that species can evolve in response to changing environmental conditions. Ensuring that species can respond to environmental change is a priority for much of the forest genetic resources research conducted within Canada. Furthermore, although it is recognized that landscape-level management of forest genetic resources will ensure the conservation of genetic diversity in some cases, there are forest types occurring over small areas where this approach is not appropriate. Capacity building needs include stable investments in research to develop methods for assessing interspecific
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Willows of Interior Alaska
    1 Willows of Interior Alaska Dominique M. Collet US Fish and Wildlife Service 2004 2 Willows of Interior Alaska Acknowledgements The development of this willow guide has been made possible thanks to funding from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service- Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge - order 70181-12-M692. Funding for printing was made available through a collaborative partnership of Natural Resources, U.S. Army Alaska, Department of Defense; Pacific North- west Research Station, U.S. Forest Service, Department of Agriculture; National Park Service, and Fairbanks Fish and Wildlife Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior; and Bonanza Creek Long Term Ecological Research Program, University of Alaska Fairbanks. The data for the distribution maps were provided by George Argus, Al Batten, Garry Davies, Rob deVelice, and Carolyn Parker. Carol Griswold, George Argus, Les Viereck and Delia Person provided much improvement to the manuscript by their careful editing and suggestions. I want to thank Delia Person, of the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge, for initiating and following through with the development and printing of this guide. Most of all, I am especially grateful to Pamela Houston whose support made the writing of this guide possible. Any errors or omissions are solely the responsibility of the author. Disclaimer This publication is designed to provide accurate information on willows from interior Alaska. If expert knowledge is required, services of an experienced botanist should be sought. Contents
    [Show full text]
  • Major Indicator Shrubs and Herbs in Riparian Zones on National Forests of Central Oregon
    United States Department of Major Indicator Shrubs and Agriculture Herbs in Riparian Zones on Forest Service National Forests of Pacific Northwest Central Oregon. Region by Bernard L. Kovaichik William E. Hopkins and Steven J. Brunsfeld Major Indicator Shrubs and Herbs in Riparian Zones on National Forests of Central Oregon By Bernard L. Kovaichik, Area IV Riparian Ecologist William E. Hopkins, Area IV Area Ecologist and Steven J. Brunsfeld, University of Idaho June, 1988 1988 USDA - Forest Service Pacific Northwest Region R6-ECOL-TP-005-88 I Acknowledgements: The authors wish to thank all those who kindlydonated their time to this publication. Thanks to Bill Hopkins and Rob Rawlings for blazingthe trail with their "Major indicator shrubs and herbson National Forests in eastern Oregon" (Hopkins and Rawlings, 1985). They developedthe format for this style of guide."Major indicator shrubs and herbs on National Forests of western Oregon and southwestern Washington"(Halverson and others, 1986) follows a similar format andwas another resource for developing this guide. Thanks to Carl Burke for illustrating some of thesketches in the glossary and Nancy Halverson, Linda Newman and Nancy Shaw forediting the document.Thanks to David Mattson for his sketch of eastwood willow. Photo credits: Bernard L. Kovalchik Steven J. Brunsfeld Wayne D. Padgett Line drawings used by permission from: Hitchcock, C. L., A. Cronquist, M. Ownberg and J. W. Thompson.1977. Vascular plants of the Pacific Northwest. Vol. 1-5. Univ. of Washington Press. Seattle. 2978p. Brunsfeld, S. J. and F. D. Johnson. 1985. Field guide to thewillows of east-central Idaho. Forest, Wildlife, and Range Experiment Station Bull.
    [Show full text]
  • A Guide to the Identification of Salix (Willows) in Alberta
    A Guide to the identification of Salix (willows) in Alberta George W. Argus 2008 Devonian Botanical Garden Workshop on willow identification Jasper National Park, Alberta 2 Available from: George W. Argus 310 Haskins Rd, Merrickville R3, Ontario, Canada K0G 1N0 email: [email protected] http://aknhp.uaa.alaska.edu/willow/index.html 3 CONTENTS Preface............................................................................................................................... 5 Salicaceae ...........…………………...........……........................................……..........…. 8 Classification ..........……………….…..….................................................….............…. 9 Some Useful Morphological Characters .......................................................….............. 11 Key to the Species.............................................................................................................13 Taxonomic Treatment .........................................................…..……….………............ 18 Glossary .....………………………………………....…..................………...........….... 61 Cited and Selected References ......................................................................................... 64 Salix Web Sites ...................……..................................……..................……............…. 68 Distribution Maps ............................................................................................................ 69 TABLES Table 1. Comparison of Salix athabascensis and Salix pedicellaris ..............................
    [Show full text]
  • Part 2 – Fruticose Species
    Appendix 5.2-1 Vegetation Technical Appendix APPENDIX 5.2‐1 Vegetation Technical Appendix Contents Section Page Ecological Land Classification ............................................................................................................ A5.2‐1‐1 Geodatabase Development .............................................................................................. A5.2‐1‐1 Vegetation Community Mapping ..................................................................................... A5.2‐1‐1 Quality Assurance and Quality Control ............................................................................ A5.2‐1‐3 Limitations of Ecological Land Classification .................................................................... A5.2‐1‐3 Field Data Collection ......................................................................................................... A5.2‐1‐3 Supplementary Results ..................................................................................................... A5.2‐1‐4 Rare Vegetation Species and Rare Ecological Communities ........................................................... A5.2‐1‐10 Supplementary Desktop Results ..................................................................................... A5.2‐1‐10 Field Methods ................................................................................................................. A5.2‐1‐16 Supplementary Results ................................................................................................... A5.2‐1‐17 Weed Species
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix B. General Wetland Class and Association Descriptions
    BC Hydro – Site C Wetlands Baseline and Construction Monitoring EcoLogic Consultants Ltd. APPENDIX B. GENERAL WETLAND CLASS AND ASSOCIATION DESCRIPTIONS :ĂŶƵĂƌLJ 201ϵ General Wetland Class and Association Descriptions | 2 APPENDIX B. GENERAL WETLAND CLASS AND ASSOCIATION DESCRIPTIONS Appendix B provides a summary of the typical characteristics of the wetland classes and associations sampled during the 2018 field season. B.1. Bog A bog is a nutrient-poor, Sphagnum-dominated peatland ecosystem in which the rooting zone is isolated from mineral-enriched groundwater, soils are acidic, and few minerotrophic plant species occur. Bogs generally occur on hummocks or raised domes and may contain a cover of slow-growing woody, ericaceous shrubs, or small stunted trees. A thick cover of Sphagnum (peat moss) is dominant, while other species that are tolerant of acidic, low-nutrient conditions also occur. Bogs often occur in closed basins (where precipitation is the primary water source), on the edges of larger peatlands, or as raised domes (normally within fens). Soils are generally deep peat deposits (although peat veneers can occur at immature, fen/bog stages) with poorly decomposed upper layers that remain saturated throughout the year. While some groundwater flow may occur, it is generally limited and confined to the lower organic tiers, resulting in little input of nutrients to plants growing on the bog surface (MacKenzie and Moran 2004). B.1.1. Wb03 Black spruce - Lingonberry - Peat-moss bog The Wb03 Black spruce - Lingonberry - Peat-moss bog is a Blue-listed ecosystem that occurs in various areas throughout northern BC (MacKenzie and Moran 2004). It occurs in depressions or stagnant portions of larger wetland complexes, where little groundwater movement occurs.
    [Show full text]
  • Alaska Natural Heritage Program National Park Service Alaska
    GLACIER BAY NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE VASCULAR PLANT INVENTORY GLACIER BAY NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE VASCULAR PLANT INVENTORY FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT Matthew L. Carlson, Keith Boggs, Robert Lipkin, & Julie A. Michaelson Alaska Natural Heritage Program Environment and Natural Resources Institute University of Alaska Anchorage 707 A Street Anchorage, Alaska 99501 National Park Service Alaska Region Inventory & Monitoring Program NPS Report : April 2004 Cooperative Agreement No. 1443CA991000013 Funding Source: National Park Service, Inventory & Monitoring Program 1 GLACIER BAY NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE VASCULAR PLANT INVENTORY ABSTRACT In 2001 and 2003 the Alaska Natural Heritage Program (AKNHP) conducted vascular plant field inventories in Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve in accordance with a cooperative agreement with the National Park Service. The primary goal was to document greater than 90% of the vascular plant species expected to occur within the park and significantly improve our understanding of current species distributions. The inventory targeted diverse habitat types and poorly-sampled areas. The AKNHP staff visited eight diverse ecogeographic regions and sampled intensively within these regions from late June to mid-August, 2001 and late June to early July in 2003. A total of 555 specimens were collected, recorded, pressed, and curated. Of the 333 individual taxa, 172 are new records for the park and an additional 44 represent verifications of previously unverified reports. A number of finds were significant range extensions or taxa of conservation concern. Collections were made of four globally restricted species: Botrychium ascendens (G2G3-S2 AKNHP rank), Platanthera chorisiana (G3-S3), Eleocharis kamtschatica (G4-S2S3), and Salix setchelliana (G4-S3). A number of collections were made of species which are very rare in Alaska, but more widespread in western North America, such as Agoseris aurantiaca, A.
    [Show full text]
  • A Second Annotated Checklist of Vascular Plants in Wells Gray Provincial Park and Vicinity, British Columbia, Canada
    A second annotated checklist of vascular plants in Wells Gray Provincial Park and vicinity, British Columbia, Canada Version 1: April, 2011 Curtis R. Björk1 and Trevor Goward2 ENLICHENED CONSULTING LTD. Box 131, Clearwater, BC, V0E 1N0, Canada [email protected], [email protected] Vascular Plants in Wells Gray SUMMARY Wells Gray Provincial Park is a vast wilderness preserve situated in the mountains and highlands of south-central British Columbia. The first major floristic study of the vascular plants of Wells Gray and its vicinity was published in 1965 by Leena Hämet-Ahti, who documented 550 taxa, including a first Canadian record of Carex praeceptorium. The present study contributes nearly 500 additional taxa documented by us between 1976 and 2010 in connection with our personal explorations of the Clearwater Valley. The vascular flora of Wells Gray Park and vicinity now stands at 1046 taxa, including 881 native species and 165 species introduced from Eurasia and other portions of British Columbia. Wells Gray Park is notable both for the presence of numerous taxa (45) at or near the northern limits of their range, as well as for an unexpectedly high number of taxa (43) accorded conservation status by the British Columbia Conservation Data Centre. Antennaria corymbosa has its only known Canadian locality within Wells Gray, while five additional species reported here are known in Canada from fewer than six localities. About a dozen unknown, possibly undescribed taxa have also been detected. Botanical inventory has thus far been confined to the southern portions of Wells Gray. Future studies in northern half of the park will certainly greatly increase our knowledge of the biological diversity safeguarded in this magnificent wilderness preserve.
    [Show full text]
  • Terrestrial Ecosystem Mapping and Wildlife Interpretations for the Dunedin Study Area
    TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEM MAPPING AND WILDLIFE INTERPRETATIONS FOR THE DUNEDIN STUDY AREA by: for: Ksenia Barton, Linda Veach, Gillian Radcliffe, and Pamela Williams SLOCAN FOREST PRODUCTS LIMITED MADRONE CONSULTANTS LTD. Fort Nelson, B. C. October 1998 Acknowledgments ACKNOWLEDGMENTS A particular thank you is owed to Bob Christie of Slocan Forest Products for making this project possible and for his assistance throughout. We also thank Melanie Clark and Mary Osika for their help in many aspects. This project would not have been possible without the support of Slocan Forest Products and the funding of Forest Renewal British Columbia. Craig DeLong of the Prince George Forest Region provided a great deal of assistance in the classification of the BWBSmw2 and the SWBmk. Del Meidinger and Will MacKenzie of the B.C. Ministry of Forests (MOF) provided advice on mapping the biogeoclimatic units, and on wetland classification, respectively. Ted Lea and Corey Erwin of the B.C. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks (B.C. MOELP) made useful comments on draft ecosystem mapping and on a draft version of this report. Bob Maxwell of the B.C. MOELP did the same for bioterrain mapping. Carmen Cadrin of the B.C. MOELP advised on expanded legend formats. Wayne Blashill audited some plots on behalf of the Prince George Forest Region and provided useful comments. Difficult plant specimens were identified by Terry MacIntosh (vascular plants and bryophytes), Chris Brayshaw (willows), and Trevor Goward (lichens). Additional funding for this was provided by the B.C. MOELP. The Conservation Data Centre provided lists of rare species. Thanks to Lisa Wilkinson, Bruce Harrison, and Andy Stewart of the B.C.
    [Show full text]
  • The Alaska Vegetation Classification
    The Alaska Vegetation Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station General Technical Classification Report PNW-GTR-286 July 1992 L.A. Viereck, CT. Dyrness, A.R. Batten, and K.J. Wenzlick Authors L.A. VIERECK is a principal plant ecologist, C.T. DYRNESS was a research soil scientist (now retired), and K.J. WENZLICK was a secretary (currently is an editorial assistant, Research information Services, Portland, Oregon 97208), ‘Institute of Northern Forestry, 308 Tanana Drive, Fairbanks, Alaska 99775-5500; and A.R. BATTEN is research associate at University of Alaska Museum, Fairbanks, Alaska 99775-l200. Abstract Viereck, L.A.; Dyrness, C.T.; Batten, A.R.; Wenzlick, K.J. 1992. The Alaska vegetation classification. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-286. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 278 p. The Alaska vegetation classification presented here is a comprehensive, statewide system that has been under development since 1976. The classification is based, as much as possible, on the characteristics of the vegetation itself and is designed to categorize existing vegetation, not potential vegetation. A hierarchical system with five levels of resolution is used for classifying Alaska vegetation. The system, an agglomerative one, starts with 888 known Alaska plant communities, which are listed and referenced. At the broadest level of resolution, the system contains three formations-forest, scrub, and herbaceous vegetation. In addition to the classification, this report contains a key to levels I, II, and III; complete descriptions of all level IV units; and a glossary of terms used. Keywords: Vegetation, classification, Alaska, tundra, boreal forest, coastal forest, plant communities.
    [Show full text]
  • The Flora of Prince Albert National Park (An Annotated Catalogue of the Vascular Plants Recorded Within the Park Boundaries)
    THE FLORA OF PRINCE ALBERT NATIONAL PARK (AN ANNOTATED CATALOGUE OF THE VASCULAR PLANTS RECORDED WITHIN THE PARK BOUNDARIES) Compiled by Vernon L. Harms, Emeritus Professor, The W.P. Fraser Herbarium, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK Introduction This constitutes an updated list of the native and naturalized (i.e. non-cultivated) vascular plants that have been recorded within the boundaries of Prince Albert National Park, in central Saskatchewan, Canada. The list is annotated to include common names, synonyms, generalized habitats, and status indications. It is nomenclaturaly updated to include most of the numerous taxonomic innovations proffered during the last decades, except when this compiler has disagreed. An attempt has been made to exclude erroneous reports (see Appendix A) and to list only well validated plant records, mostly substantiated by voucher specimens filed in recognized herbaria. But some probable species confirmed from sites adjacent to, but not within, the park boundaries have been tentatively retained on this list; these are indicated by the symbol, “V?”. Numerous individuals over the last half-century have contributed to the vascular plant list for Prince Albert National Park. These include the provincial compilations by Fraser and Russell, et al (1937, 1944, 1954), and Breitung (1957), and the park listings of Carbyn and Armbruster (1968), Koponen (1973), Gimbarzovsky (1973), Cameron (1975), Gunna, et al. (1976), Padbury, Head, and Souster (1978), Hudson, Syroteuk and Preneman (1981), Brunner (1985), Trottier (1985), Goode (1986), Hudson (1992), Koral (1996), Harms (1996, 1997a, 1997b), Thrasher-Haug (1997), and Pidwerbeski (1997). Of particular recent significance have been the revisions of the park list by John Hudson and Adam Pidwerbeski, with the present list representing an updating and fine-tuning of the latter.
    [Show full text]
  • Canadian Rocky Mountains Ecoregional Assessment
    CANADIAN ROCKY MOUNTAINS ECOREGIONAL ASSESSMENT Volume Two: Appendices British Columbia Conservation Data Centre CANADIAN ROCKY MOUNTAINS ECOREGIONAL ASSESSMENT • VOLUME 2 • APPENDICES i Citation: Rumsey, C., M. Wood, B. Butterfield, P. Comer, D. Hillary, M. Bryer, C. Carroll, G. Kittel, K.J. Torgerson, C. Jean, R. Mullen, P. Iachetti, and J. Lewis. 2003. Canadian Rocky Mountains Ecoregional Assessment, Volume Two: Appendices. Prepared for The Nature Conservancy and the Nature Conservancy of Canada. Cover page photo credits: Top, left to right: The Nature Conservancy of Canada’s Mount Broadwood Conservation Area (Dave Hillary); Water howellia (howellia aquatilis); Grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) (Dave Fraser); Northern Leopard Frog (rana pipiens), Columbia Valley Wildlife Management Area (Dave Hillary); Maligne Lake, Jasper National Park (Pierre Iachetti) Bottom, left to right: Mission Valley, Montana (Marilyn Wood); Palouse Prairie, Idaho (KJ Torgerson); Harlequin duck (histrionicus histrionicus) CANADIAN ROCKY MOUNTAINS ECOREGIONAL ASSESSMENT • VOLUME 2 • APPENDICES ii TABLE OF CONTENTS APPENDIX 1.0 SPECIES CONSERVATION TARGETS...................................................... 1 APPENDIX 1.1 CONSERVATION TARGETS CHARACTERISTICS............................... 23 APPENDIX 1.2 HABITATS/ECOSYSTEMS CONSERVATION TARGETS .................... 24 APPENDIX 1.3 GOALS CAPTURED IN THE CANADIAN ROCKY MOUNTAINS ECOREGIONAL PORTFOLIO ................................................................... 27 APPENDIX 2.0 ECOLOGICAL LAND UNITS
    [Show full text]
  • Framework for Assessing the Vulnerability of Alberta's Biodiversity
    Framework for assessing the vulnerability of Alberta’s biodiversity to climate change Chris Shank June, 2012 Prepared for the Biodiversity Management and Climate Change Adaptation Project Disclaimer: The material in this publication does not imply the expression of any opinion on the part of any individual or organization other than the authors. Errors, omissions or inconsistencies in this pub- lication are the sole responsibilities of the authors. The authors and ABMI assume no liability in connection with the information products or services made available by the institute. While every effort is made to ensure the information contained in these products and services is correct, the ABMI disclaims any liability in negligence or otherwise for any loss or damage which may occur as a result of reliance on this material. CCEMC makes no warranty, express or implied, nor assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information contained in this publication, nor that use thereof does not infringe on privately owned rights. The views and opinions of the author ex- pressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of CCEMC. The directors, officers, employees, agents and consultants of CCEMC are exempted, excluded and absolved from all liability for dam- age or injury, howsoever caused, to any person in connection with or arising out of the use by that person for any purpose of this publication or its contents. Use of this material: This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational, data col- lection or non-profit purposes without special permission from the authors or ABMI, provided acknowledgement of the source is made.
    [Show full text]