DOCSLIB.ORG

Muskwa-Kechika Wildlife Management Plan Part B: Technical

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Muskwa-Kechika Wildlife Management Plan Part B: Technical Muskwa-Kechika Wildlife Management Plan Part B: Technical Manual August 2009 Muskwa-Kechika Wildlife Management Plan: Technical Manual August 2009 Muskwa-Kechika Wildlife Management Plan PPaarrtt BB:: MM--KKWWMMPP TTeecchhnniiccaall MMaannuuaall The Technical Manual provides the comprehensive management information needed for implementation of the Muskwa-Kechika Wildlife Management Plan. August 2009 ISBN 978-0-7726-6239-2 Date: December 17, 2009 British Columbia. Ministry of Environment Muskwa-Kechika Wildlife Management Plan [electronic resource]: Part B: Technical manual i Muskwa-Kechika Wildlife Management Plan: Technical Manual August 2009 Muskwa-Kechika Wildlife Management Plan Part B: Technical Manual August 2009 Approved by: __________________________________ Date: ________________________ Barry Penner Environment Minister ii Muskwa-Kechika Wildlife Management Plan: Technical Manual August 2009 Acknowledgements The Muskwa-Kechika Wildlife Management Plan, particularly this comprehensive Technical Manual, is the result of contributions of energy, time, debate, information, deliberation and studious consideration of many individuals, organizations, and agencies with wide-ranging perspectives. Funding support for development of the Technical Manual, which is the essence of the plan, was provided by the Muskwa-Kechika Management Area Trust Fund and the B.C. Ministry of Environment. Special appreciation is extended to the Muskwa-Kechika Wildlife Management Plan Advisory Group (see below), whose members put in days and weeks of work reviewing information and developing the details of wildlife management in the Muskwa- Kechika. The Kaska Dena provided invaluable support to the Advisory Group with timely, appropriate, and considered information to initiate discussion. Many others have provided very helpful contributions and shown much patience as this complex management plan has evolved over several years. This is the work of many minds and many hands, all committed to the vision of the Muskwa-Kechika. Muskwa-Kechika Wildlife Management Plan Advisory Group The following government and non-government agencies and organizations were regular participants at the Muskwa-Kechika Wildlife Management Plan meetings from July 31, 2000 until September 30, 2003. B.C. Ministry of Forests B.C. Ministry of Environment Land and Water British Columbia Inc. Land Use Coordination Office (B.C. Integrated Land Management Agency) Kaska Dena Muskwa-Kechika Management Area Advisory Board B.C. Wildlife Federation Guide Outfitter Association of British Columbia Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation Timberline Trail & Nature Club Wild Sheep Society of British Columbia iii Muskwa-Kechika Wildlife Management Plan: Technical Manual August 2009 Organization of the Muskwa-Kechika Wildlife Management Plan The Muskwa-Kechika Area is a vast territory with many important wildlife species and habitats throughout. However, scientific knowledge of the specific geographic occurrences of populations and habitats is presently quite limited, and a key part of the plan is to expand this information base over time. To provide an effective, usable plan for such an area requires that it be outcome- focused, supported by comprehensive technical information consistent with present knowledge. Therefore, the Muskwa-Kechika Wildlife Management Plan is comprised of two documents, which serve two important, related functions: (1) clear and concise strategic direction, and (2) comprehensive technical guidance. Strategic Document This contains the essence of the Wildlife Management Plan designed to stand as an approved local strategic plan as defined by the Muskwa-Kechika Management Area Act. As such, Part A can be referred to as “the Plan”, while recognizing that an important aspect of the Plan is the support of a comprehensive Technical Manual, which is Part B. Technical Manual The Technical Manual, Part B in the full package of the M- KWMP, contains explicit technical direction and advice with respect to implementation of the Plan, including extensive appendices. Part B is designed to serve as a comprehensive reference to assist in implementing the approved Plan. Part B is referred to as “the Plan Manual.” This Technical Manual has two major components: Part B-1: Summary Objectives Tables Part B-2: Technical Management Directions iv Muskwa-Kechika Wildlife Management Plan: Technical Manual August 2009 Technical Manual Contents Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... v Organization of the Muskwa-Kechika Wildlife Management Plan ............................................... vi Technical Manual Contents .......................................................................................................... vii LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... ix LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... ix B-1: Summary Objectives Tables ................................................................................................... 1 1.0 HABITAT MANAGEMENT ......................................................................................................... 1 2.0 WILDLIFE SPECIES MANAGEMENT .......................................................................................... 5 2.1 General Species Direction ............................................................................................. 5 2.2 Ungulates ....................................................................................................................... 7 2.3 Large Carnivores ......................................................................................................... 15 2.4 Furbearing Animals ..................................................................................................... 19 2.5 Red- and Blue-listed Species ........................................................................................ 25 2.6 Fish .............................................................................................................................. 33 2.7 Reptiles and Amphibians: Western Toad ..................................................................... 35 2.8 Invertebrates ................................................................................................................ 36 3.0 NON-INDIGENOUS SPECIES .................................................................................................. 37 4.0 WILDLIFE – HUMAN CONFLICT ........................................................................................... 38 5.0 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION RELATED TO INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL ACCESS AND DEVELOPMENT................................................................................................................... 39 6.0 MANAGEMENT OF RECREATION IMPACTS ON WILDLIFE ...................................................... 40 7.0 PROTECTION OF HISTORICAL VOCATIONS AND ACTIVITIES ................................................. 40 PART B-2: Technical Management Directions ............................................................................ 41 1.0 HABITAT MANAGEMENT ....................................................................................................... 43 1.1 General Habitat Direction ........................................................................................... 43 1.2 Landscape-level Habitat .............................................................................................. 45 1.3 Stand-level Habitat ...................................................................................................... 49 1.4 Species-specific Habitat ............................................................................................... 50 1.5 Red- and Blue-listed Plant Species and Communities ................................................. 52 1.6 Fire Management ......................................................................................................... 53 1.7 Migration Habitat ........................................................................................................ 56 1.8 Results-based Habitat Management ............................................................................ 58 2.0 WILDLIFE SPECIES MANAGEMENT ...................................................................................... 60 2.1 General Species Direction ........................................................................................... 62 2.2 Ungulates ..................................................................................................................... 66 2.3 Large Carnivores ......................................................................................................... 81 v Muskwa-Kechika Wildlife Management Plan: Technical Manual August 2009 2.4 Furbearing Animals ..................................................................................................... 87 2.5 Red- and Blue-listed Vertebrate Species ...................................................................... 95 2.6 Fish ............................................................................................................................ 105 2.7 Reptiles and Amphibians ............................................................................................ 108 2.8 Invertebrates .............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."
    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • Cust-Gall Forest Plan Comments May 2019
    PO Box 8783 ● Missoula, MT 59807-8783 May 15, 2019 Custer Gallatin National Forest Attn: Forest Plan Revision Team P.O. Box 130 Bozeman, MT 59771 Dear Custer-Gallatin Forest Plan Revision Team, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the revision of the Custer Gallatin Forest Plan. We are writing on behalf of over 700 members of the Montana Native Plant Society (MNPS). The Society is a non-profit organization dedicated to preserving, conserving, and studying Montana’s native plants and plant communities, and educating the public about the values of our native flora and its habitats. Our comments, organized by draft document page, are below and submitted online. 2.3.5 Watershed and Aquatics (WTR), Objectives 01 MNPS believes that stream and wetland restoration is important for maintaining plant species diversity. The natural hydrology of wetlands such as fens and marshes as well as riparian areas should be protected and restored as much as possible. 2.3.5 Watershed and Aquatics (WTR), Objectives 03 MNPS believes that protection and restoration of at-risk aquatic plants should be prioritized. 2.3.9 At-Risk Plant Species (PRISK), Objectives 01 At-risk species occurring on Custer-Gallatin should first be ranked based on their degree of risk. For example, Carex gravida is associated with green ash woodlands on the Sioux and Ashland districts. These woodlands are heavily used for livestock grazing. On the other hand, Shoshonea pulvinata is globally rare but is not threatened by human activities at this time, so at this time it should be ranked lower than Carex gravida.
    [Show full text]
  • Vol. 52, Number 3
    Volume 52, Number 3 Autumn 2010 Inside: Strymon serapio, new for the U.S. Conservation Matters: More on Butterfly Releases: Another View Theodore L. Mead’s Journal of 1871 Diurnal Gregarious Roosting of Smyrna blomfildia Flying High: An Adventure in the Alpine Tundra of Colorado Call for Season Summary Records Membership Update, Metamorphosis, Marketplace… …and more! Contents Strymon serapio new for the U.S. (Lycaenidae: Theclinae) Volume 52, Number 3 Michael A. Rickard and Nick V. Grishin. ...................................................... 79 Autumn 2010 The Discovery of Theodore L. Mead’s Journal of 1871 The Lepidopterists’ Society is a non-profit John V. Calhoun. ............................................................................................. 85 educational and scientific organization. The Conservation Matters: More on Butterfly Releases object of the Society, which was formed in David Wagner, Felix Sperling and Bruce Walsh. .......................................... 87 May 1947 and formally constituted in De- Call for Season Summary Records cember 1950, is “to promote internationally Leroy C. Koehn. ............................................................................................... 89 the science of lepidopterology in all its The Mailbag......................................................................................................... 89 branches; to further the scientifically sound Flying High: An Adventure in the Alpine Tundra of Colorado and progressive study of Lepidoptera, to is- Gary Noel Ross.
    [Show full text]
  • Atlas of Rare Endemic Vascular Plants of the Arctic
    Atlas of Rare Endemic Vascular Plants of the Arctic Technical Report No. 3 About CAFF Theprogram for the Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF) of the Arctic Council was established lo address the special needs of Arctic ecosystems, species and thcir habitats in the rapid ly developing Arctic region. Itwas initiated as one of'four programs of the Arctic Environmental Protcction Strategy (AEPS) which was adopted by Canada, Denmark/Greenland, Finland, lceland, Norway, Russia, Swcdcn and the United States through a Ministeria! Declaration at Rovaniemi, Finland in 1991. Other programs initi­ ated under the AEPS and overlaken hy the Are.tie Council are the ArcticMonitoring and assessment Programme (AMAP), the program for Emergency Prevention, Preparcd­ ness and Response (EPPR) and the program for Protection of the Arctic Marine Envi­ ronment (PAME). Sinceits inaugural mccti.ng in Ottawa, Canada in 1992, the CAFF program has provided scientists, conscrvation managers and groups, and indigenous people of the north with a distinct forum in which lo tackle a wide range of Arctic conservation issues at the cir­ cumpolar level. CAFF's main goals, which are achieved in keeping with the concepts of sustainable developrnertt and utilisation, are: • to conserve Arctic Jlora and fauna, thcir diversity and thcir habitats; • to protect the Arctic ecosystems from threats; • to improve conservation management laws, reg ulations and practices for the Arclic; • to integrale Arctic interests into global conservation fora. CAFF operates rhrough a system of Designated Agencies and National Representatives responsible for CAFF in thcir rcspcctivc countries. CAFF also has an International Work­ ing Group wh.ith has met annually to assess progrcss and to develop Annual WorkPlans.
    [Show full text]
  • FOH Newsletter 2012
    FRIENDS Of The University Of Montana HERBARIUM Spring 2012 ....Bruce McCune MORE THAN VASCULAR AT MONTU By Andrea Pipp While perusing the vascular plant, moss, and lichen were the ecological relatives of mosses and incorporated specimens at MONTU you might see the name of Bruce them into his work. He relied on Mason Hale’s first edi- McCune. During his years at UM (1971-1979) Bruce con- tion of How to Know the Lichens and a long paper with tributed mounts of 62 vascular plant species and a larger keys titled “Lichens of the State of Washington” by Grace number of moss and lichen vouchers to the herbarium. Howard. He soon realized Hale’s book was very biased Bruce came to Missoula from the Midwest. Having toward eastern species, for even the most conspicuous grown up in Cincinnati and after completing his freshman lichens found on Mt. Sentinel weren’t in the book. Later year at Lawrence University in Appleton, Wisconsin, he discovered that Howard’s key contained as much mis- Bruce attended a wilderness botany class in northern Min- (Continued on page 7) nesota. There in the moss-carpeted forests he became quite interested in mosses and, in his words, was swept away by a remarkable young lady (Patricia Muir). Eager to escape the industrial winter of Appleton, Bruce fol- lowed Patricia to the University of Montana. That was 1971. The ‘new’ library was under construction, Hitch- cock and Cronquist, as a book, did not exist, and Botany stood on its own – a vibrant, active department, firmly ensconced in its own building.
    [Show full text]
  • The Official Newsletter of the Maryland Entomological Society ______
    Phaëton The Official Newsletter of the Maryland Entomological Society ____________________________________________________________________________________ EDITOR: Harold J. Harlan FACULTY SPONSOR: Frank E. Hanson and Austin P. (Bob) Platt Department of Biological Sciences, UMBC March 2009 1000 Hilltop Circle Volume: 29, Number 4 Baltimore, MD 21250 __________________________________________________________________________________________________ Meeting Announcement ______________________________________________________________________________________________ The Maryland Entomological Society's 267th regular meeting will be held Friday, March 20, 2009; beginning at 8:00 P.M., in Room 004 (one floor below the street level), Biological Sciences Bldg., University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC). Bring a friend and specimens/observations to share. Refreshments will be provided. Presentations are scheduled to begin about 8:15 P.M. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Speaker: Dr. Wil Hershberger Hershberger Nature Photography & Nature Images & Sounds Hedgesville, WV Title: “ The Songs of Insects.” _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Wil Hershberger works for the USDA as a molecular biologist studying the genetics of fruit tree diseases. He has been an avid naturalist most of his life and photography has become an
    [Show full text]
  • Vascular Plant Inventory of Mount Rainier National Park
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Program Center Vascular Plant Inventory of Mount Rainier National Park Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/NCCN/NRTR—2010/347 ON THE COVER Mount Rainier and meadow courtesy of 2007 Mount Rainier National Park Vegetation Crew Vascular Plant Inventory of Mount Rainier National Park Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/NCCN/NRTR—2010/347 Regina M. Rochefort North Cascades National Park Service Complex 810 State Route 20 Sedro-Woolley, Washington 98284 June 2010 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Program Center Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Program Center publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Technical Report Series is used to disseminate results of scientific studies in the physical, biological, and social sciences for both the advancement of science and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series provides contributors with a forum for displaying comprehensive data that are often deleted from journals because of page limitations. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. This report received informal peer review by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, or reporting of the data.
    [Show full text]
  • 2010 Animal Species of Concern
    MONTANA NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM Animal Species of Concern Species List Last Updated 08/05/2010 219 Species of Concern 86 Potential Species of Concern All Records (no filtering) A program of the University of Montana and Natural Resource Information Systems, Montana State Library Introduction The Montana Natural Heritage Program (MTNHP) serves as the state's information source for animals, plants, and plant communities with a focus on species and communities that are rare, threatened, and/or have declining trends and as a result are at risk or potentially at risk of extirpation in Montana. This report on Montana Animal Species of Concern is produced jointly by the Montana Natural Heritage Program (MTNHP) and Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks (MFWP). Montana Animal Species of Concern are native Montana animals that are considered to be "at risk" due to declining population trends, threats to their habitats, and/or restricted distribution. Also included in this report are Potential Animal Species of Concern -- animals for which current, often limited, information suggests potential vulnerability or for which additional data are needed before an accurate status assessment can be made. Over the last 200 years, 5 species with historic breeding ranges in Montana have been extirpated from the state; Woodland Caribou (Rangifer tarandus), Greater Prairie-Chicken (Tympanuchus cupido), Passenger Pigeon (Ectopistes migratorius), Pilose Crayfish (Pacifastacus gambelii), and Rocky Mountain Locust (Melanoplus spretus). Designation as a Montana Animal Species of Concern or Potential Animal Species of Concern is not a statutory or regulatory classification. Instead, these designations provide a basis for resource managers and decision-makers to make proactive decisions regarding species conservation and data collection priorities in order to avoid additional extirpations.
    [Show full text]
  • BC Hydro > Peace Project Water Use Plan
    Peace Project Water Use Plan Revised for Acceptance for the Comptroller of Water Rights August 21, 2007 Peace Project Water Use Plan Revised for Acceptance by the Comptroller of Water Rights Generation August 21, 2007 Peace Project Water Use Plan Preface The Water Use Planning process for BC Hydro’s Peace facilities was initiated in February 2001 and completed in December 2003. The proposed conditions in this Water Use Plan, for the operation of BC Hydro’s Peace hydroelectric facilities, reflect the December 2003 consensus recommendations of the Peace Water Use Planning Committee. BC Hydro thanks all those who participated in the process that led to the production of this Water Use Plan for their effort and dedication. The proposed conditions for the operation of BC Hydro’s facilities will not come into effect until implemented under the British Columbia Water Act. Generation Resource Management August 21, 2007 Peace Project Water Use Plan Page i Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF WORKS............................................................................. 1 2.1 Location ..................................................................................................... 1 2.2 Existing Works .......................................................................................... 2 3.0 HYDROLOGY OF THE PEACE RIVER BASIN ........................................... 4 3.1 Drainage Basin..........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation History of Central Chukotka
    Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Clim. Past Discuss., 8, 1409–1441, 2012 www.clim-past-discuss.net/8/1409/2012/ Climate doi:10.5194/cpd-8-1409-2012 of the Past CPD © Author(s) 2012. CC Attribution 3.0 License. Discussions 8, 1409–1441, 2012 This discussion paper is/has been under review for the journal Climate of the Past (CP). Vegetation history of Please refer to the corresponding final paper in CP if available. Central Chukotka Vegetation history of Central A. A. Andreev et al. Chukotka deduced from permafrost Title Page paleoenvironmental records of the Abstract Introduction El’gygytgyn Impact Crater Conclusions References A. A. Andreev1, E. Morozova2, G. Fedorov2, L. Schirrmeister3, A. A. Bobrov4, Tables Figures F. Kienast5, and G. Schwamborn3 J I 1Institute of Geology and Mineralogy, University of Cologne, Zulpicher¨ St. 49a, 50674, Cologne, Germany J I 2Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute, Bering St. 38, St. Petersburg, 199397 Russia Back Close 3Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, Department of Periglacial Research, Telegrafenberg A43, 14473 Potsdam, Germany Full Screen / Esc 4Faculty of Soil Science, Moscow State University, Vorobievy Gory, 119899 Moscow, Russia 5Senckenberg, Research Institute and Natural History Museum, Research Station for Quaternary Paleontology, am Jakobskirchhof 4, 99423 Weimar, Germany Printer-friendly Version Received: 5 March 2012 – Accepted: 12 April 2012 – Published: 20 April 2012 Interactive Discussion Correspondence to: A. A. Andreev ([email protected]) Published by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union. 1409 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Abstract CPD Frozen sediments from three cores bored in permafrost surrounding of the El’gygytgyn Impact Crater Lake have been studied for pollen, non-pollen palynomorphs, plant 8, 1409–1441, 2012 macrofossils, and rhizopods.
    [Show full text]
  • Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Volume 2
    Appendix F Species List Appendix F: Species List F. Species List F.1 Lists The following list and three tables denote the bird, mammal, fish, and plant species known to occur in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (Arctic Refuge, Refuge). F.1.1 Birds of Arctic Refuge A total of 201 bird species have been recorded on Arctic Refuge. This list describes their status and abundance. Many birds migrate outside of the Refuge in the winter, so unless otherwise noted, the information is for spring, summer, or fall. Bird names and taxonomic classification follow American Ornithologists' Union (1998). F.1.1.1 Definitions of classifications used Regions of the Refuge . Coastal Plain – The area between the coast and the Brooks Range. This area is sometimes split into coastal areas (lagoons, barrier islands, and Beaufort Sea) and inland areas (uplands near the foothills of the Brooks Range). Brooks Range – The mountains, valleys, and foothills north and south of the Continental Divide. South Side – The foothills, taiga, and boreal forest south of the Brooks Range. Status . Permanent Resident – Present throughout the year and breeds in the area. Summer Resident – Only present from May to September. Migrant – Travels through on the way to wintering or breeding areas. Breeder – Documented as a breeding species. Visitor – Present as a non-breeding species. * – Not documented. Abundance . Abundant – Very numerous in suitable habitats. Common – Very likely to be seen or heard in suitable habitats. Fairly Common – Numerous but not always present in suitable habitats. Uncommon – Occurs regularly but not always observed because of lower abundance or secretive behaviors.
    [Show full text]
  • Muskwa-Kechika Case Study (Northeastern British Columbia and Adjacent Areas of the Yukon and Northwest Territories)
    Conserving Canada’s Natural Capital: the Boreal Forest Muskwa-Kechika Case Study (Northeastern British Columbia and adjacent areas of the Yukon and Northwest Territories) Prepared for: National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy Ottawa, Ontario By: R. McManus Consulting Ltd. and Salmo Consulting Inc. Calgary, Alberta July 2004 NRTEE Muskwa-Kechika Case Study TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1 1.1 The Boreal Forest Program................................................................................. 1 1.2 Case Studies........................................................................................................ 2 1.3 Muskwa-Kechika Case Study............................................................................. 2 1.3.1 Methods....................................................................................................... 4 1.3.1.1 Literature Review.................................................................................... 4 1.3.1.2 Interviews................................................................................................ 4 1.3.1.3 Multi-stakeholder Workshop .................................................................. 5 2. Legislation and Policy Framework..................................................................... 6 2.1 Case Study Region.............................................................................................. 7 2.1.1 Major Players.............................................................................................
    [Show full text]