DOCSLIB.ORG

Annotated Map of Ancient Polar Bear Remains of the World

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Annotated Map of Ancient Polar Bear Remains of the World Annotated Map of Ancient Polar Bear Remains of the World © Susan J. Crockford November 26, 2012 Electronic resource available at http://polarbearscience/references/ ISBN 978-0-9917966-0-1 Cite as: Crockford, S.J. 2012. Annotated Map of Ancient Polar Bear Remains of the World. Electronic resource available at http://polarbearscience/references/ ISBN 978-0-9917966-0-1. 1 Map Notes for Ancient Polar Bear Remains of the World - fossil and archaeological polar bear, Ursus maritimus, remains (please note that I use “fossil” here loosely – most non-archaeological remains are truly “subfossil” since they are not mineralized). Abbreviations: AK, Alaska USA; GRLD, Greenland; CAN, Canada; RUS, Russia; SE, Sweden; NO, Norway; DE, Denmark, UK, United Kingdom; F, female; M, male; LIA, Little Ice Age; DAC, Dark Age Cold; RWP, Roman Warm Period; MWP, Medieval Warm Period. Map ref. & specimen location* Age 14C Lab # Relative Specimen Reference (* indicates archaeological deposits) (BP) † (Collection #) Age Type 1. NE Point, St. Paul Island, Pribilofs, AK A.D. 1875 (NMNH 84594) Historic (LIA) 1 skull, old M, shot 1875 Ray (1971:13) [not a “fossil” but not archaeological] [collected 1895 by Townsend ] 2. Pottery House, St. Mathew Is. AK* ca. 350-430 > 1, on deposit Late Holocene (LIA) 9 specimens Frink et al. (2001) (USF&W, Anchorage) 3. Mackenzie River delta, ca. 350-750 on deposits Late Holocene (LIA) 1 bone, ? element Betts & Friesen (2006) Kuukpak house 1 CAN* 4. North-eastern GRLD * 820 ± 60 AAR-1776 Late Holocene (MWP) 1 bone, ? element Andreasen (1997) 5. Washington Land, GRLD* 960 ± 60 AAR-5775 Late Holocene (MWP) 1 bone, ? element Bennike (2002) 6. Washington Land, GRLD * 1, 415 ± 60 AAR-5774 Late Holocene (DAC) 1 bone, ? element Bennike (2002) 7. Kolnæs (Pearyland), GRLD* 1, 440 ± 451 K-352 Late Holocene (DAC) R. mandible Bennike (1991); Harington (2003:383) [Arctic Canada (?), CAN -not mapped 1, 510 ± 30 CAMS-66368 Late Holocene (DAC) 1 bone, ? element Ingolfsson & Wiig (2008) ] 8. Victoria Island, CAN* 1, 560 ± 65 Gif-7512 Late Holocene (DAC) 1 bone, ? element Harington (2003:383) 1, 350 ± 40 Gif-8434 Late Holocene (DAC) 1 bone, ? element Harington (2003:383) 1, 310 ± 40 Gif-8178 Late Holocene (DAC) 1 bone, ? element Harington (2003:383) 9. Brønlund Fjord, N. GRLD* 1, 520 ± 110 AAR-1357 Late Holocene (RWP) 1 ulna Bennike (1997) 10. Dezhnevo, Bering St., RUS* 1, 498-887 >1, on deposit Late Holocene (DAC) 33bones, assorted Gusev et al. (1999); (aka Kaniskak) Savinetsky et al. (2004) 11. Mainland south of Wrangel n/a n/a Holocene ? # bones/ ? elements Vereshchagin (1969:46) (Chukchi Sea, RUS) [*?]3 12. Cape Baranov, Kolyma River mouth, 1, 690± 165 LE 210 Late Holocene (RWP) 16 bones, including Bland (2008, translation) Russia (East Siberian Sea, RUS)* 1 intact skull Vereshchagin 1969:31) 13. Mainland south of Laptev Strait n/a n/a Holocene ? # bones/ ? elements Vereshchagin (1969:46) (eastern Laptev Sea, RUS) [*?]3 14. Mainland, near Tikai n/a n/a Holocene ? # bones/ ? elements Vereshchagin (1969:46) (Laptev Sea, RUS) [*?]3 15. Vandfeldsnaes, GRLD* 2, 070 ± 110 AAR-1357 Neoglacial/RWP ulna Harington (2003:383) 16. Prince of Wales Island, CAN * 2, 135 ± 120 Beta-18129 Late Holocene (RWP) canine tooth Harington (2003:383) (Cape Richard Collinson) 2 Map Notes for Ancient Polar Bear Remains of the World, con’t. Map ref. & specimen location* Age 14C Lab # Relative Specimen Reference (* indicates archaeological deposits) (BP) † (Collection #) Age (Kyr) Type 17. Seahorse Gully, near Churchill, CAN* 2, 495± 100 S-521 Neoglacial a few bones Nash (1976) (western Hudson Bay, IeKn 6) [date on the deposit] 18. Gulf of Boothia, central CAN* 3, 265 ± 15 UCI-42204 Neoglacial 1 bone, ? element Dyke et al. (2011:161) (four specimens) 3, 515 ± 15 UCI-42211 Neoglacial 1 bone, ? element Dyke et al. (2011:161) 3, 290 ± 15 UCI-42210 Neoglacial 1 bone, ? element Dyke et al. (2011:161) 3, 765 ± 15 UCI-2207 Neoglacial 1 bone, ? element Dyke et al. (2011:161) 19. Ekven, Bering St., RUS* < 2, 700 BP uncal. Neoglacial 10 bones, assorted Savinetsky et al. (2004) 20. Cape Espenberg, Seward Pen., AK* ca 2, 500 BP >1, on deposit Neoglacial/Late Holo. 1 bone, ? element Saleeby (1994:333; 2003) (1 site in BELA Nat. Park, NPS) 21. Sønderland, west GRLD* 3, 320 ± 85 K-5928 Neoglacial 1 bone, ? element Rasmussen (1996) (two specimens) 3, 470 ± 85 K-5930 Neoglacial 1 bone, ? element Rasmussen (1996) 22. Qagnax Cave, St. Paul Is. 4, 830 ± 40 Beta-182978 Neoglacial 1 radius, distal, juvenile Veltre et al. (2008) Pribilof Islands, AK 4, 410 ± 60 (SPC-03-76) Neoglacial 1 phalanx, adult Veltre et al. (2008) not dated Neoglacial ? 248 bones from 6 more Veltre et al. (2008) adult bears, 2 M & 4 F 23. Bogoslov Cave, St. Paul Is. not dated (USNM 26108) Mid-Holocene? 2 adults, 1 juvenile Ray (1971) Pribilof Islands, AK 15 bones/fragments total 24. Devil’s Gorge, Wrangel Is., RUS* 3, 620-2, 950 >1, on deposit Neoglacial 1 skull frag, 1 claw Dikov (1988) 25. Walakpa Site, Barrow, AK* ca. 1, 500-1, 100 Gak-2298 (charcoal) Late Holocene (DAC) 15 bones , assorted Stanford (1976); (NPS Anchorage) ca. 1, 100-600 Gak-2297 (charcoal) Late Holocene (MWP) 6 bones, assorted Murray (2008) ca. 600-historic Late Holocene (LIA) 13 bones, assorted (dates on deposit) 26. Margaret Bay, Unalaska Is., AK* ca. 4, 700-4, 100 on charcoal Neoglacial 24 plus 85 “Ursus sp.” Davis (2001); Murray (2008) (dates on deposit) including 1 mandible Crockford & Frederick (2007) 3 Map Notes for Ancient Polar Bear Remains of the World, con’t. Map ref. & specimen location* Age 14C Lab # Relative Specimen Reference (* indicates archaeological deposits) (BP) † (Collection #) Age (Kyr) Type 27. Nuulliit, Thule, GRLD* 5,060 ± 95 K-2560 Early Holocene 1 bone, ? element Grønnow & Jensen (2003) 28. Svenskøya, Svalbard, NO 7,760 ± 50 T-4167 Early Holocene 1 bone, ? element Harington (2008:S25); Ingolfsson & Wiig (2008) 29. Svalbard, NO ca. 8,200 on deposit? V. Early Holocene >1 bone, ? elements Harington (2008) 30. Zhokhov Island, RUS* 8, 480-8, 175 >1, on deposit V. Early Holocene 397 total, ++ skulls & Pitul'ko (2003); postcranial, most adult F, Murray (2008); a few juveniles Pitul'ko & Kasparov 1996 31. Kuröd, Bohuslän, SE 10, 170 ± 125 Lu-1075 V. Early Holocene 1 dist. femur, juv. Kurtén (1988); (N.H.M. Goteborg) (+ 4 other elements) Berglund et al. (1992) 32. Nedre Kuröd Bohuslän, SE 10, 360 ± 130 Lu-1074 V. Early Holocene 1 rib fragment Kurtén (1988); (N.H.M. Goteborg) (3 bones total ) Berglund et al. (1992) 33. Finnøy, NO 10, 925 ± 110 T-4724 V. Early Holocene 1 complete skeleton, Blystad et al. (1983); (Arch. M. Stavanger) old M Berglund et al. (1992) 34. Asdal, DE 11, 240 ± 180 K-3741 V. Early Holocene 1 L. mandible w. teeth, M Kurtén (1988); Aaris- Sørensen & Petersen (1984); Berglund et al. (1992) 35. Östra Karup, Bastad, SE 12, 230 ± 130 Lu-1076 V. Early Holocene 1 R. ulna, subadult F Berglund et al. (1992) (archived LUZM) 36. Hisingen, SE not dated (1919-3356) V. Early Holocene 1 L. maxilla w. teeth Kurtén 1988; Berglund (archived N.H.M. Goteborg) deposit subadult M et al. (1992) 37. Kärraberg, Vekkinge parish, SE not dated (1925-4354) V. Early Holocene 1 Skull w. teeth Kurtén (1988); Berglund (archived N.H.M.Goteborg) (on strata) juv/subadult F? et al. (1992) 38. Kullaberg, Scania, SE 12, 320 ± 125 Lu-602 V. Early Holocene 1 R. femur Berglund et al. (1992) 12, 450 ± 145 Lu-660 V. Early Holocene (3 dates, same specimen) 12, 480 ± 185 Lu-661 V. Early Holocene 4 Map Notes for Ancient Polar Bear Remains of the World, con’t. Map ref. & specimen location* Age 14C Lab # Relative Specimen Reference (* indicates archaeological deposits) (BP) † (Collection #) Age (Kyr) Type 39. Nordcemgrotta, Kjæpsvik, NO 22,000 uncalibrated? ? LGM interstadial4 1 ulna dated Lauritzen et al. (1996); other bones present? Hufthammer (2001:206) 40. Mordy-Yahk River mouth, Yamal not dated "Pleistocene" 1 R. ulna ♂ Vereshchagin (1969:31) ; Peninsula, west side (Russia) Harington (2008:S25) 41. Pechora River, Russia not dated "Pleistocene?" 1 R. molar 1 Harington (2008:S25) 42. Baillie Islands, CAN n/a "Pleistocene" 1 bone?, ? elements Harington (2003:306); Vincent (1989) 43. Hamnsundhelleren, NO 36,000–28,000 ? Late Weichselian (MIS 3) >1 bones, elements? Valen et al. (1996); Hufthammer (2001) 44. Kew Bridge, Thames, UK not dated (BM24361) Middle Weichselian 1 R. ulna, M Kurtén (1988); (taxonomy disputed)2 deposit Harington (2008) 45. Nordcemgrotta, Kjæpsvik, NO >70,000 ± 8.5 (IRSL) ? Early Weichselian 1 rib; successful mtDNA Lauritzen et al. (1996); deposit date (ca. 115 kyr BP) (3 total: metatarsal + Hufthammer (2001); vert. disc) Davison et al. (2011) 46. Poolepynten, Prins Karls > 45,000 Forland, Svalbard, NO 150-80 kyr (IRSL) LuS-6155 MIS 5e to Early 1 L. mandible, canine, M Ingolfsson & Wiig (2008) Weichselian deposit complete mtDNA sequence (ca. 130–110 kyr BP) Lindqvist et al. (2010) Footnotes: † These are calibrated radiocarbon years BP unless indicated otherwise (cal. yr BP). Dates on polar bear bone are corrected for marine reservoir effect unless indicated otherwise (e.g. Pribilof polar bear specimen Beta-182978 uncorrected date of 4830 ± 40 cal yr BP gives a corrected date 4587 cal yr BP at two sigmas). One historic specimen (#1) is a calendar date (e.g. A.D. 1875) 1. This sample (K-352) is listed in Ingolfsson & Wiig (2008:table 1) as “440 ± 45” - corrected from Bennike 1991 and Harington 2003:383) 2. From Harington (2008:S25) “Andy Currant of the Natural History Museum–London (personal communication) believes that the Kew Bridge bear ulna represents a huge brown bear rather than a polar bear, based on faunas similar to that at Kew Bridge from many British sites containing dominant steppe bison (Bison priscus) and reindeer (Rangifer tarandus) with wolves (Canis lupus) and gigantic brown bears moderately represented.” This information awaits verification, as Kurtén (1988) identified this as polar bear and large even for that species—if Andy Currant disagrees, he needs to publish a note to this effect.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 15 Canadian High Arctic-North Greenland
    15/18: LME FACTSHEET SERIES CANADIAN HIGH ARCTIC-NORTH GREENLAND LME tic LMEs Arc CANADIAN HIGH ARCTIC-NORTH GREENLAND LME MAP 18 of Central Map Arctic Ocean LME North Pole Ellesmere Island Iceland Greenland 15 "1 ARCTIC LMEs Large ! Marine Ecosystems (LMEs) are defined as regions of work of the ArcNc Council in developing and promoNng the ocean space of 200,000 km² or greater, that encompass Ecosystem Approach to management of the ArcNc marine coastal areas from river basins and estuaries to the outer environment. margins of a conNnental shelf or the seaward extent of a predominant coastal current. LMEs are defined by ecological Joint EA Expert group criteria, including bathymetry, hydrography, producNvity, and PAME established an Ecosystem Approach to Management tropically linked populaNons. PAME developed a map expert group in 2011 with the parNcipaNon of other ArcNc delineaNng 17 ArcNc Large Marine Ecosystems (ArcNc LME's) Council working groups (AMAP, CAFF and SDWG). This joint in the marine waters of the ArcNc and adjacent seas in 2006. Ecosystem Approach Expert Group (EA-EG) has developed a In a consultaNve process including agencies of ArcNc Council framework for EA implementaNon where the first step is member states and other ArcNc Council working groups, the idenNficaNon of the ecosystem to be managed. IdenNfying ArcNc LME map was revised in 2012 to include 18 ArcNc the ArcNc LMEs represents this first step. LMEs. This is the current map of ArcNc LMEs used in the This factsheet is one of 18 in a series of the ArcCc LMEs. OVERVIEW: CANADIAN HIGH ARCTIC-NORTH GREENLAND LME The Canadian High Arcc-North Greenland LME (CAA) consists of the northernmost and high arcc part of Canada along with the adjacent part of North Greenland.
    [Show full text]
  • East and Central Farming and Forest Region and Atlantic Basin Diversified Farming Region: 12 Lrrs N and S
    East and Central Farming and Forest Region and Atlantic Basin Diversified Farming Region: 12 LRRs N and S Brad D. Lee and John M. Kabrick 12.1 Introduction snowfall occurs annually in the Ozark Highlands, the Springfield Plateau, and the St. Francois Knobs and Basins The central, unglaciated US east of the Great Plains to the MLRAs. In the southern half of the region, snowfall is Atlantic coast corresponds to the area covered by LRR N uncommon. (East and Central Farming and Forest Region) and S (Atlantic Basin Diversified Farming Region). These regions roughly correspond to the Interior Highlands, Interior Plains, 12.2.2 Physiography Appalachian Highlands, and the Northern Coastal Plains. The topography of this region ranges from broad, gently rolling plains to steep mountains. In the northern portion of 12.2 The Interior Highlands this region, much of the Springfield Plateau and the Ozark Highlands is a dissected plateau that includes gently rolling The Interior Highlands occur within the western portion of plains to steeply sloping hills with narrow valleys. Karst LRR N and includes seven MLRAs including the Ozark topography is common and the region has numerous sink- Highlands (116A), the Springfield Plateau (116B), the St. holes, caves, dry stream valleys, and springs. The region also Francois Knobs and Basins (116C), the Boston Mountains includes many scenic spring-fed rivers and streams con- (117), Arkansas Valley and Ridges (118A and 118B), and taining clear, cold water (Fig. 12.2). The elevation ranges the Ouachita Mountains (119). This region comprises from 90 m in the southeastern side of the region and rises to 176,000 km2 in southern Missouri, northern and western over 520 m on the Springfield Plateau in the western portion Arkansas, and eastern Oklahoma (Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • Physical Geography of the United States and Canada: a Land of Contrasts S
    Chapter 5 Guided Notes _________________________________________________________________________________________ NAME Physical Geography of the United States and Canada: A Land of Contrasts s North America’s vast and varied landscape and abundant resources have attracted immigrants and shaped the development of the United States and Canada. Section 1: Landforms and Resources The United States and Canada have vast lands and abundant resources. These two countries share many of the same landforms. Landscape Influenced Development U.S., Canada: former British colonies, most people speak English Strong economic and political ties with one another Vast Lands Canada second largest country in the world by area; U.S. third Together they cover one-eighth of the earth’s land surface Abundant Resources Landmass and natural resources attract immigrants to both countries U.S. and Canada have developed into global economic powers Many and Varied Landforms All major landforms are found in U.S. and Canada; The two countries share mountain chains and interior plains The Appalachian Highlands Appalachian Mountains run 1,600 miles from Newfoundland to Alabama; More than 400 million years old o include Green and Catskill mountains in the north; Blue Ridge and Great Smoky mountains in the south Erosion has created gentle slopes, peaks from 1,200–2,400 feet The Appalachian Trail is a scenic hiking path along the chain The Interior Lowlands Great Plains extend from Missouri River to Rocky Mountains; Interior Plains extend from Appalachians
    [Show full text]
  • Landforms and Resources
    Name _____________________________ Class _________________ Date __________________ Physical Geography of the United States and Canada Section 1 Landforms and Resources Terms and Names Appalachian Mountains major mountain chain in the eastern United States and Canada Great Plains largely treeless area in the interior lowlands Canadian Shield rocky, flat area that surrounds Hudson Bay Rocky Mountains mountain chain in the western United States and Canada Continental Divide line of the highest points in the Rockies that marks the separation between rivers flowing to the east and to the west Great Lakes five large lakes found in the central United States and Canada Mackenzie River Canada’s longest river Before You Read In the last chapter, you read about human geography–the way humans in general relate to their environment. In this section, you will learn about the physical features and resources of the United States and Canada. As You Read Use a graphic organizer to take notes about the landforms and resources of the United States and Canada. LANDSCAPE INFLUENCED The United States and Canada are rich DEVELOPMENT (Page 117) in natural resources. They have much How vast are these countries? fertile soil and water and many forests and The United States and Canada occupy the minerals. This geographic richness has central and northern four-fifths of the attracted immigrants from around the continent of North America. Culturally, the world for centuries. region is known as Anglo America. This is 1. What binds Canada and the United because both countries were colonies of States together? Great Britain at one time and because most of _______________________________ the people speak English.
    [Show full text]
  • Laurentide Ice Sheet Retreat Around 8000 Years Ago Occurred Over Western Quebec (700-900 Meters/Year)
    The retreat chronology of the Laurentide Ice Sheet during the last 10,000 years and implications for deglacial sea-level rise David Ullman University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Geoscience Author Profile Shortcut URL: https://serc.carleton.edu/59463 Location Continent: North America Country: Canada State/Province:Quebec, Labrador City/Town: UTM coordinates and datum: none Setting Climate Setting: Tectonic setting: Type: Chronology Show caption Show caption Show caption Description Much of the world's population is located along the coasts. In a world of changing climate, the rate of sea level rise will determine the ability of these communities to adapt to sea level rise. Perhaps the greatest uncertainty in sea level rise prediction has to do with amount of water melting off of Earth's major ice sheets. Recent decades have seen an accelerated loss of ice from Greenland and Antarctica. These bodies of ice may be prone to change more rapid than expected. Greenland and Antarctica contain enough frozen water, which, if melted could raise sea level by 70 m, but predictions on the rate at which this sea level rise could occur depend on scientists' understanding of the complex physics of ice flow (and on future climate scenarios). Paleoclimate researchers study past climates in hopes of developing a better understanding of our current and future climates. Similarly, understanding past ice sheets will aid in future prediction of ice sheet change. At the end of the Last Glacial Maximum, roughly 20,000 years ago, much of Earth in the northern hemisphere was covered in vast ice sheets.
    [Show full text]
  • Arctic Report Card 2009
    October 2009 Citing the complete report: Richter-Menge, J., and J.E. Overland, Eds., 2009: Arctic Report Card 2009, http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/reportcard. Citing an essay (example): Perovich, D., R. Kwok, W. Meier, S. V. Nghiem, and J. Richter-Menge, 2009: Sea Ice Cover [in Arctic Report Card 2009], http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/reportcard. Authors and Affiliations I. Ashik, Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute, St. Petersburg, Russia L.-S. Bai, Byrd Polar Research Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio R. Benson, Byrd Polar Research Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio U. S. Bhatt, Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska–Fairbanks, Fairbanks, Alaska I. Bhattacharya, Byrd Polar Research Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio J. E. Box, Byrd Polar Research Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio D. H. Bromwich, Byrd Polar Research Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio R. Brown, Climate Research Division, Environment Canada J. Cappelen, Danish Meteorological Institute, Copenhagen, Denmark E. Carmack, Institute of Ocean Sciences, Sidney, Canada B. Collen, Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, Regent’s Park, London, UK J. E. Comiso, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland D. Decker, Byrd Polar Research Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio C. Derksen, Climate Research Division, Environment Canada N. DiGirolamo, Science Systems Applications Inc. and NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland D. Drozdov, Earth Cryosphere Institute, Tumen, Russia B. Ebbinge, Alterra, Wageningen H. E. Epstein, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia X. Fettweis, Department of Geography, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium I. Frolov, Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute, St.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of a Pan‐Arctic Monitoring Plan for Polar Bears Background Paper
    CAFF Monitoring Series Report No. 1 January 2011 DEVELOPMENT OF A PAN‐ARCTIC MONITORING PLAN FOR POLAR BEARS BACKGROUND PAPER Dag Vongraven and Elizabeth Peacock ARCTIC COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT OF A PAN‐ARCTIC MONITORING PLAN FOR POLAR BEARS Acknowledgements BACKGROUND PAPER The Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF) is a Working Group of the Arctic Council. Author Dag Vongraven Table of Contents CAFF Designated Agencies: Norwegian Polar Institute Foreword • Directorate for Nature Management, Trondheim, Norway Elizabeth Peacock • Environment Canada, Ottawa, Canada US Geological Survey, 1. Introduction Alaska Science Center • Faroese Museum of Natural History, Tórshavn, Faroe Islands (Kingdom of Denmark) 1 1.1 Project objectives 2 • Finnish Ministry of the Environment, Helsinki, Finland Editing and layout 1.2 Definition of monitoring 2 • Icelandic Institute of Natural History, Reykjavik, Iceland Tom Barry 1.3 Adaptive management/implementation 2 • The Ministry of Domestic Affairs, Nature and Environment, Greenland 2. Review of biology and natural history • Russian Federation Ministry of Natural Resources, Moscow, Russia 2.1 Reproductive and vital rates 3 2.2 Movement/migrations 4 • Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Stockholm, Sweden 2.3 Diet 4 • United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, Alaska 2.4 Diseases, parasites and pathogens 4 CAFF Permanent Participant Organizations: 3. Polar bear subpopulations • Aleut International Association (AIA) 3.1 Distribution 5 • Arctic Athabaskan Council (AAC) 3.2 Subpopulations/management units 5 • Gwich’in Council International (GCI) 3.3 Presently delineated populations 5 3.3.1 Arctic Basin (AB) 5 • Inuit Circumpolar Conference (ICC) – Greenland, Alaska and Canada 3.3.2 Baffin Bay (BB) 6 • Russian Indigenous Peoples of the North (RAIPON) 3.3.3 Barents Sea (BS) 7 3.3.4 Chukchi Sea (CS) 7 • Saami Council 3.3.5 Davis Strait (DS) 8 This publication should be cited as: 3.3.6 East Greenland (EG) 8 Vongraven, D and Peacock, E.
    [Show full text]
  • Soil Ecoregions in Latin America 5
    Chapter 1 Soil EcoregionsSoil Ecoregions in Latin Latin America America Boris Volkoff Martial Bernoux INTRODUCTION Large soil units generally reflect bioclimatic environments (the concept of zonal soils). Soil maps thus represent summary documents that integrate all environmental factors involved. The characteristics of soils represent the environmental factors that control the dynamics of soil organic matter (SOM) and determine both their accumulation and degradation. Soil maps thus rep- resent a basis for quantitative studies on the accumulation processes of soil organic carbon (SOC) in soils in different spatial scales. From this point of view, however, and in particular if one is interested in general scales (large semicontinental regions), soil maps have several disadvantages. First, most soil maps take into account the intrinsic factors of the soils, thus the end results of the formation processes, rather than the processes themselves. These processes are the factors that are directly related to envi- ronmental conditions, whereas the characteristics of the soils can be inher- ited (paleosols and paleoalterations) and might no longer be in equilibrium with the present environment. Second, soils seldom are homogenous spatial entities. The soil cover is in reality a juxtaposition of several distinct soils that might differ to various degrees (from similar to highly contrasted), and might be either genetically linked or entirely disconnected. This spatial heterogeneity reflects the con- ditions in which the soils were formed and is expressed differently accord- ing to the substrates and the topography. The heterogeneity also depends on the duration of evolution of soils and the geomorphologic history, either re- gional or local, as well as on climatic gradients, which are particularly obvi- ous in mountain areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Report from the PAME Workshop on Ecosystem Approach to Management
    Report from the PAME Workshop on Ecosystem Approach to Management 22-23 January 2011 Tromsø, Norway Table of Content BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................................... 1 WORKSHOP PROGRAM AND PARTICIPANTS .......................................................................... 1 REVIEW AND UPDATE OF THE WORKING MAP ON ARCTIC LMES .................................. 2 CAFF FOCAL MARINE AREAS ............................................................................................................ 2 LMES AND SUBDIVISION INTO SUB-AREAS OR ECO-REGIONS ............................................................. 3 STRAIGHT LINES OR BATHYMETRIC ISOLINES? ................................................................................... 4 LME BOUNDARY ISSUES ..................................................................................................................... 5 REVISED WORKING MAP OF ARCTIC LMES ........................................................................................ 9 STATUS REPORTING FOR ARCTIC LMES ................................................................................ 10 ARCTIC COUNCIL .............................................................................................................................. 11 UNITED NATIONS .............................................................................................................................. 11 ICES (INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL FOR THE EXPLORATION
    [Show full text]
  • Legend & Notes
    Circumpolar Polar Bear Subpopulation Local and/or Traditional Ecological Knowledge Acquisition and Assessment Schedule Lancaster M'Clintock Northern Southern Southern Viscount Western Subpopulation: Arctic Basin Baffin Bay Barents Sea Chukchi Sea Davis Strait East Greenland Foxe Basin Gulf of Boothia Kane Basin Kara Sea Sound Laptev Sea Channel Beaufort Sea Norwegian Bay Beaufort Sea Hudson Bay Melville Sound Hudson Bay Canada, Canada, Canada, Jurisdictional sharing: All Greenland Norway, Russia Russia, US Greenland Greenland Canada Canada Greenland Russia Canada Russia Canada Canada Canada Canada, US Canada Canada Canada PBSG trend (2013): Data deficient Declining Data deficient Data deficient Stable Data deficient Stable Stable Declining Data deficient Data deficient Data deficient Increasing Stable Data deficient Declining Stable Data deficient Declining PBTC trend (2014): N/A Likely decline N/A N/A Likely increase N/A Stable Likely stable Uncertain N/A Uncertain N/A Likely increase Likely stable Uncertain Likely decline Stable Likely stable Likely stable Last survey carried out: N/A 2011-2013 2005-2007 N/A 2008-2010 1998-2000 2012-2014 1994-1997 1998-2000 2003-2006 1994-1997 2001-2006 2011-2012 2012-2014 2011 2005 Canada1, 2 1, 12, 15 2006 Greenland3 9 Nunavik portion Greenland3 9 12 2007 Canada 4 2008 Canada 4 2009 6, 13, 14 7 7 7 7 7 19 7, 10 11 2010 8, 20 8, 20 19 8, 20 2011 20 2012 20 20 5 2013 20 2014 17 18 16 2015 Canada Greenland Canada 2016 Greenland Canada 2017 Canada Canada 2018 Canada Canada 2019 2020 2021 Canada 2022 2023 2024 Canada Canada 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 LEGEND & NOTES: Existing Knowledge compilations Ongoing as of Fall 2015 Proposed Local and Traditional Ecological Knowledge Studies The Table includes Local and/or Traditional Ecological Knowledge that has been documented in reports.
    [Show full text]
  • THE INTERIOR PLAINS 23 the Interior Plains.—The Interior Plains Division of Canada Is Part of a Great Plains Region in The
    THE INTERIOR PLAINS 23 The Interior Plains.—The Interior Plains division of Canada is part of a great plains region in the interior of the continent stretching from the gulf of Mexico to the Arctic ocean. In Canada it extends from the Canadian Shield on the east to the Cordillera on the west. At the United States border it has a width of 800 miles but in the extreme northwest at the mouth of the Mackenzie river it is less than 100 miles wide. Throughout most of the region the underlying Palaeozoic, Mesozoic, and Tertiary rocks are nearly flat-lying. In the northwestern part of the area, however, the Franklin range, which lies between Great Bear lake and Mackenzie river, is composed of folded strata. In western Alberta, also, the rocks are folded and faulted. Geologically the region falls into three zones. On the east a narrow plain known as the Manitoba Lowland is developed on flat-lying Palaeozoic strata which range in age from Ordovician to Devonian. In Manitoba the Ordovician beds rest on the Precambrian rocks of the Canadian Shield and commonly present a low escarpment facing the Shield. To the northwest this zone broadens to form the Mackenzie Lowland. Here over wide areas Silurian measures form the base of the Palaeozoic section. In the Franklin mountains, however, red quartzites and sand­ stones of the Mount Clark formation are regarded as of probable Lower Cambrian age. They are succeeded by Middle and Upper Cambrian sandstones and shales. Beds regarded as of probable Ordovician age are also known to occur at the base of mount Kindle east of Wrigley and beneath the Silurian dolomite of the Great Slave Lake area.
    [Show full text]
  • Interior Plains Region Might Vary
    124-155_Ch05_F4 2/1/07 7:30 PM Page 124 CHAPTER Interior Plains 5 Land of Open Skies n the late 1700s, explorer and mapmaker David Thompson I travelled west after exploring the Canadian Shield. He kept a journal as he travelled, and this is how he described the region that would be called the Interior Plains. What I now relate is of the great body of dry land at the east foot of the mountains, the northern part of the forests, and the southern part of the plains, through which roll the Bow and Saskatchewan Rivers with their many branches. The Bow River flows through the most pleasant of the plains, and is the great resort of the bison and the red deer. The snow of the glaciers of the mountains, which everywhere border the west side of these plains, furnish water to form many rivers. The rivers that roll through this immense unbroken body of land of plains and forests are beautifully distributed... The climate is good, the winters about five months, the summers are warm, and the autumn has many fine days. The soil is rich and deep... and agriculture will succeed... 124 124-155_Ch05_F4 2/1/07 7:30 PM Page 125 Canada: Our Stories Continue The Interior Plains is a large region that covers parts of ? Critical Inquiry TIP Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta, as well as parts of the Northwest Territories and Yukon Territory. This region is Retrieving fairly flat, with low hills. It has areas of grassland, wooded Look at graphs, maps, tables, charts, and parkland, and large northern forests.
    [Show full text]