DOCSLIB.ORG

1999 Rampart-Lapierre-House-Management-Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1999 Rampart-Lapierre-House-Management-Plan RAMPART HOUSE HISTORIC SITE LAPIERRE HOUSE HISTORIC SITE MANAGEMENT PLAN MARCH 1999 RAMPART HOUSE HISTORIC SITE LAPIERRE HOUSE HISTORIC SITE MANAGEMENT PLAN PREPARED FOR THE VUNTUT GWITCHIN FIRST NATION And THE GOVERNMENT OF THE YUKON MARCH 1999 PREPARED BY ECOGISTICS CONSULTING BOX 181 WELLS, BC, V0K 2R0 [email protected] voice: (250) 994-3349 fax: (250) 994-3358 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Ecogistics Consulting and the planning team would like to thank the members of the Heritage Committee, the staff of the Heritage Branch of Tourism Yukon, and the staff of the Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation for the assistance they have provided throughout the project. We would also like to thank the Vuntut Gwitchin Elders and other members of the community of Old Crow and the many people who took the time to come the to public meetings and contribute their thoughts and ideas. People from several different communities took the time to respond to the newsletter and their input is appreciated. Heritage Committee: Dennis Frost Ruth Gotthardt Katie Hayhurst William Josie Doug Olynyk Esau Schafer Planning Team Judy Campbell, Ecogistics Consulting, Senior Planner Eileen Fletcher, Architect and Conservation Specialist Helene Dobrowolsky and Rob Ingram – Midnight Arts, Interpretation Specialists Colin Beaisto, Historian Sheila Greer, Consulting Archaeologist Additional Contributions: Norm Barichello For the younger generation coming up, they want to know where their forefathers came from. Dennis Frost, 1998. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 BACKGROUND ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………………………. 1 1.1.1 The Planning and Public Consultation Process…………………………………………………... 3 1.2 THE PLANNING CONTEXT………………………………………………………………………….. 4 1.2.2 Location and Legal Boundaries…………………………………………………………………... 4 1.2.2 Climate………………………………………………………………………………………….... 9 1.2.3 Rampart House Ecological Setting……………………………………………………………..… 10 1.24. Lapierre House Ecological Setting……………………………………………………………….. 10 1.2.5 Traditional Use…………………………………………………………………………………… 11 1.2.6 Current Use………………………………………………………………………………………. 13 1.2.7 Other Planning Processes………………………………………………………………………… 14 2.0 HERITAGE RESOURCES………………………………………………………………………………….. 17 2.1 DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCES……………………………………………………………………... 17 2.1.1 Background and Definitions……………………………………………………………………… 17 2.1.2 Documentary Sources Available………………………………………………………………..... 18 2.1.3 Directions for Future Research…………………………………………………………………… 19 2.1.4 On-site Resources – Lapierre House……………………………………………………………… 23 2.1.5 On-site Resource – Rampart House……………………………………………………………… 24 2.2 ASSESSMENT…………………………………………………………………………………………. 26 2.2.1 Purpose of Assessment…………………………………………………………………………… 26 2.2.2 Condition…………………………………………………………………………………………. 26 2.2.3 Significance………………………………………………………………………………………. 32 2.2.4 Identification of Risks……………………………………………………………………………. 36 2.3 CONSERVATION APPROACHES……………………………………………………………………. 37 2.4 CONSERVATION PRIORITIES………………………………………………………………………. 42 2.4.1 Information for Assessment and Planning……………………………………………………….. 42 2.4.2 Protection…………………………………………………………………………………………. 45 3.0 SITE DEVELOPMENT AND VISITOR SERVICES………………………………………………………. 49 3.1 RANGE OF POSSIBLE USES…………………………………………………………………………. 50 3.2 DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT………………………………………………………………………….. 52 3.2.1 Relationship Between Lapierre House and Rampart House……………………………………… 52 3.2.2 Relationships with Other Places………………………………………………………………….. 52 3.2.3 Transportation Links and Access…………………………………………………………………. 54 3.3 SITE DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATIONS……………………………………………………… 55 3.3.1 Alternative Levels of Conservation and Development…………………………………………… 55 3.3.2 Lapierre House……………………………………………………………………………………. 55 3.3.3 Rampart House……………………………………………………………………………………. 59 3.3.4 Old Crow………………………………………………………………………………………….. 63 3.4 IMPACTS, BENEFITS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR DEVELOPMENT……………………………. 64 3.4.1 Land Use………………………………………………………………………………………….. 64 3.4.2 Access…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 64 3.4.3 Cultural Development…………………………………………………………………………….. 64 3.4.4 Education and Training…………………………………………………………………………… 65 3.4.5 Employment and Economic Development……………………………………………………….. 66 RAMPART HOUSE/LAPIERRE HOUSE Management Plan i TABLE OF CONTENTS (con’t) 4.0 INTERPRETATION…………………………………………………………………………………….…… 69 4.1 INTERPRETIVE PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS………………………………………………….. 69 4.2 INTERPRETIVE THEMES AND STORIES…………………………………………………………… 72 4.2.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………….. 72 4.2.2 General Themes…………………………………………………………………………………… 74 4.2.3 Specific Themes for Rampart House and Lapierre House………………………………………… 76 4.3 INTERPRETIVE RESOURCES………………………………………………………………………… 81 4.3.1 Historic Resources………………………………………………………………………………... 81 4.3.2 Natural Resources…………………………………………………………………………………. 83 4.4 INTERPRETIVE PRIORITIES…………………………………………………………………………. 86 5.0 IMPLEMENTATION………………………………………………………………………………………… 91 5.1 MANAGEMENT STRUCTURES………………………………………………………………………. 92 5.1.1 Role of the Joint Heritage Committee…………………………………………………………….. 92 5.1.2 Lapierre House/Rampart House Project Manager………………………………………………… 95 5.1.3 Site Supervisor…………………………………………………………………………………….. 95 5.1.4 Technical Support………………………………………………………………………………… 95 5.1.5 Final Agreement Obligations……………………………………………………………………... 96 5.2 COMMUNITY PROJECTS……………………………………………………………………………... 97 5.2.1 Project #1: Collecting Historic Site Information…………………………………………………. 99 5.2.2 Project #2: On-site Protection and Documentation………………………………………………. 103 5.2.3 Project #3: Basic Visitor Services………………………………………………………………... 105 5.2.4 Project #4: Conservation Project at Rampart House……………………………………………... 109 5.3 IMPLEMENTATION PHASING AND SCHEDULE…………………………………………………… 111 5.4 BUDGETARY PLANNING……………………………………………………………………………... 112 5.5 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS……………………………………………………………… 118 A1.0 APPENDIX ONE: LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS……………………………………………………. 123 A2.0 APPENDIX TWO: HISTORIC SUMMARY (UNDER SEPARATE COVER) A3.0 APPENDIX THREE: BIBLIOGRAPHY……………………………………………………………… 135 A4.0 RESOURCE CHRONOLOGY FORM………………………………………………………………… 141 RAMPART HOUSE/LAPIERRE HOUSE Management Plan ii BACKGROUND For the younger generation coming up, they want to know where their forefathers came from. Dennis Frost, 1998. 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 INTRODUCTION Rampart House Historic Site and Lapierre House Historic Site are special places. They are two of the earliest places in what would become the Yukon Territory where First Nation people met and interacted with non-natives. At these sites, the Gwich‟in dealt with fur traders, explorers, Christian missionaries, and government officials; people that brought many changes to Gwich‟in culture. In the late 1800s and the early part of this century, the two sites were important Gwich‟in communities. They were home to some Gwich‟in families and regularly visited by many others. Families have relatives who are buried in the cemeteries at the two sites. Being situated in Beringia, an area where some of the oldest archaeological sites in North America have been found, the sites are also part of an ancient cultural landscape. Both sites are still visited by Gwich‟in people and occasional tourists. Because of their cultural and historic values, these two sites were identified for special protection in the land claims agreement signed by the Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation and the Yukon and federal government in 1993. Under the Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation Final Agreement (the Final Agreement or VGFNFA), the sites will be jointly owned and managed by the Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation and the Yukon government, and will be designated as historic sites under the Yukon Historic Sites Act. The preparation of this management plan is a requirement of, and is consistent with, the provisions of the Final Agreement. Since 1989, considerable preliminary work has been done at the sites, including: surveys of the built and archaeological resources oral histories projects on both sites archival research on both sites temporary repairs to buildings at Rampart House more detailed archaeology at Rampart House The investment in the two sites is in the order of $200,000 made by the Government of the Yukon, the Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation and Parks Canada. RAMPART HOUSE/LAPIERRE HOUSE Management Plan 1 BACKGROUND Section 3.3 of Schedule B of the Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation Final Agreement states that the management plans should be guided by the following principles: 1) the protection, conservation and interpretation of the Heritage Resources at Rampart House and Lapierre House in accordance with national and international standards; 2) the recognition and protection of the traditional and current use of Rampart House and Lapierre House by the Vuntut Gwitchin; and 3) the encouragement of public awareness of and appreciation for the natural and cultural resources of Rampart House and Lapierre House. The terms of reference further stated that the plans should: 4) allow for the management and operation of the sites using resources available in Old Crow, 5) have realistic and achievable goals outlined in implementation plan schedules and budgets, and 6) contribute to the cultural and economic health of the Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation. The Terms of Reference developed for the preparation of this management plan specified that the management plans for the Sites be combined in one document and that the implementation plan coordinate the management of the two Historic Sites. This document therefore presents under one cover
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Wetlands, Biodiversity and the Ramsar Convention
    Wetlands, Biodiversity and the Ramsar Convention Wetlands, Biodiversity and the Ramsar Convention: the role of the Convention on Wetlands in the Conservation and Wise Use of Biodiversity edited by A. J. Hails Ramsar Convention Bureau Ministry of Environment and Forest, India 1996 [1997] Published by the Ramsar Convention Bureau, Gland, Switzerland, with the support of: • the General Directorate of Natural Resources and Environment, Ministry of the Walloon Region, Belgium • the Royal Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Denmark • the National Forest and Nature Agency, Ministry of the Environment and Energy, Denmark • the Ministry of Environment and Forests, India • the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Sweden Copyright © Ramsar Convention Bureau, 1997. Reproduction of this publication for educational and other non-commercial purposes is authorised without prior perinission from the copyright holder, providing that full acknowledgement is given. Reproduction for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without the prior written permission of the copyright holder. The views of the authors expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect those of the Ramsar Convention Bureau or of the Ministry of the Environment of India. Note: the designation of geographical entities in this book, and the presentation of material, do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Ranasar Convention Bureau concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Citation: Halls, A.J. (ed.), 1997. Wetlands, Biodiversity and the Ramsar Convention: The Role of the Convention on Wetlands in the Conservation and Wise Use of Biodiversity.
    [Show full text]
  • Waterfowl Population Status, 2007
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln US Fish & Wildlife Publications US Fish & Wildlife Service 7-25-2007 Waterfowl Population Status, 2007 Pamela R. Garrettson U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Timothy J. Moser U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Khristi Wilkins U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usfwspubs Garrettson, Pamela R.; Moser, Timothy J.; and Wilkins, Khristi, "Waterfowl Population Status, 2007" (2007). US Fish & Wildlife Publications. 399. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usfwspubs/399 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the US Fish & Wildlife Service at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in US Fish & Wildlife Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Waterfowl Population Status, 2007 WATERFOWL POPULATION STATUS, 2007 July 25, 2007 In North America the process of establishing hunting regulations for waterfowl is conducted annually. In the United States the process involves a number of scheduled meetings in which information regarding the status of waterfowl is presented to individuals within the agencies responsible for setting hunting regulations. In addition the proposed regulations are published in the Federal Register to allow public comment. This report includes the most current breeding population and production information available for waterfowl in North America and is a result of cooperative efforts by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the Canadian Wildlife Service (CWS), various state and provincial conservation agencies, and private conservation organizations. This report is intended to aid the development of waterfowl harvest regulations in the United States for the 2007-2008 hunting season.
    [Show full text]
  • B + 1 ,EE;Trr;Ment Environnement Fam*~1Coz’Rj3 --Hiericm Wérhdf Canada Canadian Wildlife Service Canadien Service De La Faune Printed September 1996 Ottawa, Ontario
    STRATEGIC OVERVIEW OF THE CANADIAN RAMSAR PROGRAM 7 1 0 B + 1 ,EE;trr;ment Environnement fAm*~1COz’rj3 --hiericm WérhdF Canada Canadian Wildlife Service canadien Service de la faune Printed September 1996 Ottawa, Ontario This document, Strategic Overview of the Canadian Ramsar Program, has been produced as a discussion paper for Ramsar site managers and decision makers involved in the implementation of the Ramsar Convention within Canadian jurisdictions. The paper provides a general overview of the development, current status and opportunities for the future direction of the Ramsar program in Canada . Comments and suggestions on the content of this paper are welcome at the address below. Copies of this paper are available from: ® Habitat Conservation Division Canadian Wildlife Service Environment Canada Ottawa, Ontario K1 A OH3 it Phone: (819) 953-0485 Fax: (819) 994-4445 Également disponible en français. NpA ENTq4 0~ec 50% recycled paper including 10% poet- wneumer fibre. %ue 0e 50 p" 100 CIO pepier recyclé dwrt 10 p. 100 de fibres post . consOmmetiorn STRATEGIC OVERVIEW OF THE CANADIAN RAMSAR PROGRAM Prepared by: Clayton D.A. Rubec and Manjit Kerr-Upal September 1996 Habitat Conservation Division Canadian Wildlife Service Environment Canada TABLE OF CONTENTS The Ramsar Convention . .1 Ramsar in North America . : . 2 Ramsar in Canada . .2 Canada's Ramsar Database. .. .3 Distribution of Canada's Ramsar Sites . .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .3 Jurisdictional Distribution . .. .. 4 Ecozonal and Ecoregional Distributicn . .- . .- 4 Wetland Regions Distribution . 7 Wetland Classification Analysis . 8 Selection Criteria . 9 Management of Canadian Ramsar Sites . 9 Responsible Authorities for Ramsar in Canada . 13 Considerations for a National Ramsar Committee for Canada .
    [Show full text]
  • Guidebook on Scientific Research in the Yukon
    GUIDEBOOK ON SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH IN THE YUKON Prepared by: Cultural Services Branch, Department of Tourism and Culture, Government of Yukon Revised April, 2008 Updated July 2013 Table of Contents PART I - SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH IN THE YUKON ...................................................................................................... 1 1. PREPARING TO DO SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH IN THE YUKON ................................................................................. 1 2. APPLYING FOR PERMITS AND LICENCES ................................................................................................................. 1 2.1 Project Description .................................................................................................................................................. 2 2.2 Research Team ......................................................................................................................................................... 2 2.3 Travel Plans ............................................................................................................................................................. 2 2.4 Project Impact .......................................................................................................................................................... 2 2.5 Community/First Nation Consultation ..................................................................................................................... 2 3. CONSULTING WITH AFFECTED COMMUNITIES .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Change and Traditional Use of the Old Crow Flats in Northern Canada: an IPY Opportunity to Meet the Challenges of the New Northern Research Paradigm
    ARCTIC VOL. 64, NO. 1 (MARCH 2011) InfoNorth Environmental Change and Traditional Use of the Old Crow Flats in Northern Canada: An IPY Opportunity to Meet the Challenges of the New Northern Research Paradigm by Brent B. Wolfe, Murray M. Humphries, Michael F.J. Pisaric, Ann M. Balasubramaniam, Chris R. Burn, Laurie Chan, Dorothy Cooley, Duane G. Froese, Shel Graupe, Roland I. Hall, Trevor Lantz, Trevor J. Porter, Pascale Roy-Leveillee, Kevin W. Turner, Sonia D. Wesche and Megan Williams INTRODUCTION to (1) document the history of environmental change in the OCF from a unique assemblage of archives that record natu- HE OLD CR O W FLAT s (OCF), northern Yukon Terri- ral history from the last interglacial to the present; (2) assess tory, is homeland to the Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation the distribution and abundance of vegetation and wildlife (VGFN) and is a Ramsar Wetland of International and identify the processes linking these to the changing T 2 Importance. This vast northern area encompasses 5600 km physical environment; (3) evaluate the impact of changes in and approximately 2700 shallow thermokarst lakes, creat- the physical and biological environment on traditional food ing a freshwater landscape that has long been an important sources of the VGFN and community adaptation options; refuge for Arctic wildlife, while also supporting the tradi- and (4) develop a long-term environmental monitoring pro- tional lifestyle of the VGFN. Observations and traditional gram for the OCF conducted by the VGFN through the IPY knowledge of the VGFN indicate that the OCF is undergo- and into the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Blue Jay, Vol.45, Issue 4
    CANADA'S COMMITMENT TO THE "RAMSAR" CONVENTION BERT POSTON, Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada, Room 230, 4999-98 Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta, T6B 2X3 and COLLEEN HYSLOP, Canadian Wildlife Ser¬ vice, Environment Canada, Ottawa, Ontario. K1A 0E7 Since references to "Ramsar" wetlands Bureau," consisting of an administrative are encountered periodically, an explana¬ unit based at IUCN Headquarters in tion of the term is needed. Ramsar is the Gland, Switzerland, and a unit to provide city in Iran in which in 1971 the "Con¬ technical and scientific advisory services vention on Wetlands of International Im¬ based at IWRB Headquarters in Slim- portance especially as Waterfowl Habitat" bridge, England. The Bureau carries out (also known as the Ramsar Convention) the work of the Parties, such as keeping was first drafted by 18 countries. By track of The List of wetlands and changes creating an international mechanism for to it, encouraging countries to join the the protection of wetlands, these countries Convention, arranging for studies to be demonstrated their commitment to the done on important wetland issues, and ar¬ conservation, management and wise use ranging for meetings of the Parties. of these environments, their fauna and flora. Canada acceded to the Ramsar Conven¬ tion in 1981 and designated Cap Since 1971 there have been three con¬ Tourmente National Wildlife Area, ferences of the "Parties to the Ramsar Con¬ Quebec, as Canada's first Ramsar wetland. vention" - in Cagliari, Italy (1980), in Fourteen more wetlands were added in Groningen, the Netherlands (1984) and in 1982, 2 in 1985, and 11 new sites were Regina, Canada from 27 May to 5 June announced at the 1987 conference for a 1987.
    [Show full text]
  • North American Important Bird Areas
    North American Important Bird Areas A Directory of 150 Key Conservation Sites Table of Contents This publication was prepared by the Secretariat of the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC). The views contained herein do not necessarily reflect the views of the CEC, or the governments of Canada, Mexico or the United States of Table of Contents America. Foreword . v Acknowlegments . ix Reproduction of this document in whole or in part and in any Introduction. 1 form for educational or nonprofit purposes may be made with- Methods. 5 out special permission from the CEC Secretariat, provided Criteria . 9 acknowledgement of the source is made. The CEC would appre- Conservation and Management of Important Bird Areas . 17 How to Read the IBA Site Accounts. 29 ciate receiving a copy of any publication or material that uses this document as a source. Canada . 31 Introduction to the Canadian Sites . 35 Published by the Communications and Public Outreach Depart- United States . 139 ment of the CEC Secretariat. Introduction to the US Sites . 143 For more information about this or other publications from Mexico . 249 the CEC, contact : Introduction to the Mexican Sites. 253 COMMISSION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COOPERATION 393, rue St-Jacques Ouest, bureau 200 Montréal (Québec) Canada H2Y 1N9 Tel: (514) 350–4300 • Fax: (514) 350–4314 http://www.cec.org ISBN 2-922305-42-2 Disponible en français sous le titre : Les zones importantes pour la con- servation des oiseaux en Amérique du Nord (ISBN 2-922305-44-9). Disponible en español con el título Áreas Importantes para la Conservación de las Aves de América del Norte (ISBN 2-922305-43-0).
    [Show full text]
  • A Forest of Blue: Canada's Boreal
    A Forest of Blue Canada’s Boreal the pew environment Group is the also benefitting the report were reviews, conservation arm of the pew Charitable edits, contributions and discussions trusts, a non-governmental organization with sylvain archambault, Chris Beck, that applies a rigorous, analytical Joanne Breckenridge, Matt Carlson, approach to improve public policy, inform david Childs, Valerie Courtois, ronnie the public and stimulate civic life. drever, sean durkan, simon dyer, www.pewenvironment.org Jonathon Feldgajer, suzanne Fraser, Mary Granskou, larry Innes, Mathew the Canadian Boreal Initiative and the Jacobson, steve kallick, sue libenson, Boreal songbird Initiative are projects anne levesque, lisa McCrummen, of the pew environment Group’s tony Mass, suzann Methot, Faisal International Boreal Conservation Moola, lane nothman, Jaline Quinto, Campaign, working to protect the kendra ramdanny, Fritz reid, elyssa largest intact forest on earth. rosen, hugo seguin, Gary stewart, allison Wells and alan Young. Authors Jeffrey Wells, ph.d. the design work for the report was ably Science Adviser for the International carried out through many iterations by Boreal Conservation Campaign Genevieve Margherio and tanja Bos. dina roberts, ph.d. Boreal Songbird Initiative Suggested citation Wells, J., d. roberts, p. lee, r, Cheng peter lee and M. darveau. 2010. a Forest of Global Forest Watch Canada Blue—Canada’s Boreal Forest: the ryan Cheng World’s Waterkeeper. International Global Forest Watch Canada Boreal Conservation Campaign, seattle. Marcel darveau, ph.d. 74 pp. Ducks Unlimited Canada this report is printed on paper that is 100 percent post-consumer recycled fiber, Acknowledgments For their review of and comments on processed chlorine-free.
    [Show full text]
  • Giant Beaver (Castoroides) Palaeoecology Inferred from Stable Isotopes
    Western University Scholarship@Western Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository 10-27-2016 12:00 AM Giant Beaver (Castoroides) Palaeoecology Inferred from Stable Isotopes Tessa Plint The University of Western Ontario Supervisor Fred J. Longstaffe The University of Western Ontario Graduate Program in Geology A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree in Master of Science © Tessa Plint 2016 Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd Part of the Biogeochemistry Commons, Paleobiology Commons, and the Paleontology Commons Recommended Citation Plint, Tessa, "Giant Beaver (Castoroides) Palaeoecology Inferred from Stable Isotopes" (2016). Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository. 4236. https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd/4236 This Dissertation/Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Western. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Western. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Abstract Stable isotope analysis was used to explore unresolved questions about the palaeoecology of the extinct Pleistocene giant beaver (Castoroides). The 13C, δ15N, and 18O of bone collagen and structural carbonate from enamel served as proxies for palaeodiet and palaeoclimate. A new baseline for freshwater and terrestrial plant 13C and δ15N was utilized in a mixing model (SIAR) to assess rodent feeding niche. SIAR analysis indicated that Castoroides’ consumed a diet of predominantly macrophytes, making them reliant on wetland habitat for food. Based on isotopic data for potential modern analog species (Castor and Ondatra), SIAR also indicated that Castor and Castoroides occupied complementary dietary niches, allowing them to share habitat space throughout the Pleistocene.
    [Show full text]
  • English, French, Spanish)
    NATIONAL REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RAMSAR CONVENTION ON WETLANDS National Reports to be submitted to the 11th Meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties, Romania, June 2012 Please submit the completed National Report, in electronic (Microsoft Word) format, and preferably by e-mail, to the Ramsar Secretariat by 15 September 2011. National Reports should be sent to: Alexia Dufour, Regional Affairs Officer, Ramsar Secretariat ([email protected]) National Report Format for Ramsar COP11, page 2 Introduction & background 1. This National Report Format (NRF) has been approved by the Standing Committee in Decision SC41-24 for the Ramsar Convention’s Contracting Parties to complete as their national reporting to the 11th meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties of the Convention (Bucharest, Romania, June 2012). 2. Following Standing Committee discussions at its 40th meeting in May 2009, and its Decision SC40-29, this COP11 National Report Format closely follows that used for the COP10 National Report Format, which in turn was a significantly revised and simplified format in comparison with the National Report Formats provided to previous recent COPs. 3. In addition to thus permitting continuity of reporting and implementation progress analyses by ensuring that indicator questions are as far as possible consistent with previous NRFs (and especially the COP10 NRF), this COP11 NRF is structured in terms of the Goals and Strategies of the 2009-2015 Ramsar Strategic Plan adopted at COP10 as Resolution X.1, and the indicators
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring Governance in Canadian Ramsar Sites to Ensure Their Sustainability
    Exploring Governance in Canadian Ramsar Sites to Ensure their Sustainability Jocelyn Baker A Major Research Paper Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Sustainability in The Faculty of Social Sciences Brock University St Catharines, Ontario, Canada November 2019 © Jocelyn Baker, 2019 ABSTRACT The Ramsar Convention came into effect in 1975, in response to global losses of wetland habitats and their ecological services. Canada joined the Convention in 1981. As essential elements of sustainability, this research examined the types of governance and management activities used in the 37 Canadian Ramsar sites. How ecosystem governance could further support environmental sustainability was also explored. Ramsar sites were assessed using sustainability indicators, looking at the 14 priority areas of focus such as presence of co-management structures, management plans, and monitoring programs under the three commitment criteria (wise use, management, cooperation). The results showed a large variation in terms of management plans, governance structures and reporting procedures with some sites, such as Old Crow Flats, having high sustainability scores while others, such as Southern James Bay, with low scores. Reasons for variation related to the lack of updated management plans and inadequate monitoring and reporting programs. Sustainability science provides linkages between ecological and social systems, underpinned by participatory and collaborative governance structures. Canadian Ramsar sites provide a living example of how social-ecological characteristics should be integrated to ensure sustainability. Keywords: Ramsar, wetlands, ecosystem services, environmental sustainability, governance Acknowledgement My Masters candidacy experience can be summarized by a pivotal conversation, a life- changing reading and an iconic diagram.
    [Show full text]
  • Rampart House & Lapierre House Historic Sites Interpretation Plan
    Lapierre House and Rampart House Historic Sites Interpretation Plan Rampart House, June 2007. Midnight Arts photo prepared for Vuntut Gwitchin and Yukon Government, Historic Sites by Helene Dobrowolsky & Rob Ingram Midnight Arts June 2008 Lapierre House and Rampart House Historic Sites Interpretation Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...........................................................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................................3 1.0 ORIENTATION & ACCESS ...............................................................................................................................6 2.0 PLANNING BACKGROUND & RECENT ACTIVITIES..............................................................................11 3.0 A WARMER WELCOME: SITE ISSUES........................................................................................................13 3.1 RAMPART HOUSE .........................................................................................................................................13 3.2 LAPIERRE HOUSE .........................................................................................................................................16 3.3 TRAVEL CONSTRAINTS ......................................................................................................................................17 3.4 CONCLUSION .....................................................................................................................................................18
    [Show full text]