DOCSLIB.ORG

Universidade Federal De Goiás Instituto De Ciências Biológicas

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Universidade Federal De Goiás Instituto De Ciências Biológicas Universidade Federal de Goiás Instituto de Ciências Biológicas Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia e Evolução Identificando as ecorregiões das Américas prioritárias para a conservação da biodiversidade Tatiel Venâncio Gonçalves Orientador: Daniel Brito Goiânia/GO Março de 2016 Ecologia e Evolução ii Universidade Federal de Goiás Instituto de Ciências Biológicas Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia e Evolução Identificando as ecorregiões das Américas prioritárias para a conservação da biodiversidade Tatiel Venâncio Gonçalves Dissertação apresentada à Universidade Federal de Goiás como parte das exigências do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia e Evolução para a obtenção do título de Mestre. Goiânia/GO Março de 2016 v vi “O degrau de uma escada não serve simplesmente para que alguém permaneça em cima dele, destina-se a sustentar o pé de um homem pelo tempo suficiente para que ele coloque o outro um pouco mais alto.” Thomas Huxley vii Agradecimentos Agradeço primeiramente a Deus, por ter me dado fé e força para cumprir meus objetivos. Agradeço a minha esposa Kelly Cristine, que desde minha graduação me apoiou e me levantou nos momentos mais difíceis. A ela, todo meu agradecimento e amor. Agradeço aos meus pais e familiares pelo apoio e por acreditarem em meus sonhos. Agradeço aos meus amigos pela amizade e apoio em todos os momentos. Agradeço ao meu orientador pelo apoio me dado desde minha graduação, quando não deixou que desistisse do curso. Agradeço à CAPES pelo financiamento e por minha manutenção no curso. Agradeço aos professores pelo grande ensinamento que me passaram. E agradeço a todos pela torcida e apoio em todos os momentos. viii Sumário Apresentação ................................................................................................................................. 1 Resumo .......................................................................................................................................... 2 Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... 3 1.0. Introdução .............................................................................................................................. 4 2.0. Materiais e Métodos ............................................................................................................... 9 2.1. Perda histórica de cobertura vegetal ( ......................................................................... 9 2.2. Índice de endemismo de espécies ( .......................................................................... 12 2.3. Índice de ameaça de espécies ( ................................................................................. 14 2.4. Grupo prioritário ( ) ..................................................................................................... 16 2.5. Tamanho da ecorregião ( .......................................................................................... 17 2.6. Status de proteção da ecorregião ( ............................................................................ 18 2.7. Valor econômico da ecorregião ( ............................................................................. 21 2.8. Valor de prioridade e categoria final ................................................................................ 24 2.9. Categoria de ameaça da IUCN ......................................................................................... 27 2.10. Grau de desconhecimento da categoria de ameaça das espécies (GD) .......................... 29 3.0. Resultados ............................................................................................................................ 30 3.1. Ecorregiões prioritárias para a conservação ..................................................................... 30 3.2. Grupo prioritário .............................................................................................................. 32 3.3. Status de proteção............................................................................................................. 35 3.4. Categoria de ameaça das ecorregiões ............................................................................... 36 3.5. Grau de desconhecimento da categoria de ameaça das espécies ...................................... 38 4.0. Discussão .............................................................................................................................. 41 5.0. Conclusão ............................................................................................................................. 49 6.0. Referências ........................................................................................................................... 51 7.0. Material Suplementar ........................................................................................................... 59 Material Suplementar I ............................................................................................................ 60 Material Suplementar II .......................................................................................................... 74 Material Suplementar III ......................................................................................................... 76 Material Suplementar IV ......................................................................................................... 90 Material Suplementar V ........................................................................................................ 104 Material Suplementar VI ....................................................................................................... 119 Mapas Suplementares ............................................................................................................ 133 1 Apresentação Este trabalho foi escrito em capítulo único e no formato dissertativo. Está composto por: Introdução, Materiais e Métodos, Resultados, Discussão, Conclusão, Referências e Material Suplementar. As áreas temáticas trabalhadas são: conservação, biodiversidade, priorização espacial e listas vermelhas. 2 Resumo Vivemos numa atual crise de perda de biodiversidade, decorrida do crescimento populacional e do uso desordenado dos recursos. Uma das alternativas para reverter essa situação é maximizar a eficiência do uso dos recursos disponíveis para a conservação, principalmente porque estes sempre são limitados. A priorização espacial é uma ferramenta importante para este fim. Neste trabalho, o objetivo principal é identificar as ecorregiões das Américas prioritárias para a conservação da biodiversidade. Foram utilizados seis critérios na priorização: perda de cobertura vegetal, endemismo, presença de espécies ameaçadas, tamanho da ecorregião, presença de Unidades de Conservação e valor econômico. Além disso, foi identificado o status de proteção de cada ecorregião, o grupo mais prioritário, a categoria de ameaça e a proporção de espécies Deficiente de Dados (DD). Foram encontradas ecorregiões em quatro categorias de prioridade (da B3 ao A3). As mais prioritárias são as de pequeno tamanho, principalmente ilhas, e ecorregiões localizadas no Caribe, centro-oeste e sul da América do Sul, México e parte dos Estados Unidos. Cerca de 75% das ecorregiões não possuem Unidades de Conservação ou estas são insuficientes. Além disso, quase a metade das ecorregiões das Américas estão ameaçadas. O grupo das aves foi considerado o mais prioritário na maioria das ecorregiões. A proporção de espécies DD foi menor na América do Norte e maior nas regiões mais diversificadas biologicamente, principalmente no grupo dos anfíbios. Este trabalho adicionou uma nova ferramenta de priorização espacial, que deve ser aplicado em outras regiões e escalas e contribuir para os tomadores de decisão, que terão o desafio de maximizar o uso dos recursos disponíveis para a conservação em detrimento da realidade social e econômica de cada país avaliado. Palavras-chave: América, biodiversidade, conservação, ecorregião, priorização espacial. 3 Abstract We live in a current loss of biodiversity crises, elapsed population growth and uncontrolled use of resources. One of the alternatives to reverse this situation is to maximize the use of available resources for conservation, mainly because these are often limited. The spatial prioritization is an important tool for this purpose. In this paper, the main objective is to identify the priority ecoregions of the Americas for biodiversity conservation. Six criteria were used in the prioritization: loss of vegetation cover, endemism, the presence of threatened species, size of ecoregion, presence of protected areas and economic value. Moreover, was identified the protection status of each ecoregion, the highest priority group animal, the threat category and the proportion of Data Deficient species (DD). Ecoregions were found in four categories of priority (B3-A3). The highest priorities are the small size, especially islands, and ecoregions located in the Caribbean, Midwest and Southern South America, Mexico and the United States. About 75% of ecoregions not have protected areas or these are insufficient. Moreover, nearly half of the ecoregions of the Americas are threatened. The group of birds was considered the highest priority in most ecoregions. The proportion of Data Deficient species was lowest in North America and most biologically diverse regions in the most, especially in the group of amphibians. This paper added a new spatial prioritization
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Vegetation and Flora of Auyuittuq National Park Reserve, Baffin Island
    THE VEGETATION AND FLORA OF AUYUITTOQ NATIONAL PARK RESERVE, BAFFIN ISLAND ;JAMES E. HINES AND STEVE MOORE DEPARTMENT OF RENEWABLE RESOURCES GOVERNMENT OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES YELLOWKNIFE I NORTHWEST TERRITORIES I XlA 2L9 1988 A project completed under contract to Environment Canada, Canadian Parks Service, Prairie and Northern Region, Winnipeg, Manitoba. 0 ~tona Renewable Resources File Report No. 74 Renewabl• R•sources ~ Government of tha N p .0. Box l 310 Ya\lowknif e, NT XlA 2L9 ii! ABSTRACT The purposes of this investigation were to describe the flora and major types of plant communities present in Auyuittuq National Park Reserve, Baffin Island, and to evaluate factors influencing the distribution of the local vegetation. Six major types of plant communities were recognized based on detailed descriptions of the physical environment, flora, and ground cover of shrubs, herbs, bryophytes, ·and lichens at 100 sites. Three highly interrelated variables (elevation, soil moisture, and texture of surficial deposits) seemed to be important in determining the distribution and abundance of plant communities. Continuous vegetation developed mainly at low elevations on mesic to wet, fine-textured deposits. Wet tundra, characterized by abundant cover of shrubs, grasses, sedges, and forbs, occurred most frequently on wet, fine-textured marine and fluvial sediments. Dwarf shrub-qram.inoid comm.unities were comprised of abundant shrubs, grasses, sedges and forbs and were found most frequently below elevations of 400 m on mesic till or colluvial deposits. Dwarf shrub comm.unities were characterized by abundant dwarf shrub and lichen cover. They developed at similar elevations and on similar types of surficial deposits as dwarf-shrub graminoid communities.
    [Show full text]
  • Supply Base Report V1.2 Princeton Standard Pellet Corporation FINAL
    Supply Base Report: Princeton Standard Pellet Corporation www.sbp-cert.org Focusing on sustainable sourcing solutions Completed in accordance with the Supply Base Report Template Version 1.2 For further information on the SBP Framework and to view the full set of documentation see www.sbp-cert.org Document history Version 1.0: published 26 March 2015 Version 1.1 published 22 February 2016 Version 1.2 published 23 June 2016 © Copyright The Sustainable Biomass Partnership Limited 2016 Supply Base Report: Princeton Standard Pellet Corporation Page ii Focusing on sustainable sourcing solutions Contents 1 Overview ................................................................................................................................................ 1 2 Description of the Supply Base ........................................................................................................... 2 2.1 General description ................................................................................................................................. 2 2.2 Actions taken to promote certification amongst feedstock supplier ........................................................ 4 2.3 Final harvest sampling programme ........................................................................................................ 4 2.4 Flow diagram of feedstock inputs showing feedstock type [optional] ..................................................... 4 2.5 Quantification of the Supply Base ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • CW NRA Coversheet
    FOREST STEWARDSHIP COUNCIL® UNITED STATES The mark of responsible forestry ® FSC F000232 FSC US Controlled Wood National Risk Assessment DRAFT FIRST PUBLIC CONSULTATION Version: First Public Consultation Draft (V 0.1) Consultation Date: January 12, 2015 Consultation End Date: March 13, 2015 Contact Person: Gary Dodge, Director of Science & Certification Email address: [email protected] 212 Third Avenue North, Suite 445, Minneapolis, MN 55401 (612) 353-4511 WWW.FSCUS.ORG FSC$US$National$Risk$Assessment$ ! $ Overview! This%document%contains%programmatic%requirements%for%organizations%to%make%controlled)wood%claims% for%uncertified%materials%sourced%from%the%conterminous%United%States.%%% This%document%focuses%specifically%on%Risk%Categories%3%(High%Conservation%Values),%and%4%(Conversion),% as%defined%by%the%FSC%National%Risk%Assessment%Framework%(PROL60L002a).%FSC%International,%via%a% Centralized%National%Risk%Assessment%(CNRA),%is%assessing%the%other%categories%of%risk.%Specifically,%there% is%a%CNRA%for%Legality%(Category%1),%Traditional%and%Civil%Rights%(Category%2),%and%GMOs%(Category%5).%% % Part%1%of%this%document%contains%requirements%specific%to%making%controlled)wood%claims%in%the% conterminous%US.%This%Company%Controlled%Wood%Program%includes%a%Due%Diligence%System%(DDS),% Controlled%Wood%Policy,%documentation%of%the%supply%area,%identification%of%areas%of%specified)risk%in%the% supply%area,%and%a%company%system%for%addressing%specified)risk%in%the%supply%area.% Part%2%includes%the%framework%for%High%Conservation%Values%(HCVs)%in%the%conterminous%US,%including%
    [Show full text]
  • Impacts of Land Use on Biodiversity: Development of Spatially Differentiated Global Assessment Methodologies for Life Cycle Assessment
    DISS. ETH NO. xx Impacts of land use on biodiversity: development of spatially differentiated global assessment methodologies for life cycle assessment A dissertation submitted to ETH ZURICH for the degree of Doctor of Sciences presented by LAURA SIMONE DE BAAN Master of Sciences ETH born January 23, 1981 citizen of Steinmaur (ZH), Switzerland accepted on the recommendation of Prof. Dr. Stefanie Hellweg, examiner Prof. Dr. Thomas Koellner, co-examiner Dr. Llorenç Milà i Canals, co-examiner 2013 In Gedenken an Frans Remarks This thesis is a cumulative thesis and consists of five research papers, which were written by several authors. The chapters Introduction and Concluding Remarks were written by myself. For the sake of consistency, I use the personal pronoun ‘we’ throughout this thesis, even in the chapters Introduction and Concluding Remarks. Summary Summary Today, one third of the Earth’s land surface is used for agricultural purposes, which has led to massive changes in global ecosystems. Land use is one of the main current and projected future drivers of biodiversity loss. Because many agricultural commodities are traded globally, their production often affects multiple regions. Therefore, methodologies with global coverage are needed to analyze the effects of land use on biodiversity. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a tool that assesses environmental impacts over the entire life cycle of products, from the extraction of resources to production, use, and disposal. Although LCA aims to provide information about all relevant environmental impacts, prior to this Ph.D. project, globally applicable methods for capturing the effects of land use on biodiversity did not exist.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ecology of the Ponderosa Pine Zone
    The Ecology of the Ponderosa Pine Zone he Ponderosa Pine Zone takes its name from the Tponderosa pine forests that typify the area. The majestic ponderosa pine can be found in closed to open forests and savanna. This is a hot, dry zone, although not as hot and dry as the Bunchgrass Zone. The Pondrosa Pine Zone occupies low elevations in the dry valleys of the southern Interior Plateau and East Kootenays and consists of a visually satisfying mosaic of forests, grasslands, and wetlands. This zone is home to a wide variety of birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians, some of which are relatively rare or threatened by extirpation. Location The Ponderosa Pine Zone is located at low elevations along the very dry valleys of British Columbia’s southern interior. The zone occupies a narrow band along the bottoms and lower side walls of a num- ber of major river valleys, including the Fraser (in the Lytton-Lillooet area), lower Thompson, Nicola, Alex Inselberg Similkameen, and lower Kettle. It also occurs in areas Ponderosa pine stand adjacent to Okanagan Lake and in southeastern British Columbia near Cranbrook and Lake Kookanusa. The Ponderosa Pine Zone extends south into the Ecosystems United States where it is much more widespread than in Canada. The vegetation in this zone often consists of a mosaic of forests and grass- land. Ponderosa pine, which dominates most forests in this zone, is also called yel- low pine and is best known for its characteristic vanilla- scented, cinnamon-coloured bark made up of jigsaw- puzzle-shaped scales. The thick bark helps make Evelyn Hamilton the tree resistant to surface Bill Swan fires.
    [Show full text]
  • Impacts of Human Developments and Land Use on Caribou: a Literature Review Volume I: a Worldwide Perspective
    IMPACTS OF HUMAN DEVELOPMENTS AND LAND USE ON CARIBOU: A LITERATURE REVIEW VOLUME I: A WORLDWIDE PERSPECTIVE R.T. Shideler, M.H. Robus, J.F. Winters, and M. Kuwada Technical Report 86-2 Alaska Department of Fish & Game Habitat and Restoration Division The Alaslia Department of Fish and Game administers all programs and activities free from discrimination on the basis of sex, color, race, religion, national origin, age, marital status, pregnancy, parenthood, or disability. For information on alternative formats available for this and other department publications contact the department ADA Coordinator (voice) 9071465-4120: (TTD) 9071478-3648. Any person who believes slhe has been discriminated against should write to: ADF&G, PO Box 25526, Juneau, AK 99802-5526 or O.E.O. U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington D.C. 20240. IMPACTS OF HUMAN DEVELOPMENTS AJYD LAND USE ON CARIBOU: A LITERATURE REVIEW Volume I: A Worldwide Perspective by R.T. Shideler, 1vI.H. Robus, J.F. Winters, and M. Kuwada Technical Report 86-2 Norman A. Cohen Director Division of Habitat Alaska Department of Fish and Game P.O. Box 3-2000 Juneau, Alaska 99802 June 1986 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................... v LIST OF TABLES ....................................................... vi ACKNmmS..................................................... vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................... ix 1.0 GENERAL INTRODUCTION ............................................ 1 1.1 Scope & Organization
    [Show full text]
  • Community Wildfire Protection Plan
    ȱ REGIONALȱ DISTRICTȱ OFȱ CENTRALȱ OKANAGANȱȱ ȱ COMMUNITYȱ WILDFIREȱ PROTECTIONȱ PLAN ConsiderationsȱforȱWildlandȱUrbanȱInterfaceȱ ManagementȱinȱtheȱRegionalȱDistrictȱofȱCentralȱ Okanagan,ȱBritishȱColumbiaȱȱ FINALȱ ȱ Submittedȱby:ȱ AmeliaȱNeedobaȱandȱBruceȱBlackwellȱ B.A.ȱBlackwellȱandȱAssociatesȱLtd.ȱ 3087ȱHoskinsȱRoadȱ NorthȱVancouver,ȱB.C.ȱ V7Jȱ3B5ȱ ȱ ȱ Submittedȱto:ȱ CathyȱMacKenzieȱ ForestȱHealthȱOperatorȱ RegionalȱDistrictȱofȱCentralȱOkanaganȱ 1450ȱK.L.O.ȱRoadȱ Kelowna,ȱB.C.ȱV1Wȱ3Z4ȱ ȱ ȱ RPF PRINTED NAME Registered Professional Foresters Signature and Seal Bruce A. Blackwell RPF 2073 DATE SIGNED I certify that I have reviewed this document and I have determined that this work has been done to standards acceptable of a Registered Professional Forester. RDCO Community Wildfire Protection Plan Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background ..................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 How to Use this Document ........................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Documentation of Process Undertaken and Major Milestones ............................................... 2 1.4 Consistency with Adjacent CWPPs ............................................................................................. 2 2.0 STUDY AREA ..............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Nepcon CB Public Summary Report V1.2 Princeton Standard Pellet
    NEPCon Evaluation of Princeton Standard Pellet Corporation Compliance with the SBP Framework: Public Summary Report Main (Initial) Audit www.sbp-cert.org Focusing on sustainable sourcing solutions Completed in accordance with the CB Public Summary Report Template Version 1.2 For further information on the SBP Framework and to view the full set of documentation see www.sbp-cert.org Document history Version 1.0: published 26 March 2015 Version 1.1: published 30 January 2018 Version 1.2: published 4 April 2018 © Copyright The Sustainable Biomass Program Limited 2018 NEPCon Evaluation of Princeton Standard Pellet Corporation: Public Summary Report Page ii Focusing on sustainable sourcing solutions Table of Contents 1 Overview 2 Scope of the evaluation and SBP certificate 3 Specific objective 4 SBP Standards utilised 4.1 SBP Standards utilised 4.2 SBP-endorsed Regional Risk Assessment 5 Description of Company, Supply Base and Forest Management 5.1 Description of Company 5.2 Description of Company’s Supply Base 5.3 Detailed description of Supply Base 5.4 Chain of Custody system 6 Evaluation process 6.1 Timing of evaluation activities 6.2 Description of evaluation activities 6.3 Process for consultation with stakeholders 7 Results 7.1 Main strengths and weaknesses 7.2 Rigour of Supply Base Evaluation 7.3 Compilation of data on Greenhouse Gas emissions 7.4 Competency of involved personnel 7.5 Stakeholder feedback 7.6 Preconditions 8 Review of Company’s Risk Assessments 9 Review of Company’s mitigation measures 10 Non-conformities and observations 11 Certification recommendation NEPCon Evaluation of Princeton Standard Pellet Corporation: Public Summary Report Page iii Focusing on sustainable sourcing solutions 1 Overview CB Name and contact: NEPCon, Filosoofi 31, 50108 Tartu, Estonia Primary contact for SBP: Ondrej Tarabus Current report completion date: 13/Feb/2019 Report authors: Christian Rahbek and Darren Johnson Name of the Company: Princeton Standard Pellet Corporation Company contact for SBP: Richard White, General Manager.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Sea Level Rise Mediated by Climate Change 7 8 9 10 Shaily Menon ● Jorge Soberón ● Xingong Li ● A
    The original publication is available at www.springerlink.com Biodiversity and Conservation Menon et al. 1 Volume 19, Number 6, 1599-1609, DOI: 10.1007/s10531-010-9790-4 1 2 3 4 5 Preliminary global assessment of biodiversity consequences 6 of sea level rise mediated by climate change 7 8 9 10 Shaily Menon ● Jorge Soberón ● Xingong Li ● A. Townsend Peterson 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 S. Menon 18 Department of Biology, Grand Valley State University, Allendale, Michigan 49401-9403 USA, 19 [email protected] 20 21 J. Soberón 22 Natural History Museum and Biodiversity Research Center, The University of Kansas, 23 Lawrence, Kansas 66045 USA 24 25 X. Li 26 Department of Geography, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas 66045 USA 27 28 A. T. Peterson 29 Natural History Museum and Biodiversity Research Center, The University of Kansas, 30 Lawrence, Kansas 66045 USA 31 32 33 34 Corresponding Author: 35 A. Townsend Peterson 36 Tel: (785) 864-3926 37 Fax: (785) 864-5335 38 Email: [email protected] 39 40 The original publication is available at www.springerlink.com | DOI: 10.1007/s10531-010-9790-4 Menon et al. Biodiversity consequences of sea level rise 2 41 Running Title: Biodiversity consequences of sea level rise 42 43 Preliminary global assessment of biodiversity consequences 44 of sea level rise mediated by climate change 45 46 Shaily Menon ● Jorge Soberón ● Xingong Li ● A. Townsend Peterson 47 48 49 Abstract Considerable attention has focused on the climatic effects of global climate change on 50 biodiversity, but few analyses and no broad assessments have evaluated the effects of sea level 51 rise on biodiversity.
    [Show full text]
  • Letter Template
    KPMG Forest Certification Services Inc. Telephone (604) 691-3000 Box 10426, 777 Dunsmuir Street Fax (604) 691-3031 Vancouver BC V7Y 1K3 www.kpmg.ca Canada To: Zellstoff Celgar Limited Partnership FSC® CoC/CW Stakeholders October 5, 2017 Dear Stakeholder, Stakeholder Consultation KPMG Forest Certification Services Inc. (KPMG FCSI) to conduct an FSC® Chain and Custody/Controlled Wood Re-certification Audit of Zellstoff Celgar Limited Partnership Purpose and scope of the audit KPMG Forest Certification Services Inc. (KPMG FCSI) will be conducting a re-certification audit of Zellstoff Celgar Limited Partnership (ZCLP) against the requirements of the current Forest Stewardship Council® (FSC) chain of custody (CoC) and controlled wood (CW) standards. A stakeholder consultation process is planned for the fall of 2017, with the main assessment scheduled to begin on November 22, 2017 and conclude on November 24, 2017. The supply area for ZCLP includes those portions of the WWF ecoregions listed below that are located as follows: USA and Canada: • NA0507 – Cascade Mountains leeward forests • NA0518 – Northern Central Rockies forests • NA0522 – Okanagan Dry forest USA only: • NA0505 – Blue Mountains Forest – (Very small overlap at the very southern edge of their supply area) • NA0528 – South Central Rockies Forest – (Very small overlap at the very southern edge of their supply area) • NA0808 – Montana Valley and Foothill grassland (Biome is Temperate Grassland, Savannas, and Shrublands) • NA0813 – Palouse grassland – (Biome is Temperate Grassland, Savannas, and Shrublands) • NA1309 – Snake-Columbia shrub steppe – (Biome is Deserts and Xeric Shrublands) Zellstoff Celgar Limited Partnership FSC® CoC/CW Stakeholders October 5, 2017 Page 2 A map of the WWF ecoregions containing forest landscapes from which ZCLP procures fiber is located at: https://zellstoffcelgar.maps.arcgis.com/sharing/rest/content/items/ef90bedfddf54bfa87ead63ee91 74a06/data The audit will be based on the current FSC CoC (FSC-STD-40-004 V3-0) and CW (FSC-STD-40- 005 V3-1) standards.
    [Show full text]
  • Identifying Priority Ecoregions for Amphibian Conservation in the U.S. and Canada
    Acknowledgements This assessment was conducted as part of a priority setting effort for Operation Frog Pond, a project of Tree Walkers International. Operation Frog Pond is designed to encourage private individuals and community groups to become involved in amphibian conservation around their homes and communities. Funding for this assessment was provided by The Lawrence Foundation, Northwest Frog Fest, and members of Tree Walkers International. This assessment would not be possible without data provided by The Global Amphibian Assessment, NatureServe, and the International Conservation Union. We are indebted to their foresight in compiling basic scientific information about species’ distributions, ecology, and conservation status; and making these data available to the public, so that we can provide informed stewardship for our natural resources. I would also like to extend a special thank you to Aaron Bloch for compiling conservation status data for amphibians in the United States and to Joe Milmoe and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program for supporting Operation Frog Pond. Photo Credits Photographs are credited to each photographer on the pages where they appear. All rights are reserved by individual photographers. All photos on the front and back cover are copyright Tim Paine. Suggested Citation Brock, B.L. 2007. Identifying priority ecoregions for amphibian conservation in the U.S. and Canada. Tree Walkers International Special Report. Tree Walkers International, USA. Text © 2007 by Brent L. Brock and Tree Walkers International Tree Walkers International, 3025 Woodchuck Road, Bozeman, MT 59715-1702 Layout and design: Elizabeth K. Brock Photographs: as noted, all rights reserved by individual photographers.
    [Show full text]
  • Interfor Interior 2018 SFI Public Summary Report DRAFT.Pub
    kpmg Interfor Corporation—Interior Woodlands Operations 2018 SFI Surveillance Audit In July 2018 an audit team from KPMG Performance Registrar Inc. (KPMG PRI) carried out an SFI surveillance audit of Interfor Corporation (Interfor)’s Interior Woodlands operations and fibre procurement activities against the requirements of the 2015-2019 Sustainable Forestry Initiative® (SFI) forest management and fiber sourcing standards. This Certification Summary Report provides an overview of the process and KPMG’s findings. Description of Interfor’s Interior Woodlands Operations Interfor’s Interior Woodlands operations are located in the vicinity of three communities in the southern interior of British Columbia and encompass a total area of approximately 1.3 million hectares of Crown land. Interfor’s Interior Woodlands Operations include the following: ▪ Adams Lake Woodlands, which is geographically located in the southern interior of the Province of British Columbia in the Adams Lake and Thompson geographic areas, with the nearest community being the village of Chase. Tenures managed by the operation are Forest Licences A18693, A18694, A74910, A93799, and A93800 and Timber Licence T0888. ▪ Grand Forks Woodlands, which is located in the Boundary region of the province immediately adjacent to the Canada-USA border. Tenures managed by the operation are Forest Licence A18969 and Tree Farm Licence (TFL) #8. ▪ Castlegar Woodlands, which is located along the Arrow Lakes and is headquartered in the community of Castlegar. The operation manages TFL #23, TFL #3, and Forest Licences A20192 and A94220. Interfor’s Interior Woodlands have a total AAC (allowable annual cut) of approximately 1.66 million m3/year. Harvest volumes are tracked and reported to government and balanced over the five year cut control period for each licence.
    [Show full text]