Yukon Ecosystem and Landscape Classification and Mapping

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Yukon Ecosystem and Landscape Classification and Mapping Yukon Ecological and Landscape Classification and Mapping Guidelines VERSION 1.0 Government Yukon Ecological and Landscape Classification and Mapping Guidelines VERSION 1.0 ISBN: 978-1-55362-767-8 Citation Environment Yukon. 2016. Flynn, N. and Francis. S., editors. Yukon Ecological and Landscape Classification and Mapping Guidelines. Version 1.0. Whitehorse (YT): Department of Environment, Government of Yukon. Photos and illustrations are copyrighted to the Government of Yukon unless otherwise noted and should not be reproduced for individual benefit. Please contact the photographer or institution directly (credit is along the side of the image). Notification of errors or omissions should be directed to the ELC Coordinator. Editors’ affiliation Nadele Flynn, Coordinator, Ecological and Landscape Classification Program, Fish and Wildlife Branch, Department of Environment, Government of Yukon Whitehorse, Yukon Shawn Francis, S. Francis Consulting Inc. Drumheller, Alberta Copies of this report, including a digital version, are available: Ecological and Landscape Classification (ELC) Program Fish and Wildlife Branch, Department of Environment, Government of Yukon Box 2703 (V-5), Whitehorse, Yukon Y1A 2C6 867-667-3081 elc@gov.yk.ca For more information on the ELC program and other publications, visit www.env.gov.yk.ca/elc. © 2016 Government of Yukon When using information from this report, please cite fully and correctly. Front cover photo: Overview of McLean Creek, a small tributary of the Yukon River, representative of the Boreal Low Southern Lakes subzone (BOLsl), Whitehorse, Yukon (photo by H. Ashthorn). © Government of Yukon ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Over the years, the development of Yukon ELC program has greatly benefited by the expertise of several key individuals and organizations. We would like to acknowledge the contribution of John Grods over the last 20 years and whose team developed the Broad Ecosystem Unit concepts presented in these guidelines. We also thank the team at Silvatech Consulting Ltd. who, on behalf of Yukon government, produced a tactical and strategic plan in 2007 — synthesizing ELC concepts under consideration. Development of the ELC program and this report benefited from the research and standards reports produced over the years by the British Columbia Ministry of Forests and Range, Research Branch. We gratefully acknowledge the contributions of Terry Conville, Del Meidinger, John Meikle, Don Reid, Val Loewen, Lisa Knight, Anne-Marie Roberts who provided advice on the technical aspects of the guidelines report. We would like to thank Jennifer Lee, Steve Caram, Keith Maguire, Christina Guillemette and John Ryder who provided perspectives on the application of these guidelines in the environmental assessment process. We also acknowledge the contribution of case study material by Anne Marie Roberts, Sam Skinner, Don Reid, Shawn Francis, Terry Conville, Tania Tripp and Jackie Churchill. Hannah Grey and Gerry Perrier compiled all maps. Text editing was completed by Patricia Halladay of Whitehorse. Initial layout and design of the document was completed by Michelle Zieske of Outcrop Ltd. We thank current and past members of the ELC Supervisory Committee Cassandra Kelly, Tim Sellars, Kirstie Simpson, Marc Meyer, Bill Beard, Beth Hawkings and Karen Clyde for their guidance and support in the development of the ELC Guidelines. Financial support for preparation of this report was provided by Government of Yukon and Mining and Petroleum Environmental Research Group. • Beard, B., Forest Management Branch, Department • Maguire, K., Yukon Environmental & Socio-economic of Energy, Mines and Resources, Whitehorse, Yukon Assessment Board, Whitehorse, Yukon • Caram, S., Yukon Environmental & Socio-economic • Meikle, John, Technical Advisor, Whitehorse, Yukon Assessment Board, Whitehorse, Yukon • Meidinger, D., Meidinger Ecological Consultants, B.C. • Churchill, J., Madrone Environmental Services Ltd. • Meyer, M., Forest Management Branch, Department of B.C. Energy, Mines and Resources, Whitehorse, Yukon • Clyde, K., Fish and Wildlife Branch, Department of • Reid, D., Wildlife Conservation Society, Whitehorse, Environment, Whitehorse, Yukon Yukon • Conville, T., Stantec Consulting, B.C. • Roberts, A.M., A. Roberts Ecological Consulting, • Guillemette, C., Yukon Environmental and Socio- Smithers, B.C. economic Assessment Board, Teslin, Yukon • Ryder, J. Environmental Programs Branch, Department • Hawkings, B., Information Management & of Environment, Whitehorse, Yukon Technology (IMT) Branch, Department of • Sellars, T., Policy, Planning & Aboriginal Relations Environment, Whitehorse, Yukon Branch, Department of Environment, Whitehorse, • Kelly, C., Policy, Planning & Aboriginal Relations Yukon Branch, Department of Environment, Whitehorse, • Simpson, K., Corporate Policy and Planning Branch, Yukon Department of Energy, Mines and Resources, • Knight, L. Access Consulting Ltd., Whitehorse, Yukon Whitehorse, Yukon • Lee, J. Development Assessment Branch, Executive • Skinner, S., Land Use Planner, Yukon Land Use Council Office, Whitehorse, Yukon Planning Council, Whitehorse, Yukon • Loewen, V., Fish and Wildlife Branch, Department of • Tripp, T., Madrone Environmental Services Ltd., B.C. Environment, Whitehorse, Yukon TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................... 1 5 DATA COLLECTION AND MANAGEMENT ....33 1.1 BACKGROUND ..........................................................1 5.1 FIELD DATA COLLECTION ........................................ 33 1.2 PURPOSE ................................................................. 2 5.2 FIELD DATA STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL ...................... 33 1.3 HOW TO USE THESE GUIDELINES ............................... 2 5.3 SPATIAL DATA STANDARDS ..................................... 34 2 THE YUKON ELC PROGRAM ........................3 6 CONDUCTING AN ELC MAPPING PROJECT ..37 6.1 CONTACTS AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION .......... 37 3 YUKON ELC FRAMEWORKS ........................5 3.1 YUKON BIOCLIMATE ECOSYSTEM 7 MANAGEMENT APPLICATIONS .................39 CLASSIFICATION FRAMEWORK ....................... 5 7.1 YUKON BIOCLIMATE FRAMEWORK .......................... 39 3.1.1 Classification ........................................... 7 7.2 NATIONAL ECOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK .................... 40 3.1.1.1 Bioclimate classification ............................ 7 3.1.1.2 Site classification .....................................10 8 REFERENCES .......................................... 41 3.1.1.3 Vegetation Classification ..........................10 3.1.2 Names and Codes .................................. 11 APPENDix 1 – GLOSSARY ................................43 3.1.2.1 Vegetation Unit Names and Codes ............ 11 3.1.2.2 Bioclimate Unit .......................................12 APPENDIX 2 – CASE STUDIES ..........................49 3.1.3 Mapping ................................................14 3.1.3.1 Bioclimate zones and subzones .................14 Case Study 1: Ecoregions Of Yukon ...............................51 3.1.3.2 Broad ecosystems ...................................14 Case Study 2: Wetland Mapping, Southern Lakes ........... 53 3.1.3.3 Local ecosystems.....................................14 Case Study 3: Habitat Suitability Mapping, 3.1.4 Status of YBEC ........................................16 Peel Watershed ...................................... 57 3.2 NATIONAL ECOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK OF CANADA ..16 Case Study 4: Winter Range Of The Little Rancheria 3.2.1 Overview ...............................................16 Caribou Herd, Southeast Yukon ................61 3.2.1.1 Ecozones ...............................................17 Case Study 5: Local Ecosystem Mapping, 3.2.1.2 Ecoregions .............................................17 City Of Whitehorse ................................. 63 3.2.1.3 Ecodistricts .............................................17 Case Study 6: Predictive Ecosystem Mapping, Proposed Alaska Pipeline Project .............. 65 3.2.2 Status of the NEF .....................................17 Case Study 7: Baseline Studies, 4 ecOLOGICAL MAPPING GUIDELINES ........ 19 Selwyn Project ....................................... 67 4.1 MAPPING METHODS ................................................19 4.1.1 Types of Ecosystem Maps .........................19 4.1.1.1 Manual Ecosystem Mapping .....................19 4.1.1.2 Modelled Ecosystem Mapping ................. 20 4.1.1.3 Hybrid Ecosystem Mapping ..................... 20 4.1.2 Mapping Scale and Intended Use ............. 20 4.1.3 Representing Map Features: Polygons Versus Grids ............................ 22 4.1.4 Map Unit Size ......................................... 22 4.1.5 Field Sampling ....................................... 23 4.1.6 Map Accuracy ........................................ 25 4.2 MAPPING ECOSYSTEM UNITS .................................. 25 4.2.1 Bioterrain Mapping ................................ 25 4.2.2 Broad Ecosystem Units ............................ 27 4.2.2.1 Mapping ............................................... 30 4.2.3 Local Ecosystem Units ............................. 30 YUKON ECOLOGICAL AND LANDSCAPE CLASSIFIcatION GUIDELINES | VERSION 1.0 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF TABLES Figure 1. Structure of the Yukon Bioclimate Ecosystem Table 1. Overview of Yukon bioclimate zones 8 Classification system 6 Table 2. Alpha characters: Figure 2. Ecosite coding format used for naming an treed and non-treed association codes 11 ecosite within the Yukon Bioclimate
Recommended publications
  • The Evolution of the Yukon Medevac Program in an Environment of Fiscal Restraint
    Medicine in Canada The evolution of the Yukon Medevac Program in an environment of fiscal restraint Valorie Lynn Cunningham, BSc, MD he Yukon Territory is a vast area of 483 350 km2 over which 32 000 inhabitants are scat- T tered; 24 000 of those reside in Whitehorse. Aside from a 4-bed cottage hospital in Watson Lake, the 52-bed Whitehorse General Hospital is the only other hospital in the Yukon Territory. The Whitehorse Gen- eral Hospital offers the services provided by general and family practitioners, a general surgeon, a pediatrician and an obstetrician-gynecologist. There are no resident radiologists, internists, cardiologists or orthopedic sur- geons in Whitehorse, and there are no CT-scan services. The referral centres for Whitehorse General Hospital are in Vancouver and Edmonton, approximately 2500 km away. The existing ground ambulance service can only pro- vide efficient services to communities within a 175-km ra- Flight nurse Rocky Hartley escorting the medevac of a patient dius of Whitehorse. It was impractical for other more dis- from Old Squaw Lodge in the Northwest Territories. tant communities to evacuate patients by ground ambulance. There was, therefore, a clear need for a pro- gram to provide air transport for emergent, urgent and Identifying the problem and current standard elective patients from distant Yukon communities to of care Whitehorse General Hospital (intraterritorial medevacs) and for critically ill patients from Whitehorse General In 1986 a government-funded third-party audit per- Hospital to Vancouver or Edmonton (extraterritorial formed by Price Waterhouse identified the inadequacies of medevacs). There was no formal program for these med- the Yukon medevac system and recommended that a pro- ical evacuations until 1998.
    [Show full text]
  • Yukon College Student Survey Results
    Yukon College Student Survey Results 2014-15 Dawn Macdonald Institutional Research and Planning Officer December 24, 2014 Yukon College Student Survey Results: 2014-15 TABLE OF CONTENTS HIGHLIGHTS ...................................................................................................................................................... 3 PURPOSE AND METHODS ............................................................................................................................. 5 RESULTS .............................................................................................................................................................. 6 STUDENT SATISFACTION ............................................................................................................................................ 6 More than nine out of ten would recommend their program or courses .................................... 6 Nearly everyone is satisfied with the quality of instruction ............................................................. 7 More than nine out of ten are satisfied with course content ........................................................... 7 Nine out of ten are satisfied with support services ............................................................................. 8 Nine out of ten are satisfied with program advising and library resources ............................... 9 Satisfaction with spaces for group work lags behind satisfaction with social spaces and study spaces ...................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Geographic Patterns in Morphometric and Genetic Variation for Coyote Populations with Emphasis on Southeastern Coyotes
    Received: 19 March 2018 | Revised: 2 December 2018 | Accepted: 20 December 2018 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.4966 ORIGINAL RESEARCH Geographic patterns in morphometric and genetic variation for coyote populations with emphasis on southeastern coyotes Joseph W. Hinton1 | Elizabeth Heppenheimer2 | Kyla M. West3 | Danny Caudill4 | Melissa L. Karlin5 | John C. Kilgo6 | John Joseph Mayer7 | Karl V. Miller1 | Margaret Walch8 | Bridgett vonHoldt2 | Michael J. Chamberlain1 1Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, Abstract Georgia Prior to 1900, coyotes (Canis latrans) were restricted to the western and central re- 2 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary gions of North America, but by the early 2000s, coyotes became ubiquitous through- Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey out the eastern United States. Information regarding morphological and genetic 3Tacoma, Washington structure of coyote populations in the southeastern United States is limited, and 4 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation where data exist, they are rarely compared to those from other regions of North Commission, Gainesville, Florida America. We assessed geographic patterns in morphology and genetics of coyotes 5Department of Physics and Environmental Sciences, St. Mary’s University, San Antonio, with special consideration of coyotes in the southeastern United States. Mean body Texas mass of coyote populations increased along a west‐to‐east gradient, with southeast- 6United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Southern ern coyotes being intermediate to western and northeastern coyotes. Similarly, prin- Research Station, New Ellenton, South cipal component analysis of body mass and linear body measurements suggested Carolina that southeastern coyotes were intermediate to western and northeastern coyotes in 7United States Department of Energy, Environmental Sciences, and body size but exhibited shorter tails and ears from other populations.
    [Show full text]
  • Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative
    Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative Jodi Hilty jodi@y2y.net 403 678 1137 www.y2y.net Canada, US Size: 500,000 sq mile Page 1 of 6 Participants in coordinating the ongoing transboundary cooperation: Over our 20+ years of existence we Have partnered witH more than 300 different entities, see examples below. National Government: • Canada • USA Local Government: • State and provincial land and wildlife manaGement aGencies • Town Governments (e.G., Canmore) Protected area administration: • US Fish and Wildlife Service • US Forest Service • Alberta Parks • Parks Canada • National Park Service International NGOs: • Wildlife Conservation Society National NGOs: • Canadian Parks and Wilderness • Defenders of Wildlife • The Wilderness Society Local NGOs: • Great Yellowstone Coalition • Alberta Wilderness Association InterGovernmental orGanizations: • NAFTA • CEC Multi-National Corporations: • Timber companies • MininG companies Local Small Businesses: • Yes, a variety have sponsored our work over the years Community-based Organizations: • Road Watch • Bow Valley Naturalists Objectives: Protect and connect Habitat from Yellowstone to Yukon so that people and nature can thrive. Values and importance: • Natural - one of tHe most intact mountain ecosystems in tHe world. • Social and cultural– mountain communities witH a stronG fabric of indiGenous cultural presence and values. Page 2 of 5 • Economic – Strong eco-tourism, a lonG history of energy exportation. • Political – stable but lots of boundaries within and across countries. • Security
    [Show full text]
  • Alberta and Yukon Forge Stronger Ties with Formal Agreement Premiers Sign Accord of Cooperation on a Variety of Mutual Interests
    September 11, 2009 Alberta and Yukon forge stronger ties with formal agreement Premiers sign accord of cooperation on a variety of mutual interests Edmonton... A new Alberta-Yukon Accord signed by Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach and Yukon Premier Dennis Fentie will promote closer ties between the two jurisdictions for sharing information and ideas, and identifying new opportunities for cooperation. The Accord will be in effect until 2013. “The Alberta-Yukon Accord will enhance our ability to move forward on issues that are important to the residents of both Yukon and Alberta,” said Premier Stelmach. “It makes good economic sense given the natural resources in both Yukon and Alberta, and the markets we seek together.” “Yukon and Alberta governments have had a productive and cooperative relationship in the past for the benefit of our citizens,” Premier Fentie said. “I look forward to the opportunities arising from this Accord to further enhance our relationship.” Mutual interests covered by the Accord include: climate change and environmental management; education, literacy and skills training; emergency response planning; energy and resource development; health care; labour mobility; regional economic development; research and innovation; sport, recreation and healthy living; tourism; trade and investment; and transportation and infrastructure. The Alberta and Yukon governments have a history of cooperation in a number of areas including energy and resource development, wildland fire response, education and health. For more information visit www.international.alberta.ca. -30- Media inquiries may be directed to: Tom Olsen Roxanne Vallevand Office of the Premier Cabinet Communications 780-422-4905 Government of Yukon 780-718-3034 (cell 867-633-7949 E-mail: tom.olsen@gov.ab.ca E-mail: roxanne.vallevand@gov.yk.ca To call toll free within Alberta dial 310-0000.
    [Show full text]
  • Village of Teslin Official Community Plan
    VILLAGE OF TESLIN OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN November 2009 Village of Teslin Official Community Plan Prepared by Té Khâ Planning and Development Brad Stoneman, Principal PO Box 286, Teslin, Yukon Territory Y0A 1B0 (867) 390-2733 with the assistance of Beverly Suderman, Principal Avril Orloff, Graphic Facilitator Michael E. Kelly, Principal Vancouver, BC ME Kelly Consulting http://avrilorloff.com/ Bsuderman2005@gmail.com Duncan, British Columbia Damon Oriente Danica Rice Landscape Architect Valhalla Trails Ltd Vancouver, BC Cowichan Bay, British Columbia (604) 222-9200 www.valhallacontracting.com www.damonoriente.ca Acknowledgements The consultants would like to thank the participants in the focus groups and community meetings for their thoughtful and insightful input into the Official Community Plan review process. We could not have completed this Plan to your satisfaction without that support. The consultants would also like to thank Wes Wirth, former Chief Administrative Officer for the Village of Teslin, and all the staff for their unstinting time and efforts to make sure that we got our facts right. THANK YOU! GUNALCHÉESH ! Village of Teslin Official Community Plan Implementation Schedule Action Policy & Action Type of Action Time Frame Priority Reference Management/ (High, Medium, Advocacy Low) Encourage improvements to the Alaska Highway. 5.5.11.10 Advocacy 36 months High to 5.5.11.14 Ensure the primary water supply is fully in 5.5.10.11 Management 6 months High compliance with federal and territorial drinking water quality regulations. Develop a secondary water supply, to provide 5.5.10.12 Management 12 months High redundancy and ensure uninterrupted water for residents. Pursue detailed planning to upgrade the RecPlex and 5.5.12.1 Management 12 months High provide opportunities for the development of a youth 5.5.12.9 centre and seniors centre, or some combination.
    [Show full text]
  • The Alaska-Yukon Region of the Circumboreal Vegetation Map (CBVM)
    CAFF Strategy Series Report September 2015 The Alaska-Yukon Region of the Circumboreal Vegetation Map (CBVM) ARCTIC COUNCIL Acknowledgements CAFF Designated Agencies: • Norwegian Environment Agency, Trondheim, Norway • Environment Canada, Ottawa, Canada • Faroese Museum of Natural History, Tórshavn, Faroe Islands (Kingdom of Denmark) • Finnish Ministry of the Environment, Helsinki, Finland • Icelandic Institute of Natural History, Reykjavik, Iceland • Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Greenland • Russian Federation Ministry of Natural Resources, Moscow, Russia • Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Stockholm, Sweden • United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, Alaska CAFF Permanent Participant Organizations: • Aleut International Association (AIA) • Arctic Athabaskan Council (AAC) • Gwich’in Council International (GCI) • Inuit Circumpolar Council (ICC) • Russian Indigenous Peoples of the North (RAIPON) • Saami Council This publication should be cited as: Jorgensen, T. and D. Meidinger. 2015. The Alaska Yukon Region of the Circumboreal Vegetation map (CBVM). CAFF Strategies Series Report. Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna, Akureyri, Iceland. ISBN: 978- 9935-431-48-6 Cover photo: Photo: George Spade/Shutterstock.com Back cover: Photo: Doug Lemke/Shutterstock.com Design and layout: Courtney Price For more information please contact: CAFF International Secretariat Borgir, Nordurslod 600 Akureyri, Iceland Phone: +354 462-3350 Fax: +354 462-3390 Email: caff@caff.is Internet: www.caff.is CAFF Designated
    [Show full text]
  • Yukon Nuggets by Year Lake Laberge Yukon Nuggets by and There on the Marge of Lake Laberge, I Cremated Alphabet Sam Macgee
    HOUGEN BUSINESS YUKON HISTORY HOUGEN FAMILY CONTACT SubmitY QueryUKON N UGGETS before 1890 | 1890s | 1900s | YUKON HISTORY 1910s | 1920s | 1930s | 1940s | 1950s | 1960s | 1970s | 1980s | 1990s | 2000s Historical Facts by Year Historical Facts by 1840 1849 1865 1867 1869 1871 1875 1879 1882 1883 1884 1886 1887 Alphabet Yukon Nuggets by Year Lake Laberge Yukon Nuggets by And there on the marge of Lake Laberge, I cremated Alphabet Sam MacGee. That lake, made famous around the Yukon Facts world by Robert Service was named for a Quebecer. Hamacher Photos Like many other place names in the Yukon, Lake Laberge had at least several native names. In 1862, explorer Aurel Krause recorded the Tlinget name as Print-Friendly Version Tahini-wud. In 1883, the American explorer Frederick Schwatka , recorded the Tagish name "Kluk-tas-si". But it was William Dall , director of the Scientific corp of the Western Union Telegraph expedition, who gave the lake its present day name. He named Lake Laberge after Michael Laberge of Chateauguay, Quebec. Laberge along with Frank Ketchum of New Brunswick, were explorers for the Western Union who came up river from Fort Yukon to Fort Selkirk in 1867. They were looking for a possible route for the Collins Overland Telegraph line being built from New York to Paris. No-one knows for sure if Michael Laberge ever saw his lake, but it is clear that he had it described to him by native people who lived along the river. The Collins Telegraph line was never built, but the lake went on to Charles Labarge, a relative, served on the Northwestel Board.
    [Show full text]
  • Chilkoot Trail and Yukon River Canoe
    The Historic Klondike Route Hike the Chilkoot Trail and Canoe the Yukon River on an 18 day trip following in the footsteps of Yukon Gold Rush Stampeders! “The Klondike Gold Rush captured the imagination of the world. Rich and poor, young and old, women and men were attracted to the Klondike from all parts of the globe. No imagine better represents this historic event than the endless line of stampeders struggling over the Chilkoot Pass during the winter of 1897-98. Today the Chilkoot Trail National and Klondike Gold Rush National Historic Park commemorate this extraordinary journey. The contract between the scenic grandeur of the coastal mountains and the fragile remains of the stampeders’ goods and temporary structures make the Chilkoot a unique backcountry trail.” A hiker’s guide to the Chilkoot trail Historic Klondike Route Information Join us for 18 days of adventure in the Alaska and the Yukon. We’ll start our trip in historic Skagway, Alaska with a 5-day hike over the Chilkoot Trail, traveling in the footsteps of gold rushers from 100 years ago. Once over the trail we’ll trade hiking boots for paddles and begin the 400 miles of canoeing that will bring us to Dawson City Yukon, and the heart of the Klondike gold country. Along the way we’ll pass derelict steam ships, native villages, gold dredges, current day fish camps, trappers cabins, Fort Selkirk, and other relics from the Gold Rush. We’ll also visit Whitehorse, the capital of the Yukon, we’ll run the famous Five Finger Rapids, and pass through Lake Labarge.
    [Show full text]
  • Taiga Plains
    ECOLOGICAL REGIONS OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES Taiga Plains Ecosystem Classification Group Department of Environment and Natural Resources Government of the Northwest Territories Revised 2009 ECOLOGICAL REGIONS OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES TAIGA PLAINS This report may be cited as: Ecosystem Classification Group. 2007 (rev. 2009). Ecological Regions of the Northwest Territories – Taiga Plains. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Government of the Northwest Territories, Yellowknife, NT, Canada. viii + 173 pp. + folded insert map. ISBN 0-7708-0161-7 Web Site: http://www.enr.gov.nt.ca/index.html For more information contact: Department of Environment and Natural Resources P.O. Box 1320 Yellowknife, NT X1A 2L9 Phone: (867) 920-8064 Fax: (867) 873-0293 About the cover: The small photographs in the inset boxes are enlarged with captions on pages 22 (Taiga Plains High Subarctic (HS) Ecoregion), 52 (Taiga Plains Low Subarctic (LS) Ecoregion), 82 (Taiga Plains High Boreal (HB) Ecoregion), and 96 (Taiga Plains Mid-Boreal (MB) Ecoregion). Aerial photographs: Dave Downing (Timberline Natural Resource Group). Ground photographs and photograph of cloudberry: Bob Decker (Government of the Northwest Territories). Other plant photographs: Christian Bucher. Members of the Ecosystem Classification Group Dave Downing Ecologist, Timberline Natural Resource Group, Edmonton, Alberta. Bob Decker Forest Ecologist, Forest Management Division, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Government of the Northwest Territories, Hay River, Northwest Territories. Bas Oosenbrug Habitat Conservation Biologist, Wildlife Division, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Government of the Northwest Territories, Yellowknife, Northwest Territories. Charles Tarnocai Research Scientist, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa, Ontario. Tom Chowns Environmental Consultant, Powassan, Ontario. Chris Hampel Geographic Information System Specialist/Resource Analyst, Timberline Natural Resource Group, Edmonton, Alberta.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecoregions with Grasslands in British Columbia, the Yukon, and Southern Ontario
    83 Chapter 4 Ecoregions with Grasslands in British Columbia, the Yukon, and Southern Ontario Joseph D. Shorthouse Department of Biology, Laurentian University Sudbury, Ontario, Canada P3E 2C6 Abstract. The second largest grasslands of Canada are found in south-central British Columbia in valleys between mountain ranges and on arid mountain-side steppes or benchlands. The province contains five ecozones, with most of the grassland habitat in the Montane Cordillera Ecozone. This ecozone consists of a series of plateaux and low mountain ranges and comprises 17 ecoregions, 7 of which contain grasslands. Dominant grasses here are bunchgrasses. A few scattered grasslands are found in the Yukon in the Boreal Cordillera Ecozone within three ecoregions. Grasslands in southwestern Ontario consist of about 100 small remnants of what was once much more abundant tallgrass prairie. These grasslands grow in association with widely spaced deciduous trees and are remnants of a past prairie peninsula. Grasslands called alvars are also found on flat limestone bedrock in southern Ontario. This chapter briefly describes the physiography, climate, soils, and prominent flora of each ecoregion for the benefit of future biologists wishing to study the biota of these unique grasslands. Résumé. Les prairies du centre-sud de la Colombie-Britannique sont les deuxièmes plus vastes au Canada. Elles se trouvent dans les vallées séparant les chaînes de montagnes, et sur les steppes ou replats arides à flanc de montagne. La province renferme cinq écozones, et l’habitat de prairies se trouve principalement dans l’écozone de la cordillère alpestre. Cette écozone est constituée d’une série de plateaux et de chaînes de montagnes basses et se divise en 17 écorégions, dont 7 renferment des prairies.
    [Show full text]
  • P1616 Text-Only PDF File
    A Geologic Guide to Wrangell–Saint Elias National Park and Preserve, Alaska A Tectonic Collage of Northbound Terranes By Gary R. Winkler1 With contributions by Edward M. MacKevett, Jr.,2 George Plafker,3 Donald H. Richter,4 Danny S. Rosenkrans,5 and Henry R. Schmoll1 Introduction region—his explorations of Malaspina Glacier and Mt. St. Elias—characterized the vast mountains and glaciers whose realms he invaded with a sense of astonishment. His descrip­ Wrangell–Saint Elias National Park and Preserve (fig. tions are filled with superlatives. In the ensuing 100+ years, 6), the largest unit in the U.S. National Park System, earth scientists have learned much more about the geologic encompasses nearly 13.2 million acres of geological won­ evolution of the parklands, but the possibility of astonishment derments. Furthermore, its geologic makeup is shared with still is with us as we unravel the results of continuing tectonic contiguous Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, Kluane processes along the south-central Alaska continental margin. National Park and Game Sanctuary in the Yukon Territory, the Russell’s superlatives are justified: Wrangell–Saint Elias Alsek-Tatshenshini Provincial Park in British Columbia, the is, indeed, an awesome collage of geologic terranes. Most Cordova district of Chugach National Forest and the Yakutat wonderful has been the continuing discovery that the disparate district of Tongass National Forest, and Glacier Bay National terranes are, like us, invaders of a sort with unique trajectories Park and Preserve at the north end of Alaska’s panhan­ and timelines marking their northward journeys to arrive in dle—shared landscapes of awesome dimensions and classic today’s parklands.
    [Show full text]