DOCSLIB.ORG

Proceedings of the World Heritage Boreal Zone Workshop

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Proceedings of the World Heritage Boreal Zone Workshop Proceedings of the World Heritage Boreal Zone Workshop Held in St. Petersburg, Russia 10-13 October 2003 June 2004 Table of Contents Table of Contents..........................................................................................................................................................i Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................................................2 I. Workshop Description.............................................................................................................................................2 A. Background..........................................................................................................................................................2 B. The Values of Boreal Forests in the context of the World Heritage Convention...........................................3 C. Workshop Methodology and Outputs ...............................................................................................................4 II. Workshop Outputs .................................................................................................................................................6 A. Site Specific Recommendations..........................................................................................................................6 B. The St. Petersburg Statement...........................................................................................................................10 C. Frameworks Developed at the Workshop.......................................................................................................13 1. Canada Framework of existing World Heritage sites and Values............................................................13 2. Canada Framework for World Heritage Values and Potential New Sites to Fill Gaps ..........................16 3. Russia Framework for World Heritage Values and Potential New Sites to Fill Gaps ............................18 Annex 1: Details on Sites for Potential Nomination................................................................................................20 Canada ....................................................................................................................................................................20 Atikaki/Woodland Caribou/First Nations Accord Area................................................................................20 Wood Buffalo.....................................................................................................................................................20 Nahanni..............................................................................................................................................................21 Muskwa-Kechika...............................................................................................................................................21 Hudson Bay........................................................................................................................................................21 Lake Superior....................................................................................................................................................22 Wabikimi............................................................................................................................................................22 Mealy Mountains...............................................................................................................................................23 Thelon Wildlife Sanctuary and Queen Maud Migratory Bird Sanctuary ...................................................23 Canada – US Transboundary Site: Ivvavik and Vuntut National Parks with Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.................................................................................................................................................................24 Finland ....................................................................................................................................................................25 Green Belt of Fennoscandia .............................................................................................................................25 The Northern Kvarken.....................................................................................................................................26 Saimaa-Pielinen Lakeland................................................................................................................................28 Aapamire Complexes of Northern Finland.....................................................................................................31 Norway....................................................................................................................................................................32 North Norwegian Fjord Landscape.................................................................................................................32 Russia ......................................................................................................................................................................33 Basegi Nature Reserve ......................................................................................................................................33 Kuril Islands ......................................................................................................................................................33 Magadansky Nature Reserve ...........................................................................................................................34 Malaya Sos’va Reserve .....................................................................................................................................35 The Putorana Plateau Natural Complex.........................................................................................................36 The Western Sayan ...........................................................................................................................................36 Tsentralno-Sibirsky State Nature Reserve......................................................................................................37 The Tungussky phenomenon............................................................................................................................37 Valdai – the Great Watershed..........................................................................................................................38 The Bikin River valley (for extension of "Central Sikhote-Alin" World Heritage site) .............................38 Annex 2. List of Participants ....................................................................................................................................40 Table 1. Natural World Heritage Sites in the Boreal Ecozone ................................................................................3 Table 2. Criteria for World Heritage Designation....................................................................................................5 Proceedings of the World Heritage Boreal Zone Workshop i 10-13 October 2003 Disclaimer The recommendations found in this report represent the output of a technical workshop and do not necessarily represent the official views of States Parties to the World Heritage Convention nor the organizations which provided financial support. The recommendations reflect the opinions expressed by the workshop participants, which are not necessarily those of IUCN or UNESCO. Moreover, the recommendations cannot preclude the outcome of the official IUCN process to evaluate World Heritage nominations. The designation of geographical entities in this report, and the presentation of material, do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IUCN or UNESCO concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Proceedings of the World Heritage Boreal Zone Workshop 1 10-13 October 2003 Acknowledgements IUCN gratefully acknowledges the financial contributions of the UNESCO World Heritage Centre, the Ministry of the Environment in Finland, and the Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade for the workshop. IUCN would also like to thank the Baltic Fund for Nature for logistical support in organizing the workshop. I. Workshop Description A. Background The Convention on the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage was adopted at the General Conference of the United Nations on 16 November 1972, and came into effect on 17 December 1975. Currently 176 States Parties have signed the Convention, making it one of the most representative conventions for environmental protection. In 1976, the World Heritage Committee and Fund were established to enhance the efficiency of the Convention. As a result, the first cultural and natural sites were inscribed in UNESCO’s World Heritage List in 1978. Over the past 30 years, sites and ecosystem types from many regions of the world have been nominated. However, not all sites of outstanding universal value have been identified and nominated. Therefore, the World Heritage Committee established the so-called ‘Global Strategy’ in 1994 to encourage nominations from regions and biomes that are not sufficiently covered under
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Industrialization of Housing Construction As a Tool for Sustainable Settlement and Rural Areas Development
    E3S Web of Conferences 164, 07010 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf /202016407010 TPACEE-2019 Industrialization of housing construction as a tool for sustainable settlement and rural areas development Olga Popova1,*, Polina Antufieva1 , Vladimir Grebenshchikov2 and Mariya Balmashnova2 1Northern (Arctic) Federal University named after M.V. Lomonosov, 163002, Severnaya Dvina Emb., 17, Arkhangelsk, Russia 2 Moscow State University of Civil Engineering, 26, Yaroslavskoeshosse, 129337, Moscow, Russia Abstract. The development of the construction industry, conducting construction in accordance with standard projects, and transforming the construction materials industry in hard-to-reach and sparsely populated areas will make significant progress in solving the housing problem. Industrialization of housing construction is a catalyst for strong growth of the region’s economy and the quality of life of citizens. The purpose of this study is to develop a methodology for assessing the level of industrialization of the territory’s construction complex and its development potential for increasing the volume of low-rise housing stock. Research tasks: 1) assessment of the need to develop housing construction, including low-rise housing, on a particular territory; 2) development of a methodology for calculating the level of industrialization of construction in the area under consideration to determine the possibility of developing low-rise housing construction in this area in the proposed way; 3) approbation of the method using the example of rural areas of the Arkhangelsk region. It was revealed that the districts of the Arkhangelsk region have medium and low levels of industrialization. The districts that are most in need of an increase in the rate of housing construction have been identified.
    [Show full text]
  • Ramsar Sites in Order of Addition to the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importance
    Ramsar sites in order of addition to the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importance RS# Country Site Name Desig’n Date 1 Australia Cobourg Peninsula 8-May-74 2 Finland Aspskär 28-May-74 3 Finland Söderskär and Långören 28-May-74 4 Finland Björkör and Lågskär 28-May-74 5 Finland Signilskär 28-May-74 6 Finland Valassaaret and Björkögrunden 28-May-74 7 Finland Krunnit 28-May-74 8 Finland Ruskis 28-May-74 9 Finland Viikki 28-May-74 10 Finland Suomujärvi - Patvinsuo 28-May-74 11 Finland Martimoaapa - Lumiaapa 28-May-74 12 Finland Koitilaiskaira 28-May-74 13 Norway Åkersvika 9-Jul-74 14 Sweden Falsterbo - Foteviken 5-Dec-74 15 Sweden Klingavälsån - Krankesjön 5-Dec-74 16 Sweden Helgeån 5-Dec-74 17 Sweden Ottenby 5-Dec-74 18 Sweden Öland, eastern coastal areas 5-Dec-74 19 Sweden Getterön 5-Dec-74 20 Sweden Store Mosse and Kävsjön 5-Dec-74 21 Sweden Gotland, east coast 5-Dec-74 22 Sweden Hornborgasjön 5-Dec-74 23 Sweden Tåkern 5-Dec-74 24 Sweden Kvismaren 5-Dec-74 25 Sweden Hjälstaviken 5-Dec-74 26 Sweden Ånnsjön 5-Dec-74 27 Sweden Gammelstadsviken 5-Dec-74 28 Sweden Persöfjärden 5-Dec-74 29 Sweden Tärnasjön 5-Dec-74 30 Sweden Tjålmejaure - Laisdalen 5-Dec-74 31 Sweden Laidaure 5-Dec-74 32 Sweden Sjaunja 5-Dec-74 33 Sweden Tavvavuoma 5-Dec-74 34 South Africa De Hoop Vlei 12-Mar-75 35 South Africa Barberspan 12-Mar-75 36 Iran, I. R.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of Forest Sector in the Arkhangelsk Oblast During the Transition Period of the 1990S
    Development of forest sector in the Arkhangelsk oblast during the transition period of the 1990s ALBINA PASHKEVICH Pashkevich Albina (2003). Development of forest sector in the Arkhangelsk oblast during the transition period of the 1990s. Fennia 181: 1, pp. 13–24. Helsinki. ISSN 0015-0010. The Arkhangelsk oblast has long been one of Russia’s most important forest industrial regions. This paper analyses the changes in accessibility of forest resources and forest commodity production during the transition period in the 1990s. Special attention is given to firm restructuring, active roles of domestic capital and the different survival strategies that have been developed by in- dustries in the region. Further analysis deals with signs of economic recovery in the forest sector due to the processes of restructuring, modernisation and self-organisation. Albina Pashkevich, Spatial Modelling Centre (SMC), Department of Social and Economic Geography, Umeå University, Box 839, SE-98128 Kiruna, Sweden. E-mail: [email protected]. MS received 12 August 2002. Introduction adoption of a new. Some suggest that this proc- ess has been deeply embedded in the nature of The shift from central planning to a market-based the socialist system (Dingsdale 1999; Hamilton economy in Russia culminated with the dramatic 1999) and that the legacy of the communism has economic and political reorientation that began been only partly removed, and instead has mere- in the 1990s. This transition towards a market-ori- ly been reworked in a complex way (Smith 1997). ented and outward-looking economic system led Others say that reforms have actually ended the by private sector has created new challenges and old ‘command economy’ but have instead suc- opportunities.
    [Show full text]
  • Obtaining World Heritage Status and the Impacts of Listing Aa, Bart J.M
    University of Groningen Preserving the heritage of humanity? Obtaining world heritage status and the impacts of listing Aa, Bart J.M. van der IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below. Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Publication date: 2005 Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database Citation for published version (APA): Aa, B. J. M. V. D. (2005). Preserving the heritage of humanity? Obtaining world heritage status and the impacts of listing. s.n. Copyright Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum. Download date: 23-09-2021 Appendix 4 World heritage site nominations Listed site in May 2004 (year of rejection, year of listing, possible year of extension of the site) Rejected site and not listed until May 2004 (first year of rejection) Afghanistan Península Valdés (1999) Jam,
    [Show full text]
  • Confirmed Soc Reports List 2015-2016
    Confirmed State of Conservation Reports for natural and mixed World Heritage sites 2015 - 2016 Nr Region Country Site Natural or Additional information mixed site 1 LAC Argentina Iguazu National Park Natural 2 APA Australia Tasmanian Wilderness Mixed 3 EURNA Belarus / Poland Bialowieza Forest Natural 4 LAC Belize Belize Barrier Reef Reserve System Natural World Heritage in Danger 5 AFR Botswana Okavango Delta Natural 6 LAC Brazil Iguaçu National Park Natural 7 LAC Brazil Cerrado Protected Areas: Chapada dos Veadeiros and Natural Emas National Parks 8 EURNA Bulgaria Pirin National Park Natural 9 AFR Cameroon Dja Faunal Reserve Natural 10 EURNA Canada Gros Morne National Park Natural 11 AFR Central African Republic Manovo-Gounda St Floris National Park Natural World Heritage in Danger 12 LAC Costa Rica / Panama Talamanca Range-La Amistad Reserves / La Amistad Natural National Park 13 AFR Côte d'Ivoire Comoé National Park Natural World Heritage in Danger 14 AFR Côte d'Ivoire / Guinea Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve Natural World Heritage in Danger 15 AFR Democratic Republic of the Congo Garamba National Park Natural World Heritage in Danger 16 AFR Democratic Republic of the Congo Kahuzi-Biega National Park Natural World Heritage in Danger 17 AFR Democratic Republic of the Congo Okapi Wildlife Reserve Natural World Heritage in Danger 18 AFR Democratic Republic of the Congo Salonga National Park Natural World Heritage in Danger 19 AFR Democratic Republic of the Congo Virunga National Park Natural World Heritage in Danger 20 AFR Democratic
    [Show full text]
  • 2007 UNEP-WCMC Global List of Transboundary Protected Areas Lysenko I., Besançon C., Savy C
    2007 UNEP-WCMC Global List of Transboundary Protected Areas Lysenko I., Besançon C., Savy C. No TBPA Name Country Protected Areas Sitecode Category PA Size, km 2 TBPA Area, km 2 Ellesmere/Greenland 1 Canada Quttinirpaaq 300093 II 38148.00 Transboundary Complex Greenland Hochstetter Forland 67910 RAMSAR 1848.20 Kilen 67911 RAMSAR 512.80 North-East Greenland 2065 MAB-BR 972000.00 North-East Greenland 650 II 972000.00 1,008,470.17 2 Canada Ivvavik 100672 II 10170.00 Old Crow Flats 101594 IV 7697.47 Vuntut 100673 II 4400.00 United States Arctic 2904 IV 72843.42 Arctic 35361 Ia 32374.98 Yukon Flats 10543 IV 34925.13 146,824.27 Alaska-Yukon-British Columbia 3 Canada Atlin 4178 II 2326.95 Borderlands Atlin 65094 II 384.45 Chilkoot Trail Nhp 167269 Unset 122.65 Kluane 612 II 22015.00 Kluane Wildlife 18707 VI 6450.00 Kluane/Wrangell-St Elias/Glacier Bay/Tatshenshini-Alsek 12200 WHC 31595.00 Tatshenshini-Alsek 67406 Ib 9470.26 United States Admiralty Island 21243 Ib 3803.76 Chilkat 68395 II 24.46 Chilkat Bald Eagle 68396 II 198.38 Glacier Bay 1010 II 13045.50 Glacier Bay 22485 V 233.85 Glacier Bay 35382 Ib 10784.27 Glacier Bay-Admiralty Island Biosphere Reserve 11591 MAB-BR 15150.15 Kluane/Wrangell-St Elias/Glacier Bay/Tatshenshini-Alsek 2018 WHC 66796.48 Kootznoowoo 101220 Ib 3868.24 Malaspina Glacier 21555 III 3878.40 Mendenhall River 306286 Unset 14.57 Misty Fiords 21247 Ib 8675.10 Misty Fjords 13041 IV 4622.75 Point Bridge 68394 II 11.64 Russell Fiord 21249 Ib 1411.15 Stikine-LeConte 21252 Ib 1816.75 Tetlin 2956 IV 2833.07 Tongass 13038 VI 67404.09 Global List of Transboundary Protected Areas ©2007 UNEP-WCMC 1 of 78 No TBPA Name Country Protected Areas Sitecode Category PA Size, km 2 TBPA Area, km 2 Tracy Arm-Fords Terror 21254 Ib 2643.43 Wrangell-St Elias 1005 II 33820.14 Wrangell-St Elias 35387 Ib 36740.24 Wrangell-St.
    [Show full text]
  • From Wild Forest Reindeer to Biodiversity Studies and Environmental Education” 5Th to 6Th October, 2010 in Kuhmo, Eastern Finland
    YMPÄRISTÖN- SUOJELU The Finnish-Russian Friendship Nature Reserve was established in 1990 to promote and en- hance cooperation in nature conservation and conservation research. In the beginning, the main From wild forest reindeer to biodiversity emphasis was on joint research between Finland and the Soviet Union. Over the years, the co- studies and environmental education operation has expanded to include many universities and research institutes worldwide. The year 2010 marked the 20-year anniversary of the Friendship Nature Reserve. To celebrate this important year, the Finnish Environment Institute, Metsähallitus Natural Heritage Services Abstracts of the 20 years anniversary symposium of and the Kostomuksha Strict Nature Reserve (Zapovednik) arranged jointly an Anniversary Sym- the Finnish - Russian Nature Reserve Friendship posium “From Wild Forest Reindeer to Biodiversity Studies and Environmental Education” 5th to 6th October, 2010 in Kuhmo, eastern Finland. Parallel to the symposium, the 4th European Green Belt Conference was arranged in Kuhmo by Metsähallitus Natural Heritage Services. Around Outi Isokääntä and Jari Heikkilä (eds.) 150 people from 19 different countries participated the symposium. ISBN 978-952-11-3845-4 (PDF) Suomen ympäristökeskus From wild forest reindeer to biodiversity studies and environmental education Abstracts of the 20 years anniversary symposium of the Finnish - Russian Nature Reserve Friendship Outi Isokääntä and Jari Heikkilä (eds.) Helsinki 2011 FINNISH ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE Layout: Pirjo Appelgrén Cover photo: Ari Meriruoko The publication is availble only in the internet www.environment.fi/syke/fnr20 ISBN 978-952-11-3845-4 (PDF) FOREWORD Jari Heikkilä Finnish Environment Institute Friendship Park Research Centre [email protected] Over the past 20 years the Finnish-Russian Friendship Nature Reserve has been in- volved in opening the border between the East and the West for nature conservation and research.
    [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: [email protected] Internet: www.caff.is CAFF Designated
    [Show full text]
  • Forests Warranting Further Consideration As Potential World
    Forest Protected Areas Warranting Further Consideration as Potential WH Forest Sites: Summaries from Various and Thematic Regional Analyses (Compendium produced by Marc Patry, for the proceedings of the 2nd World Heritage Forest meeting, held at Nancy, France, March 11-13, 2005) Four separate initiatives have been carried out in the past 10 years in an effort to help guide the process of identifying and nominating new WH Forest sites. The first, carried out by Thorsell and Sigaty (1997), addresses forests worldwide, and was developed based on the authors’ shared knowledge of protected forests worldwide. The second focuses exclusively on tropical forests and was assembled by the participants at the 1998 WH Forest meeting in Berastagi, Indonesia (CIFOR, 1999). A third initiative consists of potential boreal forest sites developed by the participants to an expert meeting on boreal forests, held in St. Petersberg in 2003. Finally, a fourth, carried out jointly between UNEP and IUCN applied a more systematic approach (IUCN, 2004). Though aiming at narrowing the field of potential candidate sites, these initiatives do not automatically imply that all of the listed forest areas would meet the criteria for inscription on the WH List, and conversely, nor do they imply that any site left off the list would not meet these criteria. Since these lists were developed, several of the proposed sites have been inscribed on the WH List, while others have been the subject of nominations, but were not inscribed, for various reasons. The lists below are reproduced here in an effort to facilitate access to this information and to guide future nomination initiatives.
    [Show full text]
  • Putorana Plateau - 2014 Conservation Outlook Assessment (Archived)
    IUCN World Heritage Outlook: https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/ Putorana Plateau - 2014 Conservation Outlook Assessment (archived) IUCN Conservation Outlook Assessment 2014 (archived) Finalised on 25 May 2014 Please note: this is an archived Conservation Outlook Assessment for Putorana Plateau. To access the most up-to-date Conservation Outlook Assessment for this site, please visit https://www.worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org. Putorana Plateau عقوملا تامولعم Country: Russian Federation Inscribed in: 2010 Criteria: (vii) (ix) This site coincides with the area of the Putoransky State Nature Reserve, and is located in the central part of the Putorana Plateau in northern Central Siberia. It is situated about 100 km north of the Arctic Circle. The part of the plateau inscribed on the World Heritage List harbours a complete set of subarctic and arctic ecosystems in an isolated mountain range, including pristine taiga, forest tundra, tundra and arctic desert systems, as well as untouched cold-water lake and river systems. A major reindeer migration route crosses the property, which represents an exceptional, large-scale and increasingly rare natural phenomenon. © UNESCO صخلملا 2014 Conservation Outlook Good Because of its remoteness, inaccessibility, low population density and low level of infrastructure development (with resulting limited anthropogenic threats), as well as its overall effective protection and management regime, this property has one of the best conservation outlooks of all natural World Heritage sites in the Russian Federation.
    [Show full text]
  • Changes in the Arctic: Background and Issues for Congress
    Changes in the Arctic: Background and Issues for Congress Updated May 22, 2020 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R41153 Changes in the Arctic: Background and Issues for Congress Summary The diminishment of Arctic sea ice has led to increased human activities in the Arctic, and has heightened interest in, and concerns about, the region’s future. The United States, by virtue of Alaska, is an Arctic country and has substantial interests in the region. The seven other Arctic states are Canada, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark (by virtue of Greenland), and Russia. The Arctic Research and Policy Act (ARPA) of 1984 (Title I of P.L. 98-373 of July 31, 1984) “provide[s] for a comprehensive national policy dealing with national research needs and objectives in the Arctic.” The National Science Foundation (NSF) is the lead federal agency for implementing Arctic research policy. Key U.S. policy documents relating to the Arctic include National Security Presidential Directive 66/Homeland Security Presidential Directive 25 (NSPD 66/HSPD 25) of January 9, 2009; the National Strategy for the Arctic Region of May 10, 2013; the January 30, 2014, implementation plan for the 2013 national strategy; and Executive Order 13689 of January 21, 2015, on enhancing coordination of national efforts in the Arctic. The office of the U.S. Special Representative for the Arctic has been vacant since January 20, 2017. The Arctic Council, created in 1996, is the leading international forum for addressing issues relating to the Arctic. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) sets forth a comprehensive regime of law and order in the world’s oceans, including the Arctic Ocean.
    [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]