DOCSLIB.ORG

CCM-SCM Parks Ecol Cons-S

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CCM-SCM Parks Ecol Cons-S Development of Ecological Conservation Objectives and Strategies for Protected Areas A Pilot Project for Selected Provincial Parks within the CCM and SCM Ecosections Prepared for: Ministry of Water Land and Air Protection Environmental Stewardship Division Victoria, B.C. and Nelson, B.C. Prepared by: G.F. Utzig, P.Ag. C. Scott-May March, 2003 Kutenai Nature Investigations Ltd. 602 Richards Street, Nelson, B.C. CANADA V1L 5K5 TEL: (250)352-5288 FAX: (250)352-6430 E-MAIL: [email protected] EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report describes one phase of an ongoing project by the BC Ministries of Water Land and Air Protection and Sustainable Resource Management to investigate the ecological conservation role of protected areas in the Kootenay Region of British Columbia, and to define actions that could be taken to improve the effectiveness of the protected area network in fulfilling that role. Previous reports in the series have included: a review of conservation objectives formulated by previous land use planning processes (Scott-May 2002b), a Conservation Risk Assessment of selected parks in the region (Scott-May 2002a) and a summary of the ecological context for protected areas in the Central and Southern Columbia Ecosections (CCM, SCM, Utzig et al. 2003). This phase is a pilot project to examine the effectiveness of the protected area network in the CCM and SCM ecosections, the potential ecological conservation roles of selected protected areas, and where appropriate, to provide recommendations on how changes in park management might improve the ability of those parks to fulfil their ecological conservation roles. The provincial parks examined in more detail for the CCM include: Valhalla, Kokanee Glacier, McDonald Creek, and Cody Caves; and for the SCM include: West Arm, Stagleap, Kokanee Creek, Midge Creek and Moyie Lake. For the purposes of this project “ecological conservation” is used to denote the maintenance and/or restoration of ecological integrity, including maintaining and/or restoring ecosystem patterns, functions and processes that are responsible for biological diversity, the critical types and ranges of natural variation in ecosystems, and ecosystem resilience. It does not include conservation of post-European contact historical or cultural features. Two primary ecological conservation roles are recognized for protected areas: • representation – inclusion of a complete cross-section of environmental conditions and ecosystems within a network of protected areas, and • provision of local habitat supply – providing habitats necessary for the maintenance and/or restoration of biological diversity within the local area, often in concert with surrounding unprotected landscapes. Representation was systematically assessed at various levels, including ecoregions, ecosections, biogeoclimatic variants, landscape elements and site series. Representation was also subjectively examined at the ecosection level for major bedrock types, terrain and soils, watersheds and other aquatic features, and geographic distribution. Representation was analyzed with respect to two aspects: • providing areas in an undisturbed state where ecosystems are relatively unaffected by human activities such that they can serve as baselines or control areas for assessment of the impacts of land management practices on other similar areas, and • a coarse filter approach to biological conservation where protection of a percentage of the occurrence of each ecosystem is assumed to guarantee perpetuation of the species associated with those ecosystems. Local habitat supply was examined by assessing the range of habitats and species present within the protected area, the management regimes and human activities occurring within the park and the surrounding area, and habitat requirements of selected species that are naturally occurring within the protected area. Because many of the protected areas examined are small (<500 ha) and yet include wide-ranging species that depend on geographically dispersed habitats for seasonal and/or life-cycle requirements (e.g. caribou, grizzly bear, great blue heron, kokanee), the assessments employed the “greater park ii ecosystem” concept to identify areas outside the protected areas that are necessary for maintaining and/or restoring ecological integrity within the protected area itself, including its full complement of species (Zorn et al. 2001). The greater park ecosystem concept is an attempt to delineate an area that encompasses the full extent of ecosystem functional relationships that impact on the ecological integrity of an individual protected area. Ideally greater park ecosystem boundaries are consistent with natural ecosystem boundaries (e.g., watersheds or species/ population home ranges), reflecting the dominant ecosystem processes and functions that determine the environmental characteristics and biodiversity that are found in the protected area. Within the greater park ecosystem, consideration was then given to the administrative relationships that are necessary to achieve the ecological conservation goals of a protected area. While park administration controls management within the park portion of the greater park ecosystem, park managers must seek cooperation from a variety of agencies and stakeholders whose mandates or interests relate to areas outside of the park boundaries. For the purpose of this pilot project, an “area of cooperation” was generally defined on the basis of existing administrative boundaries that were related to decision-making and stakeholder actions that potentially affect the ecological integrity of the greater park ecosystem (e.g., landscape units, caribou management areas). Assessments for each of the selected parks include a review of past and present use patterns and management regimes, as well as the ecological context of the park, ecological features of the park, threats to maintaining and/or restoring ecological integrity, and potential ecological conservation roles. Following analysis of the available information for each park, recommendations for adjustments to management direction and other specific actions are provided to assist with improving each park’s fulfillment of its identified ecological conservation roles. Inadequate species and habitat inventories and a lack of understanding of natural disturbance regimes were found to hamper scientifically based ecological planning and management in all the parks examined. Although all parks likely require greater cooperation with managers and stakeholders in their greater park ecosystem and area of cooperation, the need is even greater in the smaller parks and those where wide-ranging species are a focus. Common themes that emerged for smaller parks are loss of ecological integrity due to transportation corridors, presence of invasive species and high intensity recreational use. The use of public education to assist with meeting the challenges of managing for ecological integrity in parks was identified as a potential opportunity for facilitating reductions in environmental risk, especially in those parks with high levels of recreational use (although it is recognized that government restructuring has recently eliminated such programs from the core mandate of MWLAP). The final chapter of the report provides discussion and recommendations regarding the ongoing project of examining the ecological conservation roles of protected areas in the Kootenay Region, broader issues identified during the pilot project and ecological conservation issues in the CCM and SCM ecosections in particular. Highlights of the recommendations include: • that MWLAP complete the assessments for the remaining protected areas in the CCM and SCM, review and update the ecosection network assessments, and then examine the opportunities of coordinating this project with other related initiatives (e.g., the provincial biodiversity strategy, results-based FPC monitoring); • that MWLAP select a group of parks within the CCM/SCM for development of more detailed management strategies for implementing the recommendations for improving ecological conservation, including formation of appropriate partnership group(s) in the area(s) of cooperation/ greater park ecosystem(s); • that BC Parks improve coordination with other government departments and stakeholders and provide more clarity around the ability of individual protected areas, or portions of protected areas to fulfill ecological conservation roles within a broader ecosystem management framework (especially representation – baseline/control roles); iii • that BC Parks strengthen its Conservation Risk Assessment procedures; • that MWLAP and MSRM improve ecological inventory information for protected areas, and better coordinate data collection, storage and analysis to facilitate joint planning for protected and non- protected portions of the landbase; • that MWLAP explore the possibility of amending the appropriate provincial parks legislation to provide clear and unequivocal direction to set maintaining ecological integrity as the primary objective in the management of protected areas, similar to the Federal Parks legislation, and instituting preparation of ecological integrity statements to guide conservation planning and management for provincial protected areas; • within the CCM, that MWLAP investigate expansion of the protected area network to fill critical gaps in representation, especially at lower elevations, and further investigate the range of natural variation in this ecosection to provide a basis for setting
Load more

Recommended publications
  • West Arm Provincial Park Draft Management Plan Introduction
    M ANAGEMENT LAN P May 2007 for West Arm Provincial Park Ministry of Environment, Environmental Stewardship Division West Arm Provincial Park M ANAGEMENT LAN P Prepared by Kootenay Region Environmental Stewardship Division Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication British Columbia. Ministry of Forests and Range Management plan for West Arm Provincial Park. ISBN 978-0-7726-6039-8 1. West Arm Park (B.C.). 2. Provincial parks and reserves--British Columbia--Planning. 3. Provincial parks and reserves--British Columbia --Management. FC3815.W47B74 2008 333.78'3097116 C2008-905854-2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements Executive Summary Introduction............................................................................................................1 The Management Planning Process.......................................................................1 Relationship to Other Land Use Planning.............................................................2 Background Summary...........................................................................................3 Management Issues ...............................................................................................6 Role of the Protected Area ....................................................................................8 Provincial and Regional Context...........................................................................8 Significance in the Protected Areas System..........................................................8 Protected Area Roles ...........................................................................................12
    [Show full text]
  • Kootenay Lake Bull Trout Monitoring
    BULL TROUT REDD COUNT SURVEYS IN SELECT KOOTENAY LAKE TRIBUTARIES (2013) AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE SURVEYS January 2014 BULL TROUT REDD COUNT SURVEYS IN SELECT KOOTENAY LAKE TRIBUTARIES (2013) AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE SURVEYS January 2014 Project No. FF14-07 Prepared for: Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program – Columbia 601 – 18th St Castlegar, BC V1N 2N1 Prepared by: Greg Andrusak, RPBio & Harvey Andrusak, RPBio Redfish Consulting Ltd. 5244 Highway 3A Nelson, BC V1L 6N6 Cover Photo: ‘Observed bull trout redd on upper Kaslo River.’ Photograph taken on the 4th of October 2013 by Greg Andrusak. The Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program is a joint initiative between BC Hydro, the BC Ministry of Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations (MFLNRO) and Fisheries & Oceans Canada (DFO) to conserve and enhance fish and wildlife populations affected by the construction of BC Hydro dams in Canada's portion of the Columbia Basin. Suggested Citation: Andrusak G.F. 2014. Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) redd count surveys in select Kootenay Lake tributaries (2013) and recommendations for future surveys. Report prepared for Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program – Columbia (Castlegar, BC) and BC Ministry of Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations (MFLNRO)by Redfish Consulting Ltd. (Nelson, BC). FWCP Report No. FF14-07. 41 pp. + app. Bull Trout Redd Count Surveys in Select Kootenay Lake Tributaries-2013 Executive Summary The Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program (FWCP) annually funds two major compensation projects on Kootenay Lake: a large scale nutrient restoration project, and operation of the Meadow Creek kokanee spawning channel. One of the primary rationales for these projects is the restoration of the adfluvial bull trout and Gerrard rainbow trout populations, therefore monitoring the status of these apex species is a high priority of the FWCP as reflected in the program’s Large Lake Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • For Cody Caves Provincial Park [Electronic Resource]
    Kootenay Region MANAGEMENT DIRECTION STATEMENT September 2004 for Cody Caves Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protectio Environmental Provincial Park Stewardship Division Cody Caves Provincial Park: Management Direction Statement 2004 Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication Data British Columbia. Environmental Stewardship Division. Kootenay Region. Management direction statement for Cody Caves Provincial Park [electronic resource] Cover title. At head of title: Kootenay Region. Running title: Cody Caves Provincial Park management direction statement. “September 2004” Available on the Internet. ISBN 0-7726-5356-9 1. Cody Caves Park (B.C.) 2. Provincial parks and reserves – British Columbia. 3. Ecosystem management - British Columbia – Cody Caves Park. I. British Columbia. Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection. I. Title. II. Title: Cody Caves Provincial Park management direction statement. FC3815.C62B74 2005 333.78’30971162 C2005-960107-8 Cody Caves Provincial Park: Management Direction Statement 2004 Cody Caves Provincial Park Approvals Page Foreword This management direction statement for Cody Caves Provincial Park provides management direction until such time as a more detailed management plan may be prepared. Cody Caves Provincial Park protects an extensive cave system, and associated karst features. Approvals: Wayne Stetski Nancy Wilkin Regional Manager Assistant Deputy Minister Kootenay Region Environmental Stewardship Division Date: Date: Cody Caves Provincial Park: Management Direction Statement 2004 Table of
    [Show full text]
  • Order of the Executive Director May 14, 2020
    PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Park Act Order of the Executive Director TO: Public Notice DATE: May 14, 2020 WHEREAS: A. This Order applies to all Crown land established or continued as a park, conservancy, recreation area, or ecological reserve under the Park Act, the Protected Areas of British Columbia Act or protected areas established under provisions of the Environment and Land Use Act. B. This Order is made in the public interest in response to the COVID-19 pandemic for the purposes of the protection of human health and safety. C. This Order is in regard to all public access, facilities or uses that exist in any of the lands mentioned in Section A above, and includes but is not limited to: campgrounds, day-use areas, trails, playgrounds, shelters, visitor centers, cabins, chalets, lodges, resort areas, group campsites, and all other facilities or lands owned or operated by or on behalf of BC Parks. D. This Order is in replacement of the Order of the Executive Director dated April 8, 2020 and is subject to further amendment, revocation or repeal as necessary to respond to changing circumstances around the COVID-19 pandemic. Exemptions that were issued in relation to the previous Order, and were still in effect, are carried forward and applied to this Order in the same manner and effect. Province of British Columbia Park Act Order of the Executive Director 1 E. The protection of park visitor health, the health of all BC Parks staff, Park Operators, contractors and permittees is the primary consideration in the making of this Order.
    [Show full text]
  • Kootenay Rockies
    2 38 45 45 37 Wilmore 32 15 22 36 Wilderness 43 Park 40 16 16 Vermilion 16 22 14 Leduc 14 39 21 2 20 Camrose 26 13 13 16 Wetaskiwin 13 Mount Robson Provincial 2A Park 56 Jasper 53 Ponoka 53 93 National 22 Park 21 12 Hamber 36 Provincial 11 Sylvan Nordegg Lake Lacombe Park Stettler Rocky 11 12 Mountain House Red Deer Columbia Icefield White Goat Wilderness 11 Cline River 42 54 Mica Creek 21 56 22 Olds 27 27 93 Hanna Didsbury Three Hills 27 9 CANADA K in R b y 2 a rr Hector L sk ebe BRITISH 24 5 et la Dunn L C L B Jasper Red Deer & Little Fort COLUMBIA Donald 93 Edmonton 9 O Bow R Rocky KOOTENAY 80 km 50 mi Vancouver Drumheller Yoho Banff Mountain ROCKIES L Emerald L 16 mi Burges & 25 km Lake Louise Forest Calgary Otterhead R a C Darfield James t a Reserve 22 Portland Seattle106 km 69 mi U Field Kicking r sc 9 C e ad 72 Horse b e B l 1A R Spokane Pass A 2 8 Montreal 23 M 2 km Rogers Golden 17 Minneapolis 1 m Toronto L 4 Ottertail R i L km a Pass s k B e 9 Barrière m m 53 Lake i i R m Ki k a Hunakwa L 2 cking Hors m 3 Ghost R AirdriePacific New York d R e 4 3 3 m R Minnewanka Salt Lake City A v m 4 San Francisco y k i Chicago Atlantic e e 8 t l k R I 6 s s e R m Ocean n t Louis Creek y o 2 A r k Ocean r 1 e e 1A O 2 21 A 8 m P k Martha m 3 i 7 U.
    [Show full text]
  • Karst Inventory Standards and Vulnerability Assessment Procedures for British Columbia
    Karst Inventory Standards and Vulnerability Assessment Procedures for British Columbia Prepared by The Karst Task Force for the Resources Inventory Committee January 2001 Version 1.0 © 2001 The Province of British Columbia Published by the Resources Inventory Committee National Library of Canada Cataloguing in Publication Data Main entry under title: Karst inventory standards and vulnerability assessment procedures for British Columbia [computer file] Available on the Internet. Issued also in printed format on demand. Includes bibliographical references: p. ISBN 0-7726-4488-8 1. Karst – British Columbia. 2. Geological surveys – British Columbia. I. Resources Inventory Committee (Canada). Karst Task Force. GB600.4.C3K37 2001 551.447 C2001-960052-6 Additional Copies of this publication can be purchased from: Government Publications Centre Phone: (250) 387-3309 or Toll free: 1-800-663-6105 Fax: (250) 387-0388 www.publications.gov.bc.ca Digital Copies are available on the Internet at: http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/ric Karst Inventory Standards Preface The Karst Inventory Standards and Vulnerability Assessment Procedures for British Columbia describes provincial standards for conducting karst inventories at various survey intensity levels, and outlines procedures for deriving karst vulnerability ratings. This document builds upon the recommendations and proposals for conducting karst inventories and vulnerability assessments described in A Preliminary Discussion of Karst Inventory Systems and Principles (KISP) for British Columbia (Research Program Working Paper 51/2000). The KISP document was widely reviewed by national and international karst experts, industry, and by staff from the Ministry of Forests and the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks. It is intended that these standards and procedures be implemented on an interim basis for a two-year period.
    [Show full text]
  • Kootenay Lake Bull Trout Monitoring-Overview
    BULL TROUT REDD COUNT SURVEYS IN SELECT KOOTENAY LAKE TRIBUTARIES (2011) AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE SURVEYS February 2012 BULL TROUT REDD COUNT SURVEYS IN SELECT KOOTENAY LAKE TRIBUTARIES (2011) AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE SURVEYS February 2012 Prepared for: Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program – Columbia Basin 103-333 Victoria St. Nelson, BC Prepared by: Greg Andrusak, RPBio & Harvey Andrusak, RPBio Redfish Consulting Ltd. 5244 Highway 3A Nelson, BC V1L 6N6 Cover Photo: ‘Canyon section of lower Woodbury Creek in mid-October.’ Photograph taken on the 19th of October 2011 by Greg Andrusak. The Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program is a joint initiative between BC Hydro, the BC Ministry of Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations (MFLNRO) and Fisheries & Oceans Canada (DFO) to conserve and enhance fish and wildlife populations affected by the construction of BC Hydro dams in Canada's portion of the Columbia Basin. Suggested Citation: G.F. Andrusak and H. Andrusak. 2012. Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) redd count surveys in select Kootenay Lake tributaries (2011) and recommendations for future surveys.. Report prepared for Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program – Columbia Basin(Nelson, BC) by Redfish Consulting Ltd. (Nelson, BC). FWCP Report No. XXX. XX pp. + app. Executive Summary The Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program – Columbia Basin (FWCP) annually funds two major compensation projects on Kootenay Lake: a large scale nutrient restoration project, and Meadow Creek kokanee spawning channel. A primary rationale for these projects is restoration of bull trout and Gerrard rainbow trout populations; however, there has been no lake-wide measure of bull trout abundance to use as a performance measure.
    [Show full text]
  • Toward an Ecosystem Reserve Complex for the Canadian Rockies
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 1996 Toward an ecosystem reserve complex for the Canadian Rockies Thomas M. Platt The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Platt, Thomas M., "Toward an ecosystem reserve complex for the Canadian Rockies" (1996). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 6601. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/6601 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Maureen and Mike MANSFIELD LIBRARY The University ofIVIONTANA Pennissioii is granted by the author to reproduce tliis material in its entirety, provided that tliis material is used for scholarly purposes and is properly cited in published works and reports. ** Please check "Yes** or "No" and provide signature ** Yes, I grant permission No, I do not grant permission Author’s Signature ^ Date Any copying for commercial purposes or financial gain may be undertaken only with the author's explicit consent. TOWARD AN ECOSYSTEM RESERVE COMPLEX FOR THE CANADIAN ROCKIES by Thomas M. Platt B.S. The University of Oregon, 1986 presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science The University of Montana 1996 Approved by: 1 Chairperson Dean, Graduate School Date UMI Number: EP37402 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
    [Show full text]
  • Geofile 1997-02 Slocan Mining Camp and Area (082K03, 082F14)
    GeoFile 1997-02 Slocan Mining Camp and Area (082K03, 082F14) By: B.N. Church (P.Eng.) and L.D. Jones (P.Geo.), 1997 Originally created as a web article in 1997, this document was re-released, with slight modifications, as a GeoFile in 2019. Abstract The Slocan map area of southeastern British Columbia contains 271 documented mineral occurrences, including 125 in the Slocan City area and 123 in the Slocan Camp area. The area is within the Selkirk Mountains and includes the communities of New Denver, Silverton, and Slocan City on the shores of Slocan Lake (Figure 1). Figure 1: Mineral Occurrences of the Slocan Camp and Area (082K03, 082F14) BC Geological Survey Mining History The Slocan area is one of the oldest mining camps in the province which flourished after the turn of the century and has continued to produce intermittently ever since. The history in the West Kootenays dates back to the 1820s when the Bluebell deposit (082FNE043), near Riondel on Kootenay Lake was discovered. Active exploration began around 1865. In 1883, Thomas Hammil located the Lulu and Spring claims (082FNE148) at Ainsworth. In the late 1880’s, Jim Brennan, a prospector working west of Ainsworth, collected some high grade silver samples which sparked considerable interest in this new and virtually unexplored area. After initial interest at Sandon, prospectors extended their range of exploration to the south and west, discovering several deposits containing appreciable gold on Memphis Creek and locating the Dayton claim (082FNW173) in 1893 near Slocan City. During this period, the sustained mining activity throughout the Slocan area provided the incentive for the Canadian Pacific Railway to extend their line south and east from Nakusp to Kaslo and Cody in 1895, and connect Slocan City with the Nelson line in 1897.
    [Show full text]
  • Cave/Karst Management- an Integrated Ecosystems Approach
    TABLE OF CONTENTS page INTRODUCTION PROVINCIAL CROWN LAND CAVE POLICY MINISTRY OF FORESTS' ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITIES COMMUNICATION AND CO-OPERATION PUBIC ACCESS CAVE/KARST MANAGEMENT- AN INTEGRATED ECOSYSTEMS APPROACH A. INVENTORY, CLASSIFICATION AND RECORDS Procedures and responsibilities B. SURFACE CONSIDERATIONS Planning and Construction for Roads and Landings Right-of-way felling, clearing and subgrade construction Pits and Quarries Fuel Storage Panning and Operations for Falling and Yarding Ground Skidding Silviculture Planning, Scarification and Burning C. SUBSURFACE CONSIDERATIONS - Visitor Use and Safety Cave User Management Guidelines D. NON-GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT OF CAVES E. PUBLIC SAFETY AND LIABILITY F. CAVE RESCUE REFERENCES GLOSSARY OF TERMS APPENDICES INTRODUCTION British Columbia has a surface area of approximately 95 million hectares, of which 85% is crown owned forest and range land managed by the Ministry of Forests. Extensive road networks created by timber harvesting have opened the way for many recreational activities. One of these activities, which has become increasingly popular in recent years, is the sport of caving. More than 750 caves, predominantly on Vancouver Island, have been explored; and there may be hundreds, if not thousands more to be discovered. Initially recreational cavers were content to find, explore, photograph and map their finds. However, when some of the more significant caves became vandalized and or destroyed through indiscriminate resource use, individual cavers and caving groups began to advocate government participation in the management of the cave resource. These caves are a unique non-renewable resource with geological, scenic, educational, cultural, biological, hydrological, paleontological and recreation values. The management of caves [both surface and subsurface resources] is considered to be an essential component of integrated resource management.
    [Show full text]
  • SMZ Foreword
    Foreword BC Spaces for Nature is a solutions-oriented, conservation organization created in 1990 to promote the protection of British Columbia’s rich diversity of wilderness and wildlife. BC Spaces works with individuals and organizations throughout the province to ensure that British Columbia’s wild spaces remain intact. Given this mandate, BC Spaces recognized the potential that Special Management Zones could make in safeguarding these values. Hence this Citizens’ Guide has been written to help the public ensure that the Special Management Zones will indeed achieve their potential. After over 125 years of forest development, British Columbia still contains extensive temperate forests. These wildlands contain an extraordinary range of plants and animals that are the envy of the world. Consequently, British Columbians have a global responsibility to steward the environmental values of our province. However, for many years British Columbia’s forests have been subjected to damaging logging practices and unsustainable overcutting. In the late 1980’s and early 1990’s, this led to increasing conflicts between the logging industry and conservationists. In places such as Carmanah Valley and Clayoquot Sound the tensions of these confrontations became intense. To help resolve these conflicts the B.C. government sponsored a series of land use planning processes to designate the landbase for the management of both economic and ecological values. The zones delineated through these public negotiation exercises included: Protected Areas, Integrated Management, Enhanced Resource Use and Special Management. In particular, the establishment of Special Management Zones to maintain and enhance values other than timber - such as environmental and social concerns - were critical to achieving success at the negotiation table.
    [Show full text]
  • Meteorological Comparison of Three Cave Systems
    Western Kentucky University TopSCHOLAR® Honors College Capstone Experience/Thesis Projects Honors College at WKU 2019 Meteorological Comparison of Three Cave Systems Matthew Wine Western Kentucky University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/stu_hon_theses Part of the Geology Commons, and the Meteorology Commons Recommended Citation Wine, Matthew, "Meteorological Comparison of Three Cave Systems" (2019). Honors College Capstone Experience/Thesis Projects. Paper 835. https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/stu_hon_theses/835 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by TopSCHOLAR®. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors College Capstone Experience/Thesis Projects by an authorized administrator of TopSCHOLAR®. For more information, please contact [email protected]. METEOROLOGICAL COMPARISON OF THREE CAVE SYSTEMS A Capstone Experience/Thesis Project Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree Bachelor of Science with Honors College Graduate Distinction at Western Kentucky University By: Matthew Wine ***** Western Kentucky University 2019 CE/T Committee: Approved by: Dr. Patricia Kambesis, Advisor Dr. Greg Goodrich __________________________________ Dr. Dennis Wilson Advisor Department of Geography & Geology Copyright by: Matthew Wine 2019 ABSTRACT Cave systems are home to delicate underground ecosystems that can be affected by changes in surface atmospheric conditions which in turn affect underground meteorology. Modern human use of caves is typically for tourism, so understanding surface-underground weather-climate interactions is important when caves carry streams that are prone to flooding in response to surface precipitation. The purpose of this research is to document the effects of surface weather conditions on cave meteorology in three different cave system types located in different geographic locations including an island, the central USA, and at high elevations in British Columbia.
    [Show full text]