DOCSLIB.ORG

Fort Nelson LRMP Does Not Indicate Acceptance (Or Any Other Decision) by Government Regarding the Identified Issues

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fort Nelson LRMP Does Not Indicate Acceptance (Or Any Other Decision) by Government Regarding the Identified Issues Fort Nelson Land And Resource Management Plan Fort Nelson Land and Resource Management Plan Fort Nelson Land And Resource Management Plan EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In October 1997, the government of British Columbia approved the Fort Nelson Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP). This LRMP reflects the full consensus management direction on all aspects of land and resource management within a 98 000 square kilometre area, built through participation by the public, local industry and government resource agencies. This Plan results in no anticipated job losses, stability for all resource­based industries such as tourism, oil and gas, and timber; seven new large protected areas; a planning framework to provide co­ operative and co­ordinated planning and management in the Muskwa­Kechika Management Area; and an improved outlook for recreational activities and wildlife. The Fort Nelson Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) was built over a four year time­frame by a core group of 30 people. This group consisted of a solid cross section of public participants with local, regional and provincial interests, and agency staff. Members of this group represented a wide range of values including access, agriculture, biodiversity, energy, forestry, guide outfitting, minerals, outdoor recreation and tourism, soil, transportation and utility corridors, trapping, visual quality, water and wildlife. The LRMP group worked with an “open­door” policy, using sector based negotiations. Local First Nations expressed an interest in the process, but chose not to participate. This was in part due to concerns that participation may compromise treaty negotiations, in addition to staffing and resource constraints. They were apprised of the LRMP progress through personal contacts, formal communications and the monthly LRMP update packages, which were widely distributed. Although First Nations were not formally represented at the LRMP Working Group, archaeological, cultural and heritage values were strongly endorsed by all the LRMP participants. This LRMP divides a 9.8 million hectare land base into 37 Resource Management Zones (RMZs), which are grouped into four different categories. 1. Enhanced Resource Development ­ Representing approximately 36% (3,564,900 hectares) of the land base. This category gives direction to manage land for oil and gas, mineral and timber resources, with an emphasis on the recreation and tourism resources along the Alaska Highway corridor. This category is made up of the Resource Management Zones where investments in resource development are encouraged. This category builds on existing legislation and regulations. There are 4 RMZs in this category. 2. General Resource Development ­ Representing approximately 24% (2,445,000 hectares) of the land base. The intent in this category is to manage for a wide array of integrated resource values. In these RMZs resource development will be integrated with the requirements of other resource values. Developments are subject to all applicable provincial regulations. There are 10 RMZs in this category. Major River Corridors Sub­Category ­ Identified to highlight the management of the important values within the river corridors such as archaeological, cultural, heritage, recreational, scenic, timber and energy. 3. Muskwa­Kechika Special Management ­ Representing approximately 29% (2,911,700 hectares) of the land base. This category gives direction to manage in such a way that resource development can proceed while minimizing impacts on other resource values. The Resource Management Zones within this category contain the most restrictive objectives and strategies for development. There are 16 RMZs in this category. Major River Corridors Sub­Category ­ Identified to highlight management of all the important values within the river corridors such as archaeological, cultural, heritage, recreational, riparian, wildlife habitat and industrial. Fort Nelson Land And Resource Management Plan 4. Protected Areas ­ Representing approximately 11% (1,051,000 hectares) of the land base. This category contains the zones that will be designated as protected areas for natural, cultural, heritage and/or recreational values as defined by the Protected Area Strategy for BC. Logging, mining, energy and hydroelectric exploration and development are prohibited in those areas designated under the Park Act. There are 7 Goal 1 and 14 Goal 2 areas identified in this category. All the Goal 1 Protected Areas stand alone within the plan area as functioning units. Additionally, long­term solutions were developed for the tenured oil and gas interests in the Klua Lakes, Maxhamish Lake and Thinatea Protected Areas. • Denetiah (97,200 ha) ­ This area provides a cross­section of the Rocky Mountain Trench, other special features are Dall and Denetiah lakes, with the intact Denetiah watershed, and the historic Davie Trail. The remote nature of this area enhances its recreation experience. An access corridor will be allowed; the section across the Rocky Mountain Trench is designated in a manner that maintains the opportunity for access. • Klua Lakes (28,600 ha) ­ Located in the south­eastern portion of the plan area this zone has significant archaeological value with a traditional historic commercial fishery site, a significant native village, native pack trails, an old wagon trail and a spiritual site. The entire area has very high scenic qualities of escarpments/cuesta topography, along with high recreation use. This area provides representation of the Muskwa Plateau Ecosection. Directional drilling for petroleum and natural gas with no surface access will be permitted. • Liard River Corridor (81,900 ha) ­ Featuring the Grand Canyon of the Liard, ammonite fossils, a bolted steel and wooden oil derrick, Hudson's Bay Trading Post, archaeological sites and significant grizzly bear habitat. The Liard River Corridor is representative of the Hyland Highlands Ecosection and could be considered as a Heritage River candidate. Designation on this area will accommodate an existing pipeline reserve. Any access for utility through this protected area will be subject to the management plan. • Maxhamish Lake (27,600 ha) ­ Featuring a large lake with white sandy beaches this Proposed Protected Area supports significant recreational opportunity in an area rich with waterfowl and fish values. This area also provides representation of the Etsho Plateau Ecosection. Designation on this area will allow for the opportunity in the future for an access route to the lake for recreational purposes. Directional drilling for petroleum and natural gas with no surface access will be permitted. • Northern Rocky Mountains (635,900 ha) ­ The largest of the Protected Areas this zone rests in the southern portion of the plan area and provides a core for the large intact predator/prey system that exists together with high density and diversity of large mammal species. The zones has some of the highest, most rugged mountains, and is substantially unroaded and undeveloped. This area has high wildlife and recreation value; and is very significant for wilderness and back country recreation experiences. This area provides excellent representation of the Eastern Muskwa Ranges and Muskwa Foothills ecosections. Within it there are special features such as Sleeping Chief Mountain, Mount Sylvia, Mount Mary Henry, significant wetlands along the Tuchodi River and the historic Bedeaux Trail. The Northern Rocky Mountains is the centre piece protected area ­ combined with adjacent zones, an area of 772,000 hectares in size will protect significant values. • Thinatea (19,500 ha) ­ This area provides representation of the Petitot Plain Ecosection. It is a good example of muskeg mixed with some associated upland forest. There is a significant stand of Jackpine in the RMZ; the area is important for habitat values, especially for waterfowl. Directional drilling for petroleum and natural gas resources with no surface access will be permitted, as well as the opportunity to directionally drill for pipeline purposes under the north arm. • Wokkpash (37,500 ha) ­ This zone was a Recreation Area. It has attained international significance with the Wokkpash Gorge (hoodoo canyon ­ 5 Km in length 30 m in height); Forlorn Gorge (narrow cleft ­ 150 m deep and 25 m wide); Fusillier Glacier and stepped lakes; with significant recreation values such as hiking, camping, wildlife viewing, fishing, horseback riding and hunting. Fort Nelson Land And Resource Management Plan • Goal 2 ­ 14 small areas (8,500 ha) ­ Site specific features such as provincially or regionally significant hot springs, archaeological sites, rare ecosystems and recreation areas This Plan uses three levels of management direction. 1. General Management Direction: • applies to all values and resources on Crown land; • applies as a baseline for management; and • enhances and supports legislation, policies, existing processes and operational guidelines. 2. Category Management Direction: • combination of similar Resource Management Zones; • refines management regimes for the combination of RMZs; • reflects interest­based nature of the plan; and 3. RMZ Specific Direction: • objectives and strategies for specific values; • further defines or clarifies activities or uses; • gives fine­tuned direction based on information for each zone; and • builds on the general and category management directions. There are no unresolved issues in this Plan; the Working Group reached consensus on every point negotiated. The Working Group has also developed
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Gyrfalcon Falco Rusticolus
    Gyrfalcon Falco rusticolus Rob Florkiewicz surveys, this area was included. Eight eyries are known from this Characteristics and Range The northern-dwelling Gyrfalcon is part of the province; however, while up to 7 of these eyries have the largest falcon in the world. It breeds mostly along the Arctic been deemed occupied in a single year, no more than 3 have been coasts of North America, Europe and Asia (Booms et al. 2008). productive at the same time. Based on these data and other Over its range, its colour varies from white through silver-grey to sightings, the British Columbia Wildlife Branch estimates the almost black; silver-grey is the most common morph in British breeding population in the province to be fewer than 20 pairs Columbia. It nests on cliff ledges at sites that are often used for (Chutter 2008). decades and where considerable amounts of guano can accumulate. Ptarmigan provide the Gyrfalcon's main prey in In British Columbia, the Gyrfalcon nests on cliff ledges on British Columbia and productivity appears dependent on mountains in alpine areas, usually adjacent to rivers or lakes. ptarmigan numbers. Large size and hunting prowess make the Occasionally, it nests on cliffs of river banks and in abandoned Gyrfalcon a popular bird with falconers, who breed and train Golden Eagle nests. them to hunt waterfowl and other game birds. Conservation and Recommendations Whilst the Gyrfalcon is Distribution, Abundance, and Habitat Most Gyrfalcons breed designated as Not at Risk nationally by COSEWIC, it is Blue-listed along the Arctic coast; however, a few breed in the northwest in British Columbia due to its small known breeding population portion of the Northern Boreal Mountains Ecoprovince of British (British Columbia Ministry of Environment 2014).
    [Show full text]
  • TREATY 8: a British Columbian Anomaly
    TREATY 8: A British Columbian Anomaly ARTHUR J. RAY N THE ANNALS OF NATIVE BRITISH COLUMBIA, 1999 undoubtedly will be remembered as the year when, in a swirl of controversy, Ithe provincial legislature passed the Nisga'a Agreement. The media promptly heralded the agreement as the province's first modern Indian treaty. Unmentioned, because it has been largely forgotten, was the fact that the last major "pre-modern" agreement affecting British Columbia -Treaty 8 - had been signed 100 years earlier. This treaty encompasses a sprawling 160,900-square-kilometre area of northeastern British Columbia (Map 1), which is a territory that is nearly twenty times larger than that covered by the Nisga'a Agreement. In addition, Treaty 8 includes the adjoining portions of Alberta and the Northwest Territories. Treaty 8 was negotiated at a time when British Columbia vehemently denied the existence of Aboriginal title or self-governing rights. It therefore raises two central questions. First, why, in 1899, was it ne­ cessary to bring northeastern British Columbia under treaty? Second, given the contemporary Indian policies of the provincial government, how was it possible to do so? The latter question raises two other related issues, both of which resurfaced during negotiations for the modern Nisga'a Agreement. The first concerned how the two levels of government would share the costs of making a treaty. (I will show that attempts to avoid straining federal-provincial relations over this issue in 1899 created troublesome ambiguities in Treaty 8.) The second concerned how much BC territory had to be included within the treaty area.
    [Show full text]
  • 20. Aboriginal Rights and Interests Effects
    20. ASSESSMENT OF ABORIGINAL AND TREATY RIGHTS AND RELATED INTERESTS 20.1 INTRODUCTION This chapter assesses potential adverse effects on Aboriginal and Treaty rights and related interests which may arise from the Project during construction, operations, decommissioning/reclamation, and post-closure. Underground mining activities have the potential to adversely affect Aboriginal and Treaty rights by interfering with Aboriginal groups’ ability to engage in practices, customs, and traditions that are integral to their distinctive cultures, and/or by interfering with the exercise of rights expressly recognized in a treaty. Interference with Aboriginal and Treaty rights is generally indirect, resulting from changes to environmental conditions that are necessary for the continued exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty rights. The assessment is based on information derived from the Proponent’s engagement with potentially- affected Aboriginal groups, environmental assessments carried out elsewhere in the Application/EIS, and the review of secondary data. Wherever possible, the assessment addresses potential effects on Aboriginal and treaty rights and related interests as understood from the perspective of the Aboriginal groups in question. Baseline reports informing this assessment are appended to the Application/EIS and include: Ethnographic Overview and Traditional Knowledge and Use Desk-Based Research Report (Appendix 17-A) and Saulteau First Nations Knowledge and Use Study for HD Mining Murray River Coal Project (Appendix 17-B). 20.2 REGULATORY AND POLICY FRAMEWORK The Crown has a legal duty to consult with and, where appropriate, accommodate Aboriginal interests when it contemplates a conduct that might adversely impact the potential or established Aboriginal or Treaty right. The Crown delegated procedural aspects of this duty, with respect to the Project, to the Proponent through the Section 11 Order and EIS Guidelines.
    [Show full text]
  • Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Aboriginal Interests & Use Study On
    Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Aboriginal Interests & Use Study on the Enbridge Gateway Pipeline An Assessment of the Impacts of the Proposed Enbridge Gateway Pipeline on the Carrier Sekani First Nations May 2006 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council i Aboriginal Interests & Use Study on the Proposed Gateway Pipeline ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Aboriginal Interests & Use Study was carried out under the direction of, and by many members of the Carrier Sekani First Nations. This work was possible because of the many people who have over the years established the written records of the history, territories, and governance of the Carrier Sekani. Without this foundation, this study would have been difficult if not impossible. This study involved many community members in various capacities including: Community Coordinators/Liaisons Ryan Tibbetts, Burns Lake Band Bev Ketlo, Nadleh Whut’en First Nation Sara Sam, Nak’azdli First Nation Rosa McIntosh, Saik’uz First Nation Bev Bird & Ron Winser, Tl’azt’en Nation Michael Teegee & Terry Teegee, Takla Lake First Nation Viola Turner, Wet’suwet’en First Nation Elders, Trapline & Keyoh Holders Interviewed Dick A’huille, Nak’azdli First Nation Moise and Mary Antwoine, Saik’uz First Nation George George, Sr. Nadleh Whut’en First Nation Rita George, Wet’suwet’en First Nation Patrick Isaac, Wet’suwet’en First Nation Peter John, Burns Lake Band Alma Larson, Wet’suwet’en First Nation Betsy and Carl Leon, Nak’azdli First Nation Bernadette McQuarry, Nadleh Whut’en First Nation Aileen Prince, Nak’azdli First Nation Donald Prince, Nak’azdli First Nation Guy Prince, Nak’azdli First Nation Vince Prince, Nak’azdli First Nation Kenny Sam, Burns Lake Band Lillian Sam, Nak’azdli First Nation Ruth Tibbetts, Burns Lake Band Ryan Tibbetts, Burns Lake Band Joseph Tom, Wet’suwet’en First Nation Translation services provided by Lillian Morris, Wet’suwet’en First Nation.
    [Show full text]
  • 3Nation-BC Collaborative Stewardship Forum: Phase 2 Final Report On
    3Nation-BC Collaborative Stewardship Forum: Phase 2 Final Report on Collaborative Governance Review and Research Jodi Gustafson & Kimberly Heinemeyer Round River Conservation Studies 9/28/20 Final Report September 2020, Prepared for The 3 Nations - British Columbia Collaborative Stewardship Forum 3Nation-BC CSF Co-Governance Phase 2 Final Report Round River Conservation Studies CONTENTS Report Summary .................................................................................................................................... iv Recommendations .............................................................................................................................. v Constructive Relationships: ............................................................................................................ v Identifying Shared Values: .............................................................................................................. v Information used in decision-making processes............................................................................ vi A regional framework and shared decision-making ...................................................................... vi Define and implement short term “pilot” projects ....................................................................... vi Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................... vii 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Culture and Diversity
    Culture and Diversity Creating wellness together. The Agency In the late 1980’s the elders and lead- agreement in 1997 to provide commu- ers of the newly formed Carrier Sekani nity-based health programs. As the Tribal Council (CSTC) came together service needs in child welfare, social, and decided that it was time that social health and legal programs were on the and health issues were brought to the rise; these areas became the develop- forefront. The social well-being of the ment priorities for the agency. Land- Carrier and Sekani people needed im- mark events began with the incorpora- 11 First Nation provement and it was time to begin on tion of a small office and a handful of Communities a new path- one that would lead their employees, and with the guidance of a member nations to a better place and board of directors, the society moved Society membership is made up of a solid future. The CSTC took their first forward. step on this path by employing eight persons who are registered Today, CSFS is a leading organization people to support Carrier and Sekani members at the following 11 First with more than 170 skilled staff mem- families to navigate the Child Welfare Nations Communities: bers in Prince George, Vanderhoof, system. In addition, they saw the need Fort St. James and Burns Lake. 1. Sai’kuz First Nation (Stoney to have a patient advocate for Carrier Creek Indian Band people at the then Prince George Re- gional Hospital. 2. Wet’suwet’en First Nation (Broman Lake Indian Band) 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court Rules Against Kaska Dena Council As Rights and Title Holder
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE March 7, 2019 Supreme Court Rules Against Kaska Dena Council as Rights and Title Holder WATSON LAKE – The Supreme Court of Yukon filed a decision earlier this week ruling against all claims brought forth by the Kaska Dena Council (KDC) in their motion seeking a formal declaration as a holder of Kaska Aboriginal rights and title in its dealings with the Government of Yukon. Liard First Nation was named in the case as a Defendant to oppose the KDC application to the court, on the grounds that KDC had no authority as it is not a rights-bearing group or authorized to bring this action. The ruling confirmed that Kaska Dena Council is not a rights-bearing group, nor an authorized representative of a rights-bearing group. The Court ruled that KDC cannot assert aboriginal rights or title on behalf of some members of the Kaska Nation. The court has made clear findings of fact that the Kaska Nation rights-holders are Liard First Nation, Ross River Dena Council, Dease River First Nation, and Kwadacha Nation. When Crown decisions are being made that could impact Kaska aboriginal rights and title - those are the governments whose concerns must be addressed. This decision sends a clear message that other governments and proponents must work with Liard First Nation to ensure that Kaska aboriginal rights remain meaningful when development and business opportunities are proposed in Kaska traditional territory. The decision outlines six separate issues around Kaska Dena Council’s assertions that were overturned in their entirety by the ruling. Quote: “This decision makes clear who governments and industry must consult and engage with on matters relevant to Kaska aboriginal rights and title,” said Liard First Nation Chief George Morgan.
    [Show full text]
  • NEWS RELEASE for Immediate Release Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation 2012ARR0009-000682 Kaska Dena Council May 17, 2012
    NEWS RELEASE For Immediate Release Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation 2012ARR0009-000682 Kaska Dena Council May 17, 2012 Agreement boosts economic certainty in the Northwest VICTORIA – A new strategic engagement agreement (SEA) with the Kaska Dena First Nations in northwestern B.C. provides greater certainty about how resource development can proceed in more than 10 per cent of the province. B.C. and the Kaska Dena Council developed the SEA together. The agreement sets out government-to-government decision-making structures and processes that establish a co- operative approach to reviewing proposed development activities with the Kaska Dena in their traditional territory. These will guide how government and Kaska engage with northern communities, and environmental and industry stakeholders. This agreement sets out agreed-to levels of engagement regarding resource permits and helps B.C. and the Kaska Dena Council work efficiently together, including achieving timely turn- around objectives for reviewing resource permits. Where the end result is a positive decision, this will allow industry to get shovels in the ground faster, creating more jobs and other economic benefits for both the Kaska Dena and the Province more quickly in the North, and making sure that Kaska Dena First Nations are involved in shared decision-making. The Kaska Dena Strategic Engagement Agreement complements the Dease-Liard Sustainable Resource Management Plan (SRMP) signed in January, which confirms that the majority of the SRMP area is available for sustainable development. The direction provided in the management plan will enable more meaningful discussions between the Province and Kaska on resource development and is facilitated by the SEA.
    [Show full text]
  • Traditional Knowledge Integration Final November 2007
    “Eye on the Wheel” A Strategic Plan for Linking Traditional Knowledge In Resource Planning and Management for the Muskwa Kechika Management Area prepared for The Knowledge & Understanding Committee of the Muskwa Kechika Advisory Board March 31, 2007 Prepared by Reg. C. Whiten, P.Ag MCIP InterraPlan Inc., Moberly Lake with Melanie Karjala, Dan Lousier “RE-EDITED DRAFT Nov 15, 2007” Preface In the preface of his book “Little Bit Know Something”, Robin Ridington relates the stories of Dunne-Za Elders to questions from an anthropologist’s perspective. He draws a central lesson from his in-depth experience with these people: ”How a person knows something is as important as what he or she knows….their knowledge of animals and of the land reflects an intelligence that goes back to the earliest human traditions…the Dunne-Za say that a person who speaks from the authority of his or her own experience.. “little bit know something”. Knowledge, the elders say, empowers a person to live in this world with intelligence and understanding. They recognize that knowledge is a distinctively human attribute. They recognize knowledge as a form of power. Since the time of their culture hero, Saya, Dunne-za men and women have sent their children into the bush to gain power from the animals and natural forces of their country. From these experiences, children have grown into adults who “little bit know something”. R. Ridington p.xiv-xv, ‘Little Bit Know Something’ Indeed, one’s personal experience in any given Only when you come to the place place in combination with Where you remember what is happening to you storied human Will the circle of time interactions can yield Turn around you many important, albeit Only when the tracks before you are subtle pieces of your own knowledge, special Will you turn with the circle insights, and even When your feet enter the tracks wisdom depending upon Of every other being the learner’s purpose and You will see them as your own depth of their encounter.
    [Show full text]
  • Fort Nelson, BC, Canada | Red Seal Recruiting
    Fort Nelson, British Columbia Click here to view Fort Nelson Community Guide Click here to view Directory of Northern Rockies Community Services Fort Nelson is a beautiful town in the northeastern corner of British Columbia that sits on Historic Mile 300 of the Alaska Highway. It is the administrative centre of the vast Northern Rockies Regional Municipality, which is home to 7,000 residents (4,500 of which reside in Fort Nelson). The city boasts an amazing view of the Rocky Mountains and the surrounding wilderness is incredibly beautiful. Weather Winters tend to be cold and dry in Fort Nelson, while summers are generally warm and occasionally rainy. Average Yearly Precipitation Average Days with Rainfall per Year: 71.4 Average Days with Snowfall per Year: 66.1 Seasonal Average Temperatures (˚C) January: -21.2˚ April: 2.9˚ July: 16.8˚ October: 0.6˚ Additional Information For further information about annual climate data for Fort Nelson, please visit The Weather Network or Environment Canada using the links below: http://www.theweathernetwork.com/ http://www.weatheroffice.gc.ca/canada_e.html Location Fort Nelson is situated at Mile 300 of the Alaska Highway. It sits east of the Rocky Mountains by the confluence of the Fort Nelson River, Muskwa River, and Prophet River. The city is approximately 380km North of Fort St. John and 950km (12 hours 45) Southeast of Whitehorse, Yukon. Driving Distances Fort St. John………………………………………………………380km (approx. 4 hours 47 minutes) Whitehorse...……………………………………………………950km (approx. 12 hours 45 minutes) Anchorage, Alaska…………………………………………………………….2082km (approx. 26 hours) Prince George….………………………………………………811km (approx. 10 hours 23 minutes) Transportation The nearest airport to Fort Nelson is the Fort Nelson Airport (YYE), which serves flights to and from Fort St.
    [Show full text]
  • Dionisio Point Excavations
    1HE• Publication of the Archaeological Society of Vol. 31 , No. I - 1999 Dionisio Point Excavations ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF &MIDDEN BRITISH COLUMBIA Published four times a year by the Archaeological Society of British Columbia Dedicated to the protection of archaeological resot:Jrces and the spread of archaeological knowledge. Editorial Committee Editor: Heather Myles (274-4294) President Field Editor: Richard Brolly (689-1678) Helmi Braches (462-8942) arcas@istar. ca [email protected] News Editor: Heather Myles Publications Editor: Robbin Chatan (215-1746) Membership [email protected] Sean Nugent (685-9592) Assistant Editors: Erin Strutt [email protected] erins@intergate. be.ca Fred Braches Annual membership includes I year's subscription to [email protected] The Midden and the ASBC newsletter, SocNotes. Production & Subscriptions: Fred Braches ( 462-8942) Membership Fees I SuBSCRIPTION is included with ASBC membership. Individual: $25 Family: $30 . Seniors/Students: $I 8 Non-members: $14.50 per year ($1 7.00 USA and overseas), Send cheque or money order payable to the ASBC to: payable in Canadian funds to the ASBC. Remit to: ASBC Memberships Midden Subscriptions, ASBC P.O. Box 520, Bentall Station P.O. Box 520, Bentall Station Vancouver BC V6C 2N3 Vancouver BC V6C 2N3 SuBMISSIONs: We welcome contributions on subjects germane ASBC on Internet to BC archaeology. Guidelines are available on request. Sub­ http://home.istar.ca/-glenchan/asbc/asbc.shtml missions and exchange publications should be directed to the appropriate editor at the ASBC address. Affiliated Chapters Copyright Nanaimo Contact: Rachael Sydenham Internet: http://www.geocities.com/rainforest/5433 Contents of The Midden are copyrighted by the ASBC.
    [Show full text]
  • Field Key to the Freshwater Fishes of British Columbia
    FIELD KEY TO THE FRESHWATER FISHES OF BRITISH COLUMBIA J.D. McPhail and R. Carveth Fish Museum, Department of Zoology, University of British Columbia, 6270 University Blvd., Vancouver, B.C., Canada, V6T 1Z4 (604) 822-4803 Fax (604) 822-2416 © The Province of British Columbia Published by the Resources Inventory Committee Canadian Cataloguing in Publication Data McPhail, J. D. (John Donald) Field key to the freshwater, fishes of British Columbia Also available through the Internet. Previously issued: Field key to the freshwater fishes of British Columbia. Draft for 1994 field testing, 1994. Includes bibliographical references: p. ISBN 0-7726-3830-6 (Field guide) ISBN 0-7726-3844-6 (Computer file) 1. Freshwater fishes - British Columbia - Identification. I. Carveth, R. II. Resources Inventory Committee (Canada) III. Title. QL626.5.B7M36 1999 597.176'09711 C99-960109-1 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 Text copyright © 1993 J.D. McPhail Illustrations copyright © 1993 D.L. McPhail All rights reserved. Design and layout by D.L. McPhail "Admitted that some degree of obscurity is inseparable from both theology and ichthyology, it is not inconsistent with profound respect for the professors of both sciences to observe that a great deal of it has been created by themselves." Sir Herbert Maxwell TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction · i Region 1 - Vancouver Island 1 Region 2 - Fraser 27 Region 3 - Columbia 63 Region 4 - MacKenzie 89 Region 5 - Yukon 115 Region 6 - North Coast 127 Region 7 - Queen Charlotte Islands 151 Region 8 - Central Coast 167 Appendix 193 Acknowledgements .
    [Show full text]