LANDSCAPE INTACTNESS AND CONNECTIVITY

Transcription

1 Crown Managers Partnership Transboundary Conservation Initiative Background Landscapes are the foundational backdrop for large landscape conservation initiatives. Ecoregions formed through geology, climate, soils and vegetation are the home place for native ecosystems and the biodiversity and natural processes that comprise them. Human land use is one major stressor impacting native landscapes. This conservation priority is focused on the intactness of native landscapes and the retention of connectivity for native species and processes. What supporting analysis has been and is being done? Trans- Boundary Landscapes Analysis: Since 2009, working with university and agency partners, the Crown Managers Partnership (CMP) has conducted Landscape Analysis at the scale of the Crown. Strengthening our collaboration, the Great Northern Landscape Conservation Cooperative (GNLCC began contributing to this effort in This collaboration has produced: Trans- boundary geo- spatial data sets for a suite of landscape metrics: Analysis of land cover, phenology and human- use footprint across the Crown of the Continent Ecosystem (CCE): Accurate representation of baseline ecosystem conditions and initiation of trend analysis, consistent at the scale of the CCE: and; Development of CCE geospatial analysis products including: o Grizzly bear occupancy model: ; o Human modification index: o Jurisdictional and ecological complexity maps: and o Predicted distribution for whitebark and limber pines: Landscape Patterns Environmental Quality Analysis: landscapes- analysis In 2013 the CMP partnered with various agencies and partnerships to commission a report synthesizing published scientific findings on relationships between human land use/land use patterns and the qualitative state of key indicators of ecological integrity in the environment. The breadth of literature reviewed and analysis conducted support the hypotheses: 1) that land use composition impacts ecological integrity; and 2) that specific landscape patterns are key to maintaining robust ecological function and species diversity.

2 Lorem Ipsum Species research: Researchers have done a great deal of work in the Crown on the distribution and habitat requirements of several species. Often this work has been supported by the GNLCC. A short list of examples: o Grizzly bear connectivity mapping: o Synthesis of landscape conservation values for a suite of vulnerable fish and wildlife species: and o Woverine connectivity: content/uploads/2015/01/clevenger- et- al.- Alberta.pdf. How did you go about deciding what to do? The CMP held its March 2013 Annual Forum in Cranbrook on the theme of Large Landscapes: Working Across Boundaries cmp- forum/. In September 2013, the CMP Steering Committee decided to formally launch a process to identify initial landscape conservation outcomes. The background work and analysis described above provided a basis for discussion around land use and desired ecological outcomes. In January and April 2014 two science/manager workshops were held in Fernie, BC. The first, Landscape Patterns: Moving from Knowledge to Action focused on intact landscapes, connectivity and fragmentation, shared and confirmed insights arising from relevant research and analysis and explored what landscape indicators are important and where in the CCE. There were over 40 participants representing most major agencies and land managers in the CCE, First Nations, consultants, researchers and the science community: patterns- workshopi/. Work was undertaken between the two workshops to scope potential areas of emerging interest and to craft an initial Human Modification Index (HMI) to provide additional information on footprint status in each jurisdiction. The second workshop focused on discussing connectivity language and reviewing the draft HMI, assessing agency policies and identifying priority areas of interest, management opportunities and desired outcomes: patterns- workshop- ii/. What outcome do you want to achieve? Sustain robust ecological function and species diveristy by maintain structurally intact native landscapes and assuring sustained viability of species connectivity pathways, Reduce highway mortality for ungulates and carnivores. What are your strategies for getting there? In line with adaptive management principles, the Steering Committee is adopting a start simple approach. Once initial, collective institutional capacity is built, additional competency and complexity can be added over time (more landscape management actions, more sites). The initial strategies are: Establish highway corridor crossings. Initial priority Hwy 3 Crowsnest Pass (two crossings in Alberta and two in BC). Secondary priority Hwy 2 Marias Pass; Reduce Southern East Slopes human footprint and linear disturbance in SW Alberta; Assure wildlife connectivity in the transboundary Flathead; and Retain viable wildlife connectivity across the AB/BC continental divide. Initial priority Livingstone/Elk. Secondary priority Castle/Flathead.

3 3 What have you done? Highway corridors: In AB the underpass for Bighorn Sheep in the Crowsnest Lake area is complete. The Rock Creek site is on Alberta Transportation s list of projects requiring funding; In MT it is likely that M T Department of Transportation will build a wildlife highway crossing on State land near Columbia Falls; A Roadwatch BC program has been d eveloped by the Miistakis Institute for the Rockies, Wildsight, Y2Y and the Western Transportation Initiative. There is a downloadable app: and Through an internship at the University of Montana, graduate student Peter Gurche has been taking the pulse of connectivity/wildlife crossing efforts for all of the major fragmentation corridors around the CCE. SW Alberta: The South Saskatchewan Regional Plan (SSRP, released Sept 2014), places a priority on watershed protection and biodiversity management on Crown lands in southwest AB. A follow- up sub- regional linear and footprint management plan is underway for the Livingstone and Porcupine Hills areas; and a Recreation Management Plan is underway for the Porcupine Hills with one for the Livingstone area to follow. Recreation use, footprint and linear disturbance are also topics being addressed in parks management. Planning is underway for the pending Provincial Park and Wildland in the Castle. Finally, recreational access closures are in place for the Pole Haven Grazing Association. Collectively, these measures will address recreation u se, trails and all linear footprint in the vast majority of the Crown land in SW Alberta.

4 Headwaters watershed integrity is also a major priority for the Oldman Watershed Council : action- plan/. In follow- up to the Headwaters Action Plan the OWC has undertaken the Dutch Creek pilot: creek- pilot- project and Engaging Recreationists: recreationalists projects. Transboundary Flathead: The transboundary Flathead River is a critical landscape, nested within the Crown of the Continent, linking northwest Montana and southeast British Columbia, and the southern Canadian Rockies to the northern US Rockies, across the Canada- US boundary. The importance of the landscape for both intactness and connectivity was recognized in a Memorandum of Understanding between BC and MT, signed in 2010: The GNLCC is supporting an executive- level, multi- jurisdictional working group in this landscape and key science needs including transboundary data that managers can develop common objectives from, climate modeling for the river aquatic system, common adaptation strategies for key fish species, and common objectives for key transboundary terrestrial species, including large and mid- size carnivores and ungulates. flathead AB/BC Continental Divide: In Alberta, as a result of decisions made in the SSRP, much of the alpine/sub- alpine in the northern portion of the Livingstone will be secured as native habitat in protected areas. Subsequently, the government has decided to protect the Castle. Both parks management planning and footprint, linear and recreation planning underway in the SSRP will address anthropogenic use impacts on wildlife movements. In British Columbia, the province is working with First Nations, industry, and local NGO s and stakeholders to balance the industrial footprint in the Elk and Flathead Valleys with conservation lands and restoration. Activities include the Cumulative Effects Framework for the Elk Valley and management planning for long- term conservation lands purchased by Teck Coal Ltd in What s next? Highway corridors: Secure provincial government support for wildlife corridor crossings on Hwy 3 in BC; Complete and post Crown- wide transboundary analysis of all wildlife crossing efforts; Hold an initial meeting of stakeholders to initiate planning for crossings in the Hwy 2 corridor; and Develop strategies for adding key points of connectivity on Highways 93 and 89 as additional corridor priorities. Continental Divide: Convene a meeting of the affected parties. Securing this strategy will require the goodwill and cooperation of governments, industry and recreationists on both sides of the provincial boundary. Partnering and scaling our efforts: The CMP is one of a number of organizations and partnerships working at multiple scales in western North America, in evaluating a suite of landscape metrics toward defining achievable environmental outcomes. The CMP is intentionally enhancing its efforts to work closely with both researchers and other partnerships working at multiple scales on large landscape conservation and terrestrial intactness/connectivity - - especially the GNLCC, Cascadia and the High Divide. Such networking is a richly productive way to share learnings, sustain commitment and pool collective expertise and capacity. Collaboration (who is involved)? Federal, provincial and state agencies, Tribes and First Nations, universities and key researchers who have worked in the CCE along with companies and NGOs including the Miistakis Institutue, the Western Transportation Initiative, Y2Y and Wildsight. For this indicator, action by agencies with land management control is critical so initial efforts are focusing mostly on this group. Once potential candidate sites for action are identified, broader engagement will be pursued to test societal acceptability and community/stakeholder buy- in.

5 Links to a few key websites: CMP Transboundary Conservation Initiative: University of Calgary Geography Department: National Park Service Rocky Mountain Inventory and Monitoring Network: US Highway 93 North Wildlife Crossing Structures: Great Northern Landscape Conservation Cooperative: Washington Connected Landscapes Project: Center for Large Landscape Conservation: Cascadia Partner Forum: High Divide: of- rockies.org/landscape- themes/connectivity/ IUCN Connectivity Conservation Specialist Group: Contacts: Crown Managers Partnership Erin Sexton, Landscape Conservation Priority lead, Flathead Lake Biological Station: erin.sexton@mso.umt.edu Brian Marotz, Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks: BMarotz@mt.gov Caryn Miske, Flathead Basin Commission: CMiske@mt.gov Dennis Madsen, Waterton Lakes National Park: dennis.madsen@pc.gc.ca Greg Watson, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Greg_Watson@fws.gov Ian Dyson, Planning, Alberta Environment and Parks: Ian.Dyson@gov.ab.ca Julia DalSoglio, Environmental Protection Agency: DalSoglio.Julie@epa.gov Len Broberg, University of Montana: len.broberg@umontana.edu Linh Hoang, U.S. Forest Service, Region 1: lhoang@fs.fed.us Mary Riddle (Chair), Glacier National Park: Mary_Riddle@nps.gov Mike Bruised Head, Blood Tribe: MikeBH@bloodtribe.org Mike Durglo, Confederated Salish and Kootenay Tribes: miked@cskt.org Mike Munoz, USFS, Helena and Lewis and Clark National Forest mamunoz@fs.fed.us Peter Swain, Parks, Alberta Environment and Parks: Peter.Swain@gov.ab.ca Rich Janssen, Confederated Salish and Kootenay Tribes: Richj@cskt.org Rob Davies, USFS, Flathead National Forest: rdavies@fs.fed.us Rob Simieritsch, Alberta Environment and Parks: Rob.Simieritsch@gov.ab.ca Crown Adaptation Partnership Anne Carlson, The Wilderness Society: Anne_Carlson@tws.org Regan Nelson, Crown Conservation Initiative: regan@crownconservation.net Erin Sexton, Crown Mangers Partnership: erin.sexton@mso.umt.edu Linh Hoang, Crown Mangers Partnership: lhoang@fs.fed.us Ian Dyson, Crown Managers Partnership: Ian.Dyson@gov.ab.ca Great Northern Landscape Conservation Cooperative Yvette Converse, US, Fish and Wildlife Service: Yvette_Converse@fws.gov Tom Oliff, National Park Service: Tom_Olliff@nps.gov