Yukon Podistera (Podistera yukonensis): management plan [proposed] 2022

Official title: Management plan for Yukon Podistera (Podistera yukonensis) in Canada [proposed] 2022

Species at Risk Act

Management Plan Series

Proposed

2022

Yukon Podistera
Yukon Podistera
Document information

Recommended citation:

Environment and Climate Change Canada. 2022. Management Plan for Yukon Podistera (Podistera yukonensis) in Canada [Proposed]. Species at Risk Act Management Plan Series. Environment and Climate Change Canada, Ottawa. iv + 17 pp.

Official version

The official version of the recovery documents is the one published in PDF. All hyperlinks were valid as of date of publication.

Non-official version

The non-official version of the recovery documents is published in HTML format and all hyperlinks were valid as of date of publication.

For copies of the management plan, or for additional information on species at risk, including the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) Status Reports, residence descriptions, action plans, and other related recovery documents, please visit the Species at Risk (SAR) Public RegistryFootnote 1.

Cover illustration: Yukon Podistera, Miller’s Ridge, Carmacks, Yukon. Photo Syd Cannings

Également disponible en français sous le titre « Plan de gestion du Podistère du Yukon (Podistera yukonensis) au Canada [Proposition] »

Content (excluding the illustrations) may be used without permission, with appropriate credit to the source.

Preface

The federal, provincial, and territorial government signatories under the Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk (1996)Footnote 2 agreed to establish complementary legislation and programs that provide for effective protection of species at risk throughout Canada. Under the Species at Risk Act (S.C. 2002, c.29) (SARA), the federal competent ministers are responsible for the preparation of management plans for listed species of special concern and are required to report on progress within five years after the publication of the final document on the SAR Public Registry.

The Minister of Environment and Climate Change is the competent minister under SARA for the Yukon Podistera and has prepared this management plan, as per section 65 of SARA. To the extent possible, it has been prepared in cooperation with the government of the Yukon as per section 66(1) of SARA.

Success in the conservation of this species depends on the commitment and cooperation of many different constituencies that will be involved in implementing the directions set out in this plan and will not be achieved by Environment and Climate Change Canada, or any other jurisdiction alone. All Canadians are invited to join in supporting and implementing this plan for the benefit of the Yukon Podistera and Canadian society as a whole.

Implementation of this management plan is subject to appropriations, priorities, and budgetary constraints of the participating jurisdictions and organizations.

Acknowledgments

The initial draft of this management plan was written by Rhonda Rosie (private consultant). Subsequent drafts were developed by Syd Cannings and Nancy Hughes (Environment and Climate Change Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service – Northern Region [ECCC]). Bruce Bennett, Thomas Jung, Piia Kukka, and Caitlin Willier (Government of Yukon) reviewed a draft of this plan. The Yukon Conservation Data Centre provided data on species occurrences.

Executive summary

Yukon Podistera (Podistera yukonensis) is a long-lived, tufted perennial herb with blue-green pinnate basal leaves. The leafless flowering stems bear compound umbels of small, bright yellow flowers that fade to white. This species grows from a stout elongate taproot, often forming clumps. It grows in alpine habitats in well-drained, rock-dominated areas; on talus or scree slopes, tors, and river bluffs with exposed bedrock.

Yukon Podistera is restricted globally to unglaciated areas of Alaska and west-central Yukon. Approximately 90% of its global range lies within Canada.

Yukon Podistera was listed as a species of Special Concern under Schedule 1 of the Species at Risk Act (SARA) in February 2019.

Perhaps the greatest long-term threat to Yukon Podistera is the loss of alpine habitat as a result of climate warming. Mining and mineral exploration has the potential of degrading habitat at specific sites.

The management objective is to ensure the long-term persistence of all extant subpopulations in Canada, including any newly located or rediscovered subpopulations.

The broad strategies to be taken to address the threats to the species are presented in the Conservation Measures section.

1. COSEWIC* species assessment information

Date of Assessment: November 2014

Common Name (population): Yukon Podistera

Scientific Name: Podistera yukonensis

COSEWIC Status: Special Concern

Reason for Designation: This long-lived plant, almost entirely restricted to Canada, is at risk due to projected loss of its alpine habitat as a result of rapidly changing climate. In addition, mining and mineral exploration are occurring at, or near, several locations.

Canadian Occurrence: Yukon

COSEWIC Status History: Designated Special Concern in November 2014.

* COSEWIC (Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada)

2. Species status information

In Canada, Yukon Podistera (Podistera yukonensis) is listed as Special Concern on Schedule 1 of the federal Species at Risk Act (SARA).

NatureServe (2020) considers Yukon Podistera to be vulnerable to apparently secure globally (G3G4) and nationally in Canada (N3N4), and vulnerable to apparently secure in Yukon (S3S4). In the United States, it is considered critically imperilled to imperilled nationally (N1N2) and subnationally in Alaska (S1S2). Approximately 90% of the global range is found within Canada (COSEWIC 2014).

3. Species information

3.1 Species description

Yukon Podistera is a tufted perennial plant, which often forms dense clumps from a branched underground stem arising from a stout elongate taproot. The basal leaves are blue-green, 3-12 cm long, and pinnateFootnote 3 with 3-6 pairs of leaflets on opposite sides of the stem (Figure 1). The stems are 10-40 cm tall, leafless, and tinged with red when the plant is mature. The flowers form a compound umbelFootnote 4 with several to many rays 5-10 mm long. The five petals are small (about 1 mm long) and bright yellow when newly opened (cover photo), quickly fading to white. The fruits are about 3-7 mm long by 1.5-3 mm broad, flattened, initially reddish but weathering to a straw color (COSEWIC 2014).

Figure 1 - please read long description

Figure 1. Yukon Podistera with maturing flowers going to seed; Miller’s Ridge, Carmacks, Yukon. Photo: Syd Cannings

Long description

Figure 1. This figure shows a Yukon Podistera with maturing flowers located in an open, dry sloped area near multiple rocks. 

3.2 Species population and distribution

Yukon Podistera is one of just a few species restricted globally to eastern Beringia, which includes the unglaciated areas of Alaska and west-central Yukon. With the exception of one known subpopulation, Yukon Podistera is further limited to the upper Yukon River drainage, barely extending into Alaska at the western edge of its range. Approximately 90% of the species’ global range lies within Canada based on a global extent of occurrence (COSEWIC 2014).

Twenty-six subpopulations of Yukon Podistera are known from Canada (Yukon Conservation Data Centre 2021). These subpopulations are isolated from each other by considerable distances, especially between a northern group of subpopulations centred in the Ogilvie Mountains and a southern group in the Dawson and Nisling Ranges (Figure 2).

The total number of individual plants of Yukon Podistera known in Canada is estimated to be between 17,000 and 30,000, of which approximately two-thirds are mature plants (COSEWIC 2014, Yukon Conservation Data Centre 2021). This is a minimum estimate, since all subpopulations have not been fully censused, and there are potentially undiscovered occurrences. Trends are unknown, but a decline as a result of climate warming is inferred (COSEWIC 2014).

Figure 2 - please read long description

Figure 2. Known distribution (green dots) of the Yukon Podistera in Canada (Yukon Conservation Data Centre 2021).

Long description

Figure 2. This figure is of a map that shows the known distribution of the Yukon Podistera in Canada. The subpopulations are found within the Yukon. There is a northern group centered in the Ogilvie Mountains and a southern group located in the Dawson and Nisling Ranges. There is also one subpopulation that is located northeast of Tintina Trench and south of Ogilvie Mountains.

3.3 Needs of the Yukon Podistera

Yukon Podistera is restricted to open, dry, well-drained, rock-dominated habitat, occurring in channels of developed soil and vegetation adjacent to or within rock. It is most often found on talus or scree slopes with slow movement through frost action, most commonly along the edges of vegetation strips oriented down the slope, made up of a mat of low grasses, forbs and lichen over a channel of soil. It also grows in crevices on rock tors, and on river bluffs with exposed bedrock. It grows primarily on south-facing slopes, but in a small number of sheltered microsites a few individuals have been found on east- and west-facing slopes. Slopes range from 5-40° and tend to have low snow accumulation, allowing for early spring exposure. In Yukon, it primarily grows at elevations between 1232 and 1777 m, with three populations between 500 and 800 m (Yukon Conservation Data Centre 2021). In Alaska, it ranges from 360 to 1280 m (Parker 1995; University of Alaska Museum Herbarium ALA15084).

Yukon Podistera appears to be shade-intolerant, although part of the Miller’s Ridge subpopulation (approximately 20 plants) does extend into the edge of an open aspen forest that is growing out of the debris flow (or mining trench) at the base of the slope that houses the majority of the subpopulation. The plants tolerate these conditions, but they do not appear to be as numerous, robust or fertile as the plants on the exposed, south-facing slope above (Bruce Bennett, pers. comm. 2020). It is possible that the forest is expanding over areas where Yukon Podistera established itself in the past under better conditions. The relatively young age of the aspen supports this theory. Similarly, small numbers of Yukon Podistera have been found growing within the edge of an aspen forest below the main subpopulation on Kathul Mountain in Alaska (Batten et al. 1979).

Despite large areas of apparently suitable and available habitat at some of the sites searched, Yukon Podistera was only found in very small proportions of that habitat (COSEWIC 2014). This sparse distribution may be the result of poor dispersal capabilities of Yukon Podistera, or it may simply reflect our limited understanding of ‘suitable’ habitat.

There is no obvious link between the bedrock geology and the Yukon population sites, although none of the subpopulations occur on calcareous sedimentary rock (rock mostly or partially composed of calcium carbonate), which comprises much of the unglaciated areas of Yukon. There is, however, one small subpopulation of 32 plants in Alaska in the Ogilvie Mountains that is known to occur on calcareous shale scree (Parker 1997). In this instance, it may be that Yukon Podistera tolerates the calcareous conditions in order to take advantage of the open vegetation in the area (Parker pers. comm. 2013).

4. Threats

4.1 Threat assessment

The Yukon Podistera threat assessment (Table 1) is based on the IUCN-CMP (World Conservation Union–Conservation Measures Partnership) unified threats classification system (Master et al. 2009). Threats are defined as the proximate activities or processes that have caused, are causing, or may cause in the future the destruction, degradation, and/or impairment of the entity being assessed (population, species, community, or ecosystem) in the area of interest (global, national, or subnational). Limiting factors are not considered during this assessment process. For purposes of threat assessment, only present and future threats are considered. Historical threats, indirect or cumulative effects of the threats, or any other relevant information that would help understand the nature of the threats are presented in the Description of Threats section.

Table 1. Threat calculator assessment, from COSEWIC (2014). Based on a meeting on 4 September 2014, attended by B. Bennett, S. Cannings, S. Dar, and T. Jung; reviewed in February 2021
Threat # Threat description Impacta Scopeb Severityc Timingd
3 Energy production and mining Low Restricted Slight High
3.2 Mining and quarrying Low Restricted Slight High
6 Human intrusions and disturbance Negligible Negligible Slight High
6.1 Recreational activities Negligible Negligible Slight High
11 Climate change and severe weather Medium-Low Pervasive Moderate-Slight High
11.1 Habitat shifting and alteration Medium-Low Pervasive Moderate-slight High

a Impact – The degree to which a species is observed, inferred, or suspected to be directly or indirectly threatened in the area of interest. The impact of each threat is based on Severity and Scope rating and considers only present and future threats. Threat impact reflects a reduction of a species population or decline/degradation of the area of an ecosystem. The median rate of population reduction or area decline for each combination of scope and severity corresponds to the following classes of threat impact: Very High (75% declines), High (40%), Medium (15%), and Low (3%). Unknown: used when impact cannot be determined (e.g., if values for either scope or severity are unknown); Not Calculated: impact not calculated as threat is outside the assessment timeframe (e.g., timing is insignificant/negligible or low as threat is only considered to be in the past); Negligible: when scope or severity is negligible; Not a Threat: when severity is scored as neutral or potential benefit.

b Scope – Proportion of the species that can reasonably be expected to be affected by the threat within 10 years. Usually measured as a proportion of the species’ population in the area of interest. (Pervasive = 71–100%; Large = 31–70%; Restricted = 11–30%; Small = 1–10%; Negligible < 1%).

c Severity – Within the scope, the level of damage to the species from the threat that can reasonably be expected to be affected by the threat within a 10-year or three-generation timeframe. Usually measured as the degree of reduction of the species’ population. (Extreme = 71–100%; Serious = 31–70%; Moderate = 11–30%; Slight = 1–10%; Negligible < 1%; Neutral or Potential Benefit ≥ 0%).

d Timing – High = continuing; Moderate = only in the future (could happen in the short term [< 10 years or 3 generations]) or now suspended (could come back in the short term); Low = only in the future (could happen in the long term) or now suspended (could come back in the long term); Insignificant/Negligible = only in the past and unlikely to return, or no direct effect but limiting.

4.2 Description of threats

The greatest threat believed to be facing Yukon Podistera is the loss of alpine habitat through climate change. Habitat shift (shrubification upslope) is expected to be significant in the longer term.

IUCN-CMP threat 3. Energy production and mining (low impact)

3.2. Mining and quarrying

Mining may affect the portion (18%) of the known Canadian population that are on active quartz mining claims (COSEWIC 2014); however, the impact was calculated to be low as currently most of the claims are in the exploration stage. An additional 40% of the Canadian population occurs in patches within 2 km of active mining claims (COSEWIC 2014).

IUCN-CMP threat 6. Human intrusions and disturbance (negligible impact)

6.1 Recreation

Impacts of recreation are thought to be negligible, given the remote nature of most of the subpopulations. Miller’s Ridge is along a popular hiking route with no established trail. Scrambling (climbing/hiking in areas with loose soil) possibly could affect the population there. The only other site within easy walking distance of a road is the one at Little Gold on the Top of the World Highway, but this one is on a small tor that is unlikely to be eroded by walkers (B. Bennett, pers. comm. 2020).

IUCN-CMP threat 11. Climate change and severe weather (medium-low impact)

11.1 Habitat shifting and alteration

Loss of alpine habitat as a result of climate change is ongoing.

Regional projections indicate an annual increase in temperature of 2.5–3.7°C by 2050 (Hennessey et al. 2011; Hennessey and Streicker 2011; Northern Climate ExChange 2011). Precipitation is generally expected to rise over most of the central territory although the region northeast of Dawson is expected to have decreasing precipitation. With a warming climate, the shrub line in Yukon mountain ranges will likely advance upslope (Danby and Hik 2007). An increase in shrub cover has also been observed in arctic tundra in Alaska over the last 50 years (Tape et al. 2006). The loss of alpine and arctic tundra and the increase in shrub cover will likely decrease the amount of habitat suitable for Yukon Podistera, threatening its persistence. Shrubification will likely increase snow capture, which would further reduce habitat suitability for a plant that appears to favour early spring exposure. At the Miller’s Ridge site near Carmacks, Trembling Aspen infill appears to be degrading Yukon Podistera habitat around the edges of the subpopulation, leading to plants that are less numerous, robust and fertile than those in the adjacent, exposed sites (COSEWIC 2014).

5. Management objective

Continuing presence of apparently stable subpopulations at known sites over the long term (at least 50-100 years) both implies and requires continued habitat integrity. At some sites, continued habitat integrityFootnote 5 may require mitigation measures such as avoiding disturbance of habitat within groups of plants. In the case of Yukon Podistera, this means the persistence of open (unshaded), undisturbed, rocky habitat.

The susceptibility of this species to the loss of habitat as a result of climate warming (COSEWIC 2014) presents a special challenge, since this is not easily mitigated at local scales.

6. Broad strategies and conservation measures

6.1 Actions already completed or currently underway

6.2 Broad strategies

In order to achieve the management objective, conservation measures are organized under five broad strategies (from Conservation Measures Partnerhip’s (2016) Conservation Actions Classification v. 2.0).

  1. Land management
  2. Awareness raising
  3. Conservation designation and planning
  4. Legal and policy frameworks
  5. Research and monitoring

6.3 Conservation measures

Table 2. Conservation measures and implementation schedule

Broad Strategies are taken from the Conservation Measures Partnerhip’s (2016) Conservation Actions Classification v. 2.0.

Table 2. Conservation measures and implementation schedule
Broad strategy Conservation measure Prioritye Threats or concerns addressed Timeline
Land management Assess current threats at extant and presumed extant populations, and develop and implement a mitigation plan where appropriate. Medium Mining and mineral exploration; Threat 3 2022-2026, then ongoing
Land management Develop mitigation advice Medium Mining and mineral exploration; Threat 3 2022-2026, then ongoing
Awareness raising Develop communication strategy for stakeholders and public to build awareness and encourage stewardship; produce and distribute educational materials High Mining and mineral exporation; Threat 3 2022-2026, then ongoing
Awareness raising Promote public awareness of the vulnerability of alpine ecosystems to climate change Medium Climate Change; Threat 11 2022-2026, then ongoing
Conservation designation and planning Ensure that Yukon Podistera is considered within the Dawson Regional Land Use Plan, and subsequent land use planning initiatives High Mining and mineral exploration: Threat 3 2022-2023
Legal and policy frameworks Canada meets its climate targets as outlined in the Paris Agreement. High Climate Change: Threat 11 2022-2031, then ongoing
Legal and policy frameworks Yukon meets its climate targets. High Climate Change: Threat 11 2022-2031, then ongoing
Research and monitoring Survey known populations for population status, abundance and threats High Knowledge gaps 2022-2031
Research and monitoring Search for unknown populations Low Knowledge gaps 2022-2031
Research and monitoring Establish long-term monitoring plots to determine the rate and extent of shrubification of the lower alpine zone High Climate change: Threat 11 2021-2026; then ongoing
Research and monitoring Using habitat models and climate change projections, identify areas that may be climate refuges for Yukon Podistera Medium Climate change: Threat 11 2022-2026
Research and monitoring Genetic studies to determine relationships among isolated populations Low Knowledge gaps 2022-2031

e “Priority” reflects the degree to which the measure contributes directly to the conservation of the species or is an essential precursor to a measure that contributes to the conservation of the species. High priority measures are considered those most likely to have an immediate and/or direct influence on attaining the management objective for the species. Medium priority measures may have a less immediate or less direct influence on reaching the management objective, but are still important for the management of the population. Low priority conservation measures will likely have an indirect or gradual influence on reaching the management objective, but are considered important contributions to the knowledge base and/or public involvement and acceptance of the species.

6.4 Narrative to support conservation measures and implementation schedule

Broad strategy: Land management

In order to ensure the long-term viability of the species in Canada and the continued integrity of its habitat, there is a need to develop mitigation advice for mining exploration in alpine sites. Impacts need to be documented and best management practices developed.

Broad strategy: Conservation designation and planning

The Dawson Regional Land Use Plan may identify sites for the conservation of this species, as could future land use plans in the southern parts of its range.

Broad strategy: Awareness raising

Much of the public and many stakeholders are likely unaware of the existence of Yukon Podistera. Increased communications regarding the species, its habitat needs, and the threats facing it would go a long way to ensuring the success of conservation efforts. The threat that climate warming poses to alpine ecosystems needs to be stressed to the public and governments alike.

Broad strategy: Legal and policy frameworks

Because climate warming is considered the foremost long-term threat to Yukon Podistera, both Canada and the Yukon need to play their role in global actions to minimize the magnitude of climate change. Under the Paris Agreement, Canada committed to reducing its greenhouse gas emissions by 30% below 2005 levels by 2030. In 2019, the 2005 level was estimated at 730 Mt CO2 eq (Environment and Climate Change Canada 2020). Similarly, the Government of the Yukon has pledged to reduce the Territory’s greenhouse gas emissions by 30% by 2030 (Government of Yukon 2020).

Broad strategy: Research and monitoring

Detailed mapping and accurate census estimates need to be made at all occurrences; monitoring of progress cannot occur without baseline measurements of distribution and abundance. Long-term vegetation monitoring plots or transects should be established to measure the rate and extent of shrubification of the Yukon Podistera’s alpine habitat.

Genetic data from all sites have been collected, but not thoroughly analyzed to reveal the relationships among isolated subpopulations. This would be useful to determine whether or not some might represent designatable unitsFootnote 6, in future status re-assessments.

7. Measuring progress

The performance indicators presented below provide a way to measure progress towards achieving the management objectives and monitoring the implementation of the management plan.

8. References

Batten, A.R., D.F. Murray, and J.C. Dawe. 1979. Threatened and Endangered plants in selected area of the BLM Fortymile Planning Unit, Alaska. U.S. Department of the Interior, Anchorage, Alaska. 127 pp.

Bennett, B. 2020. Personal communication to S. Cannings via telephone, 24 June 2020. Coordinator, Yukon Conservation Data Centre, Whitehorse, YT.

Conservation Measures Partnership. 2016. Conservation Actions Classification (v2.0). Available at: https://cmp-openstandards.org/using-cs/tools/__actions/. Accessed 19 August 2020.

COSEWIC. 2014. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Yukon Podistera Podistera yukonensis in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. x + 34 pp. Available at: http://sararegistry.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=45A14631-1

Environment and Climate Change Canada. 2020. Canadian Environmental Sustainability Indicators: progress towards Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions reduction target. Available at: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-indicators/progress-towards-canada-greenhouse-gas-emissions-reduction-target.html. Accessed 26 January 2021.

Government of Yukon. 2020. Our clean future: A Yukon strategy for climate change, energy and a green economy. Available at: https://yukon.ca/en/our-clean-future-yukon-strategy-climate-change-energy-and-green-economy. Accessed 26 January 2021.

Master, L., D. Faber-Langendoen, R. Bittman, G.A. Hammerson, B. Heidel, J. Nichols, L. Ramsay, and A. Tomaino. 2009. NatureServe conservation status assessments: factors for assessing extinction risk. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. 57 pp.

NatureServe. 2020. NatureServe Explorer [web application]. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available at https://explorer.natureserve.org/. [Accessed 24 June 2020]

Parker, C.L. 1995. Status and trends survey of category 2 plants in the Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve, Alaska. University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska. 78 pp. Available online: http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/units/cakn/Documents/YUCH1995opt.pdf

Parker, C.L. 1997. Rare Plant and Floristic Survey of Selected Sites in Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve, Alaska, June 1996. Unpublished report submitted to National Parks Service. 36 pp.

Parker, C.L. Personal communications to L. Schroeder by email correspondence January-March 2013. Botanist/consultant, Fairbanks, Alaska. 2012-2013

Sun, F., S.R. Downie, and R.L. Hartman. 2004. An ITS-based phylogenetic analysis of the perennial, endemic Apiaceae subfamily Apioideae of western North America. Systematic Botany 29:419-431.

Sun, F., and S.R. Downie. 2010. Phylogenetic analyses of morphological and molecular data reveal major clades within the perennial, endemic western North American Apiaceae subfamily Apioideae. Journal of the Torrey Botanical Society 137:133-156.

Wiken, E., W.G.B. Smith, J. Cinq-Mars, C.Latsch, and D. Gauthier. 2003. Habitat integrity in Canada: wildlife conservation. Background paper for the National Conference on Guidelines and Tools for the Evaluation of Natura 200 Sites in France. March 3-5, 2003--Montpellier,France.

Yukon Conservation Data Centre. 2021. Element occurrence records of Yukon Podistera, Podistera yukonensis, from the database of the Yukon Conservation Data Centre. Yukon Department of Environment, Whitehorse, Yukon. Accessed 26 January 2021.

Appendix A: Effects on the environment and other species

A strategic environmental assessment (SEA) is conducted on all SARA recovery planning documents, in accordance with the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program ProposalsFootnote 7. The purpose of a SEA is to incorporate environmental considerations into the development of public policies, plans, and program proposals to support environmentally sound decision-making and to evaluate whether the outcomes of a recovery planning document could affect any component of the environment or any of the Federal Sustainable Development Strategy’sFootnote 8 (FSDS) goals and targets.

Conservation planning is intended to benefit species at risk and biodiversity in general. However, it is recognized that implementation of management plans may also inadvertently lead to environmental effects beyond the intended benefits. The planning process based on national guidelines directly incorporates consideration of all environmental effects, with a particular focus on possible impacts upon non-target species or habitats. The results of the SEA are incorporated directly into the management plan itself, but are also summarized below in this statement.

This management plan will benefit the environment by promoting the conservation of the unglaciated alpine habitat of Yukon Podistera. This habitat is also home to the Collared Pika (listed under SARA as Special Concern), and several plants restricted globally to this region but not yet assessed or listed. The potential for the plan to inadvertently lead to adverse effects on other species was considered and the SEA concluded that this plan will clearly benefit the environment and will not entail any significant adverse effects. The reader should refer to the following sections of the document in particular: description of the species’ needs, ecological role, and limiting factors; and the conservation actions.

Page details

Date modified: