Woodland caribou scientific review to identify critical habitat: chapter 21

Appendix 6.7 (continued)

References

Carroll, C., M. K. Phillips, C. A. Lopez-Gonzalez, and N. H. Schumaker. 2006. Defi ning recovery goals and strategies for endangered species: the wolf as a case study. Bioscience 56:25-37.

Caughley, G.1994. Directions in Conservation Biology. Journal of Animal Ecology 63: 215– 244.

Environment Canada. 2007. Recovery strategy for the woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou), boreal population, in Canada. Draft, June 2007. Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series. Ottawa: Environment Canada. v + 48 pp. plus appendices.

Fryxell, J., and J. Shuter. 2008. Development of a Population Viability Analysis model of Boreal Woodland Caribou in Ontario. Unpublished Report.

Lessard, R. B. 2005. Conservation of woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in westcentral Alberta : a simulation analysis of multi-species predator-prey systems. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Alberta.

McCarthy, M. A., S. J. Andelman, and H. P. Possingham. 2003. Reliability of Relative Predictions in Population Viability Analysis. Conservation Biology 17:982-989.

Schumaker, N. H., T. Ernst, D. White, J. Baker, P. Haggerty. 2004. Projecting wildlife responses to alternative future landscapes in Oregon’s Willamette basin. Ecological Applications 14:381–400.

Schumaker, N. H. HexSim, version 1.2. US Environmental Protection Agency, Corvallis, OR. In prep.

Sorensen, T., P.D. McLoughlin, E. D. Hervieux, Dzus, J. Nolan, B. Wynes, and S. Boutin.

2008. Determining sustainable levels of cumulative effects for boreal caribou. Journal of Wildlife Management 72:900-905.

 

Appendix 6.7 - Figure 1. Initial parameterization for the Alberta study area of the relationship between caribou survival rate and proportion of landscape within 250 meters of linear disturbance features (roads and seismic lines).

Appendix 6.7 - Figure 1. Initial parameterization for the Alberta study area of the relationship between caribou survival rate and proportion of landscape within 250 meters of linear disturbance features (roads and seismic lines).

 

Appendix 6.7 - Figure 2. Results from initial HexSim simulations for the north/eastern Alberta case study area under a) habitat condition without effect of linear disturbance, b) habitat condition with effect of current linear disturbance levels.

Appendix 6.7 - Figure 2. Results from initial HexSim simulations for the north/eastern Alberta case study area under a) habitat condition without effect of linear disturbance, b) habitat condition with effect of current linear disturbance levels.

Appendix 6.7 - Figure 3. Population time series from HexSim simulations for the north/eastern Alberta study area showing long term fl uctuations around stable trend. These fl uctuations are driven by a combination of demographic stochasticity and dispersal limitation related to habitat pattern.

Appendix 6.7 - Figure 3. Population time series from HexSim simulations for the north/eastern Alberta study area showing long term fl uctuations around stable trend. These fl uctuations are driven by a combination of demographic stochasticity and dispersal limitation related to habitat pattern.

Appendix 6.7 - Figure 4. Predictions from the EMWCAC HSI model (averaged over a 100 km2 moving window) for the Manitoba study area for a) caribou summer habitat, and b) winter habitat, overlaid with linear features.

Appendix 6.7 - Figure 4. Predictions from the EMWCAC HSI model (averaged over a 100 km2 moving window) for the Manitoba study area for a) caribou summer habitat, and b) winter habitat, overlaid with linear features.

 

Report a problem or mistake on this page
Please select all that apply:

Thank you for your help!

You will not receive a reply. For enquiries, contact us.

Date modified: