2020
DOI: 10.1111/csp2.219
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The long road to protecting critical habitat for species at risk: The case of southern mountain woodland caribou

Abstract: Identifying habitat that is essential to the recovery of species at risk, known as critical habitat, is a major focus of species at risk legislation, yet there has been little research on the degree to which these areas are protected. Here, we first review the provisions for protecting critical habitat on non-federal lands within Canada's Species at Risk Act (SARA). Next, we use the declining southern mountain population of woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in British Columbia, Canada as a case stud… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
25
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

5
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
3
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The ability to enact meaningful habitat management measures in Canada typically depends upon policy instruments not primarily focused on species at risk because most wildlife is distributed over areas outside federal legislative powers (Fluker & Stacey, 2012; Palm et al, 2020). Our results support previous suggestions that despite adoption of species at risk listing representing a decision to regulate and manage, “legislative commitment to recovery planning does not necessarily mean a commitment to plan implementation” (Farrier, Whelan, & Mooney, 2007).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The ability to enact meaningful habitat management measures in Canada typically depends upon policy instruments not primarily focused on species at risk because most wildlife is distributed over areas outside federal legislative powers (Fluker & Stacey, 2012; Palm et al, 2020). Our results support previous suggestions that despite adoption of species at risk listing representing a decision to regulate and manage, “legislative commitment to recovery planning does not necessarily mean a commitment to plan implementation” (Farrier, Whelan, & Mooney, 2007).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For instance, SARA legally protects critical habitat identified in recovery strategies of listed species (Canada, 2002) and the federal recovery strategies for Boreal and Southern Mountain caribou (released in 2012 and 2014, respectively) outline recovery objectives to minimize and mitigate alteration of critical habitat (Environment Canada, 2014), while the federal management plan for Northern Mountain caribou (released in 2012) set out management goals and objectives for this ecotype (Environment Canada, 2012b). Neither AB nor BC has provincial species‐at‐risk legislation so caribou protection relies on federal statutory rules and existing provincial laws and policies (Palm, Fluker, Nesbitt, Jacob, & Hebblewhite, 2020).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While provincial and national parks have considerably protected high elevation summer range in our study area, winter range continues to be subjected to forestry and oil and gas development, with associated impacts to this seasonally critical habitat. Similarly across British Columbia, there is disproportionate protection of low-timber value, high elevation habitats, with the same patterns of ongoing land use of high economic value, low elevation caribou winter ranges (Palm et al, 2020). Accordingly, most caribou populations throughout the Southern Mountain distribution have very low population viability (Wittmer, Ahrens, & McLellan, 2010).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…C. J. Johnson et al, 2015;Palm, Jacob, Fluker, Nesbitt, & Hebblewhite, 2020;Wittmer et al, 2007), and the majority of woodland caribou populations are declining (Festa-Bianchet et al, 2011) with many notable recent extirpations. The causes of these declines are anthropogenic, resulting from direct and indirect habitat loss, increased efficiency of predators, and altered food-webs, which negatively affect caribou through apparent competition (Holt, 1977;Serrouya et al, 2019;Wittmer et al, 2007).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition to reporting seemingly irreproducible results, this study emphasized predator control to the exclusion of any meaningful consideration of the 'bottom-up' habitat requirements of caribou (Wasser et al 2012;Proulx et al 2017). It also comes at a time when regulatory safeguards to protect caribou habitat are already failing to translate to effective protection on the ground (Collard et al 2020;Palm et al 2020). If efforts to prevent the extinction of the Mountain caribou are to succeed, conservation biologists must make use of the whole spectrum of available data, and encourage government to design and implement ecotype-specific, evidence-based management plans.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%