ArticlePDF Available

Insights into integrating cumulative effects and collaborative co-management for migratory tundra caribou herds in the Northwest Territories, Canada

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Globally, many migratory mammals are facing threats. In northern Canada, large annual ranges expose migratory caribou to an array of human activities, including industrial exploration and development. Recognition that responses to human activities can accumulate for caribou is long-standing, but is heightened by recent declines in caribou abundance. For example, since the mid-1990s, the Bathurst herd has declined by approximately 90%, leading to severe harvest restrictions. More mines are being proposed and developed across the herd’s annual range, raising questions about cumulative effects. Despite progress on assessment techniques, aboriginal groups are expressing strong concerns and frustration about gaps in responsibilities for who should monitor, mitigate, and manage cumulative effects. The core of the concern is sustainability and the related trade-offs between industrial developments relative to continued access to healthy caribou for harvesting. We offer insights into how these concerns can be addressed by building on existing concepts (adaptive management) and approaches (herd management). © 2014 by the author(s). Published here under license by the Resilience Alliance.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Copyright © 2014 by the author(s). Published here under license by the Resilience Alliance.
Gunn, A., D. Russell, and L. Greig. 2014. Insights into integrating cumulative effects and collaborative co-management for migratory
tundra caribou herds in the Northwest Territories, Canada. Ecology and Society 19(4): 4. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-06856-190404
Insight, part of a Special Feature on Heterogeneity and Resilience of Human-Rangifer Systems: A CircumArctic Synthesis
Insights into integrating cumulative effects and collaborative co-
management for migratory tundra caribou herds in the Northwest
Territories, Canada
Anne Gunn, Don Russell and Lorne Greig 1
ABSTRACT. Globally, many migratory mammals are facing threats. In northern Canada, large annual ranges expose migratory caribou
to an array of human activities, including industrial exploration and development. Recognition that responses to human activities can
accumulate for caribou is long-standing, but is heightened by recent declines in caribou abundance. For example, since the mid-1990s,
the Bathurst herd has declined by approximately 90%, leading to severe harvest restrictions. More mines are being proposed and
developed across the herd’s annual range, raising questions about cumulative effects. Despite progress on assessment techniques,
aboriginal groups are expressing strong concerns and frustration about gaps in responsibilities for who should monitor, mitigate, and
manage cumulative effects. The core of the concern is sustainability and the related trade-offs between industrial developments relative
to continued access to healthy caribou for harvesting. We offer insights into how these concerns can be addressed by building on existing
concepts (adaptive management) and approaches (herd management).
Key Words: adaptive management; Arctic Canada; cumulative effects; migratory caribou; mitigation; monitoring
INTRODUCTION
Caribou are an essential part of the culture for many aboriginal
people who also depend on caribou harvest. Aboriginal people
have repeatedly voiced concern about cumulative effects of
industrial exploration and development on caribou. Their
concerns are centered on displacement of caribou from seasonal
ranges and effects on caribou health. Conserving migratory
animals can be especially difficult (Berger 2004) because their
migrations between seasonal ranges can expose them to sites of
human activities, even when such sites are highly dispersed. In
northern Canada, migratory tundra caribou Rangifer tarandus
typically have large annual migrations of hundreds to thousands
of kilometers between their seasonal ranges. While caribou are
exposed over the spatial scale of their annual range, they also
respond to stresses over their lifetime, which is typically ~15 yr
for an adult female.
Cumulative effects assessment is a part of environmental impact
assessment that examines the combined impact of the individual
effects of multiple stresses from human activities additional to
natural environmental effects, including climate. Although
relatively simple in concept, cumulative effects have proven
somewhat intractable in practice, partly because attention tends
to focus on incremental effects, rather than the condition and
capacity of the environment to absorb those incremental effects
(Duinker and Greig 2006, Kennett and Woynillowicz 2007,
Canter and Ross 2008, Noble 2010, Greig and Duinker 2011).
Lack of progress over cumulative effects in the Canadian
Northwest Territories (NWT) is becoming progressively more
apparent. In 1999, aboriginal organizations, industry, and
government agencies developed the Northwest Territories
Cumulative Effects Assessment and Management Strategy and
Framework, and the NWT Cumulative Impact Monitoring
Program. After more than a decade, progress on accounting for
cumulative effects in monitoring, mitigation, and management
has lagged. This lack of progress and deficiencies in the
management of cumulative effects have led to fears about the
sustainability of the Bathurst caribou herd as voiced by the Lutsel
K’e Dene First Nation and Tlicho Government during the
Gahcho Kue mine environmental assessment (Lutsel K’e Dene
First Nation 2012, Tlicho Government 2012). Organizations
noted that the only mitigation for cumulative effects was further
harvest restrictions, which highlighted the lack of independent
oversight for mitigation and monitoring of project-specific
impacts, and observed that Territorial and Federal governments
have not yet established a clear management framework that can
be applied in the NWT.
The pressing need to manage cumulative effects was also
recognized by government wildlife management agencies. The
Government of the Northwest Territories (GNWT) in its Caribou
Management Strategies (2006–2010 and 2011–2015) committed
to developing cumulative effects modeling tools for barren-
ground caribou (GNWT 2011). However, both strategies had only
relatively high-level policies stated and no clear path for how
decisions could be made about priorities and trade-offs among
land and resource uses on caribou herd ranges. Additionally,
neither monitoring nor mitigation for cumulative effects was
described.
Based on insights gained during our collective experience in
cumulative effects and caribou management, we identified the
need for a regulatory and institutional framework to inform
decisions about the trade-offs between the major factors that
influence the sustainability of caribou herds. Here, we propose a
framework for cumulative effects monitoring and management
for migratory tundra caribou. We have two objectives. First, we
show how cumulative effects assessment, monitoring, and
mitigation can be linked through adaptive management.
Monitoring, as applied in the framework, is used to assess
effectiveness of mitigation and management decisions to
determine how mitigation can be adjusted. To develop this
framework, we describe requirements for monitoring as well as
approaches available to mitigate cumulative effects beyond simply
restricting harvest. Mitigation is the suite of actions to modify
1ESSA Technologies Ltd.
Ecology and Society 19(4): 4
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol19/iss4/art4/
effects of human activities. Mitigation for cumulative effects
includes development of project-specific mitigation, and actions
at the herd and landscape scale to reduce vulnerability and
increase resilience.
Our second objective is to show how adaptive management of
cumulative effects can be implemented by incorporating
cumulative effects into herd-level monitoring, assessment, and
decision-making. Setting cumulative effects into a herd
management context re-asserts that the goal of environmental
impact assessment is sustainability of caribou. While an
individual project proponent is required to assess cumulative
effects, the very nature of cumulative effects is a joint (shared)
responsibility with previous and future development proponents
and resource co-management agencies. Thus, it makes sense to
provide a framework for shared responsibilities that clearly
identifies regulatory responsibilities and authorities. We have used
linkage diagrams to emphasize the relationships between the
components. While we use the Bathurst herd as an example,
integrating cumulative effects monitoring and mitigation into
herd management planning is transferable to other migratory
tundra caribou herds.
Adaptive management is a relatively broad and evolving approach
to complex ecological and socioeconomic systems (Walters and
Holling 1990, Lee 1999, Monroe et al. 2013; C. Murray and D.
R. Marmorek, unpublished manuscript: http://www.adaptivemanagement.
net/sites/default/files/Adaptive%20management%20A%20spoonful%
20of%20rigour%20helps%20the%20uncertainty%20go%20down.
pdf). While we do not explore how decisions could be made
through adaptive co-management, we acknowledge it is complex
(Monroe et al. 2013). It requires collaborative input as
communities, governments, and industries undertake the
implementation of a cumulative effects framework with
consultation to ensure that operational details are consistent with
“respecting” caribou in the context of the knowledge and values
of aboriginal people. Nor do we explore landscape management
using limits and offsets for development, despite our recognition
that these approaches cannot be postponed much longer.
The statements made during environmental assessments for the
most recent mine assessments on the NWT range of the Bathurst
herd highlight the concerns and fears of caribou harvesters. The
extent of the Bathurst caribou herd decline between 1996 and
2009 and the continued decline of breeding females during 2009–
2012 (Boulanger et al. 2014) reveals that the Bathurst herd is
highly vulnerable to further decline despite the severe harvest
restrictions already imposed.
BACKGROUND
Abundance and distribution of the Bathurst caribou herd relative
to developments
The Bathurst herd (Fig. 1) has declined from 360,000 in 1996 to
31,600 in 2009 (Boulanger et al. 2011). The decline followed a
peak of high numbers, a typical part of the abundance cycle of
migratory tundra caribou (Gunn 2003). A complex of interacting
factors drive the cycles, including changes to forage, accumulated
effects of forest fires on the winter ranges, harvesting, predation,
and parasitism. During the decline, productivity and adult cow
survival decreased (Boulanger et al. 2011), which likely increased
the herd’s vulnerability to additional environmental stresses.
Fig. 1. Annual range of the Bathurst caribou herd, showing the
locations of current and proposed mines and access roads.
The decline coincided with an increase in mining exploration and
development. Although mining exploration had been occurring
for decades, the discovery of diamonds in 1991 triggered a surge
in exploration, with an increase in camps, aircraft, and helicopters
on the tundra ranges of the Bathurst herd, which are the pre-
calving to autumn ranges. At the peak of exploration in 1993,
118,124 km² of new claims had been staked in the NWT (G.
Bouchard, Natural Resources Canada, personal communication).
The diamond exploration led to the development of three mines
and a fourth mine undergoing review on the NWT range of the
herd (Fig. 1), with a diamond mine in Nunavut.
The Bathurst herd’s pre-calving migration is led by the cows
moving north to their traditional calving grounds on the tundra.
During post-calving and summer, the caribou tend to move
clockwise from the calving grounds, southwest toward the tree-
line by late summer and autumn. During this movement, they
encounter industrial development and exploration sites.
Aboriginal elders have stated concerns about caribou avoiding
mines (Lutsel K’e Dene First Nation 2012). This zone of influence
within which caribou, especially cows with calves, avoid
infrastructure and human activity is up to ~15 km for an active
mine (Boulanger et al. 2012).
During a cumulative effect assessment for the Gahcho Kue
diamond mine in the NWT (De Beers 2012), a catalog of previous
and existing developments was compiled, which included 551
developments (exploration camps, mines, communities, quarries)
with a total area of 76,157 ha plus 2491 km of transmission lines
and roads. Most of the known start and end dates for actual work
were available only from 1996 through 2010 and thus, the
compilation did not include the peak of the diamond exploration
in 1993. De Beers (2012) reported that the direct footprint of those
developments, including the Gahcho Kue proposed mine,
compared to pre-development conditions, would cumulatively
reduce caribou habitat up to 7.3% on the autumn range. While
there are limitations in relating the scale of these projected
changes in habitat availability to changes in abundance of
Ecology and Society 19(4): 4
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol19/iss4/art4/
caribou, it is worth noting that a relatively simple population
model based on productivity and survival (De Beers 2012:7–139)
projected that “cumulative effects from development resulted in
a 12.2% reduction in projected final herd abundance relative to
reference conditions” over 30 years.
De Beers (2012) estimated the exposure of caribou cows to the
disturbance sites on the summer and autumn ranges. The
movements of caribou cows fitted with satellite collars from the
Bathurst herd were mapped to determine when they encountered
development sites on the summer to autumn ranges (De Beers
2012). Annually, the mean number of collared cows available was
14 ± 0.9 (SE) cows. From 1996 to 2009, the cows annually spent
an average of 10 ± 14.3 (SD) days or 7% of their time (summer
to autumn) within the development’s estimated 15-km zone of
influence. The amount of time within the zone of influence
increased from 1.9% in 1996 to a peak of 12.9% in 2004, and then
decreased to 10.1% in 2009 as the number of active land-use
permits declined, suggesting that monitoring land-use permits
could be used to trigger changes in mitigation.
As abundance increases or decreases, caribou distribution also
changes. During the 2000–2010 decline, the southern boundaries
of the Bathurst herd’s winter range contracted > 200 km
northward (Gunn et al. 2011). However, there did not appear to
be contraction in the use of calving and summer ranges between
1996 and 2005 (Gunn et al. 2011). The fidelity to calving and
summer ranges suggests that a development site situated in or
near either of these seasonal ranges would likely have predictable
caribou encounter rates regardless of population size.
Herd management
Management planning for the Bathurst herd has occurred at
intervals since 1988, with plans proposed in 1994 and 2004,
although they were not implemented. In 2005, the Tlicho Land
Claim Act established the Wek’èezhìi Renewable Resources Board
(WRRB), whose authority included the Bathurst caribou herd.
The rapid decline of the herd led to a Ministerial decision to stop
hunting and a WRRB public hearing from which the Tlicho
Government and GNWT developed a revised joint management
proposal. In October 2010, the WRRB recommended harvest
restrictions, which reduced aboriginal harvest from several
thousand to 300 caribou. WRRB also recommended that the
Tlicho Government and the NWT Department of Environment
and Natural Resources work on an adaptive co-management
framework for a Bathurst caribou management plan, which in
2014, is still underway (http://www.wrrb.ca/node/560).
A RESPONSE FRAMEWORK FOR ADAPTIVE
MANAGEMENT OF CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
We use a framework to link an adaptive management cycle
(Racher et al. 2011) with the different scales of monitoring and
the role of the cumulative effects assessment in monitoring design
(Fig. 2). We recognize that adaptive management is “a systematic
and rigorous approach for learning through deliberately
designing and applying management actions as experiments” (C.
Murray and D. R. Marmorek, unpublished manuscript: http://
www.adaptivemanagement.net/sites/default/files/Adaptive%
20management%20A%20spoonful%20of%20rigour%20helps%20the%
20uncertainty%20go%20down.pdf). Here, we refer to passive
adaptive management in the sense that alternative treatments
(application of mitigation actions) are most likely to be evaluated
sequentially rather than through parallel comparison of
alternatives across different sites. Although most learning about
mitigation would preferably come from experimental designs
statistically comparing several treatments at the same time, for
example, levels or types of dust control, this is not necessarily
practical for operational mines to achieve. In time, some
opportunities for parallel experimentation at different project
development sites could arise but would require collaborative
efforts by proponents across multiple development sites. We
expect that thoughtfully linking mitigation and monitoring to test
sequential mitigation actions will still provide feedback on the
mitigation effectiveness. To date, the Wek’èezhìi Land and Water
Board relies on adaptive management only for aquatics
monitoring and mitigation (Racher et al. 2011).
Fig. 2. Response framework for cumulative effects illustrating
monitoring design.
For the caribou response framework (Fig. 2), the environmental
assessment establishes the assessment and measurement
endpoints. Assessment endpoints are general statements that
relate to goals such as sustainability of populations. Measurement
endpoints are typically quantifiable and require selecting
appropriate indicators. We agree with Suter (1990) that it is
essential to define endpoints precisely. However, with sufficient
clarity, endpoints of monitoring can also be narrative statements,
which can help in incorporating community observations. The
four scales of monitoring to assess and adjust (increase or reduce)
mitigation are (1) project specific, (2) range-wide development,
(3) herd-level vital rates, and (4) environmental indicators (Fig.
2). Ecological process modeling of caribou response to multiple
stresses (natural and anthropogenic) provides a foundation to
support rigorous monitoring design. The model(s) include
representations of processes that are established from prior work
and hypothesized interactions between caribou and proposed
human activities, including proposed mitigation. They are revised
in light of the monitoring results to support monitoring design
for the next iteration of the adaptive management cycle.
The proposed framework provides a systematic approach to
evaluating the efficacy of project mitigation and herd-level
management and adjusting these management initiatives in light
Ecology and Society 19(4): 4
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol19/iss4/art4/
of monitoring results. This requires monitoring design to include
explicit consideration of hypotheses, objectives, statistical power,
and thresholds (levels to trigger decisions). We use calf survival
as an example to outline the process to select monitoring
indicators (Fig. 3), which requires estimating effect size (how
much the indicator is predicted to change) in relation to the
sensitivity of the sampling method to estimate whether the
monitoring would be capable of detecting an effect of a given size.
If the statistical power analysis indicates that an effect is unlikely
to be detected, then either the precision can be improved (e.g., by
increasing sample size or improving methodology) or an
alternative, more sensitive indicator can be selected from the
pathway analysis used to predict the effect. For example, if the
input for the model used to predict calf survival had required
information from encounter rates, foraging time, or growing
degree days in spring, then they could be considered as surrogate
indicators for calf survival. Once a suitable indicator is identified,
the models can be also used to simulate thresholds for the
monitoring indicators.
Fig. 3. Flow chart illustrating an approach to selecting
indicators for measurement endpoints.
Mitigation includes activities undertaken to avoid, minimize,
restore, or offset effects of industrial exploration and development
on wildlife, wildlife habitat, and the people who use or value them.
Relatively little is written about mitigation of cumulative effects.
As an example, mitigation listed in oil and gas plans (Lutz et al.
2011, Jakle 2012) does not distinguish between mitigation for
project-specific effects and cumulative effects. We suggest that
drawing a distinction between project-specific and cumulative
effect mitigation is essential because it recognizes that while the
effects are interconnected, the responsibility for monitoring and
guiding decisions about implementation differs. Mitigation can
be organized as a hierarchy from avoidance through minimization
to compensation (both on-site and off-site actions). Examples are
listed in a mitigation plan developed for wildlife and natural gas
development (Jakle 2012) and for mule deer and energy
development (Lutz et al. 2011). There is no counterpart document
for migratory tundra caribou.
We also observe that adaptive management is rarely applied to
estimate the effectiveness of mitigation for northern caribou. For
example, the zone of influence around the operational diamond
mines is a residual effect after some mitigation (e.g., noise and
dust control). However, there has been no effort to determine if
mitigation can be intensified to reduce the extent of the zone of
influence. In other words, the residual effect after current
mitigation practices, i.e., a 15 km radius around existing diamond
mines with reduced caribou occupancy, has become the accepted
“norm” (e.g., De Beers 2012).
There is a hierarchy for mitigation of cumulative effects: trade-
offs, landscape-scale mitigation, and project-specific mitigation
(Fig. 4). Trade-offs might include, for example, actions to increase
caribou survival (through harvesting and predator control)
relative to permitting developments. Landscape-scale mitigation
includes exchanging land, purchasing or leasing of sensitive areas
(Copeland et al. 2009), controlling the number and distribution
of development activities, or modifying start-up dates and
duration. The third category of cumulative effect mitigation is
modifying project site activities. We include more examples of
project (site-specific) mitigation (Fig. 4) because these are readily
available within individual project assessments and their
corresponding operational plans (e.g., De Beers 2012).
Fig. 4. The three categories and examples of cumulative effects
mitigation: offset (harvest, predation), land use (modify the
amount of landscape occupied by development over time and
space), and project-specific mitigations.
For all three categories, mitigations should be specific, matched
to monitoring indicators and threshold levels, and applied to herd
management in an adaptive management process (Fig. 4).
Unfortunately, the linkage between the proposed effect, its
mitigation, and monitoring to determine effectiveness of
mitigation (reduction or removal of effect) is normally weakly
described or absent, primarily because mitigation has only been
applied on a project-specific basis. In most cases, although
mitigation has been undertaken, it has not been tested for
effectiveness, and therefore, there is no opportunity to apply an
adaptive management approach. Further, mitigation applied on
a project-specific basis seldom involves formal knowledge transfer
Ecology and Society 19(4): 4
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol19/iss4/art4/
between projects and among proponents, with little coordinated
application of the mitigation, and no joint testing of effectiveness.
It is also important to differentiate mitigations that are relatively
fixed (e.g., corridor routing, road width, berm height) as opposed
to mitigation actions that can be modified (e.g., frequency, degree,
and extent of activities such as watering roads to reduce dust), a
critical feature of an adaptive management approach.
INTEGRATING CUMULATIVE EFFECTS AND HERD
MANAGEMENT
The goal of cumulative effect assessment is sustainability of a
valued ecosystem component such as caribou. Sustainability is
also a primary goal of herd management plans (and has to be
defined in that context). To achieve that goal requires an adaptive
management approach such that the effectiveness of mitigation
or management actions is determined through monitoring, and
actions are adjusted if necessary. For example, as climate changes,
and those trends modify caribou responses to mitigation,
adjustments to mitigation, including trade-offs, will be required.
Thus, we introduce the use of thresholds, i.e., qualitative or
quantitative values of the monitoring indicators that are used to
trigger decisions about mitigation or management actions (Fig.
4). Thresholds should be tied to the range of natural variation for
environmental variables (i.e., biological and measurement
uncertainty). For other indicators such as harvest or land use, we
envision a collaborative approach such as that developed by the
Porcupine Caribou Management Board (2010) for its harvest
management plan.
Caribou integrate the effects of a myriad of factors that in
themselves are additive, compensatory, and synergistic; thus,
complexity and uncertainty abounds. Environmental conditions
and anthropogenic changes are inter-related (Fig. 5); a dry
summer affects caribou directly and can intensify project-specific
effects. Monitoring natural habitat/disturbance indicators (e.g.,
forest fires) is thus complementary to monitoring numbers and
pattern of dispersion of land-use activities (exploration camps,
etc.).
Fig. 5. Probable effects of an environmental change (hot, dry
summer) and its direct effects on caribou behavior and on
project-specific effects.
Some effects are based on measured relationships whereas others
are hypothesized such as the relationship between dust and size
of the zone of influence (Boulanger et al. 2012). Monitoring
indices such as movement rates, weather indices for mosquito
harassment, and time spent foraging can be used either to predict
or explain changes in calf survival or pregnancy rates. Integrating
natural environmental variability, anthropogenic change, and
trends in climate change should involve integrative energetics
modeling, as has been developed for the Porcupine caribou herd
(Russell et al. 2005, White et al. 2014).
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Migratory tundra caribou experience wide fluctuations in
numbers over the scale of decades. Consequently, management
actions, monitoring, and the assessment of the role of industrial
development projects need to account for these fluctuating
numbers. The factors that limit annual productivity at population
highs are not necessarily applicable when populations are in
recovery. Further, the wide-ranging nature and sheer abundance
of the species creates unique social, economic, political, and
ecological challenges. It is with this backdrop that we need to
assess and manage cumulative impacts of development. We
maintain that the creation of an agreed upon collaborative
framework that recognizes each partner’s roles and
responsibilities is an essential first step in this process. The
proposed framework lays out the pathway to ensure that
continuing development does not exceed thresholds and reduce
the resilience of the human-caribou system.
We characterize our approach to monitoring and mitigating
cumulative effects as a bottom-up approach because it applies
specifics of monitoring and mitigation for a single valued
ecological component: caribou in northern Canada. We have used
flow diagrams to clarify how cumulative effects assessment,
monitoring. and mitigation can be linked through adaptive
management. Our response framework introduces three scales of
mitigation (1) project-specific mitigation, (2) landscape-scale
mitigation (i.e., dispersion and distribution of development
projects across the landscape), and (3) population-level mitigation
(i.e., modification of adult caribou survival over time as a trade-
off). These scales imply that adaptive management will have to be
at the scale of the herd’s annual range, which increases complexity
from the number of interested parties, but strengthens planning
and collaborative outcomes. A key to both the need for and the
success of applying a cumulative effects framework will be to
integrate across spatial scales. For example, there is more to be
gained by integrating protection of calving grounds with
maintaining pre-calving migration routes and ensuring winter
ranges are intact.
Experience since the 1980s with managing caribou prompted our
second objective to show how adaptive management of
cumulative effects can be integrated into herd-level monitoring,
assessment, and decision-making. The advantages are that it lays
out a visible pathway for all the parties, including land and wildlife
agencies and co-management boards that have regulatory
responsibilities. Additionally, integrating cumulative effects and
herd management focuses on sustainability and will clarify the
possible limits and trade-offs in management actions between
development and other actions such as harvest, predation control,
and habitat management such as forest fires. While we
Ecology and Society 19(4): 4
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol19/iss4/art4/
acknowledge that adaptive management is neither simple nor easy
(Walters 1997, Lee 1999), the difficulties and complexities are not
insurmountable (Monroe et al. 2013).
Urgency for action is born of any accelerated rate and pace of
development that, in the absence of a framework to mitigate and
manage cumulative effects, may lead to local changes in caribou
distribution and range fragmentation caused by roads as well as
direct influences on caribou abundance. The cumulative effects
of multiple concurrent or sequential development projects affect
not only caribou behavior but also harvesting of caribou. Access
for harvesting also includes the construction of all-season and
winter roads, which can change harvesting levels. This tension
between unmitigated cumulative effects from “unmanaged
growth” of industrial development and harvesting rights is a key
trade-off that is explicitly acknowledged in our proposed
framework.
Assessing and managing cumulative effects relative to the
condition of a caribou herd meets many of the steps outlined by
Noble (2010) to put into place the institutional arrangements and
capacity to implement effective cumulative effects management.
Including cumulative effects in migratory tundra caribou
management is not a novel idea (e.g., GNWT 2011). What is
different about our proposed framework is that it shows how
existing components can be linked through herd management, as
people already have familiarity through working relationships
and concepts.
Collectively, we already have the knowledge to make the proposed
framework operational using a rules-based approach and
narrative statements. The flexibility of the framework will allow
it to accommodate biological, measurement, and model
categories of uncertainty (Harwood and Stokes 2003). Making
decisions while accommodating uncertainty and risk should
include offsetting risks (e.g., conservative approaches that provide
options for anticipating underestimated or unexpected effects),
although adding details will be contingent on clearly defined
terms such as trade-offs and offsets (e.g., ten Kate et al. 2004).
A limitation in applying cumulative effects approaches to
managing caribou and development is that decision-makers
rarely, if ever, know what industry and government are planning
for the future, or at least very far into the future. A long-term
planning process or, less formally, a dialog among industry,
territorial, and provincial governments and aboriginal
governments exchanging potential or real plans can contribute to
a more focused approach to cumulative effects assessment.
A consistent theme in environmental assessments in the
Northwest Territories is the need for greater involvement of
aboriginal people in monitoring, mitigation, and management. It
is these people who are most affected by even small incremental
changes to caribou numbers and distribution. Integrating
cumulative effects directly into herd management planning will
strengthen aboriginal involvement, as herd management is
moving toward shared responsibility (co-management) and
accountability for the decisions about the sustainability of
caribou herds.
Responses to this article can be read online at:
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/issues/responses.
php/6856
Acknowledgments:
We thank the environmental assessment boards in northern Canada,
as we have learned much while working with them. In particular,
their on-line public registries give unprecedented access to the basis
of assessments and amount of information. We also acknowledge
those people who have shared their concerns and ideas during
environmental assessments. Kathy Racher (Wek’èezhìi Land and
Water Board) helped us with adaptive management. We thank Gary
Kofinas (University of Alaska), John Nishi, and three anonymous
reviewers for their insightful comments.
LITERATURE CITED
Berger, J. 2004. The last mile: how to sustain long-distance
migration in mammals. Conservation Biology 18(2):320-331.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00548.x
Boulanger, J., B. Croft, and J. Adamczewski. 2014. An estimate
of breeding females and analyses of demographics for the Bathurst
herd of barren-ground caribou: 2012 calving ground photographic
survey. File Report 142. Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, Government of the Northwest Territories,
Yellowknife, Canada.
Boulanger, J., A. Gunn, J. Adamczewski, and B. Croft. 2011. A
data-driven demographic model to explore the decline of the
Bathurst caribou herd. Journal of Wildlife Management 75
(4):883-896. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.108
Boulanger, J., K. G. Poole, A. Gunn, and J. Wierzchowski. 2012.
Estimating the zone of influence of industrial developments on
wildlife: a migratory caribou Rangifer tarandus groenlandicus and
diamond mine case study. Wildlife Biology 18(2):164-179. http://
dx.doi.org/10.2981/11-045
Canter, L., and W. Ross. 2010. State of practice of cumulative
effects assessment and management: the good, the bad and the
ugly. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 28(4):261-268.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3152/146155110X12838715793200
Copeland, H. E., K. E. Doherty, D. E. Naugle, A. Pocewicz, and
J. M. Kiesecker. 2009. Mapping oil and gas development potential
in the US Intermountain West and estimating impacts to species.
Plos One 4(10): e7400. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.
pone.0007400
De Beers. 2012. Gahcho Kué Project, Environmental Impact
Statement, Section 7. Key line of inquiry: caribou. Public Registry
Document 80, 23 December 2010. MacKenzie Valley Review
Board, Yellowknife, Canada. [online] URL: http://www.
reviewboard.ca/upload/project_document/EIR0607-001_EIS_S
ection_7__Caribou_1294681839.PDF.
Duinker, P. N., and L. A. Greig. 2006. The impotence of
cumulative effects assessment in Canada: ailments and ideas for
redeployment. Environmental Management 37(2):153-161. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00267-004-0240-5
Government of the Northwest Territories (GNWT). 2011.
Caribou forever – our heritage, our responsibility: a barren-ground
caribou management strategy for the Northwest Territories 2011–
2015. Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
GNWT, Yellowknife, Canada. [online] URL: http://www.enr.gov.
nt.ca/sites/default/files/strategies/2011-2015_barren-
ground_caribou_management_strategy.pdf.
Ecology and Society 19(4): 4
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol19/iss4/art4/
Greig, L. A., and P. N. Duinker. 2011. A proposal for further
strengthening science in environmental impact assessment in
Canada. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 29(2):159-165.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3152/146155111X12913679730557
Gunn, A. 2003. Voles, lemmings and caribou - population cycles
revisited. Rangifer 14(4):105-112. [online] URL: http://www.
twodeadducks.net/rangifer/pdf/SI_14_105.pdf.
Gunn, A., K. G. Poole, and J. Wierzchowski. 2011. Migratory
tundra caribou seasonal and annual distribution relative to Thaidene
Nene, a national park reserve proposal in the East Arm of Great
Slave Lake and Artillery Lake area, Northwest Territories.
Unpublished report for Parks Canada, Fort Smith, Canada.
[online] URL: http://landoftheancestors.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/
Gunn-et-al-East-Arm-Park-caribou-final-report-Jan11.pdf.
Harwood, J., and K. Stokes. 2003. Coping with uncertainty in
ecological advice: lessons from fisheries. Trends in Ecology and
Evolution 18(12):617-622. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2003.08.001
Jakle, A. 2012. Natural gas development and wildlife mitigation: a
primer. William D. Ruckelshaus Institute of Environment and
Natural Resources, Laramie, Wyoming, USA. [online] URL:
http://www.uwyo.edu/haub/ruckelshaus-institute/_files/docs/
publications/2012-natural-gas-wildlife-mitigation.pdf.
Kennett, S., and D. Woynillowicz. 2007. A review of Alberta
Environment’s proposed regulatory framework for managing
environmental cumulative effects. Unpublished report prepared
for the Pembina Institute, Toronto, Canada. [online] URL: http://
www.pembina.org/reports/Pembina-review-AB-Env-ce.pdf.
Lee, K. N. 1999. Appraising adaptive management. Conservation
Ecology 3(2): 3. [online] URL: http://www.consecol.org/vol3/iss2/
art3/.
Lutsel K’e Dene First Nation. 2012. Closing statement to the
Gahcho Kue panel. Public Registry Document 410, 21 December
2012. Mackenzie Valley Review Board, Yellowknife, Canada.
[online] URL: http://www.reviewboard.ca/registry/project_detail.
php?project_id=37&doc_stage=10.
Lutz, D. W., J. R. Heffelfinger, S. A. Tessmann, R. S. Gamo, and
S. Siegel. 2011. Energy development guidelines for mule deer. Mule
Deer Working Group, Western Association of Fish and Wildlife
Agencies, Tucson, Arizona, USA. [online] URL: http://www.
muledeerworkinggroup.com/Docs/Energy_Development_Guide
lines_for_Mule_Deer_2013.pdf.
Monroe, M. C., R. Plate, and A. Oxarart. 2013. Intermediate
collaborative adaptive management strategies build stakeholder
capacity. Ecology and Society 18(2): 24. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/
ES-05444-180224
Noble, B. 2010. Cumulative environmental effects and the tyranny
of small decisions: towards meaningful cumulative effects
assessment and management. Natural Resources and Environmental
Studies Institute Occasional Paper 8. University of Northern
British Columbia, Prince George, Canada. [online] URL: http://
www.unbc.ca/assets/nres/nresi_op_08_noble_2010.pdf.
Porcupine Caribou Management Board. 2010. Harvest
management plan for the Porcupine caribou herd in Canada.
Porcupine Caribou Management Board, Whitehorse, Canada.
[online] URL: http://www.pcmb.ca/documents/Harvest%20Management%
20Plan%202010.pdf.
Racher, K. I., N. Hutchinson, D. Hart, B. Fraser, B. Clark, R.
Fequet, P. Ewaschuk, and M. Cliffe-Phillips. 2011. Linking
environmental assessment to environmental regulation through
adaptive management. Integrated Environmental Assessment
Management 7(2):301-302. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ieam.173
Russell, D. E., R. G. White, and C. J. Daniel. 2005. Energetics of
the Porcupine caribou herd: a computer simulation model.
Technical Report Series Number 431. Canadian Wildlife Service,
Ottawa, Canada. [online] URL: http://publications.gc.ca/
collections/collection_2009/ec/CW69-5-431E.pdf.
Suter, G. W. II. 1990. Endpoints for regional ecological risk
assessments. Environmental Management 14(1):9-23. http://dx.
doi.org/10.1007/BF02394015
ten Kate, K., J. Bishop, and R. Bayon. 2004. Biodiversity offsets:
views, experience, and the business case. IUCN, Gland,
Switzerland, and Insight Investment, London, UK. [online]
URL: http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/bdoffsets.pdf.
Tlicho Government. 2012. Closing statement to the Gahcho Kue
panel. Public Registry Document 416, 21 December 2012.
Mackenzie Valley Review Board, Yellowknife, Canada. [online]
URL: http://www.reviewboard.ca/upload/project_document/
EIR0607-001_Tlicho_Government_Presentation.PDF.
Walters, C. 1997. Challenges in adaptive management of riparian
and coastal ecosystems. Conservation Ecology 1(2): 1. [online]
URL: http://www.consecol.org/vol1/iss2/art1/.
Walters, C. J., and C. S. Holling. 1990. Large-scale management
experiments and learning by doing. Ecology 71(6):2060-2068.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1938620
White, R. G., D. E. Russell, and C. J. Daniel. 2014. Simulation of
maintenance, growth and reproduction of caribou and reindeer
as influenced by ecological aspects of nutrition, climate change
and industrial development using an energy-protein model.
Rangifer, in press.
... Samtidigt visar forskning att byggande, underhåll och drift av vägar och järnvägar ger upphov till en uppsjö miljöeffekter som tillsammans bidrar till negativa konsekvenser på miljön (Sjölund et al., 2022 (Duinker et al., 2013, Duinker and Greig, 2006, Sinclair et al., 2017. Vidare visar tidigare forskning på att den svenska praktiken rörande identifikation och bedömning av KE har dragits med omfattande brister (Folkeson, 2010, Wärnbäck, 2007, Wärnbäck and Hilding-Rydevik, 2009 Vidare har forskningsprojektet som ambition att tillämpa en forskningsansats som kallas för "change agent" (Kørnøv et al., 2010, Kørnøv et al., 2011 AP1 utgjordes av en explorativ studie baserad på kvalitativa intervjuer (jfr Kvale, 1996) Arnold and Wade, 2015, Forrester, 1985, Forrester, 1994 identifierade hävstångspunkter (leverage points) för att utveckla effektiva anpassningar och åtgärder (Duinker et al., 2013, Noble, 2010, Gunn et al., 2014 Samtidigt går det att konstatera att termen KE än idag saknar en internationellt accepterad och universell definition (Noble, 2010, Gunn and Noble, 2011, Wärnbäck and Hilding-Rydevik, 2009, Blakley, 2021 Dessa kategorier pekar på att resultatet av de totala effekterna som orsakas av interaktioner inom systemet kan vara större än summan av effekterna av enskilda processer (Seitz et al., 2011, Gunn and Noble, 2011, Duinker et al., 2013, Gunn et al., 2014 (Kahn, 1966) och de små beslutens tyranni (Odum, 1982), vilka tillsammans kan leda till det som ibland kallas för långsam död (death by a thousand cuts). I planeringssammanhang innebär detta att många små effekter på en miljörecipient, över tid, kan leda till oönskade effekter, som på grund av dess gradvisa karaktär och komplexitet ofta är svåra att upptäcka. ...
... Samtidigt visar forskning att byggande, underhåll och drift av vägar och järnvägar ger upphov till en uppsjö miljöeffekter som tillsammans bidrar till negativa konsekvenser på miljön (Sjölund et al., 2022 (Duinker et al., 2013, Duinker and Greig, 2006, Sinclair et al., 2017. Vidare visar tidigare forskning på att den svenska praktiken rörande identifikation och bedömning av KE har dragits med omfattande brister (Folkeson, 2010, Wärnbäck, 2007, Wärnbäck and Hilding-Rydevik, 2009 Vidare har forskningsprojektet som ambition att tillämpa en forskningsansats som kallas för "change agent" (Kørnøv et al., 2010, Kørnøv et al., 2011 AP1 utgjordes av en explorativ studie baserad på kvalitativa intervjuer (jfr Kvale, 1996) Arnold and Wade, 2015, Forrester, 1985, Forrester, 1994 identifierade hävstångspunkter (leverage points) för att utveckla effektiva anpassningar och åtgärder (Duinker et al., 2013, Noble, 2010, Gunn et al., 2014 Samtidigt går det att konstatera att termen KE än idag saknar en internationellt accepterad och universell definition (Noble, 2010, Gunn and Noble, 2011, Wärnbäck and Hilding-Rydevik, 2009, Blakley, 2021 Dessa kategorier pekar på att resultatet av de totala effekterna som orsakas av interaktioner inom systemet kan vara större än summan av effekterna av enskilda processer (Seitz et al., 2011, Gunn and Noble, 2011, Duinker et al., 2013, Gunn et al., 2014 (Kahn, 1966) och de små beslutens tyranni (Odum, 1982), vilka tillsammans kan leda till det som ibland kallas för långsam död (death by a thousand cuts). I planeringssammanhang innebär detta att många små effekter på en miljörecipient, över tid, kan leda till oönskade effekter, som på grund av dess gradvisa karaktär och komplexitet ofta är svåra att upptäcka. ...
... Vidare hade de ingen eller liten kunskap om hur de skulle gå till väga för att bedöma KE (op.cit). I den internationella litteraturen finns en samstämmighet om att behovet av att förbättra processen för att bedöma KE är brådskande (Gunn and Noble, 2011, Noble, 2010, Duinker et al., 2013, Gunn et al., 2014, Duinker and Greig, 2006. Tidigare internationell forskning kring miljöbedömningar pekar på att ett systemanalytiskt perspektiv kan bidra till en ökad verkningsfullhet i miljöbedömningar (se t.ex. ...
... While the importance of cumulative effects has been gaining recognition across fields (Orr et al., 2020), estimating them remains a challenge (Gunn et al., 2014;Jarvis et al., 2024;Mahon & Pelech, 2021;Orr et al., 2020;Pirotta et al., 2022;Tyack et al., 2022). Many of these effects, and especially their interactions, are context dependent, which makes it harder to generalize across populations (Côté et al., 2016;Kroeker et al., 2017;Orr et al., 2020) and over time (Darling & Côté, 2008;Debecker et al., 2017;Lange et al., 2018). ...
Article
Full-text available
Protecting populations contending with co‐occurring stressors requires a better understanding of how multiple early‐life stressors affect the fitness of natural systems. However, the complexity of such research has limited its advancement and prevented us from answering new questions. In human studies, cumulative risk models predict adult health risk based on early adversity exposure. We apply a similar framework in wild yellow‐bellied marmots (Marmota flaviventer). We tested cumulative adversity indices (CAIs) across different adversity types and time windows. All CAIs were associated with decreased pup survival and were well supported. Moderate and acute, but not standardized CAIs were associated with decreased lifespan, supporting the cumulative stress hypothesis and the endurance of early adversity. Multivariate models showed that differences in lifespan were driven by weaning date, precipitation, and maternal loss, but they performed poorly compared with CAI models. We highlight the development, utility, and insights of CAI approaches for ecology and conservation.
... Protected areas alone will not solve biodiversity loss (Mora & Sale, 2011) and most landscapes outside of protected areas will continue to experience development to meet humanity's resource needs. Effective biodiversity conservation in the face of increasing cumulative habitat loss therefore requires careful planning of both developments and positive conservation action (Gunn et al., 2014;Nagy-Reis et al., 2021) and these should be considered together in a comprehensive approach to managing cumulative effects. We suggest that carrying capacity models, where carrying capacity is defined as the natural limit of a sustainable population that is set by the availability of resources in the environment (Dhondt, 1988), can inform decisions about how to better manage cumulative habitat change to help achieve sustainable conservation objectives. ...
Article
Full-text available
Successful cumulative effects management is fundamental for conservation policy and practice. We investigated the application of a carrying capacity (CC) model as a cumulative effects management tool for bighorn sheep ( Ovis canadensis canadensis ) in British Columbia, Canada, where CC is defined as the natural limit of a sustainable population that is set by the availability of resources in the environment. We estimated winter CC using forage availability across winter ranges, weighted by relative selection by sheep and a safe use factor, and divided by overwinter forage requirements to determine how many sheep the landscape can support. We explored application of our model to decision‐making about new industrial projects or conservation activities in a cumulative effects context. Cumulative effects include both positive and negative contributions to animal populations and we simulated the potential positive outcomes of burning to increase bighorn sheep carrying capacity in our study area. Our results show that carefully planned conservation actions could generate a 5% increase in CC (i.e., from 493 to 519 sheep). Robust tools and scientific techniques that are capable of quantifying multiple impacts and conservation actions and that consider spatial processes over long temporal scales, such as the CC model presented, should be applied to help inform decisions about how to better manage cumulative habitat change and achieve conservation objectives.
... Many migratory caribou populations have enigmatically and severely declined (by 70-90%) in the last decade (COSEWIC, 2016;COSEWIC, 2017;Campbell et al., 2021). These declines may be associated with an increase in cumulative stressors, such as rising temperatures, increased frequency of extreme weather events and anthropogenic development in the Arctic environment (Vors and Boyce, 2009;Festa-Bianchet et al., 2011;Gunn et al., 2014;Fauchald et al., 2017), among other stressors. Biting insect harassment is also a documented stressor of caribou that is anticipated to increase under current Arctic climate change scenarios of warmer temperatures, longer growing seasons and increasing precipitation (Witter et al., 2012). ...
Article
Full-text available
Migratory caribou (Rangifer tarandus sspp.) is an ecotype of conservation concern that is experiencing increased cumulative stressors associated with rapid climate change and development in Arctic Canada. Increasingly, hair cortisol concentrations (HCCs) are being used to monitor seasonal hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis activity of ungulate populations; yet, the effect of key covariates for caribou (sex, season, sampling source, body location) are largely unknown. The objectives of this research were 4-fold: first, we assessed the impact of body location (neck, rump) sampling sites on HCC; second, we assessed key covariates (sex, sampling method, season) impacting HCCs of caribou; third, we investigated inter-population (Dolphin and Union (DU), Bluenose-East (BNE)) and inter-annual differences in HCC and fourth, we examined the association between HCCs and indices of biting insect activity on the summer range (oestrid index, mosquito index). We examined hair from 407 DU and BNE caribou sampled by harvesters or during capture-collaring operations from 2012 to 2020. Linear mixed-effect models were used to assess the effect of body location on HCC and generalized least squares regression (GLS) models were used to examine the impacts of key covariates, year and herd and indices of biting insect harassment. HCC varied significantly by body location, year, herd and source of samples (harvester vs capture). HCC was higher in samples taken from the neck and in the DU herd compared with the BNE, decreased linearly over time and was higher in captured versus hunted animals (P < 0.05). There was no difference in HCC between sexes, and indices of biting insect harassment in the previous year were not significantly associated with HCC. This study identifies essential covariates impacting the HCC of caribou that must be accounted for in sampling, monitoring and data interpretation.
... Evaluating the combined or cumulative effects of these humaninduced disturbances (hereafter stressors) on terrestrial species is now central to many conservation and management (Gunn et al. 2014), research and monitoring (Burton et al. 2014;Mahon et al. 2019), and land use planning (Johnson et al. 2011;Chetkiewicz and Lintner 2014; BC Ministry of Forests Lands and Natural Resources Operations 2016; Yukon Land Use Planning Council 2018) efforts in Canada. Here we define cumulative effects (CE) as the combined effects of multiple stressors on species or ecosystems over time and (or) space and stressor as all human-induced activities and drivers. ...
Article
Full-text available
Landscapes in Canada are undergoing change due to resource and land use stressors and climate stressors. Understanding the cumulative effects of these stressors is challenging because of the complexity of ecosystems, the variability of stressors, and species response to individual or multiple stressors. A key challenge within the field of cumulative effects assessment (CEA) is guidance that describes and evaluates analytical methods. In this review we discuss four broad categories of methods with current or potential use for project-based and effects-based CEA for species in terrestrial systems: (i) qualitative review, (ii) habitat supply models, (iii) empirical species–stressor models, and (iv) decision support models. We describe each method and provide examples, highlight advantages and limitations, identify how methods address key science-based CEA questions, and provide direction on when and why to use specific CEA methods. Empirical species–stressor models and decision support models are the only analytical approaches that provide answers to many science-based CEA questions including how multiple stressors combine to affect an individual species and the certainty of multiple stressor effects. We provide recommendations for using one or more methods as complementary building blocks to fill data gaps, improve understanding and communication, engage diverse partner groups, and increase the quality and credibility of the CEA. Our review supports a move toward regional scale, effects-based CEA where partner collaboration to design, implement, and analyze comprehensive assessments of multiple stressors will (i) expand our knowledge of terrestrial species response to stressors and (ii) inform best management practices for resource industries and conservation and management actions for land managers.
... Doing so enables "caribou people," wildlife, and land managers to evaluate risks and trade-offs inherent in development. In the context of resolving or reducing the development costs for the PCH we have proposed a response framework to apply monitoring and mitigation within an adaptive comanagement system to support the "caribou people" as they face decisions cascading from a warmer climate and developments (Gunn et al. 2014). We would argue that the use of transparent, quantitative decision-support tools in assessing industrial development impacts on Arctic wildlife becomes more critical as climatic changes to Arctic landscapes accelerate. ...
Article
Full-text available
ABSTRACT. As large migratory caribou herds decline globally and regional climate trends point to a warmer future, there is a needand a legislative requirement to ensure impacts of industrial development are fully assessed, particularly with respect to cumulativeeffects. In this paper we use a current proposal, the potential leasing of the 1002 lands on the Alaskan Arctic coastal plain of the ArcticNational Wildlife Refuge for hydrocarbon development, to project the potential cumulative effects on the international PorcupineCaribou Herd. Using the caribou cumulative effects model, an existing decision support tool, we evaluate six alternative developmentscenarios for the 1002 lands, ranging from no leasing to full leasing with standard mitigation conditions. Compared to the no leasingoption, at the current population size (218,000 caribou), our analysis projected that the likelihood of a herd decline over a 10-yearperiod would increase from 3% to 19% depending on the leasing scenarios analyzed. This compares to an increased probability ofdecline from 11% to 26% if the starting population was 100,000, indicative of population estimates in the early 1970s. Our approachaccomplishes one of the main steps in a comprehensive cumulative effects assessment, namely the quantification of past, present, andforeseeable future projects on a valued ecosystem component, the Porcupine Caribou Herd. We suggest the testing of underliningassumptions and refinements of the model required to more fully estimate the impacts of development. The use of transparent,quantitative decision support tools in assessing industrial development impacts on Arctic wildlife becomes more critical as climaticchanges to Arctic landscapes accelerate.Key Words: Arctic National Wildlife Refuge; caribou; climate; cumulative effects; hydrocarbon; impact assessment; mitigation; modeling;Porcupine caribou
... Nevertheless, this experience proved that localized decision forums considering site specifics can in fact ease stagnated conflicts. For reindeer herders, such a forum would provide means to better cope with cumulative pressures from various land uses and climate change (Gunn et al. 2014;Sarkki et al. 2016c). ...
Technical Report
Full-text available
The world is changing, therefore preparedness to cope with changes, to adapt and to mitigate negative impacts is of utmost importance. Scenario analysis has been frequently used to anticipate future changes. Scenarios can function as a bridge between science and policy and inform policy makers and other stakeholders to orient towards future changes, to increase the understanding of the dynamics in social-ecological systems and to serve as a basis for decisions. This report synthesizes possible trajectories of European treeline areas by 2040, where climate change and land use change have been depicted as the most important drivers. The report presents the results of two qualitative scenario exercises, one in European treeline areas and another one in northern Finland, describing plausible future scenarios and possible pitfalls up to 2040. The European treeline area scenarios are based on a series of discussions among natural and social scientists within the SENSFOR consortium. The Finnish case study is based on a workshop with decision-makers within the PITCH project (Primary Industries and Transformational Change PITCH, funded by the Research Council of Norway) targeting northern Finland. Firstly, we present the qualitative scenario storylines for both of the cases. Secondly, we reflect the usefulness and problems in the two cases pertaining to the methodological choices. The scenarios for European treeline areas highlight the intensity and extent of climate change and land use change as two key uncertain drivers. Four scenarios are proposed: (i) Tyranny of Climate Governance, (ii) Global Markets, (iii) Self-sufficient Economies and (iv) Balanced Use of Ecosystem Services. The plausible impacts of these scenarios on European treeline areas are explored by down-scaling global and European scenarios to treeline areas specifics using the drivers-pressures-state-impact-response (DPSIR) framework. The scenario set for northern Finland explores how land use contradictions in northern Finland could be reconciled with respect to different goals: ensuring economic growth vs. environmental sustainability and majority rules vs. affirmative actions. Four scenarios are proposed: (i) Resource Boom, (ii) Localized Decision Forums, (iii) Value Barter, and (iv) Landscape Net. Methodologically, we used so called fast-track scenarios as an input to stakeholder workshops, where the scenarios prepared by workshop organizers were discussed. It is highlighted that down-scaling scenarios with the DPSIR framework may lead to a simplified view on anticipated causalities and a strong focus to factors directly linked to environment, such as land use and climate change. Although we targeted environmental changes, various social issues that underpin the development of European treeline areas were left out. We propose that applications of the DPSIR framework should be accompanied by contextual and locally sensitive mapping of key social factors to inform social-ecological dynamics described by the scenarios. The case study of northern Finland showed that the use of fast track scenarios can generate problems in “ownership” of the scenarios or the uncertainties explored by the stakeholders. We tried to solve this problem by creating a fifth normative scenario that combines proposals based on the four exploratory scenarios. The experience from the workshop, however, highlight that when using predetermined issues in a stakeholder workshop, it is vital to consider carefully what will be the key issues that fit to the local context and that do not turn stakeholders against each other. In conclusion, the insights collected during the scenario analysis described here can be used to orient future thinking of scenario producers toward better consideration of changing social-ecological contexts. Further-more, the methodological remarks can help recognizing the likely pitfalls in scenario building in the field of environmental sciences.
Article
This paper analyses the environmental assessment of every proposed mining project that has undergone full review through the Nunavut Impact Review Board from 1999 to 2019, with specific emphasis on how impacts to caribou were identified and assessed. Caribou are the most important terrestrial species in Nunavut from a food security, traditional culture, and harvesting perspective, and mining is known to have impacts on caribou habitat, migration and calving behaviour, predation and hunting patterns, and other effects. Close study of how caribou impacts are discerned and evaluated within environmental assessment (EA) can thus reveal broader trends about both EA and the broader resource governance process. Although some project proposals were initially rejected, every EA ultimately concluded that impacts to caribou were not significant, despite evidence presented to the contrary. We present three modes through which serious impacts are rendered insignificant within EA (mitigation, strategic use of scale, and strategic use of Inuit knowledge and consultation) and comment on the broader context shaping EA in Nunavut. We argue that EA cannot do what it is expected to do (come to rational, science-based decisions that balance ecological, social, and economic goals) and is an insufficient tool for ensuring the long-term well-being of caribou in Nunavut.
Article
Since the institutionalization of biodiversity conservation in the 1980s, co-management has become an economic policy for regulating the joint use of natural resources. However, barriers to its effectiveness are, at times, inevitable, where imported initiatives hardly acculturate with local needs. Inspired by contributions on the commons, globalization, and critical policy studies, we examine lapses in co-management and related practices of natural resource governance using a systematic review of policy publications about nature-reliant communities in the global South and North. Conclusions propose options for which a ‘localized co-management’ might help enhance the inclusiveness of local/indigenous people in making decisions about the use of natural resources. Keywords: Critical policy studies; commons; globalization; localized co-management; nature-reliant communities; decision-making
Book
The Arctic is one of the world’s regions most affected by cultural, socio-economic, environmental, and climatic changes. Over the last two decades, scholars, policymakers, extractive industries, governments, intergovernmental forums, and non-governmental organizations have turned their attention to the Arctic, its peoples, resources, and to the challenges and benefits of impending transformations. Arctic sustainability is an issue of increasing concern as well as the resilience and adaptation of Arctic societies to changing conditions. This book offers key insights into the history, current state of knowledge and the future of sustainability, and sustainable development research in the Arctic. Written by an international, interdisciplinary team of experts, it presents a comprehensive progress report on Arctic sustainability research. It identifies key knowledge gaps and provides salient recommendations for prioritizing research in the next decade. Arctic Sustainability Research will appeal to researchers, academics, and policymakers interested in sustainability science and the practices of sustainable development, as well as those working in polar studies, climate change, political geography, and the history of science. © 2017 Andrey N. Petrov, Shauna BurnSilver, F. Stuart Chapin III, Gail Fondahl, Jessica K. Graybill, Kathrin Keil, Annika E. Nilsson, Rudolf Riedlsperger, and Peter Schweitzer.
Technical Report
Full-text available
This report details the calving ground photo survey of the Bluenose-East caribou herd conducted during June of 2015 in Nunavut (NU), near Kugluktuk, NU. The main objective was to obtain an estimate of breeding females that could be compared to estimates from previous calving ground surveys in 2010 and 2013. Consistent with previous calving ground photographic surveys, data from collared caribou and systematic reconnaissance survey flight lines flown at 10 kilometer intervals in the calving grounds were used to delineate the core calving area, to assess calving status, to allocate sampling to geographic strata of similar caribou density, and to time the photographic survey plane to coincide with the peak of calving. Based on collar movements and observed proportions of calves, it was determined that the peak of calving would occur soon after June 5th and the photo plane survey was flown on June 5th. Photo plane survey effort (transect spacing) was allocated into a single high density block (stratum) where the majority of breeding females resided. Three other strata which had lower densities of breeding caribou were also surveyed visually on June 5th. A double observer method was used to estimate and correct for sightability of caribou from visual surveys. Survey conditions were favorable on June 5th with high ceilings and low snow cover. The estimate of 1+ year old caribou on the core calving ground was 38,041 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) =33,569-42,513) caribou. Using the results of the ground composition survey to adjust this number for breeding females, the estimate of breeding females was 17,396 (CI=15,088-19,704). The estimate of breeding females was very precise with a coefficient of variation of 6.3%. The pregnancy rate of females, as indexed by the proportion of adult females classified as breeding was lower in 2015 than the previous survey in 2013. For this reason, an alternative estimator that used an estimate of total adult females (breeders and non-breeders; 27,246 (CI=24,172-30,320) divided by the proportion females in the herd (from fall composition surveys) was used to estimate herd size. The resulting estimate of herd size was 38,592 (CI=33,859-43,325). Comparison of 2013 and 2015 adult female numbers indicate an annual rate of decline of 20% (CI=7-32%). Assessment of survey issues suggested that this difference could not be attributed to differences in surveys or bias. Assessment of movement of collared females between the Bluenose-East and surrounding herds from 2010-2015 documented minimal movement of collared cows to neighboring herds. Demographic modelling that used composition, collared caribou, and survey data estimated that cow survival rate was low (0.71, CI=0.69-0.72) and calf recruitment has declined. These factors along with harvest pressure have led to the ongoing decline of the herd. We suggest that continued monitoring and proactive management of harvest with a shift from mostly cows to mostly bulls is recommended. In addition, continued monitoring of calving ground distribution and spring productivity should be conducted to allow ongoing monitoring of herd status.
Article
Full-text available
Although we may be confident that many caribou populations fluctuate, we have not made much progress in linking patterns of fluctuations with their underlying processes. Caribou abundance is relatively synchronized across continents and over decades which points to climatic variation as a causative factor. Progress on describing intrinsic and extrinsic factors for smaller-bodied and larger-bodied mammalian herbivore population dynamics also reveals the role of climatic variation and specifically decadal variations. Based on experience elsewhere, we can expect complex relationships between caribou, climatic variation and their forage rather than simple correlations. Caribou responses to decadal trends in climate likely accumulate through successive cohorts as changes in body mass which, in turn, leads to changes in lifetime reproductive success.
Article
Full-text available
Simulation of maintenance, growth and reproduction of caribou and reindeer as influenced by ecological aspects of nutrition, climate change and industrial development using an energy-protein model
Article
Full-text available
Wildlife species may respond to industrial development with changes in distribution. However, discerning a response to development from differences in habitat selection is challenging. Since the early 1990s, migratory tundra Bathurst caribou Rangifer tarandus groenlandicus in the Canadian Arctic have been exposed to the construction and operation of two adjacent open-pit mines within the herd's summer range. We developed a statistical approach to directly estimate the zone of influence (area of reduced caribou occupancy) of the mines during mid-July-mid-October. We used caribou presence recorded during aerial surveys and locations of satellite-collared cow caribou as inputs to a model to account for patterns in habitat selection as well as mine activities. We then constrained the zone of influence curve to asymptote, such that the average distance from the mine complex where caribou habitat selection was not affected by the mine could be estimated. During the operation period for the two open-pit mines, we detected a 14-km zone of influence from the aerial survey data, and a weaker 11-km zone from the satellite-collar locations. Caribou were about four times more likely to select habitat at distances greater than the zone of influence compared to the two-mine complex, with a gradation of increasing selection up to the estimated zone of influence. Caribou are responding to industrial developments at greater distances than shown in other areas, possibly related to fine dust deposition from mine activities in open, tundra habitats. The methodology we developed provides a standardized approach to estimate the spatial impact of stressors on caribou or other wildlife species.
Article
Adaptive management is appraised as a policy implementation approach by examining its conceptual, technical, equity, and practical strengths and limitations. Three conclusions are drawn: (1) Adaptive management has been more influential, so far, as an idea than as a practical means of gaining insight into the behavior of ecosystems utilized and inhabited by humans. (2) Adaptive management should be used only after disputing parties have agreed to an agenda of questions to be answered using the adaptive approach; this is not how the approach has been used. (3) Efficient, effective social learning, of the kind facilitated by adaptive management, is likely to be of strategic importance in governing ecosystems as humanity searches for a sustainable economy.
Article
Efforts to implement collaborative adaptive management (CAM) often suffer from challenges, such as an unwillingness of managers to share power, unresolved conflicts between stakeholders, and lack of capacity among stakeholders. Some aspects considered essential to CAM, e. g., trust and stakeholder capacity, may be more usefully viewed as goals for intermediate strategies rather than a set of initial conditions. From this perspective, intermediate steps that focus on social learning and building experience could overcome commonly cited barriers to CAM. An exploration of Springs Basin Working Groups, organized around major clusters of freshwater springs in north Florida, provides a case study of how these intermediate steps enable participants to become more reasonable and engaged. This strategy may be easily implemented by agencies beginning a CAM process.
Article
We observe ongoing weaknesses in the quality of science underpinning environmental impact assessment (EIA) in Canada. This is frustrating because approaches for strong scientific practice in EIA were published decades ago. A major failing has been the lack of scientific support from outside the EIA practitioner community. We argue for a re-conception of science associated with EIA that includes a rigorous scholarship of application inside EIA and a vigorous scholarship of integration outside it. Cases of exemplary organizational structures and science applications in the Canadian forest sector are given. To turn EIA from the often bitter battleground of shallow impact debates to an enterprise of strong accumulation of effects knowledge, we urge the relevant communities of researchers and practitioners to become embedded communities of practice and reform the way science contributes to EIA.
Article
Among Earth's most stunning, yet imperiled, biological phenomena is long-distance migration (LDM). Although the understanding of how and why animals migrate may be of general interest, few site-specific strategies have targeted ways in which to best retain such increasingly rare events. Contrasts among 29 terrestrial mammals from five continents representing 103 populations indicate that remnant long-distant migrants have poor long-term prospects. Nonetheless, in areas of low human density in the Western Hemisphere, five social and nongregarious species, all from the same region of the Rocky Mountains (U.S.A.), still experience the most accentuated of remaining New World LDMs south of central Canada. These movements occur in or adjacent to the Greater Yellowstone region, where about 75% of the migration routes for elk (Cervus elaphus), bison ( Bison bison), and North America's sole surviving endemic ungulate, pronghorn (Antilocapra americana), have already been lost. However, pronghorn still migrate up to 550 km (round-trip) annually. These extreme movements (1) necessitate use of historic, exceptionally narrow corridors (0.1–0.8 km wide) that have existed for at least 5800 years, (2) exceed travel distances of elephants ( Loxodonta africana) and zebras ( Equus burchelli), and (3) are on par with those of Asian chiru ( Pantholops hodgsoni) and African wildebeest (Connochaetes taurinus). Although conservation planners face uncertainty in situating reserves in the most biologically valued locations, the concordance between archaeological and current biological data on migration through specific corridors in these unprotected areas adjacent to the Yellowstone system highlights their retention value. It is highly likely that accelerated leasing of public lands for energy development in such regions will truncate such migrations. One landscape-level solution to conserving LDMs is the creation of a network of national migration corridors, an action in the Yellowstone region that would result in de facto protection for a multispecies complex. Tactics applied in this part of the world may not work in others, however, therefore reinforcing the value of site-specific field information on the past and current biological needs of migratory species. Resumen: Entre los fenómenos biológicos más asombrosos, pero en peligro, de la Tierra está la migración de larga distancia (MLD). Aunque el entendimiento de cómo y porque migran los animales puede ser de interés general, pocas estrategias sitio-específicas han encontrado formas para retener tales eventos cada vez más raros. Los contrastes entre 29 mamíferos terrestres de cinco continentes que representar a 103 poblaciones indican que las MLD remanentes tienen perspectivas pobres a largo plazo. No obstante, en áreas con bajas densidades humanas en el Hemisferio Occidental, cinco especies sociales y no gregarias, todas de las misma región de las Montañas Rocallosas (E.U.A.) aun experimentan las MLD más acentuadas al sur de Canadá. Estos movimientos ocurren en la región de Yellowstone o adyacentes a la misma, donde se han perdido cerca del 75% de las rutas de migración de alces (Cervus elaphus), bisontes ( Bison bison) y el único ungulado endémico sobreviviente de Norteamérica, Antilocapra americana. Sin embargo, Antilocapra americana aun migra hasta 550 km (viaje redondo) anualmente. Estos movimientos extremos (1) necesitan el uso de corredores históricos, excepcionalmente angostos (0.1-0.8 km de ancho) que han existido por lo menos por 5800 años, (2) exceden las distancias de viaje de elefantes ( Loxodonta africana) y cebras ( Equus burchelli) y (3) son similares a los de Pantholops hodgsoni y Connochaetes taurinus. Aunque los planificadores de conservación enfrentan la incertidumbre de situar reservas en las localidades biológicamente más valiosas, la concordancia entre datos arqueológicos y actuales sobre migración por corredores específicos en estas áreas no protegidas adyacentes al sistema Yellowstone resalta su valor de retención. Es altamente probable que las migraciones se trunquen por el arrendamiento acelerado de tierras públicas para el desarrollo energético en tales áreas. Una solución a nivel de paisaje para conservar a las MLD es la creación de una red de corredores nacionales de migración, una acción que resultaría en la protección de hecho de un complejo multi-específico en la región de Yellowstone. Sin embargo, las tácticas empleadas en esta parte del mundo pueden no funcionar en otras, por lo cual se refuerza el valor de la información de campo sitio-específica sobre las necesidades pasadas y actuales de especies migratorias.