mr. joseph judas, chair wek’èezhìi renewable resources ...€¦ · mr. joseph judas, chair...

Mr. Joseph Judas, Chair Wek’èezhìi Renewable Resources Board 4504 49TH AVENUE YELLOWKNIFE NT X1A 1A7 Dear Mr. Judas: Responses to Information Request Round No. 1 – Bluenose-East Caribou Herd Joint Management Proposal The Tłıchǫ Government (TG) and the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (ENR), Government of the Northwest Territories received a list of information requests from the Wek’èezhìı Renewable Resources Board (WRRB) on February 8, 2019 in regards to the “Joint Proposal on Management Actions for the Bluenose-East Ekwo (Barren-ground caribou) Herd: 2019-2021”.

TG and ENR would like to provide the attached joint response to the WRRB’s information request. Sincerely,

Ms. Tammy Steinwand-Deschambeault Director Department of Culture and Lands Protection, Tłıchǫ Government Behchokǫ, NT [email protected]

Mr. Bruno Croft, Superintendent, North Slave Region Environment and Natural Resources Yellowknife, NT [email protected]

Attachment

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

c. Dr. Joe Dragon, Deputy Minister Environment and Natural Resources Ms. Rita Mueller, Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations Environment and Natural Resources Dr. Brett Elkin, Director, Wildlife Environment and Natural Resources Ms. Laura Duncan, Tłıchǫ Executive Officer

Tłıchǫ Government

Mr. Michael Birlea, Manager, Culture and Lands Protection

Tłıchǫ Government

Ms. Jody Pellissey, Executive Director Wek’èezhìi Renewable Resources Board

Information Requests Round No.1 – Bluenose-East Caribou Herd Joint Management Proposal 1

Information Request Round No. 1 – Bluenose-East Caribou Herd Joint Management Proposal

Information Request #1: Please provide information on the distribution of collared animals in the survey

strata during the June 2018 survey of ‘known Bluenose-East’ collars (animals who calved on the Sahtì

Ekwǫ (Bluenose-East caribou) calving ground in years prior, including unassigned collars and collared

animals from neighbouring herds).

Parties Responsible: Environment and Natural Resources

Rationale for IR #1: The Board needs more information on the June 2018 population survey, including

whether all the cow collars were within the aerial survey strata. This will help the Board assess the

reliability of the 2018 herd estimate.

Response (ENR):

At the time of the June 2018 Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) calving ground photo survey, there were 16

‘known BNE’ collared cows (see Figure 1). In addition, there were 11 cows that were captured in winter

2017-2018 and unassigned until June 2018 (see Figure 2). Figures 1 and 2 below show the survey blocks

and the movements of these collared cows from May 1 to June 11, 2018. The herd wintered separately

from its neighbours and there were no Bluenose-West or Bathurst collars on the Sahtì Ekwo calving

ground.

Figure 1. Spring movements (between May 1 to June 11, 2018) of collared Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) cows who

calved on the Sahtì Ekwo calving ground in years prior, with survey blocks.


Figure 2. Spring movements (between May 1 to June 11, 2018) of collared Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) cows for which calving location was unassigned prior to June 2018, with survey blocks.


Information Request #2: i) Please provide the updated estimates of average rate of adult survival for the

period 2015-2018 (information which the proposal indicated was forthcoming) and specify whether the

estimate was calculated using a computer model based on herd size, pregnancy rate and calf survival or

otherwise; and, ii) Please provide a table giving the annual numbers of collars, annual rate of collar loss

and the month when the collar loss occurred.


Rationale for IR #2: The Board cannot interpret the trend in herd size without current information on its

underlying vital rates. The proposal gave the 2013-2015 average survival as 71% but with no indication

of how variable it is on an annual basis. Using the model generated estimates of survival does not detail

the seasons with higher or lower survival. For those two reasons, the Board needs to know the annual

and seasonal collar loss as an indicator of survival.

Response (ENR):

The analyses described here are preliminary and should be attributed as Boulanger (Unpublished

2019). As in previous analyses, monthly collar locations and fate data were compiled to provide a

monthly count of live collared caribou and mortalities. These data were then used to estimate

yearly survival rate using the Kaplan-Meir survival rate estimator (Pollock et al 1989). Figure 3 and

Table 1 display collar-based survival rates for caribou years (beginning in June each year and ending

at the end of May).

Figure 3. Collar-based cow annual survival estimates for Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) caribou from 2010-2011 to

2017-2018. Year begins in June and ends at the end of May.

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

2011 2013 2015 2017

Calving ground year

Adult

fem

ale

surv

ival


Table 1. Collar-based annual survival estimates of Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) caribou cows from 2010-2011 to 2017-2018. A caribou year begins in June and ends at the end of May.

Caribou year Survival SE 95% Confidence Interval

2010 0.67 0.16 0.33 0.89

2011 0.97 0.03 0.84 1.00

2012 0.60 0.08 0.45 0.74

2013 0.74 0.09 0.54 0.88

2014 0.79 0.08 0.60 0.90

2015 0.93 0.04 0.77 0.98

2016 0.84 0.07 0.67 0.93

2017 0.75 0.08 0.55 0.88

Table 2. Numbers of collared Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) caribou cows from which annual survival rates were

calculated. Collar months are the sum of collars available each month.

Caribou year Yearly Mortalities Live monthly caribou sample sizes

Known Stationary collar

Collar months

Mean alive

Min Max

2010 3 0 103 8.6 6 12

2011 0 1 137 19.6 5 38

2012 4 12 415 34.6 31 39

2013 0 6 257 21.4 17 25

2014 0 6 319 26.6 21 37

2015 0 2 363 30.3 24 37

2016 0 5 363 30.3 26 37

2017 2 5 277 23.1 17 30

Total 9 37

Between Figures 3, 4 and 5, and Tables 1 and 2, it can be seen that annual collar-based survival rates

were variable and the variance on estimates was high, largely owing to limited numbers of collared

caribou. Annual estimates ranged between a low of 0.60 and a high of 0.97, and an overall average of

the 8 years in Table 1 is 0.79.


Figure 4. State space model-based estimates of cow survival (blue line) and collar-based survival rates (red dots)

2010-2018 for the Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) herd using a one-year time-step (left) and using a 3-year moving average (right). Dotted black lines show a cow survival rate of 0.86, previously shown to be associated with a stable herd with adequate recruitment, and cow survival of 0.71, the last previous estimate from 2015. Overall, model-estimated cow survival has ranged between about 0.70 and 0.80 with a potential decline in cow survival from 2015-18.

In 2018, population modeling by J. Boulanger used a Bayesian State Space integrated population (IPM)

model (Buckland et al. 2004, Kery and Schaub 2012a,b) based upon the original (OLS) model (White and

Lubow 2002) developed for the Bathurst herd (Boulanger et al. 2011) but also applied to the Sahtì Ekwo

(Bluenose-East) herd (Boulanger et al. 2016) to further explore demographic trends in the Sahtì Ekwo

data. The Bayesian State Space IPM uses herd size, pregnancy rate, calf survival and other demographic

data. This work has been in collaboration with a Bayesian statistician/modeler (Joe Thorley-Poisson

Consulting) (Thorley 2017, Ramey et al. 2018). Results of this modeling are preliminary and will be

reported in the calving ground photo survey reports for June 2018. Key results are provided in Figures 4

and 5.

The state space estimate of cow survival for the caribou year of 2017 (which spans from June 2017 to

the end of May 2018) was 0.72 (0.59-0.85). At these cow survival rates, the herd cannot be stable as it

cannot produce enough calves to offset mortalities. We suggest that the 2017 estimate of survival is

most applicable to prospective modelling of herd status given the potential downward trend in survival

rates from 2015 to 2017.

Figure 5 shows model-based estimates of fecundity (proportion adult cows producing calves each year),

calf survival, and overall calf productivity (the product of fecundity X calf survival). March/April calf: cow

ratios are obtained from composition surveys. The model and the March/April calf: cow ratios suggest a

downward overall trend from higher values 2008-2013 to lower values 2012-2018. The low calf

productivity and low cow survival both contributed to the overall rapid decline.


Figure 5. Model-based estimates of fecundity (left), calf survival (middle) and overall calf productivity (right) for the

Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) herd 2008-2018. March/April calf: cow ratios for the herd are shown as red dots with error bars in the graph on the right.

References:

Boulanger, J., B. Croft, J. Adamczewski, D. Lee, N. C. Larter, and L. M. Leclerc. 2016. An estimate of breeding females and analyses of demographics for the Bluenose-East herd of barren-ground caribou: 2015 calving ground photographic survey. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Govt of Northwest Territories, Manuscript report No. 260.

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 75:883-896.

Buckland, S. T. N., K.B., L. Thomas, and N. B. Koesters. 2004. State-space models for the dynamics of wild animal populations. Ecological Modelling 171:157-175.

Kery, M., and M. Schaub. 2012a. Bayesian population analyses using WinBugs: A hierarchical perspective. Volume 1.Academic Press, Boston.

_____. 2012b. Bayesian population analysis using WinBUGS: A hierarchical perspective. Academic Press Waltham, Massachussets USA.

Pollock, K. H., S. R. Winterstein, C. M. Bunck, and P. D. Curtis. 1989. Survival analysis in telemetry studies: the staggered entry design. Journal of Wildlife Management 53:7-15.

Ramey, R. R., J. L. Thorley, and A. S. Ivey. 2018. Local and population-level responses of Greater sage-grouse to oil and gas development and climatic variation in Wyoming. Peer J. 6: doi:10.7717/peerj.5417.

Thorley, J. L. A., G.F. 2017. The fishing and natural mortality of large, piscivorous Bull Trout and Rainbow Trout in Kootenay Lake, British Columbia (2008–2013). . Peer J. 5:doi 10.7717/peerj.2874.

White, G. C., and B. Lubow. 2002. Fitting population models to multiple sources of observed data. Journal of Wildlife Management 66:300-309.


Information Request #3: Please provide a table with the annual fall and late winter calf:cow ratios to

provide estimates of calf survival through summer and winter.


Rationale IR #3: It will be useful to the Board to know if calf survival varies between summer and winter

as background to make management decisions and monitoring recommendations.

Response (ENR):

Table 3 displays the Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) calf: cow and bull: cow ratios from October

composition surveys from 2009 through 2018. Table 4 displays the Sahtì Ekwo calf: cow ratios from March/April composition surveys from 2008 through 2018. A graph of the spring calf: cow ratios was included in the Joint Management Proposal on Management Actions for the Bluenose-East

Æekwö (Barren-ground caribou) Herd: 2019-2021 (Figure 2, page 5). Table 3. Summary of Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) caribou fall (October) composition surveys, 2009-2018. 95% confidence limits (CL) calculated via bootstrapping.

Year

Total caribou

classified

Total groups

classified

Median group size

Calves /cow

SE*

CL†

CL†

% calves in

sample

Bulls /cow

SE2

CL3

CL3

2009 4,531 79 46 0.460 0.017 0.427 0.495 24.4 0.429 0.017 0.396 0.463 2010 no

survey -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

2011 no survey

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

2012 no survey

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

2013 5,369 107 29 0.360 0.014 0.334 0.388 20.1 0.426 0.018 0.390 0.461 2014 no

survey -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

2015 4,190 51 31 0.347 0.015 0.318 0.376 19.7 0.417 0.029 0.367 0.479 2016 4,019 192 10 0.434 0.024 0.389 0.481 24.0 0.372 0.022 0.328 0.413 2017 1,666 30 59 0.435 0.019 0.401 0.475 23.2 0.437 0.069 0.317 0.590 2018 2,525 116 11 0.257 0.016 0.229 0.291 15.6 0.380 0.027 0.332 0.437

* SE = Standard Error † CL=95% Confidence Limit (lower & upper)


Table 4. Summary of Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) caribou spring (late March/early April) composition surveys, 2008-2018. 95% confidence limits (CL) calculated via bootstrapping.

Year

Total caribou

classified

Total groups

classified

Median group size

Calves /cow

SE*

CL†

CL†

% calves In

sample

2008 5,683 84 34 0.483 0.017 0.451 0.517 26.8 2009 6,110 97 33 0.384 0.014 0.356 0.412 23.0 2010 6,597 100 43 0.466 0.012 0.444 0.489 28.6 2011 5,846 68 63 0.415 0.016 0.385 0.449 23.4 2012 4,022 76 37 0.272 0.015 0.245 0.303 18.0 2013 no survey -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2014

2015a

2016

5,120 1,133 2,519

142 60 77

18 13 21

0.298 0.212 0.319

0.016 0.023 0.020

0.270 0.168 0.284

0.332 0.258 0.363

19.7 13.9 22.5

2017b no survey -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2018 2,333 48 36 0.375 0.013 0.350 0.400 26.3

* SE = Standard Error † CL= 95% Confidence Limit (lower & upper) a does not include overlap area with Bathurst caribou south of Wekweètì b overlap with Bathurst caribou herd


Information Request #4: Please provide a table giving the sample size for collared cows, the number of

pregnancies since 2010, and the mean and standard error for parturient cows recorded during calving

ground surveys since 2010.


Rationale IR #4: The proposal gives the 2018 pregnancy rates based on collared cows and information

gathered during the calving ground surveys. The proposal states that “pregnancy rates have been

healthy for this herd in the last few years” but it would be useful for the Board to see more detailed

information especially on how the pregnancy rates have varied and if there are any trends. It would also

be useful if ENR commented on how representative collared cows are of pregnancy rates.

Response (ENR):

Table 5 is a summary of the numbers of collared caribou for which blood samples were taken and

where pregnancy was tested, for captured Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) caribou cows annually from

2010 to 2018. The total number of collared cows found to be pregnant between 2015 and 2018 was

39 of 41 or 95%.

With regards to representation, when caribou are selected for capture, the focus of the net-gunner

is on females (or males) that appear healthy. There is not generally time to fully assess the animal’s

condition, and the ages range from 2 to about 12 years. Yearlings are not targeted for capture.

Caribou that are lame or appear to be unhealthy are not targeted. It is difficult to know how

representative the captured cows are of the herd, although the selection of caribou that appear to

be healthy may bias the sample somewhat towards animals in good condition.

Table 5. Pregnancy rates of captured Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) cows by year; the number of positive pregnancy tests out of the number of tested cows is shown in brackets..

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

90% (9 of 10)

100% (1 of 1)

75% (27 of 36)

67% (2 of 3)

88% (7 of 8)

93% (14 of 15)

92% (11 of 12)

100 % (5 of 5)

100 % (9 of 9)

During the March/April composition surveys in 2016 and 2018, fecal samples were collected. These

fecal samples were analyzed to identify individual animals, determine gender and assess pregnancy

status. In 2016, 72.3% (36 of 46) of the fecal samples from female caribou were from pregnant

females. In 2018, 63.8% (37 of 71) of the fecal samples from female caribou were from pregnant

females. Using this technique, fecal samples from yearling females may be among the samples

collected. Although it is possible for yearlings to be pregnant this happens at very low rates, thus

inclusion of yearling female fecal samples may reduce the overall pregnancy percentage.

Table 6 is a summary of the estimated proportion of breeding females on the Sahtì Ekwo calving

grounds during calving ground surveys. Proportions are estimated from composition sampling


undertaken during each survey. Surveys on calving grounds are based on samples of hundreds or

thousands of cows throughout the survey blocks, and are thus a much stronger representation of

the herd-wide pregnancy rate than the much smaller sample size from captured cows. The results

for 2010 and 2015 suggest that the pregnancy rate was low in those two years. The 63% breeding

females from the June 2015 survey followed the 2014 record fire and drought year in the NWT, and

may reflect poor feeding conditions and a severe insect season linked to poor cow condition in the

fall breeding season.

Table 6. Proportion of breeding cows (breeding cows/adult cows) on the Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) calving

ground in 2010, 2013, 2015 and 2018.

Year Breeding proportion SE CIlow CIhigh

2010 0.61 0.07 0.47 0.74

2013 0.80 0.06 0.66 0.89

2015 0.63 0.05 0.53 0.72

2018 0.83 0.14 0.41 0.97


Information Request #5: Please provide a summary (with maps) of the sahtì ekwǫ winter distribution

relative to likely harvesting efforts (proximity to communities) since 2010.


Rationale IR #5: The Board notes the abrupt reduction in harvest levels based on the preliminary

harvest levels of 2016/17 and 2017/2018 compared to earlier years. The Board notes ENR’s possible

explanation and would need to see how the winter distribution has changed relative to

communities and to the Bathurst herd.

Response (ENR):

A series of maps showing cumulative collar locations of Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) and Bathurst caribou for winters 2011 to 2018 can be found below (Figures 6 – 13). Winter distribution for the

Sahtì Ekwo herd has shown a high degree of variability from year to year. In winters 2017 and 2018 the herd has been further north and closer to treeline, which may be a reflection of lower numbers.

In some winters the Sahtì Ekwo herd has overlapped substantially with the Bathurst herd, but in

2018 the Sahtì Ekwo herd had no overlap with the Bathurst herd.

Figure 6. Cumulative locations of collared Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) and Bathurst caribou for the winter of 2011

(December 2010 to April 2011). In December 2010 there were 31 Sahtì Ekwo collars and 9 Bathurst collars and in

April 2011 there were 33 Sahtì Ekwo collars and 17 Bathurst collars.


Information Request #6: Please provide the range of model estimates for adult survival that together

with a harvest level of 300 bulls would be required to halt the herd’s decline.


Rationale IR #6: ENR recommends a total harvest of 300 bulls/year. However, ENR’s modeling shows the

reduction will not halt the decline and the herd will be reduced by half in 2021 (based on ENR’s

modeling with 71% adult survival and average ‘calf survival’). The Board needs more information to

consider the effect of the recommended harvest level.

Response (ENR):

The herd-wide harvest limit of 300 Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) bulls proposed jointly by Tłı chǫ

Government (TG) and Environment and Natural Resources (ENR) was not identified as likely to halt

the herd’s decline. It was proposed instead as a level of harvest that would have a relatively small

incremental effect on the herd’s decline (see Figure 14), while still allowing a level of harvest that

could address the cultural value of continued Indigenous harvesting by Tłı chǫ and other traditional

harvesters of this herd.

Figure 14. Projected herd size of the Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) herd in 2021 assuming continued cow survival of 71% and average calf productivity (from Joint Management Proposal on Management Actions for the Bluenose-

East Æekwö (Barren-ground caribou) Herd: 2019-2021, Jan. 2019).

As our two governments work together to find a balance of reducing the herd’s decline while still

maintaining a relationship with the caribou and environment through harvesting, we are reminded

of Chief Monfwi’s words when he signed the Treaty in 1921, “As long as the sun rises, the river flows,

and the land does not move, we will not be restricted from our way of life.” This is a very powerful

statement that is left for all of us to maintain. One way to maintain this is through a reduction of

harvest. The reduction in the herd’s total allowable harvest from 2016-2019 Sahtı Ekwo of 750 to 300 for


the new JMP is a 60% decrease in harvest that will result in hardships for Tłı chǫ and other communities

but allow for the continuation of traditional practices around caribou harvestıng.

The limited harvest modeling for the Sahtì Ekwo herd in winter 2018-2019 did not consider a wide

range of possible herd demographics; rather it was focused on a limited range of calf survival rates

and a constant cow survival rate of 71%. To gain insight into the demographic conditions that would

be associated with stability, we include a graph and a table from a larger harvest modeling report

(Figure 15, Table 7; Boulanger, J., and J. Adamczewski. 2016. A general approach to harvest

modeling for barren-ground caribou herds in the NWT and recommendations on harvest based on

herd risk status. GNWT ENR Manuscript Report 262).

Three levels of adult cow survival were considered: Low (0.77), medium (0.85) and high (0.90), and

4 levels of calf productivity (0.14, 0.26, 0.38 and 0.51). Harvest was 0 for these simulations. Calf

productivity is the product of fecundity and calf survival. Because fecundity was held constant

(85%) in the modeling, any change in calf productivity is a reflection of a change in calf survival.

Trends in the adult cow segment of the population were considered in this exercise. At the low cow

survival rate of 0.77, a stable population was not possible even at the highest calf survival. With low

cow survival and low calf survival, expected trend was a 17% rate of annual decline; this was the

approximate situation for the Sahtì Ekwo herd in 2018. At a high cow survival rate of 0.90, 3 of the 4

levels of calf survival were associated with an increasing adult female segment of the herd. At a

medium cow survival rate of 0.85, the herd was likely to be stable at the higher levels of calf survival

and in a slow decline at lower calf survival.

Figure 15. Trend in female population size as a function of adult female survival (Saf) and calf survival (Sc). From Boulanger and Adamczewski (2016).


The Sahtì Ekwo herd’s demographics would need to change dramatically from cow survival rates of

0.71-78 to at least 0.85 or 0.86 and from calf-cow ratios of 25:100 (Oct. 2018) to at least 40:100.

With those vital rates, a harvest of 300 bulls would have a minimal effect on the herd’s trend; if the

herd has an increasing trend (cow survival of 0.90), then that level of harvest would not prevent an

increasing trend. We note that population trend (asymptotic λ) is not influenced by initial breeding

female N when harvest=0 for the simulation model.

Table 7. Initial parameterization of simulations. Productivity was the product of calf survival and fecundity. Initial breeding females was the product of initial cows (69,930 *adult survival * fecundity). Asympotic λ values for females and calf cow ratios are also given. From Boulanger and Adamczewski 2016.

Survival Scenario

Productivity

Survival

Fecundity

Initial Female Trend

CC* ratios

Cow Bull Calf Yearling Breed F N* λ

Spring Fall

Low 0.14 0.77 0.62 0.16 0.77 0.85 45,769 0.83 0.21 0.40

0.26 0.77 0.62 0.30 0.77 0.85 45,769 0.87 0.32 0.46

0.38 0.77 0.62 0.45 0.77 0.85 45,769 0.90 0.40 0.50

0.51 0.77 0.62 0.60 0.77 0.85 45,769 0.94 0.47 0.52

Moderate 0.14 0.85 0.68 0.16 0.85 0.85 50,524 0.91 0.20 0.38

0.26 0.85 0.68 0.30 0.85 0.85 50,524 0.95 0.30 0.45

0.38 0.85 0.68 0.45 0.85 0.85 50,524 0.99 0.38 0.49

0.51 0.85 0.68 0.60 0.85 0.85 50,524 1.02 0.45 0.51

High 0.14 0.90 0.73 0.16 0.90 0.85 53,496 0.96 0.19 0.38

0.26 0.90 0.73 0.30 0.90 0.85 53,496 1.00 0.29 0.44

0.38 0.90 0.73 0.45 0.90 0.85 53,496 1.04 0.37 0.48

0.51 0.90 0.73 0.60 0.90 0.85 53,496 1.08 0.43 0.51

*Breed F N = Breeding Female Number; CC = Calf: Cow


Information Request #7: Model sahtì ekwǫ, Bathurst and Beverly populations to 2029 (the next 10

years), assuming rates of decline and of herd switching seen in 2018 continue for the Bathurst, and herd

switching begins for the sahtì ekwǫ herd when they reach a population of approximately 8,200.


Rationale for IR #7: The Board is concerned that if the sahtì ekwǫ continues to decline and overlaps with

neighboring herds during the winter, that cows may start to migrate to other calving grounds making

monitoring trends in herd size more difficult.

Response (ENR):

Since 2009, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources’ (ENR) population modeling for the

Bathurst and Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) herds has been restricted to a relatively short period, usually 3

years, because changes in adult survival, calf survival, pregnancy rates, and resulting population trend

have been highly dynamic. It has been difficult to anticipate herd size 3 years into the future, let alone

10 years. The possibility of further calving ground switches makes projecting the Bathurst herd’s trend

even more challenging. ENR is thus reluctant to model the trend of either herd for this time period (10

years), as the modeling becomes increasingly speculative.

A simple projection of trend in the Sahtì Ekwo herd based on a continued annual rate of decline of 20%,

as documented for the number of adult females 2010-2018, results in the herd estimates from 2018 to

2022 provided in Table 8. This projection suggests that the Sahtì Ekwo herd would reach 7,902 caribou

in 2022, a size similar to the estimate of 8,210 for the Bathurst herd in 2018. Whether the Sahtì Ekwo

herd might show signs of increased range switching at that herd size or at a higher or lower number is

not known.

Table 8. Estimated Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) herd size in 2018 and projected size to 2022 assuming a constant

annual rate of decline of 20%.

Year Bluenose-East Herd Size

2018 19,294 (Survey Estimate)

2019 15,435 (Projection)




ENR and the Tłįchǫ Government (TG) are very concerned about the level of calving ground switching of

the Bathurst herd in 2018 and will continue to monitor calving ground fidelity of collared adult females

in this herd and its neighbours. At this point, there has been one year (2018) in which 3 of 11 known

Bathurst collared cows switched to the Beverly/Ahiak calving ground in the Queen Maud Gulf. This

represents a rate of switching of 27% but is based on a limited sample. Normally rates of switching have

been 2-3% based on consecutive June locations of collared females, for both the Bathurst and the Sahtì


Ekwo herds. Whether this was a one-time event for the Bathurst herd or switching will continue, is

unknown.

Recent experience with other herds in the NWT suggests that there is no clearly defined threshold herd

size when switching might occur. The Cape Bathurst herd in the Inuvik region was roughly stable at

2000-3000 caribou for 10 years 2005-2015 and showed an increasing trend 2015-2018. This herd’s range

in winter sometimes overlaps with the much larger Bluenose-West herd’s range, but it has shown no

sign of increased switching by collared cows beyond the low rates of 2-3% that occur normally in NWT

herds. The Tuktoyaktuk Peninsula herd has shown a declining trend from 2006 to 2018 and the last

estimate for this herd was just 1,500 caribou. This herd has substantial overlap with the Cape Bathurst

herd but also has shown no evidence of increased collar switching between calving grounds.


Information Request #8: It is unclear how sahtì ekwǫ caribou harvest will be managed in the Sahtú.

How will harvest be managed and monitored, in the Sahtú starting July 1, 2019? How has this

changed since 2016?


Rationale for IR #8: Sahtì ekwǫ spend much of their time in the Sahtú, and while there, are not under

the jurisdiction of WRRB harvest determinations. Knowing how sahtì ekwǫ caribou harvest will be

managed in a neighbouring region will help provide context to management proposals in

Wek'èezhìı.

Response (ENR):

In 2016 the Sahtú Renewable Resources Board (SRRB) held a hearing on Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East)

caribou management. This board endorsed the Belare Wíle Gots’ç Æekwç (the Délîne caribou plan), a

community-based caribou management plan from the Délîne Renewable Resource Council (DRRC),

which included a harvest limit of 150 BNE caribou/year and 80% bulls. Since then, the Department of

Environment and Natural Resources (ENR), the SRRB and the DRRC have met regularly to implement the

plan.

Information on the Sahtì Ekwo herd’s status based on the June 2018 survey was provided to all

Indigenous governments and organizations, including the SRRB and the DRRC, in November 2018. Since

then, ENR and SRRB staff have attended meetings of the DRRC in December 2018 and January 2019.

There was also a presentation on the Bathurst and Sahtì Ekwo herds given at a meeting of the Tulít’a

RRC and the SRRB in Feb. 2019. The DRRC has invited ENR to participate at a meeting in March 2019 to

review a number of subjects, including an update to the Délîne caribou plan.


Information Request #9: Please provide a table or text reporting on the health of harvested caribou (if

any were sampled).


Rationale IR #9: The Board would like to know the condition of harvested caribou, if available. This

information can help assess the health of the herd.

Response (ENR):

Summaries of past information gathered from harvested Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) caribou up to

2014 can be found in Adamczewski et al. 2016, Carlsson et al. 2015 and Garner 2014.

Since 2015, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (ENR) has provided the Delı ne

Renewable Resource Council (DRRC) with sampling kits. A completed kit would include the lower

jaw, the left metatarsal, fecal sample, blood on filter paper, a piece of muscle tissue, a piece of hide

and tags to fill in information regarding the date and location of the kill and the harvester’s

assessment of the condition of the animal. ENR received 21 Sahtì Ekwo sample kits from the DRRC

in 2017 (the only kits received since 2015). However due to improper storage only 14 of the

samples were processed.

The majority of the sample kits had all of the samples but some of the information on the tags was

not filled out. Of the 14 harvested animals there were 2 cows and 9 bulls; the harvesters did not

provide the sex of the remaining 3 samples. The harvesters reported that both cows were

pregnant.

The harvester is asked to assess the body condition of the harvested animal as one of four pre-

defined scores, skinny, not bad, good and very good. Of the samples collected, 11 harvesters

scored the body condition; 5 were scored as skinny and 6 were scored as not in bad condition.

Thirteen metatarsals were processed, 4 of the metatarsals had cysts and signs of hair loss which is

most likely caused by a Besnoitia infection. 3 metatarsals had signs of hair loss and the remaining 6

appeared normal. Besnoitia is commonly found amongst caribou and in returned barren-ground

caribou sample kits.

As per Delı ne’s caribou plan, Belare Wíle Gots’ç Æekwç, for each animal that has been harvested a

sample kit must be submitted to the DRRC. ENR is working with the DRRC and community

harvesters to ensure samples from all harvested animals are submitted and that each submitted kit

is complete.


References:

Adamczewski, J., J. Boulanger, B. Croft, B. Elkin, and H.D. Cluff. 2016. Overview: Monitoring of Bathurst and Bluenose-East Caribou Herds, October 2014. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Govt of Northwest Territories, Manuscript report No. 263.

Carlsson, A., S. Kutz, R. Popko, A. Veitch, and S. Behrens. 2015. Overview of Bluenose-East caribou body condition from animals harvested from 2004-2014 as part of the Wildlife Health Monitoring Program in the Sahtú Settlement Area. Unpublished manuscript.

Garner, K. 2014. Tłı chǫ Caribou Health and Condition Monitoring Program: Final Report. Submitted by

Tłı chǫ Government to Cumulative Impact Monitoring Program (CIMP), Tłı chǫ Government, Behchoko,

NT.


Information Request #10: i) What goal(s) does the Tłı chǫ Government have to maintain, and rebuild, if

necessary, their relationship with caribou; and ii) How does the Tłı chǫ Government intend to implement

these goals?

Parties Responsible: Tłı chǫ Government

Rationale IR #10: In the proposal, the short-term goals of management actions are to “slow the herd’s

decline and promote recovery”. The long-term goal is to “enable sustainable caribou harvesting that

addresses Indigenous community needs levels across this herd’s range”. The proposal does not reflect

both Indigenous and ‘western’ conservation perspectives.

During the 2016 sahtì ekwö hearing, in academic literature, and in Tłı chǫ reports on caribou laws, the

Tłı chǫ people state the importance of their relationship with caribou. Evidence of the Indigenous

conservation perspectives is plentiful. Reports document Tłı chǫ people following their traditional laws

when on the land.

Response (Tłįchǫ Government):

It is stated in the Tłı chǫ Wenek’e (Tłı chǫ Land Use Plan) that “…caribou are a cultural keystone species;

they have shaped the cultural identity of Tłı chǫ over millennia” (p.29). Maintaining our relationship with

Caribou is part of Tłı chǫ traditional practices. Lately, this relationship is becoming harder to maintain as

the Kok'èetı Ekwo (Bathurst Caribou) and Sahtı Ekwo (Bluenose-East Caribou) populations decline. A

goal of Tłı chǫ Government is for our people to continue this relationship through harvesting;

encompassing all of its aspects. To continue to do that, we need recovery for the herd for the long-term

goal which is the ability for our people to practice the culture of harvesting and preparing caribou, and

feeding our families with healthy caribou meat. In maintaining that relationship, the TG is committed to

having regional/community discussions and/or workshops/conferences where the traditional knowledge

of caribou teachings is kept alive through oral storytelling and when possible, harvesting and actual

work with the caribou in planned cultural activities such as hide tanning camps, learning how to cut up

and store the meat and how to prepare it for various traditional dishes. These activities will bring out

special teachings such as the traditional laws associated with the caribou. The teachings speak to many

important areas but respect to the animal is most important. Respect to the caribou while it is alive,

respect to the care and handling of the body after the harvest and respect of the body parts both edible

and nonedible. These important teachings continue to be shared as a reminder to all harvesters,

veterans and novices.

Although the declines in the caribou herds have affected our relationship with the caribou, we strive to

continue to maintain and strengthen our relationship with the caribou through the oral stories we have

documented (which will bring out additional stories for documentation). The stories can be shared in a

multiple of ways: on the Tłı chǫ radio stations, through the delivery of the Caribou Kit lessons for school

students K-9 and cultural camps that involve working with the hide, meat, bones, etc.

Additionally, a goal of the Tłı chǫ Government, (described in the proposal), is to maintain the many

traditional trails and harvesting sites. By being out on the land at these special sites, stories associated


with these cultural places naturally emerge and are shared strengthening the listeners’ knowledge and

understanding. By maintaining traditional trails, cabins, and cultural places, community members

continue to share knowledge of these important cultural and environmental locations. Therefore, re-

visiting and maintaining these sites are important to sustain the language, culture, and Tłı chǫ knowledge

base associated with the caribou. Activities facilitated through programs such as Trails of Our Ancestors

and Boots on the Ground, are important for maintaining cultural identity and cultural practices.

Ultimately, being on the land maintaining these places conditions people with skills and knowledge of

the land, and prepares them for when caribou are plentiful again.

When permitted, we will strengthen our relationship with the caribou through the practice of harvesting

with respect. Only take what is allowed or only take what is needed (at a time when there are no

restrictions). Tłı chǫ government is committed to maintaining and strengthening our relationship with

the caribou by sharing caribou traditional knowledge through oral storytelling, sharing of documented

stories and the practice of traveling the traditional trails, harvesting, and preparing the caribou.


Information Request #11: i) Why do GNWT harvesting rules and guidelines, including limits and

enforcement, not include Indigenous/ Tłı chǫ laws; and, ii) How could following Indigenous/ Tłı chǫ laws

make a difference to harvesting behavior, including wastage and wounding of animals?

Parties Responsible: Environment and Natural Resources and Tłı chǫ Government

Rationale IR #11: Research associated with Indigenous environmental knowledge, self-governance, and

land management shows that Dene, Métis, and Inuit have traditional laws to manage human hunting

practices to sustain their land with various populations, including caribou.

From the harvesters’ and elders’ perspective, one of the most important factors contributing to the

caribou decline is human behavior and disrespect. TK research shows that Dene, Métis, and Inuit want

their TK and laws to be used and respected in association with all wildlife.

Response (Tłıchǫ Government and ENR):

i) The Department of Environment and Natural Resources (ENR) finalized a new Harvester Training

Course in 2018 that requires persons convicted of an offense under the Wildlife Act to take the

Harvester Training Course before being lawfully able to harvest again. The course includes matters on:

Hunting out of season or in a closed zone/ hunting without a required license or tag/ exceeding

harvest limits/poaching (provision related to s.38, or the Big Game Hunting Regulations s.8, or

the Small Game Hunting Regulations s.2)

Disturbance or harassment of game (provisions related to s.52)

Wounding or loss of game (provision related to s.53)

Wastage (provision related to s.54)

Improper harvesting methods (provisions related to s.60)

Baiting (provision related to s.62)

Using prohibited substances (provision related to s.69)

Using dangerous harvesting methods (provision related to s.70)

Trafficking in the meat of wildlife or other parts (provisions related to s.75(b) and 9(c))

The new Harvester Trainer Course has been created to improve and strengthen harvester behavior with

a strong emphasis on respect. This is comparable with Indigenous/Tłı chǫ laws in that respect to the

animal is of the utmost priority when harvesting. The course will be fully implemented when the

accompanying regulations come into force.

While ENR recognizes the importance and immense value of Indigenous/Tłı chǫ laws, they are not all

explicitly reflected in the Wildlife Act regulations. The enforcement power of ENR officers is set out in

the Wildlife Act and its regulations. Therefore, ENR and the Tłı chǫ Government (TG) recommend all

local harvesters (Indigenous and non-Indigenous) keep each other accountable by harvesting with

respect to the animal, the environment and each other.


TG is an order of government of Canada. TG came into existence on the effective date of the Tłı chǫ

Agreement. TG has lawmaking authority and jurisdiction related to the powers enumerated in Chapter 7

of the Tłı chǫ Agreement, including, among other things, “the power to enact laws in relation to … the

management and exercise of rights and benefits provided under the Agreement to Tłı chǫ Citizens, to the

Tłı chǫ First Nation or to the Tłı chǫ Government including those related to harvesting of wildlife, plants

and trees.” (Tłı chǫ Agreement, section 7.4.1(b)).

The determination of what laws to pass with respect to harvesting of wildlife, the substance of those

laws, when to pass those laws, and the implementation of those laws fall within the jurisdiction and

discretion of TG. At such time as TG enacts Tłı chǫ law(s) relating to wildlife harvesting, including with

respect to such matters as traditional harvesting practices and approaches, TG will, as necessary and

appropriate, work with its co-management partners and other orders of government to consider any

issues of coordination and conflict of laws and to ensure that GNWT harvesting rules and guidelines—

and the enforcement of such rules and guidelines—work harmoniously with Tłı chǫ law.

TG notes that it was—and continues to be—deeply involved in the development of the NWT Wildlife

Act and its Regulations and it continues to work with ENR to identify and implement wildlife harvesting

priorities. Tłı chǫ interests, values and perspectives are manifested in the Wildlife Act as a result of that

collaboration with ENR and as a result of the successful o-drafting approach taken in the development of

the Act. TG also continues to work with ENR to recognize and affirm Tłı chǫ practices and approaches to

harvesting through its regular interactions with ENR and through the co-management and Joint

Management Proposal processes.

In addition to this, TG appreciates that it can an also inform the WRRB of current and past Tłı chǫ

approaches to harvesting through its responses to Information Requests and presentations where WRRB

holds public hearings.

ii) Following Indigenous/ Tłı chǫ laws could make a difference in harvesting behavior, including wastage

and wounding of animals because in the traditional practice of harvesting, it is understood that some

things you just do not do otherwise there can be serious consequences the animal, the herd and to the

harvester. These cultural beliefs, if taught well at an early stage of harvesting, can minimize wastage and

wounding of animals. These beliefs and traditional laws need to be shared for all to follow. It is also a

part of the new ENR Harvester Trainer Course.


Information Request #12: i) Define ‘important’ habitat for sahtı ekwo; ii) How will the sahtı ekwo range

be protected from fragmentation; and iii) Provide available maps showing time of forest fire activity and

development on the sahtı ekwo range.


Rationale IR #12: The proposal states that protection of ‘important’ habitat will be undertaken as a

management action. Indigenous research shows that identifying and protecting a few ‘important’

habitat-types is insufficient to maintain healthy caribou; caribou need good, unfragmented habitat

throughout their range.


i) ‘Important’ habitat for Sahtì Ekwǫ (Bluenose-East) are places on the range that caribou use for specific

purposes during key times of their annual lifecycle. Calving areas, nǫɂokè (water crossings), tataa (land

bridges) and key winter ranges are some general examples of important habitat. The concept of

important habitat for ekwǫ incorporates both specific place-based locations and areas known to Tłı chǫ

elders, and their understanding of what characteristics and features makes those areas important to

caribou and why (Legat et al. 2014a and 2014b). The concepts of nǫɂokè and tataa reflect the Tłı chǫ’s

knowledge of the locations of key migratory corridors and their deep understanding of the importance

of migratory movements and habitat connectivity for ekwǫ.

ii) The annual range of the Sahtì Ekwǫ occurs within both Nunavut and the Northwest Territories (NWT),

and within the NWT the herd range spans multiple land claim areas, land-use management authorities,

communities and Indigenous governments. The Advisory Committee for Cooperation on Wildlife

Management (ACCWM) was established to exchange information, help develop cooperation and

consensus, and make recommendations regarding wildlife and wildlife habitat issues that cross land

claim and treaty boundaries. The committee consists of Chairpersons (or alternate appointees) of the

Wildlife Management Advisory Council (NWT), Gwich’in Renewable Resources Board, Ɂehdzo Got’ı ne

Gots’e Nakedı (Sahtú Renewable Resources Board), Wek’èezhìi Renewable Resources Board, Kitikmeot

Regional Wildlife Board, and Tuktut Nogait National Park Management Board.

The Government of the Northwest Territories (GNWT) has accepted the ACCWM’s Taking Care of

Caribou: the Cape Bathurst, Bluenose-West, and Bluenose-East barren-ground caribou herds

management plan as the primary guidance document for the management of these three herds. The

management plan and individual herd action plans provide details on types of actions that are

recommended based on a herd’s status. These management actions address “Habitat” and “Land Use

Activities”. Two actions in particular address habitat connectivity, Action B – 2 is to “Review results of

monitoring, including cumulative effects, to ensure enough habitat is available and caribou are able to

move between areas of good habitat” and B – 3 is to “Recommend important habitat as a ‘value at risk’

for forest fire management”.


The GNWT and Tłı chǫ Government will continue to work collaboratively with our co-management

partners, particularly the ACCWM, to consider and implement management actions for Sahtì Ekwo

through the Taking Care of Caribou plan.

iii)

Figure 16. Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) annual range and forest fire history.

Figure 17. Sahtì Ekwo (Bluenose-East) annual range and calving grounds with communities, remediation sites

(closed mines), active mineral claims and winter roads.


Information Request #13: i) Provide available evidence of human development or disturbance on the

sahtì ekwǫ range and how it has impacted barren-ground caribou habitat; ii) Provide available evidence

on the impacts of climate change on the sahtì ekwǫ range; iii) Provide an evaluation of how cumulative

impacts from climate change and human development have affected the sahtì ekwǫ range; iv) Provide

an assessment of the ability of the sahtì ekwǫ herd and their range to absorb any impacts from

additional human development and climate change; and v) Will ENR and TG set limits to human

development on the sahtì ekwǫ range as a management strategy to help protect caribou and their

habitat? If not, why not?


Rationale IR #13: The proposal states “… overall there has been limited development on the Bluenose-

East range”. Indigenous research across Canada shows that habitat loss and degradation from human

development are the main cause of many wildlife population declines, including caribou. Indigenous

knowledge research shows that climate change has significant impacts on caribou habitat, especially

from the massive and intense fires that have occurred since the mid-90s.

According to Indigenous research from ‘Climate Change and Health Adaptation’, the combination of

rapid climate change and human development will probably have negative impacts on barren-ground

caribou and their habitat. The proposal does not state how the combination of climate change and

development has impacted the sahtì ekwǫ herd and their habitat.


i) Figure 17 in the response to Information Request 12 shows the annual range and calving grounds of

the Sahtì Ekwǫ (Bluenose-East) herd with communities, winter roads, closed mines, and mineral claims

and leases. In general the level of development (mines and roads) has been limited when compared to

the Bathurst herd’s range or areas further south in the provinces. There are a number of closed mines

that have either been reclaimed or are scheduled for reclamation. The dotted line from Gameti to the

south end of Great Bear Lake is a trail, sometimes called the Denison (winter) road, which may be used

for remediation activities. Closed mines include the Port Radium uranium mine from the 1940s. Tundra

Copper had a mineral exploration camp on the southern part of the Sahtì Ekwǫ calving ground but the

company has not been active in recent years. Figure 16 in the response to Information Request 12 is a

map of fire history on the Sahtì Ekwǫ annual range. Key communities on the herd’s range are Kugluktuk,

Delįne, and at the southern end, Gamèti and Wekweètì.

ii) There has been little research specifically on the effects of climate change on the Sahtì Ekwǫ range.

An evaluation of about 25 environmental variables and their relationships with demographic variables in

the Bathurst and Sahtì Ekwǫ herds (Boulanger and Adamczewski 2017) showed that a number of

environmental variables influenced cow pregnancy rate, calf survival and cow survival and an extract of

the results is given below. However, no single factor had a dominant effect on population trend.

Because weather has effects on caribou in all seasons, a changing climate is likely to mean both positive

and negative effects on barren-ground caribou. As an example, the summer drought index and the

warble fly index showed an increasing trend for both the Bathurst and Sahtì Ekwǫ ranges from the 1980s


to 2016; these conditions will be associated with poor summer feeding conditions and potentially a low

fall pregnancy rate as lean females are less likely to breed. On the other hand, an earlier beginning to

the vegetation growing season in the spring may have positive effects on caribou as a result of better

feeding conditions when the cows are nursing newborn calves. An extract from this study is included

below.

A number of recent studies across the northern range of caribou and reindeer show that the effects of

climate change are far-reaching. They also show that there are multiple effects and that individual

populations are affected differently, and that regional effects are variable. A full description of research

on weather and climate change and their effects on caribou is beyond the scope of this document.

Abstracts from a selection (8) of some relevant recent papers are included. Based on the studies listed at

the end of this document along with others, some of the likely effects of climate change to date on the

Sahtì Ekwǫ herd include the following:

a) An earlier start to the plant growing season and greater plant growth in the summer;

b) Generally warmer winters and warmer summers;

c) A trend toward more drought and a more severe insect season in summer;

d) The potential for more severe fire seasons like 2014, with effects on the winter range and lichen

availability;

e) The potential for more snowfall in the winter and a greater incidence of icing (i.e. rain on snow

events) in some winters;

f) Tundra vegetation shifting towards taller and more extensive shrubs, and less lichen;

g) Variable effects of large-scale weather patterns like the Arctic Oscillation;

h) Weather that is more extreme and unpredictable.

(From Boulanger and Adamczewski 2017) Analysis of the environmental covariates revealed correlations

between many of the variables as well as directional trends in some of them. Results from the

demographic model analysis suggested multiple associations of environmental covariates with

demographic parameters. Most notable were positive associations between March snow-depth and

adult female survival for both the Bathurst and Bluenose-East herds. In addition, the oesterid index in

summer and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation were negatively associated with the proportions of females

breeding in both herds. Linkages with calf survival were not as strong with none of the covariates

explaining the directional trends observed in calf survival. The mushroom index was positively related

and the oesterid index negatively related to calf survival in Bathurst caribou if underlying directional

trends were modelled in unison with the covariates. Overall the results demonstrated different

associations for adult female pregnancy rates, calf survival, and adult survival with final models

containing multiple covariates for each demographic parameter. These results demonstrate the utility of

using a demographic model to explore associations with environmental variables but also demonstrate

the complexity of these associations. The associations suggested in this analysis can be applied to

further understand potential causes for population declines as well as refine forecasts of herd recovery.


Boulanger, J., and J. Adamczewski. 2017. Analysis of environmental, temporal, and spatial factors

affecting demography of the Bathurst and Bluenose-East caribou herds. Unpublished contract report,

GNWT ENR.

iii) An assessment of the effects of climate change and human development on the Sahtì Ekwǫ caribou

range would (from a scientific perspective) require complex modeling that considers climate variability

and the cumulative effects of development in the context of the natural variability of the herd itself. This

type of modeling has not been carried out for the Sahtì Ekwǫ herd and is beyond the scope of this

document. A recent analysis that demonstrates one possible approach is the report by Russell and Gunn

(2019), which was a modeling approach to assessing how the Porcupine caribou herd might respond to

development on its calving grounds in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge. We note, however, that this

modeling was possible in part because of extensive long-term data-sets for the Porcupine herd; the

equivalent data-sets for the Sahtì Ekwǫ herd in many areas do not exist.

In general terms, the cumulative effects of development on the Sahtì Ekwǫ range are to date likely

limited because the extent of mines, roads and other human infrastructure has been limited when

compared to the Bathurst herd’s range or further south. Some of the likely effects of climate change on

the herd’s range are listed above.

Russell, D., and A. Gunn. 2019. Vulnerability analysis of the Porcupine Caribou Herd to potential

development of the 1002 lands in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska. Report prepared for:

Environment Yukon, Canadian Wildlife Service, and GNWT Department of Environment and Natural

Resources. 143 pp.

iv) The ability of caribou at the level of both the individual and the population to absorb impacts of

additional stresses like further development and the multiple effects of climate change can be

understood in the context of resilience (Gunn et al. 2011). A caribou that is in poor condition is less well

suited to withstanding a severe winter; a cow that is in poor condition at the end of the summer is less

likely to become pregnant. In a similar way, a caribou herd that is declining, at low numbers, or both,

has less ability to absorb the effects of a severe winter when feeding is affected, and less ability to

tolerate a summer of high drought and severe insect harassment. For a herd like the Sahtì Ekwǫ to

recover from low numbers, it will need several years of high calf productivity and survival in addition to

sustained high adult survival rates. Any factors that impede recovery, even small-scale ones that may

affect caribou condition or calf survival, can be important in this situation. Conversely, a herd that is at

high numbers, growing, or both, is less affected by small changes in cow condition and calf survival. In

this context, the Sahtì Ekwǫ herd is at a stage where its resilience is low and it is not well suited to

tolerating additional stresses.

Gunn, A., C.J. Johnson, J.S. Nishi, C.J. Daniel, M. Carlson, D.E. Russell and J.Z. Adamczewski. 2011b.

Addressing Cumulative Effects in the Canadian Central Arctic – Understanding the Impacts of Human

Activities on Barren-ground Caribou. Pp.113-133 in Krausman, P.R. and L.K. Harris (Eds.) Cumulative

Effects in Wildlife Management: A Critical Aspect of Impact Mitigation. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.


v) Tłıchǫ Government has worked with elders and communities to complete a Tłıchǫ Wenek'e (Tłıchǫ

Land Use Plan). The Tłı chǫ Wenek’e came into effect under Tłı chǫ law in 2013. At p. 46, the Tłı chǫ

Wenek’e states that:

Tłı chǫ respect and commitment to sustain barren-ground and boreal caribou

extends beyond management of hunting and includes the broader and longer

term issues of managing traditional, industrial and recreational land use

activities on Tłı chǫ lands.

The Tłıchǫ Wenek’e does not define a specific limit or management threshold for human footprint,

however it reflects concerns regarding cumulative impacts to caribou and clearly recognizes the

importance of managing all potential sources of disturbance to caribou.

The Tłıchǫ Wenek'e recognizes that management thresholds must be set for key indicators including

wildlife habitat. A community must ask itself how much change it is willing to live with in order to move

forward with economic development. The answer to these questions will result in a determination of the

thresholds of acceptable change that is based on both science and local values and knowledge. Land

Protection Directives in Section 6.3.A provide further guidance on how cumulative effects will be

considered. As per Land Protection Directive 6.3.A in the Tłıchǫ Wenek’e, TG will seek opportunities to

work in partnership to develop a cumulative effects monitoring, assessment and management

framework for valued ecosystem components (VEC); and ekwǫ are a high priority VEC.

Effective and coordinated management across the annual range of Sahtì Ekwǫ requires collaboration

across the Northwest Territories and Nunavut. The Advisory Committee for Cooperation on Wildlife

Management (ACCWM) provides a forum to discuss what effective and coordinated management will

entail.

Additionally, environmental assessment processes in Nunavut and NWT are key opportunities to

promote conservation of caribou habitat for trans-boundary herds like Sahtì Ekwǫ. ENR and TG will

continue to participate in all assessments that may affect the range of the Sahtì Ekwǫ.

1. Linkages between large-scale climate patterns and the dynamics of Arctic caribou populations

Kyle Joly, David R. Klein, David L. Verbyla, T. Scott Rupp and F. Stuart Chapin III. Ecography 34: 345-352,

2011.

Abstract

Recent research has linked climate warming to global declines in caribou and reindeer (both Rangifer

tarandus) populations. We hypothesize large-scale climate patterns are a contributing factor explaining

why these declines are not universal. To test our hypothesis for such relationships among Alaska caribou

herds, we calculated the population growth rate and percent change of four arctic herds using existing

population estimates, and explored associations with indices of the Arctic Oscillation (AO) and the


Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO). The AO, which more strongly affects eastern Alaska, was negatively

associated with the population trends of the Porcupine Caribou Herd and Central Arctic Herd, the

easternmost of the herds. We hypothesize that either increased snowfall or suboptimal growing

conditions for summer forage plants could explain this negative relationship. Intensity of the PDO, which

has greatest effects in western Alaska, was negatively associated with the growth rate of the Teshekpuk

Caribou Herd in northwestern Alaska, but the Western Arctic Herd in western Alaska displayed the

opposite trend. We suggest that the contrasting patterns of association relate to the spatial variability of

the effects of the PDO on western and northwestern Alaska. Although predation and winter range

quality have often been considered the primary causes of population variation, our results show that

large-scale climate patterns may play an important role in caribou population dynamics in arctic Alaska.

Our findings reveal that climate warming has not acted uniformly to reduce caribou populations

globally. Further research should focus on the relative importance of mechanisms by which climate

indices influence caribou population dynamics.

2. Climate influences body condition and synchrony of barren‑ground caribou abundance in Northern

Canada

Conor D. Mallory, Mitch W. Campbell, and Mark S. Boyce. Polar Biology

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00300-017-2248-3, 2018

Abstract

Large-scale climate oscillations may contribute to the observed dramatic fluctuations and regional

synchrony in Rangiferabundance. Here, we test this hypothesis using long-term abundance and physical

condition datasets to investigate the relationshipsbetween broad climate patterns, summer-range

quality, and population dynamics in three barren-ground caribou herds in northern Canada. We found

that positive intensities of the Arctic Oscillation (AO) in the summer were associated with warmer

temperatures, improved growing conditions for vegetation, and better body condition of caribou. Over

this same period, the body condition of female caribou was positively related to fecundity. We further

identified that population trajectories of caribou herds followed the direction of the AO: herds increased

under positive AO intensity, and decreased under negative AO intensity. Our findings suggest that the

AO influences barren-ground caribou population dynamics through effects on summer-range quality,

caribou physical condition, and herd productivity.

3. Warming-Induced Shrub Expansion and Lichen Decline in the Western Canadian Arctic

Robert H. Fraser,Trevor C. Lantz, Ian Olthof, Steven V. Kokelj, and Richard A. Sims. Ecosystems

DOI: 10.1007/s10021-014-9783-3, 2014

Abstract

Strong evidence for a pan-Arctic expansion of upright shrubs comes from analysis of satellite imagery,

historical photographs, vegetation plots, and growth rings. However, there are still uncertainties related

to local-scale patterns of shrub growth, resulting interactions among vegetation functional groups, and


the relative roles of disturbance and climate as drivers of observed change. Here, we present evidence

that widespread and rapid shrub expansion and lichen declines over a 15,000 km2 area of the western

Canadian Arctic have been driven by regional increases in temperature. Using 30 m resolution Landsat

satellite imagery and high resolution repeat color-infrared aerial photographs, we show that 85% of the

land surface has a positive 1985–2011 trend (P < 0.05) in NDVI, making this one of the most intensely

greening regions in the Arctic. Strong positive trends (>0.03 NDVI/decade) occurred consistently across

all landscape positions and most vegetation types. Comparison of 208, 1:2,000 scale vertical air photo

pairs from 1980 and 2013 clearly shows that this greening was driven by increased canopy cover of erect

dwarf and tall shrubs, with declines in terricolous lichen cover. Disturbances caused by wildfires,

exploratory gas wells, and drained lakes all produced strong, yet localized increases in NDVI due to shrub

growth. Our analysis also shows that a 4°C winter temperature increase over the past 30 years, leading

to warmer soils and enhanced nutrient mineralization provides the best explanation for observed

vegetation change. These observations thus provide early corroboration for modeling studies predicting

large-scale vegetation shifts in low-Arctic ecosystems from climate change.

4. Long-Term Trends and Role of Climate in the Population Dynamics of Eurasian Reindeer

Alessia Uboni, Tim Horstkotte, Elina Kaarlejärvi, Anthony Sévêque, Florian Stammler, Johan Olofsson,

Bruce C. Forbes, Jon Moen. PLoSONE 11(6): e0158359. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0158359, 2016

Abstract

Temperature is increasing in Arctic and sub-Arctic regions at a higher rate than anywhere else in the

world. The frequency and nature of precipitation events are also predicted to change in the future.

These changes in climate are expected, together with increasing human pressures, to have significant

impacts on Arctic and sub-Arctic species and ecosystems. Due to the key role that reindeer play in those

ecosystems, it is essential to understand how climate will affect the region’s most important species.

Our study assesses the role of climate on the dynamics of fourteen Eurasian reindeer (Rangifer

tarandus) populations, using for the first time data on reindeer abundance collected over a 70-year

period, including both wild and semi-domesticated reindeer, and covering more than half of the species’

total range. We analyzed trends in population dynamics, investigated synchrony among population

growth rates, and assessed the effects of climate on population growth rates. Trends in the population

dynamics were remarkably heterogeneous. Synchrony was apparent only among some populations and

was not correlated with distance among population ranges. Proxies of climate variability mostly failed to

explain population growth rates and synchrony. For both wild and semi-domesticated populations, local

weather, biotic pressures, loss of habitat and human disturbances appear to have been more important

drivers of reindeer population dynamics than climate. In semi-domesticated populations, management

strategies may have masked the effects of climate. Conservation efforts should aim to mitigate human

disturbances, which could exacerbate the potentially negative effects of climate change on reindeer

populations in the future. Special protection and support should be granted to those semi-domesticated

populations that suffered the most because of the collapse of the Soviet Union, in order to protect the

livelihood of indigenous peoples that depend on the species, and the multi-faceted role that reindeer

exert in Arctic ecosystems.


5. Population Densities, Vegetation Green-Up, and Plant Productivity: Impacts on Reproductive

Success and Juvenile Body Mass in Reindeer

Torkild Tveraa*, Audun Stien, Ba°rd-J. Ba°rdsen, Per Fauchald. PLoS ONE 8(2): e56450.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0056450. 2013.

Abstract

Global warming is expected to cause earlier springs and increased primary productivity in the Arctic.

These changes may improve food availability for Arctic herbivores, but may also have negative effects by

generating a mismatch between the surge of high quality food in the spring and the timing of

reproduction. We analyzed a 10 year dataset of satellite derived measures of vegetation green-up,

population densities, calf body masses and female reproductive success in 19 reindeer (Rangifer

tarandus) populations in Northern Norway. An early onset of spring and high peak plant productivity had

positive effects on calf autumn body masses and female reproductive success. In addition, body masses

and reproductive success were both negatively related to population density. The quantity of food

available, as determined by the onset of vegetation green-up and plant productivity over the summer

were the main drivers of body mass growth and reproductive success. We found no evidence for an

effect of the speed of spring green-up. Nor did we detect a negative mismatch between early springs

and subsequent recruitment. Effects of global warming on plant productivity and onset of spring is likely

to positively affect sub-Arctic reindeer.

6. Climate-Driven Effects of Fire on Winter Habitat for Caribou in the Alaskan-Yukon Arctic

David D. Gustine, Todd J. Brinkman, Michael A. Lindgren, Jennifer I. Schmidt, T. Scott Rupp, Layne G.

Adams. PLoS ONE 9(7): e100588. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0100588. 2014.

Abstract

Climatic warming has direct implications for fire-dominated disturbance patterns in northern

ecosystems. A transforming wildfire regime is altering plant composition and successional patterns, thus

affecting the distribution and potentially the abundance of large herbivores. Caribou (Rangifer tarandus)

are an important subsistence resource for communities throughout the north and a species that

depends on terrestrial lichen in late-successional forests and tundra systems. Projected increases in area

burned and reductions in stand ages may reduce lichen availability within caribou winter ranges.

Sufficient reductions in lichen abundance could alter the capacity of these areas to support caribou

populations. To assess the potential role of a changing fire regime on winter habitat for caribou, we

used a simulation modeling platform, two global circulation models (GCMs), and a moderate emissions

scenario to project annual fire characteristics and the resulting abundance of lichen-producing

vegetation types (i.e., spruce forests and tundra .60 years old) across a modeling domain that

encompassed the winter ranges of the Central Arctic and Porcupine caribou herds in the Alaskan-Yukon

Arctic. Fires were less numerous and smaller in tundra compared to spruce habitats throughout the 90-

year projection for both GCMs. Given the more likely climate trajectory, we projected that the

Porcupine caribou herd, which winters primarily in the boreal forest, could be expected to experience a


greater reduction in lichen-producing winter habitats (221%) than the Central Arctic herd that wintered

primarily in the arctic tundra (211%). Our results suggest that caribou herds wintering in boreal forest

will undergo fire-driven reductions in lichen-producing habitats that will, at a minimum, alter their

distribution. Range shifts of caribou resulting from fire-driven changes to winter habitat may diminish

access to caribou for rural communities that reside in fire-prone areas.

7. Arctic greening from warming promotes declines in caribou populations

Per Fauchald, Taejin Park, Hans Tømmervik, Ranga Myneni, Vera Helene Hausner. Fauchald et al.,

Science Advances. 2017;3: e1601365. 2017.

Abstract

The migratory tundra caribou herds in North America follow decadal population cycles, and browsing

from abundant caribou could be expected to counteract the current climate-driven expansion of shrubs

in the circumpolar tundra biome. We demonstrate that the sea ice cover in the Arctic Ocean has

provided a strong signal for climate-induced changes on the adjacent caribou summer ranges,

outperforming other climate indices in explaining the caribou-plant dynamics. We found no evidence of

a negative effect of caribou abundance on vegetation biomass. On the contrary, we found a strong

bottom-up effect in which a warmer climate related to diminishing sea ice has increased the plant

biomass on the summer pastures, along with a paradoxical decline in caribou populations. This result

suggests that this climate-induced greening has been accompanied by a deterioration of pasture quality.

The shrub expansion in Arctic North America involves plant species with strong antibrowsing defenses.

Our results might therefore be an early signal of a climate-driven shift in the caribou-plant interaction

from a system with low plant biomass modulated by cyclic caribou populations to a system dominated

by nonedible shrubs and diminishing herds of migratory caribou.

8. Gauging climate change effects at local scales: weather-based indices to monitor insect harassment

in caribou

L. A. Witter, C. J. Johnson, B. Croft, A. Gunn, and L. M. Poirier. Ecological Applications, 22(6), 2012, pp.

1838–1851.

Abstract

Climate change is occurring at an accelerated rate in the Arctic. Insect harassment may be an important

link between increased summer temperature and reduced body condition in caribou and reindeer (both

Rangifer tarandus). To examine the effects of climate change at a scale relevant to Rangifer herds, we

developed monitoring indices using weather to predict activity of parasitic insects across the central

Arctic. During 2007–2009, we recorded weather conditions and used carbon dioxide baited traps to

monitor activity of mosquitoes (Culicidae), black flies (Simuliidae), and oestrid flies (Oestridae) on the

postcalving and summer range of the Bathurst barren-ground caribou (Rangifer tarandus groenlandicus)

herd in Northwest Territories and Nunavut, Canada. We developed statistical models representing

hypotheses about effects of weather, habitat, location, and temporal variables on insect activity. We


used multinomial logistic regression to model mosquito and black fly activity, and logistic regression to

model oestrid fly presence. We used information theory to select models to predict activity levels of

insects. Using historical weather data, we used hindcasting to develop a chronology of insect activity on

the Bathurst range from 1957 to 2008. Oestrid presence and mosquito and black fly activity levels were

explained by temperature. Wind speed, light intensity, barometric pressure, relative humidity,

vegetation, topography, location, time of day, and growing degree-days also affected mosquito and

black fly levels. High predictive ability of all models justified the use of weather to index insect activity.

Retrospective analyses indicated conditions favoring mosquito activity declined since the late 1950s,

while predicted black fly and oestrid activity increased. Our indices can be used as monitoring tools to

gauge potential changes in insect harassment due to climate change at scales relevant to caribou herds.


Information Request #14: i) What actions can be taken to eliminate the use of loud, fast skidoos when

harvesting caribou; and ii) What actions can be taken to eliminate flying over the calving grounds when

caribou are the most vulnerable?


Rationale IR #14: Indigenous literature across Canada and Tłı chǫ knowledge reports show that caribou

are stressed by loud noises. Low flying planes and skidoos are the most often mentioned.

Response (Tłıchǫ Government):

i) The assertion that use of “loud, fast snowmachines” needs to be eliminated implies a more

fundamental issue, which is to re-establish respectful hunting practices of caribou. TG suggests that to

minimize disturbance of caribou in winter, it may be more meaningful to address the broader question

of how snowmachines are used by hunters, rather than focus on eliminating types of snowmachines

that may be used. In this context, Tłı chǫ Government (TG) agrees that further work and consultation

with elders and hunters is needed to develop goals, objectives, and implementation strategies for re-

establishing broader acceptance and adoption of traditional Tłı chǫ hunting practices and laws in

Wek’èezhìi (also see Response to Information Request #11)

ii) Under the Draft Nunavut Land Use Plan (NLUP), core caribou calving areas, key access corridors, and

post-calving areas are assigned a Protected Area Land Use Designation. The draft NLUP also

recommends research to “identify acceptable noise levels to minimize disturbance on caribou from

industrial Projects/Project Proposals and low flying aircraft during calving and post-calving, and regular

seasonal activities.” However, since the draft NLUP is still under review, it is unclear what specific

management actions will apply to air traffic over caribou calving grounds, and clarification will need to

be sought from management authorities in Nunavut.

TG strongly agrees that minimizing disturbance on calving grounds when caribou are most vulnerable is

an important management goal. TG also recognizes that it has no management authority in Nunavut,

which is where the calving grounds for Sahtì Ekwǫ are located. In this context TG supports effective and

coordinated management and conservation of Sahtì Ekwǫ calving ground habitat through the Advisory

Committee for Cooperation on Wildlife Management (ACCWM) and through close collaboration with

partners in Nunavut Government, Parks Canada Agency, Nunavut Wildlife Management Board and other

Inuit organizations including Nunavut Tunngavik Inc., Kitikmeot Regional Wildlife Board and the

Kugluktuk Angoniatit Association Hunters and Trappers Organization.

TG supports further development and implementation of community advice regarding mitigation or

management actions pertaining to flying over calving grounds, which was highlighted in the Taking Care

of Caribou plan as follows:

limit disturbance by exploration activity and aircraft on calving grounds and migration routes;

increase minimum flying altitude; and


involve the public in reporting aircraft flying low or harassing wildlife (communicate rules and

actions to take).

TG also notes that monitoring caribou on calving grounds often requires the use of airplanes and

helicopters and that the results provide important information to decision-makers, i.e., estimates of

breeding females and calf production. TG will continue to work with GNWT and provide its independent

perspective on continuous improvement of ‘best practices’ for aircraft-based surveys and other field

work on the calving grounds to minimize disturbance to caribou.


Information Request #15: Why does the proposal not include a comprehensive monitoring program and

plan, based on harvesters and elders, as outline in various traditional knowledge reports?


Rationale IR #15: Academic articles and TK reports based on extensive research tell how Dene walk and

watch the land (monitor), including caribou. People share information with each other and with other

communities. They note and share information on the state of the habitat as well as the health of the

caribou.

Traditional knowledge research has repeatedly called for an ongoing monitoring program that focuses

on those who know the character of caribou – harvesters and elders – and those who can learn from

those who know – the youth.

The Boots on the Ground program is a step in the right direction, with some limitations. To date, it has

covered only a small area relative to the barren-ground caribou range and only for part of the year. It

does not reflect the monitoring that Tlicho elders have consistently said is necessary – for all the active

harvesters who know the land now, as well as the stories, to watch the winter habitat in the summer

and the health of caribou and their range all year round.

Response (Tłıchǫ Government):

TG is currently exploring ways to expand its caribou monitoring program of Kok’èetı Ekwo (Bathurst) to

the Sahtì Ekwǫ (Bluenose-East) herds. For the past three years, the monitoring program has been

focused on Bathurst caribou by having Tłı chǫ monitors for six weeks on the summer range of the herd.

As outlined in the rationale for Information Request 15, the current monitoring does not reflect the

Tłı chǫ elders wish to develop a comprehensive monitoring program that includes “all the active

harvesters who know the land now, as well as their stories, to watch the winter habitat in the summer

and the health of caribou and their range all year round”.

Because of concerns over the rapid decline of both Sahtı Ekwo and Kok’èetı Ekwo , WRRB, GNWT, and TG

have implemented harvest restrictions in Wek’èezhìı through a formal co-management process that was

established through the Tłı chǫ Agreement. Since 2015, these restrictions have resulted in reduced

activity by Tłı chǫ hunters on the land. Therefore, is it essential that Tłı chǫ government continues to

facilitate opportunities for Tłı cho people to be out on the land, watch, and monitor both land and

caribou. Currently, we are operating the Boots on the Ground summer caribou monitoring program, and

multiple other cultural programs to the extent possible with present available resources (equipment,

gear, and funds), and availability of staff, community members and elders.

Traditional monitoring of the land and caribou is done by walking and using a boat along the rivers and

lakes to places where caribou and people have met. To continue such monitoring, the Tłı chǫ

Government is expanding the caribou monitoring program by having more Tłı chǫ on the land, increasing

time spent on the barren ground caribou range and by placing boats on larger lakes of the summer and

fall range of Sahtı Ekwo and Kok’èetı Ekwo . Expanding the caribou monitoring will be phased in over the


next seasons. Time is needed to train new monitors, thus building capacity in the monitoring team. This

is key to the success of the program. Availability of sufficient resources (financial and people) is also

another key component of the program, including qualified staff and availability of elders. For the first

time in decades, through this caribou monitoring program we have Tłı chǫ people living and watching the

caribou range for continuous months during the summer and fall.

Tłı chǫ Government does not plan to develop a comprehensive monitoring program that includes all

harvesters all year round, as such program would require resources and staff that Tłı chǫ Government

currently does not have. Our efforts have been on developing a program led by the Elders based on

experienced Tłı chǫ harvester’s knowledge and methods for traveling and being on the land watching

caribou, as traditionally practiced. We see this coordinated effort as a step in the right direction, and a

way to maintain Tłı chǫ peoples’ presence and connection to the barrenland. Our research through our

presence and real time monitoring of the caribou generates data that verifies and creates new

understandings of today strengthening and adding to our traditional knowledge of caribou. This

research can be used to directly influence the decision-making process in the NWT on matters related to

caribou.

mr. joseph judas, chair wek’èezhìi renewable resources ...€¦ · mr. joseph judas, chair...

Documents