Management Plan for the Western Toad (Anaxyrus boreas) in Canada - 2016 [Proposed]
Species at Risk Act
Management Plan Series
Environment and Climate Change Canada. 2016. Management Plan for the Western Toad (Anaxyrus boreas) in Canada [Proposed]. Species at Risk Act Management Plan Series. Environment and Climate Change Canada, Ottawa. iv + 38 pp.
For copies of the management plan, or for additional information on species at risk, including the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) Status Reports, residence descriptions, action plans, and other related recovery documents, please visit the Species at Risk (SAR) Public Registry.
Cover illustration: © Syd Cannings
Également disponible en français sous le titre « Plan de gestion du crapaud de l'Ouest (Anaxyrus boreas) au Canada [Proposition] »
Content (excluding the illustrations) may be used without permission, with appropriate credit to the source.
The federal, provincial, and territorial government signatories under the Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk (1996) agreed to establish complementary legislation and programs that provide for effective protection of species at risk throughout Canada. Under the Species at Risk Act (S.C. 2002, c. 29) (SARA), the federal competent ministers are responsible for the preparation of management plans for listed species of special concern and are required to report on progress within five years after the publication of the final document on the SAR Public Registry.
The Minister of Environment and Climate Change Canada and Minister responsible for the Parks Canada Agency is the competent minister under SARA for the Western Toad, and has prepared this management plan as per section 65 of SARA. To the extent possible, the management plan has been prepared in cooperation with the provinces of British Columbia and Alberta, and Yukon and Northwest Territories as per section 66(1) of SARA.
Success in the conservation of this species depends on the commitment and cooperation of many different constituencies that will be involved in implementing the directions set out in this plan and will not be achieved by Environment and Climate Change Canada, the Parks Canada Agency, or any other jurisdiction alone. All Canadians are invited to join in supporting and implementing this plan for the benefit of the Western Toad and Canadian society as a whole.
Implementation of this management plan is subject to appropriations, priorities, and budgetary constraints of the participating jurisdictions and organizations.
An earlier draft of this document was prepared by Kristiina Ovaska and Lennart Sopuck (Biolinx Environmental Research Ltd.), with input from representatives of federal, provincial, and territorial governments, and regional experts. The document was updated by Greg Ferguson, Holly Middleton, and Megan Harrison of Environment and Climate Change Canada, with review and input from the following people: Lucy Reiss, Syd Cannings, David Cunnington, Andy Didiuk, Mike Gill, Stephen Hureau, Donna Mulders, Mark Wayland, and Donna Bigelow (Environment and Climate Change Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service); Diane Casimir, Barb Johnston, Rhonda Kindopp, Lisa Larson, Charlie Pacas, Derek Peterson, Brenda Shepherd, Doug Tate, and Carmen Wong (Parks Canada); Tom Jung, Tess McLeod, Bruce Bennett and Todd Powell (Government of Yukon); Rob Gau and Joanna Wilson (Government of Northwest Territories); Purnima Govindarajulu, James Quayle, Leah Westereng, Doug Wilson, Connie Miller Retzer, Sarma Liepins, Dave Trotter, and Peter Fielder (Government of BC); Gavin Berg, Lisa Wilkinson, and Scott Stevens (Government of Alberta); Brian Eaton (Alberta Innovates - Technology Futures, Vegreville); Cindy Paszkowski (University of Alberta); Danna Schock (Detroit Zoological Society), Brian Slough (Whitehorse, YT); Doug Whiteside (Calgary Zoo); and Elke Wind (Nanaimo, BC).
The Western Toad (Anaxyrus boreas) is a large, stocky toad. It ranges in colour from greenish to tan, brown or black with a light line along its mid-back and a pronounced cheek gland. The Western Toad was assessed as Special Concern by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) in 2002 and listed under Schedule 1 of the Species at Risk Act in 2005. COSEWIC reconfirmed its status in 2012 and divided the species into two populations or designatable units: Non-calling and Calling.
The Western Toad has a wide distribution in western North America, from Baja California to Alaska, and from the Pacific Coast to Colorado and Alberta. In Canada, the Western Toad occurs throughout the majority of British Columbia, western Alberta, and southeastern Yukon and southwestern Northwest Territories. The majority of the Non-calling population in Canada occurs within British Columbia and almost the entire global range of the Calling population is within Alberta.
The Non-calling population has suffered declines and extirpations in the United States and declines appear to have occurred in Canada along the south coast of British Columbia and in other localized areas within the province over a number of decades. In Yukon and Northwest Territories, the number of known occurrences has increased (likely due to increased survey effort), but there has been no evidence of expansion outside the historical range. The Calling population remains widespread throughout much of its historical range in Alberta and may be expanding its range eastward. However, declines are suspected and projected based on known vulnerabilities and threats.
The Western Toad uses a wide variety of aquatic habitats for breeding and terrestrial habitats for foraging and hibernation. These habitats may be several kilometers apart, requiring Western Toads to move extensively, increasing their vulnerability to human developments and activities. High breeding site fidelity, communal hibernation and egg-laying, and the tendency for newly emerged Western Toads to form large post-metamorphic aggregations also increase their vulnerability. The species' reliance on high adult survival to sustain populations through periods of poor reproductive success means that threats that impact adult survival can have particularly pronounced effects.
The main threats to both populations are transportation and service corridors (habitat loss/fragmentation and road mortality), and invasive and other problematic species and genes (particularly, infection with the amphibian chytrid fungus [Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis]). Other threats common to both populations include logging/wood harvesting, pollution, and climate change. The Calling population is also threatened by agricultural activities and oil and gas drilling.
The management objective is to maintain stable or increasing populations distributed throughout the species' present range in Canada.
The broad strategies and conservation measures to achieve the management objective are outlined in Section 6.2 and 6.3 of this document.
1. COSEWICNote * Species Assessment
- Date of Assessment:
- November 2012
- Common Name (population):
- Western Toad - Non-calling population
- Scientific Name:
- Anaxyrus boreas
- COSEWIC Status:
- Special Concern
- Reason for Designation:
- This species has suffered population declines and population extirpations in the southern part of its range in British Columbia, as well as in the USA. The toads are particularly sensitive to emerging skin disease caused by the amphibian chytrid fungus, which has been linked to global amphibian declines. It is relatively intolerant of urban expansion, conversion of habitat for agricultural use, and habitat fragmentation resulting from resource extraction and road networks. Life history characteristics, including infrequent breeding by females, aggregation at communal, traditionally used breeding sites, and migrations to and from breeding sites, make populations vulnerable to habitat degradation and fragmentation. The species remains widespread, but declines are suspected and projected based on known vulnerabilities and threats.
- Canadian Occurrence:
- Yukon, Northwest Territories, British Columbia, Alberta
- COSEWIC Status History:
- The species was considered a single unit and designated Special Concern in November 2002. Split into two populations in November 2012. The Non-calling population was designated Special Concern in November 2012.
- Date of Assessment:
- November 2012
- Common Name (population):
- Western Toad - Calling population
- Scientific Name:
- Anaxyrus boreas
- COSEWIC Status:
- Special Concern
- Reason for Designation:
- Almost the entire range of the calling population is within Canada. The toads are particularly sensitive to emerging skin disease caused by the amphibian chytrid fungus, which has been linked to global amphibian declines. This species is relatively intolerant of urban expansion, conversion of habitat for agricultural use, and habitat fragmentation resulting from resource extraction and road networks. Life history characteristics, including infrequent breeding by females, aggregation at communal, traditionally used breeding sites, and migrations to and from breeding sites, make populations vulnerable to habitat degradation and fragmentation. The species remains widespread throughout much of their historic range in Alberta and may be expanding their range eastwards. However, declines are suspected and projected based on known vulnerabilities and threats.
- Canadian Occurrence:
- British Columbia, Alberta
- COSEWIC Status History:
- The species was considered a single unit and designated Special Concern in November 2002. Split into two populations in November 2012. The Calling population was designated Special Concern in November 2012.
Note of COSEWIC Species Assessment
- Note *
COSEWIC (Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada)
2. Species Status Information
Status ranks for the Western Toad are listed in Table 1. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has also designated the species as "near threatened" due to declines and extirpations over parts of its distribution in the United States (IUCN 2014). COSEWIC assessed the Western Toad as Special Concern (COSEWIC 2002). It was listed under Schedule 1 of the Canadian Species at Risk Act (SARA) in 2005. COSEWIC reconfirmed its status in 2012 and divided the species into two populations or designatable units: Non-calling and Calling (COSEWIC 2012). Approximately 40% of the species' distribution is within Canada.
|Global (G) RankNote a of Table 1||National (N) RankNote a of Table 1||Sub-national (S) RankNote a of Table 1||COSEWIC Status||B.C. List||B. C. Conservation FrameworkNote c of Table 1|
|G4||N4||British Columbia: S3S4 |
Northwest Territories: S2S3
New Mexico: S1
|SC (Special Concern)||BlueNote b of Table 1||Priority 3 under Goal 1, Priority 2 under Goal 2, and Priority 4 under Goal 3|
Notes of Table 1
- Note a of Table 1
Rank 1– critically imperilled; 2– imperilled; 3- vulnerable to extirpation or extinction; 4- apparently secure; 5– secure; SNR: status not reported.
- Note b of Table 1
Includes any indigenous species or subspecies considered to be of Special Concern (formerly Vulnerable) in British Columbia. Taxa of Special Concern have characteristics that make them particularly sensitive or vulnerable to human activities or natural events. Blue-listed taxa are at risk, but are not Extirpated, Endangered or Threatened.
- Note c of Table 1
The three goals of the B.C. Conservation Framework are: 1. Contribute to global efforts for species and ecosystem conservation; 2. Prevent species and ecosystems from becoming at risk; 3. Maintain the diversity of native species and ecosystems.
3. Species Information
3.1 Species Description
The Western Toad is a member of the large cosmopolitan family Bufonidae or true toads. Much of the literature on this species refers to it as Bufo boreas, but when the genus Bufo was split (Frost et al. 2006), the species was placed into the genus Anaxyrus. In Canada, COSEWIC (2012) classified the Western Toad into two populations or designatable units; Non-calling and Calling (Figure 1). These two populations are distinguished by the presence (calling) or absence (non-calling) of a vocal sac in males and production of a true advertisement call characterized by long, high-amplitude trills (Pauly 2008). Vocalizations are also made in the Non-calling population, but are not equivalent to the high-amplitude advertisement call that distinguishes the Calling population (Pauly 2008).
The Western Toad is a robust toad with an adult body length of 55 - 145 mm (Corkran and Thoms 2006). Its colour ranges from greenish to tan, brown, grey, or black, with or without mottling; a light line down the centre of the back is usually present, but may be lacking in small toadlets. There is a pronounced oval poison gland (parotoid gland) on each cheek behind the eye and raised poison glands ("warts") on the back. The Western Toad occurs sympatrically with the superficially similar Canadian Toad (Anaxyrus hemiophrys) in eastern Alberta. The Canadian Toad is smaller (adult body length usually 70 mm or less) and has a hump (or boss) on the head between the eyes. Western Toad tadpoles are small and black, roughly 25 - 30 mm total length prior to metamorphosis (Green and Campbell 1984; Blaustein et al. 1995). For illustrations and detailed descriptions of different life stages see Russell and Bauer 2000; Jones et al. 2005; Corkran and Thoms 2006; and Matsuda et al. 2006.
3.2. Population and Distribution
3.2.1. Species Distribution
The Western Toad has a wide distribution in western North America, from Baja California to Alaska, and from the Pacific Coast to Colorado and Alberta (Figure 2). Across its range, it occurs from near sea level to elevations of at least 3355 m (NatureServe 2014). In Canada, the Western Toad occurs in British Columbia, Alberta, Yukon, and Northwest Territories (Figure 2). Most of the Canadian distribution is in British Columbia (~70%) and Alberta (~20%), with small portion in the Yukon and Northwest Territories (Figure 2). The Calling population occurs mainly to the east and the Non-calling Population to the west of the Rocky Mountains (Pauly 2008; Figure 3), but the boundary is not completely understood and will require additional study (COSEWIC 2012).
In British Columbia, the Western Toad ranges throughout most of the province, including Vancouver Island and the Haida Gwaii archipelago (Matsuda et al. 2006). The species appears to be absent from the Teslin River basin (Government of Yukon 2013) and is likely absent from extreme northeast British Columbia (COSEWIC 2012).
The range of the Western Toad extends slightly into Yukon and Northwest Territories (COSEWIC 2012). In southeast Yukon, it occurs in the southern Liard River basin, where it has been found in five geographically separated localities (Slough and Mennell 2006; Slough 2009a; Yukon CDC 2015). In southwest Northwest Territories, it occurs in the Liard River basin where it has been found in six different sites (Schock et al. 2009; Government of the Northwest Territories 2014).
In Alberta, the Western Toad ranges from the forested regions of the southwest to central and northern Alberta, and to a lesser extent into the short-grass prairie and aspen parkland (COSEWIC 2012). The distribution in northern Alberta may be more extensive than illustrated in Figure 3, which reflects limited survey effort, and few historical occurrence records (Russell and Bauer 2000; COSEWIC 2012). Surveys associated with oil and gas development and forestry activities in northern Alberta recently detected Western Toad in new areas, which could be indicative of an eastward range expansion, or simply a reflection of increased survey effort (COSEWIC 2012). If this indicates a true range expansion, the Western Toad may be replacing the Canadian Toad (Anaxyrus hemiophrys), which has declined throughout its range in Alberta (COSEWIC 2012).
3.2.2. Population Abundance and Trends
Precise global population and trend data are unavailable, but NatureServe (2014) estimates that the population is at least 100,000 adults (possibly up to 1,000,000) and has declined by up to 50% in the last 200 years (with 10-30% in the past ~18 years [i.e., 3 generations]). In the United States, the Western Toad has suffered widespread declines and disappearances (COSEWIC 2002; NatureServe 2014), partially linked to epidemic chytridiomycosis, which is caused by the pathogenic chytrid fungus Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Carey 1993; Muths et al. 2003). Populations in the southern Rocky Mountains and Sierra Nevada have experienced the most severe declines (NatureServe 2014).
Opportunistic observations and localized studies suggest that Western Toad is widespread, abundant, and persistent across a large portion of its Canadian range. However, scant information exists on population sizes or densities, and few populations have been systematically monitored to evaluate trends (COSEWIC 2012). Congregation at breeding sites and mass migrations of toadlets may give an appearance of abundance; however, tadpole and metamorph abundance is often a poor indicator of adult population size because breeding success can fluctuate dramatically and juvenile mortality is high (COSEWIC 2012). The Western Toad appears to be less abundant north of 58°N where aggregations of tadpoles and metamorphs have been reported only in the hundreds or thousands (Slough 2004; 2005; 2009a; Schock 2009) compared to elsewhere where aggregations of tens to hundreds of thousands have been reported (COSEWIC 2012).
In British Columbia, numbers appear to be declining along the south mainland coast, Vancouver Island, and in other localized areas (COSEWIC 2012) but rates of decline have not been quantified (Provincial Western Toad Working Group 2014). COSEWIC (2002) reported population declines in the Lower Fraser Valley associated with local anthropogenic habitat loss and Davis and Gregory (2003) documented the disappearance from a large wetland complex on Vancouver Island. Ohanjanian and colleagues (2006) visited 87 wetlands in the East Kootenays known historically to support Western Toads and found breeding evidence at less than a third of sites. In 2011, extant breeding populations were reported in the south coast of the mainland and Vancouver Island (Beasley unpubl. data 2011; Tayless 2011; and Wind unpubl. data 2011 in COSEWIC 2012), although the number of breeding sites is thought to have declined in the past 20 years. Wetland loss has been significant in parts of British Columbia, particularly in the Fraser and Columbia River drainages; in the South Okanagan region (part of the Columbia River drainage), ~85% of the original wetland area has been lost (Austin et al. 2008).
In Alberta, a declining trend has been observed since the 1980s by local residents (J. Russell, pers. comm. 2013) and biologists (Wallis et al. 2002) in the region of Waterton Lakes National Park. Occupancy surveys of breeding sites in Waterton Lakes National Park between 1998 and 2015 showed yearly fluctuations, with an increasing trend being observed in foothills parkland and montane ecoregions since 2014 (Johnston and Price 2015). Western Toads were known to breed in Banff National Park from 1992-2008. Data collected during pitfall trapping at six monitoring sites in Alberta from 1997 to 2008 indicated that Western Toads experienced wide fluctuations in relative abundance (Eaton and Hiltz 2012). Adults showed increasing trends in abundance at two sites, a decreasing trend at one site, and no significant findings at three sites. Other reports cited by COSEWIC (2012) (i.e., Eaves 2004; Schank 2008) indicated that Western Toad populations are either stable or increasing in parts of Alberta. It should be noted that declines or disappearances could have gone unnoticed in parts of the province with limited survey efforts (Government of Alberta, Sustainable Resource Development unpubl. 2010). Recent detections in central Alberta and the lower Athabasca Region bring the known range further east and north than previously thought, but it is unclear whether those new records represent range expansion or are simply a reflection of increased survey effort associated with resource development (C. Paszkowski, pers. comm. 2012 in COSEWIC 2012).
The population trends of Western Toads at the northern limits of their distribution in Yukon, Northwest Territories, and extreme northern British Columbia are unknown. The population appears to have declined at a monitoring site in northwestern British Columbia, where no breeding was observed for three consecutive years (from 2007-09; Slough 2009b).
3.3. Needs of the Western Toad
3.3.1. Biological Needs
The Western Toad occurs in a wide range of habitats (COSEWIC 2002) and has a biphasic life cycle consisting of aquatic eggs and tadpoles and terrestrial juveniles and adults. It requires suitable water bodies for breeding, and terrestrial habitats for foraging and hibernation, as well as connectivity among seasonally used habitats (COSEWIC 2012).
In spring, the Western Toad breeds in a variety of temporary and permanent ponds and shallow littoral zones of lakes, often with a sandy or silty bottom substrate (COSEWIC 2002, 2012). Permanent waterbodies with higher daytime temperatures (but still high dissolved oxygen concentrations) are required to promote tadpole growth (Ultsch et al. 1999; COSEWIC 2012). In the northern portion of their Canadian range, the Western Toad breeds in beaver ponds (Slough and Mennell 2006; Stevens et al. 2006), shallow stream deltas on lakes, geothermal springs, and small water bodies in gravel quarry sites (Schock 2009; Slough 2009a).
The Western Toad gathers at breeding sites to complete mating and egg-laying during a 1-2 week period in spring. In south-central British Columbia, this is typically in late April to May and coincides with the daily minimum and maximum temperatures reaching 0 °C and 10°C, respectively (Gyug 1996). The Western Toad shows some fidelity to traditional breeding sites (Bull and Carey 2008) resulting in the selection of only one or a few of the potential breeding sites in a relatively large area (Slough 2004). The female lays a clutch of thousands of eggs, often laid communally with other females. Tadpoles often form large, dense aggregations in shallow, warm water. They develop rapidly and metamorphose in the summer within three months of egg-laying (Stebbins 1951).
In the summer, adults and juveniles forage in forests and forest openings, shrubby areas, marshes, and other open and wooded habitats, and may be found several kilometers away from water bodies (COSEWIC 2002). Browne and Paszkowski (2014) found Western Toads more often in open habitat (especially wet shrubland) than predicted by habitat availability, and this was most evident during the foraging season.
Characteristics of hibernation habitats are not well known. In Alberta, hibernation sites were located in natural habitats, especially in coniferous forest stands, as opposed to human-modified or open habitats (Browne 2010). Other recent research found Western Toads hibernating in pre-existing cavities, such as rodent burrows, squirrel middens, or other subterranean crevices (Browne and Paszkowski 2010a). Sites must be below the frost line, as the Western Toad is intolerant of freezing, and must contain sufficient moisture to prevent desiccation (COSEWIC 2012). Most northern records come from valleys that receive consistently early, high snowfall accumulations (Cook 1977; Mennell 1997). In one Alberta study, 68% of Western Toads hibernated communally (Browne and Paszkowski 2010b).
Newly-transformed Western Toads form large, dense, post-metamorphic aggregations along shorelines and migrate en masse towards terrestrial foraging areas. Terrestrial movements of the Western Toad vary with the configuration and quality of seasonal habitats. On Vancouver Island (Davis 2000) and in east-central Alberta (Browne 2010), most Western Toads used terrestrial habitats within 2 km of breeding sites, although much longer movements have occasionally been reported suggesting that hibernation sites may be limiting. In Alberta, movements to reach upland hibernation sites were greater than those associated with foraging areas (Browne 2010). Hibernation sites have been found 146-1936 m (Browne and Paszkowski 2010b) and 180-6230 m (Bull 2006) from breeding sites in Alberta and Oregon, respectively.
The Western Toad is thought to exist as a series of relatively independent subpopulations within a region (Davis 2002), but few data are available on dispersal, movements among breeding sites, and population dynamics.
3.3.2. Limiting Factors
Extensive movements in terrestrial habitats and long distances between breeding, hibernation, and foraging areas (Davis 2002) increase the vulnerability of Western Toads in fragmented habitats (COSEWIC 2002). Other biological factors that increase their vulnerability include communal hibernation and egg-laying (Provincial Western Toad Working Group 2014), high breeding site fidelity (Davis 2000), and the formation of large post-metamorphic aggregations (Livo 1998). Wide fluctuations between years in breeding success also increase the vulnerability of populations to local extirpation (Marsh and Trenham 2001). The species' reliance on high adult survival to sustain populations through periods of poor reproductive success means that threats that impact adult survival can have particularly pronounced effects (COSEWIC 2002).
Threats are defined as the proximate activities or processes that have caused, are causing, or may cause in the future the destruction, degradation, and/or impairment of the entity being assessed (population, species, community, or ecosystem) in the area of interest (global, national, or subnational) (adapted from Salafsky et al. 2008). For purposes of threat assessment, only present and future threats are consideredFootnote 1. Threats presented here do not include limiting factorsFootnote 2, which are presented in Section 3.3.2.
4.1. Threat Assessment
The Western Toad threat assessment is based on the IUCN-CMP (World Conservation Union–Conservation Measures Partnership) unified threats classification system. Threats are defined as the proximate activities or processes that have caused, are causing, or may cause in the future the destruction, degradation, and/or impairment of the entity being assessed (population, species, community, or ecosystem) in the area of interest (global, national, or subnational). Limiting factors are not considered during this assessment process. Historical threats, indirect or cumulative effects of the threats, or any other relevant information that would help understand the nature of the threats are presented in the Description of Threats section. Threats for the Western Toad were assessed for the entire Canadian range (Non-calling population: Table 2, and Calling population: Table 3).
|Threat||Threat description||ImpactNote d of Table 3||ScopeNote e of Table 3||SeverityNote f of Table 3||TimingNote g of Table 3|
|1||Residential & commercial development||Negligible||Negligible||Extreme||High|
|1.1||Housing & urban areas||Negligible||Negligible||Extreme||High|
|1.2||Commercial & industrial areas||Negligible||Negligible||Extreme||High|
|1.3||Tourism & recreation areas||Negligible||Negligible||Moderate||High|
|2||Agriculture & aquaculture||Low||Restricted||Serious - Moderate||High|
|2.1||Annual & perennial non-timber crops||Low||Restricted||Serious - Moderate||High|
|3||Energy production & mining||Low||Restricted||Serious||High|
|3.1||Oil & gas drilling||Low||Restricted||Serious||High|
|3.2||Mining & quarrying||Negligible||Negligible - Restricted||Serious||High|
|4||Transportation & service corridors||Medium - Low||Restricted - Small||Extreme - Moderate||High|
|4.1||Roads & railroads||Medium - Low||Restricted - Small||Extreme - Moderate||High|
|4.2||Utility & service lines||Low||Small||Slight||High|
|5||Biological resource use||Low||Small||Moderate||High|
|5.3||Logging & wood harvesting||Low||Small||Moderate||High|
|6||Human intrusions & disturbance||Negligible||Negligible||Slight||High|
|7||Natural system modifications||Negligible||Negligible||Moderate||High|
|7.1||Fire & fire suppression||Negligible||Negligible||Moderate||High|
|7.2||Dams & water management/use||Negligible||Negligible||Slight||High|
|7.3||Other ecosystem modifications||Negligible||Negligible||Slight||High|
|8||Invasive & other problematic species & genes||Medium - Low||Pervasive||Moderate -Slight||High|
|8.1||Invasive non-native/alien species||Medium - Low||Pervasive||Moderate -Slight||High|
|9||Pollution||Low||Restricted - Small||Moderate - Slight||High|
|9.1||Household sewage & urban water waste||Negligible||Negligible||Slight||High|
|9.2||Industrial & military effluents||Low||Small||Slight||High|
|9.3||Agricultural & forestry effluents||Low||Small||Slight||High|
|9.4||Garbage & solid waste||Negligible||Negligible||Slight||High|
|11||Climate change & severe weather||Low||Small||Moderate||High|
Notes of Table 2 and 3
- Note d of Table 2 and 3
Impact - The degree to which a species is observed, inferred, or suspected to be directly or indirectly threatened in the area of interest. The impact of each threat is based on Severity and Scope rating and considers only present and future threats. Threat impact reflects a reduction of a species population or decline/degradation of the area of an ecosystem. The median rate of population reduction or area decline for each combination of scope and severity corresponds to the following classes of threat impact: Very High (75% declines), High (40%), Medium (15%), and Low (3%). Unknown: used when impact cannot be determined (e.g., if values for either scope or severity are unknown); Not Calculated: impact not calculated as threat is outside the assessment timeframe (e.g., timing is insignificant/negligible or low as threat is only considered to be in the past); Negligible: when scope or severity is negligible; Not a Threat: when severity is scored as neutral or potential benefit.
- Note e of of Table 2 and 3
Scope - Proportion of the species that can reasonably be expected to be affected by the threat within 10 years. Usually measured as a proportion of the species' population in the area of interest. (Pervasive = 71-100%; Large = 31-70%; Restricted = 11-30%; Small = 1-10%; Negligible = < 1%).
- Note f of of Table 2 and 3
Severity - Within the scope, the level of damage to the species from the threat that can reasonably be expected to be affected by the threat within an 18-year or three-generation timeframe. For this species a generation time of 6 years (COSEWIC 2012) was used resulting in severity being scored over an 18-year timeframe. Usually measured as the degree of reduction of the species' population. (Extreme = 71-100%; Serious 31-70%; Moderate = 11-30%; Slight = 1-10%; Negligible < 1%; Neutral or Potential Benefit = 0%).
- Note g of of Table 2 and 3
Timing - High = continuing; Moderate = only in the future (could happen in the short term [< 10 years or 3 generations]) or now suspended (could come back in the short term); Low = only in the future (could happen in the long term) or now suspended (could come back in the long term); Insignificant/Negligible = only in the past and unlikely to return, or no direct effect but limiting.
4.2 Description of Threats
The overall threat impact for this species is Medium-High and High for the Non-calling and Calling populations, respectively. This overall impact considers the cumulative impacts of all threats identified for each population (IUCN-CMP 2006). Transportation and service corridors and invasive and other problematic species and genes are the most significant threats for both populations. Energy production and mining and agriculture and aquaculture are additional threats for the Calling population. Details are discussed below for threats that are Low impact or greater.
IUCN-CMP Threat 2. Agriculture & Aquaculture (Low Impact: Calling Population)
Threat 2.1- Annual & perennial non-timber crops
Conversion of wetlands to agricultural land or intensification of agricultural practices can have serious effects on the Western Toad through loss or temporary destruction of wetland and upland foraging/dispersal/hibernation habitat (COSEWIC 2002) and mortality of dispersing/foraging toads by machinery. Irrigation may also reduce the suitability of aquatic breeding habitats through reducing water levels in wetlands (due to ground water diversions/water table draw down) or through increasing their salinity (Eaves 2004; Podmore 2007). Agricultural lands are expanding in the Aspen Parklands in central Alberta (World Wildlife Fund 2014). Although the Western Toad may use some types of cultivated areas for foraging, these uniform habitats are unlikely to provide for seasonal needs of the Western Toad, including hibernation sites (Browne 2010).
IUCN-CMP Threat 3. Energy Production & Mining (Low Impact: Calling Population)
Threat 3.1 – Oil & gas drilling
Oil and gas exploration and development disturbs habitat of the Western Toad via ecosystem conversion, fragmentation, and environmental contamination (for impacts of associated roads and transportation infrastructure see IUCN-CMP threat #4). The oil and gas industry is most active in northeast British Columbia and north central to northern Alberta, overlapping portions of the Western Toad's range, particularly the Calling population (Austin et al. 2008). Light and noise pollution from natural gas production negatively impacts the Calling population (COSEWIC 2012).
However, the footprint is relatively small relative to the range of the species, so the overall impact is predicted to be low.
IUCN-CMP Threat 4. Transportation & Service Corridors (Medium - Low Impact: Non-calling and Calling Population)
Threat 4.1 – Roads & railroads
Roads and other transportation corridors are a threat, particularly those close to breeding sites in developed areas of British Columbia and Alberta. Not only do vehicles kill Western Toads crossing roads, but road construction results in a loss of woodland habitat and creates barriers to dispersal. Roads alter wetland hydrology causing hydroperiods to be out of sync with the needs of amphibians. A negative association between abundance of aquatic-breeding amphibians and traffic volumes can be attributed primarily to road kill (Fahrig et al. 1995; Eigenbrod et al. 2008). The Western Toad often moves relatively long distances between foraging, hibernating, and breeding sites, and hence is more susceptible to road mortality than more sedentary amphibians (Carr and Fahrig 2001). Although many juvenile Western Toads may be vulnerable to road mortality during mass migration from natal sites (Carr and Fahrig 2001), mortality of mature females can have a larger impact on the population (P. Govindarajulu pers. comm. 2015). Adverse effects are most severe on well-used highways, but problem areas may exist on networks of logging, oil and gas development, and mining roads that are expanding with increased resource extraction in northern parts of the species' range in British Columbia, Alberta and Northwest Territories. Mortality from vehicles is not restricted to roads; in Northwest Territories all-terrain-vehicle tracks intersect breeding ponds (R. Gau, pers. comm. 2011).
Beaver control is used to prevent road flooding and can result in loss and deterioration of beaver ponds, which are used by Western Toad as breeding habitat (Stevens et al. 2007). Irrigation ponds and borrow pits created during road construction act as population sinks for Western Toad because they provide poor larval habitat (Stevens et al. 2006).
Threat 4.2 Utility & service lines
Seismic lines and pipelines associated with the oil and gas industry are prevalent in parts of the Western Toad range, particularly in northeastern British Columbia and north central and northern Alberta (primarily affecting the Calling population). Electrical transmission lines also intersect suitable habitat throughout the species' range. New construction of utility/service lines/corridors will impact Western Toad through habitat loss, and ongoing operation/maintenance of existing infrastructure (e.g., routine vegetation maintenance along rights-of-way) can disturb or harm dispersing/foraging individuals. However, the footprint is relatively small relative to the range of the species (e.g., pipeline footprints represent only 1.1% of the area of Alberta; Alberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute 2012), so the overall impact is predicted to be low.
IUCN-CMP Threat 5. Biological Resource Use (Low Impact: Non-calling and Calling Population)
Threat 5.3 – Logging & wood harvesting
The Western Toad is relatively tolerant of logging, but it is unclear what the long-term effects of forest harvesting might be on population dynamics. The increased proportion of closed canopy, young second-growth stands could decrease suitable toad habitat over the long term, although toads preferentially used recent clearcuts on Vancouver Island (Davis 2000). The major impact of forest harvesting on pond breeding amphibians might be the creation of breeding ponds in clearcuts that act as population sinks due to short hydroperiods (Gyug 1996).
IUCN-CMP Threat 8. Invasive & Other Problematic Species & Genes (Medium - Low Impact: Non-calling and Calling Population)
Threat 8.1- Invasive non-native/alien species
Epidemic diseases, particularly chytridiomycosis caused by the fungus Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis, threaten the Western Toad throughout its Canadian range (COSEWIC 2012). Globally, precipitous declines and extirpations of amphibians and the decline of the Western Toad in the United States have been linked to chytridiomycosis (Carey 1993; Daszak et al. 1999; Muths et al. 2003). The fungus is widely distributed within the Western Toad's Canadian range (Richardson et al. 2014): in Alberta at 7 of 15 sites surveyed (D. Prescott, pers. comm. in COSEWIC 2012); in the Northwest Territories in the Fort Liard area (Schock et al. 2010); and throughout British Columbia (Adams et al. 2007; Deguise and Richardson 2009a; Slough 2009b). There are a few reports of population declines in Canada associated with the presence of the fungus (COSEWIC 2012), but even mass mortalities can easily escape detection if populations are not specifically monitored. In Atlin (northwestern British Columbia), chytridiomycosis was present in a monitored population, and might have led to the extirpation of that population (Slough 2009b). In other studies, however, Western Toads that tested positive for B. dendrobatidis showed no signs of disease (Deguise and Richardson 2009a; Schock et al. 2010). It is possible that unknown cofactors need to be present for the fungi to become pathogenic (Carey 1993), or that populations stressed by habitat degradation and/or increased UV-B light exposure may be more susceptible to infection (COSEWIC 2002). As humans continue to encroach on Western Toad habitats and open up new areas for development and resource extraction, the potential for introducing chytrid fungi and other pathogens increases. Disease transmission by sport fishers, researchers, and others who enter water at breeding sites and travel from site to site is of concern, if equipment is not properly cleaned (British Columbia Ministry of Environment 2008; Mendez et al. 2008; Vredenburg et al. 2010).
Ranavirus (Family: Iridoviridae) is a potential threat to the Western Toad, having caused infection and mortality in captivity and the wild (Miller et al. 2011). The distribution of ranavirus overlaps the southwest NWT where it was detected in Wood Frogs but not in Western Toads or Boreal Chorus Frogs (Schock 2009; Schock et al. 2010). No mass mortality events directly attributed to ranavirus have been documented in British Columbia nor is there any information on the prevalence of ranavirus in Western Toads in British Columbia (Govindarajulu 2007). There is less evidence for mass mortalities via ranavirus than via Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Green et al. 2002; Daszak et al. 2003 in Govindarajulu 2007.)
COSEWIC (2002; 2012) identified the introduction of sport fish to previously fishless lakes as an important threat to the Western Toad. This practice is widespread through most of the species' Canadian range. Introduced fish threaten the Western Toad primarily through potential disease transmission rather than through predation, as adult and tadpole Western Toads are largely unpalatable to fish. Fish transmit pathogens, such as the water mould (Saprolegnia sp.), to amphibians (Kiesecker et al. 2001), but their role in chytrid transmission is unknown.
The spread of introduced species, such as Bullfrogs (Lithobates catesbeianus) in southwestern British Columbia, and increased abundance of predators such as raccoons (Procyon lotor), black and Norway rats (Rattus spp.), and common ravens (Corvus corax) in human modified landscapes are a threat to the Western Toad in localized areas (COSEWIC 2002; 2012). Predators such as raccoons and rats have been introduced to Haida Gwaii (COSEWIC 2002) and have been documented to be preying on Western Toads (Burles et al. 2004; C. Bergman, pers. comm.)
IUCN-CMP Threat 9. Pollution (Low Impact: Non-calling and Calling Population)
Threats 9.2 – Industrial & military effluents, 9.3 – Agriculture & forestry effluents, and 9.5 – Airborne pollutants
Scant research has been undertaken on the effects of specific contaminants on the Western Toad. Amphibians are vulnerable to environmental contaminants including pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, and road salt that can impose a variety of effects including loss of prey base (Relyea and Diecks 2008), immunosuppression (Fontenot et al.1994), developmental abnormalities (Kiesecker 2002; Hayes 2004; Sanzo and Hecnar 2005), and mortality (Harfenist et al.1989; Rouse et al. 1999; Hatch et al. 2001).
Contaminants from agricultural and urban sources impact Western Toad breeding sites in the South coast region and southern interior of British Columbia (Provincial Western Toad Working Group 2014). Glyphosate herbicides used for conifer release in British Columbia produce lethal and sublethal effects on amphibians (Govindarajulu 2008). Western Toads are exposed to heavy metals in tailings ponds (Brinkman 1998) and through aerial deposition (COSEWIC 2012). Exposure to heavy metals including zinc, cadmium, and copper increases mortality and alters growth rates of amphibians, indirectly reducing survival (Bridges 2000; Brinkman 1998; Glooschenko et al. 1992). Acidification of wetlands from airborne sulphur associated with oil and gas extraction in northeast British Columbia and Alberta can disrupt development (Austin et al. 2008). Heavy metals and UV-B radiation may act synergistically with other environmental stressors and depress the immune system of the Western Toad, making them vulnerable to pathogens (Carey 1993) and deformities (Worrest and Kimeldorf 1975).
Impacts of various pollutants can be locally significant, but over the entire range of the two populations, the overall impact is predicted to be low.
IUCN-CMP 11. Climate Change & Severe Weather (Low Impact: Non-calling and Calling Population)
Threat 11.2 – Droughts
Increased frequency and duration of droughts predicted under climate change scenarios (IPCC 2014) can decrease the persistence of smaller wetlands used for breeding, connectivity and micro-sites used for rehydration (Provincial Western Toad Working Group 2011). Forest habitats may be lost as wildfires become more frequent (Guscio et al. 2008).
Climate change impacts may become more significant in the future, but over the next 18 years (3 generations), the impact is predicted to remain low.
5. Management Objective
The management objective for the Western Toad is to maintain stable or increasing populations distributed throughout the species' present range in Canada.
Rationale for management objective
The Western Toad is widespread throughout much of western Canada and the numbers of localities and individuals are sufficiently large to maintain viability of the species in Canada, provided that threats are addressed and further declines are prevented. Quantifying population and habitat targets is not feasible at this time due to lack of adequate baseline information.
6. Broad Strategies and Conservation Measures
6.1. Actions Already Completed or Currently Underway
- A British Columbia management plan is complete (Provincial Western Toad Working Group 2014).
- Best Management Practices for amphibians and reptiles in urban and rural areas have been prepared (Ovaska et al. 2004)
- Research priorities for the Western Toad in British Columbia have been identified (Davis 2002).
- A Yukon amphibian management plan, including the Western Toad, is complete (Government of Yukon 2013).
- A Northwest Territories management plan for amphibians, including the Western Toad, is currently being developed (J. Wilson, pers. comm. 2015).
Surveys and monitoring:
- The Alberta Volunteer Amphibian Monitoring Program (AVAMP) was initiated in 1992 and is run by the Alberta Conservation Association (K. Kendell, pers. comm. 2014). In partnership with a local naturalist group, Alberta Conservation Association runs a boreal toad monitoring project in Crowsnest Pass, southwestern Alberta (K. Kendall, pers. comm. 2014). All AVAMP data is compiled and submitted to Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Developmentand entered into the Fish and Wildlife Management Information System database (K. Kendall, pers. comm. 2014). AVAMP is developing web-based mapping products to display and disseminate volunteer-collected data from Alberta (K. Kendall, pers. comm. 2014).
- The Researching Amphibian Numbers in Alberta (RANA project) was operational 1997-2008 and included intensive monitoring of at least four sites within the Western Toad's range (Government of Alberta, Environment and Sustainable Resource Development 2009; L. Wilkinson, pers. comm. 2010). Two of these sites still receive limited monitoring by volunteers and Government of Alberta staff (L. Wilkinson, pers. comm. 2014). Western Toads were sampled for chytrid fungus infection at 15 sites throughout their Alberta range in 2008 (D. Prescott, pers. comm. 2011).
- Banff National Park has extensive survey data on all herptiles, including Western Toad, from 1992 to 2006 (e.g., McIvor and McIvor 2006), and plans are underway to initiate an amphibian monitoring program for the park in 2016 (C. Carli pers. comm. 2015). An amphibian monitoring program in Jasper National Park, initiated in 2004, provides data on Western Toad populations in poorly known, high-elevation habitats (Brenda Shepherd, pers. comm. 2010). In Wood Buffalo National Park, inventories using automated recorders and opportunistic visits have not yielded any Western Toad records (R. Kindopp, pers. comm. 2011). In Waterton Lakes National Park, monitoring of sub-alpine, montane and foothills parkland has been ongoing since 1993 (Johnson 2014). Limited sampling occurred in Banff National Park beginning in 2006 but a large scale condition monitoring program will be launched in 2016 to assess the health of montane amphibian habitats.
- Inventories were undertaken in Mount Revelstoke and Glacier National Parks in 2003 and 2004, and an amphibian monitoring program begun in 2009 along the Trans-Canada Highway in those parks provides data from valley bottom to subalpine ponds and lakes (L. Larson, pers. comm. 2011). Similar monitoring programs were initiated in Kootenay National Park in 2009 and Yoho National Park in 2010 (D. Peterson, pers. comm. 2011). Testing for presence of chytrid fungus also occurred at a sample of Kootenay National Park sites in 2010. Since 2005, Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve has been annually monitoring Western Toad populations at five known breeding sites (H. Stewart, pers. comm. 2015). During the same surveys, presence of non-native amphibians is recorded and water samples are taken for water quality.
- A draft monitoring program for Western Toads in British Columbia has been designed (Wind 2007) and is being tested (E. Wind, pers. comm. 2010).
- Distribution records for the province have been collated and mapped (P. Govindarajulu, pers. comm. 2010).
- The British Columbia Frogwatch program (British Columbia Ministry of Environment) includes a database and website for reporting occurrence records of amphibians (Surveillance for Amphibian Mass Mortalities; SAMM).
- Amphibian inventories have been conducted in many parts of the province within the past 15 years (COSEWIC 2002), and a study of the distribution of chytrid fungus in British Columbia amphibians has been completed (Govindarajulu et al. 2013).
- A long term pond-breeding amphibian monitoring program is in development for Mount Revelstoke and Glacier National Parks. Repeat surveys at core monitoring sites were completed in 2009 and 2010 (Provincial Western Toad Working Group 2014).
- Wind and Wilmott (2012) identified known breeding sites on Vancouver Island and documented road mortality sites and mitigation efforts in BC.
- A multi-year project investigating winter movement patterns and habitat requirements including characterization and spatial location of Western Toad hibernacula is underway on south Vancouver Island (E. Wind in prep).
- Amphibian surveys have been conducted from 1973 - 2010 (Slough and Mennell 2006; Slough 2009b; S. Cannings, pers. comm. 2010).
- Chytrid fungus surveys have been conducted in northern British Columbia and southeast Yukon (Slough 2009b). Limited monitoring of known sites is taking place in northwestern British Columbia and southeastern Yukon, including the use of eDNA (S. Cannings pers. comm. 2014). These data are housed by the Yukon Conservation Data Centre, which actively comments on development proposals that may affect Western Toad habitat.
- Amphibian population and pathogen surveys were conducted in the Sahtu and Dehcho regions in 2007 and 2008 (Schock 2009; Schock et al. 2010).
- In Nahanni National Park, inventories using automated recorders and opportunistic visits have not yielded any Western Toad records (D. Tate, pers. comm. 2011).
- The Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Government of the Northwest Territories, maintains a database of all recorded occurrences of Western Toad from the Northwest Territories.
- University of Alberta studies include projects on amphibian habitat associations (Eaves 2004; Macdonald et al. 2006; Stevens et al. 2007; Browne 2010), terrestrial movements of the Western Toad (Browne 2010) and use of Automated Recording Units (ARUs) for amphibian monitoring (C. Paszkowski, pers. comm. 2014).
- Habitat use and movements have been studied in relation to resource extraction by Innovates - Technology Futures (B. Eaton, pers. comm. 2010).
- The ecology and movements of Western Toads have been studied on Vancouver Island (Davis 2000) and in the lower Fraser Valley/*8/ (Deguise and Richardson 2009b).
- Larval growth and development in relation to sedimentation have been studied (Wood and Richardson 2009).
- The effects of mechanical forest thinning and fire on amphibians were studied at wetlands in Banff National Park, 2004-2008 (Lepitzki and Lepitzki 2003; Lepitzki and Lepitzki 2007; Maxcy and Symes 2009).
- Alberta Conservation Association and Government of Yukon are piloting the use of eDNA sampling to detect amphibian presence in freshwater wetlands (C. Paszkowski, pers. comm. 2014, B. Bennett, pers. comm. 2015).
Species and population management:
Bullfrog management activities are ongoing in the Okanagan and Vancouver Island (B.C.) (P. Govindarajulu, pers. comm., 2010 in Provincial Western Toad Working Group 2014).
6.2. Broad Strategies
The following broad strategies will be used to achieve the management objective for the Western Toad:
- Identify and secure regionally important breeding sites and terrestrial habitats.
- Mitigate threats to important breeding sites and surrounding terrestrial habitats.
- Undertake research to fill key knowledge gaps.
- Establish regionally based monitoring programs to assess population status and trends.
- Conduct outreach and stewardship.
6.3. Conservation Measures
|Broad Strategy||Conservation Measure||PriorityNote h of Table 4||Threats or concerns addressed||TimelineNote i of Table 4|
|1. Identify and secure regionally important breeding sites and terrestrial habitats||Using existing data and new surveys, identify and prioritize regionally important breeding sites and terrestrial habitats.||High||All||2017-2019|
|1. Identify and secure regionally important breeding sites and terrestrial habitats||Secure regionally important breeding sites and terrestrial habitats, according to priority, by protectingc areas from the impacts of development, resource extraction and intensive human uses, and from the introduction of alien invasive species.||High||All||ongoing|
|2. Mitigate threats to important breeding sites and surrounding terrestrial habitats||Control spread of disease and invasive species among breeding sites; establish hygiene protocols and outreach for all those who work and recreate in and around breeding sites.||High||8.1 – invasive non-native/alien species|
11 – climate change
|2. Mitigate threats to important breeding sites and surrounding terrestrial habitats||Avoid drainage of wetlands in areas occupied by the species.||High||2.1 – annual & perennial non-timber crops|
3.1 – oil & gas drilling
4.1 – roads & railroads
5.3 – logging & wood harvesting
|2. Mitigate threats to important breeding sites and surrounding terrestrial habitats||Develop and implement mitigation measures and Best Management Practices associated with agriculture, oil and gas/mining, logging, and sport-fishing.||Medium||2.1 – annual & perennial non-timber crops|
3.1 – oil & gas drilling
4.1 – roads & railroads
5.3 – logging & wood harvesting
8.1 – invasive non-native/alien species
|2. Mitigate threats to important breeding sites and surrounding terrestrial habitats||Mitigate road mortality and barriers to movements along transportation corridors.||Medium||4.1 – roads & railroads||2016-2020|
|3. Undertake research to fill key knowledge gaps||Investigate factors that trigger epidemics due to chytrid fungus and other amphibian pathogens. Define current range/extent of the fungus and predicted effects of climate change.||High||8.1 – invasive non-native/alien species||2016-2024|
|3. Undertake research to fill key knowledge gaps||Investigate mechanisms of spread of pathogens, including the role of sport fish introductions.||Medium||8.1 – invasive non-native/alien species||2016-2019|
|3. Undertake research to fill key knowledge gaps||Study metapopulation dynamics, movements, and dispersal patterns in fragmented landscapes.||Medium||Knowledge gaps||2016-2019|
|3. Undertake research to fill key knowledge gaps||Study terrestrial habitat use and identify features of hibernation sites in various landscapes; develop habitat models for mapping.||Low||Knowledge gaps||ongoing|
|3. Undertake research to fill key knowledge gaps||Clarify threats in relation to land uses, including impacts of agriculture, forestry, and energy production.||Low||Knowledge gaps||2016-2024|
|3. Undertake research to fill key knowledge gaps||Clarify the distribution of Calling and Non-calling Populations in Canada and extent of species diversity||Low||Knowledge gaps||ongoing|
|4. Establish regionally based monitoring programs to assess population status and trends||Develop monitoring methods including analysis of existing amphibian monitoring programs.||High||Knowledge gaps||2016|
|4. Establish regionally based monitoring programs to assess population status and trends||Initiate population monitoring in strategic locations across the species' Canadian range.||High||Knowledge gaps||2016-2017|
|5. Conduct outreach and stewardship||Conduct targeted outreach (meetings, workshops, site visits and assessments) where important habitats occur on private lands or are under resource use leases on Crown lands.||Medium||2.1 – annual & perennial non-timber crops|
4.1 – roads & railroads
5.3 – logging & wood harvesting
8.1 – invasive non-native/alien species
9 - pollution
|5. Conduct outreach and stewardship||Effectively share information on inventory and management actions; this may include brochure(s), an interactive website, etc.||Medium||2.1 – annual & perennial non-timber crops|
4.1 – roads & railroads
5.3 – logging & wood harvesting
8.1 – invasive non-native/alien species
9 - pollution
Notes of Table 4
- Note h of Table 4
"Priority" reflects the degree to which the measure contributes directly to the conservation of the species or is an essential precursor to a measure that contributes to the conservation of the species. High priority measures are considered those most likely to have an immediate and/or direct influence on attaining the management objective for the species. Medium priority measures may have a less immediate or less direct influence on reaching the management objective, but are still important for the management of the population. Low priority conservation measures will likely have an indirect or gradual influence on reaching the management objective, but are considered important contributions to the knowledge base and/or public involvement and acceptance of the species.
- Note i of Table 4/dt>
The time-line is approximate--implementation of this management plan is subject to appropriations, priorities, and budgetary constraints of the participating jurisdictions and organizations.
7. Measuring Progress
The performance indicator presented below provides a way to define and measure progress toward achieving the management objective:
Stable or increasing Western Toad populations have been maintained throughout the species' present range in Canada.
The following targets will be used to gauge progress until there is sufficient baseline information to ensure the management objective is reached:
- The highest priority breeding sites have been secured.
- Best Management Practices have been developed and are actively used (e.g., appropriate hygiene measures have been developed and are in place to avoid spreading amphibian diseases among water bodies).
- Research has been undertaken on factors that trigger epidemics of chytrid fungus (and other important amphibian pathogens) and their mechanisms of spread; and has been initiated on other threats, metapopulation dynamics, and habitat use.
- Population monitoring programs have been initiated in strategic locations across the species' range.
- Outreach has been implemented to target owners/managers of important habitats on private and leased lands.
Adams, M. J., S. Galvan, D. Reinitz, R. A. Cole, S. Pyare, M. Hahr and P. Govindarajulu. 2007. Incidence of the fungus Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis in amphibian populations along the northwest coast of North America. Herpetological Review 38: 430-431.
Alaska Department of Fish and Game. 2006. Native amphibians – introduction. Appendix 4, pp. 127-145, in Our Wealth Maintained: a strategy for conserving Alaska's diverse wildlife and fish resources. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Juneau, Alaska. xviii + 824 pp.
Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development. 2014. Alberta Conservation Information Management System. [accessed November 2014].
Austin, M. A., D. A. Buffett, D. J. Nicolson, G. G. E. Scudder, and V. Stevens (eds.). 2008. Taking nature's pulse: the status of biodiversity in British Columbia. Biodiversity BC, Victoria, B.C. 268 pp. Website: Bio Diversity BC [accessed 25 February 2012].
Beasley, B., unpubl. data. 2011. Coastal Ecologist, Association of Wetland Stewards for Clayoquot and Barkley Sounds, Ucluelet, British Columbia .
Blaustein, A. R., J. J. Beatty, D. H. Olson, and R. M. Storm. 1995. The biology of amphibians and reptiles in old-growth forests in the Pacific Northwest. PNW-GTR-337. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Portland, Oregon.
Bridges, C.M. 2000. Long-term effects of pesticide exposure at various life stages of the southern Leopard frog (Rana sphenocephala). Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 39: 91-96.
Brinkman, S. 1998. Boreal toad toxicology studies. Pp. 83-114, in M. S. Jones, J. P. Goettl, K. L. Scherff-Norris, S. Brinkman, L. J. Livo, and A. M. Goebel (eds.). Boreal toad research progress report 1995-1997. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins, Colorado.
British Columbia Conservation Data Centre. 2014. Species and Ecosystems Explorer. B.C. Ministry of Environment, Victoria, B.C. [accessed November 2014].
B.C. Ministry of Environment. 2010. Conservation framework. B.C. Min. Environ., Victoria, BC. [Accessed November 2014]
British Columbia Ministry of Environment. 2008. Standard operating procedures: Hygiene protocols for amphibian fieldwork, 2008. Victoria, British Columbia. 8 pp.
Browne, C. 2010. Habitat use of the Western Toad in north-central Alberta and the influence of scale. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta.
Browne, C.L. and C. Paszkowski 2014. The Influence of Habitat Composition, Season and Gender on Habitat Selection by Western Toads (Anaxyrus boreas) Herpetological Conservervation and Biology 9(2): 417-427.
Browne, C. L., and C. A. Paszkowski. 2010a. Hibernation sites of western toads (Anaxyrus boreas): characterization and management implications. Herpetological Conservation and Biology 5: 49-63.
Browne, C. L., and C. A. Paszkowski. 2010b. Factors affecting the timing of movements to hibernation sites by western toads (Anaxyrus boreas). Herpetologica 66: 250-258.
Bull, E. L. 2006. Sexual differences in the ecology and habitat selection of western toads (Bufo boreas) in northeastern Oregon. Herpetological Conservation and Biology 1: 27-38.
Bull, E. L., and C. Carey. 2008. Breeding frequency of western toads (Bufo boreas) in northeastern Oregon. Herpetological Conservation and Biology 3: 282-288.
Burles, D.W., A.G. Edie, and P.M. Bartier. 2004. Native land mammals and amphibian of Haida Gwaii with management implications for Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve and Haida Heritage Site. Parks Canada Technical reports in Ecosystem Science: Report #40. Queen Charlotte City, British Columbia.
Carey, C. 1993. Hypothesis concerning the causes of the disappearance of boreal toads from the mountains of Colorado. Conservation Biology 7: 355-362.
Carr, L. W. and L. Fahrig. 2001. Effect of road traffic on two amphibian species of differing vagility. Conservation Biology 15: 1071-1078.
Cook, F. R. 1977. Records of the boreal toad from the Yukon and northern British Columbia. The Canadian Field Naturalist 91: 185-186.
Corkran, C. and C. Thoms. 2006. Amphibians of Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia. A Field Identification Guide - Revised and Updated. Lone Pine Publishing, Vancouver, British Columbia. 176 pp.
COSEWIC. 2002. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Western Toad Bufo boreas in Canada. Original prepared by E. Wind and L. A. Dupuis. COSEWIC. Hull, Quebec.
COSEWIC. 2012. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Western Toad Anaxyrus boreas in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. xiv + 71 pp. [accessed February 2014].
Davis, T. M. 2000. Ecology of the western toad (Bufo boreas) in forested areas on Vancouver Island. Final Report; unpublished report for Forest Renewal B.C., Ministry of Forestry, Victoria, British Columbia.
Davis, T. M. 2002. Research priorities for the management of the Western Toad, Bufo boreas, in British Columbia. B.C. Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection, Biodiversity Branch, Victoria, BC. Wildlife Working Report WR-106. 35 pp.
Davis, T. M. and P. T. Gregory. 2003. Decline and local extinction of the Western Toad, Bufo boreas, on southern Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada. Herpetological Review 34: 350-352.
Daszak, P., L. Berger, A. A. Cunningham, A. D. Hyatt, D. E. Green and R. Speare. 1999. Emerging infectious diseases and amphibian population declines. Emerging Infectious Diseases 5: 735-748.
Daszak, P., A. A. Cunningham, and A. D. Hyatt 2003. Infectious disease and amphibian population declines. Diversity and Distributions 9: 141-150.
Deguise, I. and J. S. Richardson. 2009a. Prevalence of the chytrid fungus (Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis) in western toads in southwestern British Columbia, Canada. Northwestern Naturalist 90: 35-38.
Deguise, I. and J. S. Richardson. 2009b. Movement behaviour of adult western toads in a fragmented, forest landscape. Canadian Journal of Zoology 87: 1184-1194.
Eaton, B. and M. Hiltz. 2012. Analysis of researching amphibian numbers in Alberta (RANA) Project - amphibian captures at pitfall trapping sites 1997-2008. Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, Fish and Wildlife Division, Alberta Species at Risk Report No. 142. Edmonton, Alberta.
Eaves, S. E. 2004. The distribution and abundance of amphibians across land-use types in Alberta's Aspen Parkland. MSc thesis. Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta.
Eigenbrod, F., S. J. Hecnar, and L. Fahrig. 2008. The relative effects of road traffic and forest cover on anuran populations. Biological Conservation 141: 35-46.
Fahrig, L., J. H. Pedlar, S. E. Pope, P. D. Taylor and J. F. Wegner. 1995. Effect of road traffic on amphibian density. Biological Conservation 73: 177-182.
Fontenot, L. W., G. P. Noblet, and S. G. Platt. 1994. Rotenone hazards to amphibians and reptiles. Herpetological Review 25: 50-156.
Frost, D. R., T. Grant, J. Faivovich, R. H. Bain, A. Haas, C. F. B. Haddad, R. O. De Sá, A. Channing, M. Wilkinson, S. C. Donnellan, C. J. Raxworthy, J. A. Campbell, B. L. Blotto, P. Moler, R. C. Drewes, R. A. Nussbaum, J. D. Lynch, D. M. Green, and W. C. Wheeler. 2006. The amphibian tree of life. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 297: 1-370.
Glooschenko, V., W. F. Weller, P. G. L. Smith, L. Alvo, and J. H. G. Archbold. 1992. Amphibian distribution with respect to pond and water chemistry near Sudbury, Ontario. Canadian Journal of Fisheries & Aquatic Sciences 49 (Suppl. 1): 114-121.
Government of Alberta (Sustainable Resource Development). 2009. Alberta's amphibian monitoring programs [accessed March 2010].
Government of Alberta (Environment and Sustainable Resource Development). 2010. Boreal/Foothills Sensitive Species Guidelines. Unpublished draft.
Government of Canada. 2014. Species at risk public registry. [accessed February 2014].
Government of Yukon. 2013. Management Plan for Yukon Amphibians.Fish and Wildlife Branch, Yukon Department of Environment, Whitehorse, Yukon.
Government of Yukon. 2014. Yukon Conservation Data Centre. [accessed November2014].
Govindarajulu, P. 2007. Emerging infectious diseases in British Columbia Amphibians: literature review to assess risk and develop survey recommendations. Unpub. Report. B.C. Ministry of Environment, Victoria, B.C. ii + 20 pp.
Govindarajulu, P. 2008. Literature review of impacts of glyphosate herbicide on amphibians: what risks can the silvicultural use of this herbicide pose for amphibians in B.C.? Wildlife Report No. R-28. B.C. Ministry of Environment, Victoria, B.C. v + 79 pp.
Govindarajulu P, Nelson C, LeBlanc J, Hintz W, Schwantje H. 2013. Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis surveillance in British Columbia 2008 - 2009, Canada. British Columbia Ministry of the Environment. Report ID 34795.
Green, D. M., and R. W. Campbell. 1984. Amphibians of British Columbia. B.C. Provincial Museum Handbook 45.
Green, D., K. A. Converse, and A. K. Schrader. 2002. Epizootiology of sixty-four amphibian morbidity and mortality events in the USA, 1996-2001. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 969: 323-339.
Guscio, C. G., B. R. Hossack, L. A. Eby and P. S. Corn. 2008. Post-breeding habitat use by adult boreal toads (Bufo boreas) after wildfire in Glacier National Park, USA. Herpetological Conservation and Biology 3: 55-62.
Gyug, L. 1996. Part IV Amphibians. In Timber harvesting effects on riparian wildlife and vegetation in the Okanagan Highlands of British Columbia. B.C. Environment, Penticton, British Columbia.
Harfenist, A., T. Power, K. L. Clark and D. B. Peakall. 1989. A review and evaluation of the amphibian toxicological literature. Canadian Wildlife Service Technical Report Series 61.
Hatch, A. C., L. K. Belden, E. Scheellele and A. R. Blaustein. 2001. Juvenile amphibians do not avoid potentially lethal levels of urea on soil substrate. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 20: 2328-2335.
Hayes, T. B. 2004. There is no denying this: defusing the confusion about atrazine. BioScience 54:1138-1149.
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2014. Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 151 pp.
IUCN (International Union for the Conservation of Nature). 2014. The IUCN red list of threatened species. [accessed February 2014].
IUCN and CMP (International Union for Conservation of Nature and Conservation Measures Partnership). 2006. IUCN - CMP unified classification of direct threats, ver. 1.0 - June 2006. Gland, Switzerland. 17 pp. [accessed April 2013].
Johnston, B. 2014. Amphibian Monitoring Program Protocol for Waterton Lakes National Park vers. 1.03. Unpublished Report. Parks Canada Agency.
Johnston, B. and C. Price. 2015. Amphibian Monitoring in Waterton Lakes National Park, 1997--2015. Parks Canada unpublished report. 24 pp.
Jones, L. C., W. P. Leonard, and D. H. Olson (editors). 2005. Amphibians of the Pacific Northwest. Seattle Audubon Society, Seattle, Washington, USA. 227 pp.
Kiesecker, J. M. 2002. Synergism between trematode infection and pesticide exposure: a link to amphibian limb deformities in nature? Proceedings of Natural Academy of Sciences 99: 9900-9904.
Kiesecker, J. M., A. R. Blaustein, and C. L. Miller. 2001. Transfer of a pathogen from fish to amphibians. Conservation Biology 15: 1064-1070.
Lepitzki, D. A. W. and B. Lepitzki. 2003. Experimental design for amphibian monitoring of the Carrot Creek forest treatment area, Banff National Park. Parks Canada, Banff, Alberta. 23 pp.
Lepitzki, D. A. W. and B. Lepitzki. 2007. FESS (Fairholme Range Environmentally Sensitive Site) Amphibian Project: Draft Progress Report, 2006. Parks Canada, Banff, Alberta. 105 pp.
Livo, L. J. 1998. Investigation of boreal toad tadpole ecology. Pp. 115-146, in M. S. Jones, J. P. Goettl, K. L. Scherff-Norris, S. Brinkman, L. J. Livo and A. M. Goebel (eds.). Boreal toad research progress report 1995-1997. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins, Colorado.
Long, Z. 2010. Anaxyrus boreas (Western Toad): Advertisement vocalization. Herpetological Review 41: 332-333.
Marsh, D. M. and P. C. Trenham. 2001. Metapopulation dynamics and amphibian conservation. Conservation Biology 15: 40-49.
Matsuda, B. M, D. M. Green, and P. T. Gregory. 2006. Amphibians and Reptiles of British Columbia. Royal British Columbia Museum Handbook, Victoria, British Columbia. 266 pp.
Macdonald, S. E., B. Eaton, C. S. Machtans, C. Paszkowski, S. Hannon, and S. Boutin. 2006. Is forest close to lakes ecologically unique? Analysis of vegetation, small mammals, amphibians, and songbirds. Forest Ecology and Management 223: 1-17.
McIvor, D., and M. McIvor. 2006. Amphibian survey in Banff National Park and adjacent areas, 2005. Bow Valley Naturalists, Banff, Alberta. 43 pp.
Maxcy, K and S. Symes. 2009. Fairholme ecologically sensitive site amphibian research program - final progress report 2004-2008. Prepared for Parks Canada, Banff, Alberta. 54 pp.
Mendez, D., R. Webb, L. Berger and R. Speare. 2008. Survival of the amphibian chytrid fungus Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis on bare hands and gloves: hygiene implications for amphibian handling. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 82: 97-104.
Mennell, R. L. 1997. Amphibians in southwestern Yukon and northwestern British Columbia. In: Amphibians in decline: Canadian studies of a global problem. Edited by D. Green. Herpetological Conservation 1: 107-109.
Miller, D., M. Gray, and A. Storfer. 2011. Ecopathology of ranaviruses infecting amphibians. Viruses 2011: 2351-2373.
Muths, E., P. S. Corn, A. P. Pessier, and D. E. Green. 2003. Evidence for disease-related amphibian decline in Colorado. Biological Conservation 110: 357-365.
Muths, E., D. Pilliod, and L. Livo. 2008. Distribution and environmental limitations of an amphibian pathogen in the Rocky Mountains, USA. Biological Conservation 141: 1484-1492.
NatureServe. 2014. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. [accessed February 2014].
Ohanjanian, P., D. Adama, and A. Davidson 2006. An amphibian inventory of the East Kootenays with an emphasis on Bufo boreas, 2005. Prepared for Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program, Nelson, British Columbia. iii + 31 pp.
Olson, D. H. 1988. The ecological and behavioral dynamics of breeding in three sympatric anuran amphibians. PhD. Dissertation. Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR.
Ovaska, K.E. 1997. Vulnerability of amphibians in Canada to global warming and increased ultraviolet radiation. Herpetological Conservation 1: 206-225.
Ovaska, K, S. Lennart, C. Engelstoft, L. Matthias, E. Wind, and J. MacGarvie. 2004. Best Management Practices for Amphibians and Reptiles in Urban and Rural Environments in British Columbia (pdf: 624 kb). Ministry of Water Land and Air Protection (now Ministry of Environment), Nanaimo, British Columbia. [accessed April 2010].
Pauly, G. B. 2008. Phylogenetic systematic, historical biogeography, and the evolution of vocalizations in Nearctic toad (Bufo). Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Texas, Austin, Texas. Xvi + 165 pp.
Provincial Western Toad Working Group. 2014. Management Plan for the Western Toad (Anaxyrus boreas) in British Columbia. Prepared for the B.C. Ministry of Environment, Victoria, BC. 29 pp.
Relyea, R. A. and N. Diecks. 2008. An unforeseen chain of events: Lethal effects of pesticides on frogs at sublethal concentrations. Ecological Applications 18: 1728-1742.
Richardson, J. M. L., P. Govindarajulu and B. R. Anholt. 2014. Distribution of the disease pathogen Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis in non-epidemic amphibian communities of western Canada. Ecography 37: 883–893.
Rouse, J. D., C. A. Bishop, and J. Struger. 1999. Nitrogen pollution: an assessment of its threats to amphibian survival. Environmental Health Perspectives 107: 799-803.
Russell, A. P. and A. M. Bauer. 2000. The Amphibians and Reptiles of Alberta. A Field Guide and Primer of Boreal Herpetology. University of Calgary Press, Calgary, Alberta. 278 pp.
Salafsky, N., D. Salzer, A. J. Stattersfield, C. Hilton-Taylor, R. Neugarten, S. H. M. Butchart, B. Collen, N. Cox, L. L. Master, S. O'Connor and D. Wilkie. 2008. A standard lexicon for biodiversity conservation: unified classification of threats and actions. Conservation Biology 22: 897-911.
Sanzo, D. and S.J. Hecnar. 2005. Effects of road de-icing salt (NaCl) on larval wood frogs (Rana sylvatica). Environmental Pollution 140: 247-256.
Schank, C.M. 2008. Assessing the effects of trout stocking on native amphibian communities in small boreal foothill lakes of Alberta. M.Sc. Thesis, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta. 112 pp.
Schock, D. M. 2009. Amphibian population and pathogen surveys in the Dehcho and Sahtu, Northwest Territories, 2007 and 2008. Department of Environment and Natural Resources Government of the Northwest Territories Manuscript Report No. 206. Yellowknife, Northwest Territories.
Schock, D.M., G.R. Ruthig, J.P. Collins, S.J. Kutz, S. Carrière, R.J. Gau, A.M. Veitch, N.C. Larter, D.P. Tate, G. Guthrie, D.G. Allaire, and R.A. Popko 2009. Amphibian chytrid fungus and ranaviruses in the Northwest Territories, Canada. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 92: 231-240.
Schock, D. M., G. R. Ruthig, J. P. Collins, S. J. Kutz, S. Carrière, R. J. Gau, A. M. Veitch, N. C. Larter, D. P. Tate, G. Guthrie, D. G. Allaire, and R. A. Popko. 2010. Amphibian chytrid fungus and ranaviruses in the Northwest Territories, Canada. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 92: 231-240.
Slough, B. G. 2004. Western toad inventory in the Chilkoot Trail National Historic Site, July-August 2004. Parks Canada Species at Risk Inventory Fund Project SARINV04-30. 54 pp.
Slough, B. G. 2005. Western toad, Bufo boreas, stewardship in the Yukon. NatureServe Yukon, Whitehorse, Yukon. 26 pp.
Slough, B. G. 2009a. Status report on amphibians in the Yukon (Western toad Anaxyrus boreas, boreal chorus frog Pseudacris maculata, Columbia spotted frog Rana luteiventris, and wood frog Lithobates sylvaticus). Report prepared for Fish and Wildlife Branch, Environment Yukon, Whitehorse, Yukon. Draft.
Slough, B. 2009b. Amphibian chytrid fungus in Western Toads (Bufo boreas) in British Columbia and Yukon, Canada. Herpetological Review 40: 319-321.
Slough, B. and R. L. Mennell. 2006. Diversity and ranges of amphibians of the Yukon Territory. Canadian Field Naturalist 120: 87-92.
Species at Risk Committee. 2014. Species Status Report for Western Toad (Anaxyrus boreas) in the Northwest Territories. Species at Risk Committee, Yellowknife, NT.
Stebbins, R. C. 1951. Amphibians of western North America. University of California Press, Berkeley, California.
Stevens, C. E., C. A. Paszkowski and D. Stringer. 2006. Occurrence of the Western Toad and its use of 'borrow pits' in west-central Alberta. Northwestern Naturalist 87: 107-117.
Stevens, C. E., C. A. Paszkowski and A. L. Foote. 2007. Beaver (Castor canadensis) as a surrogate species for conserving anuran amphibians on boreal streams in Alberta, Canada. Biological Conservation 134: 1-13.
Tayless, E. 2011. Western toad population summary 2005-2011 (May 31), Lost Lake population, Whistler, B.C. Resort Municipality of Whistler, British Columbia. 6 pp.
Taylor, M. and C. M. Smith. 2003. Northern leopard frog and western toad inventory in Waterton Lakes National Park, Alberta, in 2003. Unpublished Technical Report. Parks Canada, Waterton Park, Alberta. 82 pp.
Ultsch, G. R., D. F. Bradford and J. Freda. 1999. Physiology: Coping with the environment. Pp. 189-214 in R.W. McDiarmid, and R. Altig (eds). Tadpoles: The biology of anuran larvae. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois.
Vredenburg, V. T., R. A. Knapp, T. S. Tunstall and C. J. Briggs. 2010. Dynamics of an emerging disease drive large-scale amphibian population extinctions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the U.S.A. 107: 9689-9694.
Wallis, C., C. Wershler and R. Riddell. 2002. Ecological land classification of Waterton Lakes National Park, Alberta. Vol. II: wildlife resources. Parks Canada, Waterton Park, Alberta. 258 pp.
Wind. E. 2007. Western Toad Monitoring Program in British Columbia. Draft 2. Unpublished report prepared for the B.C. Ministry of Environment, Victoria, British Columbia.
Wind, E., unpubl. data. 2011. E. Wind Consulting, Nanaimo, British Columbia.
Wind, E. and S. Wilmott. 2012. Identification of Western Toad (Anaxyrus boreas) Breeding Sites and Road Mortality Mitigation Assessment on Vancouver Island. British Columbia
Wind, E., In prep. Western Toad Habitat Use on Vancouver Island, Part II Hibernation Pilot Study, Prepared for Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations, Nanaim, B.C.
Wood, S. and J. S. Richardson. 2009. The impacts of fine-sediment loading on the growth and survival of western toads (Bufo boreas). Freshwater Biology 54: 1120-1134.
World Wildlife Fund 2014. Canadian Aspen Forests and Parkland. [accessed October 2014].
Worrest, R. C. and D. J. Kimeldorf. 1975. Photoreactivation of potentially lethal, UV-induced damage to boreal toad (Bufo boreas boreas) tadpoles. Life Sciences 17: 1545-1550.
Yukon CDC (Conservation Data Centre). 2015. Report your sightings – Yukon animals of conservation concern (PDF: 1.6 mb), March 2015. [accessed January 2016].
9. Personal Communications
Bennett, Bruce. Yukon Conservation Data Centre Coordinator, Yukon Government, Whitehorse, YT. Personal communication through email to S. Dar, 2015.
Cannings, Syd. Species at Risk Biologist, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Whitehorse, YT.
Personal communication through email to H. Middleton. 2014.
Carli, Chris. Resource Management Officer, Parks Canada, Banff, AB. Personal communication through email via Diane Casimir to Holly Middleton.
Eaton, Brian. Aquatic Ecology Research Scientist, Alberta Innovates - Technology Futures,Vegreville, AB. Personal communication through telephone to K. Ovaska. 2010.
Gau, Rob. Wildlife Biologist (Species at Risk), Northwest Territories Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Yellowknife, NT. Personal communication through email to S. Cannings. 2011.
Govindarajulu, Purnima. Small Mammal and Herpetofauna Specialist, BC Ministry of Environment, Victoria, BC. Personal communication through telephone to K. Ovaska. 2010 and H. Middleton. 2015.
Hughson, Ward. Aquatic Specialist, Jasper National Park, AB. Personal communication through email to H. Middleton. 2015.
Johnston, Barb. Ecosystem Scientist, Parks Canada, Gwaii Haanas, BC. Personal communication through email to H. Middleton. 2015.
Jung, Thomas. Senior Wildlife Biologist, Environment Yukon, Whitehorse, YT. Personal communication through email to S. Cannings. 2011.
Kendell, Kris. Senior Biologist, Alberta Conservation Association. Personal communication through email to H. Middleton. 2014.
Kindopp, Rhonda. Park Ecologist, Parks Canada, Fort Smith, NT. Personal communication through email via D. Casimir to S. Cannings. 2011.
Larson, Lisa. Monitoring Technician, Parks Canada, Revelstoke, BC. Personal communication through email via D. Casimir to S. Cannings. 2011.
McIvor, M., pers. comm. 2012. In COSEWIC. 2012. Email and photo of a calling Western Toad from Kootenay National Park sent to D. Lepitzki. 20 November 2012. Bow Valley Naturalists, Banff, Alberta.
Mennell, L., unpubl. data. 2007. Wildlife Consultant, Lewes Lake, Yukon.
Paszkowski, C., pers. comm. 2012. In COSEWIC, 2012. Email correspondence to B. Slough and to K. Ovaska. February, March, and November 2012. Professor and Associate Chair Research, Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta.
Peterson, Derek. Conservation Biologist, Parks Canada, Radium, BC. Personal communication through email via D. Casimir to S. Cannings. 2011.
Prescott, David. Senior Species at Risk Biologist, Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, Red Deer, AB. Personal communication through telephone to S. Cannings. 2011.
Russell, John. Retired Wildlife Biologist, Waterton, AB. Personal communication through email to B. Johnston. 2013.
Sicotte, Michelle. Fish and Wildlife Planner, Environment Yukon, Whitehorse, YT. Personal communication through email to K. Ovaska. 2010.
Shepherd, Brenda. Park Ecologist, Jasper National Park, Parks Canada, Jasper, AB. Personal communication through mail to K. Ovaska. 2010.
Stevens, Scott. Species at Risk Biologist, Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, Red Deer, AB. Personal communication through email to K. Ovaska. 2010.
Stewart, Heather. A/Ecologist Team Leader. Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve, National Marine Conservation Area Reserve and Haida Heritage Site. Personal communication through email to Diane Casimir. 2015.
Tate, Doug. Conservation Biologist, Parks Canada, Fort Simpson, NT. Personal communication through email via D. Casimir to S. Cannings. 2011.
Wilkinson, Lisa. Non-game/Species at Risk Biologist, Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, Edson, AB. Personal communication through email to K. Ovaska. 2010.
Wilson, Joanna. Wildlife Biologist (Species at Risk), Northwest Territories Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Yellowknife, NT. Personal communication through email to D. Bigelow. 2015.
Wind, Elke. E. Wind Consulting, Nanaimo, BC. Personal communication through email to K. Ovaska. 2010.
Appendix A: Effects on the Environment and Other Species
A strategic environmental assessment (SEA) is conducted on all SARA recovery planning documents, in accordance with the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals. The purpose of a SEA is to incorporate environmental considerations into the development of public policies, plans, and program proposals to support environmentally sound decision-making and to evaluate whether the outcomes of a recovery planning document could affect any component of the environment or any of the Federal Sustainable Development Strategy's (FSDS) goals and targets.
Conservation planning is intended to benefit species at risk and biodiversity in general. However, it is recognized that implementation of management plans may also inadvertently lead to environmental effects beyond the intended benefits. The planning process based on national guidelines directly incorporates consideration of all environmental effects, with a particular focus on possible impacts upon non-target species or habitats. The results of the SEA are incorporated directly into the management plan itself, but are also summarized in this statement.
Conservation and management of wetland breeding habitat across the range of the Western Toad will benefit a number of other species of conservation concern that also depend on wetland habitat for all or part of their lifecycle. Similarly, conservation and management of upland hibernation, foraging, and dispersal habitats is expected to have positive effects on co-occurring species. The potential for the plan to inadvertently lead to adverse effects on other species was considered. The SEA concluded that this plan will clearly benefit the environment and will not enta
- Footnote 1
Past threats may be recorded but are not used in the calculation of threat impact. Effects of past threats (if not continuing) are taken into consideration when determining long-term and/or short-term trend factors (Master et al. 2012).
- Footnote 2
It is important to distinguish between limiting factors and threats. Limiting factors are generally not human induced and include characteristics that make the species or ecosystem less likely to respond to recovery/conservation efforts (e.g., inbreeding depression, small population size, and genetic isolation; or likelihood of regeneration or recolonization for ecosystems).
- Date Modified: