#Description of the distribution areas of local populations of woodland caribou, forest ecotype, in Quebec The data represent the ranges of the 13 local populations and two areas of knowledge acquisition of woodland caribou, a forest ecotype in Quebec (hereinafter forest caribou). The file contains the polygons and the name assigned to each population or knowledge acquisition sector, the period covered by the telemetry data used during the delimitation exercise, and the date these boundaries were last updated. The information contained in the file of occurrences of species in a precarious situation of the Quebec Natural Heritage Data Center (CDPNQ) is also present in the file (CDPNQ occurrence number, French, English and scientific name of the species, the type of occurrence, the rank of precariousness [rank S] and the status under the Act Respecting Threatened or Vulnerable Species, see MELCCFP 2023 for a description of these fields.). ## #Contexte The Ministry of the Environment, the Fight against Climate Change, Wildlife and Parks (hereinafter MELCCFP) is responsible for the monitoring and management of forest caribou in Quebec (Government of Quebec, 2021 a). In 2017-2018, the MELCCFP improved its monitoring activities in order to obtain an accurate and up-to-date portrait of the situation of the various populations on its territory (see Literature review on the factors involved in the decline of caribou populations in Quebec, Government of Quebec, 2021 b). The local population has been identified as the appropriate monitoring and management scale for this species since each population may face different threats depending on the habitat and socio-economic context in which it is found (Environment Canada, 2008). It is within this framework that the work to identify and delimit the distribution areas of forest caribou populations carried out in 2021-2022 is part of. The local population is defined as a group of caribou occupying a defined territory that is spatially distinct from the territories occupied by other caribou groups. The dynamics of the local population are determined primarily by local factors influencing birth and mortality rates, rather than by the contributions or losses resulting from immigration or emigration between groups. Therefore, the ranges of local forest caribou populations in this file are defined as the geographic area where a group of individuals exposed to similar factors influencing their demographics live and which meets the needs of their life cycle over a given period of time (e.g. calving, rutting, wintering). Note that for the two knowledge acquisition sectors, Baie-James and Matamec, the number of caribou monitored and the temporal scale of monitoring do not allow to date clearly conclude that they are distinct local populations or to associate these caribou with an adjacent population. ## #Méthodologie in short The forest caribou populations in Charlevoix and Val-d'Or were excluded from the following manipulations, as their geographic isolation is sufficient to demonstrate that they are local populations distinct from other caribou groups. A minimal convex polygon was made using 100% of telemetry data from 2004-2012 and 2017-2021 for the population of Charlevoix and from 1986 to 2020 for that of Val-d'Or. For other forest caribou populations, telemetry data from collars placed on caribou by the MELCCFP and various partners (Université Laval, Université du Québec à Rimouski, Hydro-Québec, Government of Ontario and Government of Ontario and Government of Newfoundland and Labrador) were used to identify and delimit the distribution areas of local populations. The data ranges from 2001 to 2021, but the period covered by the data varies by sector of study (see field: Layer tempo for information). Forest caribou populations in Quebec were identified by assigning caribou monitored by telemetry to a population using the fuzzy classification method (c-mean fuzzy clustering; Schaefer et al., 2001; Schaefer et al., 2001; Schaefer and Wilson, 2002). This method aims to unite individuals into groups in order to maximize the distance between members of distinct groups and to minimize the distance between members of the same group. Centroids from individual home ranges were used in this analysis. The ranges were delineated by creating minimal convex polygons including 100% of caribou locations (100% MCP) assigned to a population. For the Baie-James sector, the area was delimited by removing the overlaps between the area inventoried in 2020 (Szor and Gingras, 2020) and the distribution areas of the surrounding local populations. For the Matamec sector, the area represents the non-overlap between the distribution area of the local population of the Lower North Shore and a minimal convex polygon encompassing all telemetry data for caribou in the Matamec sector and the local Lower North Shore population. The acquisition of knowledge on the distribution of caribou and the presence of distinct populations continues in the Baie-James sector (Nord-du-Québec) and the Matamec sector (Côte-Nord). The last update was made in 2021-2022. ## #Mise on guard and limitations of data use: * The ranges of forest caribou populations in Quebec in this file represent the state of knowledge on land use by caribou between 2001 and 2021. * The ranges of the Detour and Nottaway populations overlap both the province of Quebec and that of Ontario, while the ranges of the populations Caniapiscau, Lower North Shore, Lac Joseph and Joir River also straddle the province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Only the portion of the ranges of forest caribou populations in the province of Quebec is presented in the file. * Information on the ranges of local populations does not make it possible to establish with certainty that caribou is absent in territories outside the ranges. * The ranges represent areas where it is likely to find caribou belonging to the same population. They do not make it possible to identify the sectors used more or less strongly by caribou in this population or the sectors used by caribou to move within the range or from one population to another (connectivity sectors). * The ranges are subject to change, depending on the new telemetry data that will be acquired, the refinement of our local knowledge and the modifications of land use patterns by caribou. ## #Littérature Environment Canada. 2008. Scientific review for the identification of critical habitat for the boreal population of woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in Canada. August 2008. Ottawa: Environment Canada. 80 pp. + 192 p. appendices Government of Quebec. 2021 a. Monitoring system for forest caribou populations in Quebec and mountain caribou in Gaspésie 2020-2031: summary document, Ministry of Forests, Wildlife and Parks, Directorate of Expertise on Terrestrial Wildlife, Herpetofauna and Avifauna, 16 pp. Government of Quebec. 2021 b. Literature review on the factors involved in the decline of forest caribou populations in Quebec and mountain caribou in Gaspésie, Ministry of Forests, Wildlife and Parks, Directorate of Expertise on Terrestrial Wildlife, Herpetofauna and Avifauna, 244 pp. + 15p. appendices Ministry of the Environment, the Fight against Climate Change, Wildlife and Parks (MELCCFP). 2023. The Quebec Natural Heritage Data Center — Information document, Government of Quebec, Quebec, 32 pp. Schaefer, J.A., Veitch, A.M., Harrington, F.H., Harrington, F.H., Brown, W.K., Theberge, J.B., & Luttich, S.N. 2001. Fuzzy structure and spatial dynamics of a declining woodland caribou population. Oecologia, 126 (4), 507—514. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004420000555 Schaefer, J.A., & Wilson, C. C. 2002. The fuzzy structure of populations. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 80 (12), 2235—2241. https://doi.org/10.1139/z02-184 Szor, G, and G. Gingras. 2020. Aerial inventory of forest caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in the James Bay, Rupert and La Grande sectors, Nord-du-Québec, in winter 2020, Ministry of Forests, Wildlife and Parks, Direction de la gestion de la fauna du Nord-du-Québec, 31 p.**This third party metadata element was translated using an automated translation tool (Amazon Translate).**

Mise with caution and limitations of data use: * The report by Lesmerises and St-Laurent (2018) must be cited when using this file (see Literature section). * The distribution area of the mountain caribou population of Gaspesia in this file represents the state of knowledge on the use of land by montane caribou between 1988 and 2016. * Information on the distribution of the Gaspesie mountain caribou population in this file represents the state of knowledge on land use by montane caribou between 1988 and 2016. * Information on the distribution of the Gaspesie mountain caribou population in this file represents the state of knowledge on the use of land by montane caribou between 1988 and 2016. * Information on the distribution of the Gaspesie mountain caribou population in this file represents the state of knowledge on land use by mountain caribou between 1988 and 2016. * Information on the distribution of local population does not allow us to establish with certainty that caribou are absent in territories outside of this range. * The range is subject to change, depending on the new telemetry data that will be acquired, the refinement of our local knowledge and the changes in the patterns of land use by caribou. ## #Description of the range of the local population of woodland caribou, mountain ecotype, population of Gaspesie The data represent the range of woodland caribou, mountain ecotype, population of Gaspesie (hereinafter mountain caribou of Gaspesie). The file contains the polygon and the name assigned to the population, the period covered by the telemetry data used during the delimitation exercise, and the date of the last update. The information contained in the file of occurrences of species in a precarious situation of the Quebec Natural Heritage Data Center (CDPNQ) is also present in the file (CDPNQ occurrence number, French, English and scientific name of the species, the type of occurrence, the rank of precariousness (rank S) and the status under the Act Respecting Threatened or Vulnerable Species, see MELCCFP 2023 for a description of these fields.). ## #Contexte of the publication The Ministry of the Environment, the Fight against Climate Change, Wildlife and Parks (hereinafter MELCCFP) is responsible for the monitoring and management of mountain caribou in Gaspésie (Government of Quebec, 2021 a, b). The local population has been identified as the appropriate monitoring and management scale for this species since each population may face different threats depending on the habitat and socio-economic context in which it is found (Environment Canada, 2008). The local population is defined as a group of caribou occupying a defined territory that is spatially distinct from the territories occupied by other caribou groups. The dynamics of the local population are determined primarily by local factors influencing birth and mortality rates, rather than by the contributions or losses resulting from immigration or emigration between groups. As a result, the distribution area of the local population of mountain caribou in Gaspésie is defined as the geographic area where a group of individuals exposed to similar factors influencing their demographics live and which meets the needs of their life cycle during a given period of time (e.g. calving, rutting, wintering). In 2018, Lesmerises and St-Laurent produced the report Influence of the rate of habitat disturbance, regional coyote abundance, and predator control on the demographic parameters of the Gaspesia-Atlantic caribou population report presented to the Canadian Wildlife Service (Environment Canada). One of the objectives of the report was to delineate the range of this population. The MELCCFP uses the distribution area delimited by Lesmerises and St-Laurent (2018) as part of the monitoring and management of mountain caribou in Gaspésie. For any questions related to the Lesmerises and St-Laurent report (2018), please contact Mr. St-Laurent (Martin-hugues_St-laurent@uqar.ca). ## #Méthodologie in a nutshell The methodology below is a summary of that described in Lesmerises and St-Laurent (2018). Telemetry data from three follow-ups carried out during different periods of time were used (1988-1991, 1998-2008 and 2013-2016). The caribou were equipped with VHF collars during the first two follow-ups. Aerial flights were carried out at various times in order to locate the caribou. During the follow-up from 2013 to 2016, the caribou were equipped with GPS/Argos collars programmed to acquire locations every 2 or 3 hours depending on the collar model used. The range of the mountain caribou population in Gaspesie was defined by estimating a minimum convex polygon comprising 99% of telemetry locations plus a 10 km buffer zone. Finally, the parts superimposed on the St. Lawrence River were removed. ## #Littérature Environment Canada. 2008. Scientific review for the identification of critical habitat for the boreal population of woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in Canada. August 2008. Ottawa: Environment Canada. 80 pp. + 192 pp. appendices. Government of Quebec. 2021 a. Monitoring system for forest caribou populations in Quebec and mountain caribou in Gaspésie 2020-2031: summary document, Ministry of Forests, Wildlife and Parks, Directorate of Expertise on Terrestrial Wildlife, Herpetofauna and Avifauna, 16 pp. Government of Quebec. 2021 b. Literature review on the factors involved in the decline of forest caribou populations in Quebec and mountain caribou in Gaspésie, Ministère des Forêts, de la Faune et des Parcs, Direction of expertise on terrestrial fauna, herpetofauna and avifauna, 244 pp. + 15p. appendices Lesmerises, F. and M.-H. St-Laurent. 2018. Influence of the rate of habitat disturbance, regional coyote abundance, and predator control on the demographic parameters of the caribou population in Gaspesia-Atlantique. Scientific report submitted to Environment Canada — Canadian Wildlife Service, Rimouski (Quebec). 22 pp. + 8 appendices. Ministry of the Environment, the Fight against Climate Change, Wildlife and Parks (MELCCFP). 2023. The Quebec Natural Heritage Data Center — Information document, Government of Quebec, Quebec, 32 pp.This third party metadata element was translated using an automated translation tool (Amazon Translate).

Footnotes: 1 Population estimates based on the Standard Geographical Classification (SGC) 2011 as delineated in the 2011 Census. 2 A census metropolitan area (CMA) is formed by one or more adjacent municipalities centred on a population centre (known as the core). A CMA must have a total population of at least 100,000 of which 50,000 or more must live in the core. To be included in the CMA, other adjacent municipalities must have a high degree of integration with the core, as measured by commuting flows derived from previous census place of work data. Once an area becomes a CMA, it is retained as a CMA even if its total population declines below 100,000 or the population of its core falls below 50,000. Small population centres with a population count of less than 10,000 are called fringe. All areas inside the CMA that are not population centres are rural areas. All CMAs are subdivided into census tracts. 3 Postcensal estimates are based on the latest census counts adjusted for census net undercoverage (including adjustment for incompletely enumerated Indian reserves) and for the estimated population growth that occurred since that census. Intercensal estimates are based on postcensal estimates and census counts adjusted of the censuses preceding and following the considered year. 4 Preliminary postcensal population estimates for census metropolitan areas (CMAs) in Quebec and British Columbia were prepared by l'Institut de la statistique du Québec" (ISQ) and BC Stats Ministry of Labour and Citizens' Services respectively. Estimates for Quebec were based on statistics derived from the registration file for insured people of the "Régie de l'assurance-maladie". Estimates for British Columbia were produced using a regression model based upon changes in residential electrical (hydro) connections and Ministry of Health Client Registry counts. These estimates were controlled to Statistics Canada provincial estimates. Please note that for these two specific cases5 Population estimates for July 1 are final intercensal from 2001 to 2010, final postcensal for 2011 to 2013, updated postcensal for 2014 to 2016 and preliminary postcensal for 2017. 6 The population growth, which is used to calculate population estimates of Census metropolitan areas (CANSIM 051-0056), is comprised of the components of population growth (CANSIM 051-0057). 7 This table replaces CANSIM table 051-0046. 8 Please refer to table 17100135 for more recent data. 9 Age at July 1.

In 2021, for the first time in two decades, the population of the city of Montreal, located in the Canadian province of Quebec, had declined. The city had indeed lost slightly more than 25,000 inhabitants between 2020 and 2021, dropping from approximately 4.37 million to 4.34 million. In 2022, Montreal was the second most populous city in the country, behind Toronto, which had approximately 6.7 million inhabitants.

For the first time in twenty years, the population of the city of Montreal, located in the Canadian province of Quebec, had declined between 2020 and 2021. The city had indeed lost slightly more than 12,500 male and about 13,200 female inhabitants during this period. In addition, since 2001, the gap between the number of women and men living in Montreal has been narrowing: there were approximately 76,960 more women than men in 2001, compared to 28,930 in 2022. In 2022, Montreal was the second most populous city in the country, behind Toronto, which had approximately 6.7 million inhabitants.

New census data on age and sex show that as of May 15, 2001, the median age of Canada's population reached an all-time high of 37.6 years, an increase of 2.3 years from 35.3 in 1996. This was the biggest census-to-census increase in a century. Median age is the point where exactly one-half of the population is older, and the other half is younger. The nation's median age has been rising steadily since the end of the baby boom in 1966, when it was only 25.4 years. Nova Scotia and Quebec were the nation's oldest provinces, each with a median age of 38.8 years. Alberta was the youngest with a median age of 35.0. The group to increase at the fastest pace was that aged 80 and over. From 1991 to 2001, their numbers soared 41.2% to 932,000. The number of people aged 80 or over is expected to increase an additional 43% from 2001 to 2011, during which time it will surpass an estimated 1.3 million. At the same time, Canada has undergone a substantial decline in the number of children aged four and under. In 2001, the census counted 1.7 million children in this age group, down 11.0% from 1991, the result mostly of Canada's declining fertility rate. By 2011, this group may decline to an estimated 1.6 million.