Harvesting Practices and Mountain Goat Habitat in the Babine Watershed A Background Review Prepared for:By: Megan D’Arcy, R.P.Bio.

Introduction  Goal to maintain mountain goats  Two objectives: Maintain goat habitat Maintain goat populations  Preliminary risk curve analyses identified knowledge gaps for the Kispiox (now West Babine)  Objective of background review ~ to determine if new data are available to update the monitoring framework

Since then… Both the West Babine SRMP area and the Bulkley now have management areas identified for goats An effectiveness monitoring protocol has been developed and tested for mountain goat ungulate winter range  Pilot project study areas in Okanagan- Shuswap & Sunshine Coast Forest Districts

Habitat Management  UWR polygons have been identified under FRPA for the Kispiox/Cranberry TSA These polygons were delineated based on work completed by Ardea Biological Consulting (2005)  Pacific Inland Resources has completed their Forest Stewardship Plan Mapped Habitat and an associated management strategies have been identified for mountain goats FSP incorporates Bulkley LRMP: Objectives Set by Government (2006)

Goat management areas in the Babine Watershed Shenismike Gail Creek

Table 2. Mountain goat habitat management for the BWMT area as set out in the FSP for PIR and the UWR Order for the Kispiox/Cranberry TSA. West BabineBulkley Forest Harvesting Activities Within UWR/ Mapped Habitat - Retention of all forest cover & vegetation within UWR polygon - Felling of trees is permitted when required for worker safety - Provide thermal and snow interception cover and forage - Provide security by limiting disturbance - Provide forested cover adjacent to escape terrain Buffers m horizontal distance - Within 500 m, should not “result in material or adverse disturbance to goats” - Harvesting within 200 m of Mapped Habitat will be done with non-clearcutting system or with cutblocks < 5 ha meters line of site for helicopter logging Timing of Harvesting Activities - June 15 to October 31 window - No harvesting within 200 m of Mapped Habitat from April 15 to July 15 Roads - Deactivated if within 500 m of UWR polygon - All roads within one kilometre of Mapped Habitat will be deactivated and access control points used to limit motorized access

Effectiveness Monitoring  No additional effectiveness monitoring work has been done within the Babine Watershed  A three-tiered evaluation structure has been designed by FREP (intended to be used as a standard for effectiveness evaluations)  Adapted and tested by Steve Wilson, EcoLogic Research, for mountain goats

Indicators for Maintaining Goat Habitat in Current Monitoring Framework  Type and patch-size distribution of harvest within 200 m of identified goat habitat  Presence of forested connectors between mountain ranges in Kotsine Pass Both are more applicable to the Bulkley TSA.

Current Indicators for Maintaining Goat Populations  Density of accessible roads within one kilometre of identified habitat  Amount of harvesting within 200 m of habitat during natal time (May to early June) Natal period is not only time when goats are vulnerable – most habitat management targets winter survival

Other Potential Indicators (Wilson 2005)  Proportion of established UWR relative to available suitable UWR - once  Forest Cover Characteristics – every 5 yrs  Forage Availability – every 5 yrs  Snow Depth & Consolidation – weather dependent  Evidence of Sustained Winter Use by Goats – 3 yrs Could be monitored by recreation user reports  Evidence of Movement Among Winter Ranges

Incorporation into Existing Framework  Estimated risk for West Babine (Kispiox) can be updated based on data collected by Ardea (2005) Percentage of area currently harvested, Potential level of harvest (%)  Could incorporate additional indicators developed by Wilson (2006)

Recommendations  Review and update mapping data for entire Babine Watershed  Add an ‘indices of use’ indicator to the current monitoring framework  Use mapping and field surveys to document and collect use data for important trails and mineral licks

Potential Project for 2008 Create goat habitat database and analyse existing data Collect different data layers Clean and compile data Define parameters (see spreadsheet) Analyse data and use to generate new risk curves Write report Project Initialization$ 640 Mapping (GeoBorealis) & Analysis (K. Price) $ 4,500 Report Writing$ 1,600 GST$ 337 Total Cost$ 7, 077 Ministry of Environment has expressed interest in potentially partnering with BWMT  Road proximity analysis (proposed - FIA)

Advantages  The result of this project (spatial database) could potentially be used for other BWMT initiatives  Partnering with MOE would facilitate: Access to the mapping layers Cost sharing

Other Considerations  Without the indices of use data, the mapping results only tell one side of the story BWMT allocate some money for proposal writing ($ 1, 600) Building on the idea of partnering with MOE as part of the proposal process  Collect ad hoc data from flights in and out of Silver Hilton ($ ??)

In a Perfect World…  Conduct a combination of aerial and ground surveys to determine relative use Expensive – potential FIA project? More of a priority in the West Babine  During relative use surveys, collect Forage availability data Snow depth and consolidation data  Infer “material and adverse disturbance to goats” (UWR Order) from indices of use data & forest harvesting/road analysis