Wed, 5 Aug 2015
Tags: Habitat Acquisition

Salmon River Success

Photo of the Salmon River from the newly-acquired conservation property.

has announced the purchase of 165 acres in the Salmon River estuary near Campbell River on Vancouver Island. This new acquisition is connected to conservation lands previously secured by The Nature Trust and its partners over the past four decades.

“Like many Nature Trust projects, conservation of the Salmon River estuary has been years in the making,” said Dr. Jasper Lament, CEO of The Nature Trust of BC. “This business takes time and patience. We are very grateful to our conservation partners and to the many people who helped make this deal possible.”

Major funding was provided by the Habitat Conservation Trust Foundation and the Fish & Wildlife Compensation Program. Additional support was provided by the Campbell River Salmon Foundation, Barnet Rifle Club, Steelhead Society of BC, Kingfishers Rod & Gun Club, Ducks Unlimited Canada, Totem Fly Fishers, Parksville-Qualicum Fish & Game Association, BC Federation of Fly Fishers, and individual donors from across BC.

“The Salmon River project is the latest purchase of conservation land made possible through the contributions of the anglers, hunters, guide outfitters and trappers of BC,” said Brian Springinotic, CEO of the Habitat Conservation Trust Foundation. “The securement of this high-value habitat will benefit a variety of species, as well as providing additional recreational opportunities.”

1-606_Salmon_River_left_bank.jpg“The Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program is pleased to support this land purchase,” said Program Manager, Trevor Oussoren. “Strategic land acquisitions such as this play an important role in helping fish and wildlife for generations to come.”

The Salmon River estuary is the only significant area of coastal wetland habitat located on the relatively steep and rugged 250 km stretch of coastline from Campbell River to the network of estuaries on the Quatsino lowlands. This strategic location provides critical habitat to numerous species of fish and wildlife, including Great Blue Heron, Marbled Murrelet, Northern Pygmy Owl, Roosevelt Elk, migratory waterfowl and eight species of salmonids. All five species of Pacific salmon are found in the river: Coho, Chinook, Chum, Pink and Sockeye. Anadromous steelhead, cutthroat and Dolly Varden char are all present, as well as resident trout and other native fish species.

Of the approximately 3,200 Roosevelt Elk in British Columbia, the vast majority live on Vancouver Island. Efforts continue to restore them to their historic range, but northern Vancouver Island, including the Salmon River, remains the core of their range in Canada.

“The Salmon River supports a rich diversity of fish and wildlife along with spectacular natural beauty,” said CEO Jasper Lament. “This Vancouver Island conservation treasure is both a tribute to The Nature Trust’s proud history and a wonderful gift to future generations.”

You can view a map of HCTF’s other acquisition investments here.

Thu, 16 Jul 2015
Tags: Wildlife

The Secret Lives of Bluebirds

Summer’s in full swing, and so is the field season for many of HCTF’s grant recipients. Among these is the Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team (GOERT) and their “Bring Back the Bluebirds” project. The project is an international partnership working within Vancouver Island communities to restore Western bluebirds to their native Garry oak ecosystems. By transporting pairs of bluebirds to the Cowichan Valley from a healthy population in southern Washington, the project hopes to ultimately re-establish a breeding population of the birds on southeastern Vancouver Island and the southern Gulf Islands, where they have been extirpated (locally extinct) since the mid-1990s. The primary cause of their extirpation is thought to be habitat loss: bluebirds are secondary cavity nesters, and historically have relied on the holes made by woodpeckers in dead trees for nest sites. As the number of potential nesting trees declined, so did the bluebirds, to the point where a local population could no longer be sustained. To mitigate this habitat loss, the GOERT project team has installed wooden nest boxes in suitable bluebird habitat as an alternative to traditional nesting cavities. Though it certainly hasn’t been smooth sailing for all of the translocated pairs, the project team has seen an increase in the bluebird population over the past three years: a mid-June count found 24 adults (6 translocated), and at least 24 juveniles.

This summer, GOERT managed to capture some footage of the pre-fledged juveniles in one of their nest boxes, offering a rare peak at life as a baby bluebird. Check out the video below to see a cozy pair of nestlings wait patiently for mom (or is it dad?) to bring them their dinner: you can skip to 1:21 to see the first adult arrive. They’re ready for seconds at 3:00, and by 3:50, you’ll see the other siblings (there are six nestlings in total) push their way into the frame for a chance at some grub. You can watch other videos from the nest box on GOERT’s website. The solar-powered “Bring Back the Bluebirds” nest cam was made possible by First Light Technologies and TD Friends of the Environment Foundation.

 

How can you help bluebirds?

If you happen to live in the Cowichan Valley, you can contact the Jemma Green about volunteer opportunities for this or other GOERT projects. You can also make a donation to GOERT here. Everyone can do their part to help reduce songbird deaths by keeping cats indoors or in outdoor enclosures during the spring and early summer, avoiding use of toxic insecticides, and by placing decals on large, reflective windows to prevent collisions.

Want to stay informed about this project? Bookmark the Garry Oak Ecosystem Recovery Team’s project update webpage. You can view other HCTF blog posts on the bluebird project here.

.

 

Tue, 7 Jul 2015
Tags: Fisheries

HCTF Takes a Look at the Kitimat River Cutthroat Trout Project

Aerial photo showing development along the lower Kitimat River.

As part of our evaluation program to ensure HCTF funds are benefiting fish and wildlife conservation, HCTF staff regularly visit project leaders to get an in-depth look at their projects – both on paper (financials) and on the ground.

In early June, HCTF staff biologist Lynne Bonner and financial officer Katelynn Sander travelled to Terrace to meet with Regional Fisheries Biologist Jeff Lough to learn about his project Kitimat River Cutthroat Trout Behavioral Assessments.

 

 

The Kitimat River drains a large coastal watershed and discharges into the head of Douglas Channel at the town of Kitimat. It is a high priority for coastal cutthroat trout because of impacts from multiple human activities in the watershed. It also supports a popular fishery for both local and visiting anglers and the angling effort is significant.

Prior to this study, information on the coastal cutthroat population was limited and anecdotal. This project aimed to investigate the patterns and behavior of coastal cutthroat, in an effort to understand how best to keep the populations healthy and sustained. In a joint radio telemetry and genetic analyses study with the University of Northern BC (UNBC), key cutthroat spawning, migration, and overwintering areas were identified. By understanding these crucial behavioral patterns, managers will have a better idea of where and when these populations are most vulnerable, and what actions are required to help protect them.

Project data and results are being analysed and rolled into a MSc thesis by UNBC MSc candidate Eric Vogt who carried out much of the fieldwork. The study results and options for management will be used by the Ministry to help inform land use decision making in the Kitimat watershed and sustainable angling regulations for the Skeena Region.

After a couple of hours in the office reviewing invoices and project objectives we were anxious to get out and see the actual project area. Jeff had arranged (and HCTF funded) a one-hour helicopter overview of the watershed. The flight took us over the upper Kitimat River where timber harvesting had clearly impacted the entire valley over the past couple of decades. Farther down the mainstem, Jeff pointed out the many side channels and small feeder streams that were highly productive cutthroat trout spawning and rearing habitat. Several large tributaries, such as the Wideene, extended cutthroat habitat up into the mountains. These habitats and their importance to all stages of cutthroat life history are the key pieces of information gleaned from this HCTF project’s telemetry work over the past 3 years.

 

Evidence of oil and gas development appeared at various locations in the valley and as we approached the lower reaches of the Kitimat River towards the estuary, industrial development intensified with the former pulp mill site, the aluminum smelter and the village of Kitimat spreading out below. We also saw anglers fishing for salmon along the river, reminding us that cutthroat trout fishing is very popular at various times throughout the year.

Our evaluation and review illuminated the practical and financial challenges presented by this type of habitat assessment study. This three-year project was complex in nature, due to multiple partners and multiple contract extensions, but the financial aspects were well documented. Clearly written and timely proposals and reports enabled us to better understand the project objectives and expected outcomes.

A big thank you to Jeff for taking the day to explain his project and to the other members of the team that helped make this project a success – Dr. Allan Costello, UNBC, grad student Eric Vogt, UNBC, and in-kind contributions from DFO, the Steelhead Society of BC, Kitimat Rod and Gun Club, and Haisla Fisheries. We were impressed with how well this project was implemented and managed.

And finally, we are particularly pleased that funding emerging from an environmental infraction (court awarded to HCTF) was put to good use and managed effectively and efficiently for conservation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

How a Court Award led to the Kitimat Cutthroat Assessment Project

This project was initiated in 2012-13 after HCTF received Court Award funding when a company was fined for an environmental infraction at the mouth of the Kitimat River. A creative sentencing provision in the Fisheries Act enabled a portion of the fine to be directed to HCTF. These funds were then invested into the same watershed where the original violation occurred. For additional information on HCTF and creative sentencing, click here. While the Court Award ($60,000) was the catalyst, over the three years of the project HCTF contributed an additional $200,000.

 

Thu, 21 May 2015

PCAF Project Leader Honoured with Trail Dedication Ceremony

Unveiling of the trail dedication sign.

Shane-Lake-sign_small.jpgOn May 8th, Prince George officials and community members gathered together with family & friends of the late Bob Graham to celebrate the naming of a new trail in his honour. The Bob Graham Trail is situated within Prince George’s Forests of the World park. The trail provides access to the fishing dock on Shane Lake, installed in 2012 as part of a PCAF project led by Mr. Graham and the Polar Coachman Fly Fishers Club. Bob envisioned a “city fishing place” where local residents could experience and enjoy angling as much as he did. In addition to receiving a grant from HCTF, Bob also secured funding from the City of Prince George, Polar Coachmen Flyfishers, Freshwater Fisheries Society of BC, Integris, Canfor, and Sinclar Group, and helped coordinate the many volunteer hours that made the dock a reality. HCTF Board members Dr. Winifred Kessler and Don Wilkins attended the dedication ceremony, and shared the following photos:

Ceremony participants take a walk on the dock.

HCTF Board member Dr. Winifred Kessler with some successful Shane Lake anglers.

Unveiling of the trail dedication sign.

If you’re interested in trying out fishing at the Shane Lake Dock, it’s circled on the map below (map courtesy of the City of Prince George: click on image to enlarge). The dock is about a 15 minute walk from the parking lot. Shane Lake is stocked with rainbow trout by the Freshwater Fisheries Society of BC: you can access the latest stocking reports here. And don’t forget to purchase a fishing licence if you’re 16 or over: as well as allowing you to participate in a great outdoor activity, your licence fees pay for stocking programs, fish conservation and angling infrastructure projects like this one.

Forest_for_the_WorldMap2015_small.jpg

Mon, 13 Apr 2015
Tags: Fisheries

Wood Lake Kokanee Show Signs of Recovery

Wood Lake kokanee caught in April 2014 (Photo: Jason Webster). Click on image for larger version.

Wood Lake kokanee may not be large fish, but in terms of economic and social impact, the fishery is huge: worth an estimated $1 million a year—all put at peril when the kokanee population crashed in the fall of 2011.

Dubbed “one of the last remaining high-effort kokanee fisheries in Canada,” it’s a highly-accessible fishery that yields a large annual harvest and provides year-round angling opportunities for people of all skill levels, notes Hillary Ward, Fisheries Stock Assessment Specialist for the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations.

She says conservatively it supports more than 15,000 angler days a year and more than $1 million in direct expenditures related to angling.

Because it’s vitally important to restore the kokanee numbers in this small Central Okanagan Lake, the Habitat Conservation Trust Foundation, a BC environmental granting organization, is funding a plan to figure out what caused the problems and how to resolve them.

Since 2012, HCTF has put nearly a quarter million dollars into the problem, and that expenditure has nearly doubled with contributions from other sources, in a project that is a collaboration of the Ministry, the Oceola Fish and Game Club, the Okanagan Nation Alliance and the District of Lake Country.

Wood Lake anglers realized something was wrong in 2012 and voted to support a ban on fishing in the lake until the problem was identified and corrected, but members of the Oceola club have been involved in efforts to enhance that fishery for more than three decades.

Danny Coyne is Fisheries Director for the club, and says its volunteers have worked to take eggs from some of the spawning kokanee each fall to incubate over winter and return to Middle Vernon Creek—the main spawning tributary to the lake—in spring. However, incubation has stopped now because they realize such drastic measures are only needed to jump-start a failing population, rather than on an ongoing basis. Volunteers now help ministry staff count spawning kokanee at a fish fence and efforts are underway to replant riparian areas that have been degraded.

It’s been determined that water quantity in Middle Vernon Creek and water quality in Wood Lake has been the major threat to kokanee populations.

In dry years, there has been limited water available in the creek for kokanee to spawn and in the fall of 2011 numbers collapsed due to unusually warm water temperatures and low oxygen levels in Wood Lake.

With the help of the HCTF project, the kokanee population has been intensively monitored, both in Wood Lake and in Middle Vernon Creek. Angler surveys have also been conducted to estimate harvest.

As well, hydrometric stations were set up with the help of the federal government and the Okanagan Basin Water Board at key points in the watershed, to assess the water balance and see where changes could be made to ensure adequate flows in late summer and fall help spawning kokanee survive.

Ward is confident that, armed with the watershed data from the past few years, they can improve the system’s balance, controlling flows by changing releases from Beaver Lake so there’s adequate water left in the lower part of the system in September when kokanee return to spawn.

From that, a water management plan can be created which will help ensure the long-term survival of Wood Lake kokanee, but also take into account the needs of humans, aquatic plants that occur along the shores of Ellison Lake and other users along the way.

“We’re using an ecosystem-based approach. We’ve really made excellent progress and now we’re seeing signs of recovery,” comments Ward.

With a forecast of significant numbers of kokanee returning to spawn this fall, the fishery in Wood Lake has been re-opened this year, from Apr. 1 to Aug. 31—good news for all concerned.

Written by Judie Steeves for the Habitat Conservation Trust Foundation

 

Thu, 27 Nov 2014
Tags: Wildlife

Precious Waste: Using Woody Debris to Create Connectivity Across Clearcuts

An excavator builds a windrow out of woody debris after harvest is complete. Photo: D. Gossoo

Clearcutting continues to be the dominant harvesting system across much of North America. Its environmental impacts have long been the subject of debate, but there’s a general consensus that this forestry practice results in a shift in the species inhabiting an area. In the years following a clearcut, grasses and shrubs thrive, providing browse for moose and deer. However, this short-term boon comes at the expense of some of the site’s previous residents. Furbearers such as weasels and marten depend on mature forest, both for concealment from predators and for den and rest sites in the form of coarse woody debris. On most clearcut sites, this debris is burned after harvest. But what if there was a way to prevent the displacement of some forest-dependent species by building habitat out of waste wood instead of burning it?

We spoke with Dr. Thomas Sullivan of the Applied Mammal Research Institute about his HCTF-funded project examining whether windrows constructed out of waste wood could reduce some of the negative impacts of clearcutting on small mammals.

HCTF: I understand that many furbearers are reliant on mature forest habitat, and will inevitably be impacted by clearcutting. Would you say your project is about making the best out of an imperfect situation for these species?

Red-backed_vole.jpgSullivan: Yes: the overall goal here is to try and make these harvested sites more amenable to small mammals, particularly weasels, marten, and their primary prey species, red-backed voles. Marten in particular dislike the openings left by clearcuts, because they leave them vulnerable to predation by hawks and owls. As these openings continue to increase in size, we have to provide these animals some way to get from one section of uncut forest to another if we want to keep them on the landscape.

HCTF: For this project, you proposed that waste wood shaped into windrows could act as travel corridors for small mammals, allowing them to move across clearcuts to areas of intact forest. How did you test this idea?

Sullivan: We used a combination of live traps, scat analysis and predation events to compare small mammal presence in windrows constructed out of post-harvest woody debris to their prevalence on clearcuts where the debris was left distributed, both on sites near Golden and Merritt. What we found was that evidence of marten, weasels and red-backed voles was consistently higher in the windrows.

HCTF: Your results seem to support the idea that the relatively small labour investment required to construct windrows out of post-harvest woody debris could pay big dividends for wildlife, yet the majority of this debris is burned. Why?

Burning_piles.jpgSullivan: Currently, foresters are legislated to deal with post-harvest woody debris: they have to get rid of it, either by burning or having someone agree to come and chip it up for biofuel feedstocks, with the latter only being feasible on sites near roads and processing plants. To my knowledge, the only way around this legislative requirement is if you build a variance into your silviculture prescription stating that you are going to leave some piles or windrows for habitat.

HCTF: What is the reasoning behind the current requirements around debris removal?

Sullivan: [The debris is considered] a fire hazard, even though there is absolutely no scientific evidence that these piles catch on fire by themselves. Once in a blue moon, up on a hilltop, you might get a lightning strike, but if there are any trees around, it’s far more likely to hit them. Any actual fire risk comes from humans who’d set them ablaze, which is why we probably don’t want to build windrows on sites near main roads. Far better to build them along deactivated roads or in the back country – and there’s certainly no shortage of this type of cut area. Before we can make windrows standard practice on these types of sites, there has to be a change in government policy, and that could take some time. I believe policy revisions have to follow what’s happening on the ground: we need to get as many foresters and companies trying out this method, even if it means going through a laborious variance process.

HCTF: Speaking of foresters, both Louisiana Pacific Corp. in Golden and Aspen Planers Ltd. in Merritt helped fund this study, along with HCTF. In the course of doing research on the effects of clearcutting on small mammals, have you found a significant difference in the effort that individual forestry companies are willing to expend to preserve wildlife habitat?

Sullivan: You know, the individuals are crucial. The silviculturalist with Louisiana Pacific in Golden has been instrumental in thinking in a broad-minded way. He is interested in anything that they can do to make the forest more diverse. Initially, this began as a business concern: he had a serious problem with the Microtis species of voles (the meadow voles and long-tailed voles) feeding on newly-planted trees, so he was very interested in anything that would increase the number of predators on his clearcut units.

Windrows-Photo.jpgHCTF: So building windrows to enhance predator habitat could be advantageous for foresters, as well as ecosystems?

Sullivan: Definitely. If you’ve got Microtis voles in your harvest area, it can be a serious problem. They’ll eat many of the seedlings – enough to necessitate replanting. There’s been a lot of work put into preventing the damage done by these species. Re-creating habitat to help maintain predator populations seems a logical solution.

HCTF: What about cases that are not so mutualistic: is there an appetite within the industry to adopt practices that conserve biodiversity, even if they don’t provide direct business benefits?

Sullivan: I think so, but again, it is company- and even individual- specific. For example, at Elkhart (our study site near Merritt), Aspen Planers have provided financial and in-kind support for this research, and they don’t have a problem with voles damaging trees. They are simply interested in what they can do to improve wildlife diversity. Again, this could be attributed to certain individuals’ philosophies, though I would say that the company policies of both of Aspen Planers and Louisiana Pacific are pretty positive in this direction.

HCTF: In one of your recent studies, you suggest that a habitat credit system, similar to current carbon offsetting programs, might provide the financial incentive necessary to encourage companies who are perhaps less-ecologically inclined to change their current practices. Can you elaborate?

American_marten_rev.jpgSullivan: Like it or not, we are enslaved by economics. The concept of assigning a dollar amount to ecological values leaves a bad taste in some people’s mouths, but I think we need to move there. Whether we call them habitat credits or biodiversity credits, it’s really about finding a way to recognize the importance of wildlife and habitats in an economically-driven system. We think of biofuel feedstocks as products from woody debris, why not small mammals?

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The Habitat Conservation Trust Foundation invests money from angling, hunting, trapping and guide outfitting licence surcharges into conservation projects across BC. You can read more about surcharge-funded projects here.