Aplodontia Rufa) in the Merritt Forest District: Progress Report 2001

Home , Mountain beaver

Assessment of Alternative Timber Harvesting Methods on Mountain Beaver (Aplodontia rufa) in the Merritt Forest District: Progress Report 2001.

Les W. Gyug, R.P.Bio.

Okanagan Wildlife Consulting 3130 Ensign Way Westbank, B.C. V4T 1T9

Prepared for

B.C. Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection, Southern Interior Region Kamloops, B.C.

November 27, 2001 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The objective of this project is to assess the effect of alternative timber harvesting methods on Mountain Beavers in the Merritt Forest District, and to develop mitigation measures to prevent impacts. This report summarizes information on Mountain Beaver occurrence in 17 cutblocks for eventual assessment of impacts after logging. Seven of these 17 cutblocks have been clearcut, and initial assessments made of short-term Mountain Beaver persistence after clearcutting in areas that were set as special Mountain Beaver management zones before logging began. Post-harvest evaluations on three cutblocks (A42313, A50518-1 and -2) in Railroad Creek, indicated that Mountain Beaver are indeed susceptible to crushing of their nest sites and tunnel systems by heavy machinery even protected by a 1-m deep snowpack. Impacts were greatest in areas used as skid trails, and these trails need to be carefully designated to minimize impacts. Post-harvest persistence appeared to be highest in riparian no-machine buffer zones where there was no machinery impact. Impacts on soil structure appeared to be fairly low in most areas logged on top of a snowpack in the Mountain Beaver management zones, but some sites appeared to be abandoned because runways under logs had been crushed. Four blocks that were summer logged (Tolko 118-1, 118-3, 98-1, and Weyco 597-5) generally showed very poor short-term Mountain Beaver persistence in sites previously occupied before logging, even though soil disturbance was minimal. Long-term results are needed to properly evaluate the effects in these blocks. These initial results indicated that the recommendations to mitigate timber harvesting and silvicultural effects on Mountain Beavers made in 1997 could be relatively effective, pending evaluation of further results. Briefly stated these were: Within proposed timber harvesting areas that contain Mountain Beavers: · Mountain Beaver tunnel/runway system perimeters are to be delineated, · No machine use within these perimeters except on top of a deep snowpack, · Without a deep snowpack, trees will be felled by hand, and trees top-skidded out, with treatment similar to that in a riparian "no-machine" area. · No mechanical site preparation within these perimeters, since any machine use will collapse nests and tunnels. Additional recommendations are made here regarding stocking standards in Mountain Beaver areas that will have to be evaluated in the long-term as well. Assessments need to be made on the long-term (e.g. 5 years or more post harvest) since Mountain Beaver populations are susceptible to local fluctuations, and it usually takes several years before shrub and/or tall herbaceous vegetation re-establishes after clearcutting. Blocks still to be harvested and assessed are: SBFEP A55987; Tolko 132-6, 133-1, 133-2, 133-3, 161-2; Weyco 597-3, 597-4, 693-8 and 647-3. As these sites are logged, licensees should collect record the dates of logging and the snow depths and conditions at time of logging to facilitate impact assessment.

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ...... 4 Acknowledgements ...... 4 METHODS ...... 4 RESULTS and EVALUATIONS...... 7 Post-harvest evaluation for A50518-1 and -2, Railroad Creek...... 8 Post-harvest evaluation for A42313, Railroad Creek...... 10 Post-harvest evaluation of Tolko CP98-1, Newton Creek...... 12 Post-harvest evaluation of Tolko CP118-1, Upper Tulameen River...... 12 Post-harvest evaluation of Tolko CP118-3, Upper Tulameen River...... 13 Post-harvest evaluation of Tolko CP597-5, Arrastra Creek...... 13 Searches for Mountain Beavers in other areas ...... 14 DISCUSSION ...... 16 RECOMMENDATIONS...... 17 LITERATURE CITED...... 20 PHOTOS (3 sites)...... 21 Appendix 1. Portions of Silvicultural Prescriptions dealing with Mountain Beaver in Blocks for which SP's have been prepared and approved...... 22 Appendix 2. GPS UTM (NAD83) locations of Mountain Beaver sites...... 28 Appendix 3. Maps showing locations of Mountain Beavers in and near cutblocks to be used for pre- and post-timber harvest assessments...... 29

List of Figures

Figure 1. Streams searched for Mountain Beaver in the Guichon Creek drainage northwest of Merritt...... 14 Figure 2. Revised distribution of Mountain Beaver in Canada based on Gyug (2000b) and new information collected in this project...... 15

List of Tables

Table 1. Numbers of Mountain Beaver occupied nests in cutblocks and control areas in the Merritt Forest District Mountain Beaver Study as of fall 2001...... 6 Table 2. Status of individual Mountain Beaver nest sites in Timber Sales A50518-1 and A50518-2, Railroad Creek, Merritt Forest District...... 9 Table 3. Pre- and post-timber harvest numbers of occupied Mountain Beaver nests in Timber Sale A42313, Railroad Creek, Merritt Forest District...... 11

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 3 INTRODUCTION

This project was a continuation of the Mountain Beaver (Aplodontia rufa rainieri) inventories conducted from 1996-2000 in the Merritt Forest District (Gyug 1996, Gyug 1997, Gyug 1998, Gyug 2000a). The rainieri subspecies of Mountain Beaver has been designated as Sensitive or Vulnerable and placed on the Blue List by the B.C. Conservation Data Centre. Mountain Beaver has been designated as Vulnerable by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (Gyug 1999). It has also been designated as Identified Wildlife for special management consideration under the Forest Practices Code of B.C. (B.C. Ministry of Forests and B.C. Environment 1999). Basic range and habitat information has already been detailed so that the intent of the Year 2001 work was primarily to determine the effects of timber harvesting on Mountain Beaver by comparing pre-harvest censuses to the same populations after harvesting. To accomplish this, the specific objectives of this project for 2001 were to:

1. Assess the current state of each of the 17 cutblocks and do post-harvest assessments where possible, 2. Assess new areas that are scheduled to be logged for possible inclusion in this study, 3. Obtain the portions of the Silvicultural Prescription for each cutblock that deals with Mountain Beaver, 4. Document any range extensions for Mountain Beaver particularly in the Pike Mt area, and attempt to determine if Mountain Beaver populations still exist in the Guichon drainage.

Acknowledgements

This project and report was completed under contract to the British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection through the Wildlife Section, of the Southern Interior Region, Kamloops, B.C. Funding was supplied through Forest Renewal B.C. through Weyerhaeuser Company Ltd. John Surgenor, Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection, Kamloops, served as contract monitor. J. Ross Munro (1997 and 1998), Bruce Ryder (2000 and 2001), and Laurie Rockwell (2001) assisted in the collection of field data.

METHODS

All cutblocks chosen for these surveys were south and west of Princeton and Tulameen within the Merritt Forest District. Complete Mountain Beaver censuses were done in 1998 only within cutblocks where layout was complete. Within these cutblocks we attempted to cover 100% of the potential Mountain Beaver habitat within the block boundaries. Sketch maps of the nest site locations and tunnel/runway system perimeters were prepared. After consulting with the forest licensees, we returned to each site to flag the tunnel/runway system perimeters. Flagging was usually on bushes or small trees that would not be likely to be harvested. Flag colours used to mark perimeters were different for each forest licensee, and were chosen so that there would not be conflicts with existing flagging schemes. Perimeters were also painted with a single vertical yellow slash facing outward from the tunnel system at the base of a tree large enough that the stump would likely still be intact after logging. There were 10 of these

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 4 blocks that had more than one Mountain Beaver nest site and were included in this study.

Mountain Beaver nest sites were interpreted as being “Occupied” if we could find haypiles of fresh or wilting green vegetation at the mouth of the tunnel systems. If we could find no fresh haypiles, then the sites was considered to be “Old sign” and to be unoccupied, unless some fresh burrowing activity could be seen, in which case the area was considered to be one with “Fresh Activity”. At each occupied burrow site, the location (with 15-m accuracy) was recorded using a handheld consumer-grade GPS receiver. Elevation, BEC zone, slope, aspect, and site series were recorded. Each occupied nest site was flagged and painted with a number or letter at the base of the nearest large tree or trees. Fresh activity and old sign were also recorded and GPS’d for location, but no marks were painted.

Appendix 1 lists the relevant portions of the Silvicultural Prescriptions for the 10 blocks for which the SP has been approved by the District Manager. Appendix 2 lists the GPS co- ordinates of Mountain Beaver nests for this study, as well as estimating the approximate accuracy of the readings. Readings taken in 2000 and 2001 were found to be accurate enough to return to within 10-15 m of the sites using handheld GPS units. Readings taken prior to 2000 are considerably less accurate because of the effects of Selective Availability (random error introduced by the U.S. Government) that was discontinued as of May 2000. An index map, a location map of each area, and a detailed map of each block are in Appendix 3. For sites not visited in 2001, these maps are repeated from previous reports.

Seventeen cutblocks in total have been included in this Mountain Beaver impact assessment project (Table 1). Only seven of the 17 sites had been logged by fall 2001. In 2001, post-harvest evaluations were redone in 3 Small Business timber sales in Railroad Creek (A50518-1, A50518–2, and A42313) that had been surveyed after logging twice already. Post-logging assessments were done for the first time in 2001 on Tolko CP98-1, Newton Creek, Tolko CP118-1 and 118-3, Upper Tulameen River, and Weyco CP 597-5, Arrastra Creek.

The experimental design here is a before-and-after study. Population fluctuations due to factors other than those of interest here, i.e., the impact of clearcutting with alternative harvest techniques and or site preparation, will not be controllable in this experimental design. Control sites, i.e. unharvested sites, were readily available only for some of the sites (see Table 1). Recensusing those sites will provide an estimate of natural variability in population size to judge the extent of the impact effects on overall populations. However, this project is not purely of a statistical nature on overall populations, and the direct impacts of machinery, logging and site preparation on each Mountain Beaver nest and occupied site needs to be considered in the final evaluation.

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 5 Table 1. Numbers of Mountain Beaver occupied nests in cutblocks and control areas in the Merritt Forest District Mountain Beaver Study as of fall 2001.

Occupied Mt Beaver Nests CP Location Opening No. (Year of Survey) Status Fall 2001 Pre-Harvest Post-Harvest SBFEP A50518-1 Railroad Cr. 92H045 - 2 7 (97) 2 (98) 6 (00) 2 (01) Logged 97/98; Prepped 98, Planted 99 A50518-2 Railroad Cr 92H045 - 3 10 (97) 8 (98) 4 (00) 11 (01) Logged 97/98; Prepped 98, Planted 99 A42313-1 Railroad Cr 92H045 - 4 36 (97) 32 (99) 31 (00) 42 (01) Logged 98/99, Prepped 00, Planted 01 Portion of former A42312 SW of Road 21 (98) Control nearby A55987-1 Copper Cr. NA 9 (98) Road Built Tolko 098-1 Newton Cr. 92H047-62 8 (98) 2 (01) Logged Summer 01 118-1 Gellatly Cr. 92H036-68 4 (00) 5 (01) Logged Summer 01 Control 4 (00) 3 (01) Control adjacent to block and in WTP 118-3 Coates Cr. 92H036-70 7 (00) 0 (01) Logged Summer 01 Control 6 (00) 4 (01) Control adjacent to block and in WTP 132-6 Champion Cr. 92H046-81 7 (00) Road Built Control 3 (00) Control adjacent to block 133-1 Champion Cr. NA 6 (98) Not logged, no road Control 4 (98) Control adjacent to block 133-2 Champion Cr. NA 3 (98) Not logged, no road 133-3 Champion Cr. NA 16 (98) Not logged, no road 161-2 Cunningham Cr. 7 (00) Not logged, no road Control 12 (00) Control adjacent to block and in WTP Weyco 597-3 Arrastra Cr. 92H036-27 5 (98)/5 (01) Not logged, Road Built Control 2 (98)/6 (01) Control in WTP 597-4 Arrastra Cr. 92H036-26 2 (98) Not logged, Road Built 597-5 Arrastra Cr. 92H036-67 2 (98) 1 (01) Logged Summer 2000, Prepped 2001 647-3 Copper Cr. NA 10 (98) Not logged, no road 693-8 Copper Cr. NA 5 (98) 5 (98) Not logged, no road

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 6 The Mountain Beaver location and other data has been provided to the B.C. Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection in digital format as ARC Shapefile sets. The shapefile set with all locations known to date is APRU_records_to2001_albers. This shapefile is designed to be joined to 5 database (.dbf) files via a common field named APRU_ID so that the data from different years or projects can be attached to its location in ARC GIS. These files are named: APRU_PrePostStudy.dbf--The raw data for this study. APRU_post1999_other.dbf--Records from other studies or sources in 2000 and 2001.

These next 3 files contain the bulk of the data that made up the range map in Gyug (2000b): APRU_pre2000_other.dbf-- Records from other studies or sources prior to 2000, These finalso reported in Gyug 2000b. APRU_Museum_Records.dbf (data care of David Nagorsen, Royal B.C. Museum) APRU_9698.dbf--Records from Mountain Beaver inventories in 1996-1998. Any records from 1997 or 1998 that were also used for this Pre- and Post-harvesting study were moved from this file to the APRU_PrePostStudy file above. Therefore there should be no duplication of records between files.

RESULTS and EVALUATIONS

Tolko and Weyco were contacted for Mountain Beaver sightings in proposed cutblocks and about possible inclusion of these sites in this study. Additional possible cutblocks in the Upper Tulameen (Tolko CP 119 and 177) were not included because known major concentrations of Mountain Beavers were not in cutblocks, or had been encircled by Wildlife Tree Patches within cutblocks so that no timber harvesting would take place in the Mountain Beaver areas. Three new cutblocks were field examined for possible inclusion in this study. These included Tolko 192-8 at Cook Creek (4 km northeast of Tulameen), Weyco 711-1 at Garrison Lakes, and Weyco 718-6 at Fifteen-Mile Creek (Whipsaw Creek). None of these were included in this study. Mountain Beavers were of limited distribution within the blocks (718-6 and 711-1), or were mostly contained in Wildlife Tree Patches (CP 192-8).

Weyco's CP597-3, Arrastra Creek had not yet been logged, but was recensused in 2001 (Table 1). Since the original census in 1998, the part of the block that was most densely occupied by Mountain Beavers had been turned into a Wildlife Tree Patch (WTP). This portion of the block was now designated to be an unlogged control for the other parts of the block. There were still 5 Mountain Beaver counted in the portion of the block to be logged, although there were now 4 in one area where there had been 3 in 1998, and only one in the other area where there had been 2 in 1998. The number estimated in the WTP in 1998 was only 2, but was estimated at 6 in 2001, with one of those in a pile of logs made of downed snags at the road edge.

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 7 Post-harvest evaluation of A50518-1 and A50518-2, Railroad Creek

In September 1997, we had counted and marked 7 Mountain Beaver nests in Small Business Timber Sales A50518-1 (3.2 ha) and 10 nests in A50518-2 (4.5 ha) and had marked out tunnel/runway perimeters for special management (Table 2, see Appendix 3 for map). Block A50518-1 was clearcut harvested between December 29, 1997 and January 19, 1998 while Block A50518-2 was clearcut harvested between January 7 and January 21, 1998. Both blocks were harvested using a Timco feller-buncher, which is a type typically used on steep slopes or where low ground pressure is required. Logs were dragged to landings using rubber-tired skidders with grapples, or by a D-6 caterpillar tractor where line skidding was necessary. The intention of the special management areas were to avoid soil compaction and disturbance by limiting any machine use in the area to deep snowpack conditions. At the time of harvesting uncompressed snow depth in the standing timber was 1 m. The ground was not frozen under the snowpack (data supplied by Merritt Forest District Small Business Program). No site preparation was undertaken within the Mountain Beaver special management areas. In August 1998, October 2000, and August 2001, we recensused these cutblocks (Table 2). In A50518-1, numbers of occupied nests fluctuated from year to year with a maximum of 7 occupied nests in any one year in the 12 known nest locations in or immediately adjacent (within 10m) of the block. The loss of only one site could be directly attributed to soil compaction during timber harvest (Nest 2) and this site is not now suitable for Mountain Beaver nesting. This leaves 11 known nest locations in, or within 10 m of, the block. Nests were sometimes occupied, and sometimes not occupied, with no apparent relation to the logging that had happened around them. In A50518-2, numbers of occupied nests fluctuated from year to year with a maximum of 11 occupied nests in 2001 in the 13 known nest locations in or immediately adjacent (within 3 m) of the block. In 2001 the number of occupied Mountain Beaver nests in the block was one higher than before logging, after a low of only four occupied nests in 2000. In the Mountain Beaver area that runs along the stream through the centre of the block, the abandonment of two nests in 1998 seemed to be attributable to machinery disturbance (Table 2, Nest Nos. 6 and 7). Nest No. 6 was crushed under a skid trail, was no longer suitable for nesting and was considered removed from the potential nest sites. Nest No. 7 was not disturbed directly, but the nearby tunnels were crushed under a skid trail. Other sites in the center part of the block were occupied in some years but not in other years in patterns that could not be directly attributed to logging or skidding impacts. On the western corner of A50518-2, there were just as many Mountain Beaver in 2001 as there were prior to logging (Table 2). Nest No. 8 appeared to be moved 3 m outside of the block boundary after logging, from where it had previously been right on the block boundary, and was occupied each year after logging. I do not consider a move to a second or alternate nest chamber only 3 m from the original to signify abandonment of a nest site in these calculations. At Nest No. 9 there was minimal soil disturbance, but logs had been flattened to the ground and the runways under them made unusable. Fresh activity was seen near the old Nest No.9 in 2000 and 2001 but not until 2001 was a new nest made 20 m away and closer to the block boundary.

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 8 Table 2. Status of individual Mountain Beaver nest sites in Timber Sales A50518-1 and A50518-2, Railroad Creek, Merritt Forest District (see Appendix 3 for maps). Nest Pre-harvest Post-harvest No. 1997 1998 2000 2001 A50518-1 -- includes one nest within 10 m of block boundary 1 Occupied nest Unoccupied Unoccupied Unoccupied 2 Occupied nest Nest site crushed Not suitable for occupation Unoccupied 3 Occupied nest on bdy Occupied nest Unoccupied Unoccupied 4 Occupied nest Unoccupied Occupied nest Unoccupied 5 Occupied nest Unoccupied Occupied nest Unoccupied 6 Occupied nest Unoccupied Unoccupied Unoccupied 7 Occupied nest Unoccupied Unoccupied Unoccupied 8 Unoccupied Occupied nest Occupied nest Occupied nest 9 Unoccupied Unoccupied Occupied nest Unoccupied 10 Part of territory of Nest#2 Unoccupied Occupied nest Unoccupied (11 out of Block) (Part of territory of Nest#3) (Occupied nest) (Occupied nest) 12 Unoccupied Unoccupied Unoccupied Occupied nest Total Nest Sites 12 11 11 11 Occupied Nests 7 2 7 3 A50518-2 Along stream through centre of Block 1 Occupied nest on boundary Occupied nest Occupied nest Occupied nest 2 Occupied nest Occupied nest Occupied nest Occupied nest 3 Occupied nest Occupied nest despite Unoccupied Occupied nest skid-trail disturbance 4 Occupied nest " Unoccupied Unoccupied 5 Occupied nest " Unoccupied Occupied nest 6 Occupied nest Nest site under skid trail Not suitable Not suitable for occupation 7 Occupied nest Unoccupied, much of Unoccupied Occupied nest territory under skid trail? 11 Unoccupied Occupied nest Unoccupied Occupied nest 12 Unoccupied Unoccupied Unoccupied Occupied nest on bdy 14 Unoccupied Unoccupied Unoccupied Occupied nest A50518-2 West Side of Block 8 Occupied nest on boundary Occupied nest moved 3-m Occupied nest Occupied nest 9 Occupied nest Unoccupied, runways Unoccupied Unoccupied under logs were flattened 10 Occupied nest on boundary Occupied nest Occupied nest Occupied nest 13 Unoccupied Unoccupied Unoccupied Occupied nest Total Nest Sites 14 13 13 13 Occupied Nests 10 8 4 11

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 9 Post-harvest evaluation of A42313, Railroad Creek In 1997, A42313 contained 38 occupied Mountain Beaver nests within its boundaries before timber harvest (Table 3, see Appendix 3 for map). The tunnel/runway boundaries that we flagged and painted in 1998 were GPS’d by the Small Business Program and designated as separate Standards Units (SU 2 or 3; see Appendix 3 for maps) where there was to be no machine use except on top of a 1-m deep snowpack. SU2 were connected to streams that would have received no-machine zones anyway. These boundaries were expanded in a few places to take in Mountain Beaver activity areas. SU3 were areas that would not have otherwise received any special treatment except for the presence of Mountain Beaver. There appeared to be an oversight in traversing the boundaries and the western or upper part of the area marked C was not included in SU2 or SU3. The block was clearcut between December 2, 1998, and February 2, 1999. Snow depths were between 1.1 and 1.5 m during timber harvest. Compressed snow pack depths (i.e. under logging machinery) was in the range of 30- 50 cm. Most of the block, except for Sub-area K, was broadcast burned in late September 2000 using helicopter drip-torch ignition. The Mountain Beaver SU’s were not site-prepped, and remnant small conifers were not knocked down, so that the fire did not carry very well through these any of SU2 or SU3 units.

This block was censused after timber harvest on Sept 28, 1999, when 32 occupied Mountain Beaver nest sites and sites with fresh activity were found. It was resurveyed again within one week after broadcast burning of a major portion of the block on October 2, 2000, when 31 occupied Mountain Beaver nest sites and sites with fresh activity were found. It was surveyed again on August 23, 2001.

The immediate loss of 5 Mountain Beaver nests active in 1999 could be attributed to compaction during clearcutting, although two of the nests were reoccupied by 2000 or 2001. One of the areas we flagged out as a Mountain Beaver area, Sub-area C, contained four nests and, through oversight, part of it was not included in SU2. The runways under logs were collapsed during timber harvesting although the soil did not appear heavily impacted or disturbed. Neither of the two nests in this excluded portion were occupied in 1999 or 2000, although one was reoccupied in 2001. The south end of the SU3 sub-area E in the center of the block appeared to have been heavily impacted by skidding with two nests from 1997 not occupied in 1999, although one was reoccupied by 2000. One of the 1997 active nests in the SU2 unit at sub-area L was compacted when the gully it was in was used as a skid trail, and had not been reoccupied even by 2001. It still appears to be unsuited for occupation because of ground disturbance.

In total there were more Mountain Beaver on the site in 2001, than there were in 1997 before the site was logged. However, the entire increase comes from one area (sub-area K) which was also heli-logged in 1995 or 1996 prior to being ground logged in 1998. This is a wet seepage area where streams are braided and is excellent Mountain Beaver habitat. This was also an area of very large spruce that were salvage heli-logged because of current attack or their susceptibility to spruce bark beetle in 1995 or 1996. There were very few merchantable trees left to harvest in this area in 1998, so the area did not receive much disturbance from the ground-based logging. It also appears that shrub and tall herbaceous growth has accelerated on this sub-area after logging--probably because of the original low-impact method used to log it.

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 10 The tall shrubs, intact and wet soil layer appear to have been ideal for a population increase for Mountain Beaver in this particular spot.

If the heli-logged sub-area (K) is excluded from the calculations, then overall there was only a loss of 4 Mountain Beaver (31 to 27) from 1997 to 2001, three of which could be attributed to disturbance from skidding. Among areas not compacted during timber harvest, there appeared to be quite a “shuffle” in areas used with increases in some areas, decreases in others, and nest sites in different locations than in 1997, even where the numbers remained the same. Mountain Beavers are a prey species for many predators with an annual survivorship estimated at 64% (Lovejoy and Black 1979) so that not every potential nest site can be expected to be occupied at any given time. Overall there does not appear to have been a negative impact on the Mountain Beaver population in this block from logging.

Table 3. Pre- and post-timber harvest numbers of occupied Mountain Beaver nests in Timber Sale A42313, Railroad Creek, Merritt Forest District. See Appendix 3 for map.

Pre- harvest Post- Post- Post- Sub- harvest burn burn Comments Area Nests (1997) (1999) (2000) (2001) A 2 1 1 0 Area was ignited despite being in SU3. B 3 2 2 2 Area along streamside No Machine Buffers. C 4 2 1 2 Loss in 1999 attributed to compaction of runways under logs since soil compaction was not too great. SW part of sub-area was not included in SU2 even though perimeter was marked. D 5 5 4 6 Area along streamside No Machine Buffers. E 5 4 4 4 Loss of at least one nest in 1999 from compaction in SU3 F 1 1 1 1 Area along streamside No Machine Buffers. G 2 3 3 3 Partially along streamside No Machine Buffers. H 3 3 2 3 Area along streamside No Machine Buffers. I 1 2 5 3 Area along streamside No Machine Buffers. J 2 1 0 0 No activity in 2000 or 2001. K 7 7 8 15 Heli-logged even before timber sale so that impact of machinery during clearcutting was minimal. Found 15 haypiles and 3 unoccupied nests here in 2001 L 3 1 1 3 Loss of one nest in 1999 due to compaction of a gully used as skid trail. Total 38 32 31 42

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 11 Post-harvest evaluation of Tolko CP98-1, Newton Creek

In 1998, prior to timber harvesting, Mountain Beavers were found in one area of CP98-1 along a wet seepage area on a bench above Newton Creek. Trees were felled by chain saw and logs were cable-yarded up to a road in summer 2001. There were 9 Mountain Beaver nests in 1998 (see map in Appendix 3), but only 2 were found in this area after logging in late August 2001. Neither of these two were in the same spots as any of the nests found in 1998. One nest (Number 8) appeared to have been shifted slightly so that the haypile and nest were now found under a tree on the block boundary were there was no soil disturbance. One other nest was in a new spot between original nests 3 and 6. This nest was under crisscrossed logs that had been already dead before falling and thus were not yarded. Mountain Beaver tunnels could still be seen after logging in the same places where there had been occupied nests before logging. This indicated that the cable yarding had caused only light or minimal soil disturbance. However, any runways that had been under logs were probably no longer useable since most logs had been pushed down to ground level by the weight of falling trees or trees being yarded over them. The lack of Mountain Beavers in sites previously occupied could not be attributed to soil disturbance, but possibly to removal of cover. This site will need annual checking to see if the sites are reoccupied once a dense covering layer of fireweed or other herbs or shrubs have grown on the site. There was a considerable amount of needle and branch debris on the ground from tree limbing that would probably need to be dealt with before replanting on the site. No firm decision had been taken as to what type of Site Preparation would be used on that site (Rene Thomsen, pers. comm.).

Post-harvest evaluation of Tolko CP118-1, Upper Tulameen River

In CP 118-1, Mountain Beaver nests marked in 2000 prior to logging had all been along streams except for two (B and F, see map in Appendix 3). Tree falling had been completed in CP118-1 when the post-harvest survey was undertaken in September 2001, but skidding of logs had not yet been completed. The two Mountain Beaver nests (B and F) outside streamside no-machine buffer zones had been missed by licensee staff and had not been included in any no-machine zones. Both were clearly no longer occupied because of ground disturbance from rubber-tired skidders. Yarding had not yet commenced across the lower Mountain Beaver sites (142, A, FA1) where trees had been felled across the stream with chain saws, but had not yet been pulled across by skidder. Sites within the block that were not occupied in 2000 (OL3 and sites upstream towards FA2) were occupied in 2001. Both of these were in the streamside no-machine zone, and there was no soil disturbance from logging on these sites. This block needs to be reassessed once skidding is complete. I suspect that there may be enough disturbance of runways when the downed log layer is skidded over Sites 142, A and FA1 that they might not be occupied in 2002. Adjacent to CP 118-1 and in the WTP, four of five control sites occupied in 2000 were still occupied in 2001. The single control site not used in 2001 was right on the block boundary. While there was no ground disturbance there, some covering logs had been removed from the nest area.

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 12 Post-harvest evaluation of Tolko CP118-3, Upper Tulameen River

In CP 118-3, there were a number of Mountain Beaver nests marked in 2000 that were not on any streams or creeks (see map in Appendix 3). Tree falling and skidding had been completed in the summer of 2001 before the post-harvest survey was undertaken in September. Tolko staff had marked the perimeters around all the Mountain Beaver nests, placing them within no-machine zones. Trees were felled by chain saw in these areas, and logs pulled from outside the area by skidders. There was almost no ground disturbance in these areas and Mountain Beaver tunnels appeared intact. However, the falling and skidding of trees within these Mountain Beaver no-machine areas did appear to cause runways under logs to be disturbed. In one of the areas (near Nest E), there were considerably more logs on the ground after logging since standing dead balsam had been cut down and left. Despite all these precautions, and the lack of soil disturbance, all seven Mountain Beaver nests within the block appeared to have been abandoned in 2001. This site should be revisited annually to see if Mountain Beaver reoccupy these nests once a dense covering layer of fireweed or other shrubs or herbs grows on the site. Since the soil disturbance of nests and tunnels was minimal, they should be readily reoccupied by any Mountain Beavers immigrating to the site. Three of four control nests at the north side of the block (Nests A, B, C, D) were still occupied in 2001. Both control nests (K and L) in the Wildlife Tree Patch were abandoned, but there was a newly occupied nest (newly-named M) in the WTP 12 m north of L. Nests K and L appear to have been disturbed by landing construction since soil removal occurred as little as 5-10 m from the nests. Dry hay was found at these sites, indicating they had been used earlier in the summer, but were no longer being used. The newly occupied nest (Nest M) was outside of the area disturbed in landing construction. No Mountain Beaver activity was found at the east end of this WTP along the stream where there had been fresh activity (FA1) in 2000.

Post-harvest evaluation of Weyco CP597-5, Arrastra Creek Only two Mountain Beaver areas, each with one nest, were delimited in Weyco CP 597-5. Since the area was summer logged, the Mountain Beaver areas were no-machine zones and trees had been felled by chain saw in both areas. Soil disturbance was minimal in both sites and previously occupied tunnels and runways could be seen clearly. Only one of the sites was occupied in 2001 in a small portion of the northernmost Mountain Beaver area where disturbance had been extremely light because no trees had been pulled through the area and small balsam had survived the logging. Site preparation was done by excavator and consisted of mechanical piling and screefing in dry areas, and mounding in wet areas. No site preparation appeared to have been undertaken in the Mountain Beaver areas.

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 13 Searches for Mountain Beavers in other areas Searches were made in the Guichon drainage to attempt to find populations of Mountain Beavers in the area where a National Museums of Canada specimen was captured in 1948 and where sign tentatively identified as that of Mountain Beaver was found in 1998 (Gyug 1998, Gyug 2000b). No Mountain Beaver sign was found in this area in 2001 (Figure 1), and the existence of any current population in that area is still uncertain.

M t. Beaver sign 19 98 #

%U Merritt

Streams searched for Mt. Beaver

Highways 5 0 5 1 0 Kilo meters

Figure 1. Streams searched for Mountain Beaver in the Guichon Creek drainage northwest of Merritt.

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 14 Searches were made in the Pike Mountain area northwest of Princeton after reports of Mountain Beavers there from Tolko and Weyerhaeuser staff. These sites were in an area where Mountain Beaver was previously unknown (Gyug 2000b). All known Mountain Beaver sites are now mapped in Figure 2 (see Gyug 2000b for sources except for the new records from 2000 and 2001), and the revised distribution limits shown. Mountain Beavers were found in 3 new areas in 2001: · Cook Creek - 12 haypiles--10 reported and GPS'd by Tolko staff, but 2 other haypiles found upon our inspection of the area. · Asp Creek - haypiles reported by Weyco contractor and staff in direct line with a proposed main road line up Asp Creek. 8 haypiles found upon our inspection with Weyco staff and contractor. Two of the haypiles were in direct line with the proposed road. No alternate road routes were possible in this area. · Missezula Mt. Haypile and tunnels found by LG while doing Northern Goshawk inventory for Weyco in July 2001. · 1.5 km northeast of Allison Lake - fresh Mountain Beaver tunneling reported in CP 193-2 by Tolko staff in late 2000.

Old R ecord, No new sign N # ci o l a

Mt. Beaver %U R Lytton . Distribution %U # M erritt . R in Canada # r e at w d # ol C %U # Aspen Grove # All M t. Beaver Records F # r a # s Mt. Beaver Distribution Limits e # # r #

R # . 0 10 20 30 40 50 Kilometers # # ## # New Records ## # # # # # # ## # ## # ## # T # # %U u ## ### lam ## ###### # ee Old R ecord, # n R Princeton # # . # ##### %U N o new sign ##### ###### ### ### ### ## # # #%U # # ##### Hedley ## ### ####### # . %U# ### # # R ####### # n

# e Hope # e # # # # m # # a # # ### k ### l ### i # m

# i # # # # # S # # # Ma#nning ## F # Pr ov. Park raser R # # . %U Chilliwack # # # ##### # # # ### # # ## %ULangley # # # Chilliwack R. # # # # ## # # # # nada # Abbotsford%U Ca # U.S.A.

Figure 2. Revised distribution of Mountain Beaver in Canada based on Gyug (2000b) and new information collected in this project.

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 15 DISCUSSION

Results from three years of post-logging Mountain Beaver surveys in the three Railroad Creek cutblocks has shown numbers that sometimes come close to, or exceed, the original pre- logging population, but not in every year. Mountain Beavers are a prey species for many predators with an annual survivorship estimated at 64% (Lovejoy and Black 1979). This likely explains the natural population fluctuations observed here where not every potential nest site occupied every year. Therefore the results for any newly-logged block must be viewed as preliminary, and longer-term results over a number of years are needed to be conclusive.

I had recommended special management areas established at the limits of Mountain Beaver tunnel/runway systems, and that within these special management areas the intention was to avoid soil compaction and disturbance by limiting any machine use in the area to deep snowpack conditions. With these precautions in place, the loss of only 5 of 55 Mountain Beaver nest sites in the Railroad Creek blocks could be attributed directly to winter time machinery use over the nest sites. On these sites, one meter of snow on the ground before compaction by machinery did not appear to be enough to protect soil from compaction on skid trails. However, away from the skid trails, runways under logs were collapsed but the soil structure often remained intact so that Mountain Beavers eventually reoccupied some of those areas.

The four blocks examined for the first time after logging in 2001 were all summer logged. In these blocks, Mountain Beavers appeared to abandon sites fairly easily, even when there was no apparent soil damage. The removal of logs under which there were runways, or the collapsing of the runways as trees fell on top of already-downed logs, or were then were dragged over these logs, appeared to be enough to cause Mountain Beaver to abandon these sites. Based on the results from Railroad Creek, a true assessment of the effects of logging on their populations cannot be made until 2-4 years after the logging, when numbers may have returned to what they were before logging. A full assessment will therefore have to wait for future years of this project.

Based on the seven sites examined so far, four of which were summer logged, and three winter logged, it appears the least damage is done to the soil structure of a site when no machines are used in the Mountain Beaver areas, whatever the season. Soil damage could be quite light after winter logging, but only in areas that did not see repeated passes by skidders. However, the general abandonment of Mountain Beaver areas after summer logging, even with no soil compaction or disturbance, indicates we do not yet know all we need to know about Mountain Beaver biology to avoid all impacts to their populations. The presence of runways under logs, or other shrub or tree canopy shelter, may be more important to them than we presently realize.

It will be important to separate short-term from long-term results to understand the implications of logging on Mountain Beavers. Sites that are abandoned on the short-term, may become useable in a few years. Since there is little or no disturbance of existing tunnels and nests, these could easily be reoccupied when other habitat conditions - principally tall herbs and shrubs for both cover and forage - are favourable for Mountain Beaver. If Mountain Beaver areas are not to be mechanically site-prepared, then regeneration of

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 16 conifers on site becomes an issue. However, this issue is similar to regeneration issues in streamside no-machine buffers, which often form the centre of Mountain Beaver areas as well. Possible solutions are in acceptance of natural regeneration, manual preparation of actual planting sites, and acceptance of lower stocking levels more in line with what might occur naturally in what are often wet and poorly stocked sites anyway. Broadcast burning is considered harmful to Mountain Beavers since it kills them in their burrows. The documented evidence for this is based on only one study that looked at 2 cutblocks (Motobu 1978). On one cutblock, 50% of the Mountain Beavers were killed in the broadcast burn. On the second cutblock, 20% of the block did not burn because it was wet. However, this wet spot contained the majority of the Mountain Beavers of the block, so 80% of the Mountain Beavers survived the fire. Based on the one cutblock examined in our study (A42313) that was broadcast burned, the fire did not carry well through the wetter portions of the cutblock, and it appeared that most Mountain Beavers survived the broadcast burn. However, normal procedures for making the site easier to burn were not followed (i.e., knocking down remnant small conifers) because it was felt this might have made too hot a fire in the Mountain Beaver Standards Units (Tom Lacey, pers. comm.). Long-term follow-up will be required to see if Mountain Beaver reoccupy those few areas that were heavily burned (e.g. sub-area A in A42313). Reoccupation might only be expected when fireweed and other tall herbs or shrubs are again growing on the site.

RECOMMENDATIONS Only seven of the 17 blocks in this study have been logged and reported on here, so the rest will have to wait until after harvesting and/or site preparation for any evaluation. Long-term post-harvest and post-site-preparation evaluations will be important to determine if the methods suggested to mitigate the effects of timber harvesting on Mountain Beavers are effective since short term numbers of Mountain Beavers fluctuate considerably, and the short-term effects of summer logging - even in no-machine zones - appears to be quite dramatic on Mountain Beaver. The ten blocks remaining to be harvested should be censused within a year after logging, and preferably before site preparation, and then evaluated after site preparation over the short- and long-term. This will help separate the effects of logging from the effects of site preparation. Each of the blocks, and its control if present, can be censused in one person-day or less.

Particularly important in this evaluation will be whether logging with machines over a snowpack is sufficient to prevent log and soil compaction and disruption of runways, tunnels and nest sites. Critical to this evaluation will be collecting information on the machinery used, the beginning and finishing dates of harvest, and what the snow conditions are when these areas are logged (i.e. both uncompressed and compressed snow depths). Forest licensees should record this information to assist in the future evaluations.

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 17 Based on the preliminary evaluations of these seven cutblocks, the recommendations of Gyug (1997) appear to be a good starting point for mitigating the impacts of clearcutting on Mountain Beavers. However, these will be subject to modification as this project progresses and results are evaluated. These recommendations are mainly from Gyug (1997) with minimal modifications: In proposed timber harvest areas that contain Mountain Beavers: · Mountain Beaver tunnel/runway system perimeters are to be delineated both by flagging and by painting at the bases of perimeter trees. · The areas within these perimeters are to be designated for special management. The only exception would be where these areas will fall entirely within existing no- machine areas along streams or riparian areas.

Within these Mountain Beaver perimeters: · There is to be no machine use within these areas except on top of a deep (1-m+) snowpack that would protect tunnels and nests from compaction or disruption. · Even on a deep snowpack, skidding through the area should be minimized by using direct routes outwards from the area. (added in 2001). · Any skid trails through these areas need to be carefully placed to avoid impacts on concentrations of Mountain Beaver nest sites. (added in 2000). · If harvesting proceeds when the snowpack is not deep, then trees will be felled by hand, and the trees top-skidded out of the areas. The only exception would be for trees at the edge of the area that a feller-buncher could reach without driving within the perimeter of the area. · There is to be no mechanical site preparation, since any machine use will collapse nests and tunnels. Stocking Standards and silvicultural issues were not specifically mentioned in the recommendations of the original report of 1997. The following were added on a provisional basis as guidelines in 2000 and are repeated here. Long-term evaluation of these impacts would require regeneration surveys specifically aimed at the Mountain Beaver standards units. · Stocking standards should accept natural regeneration. · Stocking standards should reflect pre-harvest stocking levels and site conditions if the areas have lower than normal stocking to begin with, e.g. because of high water tables. · Hand-skreefing of individual planting spots would be acceptable. · Broadcast burning may be acceptable in some cases depending on existence of surrounding populations for immigration, and depending on extent and impact of planned burn.

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 18 LITERATURE CITED

B.C. Ministry of Forests and B.C. Environment. 1999. Managing Identified Wildlife Guidebook (Forestry Practices Code). Volume 1. Prov. of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C. Gyug, L.W. 1996. Forest Development Plan Red- and Blue-listed Species Inventory for Small Mammals: Mountain Beaver (Aplodontia rufa), Cascade Mantled Ground Squirrel (Spermophilus saturatus), and Sagebrush Northern Bog Lemming (Synaptomys borealis artemisiae). Report prepared for B.C. Envt, Penticton, B.C. Gyug, L.W. 1997. Forest Development Plan Red- and Blue-listed Species Inventory for Mountain Beaver (Aplodontia rufa), Cascade Mantled Ground Squirrel (Spermophilus saturatus), Sagebrush Northern Bog Lemming (Synaptomys borealis artemisiae), and Tailed Frog (Ascaphus truei). Report prepared for B.C. Min. of Environment, Southern Interior Region, Penticton, British Columbia Gyug, L.W. 1998. 1998 Forest Development Plan Inventory in the Merritt Forest District, British Columbia: Mountain Beaver (Aplodontia rufa), and Tailed Frog (Ascaphus truei). Report prepared for British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Southern Interior Region, Penticton, British Columbia. 21 pp. Gyug, L.W. 1999. Update status report on the Mountain Beaver (Aplodontia rufa) in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, Ottawa, Ont. 24pp. Gyug, L.W. 2000a. The impact of clearcutting on Mountain Beaver (Aplodontia rufa) in the Merritt Forest District, British Columbia: progress report 2000. Report prepared for British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Southern Interior Region, Kamloops, British Columbia. Gyug, L.W. 2000b. Status, distribution and biology of the Mountain Beaver, Aplodontia, rufa, in Canada. Canadian Field Naturalist 114(3):476-490. Lovejoy, B.P. and H.C. Black. 1979. Population analysis of the Mountain Beaver, Aplodontia rufa pacifica, in western Oregon. Northwest Science 53(2):82-89. Motobu, D.A. 1978. Effects of controlled slash burning on the mountain beaver (Aplodontia rufa rufa). Northwest Science 52:92-99.

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 19 PHOTOS

Photo 1. Mountain Beaver haypile and nest entrances under tree in unlogged block at Arrastra Creek (CP 597- 3, Nest No. 2)

Photo 2. Skidder tracks around old Mountain Beaver nest which was occupied prior to logging but unsuitable for nesting after logging because of soil disturbance (Upper Tulameen River, CP 118- 1, Nest No. B was in upper center under stumps).

Photo 3. Mountain Beaver nest within no-machine zone, Upper Tulameen River, CP 118-3, Nest No. G. Despite intact soil surface and tunnels, nest was unoccupied after logging.

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 20 Appendix 1. Portions of Silvicultural Prescriptions dealing with Mountain Beaver in Blocks for which SP's have been prepared and approved.

Excerpts from CP 98-1 Tolko FL A18696 Newton Creek Final Copy as Submitted April 9, 1999 Approved April 28, 1999.

H - Fish and Wildlife 2) Issues . . . Mountain beaver sites have been identified. 5) Actions to accommodate fish and wildlife/biodiversity Actions to protect mountain beaver 1. Identify and mark active burrows and nest sites prior to harvesting. 2. Establish a Sensitive Harvesting Area, which will protect the area extending 5 m beyond the perimeter of each identified site according to the location of the outer, "last" visible evidence of burrows, tunnels or nests. 3. Handfall and cable yard trees away from the perimeter of the SHA as much as possible. It is recognized that some timber will need to be felled into and dragged through the SHA, otherwise, it will not be possible to utilize it. 4. Manual screef and plant on untreated, raised microsites within SHAs. 5. The SHAs may become a separate SU with a reduced minimum stocking standard if there is a significant area with insufficient natural, plantable microsites.

Excerpts from CP 132-6 Tolko FL A18696 Champion Creek Final Copy as Submitted April 1, 1997 Approved April 2, 1997. [This SP replaces old SPs that were already approved.] There is no mention of Mountain Beaver in the 1997 SP. Accompanying the original SP (1990) there was a report that states: Fish and Wildlife . . . There is an unknown burrowing type of animal found throughout the block[s?] as well. It is suspected that these animals are mountain beaver (Aplodontia rufa). These rodents are generally nocturnal and feed on ground vegetation; however, in the Chilliwack Forest District they are damaging crop trees, recently to the extent of causing failures in the higher elevation plantations. Pests There were no significant pest problems observed in the cutting permit. Consequently, it is not felt that there will be a problem in the future, except with the possibility of the mountain beaver.

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 21 Excerpts from CP 118-1 and CP118-3 Tolko FL A18696 Gellatly Creek Final Copy as Submitted May 29, 1998 Approved June 11, 1998. [Note that both are identical in respect to Mountain Beaver actions and dates.]

B - Management Objectives: 4) To protect riparian habitat along the stream and to protect mountain beaver habitats near or within the block. H - Fish and Wildlife 1) Wildlife Habitat/Species Several mountain beaver burrows were located near or within this block. 5) Actions to accommodate fish and wildlife Actions to protect mountain beaver 6. Identify and mark active burrows and nest sites prior to harvesting. 7. Establish a Sensitive Harvesting Area, which will protect the area extending 5 m beyond the perimeter of each identified site according to the location of the outer, "last" visible evidence of burrows, tunnels or nests. 8. Fall and skid trees away from the perimeter of the SHA. Machine tracks or wheels will not enter the SHA unless on greater than 1 m of snowpack or frozen ground, but a fellerbuncher may reach in. If timber will be isolated within the SHA, handfalling and line skidding may be used, and if necessary, a designated skid trail network provided the trail does not disturb any nests or burrows. 9. Leave non-merchantable stems within SHAs as specified under "Leave Tree Characteristics". [Bl, Ba and Se up to 12.5 cm dbh as Leave Trees] 10. Manual screef and plant on untreated, raised microsites within SHAs. 11. The SHAs may become a separate SU with a reduced minimum-stocking standard if there is a significant area with insufficient natural, plantable microsites and/or acceptable leave trees.

Excerpts from CP 597-3, 597-4 and 597-5 Weyco FL A18698 Arrastra Creek Final Copies as Submitted Sept 10, 1999 Approved October 5, 1999. [All are identical in respect to Mountain Beaver except for non-significant wording change in one of the SPs.]

F. Accommodation of Forest Resources 2) Fish and Wildlife/Biodiversity: c) Issues Identified: Two active Mountain Beaver sites have been identified within the harvest boundary. Measures to Accommodate Identified Issues: The sites have been marked in the field and "No machine/no skidder" buffers were established by Les Gyug, R.P. Bio. These sites will be treated as per the rest of the Standard Unit, however, no machine traffic will be permitted within the sites. Timber will be felled away from the site where possible. No site preparation will be conducted within these sites.

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 22 Excerpts from TSL A50518-1 SBFEP Merritt Forest District, Railroad Creek Final SP Submitted November 26, 1996, Approved December 17, 1996. The original SP did not mention Mountain Beaver.

SP Amendment submitted December 15, 1997, Approved January 8, 1998. Description of Changes: The creek location along the southern boundary was misclassified. The creek is Railroad Creek and is classified as an S5 creek. This creek and the other 2 S6 creeks are being protected by a 5-30 meter MFZ. No site preparation is to occur within the Mountain Beaver Habitat Areas, (Total area approx. 0.56 ha.) see attached map. [This was the map prepared by Les Gyug in fall 1997.] Mountain Beaver Habitat Areas will be protected during harvest by harvesting on a naturally compacted snow pack of 1.0 meter. Within Mountain Beaver Habitat Areas and the management zone of the S5 and S6 creeks as much pole, sapling, regeneration and herbaceous vegetation will be maintained as operationally feasible. Within the mountain beaver habitat areas no site prep will be carried out. Justification for this Amendment: Railroad Creek has since been classified as an S5 creek. Mountain Beaver Habitat Areas were identified post Silviculture Prescription preparation.

Excerpts from TSL A50518-2 SBFEP Merritt Forest District, Railroad Creek Final SP Submitted November 26, 1996, Approved December 17, 1996. The original SP did not mention Mountain Beaver.

SP Amendment submitted December 15, 1997, Approved January 8, 1998. Description of Changes: No site preparation is to occur within the Mountain Beaver Habitat Areas (see attached map). [This was the map prepared by Les Gyug in fall 1997.] Mountain Beaver Habitat Areas will be protected during harvest by harvesting on a naturally compacted snow pack of 1.0 meter. Within Mountain Beaver Habitat Areas as much pole, sapling, regeneration and herbaceous vegetation will be maintained as operationally feasible as these areas will not be mechanically site prepared. Justification for this Amendment: Mountain Beaver Habitat Areas were identified post Silviculture Prescription preparation.

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 23 Excerpts from TSL A42313 SBFEP Merritt Forest District, Railroad Creek Final SP Completed December 15, 1997, Approved January 9, 1998.

A. Tenure Description General Description A significant number of seepage areas and defined S6 channels occur throughout the block, that drain into an S5 creek (Railroad Creek) running close to the northern boundary. There is evidence of mountain beaver (Aplodontia rufa rainieri), a blue-listed species, present in the block. They are mainly confined to the immediate vicinity of these seepage and creek sites. B. Management Objectives Statement: - S.U. 2 and S.U. 3 are being managed primarily for Mountain Beaver Habitat, and as such are not being site prepared or planted. Reliance on the present stocking for meeting regen. and free growing delay.

C. Riparian and Watershed Assessment 2) Riparian Classes: **Also, no site preparation to take place within the Mountain Beaver Habitat areas (see map attached) [which is the same as Appendix 3, Map 5]. 4) Comments: Within the Mountain Beaver Habitat areas and MFZ's (approx. 5m) of S6 creeks, all trees less than or equal to 20 cm DBH will be reserved. Also within the 20 m RMZ's of all S6 creeks and within all Mountain Beaver Habitat Areas as much pole, sapling and regen. is being retained as they will contribute to stocking as these areas will not be planted. Larger trees will be felled out of these areas and/or lined away. No larger stems are being reserved in these areas as they are not windfirm. The intent is to minimize damage to habitat and reserve trees in these areas. As such trails and skidding will be kept to an absolute minimum.

D. Harvesting 4) Constraints: All harvest activities are restricted to late winter, with naturally compacted snowpack conditions of >100 cms. Movement of machinery across areas of S.U. 2 and S.U. 3 will be kept to an absolute minimum. Mountain Beaver habitat areas have been marked throughout the block.

E. Soil Conservation 3) Deactivation/Rehabilitation/Soil Protection Plan: d) Skid trails: This block is prescribed for harvest during naturally compacted snowpack conditions of >100 cms. This should ensure that skid trails will not require rehabilitation, and that impact on mountain beaver habitat is minimized.

I. Fish and Wildlife: 1) Wildlife Habitats / Species: Mountain beaver sites are located throughout this unit, and are almost completely confined to within 20 m of S6 creeks and seepage sites. 4) Comment on Surrounding Disturbances: Single tree removal Helicopter harvest is adjacent and within this block. 5) Actions to Accommodate Fish and Wildlife/Biodiversity:

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 24 . . . Actions to minimize disturbance to mountain beaver are listed in sections C., D., and N. Riparian management zones coincide mainly with habitat for mountain beaver. Timber to be felled in management zones will be "fall away-yard away" logged to the greatest extent possible. Within the Mountain Beaver Habitat Areas and MFZ's (approx. 5m) of S6 creeks, all trees less than or equal to 20 cm DBH will be reserved. Also, within the 20 m RMZ's of all S6 creeks and within all Mountain Beaver Habitat Areas as much pole, sapling and regen. is being retained as they will contribute to stocking as these areas will not be planted. Trails through these areas will e kept to an absolute minimum.

M. Silviculture: 2) Comments: S.U.2 and 3: These S.U.'s are being managed primarily for Mountain Beaver Habitat, and as such are not being site prepared or planted. The option to plant without site prep. In the ESSF zone has been shown to be unsuccessful by numerous studies. Therefore, the immature and some mature which remains following harvest will contribute to stocking of these 2 S.U.'s. As the area is being winter harvested, with no expected Forest Floor Disturbance, minimal ingress is expected. The minimum inter tree distance has been reduced to reflect the reliance on the present stocking to select the best well spaced (WS), free growing (FG) trees among the residuals. The early FG years have been reduced to reflect the reliance on the present stocking to achieve FG delay. Bl and Sx advanced regen. will be the accepted as preferred and Ba as an acceptable species in assessing WS and FG, providing they meet the following conditions: 1)Good form, 2)Meet the FG damage criteria standards, as outlined in the Establishment to Free growing Guidebook, Kamloops Forest Region, April 1995. NO height, vigor or live crown restrictions will be imposed in order that the majority of immature stems present on site, will be acceptable during stocking and FG surveys. If stocking falls below the minimum stocking levels (Not anticipated, if anything stocking is anticipated to be greater than minimums) then the SP will not need to be amended, it will be accepted at this lower level.

SP amendment Submitted September 19, 2000. Approved September 19, 2000. Description of Changes and Amendments 4. Add to Section "M. Silviculture 2)Comments:" If as a result of the prescribed burning the residual stocking is destroyed, the area in SU2 and 3 that was burned may be planted. However, as per the original SP, the management objectives for SU2 and 3 is Mountain Beaver habitat and therefore stocking will be accepted at lower levels than the targets and minimums in the SP. Reasons and Justification for Amendment(s): Initially is was uncertain as to whether prescribed fire would be acceptable on this opening given the population of Mountain Beavers on site. However, based on a recent report by Les Gyug, R.P. Bio., titled "Mountain Beaver Response to Clearcutting in SB Timber Sale A42313-1, Railroad Creek, Merritt Forest District, B.C.: dated October 6, 1999, he states that "broadcast burning be considered in the spring of 2000 if that would help meet silviculture objectives." As he suggests, we have not created fireguards around the mountain beaver/riparian areas. The site has been inspected recently and the riparian areas were found to be quite moist (i.e. wet clothing when kneeling in the moss). The burning specialist, Tom Lacey, has indicated that the ground within the riparian areas will remain intact for the most part (i.e. will not be burned) due to the present moisture on site. However, the leave tree retention in SU's 2 and 3 may be significantly impacted (due to the low crowns) and have been revised to reflect this.

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 25 MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 26 Appendix 2. GPS UTM (NAD83) locations of Mountain Beaver sites.

APRU_ID Block Mark IN? UTME UTMN MB0896 A42313 Out1 N 642012 5480380 Sites with Post SA GPS readings (5-15 m MB0897 A42313 Out2 N 642689 5480264 accuracy) MB0898 A42313 Out3 N 642788 5479865 MB0850 A42313 B1 Y 642187 5480366 MB0899 A50518-1 01 Yes 642266 5480676 MB0851 A42313 B2 Y 642147 5480375 MB0900 A50518-1 02 Yes 642318 5480697 MB0852 A42313 C1 Y 642213 5480246 MB0901 A50518-1 03 Yes 642338 5480670 MB0853 A42313 D1 Y 642302 5480301 MB0902 A50518-1 04 Yes 642143 5480652 MB0854 A42313 D2 Y 642354 5480313 MB0903 A50518-1 05 Yes 642130 5480651 MB0855 A42313 D3 Y 642261 5480193 MB0904 A50518-1 06 Yes 642119 5480645 MB0856 A42313 D4 Y 642278 5480183 MB0905 A50518-1 07 Yes 642256 5480667 MB0857 A42313 D5 Y 642275 5480173 MB0906 A50518-1 08 Yes 642287 5480670 MB0858 A42313 D6 Y 642268 5480163 MB0907 A50518-1 09 Yes 642175 5480639 MB0859 A42313 D7 Y 642270 5480095 MB0908 A50518-1 10 Yes 642318 5480681 MB0860 A42313 D8 Y 642300 5480214 MB0909 A50518-1 11 No 642347 5480666 MB0861 A42313 DFA1 N 642323 5480110 MB0910 A50518-1 12 Yes 642318 5480672 MB0862 A42313 E1 Y 642440 5480224 MB0911 A50518-2 01 Yes 641554 5480913 MB0863 A42313 E2 Y 642469 5480310 MB0912 A50518-2 02 Yes 641552 5480861 MB0864 A42313 E3 Y 642463 5480294 MB0913 A50518-2 03 Yes 641541 5480890 MB0865 A42313 E4 Y 642475 5480317 MB0914 A50518-2 04 Yes 641552 5480901 MB0866 A42313 E5 Y 642486 5480326 MB0915 A50518-2 05 Yes 641536 5480900 MB0867 A42313 F1 Y 642578 5480320 MB0916 A50518-2 06 Yes 641506 5480909 MB0868 A42313 G1 Y 642621 5480258 MB0917 A50518-2 07 Yes 641505 5480926 MB0869 A42313 G2 Y 642651 5480251 MB0918 A50518-2 08 Yes 641341 5480737 MB0870 A42313 G3 Y 642603 5480268 MB0919 A50518-2 08-2 No 641337 5480737 MB0871 A42313 H1 Y 642523 5480271 MB0920 A50518-2 09 Yes 641387 5480726 MB0872 A42313 H2 Y 642520 5480208 MB0921 A50518-2 10 Yes 641376 5480721 MB0873 A42313 H3 Y 642514 5480175 MB0922 A50518-2 11 Yes 641439 5480893 MB0874 A42313 H4 Y 642507 5480146 MB0923 A50518-2 12 Yes 641567 5480899 MB0875 A42313 I1 Y 642530 5480079 MB0924 A50518-2 13 Yes 641370 5480731 MB0876 A42313 I2 Y 642559 5480155 MB0925 A50518-2 14 Yes 641425 5480896 MB0877 A42313 I3 Y 642575 5480197 MB0926 118-1 142 Y 650309 5470350 MB0878 A42313 K01 Y 642757 5480055 MB0927 118-1 A Y 650326 5470384 MB0879 A42313 K02 Y 642736 5480058 MB0928 118-1 B Y 650379 5470440 MB0880 A42313 K03 Y 642699 5480039 MB0929 118-1 C N 650786 5470388 MB0881 A42313 K04 Y 642678 5480056 MB0930 118-1 D N 650798 5470380 MB0882 A42313 K05 Y 642615 5480031 MB0931 118-1 E N 650766 5470441 MB0883 A42313 K06 Y 642648 5479961 MB0932 118-1 F Y 650763 5470391 MB0884 A42313 K07 Y 642703 5479966 MB0933 118-1 FA1 Y 650400 5470386 MB0885 A42313 K08 Y 642719 5479977 MB0934 118-1 FA2 N 650593 5470404 MB0886 A42313 K09 Y 642698 5479996 MB0935 118-1 FA2A Y 650599 5470397 MB0887 A42313 K10 Y 642676 5480002 MB0936 118-1 FA2B Y 650609 5470390 MB0888 A42313 K11 Y 642721 5480023 MB0937 118-1 OL1 Y 650447 5470462 MB0889 A42313 K12 Y 642726 5480035 MB0938 118-1 OL2 Y 650421 5470430 MB0890 A42313 K13 Y 642759 5479998 MB0939 118-1 OL3 Y 650572 5470382 MB0891 A42313 K14 Y 642754 5479957 MB0940 118-1 OL4 N 650685 5470402 MB0892 A42313 K15 Y 642717 5479934 MB0941 118-1 OL5 N 650718 5470410 MB0893 A42313 L1 Y 642914 5479845 MB0942 118-3 A Bdy 651193 5468818 MB0894 A42313 L2 Y 642895 5479839 MB0943 118-3 B N 651214 5468821 MB0895 A42313 L3 Y 642945 5479851

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 27 MB0944 118-3 C N 651287 5468821 MB1034 CP161-2S 3 N 645555 5469452 MB0945 118-3 D N 651299 5468832 MB1035 CP161-2S 4 N 645469 5469461 MB0946 118-3 E Y 651391 5468506 MB1036 CP161-2S 5 Y 645228 5469466 MB0947 118-3 F Y 651387 5468584 MB1037 CP161-2S A N 646059 5469398 MB0948 118-3 FA1 N 651182 5468730 MB1038 CP161-2S B Y 645616 5469306 MB0949 118-3 G Y 651375 5468591 MB1039 CP161-2S FA1 Y 644180 5469725 MB0950 118-3 H Y 651227 5468543 MB1040 CP161-2S FA2 Y 643945 5469794 MB0951 118-3 I Y 651364 5468451 MB1041 CP161-2S FA3 N 643741 5469864 MB0952 118-3 J Y 651370 5468467 MB1042 CP161-2S OL1 Bdy 643650 5469941 MB0953 118-3 K N 651052 5468745 MB1043 CP161-2S OL2 Bdy 643579 5469867 MB0954 118-3 L N 651055 5468775 MB1044 597-3 1 Y 654889 5471023 MB0955 118-3 M N 651058 5468785 MB1045 597-3 2 Y 654877 5471018 MB0956 118-3 OL1 Y 651280 5468612 MB1046 597-3 3 Y 654880 5471037 MB0957 118-3 OL2 N 651172 5468745 MB1047 597-3 3B Y 654875 5471001 MB0958 118-3 OL3 Y 651343 5468692 MB1048 597-3 4 N 654734 5470937 MB0990 98-1 3 Y 660154 5479708 MB1049 597-3 4B N 654781 5470959 MB0991 98-1 310 Y 660165 5479719 MB1050 597-3 5A N 654724 5470943 MB0992 98-1 3b Y 660151 5479695 MB1051 597-3 5B N 654724 5470926 MB0993 98-1 4 Y 660115 5479668 MB1052 597-3 5C N 654708 5470930 MB0994 98-1 5 Y 660105 5479630 MB1053 597-3 5D N 654736 5470913 MB0995 98-1 6 Y 660170 5479706 MB1054 597-3 6 Y 654584 5470774 MB0996 98-1 7 Y 660165 5479731 MB1055 597-3 7 Y 654575 5470749 MB0997 98-1 8-2 Bdy 660176 5479774 MB1058 597-5 1 Y 655550 5470159 MB0998 98-1 9 Y 660082 5479639 MB1059 597-5 2 Y 655989 5470845 MB1008 CP132-6 A N 650305 5476859 APRU_ID Block Mark IN? UTME UTMN MB1009 CP132-6 A Y 650365 5477185 Sites with GPS readings pre SA (50-100 m MB1010 CP132-6 B N 649913 5476888 accuracy) MB1011 CP132-6 B Y 650275 5477289 MB0707 A55987 0 Y 662365 5452960 MB1012 CP132-6 C N 649973 5476842 MB0708 A55987 1 Y 662291 5452900 MB1013 CP132-6 C Y 650076 5477317 MB0709 A55987 2 Y 662130 5453001 MB1014 CP132-6 D Y 650050 5477339 MB0710 A55987 3 Y 662105 5452986 MB1015 CP132-6 E Y 650035 5477354 MB0711 A55987 4 Y 662142 5452865 MB1016 CP132-6 F Y 650058 5477349 MB0712 A55987 5 Y 662037 5452825 MB1017 CP132-6 FA1 Y 650262 5476920 MB0713 A55987 6 Y 662040 5452778 MB1018 CP132-6 OL1 N 650426 5476849 MB0714 A55987 7 Y 661950 5452715 MB1019 CP132-6 OL2 N 650397 5477074 MB0715 A55987 8 Y 661860 5452650 MB1020 CP132-6 OL3 Y 650287 5476925 MB0716 A42312 L1 No 642780 5480616 MB1021 CP132-6 OL4 N 650041 5476861 MB0717 A42312 L13 No 642682 5480383 MB1022 CP161-2N A Y 644397 5469949 MB0718 A42312 L2 No 642944 5480607 MB1023 CP161-2N B Y 644149 5469988 MB0719 A42312 L3 No 642968 5480422 MB1024 CP161-2N C Bdy 644330 5470039 MB0720 A42312 L4 No 642941 5480466 MB1025 CP161-2N D Y 644310 5469966 MB0721 A42312 R01 No 642644 5480452 MB1026 CP161-2N FA1 Y 644480 5469868 MB0722 A42312 R02 No 642688 5480350 MB1027 CP161-2N OL1 Y 643929 5470036 MB0723 A42312 R03 No 643013 5480347 MB1028 CP161-2N OL2 Y 644094 5470008 MB0724 A42312 R04 No 643086 5480306 MB1029 CP161-2S 1 N 645884 5469356 MB0725 A42312 R05 No 643031 5480215 MB1030 CP161-2S 1a N 645869 5469353 MB0726 A42312 R06 No 643268 5480166 MB1031 CP161-2S 1b N 645847 5469344 MB0727 A42312 R06a No 643258 5480190 MB1032 CP161-2S 2 N 643920 5469837 MB0728 A42312 R07 No 643293 5480147 MB1033 CP161-2S 3 N 643945 5469842 MB0729 A42312 R08 No 643309 5480171

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 28 MB0730 A42312 R09 No 643242 5480119 MB1007 98-4 None Y 661193 5478425 MB0731 A42312 R10 No 643229 5480097 MB1056 597-4 1 Y 654750 5471520 MB0732 A42312 R11 No 643218 5480075 MB1057 597-4 2 Y 654700 5471475 MB0733 A42312 R12 No 643192 5480109 MB1060 647-3 01 Y 659415 5456861 MB0734 A42312 R13 No 643170 5480092 MB1061 647-3 02 Y 659355 5456801 MB0735 A42312 R14 No 642702 5480392 MB1062 647-3 04 Y 659715 5456711 MB0736 A42312 R15 No 642699 5480415 MB1063 647-3 05 Y 659795 5456801 MB0737 A42312 R16 No 642694 5480434 MB1064 647-3 06 Y 659955 5456591 MB0738 A42312 R17 No 642712 5480434 MB1065 647-3 07 Y 659905 5456551 MB0739 A42312 R18 No 642725 5480419 MB1066 647-3 08 Y 660305 5456526 MB0740 A42312 R19 No 642953 5480361 MB1067 647-3 09 Y 660185 5456551 MB0959 133-1 01 N 651915 5477949 MB1068 647-3 10 Y 660105 5456531 MB0960 133-1 02 N 651860 5477949 MB1069 647-3 11 Y 660115 5456511 MB0961 133-1 03 Y 652105 5477634 MB1070 693-8 01 N 661130 5457796 MB0962 133-1 04 Y 652070 5477649 MB1071 693-8 02 N 660925 5458021 MB0963 133-1 05 N 652550 5477429 MB1072 693-8 03 N 660879 5457824 MB0964 133-1 06 N 652750 5477649 MB1073 693-8 04 N 660848 5457812 MB0965 133-1 07 Y 652920 5477399 MB1074 693-8 05 Y 660811 5457799 MB0966 133-1 08 Y 652875 5477389 MB1075 693-8 06 Y 660792 5457779 MB0967 133-1 09 Y 652270 5477764 MB1076 693-8 07 Y 660727 5457808 MB0968 133-1 10 Y 652240 5477759 MB1077 693-8 08 Y 660718 5457614 MB0969 133-2 1 N 653000 5476819 MB1078 693-8 09 Y 660684 5457810 MB0970 133-2 2 Y 652835 5476779 MB1079 693-8 10 N 660974 5457793 MB0971 133-2 3 Y 652780 5476774 MB0972 133-2 4 N 652825 5477079 MB0973 133-2 5 Y 653205 5476634 MB0974 133-3 01 Y 651950 5476985 MB0975 133-3 02 Y 652065 5476875 MB0976 133-3 03 Y 651940 5476910 MB0977 133-3 04 Y 651920 5476900 MB0978 133-3 05 Y 651905 5476775 MB0979 133-3 06 Y 651935 5476765 MB0980 133-3 07 Y 651965 5476760 MB0981 133-3 08 Y 651900 5476650 MB0982 133-3 09 Y 651930 5476635 MB0983 133-3 10 Y 651900 5476490 MB0984 133-3 11 Y 651745 5476675 MB0985 133-3 12 Y 651645 5476640 MB0986 133-3 13 Y 651620 5476625 MB0987 133-3 14 Y 651705 5476670 MB0988 133-3 15 Y 651785 5476655 MB0989 133-3 16 Y 651825 5476625 MB0999 98-3 1 N 660256 5479002 MB1000 98-3 None N 660687 5478769 MB1001 98-3 None Y 660925 5478888 MB1002 98-3 None Bdy 660363 5478432 MB1003 98-4 1 Bdy 660842 5477861 MB1004 98-4 None Y 661026 5478405 MB1005 98-4 None Y 660906 5478083 MB1006 98-4 None Y 661128 5478359

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 29

Appendix 3. Maps showing locations of Mountain Beavers in and near cutblocks to be used for pre- and post-timber harvest assessments.

Map No. Map Contents Scale 1 Key Map showing location of all blocks SBFEP 2 Location of Railroad Creek Blocks 1:30,000 3 A50518-1 and A50518-2 1:2,500 4 A42313-1 showing Mt. Bvr areas 1:5,000 5 A42313-1 showing Standards Units 1:5,000 6 A42313-1 showing 2001 Mt Beaver Haypiles 1:5,000 7 A42313-1 Field Use Map West 1:2,500 8 A42313-1 Field Use Map East 1:2,500 9 Location of Copper Creek West Block 1:20,000 10 A55987-1 1:7,500 Tolko 11 Location of Newton Creek Block 1:30,000 12 98-1 1:5,000 13 98-1 Field Use Map 1:2,500 14 98-3 and 98-4 1:10,000 15 98-3 1:5,000 16 98-4 1:5,000 17 Location of Coates and Gellatly Creek Blocks 1:30,000 18 118-1 1:5,000 19 118-3 1:5,000 20 Location of Champion Creek Blocks 1:30,000 21 132-6 1:5,000 22 133-1 1:5,000 23 133-2 1:5,000 24 133-3 1:5,000 25 Location of Cunningham Creek Block 1:20,000 26 161-2 West 1:7,500 27 161-2 West Field Use Map 1:5,000 28 161-2 East 1:7,500 29 161-2 East Field Use Map 1:5,000 Weyco 30 Location of Arrastra Creek Blocks 1:30,000 31 597-3 and 597-4 1: 5,000 32 597-5 1:10,000 33 Location of Copper Creek Blocks 1:30,000 34 693-8 (formerly 647-6) 1:10,000 35 647-3 (formerly 647-7) 1:10,000

CP 98-3 and 98-4 Newton Creek have been provided to make post-harvest comparisons. They were not included in the study because there was <1 Mt. Beaver in each block. However, based on old sign, it is possible that Mt. Beaver may be more abundant after clearcutting than before, and maps are provided to allow for checking on this sometime in the future when these clearcuts reach shrub or tall fireweed stage.

MERRITT MOUNTAIN BEAVER 2001 30