Short-eared Owl and American Bittern Inventory Columbia Basin in the Columbia Basin, 2003 Fish & Wildlife Compensation Program

PREPARED BY John M. Cooper And Suzanne M. Beauchesne Manning, Cooper and Associates

November 2003 Short-eared Owl and American Bittern Inventory in the Columbia Basin, 2003

Written by

John M. Cooper and Suzanne M. Beauchesne

Manning, Cooper and Associates Mid Island Office Box 646 Errington, BC V0R 1V0

For

Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program Nelson, BC

10 November 2003 Executive Summary

Surveys for the Blue-listed American bittern and short-eared owl were conducted in the Columbia Basin in May of 2003, in order to establish a baseline inventory for these two species, to assess habitat value and to determine areas where conservation efforts should be focused.

American bitterns were found at 12 locations in the Columbia Basin. Bitterns were detected at 4 wetlands in the Creston Valley Wildlife Management Area (CVWMA) in the West Kootenay, and at 8 sites in the East Kootenay (Bummers Flats, Lillian Lake, Bittern Lake, Lavington Creek, Bear Lake, Saughum Lake, Twin Lakes, and near Parson). The CVWMA supported the greatest concentration, with at least 43 territorial males detected. Six Mile Slough in the CVWMA contained 29 calling males and is the densest concentration of American bitterns known in British Columbia. The vast majority (89%) of bitterns detected were found within existing conservation properties.

Grassland and marsh habitats were evaluated for suitability for American bitterns and short-eared owls using provincial wildlife habitat ratings standards. Habitat that appeared to be suitable for bitterns was located at many other sites, and there were several (12) areas with historical bittern records, where no bitterns were detected in 2003. Water levels were unusually low in the Columbia River wetlands, and perhaps elsewhere, due to low spring runoff, and areas that may have had suitable habitat in some years were unsuitable in 2003. Eighteen wetlands were rated as high quality habitat for nesting American bitterns. Bitterns were found only in wetlands with shallow waters < 60 cm, and with large and/or dense patches of emergent cattails, bulrush and sedges. Other factors influenced occurrence, however, as 12 wetlands without bittern detections were rated as highly suitable. In general, high quality bittern habitat is scarce in the Columbia Basin, because of water level fluctuations and lack of marshy wetlands in many areas.

Short-eared owls were not located during surveys. One owl was reported by a knowledgeable birder in the East Kootenay Trench during the breeding season. Two other reports of short-eared owls during the migration period were received. Anecdotal evidence suggests that voles were not abundant in 2003 in the Columbia Basin which could explain the lack of owl observations as this nomadic species tends to move to areas with an abundant prey base.

High quality short-eared owl habitat was very scarce in the Columbia Basin with only fifteen sites rated as highly suitable. Many of the sites were within managed wildlife areas, managed reservoirs, or grassy meadows in remote locations, lightly-used fields, or floodplains. High suitability short-eared owl nesting habitat is scarce due to current land use practices in grassland areas. Management recommendations for American bitterns include protection of wetlands from drainage, water quality erosion, fluctuating water levels, trampling of riparian and emergent vegetation by livestock, and human disturbances. Specific management recommendations include managing wetlands for water depths < 61 cm, avoidance of drawdown of reservoirs until after the breeding season, maintenance of networks of

ii larger wetlands, buffer zones, establishment of Wildlife Habitat Areas through the BC Forest Practices Code, and protection of wetlands through land purchases, conservation easements, enforcement, and management agreements For short-eared owls, conservation actions could include conservation of grassland areas, increasing the amount of fallow field habitat in wildlife management areas, retaining patches of shrubs and hedgerows between fields for roost cover, and minimizing disturbance by people, vehicular traffic and domestic animals in areas frequented by owls. In reservoir-controlled areas, water levels should not be raised to levels impacting short-eared owl nesting habitat during the breeding season. Management activities such as burning, mowing or tilling of meadows should not be undertaken until after the beginning of August, to protect nests.

Future research should include surveys of wetlands with high habitat suitability for American bitterns, especially those wetlands that are known to contain bitterns, and fields and grasslands with high suitability and/or historical records of nesting short-eared owls. Six Mile Slough should be examined in more detail and managed with a focus on American bitterns as one of the highest priority wildlife species.

iii Table of Contents

1 Introduction...... 1

2Study Area...... 2

3 Methods...... 2 3.1 Contacting naturalists...... 2 3.2 Survey area chronology ...... 2 3.3 Survey techniques ...... 4 3.4 Survey effort ...... 4 3.5 Equipment ...... 5 3.6 Habitat assessment ...... 6

4Results...... 8 4.1 American bittern ...... 8 4.1.1 Survey locations...... 8 4.1.2 Numbers and distribution of American bitterns in the Columbia Basin...... 8 4.1.3 Habitat at occupied sites ...... 13 4.1.4 American bittern habitat availability...... 14 4.1.5 Relationship of American bittern occurrence with land status 14 4.1.6 Behaviour ...... 15 4.2 Short-eared owls ...... 16 4.2.1 Survey effort...... 16 4.2.2 Numbers and distribution of short-eared owls in the Columbia Basin...... 16 4.2.3 Short-eared owl habitat availability...... 18

5 Discussion ...... 21 5.1 American bittern ...... 21 5.1.1 Survey locations...... 21 5.1.2 Survey methods...... 21 5.1.3 Numbers and distribution of American bitterns in the Columbia Basin...... 22 5.1.4 Habitat at occupied sites ...... 24 5.1.5 American bittern habitat availability...... 24 5.1.6 Behaviour ...... 25 5.1.7 Conflicts with other species at risk ...... 26 5.2 Short-eared owl...... 26

iv 5.2.1 Survey locations...... 26 5.2.2 Survey methods...... 26 5.2.3 Numbers and distribution of short-eared owls in the Columbia Basin...... 26 5.2.4 Population trend ...... 28 5.2.5 Short-eared owl habitat availability...... 28 5.3 Web-based observations from naturalists...... 29 5.4 Relationship of occurrence of American bitterns and short-eared owls with land status...... 30

6 Management Recommendations...... 32 6.1 American bittern ...... 32 6.1.1 Best management practices for American bitterns ...... 33 6.2 Short-eared owl...... 33 6.2.1 Best management practices for short-eared owl nesting habitat ...... 34 6.3 Future research...... 34 6.4 Potential WHA Candidates...... 35 6.4.1 American bittern...... 35 6.4.2 Short-eared owl ...... 35

7 Acknowledgements...... 36

8 References...... 37

List of Figures

Figure 1. Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program, Program Area……………………………………………………...3

Figure 2. American bitterns were surveyed using call playback techniques...6

Figure 3. Part of the Argenta Marsh which was rated as highly suitable habitat for American bitterns……………………………………...7

v Figure 4. Low suitability marsh habitat for both short-eared owls (strip of upland grassland too narrow) and American bitterns (emergent vegetation lacking) in the Little Slocan River valley……………..8

Figure 5. Areas surveyed for American bitterns and locations where bitterns were detected in May 2003………………………………………..9

Figure 6. Male American bittern flying at Six Mile Slough……………….11

Figure 7. The marsh at the north end of Duck Lake did not contain American bitterns in 2003, despite apparent suitability…………………….12

Figure 8. Cattail marshes such as this one in Six Mile Slough contained most American bitterns in the Columbia Basin in 2003……………….14

Figure 9. Cranberry Marsh at Valemount contained large amounts of suitable nesting habitat for American bitterns, but none were detected…..16

Figure 10. Areas surveyed for short-eared owls in May 2003……………..17

Figure 11. Wildlife habitat ratings for surveyed areas…………………...... 20

Figure 12. Columbia River wetland near Fairmont. Drier marsh in the foreground could be used by short-eared owls………………..…21

Figure 13. Many wetlands in the Columbia Basin are bisected by railways or highways, such as this marsh near Radium…………………...25

List of Tables

Table 1. Survey effort for American bitterns and short-eared owls in the Columbia Basin in May 2003……………………………………..5

Table 2. Criteria for assessing high, medium and low breeding habitat quality for American bittern and short-eared owl…………………….7

Table 3. Survey “sites” requiring extensive survey effort (>9 call stations) for American bitterns…………………………………………….10

vi Table 4. Locations where American bitterns were detected in May 2003……………………………………………………………...10

Table 5. Previously occupied locations where American bitterns were NOT detected in May 2003……………………………………………13

Table 6. Average wildlife habitat rating for American bitterns at locations surveyed in the Columbia Basin…………………………………15

Table 7. Sites assigned a “high” habitat rating for short-eared owl……….19

List of Appendices

Appendix 1. Persons contacted for information on American bitterns and short-eared owls………………………………………………...41

Appendix 2. “Have you seen these birds?” poster………………………...42

Appendix 3. Newspaper article………...………………………………….43

Appendix 4. American bittern survey results, May, 2003…………………44

Appendix 5. Location of call stations for American bitterns at Duck Lake and the south end of Kootenay Lake in May 2003………………….46

Appendix 6. Location of call stations for American bitterns at Six Mile Slough in May 2003………………………………………………...47

Appendix 7. Location of call stations for American bitterns at Duck Lake Nesting Area in May 2003…………………………………….48

Appendix 8. Location of call stations for American bitterns at Leach Lake in May 2003…………………………………………………...49

Appendix 9. Location of call stations for American bitterns at Corn

vii Creek Marsh in May 2003………………………………………………….50

Appendix 10. Location of American bittern call stations in 2003……..….51

Appendix 11. Location of short-eared owl survey locations (other than American bittern call stations)……..………………………..……....62

viii 1 Introduction

Flooding of parts of the Columbia Basin for hydro-electric power generation has resulted in the loss of 640 km2 of valley-bottom wildlife habitat. Much of the lost wildlife habitat included very valuable riparian forests and wetlands. The valley-bottom wetlands, marshes and meadows that remain in the Columbia Basin are critical habitats for many species, including the American bittern and short-eared owl.

Both of these species are Blue-listed by the Province of British Columbia, and the short- eared owl is listed as a species of Special Concern by the Government of Canada (Cadman 1994; COSEWIC 2003). The American bittern is Blue-listed because of small, scattered populations dependent on relatively scarce habitats (wetlands with emergent vegetation) that are subject to degradation or loss through human activities. The short- eared owl is Blue-listed because of widespread population declines, small populations, and threats to habitat (Fraser et al. 1999).

Population trend data are very unreliable or unavailable for both species. However, continent-wide declines for both species, but especially for short-eared owls, have been reported (Tate 1986; Sauer et al. 1997; CWS 2003). In Canada, American bitterns show a 1.1% nonsignificant annual decline from the late 1960s-2000; but a 7.5% significant annual increase from 1991-2000 (Downes et al. 2002). There are insufficient data from British Columbia to satisfactorily determine population trends for either species in any region of the province, or from the entire province, although Breeding Bird Survey data (which has important deficiencies for American bittern) suggest a 14% annual decline for American bitterns in British Columbia from 1981-2000 (Sauer et al. 2002;).

Current data on occurrences of American bitterns and short-eared owls in the Columbia Basin, especially breeding localities and habitat, are scarce and are based mainly on records summarized in the Birds of British Columbia (Campbell et al. 1990a, 1990b). American bitterns were known to breed in the Creston Valley and near the Arrow reservoir in the West Kootenay (Butler et al. 1986; Campbell et al. 1990a). Short-eared owls were known to breed only in the Creston Valley (Butler et al. 1986; Campbell et al. 1990b). Records of both species from other areas in the Columbia Basin (Campbell et al. 1990a, 1990b) suggest that breeding likely occurs over a wider range than has been documented.

Additional data related to breeding distribution, abundance, locations and extent of suitable breeding habitat are needed to foster conservation of populations of these two rare species within the Columbia Basin. As well, the potential value of conservation properties for these two species, the status and land management practices that exist at occupied sites, and threats to remaining habitat all need to be assessed.

Both American bitterns and short-eared owls are relatively difficult to inventory, compared to most other marsh birds and owls, respectively. American bitterns tend to be local in distribution and are very secretive. Short-eared owls occur at extremely low

1 breeding densities in British Columbia, and are most active just before dark and at dawn. The nests of both species are difficult to find.

The objectives of this project are to determine the breeding distribution and habitat availability for the American bittern and the short-eared owls in the Columbia Basin. Involvement of local naturalist with the project is an important objective. Data obtained will then be used to develop conservation strategies.

2 Study Area

The study area consisted of the entire Columbia Basin (Figure 1). Survey areas were selected focusing on public and protected lands where occurrences of either species were most likely. Private land was also assessed, where access was permitted, or where habitat could be observed from a public point. Survey site selection was based on historic records, suggestions from CBFWCP and MWLAP biologists, current information from local naturalists and other biologists and on-the-fly evaluation of habitat quality by the authors.

By Forest District, surveys were conducted in the Arrow, Kootenay Lake, Rocky Mountain, Columbia Mountain and Robson Forest Districts. Some key areas for surveys were predetermined to include the Beaver Valley, Oasis, Slocan River valley, Trout Lake area, the Creston Valley Wildlife Management Area (CVWMA), the Columbia River marshes, Bummers Flats, Sue Fire, the Arrow Reservoir, and the Robson valley.

3 Methods

3.1 Contacting naturalists

Prior to commencing and during field work, representatives of local field naturalist groups in the Columbia Basin were contacted to obtain current local information on occurrences (recent and historical) of American Bitterns and short-eared owls (Appendix 1). Suggested locations for both species were then added to the list of sites to be surveyed. Interested naturalists were also invited to participate in survey activities as volunteers. Additional information was requested from the general public through the establishment of a web-based request for information, posting of posters in various communities (Appendix 2), and a newspaper article published in local papers (Appendix 3).

3.2 Survey area chronology

Surveys were conducted from 5-30 May 2003, with 22 consecutive days from 5-27 May and an additional 2 days, 29-30 May. Based on breeding chronologies reported by

2 Figure 1. Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program, Program Area.

3 Campbell et al. (1990a, 1990b), and considering the chronology of seasons in the Columbia Basin, the best month to conduct surveys for both species was determined to be May. Detection of American bitterns is more likely early in their breeding season when males call more frequently (Gibbs and Melvyn 1993). Calling tapers off as the season progresses. Short-eared owls should also be more conspicuous in May, before foliage develops and because young are likely to be present (especially later in May) forcing adults to forage more frequently (i.e., be more visible) than at other times.

Surveys began in the West Kootenay, progressing from south to north to just south of Revelstoke, then in the East Kootenay, progressing from south to north of Golden. The East Kootenay was surveyed later because “spring” was estimated to be about one week earlier in the West Kootenay compared to the East Kootenay. The McBride/Valemount area, Revelstoke area, and selected sites in the Wasa/Kimberley areas were surveyed last.

3.3 Survey techniques

Dawn call-playback surveys were emphasized for American bitterns and dusk observational surveys were emphasized for short-eared owls. Call-playback surveys were conducted for American Bitterns following RIC (1998) standards for marsh birds. These surveys were undertaken from dawn to approximately 4 hours after dawn. Bitterns were found to call readily later than 4 hours after dawn during our survey program (May) so the daily survey period was extended when necessary (for logistical reasons) for an hour or two. When a detection occurred, the direction and distance from the call station was estimated using a compass and visual estimation (in 10 m increments) of distance. In this way we could avoid double-counting birds as we moved through a marsh.

Call-playback surveys for bitterns were also conducted at some locations near dusk. An attempt was made to restrict surveys to times with favourable conditions (minimal rain and wind), however due to time restraints and the logistics of covering a very large area, some surveys were done under less than optimal conditions (i.e., windy conditions). Rain was not a factor during this study.

Surveys for short-eared owls followed RIC (2001) standards for roadside and on foot raptor surveys. In addition, during all surveys for American bitterns, personnel also watched for short-eared owls. Conversely, during all evening watches for short-eared owls, observers also listened for American bitterns.

3.4 Survey effort

On average, each team of 2 biologists surveyed one location each morning or evening survey period. One team conducted surveys on 22 consecutive days while a second team conducted surveys on 10 days over a two week period. Each team spent about 5 hours per morning conducting call playback surveys for American bitterns and 3 hours per evening conducting call playback surveys for American bitterns or stand watches for short-eared

4 owls (Table 1). One local naturalist conducted surveys on three additional days. Surveys were conducted on foot in accessible areas with good habitat. Some large wetlands such as Leach Lake, Six Mile Slough, Columbia Lake, and Columbia River Marshes were surveyed by canoe.

Survey locations were broad at times, sometimes covering many kilometres, within which there were varying numbers of sample points or “sites” (e.g., Beaver Valley, Slocan Valley). Some locations, such as CVWMA and Bummers Flats, required more than one survey day to cover adequately due to large size and large amounts of good quality habitat which warranted extensive sampling.

Over 7,400 km of road were covered by vehicle, over 30 km of the Columbia River (between Columbia Lake and Edgewater) and Six Mile Slough, Duck Lake and Leach Lake (CVWMA) were surveyed by canoe. An unknown, but substantial, number of kilometres of transect were surveyed by foot.

Table 1. Survey effort for American bitterns and short-eared owls in the Columbia Basin in May 2003.

Time Team period Species1 Hours Description Call-playback AMBI AMBI and surveys while also watching am SEOW 154 for SEOW Call-playback AMBI AMBI and surveys while also watching pm SEOW 22.6 for SEOW Dedicated SEOW habitat pm SEOW 31 watch 1 AMBI = American bittern, SEOW = short-eared owl

3.5 Equipment

Portable CD players and broadcast equipment were used for call-playback surveys. Calls from CD players were field tested and were audible to the human ear for at least 700 m. Recordings (CDs) of American bittern calls were made from Bird Sounds of Canada (Brigham undated). Additional equipment included hand held GPS units (Garmin 12) with an accuracy to 3-5 m, 10x40 binoculars, and spotting scopes.

5 Figure 2. American bitterns were surveyed using call playback techniques.

3.6 Habitat assessment

Grassland and marsh habitats were evaluated for suitability for American bitterns and short-eared owls using provincial wildlife habitat ratings standards (RIC 1999). The 4- class rating scheme was used: habitat considered to be from 76 to 100% ideal was assigned a rating of ‘high’; 26 to 75% ideal was assigned a rating of ‘moderate’; and 1 to 25% ideal was assigned a ‘low’ rating. Habitat that was entirely unsuitable was given a rating of ‘nil’.

Because there are no provincial benchmarks for high quality habitat for either of these species, a hypothetical benchmark was used, based on the authors’ judgement of what ideal habitat for either species is and from habitat summaries in Campbell et al. 1990a, 1990b, and the Birds of North America accounts (Gibbs et al. 1992; Holt and Leasure 1993). For American bitterns high quality habitat was assumed to be positively correlated with area and quality of emergent cattails (Typha latifolia) or other vegetation, emergent/water “shoreline” length and depth, area of shallow waters, and area of entire wetland. Lower quality habitat was assumed to be correlated with smaller wetland size, smaller patch size of emergents, lack of water within emergent beds, and lower height of emergents. For short-eared owls high quality habitat was assumed to be positively correlated with area and quality of grassland and shrubland, and dryness. Lower quality habitats were assumed to be correlated with smaller area, sparser ground cover, more trees, intensity of grazing, and nearness to human activity (Table 2).

Figure 3 is an example of habitat rated ‘high’ for American bitterns. Figure 4 is an example of habitat rated low for both bitterns and short-eared owls. Also see Figures 6-10 for additional examples of habitat.

6 Table 2. Criteria for assessing high, medium and low breeding habitat quality for American bittern and short-eared owl.

Habitat Rating High Medium Low American bittern Wetland >10 ha Wetland <10 ha, >1 Wetland < 1 ha ha Large patch size & Small patch size & Small patch size & dense emergents dense emergents thin emergents Water depth < 0.6 Water depth > 0.6 Emergents in m m or < 0.1 m exposed mud Emergents > 1 m Emergents 0.5-1 m Emergents < 0.5 m tall tall tall Remote from Near moderate Beside busy road or human activity human activity industry adjacent

Short-eared owl Fields > 10 ha Dense ground Dense and low Sparse and low cover < 0.7 m, > (<0.2 m) ground ground cover 0.2 m tall cover Fields with Fields with Fields with scattered shrubs scattered trees numerous trees Low livestock Moderate livestock High livestock grazing intensity grazing intensity grazing intensity Dry field Moist field Wet field

Figure 3. Part of the Argenta Marsh which was rated as highly suitable habitat for American bitterns.

7 Figure 4. Low suitability marsh habitat for both short-eared owls (strip of upland grassland too narrow) and American bitterns (emergent vegetation lacking) in the Little Slocan River valley.

4 Results

4.1 American bittern

4.1.1 Survey locations We surveyed all of the larger wetlands in the Columbia Basin which contain large amounts of suitable habitat. We also surveyed many smaller wetlands and covered the majority of possible locations along the major travel corridors. Twenty-six general locations with 77 “sites” of varying sizes were surveyed for American Bittern (Figure 5). In total, 485 call-playback surveys were conducted (Appendix 10). Some sites were small or of poor quality and could be surveyed adequately from just one survey point. Other areas or sites were larger and/or higher quality and required multiple (2-83) survey points (Table 3).

4.1.2 Numbers and distribution of American bitterns in the Columbia Basin

Fifty-four territorial male bitterns were located by survey teams (48) or reported by volunteer naturalists (5) (Figure 6). Forty-three (81%) of these birds were found in the Creston Valley. Eleven bitterns were detected in the East Kootenays (Table 4; Figure 5).

8 Figure 5. Areas surveyed for American bitterns and locations where bitterns were detected in May 2003.

9 Table 3. Survey “sites” requiring extensive survey effort (>9 call stations) for American bitterns.

Survey site Number of call stations Columbia River marshes 83 Six Mile Slough 69 Leach Lake 39 Duck Lake Nesting Area 37 Duck Lake 21 Cranberry Marsh, Valemount 20 Bummers Flat north 18 Corn Creek Marsh 16 Moberly Marsh 15 Bummers Flat south 15 Columbia Lake south 12 Revelstoke 11 Bummers Flat central 10

Table 4. Locations where American bitterns were detected in May 2003.

Location Number of bitterns Six Mile Slough 29 Duck Lake Nesting Area 6 Leach Lake 4 Corn Creek Marsh 4 Bummers Flat south 3 Parson 2 Bittern Lake 1 Lillian Lake 1 Saughum Lake 1 Bear Lake, Canal Flats 1 Lavington Creek, Canal Flats 1 Twin Lakes, Invermere 1

10 Figure 6. Male American bittern flying at Six Mile Slough.

The Creston Valley was the only area in the West Kootenays in which American bitterns were found. Bitterns were located in 4 wetlands in the CVWMA: Six Mile Slough, Duck Lake Nesting Area, Corn Creek Marsh and Leach Lake. Six Mile Slough was by far the most productive area in the Columbia Basin for bitterns, with an estimate of 29 territorial males. These birds seemed to be fairly evenly spaced, such that two or more could be heard at one time as observers moved through the marsh (Appendix 6). All bitterns in Six Mile Slough were in the southern and central compartments where water levels in emergent beds were less than 60 cm and extensive stands of emergent vegetation occurred. The northern most compartment, where water levels were higher (> 1 m), contained no bitterns.

In Duck Lake Nesting Area, bitterns occurred throughout most of the marsh where stands of roundstem bulrush (Scirpus lacustris) and cattails occurred, but the southwest corner appeared to be devoid of bitterns (Appendix 7). Bitterns were more thinly distributed in Leach Lake (Appendix 8) and Corn Creek Marsh (Appendix 9). No bitterns were detected in Duck Lake (Figure 7; Appendix 5), the south end of Kootenay Lake (Appendix 5) or in wetlands along Hwy 21 from Creston to the USA border, even though habitat appeared suitable.

In the East Kootenay, American bitterns were detected at 8 wetlands. At Bummers Flats, bitterns were detected only at the south end of the wetland. The Columbia River Marshes were devoid of bitterns except for 2 near Parson. Single bitterns were detected at 5 wetlands situated above the Kootenay or Columbia valley floor.

11 Figure 7. The marsh at the north end of Duck Lake did not contain American bitterns in 2003, despite apparent suitability.

In 2003, American bitterns were not detected in 12 wetlands in which they are known to have occurred historically (Table 5). In the mid 1990s, breeding was confirmed for the East Kootenay when a pre-fledgling American bittern was found in the Wilmer marsh (E. Zimmerman pers. comm.). In 2003, habitat at Wilmer appeared to be suitable but no bitterns were detected. Bitterns have also been recently (1990s) detected at Moberly Marsh, Golden on more than one spring Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) (E. Zimmerman pers. comm.), but none were detected during our surveys in 2003. In the Revelstoke Reach, just south of Revelstoke, one pair of bitterns is occasionally present in a backwater wetland with cattails (J.G. Woods pers. comm.). This wetland is relatively stable and is rarely impacted by fluctuating water levels in the Upper Arrow Reservoir. We did not sample this wetland in 2003, but sampled other wetlands in the area commonly known as the Revelstoke wetlands. No bitterns were detected, nor were bitterns reported to us from the previously occupied marsh (J. Jarvis and J.G. Woods pers. comm.). At Oasis, near Castlegar, a small marsh under a power line had previously been occupied by American bitterns (E. Beynon pers. comm.), but no bitterns were found in two site visits. In 2003, we found the cattail marsh at the north end of Whatshan Lake to be of suitable size, but the marsh was several meters above the lake and was extremely dry; therefore, unsuitable for nesting bitterns, and no bitterns were detected.

The most northerly location for bitterns in 2003 was Parson. Wetlands to the north, some of which were large with extensive amounts of seemingly suitable habitat (Valemount, Moberly), did not contain bitterns in 2003.

12 Table 5. Previously occupied locations where American bitterns were NOT detected in May 2003.

Location Source Oasis Marsh, Castlegar E. Beynon pers. comm. Erie Lake, Salmo Campbell et al. 1990 Whatshan Lake, Edgewood T. Antifeau pers. comm. Elizabeth Lake, Cranbrook Campbell et al. 1990 Slocan Campbell et al. 1990 Wasa Sloughs Campbell et al. 1990 Robson Campbell et al. 19901 Blackwater Creek D. Leighton pers. comm. Columbia Lake south M. White notes Campbell et al. 1990 Bartholomew’s Marsh, Wycliffe M. White notes Wilmer E. Zimmerman pers. comm. Moberly Marsh, Golden E. Zimmerman pers. comm.

4.1.3 Habitat at occupied sites The majority of bitterns located were in large marsh complexes of more than several hectares (e.g., CVWMA, Bummers Flats). All of these marshes contained more than one territorial male. Single bitterns were found at six wetlands/lakes of varying sizes, in relatively small (< 1 ha) marshy areas along the wetland edge.

Cattail was the most common vegetation type at occupied sites (Figure 8). Bulrush appeared to be less favoured, even when water depths and large amounts of bulrush were available. No bitterns were found in pure bulrush marshes. In marshes where both cattails and bulrushes were available, bitterns were found in areas with cattail (e.g., Leach Lake and Bummers Flat).

Shallow water was a common feature of occupied sites. Most bitterns were found in marshy areas where the water was estimated to be less than 60 cm deep.

The habitat at the site near Parsons, where two bitterns were found in close proximity, was unusual in many ways. Although part of the Columbia River marsh system, the site was set well back from the river. The first bird was in an area with a small (<10m diameter) pool of water, that was otherwise dry, where the vegetation consisted of mixed grass, sedge and very little cattail. The second bird was in an adjacent wet meadow where sedge and willow saplings were the dominant vegetation types and no cattail or grass was present.

13 Figure 8. Cattail marshes such as this one in Six Mile Slough contained most American bitterns in the Columbia Basin in 2003.

4.1.4 American bittern habitat availability Eighteen wetlands were given high habitat suitability ratings (not all sites were rated as some bitterns were reported by volunteers). Bitterns were not found at twelve of the locations that were considered high suitability for the species (Table 6; Fig. 9).

Water levels in the marshes around the Columbia River were low in May 2003, due to low levels of spring snowmelt. Therefore, most stands of emergent vegetation were left in exposed mud, rendering the habitat unsuitable for nesting American Bitterns. Under higher water conditions many marshes in the Columbia River wetlands might have been rated higher.

4.1.5 Relationship of American bittern occurrence with land status

All wetlands that contained more than one American bittern are within managed wildlife management areas: Creston Valley Wildlife Management Area (43 bitterns), Bummers Flats Wildlife Management Area (3 bitterns) and Columbia Marshes Wildlife Management Area (2 bitterns). These wetlands accounted for the large majority (89%) of bitterns detected during surveys. Six other wetlands contained one bittern each. One wetland near Lavington Creek was a wetland managed by Ducks Unlimited Canada. The other five wetlands were not managed.

14 Table 6: Average wildlife habitat rating for American bitterns at locations surveyed in the Columbia Basin.

Wildlife Habitat Ratings High Moderate Low Bonanza Marsh Beaver Valley Oasis Argenta Slocan Valley Little Slocan Lake Road DLNA* Trout Lake area Summit Lake Corn Creek Marsh* Mirror Lake Whatshan Lake 6 Mile Slough* Columbia Lake south Crawford Bay area Leach Lake* edge Windermere Lake Topaz Lake Lower Kootenay Columbia River, N of (Creston) IR Radium Cleveland Lake Columbia River, near Bummers Flat* Parson* Jade Lake Newgate Road marsh Yoho NP Blackwater Lake Help, Aid and Comfort Lillian Lake* Revelstoke wetlands Lakes Wilmer Wildlife Reserve Galena Bay Glacier NP Bartholomew's Marsh, Bittern Lake* Wycliffe Reflection Lake Wasa Slough Moberly Marsh Moose Lake, Robson Cranberry Marsh, Valemount Wolf Creek Marsh Elizabeth Lake *American bitterns detected in 2003

4.1.6 Behaviour When detected, bitterns were found to call aggressively, usually immediately after the first call-playback. Some bitterns flew or walked towards survey points in response to call playbacks. One male was observed walking > 75 m towards the call playback location, displaying white plumes on his back, typical of defensive displays during territorial disputes (Gibbs et al. 1992). The most aggressive behaviour was observed in areas where the bitterns were thinly distributed (e.g., Leach Lake and the Corn Creek marsh), whereas in the Six Mile Slough, where birds were more concentrated, bitterns responded by calling but did not travel towards the calling station as much.

15 Figure 9. Cranberry Marsh at Valemount contained large amounts of suitable nesting habitat for American bitterns, but none were detected.

4.2 Short-eared owls

4.2.1 Survey effort Short-eared owl surveys were conducted simultaneously with bittern surveys (Table 1; Appendix 10 and 11). In addition, approximately 33 evening hours were spent in dedicated short-eared owl habitat watches (Figure 10). Survey time totalled 207.6 hours by teams of 2 observers.

4.2.2 Numbers and distribution of short-eared owls in the Columbia Basin No short-eared owls were detected during surveys. A local biologist reported one observation of a short-eared owl in the Duck Lake Nesting Area, Creston Valley, during April (M-A. Beaucher, pers. comm.). The CBFWCP on-line survey resulted in one report of a possible short-eared owl from Perry Creek in the Slocan Valley, also from April. One short-eared owl was observed by an experienced birder near Wolf Creek and Premier Ridge, Wasa in June (D. Nicholson pers. comm.).

16 Figure 10. Areas surveyed for short-eared owls in May 2003.

17 There are 3 recent records of short-eared owls nesting in the Columbia Basin: one nest was found in the DLNA, 2002 (M-A. Beaucher pers. comm.); one was found in upland grasslands in the Revelstoke Reach in 2001 (Boulanger et al. 2002), and another nest was found in the same area in 2002 (Jarvis 2003).

4.2.3 Short-eared owl habitat availability More than 50 sites were assessed for short-eared owl habitat; 15 of these were rated as high habitat suitability (Table 7, Figure 11). Not all sites surveyed were rated as some sites were surveyed by untrained personnel. The 35 sites rated as moderate or low suitability habitat were considered of lower suitability due to various factors including: excessive human disturbance (e.g., traffic, domestic animals, etc.); potential for flooding (e.g., the Slocan Valley where fields looked good in early May but by late May were flooded, and Columbia River marshes flood in June (Figure 12); and agricultural activity (e.g., haying, heavy grazing).

18 Table 7. Sites assigned a “high” habitat rating for short-eared owl.

Location Description Comments Little Slocan River, Many areas are dry enough for nesting; SW of Mulvey Creek marshy meadows along river hedgerows available for roosting Thick dead grass for cover; potential flooding floodplain formed by Burton problem although some areas are high; may S of Burton Creek inlet have dune buggy activity

Large area with some agricultural activity but numerous fallow or lightly grazed areas provide nesting opportunities surrounded by a Edgewood agricultural fields large area for foraging marshy meadows along Between Beaton and Trout Lake there are NW of Trout Lake Beaton Creek pockets of potential nest habitat Potential nest sites by creek with hay and beside creek and hayfields fallow fields either side of road and further N Meadow Creek either side of hwy suitable for foraging Large grassy area with some shrubby cover, Kootenay Bay large area at top of bay looks fairly undisturbed Duck Lake Nesting Area SW end of Duck Lake Large grassy area; known nesting location Large area of dry grass with shrub cover; looks ideal however a regular observer has Leach Lake dry marsh area south of lake only seen 1 SEOW in 30 years islands in river N of Jaffray- Long grassy island with good ground cover, Kootenay River Wardner bridge relatively undisturbed Bummers Flat northern most section North end of area has excellent habitat Both ends of this road are good: dry marsh to Windermere Windermere Loop Rd S; hay to N Some area of marsh look excellent. Also to W Valemount Cranberry Marsh of hwy across from parking lot Cedarside meadows by hwy Extensive meadows appear suitable grassland south of town on Tall dense grass not ideal but some areas are Revelstoke banks of reservoir suitable. Known nesting location.

19 20 Figure 12. Columbia River wetland near Fairmont. Drier marsh in the foreground could be used by nesting short-eared owls but rising water levels in June would likely flood nests.

5 Discussion

5.1 American bittern

5.1.1 Survey locations No systematic surveys for American bitterns had previously been conducted in the Columbia Basin. Although we surveyed all of the large, and many small wetlands in the Columbia Basin, many additional wetlands remain to be surveyed, mainly in areas with remote access, and those along the benches above the Columbia and Kootenay rivers. This study provides baseline data which can be used for comparison with future surveys or incidental sightings.

5.1.2 Survey methods

Call playback surveys for American bitterns proved highly effective at detecting bitterns. Most bitterns responded immediately to call playbacks. In some wetlands where bitterns were not detected, but had been know to occur in previous years, subsequent conversations with local naturalists confirmed that bitterns were absent.

21 Acoustic triangulation of bittern calls is an effective method of accurately locating bitterns in large marshes (Lefebvre and Poulin 2003). We did not locate bitterns by triangulation, as there was only one marsh (Six Mile Slough) where the abundance of bitterns may have made that technique useful in avoiding double-counting of birds. However, observers used caution in Six Mile Slough when recording individual bittern locations and were confident that double-counting did not occur.

5.1.3 Numbers and distribution of American bitterns in the Columbia Basin American bitterns appear to be extremely local in distribution in the West Kootenay but are relatively abundant in some wetlands of the CVWMA. Bitterns seem to be absent or occur only rarely in the rest of the West Kootenay north to Revelstoke. American bitterns appear to be more widely distributed in the East Kootenay, but numbers are relatively low with most active sites holding just one pair.

This study showed that American bitterns in the Columbia Basin are concentrated in a few key wetlands in southern parts of the basin: CVWMA in the West Kootenay and southern parts of the East Kootenay Trench in the East Kootenay. The wetlands of the CVWMA are the centre of bittern abundance in the Columbia Basin. Six Mile Slough contained 54% of all bitterns detected, which makes this wetland the most important bittern habitat in the Columbia Basin and, likely, British Columbia. Concentrations of this magnitude have not been reported for any other area in British Columbia (Cannings et al. 1987; Campbell et al. 1990a, Fraser et al. 1999; Dawe et al. 2002). Duck Lake Nesting Area is the second most important wetland for bitterns, followed by Leach Lake, Corn Creek Marsh, and Bummers Flats. Previously, Corn Creek Marsh was thought to have the most bitterns in the CVWMA because most records were from there (Butler et al. 1986). It is likely the higher number of records for Corn Creek Marsh was influenced by the fact that wetland is home to the Wildlife Interpretative Centre and is the core area frequented by birders.

Our surveys showed that bitterns occur in some wetlands during some years but are absent during other years. Wetlands with consistent occurrence tend to be within the Kootenay River watershed whereas wetlands with inconsistent occurrence tend to be in the upper Columbia River watershed. The reasons for this are unknown but are likely related to habitat quality including variable emergent cover quality, variable water depths, and food availability, all of which can vary year to year.

At Moberly Marsh, bitterns have been recorded inconsistently (E. Zimmerman pers. comm.; D. Leighton pers. comm.), an indication that bitterns may only occur there during exceptional years. D. Leighton believes that the flooding regime at Moberly Marsh was not conducive to frog populations, which might explain his lack of bittern records at Moberly marsh and elsewhere in the Columbia River Wetlands. However, Moberly Marsh historically contained Northern Leopard Frogs (Rana pipiens; Green and Campbell 1984) and Pacific Tree Frogs (Hyla regilla) were not uncommon there during recent wildlife assessments (Cooper 1998; Gillies and Cooper 1999). The lack of bitterns

22 in the Blackwater River area, north of Golden, in 2003 was also thought to be correlated with a low frog and vole year (D. Leighton pers. comm.).

Whatshan Lake, near Edgewood, was suggested to be an important breeding marsh for American bitterns based on previous reports (T. Antifeau pers. comm.). In 2003, we found the cattail marsh at the north end of Whatshan Lake to be of suitable size, but the marsh was several meters above the lake and was extremely dry; therefore, unsuitable for nesting bitterns. Whatshan Lake is part of the Columbia River reservoir network, and water levels fluctuate depending on water availability and water needs for power generation. In years when the lake level in May coincides with the level of the cattail marsh, the marsh may contain bitterns.

In 2003, bitterns were also not located at the south end of Columbia Lake, despite historic records (M. White diaries, Campbell et al. 1990a, J.M. Cooper unpub. data). The low water level likely had a negative impact on bittern habitat suitability this year.

Both Elizabeth Lake (Cranbrook) and the Wasa Sloughs (Wasa) had historical records of bitterns (Campbell et al. 1990a); however, bitterns were not detected in 2003. Both of these marshes appear highly suitable, except they are located next to busy highways, railways and areas with high levels of human activity. It is possible these marshes have suffered the fate of many accessible marshes in the Okanagan Valley, which still contain suitable habitat, but no longer contain bitterns (Cannings et al. 1987).

Although bitterns have been detected at Oasis, near Castlegar in previous years (E. Beynon pers. comm.) the habitat suitability was considered to be low at this site in 2003, and no bitterns were located despite two site visits. However, the previous occurrence illustrates that even small, low suitability wetlands can provide habitat for bitterns in at least some years.

Bitterns were not found at many wetlands which appeared to have suitable habitat for bitterns. Some of these wetlands apparently are never occupied, which suggests that bitterns occur very sporadically in some parts of the Columbia Basin. We surveyed one marsh on Slocan Lake that was the only suitable habitat we encountered for > 100 km in the Slocan valley. No bitterns were detected there, and subsequent conversations with Gary Davidson, of Nakusp, revealed that bitterns have never been recorded there, even though he had searched for them for many years. Marshes at Argenta, at the north end of Kootenay Lake, also appeared to be suitable for bitterns; but none were detected in 2003. Apparently, bitterns had been heard there in 2002 (J. Krebs pers. comm.), and we suspect that bitterns may occur there in most years.

A recent study in the Cariboo region of British Columbia also found American bitterns to occur in relatively few wetlands (Dawe et al. 2003). In that study, bitterns were found in 4 of 70 wetlands surveyed for waterbirds. All bitterns were in cattail marshes in lakes or marshes.

23 5.1.4 Habitat at occupied sites In the Columbia Basin, the majority of bitterns were found in large wetland complexes, consistent with trends across North America where bitterns are typically found in wetlands of greater than 10 ha (Gibbs et al. 1992).

Gibbs et al. (1991, 1992) refer to impoundments or beaver-controlled wetlands as the best type of wetlands for bitterns. These wetlands tend to have more controlled water levels and provide more stable habitats than wetlands that are subject to annual variations in snow melt. During our surveys in the Columbia Basin, every wetland with more than one territorial male bittern was controlled by dykes and pumps. Six Mile Slough has multiple sub-compartments, and all bitterns in that slough were in compartments with shallow water; the single compartment with deeper water contained no bitterns. The Lavington Creek wetland, which contained one calling bittern, was enhanced with a water control structure placed by Ducks Unlimited. In the Columbia Basin in 2003, several smaller natural wetlands with more stable water levels contained one pair of bitterns, whereas some large, marshy wetlands with low water levels contained no bitterns. These results illustrate the importance for American Bitterns of stable water levels with certain depths.

Emergent vegetation is a key habitat feature for American bitterns (Gibbs et al. 1992) with cattail apparently the favoured emergent vegetation type in this region. Shallow water is also important for this species (Gibbs et al. 1992): no bitterns were found in wetlands with water > 70 cm in depth. Bitterns do, however, occasionally nest in drier, upland sites (Gibbs et al. 1992; Campbell et al. 1990a), and in the Columbia Basin 2 “non-conforming” birds were found in unusually dry sites, where the only standing water was described as a small pool <10m diameter.

In the Cariboo, all bitterns detected were in cattail marshes in relatively large wetlands (Dawe et al. 2003). One lake with two calling male bitterns was 80 ha in size with 4.8 ha of emergent vegetation. Other wetlands with single bitterns were 116 ha (64 ha of emergent vegetation), 105 ha (27 ha of emergent vegetation), and 54 ha (1.3 ha of emergent vegetation). This trend to occurrence in larger wetlands was also evident in the Columbia Basin.

5.1.5 American bittern habitat availability Undisturbed large wetlands with suitable emergent vegetation are relatively scarce in the Columbia Basin. Almost all bitterns were found in managed wetlands, a scenario common throughout its range (Gibbs et al. 1992). Bitterns seemed to avoid wetlands near roads, railway tracks or other busy areas. Most of the marshes alongside the Columbia River are in close proximity to a railway line (Figure 13), where, despite many large areas where habitat otherwise appeared suitable, and extensive survey effort by two teams of surveyors, only two bitterns were located. Five other bitterns, were, however, located in the same general region at small, relatively undisturbed lakes, suggesting that human disturbance (e.g., noise, traffic, dogs, etc) may have been a factor.

24 Figure 13. Many wetlands in the Columbia Basin are bisected by railways or highways, such as this marsh near Radium

Historic water stability or lack thereof is another possible reason for bitterns to avoid otherwise suitable habitat. Although some wetlands adjacent to the Columbia River looked suitable, water levels undoubtedly fluctuate greatly over the spring season, making them unsuitable in some or most years. Long-lived birds such as Canada Geese and Great Blue Herons will avoid areas where they have inconsistent breeding success or are repeatedly disturbed; perhaps bitterns do as well. Many wetlands in the Columbia River which were unsuitable for nesting bitterns in May 2003 because of low water levels appeared to be suitable in mid August 2003 because water levels had risen into the emergent beds. Single site visit habitat ratings are therefore prone to error in areas where observers may not be aware of potential for water fluctuations. Bittern ability to avoid fluctuating water levels may also explain the occurrence of two birds near Parsons. This was the only site in 2003 where bitterns were found low in the river corridor, in a small oxbow that was >3 channels removed from the river itself (i.e., other marshes between the river and this location would flood first, absorbing most of the water, and the bitterns nest would be safe, unless water levels rose very high or very rapidly).

5.1.6 Behaviour The universal quick response of bitterns to call playbacks gave us confidence that we detected bitterns where they occurred and when none were detected, none were likely to have been present. This conclusion was reinforced by the lack of bittern detections in the Blackwater River area, as we surveyed the site where bitterns normally occur. Later through BBS surveys, local birders confirmed that bitterns were not found in the area this year (D. Leighton pers. comm.).

25 Bitterns in Six Mile Slough seemed less aggressive than bitterns elsewhere. The Six Mile Slough bitterns seemed able to tolerate other birds within close range, without resorting to long aggressive advances through the marsh, although they did move somewhat. This behaviour suggests that Six Mile Slough contained extremely high-quality bittern habitat in 2003, and competition for resources was minimized.

5.1.7 Conflicts with other species at risk One important wetland for American bitterns is also the home of the only known population of the endangered Northern Leopard Frog in British Columbia (Waye and Cooper 2000). In 1999, we observed an American bittern foraging on frogs at the main Northern Leopard Frogs calling site. In 2003, we found a territorial male bittern at the same location. Although bitterns may be taking Northern Leopard Frogs as part of their diet, and these frogs are at extreme risk of extirpation in British Columbia, the predator is also a species at risk, which makes for a complex management issue.

5.2 Short-eared owl

5.2.1 Survey locations No systematic surveys for short-eared owls had previously been conducted in the Columbia Basin. During this study, we assessed habitat along all of the main transportation routes available to us and conducted surveys at sites that appeared most suitable. Some additional agricultural fields remain to be surveyed, as time constraints limited our ability to survey lands where permission for access was needed and the likelihood of finding short-eared owls was estimated to be low.

5.2.2 Survey methods

Although we did not detect any short-eared owls during our systematic surveys, we are confident that we did not miss many owls. Discussions with naturalists and biologists throughout the Columbia Basin revealed only 2, possibly 3 owls, detected during spring in the entire region. Since short-eared owls are active during early morning and dusk periods (Holt and Leasure 1993), which coincided with our observation periods, we suspect that owls would have been detected in at least some sites if they had been present.

5.2.3 Numbers and distribution of short-eared owls in the Columbia Basin

Short-eared owls were virtually absent as a breeding species in the Columbia Basin in 2003. The two reports of short-eared owls from April coincide with the species’

26 migration period in British Columbia (Campbell et al. 1990b); therefore, it is possible these birds were migrants. Because the Duck Lake Nesting Area, the site of the “confirmed” April record, was searched extensively in May (2 mornings and 3 evenings by 2 to 4 surveyors; plus additional observation time by biologists working in the area) with no short-eared owl sightings, it is highly unlikely that short-eared owls remained to breed in the area. The “unconfirmed” record from the Slocan Valley was from an area with some fields with “good” habitat in early May; however, much of the area had flooded by mid-May. If this owl was a short-eared, and had remained to breed in the area, it is unlikely that it would have nested successfully. It is possible the single short-eared owl observed on the Wolf Creek Road, in June, at the south end of Premier Ridge, may have been breeding in the area.

The short-eared owl is a nomadic specialist whose occurrence and abundance is linked mainly to availability of microtone rodents (voles), their dominant prey (Marti and Marks 1989; Holt and Leisure 1993; Houston 1997). The variation in numbers of short-eared owls can be “highly significant” when irruptions in prey occur. For example, short-eared owls were common (604 observations at one study site) in 1997 in southern Saskatchewan when meadow vole population irrupted, whereas the species was considered very rare in both 1996 and 1998 (2 observations for both years with similar observer effort), which were considered ‘normal’ vole years (Poulin et al. 2001). In 2003, short-eared owls were exceptionally abundant in south-eastern Alberta (R. Poulin pers. comm.).

Although no sampling of small mammals was undertaken, anecdotal evidence suggests that 2003 was a poor year for voles in the Columbia Basin. There was very little sign of vole activity (runways, grass clippings) in any of the regions sampled by the authors. Biologists working in the Creston region suggested that vole numbers were down dramatically from previous years (M-A. Beaucher pers. comm.). The Creston Valley is one of the few traditional short-eared owl nesting areas in the interior of British Columbia. Nests have previously been confirmed from the Duck Lake area and in farm fields at West Creston (Butler et al. 1986). In 2002, a nest was found near Duck Lake Nesting Area in a long grass field and voles were noted to be very abundant in that field (M-A. Beaucher pers. comm.). A similar situation occurred in Revelstoke Reach of the Upper Arrow Reservoir where a short-eared owl nest was found in 2001 and 2002, both years with high vole numbers (Boulanger et al. 2002, Jarvis 2003), but owls appeared to be absent and vole sign was very rare in 2003. It therefore seems probable that 2003 was a poor year for voles and short-eared owls moved through the region during spring migration but continued northward or eastward to search for areas with higher prey abundance.

Short-eared owls should occur in local areas of the Columbia Basin where grasslands or fields provide nesting habitat and prey is abundant. Historical breeding records indicate that at least a few short-eared owls are able to breed in the Columbia Basin in some years (Butler et al. 1986; Campbell et al. 1990b; Boulanger et al. 2002; Jarvis 2003; M-A. Beaucher pers. comm.). Sufficient prey and suitable nesting fields may occur only in some years and only at a few localities. In most areas of the Columbia Basin (e.g.,

27 Nakusp), it is apparent that short-eared owls occur only as migrants (G. Davidson pers. comm.).

5.2.4 Population trend Across Canada, there has been a 21% annual decline in short-eared owls since the late 1960s, but data are so scarce that the rate is statistically non significant (Downes et al. 2002). Kirk and Hyslop (1998), however, state there has been a significant decline. This seems obvious, regardless of statistics, as the index of abundance in Canada has fallen from about 44 to near 0 in that time, and there are statistically significant declines determined for North America (Canada and USA) (Sauer et al. 2002). Trend data from Breeding Bird Surveys in British Columbia are lacking, although most birders tell us there are fewer owls than there used to be. Declines in British Columbia were noted as far back as the 1930-1940s (Munro and Cowan 1947). It is unlikely that trends in the Columbia Basin are any different than elsewhere in the province.

5.2.5 Short-eared owl habitat availability Fifteen sites were thought to provide high quality short-eared owl nesting habitat. These high quality sites were very scarce in the Columbia Basin. Many of the sites were within managed wildlife areas (CVWMA, Bummers Flats, Cranberry Marsh (Valemount)), managed reservoirs (Revelstoke), or grassy meadows in remote locations (islands in Kootenay River near Wardner, fields on Windermere Loop Road, meadows along Trout Lake area south of Revelstoke, and lightly-used fields near Edgewood, Meadow Creek, and Little Slocan River), or floodplains (Burton Creek).

Within the Columbia Basin, most grassland habitat is currently settled, cultivated, grazed, or otherwise altered, with very few natural areas remaining. Very few open areas are currently suitable for ground nesting birds, like the short-eared owl, that require larger areas and heavy growth of grass and forbs for nest cover. Agricultural activities alter the landscape and typically reduce nest site availability by limiting cover opportunities (Marti and Marks 1989). Agriculture also affects the abundance and composition of prey populations (Kochert 1989).

It is suggested that modern agricultural practices impact the frequency with which voles reach “outbreak” proportions by reducing the natural variation in the grassland ecosystem. The indirect evidence used to support this hypothesis is that species adapted to take advantage of irruptions occur where these events are now extremely rare (e.g., only 3 occurrences in 60 years in Saskatchewan) and agriculture is currently the predominant land use (Poulin 2003). Prevention of prey irruptions across a large geographical area likely has a negative impact on species such as the short-eared owl that have specialized to respond to this type of event. It seems likely that in years when microtines are of low abundance, then short-eared owls may be absent or very rare.

Young (1989) lists the short-eared owl amongst the raptor species capable of persisting in agricultural areas, but states that survival is strongly influenced by intensity of land use,

28 agricultural practices and human activity. Agricultural use of valley bottom areas in the Columbia Basin may have disrupted microtine populations in most areas that had suitable nesting habitat, similar to what has occurred in Saskatchewan, therefore generally rendering habitat less suitable for nesting short-eared owls.

The likelihood of nest destruction due to trampling by people, domestic animals, livestock, and vehicles, increases with increased human settlement. Ground nests are also more accessible to mammalian predators such as foxes and coyotes, which tend to increase near agricultural areas (Holt and Leisure 1993). Elsewhere in North America, short-eared owls have been extirpated from areas that still contain apparently suitable habitat, possibly from mammalian predation of eggs and nestlings (Holt and Leasure 1993). An increase in populations of feral cats and dogs or coyotes in combination with urbanization likely seriously impacts this species reproductive success.

Ground nests may also be flooded by rising water, as noted at Revelstoke (Jarvis 2003). Flooding in the Columbia Basin may be a frequent problem for short-eared owls as many meadows along valley bottoms that looked suitable for nesting in early May, were flooded in late May. Flooding in late May would destroy any nests.

Avian predators such as northern harrier (Circus cyaneus) and great horned owl (Bubo virginianus) are two potential predators observed in short-eared owl habitat in the Columbia Basin. Great horned owls nest in relative abundance in the CVWMA, including Duck Lake Nesting Area, and their presence may preclude short-eared owls. Northern Harriers were infrequently encountered throughout the Columbia Basin, however they were recorded at several of the sites considered to have high suitability for short-eared owls (e.g., up to 4 were observed at one time in the DLNA, and 3 were in suitable fields near Windermere).

5.3 Web-based observations from naturalists

An attempt was made to solicit observations of American bitterns and short-eared owls from the general public. A newspaper article was distributed throughout the Columbia Basin region in local newspapers, notices were placed at some locations, and a request for assistance was posted on the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program website. The web-based request provided several responses.

One response for short-eared owls was of questionable worthiness as the respondent thought, after seeing the photograph of a short-eared owl attached to the website, he “might have seen a short-eared owl”. Short-eared owls are quite distinctive to anyone with a reasonable knowledge about bird identification; therefore, a response based on a website photo, which suggests lack of familiarity with short-eared owls, suggests a possibility of confusion with other owls such as long-eared or great horned owls.

Several responses for American bitterns were more useful. The most detailed response, however, was from an area (Corn Creek Marsh) that receives considerable attention from

29 birders and was surveyed intensively during 2003. Nevertheless, if we had not surveyed that site, the web-based response would have indicated the presence of multiple territorial males (we found 3 males there). Two other responses indicated that bitterns occurred in “a marsh out behind their place”. Follow up phone calls were necessary to confirm the localities, but one respondent could not be reached (in that case we were confident we had surveyed the wetland mentioned).

The best information on both species came from direct discussion with knowledgeable naturalists and biologists. However, web-based requests for information on rare species is worthwhile as even one record obtained in that way could prove significant.

5.4 Relationship of occurrence of American bitterns and short-eared owls with land status

Most (89%) American bitterns (48 of 54) detected during 2003 were in Wildlife Management Areas. Historical records also suggest that most bitterns in the Columbia Basin occur in the same managed wetlands as documented in 2003 but also in managed or protected wetlands such as Moberly Marsh, Wilmer National Wildlife Area, Columbia Marshes, Wasa Slough Wildlife Sanctuary, and much of Elizabeth Lake. In addition, managed and protected wetlands with high quality bittern habitat include Cranberry Marsh at Valemount, Argenta, and Wolf Creek Marsh (Wasa).

It is likely that numerous unmanaged wetlands in the Columbia Basin are home to nesting American bitterns. Many of these wetlands, especially those above the major river valleys, were not surveyed during 2003. Two small wetlands with bitterns in 2003 are not managed: Lillian Lake and Bittern Lake. Lillian Lake was consistently mentioned by naturalists as a “good” lake for bitterns and, presumably, will continue to hold bitterns if conditions do not change too much. Bittern Lake presumably received its name because bitterns are often present.

Two unmanaged wetlands with high quality bittern habitat but no bitterns in 2003 included Erie Lake and “Bonanza” Marsh (Slocan Lake). Bonanza Marsh has never contained bitterns (G. Davidson pers. comm.), but is the only suitable habitat in the Slocan Lake area. Both wetlands seem to be good candidates for acquisition as conservation properties, as they are the “best” wetlands in their respective vicinities.

Several larger managed wetlands with current or former high quality bittern habitat (Table 6) are threatened by development or suffer management regimes that are not conducive to maintaining bittern habitat. Two parcels of Elizabeth Lake are within the Cranbrook city limits and have been subject to land filling in the past. Local environmental activism is apparently safeguarding those parcels at present but the fate of the parcels remains at the whim of local government (D. Nicholson pers. comm.). The Whatshan Lake marsh and one small wetland in Revelstoke Reach of Upper Arrow Lake, where bitterns have been recorded previously, are within BC Hydro-controlled reservoir

30 systems. The Whatshan Lake marsh was dry in 2003 and the Revelstoke Reach marsh is subject to flooding during years of heavy spring runoff.

It should be noted that none of the managed wetlands with breeding American bitterns are managed specifically for bittern habitat. This makes those wetlands vulnerable to changes which may be detrimental to bitterns. For example, Six Mile Slough has several compartments. One compartment held water > 1 m deep and contained no bitterns. The other compartments were shallow and contained numerous bitterns. If those compartments were filled to water levels as high as the unoccupied compartment then no bitterns would likely have used Six Mile Slough in 2003. Bummers Flats contained bitterns only at the southernmost end of the marsh. Several kilometres of marsh to the north were devoid of bitterns. The reason for this is unclear as habitat looked to be similar and was rated as high quality at almost all survey locations. Perhaps a subtle difference in water level, or reduced prey because of cold water intake at the north end rendered that part of the marsh unsuitable. The conclusion is that managed wetlands have potential to be high quality habitat for bitterns, but only, in some cases, if managed for necessary bittern habitat qualities. Management for habitat for other wildlife (e.g., waterfowl), may be detrimental to bitterns

The one short-eared owl observed in 2003 was within the Premier Ridge Access Management Area, an area of Crown Land that is managed primarily for ungulate winter range. Prescribed burns and thinning are used as habitat management tools in that area, both of which promote grassland and more open forest habitats which could be used by short-eared owls.

Of the two recently-known short-eared owl nesting areas in the Columbia Basin, one is within a managed reservoir system; the other is in a Wildlife Management Area. The Revelstoke Reach site is subject to late spring/early summer flooding for water control purposes. In 2001, an owl nest fledged young but in 2002 the nest was flooded (Jarvis 2003). In 2003, no owls were detected (this study, J. Jarvis pers. comm.). In the CVWMA site, short-eared owls nested successfully in 2002, but did not nest in 2003. This site is likely used regularly by nesting short-eared owls, except when vole numbers are low. Other grassland habitats in the Creston Valley (casually mentioned in Butler et al. 1986 and Campbell et al. 1990b) and surrounding farmlands may be used for nesting occasionally when vole numbers are high and ground cover is suitable.

Unlike for American bittern, most areas with high quality short-eared owl breeding habitat were in areas outside of conservation properties (Table 7). These areas included managed areas (3), BC Hydro reservoir-controlled (1), Crown Land (1) and private lands (9). Meadows adjacent to wetlands at Kootenay Bay and between Trout Lake and Beaton seem to hold the most promise as conservation properties. Meadows at Cedarside and grasslands along the Windermere Loop Road also seem particularly valuable for short- eared owls, especially if grassland enhancements were undertaken.

31 6 Management Recommendations

6.1 American bittern

Management recommendations from across North America for American bitterns echo similar themes. Wetlands with suitable habitat should be protected from drainage, water quality erosion, fluctuating water levels, trampling of riparian and emergent vegetation by livestock, and human disturbances (Gibbs et al. 1992; Fraser et al. 1999; Dechant et al. 2001; Dawe et al. 2003; Shepard and Cooper 2002). Loss of wetlands through draining and filling is the most significant global cause of habitat loss (Gibbs et al. 1992), and the same is true in British Columbia (Fraser et al. 1999; Campbell et al. 2001). In British Columbia, the Okanagan Valley has lost 96% of its wetland ecosystem to draining and filling by humans (Campbell et al. 2001), so it is not surprising that bitterns are rare there now (Canning et al. 1987). As Dawe et al. (2003) point out for the Cariboo Region after citing the Okanagan situation, vigilance is required to protect wetlands in the Columbia Basin for American bitterns and other wetland-dependent species. A number of habitat management recommendations taken from Dechant et al. (2001) seem appropriate for the Columbia Basin in British Columbia and are repeated here: • Protect wetlands from drainage through conservation easements, land purchases, tax incentives, management agreements, and enforcement of wetland-protection regulations • Maintain a complex of wetlands of sufficient size (wetlands 20-30 ha in size up to 180 ha) to provide habitats at various stages of succession • Protect wetlands from siltation, eutrophication, chemical contamination, and other forms of pollution (Gibbs et al. 1992). • Maintain water levels at <61 cm throughout the breeding season (April-August) (Azure 1998). Avoid complete drawdowns before mid-August (Azure 1998). During moulting, bitterns need relatively deep, stable waters to provide adequate food and protection from predators (Azure 1998). Use slow drawdowns to mimic natural wetland succession (Fredrickson and Reid 1986). • Maintain a wide vegetative margin around wetlands to protect breeding habitat and to deter nest predators (Daub 1993).

Wildlife Habitat Area creation under the BC Forest Practices Code of the Forest and Range Practices Act, is one tool for protecting breeding habitat (Fraser et al. 1999). This type of conservation action could be warranted if wetlands with more than 1-2 breeding pairs occur, but at present all such wetlands in the Columbia Basin are within protected and managed areas. These authors also suggest that acquisition of habitat for the sole purpose of managing for American bitterns is not warranted. We agree with this principal except under unusual circumstances. For example, we would argue that Six Mile Slough would be worthy of acquisition for American bitterns alone if it was privately-owned and not already within a wildlife management area.

32 Recommendations for wetland conservation in the Cariboo Region (Dawe et al. 2003) could be useful in the Columbia Basin. Management actions that preserve ecosystem function and water quality such as maintaining buffer zones around wetlands that preclude grazing by livestock, preclude direct human disturbance, and minimize contamination of water seem to have universal applicability.

Any management action that preserves large (>10 ha) freshwater wetlands with dense emergent vegetation will help conserve bittern habitat.

6.1.1 Best management practices for American bitterns

Best management practices for American bittern breeding habitat have been developed for northeastern British Columbia (Manning, Cooper and Associates 2003a) and some of the recommended BMPs are applicable to the Columbia Basin:

• do not fill, off-load equipment, store logs, or build new roads through wetlands with cattail or bulrush stands • maintain emergent vegetation structural integrity in wetlands • to protect eggs and young do not hay wet meadows until > 1 August • avoid disturbance at nesting areas • avoid spills of noxious substances into wetlands • maintain stable water levels during the breeding season

6.2 Short-eared owl

In order to provide suitable nesting habitat, conservation grassland areas should be managed with consideration of this species. Plausible methods of habitat enhancement include increasing the amount of fallow field habitat in wildlife management areas, retaining patches of shrubs and hedgerows between fields for roost cover, and minimizing disturbance by people, vehicular traffic (particularly off road vehicles) and domestic animals in areas frequented by owls (Cooper and Beauchesne 2002).

In reservoir-controlled areas, water levels should not be raised to levels impacting identified short-eared owl nesting areas during the breeding season (e.g., Cooper 2003). Management activities such as burning, mowing or tilling of meadows should not be undertaken until after 1 August, to protect nests (Cooper and Beauchesne 2002).

In rangelands, grazing should be planned so as to minimize impact to vegetation structure. Meadows adjacent to wetlands should be left as undisturbed as possible, preferably with an average vegetation height of >50cm (Cooper and Beauchesne 2002). Encroachment of forest into natural grassland should be controlled by prescribed burning or other methods, but this should be undertaken after the breeding season (Hooper and Pitt 1995).

33 Grassland habitats considered particularly important, where management activities for short-eared owls should be considered include: Duck Lake Nesting Area (CVWMA), Revelstoke Reach (Upper Arrow Reservoir), and Cranberry Marsh (Valemount). Good habitat areas where acquisition of land might be considered include marginal agricultural land at Meadow Creek, Edgewood, and on the Windermere Loop Road.

6.2.1 Best management practices for short-eared owl nesting habitat

Best management practices for short-eared owl habitat have been developed for Vancouver Island (Manning, Cooper and Associates 2003b) and some of the recommended BMPs are applicable to the Columbia Basin:

• Old field habitat should be protected from development by acquisition or long-term stewardship agreements with landowners

• Public information and education products should be developed as part of an overall plan to encourage landowners to conserve and enhance short-eared owl wintering and breeding habitats

• Human disturbance should be minimized at roosting and wintering sites

• Discourage free-running dogs in grasslands, marshes, and estuaries

6.3 Future research

Future research should include surveys of wetlands with high habitat suitability for American bitterns, especially those wetlands that are known to contain bitterns, and fields and grasslands with high suitability and/or historical records of nesting short-eared owls.

Now that a baseline survey has been conducted, population trends for American bitterns may be detectable with similar surveys on selected wetlands in the future.

Six Mile Slough, especially, should be examined in more detail for habitat characteristics. Management regimes that focus on American bittern habitat needs should be evaluated for potential impacts on other wildlife.

34 6.4 Potential WHA Candidates

6.4.1 American bittern Wetlands that contain breeding American bitterns have habitat attributes that are relatively rare, even when considering only wetland habitats. Attributes such as sizeable and dense areas of emergent vegetation with shallow waters provide breeding habitat for bitterns but also for numerous marsh-nesting bird species, pond-breeding amphibians, fish and aquatic mammals. In our opinion, wetlands with breeding American bitterns probably provide higher quality critical habitat for the most wildlife species than any other freshwater wetland habitat type. We suggest that wetlands with breeding American bitterns, which are not already protected as a conservation property, should be considered for WHAs.

Six Mile Slough should be assessed as a possible American bittern WHA with the view to making American bittern habitat a primary objective for that wetland, given the very high density of bitterns there.

6.4.2 Short-eared owl

Some areas with highly suitable habitat for short-eared owls are already protected as conservation properties. Of those areas not protected, the most likely candidate for a WHA is the extensive meadows north of Trout Lake. These meadows run along the valley for several kilometres, and seem large enough to support sizeable microtine populations. Other areas that contain suitable habitat are mainly large, lightly-grazed fields. These fields occur at scattered locations throughout the Columbia Basin. Fields which were rated as high suitability habitat during this study, and which are near other open areas such as wetlands, could be considered for purchase and/or habitat enhancement.

35 7 Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank John Krebs of the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program for initiating and managing this project. Ted Antifeau of the Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection provided information and much encouragement. Barry Bartlett of CBFWCP produced the newspaper article, poster and web-site information request. Thomas Hill and Aaron Reid of CBFWCP contributed high energy and enthusiasm to the survey effort, and made the work even more enjoyable than it otherwise would be. Thomas and Aaron also cheerfully took on, via canoe, some of the more logistically difficult areas to survey and provided several photographs for this report.

John Krebs, Ted Antifeau, Doug Adama (CBFWCP) and Larry Halverson (Parks Canada) reviewed earlier drafts of the ms. Tasha Kirby of CBFWCP developed the GIS maps for the report. Brian Stushnoff kindly arranged a permit to work in the Creston Valley Wildlife Management Area.

We are very grateful to the local naturalists and biologists who contributed their records and shared their regional knowledge, especially Marc-Andre Beaucher, Linda van Damme, Gary Davidson, Larry Halverson, Doug Leighton, Ed McMackin, Dean Nicholson, Bill and Avy Nicholson, Brian Stushnoff, and Ellen Zimmerman. Dean Nicholson also contributed his time by participating in surveys. Dianne Cooper extracted information on bitterns and owls from the Mildred White diaries.

36 8 References

Azure, D. A. 1998. Aspects of American Bittern ecology in northwest Minnesota. M.S. thesis. University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, North Dakota. 139 pp.

Boulanger, J., J.G. Woods and J. Jarvis. 2002. Songbird use of four floodplain vegetation types in the Revelstoke Reach, Upper Arrow Reservoir, British Columbia, Canada. Unpublished report.

Brigham. M. Undated. Bird sounds of Canada, Vol. 2. Holborne Distributing Co. Ltd, Mount Albert, Ontario.

Butler, R.W, B.G. Stushnoff and E. McMackin. 1986. The birds of the Creston Valley and southeastern British Columbia. Occasional Paper No. 58, Canadian Wildlife Service, Delta, BC. 37 pp.

Cadman, M.D. 1994. Status report on the short-eared owl (Asio flammeus) in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 53 pp.

Campbell, R.W., N.K. Dawe, I. McTaggart-Cowan, J.M. Cooper, G.W. Kaiser, and M.C.E. McNall. 1990a. The Birds of British Columbia, Volume 1, Nonpasserines, Introduction, Loons through Waterfowl. Royal British Columbia Museum and Canadian Wildlife Service. 514 pp.

Campbell, R.W., N.K. Dawe, I. McTaggart-Cowan, J.M. Cooper, G.W. Kaiser, and M.C.E. McNall. 1990b. The Birds of British Columbia, Volume 2, Nonpasserines, Diurnal Birds of Prey through Woodpeckers. Royal British Columbia Museum and Canadian Wildlife Service. 662 pp.

Campbell, R.W., N.K. Dawe, I. McTaggart-Cowan, J.M. Cooper, G.W. Kaiser, and M.C.E. McNall. 2001. The Birds of British Columbia, Volume 4, Passerines, Warblers through finches, UBC Press, Vancouver.

Cannings, R.A., R.J. Cannings and S.G. Cannings. 1987. Birds of the Okanagan Valley, British Columbia. Royal British Columbia Museum, Victoria, BC. 420 pp.

Cooper, J.M. 1998. Existing conditions report – wildlife. Donald to Kicking Horse Canyon. Manning, Cooper and Associates report for Cache Creek to the Rockies Program, Ministry of Transportation and Highways, Victoria, BC. 13 pp.

Cooper, J.M. 2003. Columbia water use plan nesting bird summary. Unpub. Report for BC Hydro, Burnaby, BC. 15 pp.

37 Cooper, J.M. and S.M. Beauchesne. 2002. Short-eared Owl. Identified Wildlife Management Strategy, Vol. 2. Version 1.0. Ministry of Forests and Ministry of Water, Land and air Protection, Victoria, BC.

COSEWIC (Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada). 2003. Canadian species at risk, May 2003. Ottawa. Website: http://www.cosepac.gc.ca/htmlDocuments/CDN_SPECIES_AT_RISK_May2003_e.htm

CWS (Canadian Wildlife Service). 2003. Canadian bird trends. Website: http://www.cws- scf.ec.gc.ca/birds/trends/

Daub, B. C. 1993. Effects of marsh area and characteristics on avian diversity and nesting success. M.S. thesis. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 37 pp.

Dawe, N.K., J.M. Cooper, A.C. Stewart, and J.A. Young. 2003. In the footsteps of J.A. Munro: waterbirds and wetlands in the Cariboo parklands, British Columbia, a comparative study: 1938, 1958, 2001. Technical Report Series No. 376, Canadian Wildlife Service, Delta, BC. 190 pp.

Dechant, J. A., M. L. Sondreal, D. H. Johnson, L. D. Igl, C. M. Goldade, A. L., Zimmerman, and B. R. Euliss. 2001. Effects of management practices on grassland birds: American Bittern. Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, Jamestown, ND. Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center Home Page. http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/literatr/grasbird/ambi/ambi.htm (Version 17FEB2000).

Fraser, D.F., W.L. Harper, S.G. Cannings and J.M. Cooper. 1999. Rare birds of British Columbia. Wildlife Branch and Resource Inventory Branch, Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Victoria, BC. 244 pp.

Fredrickson, L. H., and F. A. Reid. 1986. Wetland and riparian habitats: a nongame management overview. Pages 59-96 in J. B. Hale, L. B. Best, and R. L. Clawson, editors. Management of nongame wildlife in the Midwest: a developing art. North Central Section Wildlife Society, Chelsea, Michigan.

Gibbs, J.P., J.R. Longcore, D.G. McAuley and J.K. Ringelman. 1991. Use of wetland habitats by selected nongame waterbirds in Maine. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Fish Wildlife Res. 9.

Gibb, J.P., S. Melvin, and F.A. Reid.1992. American Bittern. In The Birds of North America, No. 62 (A. Poole and F. Gill, Eds.). The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia and The American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, D.C. 22pp.

Gillies, C. and J.M. Cooper. 1999. Survey of Package 2 area of Moberley Marsh for Northern Leopard Frogs (Rana pipiens), May 1999. Manning, Cooper and

38 Associates report for Cache Creek to the Rockies Program, Ministry of Transportation and Highways, Victoria, BC. 3 pp.

Holt, D.W. and S.M. Leasure. 1993. Short-eared Owl (Asio flammeus). In The Birds of North America, No. 62 (A. Poole and F. Gill, Eds.). The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia and The American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, D.C. 22pp.

Hooper, T.D. and M.D. Pitt. 1995. Problem Analysis for Chilcotin-Cariboo Grassland Biodiversity. Wildlife Bulletin B-82. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Wildlife Branch, Victoria, BC.

Houston, C.S. 1997. Banding of Asio owls in south-central Saskatchewan. In Biology and Conservation of Owls of the Northern Hemisphere (eds. J.R. Duncan, D.H. Johnson, T.H. Nicholls), pp237-242, USDA Forest Service General Technical Report NC-190.

Jarvis, J. 2003. Preliminary evaluation of the impact of reservoir operations on nesting birds in the Revelstoke Reach, Upper Arrow Reservoir, Revelstoke, British Columbia, Canada. Unpublished report for BC Hydro, Burnaby, BC.

Kochert, M.N. Responses of raptors to livestock grazing in the western United States. In Proceedings of the Western Raptor Management Symposium and Workshop, 1987, pp. 194-203, National Wildlife Federation Scientific and Technical Series No. 12.

Lefebvre, G. and B. Poulin. 2003. Accuracy of bittern location by acoustic triangulation. Journal of Field Ornithology 74:305-311.

Manning, Cooper and Associates. 2003a. Best management practices for Identified Wildlife in TFL 48. Manning, Cooper and Associates report for Canfor Ltd, Chetwynd Division, Chetwynd, BC. 84 pp.

Manning, Cooper and Associates. 2003b. Best management practices for raptors in urban and rural landscapes in Region 1. Manning, Cooper and Associates report for Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection, Nanaimo, BC. 94 pp.

Marti, C.D. and J.S. Marks. 1989. Medium-sized owls. In Proceedings of the Western Raptor Management Symposium and Workshop, 1987, pp. 124-133, National Wildlife Federation Scientific and Technical Series No. 12.

Poulin, R.G., T.I. Wellicome, and L.D. Todd. 2001. Synchronous and delayed numerical responses of a predatory bird community to a vole outbreak on the Canadian Prairies. J. Raptor Research 35:288-295.

Poulin, R.G. 2003. Relationship between burrowing owls, small mammals and agriculture. PhD Thesis, University of Regina, Saskatchewan.

39 (RIC) Resources Inventory Committee. 1997. Standardized Inventory Methodologies for Components of British Columbia’s Biodiversity: Raptors. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Victoria, BC.

(RIC) Resources Inventory Committee. 1998. Inventory Methods for Marsh Birds: Bitterns and Rails. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Victoria, BC.

(RIC) Resources Inventory Committee. 1999. British Columbia Wildlife Habitat Ratings Standards. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Victoria, BC.

Sauer, J.R., J.E. Hines and J. Fallon. 2002. The North American breeding bird survey results and analysis. Version 2002.1. Patuxent Wildlife Research Centre, Laurel, MD. www.mbr-pwrc.usgs.gov/bbs.

Sauer, J.R., J.E. Hines, G. Gough, I. Thomas and B.G. Peterjohn. 1997. The North American breeding bird survey results and analysis. Version 96.4. Patuxent Wildlife research centre, Laurel, MD. www.mbr-pwrc.usgs.gov/bbs.

Shepard, M.G. and J.M. Cooper. 2002. American Bittern. Identified Wildlife Management Strategy, Vol. 1. Version 2.0. Ministry of Forests and Ministry of Water, Land and air Protection, Victoria, BC.

Tate, J. 1986. The blue list for 1986. American Birds 40:227-236.

Waye, H.L. and J.M. Cooper. 2000. Status and conservation of the Northern Leopard Frog (Rana pipiens) in the Creston Valley Wildlife Management Area. Manning, Cooper and Associates report for Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program, Nelson, BC.

Young, L.S. 1989. Effects of agriculture on raptors in the western United States: and overview. In Proceedings of the Western Raptor Management Symposium and Workshop, 1987, pp. 209-218, National Wildlife Federation Scientific and Technical Series No. 12.

40 Appendix 1. Persons contacted for information on American bitterns and short- eared owls.

John Krebs Ted Antifeau Brian Stushnoff Darrel Smith Linda van Damme Gary Davidson Doug Leighton Kat Enns Larry Halverson Doug Leighton Marlene Machmer Dean Nicholson Ellen Zimmerman Bill and Avy Nicholson John Woods Marc-Andre Beaucher Ed McMackin Janice Jarvis Dianne Cooper Tanya Begin

41 Appendix 2. “Have you seen these birds?” Poster.

42 Appendix 3. Newspaper article.

43 Appendix 4. American bittern survey results, May, 2003.

Territorial Survey males Habitat Area Dates points detected Other reports suitability

6 and 28 good habitat Beaver Valley May 9 0 scarce 6 and 28 Currently low Oasis May 2 0 historic record, suitability

Slocan River good habitat Valley 7 May 12 0 scarce Slocan Lake regular searches (Bonanaza have never Marsh) 8 May 1 0 produced bittern High Summit Lake 8 May 1 0 Very low Whatshan Lake 9 May 1 0 Very low Beaton to Trout Lake 10 May 17 0 Moderate Argenta 11 May 8 0 High

Duck Lake 12 to 14 known to occur here (and DLNA) May 64 6 regularly High Creston IR 14 May 6 0 moderate

14 and known to occur here CVWMA 16 May 18 4 regularly high 14, 16, and 17 6 Mile Slough May 69 29 high 15 and Leach Lake 17 May 39 4 high

EKT, SE 17 and good habitat corner 19 May 11 0 scarce 18 to 20 Bummers and 24 Flats May 42 3 high Columbia reported from the Lake 20-May 13 0 boat dock moderate

44 Territorial Survey males Habitat Area Dates points detected Other reports suitability known by local naturalists to occur Lillian Lake 21-May 3 1 here high Columbia River (Fairmont to 21 to 24 high in many Golden) May 83 2 areas

reported from here Bittern Lake 23-May 4 1 by local naturalists high

reported in previous Sue Fire 24-May 2 0 years low this year Moberly Marsh 25-May 15 0 high Valemont 26-May 20 0 high reported near Machete Island in Revelstoke 27-May 11 0 previous years high EKT, N of Cranbrook 29-May 12 0 Elizabeth Lake 30-May 6 0 moderate

45 Appendix 5. Location of call stations for American bitterns at Duck Lake and the south end of Kootenay Lake in May 2003.

46 Appendix 6. Location of call stations and detections of American bitterns at Six Mile Slough in May 2003.

47 Appendix 7. Location of call stations and detections of American bitterns at Duck Lake Nesting Area in May 2003.

48 Appendix 8. Location of call stations and detections of American bitterns at Leach Lake Slough in May 2003.

49 Appendix 9. Location of call stations and detections of American bitterns at Corn Creek Marsh in May 2003.

50 Appendix 10. Location of American bittern records and call stations in 2003 (Nad. 83, zone 11U).

Location Easting Northing Elevation WHR*

Erie Lake 473048 5448270 718 3 Erie Lake 474198 5448756 718 3 Erie Lake 474004 5448664 718 4 Erie Lake 475595 5448539 718 2 Erie Lake 475310 5448660 718 1 Pend O'reille Rd 477463 5428140 4 Pend O'reille Rd 478190 5427830 2 Pend O'reille Rd 478421 5427992 3 w Erie Lake 472119 5448273 2 Oasis 445951 5442590 4 Slocan Valley 455730 5484569 483 2 Winlaw Reg. Park 459459 5496546 2 Slocan Valley 460387 5496758 1 Slocan Valley 455486 5492048 522 2 Little Slocan Lake Road 450902 5500778 713 4 Little Slocan Lake Road 452561 5503363 668 4 Little Slocan Lake Road 453119 5503816 686 3 Little Slocan Lake Road 453538 5503945 684 3 Little Slocan Lake Road 459812 5506565 753 4 Little Slocan Lake Road 461286 5507973 733 4 Bonanza Marsh 466608 5548991 1 Bonanza Marsh 466608 5548991 1 Summit Lake 456578 5554989 543 4 Whatshan Lake 421725 5534983 615 4 Trout Lake area 457020 5613194 4 Trout Lake area 455595 5613726 787 3 Trout Lake area 451254 5616655 766 4 Trout Lake area 451538 5616541 767 4 Trout Lake area 452317 5615913 762 3 Trout Lake area 456387 5613462 770 3 Trout Lake area 455413 5613855 765 Trout Lake 456387 5613462 770 2 Trout Lake 451505 5616537 770 3 Trout Lake 452307 5615916 770 3 Trout Lake 452649 5615852 770 3 Trout Lake 455245 5614002 770 3 Trout Lake 455407 5613845 770 3 Trout Lake 455591 5613726 770 3 Trout Lake 456633 5613358 770 3 Trout Lake 456901 5613230 770 3 Trout Lake 457150 5613168 770 3

51 Location Easting Northing Elevation WHR* Argenta 505120 5559131 539 1 Argenta 505120 5559131 539 1 Argenta 505306 5559018 529 1 Argenta 505312 5558822 1 Argenta 505394 5558515 538 1 Argenta 505466 5558285 2 Argenta 505450 5558033 2 Argenta 505120 5559131 539 1 Mirror Lake 506719 5525374 536 2 Crawford Bay area 512195 5501621 538 4 DLNA 526980 5451644 541 1 DLNA 527159 5451705 541 1 DLNA 527408 5451759 541 1 DLNA 527743 5451768 541 1 DLNA 528029 5451736 541 1 DLNA 528292 5451659 541 1 DLNA 528521 5451555 541 1 DLNA 528710 5451435 541 1 DLNA 528846 5451281 541 1 DLNA 528943 5451029 541 1 DLNA 528734 5450652 541 1 DLNA 528670 5450341 541 1 DLNA 527050 5451549 541 1 DLNA 527239 5451374 541 1 DLNA 527468 5451209 541 1 DLNA 527715 5451137 541 1 DLNA 527853 5451043 541 1 DLNA 527993 5450941 541 1 DLNA 527814 5450826 541 1 DLNA 527580 5450863 541 1 DLNA 527446 5450962 541 1 DLNA 527212 5451061 541 1 DLNA 526983 5451007 541 1 DLNA 526835 5450781 541 1 DLNA 526825 5451570 541 1 Duck Lake Road marsh 529518 5450427 541 2 Duck Lake Road marsh 529841 5449759 541 2 DLNA 527175 5450313 541 1 DLNA 526980 5450158 541 1 DLNA 526916 5449972 541 1 DLNA 526980 5449730 541 1 DLNA 527106 5449543 541 1 DLNA 527336 5449498 541 1 DLNA 527559 5449487 541 1 DLNA 527825 5449539 541 1 DLNA 528067 5449?? 541 1

52 Location Easting Northing Elevation WHR* Kuskanook 525172 5459518 2 Kuskanook 525058 5459648 2 Kuskanook 525054 5459343 2 Kuskanook 525143 5458726 2 Kuskanook 525223 5458408 2 Duck Lake north end 525701 5456249 1 Duck Lake north end 525583 5456064 1 Duck Lake north end 525462 5455860 1 Duck Lake north end 525295 5455580 1 Duck Lake north end 525034 5455340 1 Duck Lake north end 524818 5455155 1 Duck Lake north end 524664 5454920 1 Duck Lake north end 524600 5454596 1 Duck Lake west side 525320 5452206 1 Duck Lake west side 525200 5452395 1 Duck Lake west side 525063 5452620 1 Duck Lake west side 524946 5452869 1 Duck Lake west side 524849 5453132 1 Duck Lake west side 524780 5453505 1 Duck Lake west side 524725 5453778 1 Duck Lake west side 524689 5454039 1 Duck Lake west side 524658 5454345 1 Creston IR 534779 5438617 548 1 Creston IR 535593 5431658 557 1 Creston IR 535589 5431330 557 1 Creston IR 535691 5430975 557 1 Creston IR 535625 5430765 557 2 Creston IR 535927 5429959 557 2 CVWMA 528145 5438643 544 1 CVWMA 528407 5438861 544 1 6 Mile Slough 526049 5450499 1 6 Mile Slough 526124 5450304 1 6 Mile Slough 526288 5450009 1 6 Mile Slough 526163 5449789 1 6 Mile Slough 525927 5449626 1 6 Mile Slough 525591 5449626 1 6 Mile Slough 525438 5449806 1 6 Mile Slough 525395 5450355 1 Duck Lake, ne end 526031 5455988 1 Duck Lake, ne end 525866 5455970 1 Duck Lake, ne end 525866 5455970 1 Leach Lake 527895 5447020 544 1 Leach Lake 527729 5446986 544 1 Leach Lake 527984 5446771 544 1 Leach Lake 528123 5446559 544 1 Leach Lake 528280 5446283 544 1 Leach Lake 528262 5446069 544 1 Leach Lake 528128 5446157 544 1 Leach Lake 528019 5446287 544 1

53 Location Easting Northing Elevation WHR* Leach Lake 527919 5446091 544 1 Leach Lake 527815 5445741 544 1 Leach Lake 527592 5445727 544 1 Leach Lake 527115 5445472 544 1 Leach Lake 526912 5445646 544 1 Leach Lake 526982 5445955 544 1 Leach Lake 527147 5446176 544 2 Leach Lake 527732 5447315 544 2 Leach Lake 527614 5447551 544 2 Leach Lake 527332 5447572 544 2 Leach Lake 528656 5446392 544 2 Leach Lake 526885 5447636 544 2 Leach Lake 526720 5447872 544 2 Corn Creek Marsh 526643 5441544 537 1 Corn Creek Marsh 526896 5441590 537 1 Corn Creek Marsh 527141 5441586 537 1 Corn Creek Marsh 527141 5441586 537 1 Corn Creek Marsh 527410 5441202 537 1 Corn Creek Marsh 527631 5441074 537 1 Corn Creek Marsh 527844 5440977 537 1 Corn Creek Marsh 528095 5441007 537 1 Corn Creek Marsh 528341 5441043 537 1 Corn Creek Marsh 528565 5440944 537 2 Corn Creek Marsh 528660 5440709 537 2 Corn Creek Marsh 528549 5440479 537 1 Corn Creek Marsh 527639 5440830 537 1 Corn Creek Marsh 527659 5440695 537 1 Corn Creek Marsh 527459 5440677 537 1 Corn Creek Marsh 526706 5441126 537 2 6 Mile Slough 525198 5450948 1 6 Mile Slough 525238 5450763 1 6 Mile Slough 525081 5451445 1 6 Mile Slough 524985 5451445 1 6 Mile Slough 524665 5451533 1 6 Mile Slough 524621 5451763 1 6 Mile Slough 524593 5452030 1 6 Mile Slough 524489 5452212 1 6 Mile Slough 524255 5452289 1 6 Mile Slough 524074 5452308 1 6 Mile Slough 523989 5452483 1 6 Mile Slough 523824 5452629 1 6 Mile Slough 523651 5452696 1 6 Mile Slough 524996 5451550 1 6 Mile Slough 525012 5451906 1 6 Mile Slough 525135 5451715 1 6 Mile Slough 525299 5451505 1 6 Mile Slough 525460 5451298 1 6 Mile Slough 524431 5452430 1 6 Mile Slough 524429 5452630 1

54 Location Easting Northing Elevation WHR* 6 Mile Slough 524243 5452794 1 6 Mile Slough 524115 5452889 1 6 Mile Slough 524115 5452889 1 6 Mile Slough 523903 5452985 1 6 Mile Slough 523731 5453005 1 6 Mile Slough 523467 5453904 1 6 Mile Slough 523361 5452920 1 6 Mile Slough 523168 5452814 1 6 Mile Slough 523070 5453070 1 6 Mile Slough 523326 5453426 1 6 Mile Slough 523744 5453571 1 6 Mile Slough 523744 5453571 1 6 Mile Slough 523498 5453481 1 6 Mile Slough 523498 5453481 1 6 Mile Slough 524094 5453707 1 6 Mile Slough 523908 5453610 1 6 Mile Slough 523908 5453610 1 6 Mile Slough 524017 5453387 1 6 Mile Slough 524017 5453387 1 6 Mile Slough 524123 5453195 1 6 Mile Slough 524123 5453195 1 6 Mile Slough 524276 5452903 1 6 Mile Slough 524451 5452713 1 6 Mile Slough 524581 5452515 1 6 Mile Slough 523531 5453529 3 6 Mile Slough 523307 5453462 3 6 Mile Slough 523528 5453770 3 6 Mile Slough 523382 5454035 3 6 Mile Slough 523240 5454265 3 6 Mile Slough 523178 5454588 3 6 Mile Slough 523330 5454988 3 6 Mile Slough 523589 5455276 3 6 Mile Slough 523791 5455490 3 6 Mile Slough 523855 5455420 3 6 Mile Slough 523801 5454990 3 6 Mile Slough 523749 5454607 3 6 Mile Slough 523785 5454410 3 6 Mile Slough 523693 5454146 3 6 Mile Slough 523831 5453887 3 6 Mile Slough 523860 5453660 3 6 Mile Slough 524051 5453742 3 Leach Lake 527812 5445558 544 1 Leach Lake 527607 5445505 544 2 Leach Lake 527551 5445490 544 1 Leach Lake 527386 5445445 544 1 Leach Lake 527300 5445422 544 1 Leach Lake 527164 5445388 544 1 Leach Lake 527028 5445348 544 1 Leach Lake 526893 5445309 544 1

55 Location Easting Northing Elevation WHR* Leach Lake 526679 5445111 544 2 Leach Lake 526557 5444971 544 2 Leach Lake 527812 5445558 544 1 Leach Lake 527708 5447402 544 1 Leach Lake 527296 5447023 544 1 Leach Lake 527725 5447350 544 1 Leach Lake 527664 5447508 544 1 Leach Lake 527414 5447577 544 1 Leach Lake 527130 5447558 544 1 Leach Lake 526820 5447655 544 1 Cranbrook 593873 5490179 3 Cranbrook 596677 5490778 2 Ha Has Lake Rd 608396 5477330 2 Bednarski Lake 609544 5476507 3 Warder Kikomun Rd 613151 5474203 3 small lake on Suzanne L Rd 626083 5465266 4 Suzanne Lake 627526 5464850 2 long cattail marsh by hwy 620181 5472700 859 1 Bummers Flat South 595127 5502843 781 1 Bummers Flat South 595275 5502463 779 1 Bummers Flat South 595275 5502463 779 1 Bummers Flat South 595320 5502222 779 1 Bummers Flat South 595411 5501903 779 1 Bummers Flat South 595614 5501913 779 1 Bummers Flat South 595645 5501663 779 1 Bummers Flat South 595648 5501414 779 2 Bummers Flat South 595652 5501167 779 1 Bummers Flat South 595656 5501002 779 1 Bummers Flat South 595610 5502098 779 1 Bummers Flat South 595607 5502296 779 1 Bummers Flat South 595586 5502487 779 1 Bummers Flat South 595484 5502659 779 1 Bummers Flat South 595382 5502731 779 1 Bummer Flat Central 595168 5503223 771 1 Bummer Flat Central 595056 5503410 771 1 Bummer Flat Central 595057 5503628 771 1 Bummer Flat Central 595066 5503854 771 1 Bummer Flat Central 595076 5504067 771 1 Bummer Flat Central 595066 5504284 771 1 Bummer Flat Central 595001 5504505 771 1 Bummer Flat Central 594921 5504710 771 1 Bummer Flat Central 594709 5504913 771 3 Bummer Flat Central 594560 5505067 771 3 Newgate Road 624634 5446726 900 1 Newgate Road 624640 5446640 900 1 Newgate Road 625176 5445731 875 2 Columbia Marshes 582252 5557776 825 Twin Lakes 581728 5477646 2

56 Location Easting Northing Elevation WHR* Bummers Flat north 593144 5507709 778 1 Bummers Flat north 593250 5507540 778 1 Bummers Flat north 593390 5507401 778 1 Bummers Flat north 593485 5507019 778 1 Bummers Flat north 593571 5506818 778 1 Bummers Flat north 593510 5506547 778 1 Bummers Flat north 593287 5506528 778 1 Bummers Flat north 593068 5506561 778 1 Bummers Flat north 592943 5506719 778 1 Bummers Flat north 592893 5506925 778 1 Bummers Flat north 592747 5507065 778 1 Bummers Flat north 592834 5507271 778 1 Bummers Flat north 592644 5507605 778 2 Bummers Flat north 592667 5507805 778 2 Bummers Flat north 592685 5508005 778 2 Bummers Flat north 592878 5507802 778 2 Bummers Flat north 592959 5507958 778 2 Columbia Lake south 582200 5558123 2 Columbia Lake south 582440 5557924 2 Columbia Lake south 582765 5558031 2 Columbia Lake south 582979 5558198 2 Columbia Lake south 583301 5558292 2 Columbia Lake south 583687 5558406 2 Columbia Lake south 583952 5558620 2 Columbia Lake south 584277 5558860 2 Columbia Lake south 582395 5558508 2 Columbia Lake south 582105 5558451 2 Columbia Lake south 582206 5557976 2 Columbia Lake south 582288 5557709 2

Lillian Lake 563971 5594973 948 3 Lillian Lake Road 564464 5595539 958 2 Lillian lake 564167 5596058 954 1 Westside Road 569792 5589452 906 4 Westside Road 572410 5586120 892 4 edge Windermere Lake 577582 5581125 817 4 edge Windermere Lake 577667 5580798 817 3 edge Windermere Lake 577816 5580559 817 3 Columbia R north from Fairmont 579670 5578514 3 Columbia R north from Fairmont 578633 5579758 Columbia R north from Fairmont 578244 5580943 Columbia R north from Fairmont 578478 5581267 Columbia R north from Fairmont 578281 5581799 Columbia R north from Fairmont 578084 5581668 Columbia R north from Fairmont 577407 5582560 Columbia R north from Fairmont 577650 5583140 Columbia R north from Fairmont 577216 5583297 Columbia R north from Fairmont 577059 5583685 Columbia R north from Fairmont 576641 5584018

57 Location Easting Northing Elevation WHR* Columbia R north from Fairmont 576476 5584314 Columbia R north from Fairmont 576001 5584512 Columbia R north from Fairmont 575680 5584845 West of Wilmer 559694 5596994 West of Invermere 568971 5597187 West of Invermere 568648 5597517 West of Invermere 569191 5597367 Windermere Lake 572391 5586127 Radium to Edgewater 563090 5608678 Radium to Edgewater 563173 5609640 Radium to Edgewater 562955 5610033 Radium to Edgewater 562758 5610374 Radium to Edgewater 562899 5610933 Radium to Edgewater 562295 5611961 Radium to Edgewater 562178 5612700 Radium to Edgewater 562249 5613112 Radium to Edgewater 561995 5613071 Radium to Edgewater 561546 5613702 Radium to Edgewater 561680 5613899 Radium to Edgewater 561523 5614112 Radium to Edgewater 561616 5614529 Radium to Edgewater 561276 5614942 Radium to Edgewater 561178 5615140 Radium to Edgewater 564102 5609341 Radium to Edgewater 564111 5609774 Radium to Edgewater 564114 5610165 Radium to Edgewater 563929 5610801 Radium to Edgewater 563643 5611382 Radium to Edgewater 563493 5611683 Radium to Edgewater 563315 5612032 Radium to Edgewater 563138 5612397 Radium to Edgewater 562995 5612678 Radium to Edgewater 562838 5613001 Wilmer 567470 5597818 806 2 Wilmer Wildlife reserve 566558 5601025 813 3 Wilmer Wildlife reserve 566610 5601053 813 3 Wilmer Wildlife reserve 566834 5601497 813 2 Wilmer Wildlife reserve 566876 5601777 813 2 Wilmer Wildlife reserve 566630 5601705 813 1 Wilmer Wildlife reserve no gps 813 1 Wilmer Wildlife reserve 566255 5601567 813 1 Wilmer Wildlife reserve 566070 5601575 813 1 Wilmer Wildlife reserve 565852 5602228 813 Topaz Lake 541852 5631488 1121 4 Cleveland lake 542705 5601487 1137 4 Jade Lake 543429 5630381 1117 4 n of Radium 566041 5606184 803 2 n of Radium 566065 5605904 1 n of Radium 565797 5606629 3

58 Location Easting Northing Elevation WHR* n of Radium 565684 5606742 2 n of Radium 565068 5607037 2 n of Radium 564934 5607113 808 3 n of Radium 564620 5607370 2 n of Brisco 550876 5630845 n of Brisco 550789 5630991 n of Brisco 550508 5631144 n of Brisco 549821 5630638 n of Brisco 549877 5632580 n of Brisco 549755 5632670 Radium 564085 5608094 2 Radium 564012 5608307 2 Bittern Lake road 528231 5647990 1012 2 Bittern Lake 528095 5647587 1007 1 Bittern Lake Road 525150 5652491 3 Bittern Lake No gps 1 Bear Lake, Canal Flats No gps Twin Lakes, Invermere No gps Blackwater Lake 471765 5719690 750 4 Help Lake 469863 5722332 750 4 GNP 467722 5694584 879 4 GNP 468187 5693780 844 4 near Cooper Lake 497910 5694982 3 Parson 524534 5656740 795 3 Parson 524735 5656877 795 3 Parson 524836 5657107 795 3 Parson 524982 5657502 795 3 Parson 521108 5661177 795 2 Parson 517542 5664863 1 Parson 508632 5671910 2 Reflection :Lake 503736 5681566 794 1 Reflection :Lake 504102 5681360 804 1 Bummers Flat 595127 5502843 Revelstoke, Machete Island No gps 3 Golden area 501423 5685720 795 1 Golden area 501427 5685613 797 1 Moberly Marsh 496831 5695377 797 1 Moberly Marsh 496676 5695636 797 1 Moberly Marsh 496489 5695683 797 1 Moberly Marsh 496170 5695689 797 1 Moberly Marsh 496105 5695604 797 1 Moberly Marsh 496208 5695168 797 1 Moberly Marsh 496352 5694987 797 2 Moberly Marsh 496548 5694939 797 1 Moberly Marsh 496940 5694804 797 1 Moberly Marsh 496940 5694804 797 1 Moberly Marsh 497102 5694684 797 1 Moberly Marsh 497175 5694870 797 1 Moberly Marsh 497068 5695051 797 1

59 Location Easting Northing Elevation WHR* Moberly Marsh 496968 5695221 797 1 Moberly Marsh 497866 5693818 797 2 Yoho NP 528940 5674056 1101 2 Moose Lake, Robson 376528 5866568 1100 1 Valemount Marsh 347238 58541159 792 1 Valemount Marsh 347420 5854077 1 Valemount Marsh 347613 5853950 1 Valemount Marsh 347790 5853847 1 Valemount Marsh 348025 5853831 1 Valemount Marsh 348075 5853868 1 Valemount Marsh 348398 5853788 1 Valemount Marsh 348585 5853773 1 Valemount Marsh 348894 5853166 2 Valemount Marsh 349532 5854303 3 Valemount Marsh 349339 5854478 2 Valemount Marsh 349180 5854580 2 Valemount Marsh 348955 5854617 2 Valemount Marsh 348676 5854656 2 Valemount Marsh 348370 5854721 2 Valemount Marsh 348185 5854601 2 Valemount Marsh 347976 5854567 2 Valemount Marsh 347844 5854446 1 Valemount Marsh 347644 5854356 1 Valemount Marsh 347418 5854277 1 Revelstoke wetlands 415639 5647398 Revelstoke wetlands 417450 5646861 3 Revelstoke wetlands 417459 5646679 3 Revelstoke wetlands 417412 5646206 4 Revelstoke wetlands 417270 5645706 447 4 Revelstoke wetlands 416790 5646009 4 Revelstoke wetlands 416474 5645999 435 4 Revelstoke wetlands 416369 5646270 443 3 Revelstoke wetlands 415831 5646611 4 Revelstoke wetlands 418808 5644105 4 Revelstoke wetlands 420436 5639248 4 Galena Bay 438661 5606962 538 2 Oasis Marsh 445932 5442759 3 Erie Lake 473047 5448277 Erie Lake 475601 5448535 Bartholomew's Marsh, Wycliffe 587149 5505740 2 Bartholomew's Marsh, Wycliffe 587134 5505532 2 Wolf Creek Marsh 595257 5521422 833 1 Wolf Creek Marsh 595054 5521354 833 1 Wolf Creek Marsh 594818 5521126 833 1 Wolf Creek Marsh 594417 5520949 833 1 Wolf Creek Marsh 594294 5520785 833 1 Wasa Slough 591414 5512181 788 3 Wasa Slough 591543 5511812 788 3 Wasa Slough 591647 5511523 788 3

60 Location Easting Northing Elevation WHR* Wasa Slough 591942 5511155 788 1 Wasa Slough 592309 5510898 788 2 Elizabeth Lake 588007 5483121 1 Elizabeth Lake 587920 5482986 1 Elizabeth Lake 587589 5482795 1 Elizabeth Lake 587544 5482701 1 Elizabeth Lake 587077 5483306 1 Elizabeth Lake 586992 5483165 1

* Wildlife Habitat Rating

61 Appendix 11. Locations of short-eared owl survey locations (Nad 83, zone 11U: other than American bittern call stations).

Location Description Easting Northing Altitude WHR* LSR sw of Mulvey Cr marshy meadows along jct river 459812 5506565 753 1 agricultural fields around Brouse loop Nakusp 4 floodplain formed by S of Burton Burton Creek inlet 436198 5536860 450 1 Edgewood agricultural fields 1 marsh and meadows NW end of Trout between town and end of Lake lake 2 marshy meadows along NW of Trout Lake Beaton Creek 456675 5613335 1 beside creek and hayfields Meadow Creek either side of hwy 501003 5564179 543 1 further north, fields west of Meadow Creek hwy 501643 5564847 547 1 Meadow Creek fields east of hwy 503581 5560511 550 3 Duck Lake Nesting Area SW end of Duck Lake 1 Duck Lake Nesting Area further south 2 Duck Lake Nesting Area north end of lake 3 dry marsh area south of Leach Lake lake 528202 544550 1 Duck Lake Nesting Area SW end of Duck Lake 1 fields W of Jaffray to Jaffray Cranbrook 4 Elizabeth Lake 4 Steeples Ranch N of Norbury Lake 4 Norbury Lake PP 609459 5489021 2 islands in river N of Bull River Jaffray-Wardner bridge *613759* *5479041 759 1 ranch on Senerich Rd; between Trout hatchery Picture valley and Fort Steele 605714 5486416 765 2 Kootenay Rd #3 (Windermere Loop Rd); S Windermere of Windermere 582252 5557776 825 1 Kootenay Rd #3 (Windermere Loop Rd); S Windermere of Windermere 573478 5590455 885 1 Kootenay Rd #3 (Windermere Loop Rd); S Windermere of Windermere 572464 5593837 876 1

62 Windermere Windermere Airport 2 Parson to Golden 3 to 5 Parson to Golden 3 to 5 grassland south of town on Revelstoke banks of resevoir 1 to 2 * Wildlife Habitat Rating

63