ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACTS OF RECREATION AND …

1

ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACTS OF

RECREATION AND RECREATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE

UPON THE CONSERVATION VALUES OF

COLUMBIA LAKE PROVINCIAL PARK

AT WARSPITE CREEK

PREPARED FOR

BC PARKS

BY

GARY TIPPER P.AG., R.P.BIO.

PHASE II VENTURES LTD.

MAY 11, 2015

Please Note: The information contained within this report does not necessarily reflect the position of the Ministry of Environment. It may contain some errors and omissions. The report is for discussion purposes only.

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................... 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .................................................................................................. 4 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................ 4 STUDY AREA ................................................................................................................... 5 PART I CURRENT STATE OF THE STUDY AREA, IDENTIFIED SPECIES AT RISK AND OBSERVED HUMAN IMPACTS..................................................................................... 6 METHODS ......................................................................................................................... 6 RESULTS ........................................................................................................................... 6

Openings ......................................................................................................................... 6 Forest............................................................................................................................... 9 Warspite Creek and Columbia Lake Riparian .............................................................. 12 Identified Species at Risk.............................................................................................. 15

PART II PROJECTED IMPACTS BY DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO........................................ 19 CONCLUSION................................................................................................................. 28 APPENDIX 1.................................................................................................................... 29 Table of plants located during surveys of the study area in Columbia Lake Provincial Park. .................................................................................................................................. 29 APPENDIX 2.................................................................................................................... 31 Selected plants located during surveys of the riparian area in Columbia Lake Provincial Park. .................................................................................................................................. 31 APPENDIX 3.................................................................................................................... 33 Table of spatial data recorded during surveys in Columbia Lake Provincial Park........... 33 APPENDIX 4.................................................................................................................... 34 Riparian Health Assessment ............................................................................................. 34 APPENDIX 5.................................................................................................................... 35 Characteristics of reed canarygrass................................................................................... 35 APPENDIX 6.................................................................................................................... 35

Riparian Areas Regulation............................................................................................ 35 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 36

3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY During the summer of 2014, staff of BC Parks began a comprehensive investigation of the potential for upgrading access to the Columbia Lake shoreline at Warspite Creek and developing a turn-around and/or parking lot area near the lakeshore, along with associated facilities. Biological surveys undertaken during June and July, 2014 confirm that:

The grassland openings support biologically diverse and productive plant communities, which appear to be on an upward trend in ecological condition

Wild ungulates utilize the openings The rare plant Hooker’s townsendia is well-represented, with nine occurrences

discovered The forest component of the study area possesses the attributes to support

flammulated owl, an identified Species at Risk (SAR). Grizzly bear and Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep, both identified as SAR, are known to utilize the park. Human activity has negatively impacted the conservation values of the study area:

Vehicular use of roads and human recreational use, including mountain biking, are having a disturbance effect on wildlife.

Off-road vehicular use has impacted portions of the openings. Areas with steep slopes, gravelly soils and sun exposure, will be very slow to revegetate.

The existing rough road to the lake has fragmented the forest into two pieces and is subject to surface erosion

Erosion is occurring at the boat launch with sediment transported into Columbia Lake

Riparian vegetation along the lakeshore has been eliminated by the boat launch Bulrush in Columbia Lake adjacent to the lakeshore has been lost to a channel

from the boat launch to deeper water In an effort to balance conservation values with public recreational access and amenities, BC Parks staff identified four development scenarios. Each scenario was assessed for human use and development impacts upon the park’s natural values.

4

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Leanne Colombo, Range Technician and rare plant expert, provided expertise during field surveys on June 6, 2014 in which populations of Hooker’s towndendia (Townsendii hookeri) were located and also to identify a variety of plants observed during surveys.

BACKGROUND Columbia Lake Provincial Park was established in 1988 by Order in Council #5. Park roles are outlined in the 2004 Management Direction Statement (Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection):

“The primary role of Columbia Lake Provincial Park is to protect a remnant grassland ecosystem and essential wetland habitat along the eastern shores of Columbia Lake.”

“Columbia Lake Provincial Park and the two neighbouring wildlife management areas collectively serve as unofficial ecological benchmarks that assist in informal monitoring of environmental impacts associated with an expanding human presence in the East Kootenay Trench.”

“the secondary role of the park is to maintain lakeshore recreation opportunities within a scenic and largely pristine area of the Columbia Valley…Columbia Lake Provincial Park lacks the facility infrastructure evident in nearby lakeside provincial parks, making it an ideal location for those seeking low impact outdoor activities in a relatively undisturbed environment” (p. 10).

The park is acknowledged as being popular among residents of Fairmont Hot Springs as well as tourists visiting the Columbia Valley. Issues identified in relation to the theme of developing a day-use area within the park include:

“Visitor use is currently concentrated in one site (core use area)1. Lack of facilities (toilets, garbage receptacles, parking, designated campfire rings) has had a negative impact on park resources.”

“Access spur road to core use area has impacted native grasslands by creating opportunities for off road use and the creation of redundant roads” (p.11).

During the summer of 2014, following consultation with the public and First Nations, BC Parks began a more comprehensive investigation of the potential for upgrading access to the Columbia Lake shoreline at Warspite Creek. As part of BC Parks due diligence, Phase II Ventures Ltd. was hired to:

Contact the Conservation Data Center for known species at risk (SAR) for the study area and establish if any are present

Carry out a professional biological field assessment of identified SAR for the study area as per the existing SAR list, which includes limber pine, grizzly bear,

1 Parks staff note that most use of the park is dispersed, with an estimated 10% of visitors using the lake frontage at Warspite Creek.

5

bighorn sheep, badger, flammulated owl, purple cliff break and Hooker’s townsendia

Results of this component of the study are presented as Part I of the report. Additionally, BC Parks identified four development scenarios, for each of which Phase II Ventures Ltd. was to:

determine and provide projected ecological/environmental impacts/cumulative effects associated with species at risk, endangered plant communities, riparian and aquatic features for the study area and

provide mitigation measures. Results of this component of the study are summarized in Part II of the report.

STUDY AREA The Study Area, as shown in Figure 1, outlines the area where development might be undertaken and where either development or human impacts may occur. This is a small portion of the park and habitat immediately adjacent to it was surveyed. For the purpose of this study, the area was broken into three components, Openings, Forest and Warspite Creek and Columbia Lake Riparian.

Figure 1. Study area within Columbia Lake Provincial Park.

6

PART I

CURRENT STATE OF THE STUDY AREA, IDENTIFIED SPECIES AT RISK AND OBSERVED HUMAN IMPACTS

METHODS The study area encompasses the footprint of potential development, including upgrading/altering access to Columbia Lake and developing a turn-around and parking area near the lakeshore. It also encompasses an area where recreationists are expected to have an effect upon the natural environment. Surveys were conducted to develop a list of plant species in the study area, to determine the presence or sign of SAR and to assess the impact of current and projected human use upon the conservation values of the study area. SAR were provided by BC Parks and a search of information from the BC Conservation Data Centre; the plant list developed by C. de Zoete during surveys in 2001 formed the basis for this study’s plant list. Effort was made during the course of surveys to intensively examine the study area, particularly the openings and other areas where plant SAR were expected to occur. No rigorous sampling technique was employed.

RESULTS

Openings

The openings, one north and one south of the forest, can be characterized as grasslands occupying fluvial fans with a broad diversity of forbs and small amounts of Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and Rocky Mountain juniper (Juniperus scopularum) encroaching into them. The non-native Canada bluegrass (Poa compressa) and Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis) are widespread and a number of agronomic species2 also occur, generally along the road margin. Alfalfa (Medicago sativa) is scattered throughout the openings. Populations of desirable bunchgrasses are well-established, most notable amongst these are rough fescue (Festuca scabrella), western wheatgrass (Agropyron smithii) and Junegrass (Koeleria cristata); bluebunch wheatgrass (Agropyron spicatum) needle-and-thread (Stipa comata) and western needlegrass (Stipa occidentalis) augment the diversity. See Appendix 1 for a detailed list of plant species observed during surveys.

Evidence of Wildlife: Rocky Mountain elk scat and tracks were observed in the openings, as was deer scat.

2 Examples include slender wheatgrass (Agropyron trachycaulum), smooth brome (Bromus inermis) and orchardgrass (Dactylus glomerata).

7

Rare Elements: Nine occurrences of the Red-listed Hooker’s townsendia (Townsendia hookeri) were observed in the openings (locations are presented in Figure 12 and Appendix 3). It is interesting to note that only two occurrences of this plant were recorded during vegetation surveys conducted by de Zoete and that those populations were distant from those discovered during this study.

The Blue-listed3 Bluebunch Wheatgrass - Junegrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata - Koeleria macrantha) plant community was documented as occurring in Columbia Lake Park by Golder Associates in 2005 (Enns, K.A. et al.). It is speculated to occur in the openings although its presence is not definitive, given the paucity of detail about the community’s make-up in the literature.

Invasive Plants: Yellow hawkweed (Hieracium pretense) was noted in two locations, one in each of the north and south openings. Two infestations of spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa) were noted during surveys in the northeast of the north opening; an additional infestation was nearby in the forest fringe (locations are presented in Figure 12 and Appendix 3).

Commentary: There is little to distinguish amongst the openings: they are grasslands dominated by non-native bluegrasses with a wide diversity of native forbs. Based on the diversity and populations of desirable bunchgrasses, it is speculated that the plant communities are on a slow, positive trend. The presumed future condition is a much higher population of bunchgrasses and a diminished population of bluegrasses, along with persistence of the native forbs that are currently present. Forest encroachment will continue and ultimately reduce the quantity and quality of the grassland openings if left unmanaged. Off-road vehicular use has impacted portions of the openings. The most severe impacts are on areas with steep slopes, gravelly soils and sun exposure which will be very slow to revegetate. Erosion is evident and establishment of invasive plants is a potential. Habitat for Hooker’s townsendia and that for the Blue-listed Bluebunch Wheatgrass - Junegrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata - Koeleria macrantha) plant community has been disturbed. Vegetation has been eliminated from the running surface of the mountain bike trails that occur in the study area. Additionally, they are potential locations for the expansion of invasive plants and are at risk from erosion.

3 This plant community was reported as Red-listed in 2005 by Enns et. al; its conservation status is currently reported as Blue-listed by the CDC.

8

Figure 2. South opening looking east.

Figure 3. North opening looking west.

9

Figure 4. Off-road vehicle impacts on west side of south opening. (also depicts Hooker's towndendia habitat.

Forest

The Forest is primarily an old growth, dry interior forest with scattered, large-diameter Douglas fir veterans and an understory of smaller, younger age Douglas fir and Rocky Mountain juniper growing underneath (ingrowth). Vegetation on the north side of Warspite Creek is typically that of a forest, displaying less understory vegetation and large patches of moss relative to the south side. Vegetation on the south side of the creek is reflective of both an encroaching and ingrowing forest, with many grassland species intermixed with species more typical of a forest. Jeff Allen (2003) characterized this stand as being “dominated by an age class 5-6 (80-120 yrs) Douglas-fir dominated stand with an understory dominated by Juniper…This stand has regenerated mostly in the 20th century, with very few (rece plots indicate approximately 40sph) large diameter Douglas-fir up to 1m in diameter and >200 yrs of age…The stratum has an estimated 100-180 m3/ha of small diameter poor quality Douglas-fir distributed over an estimated 2300-5000 stems per ha.” See Appendix 1 for a detailed list of plant species observed during surveys.

Evidence of Wildlife: Apart from a number of perching birds, no wildlife or sign was noted in the forest.

10

Rare Elements: No rare elements were noted in the forest.

Invasive Plants: Two occurrences of Spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa) were noted during surveys (locations are presented in Figure 12 and Appendix 3). Reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), an aggressively competitive grass, was observed in a number of locations in the forest, although locations were not recorded. See Appendix 5 for a brief discussion of this grass and its nature.

Commentary: The forest is in a degraded state due to both forest ingrowth and encroachment. The current stand, with an estimated 2300-5000 stems per ha of 80-120 year old Douglas fir (Allen) deviates dramatically from its historic state. That historic stand was comprised of scattered (estimated at 40 sph), large diameter (up to 1 m in diameter) Douglas fir4 (Allen). Many of the understory species observed during surveys are typically associated with grassland and open forest ecosystems. Unless the stand is opened up through ecological restoration, the area will slowly devolve to a less-robust, less diverse understory occupied by forest-loving plants.

Figure 5. Ingrowing old growth Douglas fir stand.

4 Note that the old growth Douglas fir still exists on the site in addition to the dense stands of smaller diameter Douglas fir.

11

Figure 6. Young age-class Douglas fir and shrub understory.

Figure 7. Encroaching Douglas fir regeneration and grassland understory.

The spur road to Columbia Lake and parking area/turnaround are not park facilities but have been created by unregulated, ad hoc use over a lengthy period of time. They have cut the forest into two fragments and eliminated vegetation on their running surfaces. The same can be said for the mountain bike trails that occur in the study area. Data

12

collected during the course of this study creates an image of the forest that has been eliminated by the road: forty Douglas fir with a diameter at breast height of 15 cm or greater (average diameter was 26.8 cm with a range of 15.5 – 83.1 cm) were counted within two metres of the road. Additionally, surface erosion and subsequent deposition are occurring, with some sediment ultimately transported into Columbia Lake (in part due to the absence of riparian vegetation along the lakeshore). Vegetation has been reduced/eliminated from the parking area/turnaround.

Warspite Creek and Columbia Lake Riparian

Warspite Creek is a relatively steep-gradient stream with a series of dry channels indicating lateral stream movement over time. The stream disappears into the ground prior to flowing into Columbia Lake. Riparian vegetation is very limited in the study area with only a few species immediately adjacent to the stream or shore of Columbia Lake differing from those which occupy the adjacent upland. These species are wolf willow (Elaeagnus commutate) and paper birch (Betula papyrifera). A sparse stand of bulrush (Scirpus sp.) occupies the fringe of Columbia Lake. It should be noted that a riparian area lies to the north of the study area between the lower reaches of Warspite Creek and Columbia Lake. This site is discussed briefly in Appendix 2.

Evidence of Wildlife: A common loon and hooded merganser were observed from the boat launch at the shore of Columbia Lake.

Rare Elements: No rare elements were noted in the Warspite Creek or Columbia Lake riparian.

Invasive Plants: No invasive plants were noted in the Warspite Creek or Columbia Lake riparian although the weedy species sow thistle (Sonchus arvensis) was observed in the vicinity of the boat launch.

Commentary: The Warspite Creek and Columbia Lake riparian are generally functioning properly and offer unimpacted habitat diversity. The obvious exception is the boat launch, which is not a park facility but has been created by unregulated, ad hoc use. It creates a 4.8 m wide breach in the riparian fringe around Columbia Lake. Similarly obvious is a channel through the bulrush, created by motorized watercraft travel to and from the boat launch (see Figures 10 and 11).

13

Figure 8. Warspite Creek riparian.

Figure 9. Columbia Lake shoreline riparian (looking north from boat launch).

14

Figure 10. Boat launch at Columbia Lake (looking west).

Figure 11. Channel through bulrush.

15

Identified Species at Risk

A number of Species at Risk (SAR) were identified by BC Parks staff; their presence or potential presence was assessed as part of this project.

Limber pine: According to the British Columbia Conservation Data Centre (CDC), limber pine (Pinus flexilus) occurs in a number of locations on the east side of Columbia Lake. Specific locations noted were 2.5 km north of Canal Flats, at Armstrong Bay, two separate sites in the vicinity of Warspite Creek and in the vicinity of the lake’s outfall into the Columbia River. No limber pine was observed during the course of surveys of the study area.

Grizzly bear: No occurrences of grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) are reported by the CDC. However, grizzly bear use of low elevation areas can be expected during spring green-up, when forage at higher elevations is not yet available. No bear sign of any description was observed during the course of surveys of the study area. The presence of grizzly bear in the park has been reported (Gall, M and Yeates, B. 2014. Pers. Comm.) and is corroborated by a Bear Observation Card completed by Park Ranger Wayne Sobol who observed a grizzly bear sow and cub in the park on May 23, 1997. Given the wide-ranging behaviour of grizzly bears, periodic use of the study area by them is likely.

Bighorn sheep: No occurrences of Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis) are reported by the CDC. However, winter surveys have shown that they utilize the east side of Columbia Lake and the park itself, although none have ever been sighted downslope of the main road (Teske, I. 2015, personal communication). No definitive indication of bighorn sheep presence or use was observed during the summertime surveys that were conducted, although differentiating bighorn sheep scat from that of deer is a challenge.

Badger: According to a CDC search, badgers (Taxidea taxus) have been observed on Lot 48 adjacent to the south of Columbia Lake Provincial Park and elsewhere in the general area. Neither badgers nor badger burrows were observed during the course of surveys of the study area. Similarly, no Columbia groundsquirrels or groundsquirrel burrows were observed in the study area (Columbia groundsquirrels are the primary prey of badgers).

Flammulated owl: No occurrences of flammulated owl (Psiloscops flammeolus) are reported by the CDC. According to Cannings and van Woudenberg (2004), “Important nesting habitat includes multi-age class stands with multiple canopy layers, including a veteran tree component for nesting and roosting. Wildlife trees with large live branches (class 1) provide considerable security cover for roosting, calling, and snags with cavities (wildlife tree classes 3–6) provide nesting habitat. Occasionally, nests can be found in class 7 wildlife trees, particularly if the tree species is ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa); however, successful recruitment of young is

16

unknown. Regenerating thickets of Douglas-fir provide security cover if they are adjacent to grassy or shrub-dominated openings that provide foraging habitat.” It should be noted that no specific surveys for flammulated owl were undertaken during the course of this study. However, flammulated owls were detected at other locations in the park south and east of the study area during callback surveys referenced by Klafki (2013). Based on the habitat information provided above, it is speculated that the study area possesses the habitat attributes to support flammulated owls.

Purple cliff- brake/Gastony’s cliff-brake: It appears as though the name of this plant has changed since de Zoete’s 2001 report was produced. According to a CDC search, Gastony’s cliff-brake (Pellaea gastonyi) was observed some distance to the south of the study area at Armstrong Bay. It was observed on the cliffs at the northern end of the Park during the 2001 surveys (de Zoete, p.2). No occurrences of purple cliff- brake/Gastony’s cliff-brake (Pellaea gastonyi) were observed during the course of surveys of the study area. It characteristically occupies habitat significantly different from that found in the study area.

Hooker’s townsendia: As noted earlier, nine occurrences of Hooker’s townsendia (Townsendia hookeri) were observed during the course of surveys of the study area. Many of these occurrences were of individual plants or small numbers of plants; they were past flowering at the time of the surveys. Sites occupied were characteristically harsh and sparsely vegetated with coarse soils on slope breaks or on slopes.

Commentary: The BC Conservation Data Center search was conducted on June 11, 2014. A follow-up e-mail discussion with Katrina Stipec of the CDC on June 19, 2014 elicited the following comment: “Having said that, in this particular case, the species you mention that are missing [[nnaammeellyy ggrriizzzzllyy bbeeaarr,, bbiigghhoorrnn sshheeeepp aanndd ffllaammmmuullaatteedd oowwll-- GGTT] are likely a result of the CDC not yet mapping those species. In the case of flammulated owl, it is because this species has really been not high in the list of priorities for mapping species. Although bighorn sheep are on our radar more, CDC mapping methodology has not really been easy to apply to wide-ranging species that include bighorn sheep and grizzly bear. We have recently mapped Badger (a wide-ranging mammal) but have not yet tackled the ones you mention.”

17

Table 1. Status of selected SAR investigated

English Name

Scientific Name

Provincial BC List COSEWIC SARA Global

limber pine Pinus flexilis S3S4B (2005)

Blue SC (2010)

1-SC (2003)

G4 (2000)

grizzly bear Ursus arctos S3 (2010)

Blue SC (2002)

G4 (2000)

bighorn sheep

Ovis Canadensis

S3 (2010)

Blue SC (2002)

G4 (2000)

badger Taxidea taxus

S1 (2011)

Red E (2012) 1-E (2003)

G5 (2012)

flammulated owl

Psiloscops flammeolus

S3S4B (2005)

Blue SC (2010) 1-SC (2003)

G4 (2000)

purple cliff-brake Gastony’s Cliff-brake

Pellaea atropurpurea Pellaea gastonyi

S2S3 (2007)

Blue G2G3 (2011)

Hooker’s townsendia

Townsendia hookeri

S2 (2000)

Red G5 (1986)

Table 2. Description of BC Ministry of Environment status and CDC provincial ranking (CDC website).

PROVINCIAL LIST

STATUS

DESCRIPTION PROVINCIAL RANK

RED Includes any indigenous species or subspecies (taxa) considered to be extirpated, endangered, or threatened in British Columbia. Extirpated taxa no longer exist in the wild in British Columbia, but do occur elsewhere. Endangered taxa are facing imminent extirpation or extinction. Threatened taxa are likely to become endangered if limiting factors are not reversed. Red-listed taxa include those that have been, or are being, evaluated for these designations.

S1, S2

BLUE Includes any indigenous species or subspecies (taxa) considered to be vulnerable in British Columbia. Vulnerable taxa are of special concern because of characteristics that make them particularly sensitive to human activities or natural events. Blue-listed taxa are at risk, but are not extirpated, endangered or threatened.

S1S3, S2S3, S3 (only if G3)

YELLOW Any indigenous species or subspecies (taxa) which is not at risk in British Columbia. The CDC tracks some Yellow listed taxa which are vulnerable during times of seasonal concentration (e.g. breeding colonies).

18

Table 3. Description of numerical status codes associated with global (G), national (N) and provincial (S) occurrence (CDC web site).

RANK DESCRIPTION

1 Critically imperilled, either because of known threats or declining trends, or because extremely restricted breeding or non-breeding range make the element vulnerable to unpredictable events; a candidate for ‘endangered’ status.

2 Imperilled; a candidate for ‘threatened’ status.

3 Vulnerable; usually more abundant or widespread than elements defined above, but sensitive to threats; perhaps declining

4 Apparently secure, but may have restricted range or possible long-term concerns.

5 Demonstrably secure; usually widespread and abundant.

Figure 12. Map of observations.

19

PART II

PROJECTED IMPACTS BY DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO

In this section of the report the four development scenarios identified by BC Parks undergo a professional assessment of five human use and development impacts upon the park’s natural values along with the scenario’s expected outcomes and suggested mitigation. The impacts considered include vehicular traffic, off-road vehicle use, lakeshore use, foot traffic and cumulative effects.

Figure 13. Map of potential developments discussed in Scenarios 2-4 (map provided by G. Chin).

20

Table 4. Summary of the four proposed development scenarios.

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Status Quo Main road improved Main road improved Main road improved 20 car parking lot at top

on main park road 10 car parking lot at top on main park road; 20 car parking lot within 100 metres of lake

20 car parking lot at top on main park road; vehicle turnaround within 130 metres of lake

Road gated to prevent motorized access south past parking lot



Rough road down to lake rehabilitated

Rough road down to lower parking lot improved to two lanes

Rough road down to turnaround improved to two lanes

Trail from parking lot to lake

Trail from lower parking lot to lake

Trail from turnaround to lake

Facilities: toilet at parking lot only

Facilities: toilets (to be placed near the parking lots), tables (to be developed at lakeshore) and garbage receptacles

Facilities: toilets (to be placed near the parking lots) and tables (to be developed at lakeshore)

Measures to reduce damage to open grasslands by illegal OHV and 4X4 vehicles



Green shading indicates commonality across scenarios.

21

Detailed Information on Development Scenarios

Scenario #1

Expected outcomes: Continued relatively low levels of vehicle use in park in spring/summer/ fall5 Expansion and increasing use of informal mountain bike trails Gradually increasing awareness of attractiveness of park and recently acquired

Nature Conservancy of Canada property (Lot 48) Continued low levels of use of existing boat launch site for car topper boats/ small

motor boats Continued low levels of winter vehicle use in park and ice fishing traffic onto lake Continued damage to open grasslands by illegal use of OHV and four-wheel drive

vehicle use Continued deterioration of the existing lake access Increasing impact of dispersed, unregulated use, e.g., litter, human waste and fire

pits

Assessment: Human impacts upon the study area include the spur road to Columbia Lake, parking area/turnaround, the boat launch6 and off-road vehicle use. The spur road to Columbia Lake is relatively steep and cuts through the forest, thereby fragmenting it and eliminating vegetation on its running surface. Similarly, vegetation has been reduced/eliminated from the parking area and turnaround. There was evidence of erosion of the road surface, deposition along the roadside and minor gullying of the boat launch surface. Some sediment is ultimately transported into Columbia Lake, in part due to a 4.8 m wide breech in riparian vegetation along the lakeshore7. A channel through the fringe of bulrush has been created by motorized watercraft traveling between the boat launch and deeper water of Columbia Lake. Off-road vehicle use was evident, particularly across the south grassland opening, impacting the Blue-listed Bluebunch Wheatgrass - Junegrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata - Koeleria macrantha) plant community. Off Highway Vehicle (OHV) and four-wheel drive traffic down the steep slope at the westerly margin of the south grassland opening has disturbed habitat for Hooker’s townsendia. This slope, with gravelly soils and sun exposure, will be very slow to revegetate; erosion is evident.

5 It should be noted that use of the park by mountain bikers is increasing and is expected to increase as time goes by. However, the use of vehicles for transport and support is not quantified, nor is vehicle use of the study area by mountain bikers. The impact of mountain biking per se has not been rated in this assessment nor have management and mitigative measures been considered. 6 The spur road to Columbia Lake, parking area/turnaround and boat launch are not park facilities but are legacies of unregulated, ad hoc use. 7 A riparian health assessment (Ambrose, N. 2004) of the boat launch area was conducted. Not unexpectedly, the assessment showed that specific area to be unhealthy (see Appendix 4).

22

Bare ground provides suitable sites for the establishment of invasive plants; vehicles and mountain bikes provide vectors for their transport. Vehicular and mountain bike use is having a disturbance effect on wildlife occupying the adjacent habitats, as is human recreational use. The consequence is that wildlife is being displaced and avoids areas within the proximity of humans. This is particularly critical during the late fall, winter and early spring period when ungulates, including bighorn sheep, are nutritionally deprived. A similar disturbance effect can be expected in regard to bears (including grizzly bears), particularly in the spring when they, too, are nutritionally deprived and are most likely to occupy the study area. Additionally, the potential exists for bear/human conflict.

Mitigation Measures: Low intensity management of natural and cultural values has been conducted and will continue, as required. A similar approach to invasive plant management can be expected, as well.

Scenario #2

Expected outcomes: Increased vehicular traffic in park Expansion and increasing use of informal mountain bike trails Increased awareness of attractiveness of park and recently acquired NCC property

(Lot 48) Eliminated motorized traffic to lake Eliminated damage to open grasslands by illegal use of OHV and four-wheel

drive vehicles Increased recreational use, including foot traffic, both on and off of developed

areas and trail Eliminated impacts to lakeshore riparian values from vehicles

Assessment: Replacing the spur road to Columbia Lake with an environmentally stable foot path approximately 2 m in width, eliminating the parking area/turnaround at the lakeshore and eliminating vehicular-assisted boat launching will reduce surface erosion and sediment transport. These mitigation measures will also reduce impact on the beach and enhance re-establishment of the fringe of bulrush. Gating the existing road to prohibit access south beyond the lake access will eliminate off-road vehicle use and reduce the disturbance of wildlife and plants, including SAR, in the grassland opening to the south. Vehicular and mountain bike use is having a disturbance effect on wildlife occupying the adjacent habitats, as is human recreational use. The consequence is that wildlife is being displaced and avoids areas within the proximity of humans. This is particularly critical during the late fall, winter and early spring period when ungulates, including bighorn

23

sheep, are nutritionally deprived. A similar disturbance effect can be expected in regard to bears (including grizzly bears), particularly in the spring when they, too, are nutritionally deprived and are most likely to occupy the study area. Both of these disturbances are anticipated to increase. Additionally, the potential exists for bear/human conflict.

Additional Mitigation Measures: Construct fencing and/or place structural barriers like boulders along the roads

and parking lots where they are in/adjacent to grassland openings to confine vehicles and OHV’s to them and protect the grasslands

Construct the trail to the lake in such a fashion that vehicles, including OHV’s, cannot get onto it, e.g., installing bollards, placing boulders or constructing a fence with a walk-through at its entrance

Implement a winter vehicle use restriction to prevent harassment and displacement of wintering wildlife by closing the main park road at the park entrance (or nearby location). Example closure dates are November 1 to May 1; depending upon compliance, it may be necessary to physically close the road with a stout metal gate.

Erect rail fencing to protect the riparian fringe, prevent human traffic northerly into the Warspite Creek riparian and funnel recreationists into a narrow lake access area; plant shrubs to re-populate the balance of the existing access to the lake

Construct a shallow berm or place a log at the interface between the lake access trail and the beach to intercept and re-direct water flow laterally

Install interpretive and regulatory signage to educate park visitors regarding grassland values, SAR, to explain why minimizing human foot traffic on steep slopes is important and to detail prohibited activities. It might be valuable for similar signage to explain the value of an unimpacted/minimally impacted foreshore and riparian fringe.

Undertake invasive plant treatment annually until populations are deemed to be under control and do not pose a risk of spread. Treat spotted knapweed infestations Sk1 and 2 prior to initiating construction

24

Scenario #3

Expected outcomes: Increased vehicular traffic in park (the greatest of all scenarios) Expansion and increasing use of informal mountain bike trails Increased awareness of attractiveness of park and recently acquired NCC property



areas and trail Eliminated impacts to lakeshore riparian values from vehicles and reduced

impacts to lakeshore riparian values from motorized boats Increased impacts to lakeshore riparian values from development of picnic area

and consequent human use

Assessment: Improving the spur road to Columbia Lake with an environmentally stable road, replacing the existing parking area/turnaround at the lakeshore with an environmentally stable parking area removed from the lake and eliminating vehicular-assisted boat launching will reduce surface erosion and sediment transport. Replacing the balance of the spur road from the parking lot to the lake with an environmentally stable foot path will also contribute to reduced surface erosion and sediment transport. These mitigation measures will also reduce impact on the beach and enhance re-establishment of the fringe of bulrush. Gating the existing park road to prohibit access south beyond the lakeshore access will eliminate off-road vehicle use and the disturbance of wildlife and plants, including SAR, in the grassland opening to the south. Conversely, however, establishing a picnic area at the lakeshore will lead to impacts upon riparian vegetation. Similarly, human foot traffic to the lake will reduce the positive effects of eliminating vehicle-assisted boat launching. Vehicular and mountain bike use is having a disturbance effect on wildlife occupying the adjacent habitats, as is human recreational use. The consequence is that wildlife is being displaced and avoids areas within the proximity of humans. This is particularly critical during the late fall, winter and early spring period when ungulates, including bighorn sheep, are nutritionally deprived. A similar disturbance effect can be expected in regard to bears (including grizzly bears), particularly in the spring when they, too, are nutritionally deprived and are most likely to occupy the study area. Both of these disturbances are anticipated to increase. Additionally, the potential exists for bear/human conflict. A third disturbance/displacement is expected to occur in the proximity of the picnic area, with the possible exception of habituated wildlife.

25



Implement a winter vehicle use restriction to prevent harassment and displacement of wildlife by closing the main park road at the park entrance (or nearby location). Example closure dates are November 1 to May 1; depending upon compliance, it may be necessary to physically close the road with a stout metal gate.

Erect rail fencing along the toe of the slope to the east of the parking area to prevent human traffic on Hooker’s townsendia habitat

Place picnic tables and garbage receptacles upslope of the riparian fringe such that it and the beach area remain unimpacted by facility development. Strategically placing facilities in natural openings and currently disturbed areas, such as upon the existing parking area/turnaround, will serve to protect residual riparian vegetation and be in compliance with the Shoreline Management Guidelines for Columbia Lake



Install interpretive and regulatory signage to educate park visitors regarding grassland values, SAR, to explain why minimizing human foot traffic on steep slopes is important and to detail prohibited activities.

Undertake invasive plant treatment annually until populations are deemed to be under control and do not pose a risk of spread. Treat spotted knapweed infestations Sk1 and 2 and yellow hawkweed infestation Hawkweed 2 prior to initiating construction.

Scenario #4

Expected outcomes: Increased vehicular traffic in park Expansion and increasing use of informal mountain bike trails Increased awareness of attractiveness of park and recently acquired NCC property



areas and trail

26

Eliminated impacts to lakeshore riparian values from vehicles and reduced impacts to lakeshore riparian values from motorized boats

Increased impacts to lakeshore riparian values from development of picnic area and consequent human use

Assessment: Improving the spur road to Columbia Lake with an environmentally stable road, replacing the existing parking area/turnaround at the lakeshore with an environmentally stable vehicle turnaround removed from the lake and eliminating vehicular-assisted boat launching will reduce surface erosion and sediment transport. Replacing the balance of the spur road with an environmentally stable foot path from the turnaround to the lake will also contribute to reduced surface erosion and sediment transport. These mitigation measures will also reduce impact on the beach and enhance re-establishment of the fringe of bulrush. Gating the existing park road to prohibit access south beyond the lakeshore access will eliminate off-road vehicle use and reduce the disturbance of wildlife and plants, including SAR, in the grassland opening to the south. Conversely, however, establishing a picnic area at the lakeshore will lead to impacts upon riparian vegetation. Similarly, human foot traffic to the lake will reduce the positive effects of eliminating vehicle-assisted boat launching. Vehicular and mountain bike use is having a disturbance effect on wildlife occupying the adjacent habitats, as is human recreational use. The consequence is that wildlife is being displaced and avoids areas within the proximity of humans. This is particularly critical during the late fall, winter and early spring period when ungulates, including bighorn sheep, are nutritionally deprived. A similar disturbance effect can be expected in regard to bears (including grizzly bears), particularly in the spring when they, too, are nutritionally deprived and are most likely to occupy the study area. Both of these disturbances are anticipated to increase. Additionally, the potential exists for bear/human conflict. A third disturbance/displacement is expected to occur in the proximity of the picnic area, with the possible exception of habituated wildlife.

27



Implement a winter vehicle use restriction to prevent harassment and displacement of wildlife by closing the main park road at the park entrance (or nearby location). Example closure dates are November 1 to May 1; depending upon compliance, it may be necessary to physically close the road with a stout metal gate.

Erect rail fencing along the toe of the slope to the east of the turnaround to prevent human traffic on Hooker’s townsendia habitat

Place picnic tables upslope of the riparian fringe such that it and the beach area remain unimpacted by facility development. Strategically placing facilities in natural openings and currently disturbed areas, such as upon the existing parking area/turnaround, will serve to protect residual riparian vegetation and be in compliance with the Shoreline Management Guidelines for Columbia Lake



Install interpretive and regulatory signage to educate park visitors regarding grassland values, SAR, to explain why minimizing human foot traffic on steep slopes is important and to detail prohibited activities.

Undertake invasive plant treatment annually until populations are deemed to be under control and do not pose a risk of spread. Treat spotted knapweed infestations Sk1 and 2 and yellow hawkweed infestation Hawkweed 2 prior to initiating construction.

28

CONCLUSION

None of the scenarios proposed is expected to reduce public recreational access and use below current levels. In fact, the level of human activity is expected to increase in all scenarios, although rates will vary amongst them.

Mountain biking occurs in the park and is expected to increase, as will associated vehicle use for transport and support. The impact of mountain biking has not been assessed in detail.

Each of the scenarios is in compliance with the Fairmont Hot Springs Area Official Community Plan, wherein the park is zoned for “Open Space, Recreation and Trails” (p.28)

The study area is labelled as having “High” ecological value in the Columbia Lake Sensitive Habitat Inventory and Mapping (McPherson S., D. Hlushak, I. Adams and M. Polzin, 2010), which is “sensitive to developments and that an environmental assessment would be requested for most activities” (p. v). Mitigation measures for Scenarios 3 and 4 must be implemented to ensure that the riparian fringe and beach area remain unimpacted by facility development and therefore comply with the Shoreline Management Guidelines for Columbia Lake.

29

APPENDIX 1.

Table of plants located during surveys of the study area in Columbia Lake Provincial Park.

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME N

Opening S

Opening Forested

Area

Trees

Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas fir x x x

Shrubs

Acer glabrum Douglas maple x

Betula papyrifera paper birch x

Chrysothamnus nauseosus rabbit-brush x x x

Elaeagnus commutata wolf-willow x

Juniperus communis common juniper x x

Juniperus scopulorum Rocky Mountain juniper x x

Mahonia repens creeping Oregon-grape x

Prunus virginiana chokecherry x

Rosa sp. rose x

Spiraea betulifolia birch-leaved spirea x

Symphoricarpos albus snowberry x

Forbs

Achillea millifolium yarrow x x x

Allium cernuum nodding onion

Anemone multifida cut-leaf anemone x x x

Antennaria microphylla rosy pussytoes x x x

Antennaria neglecta field pussytoes x

Arabis holboelii Holboel's rockcress x

Arnica fulgens var. sororia orange arnica x x

Artemesia frigida pasture sage x x

Aster conspicuus showy aster x

Aster laevis smooth aster x

Astragalus miser timber milk-vetch x

Calachortus macrocarpus* sagebrush mariposa lily x x x

Campanula rotundifolia harebell x

Cirsium hookerianum Hooker’s thistle x x x

Dodecatheon pauciflorum few-flowered shooting star x x

Epilobium angustifolium fireweed x x

Erigeron compositus cut-leaved daisy x x x

Erigeron pumilis shaggy daisy x x

Fragaria virginiana strawberry x

Gaillardia aristata brown-eyed Susan x x x

Galium boreale northern bedstraw x

Geum triflorum

three-flowered avens x

30

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME N

Opening S

Opening Forested

Area

Forbs (cont’d.)

Hedysarum sulphurescens x

Heterotheca villosa golden aster x x x

Heuchera chlorantha round-leaved alumroot x

Linum perenne wild blue flax x x x

Lithospermum ruderale yellow gromwell x

Lomatium dissectum Fern-leaved desert parsley x

Lomatium triternatum narrow-leaved desert parsley x x x

Medicago lupulina black medic x x x

Medicago sativa alfalfa x x x

Orthocarpus luteus, yellow owl clover x x

Oxytropis campestris field locoweed x x x

Penstemon pruinosus Chelan penstemeon x x x

Plantago major common plantain x

Plantago patagonica Indian wheat x

Potentilla pensylvanica prairie cinquefoil x

Senecio streptanthifolius Rocky Mountain butterweed x

Solidago spathulata spikelike goldenrod x x x

Taraxacum officinale dandelion x x x

Townsendia hookeri Hooker's townsendia x x

Tragopogon dubius yellow salsify x x x

Zygadenis venenosus death-camus x x x

Grasses

Agropyron repens quackgrass x Agropyron smithii western wheatgrass x x x

Agropyron spicatum bluebunch wheatgrass x x x

Bromus inermis smooth brome x x x Calamagrostis rubescens pinegrass x

Dactylus glomerata orchardgrass x x Festuca scabrella rough fescue x x x

Koeleria cristata Junegrass x x

Phalaris arundinacea reed canarygrass x

Poa compressa Canada bluegrass x x x

Poa palustris fowl bluegrass x

Poa pratense Kentucky bluegrass x x x

Stipa comata needle-and-thread x

Stipa occidentalis western needlegrass x

Invasive Plants

Centaurea maculosa spotted knapweed x

Hieracium pratense yellow hawkweed x x

31

APPENDIX 2.

Selected plants located during surveys of the riparian area in Columbia Lake Provincial Park.

Selected plant species located during a reconnaissance-level survey of the riparian area of lower Warspite Creek are presented in the table below. Some of these plants were present along Warspite Creek in the Forest component of the study; a number of others are characteristic occupants of riparian areas that are not found along Warspite Creek in the Forest (indicated in gray shading in the table below).

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME

Trees

Picea glauca x engelmannii Interior spruce

Populus balsamifera ssp. Trichocarpa Black cottonwood

Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas fir

Shrubs

Acer glabrum Douglas maple

Betula papyrifera paper birch

Cornus stolonifera red-osier dogwood

Elaeagnus commutata wolf-willow

Mahonia repens creeping Oregon-grape

Rosa sp. rose

Shepherdia Canadensis soopalallie

Forbs

Equisetum sp. horsetail

Assessment/Discussion

This is a moist, rich site labeled as “WCR Disappear” on the map in Figure 12. It provides a good deal of habitat diversity and should be protected from human activity.

32

Figure 13. True riparian area from point where Warspite Creek disappears (looking west). Note wildlife tree in background.

33

APPENDIX 3.

Table of spatial data recorded during surveys in Columbia Lake Provincial Park.

Location of UTM Coordinates (all are zone 11U)

E N

Hooker’s townsendia (2001) 581877 5573033

Hooker’s townsendia (2001) 582215 5573402

Hooker’s townsendia (2014) 581696 5571765 Hooker’s townsendia (2014) 581713 5571744 Hooker’s townsendia (2014) 581739 5571543 Hooker’s townsendia (2014) 581739 5571540 Hooker’s townsendia (2014) 581743 5571536 Hooker’s townsendia (2014) 581756 5571493 Hooker’s townsendia (2014) 581761 5571496 Hooker’s townsendia (2014) 581796 5571463 Hooker’s townsendia (2014) 581798 5571459

Spotted knapweed 581878 5571651





Yellow hawkweed 581761 5571736

Yellow hawkweed 581682 5571498

Emergent Veg. Photos N 581475 5571528

Emergent Veg. Photos S 581497 5571504

ORV/Hookers Photo 581659 5571515

Riparian area; Warspite Creek goes underground

581493 5571658

Root disease 581690 5571433

34

APPENDIX 4.

Riparian Health Assessment

35

APPENDIX 5.

Characteristics of reed canarygrass “There are conflicting reports as to whether reed canary grass is native to specific areas of the Northwest or introduced from Eurasia by Euro-American settlers. Regardless, it is evident that Palaris arundinacea has hybridized with introduced variations of this species, creating numerous strains that grow under a wide range of environmental conditions…Reed canary grass is very aggressive and capable of rapid and near total dominance over native wetland plant communities” (from Invasive Plants of Southwestern B.C.).

APPENDIX 6.

Riparian Areas Regulation

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/habitat/fish_protection_act/riparian/riparian_areas.html Only the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans or a regulation under the Fisheries Act (Canada) can authorize projects that are non compliant with the results of the Riparian Areas Regulation Assessment Methods i.e. will result in harmful alteration disruption or destruction of fish habitat (HADD). Section 3.4.2 of the Implementation Guidebook provides direction on how to prepare a proposal for authorization by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. This will help provide certainty and consistency in preparing a “no net loss proposal”, by providing guidance on the situations where a proposal will be considered, and the information required to support a proposal.

36

REFERENCES Allen, Jeff. February, 2003. Columbia Lake Park Strategic Vegetation Management Plan.

Ambrose, N., G. Ehlert, K. Spicer-Rawe. 2004. Riparian Health Assessment for Lakes, Sloughs and Wetlands – Field Workbook.

British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection. 2004. Accounts and Measures for Managing Identified Wildlife. Version 2004. Biodiversity Branch, Identified Wildlife Management Strategy, Victoria, B.C.

Original prepared by R.J. Cannings and Astrid M. van Woudenberg

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/documents/identified/iwABNSB01020.pdf de Zoete, C. 2001. Columbia Lake Provincial Park Vegetation Assessment. Enns, K.A., J. Cooper, G. Barrett, L. Hildebrand, C. Coates, D. White and A. Eade. 2005. Columbia River Road Upgrade, Columbia Lake Provincial Park, BC Level 2 Environmental Assessment. Gall, M. 2014. Personal communication during meeting on November 4, 2014. Invasive Plants of Southwestern B.C. http://www.shim.bc.ca/invasivespecies/_private/ReedCanary.htm Klafki, R. 2013. Columbia Lake Provincial Park Wildlife Tree Survey 2013. McPherson S., D. Hlushak, I. Adams and M. Polzin. 2010. Columbia Lake Sensitive Habitat Inventory and Mapping. Consultant report prepared for the East Kootenay Integrated Lake Management Partnership. Prepared by Interior Reforestation Co. Ltd., Cranbrook, BC. Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management; Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection. 2004. Grasslands of the Southern Interior. Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection, Environmental Stewardship Division. 2004. Management Direction Statement September 2004 for Columbia Lake Provincial Park. Regional District of East Kootenay. 2004. Fairmont Hot Springs Area Official Community Plan Bylaw 1734, 2004. (Adopted December 3, 2004) Sobol, W. 1997. Bear Observation Card. Stipec, K. June 19, 2014. e-mail to G. Tipper. Teske, I. 2015. Personal communication during meeting on March 23, 2015.

37

Yeates, B. 2014. Personal communication during meeting on November 4, 2014.

Documents

ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACTS OF RECREATION AND …