DRAFT Wildlife BC-MT MOU Technical Committee Meeting April ...greatnorthernlcc.org/sites/default/files/documents/... · BC#MT&MEMORANDUMOF&UNDERSTANDING&& Transboundary&FlatheadTechnical&Committee&Meeting&

BC-‐MT MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

Transboundary Flathead Technical Committee Meeting

April 30th – May 1st, 2015 |Cranbrook, British Columbia Provincial Government Offices, 1902 Theatre Road

Implementing the BC-‐MT MOU: May 1st, 2015: Terrestrial/Wildlife The following report reflects proceedings from a meeting of the Technical Committee for the

BC-‐MT Memorandum of Understanding for the Transboundary Flathead. The meeting was convened by the Province of B.C., the State of Montana, and the Great Northern Landscape Conservation Cooperative (GNLCC). Participants discussed activities to date under the MOU, reviewed existing science and management for transboundary fish and wildlife and discussed opportuntities and actions moving forward, for overall implementation of the BC-‐MT MOU.

Attendees J.Williams N. Newhouse, G. Mowat, S. LeBrecque, , R. Davies, C. Downes, P. VanEimeren, T. Their, T. Graves, M. Proctor, N. Anderson, T. Szkorupa, R. Klafki, T. Ayele, P. Holmes, J. Krebs, E. Sexton, M. Heller, S. Bischke

* DRAFT—October 1st, 2015

2 Implementing the BC-‐MT MOU; April 30th, 2015: Fisheries/Aquatics

Table of Contents

Implementing the BC-‐MT MOU: May 1st, 2015: Terrestrial/Wildlife ....................................... 1

Background ............................................................................................................................ 3

Overview of MOU and Work to Date; E. Sexton ...................................................................... 3

Jurisdictional Synopsis; Management Priorities for the TB Flathead by Agency or Entity ......... 4

B.C. Fish and Wildlife: Kootenay Region Wildlife Update; T. Szkorupa ..................................... 6

MT FWP B.C.-‐MT Transboundary Wildlife Update; T. Thier ..................................................... 6

2015 GNLCC Transboundary B.C.-‐ Kootenay Wolverine Inventory; J. Krebs ............................. 7

Elk Valley Cumulative Effects Framework (CEMF); T. Ayele ..................................................... 7

B.C. – Nature Conservancy Canada Flathead Agreement – Progress Report; P. Holmes ........... 8

Long-‐term Grizzly Bear Research in the Flathead; G. Mowat ................................................... 8

Discussion: Opportunities and Next Steps ............................................................................... 8

Appendix A. – Meeting Agenda ............................................................................................. 10

Appendix B. – BC/MT Transboundary Flathead MOU ............................................................ 12

Meeting Objectives / Desired Outcomes

1. PAST—Review past efforts under the MOU

a. Mandates, sideboards provided by the MOU b. September, 2012 MOU Technical Team meeting c. Aquatic Adaptation Framework d. May, 2014 MOU Executive Committee meeting and out-‐comes

2. PRESENT—Focus on transboundary collaborations in science and management

a. Review of existing transboundary science and management partnerships, including key fish, wildlife, and ecosystem initiatives in the Transboundary Flathead

b. Discuss jurisdictional barriers and opportunities related to transboundary collaborations c. Discuss interface with regional initiatives (Forest Plan Revision, CMP, GNLCC, etc.)

3. FUTURE—Next Steps

a. Opportunities for science and management applications b. Future projects—planned and/or possible—with emphasis on collaborative efforts c. Discuss next steps for this technical working group, including setting next meeting



Background The Flathead River, which originates in British Columbia and flows south into Montana, is

considered one of North America’s wildest rivers. Its water quality is pristine, it harbors abundant and diverse aquatic life, and it sustains the full complement of mid-‐ to large carnivores that have thrived there since the 1800s. As such, in February 2010, the governments of British Columbia and Montana signed a Memorandum of Understanding and Cooperation on Environmental Protection, Climate Action and Energy in recognition of the high value of the natural resources in the Transboundary Flathead River Basin (US North Fork). Recognizing that the Flathead River Basin includes Waterton-‐Glacier International Peace Park, a UNESCO-‐designated World Heritage Site and Biosphere Reserve, this unique area merits special protection from risks posed by gas, oil, and mineral development. The MOU outlines a framework for the signatories to work together with Federal, State and Provincial, Tribal and First Nation partners in the United States and Canada on: 1) environmental protection, 2) climate action and 3) renewable and low carbon energy. In 2011, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar appointed, and the government of British Columbia embraced, the Great Northern Landscape Conservation Cooperative (GNLCC), as a vehicle to implement the partnership to accomplish the goals set out in the MOU, while avoiding overlap and duplication of effort.

Overview of MOU and Work to Date; E. Sexton Erin Sexton provided background on the

history of the Transboundary Flathead MOU, from its signing in 2010, to the identiifcation of the GNLCC in 2011 to assist with convening and implementation, to the creation of the Flathead Executive Committee. Erin described the transboundary Flathead (Figure 1) as a place encompassing:

• a strategic linkage area between BC and MT, US and Canada;

• multiple species of wide-‐ranging transboundary carnivores; and

• a critical spawning area for transboundary bull trout and genetic stronghold for Westslope cutthroat trout.

The MOU provides a framework for collaboration on; 1) Environmental protection, 2) Climate action, and 3) Renewable energy. In 2012, the Province of B.C., State of Montana, and the GNLCC convened and executive-‐level committee among US Department of Interior, US Department of Agriculture, Canadian federal government, Tribes, First Nations and the Province of B.C. The Executive Committee out-‐lined a commitment to address portions of the MOU dealing with Land, Water, Fish, Wildlife, Invasive Species and Climate Change. In 2011-‐2012, both the Flathead Executive and Technical Committees were convened to develop a Five-‐Year Work Plan (Appendix B) with provisions for:



• Cooperating on Fish and Willdife Management

• Facilitation lf strategies for climate change adaptation

• Sharing information pro-‐actively

Jurisdictional Synopsis; Management Priorities for the TB Flathead by Agency or Entity J. Krebs – Province of B.C. – Up-‐date the original MOU , refresh the scope and add the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT) and Ktunaxa Nation as signators (witnesses under the original signing).

1. Natural Resource Priorities: a. Species at Risk (SAR) Management b. Connectivity c. Long-‐standing Grizzly bear work d. Co-‐management with Ktunaxa First Nation

G. Mowat – Province of B.C.

1. Connectivity S. LaBrecque, R. Davies– U.S. Forest Service

2. Flathead National Forest Plan Revision a. Additional recommended Wilderness – 108,000 additional acres (Tuchuck and Jewell

Basin) b. Transboundary Flathead is important connecitivty habitat in the FNF FPR c. Lynx studies in the North Fork – in partnership with the Rocky Mountain Research

Station d. Community engagement in North Fork (Bear Fair) e. Conservation easement management f. Land acquisition g. Grizzly Bear Conservation Strategy – de-‐listing -‐ Amendment 19 for grizzly bear

management carried forward in plan – manages road density for bear habitat security T. Graves – U.S. Geological Survey

1. Threatened and Endangered species management 2. Climate change 3. Connectivity 4. Habitat and Bear food

N. Newhousse – Nature Conservancy Canada

1. Work with B.C. for retirement of Flathead mineral rights – funding 2. Private land conservation easement purchases 3. Cumulative effects threats – forest companies not under Forest Stewardship Certification 4. Identification of threats and values



J. Williams and M. Deleray – State of Montana, Fish Wildlife and Parks

1. MT catching up on MOU implementation – recently engaged 2. Support Province of B.C. and counterpart agencies -‐ have B.C. biologists implementing work in

B.C. Flathead a. Funding capacity b. Manpower

3. Habitat restoration/protection through conservation easements 4. Collaboration is key: permitting and data exchange across the boundary should continue

S. LaBrecque, R. Davies and P. VanEimeren – U.S. Forest Service

1. Flathead National Forest Plan Revision a. Additional recommended Wilderness – 108,000 additional acres (Tuchuck and Jewell

Basin) b. Inland Native Fish Strategy (IN-‐FISH)-‐ carried forward into Forest Plan – enhanced river

corridor riparian protection, 300 foot buffer in fish-‐ bearing streams c. Wild and Scenic River designation recommended for key BT spawning streams d. Conservation easement management e. Land acquisition f. Grizzly Bear Conservation Strategy – de-‐listing -‐ Amendment 19 for grizzly bear

management carried forward in plan – manages road density for bear habitat security 2. Research Branch

a. NetMap Watershed Assessment -‐ restoration prioritization tool b. Climate shield temperature data

C. Downes – National Park Service –Glacier National Park

1. Wildlife connectivity and habitat 2. Eagle productivity 3. Loon monitoring 4. Wolverine 5. Bat work

T. Thier – State of Montana – Fish, Wildlife and Parks

1. Ungulates – fencing and connectivity M. Proctor – Independent Biologist

1. Connectivity – particularly in along Hwy 2 and 3 fracture zones T. Skzorupa – Province of B.C.

1. Setting objectives for SARA 2. Predator/prey dynamics 3. Trapping and hunting quotas

T. Ayele – Province of B.C.



1. Cumulative Effects Analysis for the Elk Valley 2. Transboundary CEA and management in the Elk/Kootenai

E. Sexton – University of Montana

1. Implementing the language of the BC-‐MT MOU with respect to fish and wildlife management and climate change impacts

2. Transboundary Forestry Exchange – corss-‐boundary participating in voluntary BMP audits P. Holmes – Province of B.C.

1. At-‐risk plant species (3) 2. Tailed frog 3. Screech owl

B.C. Fish and Wildlife: Kootenay Region Wildlife Update; T. Szkorupa• Mule deer – 50% decline in EK

population 2008-‐2013 • Currently monitoring – 42 collared deer • R.M Elk – Relatively stable, but

declining in trench, declining in FH • Bighorn sheep – stable, decreasing,

depending on area – issues with mining impacts to habitat

• Mtn goat – 20% of B.C.’s pop –most declining – 2-‐year intensive surveys underway

• • Cougar – may be declining since 2012 –

Developing management statement • Moose – minimal monitoring • Wolves – unknown harvest, impacts to

ungulates – Developing management statement

MT FWP B.C.-‐MT Transboundary Wildlife Update; T. Thier • Long-‐term trend monitoring for female

GB in NCDE • Wolves-‐ first track in MT in 1976 – came

from BC FH • ST Grouse – attempt to establish in MT

using BC source – not adequate habitat

• Lynx – Do not have trends in NW MT from tracking data

• Badgers – MT gave BC 15 – doing well • Wolverine – working on TB

coordination • Ptarmigan – GNLCC-‐funded surveys in

GNP

Sheep%popula*on%trends%MU Herd 198

6 1991 2001 2005 2008 2012 2014 Trend

401 Flathead 40 40 40 60 80 80 80 stable 402 Wigwam 130 235 160 270 300 215 220 stable

Galtons 115 125 80 120 120 120 120 stable 421 Estella 55 80 20 10 10 10 10 decreasing

Premier 100 140 20 45 70 60 40 decreasing Marmalade 55 40 55 65 70 60 40 fluctuating Wildhorse 50 35 20 10 0 5 5 decreasing

422 Bull?River 100 120 80 100 160 150 120 stable Lizard 85 50 50 50 50 30 50 stable

423 Elk?Valley?E 395 370 390 485 550 720 720 increasing Elk?Valley?W 170 150 175 175 130 90 90 decreasing



• Hoary Marmot – important data gap • Bighorn sheep – Koocanusa herd

declining – issues with domestic sheep • Mule deeer – sharing telemetry data

across boundary – declining in MT also

• Mtn Goats – concerned about climate change impacts – Sun Road impacts in GNP

2015 GNLCC Transboundary B.C.-‐ Kootenay Wolverine Inventory; J. Krebs • GNLCC funded work-‐ includes B.C., AB,

MT, KNC, NCC, GNP (Clevenger) • Initial work from 1970’s, Krebs (2004)

showed BC-‐MT TB critical for species • Copeland – does Spring snow cover

define the biocimatic envelope? • BC Harvest – very low in Selkirks and

Purcells, 30/yr in Kootenays • No quotas – Poor data on harvest

impacts • Cumulative impacts of additional

threats unknown • Study objectives – est. abundance,

assess harvest, connectivity, predict habitat quality

• Survey occurrence, occupancy model, density and gene flow in CCE

• Management scale – is habitat limited? Sustainable harvest? Genetic isolation and connectivity?

• Selkirks and Rockies complete, 1 year left in Purcells and S. Rockies

• Low numbers in S. B.C. • Kootenay Parks – 64 ind.

Elk Valley Cumulative Effects Framework (CEMF); T. Ayele

• Support area-‐based decision-‐making • Pilot CE Framework in the Elk – plus 3

other pilots for Provincial CE Policy • Ecosystem values and Risks to EV – risk

mapping and trends • Elk Valley initial values identified • Working group established, 5 priority

valued components (17 total) • CEMF products available by Jan. 2016 –

Risk maps and trends • Challenges with industry permitting

timelines and expectations

• http://www.elkvalleycemf.com

So Far…..

Selkirks and central Rockies done

1 more year in central Purcells

1 more year in south Rockies

KB#Strategic,Lead,(RMT,,Sec4on,Head),,

FLNRO&Project&Team&(Coordinator,&CE&Biologist,&GIS&Analyst),

,

3.&Elk&Valley&/KB&CEMF&&

Mature&&&old&forest&

WCT&

Grizzly&Bear&

BH&Sheep&

Riparian&habitat&

Expert&Teams&Working&Grp.&

Workshop&Grp.&

ADM,Sponsor,,

B.C. – Nature Conservancy Canada Flathead Agreement – Progress Report; P. Holmes • B.C. –NCC MOU Agreement on Flathead

– data collection on key species funded by GNLCC

• Gillet’s Checkerspot butterfly-‐ new suitable habitat – 25 WHA’s est. in 2014 (restrictions on logging season to protect)

• W. Screech-‐Owl – 34 WHA’s est. in 2014 (4,700 ha)

• R.M Tailed Frog – 10 WHA’s in FH – 50 sites sampled in 8/2014 fr eDNA

• WS Cuthroat – joint population sudy b/t B.C. FLNRO and USGS in TBFH

• Identified critical habitat – looking at WHA’s or Fisheries Sensitive Watershed designation

• Other species – W. sapsucker, A. badger, RM Bighorn sheep, GB Heron

• GB – McLellan, collared females, DNA in FH and Elk

• Wolverine – TB connectivity

Long-‐term Grizzly Bear Research in the Flathead; G. Mowat • McLellan; 1978-‐2014 – Determinants of population density and change – clear link between

Vaccinium sp. and bear abundance • Hunting has an impact, but not the greatest cause • Availability of higher energry foods increases resilience to human impacts • Mowat; Bear mortality concentrated around Hwy 3 – source/sink dynamics • Hwy 3 – high point source mortality – sink effect on population

Discussion: Opportunities and Next Steps Collaborative opportunities

Priorities/Needs/Recommendations

• Complete Transboundary BC-‐Kootenay Wolverine Inventory (need better coordination across entities to avoid duplication or competing funding proposals)

• Potentially apply CEMS for Elk to TB FH – need metric for measuring connectivity • Support wildlife crossing structures for Hwy 3/Hwy 2 – need funding for structures

o Develop better system to record mortalities on Hwys o Citizen science work to monitor -‐ Miistakis App o Alberta implementing with WTI

Rocky&Mountain&Tailed&Frog&(Ascaphus(montanus)&•  10&exis:ng&WHAs&(2005)&in&

Flathead&R.&Valley&(613.2&ha)&

•  Montana&F&W&surveyed&for&Bull&Trout&(2008J2012),&detected&frogs&in&areas&previously&thought&absent&

•  Sampled&50&sites&for&eDNA&in&August&2014&

•  Visually&confirmed&presence&in&Elder&Creek&

•  Analyses&of&water&samples&conducted&at&University&of&Idaho&

&



• Grizzly bear -‐ Need more data/research on bear foods and dispersal – both BC and MT • Expand BC-‐MT MOU outside of the Flathead – all Grizzly bear work is in larger context

(Elk/Kootenai, Yaak) o Bear mortality threat is outside of FH – Hwy 3

• Bighorn sheep -‐ Risk/Threat analysis for native sheep -‐ share MT sheep strategy o Zoning, Augmentation, Disease Protocol across boundaries

• Transboundary fencing inventory and mapping (cross-‐border data layers for fencing) • Ungulates -‐ Transboundary management and datasets

o Coordinate surveys (flights?) o Coordinate Management Units o Share Management Statements for each species across boundaries o Develop transboundary datasets for each species o Coordinate funding proposals

• Porcupine – big data gap – what is happening with this species? • Mtn goats – B.C. could provide disease free source population for MT (Elk Valley – high

population density) • Transboundary Forestry Exchange to share best practices • Traditional Ecological Knowledge

o Needs to be incorporated into MOU – see recommendation to invite KNC and CSKT as signators

o Hold next meeting at CSKT or KNC offices o KNC have good model for Conservation Officers and Stewardship

• Bats, Harlequin ducks – other species of concern -‐ also need transboundary datasets, communication

• Transboundary Data Share – potential new project through MOU o LCMap can facilitate and set up with permissions for sensitive data o Communications page/portal for sharing information

• B.C. fulfillment of agreement with NCC continues to be a priority • B.C. testing transboundary collaboration with GNLCC • Re-‐sign the MOU with Tribes/First Nations signatures • Develop Over-‐arching stewardship objectives

Actions

• Formal invitation to KNC and CSKT to sign MOU and join Executive and Technical Committees • Apply MOU beyond the TB Flathead boundary

Collaboratively put projects forward to GNLCC for funding • Pick a discrete Demonstration Project – Transboundary –

o Example – WSCT work between FLNRO and USGS, funded by GNLCC – important transboundary dataset

o Transboundary Forestry Exchange – field tours of forestry work in Flathead on both sides of the border

• Meet annually right before GNLCC Steering Community



Appendix A. – Meeting Agenda

IMPLEMENTING THE BC-‐MT MOU: MAY 1st, 2015: TERRESTRIAL/WILDLIFE 8:30 John Krebs Welcome and Introductions BC FLNRO 8:45 Scott Bischke Review discussion and out-‐comes from Day 2 Facilitator Overview of agenda 9:00 Erin Sexton Overview of MOU and Work to Date University of Montana Framework for the Flathead MOU and Transboundary Flathead

Work Plan (brief summary for new participants) 9:15 Representative Jurisdictional Synopsis -‐ Round Robin

From Each Agency or Entity Each agency will have 3 minutes to update on top priorities for wildlife in the Transboundary Flathead 9:30 John Krebs/ Jim Joint BC/FWP wildlife research and management -‐ brief Williams overview -‐ Tara Szkorupa & Tim Thier 10:15 Break 10:30 Jim Williams Glacier National Park Mountain Goat Project; Update and Future Needs 11:00 John Krebs/Jim Williams GNLCC Transboundary Wolverine Project Up-‐date -‐

BC FLNRO/MT FWP 2015 4-‐state WAFW Wolverine Proposal 11:30 Taye Ayele Cumulative Effects Pilot Project – Elk Valley Project Up-‐date

BC FLNRO (Tentative) Noon Lunch Eat out locally 1:00 Peter Holmes Nature Conservancy Canada – B.C. MOU Results BC FLNRO (W Screech Owl, Checkerspot, etc) 1:30 Garth Mowat Long-‐term Grizzly bear research in the Flathead BC FLNRO 2:00 Jim Williams/Tim Their Up-‐date on Management of Wolves, Sharp-‐tail Grouse and MT FWP Transboundary Elk 2:30 Scott Bischke Discussion



Facilitator 1. Opportunities for collaborative management 2. Opportunities for future collaborative projects 3. Next steps

5:00 Adjourn



Appendix B. – BC/MT Transboundary Flathead MOU



Documents

DRAFT Wildlife BC-MT MOU Technical Committee Meeting April ...greatnorthernlcc.org/sites/default/files/documents/... · BC#MT&MEMORANDUMOF&UNDERSTANDING&& Transboundary&FlatheadTechnical&Committee&Meeting&