Map (Bathurst Inlet)!.backriverproject.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/wp... · Reynolds 1997; A. Gunn and Adamczewski 2003). Muskox are commonly found near wetland and in ... 1 For ease

_̂

#*

#*

Kilo

kgik

tok

(Western

River)

Tahikafalok(Bathurst

Lake)

Kilogiktok(Bathurst Inlet - Southern Arm)

Ekalokhiokvik

GeorgeProperty

Area

GooseProperty

Area

Marine LaydownArea

Tikigak

Tahikafalok Nahik(Propeller Lake)

Hanningayuk(Beechey

Lake)

UT

MZ

on

e1

3

UT

MZ

on

e1

2

H

ann

igayok

(Bac

k River)

360000

360000

400000

400000

440000

440000

72

40

000

72

40

000

72

80

00

0

72

80

00

0

73

20

00

0

73

20

00

0

73

60

00

0

73

60

00

0

74

00

00

0

74

00

00

0

PROJECT # 0194096-0040 GIS # BAC-23-244e October 10 2013

Caribou: Fall Habitat in the Local Study Area

Figure 5.2-5Fig

ure

5.2

-5

±

Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS,AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User CommunityProjection: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 13N

1:600,000

0 10 20

Kilometres

Habitat Suitability Rating

High

Moderate

Low

Nil

Local Study Area (LSA)

Regional Study Area (RSA)

#* Existing Exploration Camp

_̂ Marine Laydown Area

TCWR Winter Road Connector

Winter Road

Winter Road, George Tie-InOption 1


BIPR Winter Road Connector

Haul and Access Road

Proposed Infrastructure

Potential Development Area(PDA)

Federal Watershed Delineation

Bathurst Inlet - Burnside River

Upper Back River

Queen Maud Gulf - Ellice River

_̂

#*

#*

!.

Kilogiktok(Bathurst Inlet, Southern Arm)

MainMap

Kiligiktokmik(Bathurst Inlet)

Kingaok(Bathurst Inlet)

UT

MZ

on

e13

UT

MZ

one

12

GooseProperty

Area

GeorgeProperty

Area

Tibbitt toContwoyto

Winter Road

TCWRWinter Road

Connector

MarineLaydown Area

BIPR WinterRoad Connector

NunavutNorthwest Territories1:3,500,000

_̂

#*

#*

Kilo

kgik

tok

(Western

River)


Lake)


Ekalokhiokvik

GeorgeProperty

Area

GooseProperty

Area

Marine LaydownArea

Tikigak


Hanningayuk(Beechey

Lake)

UT

MZ

on

e1

3

UT

MZ

on

e1

2

H

ann

igayok

(Bac

k River)

360000

360000

400000

400000

440000

440000

72

40

000

72

40

000

72

80

00

0

72

80

00

0

73

20

00

0

73

20

00

0

73

60

00

0

73

60

00

0

74

00

00

0

74

00

00

0

PROJECT # 0194096-0040 GIS #BAC-23-244f October 10 2013

Caribou: Fall Habitat in the Regional Study Area

Figure 5.2-6Fig

ure

5.2

-6

±

Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX,Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community

Projection: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 13N

1:600,000

0 10 20

Kilometres


High

Moderate

Low

Nil






Winter Road









Upper Back River


_̂

#*

#*

!.


MainMap



UT

MZ

on

e13

UT

MZ

one

12

GooseProperty

Area

GeorgeProperty

Area

Tibbitt toContwoyto

Winter Road

TCWRWinter Road

Connector

MarineLaydown Area



RESULTS

SABINA GOLD & SILVER CORP. 5-19

5.3.2.1 Model Assumptions

Summer/Fall

Early in the summer, muskox are known to feed on sedges as they are greening up (Gunn, 1984). As the summer progresses, the main forage of muskox includes graminoids such as sedges and grasses, willows and forbs which grow quickly, producing rich forage (A. Gunn and Sutherland 1997b; Nellemann and Reynolds 1997; A. Gunn and Adamczewski 2003). Muskox are commonly found near wetland and in wetter, shrubby tundra habitats in the summer (A. Gunn and Sutherland 1997b). Gunn and Sutherland (1997b) also found that single bulls and immature males used the immediate vicinity of water bodies more often than any other age or sex class. The fringes of these water bodies may support muskox forage such as sedges. The following general assumptions were made to define summer habitat ratings:

o High ratings were given to vegetation associations that contain preferred forage species, mainly willow and sedges.

o Moderate ratings were assigned to vegetation associations that contain some preferred forage species, but typically have a lower cover of sedges and willow species.

o Low ratings were given to vegetation associations that contained limited forage opportunities.

o Nil ratings were given to vegetation associations that contained sparse vegetation, or where travel was difficult.

Winter/Early Spring

Habitat use during the winter and early spring is focused on areas that provide accessible forage (e.g., low snowpack or windswept areas) and/or early vegetation growth. Willows are especially selected in spring when willow leaves are emerging (A. Gunn and Sutherland 1997a; Larter and Nagy 2004; Kristensen et al. 2011). Habitat studies have shown that late winter/early spring habitat use is varied, ranging from rugged exposed terrain in the high Arctic, to lowland areas in Alaska, indicating that habitat use may vary from region to region (Schaefer, Stevens, and Messier 1996; Nellemann and Reynolds 1997). Habitat preference is based on the need for low winter fat reserves to be replenished, and for pregnant or lactating cows to access high quality forage (Reynolds, Reynolds, and Shideler 2002). The following general assumptions were made to define winter and early spring habitat ratings:

o High ratings were given to vegetation associations where limited snowpack is likely (e.g., windswept ridges) and areas with a significant amount of early vegetation.

o Moderate ratings assumed that forage opportunities were available, but were not as accessible or available as early in the season as high value vegetation associations.

o Low ratings were given to vegetation associations with limited seasonal forage, or areas where the snowpack likely persists thereby reducing foraging opportunities.

o Nil ratings were given to vegetation associations with sparse vegetation, high disturbance, and those that typically occur in landscape positions where snow packs are deep and persistent.

5.3.3 Results and Discussion

5.3.3.1 Summer/Fall

Very little (7%) of the LSA was rated as Highly suitable summer and fall habitat for muskox (Table 5.3-2). Highly rated habitat was mapped over relatively small areas in the LSA (Figure 5.3-1), as few ecosystem polygons contained high proportions of habitat that could produce large amounts of preferred forage (e.g., sedge wetlands and riparian areas). Moderately suitable habitats, encompassing

2013 WILDLIFE HABITAT SUITABILITY BASELINE

5-20 RESCAN ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LTD., AN ERM COMPANY | PROJ#0194096-0040 | REV B.1 | NOVEMBER 2013

28% of the LSA, covered larger geographic areas than Highly rated habitats and were spread across the LSA (Figure 5.3-1; Table 5.3-2). The largest proportion of the LSA was rated as Low (65%). For the most part, Low suitability habitats were those that were almost purely composed of habitats that would produce low quantities of forage (i.e., ecosystem polygons dominated by WHR 3 rated habitats). Less than 1% of the LSA was rated as Nil.

Table 5.3-2. Muskox Summer and Fall Habitat within the Local Study Area and Regional Study Area

Suitability Rating

Amount of Habitat in the LSA Amount of Habitat in the RSA

Area (ha)1 % of LSA1 Area (ha)2 % of RSA1

High 9,416.09 7 168,221.76 13

Moderate 37,545.98 28 314,380.74 25

Low 87,203.99 65 702,002.89 56

Nil 203.24 < 1 72,547.20 6

1 For ease of presentation, percentages are rounded up or down to the next whole number. However, due to the large

number of decimal places, some percentages may not add to 100%. 2 Includes LSA. Approximately 4,852.05 ha of the RSA fell in the Unclassified class and was not included in modelling,

thus the total amount of habitat modelled in the RSA is 1,257,152.58 ha.

High and Moderate rated habitats accounted for 13% and 25% of the RSA, respectively. These habitats represented areas capable of producing large to moderate amounts of high quality summer forage; these higher quality habitat areas appeared to be most abundant in the north RSA surrounding Bathurst Inlet and in the southeastern RSA (Figure 5.3-2). Low rated habitats occupied over two-thirds (56%) of the RSA, covering the vast tracts of drier tundra and boulder fields where little to no forage may be available. A small amount (6%) of the RSA was rated as Nil.

5.3.3.2 Winter/Early Spring

Highly rated winter and early spring muskox habitat, covering 8% of the LSA, is primarily near the George Property Area and northern portion of the LSA (Figure 5.3-3; Table 5.3-3). High rated habitat was sparse within the southern portion of the LSA. Moderate rated habitats accounted for approximately a fifth (22%) of the LSA; these habitats generally had high to modest amounts of shrubby forage over the winter and into the spring but not all forage may be accessible due to deeper snowpack. Moderate rated habitat was mainly located near the George Property Area and northern portion of the LSA. The remainder of the LSA was rated as Low (44%) and Nil (26%; Table 5.3-3). These lower rated habitats encompassed much of the lower elevation habitats in the LSA, such as wetlands and larger water bodies (Figure 5.3-3). Vegetation in wetlands (e.g., sedges and grasses) can be an important food source for muskox in the winter where they can crater through soft snow down to the ground or where the wind exposes these types of habitats. However, it was assumed that the vast majority of wetlands would be covered in a deep and persistent snowpack into the spring because they generally occurred on the lowest slope positions in the study area.

A total of 6% (69,629 ha) of the RSA was rated as Highly suitable habitat for muskox in the winter and early spring (Table 5.3-3). Highly rated habitats were sparsely distributed across the RSA (Figure 5.3-4). Generally these highly rated habitats were windswept tundra and ridges where herbaceous or shrubby forage would be accessible. Moderate rated habitats accounted for 27% of the RSA and represented higher elevation, windswept habitats that have a lower quantity of suitable forage for muskox over winter and into the spring (e.g., rocky heath habitats where lichens are common but grasses and shrubs grow more sparsely). The remaining habitat was rated as Low (26%) and Nil (41%). Low and Nil rated habitats generally encompassed river valleys, water bodies, and surrounding lowland habitats were snowpack would limit foraging opportunities (Figure 5.3-4; Table 5.3-3).

_̂

#*

#*

Kilo

kgik

tok

(Western

River)


Lake)


Ekalokhiokvik

GeorgeProperty

Area

GooseProperty

Area

Marine LaydownArea

Tikigak


Hanningayuk(Beechey

Lake)

UT

MZ

on

e1

3

UT

MZ

on

e1

2

H

ann

igayok

(Bac

k River)

360000

360000

400000

400000

440000

440000

72

40

000

72

40

000

72

80

00

0

72

80

00

0

73

20

00

0

73

20

00

0

73

60

00

0

73

60

00

0

74

00

00

0

74

00

00

0

PROJECT # 0194096-0040 GIS # BAC-23-244g October 10 2013

Muskox: Summer and Fall Habitat in the Local Study Area

Figure 5.3-1Fig

ure

5.3

-1

±

Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS,AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community

Projection: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 13N

1:600,000

0 10 20

Kilometres


High

Moderate

Low

Nil






Winter Road









Upper Back River


_̂

#*

#*

!.


MainMap



UT

MZ

on

e13

UT

MZ

one

12

GooseProperty

Area

GeorgeProperty

Area

Tibbitt toContwoyto

Winter Road

TCWRWinter Road

Connector

MarineLaydown Area


NunavutNorthwest Territories

1:3,500,000

_̂

#*

#*

Kilo

kgik

tok

(Western

River)


Lake)


Ekalokhiokvik

GeorgeProperty

Area

GooseProperty

Area

Marine LaydownArea

Tikigak


Hanningayuk(Beechey

Lake)

UT

MZ

on

e1

3

UT

MZ

on

e1

2

H

ann

igayok

(Bac

k River)

360000

360000

400000

400000

440000

440000

72

40

000

72

40

000

72

80

00

0

72

80

00

0

73

20

00

0

73

20

00

0

73

60

00

0

73

60

00

0

74

00

00

0

74

00

00

0

PROJECT # 0194096-0040 GIS # BAC-23-244h October 15 2013

Muskox: Summer and Fall Habitat in the Regional Study Area

Figure 5.3-2Fig

ure

5.3

-2

±

Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX,Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User CommunityProjection: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 13N

1:600,000

0 10 20

Kilometres


High

Moderate

Low

Nil






Winter Road









Upper Back River


_̂

#*

#*

!.


MainMap



UT

MZ

on

e13

UT

MZ

one

12

GooseProperty

Area

GeorgeProperty

Area

Tibbitt toContwoyto

Winter Road

TCWRWinter Road

Connector

MarineLaydown Area



_̂

#*

#*

Kilo

kgik

tok

(Western

River)


Lake)


Ekalokhiokvik

GeorgeProperty

Area

GooseProperty

Area

Marine LaydownArea

Tikigak


Hanningayuk(Beechey

Lake)

UT

MZ

on

e1

3

UT

MZ

on

e1

2

H

ann

igayok

(Bac

k River)

360000

360000

400000

400000

440000

440000

72

40

000

72

40

000

72

80

00

0

72

80

00

0

73

20

00

0

73

20

00

0

73

60

00

0

73

60

00

0

74

00

00

0

74

00

00

0

PROJECT # 0194096-0040 GIS # BAC-23-244i October 10 2013

Muskox: Winter and Early Spring Habitat in the Local Study Area

Figure 5.3-3Fig

ure

5.3

-3

±


1:600,000

0 10 20

Kilometres


High

Moderate

Low

Nil






Winter Road









Upper Back River


_̂

#*

#*

!.


MainMap



UT

MZ

on

e13

UT

MZ

one

12

GooseProperty

Area

GeorgeProperty

Area

Tibbitt toContwoyto

Winter Road

TCWRWinter Road

Connector

MarineLaydown Area


NunavutNorthwest Territories

1:3,500,000

_̂

#*

#*

Kilo

kgik

tok

(Western

River)


Lake)


Ekalokhiokvik

GeorgeProperty

Area

GooseProperty

Area

Marine LaydownArea

Tikigak


Hanningayuk(Beechey

Lake)

UT

MZ

on

e1

3

UT

MZ

on

e1

2

H

ann

igayok

(Bac

k River)

360000

360000

400000

400000

440000

440000

72

40

000

72

40

000

72

80

00

0

72

80

00

0

73

20

00

0

73

20

00

0

73

60

00

0

73

60

00

0

74

00

00

0

74

00

00

0

PROJECT # 0194096-0040 GIS # BAC-23-244j October 15 2013

Muskox: Winter and Early Spring Habitat in the Regional Study Area

Figure 5.3-4Fig

ure

5.3

-4

±


1:600,000

0 10 20

Kilometres


High

Moderate

Low

Nil






Winter Road









Upper Back River


_̂

#*

#*

!.


MainMap



UT

MZ

on

e13

UT

MZ

one

12

GooseProperty

Area

GeorgeProperty

Area

Tibbitt toContwoyto

Winter Road

TCWRWinter Road

Connector

MarineLaydown Area



RESULTS


Table 5.3-3. Muskox Winter and Early Spring Habitat within the Local Study Area and Regional

Study Area

Suitability Rating


Area (ha)1 % of LSA1 Area (ha)2 % of RSA1

High 10,371.54 8 69,629.33 6

Moderate 29,754.76 22 340,442.43 27

Low 58,950.99 44 330,149.21 26

Nil 35,292.03 26 516,931.61 41




5.4 GRIZZLY BEAR

5.4.1 Background

Grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) in the Arctic, often referred to as barren-ground grizzly bears, are an important, top-level predator in the Arctic ecosystem. Grizzly bears in the Canadian Arctic belong to the larger, western Canadian population of grizzly bear, which are currently listed as Special Concern under COSEWIC (COSEWIC 2002), and in Nunavut, grizzly bear are considered Sensitive (CESCC 2010).

There is no official estimate on grizzly bear population sizes for Nunavut. However, a crude estimate of 800 grizzly bears was determined for a 200,000 km2 portion of the northwestern mainland of Nunavut, which includes the Project area (Ross 2002). This estimate assumed a density of four bears per 1,000 km2 based on grizzly bear densities in nearby areas (Ross 2002). The barren-ground grizzly bear population is stable or slightly increasing, but is considered vulnerable to decline from increased adult mortality (McLoughlin, Taylor, Cluff, Gau, Mulders, Case, Boutin, et al. 2003; McLoughlin, Taylor, Cluff, Gau, Mulders, Case and Messier 2003). Population modelling studies using demographic data of bears in the region show that even slight increases in mortality can precipitate a negative population trend (McLoughlin, Taylor, Cluff, Gau, Mulders, Case and Messier 2003).

Barren-ground grizzly bear occur at the northern and eastern edge of the continental grizzly bear range. These bears have the largest home ranges of any grizzly bear in North America, ranging around 2,100 km2 for females and 7,245 km2 for males (McLoughlin, Ferguson, and Messier 2000). These extensive home ranges are necessitated by the lower quality and quantity of suitable foraging habitats in the Arctic. Given the lower productivity and high seasonality of the Arctic environment, the home range of individual grizzly bear overlap more on the tundra than they do in southern, more productive areas (McLoughlin, Ferguson, and Messier 2000).

5.4.2 Habitat Suitability Model Development

Grizzly bear are omnivorous and opportunistic feeders that select habitat largely based on seasonal availability of forage (MacHutchon and Wellwood 2003; Wellwood 2003). Table 5.4-1 presents the seasonal life requisites for grizzly bear used to develop suitability ratings. Ratings focused on living requisites for the spring, summer, and fall seasons, and were based on an assessment of the ecosystem units’ abilities to produce forage species. Vegetation phenology was used to rate ecosystem units for target forage species for a given season (e.g., blueberries are absent in the spring, ripen during the summer, and die off during the fall). Prey sources that are strongly associated with specific ecosystem units were included in the ecosystem unit ratings where possible, e.g., Arctic ground squirrel



(Spermophilus parryii) colonies located within esker habitats. For the denning season, ratings were geared towards satisfying the reproducing life requisite and focussed on identifying habitats with high potential for denning opportunities (e.g., easily excavated soils).

Table 5.4-1. Seasonal Life Requisites of Grizzly Bear

Season Date Life Requisite Habitat Preference

Spring May - June Living Esker, crowberry, blueberry, sedge, riparian shrub, caribou, ground squirrel

Summer June - September Living Esker, blueberry, sedge, riparian shrub, ground squirrel

Fall September - October

Living Esker, blueberry, sedge, riparian shrub, caribou, ground squirrel

Denning October to May Reproducing Eskers, lacustrine deposits

5.4.2.1 Model Assumptions

The assumptions developed for grizzly bear were based on literature reviews, suitability mapping completed for similar projects in Nunavut and the NWT, and field assessments. The main assumptions are that grizzly bears target a variety of vegetation as it becomes available through the short, Arctic growing season, but are strongly influenced by the availability of caribou and other protein sources (e.g., ground squirrels) in the early spring and again in the late summer and fall (Gau et al. 2002). Caribou availability was not included in the rating assumptions as it is not a factor that can be accurately applied (due to the variability in the location and timing of caribou presence). The following sections describe the wildlife habitat rating assumptions and rating for each season for the LSA and RSA.

Spring

Spring habitat provides grizzly bears their first opportunity to feed after emerging from winter hibernation. Important habitat includes areas that become snow-free early, and ecosystem units that contain last season’s over-wintered berries, Arctic ground squirrel burrows, winter-weakened ungulates, and early vegetation (Gau et al. 2002; MacHutchon and Wellwood 2003). The following general assumptions were made to define spring WHRs:

o High ratings were assigned to vegetation associations that provide early season food sources. These are upland areas that are generally windswept resulting in low snowpack. Over-wintered berries from the previous season are typically available, as are Arctic ground squirrels.

o Moderate ratings were given to vegetation associations that provide some food sources, but are generally not windswept and have limited over-wintered berries. These vegetation associations also have the potential for some early season forage of sedges and grasses.

o Low ratings were given to vegetation associations that were considered to have low forage potential and are not preferred habitat for prey species.

o Nil ratings were given to vegetation associations that have a lack of forage and prey, or are disturbed.

Summer

Summer habitat use by grizzly bears is highly variable. Grizzlies primarily feed on horsetails, sedges, and cottongrass in the early summer when caribou are scarce, as well as berries if they are available. Caribou calves and Arctic ground squirrels are considered to be their primary prey sources in mid-summer (Gau et al. 2002). Late summer use focuses on areas with high berry production. The following general assumptions were made to define summer WHRs:

RESULTS


o High ratings were given to vegetation associations that provide berries, cottongrass, and sedges which are critical vegetative food sources when caribou are absent from the region. Eskers were included for Arctic ground squirrel availability and ease of travel.

o Moderate ratings were assigned to vegetation associations that provide late summer berry production and those which contain sedges and cottongrass in limited quantities.


o Nil ratings were given to vegetation associations that lacked forage and prey, and those that were disturbed.

Fall

The fall season is critical for grizzly bears as they must gain weight rapidly in order to survive the winter. Fall habitat selection is focused on areas of high caribou occurrence (Johnson et al. 2004) and berry availability. The following general assumptions were made to define fall WHRs:

o High ratings were given to vegetation associations that are most likely to contain large quantities of berries and Arctic ground squirrels.

o Moderate ratings were assigned to vegetation associations that may contain limited quantities of berries, and to a lesser extent browning sedge and cottongrass forage.


o Nil ratings were given to vegetation associations that lacked forage and prey, and those that were disturbed.

Denning

In general, denning lasts from late October to early May for most bears; some bears, males in particular, may den for shorter periods of time (McLoughlin, Cluff, and Messier 2002). Dens have been found in a wide variety of habitat types. Of 56 dens located by McLoughlin, Cluff, and Messier (2002), most (60%) were found in heath tundra and heath-boulder habitats, and many of the remaining dens were located in riparian tall shrub and birch seep habitats. Although eskers accounted for only seven of 56 den sites studied, this habitat type was selected more than expected given its low availability in the central Arctic. Hence, many habitats appear to have suitable soil texture and structure for denning, but eskers may be selected where available given the ease in which bears may excavate dens. The following general assumptions were made to define denning WHRs:

o High ratings were assigned to vegetation associations that provide terrain features that allow for denning opportunities, specifically parent materials that are easily excavated, have deep permafrost layers, and contain sufficient vegetative root masses to provide soil stability.

o Moderate ratings were given to vegetation associations that are similar to high value habitat, but are more likely to contain limitations in the form of shallow permafrost layer, or consolidated materials.

o Low ratings were given to vegetation associations that were considered to have limited potential for successful den excavations, but recognize that the arctic landscape generally provides few high value denning sites, so sub-optimal sites may be utilized.



o Nil ratings were given to vegetation associations that were not suitable for excavation due to shallow soils, high permafrost layers, organic soils, or other conditions that would make a successful den excavation difficult.

5.4.3 Results and Discussion

5.4.3.1 Spring

Very little (2%) of the LSA was rated as Highly suitable spring habitat for grizzly bear (Table 5.4-2), indicating that few ecosystem polygons contained high proportions of habitat with preferred spring forage and prey species (e.g., windswept areas with low snowpack and over-wintered berries or abundant Arctic ground squirrel colonies). The largest concentrations of Highly rated habitat were mapped northwest of the George Property Area along the LSA boundary (Figure 5.4-1). The majority (65%) of the LSA was rated as Moderately suitable spring habitat for grizzly bear and covered large expanses of most of the LSA (Figure 5.4-1). These areas have higher snowpack and are generally not windswept, so vegetation and over-wintered berries are limited. Approximately a third of the LSA was rated as Low (14%) and Nil (18%) suitability habitats and would provide very limited forage and prey species.

Table 5.4-2. Grizzly Bear Spring Habitat in the Local Study Area and Regional Study Area

Suitability Rating


Area (ha) % of LSA1 Area (ha)2 % of RSA1

High 3,182.31 2 5,457.20 < 1

Moderate 87,405.09 65 637,044.63 51

Low 19,074.53 14 412,168.14 33

Nil 24,707.36 18 202,482.60 16




Half of the RSA (51%) contained Moderately suitable spring habitat for grizzly bear and was distributed fairly evenly throughout the area (Table 5.4-2; Figure 5.4-2). Approximately one-third of the RSA was rated as Low suitability habitat (33%). Moderate and Low habitats would represent areas producing average to limited amounts of preferred early season forage and prey species. Nil suitability habitat (16% of RSA) covered much of the water and barren ecosystems, and thus provides limited to no value for foraging or hunting. Very limited portions (less than 1%) in the northern segment of the RSA were rated as Highly suitable spring habitat.

5.4.3.2 Summer

A small amount (9%) of the LSA was rated as Highly suitable summer habitat for grizzly bear. These areas are sparse throughout the LSA with a concentration along the western side of Bathurst Inlet (Figure 5.4-3). Highly suitable summer habitat was generally associated with wetlands, such as marshes or fens, which provide abundant sedges and cottongrass. Two-thirds (67%) of the LSA was comprised of Moderate suitability summer habitat and approximately one-quarter (24%) of the LSA was rated as Low suitability habitat for grizzly bear (Table 5.4-3). Moderate habitats were fairly evenly distributed within the LSA, particularly within and surrounding the Goose Property Area (Figure 5.4-3). These habitats were generally associated with shrubby areas that provide late summer berries. A larger amount of Low suitability habitat was identified near the George Property Area. Low rated habitats were typically associated with dry, sparse tundra with low forage potential and limited prey species.

_̂

#*

#*

Kilo

kgik

tok

(Western

River)


Lake)


Ekalokhiokvik

GeorgeProperty

Area

GooseProperty

Area

Marine LaydownArea

Tikigak


Hanningayuk(Beechey

Lake)

UT

MZ

on

e1

3

UT

MZ

on

e1

2

H

ann

iga

yok

(Bac

k River)

360000

360000

400000

400000

440000

440000

72

40

000

72

40

000

72

80

00

0

72

80

00

0

73

20

00

0

73

20

00

0

73

60

00

0

73

60

00

0

74

00

00

0

74

00

00

0

PROJECT # 0194096-0040 GIS # BAC-23-244k October 11 2013

Grizzly Bear: Spring Habitat in the Local Study Area

Figure 5.4-1Fig

ure

5.4

-1

±


1:600,000

0 10 20

Kilometres


High

Moderate

Low

Nil






Winter Road









Upper Back River


_̂

#*

#*

!.


MainMap



UT

MZ

on

e13

UT

MZ

one

12

GooseProperty

Area

GeorgeProperty

Area

Tibbitt toContwoyto

Winter Road

TCWRWinter Road

Connector

MarineLaydown Area



_̂

#*

#*

Kilo

kgik

tok

(Western

River)


Lake)


Ekalokhiokvik

GeorgeProperty

Area

GooseProperty

Area

Marine LaydownArea

Tikigak


Hanningayuk(Beechey

Lake)

UT

MZ

on

e1

3

UT

MZ

on

e1

2

H

ann

igayok

(Bac

k River)

360000

360000

400000

400000

440000

440000

72

40

000

72

40

000

72

80

00

0

72

80

00

0

73

20

00

0

73

20

00

0

73

60

00

0

73

60

00

0

74

00

00

0

74

00

00

0

PROJECT # 0194096-0040 GIS # BAC-23-244l October 15 2013

Grizzly Bear: Spring Habitat in the Regional Study Area

Figure 5.4-2Fig

ure

5.4

-2

±


1:600,000

0 10 20

Kilometres


High

Moderate

Low

Nil






Winter Road









Upper Back River


_̂

#*

#*

!.


MainMap



UT

MZ

on

e13

UT

MZ

one

12

GooseProperty

Area

GeorgeProperty

Area

Tibbitt toContwoyto

Winter Road

TCWRWinter Road

Connector

MarineLaydown Area



Documents

Map (Bathurst Inlet)!.backriverproject.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/wp... · Reynolds 1997; A. Gunn and Adamczewski 2003). Muskox are commonly found near wetland and in ... 1 For ease